Questions about cover...

[RigaMortus2]

I know I've read it, but I can't seem to find the rule regarding hitting cover. I found the rule as to what bonuses to AC you get if you have Cover, but I couldn't find any wording stating that if you miss your target because of the cover bonus, you hit the cover (I know it is out there).

Also, regarding Soft Cover...

Can you hit Soft Cover (I assume the answer is yes)?

Lastly, let's say you are aiming at a target who is getting cover from an ally. When you roll to hit, you miss the target because of the cover bonus (from your friend). But when you check to see if you hit your ally, you miss him because of his dodge bonus to AC. So does this mean he dodges out of the way and you do in fact hit the target, since your cover "moved out of the way"?

 

[Hypersmurf]

I know I've read it, but I can't seem to find the rule regarding hitting cover. I found the rule as to what bonuses to AC you get if you have Cover, but I couldn't find any wording stating that if you miss your target because of the cover bonus, you hit the cover (I know it is out there).

It was a rule in 3E; it's in the DMG as a variant rule (not default) in 3.5.

In 3.5, the default rule is that if you miss due to Cover, you miss.

This was the 3E rule - I think the 3.5 variant is similar, but I don't have a DMG handy:
Striking the Cover Instead of a Missed Target

If it ever becomes important to know whether the cover was actually struck by an incoming attack that misses the intended target, the DM should determine if the attack roll would have hit the protected target without the cover. If the attack roll falls within a range low enough to miss the target with cover but high enough to strike the target if there had been no cover, the object used for cover was struck. This can be particularly important to know in cases where a character uses another character as cover. In such a case, if the cover is struck and the attack roll exceeds the AC of the covering character, the covering character takes the damage intended for the target.

If the covering character has a Dexterity bonus to AC or a dodge bonus, and this bonus keeps the covering character from being hit, then the original target is hit instead. The covering character has dodged out of the way and didn't provide cover after all. A covering character can choose not to apply his Dexterity bonus to AC and/or his dodge bonus, if his intent is to try to take the damage in order to keep the covered character from being hit.

-Hyp.

 

[RigaMortus2]

That answers it, thanks very much!

 

[shilsen]

This was the 3E rule - I think the 3.5 variant is similar, but I don't have a DMG handy:

You need a DMG handy to be sure? Are you not feeling well today, Hyp ?

And yes, the 3.5 variant rule is exactly the same.