the betrayer feat allows you to make a melee attack after a successful diplomacy attempt. since snap shot allows you to threaten within 5' with ranged weapons, would it be OK to allow it to be used with betrayer even 'tho it's not specifically a melee attack? or would that be considered too powerful of a combo?
As a GM rule? Yes.
As a rule book rule? Nope.
You could reasonably draw an arrow and stick it on a neck, or you could use your bow as a club and punch the betrayed guy, but it could work only because they would be melee weapons (or used like, at least).
Nope. The feat specifies melee attack. If it isn't a melee attack you can't make it.
Now, if you're asking if it's a reasonable house rule to allow it...well I wouldn't. But I also think the feat it a pretty terrible feat anyway. I'm also not one for house ruling a feat just because something isn't a strong option.
"Nope. The feat specifies melee attack. If it isn't a melee attack you can't make it."
I know that's the RAW, but to me it just makes sense that if i threaten the target it doesn't matter what type of weapon I attack him with. (especially since throwing a dagger at him with my 20 DEX is more likely to hit than stabbing him with the same dagger using my 7 STR).
"Nope. The feat specifies melee attack. If it isn't a melee attack you can't make it."
I know that's the RAW, but to me it just makes sense that if i threaten the target it doesn't matter what type of weapon I attack him with. (especially since throwing a dagger at him with my 20 DEX is more likely to hit than stabbing him with the same dagger using my 7 STR).
This is the rule forums, and the rules are quite clear. It's not ambiguous, or something in need of interpretation. The feat specifies melee attack.
Now, if you want to ask your GM for a house rule and want opinions on whether it is reasonable that a different question altogether. And really isn't about the rules.