First of of all I want to apologize for my english (eastern european here!)

Well BGS metioned fireball like spells, flamethrower like spells and rune landmines.
What about touch spells?
I remember good o'l days with my dunmer archer Athaso Sadas.
Using my bow from afar and touch spells from close quarters I was nearly invincible!
Someone gets too close? Bam :flamed: ! Who will sweep the ashes ? (no seriously who will ? :glare: )
Please Bethesda let the touch spells make a return!
Opinions and ideas are more than welcome!

I'm expecting touch spells to still be in. Keep in mind there are over 85 spells (right?) and we have only heard of a couple.

@Dragonborn1- You are right. I knew it was either 75 or 85.

I don't see any reason why they would remove touch spells.

I believe it's 85, or around that number.

Touch spells were about 20% cheaper magicka-wise if I recall right. Other than that, they acted just like a ranged spell.

I saw an interview where Todd Howard (as well as the person interviewing him) were openly mocking the touch spells from Oblivion. Both were saying how useless the system for it was. I haven't got a link but I doubt they'll make a return in Skyrim.

Bethesda never said touch spells aren't in. It's true they haven't been mentioned, but that doesn't mean they're not there. I may be that Bethesda hasn't felt the need to talk about them, which may just be because they haven't done anything special with them.

Though honestly, I'm not a big fan of touch spells, it kind of seems to defeat the purpose of using a fire spell to kill someone over a sword if you still have to be close to do it, and with the traditional role of mages in games, if enemies get close enough for you to use touch spells, then you're doing it wrong. Of course, the Elder Scrolls gives us the oportunity to break that stereotype, and I'm VERY glad for that. But If I'm going to play the kind of mage who would actually engage enemies from close range, I'm more likely to use some form of weapon for that and just use destruction spells for ranged attacks. Not that I was bothered by the presence of touch spells, I just didn't use them much, and wouldn't really be bothered much if they're gone.

If I can absorb health with a ranged spell all the better.

I think spells that drain health, magicka, or stamina should be a little more dangerous to use than a glyph or an area type spell. So getting up close and personal makes sense to me. Besides I can use a shield to keep myself from getting pasted by the brute's hammer or axe.

i hate you for telling me that =(
Touch spells were awesome! More damage for less Magicka? come on how can people say no to that? dragon shout is just a touch spell on crack with range!

My destruction mages use touch spells almost exclusively. They're much cheaper than on-target and much more accurate. And it really doesn't take much practice to learn the timing of most enemies and know when it's safe to move in and when you need to duck out of the way. And it doesn't take much in the way of enchanted clothing to make that moot anyway.


At this point, that wouldn't surprise me in the least. And I have no doubt that, if such comes to pass, the announcement will be accompanied by another talking point word like "spreadsheety" or "redundant," which we'll immediately see repeated hundreds of times on this forum.

A ranged spell is on touch if your opponent is close enough. Tadaa

Yes I want touch spells and more to it! I want them incorporated in my Hand to Hand. No wimpy touches anymore, this one fights with his lightning and fire fist! I seriously hope that this is alteast a perk ;o

It would be a pity if they removed yet even more freedom of choice for the player by trashing touch spells. Who cares if Todd Howard doesn't like them? What's wrong with playing as a SneakyMage who creeps up behind something, and blasts them with a high-octane, on touch Destruction spell that contains a Paralyze component? I love doing that.

Ehh, why do I even respond... 'cos I'm bored I guess, but this subforum is so full of wild speculation right now, it's crazy. No one has said that Touch spells are out, and the mechanic is pretty integral to TES gameplay. Touch spells don't just harm your foes at close range; they also buff your allies at a much lower spell cost.

Todd Howard is a lousy gamer.

I'm thinking a touch animation will be added to normal spells for when enemies come within reach but I have no idea...

Well there was a hold action for the fire spell that causes a flame thrower type attack, maybe these might be a form of touch spells since they are most close range.

I found the touch spells redundant anyways. Unless they incorporate an unarmed type move that allows you too punch with the imbued spell. - Be a nice unarmed/magic perk

Touch spells were invaluable for not catching your allies in a fireball, and lest we forget, thereby incurring a bounty.

"redundant" :facepalm:

Or you could just get close to your enemy with a target spell.

Gpstr - Just my opinion.

If the AI is improved, and your companions don't keep suddenly appearing out of nowhere, between your spells or weapon swings and your enemy, then I will certainly admit it is a moot point, But I don't think I ever got through Kvatch without a couple of assaults to my name.

That's a good point with the friendly fire issue. I didn't use companions and the like so I didn't realize it, but yes, touch would be much more useful if you had allies in the fight.

Ranged spells are just touch spells for when you don't want to walk up to your enemy, how redundant.

Call upon the cleaver of cutting! Ranged spells should be removed!

I think the target magnetism would be very well-utilized by a character using touch spells. You wouldn't have to worry about hitting an ally at all, I wouldn't think. You would be so close to the enemy, with your aim magnetized, that I think it could be well implemented for magic use.

And while we're somewhat on the subject of how touch spells are useful - They are obviously useful for sneak attacks by mages, but why is it that there are really no better options for mages to have a few stealthy spells? I mean, the way I see it, not every spell from every school should involve some bright light and crazy sound just to use it. For instance, telekinesis as it stands already seems to be a "stealthier" magic. You can use it without the great flourish of all the other spells. But unfortunately, that has yet to be capitalized on in combat. I think of it this way: As a Jedi using the Force, you could in theory sneak close to some dangerous enemies, and use your telekinetic ability to trip some kind of environmental hazard near them to cause their deaths, as opposed to rushing in and engaging them all like a fool. Why not apply the same concept to AT LEAST the Telekinesis spell in Skyrim?

Imagine the ability to trip one of the traps on the far side of a dungeon and send hot oil, logs, rocks, a spiky ball, etc. onto your enemies with the focused application of a ranged telekinesis spell. Or even better, be able to pick up an object and propel it at an enemy, causing actual damage, and thus making the enemy freak out and accuse his ally of hitting him in the dark(yes, I realize we have Frenzy and the like), or simply sending it to the far side of the dungeon for them to investigate, blindly searching for the cause of the disturbance, and go wandering around while you move and plan your attack, or simply sneak past. All of those options are just simple examples of what could be done in that area, but I'm sure there are plenty more ideas I just haven't thought of yet. But, I do see this as the perfect utilization of an otherwise useless spell. What do you think?

Argonians should be removed from the game. We've already got on beast race - why do we need more? They're just redundant.

And what about all the elf races? Why do we need Altmer AND Bosmer AND Dunmer? Why so many different pointy-ears? They're redundant. All but one of them should go.

And why different races at all? It's not like you can play more than one character at a time anyway. Cut it down to Nords and that's it. The rest are redundant.

And what's with all the different weapons? Do you really need different kinds of swords? You can only use one at a time anyway - two at most if you dual wield. There should only be one kind of sword in the game - you get it when you take the swordfighter perk, and you get another one if you take the dual wield perk and that's all. All the rest of them are redundant and should be eliminated.

And five different cities and a dozen different towns? Why? You can't be more than one place at a time anyway, so what's the point of all those extras? They're just redundant.

There should be one dungeon, you go into it with one character of one race with one weapon, you fight one enemy and you get one treasure. Everything else is redundant.

Wonderfully executed straw man argument.

I agree with everything youve said.