Guild Wars 2

Obtena.7952:

I don’t suggest a way to reach that point. I guess the fact you asked means you didn’t get the point. I encourage everyone to continue proposing whatever names they like, even the most preposterous ones.

I got your point just fine. I guess you didn’t get mine. And don’t try to be aggravating for no reason.

The only thing you will get out of it are 100 different name, basically the same ones posted during the first couple of days. You can go back to the first 5 pages and copy the lists.

The point of this thread should have been to help narrow down the selection, not increase it further. If the dream of a final poll becomes more than a dream, the last thing we need is a 2-page list of names.

They could call them anything, idc, as long as it fits what the Guardian stands for. Dragonhunter doesn’t fit AT ALL.

Arrk.4102:

Leo G.4501:

Arrk.4102:

Please tell me what connection does the Guardian have to Dragons, for Draconnier to make sense?

The point is, the devs could have a piece of lore or a story being the name to which is the reason they want to keep the name related to dragons. If that possibility has yet to cross your mind thus being thoughtful of that when giving feedback, I can only assume you’re not being mature enough to compromise.

Draconnier and Dragonbane are not the only suggestions I’ve made, they’re only the ones that relate to dragons if that is an important detail that you’ve just decided to ignore. None the less, I don’t like Dragonhunter for the reasons brought up. Not because I disapprove what story the devs want to tell but how pertinent that story is to individual characters’ stories.

Immature? Nice.
Who said they want to tie the specs to the story? Dragonbane is on par with Dragonhunter imo, and much better than Draconnier.
If the devs had such a lore reason behind the name they would have used it, instead of the “high concept” explanation we got.

Yeah, I would say immature. You think they can release actual storyline to explain it? Or do you just take the explanation that Jon gave (the “high concept”) thing as an insult?

So then I’d further ask you, why you’d think anyone on these forums are important enough for Jon to need to insult. Stop being vain. Jon isn’t insulting anyone, he obviously can’t say much about the expansion.

RabbitUp.8294:

Where is it implied that Dragonhunter’s motives align with big game hunter’s motives?

Either show me the exact quote, or give this argument a rest.

You can just look at the teaser video for Dragonhunter. It’s pretty obvious.

MattyP.6954:

Obtena.7952:

So we all come to a name that everyone agrees with? No? Anyone get that point?

Nope, it’s just QQ because Anet developers made a creative decision that isn’t everybody’s favorite.

Everyone is allowed to have opinions, until they disagree with yours, and then suddenly it’s QQ. Some people complain simply to complain on both sides of this naming fence, and now the whole thread is going in circles.

The thing about this topic that I find interesting is that I don’t see that many people arguing that they actually like the name, but rather simply arguing with the people who don’t like it on whether or not it fits. Like it’s some nasty tasting medicine we should all have to swallow because Arenanet said so. I don’t think anyone should be abusive to the creative team here, but I don’t think it’s wrong to question them about their decisions.

I never particularly liked the name, but I found myself liking it even less when they tried to explain the motivations behind the name. The first post calls it a big game hunter, but when they come on the forums to justify it, suddenly it’s akin to witch hunters? These two things seem so off from each other it really does put me in the camp of people feeling like this name was just slapped on without any real theme planned. I’ll still use the spec regardless of the name, but it’s gonna be like that awkward itch between your shoulders that not everyone can reach.

Of the ones listed I like Seeker, even if it makes me think Quidditch. XD

Seeker
1. One that seeks: a seeker of the truth.
2. A device used in a moving object, especially a missile, that locates a target by detecting light, heat, or other radiation.

Someone probably posted that definition already, but with all the pages and merging I’m getting lost, so sorry if that’s the case.

Ephemiel.5694:

They could call them anything, idc, as long as it fits what the Guardian stands for. Dragonhunter doesn’t fit AT ALL.

You know what’s funny. Do a Google search for the nemesis of a dragon. See what comes up … very interesting. Then come back and say Guardian have nothing to do with Dragons. I love it when people think they know more than they really do.

DragonflyDusk.6582:

Everyone is allowed to have opinions, until they disagree with yours, and then suddenly it’s QQ. Some people complain simply to complain on both sides of this naming fence, and now the whole thread is going in circles.

The thing about this topic that I find interesting is that I don’t see that many people arguing that they actually like the name, but rather simply arguing with the people who don’t like it on whether or not it fits. Like it’s some nasty tasting medicine we should all have to swallow because Arenanet said so. I don’t think anyone should be abusive to the creative team here, but I don’t think it’s wrong to question them about their decisions.

I never particularly liked the name, but I found myself liking it even less when they tried to explain the motivations behind the name. The first post calls it a big game hunter, but when they come on the forums to justify it, suddenly it’s akin to witch hunters? These two things seem so off from each other it really does put me in the camp of people feeling like this name was just slapped on without any real theme planned. I’ll still use the spec regardless of the name, but it’s gonna be like that awkward itch between your shoulders that not everyone can reach.

Of the ones listed I like Seeker, even if it makes me think Quidditch. XD

Seeker
1. One that seeks: a seeker of the truth.
2. A device used in a moving object, especially a missile, that locates a target by detecting light, heat, or other radiation.

Someone probably posted that definition already, but with all the pages and merging I’m getting lost, so sorry if that’s the case.

FYI, I’m definitely on the same page as you! There are some out there but the whole debacle has blown up so far it’s hard to tell where the lines are at anymore.

The only thing I’d add to it is try to take other people’s considerations and perspectives in mind here. There are going to be people that like the name too. I’d honestly would have been fine with Dragonhunter had they done 2 things: put more draconic looking stuff on their abilities (more traps that look draconic/draconic wings) and had a lore reason for it. But beyond that, nothing really does it for me. That said, the devs could have already written out a narrative, done the voices and such so that the spec revolves moreso around dragons to make sense. Throwing it all away just because I’d rather something else seems selfish which is why I also considered compromises for the name to give it a better feel…just leave hunting out of it!

Now I will disagree with you on the name Seeker. I just don’t like it
Nothing more needs to be said. I don’t really like Arbiter either. My memories of Arbiters are more from City of Heroes and the Arbiters of City of Villains were like the Exectutives of the big boss man Lord Recluse and his highest ranking troops. You pretty much don’t touch them because if you did, you’d have a bad day in Mr. Recluse’s city. That said, they were more hands-off and actually worked as arbiters (i.e. they managed to keep things in order but mostly in either their favor or Lord Recluse’s). It doesn’t quite seem like the DH acts as an Arbiter but that might remain to be seen in the story.

Obtena.7952:

Ephemiel.5694:

They could call them anything, idc, as long as it fits what the Guardian stands for. Dragonhunter doesn’t fit AT ALL.

You know what’s funny. Do a Google search for the nemesis of a dragon. See what comes up … very interesting. The come back and say Guardian have nothing to do with Dragons. I love it when people think they know more than they really do.

Bunch of posts about the nemesis armor for the iOS game called Knights and Dragons? Really informative, I now fully support Dragonhunter.

Obviously you’re not well versed in traditional lore. Knights are the nemesis of dragons.

Leo G.4501:

Arrk.4102:

Leo G.4501:

Arrk.4102:

Please tell me what connection does the Guardian have to Dragons, for Draconnier to make sense?

The point is, the devs could have a piece of lore or a story being the name to which is the reason they want to keep the name related to dragons. If that possibility has yet to cross your mind thus being thoughtful of that when giving feedback, I can only assume you’re not being mature enough to compromise.

Draconnier and Dragonbane are not the only suggestions I’ve made, they’re only the ones that relate to dragons if that is an important detail that you’ve just decided to ignore. None the less, I don’t like Dragonhunter for the reasons brought up. Not because I disapprove what story the devs want to tell but how pertinent that story is to individual characters’ stories.

Immature? Nice.
Who said they want to tie the specs to the story? Dragonbane is on par with Dragonhunter imo, and much better than Draconnier.
If the devs had such a lore reason behind the name they would have used it, instead of the “high concept” explanation we got.

Yeah, I would say immature. You think they can release actual storyline to explain it? Or do you just take the explanation that Jon gave (the “high concept”) thing as an insult?

So then I’d further ask you, why you’d think anyone on these forums are important enough for Jon to need to insult. Stop being vain. Jon isn’t insulting anyone, he obviously can’t say much about the expansion.

The statement that it is “high concept” is laughable, never said it was insulting. No one is being insulted or insulting here except you calling me Immature AND vain. I simply said that the high concept excuse doesn’t mean much.

Obtena.7952:

Obviously you’re not well versed in traditional lore. Knights are the nemesis of dragons.

You told me to look up the term “the nemesis of a dragon” that’s what I did.
Also, yes, knights, not hunters.

Obtena.7952:

Ephemiel.5694:

They could call them anything, idc, as long as it fits what the Guardian stands for. Dragonhunter doesn’t fit AT ALL.

You know what’s funny. Do a Google search for the nemesis of a dragon. See what comes up … very interesting. Then come back and say Guardian have nothing to do with Dragons. I love it when people think they know more than they really do.

You know what’s funny? This entire thread showing proof that Dragonhunter doesn’t fit the Guardian.

I love it when people think they know more than they really do.

I see opinions, I don’t see proof. Please do continue to ignore established, traditional lore that makes a plausible link that Guardians could be interpreted as a nemesis to dragons.

Arrk.4102:

Leo G.4501:

Arrk.4102:

Leo G.4501:

Arrk.4102:

Please tell me what connection does the Guardian have to Dragons, for Draconnier to make sense?

The point is, the devs could have a piece of lore or a story being the name to which is the reason they want to keep the name related to dragons. If that possibility has yet to cross your mind thus being thoughtful of that when giving feedback, I can only assume you’re not being mature enough to compromise.

Draconnier and Dragonbane are not the only suggestions I’ve made, they’re only the ones that relate to dragons if that is an important detail that you’ve just decided to ignore. None the less, I don’t like Dragonhunter for the reasons brought up. Not because I disapprove what story the devs want to tell but how pertinent that story is to individual characters’ stories.

Immature? Nice.
Who said they want to tie the specs to the story? Dragonbane is on par with Dragonhunter imo, and much better than Draconnier.
If the devs had such a lore reason behind the name they would have used it, instead of the “high concept” explanation we got.

Yeah, I would say immature. You think they can release actual storyline to explain it? Or do you just take the explanation that Jon gave (the “high concept”) thing as an insult?

So then I’d further ask you, why you’d think anyone on these forums are important enough for Jon to need to insult. Stop being vain. Jon isn’t insulting anyone, he obviously can’t say much about the expansion.

The statement that it is “high concept” is laughable, never said it was insulting. No one is being insulted or insulting here except you calling me Immature AND vain. I simply said that the high concept excuse doesn’t mean much.

So then you want him to tell about the story of the expansion? Whether you’re insulted or amused, someone’s likely getting insulted. If you can’t accept that they can’t release info like that, I honestly don’t know what else to say…except you’re not going to get the devs to talk by trying to insult them by laughing at them.

Obtena.7952:

I see opinions, I don’t see proof. Please do continue to ignore established, traditional lore that makes a plausible link that Guardians could be interpreted as a nemesis to dragons.

Yep, the traditional lore that gives Knights/Paladins/etc traps and bows to fight Dragons.

Please, do continue to be blind.

Leo G.4501:

Arrk.4102:

Leo G.4501:

Arrk.4102:

Leo G.4501:

Arrk.4102:

Please tell me what connection does the Guardian have to Dragons, for Draconnier to make sense?

The point is, the devs could have a piece of lore or a story being the name to which is the reason they want to keep the name related to dragons. If that possibility has yet to cross your mind thus being thoughtful of that when giving feedback, I can only assume you’re not being mature enough to compromise.

Draconnier and Dragonbane are not the only suggestions I’ve made, they’re only the ones that relate to dragons if that is an important detail that you’ve just decided to ignore. None the less, I don’t like Dragonhunter for the reasons brought up. Not because I disapprove what story the devs want to tell but how pertinent that story is to individual characters’ stories.

Immature? Nice.
Who said they want to tie the specs to the story? Dragonbane is on par with Dragonhunter imo, and much better than Draconnier.
If the devs had such a lore reason behind the name they would have used it, instead of the “high concept” explanation we got.

Yeah, I would say immature. You think they can release actual storyline to explain it? Or do you just take the explanation that Jon gave (the “high concept”) thing as an insult?

So then I’d further ask you, why you’d think anyone on these forums are important enough for Jon to need to insult. Stop being vain. Jon isn’t insulting anyone, he obviously can’t say much about the expansion.

The statement that it is “high concept” is laughable, never said it was insulting. No one is being insulted or insulting here except you calling me Immature AND vain. I simply said that the high concept excuse doesn’t mean much.

So then you want him to tell about the story of the expansion? Whether you’re insulted or amused, someone’s likely getting insulted. If you can’t accept that they can’t release info like that, I honestly don’t know what else to say…except you’re not going to get the devs to talk by trying to insult them by laughing at them.

Didn’t say the devs were laughable, I said the statement was. Also, again, what does the story got to do with anything. The theme of DH is so uncoordinated that the I really doubt there even was a reason behind it. They just threw some themes they liked and called it a day. If not, someone missed a memo.

Ephemiel.5694:

Obtena.7952:

Ephemiel.5694:

They could call them anything, idc, as long as it fits what the Guardian stands for. Dragonhunter doesn’t fit AT ALL.

You know what’s funny. Do a Google search for the nemesis of a dragon. See what comes up … very interesting. Then come back and say Guardian have nothing to do with Dragons. I love it when people think they know more than they really do.

You know what’s funny? This entire thread showing proof that Dragonhunter doesn’t fit the Guardian.

I love it when people think they know more than they really do.

All it shows is that players have formed different ideas to what a Guardian is all about than the game developers.

Ephemiel.5694:

Obtena.7952:

I see opinions, I don’t see proof. Please do continue to ignore established, traditional lore that makes a plausible link that Guardians could be interpreted as a nemesis to dragons.

Yep, the traditional lore that gives Knights/Paladins/etc traps and bows to fight Dragons.

Please, do continue to be blind.

You’re right, traditional lore doesn’t dictate they have traps and bows to fight dragons. That’s not relevant to the point I’m making here. I’ve provided evidence, based on lore, that it’s completely reasonable that Anet made that Guardian/dragon connection contrary to most of the claims people have made about why it’s a bad name and should be changed.

Obtena.7952:

I see opinions, I don’t see proof. Please do continue to ignore established, traditional lore that makes a plausible link that Guardians could be interpreted as a nemesis to dragons.

This is not a traditional world. This is ANet made world. Weren’t you the one who argued that this game is made by ANet and that real-life and rules from other stories don’t apply here?

Obtena.7952:

Ephemiel.5694:

Obtena.7952:

I see opinions, I don’t see proof. Please do continue to ignore established, traditional lore that makes a plausible link that Guardians could be interpreted as a nemesis to dragons.

Yep, the traditional lore that gives Knights/Paladins/etc traps and bows to fight Dragons.

Please, do continue to be blind.

You’re right, traditional lore doesn’t dictate they have traps and bows to fight dragons. That’s not relevant to the point I’m making here. I’ve provided evidence, based on lore, that it’s completely reasonable that Anet made that Guardian/dragon connection.

Tradition outside of the Guild Wars story isn’t lore, unless you argue that it is, if so I want to ride dragons because the lore of Eragon states that magical knights get to do that.

Arrk.4102:

Obtena.7952:

I see opinions, I don’t see proof. Please do continue to ignore established, traditional lore that makes a plausible link that Guardians could be interpreted as a nemesis to dragons.

This is not a traditional world. This is ANet made world. Weren’t you the one who argued that this game is made by ANet and that real-life and rules from other stories don’t apply here?

Sorry, are you going to try to tell me that it’s unreasonable to think Guardians aren’t related to dragons in any way when lore exists to suggest otherwise, then in the other hand, tell me that Anet makes the world as they see fit, which would infer that they can make any relevant theme they want? That’s a great way to ride both sides of the fence. Do you want to have senseless arguments, just PM me.

Obtena.7952:

Ephemiel.5694:

Obtena.7952:

I see opinions, I don’t see proof. Please do continue to ignore established, traditional lore that makes a plausible link that Guardians could be interpreted as a nemesis to dragons.

Yep, the traditional lore that gives Knights/Paladins/etc traps and bows to fight Dragons.

Please, do continue to be blind.

You’re right, traditional lore doesn’t dictate they have traps and bows to fight dragons. That’s not relevant to the point I’m making here. If there is any class with a link to dragons in this game based on lore, it’s Guardians.

So? Does that make them the only ones to become “Dragonhunters”? No. I’m a Sylvari Thief, am i not a Dragonhunter then? I fought Shatterer, Claw of Jormag, Tequalt, freaking ZHAITAN, you know, dragons?

Why would the Guardians, this game’s version of PALADINS, suddenly say “meh, screw honor, screw being the front line, the tank/defender, i’m gonna start using traps now and longbows”? That’s like having Paladins use darkness.

And calling themselves Dragonhunters….whyyyyyyyyyy? Like i said, i’m a Sylvari Thief, am i not a Dragonhunter? Aren’t Warriors or Mesmers Dragonhunters? Hell, as a Sylvari, my darn Wyld Hunt IS TO HUNT THE DRAGONS.

Just read a few of the comments before actually trying to write something.

DragonflyDusk.6582:

MattyP.6954:

Obtena.7952:

So we all come to a name that everyone agrees with? No? Anyone get that point?

Nope, it’s just QQ because Anet developers made a creative decision that isn’t everybody’s favorite.

Everyone is allowed to have opinions, until they disagree with yours, and then suddenly it’s QQ. Some people complain simply to complain on both sides of this naming fence, and now the whole thread is going in circles.

The thing about this topic that I find interesting is that I don’t see that many people arguing that they actually like the name, but rather simply arguing with the people who don’t like it on whether or not it fits. Like it’s some nasty tasting medicine we should all have to swallow because Arenanet said so. I don’t think anyone should be abusive to the creative team here, but I don’t think it’s wrong to question them about their decisions.

I agree with that.

Just see how some people, who don’t necessarily like the name themselves, are there to contradict us, not to defend DH, just because they’re annoyed by the fact we’re discussing the name. And this way they tend to force everyone into some off topic discussions.

In my opinion this is the reason why the thread is circling like that. We’re always feeling the need to justify our opinions or our reasons to discuss when in fact we should just have the right to do so without having to fight against each other, even less against people who don’t even want to see a discussion being a thing.

Personally I’m not against people who want to keep DH as a name. I’m against the name itself. But I really feel like some here are against the anti-DH guys as a matter of principle…

Ephemiel.5694:

Obtena.7952:

Ephemiel.5694:

Obtena.7952:

I see opinions, I don’t see proof. Please do continue to ignore established, traditional lore that makes a plausible link that Guardians could be interpreted as a nemesis to dragons.

Yep, the traditional lore that gives Knights/Paladins/etc traps and bows to fight Dragons.

Please, do continue to be blind.

You’re right, traditional lore doesn’t dictate they have traps and bows to fight dragons. That’s not relevant to the point I’m making here. If there is any class with a link to dragons in this game based on lore, it’s Guardians.

So? Does that make them the only ones to become “Dragonhunters”?

No, it makes it reasonable that Guardians have a DH spec and name. Are you going to deny that Guardians aren’t the closest interpretation of a knight out of all the professions in the game?

Obtena.7952:

Ephemiel.5694:

Obtena.7952:

Ephemiel.5694:

Obtena.7952:

I see opinions, I don’t see proof. Please do continue to ignore established, traditional lore that makes a plausible link that Guardians could be interpreted as a nemesis to dragons.

Yep, the traditional lore that gives Knights/Paladins/etc traps and bows to fight Dragons.

Please, do continue to be blind.

You’re right, traditional lore doesn’t dictate they have traps and bows to fight dragons. That’s not relevant to the point I’m making here. If there is any class with a link to dragons in this game based on lore, it’s Guardians.

So? Does that make them the only ones to become “Dragonhunters”?

No, it makes it reasonable that Guardians have a DH spec and name.

I’m sorry it feels like you didn’t even try to answer his question. Does hunting dragons not make it reasonable for a Thief to get DH spec then?

Obtena.7952:

Arrk.4102:

Obtena.7952:

I see opinions, I don’t see proof. Please do continue to ignore established, traditional lore that makes a plausible link that Guardians could be interpreted as a nemesis to dragons.

This is not a traditional world. This is ANet made world. Weren’t you the one who argued that this game is made by ANet and that real-life and rules from other stories don’t apply here?

Sorry, are you going to try to tell me that it’s unreasonable to think Guardians aren’t related to dragons in any way when lore exists to suggest otherwise, then in the other hand, tell me that Anet makes the world as they see fit, which would infer that they can make any relevant theme they want? That’s a great way to ride both sides of the fence. Do you want to have senseless arguments, just PM me.

What lore? Real life fairy tales are not lore.
No, I’m using your argument against you.

What lore? Dude, open a book.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_George_and_the_Dragon

What’s even more funny … people have suggested Crusader as an appropriate name for the elite spec. The link between Guardian and Dragons is NOT as outlandish as people suggest it is.

This is not the Guild Wars lore. Every single person asking for lore reasons were asking for in game reasons. Should I post a story about walking sharks and ask for that race to be included in the game, because, maan, open a book there are tons of those.
Edit: Crusader “-someone who works hard for a long time to achieve something that they strongly believe is morally right” doesn’t really need any story based reasons, it fits both in and out of context.

I find it even funnier how you ignored everything i said.

Obtena.7952:

Sorry, are you going to try to tell me that it’s unreasonable to think Guardians aren’t related to dragons in any way when lore exists to suggest otherwise, then in the other hand, tell me that Anet makes the world as they see fit, which would infer that they can make any relevant theme they want? That’s a great way to ride both sides of the fence. Do you want to have senseless arguments, just PM me.

Yes. The history of the guardian profession is not tied to the dragons in any shape. If you read the old blog posts and interviews, ArenaNet indicates that the guardian’s origins lie with the spread of Elonian paragon teachings via the Order of Whispers. They are never connected to the dragons:

Is there a story behind the Guardian on the lore end of things? Do you have any thoughts on how it came to be?

Jeff Grubb: With the turmoil in Elona and the spread of the Order of Whispers into other lands, more Paragon teaching showed elsewhere in Tyria. These teachings melded with other traditions, and over time, the Guardians and their abilities can be found throughout the world and among all the races. They are not tied to a particular race, philosophy, or group of gods but rather to a larger concept of proactive defense, of taking the fight to a foe and protecting those you fight alongside while appealing equally to humanity’s defensive nature and the Charr’s desire to rule the battlefield.

I think the Guardian is much more of a pragmatic and tactical user of a magic as opposed to an Elementalist, who is a pure student of magic. The Elementalist casts discrete spells, and you have the feeling that there is a heritage and body of knowledge behind those spells. Guardians seem to use magical energy in the heat of combat, from the front line. That sense of immediacy sets the Guardian apart from more traditional spell-casters and allows for a heavily armored magical character.

Macha: It’s a pile of Elonian protection magic, mixed with a little monk training, wrapped up in some crazy ritualist hoo-ha from Cantha. A real grab bag of “you can’t hurt me”. They’re called guardians, and simply put, they mean trouble.

Obtena.7952:

What lore? Dude, open a book.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_George_and_the_Dragon

What’s even more funny … people have suggested Crusader as an appropriate name for the elite spec. The link between Guardian and Dragons is NOT as outlandish as people suggest it is.

LOL
What is that ?
Man you can find ANYTHING you want in myths and legends. You can’t base your whole argumentation on one thing like that.
Taking some examples from other sources can be good to make some parallels or have some references, but it is the professions’ coherence in Tyria that is being discussed. Don’t go too far…

By the way St George can be seen as one particular hero, not the representative of a particular kind of soldier specialized in hunting dragons.

Genesis.8572:

They are never connected to the dragons

Well, they are now. It could even be the genesis something bigger!

zenleto.6179:

Well, they are now.

That was not up for debate. We are all aware of ArenaNet’s forced connection.

It could even be the genesis something bigger!

Yes, the next guardian e-spec can be “bigger game hunter.”

zenleto.6179:

Genesis.8572:

They are never connected to the dragons

Well, they are now. It could even be the genesis something bigger!

We’re all connected to the Dragons, especially Sylvari. Aren’t the ones not affected by Mordremoth, for whatever reason, dragonhunters? Like i said, i’m a Sylvari Thief that has fought dragons, aren’t i a Dragonhunter myself?

Ephemiel.5694:

zenleto.6179:

Genesis.8572:

They are never connected to the dragons

Well, they are now. It could even be the genesis something bigger!

We’re all connected to the Dragons, especially Sylvari. Aren’t the ones not affected by Mordremoth, for whatever reason, dragonhunters? Like i said, i’m a Sylvari Thief that has fought dragons, aren’t i a Dragonhunter myself?

Nah, you’re a Dragonfighter. It’s like a Firefighter, except for Dragons

There is indeed the connection between dragonslaying and knighthood. However then the specialization should be called Knight or Dragonslayer, not a big game hunter called Dragonhunter.
That’s besides the point that, afaik, knights generally did not wield bows so it’s a poor fit anyway.

Ephemiel.5694:

zenleto.6179:

Genesis.8572:

They are never connected to the dragons

Well, they are now. It could even be the genesis something bigger!

We’re all connected to the Dragons, especially Sylvari. Aren’t the ones not affected by Mordremoth, for whatever reason, dragonhunters? Like i said, i’m a Sylvari Thief that has fought dragons, aren’t i a Dragonhunter myself?

No, you’re a Thief that fights dragons. The Guardian I create in the beta will still be a Guardian that has a specialisation in Dragonhunter.

zenleto.6179:

Ephemiel.5694:

zenleto.6179:

Genesis.8572:

They are never connected to the dragons

Well, they are now. It could even be the genesis something bigger!

We’re all connected to the Dragons, especially Sylvari. Aren’t the ones not affected by Mordremoth, for whatever reason, dragonhunters? Like i said, i’m a Sylvari Thief that has fought dragons, aren’t i a Dragonhunter myself?

No, you’re a Thief that fights dragons. The Guardian I create in the beta will still be a Guardian that has a specialisation in Dragonhunter.

Do you realize that you can’t use as an argument the thing that is actually being discussed ? :p

zenleto.6179:

Ephemiel.5694:

zenleto.6179:

Genesis.8572:

They are never connected to the dragons

Well, they are now. It could even be the genesis something bigger!

We’re all connected to the Dragons, especially Sylvari. Aren’t the ones not affected by Mordremoth, for whatever reason, dragonhunters? Like i said, i’m a Sylvari Thief that has fought dragons, aren’t i a Dragonhunter myself?

No, you’re a Thief that fights dragons. The Guardian I create in the beta will still be a Guardian that has a specialisation in Dragonhunter.

What’s the difference between the thief fighting dragons and the guardian doing it? Will DH do more damage against the dragons?

Arrk.4102:

zenleto.6179:

Ephemiel.5694:

zenleto.6179:

Genesis.8572:

They are never connected to the dragons

Well, they are now. It could even be the genesis something bigger!

We’re all connected to the Dragons, especially Sylvari. Aren’t the ones not affected by Mordremoth, for whatever reason, dragonhunters? Like i said, i’m a Sylvari Thief that has fought dragons, aren’t i a Dragonhunter myself?

No, you’re a Thief that fights dragons. The Guardian I create in the beta will still be a Guardian that has a specialisation in Dragonhunter.

What’s the difference between the thief fighting dragons and the guardian doing it? Will DH do more damage against the dragons?

Nothing. One profession will have a spec line and the other wont.

zenleto.6179:

Ephemiel.5694:

zenleto.6179:

Genesis.8572:

They are never connected to the dragons

Well, they are now. It could even be the genesis something bigger!

We’re all connected to the Dragons, especially Sylvari. Aren’t the ones not affected by Mordremoth, for whatever reason, dragonhunters? Like i said, i’m a Sylvari Thief that has fought dragons, aren’t i a Dragonhunter myself?

No, you’re a Thief that fights dragons. The Guardian I create in the beta will still be a Guardian that has a specialisation in Dragonhunter.

That makes so little sense, especially after everything that was talked about here, that i actually facepalmed. It’s obvious you understood NOTHING.

Ephemiel.5694:

zenleto.6179:

Ephemiel.5694:

zenleto.6179:

Genesis.8572:

They are never connected to the dragons

Well, they are now. It could even be the genesis something bigger!

We’re all connected to the Dragons, especially Sylvari. Aren’t the ones not affected by Mordremoth, for whatever reason, dragonhunters? Like i said, i’m a Sylvari Thief that has fought dragons, aren’t i a Dragonhunter myself?

No, you’re a Thief that fights dragons. The Guardian I create in the beta will still be a Guardian that has a specialisation in Dragonhunter.

That makes so little sense, especially after everything that was talked about here, that i actually facepalmed.

After having read this thread since its inception I’m not surprised.

zenleto.6179:

Arrk.4102:

zenleto.6179:

Ephemiel.5694:

zenleto.6179:

Genesis.8572:

They are never connected to the dragons

Well, they are now. It could even be the genesis something bigger!

We’re all connected to the Dragons, especially Sylvari. Aren’t the ones not affected by Mordremoth, for whatever reason, dragonhunters? Like i said, i’m a Sylvari Thief that has fought dragons, aren’t i a Dragonhunter myself?

No, you’re a Thief that fights dragons. The Guardian I create in the beta will still be a Guardian that has a specialisation in Dragonhunter.

What’s the difference between the thief fighting dragons and the guardian doing it? Will DH do more damage against the dragons?

Nothing. One profession will have a spec line and the other wont.

I’m sorry are you arguing for or against the dh name? Apparently being neutral is against the law here.

Saying that the ‘dragonhunter’ is a guardian elite specialization isn’t an argument, nor does it constitute a discussion.

Arrk.4102:

zenleto.6179:

Arrk.4102:

zenleto.6179:

Ephemiel.5694:

zenleto.6179:

Genesis.8572:

They are never connected to the dragons

Well, they are now. It could even be the genesis something bigger!

We’re all connected to the Dragons, especially Sylvari. Aren’t the ones not affected by Mordremoth, for whatever reason, dragonhunters? Like i said, i’m a Sylvari Thief that has fought dragons, aren’t i a Dragonhunter myself?

No, you’re a Thief that fights dragons. The Guardian I create in the beta will still be a Guardian that has a specialisation in Dragonhunter.

What’s the difference between the thief fighting dragons and the guardian doing it? Will DH do more damage against the dragons?

Nothing. One profession will have a spec line and the other wont.

I’m sorry are you arguing for or against the dh name? Apparently being neutral is against the law here.

Just call me Switzerland. I have seen a point to the name since its announcement but I don’t have any strong attachment to actual name itself.

Arrk.4102:

Leo G.4501:

Arrk.4102:

Leo G.4501:

Arrk.4102:

Leo G.4501:

Arrk.4102:

Please tell me what connection does the Guardian have to Dragons, for Draconnier to make sense?

The point is, the devs could have a piece of lore or a story being the name to which is the reason they want to keep the name related to dragons. If that possibility has yet to cross your mind thus being thoughtful of that when giving feedback, I can only assume you’re not being mature enough to compromise.

Draconnier and Dragonbane are not the only suggestions I’ve made, they’re only the ones that relate to dragons if that is an important detail that you’ve just decided to ignore. None the less, I don’t like Dragonhunter for the reasons brought up. Not because I disapprove what story the devs want to tell but how pertinent that story is to individual characters’ stories.

Immature? Nice.
Who said they want to tie the specs to the story? Dragonbane is on par with Dragonhunter imo, and much better than Draconnier.
If the devs had such a lore reason behind the name they would have used it, instead of the “high concept” explanation we got.

Yeah, I would say immature. You think they can release actual storyline to explain it? Or do you just take the explanation that Jon gave (the “high concept”) thing as an insult?

So then I’d further ask you, why you’d think anyone on these forums are important enough for Jon to need to insult. Stop being vain. Jon isn’t insulting anyone, he obviously can’t say much about the expansion.

The statement that it is “high concept” is laughable, never said it was insulting. No one is being insulted or insulting here except you calling me Immature AND vain. I simply said that the high concept excuse doesn’t mean much.

So then you want him to tell about the story of the expansion? Whether you’re insulted or amused, someone’s likely getting insulted. If you can’t accept that they can’t release info like that, I honestly don’t know what else to say…except you’re not going to get the devs to talk by trying to insult them by laughing at them.

Didn’t say the devs were laughable, I said the statement was. Also, again, what does the story got to do with anything. The theme of DH is so uncoordinated that the I really doubt there even was a reason behind it. They just threw some themes they liked and called it a day. If not, someone missed a memo.

Apologies for being blunt but are you being intentionally dense? Or are you just sidestepping the point? The point is, the devs alluded to the name for the Dragonhunter having a deeper concept linked to the lore. There are minor clues, especially considering the cliffhanger for the last season of LS. You’re asking what the story has to do with anything? Do you realize that I don’t know? And do you realize the devs likely are incapable of saying anything about it?

The point is: there could very well BE a strong tie with the Guardian and dragons, stronger than any other profession (since the specs tend to have some kind of link to the gameworld story). With that possibility, making suggestions that try to preserve that link for the spec should be considered.

Clarification: that isn’t to say there is a link at all or that it’s very strong therefore the name must have a dragon theme. I am saying people need to realize that the possibility is there and the nature of that possibility is still unknown.

37 pages and people, somehow, still side on Anet’s side with this.

Screw it, let’s name the Thief spec Dragonstealer, the Engineer: Dragonbuilder and the Ele: Dragon Tempest.

Actually given the Living Story, I would say that the mesmer has a much stronger claim regarding links between the dragons and the professions. Mesmers use chaos magic, which Scarlett links with the elder dragons at least as far back as the Thaumanova Reactor.

Leo G.4501:

Arrk.4102:

Leo G.4501:

Arrk.4102:

Leo G.4501:

Arrk.4102:

Leo G.4501:

Arrk.4102:

Please tell me what connection does the Guardian have to Dragons, for Draconnier to make sense?

The point is, the devs could have a piece of lore or a story being the name to which is the reason they want to keep the name related to dragons. If that possibility has yet to cross your mind thus being thoughtful of that when giving feedback, I can only assume you’re not being mature enough to compromise.

Draconnier and Dragonbane are not the only suggestions I’ve made, they’re only the ones that relate to dragons if that is an important detail that you’ve just decided to ignore. None the less, I don’t like Dragonhunter for the reasons brought up. Not because I disapprove what story the devs want to tell but how pertinent that story is to individual characters’ stories.

Immature? Nice.
Who said they want to tie the specs to the story? Dragonbane is on par with Dragonhunter imo, and much better than Draconnier.
If the devs had such a lore reason behind the name they would have used it, instead of the “high concept” explanation we got.

Yeah, I would say immature. You think they can release actual storyline to explain it? Or do you just take the explanation that Jon gave (the “high concept”) thing as an insult?

So then I’d further ask you, why you’d think anyone on these forums are important enough for Jon to need to insult. Stop being vain. Jon isn’t insulting anyone, he obviously can’t say much about the expansion.

The statement that it is “high concept” is laughable, never said it was insulting. No one is being insulted or insulting here except you calling me Immature AND vain. I simply said that the high concept excuse doesn’t mean much.

So then you want him to tell about the story of the expansion? Whether you’re insulted or amused, someone’s likely getting insulted. If you can’t accept that they can’t release info like that, I honestly don’t know what else to say…except you’re not going to get the devs to talk by trying to insult them by laughing at them.

Didn’t say the devs were laughable, I said the statement was. Also, again, what does the story got to do with anything. The theme of DH is so uncoordinated that the I really doubt there even was a reason behind it. They just threw some themes they liked and called it a day. If not, someone missed a memo.

Apologies for being blunt but are you being intentionally dense? Or are you just sidestepping the point? The point is, the devs alluded to the name for the Dragonhunter having a deeper concept linked to the lore. There are minor clues, especially considering the cliffhanger for the last season of LS. You’re asking what the story has to do with anything? Do you realize that I don’t know? And do you realize the devs likely are incapable of saying anything about it?

The point is: there could very well BE a strong tie with the Guardian and dragons, stronger than any other profession (since the specs tend to have some kind of link to the gameworld story). With that possibility, making suggestions that try to preserve that link for the spec should be considered.

Clarification: that isn’t to say there is a link at all or that it’s very strong therefore the name must have a dragon theme. I am saying people need to realize that the possibility is there and the nature of that possibility is still unknown.

The story could also make a Waffleslinger spec make sense. The matter of fact is, we don’t know. If we did, this would be a whole ‘nother discussion. But we do not know, so we ignore it, for the sake of discussion.
I mean, the story could make the player characters turn into dragons. It’s a possibility. But we ignore that because we don’t know. We use what we know, and what we know has no link between Guardian and Dragons.

Ephemiel.5694:

37 pages and people, somehow, still side on Anet’s side with this.

It’s easy to do. Despite the name-haters desire to convince people otherwise, ironically with ‘thematically inconsistencies’ and ‘lore’, there is very old, well established tradition of associating knightly character types as the nemesis to dragons. It’s not Anet’s fail for acknowledging this and borrowing on the idea. It’s a real thing, there is lots of cultural and historical references to it. Hell, there’s a kids show about it. Even my son associates knights as dragon hunters; he’s 6. It’s not a far fetched idea. If individuals can’t acknowledge this link, they are being disingenuous and have little reason to be listened to.