Guild Wars 2

RabbitUp.8294:

AikunFelcis.7258:

RabbitUp.8294:

AikunFelcis.7258:

cough Reaper shroud turns you into Grim Reaper, the avatar of death with big scythe, you are also able to chill people in fear. Everything fits perfectly with the Reaper. cough

Sure, let’s conveniently ignore the greatsword and the shouts, you know, the actual substance of the elite spec and solely focus on the profession mechanic.

I mean, the utilities could be turrets and the weapon a rifle, but it all fits perfectly, because big kitten scythe.

Greatsword fits, they made attacks feel heavy and devastating + chilling enemies in fear, you can use Scythe or Greatsword to deliver killing blow. Skills like “Gravedigger” or “Reaper’s Grasp” give nice flavor. It’s very fiting. The Reaper is just named after core mechanic you say? Then what about dragonhunter? Using your logic here like with the Reaper, there is nothing in the skills/mechanic in dragonhunter that justify it’s name! I see you chose conveniently to ignore the rest of my previous post. I have to quote myself to remind you. Any answer to this? Do I wrongly assume that consistency is important?

That’s the second time you completely ignore the shouts. Reaper as a name gives no indication what the spec is getting, outside of the class mechanic. No, greatswords and shouting have nothing to do with the Grim Reaper.

If your only justification is that greatswords are big and scary, then any horror fantasy archetype fits the bill just as good, if not better, than Reaper.

Even if you think there’s no much of a link between a Guardian and a Dragonhunter, it’s more than easy to see why a Dragonhunter would use a longbow and traps.

Yeah, Aikun, shouts are specifically more like the wails of a banshee, and the greatsword is more like a weapon for a wraith. Reapers traditional use the scythe exclusively, no swords or anything else for that matter (maybe a lantern?). You can’t, in the same breath, praise the Reaper class for these things and dismiss the Dragonhunter class for the same reasons.

However, much like how I don’t have an issue with the DH (except how the traps wouldn’t work too well on dragons), I also don’t have any issues with what the Reaper is. These classes are allowed to be a bit unconventional, and the “realistic traditionalist” approach is not the one to take for this.

Farzo.8410:

The story how the dragonhunter came to be is a long one with a lot of anger, sadness and a will of justice.

I lol’d.

Farzo.8410:

The story how the dragonhunter came to be is a long one with a lot of anger, sadness and a will of justice.

And, in at least one case, the Tyrian equivalent of Pym particles.

Nike.2631:

1. In what universe have you EVER heard of “Inquisitors” being associated with bows? Questioner/Interrogator archetypes work up close where they can talk. Whisper even. Not “Hey -twang- you -thwip- confess! -pew pew-”…
2. Look at that picture. IT’S NOT GOING TO CHANGE. Does that look like an inquisitor you?

I think the way people are thinking, the Dragonhunter is a more “support” kind of offense. Not support as in boons but support as in supplementary offensive element capable of doing its thing at any distance. In that instance, an Inquisitor, at least to me, seems the type to be all “So I hear you’ve got some interesting artifacts in the back…~non-verbal cue to one of his brutes to go and check around~ Hey! Don’t you move! My men will come bearing down on you so fast, it’ll make your head spin…that is if you can manage to stand if you take one more step. ~glares sternly~ I’ve got wards and traps all around. It’s too late to fight back so just yield and tell us what we want to know.”

I see it more like an intellectual and ‘cautious’ version of a Guardian in my head since the Guard will just thwap you down to get what he needs, the ‘DH’ will more or less lead you along and strike when he’s got the proper opening. In which case, the bow isn’t so much a means to an end but like a symbol to indicate there is no real escape.

That’s just how I see it. I like the name Inquisitor and if it were used, I can see it being more or less a title rather than just a spec…but then I’m seeing all the elite specs that way now. The reaper isn’t a Reaper, it’s a Reaper Necromancer. A Chronomancer isn’t a Chronomancer but a Mesmer Chronomancer. So an Inquisitor would be like a Golemancer Inquisitor or Inquest Inquisitor or a White Mantle Inquisitor so a Guardian would be a Guardian Inquisitor (whose goals seem to lie in-line with dragons and their corruption).

That all said, if that doesn’t work, Exorcist might work. Of course, you have to separate the term from Catholic demon exorcising or somehow link that type of mentality to the dragons or whatever. Just watch d.grayman and that might help

RabbitUp.8294:

Valmir.4590:

Dragonhunter isn’t an actual word either. Dragon Hunter are two actual words, and it would already be better.

Separating it into 2 words would make absolutely no difference. You can’t compare Dragonhunter, composed of 2 recognizable words, to Dragoneer, which doesn’t really mean anything.

It does! It makes a world of difference! In English, putting two words together makes a word a compound word and such words tend to make something only partially related to the original words. Consider these words:

Fireworks
Toothpaste
Backside

Separating them makes something completely different or indicates something else (i.e. Toothpaste is paste for your teeth while Tooth paste is paste made out of teeth). But the point is, the devs are compounding both words’ meanings when they really should have just tried making a new meaning only relating partially to either word. A Dragon Hunter IS a hunter who hunts dragons, so what is a Dragonhunter? Apparently the same thing, but he’s also a zealous inquisitor who’s trying to stamp out anything dragon related (i.e. witch hunter)…and also an actual hunter who’s after game (big game hunter)?

They should have been far more specific of what a Dragonhunter is…and likely they could have made up a far nicer sounding word (Dragonhunter is a made up word) and define it as whatever they wanted. It’s all too easy.

MiniEquine.6014:

RabbitUp.8294:

AikunFelcis.7258:

RabbitUp.8294:

AikunFelcis.7258:

cough Reaper shroud turns you into Grim Reaper, the avatar of death with big scythe, you are also able to chill people in fear. Everything fits perfectly with the Reaper. cough

Sure, let’s conveniently ignore the greatsword and the shouts, you know, the actual substance of the elite spec and solely focus on the profession mechanic.

I mean, the utilities could be turrets and the weapon a rifle, but it all fits perfectly, because big kitten scythe.

Greatsword fits, they made attacks feel heavy and devastating + chilling enemies in fear, you can use Scythe or Greatsword to deliver killing blow. Skills like “Gravedigger” or “Reaper’s Grasp” give nice flavor. It’s very fiting. The Reaper is just named after core mechanic you say? Then what about dragonhunter? Using your logic here like with the Reaper, there is nothing in the skills/mechanic in dragonhunter that justify it’s name! I see you chose conveniently to ignore the rest of my previous post. I have to quote myself to remind you. Any answer to this? Do I wrongly assume that consistency is important?

That’s the second time you completely ignore the shouts. Reaper as a name gives no indication what the spec is getting, outside of the class mechanic. No, greatswords and shouting have nothing to do with the Grim Reaper.

If your only justification is that greatswords are big and scary, then any horror fantasy archetype fits the bill just as good, if not better, than Reaper.

Even if you think there’s no much of a link between a Guardian and a Dragonhunter, it’s more than easy to see why a Dragonhunter would use a longbow and traps.

Yeah, Aikun, shouts are specifically more like the wails of a banshee, and the greatsword is more like a weapon for a wraith. Reapers traditional use the scythe exclusively, no swords or anything else for that matter (maybe a lantern?). You can’t, in the same breath, praise the Reaper class for these things and dismiss the Dragonhunter class for the same reasons.

However, much like how I don’t have an issue with the DH (except how the traps wouldn’t work too well on dragons), I also don’t have any issues with what the Reaper is. These classes are allowed to be a bit unconventional, and the “realistic traditionalist” approach is not the one to take for this.

One also has to consider this major fact: We don’t have scythe weapons.

It’s really that simple. We’re likely not getting scythes in this game besides a few skins/abilities and the Reaper will have the most prominent version. As for the Greatsword, it’s the closest analog to a scythe in this game. Just because a Reaper in other media only use a scythe doesn’t mean Tyria’s Reaper can only use a scythe.

As for the shouts, considering they tend to affect foes, it falls in line with the Necromancer’s motif.

Lastly, this is likely the only heavy melee spec the Necromancer is going to ever get and perhaps that’s what they wanted to portray the reaper as: a heavy death dealer who uses heavy weapons. What other heavy weapon exists in the game that’s closest to a scythe?

I still like Warden. Short, simple, has protective and hunter undertones.

Leo G.4501:

One also has to consider this major fact: We don’t have scythe weapons.

It’s really that simple. We’re likely not getting scythes in this game besides a few skins/abilities and the Reaper will have the most prominent version. As for the Greatsword, it’s the closest analog to a scythe in this game. Just because a Reaper in other media only use a scythe doesn’t mean Tyria’s Reaper can only use a scythe.

As for the shouts, considering they tend to affect foes, it falls in line with the Necromancer’s motif.

Lastly, this is likely the only heavy melee spec the Necromancer is going to ever get and perhaps that’s what they wanted to portray the reaper as: a heavy death dealer who uses heavy weapons. What other heavy weapon exists in the game that’s closest to a scythe?

They didn’t have to name it “Reaper”. If the fantasy of a Reaper doesn’t work given the limitations of the game, and the condition that no new weapon or skill types will be made for the elite specs, then don’t name it that.

As for the shouts, considering they tend to affect foes, it falls in line with the Necromancer’s motif."

If this is a convincing argument for you, then Dragonhunter’s traps all have pretty blue lights and chains made out of light, so they fit the Guardian perfectly.

RabbitUp.8294:

Leo G.4501:

One also has to consider this major fact: We don’t have scythe weapons.

It’s really that simple. We’re likely not getting scythes in this game besides a few skins/abilities and the Reaper will have the most prominent version. As for the Greatsword, it’s the closest analog to a scythe in this game. Just because a Reaper in other media only use a scythe doesn’t mean Tyria’s Reaper can only use a scythe.

As for the shouts, considering they tend to affect foes, it falls in line with the Necromancer’s motif.

Lastly, this is likely the only heavy melee spec the Necromancer is going to ever get and perhaps that’s what they wanted to portray the reaper as: a heavy death dealer who uses heavy weapons. What other heavy weapon exists in the game that’s closest to a scythe?

They didn’t have to name it “Reaper”. If the fantasy of a Reaper doesn’t work given the limitations of the game, and the condition that no new weapon or skill types will be made for the elite specs, then don’t name it that.

But it does work. It just works differently. It’s not like the Reaper doesn’t get a scythe, on the contrary. It is the Necromancer spec that gets it by default no matter what weapon you decide to use.

RabbitUp.8294:

As for the shouts, considering they tend to affect foes, it falls in line with the Necromancer’s motif."

If this is a convincing argument for you, then Dragonhunter’s traps all have pretty blue lights and chains made out of light, so they fit the Guardian perfectly.

I never said they didn’t. Calling them traps might be rather farfetched though. Could have just gave them some other type name. If Wards and Symbols is out of line, and Runes are already used, perhaps Marks.

My problem has always been the aspect of the spec being tied to “big game hunting” which then leaves it open to incorporate other definitions of what hunters do which Guardian really doesn’t embody.

RabbitUp.8294:

As for the shouts, considering they tend to affect foes, it falls in line with the Necromancer’s motif."

If this is a convincing argument for you, then Dragonhunter’s traps all have pretty blue lights and chains made out of light, so they fit the Guardian perfectly.

AoE debuff shouts on necromancers vs DPS/condition traps on guardians. The former seems much more appropriate for its respective class considering that necromancers are known fairly well for debuffing.

The whole Witch hunter thing was mentioned after and it was mentioned incredibly poorly. Anet said the Dragonhunter was based on big game hunters.

RabbitUp.8294:

Leo G.4501:

As for the shouts, considering they tend to affect foes, it falls in line with the Necromancer’s motif."

If this is a convincing argument for you, then Dragonhunter’s traps all have pretty blue lights and chains made out of light, so they fit the Guardian perfectly.

My issue with the traps isn’t that they don’t fit the theme. My issue is that traps in general are based on terrible mechanics and I would rather take literally any other utility set.

Leo G.4501:

But it does work. It just works differently. It’s not like the Reaper doesn’t get a scythe, on the contrary. It is the Necromancer spec that gets it by default no matter what weapon you decide to use.

If you can be this lenient about Reaper, be lenient about all specs. The truth remains that the same argument you are using could have been used to support a rifle/turret Reaper.

My problem has always been the aspect of the spec being tied to “big game hunting” which then leaves it open to incorporate other definitions of what hunters do which Guardian really doesn’t embody.

This whole “big game hunter” has gotten out of hand. The concept was that they are witch hunters morality-wise, hunting down the big bad thing of Tyria (dragons and their minions) and since dragons are big, their style and tools are similar to those of a big game hunter. It was the inspiration behind the spec, not the one phrase to define them.

Reapers were likened to Jason Voorhees, but I didn’t see anyone pointing out the differences and asking for a mask*. Or question their motives and whether they match Jason’s. It’s the same thing, the inspiration behind it and no more, give it a rest.

*We do have this, though, and it works pretty well: https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Acolyte_Mask

Fashion Mage.3712:

AoE debuff shouts on necromancers vs DPS/condition traps on guardians. The former seems much more appropriate for its respective class considering that necromancers are known fairly well for debuffing.

Black Box.9312:

My issue with the traps isn’t that they don’t fit the theme. My issue is that traps in general are based on terrible mechanics and I would rather take literally any other utility set.

“Dragon Hunter” name feedback

Incidentally, Necromancers complain a lot more than Guardians ever did about their spec, mechanics-wise. And that’s an objectively bigger issue than how cool or fitting the name is for either class.

Not to mention you are supporting Shouts being one more of the same thing the class already has, when specs were about getting something new.

RabbitUp.8294:

Leo G.4501:

But it does work. It just works differently. It’s not like the Reaper doesn’t get a scythe, on the contrary. It is the Necromancer spec that gets it by default no matter what weapon you decide to use.

If you can be this lenient about Reaper, be lenient about all specs. The truth remains that the same argument you are using could have been used to support a rifle/turret Reaper.

My problem has always been the aspect of the spec being tied to “big game hunting” which then leaves it open to incorporate other definitions of what hunters do which Guardian really doesn’t embody.

This whole “big game hunter” has gotten out of hand. The concept was that they are witch hunters morality-wise, hunting down the big bad thing of Tyria (dragons and their minions) and since dragons are big, their style and tools are similar to those of a big game hunter. It was the inspiration behind the spec, not the one phrase to define them.

Reapers were likened to Jason Voorhees, but I didn’t see anyone pointing out the differences and asking for a mask. Or question their motives and whether they match Jason’s. It’s the same thing, the inspiration behind it and no more, give it a rest.

No, they originally said that they were based on big game hunters. They started saying the witch hunter thing afterwards when people realized it was stupid.

There’s just nothing about the Guardian that fits it. That’s like saying a Paladin would suddenly become an Archer/Hunter/Ranger/etc because there’s a huge threat. WHY?

Weighing in with my 2 cents, if they’re worth anything. Bear in mind I don’t even have a Guardian and will never play one.

- I don’t like the name

- The story that the Devs have given behind the name is too obscure for players who haven’t already read into it to figure out, and particularly new players

- Every player in the game regardless of profession is, or has been, a dragonhunter

- I’m left wondering why, out of a list of a dozen other suitable names (like Tempest, Paragon, Divine, Bulwark) that fit the theme, the Devs had to choose one so unnecessarily obscure.

Yea, lets not get this thread locked, its about the name feedback of the dragon hunter,not the mechanics of Reaper or even Dragonhunter. Please dont get it locked like the other one.

RabbitUp.8294:

Leo G.4501:

But it does work. It just works differently. It’s not like the Reaper doesn’t get a scythe, on the contrary. It is the Necromancer spec that gets it by default no matter what weapon you decide to use.

If you can be this lenient about Reaper, be lenient about all specs. The truth remains that the same argument you are using could have been used to support a rifle/turret Reaper.

I am being lenient! That doesn’t make Dragonhunter a good, fitting or cool sounding name. I don’t think it’s good because it doesn’t fit Guardian’s themes, I don’t think it’s fitting because it’s trying to fit too much context into a loaded name and it’s not cool sounding because it’s trying to ride on the coat tails of the Demon hunter, Vampire hunter, Ghost hunter, Witch hunter motif but fails to sound as cool.

I just want them to use the name they came up with themselves: Draconnier. How is that not being lenient?

RabbitUp.8294:

My problem has always been the aspect of the spec being tied to “big game hunting” which then leaves it open to incorporate other definitions of what hunters do which Guardian really doesn’t embody.

This whole “big game hunter” has gotten out of hand. The concept was that they are witch hunters morality-wise, hunting down the big bad thing of Tyria (dragons and their minions) and since dragons are big, their style and tools are similar to those of a big game hunter. It was the inspiration behind the spec, not the one phrase to define them.

You’re making assumptions. I’m simply going by what the devs told us. Big game hunter was the inspiration AND it’s the name of a trait. The point is, big game hunters hunt for a reason and that reason isn’t Justice. So why mention it at all?

RabbitUp.8294:

Reapers were likened to Jason Voorhees, but I didn’t see anyone pointing out the differences and asking for a mask. Or question their motives and whether they match Jason’s. It’s the same thing, the inspiration behind it and no more, give it a rest.

And there’s no Jason Voorhees trait in there. Also, there’s no Jason Voorhees loaded motive to why the Reaper does what he does. The only resemblence is that the Reaper is slow, emphasized by the speed of its attacks.

RabbitUp.8294:

“Dragon Hunter” name feedback

Get off your high horse, I was only saying that my argument against the name is unrelated to the traps.

Ephemiel.5694:

No, they originally said that they were based on big game hunters. They started saying the witch hunter thing afterwards when people realized it was stupid.

Yes, they are based on big game hunters. Like Reapers are based on Jason Voorhees and the Pyramid Head.

To be based on something doesn’t mean that something is a perfect parallel.

There’s just nothing about the Guardian that fits it. That’s like saying a Paladin would suddenly become an Archer/Hunter/Ranger/etc because there’s a huge threat. WHY?

For the same reason a Master Illusionist starts controlling the flow of time.

RabbitUp.8294:

Ephemiel.5694:

No, they originally said that they were based on big game hunters. They started saying the witch hunter thing afterwards when people realized it was stupid.

Yes, they are based on big game hunters. Like Reapers are based on Jason Voorhees and the Pyramid Head.

To be based on something doesn’t mean that something is a perfect parallel.

There’s just nothing about the Guardian that fits it. That’s like saying a Paladin would suddenly become an Archer/Hunter/Ranger/etc because there’s a huge threat. WHY?

For the same reason a Master Illusionist starts controlling the flow of time.

You mean the same Illusionist that already had control of time?
https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Time_Warp

Now please, tell me what does the Guardian have to do with being a Dragonhunter out of nowhere.

Black Box.9312:

RabbitUp.8294:

“Dragon Hunter” name feedback

Get off your high horse, I was only saying that my argument against the name is unrelated to the traps.

So, why would you respond to me who was talking with another poster about traps? If you felt the need to make your opinion known without adding anything to the conversation, I’m not the one ridding a high horse.

RabbitUp.8294:

Not to mention you are supporting Shouts being one more of the same thing the class already has, when specs were about getting something new.

The point of specializations was to allow one to specialize in a certain aspect of the class, and at the same time was supposed to offer something new yet fitting for the base class. This is the case with reapers and chronomancers. For example, reapers do what necromancers do except strictly at close-range with an emphasis on the chill condition. Dragonhunters being ranger wannabes with extra control is the opposite of “specialization”; for the most part it’s a lot more like a jack-of-all-trades spec that completely disregards the base class and goes off on its own tangent. This is especially the case with the DH’s traps.

I’d also like to, again, describe another point of discontent about the name:

Dragonhunter is a made up word! Dragonhunter isn’t a word, Demonhunter isn’t a word, Witchhunter isn’t a word. It’s Witch Hunter. It’s Demon Hunter. It’s Dragon Hunter. I do not like Dragonhunter because they had to make up a weird word that doesn’t roll off the tongue just to fit their “one-word name” format, attempt to use the motif of Witch Hunter to make it interesting them try to cram the the theme of a hunter in there to justify the bow and traps.

There are so many better motifs for holy/light wielding archers that could have been used and a better “made up” word could be used to name it. There’s really little to refute here. Of course, if you like the name then you like it. Still doesn’t mean what I mentioned isn’t occurring here.

Leo G.4501:

You’re making assumptions. I’m simply going by what the devs told us. Big game hunter was the inspiration AND it’s the name of a trait. The point is, big game hunters hunt for a reason and that reason isn’t Justice. So why mention it at all?

Because it was a source of inspiration. You are the one who keeps making it bigger than that. No dev made a connection between Dragonhunters and the motivation of a big game hunter.

And since when the name of an optional trait defines the morality of a class?

And there’s no Jason Voorhees trait in there. Also, there’s no Jason Voorhees loaded motive to why the Reaper does what he does. The only resemblence is that the Reaper is slow, emphasized by the speed of its attacks.

So, you are ok taking only relevant characteristics from an existing fantasy figure, but when it comes to big game hunter, it’s all or nothing, huh?

Jason Voorhees has a lot more strongly defined motives than a person hunting a giraffe.

RabbitUp.8294:

Leo G.4501:

You’re making assumptions. I’m simply going by what the devs told us. Big game hunter was the inspiration AND it’s the name of a trait. The point is, big game hunters hunt for a reason and that reason isn’t Justice. So why mention it at all?

Because it was a source of inspiration. You are the one who keeps making it bigger than that. No dev made a connection between Dragonhunters and the motivation of a big game hunter.

And since when the name of an optional trait defines the morality of a class?

When they put that motivation into words as described by them. Granted, if I make a Guardian and spec him as a Dragonhunter, I don’t have to have his motivation align with the lore behind the meaning of the Dragonhunters, but that isn’t implied even by the name! The name pretty much says “you’re hunting dragons!”. Sure, I can ignore that, but as a roleplayer, why not make the story malleable? I shouldn’t have to try to shoehorn a very simple theme/character into the lore because the devs puts brickwalls everywhere.

A good GM gives a sturdy structure for your characters to interact with but also broad enough or malleable enough to work with most’s goals.

RabbitUp.8294:

Jason Voorhees has a lot more strongly defined motives than a person hunting a giraffe.

No where is it implied the Reaper’s motives align with any of the movie blockbuster killers. Only the style of their attacks. But most importantly, none of that is reflected in game.

If the devs want to erase all mention of “big game hunting” and really, hunting in general but leave the idea of what a hunter does, that would go a LOOOONG way to fixing everything! Draconnier! Light wielding Guardians who developed techniques to use their abilites at any range! Using knowledge from ancient Dragon Hunters and Slayers to guide their development! They use their wards, marks, symbols and their sense of Justice to aid their order and allies in facing down threats and hunting down dragons! They are driven! Perhaps too driven, some might say…[segway into the darker stuff!]

Farzo.8410:

The story how the dragonhunter came to be is a long one with a lot of anger, sadness and a will of justice.

Made me laugh – ty

=)

minbariguy.7504:

Gotta say, “Dragon Hunter” is a pretty boring and uninspired name, especially in a game where practically everyone is hunting dragons. Seems kinda phoned in.

But hey, if they’re that confident that no other name could possibly be better than the one they picked, even considering the high volume of feedback to the contrary, then they must be right. Because, reasons. And metrics. And stuff.

I liked this so much I’m reposting it.

Ephemiel.5694:

RabbitUp.8294:

Ephemiel.5694:

No, they originally said that they were based on big game hunters. They started saying the witch hunter thing afterwards when people realized it was stupid.

Yes, they are based on big game hunters. Like Reapers are based on Jason Voorhees and the Pyramid Head.

To be based on something doesn’t mean that something is a perfect parallel.

There’s just nothing about the Guardian that fits it. That’s like saying a Paladin would suddenly become an Archer/Hunter/Ranger/etc because there’s a huge threat. WHY?

For the same reason a Master Illusionist starts controlling the flow of time.

You mean the same Illusionist that already had control of time?
https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Time_Warp

Now please, tell me what does the Guardian have to do with being a Dragonhunter out of nowhere.

Also, there’s a huge trope of the illusionist to control the perception of time. It occurs in movies, books, anime…it’s not farfetched for the Mesmer. In fact, it’s already backed by lore that Chaos magic has the ability to alter space/time.

Guys please do not make me defend the abomination that is the Dragonhunter, but I will if you keep bringing up the even worse Draconnier. I think problem is relating the class with Dragons than with Hunting.
Guardian → Hunter makes sense, kinda, in the way that instead of using all that defensive zeal and focus to make it offensive.
Guardian → Dragon makes no sense, because there is nothing related to dragons, at all.

RabbitUp.8294:

Black Box.9312:

RabbitUp.8294:

“Dragon Hunter” name feedback

Get off your high horse, I was only saying that my argument against the name is unrelated to the traps.

So, why would you respond to me who was talking with another poster about traps? If you felt the need to make your opinion known without adding anything to the conversation, I’m not the one ridding a high horse.

Because it was meant to point out the fact that that argument isn’t relevant to everyone. There are plenty of reasons to not like the name that have nothing to do with the traps.

Arrk.4102:

Guys please do not make me defend the abomination that is the Dragonhunter, but I will if you keep bringing up the even worse Draconnier. I think problem is relating the class with Dragons than with Hunting.
Guardian -> Hunter makes sense, kinda, in the way that instead of using all that defensive zeal and focus to make it offensive.
Guardian -> Dragon makes no sense, because there is nothing related to dragons, at all.

Please don’t defend the abomination that is Dragonhunter by saying it makes sense for them to be Hunters because they use all of their defensive zeal and focus on the offensive.

At least Draconnier is so stupid, and so close to Engineer, that it’d make people laugh.

Come on Rabbit… I could take every of your posts and find at least one thing that, to me (and others considering how they’re replying), is incredibly wrong. And sometimes even objectively wrong.
The more I read what you say, the more I realize you just have different ways of thinking. VERY different sometimes. Just an example : don’t expect to convince us that the Reaper is as much ftting Necromancer as Dragonhunter fits Guardian. None of your arguments about that feel right to me.
But guess what ? That’s not a problem, it’s fine.

You’ve been saying that we should try to be objective, so you’re trying to make your own arguments look objective. But they’re not that much. It’s all about your personal way of understanding things. And you know what ? There’s no problem about that !
The whole point of the thread is to tell if we like the name (and the theme, because they’re linked together) or not, and then give our reasons IF we want to. Because giving reasons lets Arenanet identify where things maybe went wrong, or what doesn’t please us. But it’s not about giving 100% objective arguments !
The most important thing is to tell how you feel about that name. Then feel free to explain why… Everybody will have his own explanation and way of thinking. There are some people here who are against the name and theme, just like me, but for quite different reasons sometimes.

But please, stop believing you’re giving perfectly objective and irrefutable arguments…

Also, don’t go into mechanical discussions too much, because we’re not discussing how the spec works, it’s quite off topic.

Ephemiel.5694:

Arrk.4102:

Guys please do not make me defend the abomination that is the Dragonhunter, but I will if you keep bringing up the even worse Draconnier. I think problem is relating the class with Dragons than with Hunting.
Guardian -> Hunter makes sense, kinda, in the way that instead of using all that defensive zeal and focus to make it offensive.
Guardian -> Dragon makes no sense, because there is nothing related to dragons, at all.

Please don’t defend the abomination that is Dragonhunter by saying it makes sense for them to be Hunters because they use all of their defensive zeal and focus on the offensive.

At least Draconnier is so stupid, and so close to Engineer, that it’d make people laugh.

Draconnier is so stupid it makes Dragonhunter make sense.

Arrk.4102:

Ephemiel.5694:

Arrk.4102:

Guys please do not make me defend the abomination that is the Dragonhunter, but I will if you keep bringing up the even worse Draconnier. I think problem is relating the class with Dragons than with Hunting.
Guardian -> Hunter makes sense, kinda, in the way that instead of using all that defensive zeal and focus to make it offensive.
Guardian -> Dragon makes no sense, because there is nothing related to dragons, at all.

Please don’t defend the abomination that is Dragonhunter by saying it makes sense for them to be Hunters because they use all of their defensive zeal and focus on the offensive.

At least Draconnier is so stupid, and so close to Engineer, that it’d make people laugh.

Draconnier is so stupid it makes Dragonhunter make sense.

Dragonhunter is so stupid that we ended up thinking of Draconnier, which is so stupid that it makes the stupid Dragonhunter make sense.

See how bad this is Anet?

Ephemiel.5694:

Please don’t defend the abomination that is Dragonhunter by saying it makes sense for them to be Hunters because they use all of their defensive zeal and focus on the offensive.

Yeah, I agree.
I can see why he’s saying that though. But it’s not working, because it would mean that we can consider a Necromancer as some kind of defensive archetype because he’s able to kill and control ennemies… And so does a double axe/hammer Warrior. Not it’s not what we can call a supportive archetype.
The Dragonhunter actually has that supportive aspect mechanically, but it’s clearly not reflected by its name and its theme.

Ojyh.9842:

Ephemiel.5694:

Please don’t defend the abomination that is Dragonhunter by saying it makes sense for them to be Hunters because they use all of their defensive zeal and focus on the offensive.

Yeah, I agree.
I can see why he’s saying that though. But it’s not working, because it would mean that we can consider a Necromancer as some kind of defensive archetype because he’s able to kill and control ennemies… And so does a double axe/hammer Warrior. Not it’s not what we can call a supportive archetype.
The Dragonhunter actually has that supportive aspect mechanically, but it’s clearly not reflected by its name and its theme.

Oh yeah, no, I have been vehemently against Dragonhunter from day 1, and my post history reflects that, I’m just saying that Draconnier is even worse and I have been trying to justify the unjustifiable in any way possible.

Arrk.4102:

Guys please do not make me defend the abomination that is the Dragonhunter, but I will if you keep bringing up the even worse Draconnier. I think problem is relating the class with Dragons than with Hunting.
Guardian -> Hunter makes sense, kinda, in the way that instead of using all that defensive zeal and focus to make it offensive.
Guardian -> Dragon makes no sense, because there is nothing related to dragons, at all.

Go ahead and defend it then. I’ll still make it look the inferior choice.

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

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.

Arrk.4102:

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

Dragons are large, bulky, annoying creatures with bad breath.

So are guardians!

@Leo G: Every class has lore that would back up the class being linked to dragons.

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.

Kury.8210:

Arrk.4102:

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

Dragons are large, bulky, annoying creatures with bad breath.

So are guardians!

My Guardian has minty breath thanks to Healing Breeze.

Leo G.4501:

No where is it implied the Reaper’s motives align with any of the movie blockbuster killers. Only the style of their attacks. But most importantly, none of that is reflected in game.

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.

And you can’t say it is reflected in the game because it’s the name of an optional trait. That’s as far-fetched of an argument as it gets. An entire profession is called Thief, yet nobody even though to suggest their motives in-game should align with real life thieves.

Ojyh.9842:

don’t expect to convince us that the Reaper is as much ftting Necromancer as Dragonhunter fits Guardian.

I never said that. Don’t try to judge my opinion if you can’t even understand it. In fact, I said the exact opposite, that neither name fits that well and that the same arguments people here use to reject Dragonhunter can be just as easily applied to Reaper.

But please, stop believing you’re giving perfectly objective and irrefutable arguments…

What makes you think I believe that?

Also, don’t go into mechanical discussions too much, because we’re not discussing how the spec works, it’s quite off topic.

This has to be a joke. I was the one that asked people to stay on the topic of discussing the name in the first place.

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

RabbitUp.8294:

Leo G.4501:

No where is it implied the Reaper’s motives align with any of the movie blockbuster killers. Only the style of their attacks. But most importantly, none of that is reflected in game.

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.

Welcome, friends. I’m Karl McLain, and today we’ll be talking about the guardian’s new elite specialisation: the dragonhunter—a ferocious big-game hunter that specialises in ranged combat and back-line support.

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.

Obtena.7952:

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

How do you suggest we reach that point? This very thread of 15 people can’t agree on a name, how do you pick a name the majority of the community likes?

Arrk.4102:

Welcome, friends. I’m Karl McLain, and today we’ll be talking about the guardian’s new elite specialisation: the dragonhunter—a ferocious big-game hunter that specialises in ranged combat and back-line support.

I don’t see anything about no motives.

RabbitUp.8294:

Obtena.7952:

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

How do you suggest we reach that point? This very thread of 15 people can’t agree on a name, how do you pick a name the majority of the community likes?

Arrk.4102:

Welcome, friends. I’m Karl McLain, and today we’ll be talking about the guardian’s new elite specialisation: the dragonhunter—a ferocious big-game hunter that specialises in ranged combat and back-line support.

I don’t see anything about no motives.

So, he’s a big-game hunter without the motives of a big-game hunter? 0.o

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.

Personally I like names based on carrying out justice myself:

Executor
Judge