Guild Wars 2

TyPin.9860:

@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.

There are semi-objective arguments, actually. The biggest one is simply that it’s better to use more generic names so people can fill in the stories for their characters themselves. Forcing a very specific concept into a class name has the potential to create cognitive dissonance for players who care about that aspect of gameplay, while giving a class a fitting generic name carries no such potential.

-especially when the specific name is out of whack with both the concept AND the overall theme of the class.

Ezrael.6859:

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.

It’s not entitlement when it’s a game you pay to play. There’s nothing wrong with complaining about things you don’t like as long as you keep a cool head.

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

I took a look at what you posted, and you know popped in my head with that post? Don Quixote. That made me laugh so much. Also next to remembering that you guys gave Tara Strong the voice direction for Scarlet being a British Harley Quinn character archetype. I mean it’s still bad enough you still can’t write for your favorite nuance race that always hogs the spotlight. I wonder how long before Canach writing starts become loaded with overbearing cliches and stereotypes.

Einlanzer.1627:

There are semi-objective arguments, actually. The biggest one is simply that it’s better to use more generic names so people can fill in the stories for their characters themselves. Forcing a very specific concept into a class name has the potential to create cognitive dissonance for players who care about that aspect of gameplay, while giving a class a fitting generic name carries no such potential.

-especially when the specific name is out of whack with both the concept AND the overall theme of the class.

Are you serious? Or are you just trolling me?

Cognitive dissonance is a concept that can be applied to anything. Simply if someone doesn’t like the Dragonhunter theme, it creates a cognitive dissonance. That doesn’t make an argument.

But continuing with your example, the same “error” applies to thief. The profession theme of thieve already is very specific. I agree that this limits role play options. But that isn’t a conceptual contradiction. It is simply a case of how important flexible role play for players should be.

There will likely be a story (Braham’s character development) that explains how this connects with witch/demon hunter theme.

This is one instance I think Anet just needs to ignore people. It’s such a trivial thing that actually makes DOES make a lot of sense within the gw2 universe. Dragons are demons, not animals.

I will put partial blame on anet for miscommunicating this by constantly referring to “big game” when showing off the Dragonhunter.

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.

Now I understand you guys like to run your social experiments, or maybe have a cooperate head from NCsoft/nexon suggesting this , Thus making you unable to speak freely. So as a Free unbias person I can call your reasoning flawed. edit for (spelling/grammar)

No Thanks Jon.

except when it called WITCH HUNTER more people will be confused and up in arms about that.

Dragon Hunter is.. confusing at first, i guess something like Dragon SLAYER will be more fitting in lore theme. But all the support mechanics (and also, support bow spec play) kinda contradicts with more “violent” name. so they settled with “hunter”, kinda missed the spot and crossed the dome of ranger class.

if it were up to me, Dragonseeker is apt choice.

..but i’m no Anet, and i respect their reason. it’s just a name anyway.

Varylk.5628:

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.

Now I understand you guys like to run your social experiments, or maybe have a cooperate head from NCsoft/nexon suggesting this , Thus making you unable to speak freely. So as a Free unbias person I can call your reasoning flawed. edit for (spelling/grammar)

No Thanks Jon.

except when it called WITCH HUNTER more people will be confused and up in arms about that.

Dragon Hunter is.. confusing at first, i guess something like Dragon SLAYER will be more fitting in lore theme. But all the support mechanics (and also, support bow spec play) kinda contradicts with more “violent” name. so they settled with “hunter”, kinda missed the spot and crossed the dome of ranger class.

if it were up to me, Dragonseeker is apt choice.

..but i’m no Anet, and i respect their reason. it’s just a name anyway.

Dragon Slayer is too high-concept for this community to understand.

har har har

It should be pretty obvious by now, that at least for the community, that name is an issue.

You want us to have actual influence on the game? What about picking ~5 of the proposed names which would be fine with Arenanet and let the community vote on it?

What Grax.9204 said.
As a main guardian, I can’t identify with that name at all!
Your halfhearted arguments can’t change this – thanks for your feedback though.

As a guard main I really can’t see this working. It just feels that this has not been thought through. I actually like the name dragonhunter, just not for guard.
I can see it work great for my war or my ranger. But on a guard this whole Big Game Hunter just feels like a sparkling cupid hunting deer for kicks.

As a guardian main, at first I didnt get the name, but after thinking about it, and seeing the spec mechanic, I changed my mind, Dragonhunter being an order among the guardians is both fitting and makes sense in the setting that we are taking the fight to the jungle, the jungle dragon’s lair. Also helps that a spec is not a class, and there will be other orders or specs for the guardian, being a dragonhunter is a choice.

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

That’s way too vague. Perhaps if the term “dragon hunter” didn’t already exist, and if you made greater connection to a witch hunter theme, it might come off that way.
But that’s not the case, and it ends up feeling like the name is grasping at straws.

Arewn.2368:

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

That’s way too vague. Perhaps if the term “dragon hunter” didn’t already exist, and if you made greater connection to a witch hunter theme, it might come off that way.
But that’s not the case, and it ends up feeling like the name is grasping at straws.

I am not buying the name to, Justiciar or Inquisitor would be fine, connected to lore and guardian justice skill theme.

http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/White_Mantle

^my 2 cents.

Arena net whit all do respect the name is terrible there is still time to change it pls be smart about this as guardian main I HATE THE name so much is childish and dont fit the guardian at all plss im begin you change it .)

I doubt any change will come from all this, but I figured I’d get my voice in while I can Thanks for the reasoning, Jon. You guys probably know that anything you say will get flack, so it’s nice that you’ve even tried to communicate your reasoning.

1. Like many have said, all my characters are dragon hunters, so I find it difficult to support the name.

2. An additional problem for me is that witch hunters were religious zealots who murdered women and the elderly because of their religious delusions. I don’t like the implication that because my guard is going to use traps and/or a longbow that this means they’ll be burning sylvari alive. My guardian’s build should not be the determiner of how far they take their sense of justice. I understand that this was just the inspiration for the name, but… why? I mean, when we say someone is going on a “witch hunt” it’s not an action based on reality – it is the murderous equivalent of tilting at windmills. Others have gone into the cultural issues with likening them to big game hunters. I assume specializations aren’t getting plot to flesh out their namesakes – so I feel like it’s an unnecessary complication.

Someone suggested this title in the Reddit thread: Purifier (also fond of Arbiter). It contains the same “looking deep for rotten apples and pulling them out before they spoil the bunch” connotation mixed in with a potential for abuse of power while keeping in the guardian theme. Its lack of historical and cultural baggage helps it remain more neutral.

As for Arbiter, I like that it has a judicial/mediator feel without disclosing specifically what it is arbiting (like “Dragon Arbiter”). The traps seem to work with this because they’re indirect, a form of keeping an enemy in a liminal space and controlling them while their “sentence” is served (like a jail cell).

The word “Hunter” should be a buzzword that stays with Rangers, or maybe also Warriors imo.

Call the Class what it should be…..

P/Mo

That would make a lot of us happy.

guildpro.7615:

Call the Class what it should be…..

P/Mo

That would make a lot of us happy.

Nah, more Derv/Para — Righteousness in a ranged kinda way.

Aye.8392:

Nah, more Derv/Para — Righteousness in a ranged kinda way.

I can agree to that if I get a scythe and a spear

I’m fine with Dragonhunter as long as the other spec will be: TimeMage,NatureMage,ConstructionWorker, Dragonyeller(if necro gets shouts)

We can all argue until our faces turn blue over whether Dragonhunter is coherent, relevant, or good, as a name, but here are some facts:

1. Whether one likes the name or not is entirely subjective, as we attempt to rationalize our positions over the name, but there’s nothing subjective about the number of people who are in favor or against the name. Just do a comprehensive poll and let the numbers speak for themselves.

2. Everyone who is attempting to defend the merits of the Dragonhunter name, just be honest and ask yourself if you would protest and push for Dragonhunter if the elite spec came out with everything as it is, except the name? Longbow, traps and all but named Witch Hunter, or Avenger, or Templar or whatever the name that most players want, or even gasp the name that actually made the most sense relative to the core concepts of the Guardian?

We can dance in circles all day long, bench-pressing logic, arguing over artistic merit, interpreting symbolism, psychoanalyzing the developers….

OR

we can just be rationale about this and just let the facts speak for themselves. Res ipsa loquitur.

My disagreement with the name is pretty simplistic.

“Guardian” by it’s definition and such evokes thoughts of “defense” and “defender”. “Protector” and “Shelter”. One who stands his/her ground against an oncoming threat, protecting that which is behind them.

“Dragon Hunter” evokes thoughts of “offense”. “Conquering” and “Attack”. One who takes action and goes ahead to seek out evil.

Of course we have no choice. Anet is going to make it what it is and we can “just deal with it”, but the name “Dragon Hunter” just sounds off to me.

Neural.1824:

My disagreement with the name is pretty simplistic.

“Guardian” by it’s definition and such evokes thoughts of “defense” and “defender”. “Protector” and “Shelter”. One who stands his/her ground against an oncoming threat, protecting that which is behind them.

“Dragon Hunter” evokes thoughts of “offense”. “Conquering” and “Attack”. One who takes action and goes ahead to seek out evil.

Of course we have no choice. Anet is going to make it what it is and we can “just deal with it”, but the name “Dragon Hunter” just sounds off to me.

and thats the key here, this isnt about being a guardian any more. Hence why the name has to be about offence, conquering and attack. This light wielding magic users are focusing on being aggressive and hunting the enemy instead of simply protecting people.

the old guardians were protectors
the dragon hunters are smiters.

As an aside, i see a lot of people with beef here have their own preconcived notions about guardians that leads them to believe things that are not correct within the current lore

guardians arent religous, divine, or particularly good
they channel light based magic to heal, protect, or destroy.
since the last 250 years it has nothing to do with dwayna anymore.

they arent angels, far as we have seen tyria doesnt even have a concept of heaven or angels.

Look, the name isn’t changing. Get over it. We’re all going to be calling them DH anyway.

- Main Guardian

TyPin.9860:

Cognitive dissonance is a concept that can be applied to anything. Simply if someone doesn’t like the Dragonhunter theme, it creates a cognitive dissonance. That doesn’t make an argument.

I agree with that, and most of what you have said before. I’ll just try to point out a… point of view that seems to have not been discussed yet (or I have utterly missed it in those seven pages). At point’s I have used the plural since I believe no one is unique and absolutely alone in their opinion, and thus there will be those that agree with me.

Why are so many people enough people arguing about the theme that a discussion of this proportion has developed?

Q: Who are the people that are likely to take a side in the discussion?
A: The people that mainly play a Guardian and care about the profession. They feel the dissonance with the theme of the spec the most. I have played GW2 for 6 months, all of it as a Guardian, and I admit I had my own “WTF?!?” moment with the DH trailer, because it struck me as alien to the profession.

Q: Who is most likely going to try the spec?
A: The same crowd that already plays a Guardian. I mean, I like the Chronomancer very much, but it doesn’t make me want to try out Mesmer more, and a single specialization won’t change a profession so much that its player base shifts significantly (even this one, as people actually like the mechanics. I know I do.). Thus, the people that KNOW they are going to play this voice their concerns about the fact that they are going to have to overcome the theme every time they want to shoot a bow (looking forward to that too, even got a bow in mind!).

So, to answer the initial question:
(1) We, the Guardians, care about our profession, because we identify with it (or some of us do at least).
(2) We, the Guardians KNOW we will be shooting those arrows. We like the skills, the visuals and the change in tactics.
Because of (2) we know that we’ll HAVE to put up with the theme and name if we want to experience the spec (and we want to experience it alright).
Because of (1) we want to have that good feeling when we slot in the bow and spec, instead of the mixed cringe/discordant feeling we are anticipating ever since the reveal.

Some of us don’t want to put up with the theme. Others don’t want to cringe. Together the two groups make up a significant enough part of the Guardians reading the forums that a discussion like that develops.

Up until an hour ago the Mesmers discussed how they didn’t get all their traits revealed like the Guards. They only cared about the info and whether they’d be competitive enough in PvP/WvW. Right now they are hyped over their 25% speed increase. None of them are going to play a Guard. They don’t care about the Guard. We do.

My argument is this: If enough of the community (Guardians reading the forums, however a small fraction that might be) reacts such that it is felt, there probably is a problem. Don’t tell me it’s because Guards are generally more whiny than Mesmers…

Bloodchild.2680:

Look, the name isn’t changing. Get over it. We’re all going to be calling them DH anyway.

- Main Guardian

Who are you to decide that ?
It won’t change if we don’t ask. Now we’re asking for a change, so there’s a chance.

Btw even if it was impossible, we have the right to give feedback and say whatever we want as long as it respects the rules of the forums. YOU have to get over it.

Guardians are the broad “good” archetype. Some people are upset that the new spec is not a recognizable good concept, and others are upset that the spec is actually genocidal and evocative of murders and torturers which could be considered anti-good. Maybe in 3 years when every profession has 2 or 3 specializations, it won’t be an issue.

“Guardians are devoted fighters who protect their allies and smite their enemies by drawing from the power of their virtues. True guardians are brilliant tacticians and selfless defenders who know when to sacrifice their own defenses to empower their allies to achieve victory.”

Virtue:
*1. moral excellence; goodness; righteousness.
*2. conformity of one’s life and conduct to moral and ethical principles; uprightness; rectitude.

I would be more ok with it if they actually had tools to “hunt” with, ie perception and anti-stealth.

Hunting is about a lot more than having a ranged weapon or a trap – it involves locating and stalking the prey.

Of course, the fact that dragons in Tyria are actually the size of a small mountain kindof makes the whole exercise a bit pointless. We don’t need to find them, we just need to kill them and, ironically, that’s something that a single person cant do.

Mar.4839:

Look at all this controversy and discussion over the name, this is why Jon said that Dragonhunter is more of a high concept than something like a Chronomancer. Chronomancer barely requires thought, it’s a time mage, that’s it.

But Dragonhunter is basically a Witchhunter or aka Demonhunter but something more fitting for Tyria’s lore where most of the major world-affecting threats comes from dragons, hence Dragonhunter.

Witchhunters are usually hell bent on the eradication of witches/mages/spellcasters of any kind, does that mean in all the universes they exist all spellcasters are evil? No! It is just how the witchhunter perceives them. Same applies to demonhunters and demons.

They are zealous in their pursuit. Sometimes to the point of even utilizing the very magic their enemies use in order to bring them down. An example of this is Demonhunters from Diablo series having access to demonic magic themselves, or witchhunters in Elder Scrolls series utilizing conjuration magic to hunt down mages themselves.

So the Dragonhunter is the same way, a fanatical hunter that believes in eradicating all things to do with dragons. You cannot say this is true for every one in Tyria because since Sylvari are dragon minions then that would mean everyone would be killing all Sylvari, but we aren’t. Thus Dragonhunter, like witchhunter etc. has a special meaning in this context.

Requiring the explanation Jon and others, as well as I, have given is why Jon meant this elite specialization name is more subtle, nuanced, and high concept.

Chronomancer = time mage
Druid = nature magic

Those require little if any thought.

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.

LMFAO there is no thought when it comes to dragon hunter’s the fact that they have to make up excuses just to claim this name is suitable just so they dont have to cave into pressure and change it means NOTHING, it’s like how people over analyze a book and people come up with different meanings for different things, this is exactly it, over analyzing dragon hunter and convincing yourself and find ways to believe this name is suitable, but in reality, dragon hunter is as generic as ever,
chronomancer – time mage
dragon hunter – dragon hunter, THAT’S IT, no thinking required, stop making excuses and realize this name is kittened and needs to be changed

Swizzle.7982:

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.

That’s an odd statement because of the two names we have so far, I needed WAY more explanation of what a Chronomancer is vs. a Dragon hunter. It’s not a failure that Anet needed to explain it, it’s the failure that people are being obtuse as a reason to complain they don’t like the name. I mean, one needs to be pretty dense to not understand what is implied by Dragon Hunter. I’m not buying it.

Don’t like the name? Fine, but at least make some reasonable sense why you don’t like it, even if it’s just “I think the name is stupid/juvenille/etc…”. Don’t insult people by saying “Dragon Hunter? OMG, what EVER does that mean?”

Frankly, the whole discussion is stupid. I would rather have the worst name ever and get the best skills and toolset than flaunt a name with crap skills behind it. People are so distracted by shinies.

chronometria.3708:

I would be more ok with it if they actually had tools to “hunt” with, ie perception and anti-stealth.

Oh the irony .. you are aware that we will get a trap that does EXACTLY that right?

I think if they change it to Dragon Hater they wouldn’t need even to change any tool tips. I was loving something like Seeker, Sentinel or Paragon but i would be happy with Dragon Hater (DH). Giving out hate everywhere.

Bloodchild.2680:

Look, the name isn’t changing. Get over it. We’re all going to be calling them DH anyway.

- Main Guardian

If the name never changes, then I will still be a dissatisfied customer providing my feedback.

I’m most amused that it’s not even a class name; It’s simply the name of a trait line. You’re still a Guardian, you’re just using the DH traits. It’s akin to QQing about the name of Zeal traitline.

Obtena.7952:

I’m most amused that it’s not even a class name; It’s simply the name of a trait line. You’re still a Guardian, you’re just using the DH traits. It’s akin to QQing about the name of Zeal traitline.

Nope. It seems it doesn’t work this way. You will get a different icon and your elite spec name will actually appear somewhere. You will be recognized as someone who’s using that specific specialization.

Also, I wonder what planet you’re coming from to not immediately understand what Chronomancer stands for.

Srolo.5208:

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.

LOL

I mean really, a peta and dolphin killing reference? You are very confused about the difference between ‘man vs. nature’ and sport hunting harmless animals. See if this helps: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_(narrative)#Man_against_nature

Obtena.7952:

That’s an odd statement because of the two names we have so far, I needed WAY more explanation of what a Chronomancer is vs. a Dragon hunter. It’s not a failure that Anet needed to explain it, it’s the failure that people are being obtuse as a reason to complain they don’t like the name. I mean, one needs to be pretty dense to not understand what is implied by Dragon Hunter. I’m not buying it.

Then let me explain further. What is a dragon hunter? Someone who hunts dragons. As has been repeated ad nauseam WE ALL HUNT DRAGONS. But ok, dragon hunter, so it’ll have skills good against dragons? Not particularly, or at least no more than anyone else. Well how does it relate to the Guardian? Some garbage about witch hunts and big game hunters. Oh, so it in no way fits with the theme of selfless and virtuous defender?

You see, all that needs to be explained for dragonhunter to make any kind of sense or be at all relevant.
Compare this to chronomancer. Instantly you should know it’s going to be about time magic, the clue is in the name. That’s kind of the important thing about naming conventions, things have names or labels to inform us about the qualities of those things. Thieves steal things, Engineers engineer, tinker and invent, Warriors smack things with pointy sticks, Chronomancers use time magic.

Dragon hunter does not do this. Because the image created by the term is simply “someone who hunts dragons”, which for so many reasons simply doesn’t fit. Not with the guardian, not in lore, not with the world of gw2. Is the guard going to use his new trap spec to hunt mordremoth? No. Firstly you can’t really hunt something down when its right there beneath your feet, secondly it’s likely that mordremoth like the other dragons is a little too big to be trapped and far too powerful to be killed by a “dragon hunter”. After all Zhaitan was only killed after a long campaign and because we found a way of reflecting his own magic back at him. So, hunting dragons in gw2 is akin to hunting earthquakes or hurricanes, not particularly similar to 17th century witch trials where little old ladies were burnt alive. The guardian skills have nothing to do with hunting dragons, test of faith, lights judgement, dragons maw? (that last one conjures the image of a dragon, an odd thing for a dragon hunter to be doing, did witch hunters use broomsticks to fly?).

And so your comment that everyone who doesn’t understand what dragon hunter implies is dense has only shown that you do not understand the arguments against the name. Dragonhunter conveys one thing. One thing unrelated to guardian, unrelated to the lore of tyria and unrelated to any mechanic of the new specialisation.

Do you understand now?

As far as I am concerned, I find the term “dragon hunter” extremely fit for guardians. Wherever you look in the fantasy genre, there is almost always a “chapter” of the “holy warrior” class dedicating themselves to fighting the local “arch devil”. Here the “arch devil” are dragons and it is only logical to see a dragon hunter chapter be born, and traditionally it should be “holy warrior” class sporting it, hence the guardian in GW2 universe. Take a look e.g. at AD&D, you get the cavalier subclass of paladins dedicating themselves to fighting demons and dragons.

As far as I am concernened, the 24 of my 28 characters which are not guardians are jealous of this new specialisation name. It is almost as if a 4th order just spawned, dedicated to guardians. See your dragon hunter as the “templar” spec of guardians, with a knack for dragons above all other enemies given the circumstances.

As for people wondering what will happen of this “order” once all dragons are killed, 1st we are far from it and 2nd, as far as I recollect, Durmand died some time ago, yet the Priory is still the “Durmand Priory”. It has not become “Gixx Priory”. Even if dragons go extinct, the dragon hunters will remain because yes, their order was created for fighting dragons primarily, however their archpurpose, hunting the biggest threat in Tyria using light magic as a weapon, will still exist. And just as for the Priory, they won’t change their name. An order name is like a brand, you don’t change it.

5054075

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”.

Arbiter, sentinel, justicar, warden… many others…

I’ll start off by saying….I like it. I like the name Dragonhunter, and I like the lore around it. I main a guard, and was super excited after watching all the videos and seeing the previews.

My suspicion is some people hate the name because of a lack of throwback to GW1. Chronomancer was a throwback to Guild Wars Utopia that was never launched, and when we saw the preview pic of the winged guard with a bow, I bet a lot of people thought, “PARAGON THROWBACK!” Heck, I did myself. Dragonhunter brings in something completely unexpected. I also like that Guardian gets a bit more depth in that there may be in a more morally gray area of guards that are so lawful good and zealous to the point of declaring death to all evil (dragon minions) in whatever form. This is exciting, and I look forward to seeing more of it in beta in the future before the general release.

Thanks for the information Jon Peters. Keep up the hard work on the game!

7 pages of useless arguments when we are named guardians. GUARDIANS for kittens sake. We have little to no reason to ever guard any of our allies.

Ojyh.9842:

Obtena.7952:

I’m most amused that it’s not even a class name; It’s simply the name of a trait line. You’re still a Guardian, you’re just using the DH traits. It’s akin to QQing about the name of Zeal traitline.

Nope. It seems it doesn’t work this way. You will get a different icon and your elite spec name will actually appear somewhere. You will be recognized as someone who’s using that specific specialization.

OK. I must have missed that detail.

Ojyh.9842:

Also, I wonder what planet you’re coming from to not immediately understand what Chronomancer stands for.

Apparently the same planet where people come from that don’t immediately understand what the enigmatic description “Dragon Hunter” means ><

Swizzle.7982:

Then let me explain further. What is a dragon hunter? Someone who hunts dragons. As has been repeated ad nauseam WE ALL HUNT DRAGONS. But ok, dragon hunter, so it’ll have skills good against dragons? Not particularly, or at least no more than anyone else.

The only explanation is that Anet makes the profession concepts and based on their explanation, they make sense. Are the skills good against dragons? I don’t think it matters … the concepts are based on lore, the skills are based on game play. Therefore, the real question is if the skills have use in the game, not if they fit a name. I hope they don’t fit the name because frankly the name is irrelevant.

Panites.6798:

7 pages of useless arguments when we are named guardians. GUARDIANS for kittens sake. We have little to no reason to ever guard any of our allies.

Yeah, funny that pedantic arguments about profession naming is a thing all the sudden, considering that 7 of the original 8 names are the most generic, least thoughtful names ever. Even D&D 2nd Ed. has more interesting class names IMO.

Apparently we’re all just too dumb to understand this “high concept mature theme” even though the name itself is incredibly immature and still out of character for a guardian.

Apparently so, because it’s not that hard to get. Dragon Hunter. I’m going to guess and say … has something to do with hunting dragons. Where youi are wrong is that it’s not a highly complex theme. It’s brain dead easy, like most other things in this game. People just trying to overthink it because they don’t like the name.

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.

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?

This is an odd point of view.

While “Nature” does include animals, dolphins and crocodiles, that also includes humans then to since humans are also animals. Pointing to warring with animals like crocodiles as a comparison to the subject of Tyria’s current situation would be like comparing it to an engraged madman rampaging through your home. How does that in any way relate to Tyria’s situation? The reason the elder dragons are considered forces of nature is by what they consume: magic. It’d be like if there was a country-sized ancient bird that consumed the huge portions of the ozone layer. That would be a global threat that could result in changing ecosystems around the world!

Konig Des Todes.2086:

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.

If it were a matter of Justice to fight the elder dragons, a moral choice must exist. The only one really is that the Sylvari are dragon minions but Glint’s egg could be another.

And I wouldn’t Chalk the Elder Dragons as simple dictators. It hasn’t been shown their motives are anything but instinct and self preservation. They simply consume. The only thing they gain from killing us is self preservation. They aren’t trying to conquer us and take our land, people or possessions or acting on some sort of glory. They just feed then go back to sleep. If they were dictators, they’d simply keep what their power wrought.

Azzer.8137:

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

Then use the 1% that isn’t awful.

Leo G.4501:

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.

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?

This is an odd point of view.

While “Nature” does include animals, dolphins and crocodiles, that also includes humans then to since humans are also animals. Pointing to warring with animals like crocodiles as a comparison to the subject of Tyria’s current situation would be like comparing it to an engraged madman rampaging through your home. How does that in any way relate to Tyria’s situation? The reason the elder dragons are considered forces of nature is by what they consume: magic. It’d be like if there was a country-sized ancient bird that consumed the huge portions of the ozone layer. That would be a global threat that could result in changing ecosystems around the world!

Konig Des Todes.2086:

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.

If it were a matter of Justice to fight the elder dragons, a moral choice must exist. The only one really is that the Sylvari are dragon minions but Glint’s egg could be another.

And I wouldn’t Chalk the Elder Dragons as simple dictators. It hasn’t been shown their motives are anything but instinct and self preservation. They simply consume. The only thing they gain from killing us is self preservation. They aren’t trying to conquer us and take our land, people or possessions or acting on some sort of glory. They just feed then go back to sleep. If they were dictators, they’d simply keep what their power wrought.

Azzer.8137:

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

Then use the 1% that isn’t awful.

actually the dragons are intelligent, and zhaitan was greedy, seeking to conquer.
modremoth created a whole race of beings then stole their free will

glint was created to manipulate and control minds at the whims of her master.

yeah they are forces of nature, but they arent just beasts with instinct.

Obtena.7952:

Apparently so, because it’s not that hard to get. Dragon Hunter. I’m going to guess and say … has something to do with hunting dragons. Where youi are wrong is that it’s not a highly complex theme. It’s brain dead easy, like most other things in this game. People just trying to overthink it because they don’t like the name.

But how does their aim of a “backline support” spec match up with their idea of a “big game hunter that actively seeks the dragons to destroy them”? It’s completely contradictory.

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

Subtle, nuanced, mature, high concept? Wow..Really? No. None of those buzz words fit. & the idea of “big game hunter” doesn’t fit with any of that either. It fits a cheesy “big hunter guy that hunts dragons as big game”. Witch Hunter works far better. Every player is “Dragon Hunter” based on your “high concept” description. & it sounds dumb. The only thing that really matters is that it sounds dumb for a Guardian.

Guardians guard, protect. Looking at the “dragon hunter” it looks like a class that goes out of its way to hunt down things and bring justice, correct wrongs and down evil. That is why I propose the name Justicar. Fits the gameplay, fits the theme and doesnt sound generic. Also, nobody can claim it but the guardians who took up bows and went hunting to deal justice.

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

I rarely have reason to post, but your statement shows a huge lack of perspective to what a Witch Hunter is in any lore. If this is truly what you guys thought, I am speechless. Then to call it a high concept? What does that Mean? That we are stupid if we don’t get it?

The concept itself is logical. A GW equivalent to a Witch Hunter. The entire execution is the problem.

There are 3 classes that if you said “Witch Hunter like” would immediately come to mind, Thief, Engineer and Ranger. The absolute last class I would apply this to is Guardian.

I am pretty widely read and can’t think of any concept of a Witch Hunter that is in Heavy Armor and wielding a bow.

This is a witch hunter:

http://www.blacklibrary.com/Images/Product/DefaultBL/xlarge/Witch-Hunter-omnibus.jpg

If you had taken your concept, put it on any of the medium classes with a pistol/rifle/melee based build, a unique mix of spellcasting/fire/ranged play……