The logic of concealment and cover -- why a miss %?

[lukelightning]

One it does do is make cloaks of diplacement virtually indespensible at high levels. With fighters virtually guarranteed to hit on their 1st attacks, 50% miss chance goes a long way.

Plus it makes you immune to sneak attacks.

 

[buzz]

I do think it's odd that pretty much the only things in D&D that are percentage based are chance to miss from concealment and spellcasting failure for armor.

I think the distinction is (and I'm totally guessing here):

• d20 roll = just trying to roll high, not looking for a specific number; can be modified; rolling to succeed.
• d% roll = trying to roll within a specific range; is never modified; rolling to fail.

Different set of mechanics, different set of dice, elimination of confusion. Supposedly.

I also like Thornir's and Scribble's justifications, to which I add: concealment is intangible, cover is tangible. Cover is literally "armor," while concelament is simply uncertainty (and uncertainty that is not mitigated by expertise, hence not a modifier).

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

d20 rolls scale with modifiers and levels; d% do not (at least as currently implemented). If you want to have an element in the game that remains constant regardless of the level of character, use the d% - -you'll see that applies in these cases.

While I wouldn't mind seeing the additional mechanic go away, it should be replaced by something level-insensitive -- which d20+modifiers, particularly for "to-hit" concealment rolls isn't.

 

[Joshua Randall]

As an illustration of how annoying concealment can be, last night my raging, hasted barbarian with attacks of +17/+17/+12 rolled 18, 15, and 20 on his attack rolls... and missed all three because of concealment.

That. Sucked.

I am in favor of removing rules that make the game suck for the players.

 

[Scribble]

Cover should give a Miss chance as well. Your weapon swing or arrow either hits the rock and stops dead or you stike your foe's AC as normal. Taking cover should be superior to taking concealment.

But see that's kind of why I discribed it how I did...

When someone you're aiming at takes cover, say behind a rock, you still know the difference between the rock and the target. The target just becomes smaller and thus harder to hit. So a penalty is applied.

With concealment, remember, technically you see if you hit first, and THEN make your miss chance...

You aim at a target, and then if you hit said target, you find out if said target was actually what you were hoping it was.

If you don't succeed after the miss chance, it doesn't negate the fact that you originally rolled a successfull hit. You put your arrow right where you wanted it to go... It just means where you wanted it to go, was not a good place for it to be.

 

[Hammerhead]

As an illustration of how annoying concealment can be, last night my raging, hasted barbarian with attacks of +17/+17/+12 rolled 18, 15, and 20 on his attack rolls... and missed all three because of concealment.

That. Sucked.

I am in favor of removing rules that make the game suck for the players.

Maybe we should take out negative levels, ability damage, and any ability for the bad guys to improve their ACs.

 

[Stalker0]

As an illustration of how annoying concealment can be, last night my raging, hasted barbarian with attacks of +17/+17/+12 rolled 18, 15, and 20 on his attack rolls... and missed all three because of concealment.

True, but the players can take the same advantage, allowing them to take much less damage from a target.

At high levels, if a wizard gets in melee with a big creatue, concealment may be the ONLY thing that keeps them alive if they somehow lose their mobility spells, as their AC will not protect them.

 

[Evil Monkey]

I am in favor of removing rules that make the game suck for the players.

Concealment comes up in my games quite often. My players love it when it works for them and hate it when it works against them. All in good fun. It balances out.

 

[Darkness]

As an illustration of how annoying concealment can be, last night my raging, hasted barbarian with attacks of +17/+17/+12 rolled 18, 15, and 20 on his attack rolls... and missed all three because of concealment.

That. Sucked.

I am in favor of removing rules that make the game suck for the players.

Well, you could roll concealment % first and then only make the attacks that weren't stopped by the concealment. I think that could reduce the frustration some (at least in extreme cases like the above example). *shrug* Just my 2 cents, though.