Guild Wars 2

Arrk.4102:

Knighthonor.4061:

Dragon Hunters are the GW2 version of Demon Hunters from Diablo 3.
No demons here so we Dragon Hunters.

What’s wrong with that?

Mesmers have time magic, so Chronomancer is a natural evolution.
Necromancers have death magic, 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 DH is a natural evolution.

Tell me what is X.

Also, we have demons in GW2, so there.

To be fair, I already told you what X was in an earlier post. Just because X isn’t a type of magic (engineers won’t become magical either, and most likely thieves too) doesn’t mean that it can’t work.

dietzero.3514:

Knighthonor.4061:

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.

MiniEquine.6014:

Arrk.4102:

Knighthonor.4061:

Dragon Hunters are the GW2 version of Demon Hunters from Diablo 3.
No demons here so we Dragon Hunters.

What’s wrong with that?

Mesmers have time magic, so Chronomancer is a natural evolution.
Necromancers have death magic, 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 DH is a natural evolution.

Tell me what is X.

Also, we have demons in GW2, so there.

To be fair, I already told you what X was in an earlier post. Just because X isn’t a type of magic (engineers won’t become magical either, and most likely thieves too) doesn’t mean that it can’t work.

Except it doesn’t link to the class at all. ““X”, in this case, is some sort of furious zeal.”
DH has nothing to do with Zeal, so there is no link. Engineers are getting some sort of flying turrets, so a thing they have established as a class already. Technological theme going further. I’m not saying it has to be magical, I’m saying it has to at least be established.

Arrk.4102:

MiniEquine.6014:

Arrk.4102:

Knighthonor.4061:

Dragon Hunters are the GW2 version of Demon Hunters from Diablo 3.
No demons here so we Dragon Hunters.

What’s wrong with that?

Mesmers have time magic, so Chronomancer is a natural evolution.
Necromancers have death magic, 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 DH is a natural evolution.

Tell me what is X.

Also, we have demons in GW2, so there.

To be fair, I already told you what X was in an earlier post. Just because X isn’t a type of magic (engineers won’t become magical either, and most likely thieves too) doesn’t mean that it can’t work.

Except it doesn’t link to the class at all. ““X”, in this case, is some sort of furious zeal.”
DH has nothing to do with Zeal, so there is no link. Engineers are getting some sort of flying turrets, so a thing they have established as a class already. Technological theme going further. I’m not saying it has to be magical, I’m saying it has to at least be established.

Definition-wise, it does have to do with zeal. Zeal is a great energy or enthusiasm in pursuit of a cause or an objective. The Guardian is the “holy warrior” archetype of the GW2 universe, and those guys are well known for their zeal, honor, valor, passion, and righteousness.

I reiterate, I wouldn’t have made the class like this if I had the choice, but the link is there.

I’m re-posting my reply from another thread into here as its more relevant to this thread in the first place (even though its responding to another in the other thread). Apologies if you’re reading this twice and feeling confused.

Yes, i get the goofy feeling of the name. i know that many of us imagine some 12 year old at the D&D table for the first time introducing his half-elf warrior named Sylvan Deathmaker when we first heard the name, BUT…
While anyone can become a hunter of dragons, i think they meant it thus:
Just as a warrior in D&D might follow the teachings of a certain god, they are still a warrior and not say, a Paladin or cleric of that god. In the same vein, in GW2 while everyone is fighting against the dragons, the Guardians felt a deeper calling to this one particular act and having been the GW2 equiv of a paladin already, it made sense for them to take on this “calling” similar to how vampire slayers or witch hunters develop that singular unrelenting focus on going after and trying to erradicate whatever it is they are going after. Its more a description of an obsession fueled by events in the world around them. To that end then, i can be a bit more forgiving of the name. Even more so if the way we get the class introduced is because something happens to Eir, spurring her son on to take up her bow in search of her or to avenge her.
Then the fanaticism would definitely make sense.
Seriously, we play a game with “Warrior” and “Ranger” as class names already. Dragonhunter, while on the surface not as flashy or cool at first glance as Chronomancer or Reaper is still fine and possibly more understandable when tying it to actual class motivations.

PookieDaWombat.6209:

I’m re-posting my reply from another thread into here as its more relevant to this thread in the first place (even though its responding to another in the other thread). Apologies if you’re reading this twice and feeling confused.

---

Yes, i get the goofy feeling of the name. i know that many of us imagine some 12 year old at the D&D table for the first time introducing his half-elf warrior named Sylvan Deathmaker when we first heard the name, BUT…
While anyone can become a hunter of dragons, i think they meant it thus:
Just as a warrior in D&D might follow the teachings of a certain god, they are still a warrior and not say, a Paladin or cleric of that god. In the same vein, in GW2 while everyone is fighting against the dragons, the Guardians felt a deeper calling to this one particular act and having been the GW2 equiv of a paladin already, it made sense for them to take on this “calling” similar to how vampire slayers or witch hunters develop that singular unrelenting focus on going after and trying to erradicate whatever it is they are going after. Its more a description of an obsession fueled by events in the world around them. To that end then, i can be a bit more forgiving of the name. Even more so if the way we get the class introduced is because something happens to Eir, spurring her son on to take up her bow in search of her or to avenge her.
Then the fanaticism would definitely make sense.
Seriously, we play a game with “Warrior” and “Ranger” as class names already. Dragonhunter, while on the surface not as flashy or cool at first glance as Chronomancer or Reaper is still fine and possibly more understandable when tying it to actual class motivations.

Why should we get motivations thrust upon us? Reaper and Chronomancer are more describing the class (Reaper – death connotations, the new death shroud, chrono obviously is dealing with time) while Dragonhunter is what they seek to do. That is already pushing what the devs want onto us. It would be fine if all the classes were forced on that, but again DH is the anomaly.

Arrk.4102:

PookieDaWombat.6209:

I’m re-posting my reply from another thread into here as its more relevant to this thread in the first place (even though its responding to another in the other thread). Apologies if you’re reading this twice and feeling confused.

---

Yes, i get the goofy feeling of the name. i know that many of us imagine some 12 year old at the D&D table for the first time introducing his half-elf warrior named Sylvan Deathmaker when we first heard the name, BUT…
While anyone can become a hunter of dragons, i think they meant it thus:
Just as a warrior in D&D might follow the teachings of a certain god, they are still a warrior and not say, a Paladin or cleric of that god. In the same vein, in GW2 while everyone is fighting against the dragons, the Guardians felt a deeper calling to this one particular act and having been the GW2 equiv of a paladin already, it made sense for them to take on this “calling” similar to how vampire slayers or witch hunters develop that singular unrelenting focus on going after and trying to erradicate whatever it is they are going after. Its more a description of an obsession fueled by events in the world around them. To that end then, i can be a bit more forgiving of the name. Even more so if the way we get the class introduced is because something happens to Eir, spurring her son on to take up her bow in search of her or to avenge her.
Then the fanaticism would definitely make sense.
Seriously, we play a game with “Warrior” and “Ranger” as class names already. Dragonhunter, while on the surface not as flashy or cool at first glance as Chronomancer or Reaper is still fine and possibly more understandable when tying it to actual class motivations.

Why should we get motivations thrust upon us? Reaper and Chronomancer are more describing the class (Reaper – death connotations, the new death shroud, chrono obviously is dealing with time) while Dragonhunter is what they seek to do. That is already pushing what the devs want onto us. It would be fine if all the classes were forced on that, but again DH is the anomaly.

All classes have a motivation behind them.

The Guardian class is meant to be a protector of the innocent through defensive magic, but that doesn’t mean you can’t be a greatsword-wielding medi guard that spins to win and brutally murders their foes.

A ranger’s motivation is to gain greater understanding of nature and animals, but there’s nothing stopping you from going on a murderous rampage of all the woodland critters.

Elementalists strive to achieve strength through attunement to the elements. Necromancers gain strength through devoting their training towards death and blood magic (but they aren’t the bad guys, they do it for good!). I could go on.

You always have motivations thrust upon you. Some would even say that it’s the motivations of the class that get them to play it, sometimes more than the skillset. At the end of the day, you can still play the class however you want. When I take the DH spec, I’m probably going to use the Longbow and a full set of shouts. Traps aren’t really my cup of tea in PvE and WvW.

MiniEquine.6014:

Arrk.4102:

PookieDaWombat.6209:

I’m re-posting my reply from another thread into here as its more relevant to this thread in the first place (even though its responding to another in the other thread). Apologies if you’re reading this twice and feeling confused.

---

Yes, i get the goofy feeling of the name. i know that many of us imagine some 12 year old at the D&D table for the first time introducing his half-elf warrior named Sylvan Deathmaker when we first heard the name, BUT…
While anyone can become a hunter of dragons, i think they meant it thus:
Just as a warrior in D&D might follow the teachings of a certain god, they are still a warrior and not say, a Paladin or cleric of that god. In the same vein, in GW2 while everyone is fighting against the dragons, the Guardians felt a deeper calling to this one particular act and having been the GW2 equiv of a paladin already, it made sense for them to take on this “calling” similar to how vampire slayers or witch hunters develop that singular unrelenting focus on going after and trying to erradicate whatever it is they are going after. Its more a description of an obsession fueled by events in the world around them. To that end then, i can be a bit more forgiving of the name. Even more so if the way we get the class introduced is because something happens to Eir, spurring her son on to take up her bow in search of her or to avenge her.
Then the fanaticism would definitely make sense.
Seriously, we play a game with “Warrior” and “Ranger” as class names already. Dragonhunter, while on the surface not as flashy or cool at first glance as Chronomancer or Reaper is still fine and possibly more understandable when tying it to actual class motivations.

Why should we get motivations thrust upon us? Reaper and Chronomancer are more describing the class (Reaper – death connotations, the new death shroud, chrono obviously is dealing with time) while Dragonhunter is what they seek to do. That is already pushing what the devs want onto us. It would be fine if all the classes were forced on that, but again DH is the anomaly.

All classes have a motivation behind them.

The Guardian class is meant to be a protector of the innocent through defensive magic, but that doesn’t mean you can’t be a greatsword-wielding medi guard that spins to win and brutally murders their foes.

A ranger’s motivation is to gain greater understanding of nature and animals, but there’s nothing stopping you from going on a murderous rampage of all the woodland critters.

Elementalists strive to achieve strength through attunement to the elements. Necromancers gain strength through devoting their training towards death and blood magic (but they aren’t the bad guys, they do it for good!). I could go on.

You always have motivations thrust upon you. Some would even say that it’s the motivations of the class that get them to play it, sometimes more than the skillset. At the end of the day, you can still play the class however you want. When I take the DH spec, I’m probably going to use the Longbow and a full set of shouts. Traps aren’t really my cup of tea in PvE and WvW.

The “motivation” of the Elementalist is controlling the elements. Not using the elements to kill elemental threats to Tyria. Similarly Guardians “motivation” is to protect, not to protect against the Icebrood. If the new Warrior spec is called “Nightmareslayer” people would get equally mad that a motivation of killing Nightmare is getting put upon them AND we get no description of the spec itself, just what they seek out to do.

Leo G.4501:

You’re attempting to use circular logic to some sort of conclusion. I don’t even know what conclusion you’re arriving at. But the reason I use those definitions is because that is what the devs wanted their Dragonhunter to mean. Maybe they only wanted the huntery feel of a bow wielding woodsman when they mentioned “big game hunter” and only wanted the Justice motivation of their goals as the definition of Dragonhunter, but I’m just parroting what they themselves said they meant. It’s not pointless to argue the different definitions when those are the definitions they’re using.

The points to be focused on for meaning here are:
-Witch Hunt/Witch Hunter
-Hunter in general
-Game from Big Game Hunting

They gave us these points and began to give us what they mean in context of the Dragonhunter. I don’t think they work because of the points I brought up earlier. I even pinpoint the part that messes things up for everyone and how to help fix it.

I’m only pointing out your circular logic.

“Game” as in “big game hunter” doesn’t mean fun and games, it means prey.

Game
noun
4.a (1) : animals under pursuit or taken in hunting; especially : wild animals hunted for sport or food (2) : the flesh of game animals

So, a big game hunter is a hunter that hunts big game. I don’t get why you insist to draw conclusions about any implied motives from such a title.

dietzero.3514:

The name does not fit, from any point of view. And yes, I am the scholarly type who is very concerned with language. I have always made a point of educating the ignorant on the correct use of words. For example, onto is one word, while a lot is two.

Also, shoehorning a failure of a name in, is far inferior to actually picking a thematically fitting name. Not to mention more work, which seems to be what you base everything off.

Bullkitten. I don’t see you complaining about the misuse of -mancy, scholar.

Words get misused all the time in fantasy settings. I’m pretty sure GW2’s Seraphs are not actual angelic beings.

Arrk.4102:

The “motivation” of the Elementalist is controlling the elements. Not using the elements to kill elemental threats to Tyria. Similarly Guardians “motivation” is to protect, not to protect against the Icebrood. If the new Warrior spec is called “Nightmareslayer” people would get equally mad that a motivation of killing Nightmare is getting put upon them AND we get no description of the spec itself, just what they seek out to do.

Right now I’m not really concerned about the name, since you brought up motivation. Motivations can change and they don’t have to all be based along the same type of thing. This is evident in the real world as well.

The name doesn’t actually cause the motivation, it’s the design behind the class or specialization that does. Typically, a name is an afterthought to a motivation because somebody feels strongly about something and then labels themselves, not the other way around. We also did get an explanation of what the DH does, so I’m not sure what “no description of the spec itself” means when you use it.

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.

MiniEquine.6014:

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.

Arrk.4102:

MiniEquine.6014:

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.

MiniEquine.6014:

Arrk.4102:

MiniEquine.6014:

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?

Knighthonor.4061:

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.

Well technically we do have Spears in the game, you just have to engage in underwater combat to use them. It’s quite possible that we will never have land spears added to the game, that we might at best have spear skins for the staff. So if they never add Paragon styled spears, does that mean we will never see the Paragon in GW2? Or if they make it that every aquatic spear wielding class gets to use spear on land, how does that increase the likelihood of a special Paragon exception if nearly everyone is using spears?

With the Dragonhunter in play, it takes the need for the Paragon off the table. Why would they add a ranged Guardian spec that is designed to combat evil when there is already the Dragonhunter that fills that role. Especially when the Dragonhunter spec uses the Paragon styled spear, shield and wings for their profession mechanic. The angel wing graphic that used to be iconic to the Paragon now belongs to the Dragonhunter.

Besides we are likely never going to see the scythe wielding Dervish in GW2 when we have the scythe wielding Reaper. Keeping the Dragonhunter may very well mean losing the Paragon.

And comparing the Dragonhunter to a class from Diablo 3 isn’t that relevant because it isn’t bound by the same universe as GW2. I don’t think the developers would want to justify its’ inclusion thanks to Diablo 3.

Arrk.4102:

MiniEquine.6014:

Arrk.4102:

MiniEquine.6014:

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?

I get what you’re saying, but nobody is forcing you to do any of that. What if I don’t like time magic but I like the trait line of the Chronomancer. Is Anet forcing me to feel like I should use time magic simply because my name is a Chronomancer? Should I feel like I must reap souls if I’m a reaper? What if I only want to raise undead corpses?

That’s the point I’m trying to make. You’re not being forced to feel or think that you should do something or that you ought to feel a certain way. The only way you are forced into it is if you force yourself to think that your spec is Dragonhunter therefore you must hunt dragons.

MiniEquine.6014:

Arrk.4102:

MiniEquine.6014:

Arrk.4102:

MiniEquine.6014:

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?

I get what you’re saying, but nobody is forcing you to do any of that. What if I don’t like time magic but I like the trait line of the Chronomancer. Is Anet forcing me to feel like I should use time magic simply because my name is a Chronomancer? Should I feel like I must reap souls if I’m a reaper? What if I only want to raise undead corpses?

That’s the point I’m trying to make. You’re not being forced to feel or think that you should do something or that you ought to feel a certain way. The only way you are forced into it is if you force yourself to think that your spec is Dragonhunter therefore you must hunt dragons.

But I’m saying they describe your abilities as that spec. Chronomancer is the time mage, therefore he CAN use time magic. You can choose not to do it, but it only describes your ability and the focus of the spec. Dragonhunter describes NOT an ability, but the goal. You don’t have “dragonhunting” abilities. You do not become better at hunting dragons. You do not do increased damage to dragons.

If a Dragonhunter doesn’t hunt dragons does that make him a dragon hunter?

Mordeus.1234:

If a Dragonhunter doesn’t hunt dragons does that make him a dragon hunter?

It makes him a wannabe pretentious guy using a title-sounding class name.

dietzero.3514:

Knighthonor.4061:

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.

Still in Diablo universe Demons are Synonymous with Evil.
in GW2 universe Dragons are synonymous with Evil.
So across universes Demon and Dragon are one in the same.

Those who call themselves demon hunters are not a people or a nation. They owe allegiance to no king. They are but a remnant – an echo – of those who’ve lost their lives to hellspawn. When their homes are burnt and their families butchered by demons, most newly scarred refugees give up on living – but a few bury their dead, band together, and swear vengeance.

Though they are small in number, hunters track and corner demons in the hopes that, if they can save even one life, their world will be better for it. At the end of a day’s hunt, most still close their eyes and have nightmares in which they see the horrors that brought them together: gore-caked claws, and men and women drowning in their own blood.

Awake, demon hunters see much the same. But, now, in the present, they finally have the power to retaliate.

They dare not dream of victory, or, even less likely, peace. And yet, they hunt. They can do nothing else.

again replace everywhere you see Demon with Dragon, and you have GW2’s Dragon Hunter. they are the same theme across universes, just as Guardians in GW2 are the same theme as Paladins in World of Warcraft just in different universes and different names,,,

http://us.battle.net/d3/en/class/demon-hunter/ here is the Diablo 3 Demon Hunter. Same concept. people could say all classes hunt demons right? right??

Knighthonor.4061:

again replace everywhere you see Demon with Dragon, and you have GW2’s Dragon Hunter. they are the same theme across universes, just as Guardians in GW2 are the same theme as Paladins in World of Warcraft just in different universes and different names,,,

http://us.battle.net/d3/en/class/demon-hunter/ here is the Diablo 3 Demon Hunter. Same concept. people could say all classes hunt demons right? right??

I see your point there, but I’d argue that internal consistency trumps what other games do. While I’m not raging mad about the “Dragonhunter” name or even the concept that there could be a dedicated fanatically driven anti-dragon set of fighters, I do feel it doesn’t flow with the rest of this game’s design. As others have said repeatedly in this thread, it makes the profession part of a faction, when no profession thus far has been created to espouse specific viewpoints.

ANet does like to turn things on their heads and not get stuck in a rut just because it’s always been that way, but they also have a cohesive overall feel to the game and “Dragonhunter” breaks that cohesion for a lot of people.

Maybe if they’d been developing story threads all along to show this growing fanaticism it might be different. And who knows, maybe there will be development in the HoT story along those lines, though that would mean getting the buildup after the reveal since the profession will be available right away, before people see the narrative.

Arrk.4102:

You don’t have “dragonhunting” abilities.

This particular part is really the thing I think we can both agree on. If they gave abilities that were specifically designed around a theoretical fight with a dragon, then it could work. They did not do this too well, since dragons can just fly over traps. They could have really given it a knight in shining armor vs dragon feel, and they fell short.

We can argue about why the Dragon hunter is illogical, but let’s not forget the simple truth: Many of us think the name just plain sucks.

“Dragonhunter” is a generic name with an oddly specific role implication and an oddly ambiguous connection to the specs actual role in various combat situations.

It’s also displeasing to look at. My visual word aesthetic says there should be a space between Dragon and Hunter. Or we could just rename it Hunter.

Arrk.4102:

lukejoe.1592:

Paragon is an outright stupid profession name. Paragon of what?!

A class that deals with Virtues and you say Paragon is stupid? Really?

Don’t argue with kittens, they bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Paragon, Sentinel and Warden would be my three picks. Since we must narrow it down, those are what ill go with.

RabbitUp.8294:

Leo G.4501:

You’re attempting to use circular logic to some sort of conclusion. I don’t even know what conclusion you’re arriving at. But the reason I use those definitions is because that is what the devs wanted their Dragonhunter to mean. Maybe they only wanted the huntery feel of a bow wielding woodsman when they mentioned “big game hunter” and only wanted the Justice motivation of their goals as the definition of Dragonhunter, but I’m just parroting what they themselves said they meant. It’s not pointless to argue the different definitions when those are the definitions they’re using.

The points to be focused on for meaning here are:
-Witch Hunt/Witch Hunter
-Hunter in general
-Game from Big Game Hunting

They gave us these points and began to give us what they mean in context of the Dragonhunter. I don’t think they work because of the points I brought up earlier. I even pinpoint the part that messes things up for everyone and how to help fix it.

I’m only pointing out your circular logic.

“Game” as in “big game hunter” doesn’t mean fun and games, it means prey.

Game
noun
4.a (1) : animals under pursuit or taken in hunting; especially : wild animals hunted for sport or food (2) : the flesh of game animals

So, a big game hunter is a hunter that hunts big game. I don’t get why you insist to draw conclusions about any implied motives from such a title.

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.

That all said, I’ll reclarify from your last statement:

RabbitUp.8294:

So, a big game hunter is a hunter that hunts big game. I don’t get why you insist to draw conclusions about any implied motives from such a title.

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.

Dante.1763:

Paragon, Sentinel and Warden would be my three picks. Since we must narrow it down, those are what ill go with.

Sentinel
Warden
Paragon

That’s the order I’d like ^^. But yeah, any of these would be really nice.

I feel that dragon hunter invokes of a singular warrior without need for support , killing dragons is his duty his code . while i get the concept i dont think it fits a class specialization thats main focus is long range support not singular combat .
Given that the focus is long range support and the guild wars lore i dont understand why this isnt called the paragon , to me this name is a given. Some will argue that they traditionallly use spear but the key is that paragon provides long range support which is what the dragon hunter does . Then again calling it something as obvious as paragon might be too high of a concept

PookieDaWombat.6209:

To that end then, i can be a bit more forgiving of the name. Even more so if the way we get the class introduced is because something happens to Eir, spurring her son on to take up her bow in search of her or to avenge her.

Just to speak on this opinion.

I’ve heard it mentioned many times before and as I think more and more about it, I feel more opposed to the notion of this being the origin.

For one, it downplays the urgency of the dragon threat currently and only pushes a particular person then to take the threat seriously. It’s a strong motivator but surely a powerful Guardian had to feel the same loss at one point before and pushed to the same extent to achieve a grander result…but it hasn’t. Loss of a loved one should only the beginning of the journey, not the result.

For two, while I don’t care much for the name of the Dragonhunter, and I do want it changed, I can at least fathom it still working in the vein of a type of Witch Hunter/Demon Hunter…but only if it makes more sense. What made Witch/Demon Hunters a thing is usually they have a set of tools or a wealth of knowledge about the thing they exterminate. This might come from a group of like-minded people who have amassed this knowledge and expertise over time and have shared it with others who chase the same cause. The devs imply this is what the Dragonhunters are with their faction, so there must be a subset of people who have knowledge of the dragons to share to aid in the fight and that’s what Braham uses to become the Dragonhunter.

It even makes a bit more sense since just having these extra tools doesn’t make you better at fighting them, just equipping yourself better so you can face the threat with more confidence.

That all said, I STILL think Draconnier, Dragner, Dragonbane or Dragoneer would be better with the above, especially if it cuts out the whole “big game hunter” bit. You don’t need it! If Eir dies and Braham takes her bow and Rox teaches him how to use it better and he gains knowledge about the dragons from some special secret sect of the Priory while he heals up, all the pieces are accounted for:

• Traps = knowledge of what he learned from Priory + his Guardian magic
• Bow = Eir + Rox
• Motive = Dragons endangering his friends + Killed his mom
• Virtues = Mostly Braham’s drive + Guardian magic

The “big game hunter” part is extra mess that needs to be ignored.

Leo G.4501:

That all said, I STILL think Draconnier, Dragner, Dragonbane or Dragoneer

That still runs into two problems a lot of people have with the name of the spec:
It doesn’t describe your abilities, and it puts a focus on one type of enemy. Are we any better at killing dragons than any other classes? No.

lukejoe.1592:

Paragon is an outright stupid profession name. Paragon of what?!

Paragon of Tyria.

Vindicator

- or perhaps too much World of Warcraft

Arrk.4102:

Leo G.4501:

That all said, I STILL think Draconnier, Dragner, Dragonbane or Dragoneer

That still runs into two problems a lot of people have with the name of the spec:
It doesn’t describe your abilities, and it puts a focus on one type of enemy. Are we any better at killing dragons than any other classes? No.

But those names don’t have anything to do with killing dragons. If anything, it’s too vague to judge.

The point is, it’s a compromise. If the desire of the devs is to make an elite spec linked to a particular story segment, those names can accomplish that while still being vague enough not to dictate a desire or motivation. For example, Draconnier can simply mean one who studies dragons and uses that particular knowledge to keep themselves uncorrupted. Dragoneer could mean someone who siphons away the energy of dragons and uses that to fight. Dragonbane can simply mean you have the power to overcome their corruption thus being the bane of the dragons.

But none of that is seen in game.

Arrk.4102:

But none of that is seen in game.

What do you mean?

Craywulf.5793:

Ok lets narrow it down folks….list only three names in order of preference.

1. Paragon
2. Arbiter
3. Sentinel

I would advise we keep this thread alive not by debating back and forth of merits of whether any name fits, because frankly we’ve been doing that for nearly 30 pages and there’s been no progress. So please list just three names until we have a general census of names to be considered. Feel free to explain your choices, but lets not haggle each other over the reasons. Lets get three names and make some real progress here.

1) Seeker
2) Seeker
3) Seeker

I definetely go for the 3 most fitting names that suit to a holy zealot, thats all super righterous about justice, acting like what ANet envisions with “Witchhunters” in that gameplay design. Like a kind of Judge, which goes in all in like also with the guardian’s judge skill (Judge’s Intervention)
And for that I can narrow all names just down to 1 thing > Seeker
They are for me the personal impersonifications of relentless justice, which seek down with their holy arrows anyone and everything evil (not just only dragons)as also bring the truth, right and order back to Tyria by erading out all evil threats that they think deserve to be punished and purged by them, where they use even traps to have an easier time to catch all those evil sinners and criminals all around Tyria. Something, only a Seeker comes into question for to do that as an offensive specialization of a Guardian

The whole thing with the active virtues, the wings of light, the light arrows ect. and the light traps basicalyl all screams out Seeker and if ANet would rename the Longbow Auto attack Skill to “Seeking Arrows”, which was once a GW1 Ranger Skill, the perfect reference and nostalgia would be added.

Give the class then some better visuals here and there that are of the same quality as like that of the Reaper (could coutn here and there for the Chronomancer too) and everything would be perfect and fine.

In regard of the overall design quality, the Reaper Presentation were like the difference between light and shadow, just with the point, that the Reaper currently absolutely outshines everythign that has been presented before, from gameplay to overall design quality, to fun aspects and so on…

So far I would go to say, that everything we know so far, stands deep behind the Reaper’s Shadow right now …
The cHronomancer was already awesome realyl, but the Reaper absloutely overtopped right now all of my personal expectations by far!

PS: But if you really want me to tell you 3 name votes, then list (Seeker, Inquisitor, Exorcist as my votes)

Leo G.4501:

Arrk.4102:

But none of that is seen in game.

What do you mean?

Like, the explanations for the various Dragon related names. None of that dragon knowledge or whatever is seen in game. No extra damage against dragons, no extra defence, nothing. And why can’t my scholarly Elementalist be the one who learns about them and become the Draconeer or whatever? The spec has to be an expansion of the class. The Artist can become the Painter, but not the Driver, if you will. You go and focus in a certain direction from what you have, you don’t throw in something completely unrelated.

Orpheal.8263:

Craywulf.5793:

Ok lets narrow it down folks….list only three names in order of preference.

1. Paragon
2. Arbiter
3. Sentinel

I would advise we keep this thread alive not by debating back and forth of merits of whether any name fits, because frankly we’ve been doing that for nearly 30 pages and there’s been no progress. So please list just three names until we have a general census of names to be considered. Feel free to explain your choices, but lets not haggle each other over the reasons. Lets get three names and make some real progress here.

1) Seeker
2) Seeker
3) Seeker

I definetely go for the 3 most fitting names that suit to a holy zealot, thats all super righterous about justice, acting like what ANet envisions with “Witchhunters” in that gameplay design. Like a kind of Judge, which goes in all in like also with the guardian’s judge skill (Judge’s Intervention)
And for that I can narrow all names just down to 1 thing > Seeker
They are for me the personal impersonifications of relentless justice, which seek down with their holy arrows anyone and everything evil (not just only dragons)as also bring the truth, right and order back to Tyria by erading out all evil threats that they think deserve to be punished and purged by them, where they use even traps to have an easier time to catch all those evil sinners and criminals all around Tyria. Something, only a Seeker comes into question for to do that as an offensive specialization of a Guardian

The whole thing with the active virtues, the wings of light, the light arrows ect. and the light traps basicalyl all screams out Seeker and if ANet would rename the Longbow Auto attack Skill to “Seeking Arrows”, which was once a GW1 Ranger Skill, the perfect reference and nostalgia would be added.

Give the class then some better visuals here and there that are of the same quality as like that of the Reaper (could coutn here and there for the Chronomancer too) and everything would be perfect and fine.

In regard of the overall design quality, the Reaper Presentation were like the difference between light and shadow, just with the point, that the Reaper currently absolutely outshines everythign that has been presented before, from gameplay to overall design quality, to fun aspects and so on…

So far I would go to say, that everything we know so far, stands deep behind the Reaper’s Shadow right now …
The cHronomancer was already awesome realyl, but the Reaper absloutely overtopped right now all of my personal expectations by far!

I really like this idea. It makes a lot of sense.

I, too, like the Seeker name a lot.

Arrk.4102:

Leo G.4501:

Arrk.4102:

But none of that is seen in game.

What do you mean?

Like, the explanations for the various Dragon related names. None of that dragon knowledge or whatever is seen in game. No extra damage against dragons, no extra defence, nothing. And why can’t my scholarly Elementalist be the one who learns about them and become the Draconeer or whatever?

If it’s focused on purification, that’s the purpose of the light. The knowledge may come in speaking of rituals or objects used to purify and the skill comes from the fact Guardians have spiritual light powers and purification abilities.

So you wouldn’t have to be a Guardian or even a Draconnier/Dragoner/Dragoneer/Dragonbane to do it but it’s difficult/unlikely to be possible without a means of purifying things.

And there is precedence in Trahern purifying Orr but requiring an object that has purifying abilities.

Trahearne is a necromancer. Also we have seen other npc’s resist dragon corruption so you actually don’t have to be a Guardian for that. So any dragon theme does NOT fit the spec.

Seeker seems like it’d be a good fit to me as well. Reminds me of the Seekers from Dragon Age, who search for demons and dark magic and bring the fight to them in an effort to cleanse the land.

Y’know, just like the “Dragonhunter”.

Seeker, Sentinel, Warden. Amended my list because i want the paragon to be a thing for if they ever(Hopefully) bring spears onto land.

Sentinel, Seeker and Warden then, because Paragon deserves a separate spec, I agree.

I doubt that we will ever get to see Spears for land, if then, it would be categorized as “polearm weapons” that will be stuff like halberdsa, lances, pikes, glaives and the like, but not something like “Javelins”, because thats what we actualyl had in GW1, Javelins, not Spears, which are smaller and lighter spears more fitting for throwign them, while big spears aren’t thrown but used for melee combat and handled more like a quarterstaff with a pointy spike on its head to pierce through the enemies armor with them with your thrust attacks.

To me is Paragon also a human/elona only term, so as long we will not be able to return to Elona to explore it again (and right before this ever will happen, Cantha will be surely first. So I wouldn’t get hopes up so much for Paragons, especially not when the current Elite spec already shares mostly all aspects of what made the GW1 paragons what they were – the wings, the spear, the shouts, nothign speacial left ove,r that warrants a different unique paragon spec, despite paragon beign a same as dumb unfitting name, like dragonhunter, just with the difference that it even sounds much lesser like no profession at all, they were in GW1 already nothing else but wannabe angelic bards and when it comes down to bards, they simply have to become the next Mesmer Elite Specialization, because Music is all about INSPIRATION and the Chaos Effect if inspiring positively as same as like negatively at once foes and allies at the same time when you hear them, like moralizing your allies, while demoralizign your foes at the same time. However, I get offtopic so back to the better DH naming

Orpheal.8263:

1) Seeker
2) Seeker
3) Seeker

I definetely go for the 3 most fitting names that suit to a holy zealot, thats all super righterous about justice, acting like what ANet envisions with “Witchhunters” in that gameplay design. Like a kind of Judge, which goes in all in like also with the guardian’s judge skill (Judge’s Intervention)

Or the captain of a Hogwarts quidditch team.

Genesis.8572:

Orpheal.8263:

1) Seeker
2) Seeker
3) Seeker

I definetely go for the 3 most fitting names that suit to a holy zealot, thats all super righterous about justice, acting like what ANet envisions with “Witchhunters” in that gameplay design. Like a kind of Judge, which goes in all in like also with the guardian’s judge skill (Judge’s Intervention)

Or the captain of a Hogwarts quidditch team.

ROFLMAO
be ensured, this was surely not my inspiration to come up with the Seeker XD

I see Seekers 100% purely as the righteous profession, that seeks out all evil to punish and purge all those, that are guilty, which have commited crimes and various sins.
Their zealotry drives them for relentless justice, lonewolfs that preserve right and order and aren’t of themself thinking of being too good for doing also the dirty works to find out everythign that is needed to get to the truth that declares, who is in their eyes guilty and who is not, using as utility traps to easier catch those they think deserve it to be punished and purged/erased.

They are basically like holy head/witch hunters which Anet referred to, just that they do their job not just for money, but for a much much greater personal ideal that they have and follow.
Seekers basically would be for humans to speak as an example the most perfect disciples of Kormir, as shes the Goddess of TRUTH and ORDER

https://wiki-en.guildwars2.com/wiki/Kormir

The original impersonification of justice who wielded in her times when she was a mere mortal human a spear! Spear of Justice under a “Seeker” would be the perfect homage to that following of her teachings and all other races surely also have some kind of strong sense for justice and adapted over the past 250 years alot fro mthe humans .

Genesis.8572:

Orpheal.8263:

1) Seeker
2) Seeker
3) Seeker

I definetely go for the 3 most fitting names that suit to a holy zealot, thats all super righterous about justice, acting like what ANet envisions with “Witchhunters” in that gameplay design. Like a kind of Judge, which goes in all in like also with the guardian’s judge skill (Judge’s Intervention)

Or the captain of a Hogwarts quidditch team.

Seeker is a member of Quidditch team, not always a captian. Oliver Wood and Angelina Johnson weren’t Seekers, right?

Back to the topic, I think that Genesis’s idea is very good. Seeker is fine for me.

Arrk.4102:

Trahearne is a necromancer. Also we have seen other npc’s resist dragon corruption so you actually don’t have to be a Guardian for that. So any dragon theme does NOT fit the spec.

…Did you even read what I said?

Yeah, I agreed that you don’t have to be a Guardian to deal with the dragons but you would have to be a Guardian to use the powers of light against the dragons which was the whole point of the explanation.

I even mentioned Trahern because he obviously is using an object that channels the power of light to purify forming precedence that light a keen way to purify dragon corruption.

I like Seeker, Warder (not Warden, Warder), and Sentinel, in that order. Seeker fits best all around, Warder reflects guarding with traps, and Sentinel has a righteous feel though it might not work for this Guardian Elite and fit better for a new one down the road.