Cover and Concealment

[Emerald]

I am having a hard time understanding the cover and consealment rules. In a PbP I am DMing (see sig) there is a fight on a road in the middle of the swamp or marshy area. There is dense foliage on either side of the road. The NPC is ambushed by the party and is greatly outnumbered so he runs off into the woods, casts invisability, and attempts to hide in the foliage.

I originally just wanted him to have cover from ranged attackes but after reading the description it did not seem to me anyway that I could use it that way, it had to apply to both ranged and melee. The says that you get 3/4 cover if you are "peering around a tree" and 1/2 if "fighting around a tree" . Since he was attempting to use the trees to protect him I granted him 3/4's cover but I am not sure that was right. Under concealment it says you can have 3/4's concealment for dense foliage, so maybe that would have been a better call.

Anyway, I am extremely confused and I made a call based on what I read, but now some of the players are asking for clarifications on how I made that call, and I am usure how to explain it, since I did not really understand it myself.

How do these rules apply in this situation?

Emerald

PS This is my first time DMing so I am still trying to catch on to the finer points of the rules.

 

[tolliver]

It's pretty much your call as the DM. If your NPC was just hiding behind a tree, trying to keep totally out of sight he would have 3/4 cover at least.

If he cast invisibility he should have total concealment (50% miss chance) unless your PCs have blindsight or some other non-visual means of locating targets. How were your PCs locating this NPC if he was invisible?

 

[MerakSpielman]

I'm playing in this game.

On his initiative, the enemy wizard attacked (to cut the bindings of an Animate Rope spell) and moved 30' into the dense foliage. We followed and in in the foliage ourselves. Lots of underbrush and shrubbery, not much in the way of open spaces between trees. This is rough, wild, overgrown terrain, except for the path we've vacated. The decision of Emerald seems to be that the dense foliage is providing cover rather than concealment, based on the rules stating that cover is solid obstructions and concealment is non-material visual impairment.

The deal is that he's benefiting from the cover of the dense foliage in melee, with us right next to him. The rules do not state that cover is only for missile attacks, so this seems to be valid, yet I've never heard of it before. They also specifically state thay you cannot make attacks of opportunity while affected by cover, so he popped into invisibility right next to our fighter. He can't run without being heard, so he's trying to move silently so we can't pinpoint and attack him. Only one of us heard him move after casting, and not well enough to pinpoint his location (per the invisibilty rules, DMG). I also would assume if he moved too rapidly the movement of the foliage would betray his position.

Now, it seems, he benefits from 3/4 cover and 100% concealment. Yet, he's not out of the woods yet (da-dum-ching!). This bastards not getting away again...

I hope this clarifys the situation, and the cover rule confusion we're suffering from. Anybody care to clarify?

 

[silentspace]

I would say foliage gives concealment, not cover.

But I think in general, this falls under the special 'whatever the DM feels like' rules.

For example, if a human gets 50% concealment in low foliage, why wouldn't a gnome get 100%? He might be able to still see his opponents pretty well (the leaves could be horizontal to catch the sun?) The little people can have a lot of fun running around in the shrubbery why the taller folk try to smack him. Hehe. Don't take me seriously, I'm just goofing around. Sounds like a fun battle though.

 

[Altamont Ravenard]

Cover is a hard barrier between yourself and your opponent, whereas Concealment is anything that gets in the way of you clearly seeing your opponent. Cover can be a wall, a doorway, a Tower shield, even another creature. Concealment can be smoke, curtains, shadows, foliage, even invisibility.

If you fight someone with cover, you get a basic chance of hitting the cover instead, which translates into an AC bonus for cover.

If you fight someone with concealment, you get a basic chance of misjudging where your opponent is, and miss him completely, which translates into a % chance of missing.

You can't make an AoO if the target has ½ cover or better. In 3.5, you can't make an AoO if the target has total concealment (it wasn't clear in 3.0). A rogue cannot make a sneak attack on a creature that has concealment.

In this situation, if the foliage is heavy enough to actually block a swung sword or axe, then, yes, you can treat it as cover. If the foliage is light and only blocks line of sight, then it's concealment.

(related question: can an obstacle provide both cover and concealment?)

Hope this helps.

AR