Guild Wars 2

TyPin.9860:

Your profession is called guardian. Where is the outrage about that? My Mesmer has guarded people, yaks and objectives, Thieves do that, Warriors. We are all Guardians at some point, even if don’t play that profession. Now call out already for a change of your class name, because everyone is essentially a guardian.

And did you know that there is a profession called Warrior? Well my Mesmer also is a Warrior, so are Thieves, Guardians, Elementalists and all others. Now complain about that name already too.

What if I choose with my Mesmer to protect the wildlife in WvW? Am I ranger then? What when I build siege blue prints for and siege weapons in WvW? How is there a special Engineer class, when basically all classes can be Engineers too?

Seriously, the reasoning of you Dragonhunter-name-haters bites itself in the kitten . You just don’t like it, but don’t pretend that this “We all hunt Dragons”-argument (Btw, I do not hunt dragons) is anything more than a try to rationalize your personal disliking.

You’re right in a sense. But they are all very classical and unavoidable archetypes you find in any RPG, that’s why they’re here. We automatically link them to a playstyle and a specific type of character. Which is not particularly the case for our Dragonhunter (THAT specific one, which should be highly related to Guardians).
Also you shouldn’t understand Guardian the way you do considering a class in an fantasy world.
But when you look at magical professions you realize that your argument falls short.

Anyway if that was the only thing going wrong with the Dragonhunter I guess it wouldn’t make so much noise. The problem is that it goes way beyond that.

Hunter sounds WoW-ish. This is Guildwars, so the name should be DragonRanger.

I thought it was a funny name.

Then I realised it wouldn’t matter what name they chose because there would always be a thread like this.

Aaron.4807:

purecontact.1680:

rapthorne.7345:

Arbiter is a far, far better name. It fits the theme (Judge/Jury/Executioner of evil) and it’s not laughably generalist like “dragon hunter” (aka every single PC in Tyria)

Translation of Arbiter in french : Arbitre.
Yes, it’s a referee.

Well, thank god Arbiter is an English word, and while it somewhat means referee there is a lot more gravitas to it’s meaning then that picture you posted.

From Dictionary.com: 1350-1400; Middle English arbitour, arbitre < Anglo-French, Old French < Latin arbiter

Its a french word. The spelling is a dead give away. Dont forget that English is a language filled to the brim with borrowed words. In fact most of the ‘cool sounding’ words are in other languages

A guardian is basically a paladin. Another “classical and unavoidable archetype found in any RPG”. There will also always be fantacial hunters in any RPG, whether they be Witchhunters, Demonhunters, VampireHunters, Vigilante of Stendarr. Etc etc.

Guardian is nothing new, It is basically a Paladin but with a name ArenaNet decided works better for their world.

Same with Elementalist, it is basically a Mage/Wizard but ArenaNet decided to choose Elementalist instead.

The Dragonhunter is basically a Witchhunter. ArenaNet just chose to change the first part because GW universe has Dragons being the biggest threat of the overall world.

I mean seriously just look at it is a Witchhunter then change the first part of the name to Dragon. That’s it.

And for people saying it’s too specific. Thief is also very specific of a name and archetype. Does that mean all of us Thieves go around stealing and killing whoever/whatever we feel like and just look out for ourselves? Hell no cuz if you play Personal Story as your Thief you do some pretty Unthiefy things like being a Commander and leading an army and just overall being unselfish. Necromancer would fit here too.

ArenaNet has said that the personal story and living world never focuses on your profession, that’s why Revenants aren’t gonna get some special tie-in to lore available only for them.

nexxe.7081:

RabbitUp.8294:

nexxe.7081:

Well, i guess that’s it. The name won’t be changing. It’s a silly name, with the majority against it, but it’s their game.

As Harvest suggested, it’s not about fighting for morality, so it doesn’t make sense. We’re all essentially dragon hunters in our fight against Modremoth, and other dragons. Many other names would’ve been better.

We are not all dragon hunters. Hunters don’t defend themselves or the land from a threat, which is what we are doing against the dragons. Hunter are on the offensive, the ones that stalk their prey and prepare the traps for it. Hunters don’t fight, they murder.

And not all professions/players share the notion that the only way to fight the dragons is to eliminate them, their minions and the entire Sylvari race.

..because the Pact isn’t actively hunting Modremoth, right? Heart of Thorns is exactly all about that. Didn’t you play Season 2?

Modremoth and the dragons are threatening Tyria. The Pact is defending themselves against the Dragons, not as a preemptive measure, but because it is certain Mordemoth is going to attack.

That’s not called hunting, it’s called fighting. A hunter is not threatened by the deer they kill, they do it for food, profit or sport. It’s completely different. We don’t call soldiers fighting a war “hunters”, do we?

From what was revealed already, the key difference here are how Dragonhunters treat Sylvari, Mordemoth’s minions, who are not, as a race, threatening Tyria. The devs spelt it out for everyone how they wanted to draw parallels with Witch Hunters.

Just change the name to Dragonbane or Sentinel or something just so people will shut up. I personally don’t like the name, but it’s not a huge deal. I don’t know why so many people are making a fuss about it.

Ideally Dragonbane, because it keeps the theme that you wanted, sounds less general, and is significantly cooler sounding.

Dragonhunter is fine, the whining entitlement from the small vocal minority here however isn’t.

Whatever name you attempt to pick within your cliques and biased strawpolls will be unfavourable to most people.
The majority of players don’t even read the forums, nevermind post.

Ojyh.9842:

You’re right in a sense. But they are all very classical and unavoidable archetypes you find in any RPG, that’s why they’re here. We automatically link them to a playstyle and a specific type of character. Which is not particularly the case for our Dragonhunter (THAT specific one, which should be highly related to Guardians).
Also you shouldn’t understand Guardian the way you do considering a class in an fantasy world.
But when you look at magical professions you realize that your argument falls short.

Anyway if that was the only thing going wrong with the Dragonhunter I guess it wouldn’t make so much noise. The problem is that it goes way beyond that.

So, it’s ok to use vague, generic, ill-fitting, or cheesy names as long as they were used in DnD before?

Let’s forget the lore and the dragons for a second. Let’s say you presented a person with 2 classes, the Hunter and the Arbiter. What do you think they could guess an Arbiter does, from the name alone?

“Well, he’s like a judge, those have gavels, so maybe he uses hammers?”
“Actually, he lays down traps and shoots a bow.”

Srolo.5208:

From what I’m gathering people would rather it be called Witch Hunter than Dragon Hunter because the term “Witch” is inherently associated with being evil and that goes against the thematic elements of the Guardian blah blah blah. Now having said that, WHERE ARE THE kitten WITCHES IN THE GUILD WARS UNIVERSE? I don’t know about any of you but I’ve yet to encounter any.

The majority of you people just dislike the name for the simple fact that it has “Dragon” in it and you automatically associate that with a childish mindset. In the GW2 universe the evil and corrupt are the DRAGONS and the DRAGONS MINIONS so why is it so unbearably hard to comprehend the fact that a sect of righteous, holy warriors have chosen to hunt down and exterminate the corruption and evil that’s spreading?

Now you may say “WAHHH BUT EVERYBODY HUNTS AND EXTERMINATES THEM!” and you’d be wrong. During this time there IS a unified effort to combat and stop the Elder Dragons, yes, however that is NOT the main goal of the other classes. Engineers didn’t suddenly wake up one morning and go “Hey, you know what? I think I’m going to become technologically proficient so that years from now I’m going to possess all the relevant skills I need to fight something that myself, nor others actually know is coming or even believes to be real for that matter!”

My god you people are kittening thick.

Pretty sure I met a witch in Toxal Bog but she makes the best stew in that miserable place; I wouldn’t hunt the lady.

P.S. your caps lock may be broken.

There are krait Witches you encounter in events.

I just don’t get where the connection is. If I’d been told to think of a “dragonhunter” without knowing that it was the name of the guardian’s elite spec, I would have come up with something completely different from what we have. Not only does it seem like a terribly juvenile name in my opinion, but it just doesn’t fit. Other than the name of the elite trap, there is nothing descriptive about the name that you can associate with the spec.

The chronomancer and druid both make sense, because they define what the spec is and what it does. A chronomancer is a manipulator of time, and a druid is a mage of nature. But dragonhunter just feels wrong because it has little to no relation to what the spec is or how it works.

Eggs.3142:

Aaron.4807:

purecontact.1680:

rapthorne.7345:

Arbiter is a far, far better name. It fits the theme (Judge/Jury/Executioner of evil) and it’s not laughably generalist like “dragon hunter” (aka every single PC in Tyria)

Translation of Arbiter in french : Arbitre.
Yes, it’s a referee.

Well, thank god Arbiter is an English word, and while it somewhat means referee there is a lot more gravitas to it’s meaning then that picture you posted.

From Dictionary.com: 1350-1400; Middle English arbitour, arbitre < Anglo-French, Old French < Latin arbiter

Its a french word. The spelling is a dead give away. Dont forget that English is a language filled to the brim with borrowed words. In fact most of the ‘cool sounding’ words are in other languages

I am not 5, I know all of this.

What I am saying is the french meaning and the english meaning are different enough to point out that we are using the english meaning since this game is in english.

Understand?

And btw, it isn’t a French word it is a Latin word. In fact most of the ‘cool sounding’ words are Latin roots. Hence why most European languages are known as Romance languages. Latin>Rome>condescending enough for you now?

The “What&why vs. how”-argument misses my itch. I don’t care, if my profession or elite spec has a deterministic name. What urks me: the name does not tie-in to the base profession. (so I’m not agreeing with Ojyh, read Genesis.8572’ comment)

Mesmer. As a new player, you may or may not have a vague idea, what he’s doing. After playing and experiencing him (design, gameplay & feel, UI, etc.) “Chronomancer” immediately clicks. The Mesmer is elegant, he controls the flow of battle with arcane and perplexing arts.

“Ranger” is simple. Its descriptive, it evokes an image of someone in the woods. After you played a Ranger, you will notice his connection to nature in many of his skills. “Druid” ties-in perfectly.

Guardians have exceptional defense. You can be a protector, or you can be a avenger. Be a bulwark or abuse your defense to attack even more recklessly. A fighter who wields his spirit as a weapon. Purity, mind and body, chivalry and honour.

Dragonhunter fails as a descriptor.

The name evokes the imagery of Siegfried, the dragonslayer. Strength, courage, masculinity. Something between knight and warrior. Siegfried conquered a dragon, gained fame, honour, treasures and bathed in dragons blood. Its something primal and boastful, not clean, not sophisticated.

What you get is Van Hellsing. A mistrustful agent of an inquisitive nature, seeker of “truth”. Something elaborate. An agent who does not conform to chivalry but uses dirty tricks like traps and ranged weapons. The ends justifies the means.

To see that dragonhunter means “witch-hunter”, Jon first had to explain their intentions. It proves that dragonhunter fails as a decriptor.

Gameplay already determines, what the dragonhunter is like. He is more a search and destroy kinda guy, a seeker. Not a big game hunter. Also it would leave the opportunity for ANet to do a full on dragon-elite-spec.

Genesis.8572’ comment
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/professions/guardian/Liked-the-ready-up-name-still-doesn-t-fit/page/3#post5048946

While I don’t like the name at all(but appreciate Jon taking the time to explain)I am more concerned with the fact that Signets for Guardian are still really bad and they have added a whole new line of utilities that are far superior in every way to signets. Please bring viable builds to the mix and make all utilities viable.

Ya all are looking too far into this lol. It’s just a name.

It’s going to be ok.

I promise.

RabbitUp.8294:

Ojyh.9842:

You’re right in a sense. But they are all very classical and unavoidable archetypes you find in any RPG, that’s why they’re here. We automatically link them to a playstyle and a specific type of character. Which is not particularly the case for our Dragonhunter (THAT specific one, which should be highly related to Guardians).
Also you shouldn’t understand Guardian the way you do considering a class in an fantasy world.
But when you look at magical professions you realize that your argument falls short.

Anyway if that was the only thing going wrong with the Dragonhunter I guess it wouldn’t make so much noise. The problem is that it goes way beyond that.

So, it’s ok to use vague, generic, ill-fitting, or cheesy names as long as they were used in DnD before?

Let’s forget the lore and the dragons for a second. Let’s say you presented a person with 2 classes, the Hunter and the Arbiter. What do you think they could guess an Arbiter does, from the name alone?

“Well, he’s like a judge, those have gavels, so maybe he uses hammers?”
“Actually, he lays down traps and shoots a bow.”

Ill-fitting, generic and cheesy totally fit to Dragonhunter. So much that I had to take a moment to know if you were actually arguing in favor or against it.

I never said Arbiter was the best option, just a better one.

Also everybody should remember that elite spec will only change like 20% or even less of what your character actually is. So it is always way better to get a name that stays linked to the original profession. Because knowing how elite specs work, we could totally make a Dragonhunter that is " like a judge […] so maybe he uses hammers".

And by the way, A.net has always tried to tell us that having a bow doesn’t mean you’re a hunter, having a sword doesn’t mean being a soldier, having a dagger doesn’t mean being an assassin… Why suddenly taking that concept in reverse ?
And even if they were going back to that idea that says having a bow means you are a hunter, I’m now asking you question you asked me. If someone tells you to think about a hunter, will you think about what the GW2 Dragonhunter (as a whole) is ? Probably not…

Black Box.9312:

The chronomancer and druid both make sense, because they define what the spec is and what it does. A chronomancer is a manipulator of time, and a druid is a mage of nature. But dragonhunter just feels wrong because it has little to no relation to what the spec is or how it works.

If you didn’t know that mesmers have that one time related elite skill, chronomancer wouldn’t make sense either. Creating illusions and causing hallucinations is not exactly related to controlling the flow of time.

You could make an entire Guardian elite spec based on Marvel’s Human Torch based on such a connection, since Guardians have a skill that sets themselves on fire.

As for how describing what the spec does, how does “hunter” not hint at the introduction of bow and traps?

RabbitUp.8294:

If you didn’t know that mesmers have that one time related elite skill, chronomancer wouldn’t make sense either. Creating illusions and causing hallucinations is not exactly related to controlling the flow of time.

You did though, otherwise, you can’t become a dragonhunter. Well ok, if you use a kitten-ton of tomes, maybe then, but you get my point. Mesmers also control the flow of battle, he is a conductor and a disruptor. He controls space, now he controls time.

RabbitUp.8294:

You could make an entire Guardian elite spec based on Marvel’s Human Torch based on such a connection, since Guardians have a skill that sets themselves on fire.

As for how describing what the spec does, how does “hunter” not hint at the introduction of bow and traps?

It lacks the tie-in to the guardian profession. It also is in itself a incoherent concept, read Genesis comment, link in my comment above.

J Eberle.9312:

Ya all are looking too far into this lol. It’s just a name.

It’s going to be ok.

I promise.

Thats fair. But its like i already said before.

I’ll still play dragon hunter, if they keep the name. Doesn’t change the fact however, that I cringe everytime, when i think about it. As a consumer, my feedback is to some value. And it looks like, its not just a couple people, who find it weird. That makes it a valid criticism!

Ojyh.9842:

Ill-fitting, generic and cheesy totally fit to Dragonhunter. So much that I had to take a moment to know if you were actually arguing in favor or against it.

You could use those terms, but that’s entirely subjective. The point is that you can use the same terms for any of the existing professions, yet people have no trouble with them, only because they appear everywhere, which actually makes them more generic than dragonhunter.

Not to mention that some, like thief, don’t even describe their class very well and only rely on pre-established fantasy cliché to get their point across.

Ojyh.9842:

Also everybody should remember that elite spec will only change like 20% or even less of what your character actually is. So it is always way better to get a name that stays linked to the original profession. Because knowing how elite specs work, we could totally make a Dragonhunter that is " like a judge […] so maybe he uses hammers".

The same can be said for the Chronomancer. You can avoid using any of the new skills and weapon and stick to illusions. Avoid talking Time Warp as your elite, and your only time related skill will be the new shatter.

Ojyh.9842:

And by the way, A.net has always tried to tell us that having a bow doesn’t mean you’re a hunter, having a sword doesn’t mean being a soldier, having a dagger doesn’t mean being an assassin… Why suddenly taking that concept in reverse ?
And even if they were going back to that idea that says having a bow means you are a hunter, I’m now asking you question you asked me. If someone tells you to think about a hunter, will you think about what the GW2 Dragonhunter (as a whole) is ? Probably not…

And yet warriors use the sword to fight like soldiers, and thieves use the dagger to assassinate.

Anet both play their tropes straight and avert them. Just look at the hammer. Warriors/Guardian/Engineers (from what was shown so far) use it as a heavy-hitting melee weapon, while Revenants as a casting one. Same deal with Greatsword.

The fact that using a bow doesn’t necessarily make you a hunter in this game doesn’t mean that no class will ever use it as a hunting weapon.

GruntSquad.1530:

You did though, otherwise, you can’t become a dragonhunter. Well ok, if you use a kitten-ton of tomes, maybe then, but you get my point. Mesmers also control the flow of battle, he is a conductor and a disruptor. He controls space, now he controls time.

Guardians have a skill that sets themselves on fire. In fact the same skill shoots a fireball. Would you support an entire spec based on Marvel’s Human Torch? That’s as much of a connection there is between mesmer and chronomancer. And mind you, I’m not complaining. In fact, I love both the chronomancer, and I wouldn’t mind the Human Torch clone. I never say no to more options. I still recognise the existence of a logical gap, though.

I do get your point, but I only agree with it to an extent. While there’s merit in preserving the flavour and concept of the class, the same cannot be said about the playstyle. The entire point of this system is to add more options, not enhance the existing ones. It’s natural that when switching from vanilla to elite spec, the class plays differently.

And even then, Dragonhunter retains aspects of the base class. Area denial, support and offence mixed together, healing options.

RabbitUp.8294:

Guardians have a skill that sets themselves on fire. In fact the same skill shoots a fireball. Would you support an entire spec based on Marvel’s Human Torch? That’s as much of a connection there is between mesmer and chronomancer. And mind you, I’m not complaining. In fact, I love both the chronomancer, and I wouldn’t mind the Human Torch clone. I never say no to more options. I still recognise the existence of a logical gap, though. .

Actually… well… before the announcement i had anticipated something like a purifyer! I thought the Guardian would use the bow like the Warrior would. You know, the enemies are plants, so i imagined he would spew fire and stuff like that. So.. yeah, i would totally support it. Guardian overall has a big connection to fire, like Virtue of Justice, Smite Condition and stuff. But I guess thats a bit off-topic.

But i get your point. I think Glacial heart fits you point better.
https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Glacial_Heart
In that case it comes down to its implementation. If you think Siegfried from Soul Calibur 4 with his crystal/ice look, maybe less over-the-top, i see myself supporting it. Maybe…. Its a good point though.

But i don’t think, Chronomancer is that case. In GW1 Mesmers already had a “speeding-up” theme, even now with Sword 2 and focus.
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Temporal_Curtain
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Blurred_Frenzy

Blurr in general.

RabbitUp.8294:

[…]
You could use those terms, but that’s entirely subjective. The point is that you can use the same terms for any of the existing professions, yet people have no trouble with them, only because they appear everywhere, which actually makes them more generic than dragonhunter.

Not to mention that some, like thief, don’t even describe their class very well and only rely on pre-established fantasy cliché to get their point across.

OK, then there is no point to use those terms yourself.

I personnaly didn’t really like Thief as a name exactly for that reason. But the fact that this concept is something commonly admitted in fantasy worlds and that it is still pretty consistent I accepted it after a while.
But the thief is a profession, not a spec, so we don’t really need to find a coherent link with any larger concept he’s supposed to descend from. Actually I think I could ALMOST accept a Dragonhunter as a profession…

RabbitUp.8294:

[…]
The same can be said for the Chronomancer. You can avoid using any of the new skills and weapon and stick to illusions. Avoid talking Time Warp as your elite, and your only time related skill will be the new shatter.

That’s true, anyway the new shatter skill stays something that ties the character to this concept.
However many opinions about Chronomancy in Tyria are about creating an illusion of time manipulation. It is pretty much impossible to really affect the flow of time, and it is impossible to translate it concretely in the game. So stuns are becoming frozen in time, slowing time is actually slowing one specific character (same for accelerating), and going back in time can be interpreted as creating an illusion that will “absorb” what happened for a moment, and when the illusion disappears everything actually returns as it was before. Or… as it has always been since the illusion appeared !
Could seem a bit far-fetched but works well.

RabbitUp.8294:

[…]
And yet warriors use the sword to fight like soldiers, and thieves use the dagger to assassinate.

Anet both play their tropes straight and avert them. Just look at the hammer. Warriors/Guardian/Engineers (from what was shown so far) use it as a heavy-hitting melee weapon, while Revenants as a casting one. Same deal with Greatsword.

The fact that using a bow doesn’t necessarily make you a hunter in this game doesn’t mean that no class will ever use it as a hunting weapon.

Here’s the idea :
Every warrior should be able to use a hammer, this is pretty much logic.
But why wouldn’t anybody else use a hammer too with its own style ?
That’s why we have a Mesmer using greatswords as casting weapons, or Elementalists using daggers as casting weapons too.
When Ranger was announced for the first time many people complained because they thought it would be the hunter archetype (and it actually is, probably the only one I could see as a Dragonhunter even though is sounds lame). Therefore it had to be THE long ranged guy. But warrior was already using a bow in his own fashion. Why the Ranger wouldn’t be able to use swords, axes and greatswords in his own fashion too ?
Revenant’s hammer seems really strange… But at least he’s using the Mists. And the Mists are clearly some kind of Deus ex machina thing in Tyria.

You see, they’ve always been giving weapons that could feel rather inconventionnal, but always made them fit into the style of their professions. They never had to turn their characters into something else.
To me making a hunter out of a Guardian is completely turning it into something else.
Remember that, as I said earlier, specs are not supposed to change the theme, just giving it another twist from something that already existed in the base profession.

JonPeters.5630:

A couple notes on Dragonhunter. We went with this name because we felt it was evocative of the medieval witch hunters. Guardians consider themselves protectors of the innocent. Followers of their faith be it in honor, valor, etc. The origin of the dragonhunter is a more subtle nuanced version of this. Guardians fight for justice and the dragonhunter faction believes justice is the eradication of dragons and their minions. I understand this is a lot more high concept than Mesmer but at the end of the day we felt like we wanted to try and push a more mature theme here. I hope this helps explain our thinking. We had other generic names in mind but felt like it was important to have a mix of spec names that are generic fantasy, more Tyrian fantasy, and more high concept. This one falls more in the third category.

Thanks,

Jon

As a player that has played a guardian since the beta’s and launch of this game from the beginning I just want to express my own opinion, that I do not like the name simple as that. I love what you have done for the specialization. It’s just the name, the title you gave it doesn’t set right with me as a player. That’s my 2cents.

RabbitUp.8294:

Black Box.9312:

The chronomancer and druid both make sense, because they define what the spec is and what it does. A chronomancer is a manipulator of time, and a druid is a mage of nature. But dragonhunter just feels wrong because it has little to no relation to what the spec is or how it works.

If you didn’t know that mesmers have that one time related elite skill, chronomancer wouldn’t make sense either. Creating illusions and causing hallucinations is not exactly related to controlling the flow of time.

You could make an entire Guardian elite spec based on Marvel’s Human Torch based on such a connection, since Guardians have a skill that sets themselves on fire.

As for how describing what the spec does, how does “hunter” not hint at the introduction of bow and traps?

Even without thinking of time warp, I could have easily made the connection for the chronomancer. Mesmers are already based around the idea of using magic to distort reality. Extending their control to that of time as well is hardly a stretch, and yet at the same time it adds an entirely new dimension to the class. It still feels distinctly like a mesmer, but it’s a mesmer spun in a new direction. Better still, the use of alacrity and their new F5 shatter bring an entirely new way to play the game that you can’t even come close to replicating with what we currently have.

With the dragonhunter, Anet appears to have taken the idea of a guardian and just flipped it entirely on its head. Using both a bow AND traps AND giving it the theme of being a “hunter” gives the impression that it’s little more than a wannabe ranger, and other than the blue effects it hardly feels like a guardian at all, let alone a new playstyle for one.

It’s really frustrating to me that for nearly 3 years guardians have been shafted in terms of balancing (damage being primarily centered around ground-based AoE and the use of slow-moving projectiles, very little soft CC to prevent enemies from avoiding the aforementioned damage, virtually no disengage, defensive builds being almost entirely reliant on allies for effectiveness, etc.) because of the theme, and then suddenly with this new spec they decide to do a complete turnaround and break the theme because OMG BOW. There were so many suggestions by so many people on how they could have given the class a long ranged, CC oriented spec while still staying true to what separates a guardian from other classes, as well as creating a unique playstyle that introduces new mechanics and added dimension to the game. Instead, they decided to copy/paste ranger mechanics and throw in some light magic visuals and call it good.

JonPeters.5630:

A couple notes on Dragonhunter. We went with this name because we felt it was evocative of the medieval witch hunters. Guardians consider themselves protectors of the innocent. Followers of their faith be it in honor, valor, etc. The origin of the dragonhunter is a more subtle nuanced version of this. Guardians fight for justice and the dragonhunter faction believes justice is the eradication of dragons and their minions. I understand this is a lot more high concept than Mesmer but at the end of the day we felt like we wanted to try and push a more mature theme here. I hope this helps explain our thinking. We had other generic names in mind but felt like it was important to have a mix of spec names that are generic fantasy, more Tyrian fantasy, and more high concept. This one falls more in the third category.

Thanks,

Jon

If the dragons are supposed to essentially be forces of nature, I don’t see how one can take a moral stance against them and enact justice. It’s like taking a righteous stand against all sea water because of flooding and tsunamis.

Ojyh.9842:

OK, then there is no point to use those terms yourself.

I personnaly didn’t really like Thief as a name exactly for that reason. But the fact that this concept is something commonly admitted in fantasy worlds and that it is still pretty consistent I accepted it after a while.
But the thief is a profession, not a spec, so we don’t really need to find a coherent link with any larger concept he’s supposed to descend from. Actually I think I could ALMOST accept a Dragonhunter as a profession…

Ok but here’s the thing, choosing that elite spec changes our class icon and redefines how the class plays. Arena Net themselves even say that when you don’t use the elite spec then they expect you to tell people you’re a Ranger speccing into a,b,c. But if you choose the elite spec then you are a Druid who specs into c and d. We can even reduce that down into telling people you’re either a Ranger or a Druid. With the icon change you won’t even have to ask in most cases because you’ll just visually see it.

This is another reason why everyone is getting so confused on elite specs in general. Yes there is a base class you have to be in order to play one but once you choose to be that elite specialization you sort of have to see it as a stand-alone. That’s why they’re trying to drive that point home by changing the profession’s icon along with the choice.

Also the part that Dragonhunter theme takes from Guardian is being zealous in their pursuit of justice, they use the Light to do what they believe needs to be done. It’s basically a Guardian devoting themselves to a singular cause.

That’s the theme anyway, I really want to stress this point, it is just a theme. It does not mean you have to play your Dragonhunter as “hurr duur sylvari dragon minion, kill kill kill.”

Aaron.4807:

Eggs.3142:

Aaron.4807:

purecontact.1680:

rapthorne.7345:

Arbiter is a far, far better name. It fits the theme (Judge/Jury/Executioner of evil) and it’s not laughably generalist like “dragon hunter” (aka every single PC in Tyria)

Translation of Arbiter in french : Arbitre.
Yes, it’s a referee.

Well, thank god Arbiter is an English word, and while it somewhat means referee there is a lot more gravitas to it’s meaning then that picture you posted.

From Dictionary.com: 1350-1400; Middle English arbitour, arbitre < Anglo-French, Old French < Latin arbiter

Its a french word. The spelling is a dead give away. Dont forget that English is a language filled to the brim with borrowed words. In fact most of the ‘cool sounding’ words are in other languages

I am not 5, I know all of this.

What I am saying is the french meaning and the english meaning are different enough to point out that we are using the english meaning since this game is in english.

Understand?

And btw, it isn’t a French word it is a Latin word. In fact most of the ‘cool sounding’ words are Latin roots. Hence why most European languages are known as Romance languages. Latin>Rome>condescending enough for you now?

Im just saying, to me, they mean the same thing. The umpire at the baseball game is an Arbiter, the judge in the grand jury is an Arbiter, heck, we are all in arbitration over the arbitrary name choice here. The meaning of the word to me is the same, everyone here us just arguing over precived conception based on the sound of something.

Genesis.8572:

For what it’s worth, I did a hypothetical rework that removed the condescending portions, and it still would not have fit one post.

Here you go:
“Thank you for your reply [Jon]. We appreciate anyone from ArenaNet providing feedback on the fan responses. I get what you were going for. I really do. That became apparent in the Friday twitch stream on the guardian elite specialization. But you are sending mixed messages through the name and the flavor text in a manner that feels both disassociated from the core concepts of the guardian and what you claim the elite specialization is about.

You and Karl indicate that ArenaNet seek to evoke a “medieval witch hunter.” But ANet talks about the specialization being “big game hunters,” which is a distinct concept from a “medieval witch hunter.” I can see “witch hunters” being connected conceptually to guardians, as purifiers and inquisitors of the faith, but not “big game hunters.” “Witch hunters” were not known for taking down “big game,” but the secretive, deceptive, and dangerously subtle ‘game’ that lurked within the hearts of their fellow humans: apostates, pagans, and heretics. The danger for “witch hunters” was neither “big game” nor the world outside of their community, but within their community.

When many people think “witch hunter,” they think of the _Victorian Van Helsing. More broadly, the “witch hunter” concept evokes colonial Puritan and medieval Germanic witch hunts and Spanish inquisitions. Even Van Helsing was less concerned with “big game” and more with the deception of the occult, vampires, and Satanic forces of evil. For both medieval witch hunters and later invented popular conceptions (e.g. Van Helsing), exorcisms, charms, and prayers were a significant component of how they performed their work. Even 20th century Hollywood action-hero witch hunters (e.g. Blade, Hanzel and Gretel, Van Helsing) are not “big game hunters,” even with their semi-automatic use of arrow ballistics. When I think of a “big game hunter,” I think of posh British imperialists in 19th century Africa on a leisure holiday unwittingly driving creatures to extinction for kittens and giggles._

A lot of the famous dragon-hunters of folklore (e.g. Beowulf, Siegfried, Saint George, etc.) were conceptually nothing like “medieval witch hunters,” nor were they “big game hunters.” Saint George did not slay the dragon he had captured until the populace of Silene converted to Christianity. It’s even a miracle in itself that a Christian saint can be counted among the folkloric dragon hunters. They were simply warriors. The same is true for most dragonhunters in modern fantasy conceptions: basically warriors and rangers. A lot of the virtuous knights and warriors who slew dragons in myth, folklore, and poem did so with swords, spears, and shields. Not bows. That’s true even for Turin Turambar. Bard the Bowman of Laketown is seemingly the exception, and he’s no guardian.

What’s more, one of the big points of the Season 2 Living Story was that the elder dragons are not so much evil, but Galactus-style forces of nature. There must always be a Lich Ki…errr…. Elder Dragons. They are forces of nature that everyone seeks to vanquish to either their death or slumber. There’s no hunting involved, nor stalking nor tracking. The dragons operate openly and boldly. We (roughly) know where the dragons are.

So here we are in the Maguuma Jungle for Heart of Thorns. Humans of Kryta are facing the Mursaat, their ancient foes. Clues of the White Mantle abound throughout the Maguuma Wastes and Western Kryta. Operative Sylvari agents of Mordremoth lie in wait amidst accusations of treason, distrust, and fear. And the guardians you want to evoke “medieval witch hunters” are “big game hunting” dragons and their publicly-operating minions? There’s a disconnect there.

Furthermore, the elite specialization builds off of the guardian, which is indeed about warrior justice. But there is little about fighting dragons in the ability names or even the aesthetics of the specialization. When you posted an elite specialization teaser picture with angel wings, people thought “paragon.” There’s nothing particularly “draconic” about the specialization. The specialization ability names are indeed just as generic as most of the alternative proposed names for the specialization.

The mechanics are sound. They have been what guardians have wanted, though the symbol-like traps took people for a surprise. The elite specialization name and its attached flavor text are not. Please rethink the name. I feel you would find that people would be far more receptive to the guardian’s elite specialization with an appropriate name change."

Alice.5360:

Mar.4839:

So the Dragonhunter is the same way, a fanatical hunter that believes in eradicating all things to do with dragons. Y

But I don’t want my guardian to be a “fanatical hunter that believes in eradicating all dragons.” As someone said in another thread, giving a class name “explicit story motivations” is constricting. It forces the PVE story down everyone’s throats- RPers, WVWers, PVPers and even plain old players that just don’t get caught up in the story.

I feel this is a valid point. One thing you don’t want to do is ‘godmode’ characters. I know the devs are essentially gods of Tyria, but when it comes to small things like custom looks, races, motivations and even biography, the player is going to resist tooth and nail to retain as much of their identity as they can! Tying motivations to professions is infringing on some of those options the player wants to keep. Granted, an RPer can easily just ignore that part of the lore of what their motives are as a Dragonhunter and Guardian, the goal of a lore writer should be to try to craft things to be as malleable as possible while still creating a good structure to build a story from.

Vikkela.7261:

Thanks for the reply Jon, really appreciate it

Thanks Jon… It’s always great when staff reach out to customers!

Doon.2364:

Hunter sounds WoW-ish. This is Guildwars, so the name should be DragonRanger.

Yeah, but it is still a guardian, and guardians are powerful.

So I think it should be Power Ranger instead.

_The mechanics are sound. They have been what guardians have wanted..

Nope, they were not pal.. a huge majority expected a very VERY different angle from this elite spec. (see the previous artwork from the “new spec” a guardian with blue wings and a crystal bow.. how’s that supposed to be a hunter of some sort..?) hence the mixed and bland reception on different parts on the net.. Compare it with Chronomancer, which was unanimously well received.

The concept is not only vastly different but weird for what a Guardian is supposed to be, it’s not even coming closer to a Paragon to the very least.. The mechanics are OK, but again, Guardian with traps?.

They should’ve considered a different approach, elites were supposed to be a ramification from the main profession not a whole different concept (both thematic and mechanics). It just doesn’t make any sense at all.

Its a bit forced to expect to see a D.hunter to be a witch hunter or a righteous whatever they want to call the elite spec now. I think ANet just wanted to justify the elite name..

Action Sloth.2603:

JonPeters.5630:

A couple notes on Dragonhunter. We went with this name because we felt it was evocative of the medieval witch hunters. Guardians consider themselves protectors of the innocent. Followers of their faith be it in honor, valor, etc. The origin of the dragonhunter is a more subtle nuanced version of this. Guardians fight for justice and the dragonhunter faction believes justice is the eradication of dragons and their minions. I understand this is a lot more high concept than Mesmer but at the end of the day we felt like we wanted to try and push a more mature theme here. I hope this helps explain our thinking. We had other generic names in mind but felt like it was important to have a mix of spec names that are generic fantasy, more Tyrian fantasy, and more high concept. This one falls more in the third category.

Thanks,

Jon

If the dragons are supposed to essentially be forces of nature, I don’t see how one can take a moral stance against them and enact justice. It’s like taking a righteous stand against all sea water because of flooding and tsunamis.

man versus nature is not a new concept

Mar.4839:

To understand Dragonhunter =/= anyone who hunts dragons requires more thought than the other two.

Whether you feel like all specialization names should require little or no thought, or enjoy them, is a different sentiment entirely. But there’s a lot basis for why ArenaNet decided on this name.

So much time do you spend thinking that “Duck Hunters” is a high concept game?

MFranco.9514:

“Paragons are the guardian angels of Elona, humanity’s champions against malefic threats”. Guardian evolved from paragon and in therms of specialization Dragonhunter feats perfectly.

Actually, you’re making a better case here that the specialization should be called the ‘paragon’ than you are for the ‘dragonhunter.’

Alice.5360:

Christ that is terrible reasoning. “Other generic names”. What could be more generic than “Dragonhunter”? And there is NOTHING subtle or nuanced about “Dragonhunter.”

Exactly. It’s the poster-child of generic names.

For me it’s also a poor name because:
1) if the class is supposed to hunt/kill dragons, why is not one of the skills/traits/mechanics/anything is tailored to killing dragons? do the new trap skills work against elder dragons? i think not.
2) it’s the only class named this way. it sticks out, and not in a good way.
3) it’s more in line with a profession name than a class name.

scerevisiae.1972:

Exactly. It’s the poster-child of generic names.

For me it’s also a poor name because:
1) if the class is supposed to hunt/kill dragons, why is not one of the skills/traits/mechanics/anything is tailored to killing dragons? do the new trap skills work against elder dragons? i think not.
2) it’s the only class named this way. it sticks out, and not in a good way.
3) it’s more in line with a profession name than a class name.

1) Why does the engineer not build things? Why does the Thief not actually steal things?
2) It’s the name of a specialization, not a class. And you don’t know yet, what is to come.
3) Yeah, well, we have no classes in GW2. We have only professions, like Guardian, Mesmer or Thief (that is the actual wording, which ANet uses). Chronomancer and Dragonhunter are no classes either, they are elite specializations (see #2).

@all:
And how is it, you all know better, how a profession and specialization is “supposed” to be. When the actual game designers, who define the content of the game, say otherwise. A lot of entitled opinions in this thread… but when children scream “childish”, what can we expect?

TyPin.9860:

1) Why does the engineer not build things?

Inventions. Kits. Turrets. Gadgets. Toolbelts.

Why does the Thief not actually steal things?

Because they are a noob who has not pressed their F1 key.

phys.7689:

Action Sloth.2603:

JonPeters.5630:

A couple notes on Dragonhunter. We went with this name because we felt it was evocative of the medieval witch hunters. Guardians consider themselves protectors of the innocent. Followers of their faith be it in honor, valor, etc. The origin of the dragonhunter is a more subtle nuanced version of this. Guardians fight for justice and the dragonhunter faction believes justice is the eradication of dragons and their minions. I understand this is a lot more high concept than Mesmer but at the end of the day we felt like we wanted to try and push a more mature theme here. I hope this helps explain our thinking. We had other generic names in mind but felt like it was important to have a mix of spec names that are generic fantasy, more Tyrian fantasy, and more high concept. This one falls more in the third category.

Thanks,

Jon

If the dragons are supposed to essentially be forces of nature, I don’t see how one can take a moral stance against them and enact justice. It’s like taking a righteous stand against all sea water because of flooding and tsunamis.

man versus nature is not a new concept

Nor is it a moral concept. I get the DH concept they’re trying to sell. It wasn’t what I was hoping for but it sorta works. And really I care more about functionality than names; I can always invent my own concept.

My main wish was for a ranged option that doesn’t suck and it looks like that’s happening; very cool. Traps though… what’s next, elementalists with venoms and warriors with minions?

Genesis.8572:

TyPin.9860:

1) Why does the engineer not build things?

Inventions. Kits. Turrets. Gadgets. Toolbelts.

Why does the Thief not actually steal things?

Because they are a noob who has not pressed their F1 key.

I knew those answers would come. What engineer does is summon stuff, any profession in GW2 can do similar things. They do not really engineer or even build things. Also thieves don’t steal anything. The skill might be called “steal”, but what do they actually steal. Like ‘Consume plasma’? What is it they stole from a Mesmer, when they use that skill?

EDIT:
deleted

Action Sloth.2603:

If the dragons are supposed to essentially be forces of nature, I don’t see how one can take a moral stance against them and enact justice. It’s like taking a righteous stand against all sea water because of flooding and tsunamis.

Evolution works under selection pressure. The ones who are too weak or over all not adapted will be extinct. Still, knowing that doesn’t mean, human society has to work like that. One can easily say that invoking principles of evolution in human society is immoral.

The same goes for Dragonhunters. Even if they recognize the dragons as forces of nature, they can still find it immoral to support them. Thus, they hunt down any minion of the dragons. Also, the dragons may show sings of awareness. So a Dragonhunter can easily justify that the actions of the dragons are choices to an extend and thus can be seen as immoral in their very nature.

I love all the pedantic arguments being made here.

What I take from JPeters post is the following:

“We have thought this through much more than you. I’m explaining our logic as a courtesy. The name isn’t changing”.

They probably already recorded voicelines with dragonhunter in them. So no more changing around. If you want them to change it you need to vote with your wallet. But non of you would just refuse to buy HoT because of that.

GreyWraith.8394:

phys.7689:

Action Sloth.2603:

JonPeters.5630:

A couple notes on Dragonhunter. We went with this name because we felt it was evocative of the medieval witch hunters. Guardians consider themselves protectors of the innocent. Followers of their faith be it in honor, valor, etc. The origin of the dragonhunter is a more subtle nuanced version of this. Guardians fight for justice and the dragonhunter faction believes justice is the eradication of dragons and their minions. I understand this is a lot more high concept than Mesmer but at the end of the day we felt like we wanted to try and push a more mature theme here. I hope this helps explain our thinking. We had other generic names in mind but felt like it was important to have a mix of spec names that are generic fantasy, more Tyrian fantasy, and more high concept. This one falls more in the third category.

Thanks,

Jon

If the dragons are supposed to essentially be forces of nature, I don’t see how one can take a moral stance against them and enact justice. It’s like taking a righteous stand against all sea water because of flooding and tsunamis.

man versus nature is not a new concept

Nor is it a moral concept. I get the DH concept they’re trying to sell. It wasn’t what I was hoping for but it sorta works. And really I care more about functionality than names; I can always invent my own concept.

My main wish was for a ranged option that doesn’t suck and it looks like that’s happening; very cool. Traps though… what’s next, elementalists with venoms and warriors with minions?

Try again. PETA and various other rights activists beg to differ. And what about all the dolphin killings for fins?

It’s the reverse of what we have in game. “Nature” in the form of living, breathing, beings trying to kill society.

Saint.5647:

Rashagar.8349:

Genesis.8572:

Let’s put it this way: If the Guardian elite specialization had been ‘inquisitor/avenger/arbiter/paragon’ or just about anything else that has been thrown around , how many apologists of the name ‘dragonhunter’ would have thought that a ‘dragonhunter’ would have been a more apt name and clamoring for that change?

If the guardian elite specialisation had been inquisitor I’d be asking them to remove any overtly religious references. They’ve done a good job of doing that so far, and the specialisation isn’t anything to do with enforcing religious doctrine or rooting out heresy, no matter how close that is to making a pun.

Well, I guess it’s time for you to ask for the removal of religious references. Ironically, the name references exactly what you had an issue with.

JonPeters.5630:

A couple notes on Dragonhunter. We went with this name because we felt it was evocative of the medieval witch hunters. Guardians consider themselves protectors of the innocent. Followers of their faith be it in honor, valor, etc. The origin of the dragonhunter is a more subtle nuanced version of this. Guardians fight for justice and the dragonhunter faction believes justice is the eradication of dragons and their minions.

… I was going to go into detail of what I meant by the word overt (hint: “hunter” is not it) but then I realised that that wouldn’t address the issue here…

Witch hunter =/= Inquisitor

Like, at all.

Srolo.5208:

Try again. PETA and various other rights activists beg to differ. And what about all the dolphin killings for fins?

It’s the reverse of what we have in game. “Nature” in the form of living, breathing, beings trying to kill society.

There’s alot of problems using this argument, especially in relation to the world of Tyria.
Nothing is stopping heroes from slaughtering countless critters for some greens or blues after all. No discrimination there. Adding to that, NPCs still poach, hunt and do plenty of the same crimes as they would say on Earth. The only difference is, they aren’t the dominant force in the world as humans are on Earth.

The roles actually aren’t all that reversed actually, just the fact that Nature actually has a powerful force behind it, albiet killable. The dragons don’t have any morals. Just like tornadoes or earthquakes. Hence why they are considered forces of nature. Is a tornado evil? Are there those who wish to destroy all tornadoes for the havoc and destruction they place upon the world?

The Dragonhunter concept is ok, the ‘Big Game Hunter’ association is not.

Dragons are not game; you don’t go hunting them for sport! If you want to retain the whole “purge the wicked” theme of the Dragonhunter, then the ‘hunting’ motif needs to stay on point and not end up like:

Talonblaze.3175:

Srolo.5208:

Try again. PETA and various other rights activists beg to differ. And what about all the dolphin killings for fins?

It’s the reverse of what we have in game. “Nature” in the form of living, breathing, beings trying to kill society.

There’s alot of problems using this argument, especially in relation to the world of Tyria.
Nothing is stopping heroes from slaughtering countless critters for some greens or blues after all. No discrimination there. Adding to that, NPCs still poach, hunt and do plenty of the same crimes as they would say on Earth. The only difference is, they aren’t the dominant force in the world as humans are on Earth.

The roles actually aren’t all that reversed actually, just the fact that Nature actually has a powerful force behind it, albiet killable. The dragons don’t have any morals. Just like tornadoes or earthquakes. Hence why they are considered forces of nature. Is a tornado evil? Are there those who wish to destroy all tornadoes for the havoc and destruction they place upon the world?

You’re still comparing tornadoes to something like a crocodile running around in your house that just ate your dog and is trying to eat you. Do you still not see the difference?

Still sounds like a generic word salad pick
and will never make since with my Sylvari Guard Would i get exp if i jump of something high and kill my self ?