Fog Cloud Combat

[Cowboy_ninja]

Fog cloud creates a Heavily Obscured area which in PHB says anyone who is heavily obscured is effectively suffering from Blinded condition.

So how does combat work?

Two melee characters are effectively blinded so, assuming they find each other, it cancels out and no one has advantage nor disadvantage?

What about an archer shooting into fog cloud?

[TaiLiu]

Fog cloud creates a Heavily Obscured area which in PHB says anyone who is heavily obscured is effectively suffering from Blinded condition.

So how does combat work?

Two melee characters are effectively blinded so, assuming they find each other, it cancels out and no one has advantage nor disadvantage?

What about an archer shooting into fog cloud?
Fog cloud is a really cool spell and a real mechanical mess. Yes, the advantage and disadvantage cancel out. Yes, if an archer is able to locate someone in the cloud, advantage and disadvantage also cancel out. It's quite unintuitive, which in my opinion makes this a poorly-written spell.

[Gignere]

Most DMs I’ve played with just rule everyone has disadvantage. Basically simulating that if no one can see it just makes it harder for anyone to hit.

[sithlordnergal]

RAW, everything is a straight attack roll because the Advantage/Disadvantage cancel each other out. Its a wonderful way to get rid of disadvantage/advantage. And since its Heavy Obscurement, very few things can see through it

[Skrum]

What others said

As good as the adv/disadv system is, fog cloud (or more precisely, sight limitations) is the one area where it really falls down hard. The bluntness of it just washes out all subtly, leaving a very dissatisfying mess.

The optional flanking rules are also bad, but I blame the flanking rules more than I blame adv/disadv.

[animorte]

I've always loved Fog Cloud, though I've been known to use it more for, "Well, this didn't go as planned. GTFO!"

The advantage vs disadvantage argument typically only happens on internet discussions and high optimizers attempting to take advantage of the ambiguity. It's just more reasonable to say everybody has disadvantage. Blind fighting exists for a reason.

[Tanarii]

RAW the unseen attack advantage cancels out disadvantage for not being able to see the target.

It's fairly commonly discussed as house ruled by folks on this forum tho. Usually the rule is to modify the unseen attacker rule to only give advantage I'd the attacker can see the target. That way they just get disadvantage from not being able to see them, there's no advantage to cancel it out.

RAW may or may not need to guess the square when they can't see a target, its specifically called out as a possibility but no details, so it depends on how the DM wants to rule it.

There are no rules for pinpointing an unseen target by hearing, so DM is free to make up rules they want. Any DM doing so, its worth keeping in mind that normal conversation is as loud as a whisper at 30ft, and loud conversation the same at 60ft.

One commonly claimed rule that actually isn't a rule: That you always know (as in pinpoint) where any creature not hiding is located.

[5eNeedsDarksun]

Per the archer (assuming there's not silence or something similar) my rule is: beyond 5' you make a perception check with a DC of the # of feet from you to the target in order to pinpoint the target. If you miss by more than 5 you pinpoint an incorrect target randomly.

[Theodoxus]

I've always loved Fog Cloud, though I've been known to use it more for, "Well, this didn't go as planned. GTFO!"

Blind fighting exists for a reason.

Best use I've used was as a 2nd level Moon Druid, built for exactly this exploit. Ghostwise Halfling, cast fog cloud on the party engaged in melee with bandits on a random encounter in the road. Bonus Action, turn into a giant spider and wade into the fog. Using blindsight when I get within 10' of a bandit, I hone in on him and attack with advantage, while telepathically telling the barbarian where the bandit is. Between the bite and poison, I was the MVP of the fight. Since I could "see" the bandits, they were attacking me with disadvantage, and missing a lot. The bandits eventually got wise and ran out of the cloud, only to be picked off one by one by the ranger.

Fog cloud saved the party that day. Only time I've ever played a druid in 5E, kinda sad the game fizzled out after 3rd level.

[Skrum]

One commonly claimed rule that actually isn't a rule: That you always know (as in pinpoint) where any creature not hiding is located.

OK please help me. My table has come to this conclusion and it always bugged the heck out of me

[Amnestic]

I actually really like fog cloud negating adv/disadv. Makes it fairly neutral for martials (and occasionally beneficial if they've got blindsight), and absolutely nukes a whole swath of spells from being used. No more Healing Word popups anymore on your bonus action, it requires sight. Hope you prepared Cure Wounds today.

[TheCleverGuy]

I've always loved Fog Cloud, though I've been known to use it more for, "Well, this didn't go as planned. GTFO!"

Fog Cloud also prevents anyone from taking attacks of opportunity, because by RAW you need to be able to see the creature to take the reaction. That little rule turned out to be a life-saver for my party when we were in the last battle of the Light of Xaryxis adventure.

[tieren]

OK please help me. My table has come to this conclusion and it always bugged the heck out of me

If you don't take the Hide action, then your location is detectable, even if you are invisible. That is RAW.

The vagary comes in with "detectable", at some tables that will mean your location is known, at others it may require a perception check to notice where they are, some even go to a contested stealth check, but that is too far n my opinion as it would negate taking the Hide action.

[Mastikator]

Fog cloud is a really cool spell and a real mechanical mess. Yes, the advantage and disadvantage cancel out. Yes, if an archer is able to locate someone in the cloud, advantage and disadvantage also cancel out. It's quite unintuitive, which in my opinion makes this a poorly-written spell.

You can't accurately see the target you're shooting arrows at, the target can't see the arrow coming. Like two drunks fighting, their conditions cancel out.

[Psyren]

Two drunk/blinded people fighting should be disadvantage for both, not perfectly equal to two sober sighted people fighting. I agree the rule as written doesn't make sense.

Note however that the rules do allow the DM to override the prevailing conditions and impose disadvantage (or advantage) as circumstances warrant.

[Witty Username]

One commonly claimed rule that actually isn't a rule: That you always know (as in pinpoint) where any creature not hiding is located.

That would be part of the invisible condition, which includes that while the creature can't be seen directly, its location is known if observors can see the area its in or hear.

[KorvinStarmast]

Most DMs I’ve played with just rule everyone has disadvantage. Basically simulating that if no one can see it just makes it harder for anyone to hit. Not a bad idea.

RAW, everything is a straight attack roll because the Not quite. Melee attacks are a straight attack roll.
Shooting into the fog cloud is one of two things, but the core issue is the chance for auto miss since the ranged attacker may be shooting where someone isn't. You can't see the target to shoot at it. At best, attack with disadvantage.

I've always loved Fog Cloud, though I've been known to use it more for, "Well, this didn't go as planned. GTFO!" That's one of its best uses.

The advantage vs disadvantage argument typically only happens on internet discussions and high optimizers attempting to take advantage of the ambiguity. It's just more reasonable to say everybody has disadvantage. Blind fighting exists for a reason. Aye. And if you are inside it, you can't see out, so WTF are you aiming at?

Per the archer (assuming there's not silence or something similar) my rule is: beyond 5' you make a perception check with a DC of the # of feet from you to the target in order to pinpoint the target. If you miss by more than 5 you pinpoint an incorrect target randomly.
Not a bad idea, that.

Fog Cloud also prevents anyone from taking attacks of opportunity,

Opportunity Attacks. This is 5e... (yes, I am being nit picky. [QUOTE]
because by RAW you need to be able to see the creature to take the reaction. Yes. It's a great way to break contact.

Two drunks/blind people fighting should be disadvantage for both, not perfectly equal to two sober people fighting. I agree the rule as written doesn't make sense.

Note however that the rules do allow the DM to override the prevailing conditions and impose disadvantage (or advantage) a circumstances warrant. Also true.

[animorte]

If you don't take the Hide action, then your location is detectable, even if you are invisible. That is RAW.

The vagary comes in with "detectable", at some tables that will mean your location is known, at others it may require a perception check to notice where they are, some even go to a contested stealth check, but that is too far n my opinion as it would negate taking the Hide action.
That particular word "detectable" says very clearly to me that you are able to be detected. Nothing about it gives me the impression you are automatically detected. Sure, change it to detectauto and we'll talk. :smalltongue:


Aye. And if you are inside it, you can't see out, so WTF are you aiming at?
^ yeah, that. And if you're shooting in it's not like shooting fish in a barrel or launching arrows to the sky at an approaching army of ten-thousand where you're bound to hit something.

[Tanarii]

If you don't take the Hide action, then your location is detectable, even if you are invisible. That is RAW.

The vagary comes in with "detectable", at some tables that will mean your location is known, at others it may require a perception check to notice where they are, some even go to a contested stealth check, but that is too far n my opinion as it would negate taking the Hide action.Right. You're aware they are around. The rules don't say that you automatically pinpoint them.

How you pinpoint them, e.g. if it depends on range and if any kind of check is required (or if it is automatic success or failure), is up to the DM.

Personally I'd be happier if they provided some solid rules, but WotC D&D has a history of ... not very good ones that generate too many edge cases and weird behavior. PF2 has some that appear to be pretty good though.


That would be part of the invisible condition, which includes that while the creature can't be seen directly, its location is known if observors can see the area its in or hear.
The invisible condition tells how it is possible for an invisible creatures location to be determined. It doesn't state it is automatic and at any range.


That particular word "detectable" says very clearly to me that you are able to be detected. Nothing about it gives me the impression you are automatically detected. Sure, change it to detectauto and we'll talk. :smalltongue:Good correction. It's possible that a non-hiding creature might not even be detected (let alone pin pointed) if out of sight, especially if you're very far away.

Again, I like the PF2 rules for this far more than 5e rules.

[verbatim]

at low level one Fog Cloud can turn getting ambushed by a pack of wolves (with pack tactics) from a TPK into a very winnable slogfest by turning all attacks from both parties into normal rolls.

at higher levels it destroys Beholders. If a Beholder has its antimagic cone on the Fog Cloud suddenly the party is in a cone that protects them from all the other rays. If the antimagic cone isn't protecting the party then none of the other rays can target someone who is in a Fog Cloud since the targeting perquisite is a target within 120 ft that the Beholder can see.

The RAW here is very much something that could get overruled at the table in order to stop it from destroying the encounter though so YMMV.

[Segev]

One commonly claimed rule that actually isn't a rule: That you always know (as in pinpoint) where any creature not hiding is located.


Right. You're aware they are around. The rules don't say that you automatically pinpoint them.

How you pinpoint them, e.g. if it depends on range and if any kind of check is required (or if it is automatic success or failure), is up to the DM.

Personally I'd be happier if they provided some solid rules, but WotC D&D has a history of ... not very good ones that generate too many edge cases and weird behavior. PF2 has some that appear to be pretty good though.

Eh, the rules don't say you need to "pinpoint" someone to attack them, either. IF you're aware of them and they're in range, you can attack them, as far as the rules state. "Pinpointing" isn't necessary. I would guess that "disadvantage" is doing a lot of heavy lifting, representing not only that you can't see them well enough to aim precisely, but also representing that you might fire in entirely the wrong direction.

[Chronos]

And the rules can't say that you need to target the "correct square", because as far as the standard rules are concerned, squares don't even exist.

[Tanarii]

Eh, the rules don't say you need to "pinpoint" someone to attack them, either. IF you're aware of them and they're in range, you can attack them, as far as the rules state. "Pinpointing" isn't necessary. I would guess that "disadvantage" is doing a lot of heavy lifting, representing not only that you can't see them well enough to aim precisely, but also representing that you might fire in entirely the wrong direction.
Yes they do. PHB 194-195
When you attack a target that you can't see, you have disadvantage on the attack roll. This is true whether you're guessing the target's location or you're targeting a creature you can hear but not see. If the target isn't in the location you targeted, you automatically miss, but the DM typicallyjust says that the attack missed, not whether you guessed the target's location correctly.

What is missing is a clear rule on exactly when you have to guess, and when a target counts as one "you can hear but not see". And there isn't a rule that says that hiding is the only way to avoid being heard but not seen. DM judgement would be required. Things they might need to consider at the minimum: Distance to the target, and environmental noise (including sounds of battle).

[Mastikator]

The Player Handbook has something to say about the whole "can you pinpoint an invisible target" (chapter 9: Unseen Attackers and Targets), when you make an attack roll against an invisible target, you make the attack roll with disadvantage, even if the target isn't there. "If the target isn’t in the location you targeted, you automatically miss, but the DM typically just says that the attack missed, not whether you guessed the target’s location correctly.".

In chapter 8: Vision and Light, it mentions heavy obscurement (such as granted by Fog Cloud). A creature in an area that grants heavy obscurement is effectively blinded when trying to see something in that area.

To me this strongly suggests that you don't automatically pinpoint the location of other creatures inside a fog cloud, nor does anyone automatically pinpoint you when you are in a fog cloud.

(unless you're 5 feet adjacent, then I'd just say yeah you hear them clearly enough to pinpoint their spot unless they hide)

Edit- destroyed by a ninja

[strangebloke]

IMO ranged attacks shouldn't get advantage just because the target can't see them. Holding up a shield in the general direction the arrow is coming from is far easier than finding a gap in someone's armor when you're only sorta sure they're in a five foot space. This one rule (Unseen ranged attackers get advantage) is a common and huge source of optimization for ranged builds and its just sort of silly.

[Segev]

Yes they do. PHB 194-195
When you attack a target that you can't see, you have disadvantage on the attack roll. This is true whether you're guessing the target's location or you're targeting a creature you can hear but not see. If the target isn't in the location you targeted, you automatically miss, but the DM typicallyjust says that the attack missed, not whether you guessed the target's location correctly.

What is missing is a clear rule on exactly when you have to guess, and when a target counts as one "you can hear but not see". And there isn't a rule that says that hiding is the only way to avoid being heard but not seen. DM judgement would be required. Things they might need to consider at the minimum: Distance to the target, and environmental noise (including sounds of battle).

Ah, fair enough! I had misremembered what was actually present in the rules. That pesky "whether you're guessing the target's location or you're targeting a creature you can hear but not see" does open the door to needing to guess a location sometimes. While "or" is technically non-exclusive, the way colloquial English uses it, it generally is treated as such. So I would expect that the intent behind "whether you're guessing the targets location or you're targeting a creature you can hear but not see," being phrased like that, is that if you can hear them, but not see them, you can target them without having to guess the location.

[Tanarii]

I agree if you can hear them but not see them you shouldn't have to guess.

The question is what qualifies as hearing them, and how it's determined given the specific details.

Obviously if they make a Stealth check vs your passive perception they've qualified as not being heard.

But other factors might apply, and the DM has to determine how they're resolved. Especially distance and ambient noise.

Edit: The term "pinpoint" is my own. It's to distinguish between knowing an enemy is somewhere, possibly quite a limited choice of somewhere based on the circumstances, and having to guess. Vs determining by hearing (or maybe smell for creatures with Keen Smell) and not having to guess.

[Samayu]

I think it should be easier to locate a target the closer they are. I would rule that you automatically know the location of someone who is only five feet away. Then a perception test with a sliding DC based on how far away they are.

[Schwann145]

I agree if you can hear them but not see them you shouldn't have to guess.
Shouldn't you, though?
If you're blinded and hear a noise off to your left, you know it's to your left but you won't know if it's 10, 15, even 20 feet away. You either need even more context clues to get a better idea of location, or you're stuck guessing.
Otherwise, everyone is basically Daredevil.

Regardless, since 5E decided that *all* perception rules would be sight-based, you do still have to guess.

[shinakuma2]

Shouldn't you, though?
If you're blinded and hear a noise off to your left, you know it's to your left but you won't know if it's 10, 15, even 20 feet away.

Why wouldn't you? I'm quite certain you can tell the difference between a noise that is close and one that is far away. The same stereo hearing that lets you tell what direction a noise comes from also tells you how far it is.

[sithlordnergal]

Not quite. Melee attacks are a straight attack roll.
Shooting into the fog cloud is one of two things, but the core issue is the chance for auto miss since the ranged attacker may be shooting where someone isn't. You can't see the target to shoot at it. At best, attack with disadvantage

Wouldn't it still follow the Unseen Attacker's rules. Now, you could auto-miss due to shooting a spot that's empty, but if you shoot a spot with a creature in it then it should be a straight roll. You can't see them, they can't see you, to its a straight roll.

[verbatim]

Wouldn't it still follow the Unseen Attacker's rules. Now, you could auto-miss due to shooting a spot that's empty, but if you shoot a spot with a creature in it then it should be a straight roll. You can't see them, they can't see you, to its a straight roll.

Correct! Having either party in a Fog Cloud makes interactions neutral roll unless someone has Blindsight or Tremorsense (Fog Cloud blocks Truesight).

[sithlordnergal]

Correct! Having either party in a Fog Cloud makes interactions neutral roll unless someone has Blindsight or Tremorsense (Fog Cloud blocks Truesight).

I thought so. Which does make it rather funny. The best way to make long range shots in 5e is to cast Fog Cloud, step out of the cloud to see where someone is, step back in, and make the shot X3

[Aimeryan]

Shouldn't you, though?
If you're blinded and hear a noise off to your left, you know it's to your left but you won't know if it's 10, 15, even 20 feet away. You either need even more context clues to get a better idea of location, or you're stuck guessing.
Otherwise, everyone is basically Daredevil.

Regardless, since 5E decided that *all* perception rules would be sight-based, you do still have to guess.

Yup, and that isn't even accounting for the case where you are in a cave or similar structure and the sounds bounces around.

Out of interest, does anyone know if D&Done will be doing a pass at the basic rules? Vision, Perception, etc.