Artoomis said:
Anyway, the whole issue come down to when are touch attacks (and ranged touch attacks) like weapons, and when are they not like weapons. Obviously it varies by situation.
I believe it should only matter in those situations where having a physical weapon matters.
In those situations where it's only a matter of being able to target your opponent and deliver damage, it shouldn't matter if it's a dagger or shocking grasp. At range it shouldn't matter if it's an arrow or flaming arrow.
What matters is that it can hit the target in a vulnerable spot can cause extra damage if you critical.
For example, touch attacks are like weapons when it comes to not provoking an AoO for an unarmed attack. Ranged touch attacks, however, are not like weapons when it come to provoking an AoO for using a ranged weapon.
Like I said, double jeopardy.
Ranged weapons like bows, crossbows, whips, and slings require you to concentrate on making an attack rather than defending yourself.
Spells (melee or ranged) do the same, but defensive casting allows you to overcome it. Having ranged touch spells provoke an AoO a second time would be double jeopardy.
You think they count as weapons for Coup de Grace, I do not.
A Coup de Grace is targeting your attack so that it hits a very vulnerable part of their anatomy, automatically causing a crit and probably killing them. This is why you also get your sneak attack damage.
I haven't seen a logical reason why it matters if the damage comes from a physical weapon or spell energy. Touch attack spells can crit and deliver sneak attack damage.
Why would you suddenly be less accurate with a touch attack than a melee attack when your target is helpless?
Clearly, neither of use really believes they are weapons for all purposes, or that anything that does damage, requires an attack roll and can critical is a weapon for all purposes.
For any purpose that requires posing a credible threat, or an attack roll and the ability to critical, touch spells are weapons.
Provoking an AoO doesn't require either, so they don't count as a weapon for that purpose. They only count as spells in that instance.
My actual serious point to make is that such things as improved unarmed attack, touch attacks and ranged touch attacks sometimes count as weapons and sometimes do not. It's not always clear from the rules which they should be, or even what the intent of the writers/editors was in any particular circumstance.
That, I think, is something on which we can agree.
*shrug* It's always seemed pretty clear to me, I just couldn't seem distill it down to a few clear statements until you implied I was being a hypocrite.
Sometimes I'm wrong, and occasionally I can't manage to express myself with enough caveats and exceptions listed out to satisfy everyone, but I never lie.
Yeah, I think I finally figured out that we just aren't going to get along, so, what the hell. I think Artoomis did have a legitimate question though. He explained it really well in the post above. You two just have different opinions, that's all.
Seriously, how did it happen?
