Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hypersmurf" data-source="post: 3023457" data-attributes="member: 1656">Yes.Yes.It depends what you mean.Essentially, a creature either has cover, or it doesn't.  If you're behind a low wall and a goblin, you have cover, and +4 to AC.However, in some situations, the DM might rule that the combination is enough for 'improved cover' (see 'Varying Degrees of Cover' in the Combat Modifiers section of the PHB).It's not that 'reach weapons are subject to soft cover'; it's that 'melee attacks against non-adjacent creatures use the rules for determining cover against ranged attacks'.  The rules for determining cover against ranged attacks state that if the line passes through a creature etc, the target has soft cover.  So if you're making a melee attack against a non-adjacent target, and the line passes through a creature, the target has soft cover.So the cohort would provide soft cover for you from the dragon (unless the dragon is closer to the cohort than you are, since the cohort will count as a low obstacle to the dragon), and the dragon will not be able to make an AoO on you.  Mage Slayer is irrelevant, since you aren't trying to cast defensively anyway.The PHB says "Creatures, even your enemies, can provide you with cover against melee attacks, giving you a +4 bonus to AC."  The erraa corrects this, stating that it provides cover against ranged attacks, not melee, so the corrected line is "Creatures, even your enemies, can provide you with cover against ranged attacks, giving you a +4 bonus to AC."  You will find this corrected line in the SRD, for example.However, since melee attacks against non-adjacent targets use the rules for determining cover from ranged attacks, the phrase 'can provide you with cover against ranged attacks' applies to melee attacks against non-adjacent targets as well.-Hyp.</blockquote>

Verification