Aid Another and physical contact

[Josh-o-Lantern]

Does the Aid Another action ever make physical contact with the target?

Aid Another:

In melee combat, you can help a friend attack or defend by distracting or interfering with an opponent. If you're in position to make a melee attack on an opponent that is engaging a friend in melee combat, you can attempt to aid your friend as a standard action. You make an attack roll against AC 10. If you succeed, your friend gains either a +2 bonus on his next attack roll against that opponent or a +2 bonus to AC against that opponent's next attack (your choice), as long as that attack comes before the beginning of your next turn. Multiple characters can aid the same friend, and similar bonuses stack.

From what I can gather, since you need to be threatening the target and that it is an attack roll, you are actively attacking the target... but are you hitting it in any way? Such as bouncing an arrow off their armor using Covering Fire or cracking a whip on their foot.

More to the point, would effects that trigger on hit, such as a Limning weapon or the effect of the spell Fire of Entanglement for example, trigger their effect?

Furthermore, should it fail to by some quirk of the rule I failed to notice, would it be fair to allow such Aid Another attacks to make contact if they break the targets touch AC in addition to the standard AC 10?

[dragonhunterq]

No you are not attacking them, you are assisting your ally. You do not make an attack roll against the foes AC, touch or otherwise. You do not hit the enemy in any meaningful way. You can flavour it as you suggest, but such contact is not significant enough to trigger ancilliary effects
And yes allowing it would likely be a significant action advantage to the aider bordering on, if not outright, unfair. You are effectively giving the aider a free aid another action for no real investment.

[Josh-o-Lantern]

dragonhunterq wrote:

No you are not attacking them, you are assisting your ally.

I'm not as certain this is correct. Take Covering Fire for example:

"You can use the aid another action with a ranged attack against an opponent, regardless of whether the opponent threatens an ally. Range penalties apply to this attack roll. Choose one ally when making the attack."

Again called out as an attack roll and it's clear by the bolded part of the action is an attack toward the foe and not interacting directly with the ally.

dragonhunterq wrote:

You do not make an attack roll against the foes AC, touch or otherwise.

I'm aware, I was just suggesting if you did add such a rule to the Aid Another action, would the results be dire, which you addressed below.

dragonhunterq wrote:

You do not hit the enemy in any meaningful way. You can flavour it as you suggest, but such contact is not significant enough to trigger ancilliary effects

And yes allowing it would likely be a significant action advantage to the aider bordering on, if not outright, unfair. You are effectively giving the aider a free aid another action for no real investment.

I'm not seeing any significant action advantage, unless you are saying any addition is significant. I say this with only a few examples on hand that are simple on hit effects, but perhaps you or someone else could point out the effects that would cause this change to come back and bite me?

[Andy Brown]

Josh-o-Lantern wrote:

someone else could point out the effects that would cause this change to come back and bite me?

How about a held Shocking Grasp?

Not only do you take the damage, but your other attacker now has a bonus to hit you.

[Josh-o-Lantern]

Andy Brown wrote:

Josh-o-Lantern wrote:

someone else could point out the effects that would cause this change to come back and bite me?

How about a held Shocking Grasp?

Not only do you take the damage, but your other attacker now has a bonus to hit you.

My intent is for it to apply only to effects that don't cause damage.