(Water & cover) Am I reading this right?

[kigmatzomat]

There are a couple of complex things going on that d20 is trying to model simply.

First of all, spear fishing requires certain learned skills just to figure out where to aim. Crystal clear water isn't. Ever. There is always a significant distortion and your aim point is guaranteed to be off. How much off varies with the angle of incidence but you will not hit where you think unless you are directly over the target where the distortion is zero and even then you are probably guessing wrong about the depth.

Second water is a non-compressible fluid which means the harder you hit it, the harder water gets. Water is basically what flesh is made of so every inch of water is about equal to being behind an inch of flesh. So someone 2' under water is very similar to having complete cover from another body or two; very difficult to get through with much energy left at the end.

Bludgeoning weapons suffer the worst because they have large, blunt surface areas that the water just stops cold. (Hit water with a baseball bat, see how deep you go).
Slashing weapons have narrower cross-sections but they become hard to maneuver; water is so thick that the blade cannot be redirected easily since the blade acts like a 'wing.'

Spears are actually low velocity weapons in comparison to a club or a sword; they rely a lot on your body mass to provide the energy. Clubs & swords are all arm motion and a whole lot of velocity at the point of impact but a spear is braced with the upper torso and/or whole body.

Projectile weapons have a horrible time against water. Stones skip, even bullets can bounce. The problem is the water fails to compress and the missle is deflected heavily. Arrows suffer from excess drag as fletchings are ripped to shreds and begin to tumble.

So as a general rule, I have no trouble saying that water provides an impenetrable layer of cover.

 

[Notmousse]

Thank you for saying what I had intended with more eloquence.

 

[R-Hero]

Yes, but spears don't. Saying "Even high powered rifles can't (...)" doesn't mean "No medieval weapons can (...)".

This is addressed.
Piercing weapons do full damage while slashing/bludgenoning do half damage.

 

[Elemental]

I was pointing out the absurdity of the argument by proposing a more absurd one. Thanks for REALLY illustrating my point for me.

Now, back to bulletproof water and things more cogent...

Sorry if I misunderstood it--it had been a long day, and so my patience was a bit worn. Didn't mean to offend.

 

[green slime]

Sorry if I misunderstood it--it had been a long day, and so my patience was a bit worn. Didn't mean to offend.

Oh no. Its too late for that now. Even in England.

Unfortunately, we have run out of steaks, so we are going to have to burn you tied to a cellery stick. I hope that is satisfactory?

 

[DreamChaser]

All im saying is if you have a puddle thats a few inches deep, and someone is just under the surface, They shouldnt get that complete cover.

Raw they do

But you should be able to make a judgement call , as you would with many other things.

the 5' cube world i'll agree with you, if your fighting someone and they are in a square filled with water, they could very well be deep enough to not count.

But some situations need to be dealth with independantly. If something doesnt make sense at the time, make a judgement call.

See but that's the thing; in the 5' SQUARE (not even cube, thus 3d becomes rough) world of D&D, a creature in a section containing water could not be COMPLETELY submerged unless their entire space was submerged.

Why?

Because a creature is assumed to be moving around the area of his space during the course of a combat round.

Which means that if a creature were in a space partially filled with water, at times a portion of their body would not be submerged...

which means within a combat round, there will be times that they are not "completely submerged"...

which means that they do not benefit from cover...

which means they can be attacked.

Now if their space is completely filled with water, this becomes a non issue because so far there has been broad agreement (even from the OP) that as much as 5 feet of water would be reasonable to provide cover.

DC