Combat expertise and touch spells

Combat Expertise (Combat)

You can increase your defense at the expense of your accuracy.

Prerequisite: Int 13.

Benefit: You can choose to take a –1 penalty on melee attack rolls and combat maneuver checks to gain a +1 dodge bonus to your Armor Class. When your base attack bonus reaches +4, and every +4 thereafter, the penalty increases by –1 and the dodge bonus increases by +1. You can only choose to use this feat when you declare that you are making an attack or a full-attack action with a melee weapon. The effects of this feat last until your next turn.

so am I correct in interrupting that it doesnt work with touch attacks?

It appears so, there wouldn't have been a reason to add that last bit in otherwise, I'll check the sample dragons for a reference.

EDIT: Well ancient black dragon seems to have combat expertise, I think the general idea is you have to count as being armed.

well i'd consider a claw a melee weapon

a touch attack counts as armed when you make it, but i'm not sure it counts as a melee weapon for combat expertise. its a melee touch attack, but is it a melee weapon in this case?

well i'd consider a claw a melee weapon

a touch attack counts as armed when you make it, but i'm not sure it counts as a melee weapon for combat expertise. its a melee touch attack, but is it a melee weapon in this case?

Since unarmed strikes with the Improved Unarmed Strike feat are counted as melee weapons, I can't see any reason touch attacks wouldn't be considered melee weapons. It might also just be an oversight on the part of the writer, since there probably isn't a lot of spellcasters taking this feat on a regular basis (at least in my experience).

Since unarmed strikes with the Improved Unarmed Strike feat are counted as melee weapons, I can't see any reason touch attacks wouldn't be considered melee weapons. It might also just be an oversight on the part of the writer, since there probably isn't a lot of spellcasters taking this feat on a regular basis (at least in my experience).

Spellcasters in general don't have a lot of BAB to spare. For them if they're delivering a touch spell that already has a lot of damage, why make it less likely to hit for a measely one or two pts of extra damage?

idk, combat expertise always seemed like a blocking with the weapon to me, and touch attacks are gone after you use them. maybe thats clouding my vision

its relevant to a player in my game thats planning on being an arcane trickster and will have an at will 0 level touch spell

idk, combat expertise always seemed like a blocking with the weapon to me, and touch attacks are gone after you use them. maybe thats clouding my vision

its relevant to a player in my game thats planning on being an arcane trickster and will have an at will 0 level touch spell

I've played an Arcane Trickster myself and lowering my to-Hit is something I'd never do. With all that sneak attack damage, why lower your attack plus for one or two pts of armor class when you're going to be front loading all those extra D6's. As an Arcane trickster who does not have the BAB of a fighter, it's far more important that you HIT rather than get 2 pts of damage especially since you're not going to have all those chances for sneak attack.

So yes, while Combat Expertise might give him a couple of extra AC points, I'd rather get those from a shield spell and get my target down faster by making sure I hit in the first place.

Spellcasters in general don't have a lot of BAB to spare. For them if they're delivering a touch spell that already has a lot of damage, why make it less likely to hit for a measely one or two pts of extra damage?

It doesn't add to damage, it adds to AC. I don't think it works, because of the clear text "with a melee weapon." Being armed isn't the same as a melee weapon. It means you can flank and take AoOs.

I would say the "melee weapon" bit is included so that you're not trying it while using a ranged weapon. Notice the penalty is only to melee attack rolls and CMB.

I see no rules reason why this shouldn't be allowed. I do get the fluff reason of "they can't threaten/block with a hand that doesn't have a spell anymore", but that's an after-affect of the sequential order of rounds (everyone doing their 6 seconds of action separately, but only 6 seconds go by), so I'd discount that.

Go for it, good for Eldritch Knights. Possibly the same for Fighting Defensively.

I would say the "melee weapon" bit is included so that you're not trying it while using a ranged weapon. Notice the penalty is only to melee attack rolls and CMB.

I see no rules reason why this shouldn't be allowed. I do get the fluff reason of "they can't threaten/block with a hand that doesn't have a spell anymore", but that's an after-affect of the sequential order of rounds (everyone doing their 6 seconds of action separately, but only 6 seconds go by), so I'd discount that.

Go for it, good for Eldritch Knights. Possibly the same for Fighting Defensively.

then it should say melee attack, not weapon