After marinating my mind in the stealth rules, I began to question why cover provides stealth. I mean if it's because it obscures the vision, wouldn't that count as concealment? And nothing in the rules that I read ever said that cover can't provide concealment. So I'm planning on just having it so that cover that actually obscures vision also provides concealment. And if cover doesn't provide concealment such as leaving too much visible or being transparent, then it doesn't allow for stealth.
This also makes for a good houserule that an attack that misses because of concealment from soft cover hits the soft cover, and that precise shot negates the concealment from soft cover.
This makes cover a lot more powerful, and position that much more important.
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
In military combat, the concept of cover refers to anything which is capable of physically protecting an individual from enemy fire. This differentiates it from the similar concept of concealment, in that an object or area of concealment only affords the benefit of stealth, not actual protection from small arms fire or artillery fragments. An example of "cover vs. concealment" would be sandbags vs. tall grass.And so:
And if cover doesn't provide concealment such as leaving too much visible or being transparent, then it doesn't allow for stealth.
I think that reeks of common sense. I would not let Precise Shot negate concealment, because you are not 100% sure how they are positioned behind the concealment.
Please define "soft cover." Your definition is prolly different than mine. Soft cover to me is cover that stops small arms and fragmentation.
Soft Cover is a defined game term found in the Combat section.
Soft Cover: Creatures, even your enemies, can provide you with cover against ranged attacks, giving you a +4 bonus to AC. However, such soft cover provides no bonus on Reflex saves, nor does soft cover allow you to make a Stealth check.
Ack, man I have not been letting these rules marinate enough. How did I miss that rider on soft cover? I can see where it wouldn't allow a stealth check, but I could also totally see a person providing stealth if coverer were bigger than you and between your enemy and you. There really is no account to size of creatures, and I feel there should be. More house rules! I would not feel comfortable to allow a small creature and definitely not a tiny creature to provide cover to a medium creature.
Maybe if soft cover provided 10% concealment (or dependent on size of creature providing cover in comparison), and stealth requires at least 20% concealment. Hmm...