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.
Regarding the Ogre thing, meanwhile, the sides of walls are typically not considered as cover if you're only striking alongside them, not through them. Otherwise, a person in a 5' corridor could not fire at someone further down said corridor.
1. Large creatures get to choose which square they use for the determination of cover for one.
Any creature with a space larger than 5 feet (1 square) determines cover against melee attacks slightly differently than smaller creatures do. Such a creature can choose any square that it occupies to determine if an opponent has cover against its melee attacks. Similarly, when making a melee attack against such a creature, you can pick any of the squares it occupies to determine if it has cover against you.
2. You are using the line from determining cover for ranged weapons when the ogre is in melee and instead uses the line for cover from melee weapons.
When making a melee attack against an adjacent target, your target has cover if any line from any corner of your square to the target's square goes through a wall (including a low wall). 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 the ogre choses the square he occupies closest to the cleric. None of the corners of that square have any interference in drawing a line to the square (not the corners of the square just the square) the rogue occupies. Again he just has to draw a line to the square the rogue occupies, not any specific point on the square the rogue occupies. The ogre can draw a line from each of his corners on the square closest the cleric to the line of the rogue's square that runs "up" from the corner of the building beside the rogue.
The rogue cannot return the favor because that square is outside of his reach.
|
2. You are using the line from determining cover for ranged weapons when the ogre is in melee and instead uses the line for cover from melee weapons.
When making a melee attack against an adjacent target, your target has cover if any line from any corner of your square to the target's square goes through a wall (including a low wall). 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.
That's incorrect. The ogre has reach and does use the ranged rules. It's stated in the second sentence of your quoted text. This is also stated explicitly in the caption for the example.
You're also misinterpreting the melee rules. "To the target's square" still means to each corner of the target's square. This is also stated in the caption to the example.
#2: The rogue is adjacent to the ogre, but lines from the corners of her square to the corners of the ogre's square cross through a wall. The ogre has melee cover from her, but if it attacks her, the rogue does not have cover from it, as the ogre has reach (so it figures attacks as if attacking with a ranged weapon).
This is a minor detail to the thread, but relevant. And due to myself and my group being wrong about it for almost 13 years before we finally realized, I've got to throw this out there.
Fireball is a spread, not a burst. Cover will not help you.
Tom Parker that is omly true for creatures not adjacent to you.
The rogue is still adjacent to the ogre.
|
|
Tom Parker that is omly true for creatures not adjacent to you.
The rogue is still adjacent to the ogre.
That's not what it says in the Core Rulebook. It specifically says in the Cover example (page 194 in my version) that Merisiel is adjacent to the ogre and that she does not have cover because he figures attacks as if using a ranged weapon.
ETA: I think you're missing the section a couple paragraphs down from your citation:
Big Creatures and Cover
Any creature with a space larger than 5 feet (1 square) determines cover against melee attacks slightly differently than smaller creatures do. Such a creature can choose any square that it occupies to determine if an opponent has cover against its melee attacks. Similarly, when making a melee attack against such a creature, you can pick any of the squares it occupies to determine if it has cover against you.
As a large creature with reach, the ogre can choose the square that is not adjacent to the rogue and, as the CRB says, would figure the cover using the ranged rules.
Tom Parker that is omly true for creatures not adjacent to you.
The rogue is still adjacent to the ogre.
That's not what it says in the Core Rulebook. It specifically says in the Cover example (page 194 in my version) that Merisiel is adjacent to the ogre and that she does not have cover because he figures attacks as if using a ranged weapon.
ETA: I think you're missing the section a couple paragraphs down from your citation:
As a large creature with reach, the ogre can choose the square that is not adjacent to the rogue and, as the CRB says, would figure the cover using the ranged rules.Big Creatures and Cover
Any creature with a space larger than 5 feet (1 square) determines cover against melee attacks slightly differently than smaller creatures do. Such a creature can choose any square that it occupies to determine if an opponent has cover against its melee attacks. Similarly, when making a melee attack against such a creature, you can pick any of the squares it occupies to determine if it has cover against you.
Your missing the part that if they were using a ranged weapon from any square the ogre occupies that she would have cover from him.
Unless you can show me which of those squares the ogre can use a ranged weapon from and she not have cover.
My argument is thus:
Just because the ogre chooses a square that is not adjacent does not take away the fact the ogre is still adjacent to Merisel. So regardless of which square the ogre chooses he is still adjacent.
This is honestly the only way Merisel does not gain cover from him, because if we use the ranged attack rules for determining cover then Merisel would have cover from the ogre, because none of the ogre's squares lack a corner (remember any corner of the square) that would not pass through the wall. The "center corner" of the ogre's four squares passes through a wall to get to Merisel's square. Therefore all four squares would have to contend with cover for Merisel.
We can plainly see this is true due to the line from the sorcerer to the ogre that passes through the corner of the wall (now granted the sorcerer has other corners that are just as problematic).
Ergo if we only use the ranged rules in conjunction with the large creature rules Merisel should have cover from the ogre. The only way she does not is if we accept the fact that the ogre is adjacent and therefore gets to use the best of all worlds for determining cover (the fact he is adjacent and the fact he gets to choose a square to attack from).
In short the example given in the book doesn't work and is wrong.
Either of the front corners work. Along the wall is not through the wall.
The square beside Merisel doesn't work for the same reason her square doesn't work.
The square to the left doesn't work since the inside corner runs into the same problem that arrow #4 illustrates, if it is drawn like a ranged attack, please note that wall borders count in such cases for creating cover.