"Ignore Cover"?

[The Little Raven]

In my experience, it specifies when it applies to superior cover (-5), otherwise it only applies to regular cover (-2).

However, I don't think it would be out of place to interpret that as "reduce cover category by one," so if they had superior cover (-5) would become regular cover (-2).

 

[Ferghis]

but as a -personal- rule of thumb, i'd say that if it doesn't mention surperior cover then it does not bypass superior cover, only cover.

If it doesn't explicitly say (and many do), I'd be inclined to rule the same way, even though my reading of RAW would include superior cover within the notion of cover.

I'd have to see the class and build to give a more specific opinion. For example, if it's a well-built bow ranger, I would probably either reduce the superior cover penalty to -3 or apply the full penalty. For a less (mechanically) crafty build, say a Seeker, I would more inclined to remove both penalties.

 

[S'mon]

If it doesn't explicitly say (and many do), I'd be inclined to rule the same way, even though my reading of RAW would include superior cover within the notion of cover.

I'd have to see the class and build to give a more specific opinion. For example, if it's a well-built bow ranger, I would probably either reduce the superior cover penalty to -3 or apply the full penalty. For a less (mechanically) crafty build, say a Seeker, I would more inclined to remove both penalties.

It's a PHB Archer Ranger, I expect it as an ability from the PHB but I cannot find it, player has not got back to me yet. The player is not a big min-maxer, and I tend to be fairly heavy on cover penalties. Making superior cover a -3 penalty is my current ruling and probably as harsh as I'd want to go, ie I'd be willing to house rule it if the official rule is that it's still a full -5.

 

[Ferghis]

That seems pretty fair to me.

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

I play a Seeker and have the level 2 skill perception utility 'Far Sight'. It is a minor action encounter power that allows for ignoring cover and concealment as well as no penalty for long range. The power explicitly states that it does not apply to superior cover or total concealment, and it is only 'until the end of your next turn'

I don't know of any other non-seeker specific power that grants this. As a Seeker I have 'improved inevitable shot' feat that allows for that specific attack to ignore cover and concealment.. and that one does not specify anything with regards to superior cover or total concealment.

Based on the 'Far Sight' power I would have to assume that it would only apply to normal cover.
As a player, I much prefer the 'treat cover as one category less' approach, but I think that is HR territory.

 

[S'mon]

OK, it seems to be Hunter's Aim from Martial Power page 136 - "You don't take the normal -2 penalty to attack rolls against your quarry if it has cover or concealment". No indication what happens with Superior Cover or Superior Concealment.

 

[D'karr]

OK, it seems to be Hunter's Aim from Martial Power page 136 - "You don't take the normal -2 penalty to attack rolls against your quarry if it has cover or concealment". No indication what happens with Superior Cover or Superior Concealment.

My take would be that since it doesn't say anything about Superior C/C it doesn't impact them. Specially since it specifically calls out the -2 penalty instead of making a generic reference to a penalty.

However, I probably wouldn't be opposed to reducing the Superior C/C penalty by 2 points as a house rule.

 

[S'mon]

My take would be that since it doesn't say anything about Superior C/C it doesn't impact them. Specially since it specifically calls out the -2 penalty instead of making a generic reference to a penalty.

However, I probably wouldn't be opposed to reducing the Superior C/C penalty by 2 points as a house rule.

Thanks, that's my feeling too. Balance of probabilities, I suspect it was intended to keep Superior C/C at -5, but it doesn't seem unreasonable to knock -2 off that.

 

[D'karr]

Thanks, that's my feeling too. Balance of probabilities, I suspect it was intended to keep Superior C/C at -5, but it doesn't seem unreasonable to knock -2 off that.

There is a Ranger Attack power called Aimed Shot that disregards cover/concealment and makes the penalty for superior C/C no greater than -2. It is one of those selectable by Essentials Classes.

It is a basic ranged attack rider similar to how Power Strike works, and it's a standard action to use.

You might want to keep that in mind as a comparison.

 

[Ferghis]

lidskatherin
has no status.

Registered User

Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7

I can't report this as spam for some reason. Will someone else?