Guild Wars 2

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 your reply. We appreciate anyone from ArenaNet providing feedback on the fan responses. I get what you were going for. I really do. That became apparent in the Friday twitch stream on the guardian elite specialization. The problem is that the concept comes across as incredibly garbled mess. Intent does not equate to reception. You are sending mixed messages through the name and the flavor text in a manner that feels both disassociated from the core concepts of the guardian and what you claim the elite specialization is about.

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

When many people think “witch hunter,” they think of the Victorian Van Helsing. More broadly, the “witch hunter” concept evokes colonial Puritan and medieval Germanic witch hunts and Spanish inquisitions. Even Van Helsing was less concerned with “big game” and more with the deception of the occult, vampires, and Satanic forces of evil. For both medieval witch hunters and later invented popular conceptions (e.g. Van Helsing), exorcisms, charms, and prayers were a significant component of how they performed their work. Even 20th century Hollywood action-hero witch hunters (e.g. Blade, Hanzel and Gretel, Van Helsing) are not “big game hunters,” even with their semi-automatic use of arrow ballistics.

When I think of a “big game hunter,” I think of posh British imperialists in 19th century Africa on a leisure holiday unwittingly driving creatures to extinction for kittens and giggles. Even the name of the GM Trait “Big Game Hunter” feels about as terrible of a name “Kill the Bad Guy Shot” or “Make the Dragon Dead.”

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

I’m not sure how ‘dragon-hunting’ is anymore “high concept” or “mature” than a profession named after Ninendo’s “Duck Hunters.” The name has the transparency of a glass window pane completely shattered by thrown bricks. We get it. Dragonhunters “hunt dragons.” But that’s just about as far from “high concept” or “nuanced” as you can get.

Post Continued…

There are a number of people, but admittedly not all, who absolutely fail in making a connection with this name. A chronomancer performs magic of time. A druid performs magic in connection with nature. But when it comes to the ‘dragonhunter’ specialization, many people can’t help but quote ‘the Bobs’ of Office Space: “So what would you say, you do here?” “Hunt dragons” is the almost reflexive response by the forum apologists of this name. Yet “Aren’t we all dragon hunters?” has become a mantra repeated among a number of threads here on the ANet forums, on Reddit, and even in conversations I have held with players in-game.

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

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

What’s more, a lot of the design for your “big game hunters” is back-line support. Sure, it’s more offensive in that it deals with conditions, traps, and proactive uses of virtues, but the “big game hunters” are in the back providing support. I’ll tell you what they are not doing: dragon-hunting.

Furthermore, the elite specialization builds off of the guardian, which is indeed about warrior justice. But there is little about fighting dragons in the ability names or even the aesthetics of the specialization. When you posted an elite specialization teaser picture with angel wings, people thought “paragon.” “Dragonhunter” never even made the list. There’s nothing particularly “draconic” about the specialization. Draconic armor and bow does not a dragonhunter make.

The specialization ability names are indeed just as generic as most of the alternative proposed names for the specialization. What do “purification,” “tests of faith,” “fragments of faith,” “light’s judgment” have to do with hunting dragons? Yeah, I can see how that connects with your original intent of witch-hunting inquisitions, but not dragon-hunting, especially not the dragons of Guild Wars.

This is what I mean about how the total package for the ‘dragonhunter’ feels like an assortment of poorly-cobbled mixed messages. The specialization name is easier to change than everything else in order to better harmonize the contents of the package.

Finally, it is embarrassingly telling that GW2’s twitter feed retweeted well-known GW2 video blogger responses to the ‘dragonhunter’ reveal on Thursday who were less than enthused by the name. In particular, I have AuroraPeachy and WoodenPotatoes in mind. I could not help but wonder if ArenaNet had even watched these videos before retweeting them. If they had, they would have been smacked repeatedly by the voiced hesitation, uneasy reservation, and unenthusiatic responses by Guild Wars 2’s otherwise most enthusiastic of public blogging fans.

The mechanics are sound. They have been what guardians have wanted, though the symbol-like traps took people for a surprise. The elite specialization name and its attached flavor text are not. ArenaNet’s explanations for what they were going for with the name even reinforce your failure in that regard. You were going for “witch hunter of Tyria” but “dragonhunter” does not cut it.

Please rethink the name. I feel you would find that people would be far more receptive to the guardian’s elite specialization with an appropriate name change.

Personally, I feel that the name Dragonhunter is way too generic. There is no high concept behind the name, we have all already hunted dragons and we will all continue to do so. At least, I do not assume that in order to kill Mordremoth, we will have to roll a group of 5 Dragonhunters. (Although that might be quite funny at the same time). In comparison to Druid, Chronomancer and Tempest the name Dragonhunter just does not fit in. I think this thread has mentioned a number of viable alternatives and without making a super long post, I, personally, hope that the name gets changed before launch.

JonPeters.5630:

high concept
a more mature theme

You do realise you called it Dragonhunter right?

D hunter sucks and no amount of trying to weasel your way into presenting it as a super mature, deep and complex name is going to change that.

Swizzle.7982:

JonPeters.5630:

high concept
a more mature theme

You do realise you called it Dragonhunter right?

D hunter sucks and no amount of trying to weasel your way into presenting it as a super mature, deep and complex name is going to change that.

Yeah sorry, but I’m gonna have to agree here. When I first read it I instantly had the impression that someone brought their 7 year old kid to work and asked them to name the guardian elite specialization. It has a very juvenile vibe; it doesn’t sound mature at all.

What happens when we receive our second elite specialisation? Do we stop hunting dragons?
If the dragons are such a massive threat to Tyria shouldn’t we not only stay specd Dragon Hunter forever, but also teach every other profession to become Dragon Hunters?
Because apparently Dragon Hunters are the only profession in the entire universe of Guild Wars 2 that is specifically focused on killing dragons.

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 think the problem is, this just came out of nowhere. The Chronomancer was “generic fantasy”. A mage that uses abilities that affect time. Simple. Descriptive. And it works. It’s a trait line you choose in a game UI. It’s not the class you choose at the character creation screen.

Suddenly saying that if you pick 6 traits in this trait line your noble and stoic Guardian becomes morally ambiguous and starts turning on the leader of The Pact he fought to create and defend and fight beside against Zhaitan because he’s a Sylvari is just laughable to be honest. It’s like you guys spent hours in meetings philosophically discussing the moral implications of the zealous pursuit of justice then just turned around to us and went “here is da dragonhunter u guyz”. It’s just not sitting right. It feels like I’ve missed the conversation and just got the tl;dr

I should add that if you take out “Dragonhunter” I really liked the concept of the specialization, and it adds a playstyle to Guardian that was really missing. I’m looking forward to trying it out in HoT. Just don’t expect me to get on board with this “high concept”, which is obviously way over our heads [/sarcasm].

I like the name.

Arnath.2319:

What happens when we receive our second elite specialisation? Do we stop hunting dragons?

You stop using the skills (and profession symbol) of the ‘Order of Dragonhunters’ essentially.

How do you normally justify ANY spec swapping from a lore-based standpoint?

MelGT.8326:

I think the problem is, this just came out of nowhere.

To us maybe. I’m sure they’ve had time to let it roll around on the tongue and in the ear for months.

JonPeters.5630:

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.

Dragonhunter.. doesn’t feel in any way “mature”. It’s what a five year old would say if you asked him what he wants to be when he’s all grown up. Only by that time he’s an accountant.

Also I’m very glad you guys are so into your “high concept” and enjoying “high concept” (cause we’re using that term on repeat it seems) – but how about making something that the community will enjoy? ..Seeing as we’re the people playing your game.

Dragonhunter is a silly name, and it has made me feel like you do not take Guardians seriously.

Future.8641:

JonPeters.5630:

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.

Dragonhunter.. doesn’t feel in any way “mature”. It’s what a five year old would say if you asked him what he wants to be when he’s all grown up. Only by that time he’s an accountant.

And yet plenty of the adults in the room like it.

Might want to find a better lever than “nya nya I think you’re immature!” if you want to move this rock. Calling Devs something akin to five-year olds doesn’t work real well in my experience.

Nike.2631:

Future.8641:

JonPeters.5630:

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.

Dragonhunter.. doesn’t feel in any way “mature”. It’s what a five year old would say if you asked him what he wants to be when he’s all grown up. Only by that time he’s an accountant.

And yet plenty of the adults in the room like it.

Might want to find a better lever than “nya nya I think you’re immature!” if you want to move this rock. Calling Devs something akin to five-year olds doesn’t work real well in my experience.

Are the Devs not insinuating that everyone who dislikes the name is immature and unable to grasp the high concept name “Dragonhunter”?
The name is nondescriptive, and so it has failed as a name at all. It is also unimaginative. It also fails to fit in at all with anything guardian related, despite this poor attempt by the devs to convince us that “no guys, it really is relevant!”.

This is akin to a comedian not receiving any laughs and then blaming the audiences’ poor grasp of humour. Perhaps the comedian is just kitten?

I’ll just reemphasize, what others already explained very well: please change the name!

Genesis.8572 made a perfect response, please read it and take it to heart.
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/professions/guardian/Liked-the-ready-up-name-still-doesn-t-fit/page/3#post5048946

I know, you already made the assets for the gauntlets and the bow, but it will hurt the profession in the long run. sell it on the black lion store, if need be.

personal favourites: Envoy, Confessor, Sentinel

Swizzle.7982:

This is akin to a comedian not receiving any laughs and then blaming the audiences’ poor grasp of humour. Perhaps the comedian is just kitten?

The analogy would probably hold up better if the room were actually silent. It’s not. There IS a divide between those who like it and those who don’t. Trying to say that line is “maturity” is probably not giving the impression you think it is .

Plus there’s a whole bunch of folks in the room who recognize the act on stage is pretty secondary to what an incredible meal has just been put in front of them and are largely ignoring the applause and the hecklers.

@Genesis:
A well written post, I’ll give you that. And I can sympathies a bit more with the dislike of the implementation of the Dragonhunter theme after reading it.

But your comparisons of “real life” dragon hunters and “real life” witch hunters is flawed for one reason: ANet has been inspired from the witch hunter theme, not the dragon hunter theme. Comparing the Dragonhunter in GW2 with “real” Dragonhunters can only conflict with your own preconception. But the name similarity should be seen more as a coincidence than an actual reference to “real” Dragonhunters. It’s as simple as that. As I have earlier pointed out, the community is more fighting with their own expectations than with the actual theme.

That being said, I agree that the angle wing preview of the class is not well fitting with the witch hunter or Dragonhunter theme. And this contributes to the big dissonance between expectation and what was delivered so far. The other problem is (and this goes a bit against my earlier point) that the name “Dragonhunter” is strongly associated with preconceptions. This could and should have been anticipated by ANet. Although ANet may not intend to feed into those preconceptions, they certainly did.

I personally like the Dragonhunter theme. On the other hand I do not main a Guardian (but almost did^^) and I do not have that strong a connection with the profession as with may main (Mesmer). ANet on the other hand must decide. Do they wanna try to push their idea still regardless of the critique? And, thus, possibly kitten off a big part of the Guardian community to possibly appeal to other gamer types, who may like the theme or do they listen to the community and try to find a compromise between their intend of where the specialization should go and the appeal to the community?

Nike.2631:

Swizzle.7982:

This is akin to a comedian not receiving any laughs and then blaming the audiences’ poor grasp of humour. Perhaps the comedian is just kitten?

The analogy would probably hold up better if the room were actually silent.

Seems like it’s just one guy clapping very loudly to the derision of onlookers. We get it, you love the name, and thus everyone who dislikes it is wrong. Thanks for the input.

How about in light of player feedback anet provide a range of names and let the community vote. I get the feeling that Dragonhunter would not be the winning name.

TyPin.9860:

@Genesis:But your comparisons of “real life” dragon hunters and “real life” witch hunters is flawed for one reason: ANet has been inspired from the witch hunter theme, not the dragon hunter theme. Comparing the Dragonhunter in GW2 with “real” Dragonhunters can only conflict with your own preconception. But the name similarity should be seen more as a coincidence than an actual reference to “real” Dragonhunters. It’s as simple as that. As I have earlier pointed out, the community is more fighting with their own expectations than with the actual theme.

I don’t think so. Jon specifically mentioned the “high fantasy” image of a dragon hunter. We only can derive that from “real life”, or is there a similiar profession in Guild Wars 1?
The way he put it – “hunting big” – is clearly a reference to Siegfried and others.
The way I see it, they only have the choice of either going the “big game hunter”-route or the “Inquisitor” one. Given, that they take the criticism to heart.

Dragonhunter is someone who not only hunts Dragons but also knows of dragons and fights its corruption.

Now we have another Game with Demonhunters. Everyone knows what a demonhunter is. Its not simply someone who hunts demons, as many do this. They making it their main goal in live.
So do the Dragonhunter. Its not someone who fights Dragons to stay alive. Hunting Dragons is their zealos goal in life. They are dedicated to it, nearly relentlessy hunting them down. this is the witchhunter connection. Relentless fighting the evil. Not the way they do it.

Also most of the other names that players brought up are plain stupid once it reaches the localization. Seeker was the best of it, yet after translation its some one who looks for something. Makes no sense.
Dragonknight is also bad. A Dragonknight uses the power of dragons and does not fight them.

The reason why a name like witch hunter works and a name like dragonhunter doesn’t, in this context, is that a witch hunter has a more specific and religion-driven goal, making it both less generic and more guardian-ish, while a dragon hunter, in GW2’s universe, pretty much stands for what everyone is doing already, against an enemy that is nature-themed and not religious-themed in the first place.

I do not mind a dragon-themed elite spec, but in GW2, that won’t work unless if has dragon-themed mechanics as well. Hardened drake scales, fire breathing, flying, dragon fang/ claw skills, dragon transformations, etc. That, or the elite spec would need mechanics that read “this skill deals more damage against dragon-type enemies”, which just doesn’t works in GW2’s general game design. Without any kind of those mechanics, and taking into account what dragons are in GW2, the name dragonhunter will simply feel random and out-of-place.

Maybe, someday, you can add a truly dragon-themed guardian (or revenant) spec to us, and I would be all for it. Give him wings too, give him a dragon transformation, have him breath fire, gain massive armor/ defense and pierce through your opponent’s armor. But this holy-hunter resembles more an angelic ranger than anything dragon-ish.

You could name it “lich hunter”, “demonhunter”, “whitehunter”, “orrseeker”, whatever, and it would be a better fit.

GruntSquad.1530:

TyPin.9860:

@Genesis:But your comparisons of “real life” dragon hunters and “real life” witch hunters is flawed for one reason: ANet has been inspired from the witch hunter theme, not the dragon hunter theme. Comparing the Dragonhunter in GW2 with “real” Dragonhunters can only conflict with your own preconception. But the name similarity should be seen more as a coincidence than an actual reference to “real” Dragonhunters. It’s as simple as that. As I have earlier pointed out, the community is more fighting with their own expectations than with the actual theme.

I don’t think so. Jon specifically mentioned the “high fantasy” image of a dragon hunter. We only can derive that from “real life”, or is there a similiar profession in Guild Wars 1?
The way he put it – “hunting big” – is clearly a reference to Siegfried and others.
The way I see it, they only have the choice of either going the “big game hunter”-route or the “Inquisitor” one. Given, that they take the criticism to heart.

Inquisitor would have been a much better fit. It aligns well with the zealotry and religiosity that underlies the guardian. Witch hunter was never an official title, it was used a few times by american authors, but in general it would have been priests, inquisitors, etc. who would find and punish pagans. If the idea is that this specialisation hunts down and traps dragons and dragon minions (including sylvari) then inquisitor would have been a fitting name.

One other point, the guardian elite trap shows a blue dragon head appearing out of the ground to immobilize enemies, why is a dragon hunter utilizing the power of dragons, or forming his spells in their image? A witch hunter would hate and despise all things witch related. Just another example of the discrepant name.

I really liked the skills and the traps as well, guards were said to be great at area controllers and i think the traps actually make this happen.

I have no issues with the name other than its better suited as a title and less suited as a profession/specialization.

I also liked that Anet finally listened to the community and changed inner fire to trigger actively when hitting something instead of triggering when being hit on.

Would be really cool if inner fire had the same fury duration as internal cd. That would really make it worth investing in condition duration and being able to maintain three stacks of burning and never ending fury.

What i would like to see though is tht one of the end feats should add healing (like meditations) when placing a trap. This would further more open up build diversity in wvw and pvp. Not making meditations or AH mandatory. It would make it possible to invest in DH, zeal and radiance and go for a full blown bow and trap dps build

Black Box.9312:

Swizzle.7982:

JonPeters.5630:

high concept
a more mature theme

You do realise you called it Dragonhunter right?

D hunter sucks and no amount of trying to weasel your way into presenting it as a super mature, deep and complex name is going to change that.

Yeah sorry, but I’m gonna have to agree here. When I first read it I instantly had the impression that someone brought their 7 year old kid to work and asked them to name the guardian elite specialization. It has a very juvenile vibe; it doesn’t sound mature at all.

You can say that about the professions we have here. You cannot get more generic, or in this case, juvenile, then calling something a “Warrior” or “Ranger”.

I’m still baffled that people are caught up in a name that has no impact on you whatsoever (okay, maybe role players).

I personally don’t care much for the Dragonhunter name but it’s only that, a name. Show me skills, show me traits, show me utilities that will be worthwhile to take and you can name the class whatever you want.

Alice.5360:

Saiyan.1704:

Alice.5360:

Dragon hunter is not this game’s version of Witch-hunter and here’s why:

Witch-hunters are subtle, sly and solo hunters that seek to ferret out witches hidden among seemingly innocent populations. Witches look human and act human and are generally unlimited in number. Witch-hunters are also often portrayed as religious zealouts, acting to protect an ideology and not civilians.

Dragonhunters will never have a way to fit this trope within the Guild Wars setting. For starters, being a solo hunter is directly opposite of the backline support play style this new class has. As for he world itself, dragons are limited in number and there is no real need to “discover them.” Their minions are obvious and not mingling around as civilians. (They’re large remember? That’s why dragon hunters are "big prey hunters lol.) Finally, there’s no religious zealotry.

PS: Here is what a big game hunter is: https://www.flickr.com/photos/billthepony/2884372000/

Is that what we want Dragonhunter to be?

Big Game Hunter is exactly what they are portraying Dragonhunter as being. Just not as comical as the picture you posted. At this point, the name is being blown way out of proportion.

Do you have another name that better fits the Big Game Hunter rendition?

They’re trying to portray both a big game hunter AND a witch hunter in one go and it’s just not working. Witch hunter makes me think of Van Hellsing. Big Game Hunter makes me think of the villain from Disney’s Tarzan.

I think they need to scrap the entire “hunter” idea and go with something refined. I was behind arbiter but other names have popped up that fit the ticket. Arclight/Archlight was a very strong contender that references the new found range. Other great names were Harbinger and Sentinel and Warder and Bastion and Stalwart and Valkyr and Seeker.

Actually, I quite like Harbinger.

“I’m a Harbinger”
“I’m a Dragonhunter”

Yea, Harbinger sounds better and a lot less argumentative.

Genesis.8572:

-snip-

Thank you, have all my internets good sir or madam!

Actually to give my post more substance, I would really advise ANet to take this criticism and change the name. It might be a small part of your upcoming expansions, but it is what you’re going to be drawing players in with. If the poor name and theme discrepancies are any indication of the creativity going into the expac, players will be less inclined to purchase.

phokus.8934:

You can say that about the professions we have here. You cannot get more generic, or in this case, juvenile, then calling something a “Warrior” or “Ranger”.

I’m still baffled that people are caught up in a name that has no impact on you whatsoever (okay, maybe role players).

I personally don’t care much for the Dragonhunter name but it’s only that, a name. Show me skills, show me traits, show me utilities that will be worthwhile to take and you can name the class whatever you want.

“Warrior” and “Ranger” are base professions. A simple description, a simple image. GW2 builds on top of that (colours, design, gameplay, UI, etc.).
Chronomancer and Dragon Hunters are elite specialization. Not only have they have to be descriptive, but also needs to tie-in to the base professions. A Dragon Hunter is a extension of the Guardian, not a seperate entity! The name however implies no (direct) connection whatsoever!

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

The name implies currently that all the other specializations released with HoT will have an obligatory “Dragon” in the name:
“Meet the Dragon Thug: Thief Elite Specialization”
“Meet the Dragon Knight™: Warrior Elite Specialization”

The Mesmer got such a unique and appropriate name for their specialization line, granted it was something that was on the back burner for a long time.
They are always actively saying that the skill specifics and traits are still being worked on.
Can this please be one of those things you are still tweaking?
There has to be something better out there that makes just as much sense without sounding like a placeholder for something better.

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

Then just call them Inquisitors.

EDIT: I just saw it. “(…)push a more mature theme(…)”. With a “Dragonhunter”? Wait, wait. “Mature” in this game? You mean, anime hairstyles, unicorns, shiny heroes and bad dragons? How can you achieve that?

I thought that after GW1 and designing Charr for a release and failing in Tower of Nightmares with achieving it you trashed this concept and I accepted that. Now you want to bring it back?
And, god forbid, pass PEGI 6+?

That’s probably the most interesting thing I heard from ArenaNet in 3 years… Pushing for mature theme…oh boy

Rym.1469:

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

Then just call them Inquisitors.

An “Inquisition” line of specializations would also more thematically fit in with the existing categories guardians have: i.e., honor, valor, virtue, zeal, radiance, and then inquisition.

Thanks Jon for the explanation, but I still think it is a terrible name.

Saiyan.1704:

Alice.5360:

Saiyan.1704:

Alice.5360:

Dragon hunter is not this game’s version of Witch-hunter and here’s why:

Witch-hunters are subtle, sly and solo hunters that seek to ferret out witches hidden among seemingly innocent populations. Witches look human and act human and are generally unlimited in number. Witch-hunters are also often portrayed as religious zealouts, acting to protect an ideology and not civilians.

Dragonhunters will never have a way to fit this trope within the Guild Wars setting. For starters, being a solo hunter is directly opposite of the backline support play style this new class has. As for he world itself, dragons are limited in number and there is no real need to “discover them.” Their minions are obvious and not mingling around as civilians. (They’re large remember? That’s why dragon hunters are "big prey hunters lol.) Finally, there’s no religious zealotry.

PS: Here is what a big game hunter is: https://www.flickr.com/photos/billthepony/2884372000/

Is that what we want Dragonhunter to be?

Big Game Hunter is exactly what they are portraying Dragonhunter as being. Just not as comical as the picture you posted. At this point, the name is being blown way out of proportion.

Do you have another name that better fits the Big Game Hunter rendition?

They’re trying to portray both a big game hunter AND a witch hunter in one go and it’s just not working. Witch hunter makes me think of Van Hellsing. Big Game Hunter makes me think of the villain from Disney’s Tarzan.

I think they need to scrap the entire “hunter” idea and go with something refined. I was behind arbiter but other names have popped up that fit the ticket. Arclight/Archlight was a very strong contender that references the new found range. Other great names were Harbinger and Sentinel and Warder and Bastion and Stalwart and Valkyr and Seeker.

Actually, I quite like Harbinger.

“I’m a Harbinger”
“I’m a Dragonhunter”

Yea, Harbinger sounds better and a lot less argumentative.

If these guards are going to be heavy hitting openers, Harbinger is the perfect name. It also overlaps some of what Anet wanted “hunter” to mean, such as seeking out or heading in advance to lay traps.

Swizzle.7982:

Nike.2631:

Future.8641:

JonPeters.5630:

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.

Dragonhunter.. doesn’t feel in any way “mature”. It’s what a five year old would say if you asked him what he wants to be when he’s all grown up. Only by that time he’s an accountant.

And yet plenty of the adults in the room like it.

Might want to find a better lever than “nya nya I think you’re immature!” if you want to move this rock. Calling Devs something akin to five-year olds doesn’t work real well in my experience.

Are the Devs not insinuating that everyone who dislikes the name is immature and unable to grasp the high concept name “Dragonhunter”?
The name is nondescriptive, and so it has failed as a name at all. It is also unimaginative. It also fails to fit in at all with anything guardian related, despite this poor attempt by the devs to convince us that “no guys, it really is relevant!”.

This is akin to a comedian not receiving any laughs and then blaming the audiences’ poor grasp of humour. Perhaps the comedian is just kitten?

I appreciate John posting his reasons as to why he chose the name. Lets not discourage him from making another post because some one mistook it as him “making fun of us”. All the same, i’m sure the Devs appreciates subjective criticism.

My subjective criticism

• Mesmers now have wells, so they obviously takes after Necromancer’s. Hence the name Chronomancers.
• Druid is a nostalgic archetype for any beaty-natureloving class. The simple name makes sense overall.
• Dragonhunter’s abilities take after Rangers yet the name is specifically towards Dragons itself. Druids is a generic name but not every class is one. Dragonhunter is a generic name but every class technically is one. So aren’t Rangers Dragonhunters too since they have similar skill sets? I feel the name should be more influential towards Rangers than a specific entity in the GW2 lore.

I respect the Dev’s enough to accept what ever it is they like to call their product. So I suppose the name Dragonhunter doesn’t bother me as much as most. Especially since it’s going to be abbreviated as DH anyways. But that’s besides the point.

Alice.5360:

Saiyan.1704:

Alice.5360:

Saiyan.1704:

Alice.5360:

Dragon hunter is not this game’s version of Witch-hunter and here’s why:

Witch-hunters are subtle, sly and solo hunters that seek to ferret out witches hidden among seemingly innocent populations. Witches look human and act human and are generally unlimited in number. Witch-hunters are also often portrayed as religious zealouts, acting to protect an ideology and not civilians.

Dragonhunters will never have a way to fit this trope within the Guild Wars setting. For starters, being a solo hunter is directly opposite of the backline support play style this new class has. As for he world itself, dragons are limited in number and there is no real need to “discover them.” Their minions are obvious and not mingling around as civilians. (They’re large remember? That’s why dragon hunters are "big prey hunters lol.) Finally, there’s no religious zealotry.

PS: Here is what a big game hunter is: https://www.flickr.com/photos/billthepony/2884372000/

Is that what we want Dragonhunter to be?

Big Game Hunter is exactly what they are portraying Dragonhunter as being. Just not as comical as the picture you posted. At this point, the name is being blown way out of proportion.

Do you have another name that better fits the Big Game Hunter rendition?

They’re trying to portray both a big game hunter AND a witch hunter in one go and it’s just not working. Witch hunter makes me think of Van Hellsing. Big Game Hunter makes me think of the villain from Disney’s Tarzan.

I think they need to scrap the entire “hunter” idea and go with something refined. I was behind arbiter but other names have popped up that fit the ticket. Arclight/Archlight was a very strong contender that references the new found range. Other great names were Harbinger and Sentinel and Warder and Bastion and Stalwart and Valkyr and Seeker.

Actually, I quite like Harbinger.

“I’m a Harbinger”
“I’m a Dragonhunter”

Yea, Harbinger sounds better and a lot less argumentative.

If these guards are going to be heavy hitting openers, Harbinger is the perfect name. It also overlaps some of what Anet wanted “hunter” to mean, such as seeking out or heading in advance to lay traps.

Sí estoy de acuerdo señor.
I had to speak in an exotic language to show how much I agree.

@Jon:

While I understand what you were trying to do with the name, “Dragon Hunter” does not have the same ring to it like “Witch Hunter” or “Demon Hunter”. Because a dragon is usually seen as an animal, “Dragon Hunter” sounds like someone who hunts for the trophy, not because it’s the right thing to do.

http://i.imgur.com/sI1SbOl.jpg

Why not make an official contest with players for a different name?

Dragonquisitor

Or why not Dragon Slayer?

Dragon’s Bane
Wyrm Hunter
Wyrm Slayer

I think the problem, for me, comes down to lack of punch. “Dragon” and “Hunter” are very common words, and lack specificity.

Imagine if you had called the Mesmer elite, “Time Wizard” instead of “Chronomancer”. Feel the difference?

Nike.2631:

Future.8641:

JonPeters.5630:

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.

Dragonhunter.. doesn’t feel in any way “mature”. It’s what a five year old would say if you asked him what he wants to be when he’s all grown up. Only by that time he’s an accountant.

And yet plenty of the adults in the room like it.

Might want to find a better lever than “nya nya I think you’re immature!” if you want to move this rock. Calling Devs something akin to five-year olds doesn’t work real well in my experience.

Neither does the devs insinuating that their player base isn’t mature enough to grasp the concept behind an obviously divisive name. Maybe it wasn’t meant as an insult, but reading it without prior context sure as hell made it seem like one.

The problem here is that they come up with a concept for an npc factions bend on destroying anything that is related to dragons. But you are not naming npc faction you are naming specialization of an existing class. You are basically forcing a role and an ideology on us. You are trying to turn guardians into ruthless zealots by changing their skills and a name. It simply doesn’t work. I like the concept of a group of Guardians going after dragons, dragons minions and sylvari because they don’t see a difference between them but they should be part of a HOT story, not class specialization.

Im a gaurdian. I dont particularly hate or want to hunt dragon, and i dont believe that all dragons are inherently evil and worth hunting.

however, i do want to use a longbow.

…sooooo they only way i can wield a longbow and shoot stuff is to change my characters core identity, ambitions, principles, and become a become a hunter of dragons

I liked the suggestion of Seeker as a more subtle, mature name that captures a similar feel.

Plot Twist: Kralkatorrik didn’t kill Glint, a Dragon Hunter did, because Dragon hunters are stupid enough to believe all dragons and their minions are evil.

Don’t worry about Caithe, it’s the Dragon Hunters who are the biggest threat to Glints egg.

Sighduck…

I don’t have a problem with Dragonhunter as a name so long as there are in-game lore reasons for calling it that. Like an actual group of people calling themselves dragonhunters teach my guardian the skills that they think will help them better hunt dragons. However, if HoT launches and I just unlock the elite specialization using the mastery system with no lore whatsoever behind it then I will have a problem with the name and with elite specializations in general.

Gibson.4036:

Or why not Dragon Slayer?

Dragon’s Bane
Wyrm Hunter
Wyrm Slayer

Not sure if this here is meant serious, or if it is blatantly trolling ….
But based on your post before, I guess rather its trolling …

ANet should simply rename it to either

- Seeker (this fits imo the most best, because it perfectly blends in with the ranger gameplay aspects, because there was also already a ranger Skill in GW1 called Seeking Arrows)
- Justiciar
- Inquisitor
- Exorcist

Thats by far the most fittign options for sublte “mature” professions that are extremely righteous about what they do and about what they think needs to be punished.

3 of them could be basically be seen as “Tyrias Police” , while the Exorcist is the most mature and fitting abbreviation basically for a “Demon/Witch Hunter” while the other 3 can be seen basically as the police of Tyria, which hutn down criminals, evil creatures of all sorts and hunt them down to catch and arrest them to punish them for what sins they did.

Seeker is in my humble opinion followed by Inquisitor the most best fitting option.
Yes, there the asuran Inquest, but I do see them more like fanatic Justiciars other then Inquisitors that are zealous about bringing relentlessly justice to Tyria.
They see in their fanatism only what is “right” for them.

However, Justiciar seen in our PoV would that way fit naturally also, when Guardians just simpyl take their zeal to the next never of fanatism about having to ensure that right and order gets to be ensured by their very own hands.

Seekers of Truth, Seekers of Justice, Seekers of Order

Thats what the whole gameplay design of the Guardian Elite Specialization stands for the most and they pursue their path of integrity by relentlessly chasing down anything and anyone, who stands against that virtue of them.

THIS INCLUDES NATURALLY ELDER DRAGONS TOO, WITHOUT THE NEED OF PUTTING THEM INTO THE NAME OF THAT PROFESSION

A Seeker is a disciple of justice who sets justices above everything on first place.
They are so zealous about it, they they simply can’t sit still when anythign in their near happens that is unjustly for them and they instantly act as arbiters and try if needed to find out the truth, who is guilty and who is not.
Thats a Seeker, the perfect Elite Specialization for a Guardian of Justice.

Vilkata.4725:

I don’t have a problem with Dragonhunter as a name so long as there are in-game lore reasons for calling it that. Like an actual group of people calling themselves dragonhunters teach my guardian the skills that they think will help them better hunt dragons. However, if HoT launches and I just unlock the elite specialization using the mastery system with no lore whatsoever behind it then I will have a problem with the name and with elite specializations in general.

I’d like to see some form of Dragonhunting order in game. Would be fun.

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

Call the specialization “Dragon Hunter”, says they wanted it to be a more mature name…

I know you aren’t changing the name at this point but you can just say, “yes, it is silly. no, we can’t change it at this point.”

Genesis.8572:

~2 post snip~

I think you could have condensed your post down to just 1 post if you cut out the more condescending portions of your critique. Really no need to proceed on and on with loaded or hypothetical questions and just stick with a more concise critique, especially for something more simple as a name. That said, I agreed with a lot of what you said but most of it comes off as too harsh and unnecessary questioning that likely won’t get answered and even if it would get answered, you’d just use it to heckle them further…so yeah.

Jelle.2807:

Genesis.8572:

-snip-

Thank you, have all my internets good sir or madam!

Lol I guess my shorter critique that said much the same wasn’t harsh enough to get noticed? Whatever, I still don’t think much of the harsh exchange is needed.

TyPin.9860:

I personally like the Dragonhunter theme. On the other hand I do not main a Guardian (but almost did^^) and I do not have that strong a connection with the profession as with may main (Mesmer). ANet on the other hand must decide. Do they wanna try to push their idea still regardless of the critique? And, thus, possibly kitten off a big part of the Guardian community to possibly appeal to other gamer types, who may like the theme or do they listen to the community and try to find a compromise between their intend of where the specialization should go and the appeal to the community?

Heh, I’ve been trying to hammer that notion of compromise but I seem to go unheard. Again, I think we don’t need to abolish the concept the devs have for the spec (like a lot of people are suggesting) and simply change the meaning of the name instead. It’s far easier to do that with names that don’t have any kind of connotation to them, like Draconniar. And what I mean by changing the meaning of, a Draconniar could be a devout user or developer of “Dragon-corruption purity techniques” learned from various Dragon Hunter knowledge of how the corruption works and spreads. The Draconniar might just take that knoweldge a step further, aiming to trap and purge anything touched by the dragons. I think the only thing such a change would separate is the whole “big game” part of the concept which can still remain as a trait but is gone as a concrete concept of the spec itself. The ‘witch-hunt vibe’ is still there, the ‘dragon hunting’ concept is intact but it distances itself from both by not needing to relate to them in name or definition by making a new definition and creating the context through the story.

Lastly, if anything, it is a show of faith in Anet’s talents because Draconnier is a name they made themselves! Just use that! Or Dragonbane.

You know, there is a game about hunting and killing demons called diablo III
in it, there is a class called demonhunter
yes, all classes hunt demons, but this one is called demon hunter.

It has no special bonus to killing demons.

they are dragon hunters because they have altered their focus to be hunting and eradicating the corruption caused by the influence of the dragons.

I dont love the name, but its really as good as any other. No name i have seen suggested is any better or more interesting.
mostly they just fit some one elses personal feelings on things

inquisitor? there is no guardian faith, and this has virtually nothing to do with traps/bows/ and more active virtues.
arbiter? a judge, these guys arent really judges, they are just trying to hunt dragon corruption
divinehunter, they are hunters, but they arent really divine, the power of magic that charachters use is no longer tied to the gods. and they certainlly arent hunting the divine.

there isnt an easy good name, here. Thats the problem.

They can rename anything of this game whenever they want, the point is only, it becomes more ressourceful and time consuming, once a term or a name has been already used so depthfully in the development of this game – in this case HoT in regard of texts and especially voice acting, that if this has been already done and recorded all, then it will be all not so easy anymore to rename things without having bigger efforts of cleaning that mess up afterwards.

If its just only texts that need to be renamed, thats absolutely no problem at all and can be done also quickly later with the help of alot of willing people that send daily the localization teams lots of things, what needs to be corrected, or better locoalized and so on.. thats then the job of the localizers and text editors ect. do rename these things in the text codes.

A bit more time consuming is redesigning several skill effects/traits and maybe combat shouts, but however, HoT is still in development and correcting these things shouldn’t hold them up too much, when in fact changing this stuff is more than worthy to have at the end a much better high quality product with fitting profession names, that are all of the same quality and congruency level as like the Chronomancer for the Mesmer.

@ phys: You are wrong, there is one > Seeker. And Inquisitors aren’t about religion, they are about faith as a general virtue that is more integral for them as like for a normal guardian.
They are so faithful about being the right hands of justice that they would do just everything that is possible for them to ensure to guarantee right and order in Tyria.
Their faith is it, that they are the only ones, that are capable for doing this with a relentless zealotry.
However, I share your opinion, that Inquisitor doesn’t fit as good to the ranger like trap gameplay, as much as good as like Seekers would fit much better for that part of the design.

I will just repeat myself extra for that comparison and for food for thought here for some people.

THIS -> http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Seeking_Arrows

phys.7689:

You know, there is a game about hunting and killing demons called diablo III
in it, there is a class called demonhunter
yes, all classes hunt demons, but this one is called demon hunter.

But Demon Hunters in Diablo are dark, filled with hate and rage, they are savage, wanting nothing but the blood of their enemies.

Taken from the wiki:
“Some say that Demon Hunters are no better than the demons they hunt, that they bring death and destruction with them. And indeed, sometimes, a Demon Hunter loses their ability to control their fear or hatred, and consequently lose themselves to their violent impulses. Many Demon Hunters’ eyes glow with hellfire, due to peering into demons and seeing vengeance.”

That sounds nothing like what a Guardian should be, maybe it would work on a Warrior or Ranger, but not a Guardian.

Gibson.4036:

I think the problem, for me, comes down to lack of punch. “Dragon” and “Hunter” are very common words, and lack specificity.

Imagine if you had called the Mesmer elite, “Time Wizard” instead of “Chronomancer”. Feel the difference?

this /15chars