Guild Wars 2

Ridiculous forum bug.

Tigaseye.2047:

I envisage rangers spending a lot of their time running through forests.

Long coats would catch on everything – undergrowth, low branches, fallen trees – it would be a total nightmare.

Trenchcoats are for open ground and well, trenches…

I feel that a sleek top and leggings, with as little in the way of extraneous attachments and loose material, as possible and flat boots, would be far more practical; or even a catsuit type thing.

I think ‘rangers’ by general definition, encompass so many different archtypes and themes it’s hard to say one suits all.

I’d envision a ranger of the wild to use something simple. More akin to a general leather tunic, pants, and coat with pockets for storage and easy to maintain. Like Aragorn from LOTR movies. Because tight/sleek pants and a top wouldn’t have much storage and all. Using modern terms, I’d picture them wearing cargo pants and a simple shirt with a good coat over tight jeans and a tight shirt.

Now somebody who lives in a city but hunts, I could see using more of a tight leather armor, with a coat overtop. A scout themed ranger would have more of a leather armor or light (meaning chainmail/light weight) armor look to them.

“Getting caught on everything around” depends on the terrain. I mean, some forests are thick and cramped, others are more open with less brush. Is the ranger situated in a harsher or colder enviroment (Like the shiverpeaks)? They’d probably go for a longer coat simply for warmth reasons (assuming we are talking about a human.) While one who is in a warmer/more friendly enviroment may prefer just a tunic with a cloak or coat in their pack for a rainy day.

I’d wager a coat would catch less then loose straps. edit: Meaning, if the ranger lives out in the wild more then in civilization, they likely carry everything with them. A coat is an effective protection from rain and elements, and can double as a blanket. Even if they aren’t wearing it, it likely is bundled and attached to their pack (which they’d have to have anyway because pockets can only hold so much).

Kalavier.1097:

Tigaseye.2047:

I envisage rangers spending a lot of their time running through forests.

Long coats would catch on everything – undergrowth, low branches, fallen trees – it would be a total nightmare.

Trenchcoats are for open ground and well, trenches…

I feel that a sleek top and leggings, with as little in the way of extraneous attachments and loose material, as possible and flat boots, would be far more practical; or even a catsuit type thing.

I think ‘rangers’ by general definition, encompass so many different archtypes and themes it’s hard to say one suits all.

I’d envision a ranger of the wild to use something simple. More akin to a general leather tunic, pants, and coat with pockets for storage and easy to maintain. Like Aragorn from LOTR movies. Because tight/sleek pants and a top wouldn’t have much storage and all. Using modern terms, I’d picture them wearing cargo pants and a simple shirt with a good coat over tight jeans and a tight shirt.

Now somebody who lives in a city but hunts, I could see using more of a tight leather armor, with a coat overtop. A scout themed ranger would have more of a leather armor or light (meaning chainmail/light weight) armor look to them.

“Getting caught on everything around” depends on the terrain. I mean, some forests are thick and cramped, others are more open with less brush. Is the ranger situated in a harsher or colder enviroment (Like the shiverpeaks)? They’d probably go for a longer coat simply for warmth reasons (assuming we are talking about a human.) While one who is in a warmer/more friendly enviroment may prefer just a tunic with a cloak or coat in their pack for a rainy day.

I’d wager a coat would catch less then loose straps. edit: Meaning, if the ranger lives out in the wild more then in civilization, they likely carry everything with them. A coat is an effective protection from rain and elements, and can double as a blanket. Even if they aren’t wearing it, it likely is bundled and attached to their pack (which they’d have to have anyway because pockets can only hold so much).

Well yes, as you say, we do also have backpacks (and a quiver, maybe) for storage.

I just think of hunters (which is, basically, what the ranger class is) as being, traditionally, mainly found in woods and forests.

…and I live in the UK, where the climate is normally damp, but temperate and deciduous woods and forests are generally full of undergrowth and stuff to get caught on.

But, yes, rangers could be anywhere and loose straps would be even worse than long coats, but I don’t really get why it, necessarily, needs to be one or the other?

I think, ideally, you would have a choice of clothing styles available in-game.

The Aragorn look is great.

The jungle outfit is fairly close to what you are describing, with the pockets, but it’s obviously a gemstore item.

…and this is probably where the problem lies.

The more choices you provide in-game, the less you can force people to feel they have to buy gemstore stuff.

I think they can take that approach too far, though.

Provide no real choice in-game and people will be more likely to lose interest.

Personally, I wouldn’t have started from here – I would have made the game a sub one and provided everything in-game.

Where, or not, that would have been a smart business move, I’m not sure, but it’s what I prefer.

I think rangers simply are one of the most diverse class types that can be found.

Though I personally think if the coat is one of the ones that goes down past belt a little bit, it’s not really a long-coat and wouldn’t affect stuff. Stuff like the studded armor is just a padded tunic after all.

Support this.

As a female medium armor wearer I’ve got a few non-trenchcoat options, but still, they are too much!