Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="RLBURNSIDE" data-source="post: 5371565" data-attributes="member: 94650">what about an arrow slit in a castle wall?An arrow slit provides superior cover to the archer, but I fail to how it could possibly provide cover to the creatures below, out in the open. The idea that cover is symmetric completely negates the obvious physical interpretation of the problem. It might grant differing levels of cover, say one step less, for those outside, but there has to be an advantage to the archer otherwise the rules are just dumb. (imo)I do like the idea of having to drop prone, move a bit to re-stealth, then pop up for your next shot above that 5 foot high wall with combat advantage. But ya probably only a rogue with special powers could pull off 1/round firing rate like that. Concealment and cover are what they seem to do best. I like it when they have to work to get CA. And it's good to learn new tricks like charging out from the shadows that maintains CA and concealment until the first action is ended == w00t. Our rogue will love that. So it's not always DM fiat that allows this type of strategy to work, it just does.I'd also argue for realism sake that if a creature is behind you, you can't see it and thus it has concealment from you unless you perceive it with a passive perception check and thus are made aware of it. But if two creatures charge some guy from different entrances into the room he's in, there's no way he can counter / be ready for both, if he's facing one way and not looking down both halls simultaneously. Or at least paying attention. Our DM also house rules that teleporting behind an enemy gives CA each time == backstab</blockquote>

[QUOTE="RLBURNSIDE, post: 5371565, member: 94650"] [b]what about an arrow slit in a castle wall?[/b] An arrow slit provides superior cover to the archer, but I fail to how it could possibly provide cover to the creatures below, out in the open. The idea that cover is symmetric completely negates the obvious physical interpretation of the problem. It might grant differing levels of cover, say one step less, for those outside, but there has to be an advantage to the archer otherwise the rules are just dumb. (imo) I do like the idea of having to drop prone, move a bit to re-stealth, then pop up for your next shot above that 5 foot high wall with combat advantage. But ya probably only a rogue with special powers could pull off 1/round firing rate like that. Concealment and cover are what they seem to do best. I like it when they have to work to get CA. And it's good to learn new tricks like charging out from the shadows that maintains CA and concealment until the first action is ended == w00t. Our rogue will love that. So it's not always DM fiat that allows this type of strategy to work, it just does. I'd also argue for realism sake that if a creature is behind you, you can't see it and thus it has concealment from you unless you perceive it with a passive perception check and thus are made aware of it. But if two creatures charge some guy from different entrances into the room he's in, there's no way he can counter / be ready for both, if he's facing one way and not looking down both halls simultaneously. Or at least paying attention. Our DM also house rules that teleporting behind an enemy gives CA each time == backstab [/QUOTE]

Verification