Guild Wars 2

It’s not because he can’t, its because he doesn’t want to.

Rangers see the rifle as a lowly peasant tool requiring very little training to master.

Ontop of that Rangers are intune with nature, rifles are the product of industry.
Industry destroys nature, look at the Charr homeland.

And then theres some of you who say, well they use Spear GUNS.
Spearguns don’t use black powder, black powder wont ignite when wet, spear guns use compressed air, or in some of the art I’ve seen of the spearguns here, kenetic energy in the form of elastic strings.

You don’t give thieves great swords, why?
Because its big, its unwieldy and unstealthy, the complete opposite of what a thief is.
Same reason why you dont give rangers rifles.
Its the complete opposite of their lore.

And for people who argue that, well rangers can carry greatswords thats “odd”
Really?

Average draw weight of a longbow is around 100pounds or 50kilos, you think someone who can pull that much weight can’t carry a great sword about 2 -5kilos or 4 to 10 pounds and then decide later on hes going to learn how to use this weapon effectively?

And lastly the word RANGER does not imply one who attacks from RANGE.
A person who owns a huge cattle range is called a Ranger, does that make him a superb range tactician?
It means one who covers a lot of range/grounds.

noun
1.
forest ranger.
2.
one of a body of armed guards who patrol a region.
3.
( initial capital letter ) a U.S. soldier in World War II specially trained for making surprise raids and attacks in small groups. Compare commando ( def. 1 ) .
4.
a soldier specially trained in the techniques of guerrilla warfare, especially in jungle terrain.
5.
a person who ranges or roves.

1 – 4 none of them indicate a master of ranged combat.
Number 5 fits what a ranger in Gw2 is.

Agreed 100%, been telling people this. Id love to get back to my ranger but atm Im waiting for them to buff longbow. After that I might put tief off for ranger, maybe.

Whatever you believe the Ranger to be is your rightful opinion, but why are you trying to take others opinion away? A lot of players expected that the Ranger would have a rifle, and a lot of people still want the Ranger to have a rifle. There is a time span of 250 years between Guild Wars 1 and 2, yet the Ranger is pretty much the exact same profession. That doesn’t make a lot of sense considering the progression other professions have made over the same time span. But regardless of that, even if the Ranger did have the option of using a rifle, your opinion of it would not be affected in any way, as you could simply just choose not to use it.
__

It might be that the literal term of a ranger means to range, but that doesn’t mean anything on it’s own, other then someone who walks a lot. The fantasy ranger is mostly related to the military ranger, or more precisely; Rogers’ Rangers. In 1955 during the ‘French and Indian War’, there was a British soldier who’s talent for military tactics were so effective, that a company was created based on his knowledge. His name was Robert Roger. What made him so brilliant was his knowledge and skill for “reading” nature, skills that he had taught from the native people, which made him able to travel and live out in the wild for months at a time. Something that wasn’t possible for the modern military before that time. Robert Rogers was quickly recognized as a great asset to the military, and a company was created for him so that others could learn his talents. They were called Rogers’ Rangers. The first of the military rangers as they still exist today.

Rogers’ Rangers were a rapidly deployable light infantry force, tasked with reconnaissance and conducting special operations (raids) against distant targets. They had their own code that they operated by, which of curse was created by Robert Rogers himself. Some of the rules were: “4. Before reaching your destination, send one or two men forward to scout the area and avoid traps.” – “12. If a rally is used after a retreat, make it on the high ground to slow the enemy advance.” – “13. When laying in ambuscade, wait for the enemy to get close enough that your fire will be doubly frightening, and after firing, the enemy can be rushed with hatchets.” – “22. When returning from a scout, use a different path as the enemy may have seen you leave and will wait for your return to attack when you’re tired.” – “24. When traveling by water, leave at night to avoid detection.” They also had special equipment: Uniforms that were colored dark browns and greens (original uniforms were red) to allow for camouflage. Hatchets that were not only meant as tools, but also for fighting. Dogs as company, to sniff out enemies and possibly also for hunting prey. And then they used cut down muskets, with a special load that caused shots to spread. Robert Rogers prefered the musket, even thought he had the option of using a bow.

But here’s the funny part: Tolkien wrote Lord of the Rings during WW2, at which point Robert Rogers was a very popular name for fiction. So much so that there was even made a movie about him in 1940, named ‘Northwest Passage’. Needless to say, there’s a high probability that Tolkien was greatly inspired by Robert Rogers.

Edit: Found a trailer for ‘Northwest Passage’. It’s quite funny: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ns0X_OqcPgw

Agreed with OP. it’s not about opinions here it’s about fact lol alot of people wanting a rifle just because or you think you need rifles doesnt mean the class should have it nor should anet and others agree with you. Other than it being cool and people like it I don’t see any real solid reason why rangers should be given guns

If your an Asura Ranger you like technology, therefore you would probably use a rifle. Just saying. Above statement are false. BTW I do not want to use a rifle, before you choose to rageface.

A ranger hunts – it’s in the nature of his profession. If he were to use a NOISY gun, he would scare all the animals away. Bows are quiet.

@Kasma, it’s not his opinion on what the ranger is, it’s Anets, that would make people with differenting opinions WRONG in the tyria universe, they have flat out said where in the 250 year span some profs, like the warrior, thief and mes, embraced the industrialism and technology, where the rangers, ele, and necros shunned it and relied more on their ancient ways/embraced magic further, seeing as how this was said in a blog post or an interview (idk what one if you care that much you can go read through all of em) i’m going to say that’s a very good reason as to why rangers don’t use anything blackpowder…

Durzlla.6295:

@Kasma, it’s not his opinion on what the ranger is, it’s Anets, that would make people with differenting opinions WRONG in the tyria universe, they have flat out said where in the 250 year span some profs, like the warrior, thief and mes, embraced the industrialism and technology, where the rangers, ele, and necros shunned it and relied more on their ancient ways/embraced magic further, seeing as how this was said in a blog post or an interview (idk what one if you care that much you can go read through all of em) i’m going to say that’s a very good reason as to why rangers don’t use anything blackpowder…

The game is not set in stone. Items can be added if enough people want it, and it makes sense for the given character. And a lot of people want the rifle for the Ranger, which makes sense because the Ranger is a mixture of magic and power. I could just as easily see a rifle for the Guardian, or even a staff for the Ranger as well. It’s all about how you create the skills. The greatsword is a great example of that.

Also, technology is really a wrong word for a rifle. Engineering is a much more fitting, seeing as a rifle uses a mechanism that’s just as simple as a bow. You press the trigger to release the leveler, which fuses a spark that ignites the gunpowder, that then pushes the bullet forward. There’s nothing technically advanced about it. The first rifle dates back to 13th century China, and was called a hand cannon.

A ranger hunts – it’s in the nature of his profession. If he were to use a NOISY gun, he would scare all the animals away. Bows are quiet.

An animals senses are far more fine tuned then a humans. As soon as you fire that first arrow, the animal will hear it, and be gone if you miss. A rifle is a far better hunting weapon, as it can hit a target over a much longer distance, then a bow. This is also why bow hunting requires a different technique, which is to sit still and wait for the animal to come to you. Animals can be trained to get use to the sound of gunfire, that’s why you use hunting dogs.

Watch this video at 3:54 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZg9pCQswtA

as an asura ranger, i see where you are coming from, but there is much else to take into consideration.

a rifle doesn’t not have to disrupt the environment. with the proper application of varied energy glyphs and miniature sound dampening mounted fields it is completely possible to produce less noise than a crude bowstring and less pollution than the arrows littered around after a skirmish. do not compare our masterpieces to those made by the charr.

being a ranger in the end does involve maintaining balance, but more importantly it requires having a renewable fighting style that maintain equilibrium to our adjacent cogs in the eternal alchemy, and we should be allowed to use everything in our arsenals that can used to this effect (including the above-standard intelligence of the asura).

OP is right. You might as well give a necromancer a rifle.

Hrm, so I guess Charr with the racial Charrzooka is the blacksheep of the ranger community?

Fayte.1803:

Hrm, so I guess Charr with the racial Charrzooka is the blacksheep of the ranger community?

Of course we are – and proud of it!

Or we could just stop kittening about it. We access to both bow types.

Speno.1874:

If your an Asura Ranger you like technology, therefore you would probably use a rifle. Just saying. Above statement are false. BTW I do not want to use a rifle, before you choose to rageface.

So Warmaster Efut who is an Asura in the Vigil shoulda been a mage like Zojja and wore glowy armour and such?

Fantasy racism much?

Rangers are loners and seeks isolation and solitude spending time away from civilization an Asura ranger is no different, maybe his or her reason for leaving Rata Sum to find themselves is because they didnt feel at home with the magical alchemy stuff.

Kasama,

You provided a nice piece of historical context, but unfortunately for the point that you are trying to make, that “ranger” came from Roger’s Rangers (who used rifles), the term “ranger” predates the French-Indian War by about 400 years.

ranger :

late 14c., “gamekeeper,” from range (n.)). Attested from 1660s in sense of “man (often mounted) who polices an area.” Modern military sense of “member of an elite U.S. combat unit” is attested from 1942 (organized 1941).

“ranger.” Online Etymology Dictionary. Douglas Harper, Historian. 10 Oct. 2012. <Dictionary.com http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ranger>;.

(You may want to edit your post, btw, as you have a typo that moved the French-Indian War to 1955. )

As to the rest, what happened in the French-Indian War, WWII, or any other more modern setting is irrelevant to the game. The context of “ranger” is dependent on the time period the game is set in, not a more modern context. Likewise, the game’s use of the term is dependent on the lore of the game, not the lore of more modern wars.

In the fantasy time setting the game is in, it is perfectly reasonable that there would be a nature oriented profession that eschews firearms. The lore of the game enforces this idea, as someone else indicated.

As to the idea that everyone has a right to an opinion and that, if enough people want something it can be added, I have two comments.

First, everyone has a right to an opinion, but that does not make every opinion right. As such, like it or not, people who disagree with you have the right to tell you that your opinion is wrong, even if you have a right to it. That is all the OP is doing, showing why he thinks your opinion is wrong, just like your attempt to provide a counter argument is saying his opinion is wrong.

Second, no, just because a bunch of people want something added to the game does not justify it being added. When you buy the game, you are buying a right to play the game, not a right to have a say in its development. Developers may be wise to listen to what players want, but 10 years experience playing MMOs tells me that the last thing I want is to play a game that gives player opinions as to what should and should not be in a game undue weight. The resulting Rube Goldberg monstrosity would likely collapse in on itself creating a black hole so massive that all MMOs, if not the universe itself, would be in peril.

Thank you for this post. GW2 players tend to use ‘Ranger’ as a misnomer for ‘one who attacks at a range’, which is untrue.

Good post.

Can we just give this debate a rest already?

Here’s the REAL reason Rangers don’t have rifles:

ArenaNet did not give them rifles.

The GW2 Ranger is ArenaNet’s creation. It’s not the same Ranger as Tolkien’s Ranger, Roger’s Rangers, D&D’s Ranger, or WoW’s Ranger. It may be similar, but A-Net has the final say in what they want their Ranger to do. ArenaNet said Rangers use bows and Engineers use guns. That’s the way it is. A-Net designed their Ranger the way they did for their own reasons, whatever they may be. YOU may want Rifles, but A-Net isn’t just going to add them for the sake of adding them.

still wouldnt say no to a sword offhand as a thief tho :P
i mean, if a caster such as the mesmer can dw swords… why not thieves.

Trikittenistos.3046:

still wouldnt say no to a sword offhand as a thief tho :P
i mean, if a caster such as the mesmer can dw swords… why not thieves.

Thieves should also get rifles imo.

Here’s the REAL reason Rangers don’t have rifles:
ArenaNet did not give them rifles.

This is the correct answer.

A ranger hunts – it’s in the nature of his profession. If he were to use a NOISY gun, he would scare all the animals away. Bows are quiet.

This is the wrong answer…

If you were a hunter, you’d know that a Rifle is a FAR more reliable weapon.
Bow hunting is a longer season cause it’s harder to be successful. (an most people can’t shoot a bow) Rifle you can hit your target from a long way off, before the animal can ever smell/hear you, bow… inside 60 yards. LONG after they can hear/smell you. and as someone pointed out earlier, after the first shot… odds are you will NOT get a 2nd shot.
This isn’t the movies where a bow is so silent that nobody hears it… there IS sound and you CAN hear it from farther than you’d think. and animals have better hearing than humans.

WTF, again this topic?

As I said in one before: ranger in GW2 is what ANet want him to be, not some realistic thing. Stop comparing them to RL, because it is fanatsy game and everything can happen.
Doesn’t fit? Then how do you explain necros with axe?
And don’t tell people what they should think. I made ranger coz I like hunter/archer characters and this one is closest one. My ranger isn’t some nature magic, tree hugging guy, but bowman – game gives me chance to build my character in that way.

And no, I don’t really want rifles, but it also wouldn’t hurt. More options = more variety = more players interested.

I also wouldn’t have anything against rager with staff and full-druidic skills

@Sotaudi

I wasn’t trying to explain the origin of the term ranger, but the similarity and origin of the fantasy ranger and the military ranger. The word ‘ranger’ it itself has many different meanings (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranger). My point was that the ranger, as it’s understood in a fantasy setting, is mostly related to the Rogers’ Rangers, i.e. the military ranger. A police officers job is to maintain order and avoid confrontation if possible, which is almost the opposite of what the fantasy ranger does. The fantasy ranger is often related to stories evolving war, and the ranger himself is described as someone who is sneaky, and has a very good knowledge of nature. All things that match perfectly with Rogers’ Rangers.

Yes, the war was of curse in the 17th century. I doubt that anyone here really cares about it though, but thanks =)

It’s not completely irrelevant to the game. In Guild Wars 2, guns are still new to the world, so within reason you can compare how we in the real world looked at guns, to how races in the game looks at guns. It makes sense that professions who are already using projectile weapons, would also be interested in guns and the benefits they come with. Of curse this is mostly a lore thing, but that is also what most of the negative comments are about.

My point is that nature and rifles are not two separate things. The fact that people are trying to enforce that guns are an opposite to nature, or bows, is only a testimony to their lack of knowledge when it comes to weapons. Rogers’ Rangers are the perfect example that rifles are not the “enemy” of the ranger.

First: It’s true that he has every right to his negative opinion of a ranger using a rifle. But that doesn’t make him right about his reasons to this statement. I.e. implying that giving the ranger a rifle somehow destroys everything ells about that profession, and turns him into a nature destructive class. And that the fantasy ranger is just a reference to someone who ranges. Also, giving a rifle to the Ranger does not take anything away from the ranger. You are not replacing anything, you are only adding something. So trying to argue that the Ranger should not have a rifle, is a bit upsetting, as it won’t have any impact on people who don’t like anyway. I don’t like the look of a staff for the Ranger either, but I would never try to argue against people who do want that. I have no reason to.

Second: This games success is based on us, ArenaNets consumers. Therefor it is smart to listen to what most of us wants, as long as it’s not something that causes any major changes. And no one are forced to use a rifle, so it can’t cause any major impact. New weapons are pretty much guarantied to be added to the game at some point, anyway.

I admit I would love to be able to have my ranger use a rifle. That would be cool, but as ANet has chose to not make a ranger carry firearms, it’s fine as it is. I just don’t understand why everything should be right or wrong, black and white. Why can’t there be rangers with different approaches, some who choose to be the hunter who catches his prey using his skills and the most efficient weaponry available, while some choose to be the druid who defeats his enemy by summoning the forces of nature to aid? All professions have some space for personal variation, it would be a crappy rpg if every character of the same class was forced to be the same.

Adding different subtype of rangers or other classes would involve actually using the Q&A from character creation to give different variations of the profession which in turn would give the player base more of the feel of being unique but it is impossible to implant this into a game that’s already out of dev and selling as its basically a staple of the game that would need a whole revamp.

I was one of the people who thought it was weird that a ranger wouldn’t have firearms. If they add it or not doesn’t bother me as its not my choice to add or not add stuff.

To add more depth into the game release new weapon types and add more skills to current weapons that we can rotate out of battle to make to characters feel more like ours.

I see where most people are coming from and how I see it is if you give a ranger firearms you might as well give us a staff but would through off the said balance of weapons per class

it is Anets game, so “Ranger” is what they say it is, by their definition, and this is what a GW2 Ranger is :

Rangers rely on a keen eye, a steady hand, and the power of nature itself. Unparalleled archers, rangers are capable of bringing down foes from a distance with their bows. With traps, nature spirits, and a stable of loyal pets at their command, rangers can adapt to any situation.