Guild Wars 2

Would the community humor the notion that rangers are poorly designed this time around? I was a primary Ranger in the first game, and I loved it. But I just wasn’t in love with the whole pet thing.

I decided to create a brand new ranger here, and I found out how different they seem. That you can’t play without a pet. If you stow it away, it comes out the next time you enter combat. Most abilities also seem to involve the pets as well.

I personally feel that we’re being forced to play a single “spec”, because Arenanet wants us to embrace their pet system. They’re really struggling to synergize the player and their pet.

I love the spirits, traps and marksmanship of rangers, but they just seem to be overshadowed by pets. What has made Arenanet want to solely define rangers as beast masters? The Ranger goes back to the days of PnP games, and has been done in many other RPGs and MMOs. They don’t all use pets, but they still manage to incorporate the rest of the elements that make a ranger what it is.

So I ask these questions;
Are the rangers of Guild Wars 2 really rangers?
Why has Arenanet refused, time and time again, to let us decide how we want to play the class?
Should “Stow Away” even be there, if it effectively does nothing?

I am truly amazed by this post, because no matter how much I try, I can’t seem to find a single thing to complain about when it comes to using pets.
Nobody is forcing you to take beast mastery traits.
Nobody asks you to sacrifice your trap’s/arrow’s/spirit’s potency for the sake of having a pet.
What you do get is another actor fighting alongside you, increasing your damage, granting you extra utility, interrupting your enemies, buffing your allies and saving your life.
I didn’t play Guild Wars 1, but what I understood from other posts is that having a pet there demanded a sacrifice. But again, this is a new game, and this time around the pet doesn’t have a price tag.

You also asked about stowing your pet, and as I see it it’s identical to town clothes: It wasn’t designed for anything besides role playing value.

So considering all this I ask you, what reason do you really see for getting rid of your class’s unique, and powerful mechanic?

I see a few reasons. And for clarity, I never said that pets are terrible. Just that they shouldn’t be mandatory for a class that has many other strong suits and elements.

It did require a sacrifice in the first game, but it wasn’t just about that. It was also that we didn’t want to have to babysit an NPC. There are things like aggro to consider, and proper coordination.

Some players (arguably a minority) just want a simple compromise regarding pets. We’re not demanding they be removed from the players that like them, or altered drastically. Just that those of us, that want to operate solo, can do so. Is that so much to ask for?

It worked in the first game, and while this isn’t the first game, it can still work here. If I don’t want to use pets, I have to give up the spirits and other abilities and play a class that’s more divided onto other things. Warriors and Thieves for example. Can’t warriors only use longbows, and Thieves shortbows? And Thieves operate with intiative.

So, what you really want is for “stow away” button to keep pet hidden in fight as well, so that you can play the way you want? That sounds more like a suggestion for improvement, rather than complaint about class design and doesn’t seem like anything bad.

For the record, warriors can also use rifles and thieves can also use pistols, so they are not limited to single ranged weapon.

You can manage agro by clicking on the passive skill. Makes your pet just a bystander. It won’t go after your target or go find targets etc.

Melesie.5723:

So, what you really want is for “stow away” button to keep pet hidden in fight as well, so that you can play the way you want? That sounds more like a suggestion for improvement, rather than complaint about class design and doesn’t seem like anything bad.

For the record, warriors can also use rifles and thieves can also use pistols, so they are not limited to single ranged weapon.

I like bows. So many games have done guns to death for me.

The complaint about class design kind of operates on the matter that Arenanet seems to refuse giving us the option I suggested for Stow Away. I’m not the first person to request it. And if you were to google it, a lot of people want to hide the pet and play rangers like the good old times. It’s something we’re familiar with and love. We just really want to enjoy Ranger again.

Kailthir.6384:

You can manage agro by clicking on the passive skill. Makes your pet just a bystander. It won’t go after your target or go find targets etc.

That doesn’t work. I tried and Vampire Bats still kept attacking my Moa. It had done nothing to gain aggro. The bat just decided to attack it, and because it has life steal, the pet ended up being a source for easy heals on the bats part.

honestly they should have a petless option the necro does after all and its a petclass heck necro petless options pretty potent to.

The pets are Ranger’s class feature, if you don’t like them please play a warrior instead. If you don’t like a class’ mechanics that’s not a design flaw. This is like the 100th topic about this in the last month.

The only thing that every thread seems to agree on is that “stowing away” should be permanent until the pet is manually called out. Anyone who doesn’t want to play with a pet should be allowed to play alone, but there shouldn’t be any buffs gained from stowing away pets. I agree with this too, as targeting is very glitchy at the moment and pets tend to attack mobs when you cast buffs, spirits and traps.

The best solution I can give you right now, if you so desire it, is setting your pet’s behavior to peaceful, making it ignore combat till you tell it to attack.
And yet, I assure you that you will lose much more then you will gain by doing so. Pet management in this game can be as basic as hearing the sound of your pet’s death and pressing F4 to summon the secondary pet. No cast time, it doesn’t interfere with your other actions, no down sides. On the other hand, disabling your pet means you lose that one condition, that one knock down, that it could contribute before being defeated.
Besides that, there are at least 2 solutions superior to the one you seek:

1. Use a bear. They are tough, have high health, can self-heal and stand their own against an enemy without much help from the player, also allowing you to rain spirit-powered death from afar.
2. Use a spider/devourer. These are ranged pets and won’t get in the way between you and your target, especially considering that the only reason enemies attack your pet is because it stops the enemy from getting to you directly. That is, by the way, the dungeon strategy preferred by many rangers.

But in the end, it’s your decision, so choose wisely.

I rejected those answers; instead, I chose something different. I chose the impossible. I chose… (petless) Ranger!

And I don’t want warrior. It’s different from ranger. They only get one type of bow, and don’t have the traps or nature stuff. They also wear a different armor type. I get I miss out on some things by not using the pet, but I did it in Guild Wars 1 without problems, and I can do it again. My decision doesn’t harm anyone else and I’m just as entitled to ranger as the people who play it with pets.

Why oh why do people play a hunter/ranger and complain about the main feature mechanic of pets. Pets are the primary source and quality of a ranger/hunter. If you don’t want a pet then play a thief or a warrior. Players like Drosser have no clue on what a hunter/ranger class really is. I guess they are stuck on the definition that Aion provided which btw goes against most mmo designs of the hunter/ranger class. Drosser if you really want to play a kittenized version of a hunter/ranger please go back to Aion.

Drosser.2317:

I rejected those answers; instead, I chose something different. I chose the impossible. I chose… (petless) Ranger!

And I don’t want warrior. It’s different from ranger. They only get one type of bow, and don’t have the traps or nature stuff. They also wear a different armor type. I get I miss out on some things by not using the pet, but I did it in Guild Wars 1 without problems, and I can do it again. My decision doesn’t harm anyone else and I’m just as entitled to ranger as the people who play it with pets.

Ok, I get the fact that in GW1 using a pet had its downside, as to use it properly it took a few skill slots, but here it takes nothing, it is a win win situation, there are extra attacks/damage on your opponents. If your pet goes to attack a large group which you dont want, then call it back with the F3 key.

To be honest, other than the mess up targeting issue , having a pet around you is a blessing more than a hindrance, wolf pet can heal you up , save me countless time in battle where I am surrounded by mobs. Bear, took aggro from mobs while I execute a quick escape from death.
Like one of the above post says, if you do not like the pet, just set it to "peaceful " mode. Everything is good.:)

Using your pet (sending it in, calling it back, etc) is fundamental to giving the class an added layer of complexity. I really enjoy this aspect to the class.
I often send my pet to different targets to ‘pull’ them together and AOE, use it to pull mobs over traps I have placed, know when to just leave it at your side (which I have as default). Sometimes I will just use my pets unique abilities and bring it back to me. I’d be lost without my furry companion.

Drosser, try binding some keys to your pet commands and leave it on passive. You can do some very useful things playing your Ranger in that way. Sure it is a little more to think about and react to but once you are used to it, it makes life as a Ranger that much better.

There’s only 8 professions. We only have those choices.

Say I want a heavy armor shadow-knight.
Say I want to play a melee fighter who wears light armor?
An elf like Legolas?

Well, I better play a different game, or adapt my choice.

I agree with this, love the game so far, but honestly I despise pet Playing classes. I cannot stand sitting back while pets do the work, and or a ranger to have a pet be mandatory kind of sucks for me. I love rangers style of play of woods and survivability and long range bows and arrows, but the fact that a LARGE amount of utility skills are based around pets is kind of frustrating for someone that does not want to play a pet. Some of the traits involve pets that aren’t even in the beast master section..

I think rangers are so fun in pvp, i love grabbing mine after i’m tired of my axe. It’s nice to actually be able to do alot of damage, very diferent from the interrupts/conditions only gw1 ranger

A pet certainly helps with being a *_range_*r. 90% of the time my GW1 ranger was a beastmaster (high damage, high survivability), only switching when the situation required non-BM skills.

Having said that, wife is loving her ranger and having played it some, it feels solid (of course, I play elementalist, so everything else feels more solid). The pet was too squishy BWE2 but not in BWE3 or now. I can only see the pet losing its value during the really obnoxious bosses (giant aoe one-shots) but those are a PITA anyway but less so for ranged classes.

I don’t think its poorly designed at all.

Im surprised no one has mentioned the Red Moa – F2 skill grants 15s of Fury (20% crit chance) on a 30s cooldown. If you really hate the pet system, just set the red moa to passive and get free crit chance every 30s. I keep a blue moa on swap for similar reason – the -33% incoming dmg for 10s is a life saver.

In short, get a blue and red moa, they help by buffing everyone, and surprisingly have the second best vitality after bears, giving them good AOE survivability.

Fury+quickness (from quickening zypher) is OP. Just saying.

I feel like the only person who prefers drakes

They deal helluva good amount of damage, and they can decently tank most enemies :o

If you dont like pets, just ignore then.

They do a nice damage, some can take a nice ammount of damage(bears<3), some are so versatil(canines) and some are just awsome to have next to you(birds)

And “stow” is to prevent your pet from goingkitten and aggro anything in sight, the pet is part of the proff, learn to control it or you will never master the Ranger

Not my pet, NO!
My pet is mortally wounded!
Don’t worry, I will save you!

Yeah, I’m bad with pet management. Good thing I know where the f4 key is.

If you want a petless ranger, go Bowthief.

Kymbre.6384:

Why oh why do people play a hunter/ranger and complain about the main feature mechanic of pets. Pets are the primary source and quality of a ranger/hunter. If you don’t want a pet then play a thief or a warrior. Players like Drosser have no clue on what a hunter/ranger class really is. I guess they are stuck on the definition that Aion provided which btw goes against most mmo designs of the hunter/ranger class. Drosser if you really want to play a kittenized version of a hunter/ranger please go back to Aion.

If Aion is the best precedent you can come up with for Rangers, you know little about them.

Rangers have been a staple of RPG and CRPG gaming forever. Game design giving them pets is a direct attempt to try to parallel the Hunter class from World of Warcraft under a different name. Historically they don’t have them in RPGs.

Some notable examples in PnP and computer gaming:

Advanced Dungeons and Dragons (1978) added the ranger to fantasy gaming. No pets.
Wizardry series, 1981-. No pets.
Ultima series, starting with Ultima IV, 1985. No pets.
DIKUMUD games (many), 1990-. No pets.
Elder Scrolls series 1994-. No pets.
Everquest, 1999. No pets.

In RPGs, Rangers are historically a dual-wielding and/or bow-using, medium-armor, spellcasting class.

Guild Wars is the exception to this, not the rule.

Yzen.1256:

Kymbre.6384:

Why oh why do people play a hunter/ranger and complain about the main feature mechanic of pets. Pets are the primary source and quality of a ranger/hunter. If you don’t want a pet then play a thief or a warrior. Players like Drosser have no clue on what a hunter/ranger class really is. I guess they are stuck on the definition that Aion provided which btw goes against most mmo designs of the hunter/ranger class. Drosser if you really want to play a kittenized version of a hunter/ranger please go back to Aion.

If Aion is the best precedent you can come up with for Rangers, you know little about them.

Rangers have been a staple of RPG and CRPG gaming forever. Game design giving them pets is a direct attempt to try to parallel the Hunter class from World of Warcraft under a different name. Historically they don’t have them in RPGs.

Some notable examples in PnP and computer gaming:

Advanced Dungeons and Dragons (1978) added the ranger to fantasy gaming. No pets.
Wizardry series, 1981-. No pets.
Ultima series, starting with Ultima IV, 1985. No pets.
DIKUMUD games (many), 1990-. No pets.
Elder Scrolls series 1994-. No pets.
Everquest, 1999. No pets.

In RPGs, Rangers are historically a dual-wielding and/or bow-using, medium-armor, spellcasting class.

Guild Wars is the exception to this, not the rule.

We shoot magic arrows, we call the spirits of nature
We seem to follow the standart of spell casters

Sneakier.9460:

Yzen.1256:

Kymbre.6384:

Why oh why do people play a hunter/ranger and complain about the main feature mechanic of pets. Pets are the primary source and quality of a ranger/hunter. If you don’t want a pet then play a thief or a warrior. Players like Drosser have no clue on what a hunter/ranger class really is. I guess they are stuck on the definition that Aion provided which btw goes against most mmo designs of the hunter/ranger class. Drosser if you really want to play a kittenized version of a hunter/ranger please go back to Aion.

If Aion is the best precedent you can come up with for Rangers, you know little about them.

Rangers have been a staple of RPG and CRPG gaming forever. Game design giving them pets is a direct attempt to try to parallel the Hunter class from World of Warcraft under a different name. Historically they don’t have them in RPGs.

Some notable examples in PnP and computer gaming:

Advanced Dungeons and Dragons (1978) added the ranger to fantasy gaming. No pets.
Wizardry series, 1981-. No pets.
Ultima series, starting with Ultima IV, 1985. No pets.
DIKUMUD games (many), 1990-. No pets.
Elder Scrolls series 1994-. No pets.
Everquest, 1999. No pets.

In RPGs, Rangers are historically a dual-wielding and/or bow-using, medium-armor, spellcasting class.

Guild Wars is the exception to this, not the rule.

We shoot magic arrows, we call the spirits of nature
We seem to follow the standart of spell casters

And what this thread is about is pets. Some people that historically have played rangers in RPGs don’t like them, like the OP. The pet was not a core mechanic in GW; you could just put your points in the other masteries and ignore pet use entirely.

You can’t do that in GW2.