Redirect attack vs CMBs

[Kain Darkwind]

Question came up in my game, and I'm curious. Is the intent of the rogue advanced talent 'redirect attack' to allow it to only redirect a damaging hit, or does a 'melee attack' include making use of a combat maneuver, like disarm, grapple or sunder?

[Coriat]

Quote:

Benefit: Once per day, when a rogue with this talent is hit with a melee attack, she can redirect the attack to strike at an adjacent creature with a free action. The creature targeted must be within melee reach of the attack that hit the rogue, and the creature that made the attack against the rogue must make a new attack roll against the new target.

Quote:

When performing a combat maneuver, you must use an action appropriate to the maneuver you are attempting to perform. While many combat maneuvers can be performed as part of an attack action, full-attack action, or attack of opportunity (in place of a melee attack), others require a specific action. Unless otherwise noted, performing a combat maneuver provokes an attack of opportunity from the target of the maneuver. If you are hit by the target, you take the damage normally and apply that amount as a penalty to the attack roll to perform the maneuver. If your target is immobilized, unconscious, or otherwise incapacitated, your maneuver automatically succeeds (treat as if you rolled a natural 20 on the attack roll). If your target is stunned, you receive a +4 bonus on your attack roll to perform a combat maneuver against it.

When you attempt to perform a combat maneuver, make an attack roll and add your CMB in place of your normal attack bonus. Add any bonuses you currently have on attack rolls due to spells, feats, and other effects. These bonuses must be applicable to the weapon or attack used to perform the maneuver. The DC of this maneuver is your target's Combat Maneuver Defense. Combat maneuvers are attack rolls, so you must roll for concealment and take any other penalties that would normally apply to an attack roll.

The debate (at least as we had it) hinges partly on whether something that is used in place of a melee attack is still a melee attack (as the rogue ability works on a "melee attack")

1: Favors a broad reading of melee attack. Things that replace a melee attack (disarm, in this case) are treated the same as a melee attack: try to wrest away a rogue's weapon, he can make you wrest away someone else's.

2: Favores a strict reading of melee attack. Only an actual melee attack counts, something that is used in place of a melee attack does not (even if it is something using an attack roll).

3: Some other argument we didn't think of?

[Isil-zha]

The last sentence you cited, states that combat maneuvers are attack rolls, and since most of them require you to be within melee range this might make for an argument that they are forms of melee attacks.

Not saying that I necessarily agree with this reasoning, but I can see someone bringing this up to make their case.

[mplindustries]

The key phrase here is "hit with a melee attack."

Whether or not maneuvers are melee attacks, they do not "hit," they meet a DC.

So, no, you cannot redirect a maneuver.

[Isil-zha]

well, then that's true for a regular attack as well (the DC is the targets AC the same way the CMD is the DC of the maneuver)

whether or not every beaten DC would be called a hit is a different question (For a sunder attempt I'd definitely say yes though - even though in this case it's not the rogue that got hit, but his weapon)

Edit: Again, not trying to argue for either position, just saying that the language isn't quite as clear. If I had to rule on this I'd totally be with mplindustries on that one, I think this is RAI.

[blackbloodtroll]

A combat maneuver is very much an attack.

[jerrys]

i think it's a lot easier to accidentally hit the wrong guy with your club, than it would be to accidentally grapple the wrong guy.

I guess that I could see accidentally tripping the wrong guy. (And grapple is a bad example anyway since it's a standard action.)

What about this: say that the rogue has one weapon, and the redirect-victim has two. And the attacker tries to disarm the rogue. If you let the rogue redirect the disarm to the other guy, which hand gets disarmed? Or, same with sunder?

I guess that I would rule that you can use the redirect to negate the maneuver on you, but not have it affect the other guy. (i realize this is consistent with neither interpretation of the rules, but it's what I like.)

[mplindustries]

Isil-zha wrote:

well, then that's true for a regular attack as well (the DC is the targets AC the same way the CMD is the DC of the maneuver)

First, no, AC is never called the DC of an attack roll the way CMD is called the DC of a maneuver.

Second, I should not have even mentioned it as it is not as relevant as the fact that while maneuvers are attacks, they do not "hit." Only actually damaging attacks hit.

[Isil-zha]

So, with this definition, a sunder attack hits, a maintained grapple to do damage hits... I wish the language were as clear cut as you make it out to be, but it isn't.

I still think the intention for the rogue talent is quite clear, though.

And of course AC is a DC it follows all the same rules and the whole game is based on that same principle of meeting difficulties to succeed on the role, differentiating at this point is rather like splitting hairs, I believe.