D&D 5E How Are People Handling Cover?

[KarinsDad]

The Basic Rules do not seem to mention this. Or maybe I just missed it.

As an example, do you use the following where C has cover and D and E do not?

         A
         B
        | |
        | |
        | |
        | |
         C  D  E

or the following where C and D have cover and E does not (maybe 60 degrees)?

         A
         B
        / \
       /   \
      /     \ 
     /       \
         C  D  E

or the following where C, D and E have cover (maybe 90 degrees)?

         A
         B
        / \
      /     \
    /         \ 
  /             \
         C  D  E

or something else?

 

[Xodis]

I go with the first model. Combat is people shuffling around really, but directly in the way is DIRECTLY in the way. So unless we get a "Precise Shot" type of feat or ability, melee characters are in the way, but hey maybe its a good thing.

 

[GX.Sigma]

I guess I'd use the third. It probably won't come up, since the shooter would also have disadvantage (assuming B is an enemy creature), so the player wouldn't want to shoot at all.

If it ever really really mattered, I'd use 4e's cover rules (which I expect will be in the 5e DMG). It's based on tracing lines from a corner of your square to the corners of the target's square.

 

[WitchyD]

From the Basic PDF (p. 74): "A target can benefit from cover only when an attack or other effect originates on the opposite side of the cover." I would interpret that as the first case you've presented, where only C would have cover. An argument could be made for the second case, though. :/

My rule-of-thumb when I'm playing on a grid: if I can draw an unobstructed line from one corner of a square to a corner of another square, no cover exists there. Beaten to it.

 

[Wrathamon]

From the Basic PDF (p. 74): "A target can benefit from cover only when an attack or other effect originates on the opposite side of the cover." I would interpret that as the first case you've presented, where only C would have cover. An argument could be made for the second case, though. :/

My rule-of-thumb when I'm playing on a grid: if I can draw an unobstructed line from one corner of a square to a corner of another square, no cover exists there. Beaten to it.

agree

beaten to it twice

 

[KarinsDad]

It seems odd to me that it would be the first case.

Such a tiny portion of the map is cover that it will rarely happen. Why have it in the game system in that case?

Once in a blue moon, PCs will be in a narrow corridor, but PCs cannot even set up cover.

For example, C, D, and E are NPCs, and A and B are PCs, A only gets cover from C's attacks due to B, and C just moves a tiny bit and A no longer has cover.

Why have the cover rule if it is so easy to avoid it?

PCs would not be able to protect other PCs.

 

[MerricB]

Cover - in the basic rules - is much more a case of DM judgement. The rule about "opposite side of the cover" just means that cover doesn't work when you're shot from the side the cover isn't on!

A-----> B -- C <------D

If A fires at B, he gets no cover from C, despite C providing cover to B from D's attack.

The suggestion is that creatures give half cover, arrow slits give three-quarters cover and standing in a different room entirely with a wall between you gives you full cover.

The interesting thing about the basic rules is that if there are several creatures in the way, all providing half cover, that never equates to more; you just use the half-cover modifier.

When attacking at an angle, use your judgement as to when the cover no longer applies.

Cheers!

 

[Lidgar]

The suggestion is that creatures give half cover, arrow slits give three-quarters cover and standing in a different room entirely gives you full cover.

This. For the ranged combat situation that is depicted by the OP, we tend to go with the first example.

 

[jadrax]

It is also wise to remember that the three scenarios the op outlines are never actually going to occur.

In real life people do not stand about for 6 seconds waiting for their next turn like chess pieces. The floor is very unlikely to be as flat as a chess board either. People in real life are going to try and get low to the ground even when running, and if the wizard sees someone to the right of him start to loosen an arrow, he's probably going to move more to the left and behind the warrior if he can.

 

[Ritorix]

You can also run into situations like a halfling rogue hiding behind a taller ally. They can shoot through the ally's square (square! I can't think without a grid) and would get cover depending on the angle the DM decides on. They would also get advantage if hidden (halflings can hide behind taller allies). So you might end up in a weird situation where a halfling is firing at -2 but with advantage. A rogue wouldn't want to 'pop out' behind the ally, because then he would be seen and lose advantage on the shot.