|
That's the question.
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).
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.
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.
It had never occured to me till now(perhaps I am just really tired) but is Soft Cover intended to always be a +4? Is Partial Cover exclusive to regular ole' cover?
Have I been too hard on my ranged players all these years?
|
No soft cover only comes from creatures and this is talking about a Large, Huge, G, C sized creature only half around the corner of a wall for instance.
A better example is the Tarrasque is in the middle of downtown Magnimar and while walking down a major street it stops between two towers 30 feet wide. Since Big T is 5 or 6 squares wide half of its body is hanging out. You want to hit it with your hammer of thunderbolts and its rear end is wide open... but it is half covered by a tower so its AC goes up to 42 from the partial cover.
--We will, we will, Vrock you
|
|
No soft cover only comes from creatures and this is talking about a Large, Huge, G, C sized creature only half around the corner of a wall for instance.
A better example is the Tarrasque is in the middle of downtown Magnimar and while walking down a major street it stops between two towers 30 feet wide. Since Big T is 5 or 6 squares wide half of its body is hanging out. You want to hit it with your hammer of thunderbolts and its rear end is wide open... but it is half covered by a tower so its AC goes up to 42 from the partial cover.
--We will, we will, Vrock you
Which is how I've always understood it to be prior to yesterday. I am teaching new player who wants to be a ranger and I made up a diagram showing different types of cover, what they look like, bonuses given, etc. In doing so It seemed odd that a +4 is always given for soft cover even if only a small portion of your target is covered by said cover!
I've always ruled 'partial' as something which modifies either hard or soft cover. RAI: Soft cover does not provide a reflex bonus, so partial cover (which calls out a reflex bonus) is probably not intended to work with it.
Which makes perfect sense to me now. Soft Cover still is considered cover but only denies the bonus to Reflex. I don't see why partial Cover would not also be able to apply to it. I am going to run it in this way for my homes games but something that concretely points me to a yes or no would be great to have. Is the "partial cover is subject to the GM's discretion." line saying I could apply this to soft cover for the purpose of something like a Society Game?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you don't apply partial cover rules to soft cover, a halfling standing in front of an ogre would grant the ogre a +4 AC against ranged attacks from any angle that has the halfling covering at least a part of the ogre, no matter how small that part. Doesn't seem like that's how it's intended to play.
|
|
If you don't apply partial cover rules to soft cover, a halfling standing in front of an ogre would grant the ogre a +4 AC against ranged attacks from any angle that has the halfling covering at least a part of the ogre, no matter how small that part. Doesn't seem like that's how it's intended to play.
This is the exact situation that comes to mind and makes me question how I've run things in the past and how the rules are intended to interact.
This is the exact situation that comes to mind and makes me question how I've run things in the past and how the rules are intended to interact.
In my playing circle, we've always applied partial cover rules to soft cover. The rightness of it has never even come into question, because it's such an intuitive thing to do when looking at the grid and miniatures.
This is in relation to firing into melee but
"If your target is two size categories larger than the friendly characters it is engaged with, this penalty is reduced to –2. There is no penalty for firing at a creature that is three size categories larger than the friendly characters it is engaged with."
I don't see any reason not to apply this to soft cover as well as a homebrew rule
|
|
I've found that a lot of people mistakenly apply the partial cover rules when they should be applying soft cover rules - "yes, but from a creature that's only soft cover, so only a +2".
I could see how the mistake could come about.
This is in relation to firing into melee but
"If your target is two size categories larger than the friendly characters it is engaged with, this penalty is reduced to –2. There is no penalty for firing at a creature that is three size categories larger than the friendly characters it is engaged with."
I don't see any reason not to apply this to soft cover as well as a homebrew rule.
I appreciate the input. This is another one of those obscure rules I wasn't aware of till now!
Yeah Pathfinder has a lot of those doesn't it?