I understand the rules about LOS and cover and the bonuses you receive for full and partial cover, and that when in the same area cover does not apply.  However, what happens when you are not in the same area, but DIRECTLY behind someone in cover?  I ran into several circumstances where I was directly behind a locust in cover but his back was facing me and I was directly behind him.  Does the locust still get a partial cover boost for being in cover, even tho I'm directly behind him and no part of the cover is near me?

Thanks!

You mean like?

Cover - COG | (area separation) Locust - Cover

If so, then both would get partial cover against attacks from one another.

I agree too with Dam

|<locust> <-----area----> cog

Something like that ^^.  If you are directly behind them, it doesn't make sense that they'd have a cover bonus.  If you need it to be clearer I could set up a board and take a picture if it helps.

If a figure is in a cover space and the attack doesn't come from the same area, it gets cover bonus, even if the attack seems to come from a direction where no cover would seem likely. Don't think of cover as fixed blocks (although they are such in the video games), they provide a abstract picture of cover, all that matters are is the figure in cover and is the attacker in the same area (unless using area attacks that ignore cover).

I agree with Dam....again.

Ok.  I've only played a couple games so I'm still getting used to it.  It seems kind of silly if the cover is facing the opposite direction and he's completely exposed, but if that's the rules, I'll stick to them.  Thanks for the help guys!

AceMilo said:

Imagine that he is crouching behind his cover, so he is a smaller target (and thus harder to hit) even for enemies who are shooting at him from behind. 

 plus i think the idea is that the characters arent static. theres a chance they could jump over the cover. or that the cover is more than just a block. its like when your in the open and you draw line of sight from the area, its because you are moving around and you could be occupying any part of the area at any given time. 

Graf said:

That's what I figured when I read the rules but wanted to be sure.  Thanks again.

AceMilo said:

note that in that case, the opponent only has a limited cover (+1d) and not a full cover (+2d). So that's not fully illogical on a miniature game's point of view