Accurate Strike and Combat maneuvers

[NikolaiJuno]

Accurate Strike (Ex)

Prerequisite: Magus 9

Benefit: The magus can expend 2 points from his arcane pool as a swift action to resolve all of his melee weapon attacks until the end of his turn as melee touch attacks.

Some combat maneuvers require attack roles and can use melee weapons.
Can you use Accurate Strike to make a combat maneuver against touch AC?

[James Risner]

Expect table variance.

When making Combat Maneuver checks, you are making attacks and may make then with weapons and gain applicable bonuses the weapons have. But you are not making melee weapon attacks. You are making Combat Maneuver checks.

[fretgod99]

Are there combat maneuvers that target anything other than CMD? I know CMD can change based on being flat-footed or denied DEX. I don't think it changes for touch.

Touch attacks ignore armor. Since armor generally isn't relevant for CMD, I don't think there should be any kind of difference between making a combat maneuver check and making a combat maneuver check as a touch attack.

Could be wrong, though. *shrug*

[Jiggy]

NikolaiJuno wrote:

resolve ... as melee touch attacks.

Okay, so what does it mean to make a touch attack?

Core Rulebook, Combat chapter, Touch Attacks wrote:

When you are the target of a touch attack, your AC doesn't include any armor bonus, shield bonus, or natural armor bonus.

See how there's not actually a stat called "touch AC" that touch attacks are defined as being rolled against? Instead, the definition of a touch attack is that the target's AC doesn't include X, Y and Z for that attack.

Now, if we look at Combat Maneuvers:

Core Rulebook, Combat chapter, Combat Maneuvers wrote:

CMD = 10 + Base attack bonus + Strength modifier + Dexterity modifier + special size modifier

That already doesn't include the things that are denied the target of a touch attack, so there's no change for a "touch" combat maneuver.

[Jiggy]

James Risner wrote:

Expect table variance.

When making Combat Maneuver checks, you are making attacks and may make then with weapons and gain applicable bonuses the weapons have. But you are not making melee weapon attacks. You are making Combat Maneuver checks.

It is true that you are making Combat Maneuver Checks, but it is not true that you are not making melee weapon attacks. The Combat Maneuver rules even explicitly say things like "make an attack roll" and "this is an attack roll, therefore X".

The roll is both an attack roll and a combat maneuver check, the latter being a subset of (rather than alternative to) the former. Much like how "square" is more specific than "rectangle", but every square is also still a rectangle.

[Avoron]

First of all, a combat maneuver being a touch attack would do nothing, because a touch attack just affects what is included in their AC, which you wouldn't care about for a combat maneuver.

Second of all, yes, combat maneuvers are attacks. But whether they are melee attacks has been the subject of some debate.

Even combat maneuvers that are used with weapons and don't require are a standard action specify that they are used "in place of a melee attack," indicating that they are not melee attacks themselves.

[NikolaiJuno]

Jiggy wrote:

NikolaiJuno wrote:

resolve ... as melee touch attacks.

Okay, so what does it mean to make a touch attack?

Core Rulebook, Combat chapter, Touch Attacks wrote:

When you are the target of a touch attack, your AC doesn't include any armor bonus, shield bonus, or natural armor bonus.

See how there's not actually a stat called "touch AC" that touch attacks are defined as being rolled against? Instead, the definition of a touch attack is that the target's AC doesn't include X, Y and Z for that attack.

Now, if we look at Combat Maneuvers:

Core Rulebook, Combat chapter, Combat Maneuvers wrote:

CMD = 10 + Base attack bonus + Strength modifier + Dexterity modifier + special size modifier

That already doesn't include the things that are denied the target of a touch attack, so there's no change for a "touch" combat maneuver.

Ah, I was thinking of touch attack as one targeted against the touch AC listed on a standard character sheet.

[Jiggy]

NikolaiJuno wrote:

Ah, I was thinking of touch attack as one targeted against the touch AC listed on a standard character sheet.

Bonus challenge: find where "touch AC" is defined as a thing in the Core Rulebook besides there just being a space for it on the character sheet.