Guild Wars 2

its just common sense and i really like rangers and rifles. Add rifles to ranger please

No. Rifles have nothing to do with rangers and nature in general. Rangers=bow.

/sign Fjandi

give the ranger a staff :>

Bambula.3649:

give the ranger a staff :>

+1!
That melandru staff looks AMAZING

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Melandru's_Gaze

I think we will see a rifle for the Ranger, once we get more weapons in the game. This is far from the first topic about it.

And, yes, it makes perfect sense. Unless you are one of those people who thinks there are overarching “Ranger rules”, that must apply to all fictional universes..

I’ve been all for that Staff for a long time lol. Give it a medium range much like Guardian’s staff and high party utility for those group Rangers. Maybe even some AoE Boon removal on the 4/5th skill to keep it true to old Ranger/Melandru enchantment (boons) hate. We’re really missing a party weapon. :/

How is rifle “common sense”? What does it have to do with nature magic? Personally if Staff and/or other magic weapons were added for even more of a Druid feel I would love that… and unlike a rifle, it actually fits with the rest of the theme.

Unless you are one of those “Ranger = range attack” people…

It doesn’t make sense because its a weapon that wouldn’t have a unique role within the current weaponsets. And having 2 weapons the serve the same function is pointless.

Surbrus.6942:

How is rifle “common sense”? What does it have to do with nature magic? Personally if Staff and/or other magic weapons were added for even more of a Druid feel I would love that… and unlike a rifle, it actually fits with the rest of the theme.

Unless you are one of those “Ranger = range attack” people…

In the same line of thought, Thieves should never be allowed to use Pistol because BANG BANG is not stealthy.

Eles shouldn’t have daggers because duh, melee and Mesmer 2h Sword cannon makes no sense.

<.<

DargorV.8571:

In the same line of thought, Thieves should never be allowed to use Pistol because BANG BANG is not stealthy.

Eles shouldn’t have daggers because duh, melee and Mesmer 2h Sword cannon makes no sense.

<.<

Non of that which you said even makes sense though. Your reasoning is basically just saying “well this is how I think it should be, so therefore it should be common sense for everyone else”. Whereas the Ranger Rifle goes against the natural magic theme, as well as doubling up on weapon roles that already exist. You’re not going to convince anyone with that kind of explanation.

Surbrus.6942:

DargorV.8571:

In the same line of thought, Thieves should never be allowed to use Pistol because BANG BANG is not stealthy.

Eles shouldn’t have daggers because duh, melee and Mesmer 2h Sword cannon makes no sense.

<.<

Non of that which you said even makes sense though. Your reasoning is basically just saying “well this is how I think it should be, so therefore it should be common sense for everyone else”. Whereas the Ranger Rifle goes against the natural magic theme, as well as doubling up on weapon roles that already exist. You’re not going to convince anyone with that kind of explanation.

I really don’t understand why you, or anyone ells, have such a big problem with rifles for the Ranger? What exactly is it you think is going to happen, if a rifle is introduced to the Ranger? Guild Wars 2 is build up in such a way, that adding new weapon skills can be done, without changing anything ells for that profession. Therefor, adding a rifle to the Rangers weapon choice, would have no effect on the rest of the profession, at all. And what the hell is this “magical theme” you’re talking about? Are there some for of universal fantasy rule that says; “a rifle in a fantasy setting, can not have any magic associated with it”? And why do you assume the rifle skills would have the same role as the other two-handed weapons the Ranger already got? Surely it makes a lot more sense to create something new and fun that we don’t already have available. Seriously, you’re just being fanatical for no apparent reason.

Kasama.8941:

And what the hell is this “magical theme” you’re talking about? Are there some for of universal fantasy rule that says; “a rifle in a fantasy setting, can not have any magic associated with it”?

With exception to the Mesmer Pistol, non of the firearms in this game are magical. A Ranger isn’t going to be one of the few that is able to enchant a firearm into some magical implement before you’re going to have Elementalists having rifles that shoot snow balls. A magical firearm for the Ranger would thus break established fluff, and break immersion… if anything, the Longbow or Shortbow should shoot magic before a Ranger rifle does.

As for why people are against the idea of rifles, that would be because, until every weapon is usable by the class, development and implementation of a Ranger rifle is taking away from more legitimate weapons for the Ranger, such as a staff, or even sceptre/focus which meshes much nicer with the natural magic theme the Ranger already has.

Back to the fluffier stuff, you could also argue that a firearm, needing manufactured ammunition, is a bad choice for a Ranger.

The proponents of Ranger rifles such as the OP, are claiming they have “common sense” backing them up, and need not elaborate. However it looks like any closer look at the potential weapon selections would have firearms obviously being the worst option… well, 2H hammer would probably be the very worst one for fluff.

tl;dr: There are so many better weapon options that would be ahead of Ranger rifles, and any work on a Ranger rifle is work taken away from a more legitimate new weapon.

Rangers are hunters. Rangers should be able to equip hunting rifles.
Why not equip spirit bullets?

What about the lone ranger? He uses rifles.
What is the definition of a ranger? It’s a person who uses weapons at a distance.

And if you’re talking about common sense, why can warriors
use BOTH longbow and rifles? That makes them more of a ranger than us, and they have more melee damage than us.

Rangers can equip buckshot ammo or have rapid fire with their rifle.

MindfulPerson.5273:

Rangers are hunters. Rangers should be able to equip hunting rifles.
Why not equip spirit bullets?

What about the lone ranger? He uses rifles.
What is the definition of a ranger? It’s a person who uses weapons at a distance.

And if you’re talking about common sense, why can warriors
use BOTH longbow and rifles? That makes them more of a ranger than us, and they have more melee damage than us.

Rangers can equip buckshot ammo or have rapid fire with their rifle.

probably you dont understand that ranger is means not range..

MindfulPerson.5273:

What is the definition of a ranger? It’s a person who uses weapons at a distance.

You do understand this pretty much invalidates your entire argument right? I am assuming this is the thinking of many of the “Ranger needs rifle” people.

Surbrus.6942:

MindfulPerson.5273:

What is the definition of a ranger? It’s a person who uses weapons at a distance.

You do understand this pretty much invalidates your entire argument right? I am assuming this is the thinking of many of the “Ranger needs rifle” people.

We don’t have magic. Nor do we have melee capability comparable to fighting guardians or warriors. We have throwing axes as well. We also have traps with ground-targeting traits with a range of 600. Traps are also used to prevent our enemies from coming at a distance. Even our spirits have activated-traps to prevent enemies from approaching us.

We are supposed to be specialized in range.

MindfulPerson.5273:

Surbrus.6942:

MindfulPerson.5273:

What is the definition of a ranger? It’s a person who uses weapons at a distance.

You do understand this pretty much invalidates your entire argument right? I am assuming this is the thinking of many of the “Ranger needs rifle” people.

We don’t have magic. Nor do we have melee capability comparable to fighting guardians or warriors. We have throwing axes as well. We also have traps with ground-targeting traits with a range of 600. Traps are also used to prevent our enemies from coming at a distance. Even our spirits have activated-traps to prevent enemies from approaching us.

We are supposed to be specialized in range.

Please take no offense, but Rangers:

-have (nature) magic.

- can be quite adept at melee combat (in fact, that’s the ranger where your Ranger would theoretically be the mot powerful.)

-having throwing axes doesn’t invalidate the Melee Ranger, nor does it make the Ranger a “ranged” character.

-not necessarily choose that trap trait-although nice-and traps are effectively usable at melee range.

-traps can be used to help you get at a distance or escape perilous situations, but also as powerful offensive weapons-I.E. the Ranger does not need to go back to 1,200 range after trapping someone.

-Spirit “traps” don’t mean you have to “get away”, but can also be used defensively at melee range.

In short, I am basically saying that what you claim makes the Ranger a “ranged” character is basically your own interpretation of the current skills, as well as your personal bias of what the ranger “should be.” It’s fine for the Ranger to fight at long range, of course, but in this game you are equipped with tools to make you effective at melee range as well.

As for the rifle argument, I don’t care enough, but I probably wouldn’t switch easily to it (I don’t even usually use Rifle with my Warrior.) Longbow is a good weapon, and feels like a natural fit, even though barrage was never my favorite skill (too different from the original, but that’s OK.)

-

When they released the Ranger they said they wanted to go for a Spiritual Woodsman who is very close to nature and they felt rifles and guns were the exact opposite of that therefore they did not and were probably never going to introduce a rife to the class. I agree 100% with this assessment. Sorry.

What we need is a weapon we can specialize with in groups. A copy of the longbow is not that.

Surbrus.6942:

Kasama.8941:

And what the hell is this “magical theme” you’re talking about? Are there some for of universal fantasy rule that says; “a rifle in a fantasy setting, can not have any magic associated with it”?

With exception to the Mesmer Pistol, non of the firearms in this game are magical. A Ranger isn’t going to be one of the few that is able to enchant a firearm into some magical implement before you’re going to have Elementalists having rifles that shoot snow balls. A magical firearm for the Ranger would thus break established fluff, and break immersion… if anything, the Longbow or Shortbow should shoot magic before a Ranger rifle does.

As for why people are against the idea of rifles, that would be because, until every weapon is usable by the class, development and implementation of a Ranger rifle is taking away from more legitimate weapons for the Ranger, such as a staff, or even sceptre/focus which meshes much nicer with the natural magic theme the Ranger already has.

Back to the fluffier stuff, you could also argue that a firearm, needing manufactured ammunition, is a bad choice for a Ranger.

The proponents of Ranger rifles such as the OP, are claiming they have “common sense” backing them up, and need not elaborate. However it looks like any closer look at the potential weapon selections would have firearms obviously being the worst option… well, 2H hammer would probably be the very worst one for fluff.

tl;dr: There are so many better weapon options that would be ahead of Ranger rifles, and any work on a Ranger rifle is work taken away from a more legitimate new weapon.

Allow me to quote yourself: “Non of that which you said even makes sense though. Your reasoning is basically just saying ‘well this is how I think it should be, so therefore it should be common sense for everyone else’.”

A spirit eagle appears when you use your greatsword. You can shoot an arrow through flames, to set the arrow on fire. You can blow a horn to make eagles attack a foe. You can make roots appear from the ground. And the last time I saw someone fire an arrow up in the air, in the real world, a thousand more didn’t drop from the sky. It’s a fantasy game! Anything goes. And it’s not exactly hard to design a set of rifle skills that fall in line with this aesthetic..

Those choices are only what you perceive as being “legitimate”. The Ranger has as much of a hunter theme, as he has a druid theme. It’s simply a matter of what you chose to use. Also, you have no idea how ArenaNet would develop new weapons, so I’m not sure why you are trying to argue that it would be a waste of time. Least of all because a lot more people would probably like to see a rifle for the Ranger, before a scepter. Taking into account the almost countless topics there has been about a rifle.

Yes, you could argue that, but it would be pretty kittened. Seeing as this is a fantasy game, and you don’t actually go and collect projectiles..

It makes as much sense as suggesting a staff for the Ranger (which would be cool as well). I don’t see why the Ranger shouldn’t be able to get both a rifle and a staff, at the same time. Players want both, and there is no reasoning in restricting that. Unless you see it from a fanatic point of view..

I would like it because this could be our only way to hit hard at 1200 range and not being stuck with braindead LB arrow velocity that can’t hit anything. But a rifle doesn’t fit the class at all, even tho i could see some armor with leafs on a ranger that looks like a ghillie suit and a rifle equipped like a sniper rifle lol. Having a ghillie suit looking armor, wielding something that looks like a sniper rifle with a dog as a companion is more suited for activision and their garbage call of duty than gw2 -.-

Kasama.8941:

…

As Castaliea pointed out immediately before your post here, even Anet doesn’t think that rifle goes with the Ranger’s theme. The theme matters greatly when determining how skills will work and appear. Sure, if Anet wanted to they could have the Ranger rifle shoot mechanized sharks with laserbeams on their heads (because “its fantasy”), but we all know that there is approximately zero percent chance of that happening because it would grossly hurt the theme of both the Ranger profession as well as the rifle weapon.

Even if the rifle wasn’t at odds with the theme of the Ranger, again, development on one thing means that there isn’t going to be that development on something else. You can’t simply say “I want both” when the limiting factor is the time it takes to make those two options.

MindfulPerson.5273:

What is the definition of a ranger? It’s a person who uses weapons at a distance.

Not really. That is not what the term “Ranger” means. You’re just slapping your own definition over the real definition. Again the problem is not “rangers cannot use rifles”. The problem is that role (ranged guy with a rifle) is already occupied by the warrior. Also i read somewhere in gw2 lore some classes embraced technical innovation, like thieves and engies, while others refused it, like, yes, rangers.
Our ranged “sniper” weapon is the longbow, sorry but there is no place for rifle imo, this is not going to happen. On a side note a thief with a sniper rifle would look much better than a ranger.

It depends on what your definition of “is” is…

A definition of a ranger in a mmorpg is a person who fights from long-distance.
A definition of a ranger in gw2 is a park ranger who is specialized in hunting.
And no one can hunt animals by going on foot or using melee. They use traps and attack from afar, because animals run faster than humans.

Indeed. “The problem is that role (ranged guy with a rifle) is already occupied by the warrior.” They can also use longbows.

So why rangers use rifles as well?

MindfulPerson.5273:

It depends on what your definition of “is” is…

A definition of a ranger in a mmorpg is a person who fights from long-distance.

Uff…
The word “Ranger” came from the word “range”, but it has nothing to do with fighting at range.
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ranger
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ranger
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/range#English

2.A keeper, guardian, or soldier who ranges over a region (generally of wilderness) to protect the area or enforce the law.

In mmorpgs a ranger is usually skilled in long-range fights, ye that’s true but, again, it has nothing to do with the original meaning of the name.

MindfulPerson.5273:

Indeed. “The problem is that role (ranged guy with a rifle) is already occupied by the warrior.” They can also use longbows.

Warrior’s longbow is not really a sniper weapon. Compared to the ranger version, the range is also lower. Warrior is like a “weapon master” in this game, that’s why they can use pretty much every single non-magical wapon, including bows and rifles. That said, rangers can use both types of bows, long and short, while the warrior can use the long version only. Rangers in this game use bows, not firearms.

I don’t see how Rangers = Range. If you do even the slightest amount of research and find out where the Fantasy Ranger came from, you can trace any game out today back to Dungeons and Dragons who based their very first Ranger class almost entirely on Aragorn from Lord of the Rings. Later additions to the Class included Nature Magic and an Animal Companion, but using Melee Weapons has Always existed with the class since its creation.

In almost all versions of the class, Rangers weren’t even the Gods of Ranged Combat, and never were amazing at Melee combat or Magic because a properly built Character of another class was Always better.

The Ranger was a Jack of All Trades in other games, and they had abilities that they only had, that made them much Better than other classes, Such as the Animal Companion, their superior self healing abilities (in Gw2, Healing Spring and Troll Unguent are the best heals in the game, and Troll Unguent was probably the best self heal in Gw1), they could detect and lay traps (it would be nice if Rangers could see or detect traps and stealthed characters in this game…), Track specific creatures, etc.

You guys need to read up on where the Ranger class originally came from. It will definitely give you a little perspective beyond :::

“Hmmm… Range is in the name, so that means Rangers are supposed to be a Ranged Class!!!!!”
- Moronic Anon

Personally, I don’t want to see a Ranger with a Rifle in this game because the Ranger already has access to two different bows. Why do they need yet another weapon to shoot projectiles with? Why not have a Staff or other weapon to cement their Nature Magic aspect into Place before we go all Industrial on them?!? You know, like how this Priestess of Melandru in Queensdale has in the Attached picture :::

Fjandi.2516:

MindfulPerson.5273:

It depends on what your definition of “is” is…

A definition of a ranger in a mmorpg is a person who fights from long-distance.

Uff…
The word “Ranger” came from the word “range”, but it has nothing to do with fighting at range.
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ranger
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ranger
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/range#English

2.A keeper, guardian, or soldier who ranges over a region (generally of wilderness) to protect the area or enforce the law.

In mmorpgs a ranger is usually skilled in long-range fights, ye that’s true but, again, it has nothing to do with the original meaning of the name.

I see this argument thrown around a lot. It is NOT about what you can define the word from the internet as. The GW Ranger is not “A Ranger” the GW Ranger is just that, The “GW Ranger”. Idc if some dude from LotR was called “A Ranger” or you find any other use of the word; That does not in any way help any argument. The GW Ranger is a separate, unique, entity. It has nothing to do with anything else.

That being said. The original GW Ranger used Bows. That was what they did. They weren’t melee masters, or magic users. They used Bows. Obviously the world has changed and the Ranger along with it but who and what the GW Ranger is at heart has and always be the same regardless of what you find for the simple definition of the word on wiki, from LotR, or some random games. A Rifle just does not fit with the class nor is it a weapon we need as a profession. Sorry.

It would be nice if it was filling a different ranged niche that our current options with bows.

A long range, big damage, low rate of fire option for example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T66jwrrGDJM

Add a camo skill somewhere in the 1-5, as well as a flying pet air drop for rapid deployment, and we’ll finally be the elite light infantry corps that Rangers are supposed to be.

I believe this is the way Anet is going at any rate. I have it on good sources that ‘Commando’ is the Ranger’s 6th trait line in the next big update.

Well personally I would like to see the staff added to the ranger but change it up and make it a melle weapon so we can hit people about the head with it and maybe have some support skills on 4 and 5.
As for the rifle that could be done just look at the guy at hunters lodge that starts the giant boat event, I would wonder what skills it would have tho since the warrior riffle is very similar to the ranger longbow ….

I could honestly see a lot of weapons added to ranger. Staff is the main one, a lot of the skills give it a fairly shamanistic feel so it wouldn’t be too far off.

Castaliea.3156:

I see this argument thrown around a lot. It is NOT about what you can define the word from the internet as. The GW Ranger is not “A Ranger” the GW Ranger is just that, The “GW Ranger”. Idc if some dude from LotR was called “A Ranger” or you find any other use of the word; That does not in any way help any argument. The GW Ranger is a separate, unique, entity. It has nothing to do with anything else.

Lolwut? My post was strictly about the origin of the word “ranger”, i don’t care at all about anet’s vision of the class. That was my anwer to this statement:

MindfulPerson.5273:

What is the definition of a ranger? It’s a person who uses weapons at a distance.

That’s not the definition of a “ranger in gw1” that’s the definition of the word “ranger”.
I had 4 characters in gw1…3 of them were rangers….the ranger used to be a ranged class in that game. Cool, still the word “ranger” has nothing to do with “fighting at range”.

that is why i love my german language. here ranger is called “Waldläufer” which means literally “forest runner”. so the misunderstanding that is has to be a “ranged” class is out of question. on the other side it describes the rangers relationship to the nature in form of the “forest” better then the english word does.

Surbrus.6942:

As Castaliea pointed out immediately before your post here, even Anet doesn’t think that rifle goes with the Ranger’s theme. The theme matters greatly when determining how skills will work and appear. Sure, if Anet wanted to they could have the Ranger rifle shoot mechanized sharks with laserbeams on their heads (because “its fantasy”), but we all know that there is approximately zero percent chance of that happening because it would grossly hurt the theme of both the Ranger profession as well as the rifle weapon.

Even if the rifle wasn’t at odds with the theme of the Ranger, again, development on one thing means that there isn’t going to be that development on something else. You can’t simply say “I want both” when the limiting factor is the time it takes to make those two options.

That quote is a year old, if not over a year old. The game is not written in stone, and this is not Guild Wars 1. Just ten days ago, an interview on MMORPG came up saying this:
“What’s more is that the team is also working very kitten finding a way to make it so that every profession has access to every weapon and their own weapon skills for those previously locked weapons. Engineer plus Hammer? Check. Again, there’s no specific timeline for this, but a new progression system is coming”.
http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/game/473/feature/7597/Guild-Wars-2-ArenaNets-Master-Plan-for-2013.html

It doesn’t take more then a little imagination to design some rifle skills that fits the Ranger. Take the greatsword for each profession as an example. They all look and work very differently. Even the rifle for the Warrior and Engineer are very different from each other.

but one question..why and for what we need a riffel?

we got the longbow for dmg on long rang, we got the shortbow for condition and skirmishing, what we could get with the riffel?..would be the same than longbow..yay

Staff / whip / rapier / hammer

Plz

Kasama.8941:

Surbrus.6942:

DargorV.8571:

In the same line of thought, Thieves should never be allowed to use Pistol because BANG BANG is not stealthy.

Eles shouldn’t have daggers because duh, melee and Mesmer 2h Sword cannon makes no sense.

<.<

Non of that which you said even makes sense though. Your reasoning is basically just saying “well this is how I think it should be, so therefore it should be common sense for everyone else”. Whereas the Ranger Rifle goes against the natural magic theme, as well as doubling up on weapon roles that already exist. You’re not going to convince anyone with that kind of explanation.

I really don’t understand why you, or anyone ells, have such a big problem with rifles for the Ranger? What exactly is it you think is going to happen, if a rifle is introduced to the Ranger? Guild Wars 2 is build up in such a way, that adding new weapon skills can be done, without changing anything ells for that profession. Therefor, adding a rifle to the Rangers weapon choice, would have no effect on the rest of the profession, at all. And what the hell is this “magical theme” you’re talking about? Are there some for of universal fantasy rule that says; “a rifle in a fantasy setting, can not have any magic associated with it”? And why do you assume the rifle skills would have the same role as the other two-handed weapons the Ranger already got? Surely it makes a lot more sense to create something new and fun that we don’t already have available. Seriously, you’re just being fanatical for no apparent reason.

Oh, no, not at all, actually you’re in the minority. We almost all want a staff (most rangers do, the ones I’ve talked to who don’t prefer hammer). Then next most popular wants were whip and rapier (sword is a love it or hate it weapon so having another strong mainhand melee option is ideal for the ranger community). Hammer comes in third (JUGGGGGERNAUT).

Sorry no one else wants rifles, we just don’t feel they fit as well as staff or rapier or hammer. Ranger’s are already, right now, very awesome at range with longbow. But ranger is missing weapon AoE that a hammer or staff would provide. Ranger is missing an alternative from mainhand sword.

Rifle ends up being very low on the list.

Personally, I want to run around like Indiana Jones with whip/torch.

Staff would be nice too indeed, provided it’s made as a melee/cc weapon.

We can already pick tight pants and dye them green.

We already have a longbow.

Gimme a quarterstaff to rule melee and i can finally go all Robin Hood on those Mists Invaders!

(and suffice to say, the Hood was ruling the ranger class well before Aragorn was even thought of)

Bambula.3649:

but one question..why and for what we need a riffel?

we got the longbow for dmg on long rang, we got the shortbow for condition and skirmishing, what we could get with the riffel?..would be the same than longbow..yay

We are still missing a AoE/control weapon, like the Mesmers greatsword, or the Warrior and Guardians hammer. It could be something on the lines of; #1 fire a piercing shot, #2 fire a series of shots in a cone pattern that blinds up to five targets, #3 fire a shot that bounces between five targets and deals vulnerability, #4 charge your foe while firing a series of shots-first shot deals fear, #5 roll backwards-your pets next attack also knocks down.

Lol! Hey! If those are the rifle skills then I’ll take it! Seriously, though, I know you’re just making stuff up on the fly to give an example of a rifle with aoe, but, seriously, #4 is basically rapid fire with fearon first shot. Also, Sun Spirit is on a 30s CD and has a short range AoE blind. So your #2 would end up having a long, painful cooldown. It’s basically splitblade or poison volley with a freaking blind! Your auto attack is a…free pierce? You must not want anyone to play bows anymore (or else you just resent having to take peircing arrows trait).

And then number 5…that’s actually an interesting skill. The 3 skill, meh, I don’t know.

So uhm what skills would the rifle have?

Chopps.5047:

Lol! Hey! If those are the rifle skills then I’ll take it! Seriously, though, I know you’re just making stuff up on the fly to give an example of a rifle with aoe, but, seriously, #4 is basically rapid fire with fearon first shot. Also, Sun Spirit is on a 30s CD and has a short range AoE blind. So your #2 would end up having a long, painful cooldown. It’s basically splitblade or poison volley with a freaking blind! Your auto attack is a…free pierce? You must not want anyone to play bows anymore (or else you just resent having to take peircing arrows trait).

And then number 5…that’s actually an interesting skill. The 3 skill, meh, I don’t know.

The goal of the rifle, in my example, would be less about damage and more about control. Meaning it most likely wouldn’t deal as much damage as the longbow.

• The trait Piercing Arrows gives pierce to all bow shots. The rifle would only have pierce on the first skill.
• The Sun Spirit has a passive skill, that’s why the active skill has such a long recharge time. The Engineers pistol skill Static Shot can hit up to four foes, and deals both blind and confusion, with only a 15 second recharge time. A simple AoE blind fired in a cone pattern, is really not that powerful.
• The third skill would give some much needed vulnerability, that gives the weapon a little more damage.
• The fourth skill forces you to run forward, so if the fear doesn’t hit, you run strait into your foe. This makes it a very different skill from Rapid Fire.
• The fifth skill also works in combo with the fourth skill.

Well, regardless of your hypothetical shotgun/rifle hybrid weapon, why not staff / rapier / hammer? I addressed that a few posts up, you may have missed it. I explain why I think another ranged option doesn’t fit in terms of the needs of the ranger profession.

Chopps.5047:

Well, regardless of your hypothetical shotgun/rifle hybrid weapon, why not staff / rapier / hammer? I addressed that a few posts up, you may have missed it. I explain why I think another ranged option doesn’t fit in terms of the needs of the ranger profession.

Why not all those weapons at the same time? Your argument is basically “me and other players want these weapons, but the players who want a rifle can’t have it, because some don’t like that”. You are talking like someone would force you to use the rifle. I wouldn’t use a staff either, because I don’t think it would fit my Ranger. But you don’t see me complaining that others shouldn’t have the chance to use it. Why does there have to be a reason to have a rifle, beyond the fact that a lot of players want to use a rifle with their Ranger in the game? There is no “needs”, only wishes and hopes, of what each player want to see for the Ranger. And a rifle is no more far fetched then a staff or hammer is. All these arguments about “Aragorn didn’t have a rifle, so neither should the Ranger in Guild Wars 2!” are just plain out ridiculous. Guild Wars 2 is a completely different fictional universe from Lord of the Rings. It’s even very different from Guild Wars 1. I don’t even understand why we are having this discussion.

DargorV.8571:

In the same line of thought, Thieves should never be allowed to use Pistol because BANG BANG is not stealthy.

Eles shouldn’t have daggers because duh, melee and Mesmer 2h Sword cannon makes no sense.

<.<

You’ve never heard of a crook robbing a place at gunpoint? Or wizards carrying daggers for up close and personal self-defense? Really?

For the shown ranger trope in this game, a rifle or pistol would be exceedingly out of place on the class whose notable skills are beast mastery, nature magic, and wilderness survival instincts.

A melee staff would be pretty cool though.

Rottaran Owain.6789:

You’ve never heard of a crook robbing a place at gunpoint? Or wizards carrying daggers for up close and personal self-defense? Really?

For the shown ranger trope in this game, a rifle or pistol would be exceedingly out of place on the class whose notable skills are beast mastery, nature magic, and wilderness survival instincts.

A melee staff would be pretty cool though.

I would be very surprised if you’ve never heard of a Ranger carrying a rifle..

Marksmanship, skirmishing, and wilderness survival, can all fall under the category of a hunter as well. Hunters also use rifles.

A melee staff for the Ranger would be very cool. For the Thief as well!

I don’t know about all the stuff your ranting about, I just think the ranger community would like

A) Melee main hand similar to sword except without the leap animations

B) A short range AoE weapon

I think the rifle would duplicate the bows. Ranger needs more build options, not more ranged weapons. In the future? Maybe I can see rifle. But right now, if ANET is adding weapons slowly, I don’t think many are with you, Kasama.

We’d like to see thigs like staff or rapier and not because “we get what we want and you don’t hahaha”, which seems to be how you’re interpretting this. Rather, those weapons make the most sense for what the profession needs right now as of July 28, 2013.

Kasama.8941:

I would be very surprised if you’ve never heard of a Ranger carrying a rifle..

Marksmanship, skirmishing, and wilderness survival, can all fall under the category of a hunter as well. Hunters also use rifles.

A melee staff for the Ranger would be very cool. For the Thief as well!

Military, or modern ranger? Yeah, of course. Ranger who fights with wild animals, spirits, and guns at the same time? No, never.

Chopps.5047:

I don’t know about all the stuff your ranting about, I just think the ranger community would like

A) Melee main hand similar to sword except without the leap animations

B) A short range AoE weapon

I think the rifle would duplicate the bows. Ranger needs more build options, not more ranged weapons. In the future? Maybe I can see rifle. But right now, if ANET is adding weapons slowly, I don’t think many are with you, Kasama.

We’d like to see thigs like staff or rapier and not because “we get what we want and you don’t hahaha”, which seems to be how you’re interpretting this. Rather, those weapons make the most sense for what the profession needs right now as of July 28, 2013.

Why are you taking for everyone ells? You have nothing to base this on. The rifle is the most common discussed weapon for the Ranger. There has been more topics suggesting it, then any other weapon, ever since beta. And in all the topics, there are always been just as many players who are open minded to the idea, as those who are rejecting it (mostly based on an idea that the Ranger is suppose to be some kind of druid).

You continue to reject the idea of a rifle with the same futile arguments. The topics about wanting another main melee weapon for the Ranger, are almost none existent, so I’m not sure why you would get the idea that more players would want that, before a rifle? What makes you think that ArenaNet would add weapons slowly, or one at a time? And why do you continue to talk about “needing” a weapon, when the weapon itself isn’t what defines it, but the skills that are attached to it. Which can be anything ArenaNet makes up!

Here let me go over all the points, because this is getting repetitive:

• There has been more topics suggesting a rifle for the Ranger then any other weapon type, ever since beta.
• The Ranger, in Guild Wars 2, can be as much of a hunter as it can be a druid like profession. If I pick longbow, axe/axe, shouts, signets, survival skills, traps, and Rampage As One, my build would have nothing to do with a nature themed Ranger, at all. And a rifle would fit perfectly here.
• Talking about gun noises or nature based weapons, makes no sense, as these things are not a factor in the game. But for the record, some animals get just as scared from the sound of a bow firing, as they do of a gunshot (like a deer). And vice versa, some animals don’t care about noise at all (like a boar). Some animals can also be trained to not be scared of loud noises, even if it’s in their nature to be (like hunting dogs). A rifle is made out of metal and wood, which both are natural elements. The first rifle was called a hand cannon, and dates back to the 13th century China. There’s nothing modern about it.
• Just because the Ranger gets a rifle, it doesn’t mean that it would work like the Warriors rifle. Take greatswords as an example. The skills and animations for greatsword, are completely different for the Ranger and the Mesmer. Use your imagination..
• Things that the Ranger is still missing are a control weapon, and a support weapon. These are the roles a rifle could fill. But having said that, there are other examples of weapons in the game that work the same way, but that are still both in the game. The Warriors weapons are a good example of this.
• Just because we already have two two-handed ranged weapons, it doesn’t mean that a third one would be “too much”. We also have four different offhand weapons.
• We have no idea how ArenaNet would implement new weapons. For all we know, they could give two or three weapons to each profession at the same time. Or they could make a lot of weapons for each profession in advance, and then add them into the game one at a time, as they see fit.
• Yes, ArenaNet said that they wanted the Ranger to be a spiritual woodsman, a long time ago. But they have changed their minds about a lot of things since then. Nothing is written in stone. Also, a resent interview suggest that ArenaNet are planning on giving all weapons to all professions.
• The creation of the Ranger in the real world, as is mostly related to the Ranger in fiction, was done by Robert Rogers, during the French and Indian War (1754–1763) and the American Revolution. Robert Rogers formed a rapidly deployable light infantry force, tasked mainly with reconnaissance as well as conducting special operations against distant targets. He used tactics inspired by native americans, and learned his men to survive out in the wild by using natures resources. Rangers was a known name for other companies before this, but none of them used the tactics that Robert Rogers did. Fictional books and movies have also been created about Robert Rogers. And it’s not totally unreasonable to believe that Tolkien could also have been inspired by Robert Rogers, when he created Aragorn. Robert Rogers also used a cut down musket, even though he did have the option of using a bow at the time.

I’d love to see rangers get rifles and believe it fits their theme, but don’t think it will happen due to Anet’s past stance on the matter. I’d like to see them get staves too if no proper druid class is in the works for an expansion.

I must admit I’d find it hard to believe that Anet said they’d give all weapons to each class. Can you produce a quote for that?

Gaiawolf.8261:

I’d love to see rangers get rifles and believe it fits their theme, but don’t think it will happen due to Anet’s past stance on the matter. I’d like to see them get staves too if no proper druid class is in the works for an expansion.

I must admit I’d find it hard to believe that Anet said they’d give all weapons to each class. Can you produce a quote for that?

http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/game/473/feature/7597/Guild-Wars-2-ArenaNets-Master-Plan-for-2013.html

I find it hard to believe as well, but it seems legit.

Kasama.8941:

There has been more topics suggesting a rifle for the Ranger then any other weapon type, ever since beta.

And there have been just as many replies in those Topics, saying that the Rifle is a horrible idea, and it doesn’t fit very well with the Ranger or Nature. So, Your point with that is what, exactly? Topics > Replies?

The Ranger, in Guild Wars 2, can be as much of a hunter as it can be a druid like profession. If I pick longbow, axe/axe, shouts, signets, survival skills, traps, and Rampage As One, my build would have nothing to do with a nature themed Ranger, at all. And a rifle would fit perfectly here.

Rangers are good with Traps and Suvival skills because they are so at one with Nature (especially a Trap that freezes enemys? Or a survival skill that creates literal muddy terrain? Or how about Rampage as one with strengthens the link between you and your animal companion (which you charmed straight out of Nature) with every attack you make? How does that even work without Nature?)

The first rifle was called a hand cannon, and dates back to the 13th century China. There’s nothing modern about it.

The First rifle was invented almost 800 years ago, but it wasn’t used in Hunting for those 800 years, and it never automatically replaced bows. There are still many people who hunt with bows today, so there is nothing about Bows that equals ancient history either!

Just because the Ranger gets a rifle, it doesn’t mean that it would work like the Warriors rifle. Take greatswords as an example. The skills and animations for greatsword, are completely different for the Ranger and the Mesmer. Use your imagination..

Unless the Ranger has a Nest on the end of the gun, and it Shoots Hornets and Wasps out of the gun and they cause Vulnerability and Poison with every attack, It wont be that much different, which is my problem with the weapon. Unless it can be used in a totally off the wall unique way, its not going to be that much different from how the Warrior or Engineer use their rifles.

Things that the Ranger is still missing are a control weapon, and a support weapon. These are the roles a rifle could fill. But having said that, there are other examples of weapons in the game that work the same way, but that are still both in the game. The Warriors weapons are a good example of this.

There are Control Roles the Rifle could fill, like shooting a net, etc (which the Engineer does already). There are Control Roles a Staff or Scepter could fill as well. Hell, a Mainhand Torch could fill a better Control/Support Role than a Rifle,…And hasn’t been done already!

Just because we already have two two-handed ranged weapons, it doesn’t mean that a third one would be “too much”. We also have four different offhand weapons

Really, its a new Melee weapon that we need! We have 2! There is a severe lack of representation of the Rangers Close Range combat abilities here!!! And having an Animal Companion to go infront of you to soak up damage is no excuse for the lack of melee options!!!

The creation of the Ranger in the real world, as is mostly related to the Ranger in fiction, was done by Robert Rogers, during the French and Indian War (1754–1763) and the American Revolution…..
….. Fictional books and movies have also been created about Robert Rogers. And it’s not totally unreasonable to believe that Tolkien could also have been inspired by Robert Rogers, when he created Aragorn. Robert Rogers also used a cut down musket, even though he did have the option of using a bow at the time.

As Correct as you are, you are still missing the main point about a Fantasy Ranger. The Creation of the Ranger, as far as fantasy fiction and games goes, still traces its origins to Aragorn in the Lord of the Rings, through Dungeons and Dragons, and almost everything that has to do with Modern Fantasy Rangers owes their existence to D&D, not WOW or Everquest, or any piece of literature written after that time. That doesn’t mean that they aren’t experts with Rifles (I had a Ranger while I was playing through an Eberron Campaign that used only Rifles.). The Point I was making in my last post was that Rangers do not automatically equal Range. I am not for or against Rifles, but there are many things besides Range, including their animal companion, survival skills, Tracking, or Nature Magic. I want to see one of those points get overhauled or redone before I see another Ranged weapon. That is my opinion and I am sticking to it!