Guild Wars 2

Ok so i wonder when we will have to face the dragon will we have to buy an expansion or it will be a huge update and do you think it will raise the level cap because of new areas? And with the world completion will you have to start over because of new content being added and also do you think we will have a new playable race? And which dragon can be next? Sorry for all the questions…..

This isn’t really a lore question, should be in general topic forum I think. But anyways…

Personally, I’d prefer a large content update since if their expansions are large enough, I can’t easily see a single dragon per expansion being very enjoyable, nor can I see said expansions having a large enjoyable plot if the main focus is a dragon. I’d rather have a (or some) content updates that add a full region itself, while the expansions go on other routes.

Level caps I don’t think would be raised anytime soon, tbh, but I think they’ve said that they intend to raise them in the future (they’re bound to improve the level scaling system long before they add more levels, and adding more levels also means rebalancing things for when you get stronger via more levels). Probably in an expansion, but we’re not given any real indication or implication when we’ll get a sold expansion.

For world completion, it’ll probably just like how the things they’ve added affected it – those who haven’t completed it yet will need to grab the new things, but those who have won’t get anything taken from them or gain new things from recompleting. Similarly, it’s possible that it’ll act like Southsun Cove (hope not), or will be like how Cartographer in GW1 was – a new world completion achievement for each expansion (and in turn, reward).

New playable races in the future is highly likely. IMO, the most wanted that’s also most likely are tengu, largos, and kodan (no particular order – a lot of folks want the lesser races like quaggan and skritt but you can bet they won’t ever become playable due to the racial sympathy system).

Jormag’s most likely to be next, given all the attention he has and how big of a threat he is. This is tbh, the only lore related question here – since it’s a storyline related one. Kralkatorrik as things stands is likely second to next, then the DSD, then Primordus, then Mordremoth – though if Anet wants, they can have the latter three making a big name for themselves forcing them to be bumped up in order of which is most likely to be attacked next. The Pact seems to focus on imminent threats, which is why Zhaitan – who was closest and launched a large attack on LA – was attacked first. And currently, Jormag’s the next biggest.

My prediction is for Primordius and the dwarfs(now in stone) to make an appearance again. This “disturbance” we see i think is him launching his armies once again. As far as i know Jormag has not been active at all in Ascalon so far. But we can see destroyers both in Norn and in Char lands. Return of dwarfs will be a nice touch – dwarfs have a huge fanbase and tbh asura do not even get close to covering the uniqueness of dwarfs. In many aspects they are the exact opposite of the dwarfs – calculating, always sober thinking and rellying not on personal strength but on the strength of their inventions. There are some commonalities but for the dwarf fanbase those are not enough.

As for what is to come – i expect a rather big patch coming with tengu as race and monk and maybe dervicher classes making a glorious comeback (the general feeling is that monk class is a must)

Thanks guys both of you for helping me out

Grezko.7950:

uniqueness of dwarfs

lolololololololololololol

Sorry but, dwarves are unique? xD

Besides, asura aren’t meant to fill in for dwarves. They’re just another subterranean race and tbh, dwarves weren’t that subterranean compared to other fantasy settings anyways. If any race is meant to fill in for dwarves, it’d be norn. But even then they’re not fill-ins. Just as sylvari aren’t fill-ins for elves.

Grezko.7950:

monk […] making a glorious comeback (the general feeling is that monk class is a must)

However, Monk will never ever happen. Why? Because Guardians were made to replace monks, and the game doesn’t support the concept of a dedicated healer. Dervish is unlikely to return due to lore reasons as well (dervishes, by nature, are followers of the gods – Guardians are the closest thing you’ll get, via being magic powered by faith; you’ll never see a charr dervish).

Konig Des Todes.2086:

Grezko.7950:

monk […] making a glorious comeback (the general feeling is that monk class is a must)

However, Monk will never ever happen. Why? Because Guardians were made to replace monks, and the game doesn’t support the concept of a dedicated healer. Dervish is unlikely to return due to lore reasons as well (dervishes, by nature, are followers of the gods – Guardians are the closest thing you’ll get, via being magic powered by faith; you’ll never see a charr dervish).

I totally agree with this. Guardians fill the role of a smiting monk, using faith as the means to their magic. There could be a chance for the monk to return but I highly doubt it. Dark Age of Camelot had the Monk, Paladin (which is really like a guardian) and they had a Ministal. But in that case the monk was a dedicated healer and the smite build was nerfed so it wasn’t very useable.

As for Dervish’s, I don’t think they will make a return either but they would have a greater chance in my opinion then the monk. I think in the 250 years since GW1 the dervish would have had to change some for it to be able to come back and they would have to have the lore in place before hand for that to happen, otherwise it will never make it back as things stand now.

Konig Des Todes.2086:

Grezko.7950:

uniqueness of dwarfs

lolololololololololololol

Sorry but, dwarves are unique? xD

Besides, asura aren’t meant to fill in for dwarves. They’re just another subterranean race and tbh, dwarves weren’t that subterranean compared to other fantasy settings anyways. If any race is meant to fill in for dwarves, it’d be norn. But even then they’re not fill-ins. Just as sylvari aren’t fill-ins for elves.

Grezko.7950:

monk […] making a glorious comeback (the general feeling is that monk class is a must)

However, Monk will never ever happen. Why? Because Guardians were made to replace monks, and the game doesn’t support the concept of a dedicated healer. Dervish is unlikely to return due to lore reasons as well (dervishes, by nature, are followers of the gods – Guardians are the closest thing you’ll get, via being magic powered by faith; you’ll never see a charr dervish).

I meant dwarfs in general – they are unique, no matter in what game / book – they always enjoy drinking, fighting, mining, swearing and shinies.

As for monk – the whole things about tattoo armor was quite unique to GW1 and quite interesting. I believe monk can make an appearance as a more mpds-oriented class. Some type of faith based berserker. Guardians were meant and are the ultimate punchbags – something monks were never meant to be. So i do believe there is still place for them ingame.

I have to disagree with the derv comments. seeing as how Elona is cut off from Tyria, and that palawa joko has taken over that continent. I think in upcoming updates/releases of gw’s we will see the coasts of Elona and at least the return of the dervish (since paragons were molded with monks to make guardians).
personally, i’m more interested in going to canthi.
I want my ritualist back

Cantha*, not Canthi. my bad

Grezko.7950:

I meant dwarfs in general – they are unique, no matter in what game / book – they always enjoy drinking, fighting, mining, swearing and shinies.

Sounds like what you get when you mix a norn and a skritt.

Grezko.7950:

As for monk – the whole things about tattoo armor was quite unique to GW1 and quite interesting. I believe monk can make an appearance as a more mpds-oriented class. Some type of faith based berserker. Guardians were meant and are the ultimate punchbags – something monks were never meant to be. So i do believe there is still place for them ingame.

Necromancers had “tattoo armor” too, but that didn’t make a return. I really can’t see a faith-based berserker (oxymoron much) – I mean, what would that be? Lore wise, it’s not very different from guardians. Mechanic-wise, it’s just a heavy-hitter weaker-armor version of guardian… which can tbh be made by putting more stats in power/precision than in toughness/vitality, and equipping one of the higher-damage focused weapons (sword/torch, for instance).

I don’t think there’s enough of a gap for such, especially when the lore already states that the monk profession developed into the guardian profession. In other words, it’s an established bit that monks are no more in lore.

lefty twotoe.2851:

I have to disagree with the derv comments. seeing as how Elona is cut off from Tyria, and that palawa joko has taken over that continent. I think in upcoming updates/releases of gw’s we will see the coasts of Elona and at least the return of the dervish (since paragons were molded with monks to make guardians).

It’s got nothing to do with location, but the lore of the profession. Dervishes, by nature, were devout followers of the Five (then Six) Gods. Those “dervishes” that weren’t following a god were just scythe wielders through and through. This is downright what a Guardian is – a follower of faith that utilizes heavy PBAoE (especially greatsword Guardians) and GW2’s version of enchantments (boons).

Want a dervish? Take a guardian, give him a scythe, dress, and hood. Bam – dervish.

Where is it stated that monks developed into guardians? Yes, guardians share few skills with monks from GW1 but one can argue that guardians are equally similar to paragons. You misrepresented my vision for the monk class though. What i meant for the the role of a what a monk should be is: a medium armor wearing class that relies on dmg reduction abilities charged by using certain abilities that grant him “holy fury” in example. Basically if the defensive skills of the monks went to the guardians why not combine their former offensive one’s with some other skills to turn them into melee self-healing debuffers (blinding ppl wiht “holy light”, adding confusion, weakness). Basically something in between the current skillsets of a guardian(but with more offence, less groupbuffs and more debuffs) and a necromancer (tougher in melee, no poisons, more focused on confusion and blinds + melee selfheal).

As for lore – the current distress(flame and frost) leads to the monks being forced to abandon their remote monasteries and rejoin the populace of tyria. The fall of Zaitan is a part of an ancient prophecy says that once one of the elder dragons dies the others will follow. And the monks are determined to see this prophecy fulfilled.

As for Elona – i expect we will see it again after some time but i don’t expect this to happen this year. Fighting some more undead (Palawa Joko) is the last thing the game needs atm. Lets have some other bad guys.

Grezko.7950:

Where is it stated that monks developed into guardians?

I found this on the wiki:

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.

Was stated directly by Jeff Grubb in an interview just after the Guardian’s reveal – the wiki, as maddoctor posted, holds a verbatim copy of Jeff’s exposure of the Guardian’s origin. They are a merge of the monk and paragon.

Grezko.7950:

You misrepresented my vision for the monk class though. What i meant for the the role of a what a monk should be is: a medium armor wearing class that relies on dmg reduction abilities charged by using certain abilities that grant him “holy fury” in example. Basically if the defensive skills of the monks went to the guardians why not combine their former offensive one’s with some other skills to turn them into melee self-healing debuffers (blinding ppl wiht “holy light”, adding confusion, weakness).

When you take away the pretty words, this is can be viewed as just a medium-armor version of the Guardian. That doesn’t give much, especially when it’d be creating a fourth adventurer when there’s still only two soldier professions.

BTW, guardians blind people with “holy light” and also took plenty of the monk’s more offensive skills – more of them come from the monk than paragon, in fact.

And they still hit like wet noodles…

And i do not see the word “monk” in the background quoted by maddoctor. I do see the word paragon though. So if we want to be correct lore-wise we can say that the guardian is based on the paragon with upgrades from “other traditions”, witch of course include monk.

The point about there being only 2 soldier classes and 3 adventures is valid although i would like to point out that engineer and the ranger are far more specialized in ranged combat, while the thief is the only medium armored melee-dmg-focused profession. Something i find both good (strong mdps classes can be very OP) and bad (if one want so play mdps he is forced to either choose a tank that does more dmg or to go thief). Not to mention thieves are a bit OP in 1v1 combat exactly due to lack of any other class that offers their high dps without being very flimsy (talking about light armored classes)

Oh for crying out loud. Is it really that big of a chore to go to GW2W’s page for Guardian press ctrl F and type “monk” – or to go to the references and go to the site listed for the background and do the same?

From GW2W: Many of their skills share names with those used by the monk profession in Guild Wars, such as the Protection Prayers and Smiting Prayers skills.

During early development the guardian had less magical ability and was called a “knight”. As the other professions became more defined, the guardian received more magical type abilities, pulling in aspects of the Guild Wars monk and paragon professions.

From the reference:
Did the style change much from concept to creation? How did you arrive at her final appearance?

Eric Flannum: From an appearance standpoint, it didn’t actually change a whole lot. Our artists really nailed the look of the Guardian pretty quickly, which they tend to do quite often (we’re pretty spoiled that way). From a functionality standpoint, I think we started with something that was less magical feeling; at one point we were calling the Guardian a “Knight.” As the rest of our professions began taking shape around the Guardian, she started becoming more magical, and we brought in some elements from the protection Monk and Paragon from the first game. The current Guardian feels very magical in nature.

There is a lot of talk drawing parallels between the Guardian and more than one current Guild Wars profession. How much of the Guardian profession was pulled from the current crop, both from an “out-of-character” design standpoint and from a lore standpoint within the storyline?

Jeff Grubb: I’ve seen the Guardian compared to the prot Monk, the Paragon, the Dervish, and the Ritualist, and there are bits and pieces of all of them in there, plus a lot of new stuff. The virtues in particular are a neat piece that makes the entire package work. It is not so much a replacement of any one profession but rather an evolution that uses the best parts of several earlier classes.

What is this crusade of yours to prove to the world that the “monk” has no place in GW2? You hate the class so much? All i am saying is that i think it will be a lot of fun to have that class back + its can be done by altering his role a bit from what it was in GW1 + its doable lore-wise.

The post in the trivia says nothing more than what i said 2 posts above – guardian gets pieces of paragon and monk(+ some more ). I believe there is plenty more to work with if either of those professions make a comeback. Far less for the paragon considering it used to be a heavy armored group buff class. Although there is the possibility of introducing a spear/polearm wielding class that lorewise will be what is left of the former sunspears, helped somehow by Kormir. I always found the thought that Kormir will just stand and watch the sunspears get destroyed a bit far-fetched.

Truth to be told monk has been one of the favorite gimmick’s of GW1 for many ppl.

It’s been outright stated by ArenaNet on multiple occasions that Guild Wars 2’s mechanical format has no place for a dedicated healer – which is what a monk is.

All you’re wanting is a guardian that isn’t heavy armor. And such a thing is as unlikely as a necromancer or mesmer in heavy armor – e.g., beyond unlikely. Especially given how it fully conforms into the nich roles of other professions.

It’s no crusade, it’s just a fact that you’ll have to deal with – Anet wanted no trinity classes in GW2, and that’s what you’re wanting. What you’re wanting is outright against what Anet wants, and its their game so its what they want first.

Quoting myself looks silly so i will just try explain it another way. A monk according to me is NOT a dedicated healer and i have NEVER stated anywhere that. I said on numerous occasions that i foresee a possible return of the monk as a mdps-focused non-tank.

Currently 1 archtype familiar from to many of us from other games (i personally played warhammer age of reckoning before GW2) is the non-stealth mpds-er. In warhammer we had Slayers and Choppas – they were loads of fun to play with their characteristics being increasing dps with increasing squishiness. The problem with such archtype was that it can become OP in the hands of the more organized guilds, because if such a class can be protected enough it can dish out really remarkable amounts of dps. Implementation of such a class is a very tricky matter from a developer point of view.

I am pretty confident that other MMO’s have classes that belong to the same archtype as well.

I am rather unhappy with the current sutiation of the Thief being the only true-nontank mdps class.

Apparently you’re not listening to me since I said “All you’re wanting is a guardian that isn’t heavy armor.” – which I’ve said numerous times. I never said you wanted a dedicated healer, but that’s what a monk is – remove that and its not a monk anymore.

All your wanting is a medium-armor Guardian; or alternatively a holy-style thief. There’s not much difference between the professions here. So it’s unlikely to occur.

Other MMOs have classes that belong to the same archtype typically because they have professions which are limited to certain races or the like. And similarly, they don’t focus so much on the aspect of balance as GW2 does. Furthermore, GW2 isn’t other MMOs and it’s been stated that Anet is trying (succeeding is another matter) to be as different from other MMOs as possible – so what other MMOs do and don’t do is 100% irrelevant.

Half the skills and the professions mechanics in GW2 can be seen in other MMO’s – it is inevitable but there is nothing wrong with it. And come on, are you really stating that some professions don’t fit some archtypes we know?
Of course they do – you have certain professions that are better than others in being a tank, stealth dps, Rdps aoe-er and so on.

And how many times do i need to state it – guardian has 2 main descriptions – toughness and hitting like noodle. I want a non-tank class that is more mdps focused. I don’t really care if its monk – i just thought that monk has interesting enough background to fill that spot. A faith based mechanic is and interesting thought as well.

So stating i want a medium armored guardian is like stating i want a non-ferari italian car if i wanted a fiat…

I have played 4 or 5 MMO’s before GW2 and countless other games and class balance has little to do with race or anything similar. For EVERY multiplayer game that has difference classes/playable factions / cars, no matter if its a RTS, car simulator, RPG, FPS or anything else balance IS the key. So stating that other games “don’t focus so much on the aspect of balance as GW2 does” is a wrong statement in my book. They do – the difference is the varrying degree of success each developer team has.

GW2 has its class balance issues – thief’s “perma-invisibility” spec, guardian’s “i will outlive even the apocalypse” spec, elementalists “i can run is circles around the entire map and you cannot catch me” spec. I am eagerly awaiting to see how these are gonan be addressed. So far the dev’s record has been exemplary.

Anyway i think we strayed quite away from the main topic.

Grezko.7950:

And come on, are you really stating that some professions don’t fit some archtypes we know?

No, I’m not.

I’m saying they’re not stepping on each others’ toes by going into the same niche. There’s no profession that plays like a theif other than thief, and no profession that plays like elementalist but the elementalist.

Your “neo-monk” would be stepping on the toes of both thief and guardian. Same theme as the guardian, same playstyle as thief (basically, from what you’re telling me, it’s a faith-based thief that doesn’t have a dark (e.g., stealthing/stealing/venoms) theme).

Grezko.7950:

GW2 has its class balance issues

Never said otherwise. However, unlike other MMOs, GW2 at least tries to keep professions balanced and, most importantly, not similar to each other.

thief = stealth. Stealth is pretty much what defines a thief, sneakiness, poison, “piercing” attacks and so on. Again you cannot remove the main defining feature of a class and say some other class is that class without it. There is an old joke about the Chukchi people that has something like it, i will not retell it all but basically when asked a Chukcha described an elephant as “like a deer but without antlers, much bigger and with longer nose”. You are doing pretty much the same …

I just want another non-tank mdps focused class – THAT’s it.

Grezko.7950:

I just want another non-tank mdps focused class – THAT’s it.

THANK YOU!

Key word: Another

That’s been my entire point the whole freaking time. You’re just wanting another version of something that exists already!

Grezko.7950

I want a non-tank class that is more mdps focused. I don’t really care if its monk – i just thought that monk has interesting enough background to fill that spot.

Either READ what i write before arguing with me or we cannot have ANY sort of conversation. You’re cherry picking part of what i say and twisting them.

Elementalist and Necromancers are BOTH ranged classes – in your logic they are the just another version of one another – and this is NOT true. The same way saying that i jsut want another version of a thief is not true. When did Thief = mdps became an axiom ?

Except that they function vastly different than other ranged professions (and tbh, they can also go melee or mid-ranged and they can have similar builds made up). However, there wouldn’t be much difference between a thief and your wanna-be-monk. It’d just be a thematic change.

There can be vast difference – are you a game develper to say that a mdps-focused class can ONLY be as thief? Other games achieved that, are you saying GW2 developers are inferior somehow and they cannot come up with another mdps-oriented class concept? I don’t think so.

It seems that you’re misunderstanding me as much as you claim I’m misunderstanding you.

Just because monks were mainly healers in GW doesn’t mean they have to be healers in GW2. In fact, they can’t. Professions have to be versetile and be capable of filling several roles. Those roles however, would most likely be identical to Guardians. And that’s why Monks feel unnecessary to some of us. They’re just too similar role- and skill-wise. At least how I picture them.