Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 5080817" data-attributes="member: 82106">This is flawed reasoning. The specific rule on allies and cover states it only exists for ranged attacks and SPECIFICALLY disallows it for melee, area, and close attacks. It also doesn't mention the possibility of superior cover. So, unless you assume that rule is just verbal drivel then you MUST accept that it is more specific than the general cover rule.Now, I am willing to grant that the specific ally cover rule does NOT state that superior cover is never granted for allies, nor does it give a specific procedure for determining if an ally is 'in the way' of a ranged attack. We will thus have to assume that the 'in the way' determination is the normal line tracing procedure from the general cover rules. As to whether or not superior cover is possible from allies alone the rules are not really clear. I'd be perfectly willing to accept that as a possibility with a reasonable argument from RAW.However, the point is it is clear that the cover granted for allies is only against ranged attacks. Its use for stealth is not defined in the specific ally cover rule, but since we already know that you can't remain hidden using allies as cover that would be highly suggestive of the idea that allies can't allow you to hide at all. Again its not conclusive and I won't insist on arguing that RAW clearly forbids it, but any arguments in favor of allies allowing you to hide or remain hidden is resting on VERY VERY thin ice from a rules perspective.And lest one think this issue really is trivial there would be dirt simple ways to exploit the ability to do this. For instance if you had a row of combatantsRXEwhere R is a rogue, X is an ally, and E is an enemy by the cover rules R would have superior cover vs E. He can simply stand there, make a hide check and attack with CA. X doesn't block his fire, so basically its just as good as flanking assuming he can make the hide check. Even if E steps around X on its turn, so what? R can step around the other way on his turn and STILL make the hide check. E can't escape from this 'pseudo flanking'. R can even use Nimble Strike and make a melee attack with CA using this. With Chameleon he can get a -5 to any attack E makes against R as well. I would consider this to be ridiculous and if it were determined to be RAW I would consider it a flaw in the rules. As it stands I can't see ANY justification for interpreting the rules to allow this kind of silliness.</blockquote>

Verification