Blind affecting touch skills?

Every so often while running through AB or the Maguuma, I think to myself, why is it I can't hit them while I'm blinded with a wild swing of my sword/axe yet these touch creatures can feel me up all they like when they're blinded?

It would give the whole thing a sense of continuity and a bit more reality i guess.

If only this was implemented back when Touch Rangers were all the rage...

I like it, but it may be to late

/sign anyway.

This would be long overdue, but is such a really really good idea. I am all for this, it's only logical.

maybe because logically you can grope at your targets when blinded?

/signed

though touchers aren't that big anymore.

Touches are skills that have 'touch range'.
That range is between 'self' and 'adyacent' that's REALLY close.

If you are close enough that you can smell the enemy, he cannot avoid you touching him onless he moves away.

And precisely moving away is the only way to prevent touches other than "Can't Touch this!".

On top of that, there is only ONE attack with touch range:
http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Consuming_Flames

The rest are all either 'Skills' or ' Spells'.

Blidness affects only attacks and attack skills so this can't be done.

In order to hit someone with your sword/axe/whatever, you have to be within adjacent range.

GG

We all know Blindness only affects attacks and attack skills, the suggestion is to change it to affect touch spells/skills as well.

If you consider that melee attacks technically have to be touch range (base to base adjacent contact) then the same logic could be applied to that.

Spears, Bows and Wands/Staves are a different issue, because they are ranged attacks. Axes, Hammers, Swords, Scythes and Daggers aren't ranged.

I'm pretty sure it can be done. 'Touch skill' would lend itself nicely to a specific coding syntax after all.

The game isn't supposed to be realistic to the letter. Might as well make it so casters cant aim while blinded, because they're supposed to see who they're targetting as well.

I don't see how this applies. No one ever said you have to see the person you're casting a spell on, maybe the caster is thinking it. But in order to physically "touch" someone, it involves physical contact. Unless the skill is more of a "spiritual" touch.

I know the game isn't supposed to be 100% realistic, but it should at least make a certain amount of sense.

Oh, yes. Yes they are, their range start from the handle.
http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Longsword
If longwords could hit realistically, they could have nearby range.
You can't hit with weapons while blinded because weapons need to hit certain spots to cause effects.
Touches just need to reach the enemy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braile

Now tell me how do blind people read braile if they need to 'see' in order 'touch'. To touch you need three things:
1. Hands or any similar limb or appendix.
2. Be close enough.
3. Know where the objective is.

You may think that 3 is the problem, that losing sight would prevent nowing were the enemy is. But characters have much more senses:
*Hearing : Have you ever heard and IMP? It's IMPOSSIBLE not to know where an imp is!
*Taste
*Smell : Have you ever smelt a cow? Minotaurs smell worse.
*Touch : Hm.. hm... hm... touch around...
*Temperature : You can feel where an Ice golem or a Fire fjinn is from miles away like that.
*Pain : If you don't know where the stones come from when they hit you, you are doomed.
*Balance and acceleration
*Body awareness : If someone touches you you feel them.
*And other internal senses


We don't know which grade of blindness Blind applies. We just now that attacks and attack skills wil have 90% rate of failure and other projectiles (such as spell prohectiles like Flare) would have increased chances to stray from target.

But the Touch range is closer than adjacent. To touch you just need to spin around with extended hands.

I could accept "Touches may hit other adjacent enemies instead of target foe".
But never preventing them to hit.

It is not a needed change.

No its not.

It's the same range as a melee attack, and if you can't hit someone with your 4 foot long sword/axe, from adjacent range, I don't see why you can hit them with your 6 inch long hands.

You can, but it's useless.
With a touch you can just brush the sleve of the target and ding! Touch takes effect. Most of the time they target the torso because it's the 'default' target and touches just need to reach the enemy. It doens't matter where do you touch as long as you touch.
But with attacks you need to hit the enemy itself. Attack skills target feet, head, torso, hands, etc.

In visual distance it is. But not in game mechanics.

And remember that GW has a certain degree of asynchrony. So what you see is not always what others see.

If I get hit with a sword strike IRL, I'm not going to be like "Oh, good, at least it wasn't my torso." I'm going to be like "I just got hit with an effing sword!"

I agree. It comes down to common sense versus game mechanics, and I'm for common sense.

/Signed.

Sure why not.

/signed

/notsign

Touchers are not that powerful. No need to nerf that.

Beside you can always touch someone when you are blind anyway! If you say you can not touch a person when you are blind then you might as well suggest when you are blind, your screen become complete black then. Blind and still be able to chase behind a target with a sword or hammer (though not hit)? Nice joke!

I think if you go blind, you're screen should go black and your target locking is turned off. If you run near a cliff while blind, there should be no invisible wall blocking you so you can fall off the cliff and die. You can also accidently attack your own teammates too. (sarcasm)

Not signed

So, you can touch someone when you're blind, but you can't hit them with a 4 foot long sword? That's sound logic right there!

What you're suggesting is basically remove blind from the game.

/agree with that ^^

I agree with the fact that a touch is easier to land than a weapon swing as they're much easier to dodge in terms of watching an opponents movements.

Perhaps a touch skill affected by blinding shouldn't affected to the same level as an attack or attack skill.

/not signed.

I haven't seen one actual reason for making this change. Realism isn't a reason, since last time I checked, this game is hardly realistic (the existence of magic takes care of that one).

LF BSurge ele Duncan HM

/signed

Next we make blind work on projectile spells? If you want realism, and continuity, you'd need to add that in too. A Ranger can't hit you with an arrow while blind, but an Elementalist can hit you with a Shock Arrow? There are a LOT of projectile spells that could easily fit into a blind scenario.

Although I like the idea of continuity, it would mean a HUGE overhaul to the entire game. If it didn't, balance gets thrown out of whack.