"DragonHunter" name feedback [merged]
Paragon likely coming when they add Spears to the main game. No point added paragon when the weapon is long bow.
And Dragon Hunters fit, since they are similar to Demon Hunters in theme from Diablo 3…. Except we hunt Dragons in this universe.
Demon Hunters were normal humans whose families were killed by demons, and now use their hatred and training to hunt them down. Guardians are already fully trained and powered humans, who are now suddenly big game dragon hunters? Yeah, no.
Diet, this is not a good argument. There are other reasons that DH is not the best name, but your logic here is not sound.
If a normal person without any training is able to focus their hatred and eventual training into living a life of hunting demons, then why would it not be possible for a trained fighter to add a new set of skills in the same manner when the same hatred exists? Wouldn’t they actually be more qualified for the job? Imagine both groups were hunting demons instead; this is why this particular argument doesn’t work.
That was not my point. It is much easier for a normal person to become a demon hunter, than it is for an established profession to suddenly become a big game hunter of dragons. The Demon hunter makes sense, thematically, while the Dragonhunter does not. There is a giant, thematic, gap between Guardian and Dragonhunter. It has nothing to do with training.
That could be, but it doesn’t mean it couldn’t happen. That gap could be bridged, even if you think it’s very big. That’s the great thing about how fantasy is developed in a game. It doesn’t actually need to make a whole lot of sense. The only rules that govern this are the ones that are completely made up by the devs. As long as the link can be made, you can say “Oh, that could happen” and that’s enough.
Bit hard to say that the developers are making the rules up in regards to the Dragonhunter when they’ve already said that the Dragonhunter is based on a pre-existing stereotype of big game hunter and witch hunter. The Dragonhunter’s reasoning is all based on precedents.
The problem is that the link is extremely tenuous, one that needs to be explained in precedents by the developers. There is a limit to the suspension of disbelief even in fantasy. For example you could conclude a fantasy story with a deus ex machina that had no basis in what came before it but it would be seen as a complete let down. It is all about laying down a credible foundation which even the best fantasy strives to achieve. Even though it is fantasy you want the universe that is created to make sense or rather be cohesive.
I think i know what could make the Devs finally change the name once and for all.
Sylvati have been corrupted yah or some have shown signs of corruption. Why on earth would a Sylvari guardian corrupted by Mordremoth ever become a dragon hunter?
What exactly is a corruptrd dragon hunter of any race?Simple easy peasy solution: drop the Dragon and name it “Hunter”. JUST LIKE THAT EVERY ODY WINS AND LOOSES AT TGE SAME TIME
That keep their high concept we get a name change that matches Witchhunting.
Who wants cake?!
not possible, elite skills dragon maw got a freakin dragon head , dragon hunter will be cast in stone
I think i know what could make the Devs finally change the name once and for all.
Sylvati have been corrupted yah or some have shown signs of corruption. Why on earth would a Sylvari guardian corrupted by Mordremoth ever become a dragon hunter?
What exactly is a corruptrd dragon hunter of any race?Simple easy peasy solution: drop the Dragon and name it “Hunter”. JUST LIKE THAT EVERY ODY WINS AND LOOSES AT TGE SAME TIME
That keep their high concept we get a name change that matches Witchhunting.
Who wants cake?!
I have two Guardians that will be taking the spec up full time and one of them is Sylvari.
And he’s angry.
Very angry.
The truth that his father is the Vine Devil and not some wandering bee has him setting out to singlemindedly rid the world of the dragons once and for all. Vengeance with extreme prejudice as only a Guardian can.
And stand heroically at the back while he does it.
Fire up the Hyperbowl ma, we’re going to town!
Would you like some hard cheeze with your sad whine?
Would you like some hard cheeze with your sad whine?
not possible, elite skills dragon maw got a freakin dragon head , dragon hunter will be cast in stone
Why would a Dragonhunter who hates dragons channel a dragon as his’ elite?
"DragonHunter" name feedback [merged]
in Guild Wars 2: Heart of Thorns
Posted by: ArkisTruefire.1746
So I loved a lot of the skills and where they were going with the Dragonhunter in many ways. It fills a lot of what is missing current with the Guardian.
WITH THAT SAID THOUGH… the theme is just all sorts of a mess. During the PAX Dev interview, they had said that the Guardian specialization would be a “Crowd Pleaser”. I still can’t comprehend that random bit of hype after seeing the reveal.
A LOT of people on this thread thought it would be something like the Paragon. Now, I actually was hoping they didn’t come out with a Paragon class until we visited Elonan areas. But then they released the concept art:
https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/File:Dragonhunter_concept_art.jpg
At that point I was like “eh whatever even if this isn’t Elona”. I was ALL IN on the hype train that it would be the Paragon or a spiritual successor.
And in many senses it is:
-Long range attack
-Long range support
-Wing attack
-Spear of Justice that seems like you could spec to use it as a pretty decent attack
And then you have a bunch of stuff that just doesn’t make any sense. Like they mashed two themes together last minute.
The most disappointing part of the reveal is that the theme does not fit (yes this a game about cosmetics and looking cool so yeah theme matters). That and this was just hyped really poorly…
Let’s go back and see why some people thought this would be more “Holy Warrior of Light” and less “Hunter of Dragons”.
-They stated this would be a crowd pleaser so people expected something from GW1 or at least something that was just awesome.
-The concept art revealed had wings.
-GW1 Paragons have very similar wings: http://images.mmorpg.com/images/galleries/full/512007/ca2f9eea-c006-4be6-8ebe-3a3d38b26f07.jpg
-Everyone got it in their heads on Monday of the reveal week that this would be the Paragon or similar.
Instead, that morning, everyone got a reveal of a really poorly made video of a guy who is in Draconic armor… poorly modeled bow and gloves… shooting a giant beast for no real reason other than “it was around”…. whose skills scream “Guardian” with the exception of 2-3 traits…. and call him the “Dragonhunter”. None of that makes sense. And this… after the awesome Chronomancer trailer with the awesome look. And then the even more awesome Reaper trailer.
And then the random hyping… Why even bother with the Wings and to obviously hype up a “crowd pleaser” if it isn’t one?
It’s like someone half-way through development decided to say “we need another theme! I don’t care if it doesn’t make sense! I want an awesome Dragonhunter dudebro and to make a joke about Big Game Hunting!”.
(edited by ArkisTruefire.1746)
The main difference between the Icebrood and the Nightmare Court is that, while they are enemies, they are specifically enemies of a particular race. The Dragons seem to be enemies of everyone. It’s not a good comparison.
Fair enough, how about “Orr Vanquisher”. Orr are not race specific, the inhabitants of it are a threat to anyone who steps foot in there. This pushes the focus of vanquishing Orr onto the class, when someone may have no interest at all in that part of the game. For example my friend who mains a Guardian really has no interest at all in the lore or the dragons. He only plays PvP. Reaper, Druid, Tempest, Chronomancer all make sense. They describe what the class can do in the sense that you know a Reaper is usually associated with death, Druids with nature magic, Chronomancer instantly tells you it’s about using Time. Dragonhunter just says that you are a guy that hunts dragons. And people keep saying that it is fine to show inconsistency but it’s not if only one class does it.
Yes, “Orr Vanquisher” (Orrvanquisher? :P ) is a better example of this. The Undead will always be our enemy since they are a Zhaitan’s creation. I don’t necessarily see a problem with a group that devotes their lives to slaying the undead though.
Still, you’re allowed to play the class however you like. They aren’t changing any personal stories for any classes or races. A Chronomancer doesn’t have to even use any time magic, and in the same way a DH doesn’t need to use a longbow or traps. Think of the Dragonhunters as the reason why Guardians can now do something, but not all Guardians that take Dragonhunter specs necessarily do it. Heck, you can even run a full bunker build and take Dragonhunter traits (which really isn’t that bad, to be honest). This totally flies in the face of what the spec is there for, but you’re allowed to do it and nobody is forcing you to feel or think otherwise.
Sure, a group of undead slayers would be fine, but do not force it on the player. Look at it this way:
What can a Chronomancer do? Chrono implies time and in fantasy it’s established that mancer will deal with manipulation of that, i.e necro mancer manipulator of death ect.
What can a Druid do? Druid implies nature manipulation ect.
What can a Dragonhunter do? Hunt dragons?
You see how the other spec names imply an ability but this one implies the goal? (IDK what word I’m looking for)Not what he can do, but what he should do?
What can a Reaper do? Reap?
Time and time again, these kind of arguments appear just to mask the real argument that you just dislike the name.
Reaper is vague and doesn’t match a Greatsword-wielding Shout Necromancer, Chronomancer is not a logical progression for the master of illusion, we are all Warriors.
As for being forced, it’s the same kind of forced as bring unable to play an Engineer because you hate charr. But wait, I can’t hate them, I must agree with Jenah and support the alliance, and help charr kill the ghosts of my predecessors. How is any of that less forced?
(edited by RabbitUp.8294)
Hey, I’m going to preface this by saying I’m going to be as unbiased as possible.
So, recently we got a look at the 4th known Specialization: The Reaper. The Spec itself was pretty awesome looking, and the theme it followed fit right into the “box” of the class. I’m going to go over the currently known specs, and talk about their theme, then I’m going to get to the Dragonhunter.
1) The Mesmer. The Mesmer class, that mainly deals with illusions and other reality-manipulating skills got the access to the new Chronomancer specialization that deals with the manipulation of time. Overall the spec fits the theme fairly well, taking the concept of “time” from the core class, with skills such as Temporal Curtain and Time Warp, and traits such as Compounding Celerity, Temporal Enchanter and Illusionists Celerity. They expand on this connection to time, and specialize into it. The theme of the specialization and the name of it work well together and create a spec that you can know what it can do in theory just by looking at it’s name, seeing Chrono you know it deals with time.
2) The Necromancer. The Necromancer class, that deals with Death and Corruption got the Reaper specialization that mainly makes you an avatar of death or the Grim Reaper, wielding a scythe to cleave through your enemies, and “reap” their souls. The Connection between the core class and the spec is fairly obvious. The major ones would be all the thematic links to death as a concept: Death Magic trait line, Death Shroud, Reaper’s Mark, Reaper’s Touch, Reaper’s Scythe, Taste of Death, Grim Specter, and traits such as Death’s Embrace, Reaper’s Might, Reaper’s Precision and Reaper’s Protection. The mechanical side of the core-to-spec relation is obvious when you see that both the core class and the new spec have a fairly healthy access to the Chill condition and the thematic link is extremely obvious with the imagery of “The Reaper” evident in both the core and the specialized classes.
3) The Ranger. The Ranger class is getting access to the Druid Elite Specialization, which from what limited footage we have seen we know will be focusing on the nature magic that the Ranger has. If we look at the Nature skills the Ranger has to offer, we can see skills such as Call of the Wild, Healing Spring, Water Spirit, Frost Spirit, Stone Spirit, Storm Spirit, Sun Spirit, Muddy Terrain and Spirit of Nature. If we look at the traits, we can firstly see the trait line called Nature Magic, and traits such as Circle of Life, Nature’s Bounty, Nature’s Protection, Nature’s Entanglement, Zephyr’s Speed and Nature’s Voice. This provides fairly obvious and thematically fitting links to the Druidic theme.
4) The Guardian. The Guardian class is getting access to the Dragonhunter Elite Specialization, that provides access to the skills of the hunter, and weaponizes the light magic that the Guardian uses. If we look at the core class we can see that no traits or skills have anything to do with either Hunting or Dragons in general. A more in depth look will reveal that the Dragonhunter spec offers quite a few skills and traits that link back to the core class, but nothing that would transfer over from core-to-spec. Now if we look at the explanation provided to us by the Lead Game Designer Jon Peters, we can see that the Dragonhunter is meant to be looked at as a Witchhunter that goes after the Dragons and all their minions. However the running theme of the Dragonhunter is the “Big Game Hunter” with traits such as Hunter’s Determination, Hunter’s Fortification and Big Game Hunter, and skills such as Hunter’s Ward. The definition of “Big Game Hunter” is “(Hunting) large animals that are hunted or fished for sport”. This is at odds with the theme of the Witcherhunter, which goes after the threat he perceives as the most dire. So are the Dragonhunters hunting dragons for sport or are they eradicating them because of their threat. These two themes clash when the other known specs follow one theme that is already present in their core class.
Now that the analysis is over, I’m going to go over another thing I have seen mentioned fairly often. The name defines your abilities. For example, the Chronomancer allows you to manipulate time. The Reaper allows you to use scythes and other “death” imagery evoking skills. The Druid obviously lets you use Druikittennowledge and Nature magic to fight your foes. The Dragonhunter lets you… hunt dragons? You see how the name is really specific, but it doesn’t offer any information about what can you do. The other 3 specs describe your abilities, be it in vague terms, while this one describes your focus. Two of my most liked arguments are as follows:
1. If the Warrior was to gain the Orr Vanquisher (Orrvanquisher?) Elite Specialization it would be in the exact same boat. We would get a motivation that not everyone shares put on us as players, and the spec name would not describe the abilities of the specialization.
2. The Dragunhunter name and theme is an anomaly from what we have seen so far, so it is not fitting.
Now, since all of that is over, I would like to put forth a little “test” to see if the specialization fits the core class:
Mesmers have time magic, so Chronomancer is a natural evolution.
Necromancers have the whole death theme, so Reaper is a natural evolution.
Rangers have nature magic, so Druid is a natural evolution.
Elementalists have air magic, so Tempest is a natural evolution.
Guardians have X, so Dragonhunter is a natural evolution.
Can you tell me what X is?
(P.S. It is not “zeal” as my Ranger has zealously farmed SW for the past few weeks in hopes of a portal drop, but that does not make him a Mordremhunter.)
What can a Reaper do? Reap?
Time and time again, these kind of arguments appear just to mask the real argument that you just dislike the name.
Reaper is vague and doesn’t match a Greatsword-wielding Shout Necromancer, Chronomancer is not a logical progression for the master of illusion, we are all Warriors.
As for being forced, it’s the same kind of forced as bring unable to play an Engineer because you hate charr. But wait, I can’t hate them, I must agree with Jenah and support the alliance, and help charr kill the ghosts of my predecessors. How is any of that less forced?
A Reaper, if you have been living under a rock, alludes to the whole Grim Reaper theme that the Necromancer and it’s new Specialization has going for it.
Chronomancer is quite logical, since the Mesmer already has a few skills and traits that deal with manipulation time, while Guardian has nothing about hunting. We may be all warriors but the Warrior is the one who trained with the most weapons.
You can play a Human Engineer and hate the charr, and the only reason you side with Jenah is because she is your queen and can and will execute you for treason. That is being forced in a sense of story constrains. Not some arbitrary title you are forced to take and get the motivation of hunting dragons thrust upon you.
You claim to try and be unbiased and yet your dislike for the Dragonhunter is extremely clear.
I am also rather sure that you created more or less the exact same thread on Reddit a couple of days ago and got plenty of arguments for why the Dragonhunter works, which you simply disregarded.
Here is the thread in question: http://www.reddit.com/r/Guildwars2/comments/35yf59/looking_for_dh_defenders_no_disrespect_please/
And as was pointed out multiple times in that thread:
Hunting can be used to pursue and vanquish dangerous creatures that threatens the people. Ergo protecting the people, which is exactly what the Guardian is all about.
Krall Bloodsword – Mesmer
Krall Peterson – Warrior
Piken Square
Krall Peterson – Warrior
Piken Square
It’s sad that there is barely any gameplay related feedback fof the spec on the front page. You are either extremely satisfied with it, or only care for something minor as its name.
You’re not pointing out my circular logic, you’re using circular logic to disregard my point. What I mean is, I can sit here and explain to you what this or that is, you will then misinterpret it causing me to have to explain a particular point, to which you’ll dismiss the previous and misinterpret things again, causing a weak pattern to cycle.
Like the game part: Did I say anything about it being a game as in “play”? No, I said (and I’ll quote it)
“The descriptor of “big game hunter” tells you exactly the hunter’s motives: Game. Sport. Or Food.”
I say it tells what the hunter’s motives are in the descriptor of “big game hunter” then point to the word “Game” then clarify it as “Sport” OR (or is very important as it indicates an ‘either or’ situation and doesn’t have to be both) Food.
But what you’ll try and do is twist the words to intentionally misinterpret them, causing me to explain what I said again which hardly gets any of us anywhere since you’re doing this intentionally, not for the purpose of actually understanding what I’m saying. That is to say, you don’t want to acknowledge my position or opinion, just dispute it. This is pointless. It’s like disputing that coffee is great. It’s an opinion and just as valid of one as coffee being horrible.
A big game hunter is a hunter that hunts big game for food or resources. There are no big game hunters who hunt big game for Justice or to rid the world of some sort of evil or menace. Hunters hunt for food, pelts, parts like horns and stuff for medicine, or to gain the resources that they use or excrete. Exterminators or Exorcists rid a place of a particular creature for the possible effects they have on the situation or environment.
The issue is, the devs are using both definitions at once despite not being at all complementary and being downright out of place to the original concept of the Guardian. It’s not complementary because it implies two different motivations that don’t coincide and it’s out of place because neither enforces the motif of Guardians who protect.
Again (and again) that’s what a HUNTER does. Witch Hunters are not real, you know, there is no hunter that hunts for justice. All real life hunters hunt for food, profit, or as a hobby. It doesn’t matter if you are hunting rabbits or giraffes. The difference is that the former is called small game hunter, the latter big game hunter.
And “game” doesn’t mean sport. I gave you the definition.
That was my point from the very beginning, and to call it circular logic shows you don’t understand your own logic. You keep using the real life definition of hunter for “big game hunter”, and the fantasy definition of someone who pursuits/stalks/exterminates enemies for “witch hunter”.
(edited by RabbitUp.8294)
Waging Wars (Warrior) can be used to pursue and vanquish dangerous creatures that threaten the people. Ergo protecting the people, which is exactly what the Guardian is all about.
Patrolling (Sentinel) the land can be used to pursue and vanquish dangerous creatures that threaten the people. Ergo protecting the people, which is exactly what the Guardian is all about.
ect. ect. Hunting has nothing to do with Protecting. You can use hunting to protect, you can use pillows to protect, does that mean the next spec is the Pillowmancer? It has no thematic link from the core class to the spec. And after I logically dissected all those arguments, no body responded.
And I do try to be unbiased, I do not point out for example the fact that JP tried to justify the name as a more “mature” thematic, even though “Dragonhunter” is about as mature as “xBloodAngelx”
Edit: Having said all that, we can clearly see the issue of the name by the fact that during one week since the reveal, there has been at least 1,9k posts about it on the official forums, and at least a couple more hundred in others. While the Engineer forum thread about the “hobo sacks” has gotten 1779 posts since it’s creation two years ago.
(edited by Arrk.4102)
Alright, lets say that there was a large dangerous bear running around killing livestock and people in this small medieval town.
Who do they send out to track down and kill him?
They send a hunter, simply because a hunter already have the skills necessary to track down and take care of said dangerous bear.
EDIT: The number or posts in a thread is completely irrelevant actually. Especially considering that it is mainly the same people posting over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again. It is also a rather unfair comparison seeing as the Engineer thread is in a forum more or less only Enginners would check, while the Dragonhunter thread is in one of the major forums.
Krall Bloodsword – Mesmer
Krall Peterson – Warrior
Piken Square
Krall Peterson – Warrior
Piken Square
A Reaper, if you have been living under a rock, alludes to the whole Grim Reaper theme that the Necromancer and it’s new Specialization has going for it.
Chronomancer is quite logical, since the Mesmer already has a few skills and traits that deal with manipulation time, while Guardian has nothing about hunting. We may be all warriors but the Warrior is the one who trained with the most weapons.
You can play a Human Engineer and hate the charr, and the only reason you side with Jenah is because she is your queen and can and will execute you for treason. That is being forced in a sense of story constrains. Not some arbitrary title you are forced to take and get the motivation of hunting dragons thrust upon you.
1. So, Reaper completely relies on pre-established fantasy tropes to even work. Now, if I told someone who knows what Necros do that their elite spec is called Reaper, would they conclude that it’s a GS-wielding Shouting spec?
2. One, they have one clearly time-related skill. It’s still completely seperated from the main idea of the class, and relies on a very minor aspect to draw a connection. A Moamancer would have been equally thematic for the class.
3. So story constraints don’t work for dragonhunters? We don’t even know how elite specs work, we might all need to rely on a mentor. I’m still forced to use Charr technology as the Engineer, I can be a non-Human, but no matter what, the Iron Legion came first and showed Tyria the way.
And that’s how GW2 always worked, you are never given anything more than the illusion of choice.
It’s sad that there is barely any gameplay related feedback fof the spec on the front page. You are either extremely satisfied with it, or only care for something minor as its name.
The gameplay feedback is there too. It’s in the Guardian subforum, and sadly it’s not really all that positive. Unlike the other two revealed so far, our spec has little to no synergy with the rest of the class. Also traps are terrible because they’re based on terrible mechanics. We got shafted.
But this thread is about the name, specifically. If you want to talk about gameplay, go do it in a different thread.
There actually has been that exact same quest in the original Guild Wars, but for some reason that has not been limited to the Ranger profession.
The number of posts is relevant because the Engineers HAD posted in the major forums, and the thread just had no people posting in it. The thread in the Guardian subforum has at the moment of this post 450 replies in 7 days. The issue is there, it’s just that the zealous ANet fanatics refuse to see it. If one or two people care enough to defend it against the many more who dislike it, I think that is a pretty big indicator in itself.
It’s sad that there is barely any gameplay related feedback fof the spec on the front page. You are either extremely satisfied with it, or only care for something minor as its name.
The gameplay feedback is there too. It’s in the Guardian subforum, and sadly it’s not really all that positive. Unlike the other two revealed so far, our spec has little to no synergy with the rest of the class. Also traps are terrible because they’re based on terrible mechanics. We got shafted.
But this thread is about the name, specifically. If you want to talk about gameplay, go do it in a different thread.
“It’s sad that there is barely any gameplay related feedback for the spec on the front page.”
I wasn’t talking about this specific thread. And if you take gameplay related feedback to the class forum, take this argument with you, too.
A Reaper, if you have been living under a rock, alludes to the whole Grim Reaper theme that the Necromancer and it’s new Specialization has going for it.
Chronomancer is quite logical, since the Mesmer already has a few skills and traits that deal with manipulation time, while Guardian has nothing about hunting. We may be all warriors but the Warrior is the one who trained with the most weapons.
You can play a Human Engineer and hate the charr, and the only reason you side with Jenah is because she is your queen and can and will execute you for treason. That is being forced in a sense of story constrains. Not some arbitrary title you are forced to take and get the motivation of hunting dragons thrust upon you.1. So, Reaper completely relies on pre-established fantasy tropes to even work. Now, if I told someone who knows what Necros do that their elite spec is called Reaper, would they conclude that it’s a GS-wielding Shouting spec?
2. One, they have one clearly time-related skill. It’s still completely seperated from the main idea of the class, and relies on a very minor aspect to draw a connection. A Moamancer would have been equally thematic for the class.
3. So story constraints don’t work for dragonhunters? We don’t even know how elite specs work, we might all need to rely on a mentor. I’m still forced to use Charr technology as the Engineer, I can be a non-Human, but no matter what, the Iron Legion came first and showed Tyria the way.
And that’s how GW2 always worked, you are never given anything more than the illusion of choice.
1. At least it makes sense thematically for a class dealing with death and it’s imagery to get death related skills.
2. That is one more then the Guardians have related to Hunting.
3. We know nothing about how the DH works story-wise, but even just the name forces the constraint on the player. You can role play that your human is using original technology. You can not roleplay that you are a dragon hunter that does not hunt dragons.
It’s sad that there is barely any gameplay related feedback fof the spec on the front page. You are either extremely satisfied with it, or only care for something minor as its name.
The gameplay feedback is there too. It’s in the Guardian subforum, and sadly it’s not really all that positive. Unlike the other two revealed so far, our spec has little to no synergy with the rest of the class. Also traps are terrible because they’re based on terrible mechanics. We got shafted.
But this thread is about the name, specifically. If you want to talk about gameplay, go do it in a different thread.
“It’s sad that there is barely any gameplay related feedback for the spec on the front page.”
I wasn’t talking about this specific thread. And if you take gameplay related feedback to the class forum, take this argument with you, too.
There IS a thread discussing the name there, too. And there were more, but most of them got merged into THIS one.
Also, if you look, there IS at least one thread in this subforum discussing the actual spec beyond just the name. Right now you’re just trying to belittle people for voicing their opinion for something that they are unsatisfied with. If you’re going to argue a point, please do so in a mature manner without resorting to passive-aggression.
So they recently revealed the Reaper.
For those who said that the community is always whining anyway and that the devs shouldn’t pay attention to the “Dragonhunter issue”, or that all those threads and comments are a vocal minority (I wonder how they could know that by the way) just look at the general reaction to the Reaper. Remember the general reaction to the Chronomancer. Compare it with the general reaction to the Dragonhunter.
The difference is quite obvious. It definitely tells that an important part of the community dislikes or even hates that name.
There are people who don’t like the Reaper and/or the Chronomancer. But they’re quite rare. They’re probably that percentage of the community that we can expect to be complaining in any situation. It is different for the Dragonhunter, it clearly doesn’t take the same proportions.
We already talked about the french translation of Dragonhunter. Some believe it sounds better. It is indeed closer to what we can expect for a spec/profession name in GW naming conventions. It has this unique-and-efficient-word-that-sounds-cool aspect (although it is not really better than Dragonhunter on a thematic point of view)
The literal translation for Reaper should be Faucheur or Moissoneur (but this one sounds a bit more agricultural just like Harvester would in english).
But instead of that, we have Fauchemort. It would be Deathreaper or Reapdeath or whatever… You see how they built it the same way they built Dragonhunter, and it has the same uncreative and childish effect. People are complaining about that right now. Although I agree with them I’m not going to bring this discussion here, that’s not the point.
You can see how the meaning of the name could take a little deviation with this translation.
BUT Fauchemort is still better accepted than Dragonhunter is.
Why is it ? Because Fauchemort still fits into the Necromancer’s theme !
It is coherent with what the character does, how it plays, how it feels, what it looks like and stays integrated into the Necromancer’s concept. So we can still feel the consistency this name has.
It clearly shows that it’s not only about the name. Even when a name looks/sounds bad it is easier to accept it when we feel that it is a good thematic choice. This is something many people can’t find in the Dragonhunter. And there is no need to discuss it actually, that’s just how people feel about it and the feeling is important. This is something A.Net worked on a lot when they created their core professions, so why are they destroying this continuity of profession-feeling ?
We have to explain why we have that bad feeling. Because it’s useful to identify where the things went wrong. But we don’t need to explain it to argument or give any weight to what we say. It’s not about knowing who is objectively right or wrong. Nobody is. The simple fact that we don’t like it and we say it feels wrong should be enough to make the devs react.
That’s one of the reasons why giving a high concept aspect to the name with a specific background can’t work as a good argument, because it won’t change the feeling we have.
(edited by Ojyh.9842)
1. So, Reaper completely relies on pre-established fantasy tropes to even work. Now, if I told someone who knows what Necros do that their elite spec is called Reaper, would they conclude that it’s a GS-wielding Shouting spec?
2. One, they have one clearly time-related skill. It’s still completely seperated from the main idea of the class, and relies on a very minor aspect to draw a connection. A Moamancer would have been equally thematic for the class.
3. So story constraints don’t work for dragonhunters? We don’t even know how elite specs work, we might all need to rely on a mentor. I’m still forced to use Charr technology as the Engineer, I can be a non-Human, but no matter what, the Iron Legion came first and showed Tyria the way.
1. I expect a “reaper” to be a close-ranged melee character that uses a scythe. Reapers in this are a close-ranged melee specialization that use scythes as their profession mechanic.
2. Their wells literally have clocks spinning around on them, their profession mechanic turns back time, their shield’s abilities are obviously time-themed, alacrity is time themed, and they deal with a lot of stuff that involves speeding up allies and slowing down enemies in a variety of ways. The mesmer also already had Temporal Curtain and Time Warp.
3. Engineers don’t necessarily use Charr technology.
(edited by Fashion Mage.3712)
Alright, lets say that there was a large dangerous bear running around killing livestock and people in this small medieval town.
Who do they send out to track down and kill him?
They send a hunter, simply because a hunter already have the skills necessary to track down and take care of said dangerous bear.
No, they’d run up to the nearest player character, regardless of profession, and pester him or her for help. Over and over and over. Even if that character had already killed that kitten bear a hundred times before. Ahem.
Anyway, your scenario… I can see it now….
Sheriff Mortin: Uh, I just… Uh, I just wanna tell you what we’re planning so far…
Armorsmith: What about the meadows, Sheriff?
Sheriff Mortin: We’re gonna to put on the summer… the extra summer deputies as soon as possible. And then we’re gonna try and use, uh, bear spotters in the meadows.
Merchant: Are you going to close the Super Beerdrinker’s Keg Event?
Sheriff Mortin: Yes, we are. We’re also planning to bring in some experts from the Spirit of Bear Institute in Hoelbrak—
Vaunn: Only twenty four hours.
Sheriff Mortin: I didn’t agree to that.
Vaunn (firm): Only twenty four hours.
Bartender: Twenty four hours is like three weeks!
[Sound of asura fingertips squeaking on chalkboard]
Bearhunter Quinnt: Y’all know me. Know how I earn a livin’. I’ll catch this bird for ya, but it ain’t gonna be easy. Bad mammal. It’s not like going down to glade chasin’ tomcats or billy goats. This bear – swallow ya whole. L’il shakin’, l’il tenderizin’, down ya go. Now we gotta do it quick, that’ll bring back the beerdrinkers, that’ll put all your businesses on a payin’ basis. But it’s not gonna be pleasant! I value my neck a lot more than three copper, Sheriff! I’ll find him for three, but I’ll catch him… and kill him… for ten gold! Now you gotta make up your minds. Gonna stay alive and ante up? Or ya wanna play it cheap, be on welfare the whole winter. I don’t want no volunteers; I don’t want no mates. There’s too many bosses on this island. Ten gold coins for me by myself. For that you get the head, the paws, the whole kitten thing.
- * *
Substitute dragon for bear as I’ve substituted bear for shark and there’s another interpretation of our esteemed dragonhunter.
Wait. Another thought just came to me. Those guys hunting bears, in pre-searing Regent Valley in Ascalon… yeah!
http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/The_Bear_Hunters
A source of inspiration?
The table is a fable.
(edited by Tachenon.5270)
I’m ok to rename the spec “Beer Hunter”.
I have to say. I liked what I saw for the skills and the virtues.
But I just hate this name “Dragonhunter”. I’ve pretty much played my Guardian exclusively since the game came out. The name “Dragonhunter” just feels wrong and doesn’t fit at all. I heard ANET’s explanation of the name, but it just doesn’t feel like a Guardian with a name like that.
I guess in the end, what’s in a name? But I still wish they would have picked something truer to the heart of the profession.
Sir Helvidius | Sir Beregond | Proud Ascalonian Humans
“Remember The Searing. We never forget, and never forgive.” – Family Motto
“Remember The Searing. We never forget, and never forgive.” – Family Motto
Considering the fact that we got more posts in 7 days than the whole Engineer thread about “hobo sacks” in 2 years, I’m hoping we will get a response from someone soon.
Again (and again) that’s what a HUNTER does. Witch Hunters are not real, you know, there is no hunter that hunts for justice. All real life hunters hunt for food, profit, or as a hobby. It doesn’t matter if you are hunting rabbits or giraffes. The difference is that the former is called small game hunter, the latter big game hunter.
And “game” doesn’t mean sport. I gave you the definition.
That was my point from the very beginning, and to call it circular logic shows you don’t understand your own logic. You keep using the real life definition of hunter for “big game hunter”, and the fantasy definition of someone who pursuits/stalks/exterminates enemies for “witch hunter”.
Here we go again (funny you make the complaint yet you’re still making the same misinterpretations, not acknowledging you are but instead blaming the misinterpretations on me).
Witch Hunters are a part of history. They are real. What they may have hunted might not be real but that depends on your faith.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witch-hunt
But that’s beside the point. Anyway, you didn’t give me the definition of “game”, I gave YOU the definition of game and you went and repeated it back at me, misinterpreting why I even gave the definition in the first place.
No, you just operate solely based on habit. A description like big game hunter, which tells you nothing more than the size of the game the hunter specializes in, simply can’t have any input on that hunter’s motives.
The descriptor of “big game hunter” tells you exactly the hunter’s motives: Game. Sport. Or Food. The definition of game in this context is:
a (1) : animals under pursuit or taken in hunting; especially : wild animals hunted for sport or food (2) : the flesh of game animals
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/game
That post came before the one where you posted the very same definition. But the reason I put it there was to give the broad definition of game, not to label game a sport but to represent the motivation to OBTAIN game. Game is wild animals hunted for sport or food. You’ve simply misinterpreted the entirety of the post and definition so you can try to say I think game means sport or fun.
NO! LISTEN FOR ONCE!
Game are CREATURES hunted FOR SPORT OR FOOD, i.e. resources. The Dragonhunter does neither. He hunts for a higher purpose, for justice. To protect the people of Tyria, not for a meal or a paycheck or because he wants the glory. He’s an exterminator or an exorcist (since the creatures he’s ridding Tyria of are evil).
As for the bear attacking the countryside example, yeah you’d call in a hunter. That hunter is then doing it for sport and likely money. Money because the person who needs the bear dead is going to compensate the man and for sport so he has the glory of saying he helped the village. If the bear was rampaging through towns, destroying everything and killing everyone, then you wouldn’t call in hunters, you’d call in an army.
A lot of good arguements, a lot of bad arguements, but all of them spawned because lots of people read the reveal article and we’re immediately confused or unpleasantly surprised.
I myself laughed at the horrible name and the weak article trying to justify it and over hype a bizarre spec.
People could make a thread like this arguing valid/invalid points about any of the other prof names but none of them are 30 pages long. Because none of the other spec names are as unacceptably left field as the name “dragonhunter”.
Good arguments or bad arguements, we’re only having these arguements because the spec name is bad.
Ok, clearly there is something wrong with the name Dragonhunter. There is 30 pages worth of “feedback” also 2 other threads one in the guardian and another in GW2 HoT, a good 75% of it is negative (rough estimate). In no way, shape, or form does the name “Dragonhunter” fit the guardian. I can easily think of a few names that would fit the description of a guardian with a bow: Warden, Sentinel, Seraph, Paladin, Inquisitor, Seeker, etc.
For some reason though a guardian got a name that does not go with the class style of a Holy Warrior who uses light magic, while wielding weapons. The name Dragonhunter would fit a ranger specialization better than a guardians. Give the ranger a rifle and call it a Dragonhunter it would fit the ranger play style more, and allow Anet to reuse this name. Arenanet really needs to change the name while they have the chance, before its too late and we’re stuck with such a terrible name.
Crystal Desert Kingswood Brotherhood [KWBH]
Percivel: Guardian, Vayne Silverjaw: Warrior, Varon Aren: Elementalist
Percivel: Guardian, Vayne Silverjaw: Warrior, Varon Aren: Elementalist
Anet, listen to this feedback. So many threads and pages have to mean something to you.
“Would you kindly?”
I posted this on the other Dragon Hunter page in the Guardian sub-forum, but I thought it might be useful for those strictly reading this thread.
Fan Bloggers who Voiced Dislike or Unenthusiasm about the “Dragonhunter” Name:
Aurora Peachy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9b2e6c0TV1M
- Guild Gab: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7HAFDlMG1A
Bog Otter: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Ksm_sKWicE
- Argues that this does not qualify as “high concept” but is simply ground-up design with scant thematic justification.
MMOINKS: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dqwvGbdcmQE
Wooden Potatoes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7HAFDlMG1A
- More focused on the mechanics, but unenthused about the name. In another stream with MattVisual, he argues that the revised virtues suggest the spec was originally meant to be a paragon.
Guild Wars Players News: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BGVzoXOYLkE
Ten Ton Hammer (Lewis Burnell): http://www.tentonhammer.com/editorial/guild-wars-2-thoughts-dragonhunter
Guild Mag (draxynnic): http://www.guildmag.com/dragonhunter-rose-name/
- And a resident lore guru on the forums.
That_Shaman: https://twitter.com/that_shaman/status/596360746105176064
- https://twitter.com/that_shaman/status/596755704289034240
Tea Time (Bootts, Brazil, Inks, MightyTeapot): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3XGze1TN5mY
GuildMag Podcast (Valiant, Draxynnic, Starconspirator): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5wZBefgvODI
I may update this too. If I find public GW2 bloggers who are enthused about the name I WILL include them. Please let me know about other public bloggers who voice an opinion on the “dragonhunter controversy.” Thank you.
Will Hawkins (Human Guardian)
Feryl Grimsteel (Charr Engineer)
Tarnished Coast
Feryl Grimsteel (Charr Engineer)
Tarnished Coast
(edited by Genesis.8572)
I posted this on the other Dragon Hunter page in the Guardian sub-forum, but I thought it might be useful for those strictly reading this thread.
Public Fan Bloggers who Voiced Dislike or Unenthusiasm about the “Dragonhunter” Name:
….
Great post! I’ll have a look at those links and like them where applicable.
"DragonHunter" name feedback [merged]
in Guild Wars 2: Heart of Thorns
Posted by: Mor The Thief.9135
From what I’ve read so far(too many pages to read but still getting the gist of it).
The Dragonhunter name is disliked by the majority of the populace for either not fitting the theme and role of guardians(even with the background of a GW2 witch hunter), and being a name that sounds too childish.
Concerning the Witch hunter base. At that time people didn’t have any other threats other then the so called witches(and those weren’t real as well). Unlike GW2 which has many other threats other then dragons(it’s just that dragons are the bigger threat)
I’ve seen many other names suggested instead of the Dragonhunter and out of all of them i believe Exorcis fits it the most.
A hunter usually studies its prey before it strikes, while figuring out what will work best against it. An exorcist most of the time first studies on demons(and other spirituals) and any way to fight them. Now I don’t want to bring any examples as this might be untrue or unrealistic or impossible to do, but I’m gonna do it anyway.
A good example of exorcists are the Winchester brothers from the Supernatural TV show. During most of the show they trap demons(and other spiritual things) in order to be able to fight them and exorcise them. Also during the show they study a lot about their foes and finding new and better ways to fight them.
Also being a “big game hunter” still fits an exorcist as not all exorcists fight evil with a sense of justice. Instead some fight evil as a sport for fun(having fun killing evil, e.g. 2 birds with 1 stone – having fun by eradicating evil and removing a threat to the people) and some fight as a job in order to live.
Of course, Exorcist is just my opinion of a name that fits better then Dragonhunter. There are most likely better names that fit the role, but in the end it’s all about a matter of taste.
With all that said i still think the name Dragonhunter is bad and really doesn’t fit.
(edited by Mor The Thief.9135)
To Quote myself with regards to Specialization themes & naming.
Wow what a thread!
It’s been very interesting to see every bodies thoughts with regard to the “Dragronhunters”. I can see how the Protector’s & the Virtuous are at odds with Dragonhunter as this sepcialization does not enhance or expand this profession that was a guardian, a protector & a supporter.
But for me like others I was surprised with the name & reveal, but after reading & watching each of the little bits of information “Dragonhunter” really started to grow on me and I’m really enjoying theorycrafting each of the components the Dragonhunter brings to Guardian’s and how the core profession & this elite could interact.
For me the Dragonhunter is in the theme of the Zealous, the Smiter, the Fanatic end of the Guardian theme and this works (at least for me & some others). For other they’re really not liking it and this bring for me the question about “Only Releasing One Elite Specialization Per Profession”
Would we all be this up in arms over the Dragonhunter’s theme & name if a 2nd Guardian elite spec was also released but along the Protector, this Guardian of Righteousness theme.
And with this I’m not so sure. Lastly for some of the names & theme ideas players have put forward I would look & be very excited for these to be future Elite Specialization.
For me I believe only releasing one specialization with regards to players desires was an interesting choice. With 2 you could play safe and please current profession fans with different aspects of the current profession enhanced or safe with one & go wild with the other, pushing the boundaries of what that profession can be.
As of now with only one, it can be a hit or miss with current fans if looking to push a profession’s boundaries.
I just made a Male Human Guardian called High Concept.
“I’m High Concept….. this is my story.”
I just made a Male Human Guardian called High Concept.
“I’m High Concept….. this is my story.”
I love you. I really do. <3
The pvp community reminds me of what Obi-kittenenobi describes Mos Eisley as from star wars.
looooool that made my night I Love u more Mordeus I really do!!!
Oh and I totally hate Dragonhunter for the same reasons many people have stated. Waiting on you Anet.
Just saw a lv1 Human Warrior in LA with pink mutton chops and a really flashy gold/red armor named Dragonbrawler The Annihilator. He kept saying that he is the future.
When a elite spec turns into a meme you know something went wrong in the design process.
Please ArenaNet, i don’t want to play a meme, please change the name AND theme of this elite spec.
Keep the LongBow. Keep the traps.
But remove the “dragon big game hunter” theme.
"DragonHunter" name feedback [merged]
in Guild Wars 2: Heart of Thorns
Posted by: Dream In A Dream.7213
+1.
Or move it to ranger / war spec.
I dont even hate dragonhunter as a spec, just cant see it as guard spec.
I agree with everyone here. Just how did the Guardian, the paragon of righteousness, the tank, the protector of the weak…….suddenly became a trap-using dragonhunter.
Think about this, this game’s equivalent of PALADINS…..and they’re suddenly using traps and calling him/herself Dragonhunter. WE ARE ALL DRAGONHUNTERS. We’re all trying to hunt the Elder Dragons and their lieutenants, aren’t we? This entire spec fits more for a Ranger or Thief or even a Warrior, not a Guardian.
Hell, i can accept a Guardian using traps, but why the name? Why are Guardians suddenly becoming and calling themselves “Dragonhunters”?
“Would you kindly?”
Come on… I know the name is bad, but at least, people have to recognize that, yes, the Dragonhunter is neither a Ranger wannabe, nor a totally unrelated evolution for the Guardian…
Some Guardians have chosen to deal with the Dragon’s corruption by going out. For them, protecting the innocent when the enemies comes at you is insufficient. They protect them by going to the enemy, , with hit and run tactics and support for others, through the cunning use of magical traps and the power of their cleansing fire.
And because they don’t believe that you protect someone by waiting for his enemy to come closer, they have chosen to use bows. And no, it doesn’t make them Ranger’s wannabe, not more than Guardian using two-handed swords would be Warriors wannabe… or maybe Ranger wannabe ? And what about the Guardian with staff is obviously some Elementalist wannabe…
Okay, enough with the irony, I know it isn’t really funny here. But what I want to say is : dislike the Dragonhunter name because it is objectively bad (being two words merged together), not for its supposed lack of thematic. Because it has a well-rounded theme and I think that aside of the name, it deliver it (because, except in Fairy Tail, when I think of a Dragon Hunter, I don’t think of someone using powers mimicking Dragons, but a guy who developed ways to kill those monsters most efficiently.
Well it’s not a Dragon Hunter, it’s a Dragonhunter, and the thematic of a hunter does not fit a Guardian. Would work better for Warrior or Ranger, to be honest.
The thematic of a Hunter fit pretty well with the Guardian. He hunt downs hos foes, I don’t see any problem with it. he is basically over-zealous and go out of his way to cull them, instead of waiting for them to attack. What doesn’t fit ?
The thematic of a Hunter fit pretty well with the Guardian. He hunt downs hos foes, I don’t see any problem with it. he is basically over-zealous and go out of his way to cull them, instead of waiting for them to attack. What doesn’t fit ?
Would you like to know what the over-zealous profession that goes after foes instead of waiting for them to attack is called? Warrior.
“Would you kindly?”
@Valmir Would you please go log on the game, choose a Guardian and read the list of skills and traits he has. Name ONE that has anything to do with “hunting”. Just one.
@Valmir Would you please go log on the game, choose a Guardian and read the list of skills and traits he has. Name ONE that has anything to do with “hunting”. Just one.
There isn’t a “Hunter something” trait yet in the Guardian traits, but I easily find some basis for the Dragonhunter “birth” :
Binding Jeopardy : Immobilizing a foe also applies vulnerability to them
This is basically a first step toward traps since the Guardian has to immobilize the foe, so theDragonhunter do that, but with some distance and full-blown magical traps.
Searing Flames : When you apply burning to a foe, remove a boon
The Dragonhunter also relies heavily in the use of fire, so this one is probably the basis of its evolution, with the Dragonhunter seeking to set fire to his enemies from afar.
Writ of Exaltation : Symbols are larger and Writ of Persistence : Symbols last longer
Once again, a basis for the evolution of simple symbols to traps for the Dragonhunter, since he has concentrated in transforming his symbols to a better effectiveness against the enemy.
Vengeful : Retaliation lasts longer
It seems to be a basis behind the Dragonhunter thematic here. Not much in the gameplay sense, however (at least, I haven’t seen the Dragonhunter using it so far, but I’ve maybe missed something).
So, as you can see, the basis for the Dragonhunter is already here.
And just saying, the elite specialization aren’t mean to be the class plus something, it is a very specific evolution of the class, which goes in new directions.
@Ephemiel.
The Warriors aren’t zealous. They are just heavy lifter doing their duty, or maniacs liking to fight and kill. They have no drive to protect, but a drive to fight, which is quite different.