Guild Wars 2

Wait is this guy serious? Soo, Ohoni, would you agree with allowing a PvP track for a legendary weapon?

Could add something like:
“Shadow’s Mark” Any critical hit on this target does 50% more damage.
Would make Thieves more appealing to take in Raids, and they would have something unique to Thief.

That you do not understand how gear, trait builds and downscaling work, which are really basic parts of the game.

Burtnik.5218:

Druid overall need some serious nerf. That daze uptime is just unrealistic. Tried to play a war now and most of the time i was dazed even in rampage form.. so basically i have spent most of my time running around as i wasnt able to do anything. Idk what they smoked at office really.

The daze is easily the worst part. 4-5 seconds of not being to just use any weapon skills is so unbalanced.
Also, thanks for the carry game m8.

The Thrasher in Iron Marches, only uses his spinning attack, never dropping the nectar, even if there is only one person and that person is in melee range.

vesica tempestas.1563:

if you make a couple mistakes you die, thats a decent example of challenging imo.

Not really. This is an MMO, not a Solo Adventure experience. You can afford to make mistakes. If you don’t play the game as intended i.e. solo, then yes the game can be challenging. But even then, it’s easily doable.

Werdx.2059:

I am sure,those people saying game is not hard,you should do it with ease,they play zerk Necro or some other op class.

Go play scepter/shield/hammer guardian,with 12 k hp,vs mobs hitting you 5 k,then come with fairy tales like “game is not hard”.

Now comes “play meta”…Not everyone is trender,some people actually playing spec and class they enjoy,not what gives them easy way out.

Done. Show me the challenge, please.
If you want me to do it again, with Scepter and Shield or Hammer, I can go and do it. But don’t think this game is hard, because it really isn’t.

Rotation – the most efficient order of using abilities.
Min-Max – doing everything to maximize whatever is important, in this game, it’s damage. So in this case, it would refer to using all consumable items, all buff’s ect. to do the most damage possible.

IndigoSundown.5419:

Arrk.4102:

IndigoSundown.5419:

I’d like the see those claiming HoT is not challenging link videos of themselves soloing stuff like, say, some of the Hero Challenges, maybe the one in VB with the Vet Teragriff, pack of wolves and mender. We might learn something.

Honestly, the only challenging thing about this was timing it right so I could actually solo it, and not get someone jumping it to “help” mid fight.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGcJLnVyxHA

Thank you for making the effort, Arrk. Hopefully, some people will learn something from it.

Out of curiosity, does the Vet change each time it’s activated, or am I mis-remembering it as a Teragriff. I just got HoT and have only been there once.

It does change every time, your memory is quite fine. It can be a Teragriff, a Leeching Thrasher, a Vile Thrasher, a Troll, a Husk or a Wolf. Though Leeching Thrasher is currently bugged, and does not attack you.

IndigoSundown.5419:

I’d like the see those claiming HoT is not challenging link videos of themselves soloing stuff like, say, some of the Hero Challenges, maybe the one in VB with the Vet Teragriff, pack of wolves and mender. We might learn something.

Honestly, the only challenging thing about this was timing it right so I could actually solo it, and not get someone jumping it to “help” mid fight.

Kampilan.3895:

The problem is that NECESSARY content is behind this challenging content.

Please explain, what exactly is necessary that is locked behind challenging content?

I personally do not face these players, either the ragers or the bad build running ones. Though when I queued with a friend in amber, I ran into so many of both, it was impressive.

naphack.9346:

My best one up to date was “why do you [censored] play ranked when you don’t have elite specs? Arena.net should bar everyone who doesn’t have HoT from entering ranked!”

Like hell I will stop playing pvp after 3 years of guild wars 2 just because Arena.net decided to go full mental and break the balance of their own game in half by hiding the strongest specs behind a p2w wall.

Not to be insulting to you, but why do you intentionally hinder your team by playing sub-par builds? If you want to continue playing PvP, please do, but you can choose not to play ranked, where wins actually matter.

I really do not see why they should have to cater to people who probably still click their skills with the mouse.

DH is easily countered if you have at least 4 brain cells. (2 to dodge, 2 to use your attack skills).

You see him plop down the traps. There is an actual animation they do. Dodge away from that place, and that’s it. More then half his damage is gone.

Don’t go “oh they have more traps then I have dodges”. You have other defensive skills. Use them. If you don’t know how, that is a l2p issue, not a DH problem.

There is a reason high rated matches don’t have DH in every game. People who actually know how to play the game counter it easily.

You don’t balance a game around someone who just started playing, you balance it around those who know how to play.

I had an idea for an elite skill we could receive whenever we get a new specialization.
Don’t know about the exact wording but something like this:
[Whatever Name]
Create a field in which any damage you would receive will be dealt to the enemies in the field instead. Any healing received by the enemies in the field heals you or your allies in the field instead.
X duration.

I’m thinking the field would be the size of Time Warp.
This gives the mesmer a really good team fight potential for PvP or WvW, and allows to face tank in PvE.

Thoughts, suggestions?

DeT M.4319:

wow… 42 page just for Dragon Hunter name? I find Dragon Hunter good enough.

And renaming it…. wont change anything.

Why dont suggest to rename warrior? I mean all classes are warriors. By that word definition.

It’s not Dragon Hunter, it’s Dragonhunter.
And if renaming won’t change anything why complain about it?

One bow and a pair of gloves are not that hard to change. They could just add those to the cash shop to not waste development time, and make a nice profit too.

KDXX.9520:

Not gonna comment on skills really, because the weapon swapping

correct me if I’m wrong, but Revenants will not have weapon swapping.

You guys, we will be getting good elites that will finally not be the ones that 3 people in the entire game use or the terrible version of Mesmers Distortion, and you are trying to stop it? Really?

A) Tomes will be brought back with a Tome – centric spec.
B) Lich is the most used of the ones you listed. Rampager and Tornado are so niche that honestly if they were redone in the same way, an insignificant amount of people would complain.

Just a note to all the new people in this thread. There is no such thing as a Dragon Hunter. It’s Dragonhunter.
In my honest opinion, I gave up. Name it whatever the kitten you want. Some people will still defend ANet to the bitter end.

Dante.1763:

Arrk.4102:

Wish you guys would stop whining about the whining and instead help the Developers improve the actual concept or skills. It’s really a silly waste of time.

See how this can easily be avoided? And posting on one thread does not prevent you to post in another, so people can do both.

Another thing, not everyones strong point is thinking of skills either , some of us are very closely attached to the lore of the game, more so than the actual gameplay of the game
(not directed at you Aark.)

Hey, to each their own. I personally prefer the lore to complement the gameplay, but if the game includes lore, it better be consistent.

Wish you guys would stop whining about the whining and instead help the Developers improve the actual concept or skills. It’s really a silly waste of time.

See how this can easily be avoided? And posting on one thread does not prevent you to post in another, so people can do both.

Mikhail.4961:

Nike.2631:

Genesis.8572:

Inquisitor?

No less terrible than last time it came up . Torturers and murderers aren’t generally a heroic archetype. Tyria had them before and seems to largely be glad to be rid of them.

Neither were witch hunters, but ANet is trying to draw parallels to them and the Dragonhunter: the specialization of their perhaps most “selfless/heroic” class.

Legit question now: has there been any other statements since Peters’ post about the name?

Nope.

Maybe if you keep whining about it, people will finally stop complaining.
Edit: not aimed at Obtena

Nike.2631:

Tachenon.5270:

All you have to do is visualize the dragonhunter coming face to face with his prey in a dark valley in some remote corner of the world. What’s he gonna do? Arrest it? Tell it to straighten up and fly right? He sure as nerfs ain’t gonna kill it with traps or arrows or anything else at his disposal short of a Pact fleet with mass quantities of airships bristling with guns and some sort of megalaser or maybe a tactical nuke.

His “prey” are Dragon MINIONS, not the whole kitten dragon. The one victory the People of Tyria have had over dragons has come from taking apart its powerbase one lieutenant at a time until the beast was finally made vulnerable. Here we have a faction – as in many – of Guardians who are no longer satisfied to stand watch and wait and guard – they are training to go out and find and kill those lieutenants and knock the legs out from under the armies of other dragons after the success in Orr.

Sooo Dragonminionhunter?

It’s just a tiny amount of people whining, get the kitten over it.

Thund.2795:

purecontact.1680:

I don’t like Dragonhunter, here is why :

First point:
I think this name doesn’t fit in the guardian’s archetype

Hunter is in the rogue archetype.
Guardian is in the soldier archetype.

No matter how you twist it, the “hunter” name will stay in the rogue archetype.

You can make a hunter wearing heavy armor, using mace and shield or light magic, it will always be in the rogue archetype:
“Hunter” is connoted and you can’t break this connotation just because of your background: it won’t fit better to a soldier than a rogue archetype.

Second point:
It is very hard to justify this name

Dragon is a specific enemy.
By using this prefix, you close a lot of doors.
I see a centaur attacking my allies but nope, I won’t kill it because it is set in stone: I’m a Dragonhunter/slayer/bane/knight/whatever
I got that Dragon means Evil in Tyria but Witch hunter didn’t hunt bandits or scoundrels and as I have my root in the Guardian’s archetype, I have to keep defending people from this kind of enemies (or hunt them, the main purpose of this spec).

The only way to justify that a Dragoninsertname attack something which isn’t related to Dragon is to say that you have draconic magic in the game and a specialization use this magic.
It can fit with Silvary but it won’t fit with any of the other races.

Third point:
It is a very confusing name

Dragonhunter is both generic and specific.

It’s generic because like a lot people said : we tracked mordremoth during season 2 and that make all of us dragonhunter.

It’s very specific because you gave this class a specific goal : hunting dragons (and all their minions) and like I said before, it closes doors.

Why Sentinel should prevail:

Gameplay
Sentinel adapts to the soldier archetype.
Sentinel wears heavy armour and a longbow.
Sentinel sets traps to defend his camp.
Sentinel tracks intruders.

Background
Sentinels are border guard.
During wartime however the Border guard withdraw from the Border outposts and provide assistance in a limited capacity to the country’s regular army.
Wartime assistance of the Border guard to the Army is essential as they are familiar with the local terrain having patrolled it on a daily basis during peacetime.

It makes sense:
We are in a war against mordremoth, Guardian pursue mordrem intruders from inside frontier to the maguuma jungle.
They have to specialize themselves into Sentinels, becoming familiar with jungle threats.

As a sentinel, you learned how to prepare a battleground efficiently (traps) and how to always keep an advantage on your enemies (longbow).
Moreover, your mastery in this specialization allows you to keep enemies under control until allies comes (immobilize, cripple, stun).

As as sentinel, you’re not a lonely hunter tracking dragons/enemies, you’re a part of a team.

Extra!
-There is no religious connotation.
-It is flat enough to set up the roleplay that the player want.

This ^
(Even if you don’t like the name Sentinel, this post explain pretty well the “dragonhunter problem”)

Yeah, Sentinel fixes all of the problems. And you don’t even have to change the skins/skills. Just go for the “it’s an intimidation tactic” and it’s done.
+1

I, too, would love too see this.

But none of the knights did any hunting.
The problem most people have with DH is the connection between it and the core Guardian class.
The connection between the archetypical knight and slaying dragons is there. But then there is no connection between knights and game hunting. There is a really tenuous connection between knights and witch hunting, but that’s stretching it. But people are asking for connection between Guardian and Dragons. Not between the archetypical knight and the dragons.

Obtena.7952:

Arrk.4102:

Obtena.7952:

Arrk.4102:

Obtena.7952:

Arrk.4102:

Obtena.7952:

Ephemiel.5694:

Obtena.7952:

Ephemiel.5694:

Obtena.7952:

Arrk.4102:

Where did you see knights slaying dragons in GW?

That’s a very obtuse statement. Where do I see knights? Guardian is obviously closely related to a knight archetype. my Guardian killed a dragon in the storyline.

My Thief did, my Mesmer did, my Warrior did and my Necromancer did.

Is there any real info you can give to prove me or anyone else who realizes Dragonhunter is a ridiculous name for a Guardian spec?

Other than hundreds or thousands of years of established legends/myths that fantasy MMO’s commonly pull their content from, I guess not ><.

MMOs BASE their content of that, they do not follow it to the letter.

Please, just give up, you have 0 arguments against this.

I didn’t say they follow it to the letter. In fact, I already mentioned it doesn’t. Anet is just making a variation on a legendary theme that’s actually very common and well-associated.

Which theme? The Dragon fighting knight, the big game hunter or the witch hunter?

I don’t get your point here. Feel free to tell me again why Guardians have absolutely nothing to do with dragons again even though it’s a very commonly associated theme in fantasy settings?

Never asked for their association to generic fantasy setting. I asked for their association in GW.

Unfortunately, I don’t think Anet is considering your individual needs when developing the game. Anet is obviously borrowing heavily from a generic fantasy setting. If that doesn’t appeal to you, you’re wasting your time.

I didn’t ask it from ANet. I asked it from you when you stated that DH makes perfect sense in story of GW.

I already explained it. Knights have an established association with dragons. It’s not unreasonable to borrow on this theme for GW2 and attach it to the knightly character.

I get you hate the name but it but at least be less obtuse about it.

No no no, I specifically, way back in page 20 something asked for established in-GW lore connections. The implied, borrowed stuff doesn’t work.

I will stop being so literal in my arguments when you do.

Obtena.7952:

Arrk.4102:

So we should follow the themes until they don’t suit the purpose and then disregard them completely?

Perhaps that’s your opinion that the theme doesn’t suit the purpose. Perhaps you don’t understand what the purpose actually is.

I’m not against good ideas for new names but it’s rather dumb for people to say that an obviously knightly character has zero association to dragons just to be sensational and give the illusion that the name is worse than it is.

And let’s also address the fact that not all knightly characters hunted dragons, or the fact that they didn’t use bows or traps.
I’m guessing you will now say that is irrelevant because “well you don’t have to use those”

Obtena.7952:

Arrk.4102:

Obtena.7952:

Arrk.4102:

Obtena.7952:

Ephemiel.5694:

Obtena.7952:

Ephemiel.5694:

Obtena.7952:

Arrk.4102:

Where did you see knights slaying dragons in GW?

That’s a very obtuse statement. Where do I see knights? Guardian is obviously closely related to a knight archetype. my Guardian killed a dragon in the storyline.

My Thief did, my Mesmer did, my Warrior did and my Necromancer did.

Is there any real info you can give to prove me or anyone else who realizes Dragonhunter is a ridiculous name for a Guardian spec?

Other than hundreds or thousands of years of established legends/myths that fantasy MMO’s commonly pull their content from, I guess not ><.

MMOs BASE their content of that, they do not follow it to the letter.

Please, just give up, you have 0 arguments against this.

I didn’t say they follow it to the letter. In fact, I already mentioned it doesn’t. Anet is just making a variation on a legendary theme that’s actually very common and well-associated.

Which theme? The Dragon fighting knight, the big game hunter or the witch hunter?

I don’t get your point here. Feel free to tell me again why Guardians have absolutely nothing to do with dragons again even though it’s a very commonly associated theme in fantasy settings?

Never asked for their association to generic fantasy setting. I asked for their association in GW.

Unfortunately, I don’t think Anet is considering your individual needs when developing the game. Anet is obviously borrowing heavily from a generic fantasy setting. If that doesn’t appeal to you, you’re wasting your time.

I didn’t ask it from ANet. I asked it from you when you stated that DH makes perfect sense in story of GW.

Ephemiel.5694:

Arrk, give it up. It’s impossible to convince someone so blind to reason.

Oh I know, this is a Sisyphus task. I just enjoy it.

So we should follow the themes until they don’t suit the purpose and then disregard them completely?

Obtena.7952:

Arrk.4102:

Obtena.7952:

Ephemiel.5694:

Obtena.7952:

Ephemiel.5694:

Obtena.7952:

Arrk.4102:

Where did you see knights slaying dragons in GW?

That’s a very obtuse statement. Where do I see knights? Guardian is obviously closely related to a knight archetype. my Guardian killed a dragon in the storyline.

My Thief did, my Mesmer did, my Warrior did and my Necromancer did.

Is there any real info you can give to prove me or anyone else who realizes Dragonhunter is a ridiculous name for a Guardian spec?

Other than hundreds or thousands of years of established legends/myths that fantasy MMO’s commonly pull their content from, I guess not ><.

MMOs BASE their content of that, they do not follow it to the letter.

Please, just give up, you have 0 arguments against this.

I didn’t say they follow it to the letter. In fact, I already mentioned it doesn’t. Anet is just making a variation on a legendary theme that’s actually very common and well-associated.

Which theme? The Dragon fighting knight, the big game hunter or the witch hunter?

I don’t get your point here. Feel free to tell me again why Guardians have absolutely nothing to do with dragons again even though it’s a very commonly associated theme in fantasy settings?

Never asked for their association to generic fantasy setting. I asked for their association in GW.

Obtena.7952:

Arrk.4102:

Obtena.7952:

Arrk.4102:

Obtena.7952:

It could, but it doesn’t. You might think the explanation is weak but it’s plausible. To say there is no connection between knightly types and dragons just shows people lack exposure to historical legends/myths, etc… things commonly touched upon by any fantasy setting.

Knightly archetypes going against dragons are all well and good. But is the Warrior not a knight as well?

I would say it’s not as knightly as a Guardian is.

Why not? I would say they are even more knightly, since knights don’t use magic.

I associate Guardians with knights because of their similar links to valour, virtue, honour, etc… Warriors don’t have those elements. The magic thing is just Anet’s variation on the theme. That’s not unreasonable.

It’s a name of the trait line. Does that mean that I will not be able to use traps if I spec into honour? You know, since traps are not knightly and honourable.

Obtena.7952:

Ephemiel.5694:

Obtena.7952:

Ephemiel.5694:

Obtena.7952:

Arrk.4102:

Where did you see knights slaying dragons in GW?

That’s a very obtuse statement. Where do I see knights? Guardian is obviously closely related to a knight archetype. my Guardian killed a dragon in the storyline.

My Thief did, my Mesmer did, my Warrior did and my Necromancer did.

Is there any real info you can give to prove me or anyone else who realizes Dragonhunter is a ridiculous name for a Guardian spec?

Other than hundreds or thousands of years of established legends/myths that fantasy MMO’s commonly pull their content from, I guess not ><.

MMOs BASE their content of that, they do not follow it to the letter.

Please, just give up, you have 0 arguments against this.

I didn’t say they follow it to the letter. In fact, I already mentioned it doesn’t. Anet is just making a variation on a legendary theme that’s actually very common and well-associated.

Which theme? The Dragon fighting knight, the big game hunter or the witch hunter?

dietzero.3514:

Why are people arguing with Obtena?

Because trolls are like click-bait articles. You know it’s silly, but you can’t resist.

Obtena.7952:

Arrk.4102:

Obtena.7952:

It could, but it doesn’t. You might think the explanation is weak but it’s plausible. To say there is no connection between knightly types and dragons just shows people lack exposure to historical legends/myths, etc… things commonly touched upon by any fantasy setting.

Knightly archetypes going against dragons are all well and good. But is the Warrior not a knight as well?

I would say it’s not as knightly as a Guardian is.

Why not? I would say they are even more knightly, since knights don’t use magic.

Obtena.7952:

Arrk.4102:

Where did you see knights slaying dragons in GW?

That’s a very obtuse statement. Where do I see knights? Guardian is obviously closely related to a knight archetype. my Guardian killed a dragon in the storyline.

My Warrior did as well. Is that now basis for Warrior’s Dragonslayer spec?

Obtena.7952:

It could, but it doesn’t. You might think the explanation is weak but it’s plausible. To say there is no connection between knightly types and dragons just shows people lack exposure to historical legends/myths, etc… things commonly touched upon by any fantasy setting.

Knightly archetypes going against dragons are all well and good. But is the Warrior not a knight as well? Then it makes perfect sense for him to be a DH as well. Then that means that the spec doesn’t even have a unique requirment to it like the others do.

Leo G.4501:

Arrk.4102:

The story could also make a Waffleslinger spec make sense.

And you were worried I mislabled you as immature?

It’s also not healthy to ignore what you don’t know or understand. It’s best to consider the possibility that you’re ignorant or wrong which is the basis for when I suggest the name Draconnier.

That said, I believe I’m done. Reply but you won’t be getting a response from me.

Ignoring people is mature though.
And Draconnier does not address any but one problem people had with the name. Also did you ever consider that YOU could be wrong? We assume no coming story, because if we knew for sure, one side of the discussion would instantly lose and it would not be an argument anymore.

Obtena.7952:

Arrk.4102:

Obtena.7952:

Ephemiel.5694:

37 pages and people, somehow, still side on Anet’s side with this.

It’s easy to do. Despite the name-haters desire to convince people otherwise, ironically with ‘thematically inconsistencies’ and ‘lore’, there is very old, well established tradition of associating knightly character types as the nemesis to dragons. It’s not Anet’s fail for acknowledging this and borrowing on the idea. It’s a real thing, there is lots of cultural and historical references to it. Hell, there’s a kids show about it. Even my son associates knights as dragon hunters. It’s not a far fetched idea. If individuals can’t acknowledge this link, they are being disingenuous and have little reason to be listened to.

I’m sorry, do not ignore the points you failed to address. I will repeat it though. When people are asking for lore explanation, they are not asking for out of story one. They are asking for one in context of Guild Wars. Not real life fairy tales or cartoons.
There is also the Dragon Age Inquisition game, where the player character, the Inquisitor, can hunt dragons. So now that there is precedence for it, why can we not have Inquisitor instead?

This is not out of context for GW … it has dragons, it has knightly characters. Just because you can’t acknowledge Anet is borrowing on those themes to make connections with people’s backgrounds doesn’t make it nonsense. Artists do this ALL the time and the people writing the backgrounds of this game are doing it now.

Where did you see knights slaying dragons in GW? Oh, you didn’t? Then it is out of context. Sure they can take inspiration from anything they want, but it was either you or that Val person who argued that DH makes perfect sense in story. When it doesn’t with what we have. What we don’t have is anything thst that links Guardians, specifically, to dragons. Knights are Warriors too. What specifically about Guardian links them?

Obtena.7952:

Ephemiel.5694:

37 pages and people, somehow, still side on Anet’s side with this.

It’s easy to do. Despite the name-haters desire to convince people otherwise, ironically with ‘thematically inconsistencies’ and ‘lore’, there is very old, well established tradition of associating knightly character types as the nemesis to dragons. It’s not Anet’s fail for acknowledging this and borrowing on the idea. It’s a real thing, there is lots of cultural and historical references to it. Hell, there’s a kids show about it. Even my son associates knights as dragon hunters. It’s not a far fetched idea. If individuals can’t acknowledge this link, they are being disingenuous and have little reason to be listened to.

I’m sorry, do not ignore the points you failed to address. I will repeat it though. When people are asking for lore explanation, they are not asking for out of story one. They are asking for one in context of Guild Wars. Not real life fairy tales or cartoons.
There is also the Dragon Age Inquisition game, where the player character, the Inquisitor, can hunt dragons. So now that there is precedence for it, why can we not have Inquisitor instead?

Leo G.4501:

Arrk.4102:

Leo G.4501:

Arrk.4102:

Leo G.4501:

Arrk.4102:

Leo G.4501:

Arrk.4102:

Please tell me what connection does the Guardian have to Dragons, for Draconnier to make sense?

The point is, the devs could have a piece of lore or a story being the name to which is the reason they want to keep the name related to dragons. If that possibility has yet to cross your mind thus being thoughtful of that when giving feedback, I can only assume you’re not being mature enough to compromise.

Draconnier and Dragonbane are not the only suggestions I’ve made, they’re only the ones that relate to dragons if that is an important detail that you’ve just decided to ignore. None the less, I don’t like Dragonhunter for the reasons brought up. Not because I disapprove what story the devs want to tell but how pertinent that story is to individual characters’ stories.

Immature? Nice.
Who said they want to tie the specs to the story? Dragonbane is on par with Dragonhunter imo, and much better than Draconnier.
If the devs had such a lore reason behind the name they would have used it, instead of the “high concept” explanation we got.

Yeah, I would say immature. You think they can release actual storyline to explain it? Or do you just take the explanation that Jon gave (the “high concept”) thing as an insult?

So then I’d further ask you, why you’d think anyone on these forums are important enough for Jon to need to insult. Stop being vain. Jon isn’t insulting anyone, he obviously can’t say much about the expansion.

The statement that it is “high concept” is laughable, never said it was insulting. No one is being insulted or insulting here except you calling me Immature AND vain. I simply said that the high concept excuse doesn’t mean much.

So then you want him to tell about the story of the expansion? Whether you’re insulted or amused, someone’s likely getting insulted. If you can’t accept that they can’t release info like that, I honestly don’t know what else to say…except you’re not going to get the devs to talk by trying to insult them by laughing at them.

Didn’t say the devs were laughable, I said the statement was. Also, again, what does the story got to do with anything. The theme of DH is so uncoordinated that the I really doubt there even was a reason behind it. They just threw some themes they liked and called it a day. If not, someone missed a memo.

Apologies for being blunt but are you being intentionally dense? Or are you just sidestepping the point? The point is, the devs alluded to the name for the Dragonhunter having a deeper concept linked to the lore. There are minor clues, especially considering the cliffhanger for the last season of LS. You’re asking what the story has to do with anything? Do you realize that I don’t know? And do you realize the devs likely are incapable of saying anything about it?

The point is: there could very well BE a strong tie with the Guardian and dragons, stronger than any other profession (since the specs tend to have some kind of link to the gameworld story). With that possibility, making suggestions that try to preserve that link for the spec should be considered.

Clarification: that isn’t to say there is a link at all or that it’s very strong therefore the name must have a dragon theme. I am saying people need to realize that the possibility is there and the nature of that possibility is still unknown.

The story could also make a Waffleslinger spec make sense. The matter of fact is, we don’t know. If we did, this would be a whole ‘nother discussion. But we do not know, so we ignore it, for the sake of discussion.
I mean, the story could make the player characters turn into dragons. It’s a possibility. But we ignore that because we don’t know. We use what we know, and what we know has no link between Guardian and Dragons.

zenleto.6179:

Arrk.4102:

zenleto.6179:

Ephemiel.5694:

zenleto.6179:

Genesis.8572:

They are never connected to the dragons

Well, they are now. It could even be the genesis something bigger!

We’re all connected to the Dragons, especially Sylvari. Aren’t the ones not affected by Mordremoth, for whatever reason, dragonhunters? Like i said, i’m a Sylvari Thief that has fought dragons, aren’t i a Dragonhunter myself?

No, you’re a Thief that fights dragons. The Guardian I create in the beta will still be a Guardian that has a specialisation in Dragonhunter.

What’s the difference between the thief fighting dragons and the guardian doing it? Will DH do more damage against the dragons?

Nothing. One profession will have a spec line and the other wont.

I’m sorry are you arguing for or against the dh name? Apparently being neutral is against the law here.

zenleto.6179:

Ephemiel.5694:

zenleto.6179:

Genesis.8572:

They are never connected to the dragons

Well, they are now. It could even be the genesis something bigger!

We’re all connected to the Dragons, especially Sylvari. Aren’t the ones not affected by Mordremoth, for whatever reason, dragonhunters? Like i said, i’m a Sylvari Thief that has fought dragons, aren’t i a Dragonhunter myself?

No, you’re a Thief that fights dragons. The Guardian I create in the beta will still be a Guardian that has a specialisation in Dragonhunter.

What’s the difference between the thief fighting dragons and the guardian doing it? Will DH do more damage against the dragons?

Ephemiel.5694:

zenleto.6179:

Genesis.8572:

They are never connected to the dragons

Well, they are now. It could even be the genesis something bigger!

We’re all connected to the Dragons, especially Sylvari. Aren’t the ones not affected by Mordremoth, for whatever reason, dragonhunters? Like i said, i’m a Sylvari Thief that has fought dragons, aren’t i a Dragonhunter myself?

Nah, you’re a Dragonfighter. It’s like a Firefighter, except for Dragons

This is not the Guild Wars lore. Every single person asking for lore reasons were asking for in game reasons. Should I post a story about walking sharks and ask for that race to be included in the game, because, maan, open a book there are tons of those.
Edit: Crusader “-someone who works hard for a long time to achieve something that they strongly believe is morally right” doesn’t really need any story based reasons, it fits both in and out of context.