Attacking around corners

[Noumenon]

Thanks Frank for clearing up what Google couldn't, thanks irdeggman for putting up with me doubting you. So many things provide "cover" and never mention that it's different for melee attacks.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

Frankthedm's diagram is confusing, which may explain why folks seem to be reaching the wrong conclusions from it.

XXX-
XXX-
XXXA
--B-

A is an archer, B is wielding a sword.

A has cover against B. A can force B to draw a line from square to square that goes through the wall.

B does not have cover against A. A can test cover from the shared corner of the squares he and B occupy (or from one other corner) and no line drawn from that corner to any part of B's square goes through the wall.

The question of whether the "in melee" penalty applies against shots from A is more in doubt, but given that (1) all of the examples use two other characters in melee, and (2) it's a little absurd to think you have to "avoid" shooting yourself when aiming at someone else five feet away, I very much doubt it's intended. I've been in many, many games where missile fire occurred at melee range, and I've never seen a DM invoke the penalty (except with another character involved).

 

[Noumenon]

Wow, this is a whole new area of the rules for me -- the difference between "ranged cover" and "melee cover." I never realized you determined them in different ways. So "ranged cover" means things that block any corner of your square from reaching a corner of theirs. And "melee cover" means corners, and only applies against adjacent enemies -- reach uses "ranged cover" rules.

What about things that just provide "cover"? Does dropping down behind your horse with the Ride skill give you cover against both melee and ranged attacks? Or tower shields?

 

[irdeggman]

Frankthedm's diagram is confusing, which may explain why folks seem to be reaching the wrong conclusions from it.

XXX-
XXX-
XXXA
--B-

A is an archer, B is wielding a sword.

A has cover against B. A can force B to draw a line from square to square that goes through the wall.

B does not have cover against A. A can test cover from the shared corner of the squares he and B occupy (or from one other corner) and no line drawn from that corner to any part of B's square goes through the wall.

Wrong both have cover against each other.

B likewise can force A to draw a line from square to square that goes through the wall. {It is essentially the same line.}

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).

 

[Jeff Wilder]

Wrong both have cover against each other.

B likewise can force A to draw a line from square to square that goes through the wall. {It is essentially the same line.}

Sigh. No.

The difference is that with ranged cover, the attacker chooses which corner of the square to use, and he has two corners he can choose from which he can trace lines to the defender without passing through the wall.

You really need to reread the rules, because you're categorically stating incorrect information, and cover is already a little confusing without that.

 

[frankthedm]

Frankthedm's diagram is confusing, which may explain why folks seem to be reaching the wrong conclusions from it.

What folks are you referring to? There were only 2 people who posted after I posted the image before you posted.

The type of attack being made determines which standard of cover is being used. Sorry if that was not clear from the diagram.

 

[Vegepygmy]

So "ranged cover" means things that block any corner of your square from reaching a corner of theirs.

Um, no. You pick a corner of your square (the best one, obviously). You draw four lines from that corner; one to each corner of your opponent's square. If one (or more) of those four lines passes through something that provides cover, your opponent has cover from you. (This says nothing about whether you have any cover from your opponent.)

What about things that just provide "cover"? Does dropping down behind your horse with the Ride skill give you cover against both melee and ranged attacks? Or tower shields?

If a thing says you have cover (like the Ride skill), without qualification, then you have cover. Period.

Tower shields are a whole 'nother thing. I suggest you read the FAQ for more about them.

 

[irdeggman]

Sigh. No.

The difference is that with ranged cover, the attacker chooses which corner of the square to use, and he has two corners he can choose from which he can trace lines to the defender without passing through the wall.

Does the "wall" count as being in both squares? Is the "side" in both squares or in "neither"?

Using the line of effect rules, shooting around a corner would appear to provide no cover for the target, but an arguement could be made otherwise - depending on how the edge of a square is handled with regard to how much space is occupied by it.

 

[Vegepygmy]

Does the "wall" count as being in both squares? Is the "side" in both squares or in "neither"?

I think I understand what you're asking (but I'm not sure I do). Let me ask a question that I think gets at the heart of the matter.

X = wall
O = opponent
A = archer

XXX XXX
XXX XXX
XXX XXX
XXXOXXX
XXX XXX
XXX XXX
XXX XXX
XXXA

Does the opponent have cover from the archer's ranged attack? (He's standing in the middle of a 5-foot-wide hallway, with no other obstructions.)

 

[Noumenon]

So "ranged cover" means things that block any corner of your square from reaching a corner of theirs.

Sorry, I should have said "things that block all corners of your square from reaching a corner of theirs."