If a spell actually doesn't target anything, then doesn't it also not affect anything?
Since the spell affects yourself, then it must be targeting yourself. Even if there is a big blank space where the targeting line is.
Is there actually a printed rule somewhere that says that spells that affect yourself should not be considered to be targeting a creature (yourself)? That is what I am looking for. Somewhere that says:needed rule wrote:A spell that does not have a target line cannot be used for feats, abilities, or effects that require a spell with a target.
Similarly, could you use Lightning Bolt with Striking Spell? It also doesn't have a 'target: single creature' line. It is possible to affect only a single creature with the Lightning Bolt.
How about if you use Capture Spell when you get hit by a Lightning Bolt? If you succeed at the save, could you capture it?
This is one of those cases where "target" is both a technical term and a plain language term and they get confusing. Unless someone has a FAQ/Clarification somewhere I can't find, we don't have any such advice for reading Target as a technical term. If they mean "Has a Target Line that contains One Creature/Object" then the number of spells you can Spell Strike is pretty limited. There's nothing in the actual rules that suggests an Area spell targets a Creature or an Object - the Target/Area rules only ever refers to "Affect" rather than "Target" with Areas. And even a plain language reading of "Target" can separate "Affect" and "Target" as categories.