Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="SWAT" data-source="post: 4318468" data-attributes="member: 2751">What's the deal with the extra rule for lightly obscured terrain on the bottom right of p.61 in the DMG? Am I the only one who doesn't get why it's there, and only there?Let's see, the rule itself, about how creatures 5 or more lightly obscured squares away from you have total concealment instead of concealment, doesn't seem to have any DM-specific reason to only be in the DMG. Why couldn't it be with the rest of the obscured terrain rules in the PHB's Combat chapter? And it's not even in the DMG's Additional Rules section, but tucked away with the examples of interesting terrain. To be fair, though, I think it was a bad move to split the special terrain section into two parts. The result is that the section on p.44 references p.61 three times!Anyway, I'll be house-ruling that rule away, in part due to the unneeded extra complexity, but mostly out of spite for where they put the rule...</blockquote>

[QUOTE="SWAT, post: 4318468, member: 2751"] What's the deal with the extra rule for lightly obscured terrain on the bottom right of p.61 in the DMG? Am I the only one who doesn't get why it's there, and only there? Let's see, the rule itself, about how creatures 5 or more lightly obscured squares away from you have total concealment instead of concealment, doesn't seem to have any DM-specific reason to only be in the DMG. Why couldn't it be with the rest of the obscured terrain rules in the PHB's Combat chapter? And it's not even in the DMG's Additional Rules section, but tucked away with the examples of interesting terrain. To be fair, though, I think it was a bad move to split the special terrain section into two parts. The result is that the section on p.44 references p.61 three times! Anyway, I'll be house-ruling that rule away, in part due to the unneeded extra complexity, but mostly out of spite for where they put the rule... [/QUOTE]

Verification