D&D 5E Another "have I always played it wrong?" moment: Cover!

[Li Shenron]

The way I've always played cover is, character A goes behind cover to get AC bonus from character B who gets nothing. See this picture where "|" is for example 1/2 cover such as a low wall or tree trunk:

A|               B

Recently I have been reading miniatures games rules, where actually cover works both ways: if A has cover from B then B has cover from A. My first reaction was to think ok, so cover just works differently than in d&d. So I checked the cover rules in the PHB and... I cannot find a definitive answer on this!

Now if the situation was instead the following, it would actually make sense that both gets AC bonus:

A             |              B

but the RAW says nothing about how distance from cover affects the situation.

I have twitted Crawford to hear what is the Sage Advice opinion on this, it would be nice to hear what is the official RAW before applying any ad-hoc adjudications.

 

[CapnZapp]

Huh?

Cover is dependent on a direction.

 

[Oofta]

From the DMG

Cover
To determine whether a target has cover against an attack or other effect on a grid, choose a corner of the attacker’s space or the point of origin of an area of effect. Then trace imaginary lines from that corner to every corner of any one square the target occupies. If one or two of those lines are blocked by an obstacle (including another creature), the target has half cover. If three or four of those lines are blocked but the attack can still reach the target (such as when the target is behind an arrow slit), the target has three-quarters cover.​

If you don't use a grid, it's up to the DM. But the position of the cover absolutely matters. If the PC is peaking out around a wall to fire an arrow at an orc, the orc does not have cover because the PC can draw a line from his point of view to all the space the orc occupies. On the other hand, the PC probably has 3/4 cover from the orc.

 

[Ovinomancer]

RAW is that the DM determines cover. If cover is a tree halfway between the fies, makes sense both get it. If cover is an arrowslit, which is designed to provide cover to the archer while also providing a clear field of fire, it doesn't.

 

[Coroc]

Well that is the purpose of a shield as well, but interestingly the further out you hold a shield the more it covers your body (if the shields center is pointed towards the exact point of an attack of course)

For the table rules are of course like [MENTION=6801845]Oofta[/MENTION] did clarify this, there is no way to construct a dual lance wielding shenanigan out of this.

 

[Li Shenron]

From the DMG

Cover
To determine whether a target has cover against an attack or other effect on a grid, choose a corner of the attacker’s space or the point of origin of an area of effect. Then trace imaginary lines from that corner to every corner of any one square the target occupies. If one or two of those lines are blocked by an obstacle (including another creature), the target has half cover. If three or four of those lines are blocked but the attack can still reach the target (such as when the target is behind an arrow slit), the target has three-quarters cover.​

If you don't use a grid, it's up to the DM. But the position of the cover absolutely matters. If the PC is peaking out around a wall to fire an arrow at an orc, the orc does not have cover because the PC can draw a line from his point of view to all the space the orc occupies. On the other hand, the PC probably has 3/4 cover from the orc.

Thanks for pointing out the DMG which I forgot to check.

The problem tho, is that the DMG considers only ground positions of obstacles and not their height or shape. And in addition, it's only for the grid.

It does seem that the DMG rules favor whoever is closer to the cover, because the attacker can choose its own corner to evaluate cover, while all 4 defender's corners are used - thus someone in the open will always have its 4 corners easili reachable.

Otoh the DMG rule is useless for low walls, arrow slits, or tree trunks that are smaller than a creature space on the grid.

Anyway the grid is an optional rule, while cover is not. What is the RAW when you don't use optional rules?

 

[Coroc]

Well there is half, three quarter and total cover for -2, -5 and zilch chance to hit. you gotta determine what an arrow slit or a low wall means, I would rule an arrow slit -5 and the low wall -2 if you are e.g. fighting from these positions with a ranged weapon,

 

[Rya.Reisender]

I honestly would prefer to do away with cover altogether because it seems to overcomplicate things and only results in all my players saying "I take cover behind" at the end every single turn.

But at least the "DM determines it" is still quite manageable unlike that DMG rule for grids. Ugh.

 

[Oofta]

In TOTM games, the DM makes a judgement call. How obstructed is the target from the perspective of the attacker.

I don't see why that would be particularly difficult if given a decent description of the environment.

 

[Pauper]

It should be noted that the DMG rules for cover are tied to the Playing on a Grid optional rules -- if you're not using a grid, those rules don't apply. The same applies to miniatures game rules -- they depend on the use of a grid/map, and aren't as useful without it.

In the Basic Rules, there are other rules for cover (see p.74):

- If a target is behind an obstacle that covers at least half its body, it has half cover (+2 to AC and Dex saving throws).
- If a target is behind an obstacle that covers roughly three-quarters of its body, it has three-quarters cover (+5 to AC and Dex saving throws).
- If a target is completely concealed by an obstacle, it has total cover (can't be targeted by attacks or spells, but might be reachable by an area of effect).

If a specific target potentially has cover from multiple sources, only the highest bonus applies.

This works in narrative/theater-of-the-mind play, as it depends on what obstacles you can put between you and an attacker. My ruling would be, if there's a random tree trunk on the battlefield, it has no effect on combat unless someone decides to use it for cover.

--
Pauper