This seems like a basic 101 question so I apologize in advance.
Setup: A series of goblins are using a three-foot wall as coverage and have all their movement available.
Can the goblins attack with their ranged weapon and then duck behind the wall and get what could possibly be 'Three-Quarters' or 'Total' cover? Next round could the goblins pop-up from behind the wall and again attack with their ranged weapons and duck behind the wall? If this is possible I assume the goblins would not need to fall prone to get the coverage?
I would say the goblins do need to drop prone to get full cover (just to be fair), but can get 1/2-3/4 while standing.
And while I totally appreciate using the rules with realistic tactics, keep in mind that this could make the encounter much harder. I've heard stories of goblins TPKing mid level (7-9) parties just by having terrain advantage.
Yes, the goblins can use this tactic. So could the players in a comparable situation. This is also more or less how the encounter is intended to run.
The three foot high wall has crenelations. (This means the higher and lower parts so it is possible to step out from behind a taller part and shoot from the lower then move behind the higher part again). Goblins are small creatures. According to Volo's they are typically between 3 and 4 feet tall. They can easily hide behind a 3' high wall and have very little need to duck and certainly don't need to go prone to obtain total cover.
This can be a challenging encounter for low level characters especially with the caltrops in the way making it difficult to rush the wall while the goblins pop out and shoot at anyone trying to run up. One option for the players is to move into view with ranged weapons while the goblins are behind the wall and then ready an action to shoot the goblins when they emerge to shoot.
If a Goblin is 3 feet tall, they're behind full cover
A 4 foot tall Goblin is behind three-quarters cover
Can the Goblins attack from behind cover? Generally, yes, but not always. Line of sight dictates who can attack what. Elevation matters too, but let's assume a flat plane.
Firing from three-quarters cover is no problem at all; the cover only impacts incoming attacks
Full cover is a no-go; creatures cannot be targeted. Full cover blocks line of sight completely, and--on a flat plane--the Goblin can't see their enemies either.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
I'm in the camp of giving them 3/4 cover when standing behind cover, 1/2 cover if shot with a readied action, and requiring them to go fully prone to get the benefits of full cover. However, I'd also rule that it's enough coverage for them to use nimble escape to make a stealth attempt, so a successful stealth roll would essentially give them the benefits of full cover... there's just a chance of failure on that versus going prone.
Yes, the goblins can use this tactic. So could the players in a comparable situation. This is also more or less how the encounter is intended to run.
The three foot high wall has crenelations. (This means the higher and lower parts so it is possible to step out from behind a taller part and shoot from the lower then move behind the higher part again). Goblins are small creatures. According to Volo's they are typically between 3 and 4 feet tall. They can easily hide behind a 3' high wall and have very little need to duck and certainly don't need to go prone to obtain total cover.
This can be a challenging encounter for low level characters especially with the caltrops in the way making it difficult to rush the wall while the goblins pop out and shoot at anyone trying to run up. One option for the players is to move into view with ranged weapons while the goblins are behind the wall and then ready an action to shoot the goblins when they emerge to shoot.
It was this room where the session ended on Sunday so next game we start with the caltrop hall and the goblins are on alert because the doorbell/trap did get triggered. Now that I have a better understanding of the tactic both from the Goblins and Players side I feel comfortable running that encounter.
If a Goblin is 3 feet tall, they're behind full cover
A 4 foot tall Goblin is behind three-quarters cover
Can the Goblins attack from behind cover? Generally, yes, but not always. Line of sight dictates who can attack what. Elevation matters too, but let's assume a flat plane.
Firing from three-quarters cover is no problem at all; the cover only impacts incoming attacks
Full cover is a no-go; creatures cannot be targeted. Full cover blocks line of sight completely, and--on a flat plane--the Goblin can't see their enemies either.
How tall they are is not something I would have considered and wouldn't that be hard to keep a constant 'height' chart for any creature where this type of cover would be in play. I understand with a goblin because the height is defined in Volo's as a player race but what if the same situation is a Deathlock, medium-sized, but nothing to give a defined height.
Still, your point, in this case of my question, is valid and something I should think about when it comes to the encounter.
BK, when in doubt, just look at the generic creature size:
Creature Size
Each creature takes up a different amount of space. The Size Categories table shows how much space a creature of a particular size controls in combat. Objects sometimes use the same size categories.
Size Categories
Size
Space
Tiny
2 1/2 by 2 1/2 ft.
Small
5 by 5 ft.
Medium
5 by 5 ft.
Large
10 by 10 ft.
Huge
15 by 15 ft.
Gargantuan
20 by 20 ft. or larger
5e doesn't place as much emphasis on height as older editions, but creatures (size medium and larger) are typically taller than the dimensions of the cube(s) they actually occupy:
Tiny, 1-2 ft
Small, 2-4 ft
Medium, 4-8 ft
Large, 8-16 ft
Huge, 16-32 ft
Gargantuan, 32-64 ft
Colossal, 64+ ft
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
BK, when in doubt, just look at the generic creature size:
Creature Size
Each creature takes up a different amount of space. The Size Categories table shows how much space a creature of a particular size controls in combat. Objects sometimes use the same size categories.
Size Categories
Size
Space
Tiny
2 1/2 by 2 1/2 ft.
Small
5 by 5 ft.
Medium
5 by 5 ft.
Large
10 by 10 ft.
Huge
15 by 15 ft.
Gargantuan
20 by 20 ft. or larger
5e doesn't place as much emphasis on height as older editions, but creatures (size medium and larger) are typically taller than the dimensions of the cube(s) they actually occupy:
Tiny, 1-2 ft
Small, 2-4 ft
Medium, 4-8 ft
Large, 8-16 ft
Huge, 16-32 ft
Gargantuan, 32-64 ft
Colossal, 64+ ft
I knew about the size chart but had not taken account of doing some height math based on that information.
So, just for conversation, how often in your games do you apply height outside of high jumping movement with creatures?
TBH, not often. I use it most frequently for situations exactly like yours--ambushes, urban encounters, and sieges/assaults.
For adjustments to cover from changes in elevation, I typically eyeball the angle of elevation from attacker to defender. Attacking upward at an angle of ~20°-60° increases the defender's cover by one interval, and attacking downward at an angle of ~20°-60° decreases the defender's cover by one interval.
For angles >60° I adjust by two intervals, which effectively places the defender in either total (untargetable) or no cover.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
I would rule that unless you have some sort of special sense to see past your own cover, you can't have total cover if you intend to attack. As a shooty person, you need to have some sense of where your targets are and what they are doing, and it takes a second or two to aim effectively. When it's not your turn you would still need to peak out. If you are hiding, that means you are being really sneaky about how, when, and where you are peaking out.
I would rule that unless you have some sort of special sense to see past your own cover, you can't have total cover if you intend to attack. As a shooty person, you need to have some sense of where your targets are and what they are doing, and it takes a second or two to aim effectively. When it's not your turn you would still need to peak out. If you are hiding, that means you are being really sneaky about how, when, and where you are peaking out.
The total cover would come into play after the goblins would fire with their ranged weapons and either drop prone or take into the height discussion.
Never would be the case that they attack with total cover.
I would rule that unless you have some sort of special sense to see past your own cover, you can't have total cover if you intend to attack. As a shooty person, you need to have some sense of where your targets are and what they are doing, and it takes a second or two to aim effectively. When it's not your turn you would still need to peak out. If you are hiding, that means you are being really sneaky about how, when, and where you are peaking out.
I'd just like to point out that this is not RAW. Creatures can be behind total cover, step out and make an attack and return to total cover. Players, in particular rogues, do this all the time. Using an action to hide requires that the creature be unseen when they do it. Most often this is provided by an obstacle providing total cover. Hide behind cover, step out, make a ranged attack and return to total cover is a frequently used tactic in my experience by both NPCs and PCs and does not require any special sense or otherwise being aware of what the creatures that are out of sight are doing for the rest of the turn before the creature steps out to make their attack.
If you have to be able see creatures BEFORE you move in order to make an attack on them that turn then it breaks a number of mechanics. Characters can't run around a corner to make an attack since they would be unaware of where the creatures were before going around the corner. The character's turn represents the same 6 seconds whether they are making a ranged or melee attack. If the poster above requires the creature to be constantly peeking in order to step out and make a ranged attack then they could not step out and make a melee attack either since they have the same amount of time to see where the opponent is and if that is insufficient for a ranged attack it is also insufficient for a melee attack ... i.e. to me at least the idea doesn't make any sense as described since moving and making a ranged attack takes the same amount of time as moving and making a melee attack.
BK, when in doubt, just look at the generic creature size:
Creature Size
Each creature takes up a different amount of space. The Size Categories table shows how much space a creature of a particular size controls in combat. Objects sometimes use the same size categories.
Size Categories
Size
Space
Tiny
2 1/2 by 2 1/2 ft.
Small
5 by 5 ft.
Medium
5 by 5 ft.
Large
10 by 10 ft.
Huge
15 by 15 ft.
Gargantuan
20 by 20 ft. or larger
5e doesn't place as much emphasis on height as older editions, but creatures (size medium and larger) are typically taller than the dimensions of the cube(s) they actually occupy:
Tiny, 1-2 ft
Small, 2-4 ft
Medium, 4-8 ft
Large, 8-16 ft
Huge, 16-32 ft
Gargantuan, 32-64 ft
Colossal, 64+ ft
I knew about the size chart but had not taken account of doing some height math based on that information.
So, just for conversation, how often in your games do you apply height outside of high jumping movement with creatures?
Characters of most races are Medium, a size category including creatures that are roughly 4 to 8 feet tall. Members of a few races are Small (between 2 and 4 feet tall), which means that certain rules of the game affect them differently. The most important of these rules is that Small characters have trouble wielding heavy weapons, as explained in theEquipment section.
I would rule that unless you have some sort of special sense to see past your own cover, you can't have total cover if you intend to attack. As a shooty person, you need to have some sense of where your targets are and what they are doing, and it takes a second or two to aim effectively. When it's not your turn you would still need to peak out. If you are hiding, that means you are being really sneaky about how, when, and where you are peaking out.
The total cover would come into play after the goblins would fire with their ranged weapons and either drop prone or take into the height discussion.
Never would be the case that they attack with total cover.
That's only partially true, to the extent that nobody really attacks with cover... cover is only relevant with regard to the creature being attacked. Movements within cover to get line-of-sight on a target are completely normal. You're essentially interacting with the environment, and that can be included with your action (if not actually changing location) or movement. Cover is only applicable to the extent that it conceals a target from your sight, at the moment an attack is made, and is based on the percentage of their body that is being obscured. There's overlap on that point with unseen attackers.
When an attacker is firing their bow upward at a target, and there is an obstruction blocking view of the target's body, the obstruction conceals more of the target's body than it would on an even plane. Likewise, when attacking downward an obstruction conceals less of the target's body than it would on an even plane. This is why I place a lot of emphasis on elevation as a factor in the RAW for cover that many don't take into account. The degree of cover is only determined by percentage of concealment, and elevation is absolutely a factor influencing that percentage.
The only (relevant) thing that would prevent a creature from attacking while behind an obstruction would be when it is not possible to get line-of-sight on a target from that position: obstruction is too high to lean over, too wide to see around, no holes to see/shoot through, etc. A creature firing from a castle rampart is likely to be considered, in relation to a creature on the ground, as being behind total cover; that does not prohibit the creature up top from raining arrows down freely. They can see you juuust fine! :P
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
Even archer towers that only have slits for the arrows to shoot through are 3/4ths cover from below. If any straight line can be drawn between creatures, the cover is not total. It is total cover when no straight lines can be drawn between them, that means neither can attack the other.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
This seems like a basic 101 question so I apologize in advance.
Setup: A series of goblins are using a three-foot wall as coverage and have all their movement available.
Can the goblins attack with their ranged weapon and then duck behind the wall and get what could possibly be 'Three-Quarters' or 'Total' cover? Next round could the goblins pop-up from behind the wall and again attack with their ranged weapons and duck behind the wall? If this is possible I assume the goblins would not need to fall prone to get the coverage?
I think this is totally viable and legal strategy. And I don’t even think they would need to fall prone to get at least 3/4 cover, if not Total.
Remember Goblins can Dash (and Disengage) as a bonus action, which favors even more this tactic.
I would say the goblins do need to drop prone to get full cover (just to be fair), but can get 1/2-3/4 while standing.
And while I totally appreciate using the rules with realistic tactics, keep in mind that this could make the encounter much harder. I've heard stories of goblins TPKing mid level (7-9) parties just by having terrain advantage.
Maybe remind players they can ready actions.
Definitely this! Monsters can do it too, if the party start using the same tactic.
Yeah, one counter to this for ranged attackers is that the players can Ready their action to attack when the goblins stand up.
Yes, the goblins can use this tactic. So could the players in a comparable situation. This is also more or less how the encounter is intended to run.
The three foot high wall has crenelations. (This means the higher and lower parts so it is possible to step out from behind a taller part and shoot from the lower then move behind the higher part again). Goblins are small creatures. According to Volo's they are typically between 3 and 4 feet tall. They can easily hide behind a 3' high wall and have very little need to duck and certainly don't need to go prone to obtain total cover.
This can be a challenging encounter for low level characters especially with the caltrops in the way making it difficult to rush the wall while the goblins pop out and shoot at anyone trying to run up. One option for the players is to move into view with ranged weapons while the goblins are behind the wall and then ready an action to shoot the goblins when they emerge to shoot.
Goblins are usually ~3-4 feet tall, so it basically comes down to two things:
Then refer to the section on cover in Ch 9.
Can the Goblins attack from behind cover? Generally, yes, but not always. Line of sight dictates who can attack what. Elevation matters too, but let's assume a flat plane.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
I'm in the camp of giving them 3/4 cover when standing behind cover, 1/2 cover if shot with a readied action, and requiring them to go fully prone to get the benefits of full cover. However, I'd also rule that it's enough coverage for them to use nimble escape to make a stealth attempt, so a successful stealth roll would essentially give them the benefits of full cover... there's just a chance of failure on that versus going prone.
Watch Crits for Breakfast, an adults-only RP-Heavy Roll20 Livestream at twitch.tv/afterdisbooty
And now you too can play with the amazing art and assets we use in Roll20 for our campaign at Hazel's Emporium
It was this room where the session ended on Sunday so next game we start with the caltrop hall and the goblins are on alert because the doorbell/trap did get triggered. Now that I have a better understanding of the tactic both from the Goblins and Players side I feel comfortable running that encounter.
How tall they are is not something I would have considered and wouldn't that be hard to keep a constant 'height' chart for any creature where this type of cover would be in play. I understand with a goblin because the height is defined in Volo's as a player race but what if the same situation is a Deathlock, medium-sized, but nothing to give a defined height.
Still, your point, in this case of my question, is valid and something I should think about when it comes to the encounter.
BK, when in doubt, just look at the generic creature size:
5e doesn't place as much emphasis on height as older editions, but creatures (size medium and larger) are typically taller than the dimensions of the cube(s) they actually occupy:
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
I knew about the size chart but had not taken account of doing some height math based on that information.
So, just for conversation, how often in your games do you apply height outside of high jumping movement with creatures?
TBH, not often. I use it most frequently for situations exactly like yours--ambushes, urban encounters, and sieges/assaults.
For adjustments to cover from changes in elevation, I typically eyeball the angle of elevation from attacker to defender. Attacking upward at an angle of ~20°-60° increases the defender's cover by one interval, and attacking downward at an angle of ~20°-60° decreases the defender's cover by one interval.
For angles >60° I adjust by two intervals, which effectively places the defender in either total (untargetable) or no cover.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
I would rule that unless you have some sort of special sense to see past your own cover, you can't have total cover if you intend to attack. As a shooty person, you need to have some sense of where your targets are and what they are doing, and it takes a second or two to aim effectively. When it's not your turn you would still need to peak out. If you are hiding, that means you are being really sneaky about how, when, and where you are peaking out.
The total cover would come into play after the goblins would fire with their ranged weapons and either drop prone or take into the height discussion.
Never would be the case that they attack with total cover.
I'd just like to point out that this is not RAW. Creatures can be behind total cover, step out and make an attack and return to total cover. Players, in particular rogues, do this all the time. Using an action to hide requires that the creature be unseen when they do it. Most often this is provided by an obstacle providing total cover. Hide behind cover, step out, make a ranged attack and return to total cover is a frequently used tactic in my experience by both NPCs and PCs and does not require any special sense or otherwise being aware of what the creatures that are out of sight are doing for the rest of the turn before the creature steps out to make their attack.
If you have to be able see creatures BEFORE you move in order to make an attack on them that turn then it breaks a number of mechanics. Characters can't run around a corner to make an attack since they would be unaware of where the creatures were before going around the corner. The character's turn represents the same 6 seconds whether they are making a ranged or melee attack. If the poster above requires the creature to be constantly peeking in order to step out and make a ranged attack then they could not step out and make a melee attack either since they have the same amount of time to see where the opponent is and if that is insufficient for a ranged attack it is also insufficient for a melee attack ... i.e. to me at least the idea doesn't make any sense as described since moving and making a ranged attack takes the same amount of time as moving and making a melee attack.
Just pointing out, for small and medium creatures at least, those height guidelines are actually provided in the PHB/Basic Rules section on Character Height in Chapter 2.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
That's only partially true, to the extent that nobody really attacks with cover... cover is only relevant with regard to the creature being attacked. Movements within cover to get line-of-sight on a target are completely normal. You're essentially interacting with the environment, and that can be included with your action (if not actually changing location) or movement. Cover is only applicable to the extent that it conceals a target from your sight, at the moment an attack is made, and is based on the percentage of their body that is being obscured. There's overlap on that point with unseen attackers.
When an attacker is firing their bow upward at a target, and there is an obstruction blocking view of the target's body, the obstruction conceals more of the target's body than it would on an even plane. Likewise, when attacking downward an obstruction conceals less of the target's body than it would on an even plane. This is why I place a lot of emphasis on elevation as a factor in the RAW for cover that many don't take into account. The degree of cover is only determined by percentage of concealment, and elevation is absolutely a factor influencing that percentage.
The only (relevant) thing that would prevent a creature from attacking while behind an obstruction would be when it is not possible to get line-of-sight on a target from that position: obstruction is too high to lean over, too wide to see around, no holes to see/shoot through, etc. A creature firing from a castle rampart is likely to be considered, in relation to a creature on the ground, as being behind total cover; that does not prohibit the creature up top from raining arrows down freely. They can see you juuust fine! :P
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
Even archer towers that only have slits for the arrows to shoot through are 3/4ths cover from below. If any straight line can be drawn between creatures, the cover is not total. It is total cover when no straight lines can be drawn between them, that means neither can attack the other.