Category talk:Skills that target self

This category's name is incorrect and misleading. These skills have no target, are treated as such in-game, and should be classified as such on the wiki. Sure, they technically target self, but that is the default for no target. These are different in that they are unaffected by skills that affect or are triggered by targeting. This page should be moved to  Category:Skills with no target . Yes? No?  -~=Ϛρѧякγ    (τѧιк)  00:49, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Seeing as how skills such as Bloodsong are on the list, I would agree to the change, so long as we're sure that none of the skills listed aren't affected by things such as Shadow Shroud. G R E E N E R  08:27, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Renaming the category seems like the right thing to do. Skills with no target or skills without a specific target is much more accurate.


 * This is a huge category, though, with over 670 skills, including:


 * Skills that don't have to be targeted and are applied to self, e.g. Dash, Distortion, and preparations.
 * Skills that don't have to be targeted, but don't apply to self, e.g. Rituals
 * Skills that force an action on a controlled entity, e.g. Brutal Strike forces a pet attack
 * Skills that apply to all within earshot, e.g. Shouts and Chants
 * AoE skills, centered around the caster, e.g. Grasping Earth
 * Monster skills
 * Special use skills, e.g. Powder Keg Explosion
 * Consumable effects, e.g. Birthday Cupcake (skill)


 * Clearly, many of these don't apply to the initiator, so the current name is misleading. &mdash; Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 09:23, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I actually think backsword dug around in the dat to find how some skills were targeted, and went around tagging all of the ones that used the skill user as an anchor of some sort - spells that could hit through spell breaker and shadow form by simply standing next to the protted target, etc.
 * It's named "correctly" - in a technical sense, I was under the impression that all of these skills, mechanically, do target the player, even if the player is unaware of the targeting taking place. If this category were split into smaller subsections, each of those could do with a renaming. - Auron 11:12, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I think it should be split, not just renamed. Some of these really do target self and wouldn't work under "Skills with no target", and others really don't target self and wouldn't work under "Skills that target self"... I think a slightly simplified version of TEF's list would be best. Something like this longer one:
 * Only ever automatically applied to self (stances/preparations/etc)
 * Apply to allies in range (shouts/chants/etc)
 * Affect pets
 * Summon spirits
 * Target ground [that is, AoE]
 * Actually do lack a target (effects?)
 * Or perhaps this even simpler one:
 * Only ever automatically applied to self
 * Apply to entities in range (party, pets, rituals, effects)
 * Target ground
 * TEF is right: for most of the skills in here, the name just doesn't apply, & for many the word "target" could never apply. | 7  2   User_72_Truly_Random.jpg | 21:01, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Read my post again. Mechanically, these all target the player who activated them, even if you can't see it happening. The game doesn't make Grasping Earth target "the ground," it targets the player who activated the skill and hexes those around him. The game doesn't make shouts target every party member, it targets the caster and then applies it to everyone in range. In a mechanical sense, all of these skills use the skill user as the anchor for the effect, even if the effect hits other players. - Auron 01:51, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm inclined to agree with Auron.
 * I'm basing this partially on the way that Spirit Siphon worked while it was bugged and could target anyone, since I think that it is the single most relevant example. Also, given the way that Gaze of Fury functions, I'm inclined to believe that other binding rituals work in a similar fashion.  &mdash;  Raine Valen  [[Image:User_Raine_R.gif|19px]]  1:58, 17 Aug 2010 (UTC)
 * Pardon my ignorance, because you've now peaked my curiosity. Are you suggesting that a "target" is a fundamental part of those skills? Then (and I'm wishing my monk was far enough into Factions to test this), would HB be blocked by Shadow Shroud, as it is an enchant which at its most basic level "targets" the caster? If it isn't blocked, then "target other" must be at a higher level, one which Shadow Shroud tests for. That would also explain why Mending Touch defaults to the caster when my ranger is targeting a foe... I'm stopping from more rambling, now. G R E E N E R  02:10, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I believe that skills like Shadow Shroud, Shame, and Well of the Profane check for the "is targetable" property of skills. I'm fairly certain that Shame won't pop on Heaven's Delight, even though it triggers Divine Favor on the caster.  Don't quote me on that, though.
 * What I find odd, though, is that, if my memory serves, similar skills don't trigger Divine Favor (I don't believe Aegis did, and I'm fairly certain that Heal Area doesn't). This leads me to believe that there are several variables associated with the mechanic.  &mdash;  Raine Valen  [[Image:User_Raine_R.gif|19px]]  2:32, 17 Aug 2010 (UTC)
 * I was thinking of a category more on the level of what we, the users, see and operate on when using these skills. I don't know which is preferable: categories based on the internal game mechanic or categories based on user-identifiable groupings. Personally, I think the latter is more useful for a wiki | 7  2   User_72_Truly_Random.jpg | 03:19, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm thinking from a technical standpoint. Afaik, none of these skills trigger effects related to targeting. If you don't have a target selected, then any skill you use will act as if you are targeting yourself. So it would make sense to say that these skills ignore your selected target (therefore, not targeting) and use the default, the user. -~=Ϛρѧякγ User Sparky, the Tainted guided sig.png (τѧιк)  06:59, 17 August 2010 (UTC)


 * So, it depends on what we want from this category. Auron makes a good point: from a game mechanics point-of-view, these skills belong together; we could rename it to Skills that game treats as targeting the initiator, but surely Skills that target self works just as well to describe it.


 * OTOH, as noted, from a player point-of-view, this category isn't very useful. Of course, it doesn't have to be &mdash; a skill can belong to multiple categories, some of interest to the player and some of interest to those interested in the game innards. The groupings listed above (by myself and others) are examples of those player-centric categories and most of them already exist. If it's valuable to people, we could create any other category we like. The one I would most like to see would be Skills that can sneak through shielding without targeting an ally or foe; these would be skills that can be used against Shadow Form, Spell Breaker, ... &mdash; Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 11:17, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Good point, we could preserve this technical category and also add its skills to those other functional lists | 7  2   User_72_Truly_Random.jpg | 16:55, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I would not say that this is a technical category, because all skills target you if you do not have a target. Of course these skills were designed to use the player as an anchor, because they do not have any other option. -~=Ϛρѧякγ User Sparky, the Tainted guided sig.png (τѧιк)  18:32, 17 August 2010 (UTC)