Guild Wars 2

TyPin.9860:

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?

are you familiar with the phrase “the customer is always right”? we are the customers.

this forum exists to garner feedback, we are providing it.

why do you arrogantly assume the role of trying to censor legitimate opinions? you need only post that you like the name, and leave others to express their own opinions.

Harvest.2506:

There is no sense of Justice in Dragon Hunter, Its a Matter of Survival, not a matter of fighting for Morally. You could have just called it “Witch Hunter” and be done with it.

While you’re not wrong that “it’s a matter of survival”, it is also a matter of “fighting for morally” – though that’s not the only thing that a “sense of justice” is – a sense of justice refers to prosecution of morals and laws, of defending the innocent and persecuting the unjust.

Not all senses of justice adhere to morals or laws.

However, what’s important to note that fighting the Elder Dragons is no more a “matter of survival” than fighting a war against a tyrannical invasive nation. Because, in essence, once you get past all the magic and brainwashing that is draconic corruption, that’s what the Elder Dragons and their minions are.

And fighting evil nations? That is a case of fighting for justice. And all the Elder Dragons are, are magical ancient dictators once you get past the fluff and the lies/misdirection that they’re mindless animals.

Konig Des Todes.2086:

Harvest.2506:

There is no sense of Justice in Dragon Hunter, Its a Matter of Survival, not a matter of fighting for Morally. You could have just called it “Witch Hunter” and be done with it.

While you’re not wrong that “it’s a matter of survival”, it is also a matter of “fighting for morally” – though that’s not the only thing that a “sense of justice” is – a sense of justice refers to prosecution of morals and laws, of defending the innocent and persecuting the unjust.

Not all senses of justice adhere to morals or laws.

However, what’s important to note that fighting the Elder Dragons is no more a “matter of survival” than fighting a war against a tyrannical invasive nation. Because, in essence, once you get past all the magic and brainwashing that is draconic corruption, that’s what the Elder Dragons and their minions are.

And fighting evil nations? That is a case of fighting for justice. And all the Elder Dragons are, are magical ancient dictators once you get past the fluff and the lies/misdirection that they’re mindless animals.

Here http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constable_of_France

Just call them constables you have everything to back it up. Pains me that I know more history than most and I’m only 29.

Hi Jon!

Thanks for the clarification, it is appreciated.

Will this “faction” somehow be introduced in game and furthered in lore via other methods?

I am in the camp of : not liking the name as it does not FEEL right.

However a good in game and lore explanation, I would be just fine with it, even impressed.

For that matter, are ALL the specializations getting in game lore explanation?

I feel that Inquisitor would have been extremely fitting for this spec. I am fairly excited to try out parts, but not necessarily the whole of this specialization.

The funny thing here is actually that 99% of all other names for the specialisation from the community is just plain awfull.

I wish people would stop disliking a name just because they “think” they can do it better, you can’t Dragonhunter might not be the “best” but it sure as hell beats 99% of other names people came up with.

We get it though, because YOU think it’s immature for a name then EVERYONE should think so too but that’s not how the world works.

Now if someone actually provided proper feedback instead of the usual “lazy, immature, boring, generic” insults then they might have a point but so far that’s not been the case at all it’s even been proven by many that the lore of the name fits the GW lore.

Lastly, if the name is what makes you angry then your profession might be a tad too strong in the game now if this is your biggest concern.

scerevisiae.1972:

are you familiar with the phrase “the customer is always right”? we are the customers.

this forum exists to garner feedback, we are providing it.

why do you arrogantly assume the role of trying to censor legitimate opinions? you need only post that you like the name, and leave others to express their own opinions.

This is such a 90s philosophy about how that thing works. Who of those, who dislike the name, will not buy the expansion because of it? How many ppl are represented within this forum? Marketing works a bit different than simply following what the crowd says should be done. Also, you (and the forum community) are just a tiny fraction of the GW2 community.

In the end I am not trying to censor anything. You in fact are the one, who tells me what I “need” to do. I simply asked a question. Because ppl say: “this is guardian, this aint guardian”, as if they knew better. Simply being a single customer (or part of a minority of those customers) doesn’t make you automatically right. Wasn’t like that in the 90s, and it isn’t like that today.

I simply asked a question, which btw you did not reply to, but instead you tried straw man me out of the discussion. You failed.

EDIT:
Btw, we both are customers with different opinions. Who of us is right?

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

Jon, As much as I like your work and I appreciate a lot the fact that you wanted to communicate with us, the explanation just does’t work. Or rather, it works in showing your reasoning, but it’s just not a very sound reasoning.

Dragonhunter doesn’t evoke a Witchunter, for the quite simple reason that Dragonhunter is a concept of its own, that already exists, with its references, imaginaries and tropes that are different from the Witchunter ones.

Add to this that you played everywhere in descriptions and flavour text with stuff like “it’s a big game hunter” and “it uses traps”, and it becomes even more clear that you are in fact pointing to a hunter of beasts, which is a hunter/ranger notion, not an inquisitor/justicar one like a witchhunter.

Final blow, you made a presentation video about a Dragonhunter going after a Dinosaur in a forest, and the whole idea of the Witchunter disappears for me.

I mean, it’s not the end of the world, but I still think that thematically you really screwed up this, and this explanation confirms it even more in this sense. You should have taken another name, or at least changed it after the backlash: for once, it was well justified.

Guys, just give up. They aren’t going to change it. Time and time again, history shows that some of the Anet devs don’t know what humility is, so they double down on their stance and defend it. FoV and First Person View come to mind, until they finally changed it, but once the name is set, they can’t change it. Some of them are just too arrogant and prideful. They always seem to think they know better. I guess some of us are just expecting too much out of GW2. Just learn to accept it for what it is, a really cheesy PVE storyline with dragons. You won’t find meaningful depth, especially when you have silly names like “Dragon Hunter” that seem to be catered towards pre-teens. Maybe that’s their target audience though.

How rad would it have been for Anet to have the “Dragonhunter” reveal be last and have the final shot of the video be a zoom out showing the character’s back while he gets poised to fire at a rising mass of shaking jungle then cut to black, alluding to actually hunting an elder dragon and not a dinosaur.

Azzer.8137:

The funny thing here is actually that 99% of all other names for the specialisation from the community is just plain awfull.

I wish people would stop disliking a name just because they “think” they can do it better, you can’t Dragonhunter might not be the “best” but it sure as hell beats 99% of other names people came up with.

We get it though, because YOU think it’s immature for a name then EVERYONE should think so too but that’s not how the world works.

Now if someone actually provided proper feedback instead of the usual “lazy, immature, boring, generic” insults then they might have a point but so far that’s not been the case at all it’s even been proven by many that the lore of the name fits the GW lore.

Lastly, if the name is what makes you angry then your profession might be a tad too strong in the game now if this is your biggest concern.

Many people think the name is immature, and people have rallied behind alternatives whilst giving proper reasoning. That’s how things evolve and change in the real world.

You’re obviously here more for the discord than the discussion otherwise you would have read the beautiful thesis written by others on this topic.

What got me a little ticked off is the term big game Hunter. As someone who really feels strongly against any type of hunting for sport in real life I absolutely hate this term being used so excessively, since all it does is invoke images of poachers and the like posting kittened up selfies with their kills on Facebook and instagram…
Maybe that’s just me. But that and the name dragon Hunter being so distanced from the concept of a guardian really makes me never want to touch a guardian again…

It just doesn’t fit, and I understand the reasoning by Jon Peters, but it really should be reworked.. It’s still beta isn’kitten Everything is subject to change after all… Right?

So, of the arguments in this thread, the only one that actually makes sense is “I simply don’t like the name”; and that’s fine because nobody requires you to like it.

As for the other arguments they fall short:

- No, it’s not a generic poster title anymore than tempest, or druid, (or some other upcoming elite spec name).
- No, none of the other elite spec names feel mutually exclusive to that class. A Guardian could totally become a Tempest. An Elementalist could totally become a chronomancer; so could a necromancer, and we’ll most likely see more non-exclusive names.
- No, we are not all dragonhunters. Some might feel like they are a dragonhunter because they are hunting mordremoth, but you are still a pact commander and “your class”, not a dragonhunter (a person specialising in hunting dragons). If you still say you are then I could run the same line of logic, and say, “but my Guardian is already a self-stylized Tempest why does Elementalists get that name? QQ.”

Tbh, the name doesn’t evoke any more awe than the other elite spec names I have seen, but that’s me. Dragonhunter seems a valid name for a Guardian, and I don’t think any of the other names that people have come up with fit any better.

I like the announced name and think most suggested names are actually worse and don’t fit the theme at all.

ANET became too arrogant after the success of GW2. I miss the ANET of GW1 when they were much more accepting of feedback. For better or worse, ANET is no longer the ANET from 10 years ago. Much of its principle has changed since GW1. I guess that’s the price of becoming a bigger company.

All professions seek to eliminate Dragons in Tyria. The hunter name and theme was obviously made as an after thought after they assigned Traps to Guardian. Longbow and Traps….oh, it is a hunter! And lets put dragon in front of it to make it “Tyrian” and cool. Such a low level naming and decision. And Jon dare to call this name high level? Feel they cannot fit Traps anywhere else and Guardian drew the short end of the stick getting it.

Wait, aren’t all classes dragonhunters in the expansion? They are killing dragon minions and dragon himself.

@john : i totally agree with your idea and theme for Dragon Hunter and appreciate the high concept, not your fault if some people can’t get it. Love your work, continue like this !

Read the reasoning, but it still just sounds so off to me.

Even the generic titles you thought of would have been much, much better. Even “Bow Knight” or something would have been better.

You can still save this. Just change the name of the elite skill itself and its animation.

Obtena.7952:

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”.

I see the fact that the name required an explanation in the first place to be a sign of its failure.

Did anyone need chronomancer, druid or tempest explaining?

More like “We over thought this so much that we accidentally named an NPC faction instead of a guardian specialisation, now maybe if I explain our illogical choice by pretending it’s mature and high-concept people will stop saying it’s pants”.

The name D hunter and it’s explanation sound like bad headcanon or something from a terrible fanfic. Actually, considering the name is probably based on Brahms transition to D hunter and his personal story, I’m probably not far wrong.

scerevisiae.1972:

are you familiar with the phrase “the customer is always right”? we are the customers.

The phrase is total bs, unless maybe in ’murica where everyone sues each other over anything.

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

Jon this is a great explanation, the only problem is all the references to the Dragonhunter being a “big game hunter” a term usually reserved for sport hunting. If you guys go back and change the concept lore from that of a bgh to that of a hunter of Dragon corruption (much like a witchhunter) then I think 90% of people would be happy with the name, as it stands your reasoning and the supporting lore are conflicting. That I’d what is causing the great schism in the player base between liking the name and hating it!

scerevisiae.1972:

are you familiar with the phrase “the customer is always right”? we are the customers.

this forum exists to garner feedback, we are providing it.

why do you arrogantly assume the role of trying to censor legitimate opinions? you need only post that you like the name, and leave others to express their own opinions.

I have to chime in here.

You’ve got the quote wrong. Its “The customer is always wrong, and they don’t really know what they want. If you don’t like them, give them exactly what they ask for”.

This thread reached a new level of ridiculousness. Now ANet is being arrogant and self centered, because they do not listen to the input of some players. Especially ANet not knowing “humility” is the most backward stance I have seen so far in this thread.

To those, who advocate the arrogance of ANet:
Did you ever think that your opinion isn’t the only one? I wonder who the arrogant one is…

But keep it coming. The “argument” against the Dragonhunter name, which try to go beyond a simple: “I don’t like it”, are becoming more and more self defeating. It is actually kinda funny at this point…

Ok… 5 additional pages without any feedback from Devs.

Anyway here is my 2 copper.

I think that the Fact that the name “Dragon Hunter” really applies to any class has been driven through clearly enough and without any doubt it is clear that it was not the best choice for the proffesion.

Doing a simple Synonym search for the word Guardian we get several better options for the Elite Specialization.

we have:
advocate, ally, backer, challenger, champ, conqueror, defender, endorser, exponent, expounder, hero, heroine, medalist, nonpareil, number one, numero uno, paladin, artisan, patron, proponent, protector, supporter, sympathizer, the greatest, titleholder
top dog, upholder, vanquisher, victor, vindicator, warrior, winner.

out of those there are some that would be better suited, like:

advocate, conqueror, defender, paladin, vanquisher, vindicator.

for me the last (VINDICATOR) would fit the role much better than a generic “Dragon Hunter”.

Srolo.5208:

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?

Yes, one can be controlled, captured and and dealt with in a peaceful manner by the appropriate professionals without further problems. Except the ones who would simply blow it away, then would have people like PETA on their kitten .

So if that’s the comparison you are going to make, then technically it should be Tyria who should be the one’s with the moral obligations of pondering of even killing these beasts? A crocodile doesn’t know any better. It has no morals. It is not evil.
Yet is killing it right simply because it was going off it’s primal instinct? Especially since there could be alternatives.

If anything, the fact that Tyria has simply decided to off the dragons rather than subdue them (and didn’t even try to either), shows their own lack of morality.
They are anything but animal control.
The only reason the Tyrian’s aren’t villians is because they are unfortunate victims, and haven’t protected or educated themselves properly. But they are far from saint’s in this whole ordeal.

purecontact.1680:

Sentinel works really well.
It’s a border guard and in guild wars 2 background, it works great.
Guardians used to keep their city safe but now that the danger comes from beyond the frontier, they have to investigate further, they became Sentinel.
Once I, as a Sentinel, have found what I came for, I can take my own decision.

“Dragonhunter” is very Dragon-oriented (I know, no kitten sherlock).
To me, it means you’re only role in this xpac is to kill Mordremoth (and his minions) but as a player, I will discover ancient civilization and I may fight enemies which are not dragon-related.

I like Sentinel as well. Maybe the name seems a bit passive but that how are the new traps. You set them up and wait the enemy forces to come upon.
The DH however is defined as a backline attacker and in my experience that’s a more passive rol than a frontliner. So i think Sentinel is the perfect fit for this new trait line.

GreatWoolf.3412:

advocate, conqueror, defender, paladin, vanquisher, vindicator.

for me the last (VINDICATOR) would fit the role much better than a generic “Dragon Hunter”.

no, no, no, no, no, no

You complain about generic names, but your suggestions sound all horrible. And I don’t simply write that to oppose you, I really find those suggestions a horrid choice. Do you see how opinions can differ? Do you see that your opinion aint the only one?

You may like those suggestions better, but that doesn’t mean that those are actually the better options.

As some1 in this or another thread has said: I am glad you guys are not on the dev team.

Talonblaze.3175:

If anything, the fact that Tyria has simply decided to off the dragons rather than subdue them (and didn’t even try to either), shows their own lack of morality.
They are anything but animal control.
The only reason the Tyrian’s aren’t villians is because they are unfortunate victims, and haven’t protected or educated themselves properly. But they are far from saint’s in this whole ordeal.

How is this relevant for this discussion?

Also had Sentinel in mind from first seeing the teaser image. And after the reveal and showcase of skills, I still think it’s a great fitting name, heck of a lot more than ducking fragon Hunter :p

Nexrex.8273:

Also had Sentinel in mind from first seeing the teaser image. And after the reveal and showcase of skills, I still think it’s a great fitting name, heck of a lot more than ducking fragon Hunter :p

Same here!! And yes, we should call them all ducking fragon Hunter that name reserve more likes!!

TyPin.9860:

How is this relevant for this discussion?

In regards to the Dragon Hunter being morally conceptual. You can follow the quote links.

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

Are we even playing the same game, Jon Peters? Dragonhunter feels about as generic a name as you could possibly be! If you wanted it to be an inquisitor type class idk maybe? Call it that?"

As it stands, it seems like the Actual spec name is;

“Dragonhunter (You know, like a witch-hunter)”

Since you have to explain that every single time without the class sounding like the dumb fighter of the group.

Dragonhunter should be an title in-game, we are all dragon hunters here. Calling this spec that, is kind of an insult to all other ""non-dragon hunters"" out there.

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

Thank you for the clarification but did I miss something? I’ve always considered witch hunting to be one of the most unjust activities in human history. How is the slaughtering of innocents in any way something that should be idolized or considered heroic?

Even if this is alluding to the dragons being “good” and we’re wrongfully trying to stop them, I still don’t like the idea of my character being branded a religious extremist or big game poacher. I took down Zhaitan to protect the only world I had left. I didn’t do it because I’m some nutter who wants to commit genocide.

The main problem I have with the name is the story being forced into it. When the dragons are all dead what happens to Dragonhunters? Chronomancers can still Chronomance. What do Dragonhunters do? If they can still use their skills to go after other “prey” then why can’t they have a less specific name to begin with?

Just based on the skills we’ve been shown I think Warden would make the most sense.

Warden
- A person responsible for the supervision of a particular place (traps) and enforcing the regulations associated with it (justice etc).

Yes, it’s likely nothing will change but at least the feedback from the Dragonhunter can be taken into account when it comes to future specialisations. Unless you’re content with sitting back and letting Warrior become Drakeslayer and Thief become Harpyslapper.

TyPin.9860:

GreatWoolf.3412:

advocate, conqueror, defender, paladin, vanquisher, vindicator.

for me the last (VINDICATOR) would fit the role much better than a generic “Dragon Hunter”.

no, no, no, no, no, no

You complain about generic names, but your suggestions sound all horrible. And I don’t simply write that to oppose you, I really find those suggestions a horrid choice. Do you see how opinions can differ? Do you see that your opinion aint the only one?

You may like those suggestions better, but that doesn’t mean that those are actually the better options.

As some1 in this or another thread has said: I am glad you guys are not on the dev team.

It’s funny how you’re telling everyone that if we find Dragonhunter is bad it’s just a matter of taste, and then you reject the other propositions just because they don’t please you (even if I agree, I don’t find those ones fitting more, but others do)
Also you seem to deliberately ignore the tons of objective arguments and explanations about why so many people don’t like it.
You have to undertsand that it’s not only about the name, it’s also the whole theme that goes with it. So giving more depth to this theme will never resolve the problem as the core concept itself is being discussed.

Because you probably already have an answer prepared for any statement we will make, you will probably say that we are a minority even if we make a lot of noise, or that we’re not able to understand or whatever… But clearly so many people can’t be all wrong. I mean, even if we had no arguments (which is not the case !!) the simple fact that so many people dislike that name and feel that it is incorrect should already be an indicator that something IS definitely wrong with it.
Yeah, I said “many”. Because this thread is not the only one to discuss it you know… People are discussing it here, but also in other sections of the official forums, fan forums, comments on youtube, on press articles, on reddit etc… And I would say that what strikes me when I read all that is that EVERYWHERE there a significant amount (sometimes the majority) of people who dislikes the name.

The thread became ridiculous the moment people like you came to criticize the criticism made by others on a feature that actually needs to be criticized (this is called feedback and that’s what A.Net want). All that without giving any proper arguments in favor of the Dragonhunter. You’re more trying to fight us than actually defending the concept of the Dragonhunter. Nope, Jon Peters’ explanation doesn’t count as an argument in favor. Many people totally disagree with him, and his intervention is indeed extremely debatable. I even saw people saying that they were OK with the name until they read Jon Peters’ explanation !

Anyway even if their choices are debatable, I am glad that YOU are not the devs.

Lastly, there is one general thing I wanted to talk about (not specially for you TyPin)
I cannot understand why some people who just don’t care about all this discussion have to come here to tell us to stop discussing it… If you don’t care then please show us how much you don’t care by not participating to the discussion ! The result won’t matter for you anyway.

Dewzie.7015:

Yes, it’s likely nothing will change but at least the feedback from the Dragonhunter can be taken into account when it comes to future specialisations. Unless you’re content with sitting back and letting Warrior become Drakeslayer and Thief become Harpyslapper.

Omg please let Harpyslapper and Drakeslayer be actual spec names. Guardians can’t be the only ones given the short end of the stick!

I posted this on reddit but I feel it bears repeating here:

I feel like the “dragons = evil = demons = demon hunters” argument isn’t good enough. They’ve established in the lore that the dragons are primordial beings that have been around since before recorded time. They go in cycles where they sleep, wake, consume the world’s magic (wiki) and then go back to sleep. That strikes me more like a latent natural disaster, and you can’t call an ice age or a meteor or an earthquake “evil” just because it harms people. It simply acts on the world. Even if there was no intelligent life in Tyria the dragons would still do what they do and IMHO, evil requires sentience and intent.

So does that really fit with “demon hunting”? It seems more like we’re fighting global warming than the forces of evil. So what that leaves me with with is a feeling that now we’re beating up forces of nature, and on a daily scale going out and hunting animals. I’m sorry, but the last thing I’d expect for a guardian is for one to go on a safari to get a trophy to mount on their wall. It really doesn’t matter if this is following Brahm’s story line, Brahm can be a special snowflake. Guardians are about protecting their allies, dispensing justice, and holy might, and absolutely nowhere should the phrase “Big Game Hunter” come into that.

Except dragons are not inherently evil. They are smart and clever, but it is also in their nature to contain magic and restore balance to the world. I believe they are considered more of a force of nature than a true evil. It might be a noble cause to defend the innocent from a dragon, but to hunt a creature of the natural world to extinction isn’t exactly justice. When a wild animal does something like kill a person they are not doing it because they are evil they are doing it because that is their nature and they are just trying to survive. Killing the dragons might be the best known approach to saving the lives of the races of Tyria, but I wouldn’t call it justice as much as it is a necessary evil when a wild animal threatens the Tyrian population.

Once the dragons are gone, if the Guardian profession as a group decided there is great justice in killing the “evil” bears of Tyria, because bears are the greatest threat and protecting the innocent from them is a Guardians calling then I guess we will get the Bear Hunter specialization.

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

Thank you for the reply Jon, believe it or not there are some of us that enjoy the name and concept. Looking forward to getting my hands on it.

Justified reasoning or not, bad choice is still bad.

purecontact.1680:

Like the Vigil, Priory Durmand, Order of Whispers and the Pact.
Do you see where is the problem ?

Problem No. These are the factions /orders that send in the fleet.

And what happen to that!

I find no issue with a group of Guardians now going off creating a new Order per say these Dragonhunters that have seen these orders fail and believe they know better & can do better. Some of them might even of been from these orders and left believing the order are no long capable of achieve the goal of defeating the Elder Dragons. As such they take it on them selves & become The Dragonhunters.

I truth I think part of the biggest problem with this is only 1 spec per profession. And to quote myself.

Bezagron.7352:

I have no problem with that, but I think this has been one of Arenanet’s mistakes in only releasing 1 specialization per profession. They really needed at least 2 specialization per profession at release:

• One to please the core profession fans which enhanced & have the same virtues that defined the profession.
• And 1 that was out there. That it could be a hit or miss with the core fans but shows a gameplay / lore story / name that other players like & were interested in playing.

This way you could enhance & please current profession fans but also shown the possibilities & options specializations would bring before everyone believes this is the Only Way a specialization should be created.

You needed the 2 Specs but we only have the 1 and I think for me this is what has been shown with the Dragonhunter. It really shows that there’s more to specialization them we first through but hasn’t been welcomed by all.

Voonith.2561:

Justified reasoning or not, bad choice is still bad.

Is it, or is it more that some very passionate fans are very unhappy. I see this spec as opening up different gameplay & story gameplay that was a hit or miss with core Guardian fans. And these fans are looking for the specialization that ticks all / to most of the boxes for them.

And this was one of the largest problems I see of only release 1 spec per 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

Where you claim this is a higher, more nuanced, high concept name I don’t see any of those things. It has no magic, no sense of what the spec is or what it does. “I want to protect the innocent so I will call myself a Dragonhunter.” This makes no sense. Sentinel makes sense. Paragon makes sense; hell, Surgeon makes sense.

The very least you could have done would be to make it a more generic name instead of making it specific to dragons. Possibly a throwback to the old Sierra Gabriel Knight series with Schattenjäger. At least that would conjur some imagination. As it is the name is, at best, lackluster regardless of this explanation.

Talonblaze.3175:

TyPin.9860:

How is this relevant for this discussion?

In regards to the Dragon Hunter being morally conceptual. You can follow the quote links.

But it is irrelevant what you consider moral yourself. Moral standards are far from objective. So if the Dragonhunter concept follows certain morals, and you don’t agree with those morals, then this doesn’t mean the concept falls apart. It simply means, you have different morals.

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

My only problem with the name is looking forward into the future, what happens when we kill all the dragons ? Does the specialization get renamed to Retired Dragon Hunter?

Dewzie.7015:

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

Thank you for the clarification but did I miss something? I’ve always considered witch hunting to be one of the most unjust activities in human history. How is the slaughtering of innocents in any way something that should be idolized or considered heroic?

Even if this is alluding to the dragons being “good” and we’re wrongfully trying to stop them, I still don’t like the idea of my character being branded a religious extremist or big game poacher. I took down Zhaitan to protect the only world I had left. I didn’t do it because I’m some nutter who wants to commit genocide.

The main problem I have with the name is the story being forced into it. When the dragons are all dead what happens to Dragonhunters? Chronomancers can still Chronomance. What do Dragonhunters do? If they can still use their skills to go after other “prey” then why can’t they have a less specific name to begin with?

Just based on the skills we’ve been shown I think Warden would make the most sense.

Warden
- A person responsible for the supervision of a particular place (traps) and enforcing the regulations associated with it (justice etc).

Yes, it’s likely nothing will change but at least the feedback from the Dragonhunter can be taken into account when it comes to future specialisations. Unless you’re content with sitting back and letting Warrior become Drakeslayer and Thief become Harpyslapper.

I think this is a good point that I hadn’t really considered. Witch hunting seems like it’d be just and valiant on paper, but you have to consider the fact that REAL witch hunting in the 17th century was horrendous and resulted in the deaths of many innocent people. People actively seeking the punishment of witches were very misguided at best and sadistic murderers at worst, because spoiler alert: there weren’t actually any witches.

Between this and the contradictory “big game hunter” theme, Jon’s justification here fails on two fronts.

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

Nice explanation of the thought process behind it, but it still doesn’t fit. I (and most other posters) can think of about a dozen other names that make more sense even with the concept you described here. And, more importantly, most people just thematically prefer a more generic name so they don’t end up with cognitive dissonance being shoehorned into a theme that doesn’t align with their vision of what their character is or does.

Also, witch hunting was never a positive thing. It was misguided, indoctrinated zealotry.

Also, everyone in the game world is a Dragon Hunter.

Frankly, I think you guys need to backpedal and rename the spec. Unfortunately I’d imagine you’re too proud to do that.

Honestly, I could care less about the name of the elite spec. I’m more concerned with its gameplay. Some people are concerned that this elite spec might be too much like a ranger profession. I having trouble understanding what about it makes it stand apart from other longbow professions. Don’t get me wrong, the idea of a guardian using a longbow instead of a stick is awesome! I’m excited to see what it can do. At the same time though, I don’t want to see the guardian become the new ranger.

Black Box.9312:

Dewzie.7015:

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

Thank you for the clarification but did I miss something? I’ve always considered witch hunting to be one of the most unjust activities in human history. How is the slaughtering of innocents in any way something that should be idolized or considered heroic?

Even if this is alluding to the dragons being “good” and we’re wrongfully trying to stop them, I still don’t like the idea of my character being branded a religious extremist or big game poacher. I took down Zhaitan to protect the only world I had left. I didn’t do it because I’m some nutter who wants to commit genocide.

The main problem I have with the name is the story being forced into it. When the dragons are all dead what happens to Dragonhunters? Chronomancers can still Chronomance. What do Dragonhunters do? If they can still use their skills to go after other “prey” then why can’t they have a less specific name to begin with?

Just based on the skills we’ve been shown I think Warden would make the most sense.

Warden
- A person responsible for the supervision of a particular place (traps) and enforcing the regulations associated with it (justice etc).

Yes, it’s likely nothing will change but at least the feedback from the Dragonhunter can be taken into account when it comes to future specialisations. Unless you’re content with sitting back and letting Warrior become Drakeslayer and Thief become Harpyslapper.

I think this is a good point that I hadn’t really considered. Witch hunting seems like it’d be just and valiant on paper, but you have to consider the fact that REAL witch hunting in the 17th century was horrendous and resulted in the deaths of many innocent people. People actively seeking the punishment of witches were very misguided at best and sadistic murderers at worst, because spoiler alert: there weren’t actually any witches.

Between this and the contradictory “big game hunter” theme, Jon’s justification here fails on two fronts.

Yes, THIS. I didn’t much like the name before, but this explanation only makes it worse.

@Ojyh.9842:
First:
There is not a single objective argument in the world. Nowhere. It is impossible. But this is a more philosophical discussion and would lead away from the purpose of this thread.

Back on topic:
I have specifically (even in the thread you quoted) said, that I am simply a customer with an opinion. And that there are different opinions out there.

But argument and sheer liking are different things. If ppl would say: “I do not like the Dragonhunter theme”, then I could say nothing more than: “Well, I like it, but we seem to simply have different tastes here”.

What I will absolutely refuse is to accept personal taste as an argument in a conceptual discussion. The one is a matter of taste (which you can only state, not argue), the other is a matter of conceptual contradictions. I have seen no argument in the thread, that points conclusively to a conceptual contradiction. I would be happy to discuss those and I do not dismiss the possibility, that I have overseen such arguments. If you would point me to those, I’d be glad to check them out.

Of course, if you wanted, you could hold a poll with the whole of the GW2 community (of which the majority does not take part in the forums, any forums). And in the end you would find ppl, who like or dislike the concept. But we don’t have that. What we have are polls with a completely uncontrolled population taking part in it. And since only a minority of the community takes part in online discussions, there is no conclusive proof, that there is actual a majority of people disliking the concept. Further, to have vocal accounts on different websites express their dislike, does not mean, that this equals the number of people vocalizing their dislike. Number of internet identities =/= number of people behind those identities.

To clarify my position, because I feel ppl tend to dislike a misconception of my position or simply argue straw men:

• I personally did not expect the Dragonhunter theme (merely because of the ill fit between the preview and the actual profession).
• The concept but grew on me quickly throughout the Dragonhunter article and I came to like it. This is but nothing more than my personal opinion.
• I have seen people express their dislike with the concept, by stating, they didn’t like it.
• I have not seen a single conclusive argument showing conceptual contradictions of the Dragonhunter theme
• I have seen but the majority of people, who dislike the concept, trying to rationalize their dislike by forging arguments out of their taste.

—> I am mainly concerned with the last two points. I would gladly check out conclusive arguments, if I oversaw them. But what I have seen was the try to make ones opinion seem more important and more “objective” by forging arguments, which all fell apart so far.