| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Okay, a spell caster is around a corner. On his turn, he sticks his head out, fires off a spell, then ducks back behind the corner again. His feet haven't really moved since he just leaned.
Is this possible under our ruleset?
Also there are rules for sniping that may be applicable here. If he was stealthed, he can attempt to stealth when he hides around the corner again, at a -20 penalty. Other than that IkeDoe and LazarX are on top of it.
LazarX, I am sorry, but I don't want to tell my player he has to take a five foot step to peek around the corner.
I thought he'd get total cover, except during his turn, when he would have partial cover as he peeks out.
That means that unless someone readies an action to attack him when he peeks out, he is protected from arrows and line of effect spells.
Is this right?
LazarX, I am sorry, but I don't want to tell my player he has to take a five foot step to peek around the corner.
I thought he'd get total cover, except during his turn, when he would have partial cover as he peeks out.
That means that unless someone readies an action to attack him when he peeks out, he is protected from arrows and line of effect spells.
Is this right?
The problem is, the system is not set up for this. The combat is VERY abstract. It also doesn't specify how many initiative rounds it takes to cast a spell, just the type of action it takes. So, a standard action is longer than a swift action which is longer than a free action. How many of the 6 seconds does he have to remain visible to get the spell off? 1? 2? 3? 5? We don't know. The system abstracts all that and basically says 'If you're doing anything that exposes you during the turn, you don't get total cover at all'.
LazarX, I am sorry, but I don't want to tell my player he has to take a five foot step to peek around the corner.
I thought he'd get total cover, except during his turn, when he would have partial cover as he peeks out.
That means that unless someone readies an action to attack him when he peeks out, he is protected from arrows and line of effect spells.
Is this right?
I would not agree with this approach. I wouldn't allow this in my games.
It is contrary to the ways that a lot of the combat set-ups work. Free action, standard actions and full round actions. You don't get to take two move actions (doesn't matter if your feet don't move -which I find hard to visualize) and a standard action. Plus, casting spells normally takes somatic actions, in which your body has to move in certain ways, postures, which is hard to do if you are off balance when "leaning" out, around a corner, while you cast.
And, it makes light of a feat chain that allows something like this for archers - Shot on the Run.
I would allow it if the sorc/wizard/caster took the appropriate "Shot on the run" feats for it.
Otherwise it's going to be:
Round 1: Move around corner and cast #1
Round 2: Cast #2 and move out of line of sight.
Combat is a b***, but this way he still has 50% of the time total cover, so not so bad :)
|
The problem is, the system is not set up for this. The combat is VERY abstract. It also doesn't specify how many initiative rounds it takes to cast a spell, just the type of action it takes. So, a standard action is longer than a swift action which is longer than a free action. How many of the 6 seconds does he have to remain visible to get the spell off? 1? 2? 3? 5? We don't know. The system abstracts all that and basically says 'If you're doing anything that exposes you during the turn, you don't get total cover at all'.
There is a reason it is not set up for that. It makes to combat drag out too much. If you have ever played 1st edition where the type of weapon you wielded affected your initiative and when your second attack would happen then you would appreciate the simplicity of this system.
As far as prawn's concern goes: what your player wants to do requires feats or DM fiat. If you are fine with him doing that then allow it. Just be consistent in applying it to NPC spell casters and archers.
If you are inclined to allow it then here is my suggestion. Have him be flat footed for the period that he is casting the spell. In this fashion if a mob readys an action he is easier to hit at this point.
That's pretty much the question we ask: Do you want the bad guys to be able to do that to you? If the answer is yes, then I don't mind having people doing it. I don't know that I would equate it with shot on the run. He is simply peeking around the corner.
I was asking if there is a way to do this in RAW. If there isn't, I'll just use my house rule.
Thanks
P
Which, I think, brings us back to the problem. When he peeks around the corner, he is extending himself into another space, essentially taking a five-foot-step. Then he fires off his spell. Then he takes another five-foot-step to lean back into his square.
Two move actions, one standard.
Personally, I picture cowboys in these situations. Here they are, taking cover, firing at one-another. In the movies, cowboys are hit randomly when they stand up or lean out to fire, which the game abstracts by having the character actually occupy that corner, but gain bonuses from cover. The better cowboys might get a good shot off. The lousy ones will hit the obstruction, instead.
"When he peeks around the corner, he is extending himself into another space, essentially taking a five-foot-step."
So in order to peek around the corner, the guy needs to walk ten feet? You and I both know that's wrong. If you wish to follow the rules to the letter, I guess I can understand your choice. I don't mind filling in this hole in the rules as a DM and letting the player do this.
|
|
Which, I think, brings us back to the problem. When he peeks around the corner, he is extending himself into another space, essentially taking a five-foot-step. Then he fires off his spell. Then he takes another five-foot-step to lean back into his square.
Two move actions, one standard.
Personally, I picture cowboys in these situations. Here they are, taking cover, firing at one-another. In the movies, cowboys are hit randomly when they stand up or lean out to fire, which the game abstracts by having the character actually occupy that corner, but gain bonuses from cover. The better cowboys might get a good shot off. The lousy ones will hit the obstruction, instead.
Your analysis is not quite correct. The game already allows characters to extend into an adjacent space with no movement. It is call combat. Every time a monk kicks some orc or a cleric heals his companion they must intrude upon an adjacent space to do so. They do not take extra steps to do this it just happens.
Having established that it is possible to extend into an adjacent space under RAW we can see that such leaning into another space exists in the rules but is not explained by the rules. So it is not a problem really as the player's DM is willing to allow him to do that leaning if all other creatures can do so too. I think it is a reasonable solution and does not require rewriting the game to fit this circumstance.
He's by the corner, he probably has a +4 cover bonus to ac. If he wants to define that as being exposed some of the time and hidden the rest of it, fine.
This doesn't work without shot on the run.
|
If he is insistent on casting in this fashion, have one or more enemies (assuming they are aware that he was there) wait until he peeks around the corner to cast, then they attack with their bows (Delay Action). Now he gets an attack (with +4 to AC for Cover), and if he's hit, he needs to make a Concentration check DC 10 + damage taken + spell level. If he fails the Concentration check, he loses the spell.
The problem is, the system is not set up for this. The combat is VERY abstract. It also doesn't specify how many initiative rounds it takes to cast a spell, just the type of action it takes. So, a standard action is longer than a swift action which is longer than a free action. How many of the 6 seconds does he have to remain visible to get the spell off? 1? 2? 3? 5? We don't know. The system abstracts all that and basically says 'If you're doing anything that exposes you during the turn, you don't get total cover at all'.There is a reason it is not set up for that. It makes to combat drag out too much. If you have ever played 1st edition where the type of weapon you wielded affected your initiative and when your second attack would happen then you would appreciate the simplicity of this system.
Never said it was a bad thing, just said that's the way combat is abstracted. I've been in systems that allowed you to do what he's talking about (GURPS for example) that didn't have slow combats (actually, GURPS combat tends to be pretty quick as people usually end up dieing pretty quickly from limbs getting blown off if you're using powerful guns or spells).
I do think the earlier mentioned cast on the run (although I think that's 3.5 only isn't it?). Would allow you to step out, cast, step back into total cover (even 10 feet back).
|
A wizard standing at the corner of the hallway its being smart by using cover. He does not have to use any actions to cast around the corner. The border of his space touches the hallway meaning he can see and act into the open adjacent squares in the hall. He gets a +4 cover bonus to AC, thats it. An archer down the hall can still target the wizard, its just a little harder. Keep it simple.
--Vrocket Launcher Tag
In my game, stealth wasn't a question. It was a mage and a fighter firing at each other over the course of several turns. They both got some cover bonus. The fighter was using a bow, and the mage was using magic missle. Even with the concentration check form damage taken by the arrows, the fighter still lost.
Due to the abstraction of the game turn and perception rules, if you peek around the corner at any point during your turn, you lose the total cover bonus for the entire turn. The system is not designed to handle anything else.
If you look at it realistically, a wizard casting around the corner.
1. Peeks around the corner to get an idea where his foes are.
2. Starts casting the spell.
3. Peeks around the corner right as he finishes the spell to target it.
4. Ducks behind the corner after the spell is done.
5. Does another quick peek around the corner to see what effect the spell had.
IE the wizard probably peeks more than one time during their 6 second turn and thus gives his opponents several chances to attack him.
Steps 1 and 5 are assumed under the standard perception rules. If the wizard wants to have total cover against an enemy, then the enemy gets total cover(which grants total concealment) against the wizard. Thus, the wizard CANNOT know anything about the fighter's movements while he is cowering behind the wall. So, if the wizard is getting total cover, and you are letting him know where the enemies are, then you are letting him metagame. For all the wizard knows, he could peek around the corner to cast a spell to find that the fighter is 5 feet away with a big sword ready to swing.
The OP has clearly decided to house rule this. The rules are also clear and have been described well. The rules as written already factor in the idea of peeking around a corner. That's where the +4 bonus to AC comes from. The confusion may come from not realizing that the rules are an abstraction of combat. Because the mechanic is turn based it is easy to forget that the abstraction is supposedly modeling SIMULTANEOUS activities. The reason the fighter can shoot you is because he does so as you are shooting HIM. To avoid being shot by the fighter your best bet is to stay away from the corner. If you want to improve your odds of getting a shot off, you can take a feat and/or cast swift or quickened spells.
To allow wizards or archers free "peek around the corner" benefits is unfair, disregards the rules and might indicate a lack of understanding of the existing combat abstraction.
The OP can house rule as he likes, but I hope most readers understand why they should not follow suit and stick with the well thought out rule here.
To allow wizards or archers free "peek around the corner" benefits is unfair, disregards the rules and might indicate a lack of understanding of the existing combat abstraction.
I am not sure why this is unfair since the PCs and enemies alike can both do it.
The rules are also clear and have been described well.
It's not as clear as you think, Brassbaboon, since people here seem to have a half-dozen different opinions about it.
I don't want to tell a player he can't do something cool in-game because of an inference about the rules. The whole point of the game is to have fun. Where there is grey area or any room for judgement, as I believe there is in this case, I say judge on the side of fun. I have played with the same people for many years, and this policy has served me well.
The OP can house rule as he likes, but I hope most readers understand why they should not follow suit and stick with the well thought out rule here.
For the people in my game it is more fun for the mage and the archer to have a duck and cover duel than to tell them they can't do it because the rules don't support it.
If you don't like my house rule, Brassbaboon, that's fine, but I suggest that when there are grey areas requiring interpretation, erring on the side of fun will be a good policy.
I am not sure why this is unfair since the PCs and enemies alike can both do it.
One of the problems that I have with your houserule is that it makes casters more powerful, letting them have what an archer needs 3 feats to get, for free.
It would be easy for them to have something blocking a melee character from attacking them (perhaps one of the pit spells cast near the intersection and a wind wall to take care of ranged attacks) and being able to get off as many spells as they wanted too, with no chance of being stopped, interrupted or hurt.
Cool ideas are fun, but not if they can end up breaking the game, especially when they break it for other character types.
One of the problems that I have with your houserule is that it makes casters more powerful, letting them have what an archer needs 3 feats to get, for free.
No, in my house rule, both archers and casters can do the same peek around the corner trick. Every PC in my party has both ranged and melee attacks, as do most opponents. If all spell casters and all archers can do it, how is it unfair?
The three feats let you run before and after attack. My house rule says everyone can stand at a corner and fire around it. When they fire around it, they have partial cover.
No, in my house rule, both archers and casters can do the same peek around the corner trick. Every PC in my party has both ranged and melee attacks, as do most opponents. If all spell casters and all archers can do it, how is it unfair?
One of the problems that I have with your houserule is that it makes casters more powerful, letting them have what an archer needs 3 feats to get, for free.
Most non-caster PCs are specialized in either melee or ranged. Even if the melee character has a ranged weapon, they still have to draw it, load it, and then ready an action to attack your caster and/or archer.
If all casters and archers can do it, then you are giving them all 3 feats for free. Are you giving 3 free feats to the non-casters and non-archers?
The three feats let you run before and after attack.
Actually, the feat doesn't allow you to run at any time during the round. It allows you to move before and after your attack, up to your speed.
My house rule says everyone can stand at a corner and fire around it. When they fire around it, they have partial cover.
Not sure if you are saying that they stay in sight and have partial cover due to the corner, or if they can peek around the corner to get their spell off with partial cover?
|
|
Echoing what others have said: the Wizard can
1) stand next to the corner and have cover all the time (depending on where the baddies are relative to him, of course); between his placement, ally placement, and Line of Sight rules, it's possible that some enemies will get cover vs him or that he will not have Line of Sight on all the baddies.
2) Have total cover one round, then step out (move action), cast, and end turn out of cover. Next turn, cast again, then mvoe back into full cover.
3) as 2), but with "spring attack", "running attack", "casting attack", or similar feat / home-brew feat, allowing him to move back into full cover after casting. Fair, because baddies can still ready actions to whack him (which will also disrupt his magic), and because he had to spend multiple feats to do it.
4) Use sniping rules to maintain "Stealthed" status; not quite the same as cover, but still really helpful to have.
Not sure if you are saying that they stay in sight and have partial cover due to the corner, or if they can peek around the corner to get their spell off with partial cover?
PC is behind the corner. Total cover. PC peeks around the corner and fires their bow or spell, and they have partial cover.
If it is two spell casters (or two archers) firing at each other from around corners (say they are across the street from each other), they have exactly the same advantages, which seems fair.
If you have an archer versus a spell caster, I guess you might say it is unfair to the archer because you can only ready a standard action, so an archer might not get his full attack, if he normally fires more than one arrow.
On the other hand, the spell caster who is hit by the archer will have to make a concentration check to finish casting the spell, and if he fails, the spell doesn't go off at all which is an advantage for the archer.
|
Having established that it is possible to extend into an adjacent space under RAW we can see that such leaning into another space exists in the rules but is not explained by the rules. So it is not a problem really as the player's DM is willing to allow him to do that leaning if all other creatures can do so too. I think it is a reasonable solution and does not require rewriting the game to fit this circumstance.
Given RAW, the wizard does not need to "step out" at all. Since vision originates from each corner of the wizard square, they have line of sight to the target anyway.
There you go -- problem solved. Using the "abstract combat" technique, no less!
But I would be careful with allowing a wizard to "pop his head out" around a corner. What do you do with a creature that has 10-ft reach? Can such a create stay 10-ft back from the corner and still "pop their head out"? If so, what's to stop said creature from staying 5-ft back from the corner, then popping their head out 10-ft? This eliminates any way for the PCs to attack back again since the creature has total cover...
Mind you, I don't have a problem with anyone who wants to house rule things like this. Having a GM is what makes the pen&paper games so much better than any computer-based RPG, IMO. But unless the GM has taken the time to consider how this ruling with affect other rules (such as reach) then it's best not to start modifying things...
Again, the rules here are clear. The existing rules already factor in "peeking around the corner." If the DM and player want to "have fun" by role playing the peeking part, they are welcome and highly encouraged to do so. There are no doubt hundreds of combat examples of how granting three free combat feats would make the fight "more fun." Want to make melee more fun? Give every melee combatant free combat expertise, free TWF and free spring attack. Hey, it's just more fun that way!
Look at the graphic on pg. 194 of the Core Rulebook.
I believe situation #3 covers something similar to what you're talking about. The caster can make the attack, but the target has cover (not too big a deal because it's probably a touch attack). The target can make a ranged attack against the caster, but the caster also has cover. This goes on his total AC and not just his touch AC. Caster definitely has the advantage.
Lol. I love how this thread just keeps going.
OP: Does it work like this?
Everyone else: No, the rules say to do it this way.
OP: Well, me and my players would rather it go this way for fun, so we're doing that.
^^ how was that not the end of the conversation? :)
If he is insistent on casting in this fashion, have one or more enemies (assuming they are aware that he was there) wait until he peeks around the corner to cast, then they attack with their bows (Delay Action). Now he gets an attack (with +4 to AC for Cover), and if he's hit, he needs to make a Concentration check DC 10 + damage taken + spell level. If he fails the Concentration check, he loses the spell.
This is the way I would handle this. I was hoping someone else would already have done the work of typing it all out so I wouldn't have to. :)
You can solve a lot of the problem by defining how long it takes to cast a spell. One standard action = 10 segments = 3 seconds. There you go.
So everyone rolls initiative. For 10 segments before the wizards turn, he is vulnerable because he is sticking his head out, gaining the cover bonus. The rest of the time, he is completely concealed around the corner.
Not really, it just makes things even more weird and overly complicated.
Combat number 1, everyone rolls well for initiative. The highest initiative is a 20, the lowest is a 15. Everyone acts within the same 1.5 second interval according to your 10 segments = 3 seconds rule.
Combat number 2, guy with a +5 initi mod rolls a 20 giving him a 25. Monster with a -2 init mod rolls a 1 giving him a -1. The combat rounds are actually taking 25 initiative segments which is 7.5 seconds.
OR
You can just go with the rules. If you want the benefit of total cover from an opponent, then you cannot do anything during your turn that gives them LOS to you. If you gain LOS to you opponent, then your opponent gets LOS to you and your total cover becomes just cover.
Fair enough.
Personally, I wish casting was always a full round action and that being hit at any point during a round before your spell goes off would force a concentration check.
That is actually not a bad idea for a low magic game. Double the casting time for all spells.
Not really, it just makes things even more weird and overly complicated.Combat number 1, everyone rolls well for initiative. The highest initiative is a 20, the lowest is a 15. Everyone acts within the same 1.5 second interval according to your 10 segments = 3 seconds rule.
I agree that your suggestion is overly complicated.
We already have the readied action. The archer or an opposing spell caster can say, "I ready an action to nail him when he sticks his head out." The corner guy may even lose his spell that way.
Want to make melee more fun? Give every melee combatant free combat expertise, free TWF and free spring attack. Hey, it's just more fun that way!
Now you are being silly. I said that if there is a grey area in the rules (like this one, where we have multiple interpretations), err on the side of more fun.
I think most people would endorse this principle.
The DM that says "Screw the players" when there is grey area, soon may find himself with out any players at all.
|
|
Look at the graphic on pg. 194 of the Core Rulebook.
I believe situation #3 covers something similar to what you're talking about. The caster can make the attack, but the target has cover (not too big a deal because it's probably a touch attack). The target can make a ranged attack against the caster, but the caster also has cover. This goes on his total AC and not just his touch AC. Caster definitely has the advantage.
However, the original poster seems to be saying that the Wizard has Total Cover, and therefore can't be attacked. Furthermore, it seems as though her opponent's cover bonus versus the Wizard is being ignored, since the Wizard has poked her head around the corner.
Me, I'm just fine with the rules as written.
Want to make melee more fun? Give every melee combatant free combat expertise, free TWF and free spring attack. Hey, it's just more fun that way!Now you are being silly. I said that if there is a grey area in the rules (like this one, where we have multiple interpretations), err on the side of more fun.
I think most people would endorse this principle.
The DM that says "Screw the players" when there is grey area, soon may find himself with out any players at all.
Prawn, I use that principle quite liberally myself. You and I don't agree that this is a "gray area." I believe it is clearly and explicitly covered in the rules as I and several others have explained. As far as my melee example being "silly" i'm glad you see it that way since the "peek around the corner to shoot" house rule is pretty much directly comparable since it is basically granting the ranged attacker three free ranged feats, as has been shown by several posters here.
Using the rules properly should not detract from the fun of the game play experience. I've been both a player and a DM for decades and have been routinely in exactly the situation described here. Funny how using the rules correctly never detracted from our fun.
Lol. I love how this thread just keeps going.
OP: Does it work like this?
Everyone else: No, the rules say to do it this way.
Everyone else, Eben?
Check the thread. More people agree with me than disagree.You and I don't agree that this is a "gray area." I believe it is clearly and explicitly covered in the rules as I and several others have explained.
How can you say this is not a grey area when we have a dozen different interpretations of it on this thread?
There are three camps: You can't do it (3 people), you can do it (11 people), or you need shot on the run to do it (3 People).
This is totally a grey area.
Here is a summary of the interpretations so far.
CAMP 1: CAN'T DO IT
LazarX, Mistwalker and Bruunwald say you can't do it because it requires too many moves.
CAMP 2: YOU CAN DO IT
IkeDoe says the caster only needs line of effect
MDT says 'If you're doing anything that exposes you during the turn, you don't get total cover at all'
karkon, King of Vrock, reefwood, and azhrei_fje says it works because it is possible to extend into an adjacent space under RAW
Heymitch and That Old Guy say it works, but remember the concentration check
Charender says it works, but you'd lose cover your whole turn.
Geeky Frignit says The caster can make the attack, but the target has cover
cranewings says it works if you modify the init system to allow it
CAMP 3 YOU NEED Shot on the Run TO DO IT
Rickmeister BigNorseWolf BobChuck says it would work if you had shot on the run
Hmm, three different interpretations, pretty evenly divided. Seems like a grey area to me.
And if it is a grey area, my reccomendation is to err on the side of fun, and let the players do it.
Charender says it works, but you'd lose cover your whole turn.
Slight correction.
It works, but you would lose full cover(+8 AC) for you turn. You would still have cover(+4 AC).
If you are trying to do this from behind a low wall instead of around a corner, it's pretty easy:
Start in a prone position behind the wall.
Move action-- stand up.
Standard action-- fire a ranged attack.
Free action-- drop prone.
I think I'd go with the rules on a situation like this. With the house rule, how is popping out for free and popping back into full cover - while still having cover while taking the shot/casting the spell - not always better than simply taking cover? Why would anyone not do this? In a game, you really want better trade-offs in choices than this. Why would anyone take the dominated strategy?
To make something like this work - posing a real choice between peeking around from full cover and simply taking cover - I think you need to either not allow any cover at all while the character is peeking around (a solution I would not favor either) or impose some kind of a snap shot penalty for trying to size up a dynamic situation, find a target, and hit it in an instant rather than being able to observe it develop continually. I'd probably impose a -4 to hit and maybe even require a to hit roll for area-targeted spells (treating misses like splash weapons) if the character wanted to try this particular tactic. They simply don't have as good a chance to identify and hit a target as a character directly observing the situation.
|
|
Pleas use 1X1 grid map. Then look at it and tell me exatly how you have full cover? So if your in the door square to a hall. And there in a door square across the hall or just in the hall. You only get partal cover ever. So thay can target the caster at any time. All you have to see is any part of the square there in.
Cover
To determine whether your target has cover from your
ranged attack, choose a corner of your square. If any line
from this corner to any corner of the target’s square passes
through a square or border that blocks line of effect or
provides cover, or through a square occupied by a creature,
the target has cover (+4 to AC).
Total Cover
If you don’t have line of effect to your target (that is, you cannot draw any line from your square to your target’s square without crossing a solid barrier), he is considered to have total cover from you. You can’t make an attack against a target that has total cover.