Attack rolls that are neither melee nor ranged?

[Particle_Man]

I was thinking of taking a character that has the shaky and non-combatant flaws. Together they give me a -2 penalty to ranged and melee attack rolls.

Is there any other attack roll I could make (as a Druid/wizard/mystic theurge/arcane hierophant) to which this penalty would not apply? Or am I simply -2 to all attack rolls?

[Zombulian]

I was thinking of taking a character that has the shaky and non-combatant flaws. Together they give me a -2 penalty to ranged and melee attack rolls.

Is there any other attack roll I could make (as a Druid/wizard/mystic theurge/arcane hierophant) to which this penalty would not apply? Or am I simply -2 to all attack rolls?

I’m 99% sure that all attack rolls are defined as either melee or ranged but I’d be interested in being wrong about that.

[AlurenDarkfire]

Not sure which specific system you're looking at, but in Pathfinder, Aid Another requires an attack roll against AC 10. It doesn't specify Melee or Ranged, just *an* attack roll
https://www.d20pfsrd.com/Gamemastering/Combat/#Aid_Another
Edit: Same for 3 and 3.5 D&D

[Particle_Man]

3.5, where aid another is only used if you are in a position to make melee attack.

Not sure the pathfinder wording indicates a third option “attack (which is neither melee nor ranged)” or is just allowing either of the two original options “attack (which can be either melee or ranged)” to be used.

[Kelb_Panthera]

The -only- thing I can think of that calls out an attack roll that's not -explicitly- a melee or ranged attack (though it is implicitly melee) is the wall of blades maneuver. I can't imagine you're going to be picking up such a limited ability with the limited resources required as a non-gish caster.

Otherwise, yeah, you're just taking -2 to all attack rolls.

[Bronk]

Hmm... grapple checks, for one. I think a case could be made for ranged and melee touch attacks for another, since they aren’t described in the regular attack section and are slightly different.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Replace Noncombatant with Bestial Instinct (Dragon 324 p93), that gives a -2 to all attack rolls except those made with unarmed strikes or natural weapons. So that would be a -4 to ranged attack rolls, and a -2 to melee attacks with manufactured weapons and spells (unless a melee touch spell is delivered with an unarmed strike or natural weapon attack).

[False God]

Hmm... grapple checks, for one. I think a case could be made for ranged and melee touch attacks for another, since they aren’t described in the regular attack section and are slightly different.

"Starting a grapple requires a successful melee attack roll."

So that's probably not gonna fly.

[ShurikVch]

Don't do any attack rolls altogether - use AoE

Or, at the very least, try to get a touch attack (and use it on flanked flat-footed enemies)

[MisterKaws]

Don't do any attack rolls altogether - use AoE

Or, at the very least, try to get a touch attack (and use it on flanked flat-footed enemies)

This. Just use AoE, summons, debuffs, Save-or-dies, etc.

[Zombulian]

Don't do any attack rolls altogether - use AoE

Or, at the very least, try to get a touch attack (and use it on flanked flat-footed enemies)

Yep. If you don’t want to have rounds where you don’t do any actions because you have a crappy attack and no spells you want to use, consider picking up a reserve feat like Fiery Burst.

[Particle_Man]

I am going for mystic theurge. I will always have a spell to use! :smallbiggrin:

[Zombulian]

I am going for mystic theurge. I will always have a spell to use! :smallbiggrin:

Then don’t worry about attack rolls :smallwink:

[Psyren]

Not sure which specific system you're looking at, but in Pathfinder, Aid Another requires an attack roll against AC 10. It doesn't specify Melee or Ranged, just *an* attack roll
https://www.d20pfsrd.com/Gamemastering/Combat/#Aid_Another
Edit: Same for 3 and 3.5 D&D


3.5, where aid another is only used if you are in a position to make melee attack.

Not sure the pathfinder wording indicates a third option “attack (which is neither melee nor ranged)” or is just allowing either of the two original options “attack (which can be either melee or ranged)” to be used.

The section begins with "in melee combat" which would explain why they didn't feel the need to specify the type of attack roll further down.



I am going for mystic theurge. I will always have a spell to use! :smallbiggrin:

Then don’t worry about attack rolls :smallwink:

This; why do you even care? These flaws should be a non-issue.

[Particle_Man]

Well just because I don't want to have to engage in combat with attack rolls doesn't mean that monsters/bad guys will always respect my wishes. :smallsmile:

But really, it is just if I can legit just right "-2 on my attack rolls" on the character sheet to save space, and be technically correct (the best kind of correct).

[Doctor Awkward]

No.

The rules are quite clear. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm#attack)

"Making an attack is a standard action."

The types of attacks available are melee, unarmed (which for nearly all purposes is just like a melee), and ranged.

The Rules As Written do not allow for any attack roll that does not fall into one of those categories.

[Bronk]

"Starting a grapple requires a successful melee attack roll."

So that's probably not gonna fly.

You can also join an existing grapple without an attack roll...

http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20050322a