Guild Wars 2

ranger with no pet

DevilLordLaser.8619:

I get that it’s not good English, and I would’ve preferred Dragon Hunter myself. However, ArenaNet has had a very long-standing tradition of one-word class names they’re clearly unwilling to break. Give me a better idea for a proactive, righteous hunter of bad things – an actually better idea, not just Guardian with different letters – and we’ll talk.

I have yet to see one.

I support Avenger as genesis does
along with some good ideas put forth by Tachenon such as Pathfinder, Wayfarer, and Visionary.

We Need a one word name, or at the very least a word that is partially merged to get catchy, DragonHunter just sound like something Duct taped togather in a hurry.

Eh why not Serpent Seeker. It has two S’s

Valkyrie is a cool name? Yes. Definitely.
Does it suits the class? Nope.

Also,I think I’ve never seen Valkyrie used as class name. Mainly because Valkyries are female,so if a game actually let you create a Valkyrie,it must be one of those games where the class is gender restricted.

Harvest.2506:

DevilLordLaser.8619:

I get that it’s not good English, and I would’ve preferred Dragon Hunter myself. However, ArenaNet has had a very long-standing tradition of one-word class names they’re clearly unwilling to break. Give me a better idea for a proactive, righteous hunter of bad things – an actually better idea, not just Guardian with different letters – and we’ll talk.

I have yet to see one.

I support Avenger as genesis does
along with some good ideas put forth by Tachenon such as Pathfinder, Wayfarer, and Visionary.

We Need a one word name, or at the very least a word that is partially merged to get catchy, DragonHunter just sound like something Duct taped togather in a hurry.

Well what if the lore behind the new spec has nothing to do with Eir, Braham or any particular people dying?

Windu The Forbidden One.6045:

‘Ranger’ would have made more sense though lmao.

When I heard Dragonhunter, I immediately thought of Ranger. Being a pet/hunter type class, I could see the connection of hunting a dragon as a specialization for the Ranger class.

I see absolutely no connection between Dragonhunter and the Guardian class, or to any other class for that matter.

Harvest.2506:

Gaiyeerishima Cat.1082:

Harvest.2506:

DragonflyDusk.6582:

Harvest.2506:

DragonflyDusk.6582:

Harvest.2506:

3. Its copying ESO and Final Fantasy to the Cheesiest degree

I’m pretty sure hunting dragons wasn’t invented by those titles.

One game had the Dragonborn, the other Befriended a dragon from birth. yet still fight dragons. So fine, even if we don’t Need the close association with dragons to have Dragon in the class spec, Why are guardians any better at hunting Dragons than every other class. its just too broad a term for a name to give to a Specialty.

How in the world did you get any of that out of my statement? You said the name was cheesy and accused it of ripping off of other games, I said dragons are not limited to Final Fantasy and ESO. That argument was off, which is why I pointed it out. I didn’t say you were wrong for not liking the spec name or that the spec name even made sense.

Its more about timing, than ripping someone off, its too common now to use the idea of dragonhunting and far too broad for a class Spec. I’m glad you see it doesn’t make sense as well.

Well seeing as the story of Guild Wars 2 revolves around the elder dragons, namely us fighting them, I think it makes a lot of sense to have people specialize in hunting them. And how is dragon hunting broad? If anything, it is rather specific. More specific than hunting, more specific than big game hunting, more specific than flying big game hunting. It is dragon hunting. Anet decided that the advanced techniques of guardians were more suited to hunting dragons than the advanced techniques of the other classes, and that is fine by me. (Note that by advanced techniques I mean the skills that classes have been developing/honing into the new elite specializations.)

Except this isn’t just about the PVE story is it? I don’t see any dragons in Spvp or WvW. a specialization for big game hunting won’t help you fighting multiple players. the idea is that the specializations should be named accordingly to what they can do.

For example Arbiter: judgement from Afar
Signaller: Artillery guidance

These more broad terms span pve and pvp and match the flavor this current specialiation more closely than DragonHunter. Names still need to hawken back to the scource of the class itself, and in this case the Holy light magic theme is not represented at all.

I’m dragon rank though… So those dragon hunters can hunt me in pvp

Leo G.4501:

Well what if the lore behind the new spec has nothing to do with Eir, Braham or any particular people dying?

Then it’s still generic enough to work while evoking the spirit of the elite specialization.

Should we just call it the Marvel, while we’re at it? Or perhaps the Cap?

I get that some names are going to have already been used for other things. That happens a lot. But you cannot believe anyone would take “the Avenger!” seriously. Not when that name is so widely, thoroughly, and infamously associated with a Marvel superhero group. Just doesn’t work.

Same with Arbiter. ‘Arbiter’ either means a very particular Elite from an old Bungie property, or someone who decides against you in a legal decision out of court. Furthermore, neither of those words remotely suggest a hunter, which is what this new specialization is.

Frankly, Archangel is closer to the correct idea, but it’s also patently unsuitable as these things are not, in fact, divine beings. Which also shoots down Valkyrie twice over, for that matter. And again, coming up with every single possible way of saying "Guardian’ except with different letters offers absolutely no indication of what this class actually does.

“Druid” is intuitively understood as a natural magic user who communes closely with nature.

“Chronomancer” is intuitively understood as a mage who specializes in time manipulation

Hell, for that matter “Guardian” is intuitively understood as an individual who stands with his allies and protects them from harm.

This new specialization is a big-game hunter who fuels his archery and his traps with righteous light manifested as burning energy/constructs. Ya know what? There is no good one-word name for one of those. “Dragonhunter” is honestly about as close as we can realistically get to a single word which tries (and does partially fail, but less so than anything else I’ve seen) to make what the thing does intuitively understandable from its name alone.

Until you can find me a one-word title that says “Light-manipulating hunter of large angry animals”, we’re probably going to have to stick with Dragonhunter as the best they can do.

That’s what happens when you get beyond established tropes in a fantasy setting – longstanding one-word names just don’t really work anymore.

Genesis.8572:

Leo G.4501:

Well what if the lore behind the new spec has nothing to do with Eir, Braham or any particular people dying?

Then it’s still generic enough to work while evoking the spirit of the elite specialization.

Lol that feels like it’s reaching worse than Dragonhunter though.

Also, has nothing to do with traps or any kind of aspect of the build.

It’s not odd if the tools we get as a Dragon Hunter excel at hunting dragons. I would actually beg to differ … no one is a dragon hunter. You fight their minions and defeat them, but that doesn’t make people a hunter.

DevilLordLaser.8619:

Should we just call it the Marvel, while we’re at it? Or perhaps the Cap?

No need for your crassness. Avenger works.

I get that some names are going to have already been used for other things. That happens a lot. But you cannot believe anyone would take “the Avenger!” seriously. Not when that name is so widely, thoroughly, and infamously associated with a Marvel superhero group. Just doesn’t work.

‘Avenger’ is used in D&D often for a more offensive paladin type as well as a class of starships in Star Trek. I suspect that people will take ‘Avenger’ as a name more seriously than ‘Dragonhunter,’ and ultimately that’s what matters most.

This new specialization is a big-game hunter who fuels his archery and his traps with righteous light manifested as burning energy/constructs. Ya know what? There is no good one-word name for one of those. “Dragonhunter” is honestly about as close as we can realistically get to a single word which tries (and does partially fail, but less so than anything else I’ve seen) to make what the thing does intuitively understandable from its name alone.

Until you can find me a one-word title that says “Light-manipulating hunter of large angry animals”, we’re probably going to have to stick with Dragonhunter as the best they can do.

Check out the “Inquisitor” class in Pathfinder. That’s exactly what you are describing to a T.

Leo G.4501:

Lol that feels like it’s reaching worse than Dragonhunter though.

Also, has nothing to do with traps or any kind of aspect of the build.

And this specialization has little to do with dragons.

DevilLordLaser.8619:

Should we just call it the Marvel, while we’re at it? Or perhaps the Cap?

Same with Arbiter. * ‘Arbiter’ either means a very particular Elite from an old Bungie property, or someone who decides against you in a legal decision out of court. Furthermore, neither of those words remotely suggest a hunter, which is what this new specialization is. *

Frankly, Archangel is closer to the correct idea, but it’s also patently unsuitable as these things are not, in fact, divine beings. Which also shoots down Valkyrie twice over, for that matter. And again, coming up with every single possible way of saying "Guardian’ except with different letters offers absolutely no indication of what this class actually does.

This new specialization is a big-game hunter who fuels his archery and his traps with righteous light manifested as burning energy/constructs. Ya know what? There is no good one-word name for one of those. “Dragonhunter” is honestly about as close as we can realistically get to a single word which tries (and does partially fail, but less so than anything else I’ve seen) to make what the thing does intuitively understandable from its name alone.

Until you can find me a one-word title that says “Light-manipulating hunter of large angry animals”, we’re probably going to have to stick with Dragonhunter as the best they can do.

That’s what happens when you get beyond established tropes in a fantasy setting – longstanding one-word names just don’t really work anymore.

Jfc thank you. As a writer I was really glad, rather, largely surprised that Arenanet went with something unique and creative. Okay, maybe not unique, but since when in a fantasy setting do you see a holy warrior, become a big game hunter? The closest thing to a Dragonhunter in this sense is a Demon hunter. And it largely kittenes me off that most people’s ideas are painfully cliche and trite.

For the love of god, why does it HAVE to be something that exists in literally every fantasy book, show, movie, game EVER? Why does it HAVE to obey the natural law of it sticking to its defensive holy theme? Especially with the description of what the Dragonhunter does?

But the way this is going, Anet is probably going to change the name. All I can hope for is something unique that fits the specialization NOT the Guardian class itself. Time Magic =/= illusion magic for example.

Giving the elite spec traps does give it a rangery feel, which means most names being something only ever used for the Paladin archetype make little sense. Arenanet went with something creative, rather than unbearably cliche (they should just change the elite spec and name it Avenger, and give it spell names like “Avenging Wrath” or “Retribution Aura”) which I largely applaud them for, and the response was effectively that they’re not allowed to be original. Guardians MUST fit their DnD archetype, when it comes to Elite specs.

Alasteir.7031:

Time Magic =/= illusion magic for example.

The mesmer is about chaos magic and both illusion and time magic are aspects of chaos magic.

Genesis.8572:

Alasteir.7031:

Time Magic =/= illusion magic for example.

The mesmer is about chaos magic and both illusion and time magic are aspects of chaos magic.

The mesmer, all the way down to its name and its style of gameplay is based on illusion. The only time related skill is Time Warp, afaik. Chaos Magic is the in-lore description of its “element”.

But the fact that they can make Chronomancer fit, just means Dragonhunter shouldn’t be a problem with skills like “Dragon’s Maw”. Add some draconic flair, or something related to hunting threatening forces, and the theme would fit.

Okhu.7948:

Avenger :^) 15 Char

Dragohunter is not a good name. I prefer this suggestion much better.

Read this, the tone is right on the spot:
http://www.reddit.com/r/Guildwars2/comments/357a70/fixing_dragon_hunters_lukewarm_reception_is/#

Vindicator.

(I would go with Avenger, but Marvel)

Why? A guardian stands between you and danger, a vindicator goes and hunts down those trouble makers.

Genesis.8572:

The mesmer is about chaos magic and both illusion and time magic are aspects of chaos magic.

And the Guardian can be said to be about righteousness or virtuous battle.

Righteousness doesn’t always have to mean a passive defender. Virtuous battle is still battle. Many tales exist of chivalrous knights seeking to defeat a great and terrible monster – do they wait until the monster is in their base eating their dudes?

No – they went out looking for the monster, they found it where it lives, and they jacked its face up.

Is there a particular reason every Guardian spec ever needs to be a passive, defensive thing instead of an aggressive smiter of the wicked? because let me tell you, I have two Guards right now, and both of them are leaned as far towards “aggressive smiter of the wicked” as I can realistically make them because “stalwart defender of the innocent” is boring.

Guys, please. You are missing the bigger picture here. The Guard is all about justice. Whether it is wielding a bow or mace the Guard is focused on dishing out justice. What character comes to mind when you think of justice? That’s right boys, Batman. The elite specialization should be called Batman. Think about it. Mesmer elite will have clones that throw shields like Captain America. All elite specializations will be superhero themed. Calling it now.

DevilLordLaser.8619:

Until you can find me a one-word title that says “Light-manipulating hunter of large angry animals”, we’re probably going to have to stick with Dragonhunter as the best they can do.

That’s what happens when you get beyond established tropes in a fantasy setting – longstanding one-word names just don’t really work anymore.

That is a lot to fit into one word. But since I have an Art degree I’ll try.
lets say for instance we have to have a 2ish word name we could still do it without the Dragon there. Its sybolising the weapon more so than the prey. Except we’re not using any dragonlike weapons in fact our weapons look nothing like biorganic claws they wield.

So our Prefix the should be light, something along the lines of “Photon-”
long range weapon http://www.economist.com/node/12502799

Ok so we established the weapons which relates to the original profession so not let talk about the Suffix. This will refer to the person and more indepth about what they are doing. in this case hunting big game. Maybe in pvp this could be related to the anti-tank, or anti door, those roles can fit into pve fighting big monsters at the same time with the word “Buster”

so there you have it [b]PhotonBuster[b] a name I invented with a little bit of research that would satisfy all Requirements it stays true to the Guardian, It takes down big things, it doesn’t appear to be copying anybody too badly. Matter of fact I’m going to start making a vlog about this right now.

…Photonbuster.

Yep. You sure showed me, man. That is such an amazing choice I can’t believe it hasn’t come up before. Absolutely. That is the 100% perfect name for a righteous hunter. Going to go preach it to the rest of the forums right now.

.
..
…
….#sarcasm.

DevilLordLaser.8619:

…Photonbuster.

Yep. You sure showed me, man. That is such an amazing choice I can’t believe it hasn’t come up before. Absolutely. That is the 100% perfect name for a righteous hunter. Going to go preach it to the rest of the forums right now.

.
..
…
….#sarcasm.

Searching right now man it really hasn’t come up before, I’ll admit i got the idea from Ojyh.9842’s Photonmancer, but to me that sounded too casterlike.

My pitch is that is sounds like what it does. Which is to Destroy things with Light, wasn’t that what you wanted?

DevilLordLaser.8619:

…Photonbuster.

Yep. You sure showed me, man. That is such an amazing choice I can’t believe it hasn’t come up before. Absolutely. That is the 100% perfect name for a righteous hunter. Going to go preach it to the rest of the forums right now.

.
..
…
….#sarcasm.

I do believe someone on reddit also mentioned, to their credit that complaining about the fact that it’s called the Dragonhunter, when we all hunt dragons makes no sense, in which they cite Diablo III as an example where the primary enemies are Demons, and the Demon Hunter exists as a class despite every class focusing on killing demons.

I feel this is the idea behind the Dragonhunter. You can therefore expect their trait names, spell names to be anti-dragon themed, or just with a general draconic flair. Their effectively a variation of the Demon-Hunter archetype of a righteous warrior focusing their entire purpose in life to killing Demons. I think that’s what Arenanet was playing with. Dragons are the main enemy, and the Guardians realize defending people is not enough, so they focus on killing, all without making Dragonhunters op when it comes to pve battles involving dragons, giving them an unfair advantage. Could be wrong however.

Divinity Sentinel

Genesis.8572:

And this specialization has little to do with dragons.

Have any evidence of that? Either present the lore that backs up your claim or ditch the disingenuousness. You are confusing your subjective opinion, with that of subjective fact.

Alasteir.7031:

The mesmer, all the way down to its name and its style of gameplay is based on illusion. The only time related skill is Time Warp, afaik. Chaos Magic is the in-lore description of its “element”.

Play the Guild Wars 1 mesmer and get back to me.

DevilLordLaser.8619:

And the Guardian can be said to be about righteousness or virtuous battle.

Hence why you are doing a terrible job playing apologetics for the terrible name ‘Dragonhunter.’ But imagine that if this specialization had been called ‘crud-eater,’ you would still be defending ArenaNet to the death.

DevilLordLaser.8619:

…Photonbuster.

Yep. You sure showed me, man. That is such an amazing choice I can’t believe it hasn’t come up before. Absolutely. *That is the 100% perfect name for a righteous hunter. * Going to go preach it to the rest of the forums right now.

.
..
…
….#sarcasm.

Inquisitor. Again, check out the Pathfinder ‘Inquisitor’ class, which is precisely a bow-wielding divine/defensive magic-using hunter of big scary monsters.

coglin.1867:

Have any evidence of that? Either present the lore that backs up your claim or ditch the disingenuousness. You are confusing your subjective opinion, with that of subjective fact.

Do you have evidence that it does?

Genesis.8572:

Leo G.4501:

Lol that feels like it’s reaching worse than Dragonhunter though.

Also, has nothing to do with traps or any kind of aspect of the build.

And this specialization has little to do with dragons.

We don’t know that.

Actually, we do know that the elite skill is a trap called Dragon Jaw(?) so there’s that.

All I’m saying is, sure come up with ideas that might have a better ring to it but don’t just pick one and think that anyone in charge should be inclined to change it to that. Providing a list of alternatives is far more likely to produce something worthwhile.

Arbiter

Leo G.4501:

All I’m saying is, sure come up with ideas that might have a better ring to it but don’t just pick one and think that anyone in charge should be inclined to change it to that. Providing a list of alternatives is far more likely to produce something worthwhile.

There are a lot of viable alternatives out there, IMHO: Arbiter, Avenger, Inquisitor, and Vindicator all readily come to mind as proposed alternatives.

DevilLordLaser.8619:

Until you can find me a one-word title that says “Light-manipulating hunter of large angry animals”, we’re probably going to have to stick with Dragonhunter as the best they can do.

That was a nice post.

As for the name, it’s a strict concept. Personally, I would go with Seeker.

Play the Guild Wars 1 mesmer and get back to me.

I did. In fact, Chronomancer was going to be an entirely different class in gw1, not a mesmer attribute line. Sounds similar to the Ranger Guardian debate going on with this.

Hence why you are doing a terrible job playing apologetics for the terrible name ‘Dragonhunter.’

There exists somewhere, an ultimate standard in the Universe that dictates what is, and what isn’t a terrible name. Or put another way, whether or not it’s terrible is largely subjective.

But imagine that if this specialization had been called ‘crud-eater,’ you would still be defending ArenaNet to the death.

How very rational to assign intent to a stranger on the internet. Yes, yes. Anyone who disagrees with you MUST love anet. There couldn’t possibly exist any other reason over matters of subjectivity.

Inquisitor. Again, check out the Pathfinder ‘Inquisitor’ class, which is precisely a bow-wielding divine/defensive magic-using hunter of big scary monsters.

So they should copy from somewhere else? Inquisitor has other connotations associated with it, none of which imply a hunter of evil monsters.

Do you have evidence that it does?

See the Burden of Proof. Until the ready up, and further information is released, the people saying it has no lore basis must be the ones to provide evidence, since they’re the ones making the initial claim.

There are a lot of viable alternatives out there, IMHO: Arbiter, Avenger, Inquisitor, and Vindicator all readily come to mind as proposed alternatives.

And all of those examples are either excruciatingly overdone in anything fantasy, ever. While things like Inquisitor are a largely mixed bag, like Crusader.

I agree that the name is questionable at best.

I don’t even think it would need to tie to the core aspects of a Guardian IF the actual specialization felt more aggressive. Shooting virtues and blocking attacks doesn’t take things far enough from ‘protecting’ and into ‘hunting’ to fit though… :-/

Alasteir.7031:

DevilLordLaser.8619:

…Photonbuster.

Yep. You sure showed me, man. That is such an amazing choice I can’t believe it hasn’t come up before. Absolutely. That is the 100% perfect name for a righteous hunter. Going to go preach it to the rest of the forums right now.

.
..
…
….#sarcasm.

I do believe someone on reddit also mentioned, to their credit that complaining about the fact that it’s called the Dragonhunter, when we all hunt dragons makes no sense, in which they cite Diablo III as an example where the primary enemies are Demons, and the Demon Hunter exists as a class despite every class focusing on killing demons.

I feel this is the idea behind the Dragonhunter. You can therefore expect their trait names, spell names to be anti-dragon themed, or just with a general draconic flair. Their effectively a variation of the Demon-Hunter archetype of a righteous warrior focusing their entire purpose in life to killing Demons. I think that’s what Arenanet was playing with. Dragons are the main enemy, and the Guardians realize defending people is not enough, so they focus on killing, all without making Dragonhunters op when it comes to pve battles involving dragons, giving them an unfair advantage. Could be wrong however.

here https://www.reddit.com/r/Guildwars2/comments/357a70/fixing_dragon_hunters_lukewarm_reception_is/

WarDuggery on Reddit suggested the idea, but was counteredd by joshuarion saying that we’re not soloing or hunting dragons on our own. in THIS game. DH in d3 had lore build around them, they were not branched out into another type of class all together.

By the way why in the Hell of Abaddon should we be following Diablo 3 anyways. All because they copy all the good ideas from Arena net doesn’t me Anet should copy all of Blizzards crappy ones. Wow did just lose 3 million Subs for a reason.

Alasteir.7031:

I did. In fact, Chronomancer was going to be an entirely different class in gw1, not a mesmer attribute line. Sounds similar to the Ranger Guardian debate going on with this.

My point being that the mesmer has been more than just an illusionist from the get go. Illusion was only one line even back then in GW1, along with domination and inspiration (aka enchantment). The old mesmer also had fast casting, which is something that ANet is trying to bring back with the chronomancer.

How very rational to assign intent to a stranger on the internet. Yes, yes. Anyone who disagrees with you MUST love anet. There couldn’t possibly exist any other reason over matters of subjectivity.

It’s a basis of an individual’s posting habits.

So they should copy from somewhere else? Inquisitor has other connotations associated with it, none of which imply a hunter of evil monsters.

It’s not about copying from somewhere else. It’s pointing out that what Devil was describing does already exist as an archetype in gaming.

See the Burden of Proof. Until the ready up, and further information is released, the people saying it has no lore basis must be the ones to provide evidence, since they’re the ones making the initial claim.

Is there any suggestion in the article that there is a convincing lore basis?

Alasteir.7031:

And all of those examples are either excruciatingly overdone in anything fantasy, ever. While things like Inquisitor are a largely mixed bag, like Crusader.

Thankfully ‘Dragonhunter’ has never been done to excruciating death in anything fantasy, ever.

Genesis.8572:

Hence why you are doing a terrible job playing apologetics for the terrible name ‘Dragonhunter.’ But imagine that if this specialization had been called ‘crud-eater,’ you would still be defending ArenaNet to the death.

…

Inquisitor. Again, check out the Pathfinder ‘Inquisitor’ class, which is precisely a bow-wielding divine/defensive magic-using hunter of big scary monsters.

Right then.

Listen, Gene. I’m not saying I’m married to the name Dragonhunter. Matter of fact, I’m pretty sure what I said was “the only things worse than Dragonhunter is everything I’m seeing in this thread.”

Chronomancers are Mesmers, but Mesmers are not Chronomancers. Druids are Rangers, but Rangers are not Druids.

Calling the new Guard elite spec…:

-Defender
-Protector
-Sentinel
-Warden
-Paladin
-Keeper
-Bulwark
-Stalwart
-Intervener

-…or any of the other ninety-seven things people have come up with which is functiuonally identical to "Guardian’ actively bothers me. Those things would be Guardians, yes. Guardians would also be all of those things.

Avenger is just as silly as Dragonhunter. What am I avenging, exactly? The Fleet’s destruction? The (assumed) death of my B-team? Marjorie’s sister? Trahearne? Trahearne’s cat?

Same problem – we’re all avenging those things, just the same way we’re all hunting dragons. Every character of every race, class, and gender is going to be out to get their own back from Mordremoth and his plant goons for making us look like right and propah fools. Trust me, my Thief is just as aggravated at Mordy’s nonsense as either of my Guards, and she will be doing everything she can to avenge her own self on them as well.

Now, if you want to talk about Inquisitor? All right, we can do that.

‘Inquisitor’ is a term with a lot of very dark, negative connotations, even for players who don’t have, like, six friends who all play Warhammer 40k. The term ‘Inquisitor’ generally brings to mind a very cruel individual seeking to inflict pain and harm on his victims, and I use the word ‘victims’ rather than ‘targets’ or ‘enemies’ very specifically. Inquisitors are people put in charge of religious torture chambers. Or Spaniards. Monty Python aside, honestly I’d associate the term Inquisitor with a Necromancer specialization far more than a Guardian spec. In fact, Inquisitor would actually be an excellent name for a Necromancer elite spec.

I can’t really see the case for it for Guardian however, especially as I have no earthly idea what Pathfinder is or why I should care about it.

What you might be able to get away with is Vanguard, but at that point we have the issue of ‘Vanguard’ more or less containing the original name of ‘Guardian’, which is just as awkward in its own special way as Dragonhunter.

It’s difficult to come up with good names for proactive holy archers because proactive holy archers don’t really exist in the general lexicon of Accepted Fantasy Stuff. Not as a single, unified concept. Whenever they show up they tend to be forcibly folded into other things which impose their own restrictions (the otherwise excellent ‘Valkyrie’ suggestion being untenable due to gender exclusions issues, for example), or come saddled with a specific term unique to that game ‘verse which players are explicitly instructed means ’holy archer’ (i.e. ‘Cipher’ meaning a psionic Mesmery sort of weird caster in Pillars of Eternity).

There’s no generic term for a righteous hunter/holy archer. Trying to force some random synonym for ‘Guardian’ to mean righteous hunter sucks and I won’t stand for it. Everything else tends to come with baggage the new spec doesn’t need. It is difficult; if it wasn’t, ArenaNet would’ve come up with a better name themselves, or we would have all come up with a better name folks generally agreed on as ‘the obvious choice’.

The lack of an obvious choice is exactly why we currently have a Dragonhunter and not a ‘The Obvious Choice’.

Justiciar
Confessor
Idol
Luminary

Genesis.8572:

coglin.1867:

Have any evidence of that? Either present the lore that backs up your claim or ditch the disingenuousness. You are confusing your subjective opinion, with that of subjective fact.

Do you have evidence that it does?

Certainly. The main story of the game, most of the games lore, and a large portion of the plot lines revolve around the dragons awakenings.

The specialization is being added in an expansion based around another dragons arise.

The skills introduced by it are based around staple attack skill for killing a dragon.

All of which, is more evidence then you offered.

Arbiter? Maybe?

Any of these suggestions would be infinitely better. I agree that it’s such a small change really – why not do it just to satisfy your fan base? Take a poll. If it is voted by the community to stay Dragon hunter so be it but at least give us a chance to give our opinion.

Yech. Dragon Hunter…

Thankfully ‘Dragonhunter’ has never been done to excruciating death in anything fantasy, ever.

You can bet your kitten that the dragonhunters in other fantasy settings are not the Paladin archetype. At least for the most part.

I think War Monk would be a great name instead of what we have now.

It honors all GW1 players who played Monks. And fits into the theme of Long-range weapon and traps. Monks in original GW1 were mostly ranged for the most part, but not so offensive and corporeal.

I vote WAR MONK!

Harvest.2506:

Alasteir.7031:

DevilLordLaser.8619:

…Photonbuster.

Yep. You sure showed me, man. That is such an amazing choice I can’t believe it hasn’t come up before. Absolutely. That is the 100% perfect name for a righteous hunter. Going to go preach it to the rest of the forums right now.

.
..
…
….#sarcasm.

I do believe someone on reddit also mentioned, to their credit that complaining about the fact that it’s called the Dragonhunter, when we all hunt dragons makes no sense, in which they cite Diablo III as an example where the primary enemies are Demons, and the Demon Hunter exists as a class despite every class focusing on killing demons.

I feel this is the idea behind the Dragonhunter. You can therefore expect their trait names, spell names to be anti-dragon themed, or just with a general draconic flair. Their effectively a variation of the Demon-Hunter archetype of a righteous warrior focusing their entire purpose in life to killing Demons. I think that’s what Arenanet was playing with. Dragons are the main enemy, and the Guardians realize defending people is not enough, so they focus on killing, all without making Dragonhunters op when it comes to pve battles involving dragons, giving them an unfair advantage. Could be wrong however.

here https://www.reddit.com/r/Guildwars2/comments/357a70/fixing_dragon_hunters_lukewarm_reception_is/

WarDuggery on Reddit suggested the idea, but was counteredd by joshuarion saying that we’re not soloing or hunting dragons on our own. in THIS game. DH in d3 had lore build around them, they were not branched out into another type of class all together.

By the way why in the Hell of Abaddon should we be following Diablo 3 anyways. All because they copy all the good ideas from Arena net doesn’t me Anet should copy all of Blizzards crappy ones. Wow did just lose 3 million Subs for a reason.

I used D3 as an example. That’s supposed to mean something. The idea was not to copy Blizzard, but using D3 as an example to point out that Dragonhunter can’t be used because every profession is a dragon hunter, is something that can be applied to Warriors. Everything that a Warrior would be expected to do, every profession has done in the story. If you can then say that in this context, Warrior can mean something different, then logically that can also be applied to Dragonhunter. Really would like a space in that name, by the way.

To toot my own horn a bit, Seeker gives a rough idea of the indented concept.

A Seeker can be a hunter, who seeks their prey. particularly a ranged hunter, that prepares beforehand, instead of a slayer who would face a monster directly.

A Seeker can also be an explorer in the new Maguuma wilderness. The name also carries a more spiritual flavour, befitting the profession.

Alasteir.7031:

You can bet your kitten that the dragonhunters in other fantasy settings are not the Paladin archetype. At least for the most part.

Since when have knights and holy warriors fighting dragons not been done to death? In D&D – the granddaddy of all tabletop RPG and computer/video gaming – dragon-hunting paladin archetypes are exceptionally common.

Genesis.8572:

Leo G.4501:

All I’m saying is, sure come up with ideas that might have a better ring to it but don’t just pick one and think that anyone in charge should be inclined to change it to that. Providing a list of alternatives is far more likely to produce something worthwhile.

There are a lot of viable alternatives out there, IMHO: Arbiter, Avenger, Inquisitor, and Vindicator all readily come to mind as proposed alternatives.

I’d say we still need more and more varied. While some of those alternatives are good, again, most have nothing to do with the flavor of the spec. While generic is good, it wouldn’t hurt coming up with more options that actually have a flavor.

Genesis.8572:

Alasteir.7031:

You can bet your kitten that the dragonhunters in other fantasy settings are not the Paladin archetype. At least for the most part.

Since when have knights and holy warriors fighting dragons not been done to death? In D&D – the granddaddy of all tabletop RPG and computer/video gaming – dragon-hunting paladin archetypes are exceptionally common.

When the description of the Dragonhunter is that of a big-game hunter, you get a different connotation that those archetypes, especially with the lore of the Elder Dragons being Natural, and not intrinsically evil, or demonic. If something has been done to death, and you want to do it, the least you can do is make it as original as possible. Every solution proposed so far just makes it more overdone.

Like, if those random name generators that you find online gave you the option to list a name for a paladin archetype, pretty much all of the solutions other than Photonbuster would probably come up.

Hold on! Gonna find me one of those generators!

Alasteir.7031:

Genesis.8572:

Alasteir.7031:

You can bet your kitten that the dragonhunters in other fantasy settings are not the Paladin archetype. At least for the most part.

Since when have knights and holy warriors fighting dragons not been done to death? In D&D – the granddaddy of all tabletop RPG and computer/video gaming – dragon-hunting paladin archetypes are exceptionally common.

When the description of the Dragonhunter is that of a big-game hunter, you get a different connotation that those archetypes, especially with the lore of the Elder Dragons being Natural, and not intrinsically evil, or demonic. If something has been done to death, and you want to do it, the least you can do is make it as original as possible. Every solution proposed so far just makes it more overdone.

Like, if those random name generators that you find online gave you the option to list a name for a paladin archetype, pretty much all of the solutions other than Photonbuster would probably come up.

Hold on! Gonna find me one of those generators!

I dunno, but an avenger class going after a dragon seems less frequently done then a dragon hunter- sorry, dragonhunter- class going after a dragon.

And why do those names instead of dragonhunter come up? Because they fit the theme and lore of the class you asked for. Dragonhunter is so left field, it’s too left field.

Besides, if your argument is ‘those are over done’ we should rename warrior, thief, elementalist, necromancer, and ranger as well. Possibly even guardian and mesmer… though I think those might be the two professions I’ve heard the least in my gaming experience.

Alasteir.7031:

Genesis.8572:

Alasteir.7031:

You can bet your kitten that the dragonhunters in other fantasy settings are not the Paladin archetype. At least for the most part.

Since when have knights and holy warriors fighting dragons not been done to death? In D&D – the granddaddy of all tabletop RPG and computer/video gaming – dragon-hunting paladin archetypes are exceptionally common.

When the description of the Dragonhunter is that of a big-game hunter, you get a different connotation that those archetypes, especially with the lore of the Elder Dragons being Natural, and not intrinsically evil, or demonic. If something has been done to death, and you want to do it, the least you can do is make it as original as possible. Every solution proposed so far just makes it more overdone.

Like, if those random name generators that you find online gave you the option to list a name for a paladin archetype, pretty much all of the solutions other than Photonbuster would probably come up.

Hold on! Gonna find me one of those generators!

Well you asked ME to come up with one that describes a light-user taking down big things that hasn’t been done. and I did on my own without a generator.

Leo G.4501:

I’d say we still need more and more varied. While some of those alternatives are good, again, most have nothing to do with the flavor of the spec. While generic is good, it wouldn’t hurt coming up with more options that actually have a flavor.

The spec doesn’t seem to have a defined flavour in my eyes.
I guess more than anything it still seems like ‘Guardian with a bow’, but then there’s random traps and conditions that sort of clash with that and make it feel like its somewhat of a skirmisher.

It certainly doesn’t strike me as a Dragon Hunter though. A dude that helps other guys while they go hunt dragons, maybe, but not a hunter in itself. More like.. A Dragoon Squire? >_>