I would say no AoO. Thats part of what the meatshield's bringing to the party by standing right there. I THINK a huge creature could go around a medium one by attacking in 3-d though.
Whichever way you do it though, let the character make their decision based on how the rules of the universe are operating today. If that means you need to stop the game for a second and ask "are you sure you want to do that? The big giant thing will get to whack you?" then do so. I don't normally consider it a double secret feature of the 20 foot tall monster that its got a bit of reach to it.
In PFS you're going to run into "what he hells?" from people that have been doing it the right way the entire time. Thats one reason its important to do it the right way, especially since there's not much room for ambiguity here.
|
Part of the core assumption of PFS is that games are to use the rules as written unless there is a stated exception in the guide to organized play, in the official FAQ or posted on the message boards by Paizo staff.
IMO however this sounds like more of an issue of the people you have been playing with being unaware of the fact that cover prevents AoO's
creatures provide soft cover, which does not prevent attacks of opportunity. this used to be worded more concretely in the rules, but it looks like the wording may have been updated in a more recent printing of the CRB.
however, even the current wording points out that soft cover only applies against ranged attacks (emphasis mine):
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.
|
That's pretty much how it works. Here is your argument:
Creatures, even your enemies, can provide you with cover against ranged attacks.
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.
You can't execute an attack of opportunity against an opponent with cover relative to you.
If they push the question you simply respond by politely asking for them to come up with a rules justification as to why not using some kind of citation. "I don't like it that way," is not a PFS acceptable answer. If pushed accept it and report them to your local representative. As you can see even a venture captain can get it wrong. ^
creatures provide soft cover, which does not prevent attacks of opportunity. this used to be worded more concretely in the rules, but it looks like the wording may have been updated in a more recent printing of the CRB.
however, even the current wording points out that soft cover only applies against ranged attacks (emphasis mine):
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.
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.
So reach or ranged it doesn't matter, if the meatshield is in the way he grants cover.
And Differences like this are why i feel obligated to point out when a player is going to draw that AOO if they do something standing there.
|
|
Good point nosig! Missed that entirely.
Totally run it Rules as Written. Really just run like everything that way in a living campaign. It's the only fair way to do things. We've already abandoned like 3 outlets for just horrible house rules creeping into PFS games over the years. Yuck.
It goes both ways after all, how else are you supposed to protect squishy caster bad guys from Enlarged or other reach having PCs? Not really sure that it's RAI not to be that way?
As the Large creature can calculate cover from any square it occupies, why not draw the line from its UPPER squares to the top of the target square? Its 3d :)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
As the Large creature can calculate cover from any square it occupies, why not draw the line from its UPPER squares to the top of the target square? Its 3d :)Basically what he said. Crappy ASCII art to follow:
__XX
CMXXC=caster
M=meat shield
X=large monsterMonster can attack from the top left corner with no cover therefore there is no cover and an AoO is possible.
I disagree. If the monster draws a line from his top left corner, it has to hit all 4 corners of C or it has cover per rules for ranged attack cover. A line from top left to bottom right of C's Corner will go through M, thus it has cover.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What the dice said.
If we're going 3D then you have to draw it to the ground corners of the cube too.
Hmmm.. without breaking out the leggo blocks and pipe cleaners does that ever work against an adjacent target?
Yep, that one is easy, I'll also put in that you would be squeezing, thus in addition to not having cover and provoking the AOO, you would get a -4 to AC.
Friend: You can move through a square occupied by a friendly character, unless you are charging. When you move through a square occupied by a friendly character, that character doesn't provide you with cover.
In the prd for squeezing it says
"A creature can squeeze past a creature while moving but it can't end its movement in an occupied square."
I see I read that wrong, good to know
|
I don't think so. A creature with reach has to use ranged attacks for determining cover. That means no matter which square the huge creature chooses to attack from, the creature has to be able to target every corner of the target without crossing the lines of square that provides cover. I'd have to double check a map, but I don't think that's possible regardless of the creature's size.I THINK a huge creature could go around a medium one by attacking in 3-d though.
ranged attack cover is calculated differently than melee - ranged attack chooses 1 corner and looks lines to all corners of target - it is very possible for a large or huge creature to choose a corner that bypasses the medium creature entirely.
Melee attack cover is calculated in an opposite fashion.
If two melee combatants are around a hard corner of each other, they have cover for their melee attacks. But if an archer (or reach attacker) is around a hard corner from the melee the archer (or reacher) does not have cover for a ranged attack.
|
"Rules-As-Intended" is a double edged sword, and should be handled with extreme care.
On the one end, "intension" often relies on "interpretation". An author's intension may be ambiguous, and multiple interpretations may arise because of that ambiguity. These different sides may all run a rule differently, with each of them claiming that "RAI" is on their side.
On the other end, sometimes an author's intension becomes void, as in the classic example of the Titan Mauler. The class was intended to eventually wield gigantic weapons, but the Design Team changed how the class worked because it would become too powerful if left "as intended".
Somewhere in the middle of these two is the best place to exist with regards to "Rules-As-Intended".
I'm curious why the OP thinks that the rules are intended to be different than what's actually written.
It happens occasionally. (throwing shields)
I just don't see why this is one of those times.