Guild Wars 2

Hi, I was hoping to get an answer from the Arenanet crew to this question….
Are crossbows a possibility in this game for a ranger weapon?
I was also wondering if they are part of the world/lore or would they be something new?

p.s. would also like to use a rifle with some cool skills …http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gz3zHUsQWKE

My hope is that when they come out with an expansion, they give each class some new weapon types. Why? Because new weapons means new skills for each class! And the Guild Wars campaigns each put in new skills (as well as classes) so there is some historical precedent.

I don’t see rifles EVER being a ranger weapon period, it kinda goes against the whole rangery theme of being able to live with the environment, bullets do not get replenished in the wilderness as easily as arrows, making them nearly useless for someone who lives out in the wilderness…

A crossbow on the other hand… that’d be totally within the realm of the ranger (and the engineer as well making it even more likely we’d see that weapon IG at some point), it has all the advantages of using arrows, with a lot of the advantages of using a gun (i said -a lot- not -all-), i could see it being a mid range single target nuker tbh, depending on if they make it one or two handed would also varry it up (i’m thinking 2 handed)

yeah screw that, i don’t ever wanna see rifles for rangers, but crossbows would be cool as hell!

Rifles for ranger?
Sure

Anet seems to have forgotten what a “ranger” is….it has more than one singular meaning.

But a crossbow sounds nice aswell.

I don’t know. A crossbow seems to be an insult for a ranger. Crossbow’s where made as an easy to use/aim substitution for the bow and arrow. It was created to ‘dumb down’ the art of archery for people that weren’t archers, for any soldier running up to defend a wall, so they could easily pick it up, aim and shoot. True it had more power then a longbow for penetrating armor, however, it had a VERY slow loading time, having to put it on the floor, in order to draw it, then draw a shaft into it before you can fire. A good archer could shoot 4 or 5 arrows in the time it took a crossbowman to reload for the second shot.

Wilderness survivalist use anything in there arsenal to “survive” I dont see how having a “purist bows only” concept helps with the survival concept.

Well, you get people in a few camps when it comes to rangers.

1) The naturalists: They don’t want to see guns because they see the ranger as something in tune with nature. Rifles seem out of that view because of the heavy reliance on manufactured components.

2) The hunters: These people see the Ranger as a predator, a master hunter that can stalk, trap, and defeat any prey. Rifles are the most advanced hunting weapon available, and hunters like the idea of a precise, easy to use weapon that can operate at a much longer range. (Granted, in GW2, Bows and Rifles have comparable ranges.)

3) The traditionalists: They see the ranger as a bow-user, simply because that’s the stereotype. Rifles just aren’t what they’re used to seeing on something labeled as a Ranger, because they expect a certain brand of graceful bow-slinging and sword dual-wielding action.

4) The “range”-ers: Bad pun as it may be, there are some that think that the Ranger is the master of ranged combat. Sit in the back, shoot all day long in safety, ???, profit. Most would want Rifles because it’s a ranged weapon, and they should be able to use the ranged weapon being the master of ranged combat.

But what’s right? Well, it’s hard to say. I personally would like to see rifles. But I’d like to see weapon proliferation in general. In another thread, someone said Ranger staff would be awesome. And I think that’d be infinitely cooler than a rifle. But in order to know what’s right, we have to look at it from one perspective: What’s right for the Lore?

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.

Power of nature would suggest the Naturalists have something going for them. And they are described as archers, as opposed to ranged combatants. But they’re also adaptable, so shouldn’t they also be able to adapt to the changing technology of the world?

All we can do is wait and see how the class develops. I’ll be hoping for some great things, and new weapons for all classes. (I especially want land-spears. Because spears and polearms are awesome.) But for now, I’m more than happy with what we’ve got, and what we will be getting. ANet is fixing what we do have, and I’d rather we fix what we have before we get too far into asking for things we don’t have.

@Wasdclick in the GW universe rangers are intune with nature, hell, their primary attribute in GW1 Expertise, lore wise meant that they became so intune with nature that every action they did caused them to use nearly any energy causing them to pretty much be able to fight for freaking ever. Another lore thing for Rangers in GW is they are, for all intents and purposes, spirit summoning druids with bows.

@Wasdclick – there is one more definition of ranger, the one I tend to keep in mind when I think of the class, and it seems in tune with GW2s description of being intune with nature (maybe not magically so, but details) and the ability to adapt to any situation.

I always think of the Ranger as the LotR rangers. Aaragorn, Halbarad and the rest of the grey company/dunedain/rangers of the north. These were essentially warriors who could suvive in the wild and use it to their advantage. They could shoot and fight often with equal proficiency, adapting as the situation required.

Now of course in LotR there was the fact they physcially lived longer and their special bloodlines and so on. But I still like that core definition of an agile warrior at home in the wild. Magic elements or not is up to each setting.

Crossbows would be neat yes. Not sure it fits with my image of a ranger personally but I wouldn’t take issue with. I’d rather see spears and/or javelins first.

Helequin.2608:

@Wasdclick – there is one more definition of ranger, the one I tend to keep in mind when I think of the class, and it seems in tune with GW2s description of being intune with nature (maybe not magically so, but details) and the ability to adapt to any situation.

I always think of the Ranger as the LotR rangers. Aaragorn, Halbarad and the rest of the grey company/dunedain/rangers of the north. These were essentially warriors who could suvive in the wild and use it to their advantage. They could shoot and fight often with equal proficiency, adapting as the situation required.

Now of course in LotR there was the fact they physcially lived longer and their special bloodlines and so on. But I still like that core definition of an agile warrior at home in the wild. Magic elements or not is up to each setting.

Crossbows would be neat yes. Not sure it fits with my image of a ranger personally but I wouldn’t take issue with. I’d rather see spears and/or javelins first.

I can guarantee we wont see Javelins until we venture to Elona, that was a pretty largely used weapon there, so that’ll likely be where we see them reintroduced.

I would personally love to see rifles for Rangers. I think it’s fair to say that “Daniel Boone” can considered a Ranger and he was a crack shot with the Kentucky long rifle.

How about we allow ANet to fix the shortbow and longbow first….before entertaining the idea of new ranged weapons =P

You know what would be cool? A two-handed slingshot.

One word…Boomerang.

Sunspots.9861:

One word…Boomerang.

We practically have one with our MH Axe.

I just need an axe that looks like a boomerang. Then I can be annoying and spam-quote Sokka.

I vote Sunspots, for Ranger President. If the autoattack would perform in a swooping motion and hit multiples faster than axe and be as smooth as ele d/d water one.

Personally I could see Rangers using a crossbow, but I couldn’t see them using a rifle. I see Rangers as a scout (even though they really suck at that right now) and a rifle isn’t the most silent way of killing things.

There are many other weapons Anet can add to the arsenal. They dont need to put too many, just a couple that can be utilized by the classes. For example: Claws, Crossbows, Spear/Polearm. Personally, a Crossbow sounds very nice for a ranger. I played D2 and remembered enjoying some of the crossbows on my amazon archer so it would be cool to see how it would be in GW2.

I’d rather get a 2H Staff and turn rangers into a druid like class… support and survivability.

Avandor.5743:

I’d rather get a 2H Staff and turn rangers into a druid like class… support and survivability.

Intresting thought a return to Druid roots, I like it.

I want my Ranger to be like Link from LoZ (I always considered him a Ranger).

+1 for the crossbow idea. Not the “big” crossbow you need to put on the floor to crank which is like a small ballista, but more the “pocket crossbow” that the Ranger pulls off his belt for a point-blank shot when the enemy closes in too close for a longbow to be effective.

Related to the Ranger theme discussion, I also like the survive in the wild warrior concept – one who uses patience and skill and speed much more than overpowering strength.