Reach weapons, cover, threatening and AoO?

[Raleighdnd]

When cover exists, either from an ally or enemy, does an individual wielding a reach weapon (such as a glaive) still threaten enemies, receive flanking bonuses, or make AoO?

The players handbook seems to suggest they don't. In regards to cover and flanking with reach weapons, the PHB states on page 150 that "when making a melee attack against a target that
isn't adjacent to you (such as with a reach weapon), use the rules
for determining cover from ranged attacks. Referring to the Table 8-
5 above, which summarizes the benefits when the "Attacker is…" shows
flanking is not possible with ranged attacks—and thus, not with reach
weapons when opponents have cover.

I've seen thread mentioning this issue may have been covered in Song and Silence, but I am curious what other DM's have done to resolve this issue or if their is some standard errata out there I am unaware off.

thanks
j

 

[Altamont Ravenard]

IIRC, 50% or more cover will prevent AoO's.

So, if you're in a corridor:

XAR

Where X is the enemy mage, A is your cleric partner and R is you with a reach weapon, and X starts casting a spell, the cleric will get an AoO, but not you, since someone your size represents 50% cover.

AR

 

[Raleighdnd]

Threatening and flanking bonuses?

Thanks AR for your input. What about the aspects of threatening and flanking?

 

[Zaruthustran]

Thanks AR for your input. What about the aspects of threatening and flanking?

Assuming D&D 3.5:

"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).

When making a melee attack against an adjacent target, your target has cover if any line from your square to the target’s square goes through a wall (including a low wall). When making a melee attack against a target that isn’t adjacent to you (such as with a reach weapon), use the rules for determining cover from ranged attacks.

Cover and Attacks of Opportunity: You can’t execute an attack of opportunity against an opponent with cover relative to you."

Cover has no impact on whether you threaten, and thus no impact on flanking.

This quote shows the origin of your confusion. You're extending the cover rules for reach weapons into flanking rules, which you shouldn't do:

Referring to the Table 8-
5 above, which summarizes the benefits when the "Attacker is…" shows
flanking is not possible with ranged attacks—and thus, not with reach
weapons when opponents have cover.

Flanking is not possible with a ranged attack, true. But a reach weapon is not a ranged weapon. It's a melee weapon. You can flank with a melee weapon.

The cover rules say, essentially, "treat a reach weapon as a ranged weapon for purposes of determining cover". That's it. A reach weapon is still a melee weapon for all other purposes, including flanking.

The only case where you treat the reach weapon as a ranged weapon is when you're trying to figure out whether or not a creature has cover.

So:

ABXC

X is the bad guy
A has a reach weapon
B and C are allies of A

A, B, and C all get flank bonuses. X has cover from A, so A cannot make attacks of opportunity against X and X gets a +4 AC bonus against attacks from A.

-z