Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Artoomis" data-source="post: 109867" data-attributes="member: 111">Seems I was wrong and the rules do NOT mention &quot;time exposed&quot; as part of determining cover at all (maybe I was flashing back to 2e?).In any case, you SHOULD be able to do something that resembles a &quot;shoot around the corner&quot; sort of manuever.&nbsp; I think you can, but it depends on how the squares line up (it shouldn't, but it does).Let's say you have a 12' wide street with two buildings on either side forming the opening.&nbsp; Well, how to the squares line up?&nbsp; At a minimum,&nbsp; one side must have only a partial square at corner, providing partial cover if you stand in that square - you'd have teh building in front of you, but only in part of the square.But if the squares line up exactly (as in a 10' or 15' street), you get either no cover or 100% cover.&nbsp; Seems silly, doesn't it?You may want to use my suggestion in the post above for this situation, though I have to admit it would be a house rule, but a house rule designed to hande a tricky situation that defies normal logic.&nbsp; You should not be able or not able to do some action solely dependent upon how the squares happen to line up - and, in fact, this situation is handled differently if you don't use any squares at all!Since miniatures and/or squares are NOT required for the game, maybe my solution is a good one?&nbsp; To more accurately represent what is happening when you want to shoot or cast around a corner.Thoughts?P.S.&nbsp; Caliban is dead on about what the rules say, if you assume the squares line up exactly with the street and the buildling you are using for cover.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Artoomis, post: 109867, member: 111"] Seems I was wrong and the rules do NOT mention "time exposed" as part of determining cover at all (maybe I was flashing back to 2e?). In any case, you SHOULD be able to do something that resembles a "shoot around the corner" sort of manuever. I think you can, but it depends on how the squares line up (it shouldn't, but it does). Let's say you have a 12' wide street with two buildings on either side forming the opening. Well, how to the squares line up? At a minimum, one side must have only a partial square at corner, providing partial cover if you stand in that square - you'd have teh building in front of you, but only in part of the square. But if the squares line up exactly (as in a 10' or 15' street), you get either no cover or 100% cover. Seems silly, doesn't it? You may want to use my suggestion in the post above for this situation, though I have to admit it would be a house rule, but a house rule designed to hande a tricky situation that defies normal logic. You should not be able or not able to do some action solely dependent upon how the squares happen to line up - and, in fact, this situation is handled differently if you don't use any squares at all! Since miniatures and/or squares are NOT required for the game, maybe my solution is a good one? To more accurately represent what is happening when you want to shoot or cast around a corner. Thoughts? P.S. Caliban is dead on about what the rules say, if you assume the squares line up exactly with the street and the buildling you are using for cover. [/QUOTE]

Verification