5
\$\begingroup\$

We play a mainly pathfinder game (occassional and as time goes on fewer feats from 3.5) and we still keep coming across things that have changed between 3.5 and pathfinder.

Casting a spell triggers an AoO (unless you cast on the defensive) but does touching an ally to deliver the spell trigger as well? A pathfinder RAW answer would be good. I am sure in 3.5 it did but cannot find anything in pathfinder.

I have found something that says if I use a full round action to touch upto 6 ally it does trigger (if you can fit an enermy in that ruck) but how about just a standard action and just one.

cheers

Improve this question
\$\endgroup\$
2
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Touch attacks never provoked, in 3.5 or Pathfinder. Only actually casting the spell did. Ranged touch attacks would have, but only because all ranged attacks do, the fact that it's a touch attack has nothing to do with it. \$\endgroup\$
    – KRyan
    Apr 21, 2013 at 14:25
  • \$\begingroup\$ But what about casting a cure spell on the defensive, then touching an ally with the cure whilst you are both stood in front of a monster that threatens you both? \$\endgroup\$
    – user8067
    Apr 21, 2013 at 18:55

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
5
\$\begingroup\$

No, touching an ally does not provoke AoO.

Pathfinder SRD, Combat (emphasis mine):

"Armed" Unarmed Attacks: Sometimes a character's or creature's unarmed attack counts as an armed attack. A monk, a character with the Improved Unarmed Strike feat, a spellcaster delivering a touch attack spell, and a creature with natural physical weapons all count as being armed

Armed melee attacks do not provoke an AoO.

This is explicitly repeated in Touch spells in combat section:

Touch Attacks: Touching an opponent with a touch spell is considered to be an armed attack and therefore does not provoke attacks of opportunity. The act of casting a spell, however, does provoke an attack of opportunity.

The exception to this is a full-round action to touch 6 allies, which always provokes an AoO.

Improve this answer
\$\endgroup\$
7
  • \$\begingroup\$ Their wording is bad but a Touch attack on an ally allows the ally for a AoO on you, but we simply assume he never takes it. \$\endgroup\$
    – user4000
    Apr 20, 2013 at 12:14
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @MrJinPengyou Actually it specifically says that no, a Touch Attack doesn't allow for a AoO. \$\endgroup\$
    – Cristol.GdM
    Apr 20, 2013 at 12:59
  • \$\begingroup\$ Oh yeah sorry I read too fast I guess \$\endgroup\$
    – user4000
    Apr 20, 2013 at 19:28
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ The Touch Attacks excerpt does not differentiate between harmful and beneficial spells for the purpose of delivering a touch spell. Therefore, yes. \$\endgroup\$
    – Jeor Mattan
    Apr 21, 2013 at 21:46
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @JeorMattan It does specifically call out “opponent,” though. That could be an oversight, or it could be an example of exception proves the rule. \$\endgroup\$
    – Bradd Szonye
    Apr 22, 2013 at 4:03

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .