Soft Cover and Attacks of Opportunity

[Some call me Tim]

Situation: Enemy with reach trips my ally 10 feet from himself. I use a 5-foot step to stand between him and my ally. Ally stands up. GM ruled he provoked. I pointed out that I provided cover so no attack of opportunity. GM said soft cover doesn't prevent attacks of opportunity.

I didn't want to argue the point in the middle of a game, but everything I can find leads me to the conclusion that in such a case the ally could stand up without fear of an attack of opportunity. Is this a legitimate tactic for helping your buddy stand up without suffering an attack of opportunity?

Supporting rules:

"Cover and Attacks of Opportunity: You can’t execute an attack of opportunity against an opponent with cover relative to you."

"When making a melee attack against a target that isn’t adjacent to you (such as with a reach weapon), use the rules for determining cover from ranged attacks."

"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)."

"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." [no mention of soft cover not negating an attack of opportunity]

[Charender]

It should not have provoked.

The only exception I can think of is for a very large creature who could basically reach around you. In other words, if the creature had a line from any of his occupied squares to your ally's square without passing through your square, then you are not actually giving your ally cover. Other than that, if they have to attack through your square, then you are giving cover. If they have cover, they don't provoke.

Edit: also good to know because you can stand infront of a spellcaster to prevent AoOs, even AoOs caused by abilities like spellbreaker.

[Some call me Tim]

Charender wrote:

It should not have provoked.

The only exception I can think of is for a very large creature who could basically reach around you. In other words, if the creature had a line from any of his occupied squares to your ally's square without passing through your square, then you are not actually giving your ally cover. Other than that, if they have to attack through your square, then you are giving cover. If they have cover, they don't provoke.

Because of the geometry involved it doesn't matter how big the creature is, at least one line from any of the creature's square will pass through your square and provide cover if you're adjacent to your ally and closer to the enemy.

Now, that leads me to another question. Given a sufficiently large creature, if only one line passed through your square would this fall under 'partial cover'

"Partial Cover: If a creature has cover, but more than half the creature is visible, its cover bonus is reduced to a +2 to AC and a +1 bonus on Reflex saving throws. This partial cover is subject to the GM’s discretion."

Would partial cover prevent attacks of opportunity?

[Barachiel Shina]

This is he only thread I can find on this. Was this confirmed? That soft cover prevents AoO?

[Tarantula]

All cover prevents AoO.

[_Ozy_]

The cover rules for large creatures that would apply, would be if the cover (you) were closer to the large creature than the prone character. If so, you wouldn't count as cover.

Quote:

A low obstacle (such as a wall no higher than half your height) provides cover, but only to creatures within 30 feet (6 squares) of it. The attacker can ignore the cover if he's closer to the obstacle than his target.

[Berti Blackfoot]

yes my players were very upset when their large ape (with high int and weapon feats wielding a pole arm) could not keep provoking all over the battlefield, and all their reach weapons wouldn't provoke.