Hunters without pets?

[Cyph3r]

I wish Blizz would just give us a ranger or a class that can use ranged weps without the damn pet but oh well =/

This would be preferable to having 1 Hunter spec be petless, in my opinion. Not that we need more classes.

And with my previous post I was merely attempting to point out the prevalent mindset of a lot of the community. I don't personally agree with it, and I'd be pissed if I was faced with that question, because I love my pets. I do have to agree that Warlocks aren't any different than use as a pet class. I don't think they should have been given an option to ditch their pet either. It just feels wrong, it's such a basic core mechanic of how the class works; as soon as their is an option without using the pet, you open a huge can of worms of what people want, vs what they're compelled to do. How many Warlocks out there absolutely love their demons, but aren't using one because sac gives them higher dps? Or maybe the other way around, if sac is a dps loss, how many players who HATE having a pet are still using theirs for the damage boost. It would drive me insane knowing that I could play the way I wanted, if only my raid would let me.

The way I see it a Hunter without a pet is a Rogue without stealth. Or a Druid without shapeshifting. It's just part of who we are as Hunters.

[Kelln12]

I wish Blizz would just give us a ranger or a class that can use ranged weps without the damn pet but oh well =/

They could just rip MM and Surv from the Hunter, add them to the new spec, with a healer spec as well.
MM - Pet-less ranged damage dealer who focuses on bow/gun mastery
Surv - Pet-less ranged damage dealer who focuses on traps/explosives
Gatherer - healer who uses herbs and roots found in the forests to heal allies.

The Hunter spec would maintain BM and add a melee pet spec and a tank spec.
BM - Ranged damage dealer who focuses on his pet to deal damage
Beastslayer - Melee damage dealer who fights side by side with his pet in the heat of battles
Beast Guardian - A tank that uses his pet to draw the attention of his enemies.


^ That would solve alot of fans hunter suggestions like
BM being melee
BM being tank
MM being pet-less

[Slot]

This would be preferable to having 1 Hunter spec be petless, in my opinion. Not that we need more classes.

And with my previous post I was merely attempting to point out the prevalent mindset of a lot of the community. I don't personally agree with it, and I'd be pissed if I was faced with that question, because I love my pets. I do have to agree that Warlocks aren't any different than use as a pet class. I don't think they should have been given an option to ditch their pet either. It just feels wrong, it's such a basic core mechanic of how the class works; as soon as their is an option without using the pet, you open a huge can of worms of what people want, vs what they're compelled to do. How many Warlocks out there absolutely love their demons, but aren't using one because sac gives them higher dps? Or maybe the other way around, if sac is a dps loss, how many players who HATE having a pet are still using theirs for the damage boost. It would drive me insane knowing that I could play the way I wanted, if only my raid would let me.

The way I see it a Hunter without a pet is a Rogue without stealth. Or a Druid without shapeshifting. It's just part of who we are as Hunters.

What raid wouldnt let you go the spec you want to play as long as you weren't doing damn near last place dps because of it? I have heroic raided as MM just because I hate BM and it was not an aoe fight so Surv was out of the question. Pets do not bring that much to the table of things as you might think, not counting BM of course. I think having one spec have the option of being a pet less spec would be very cool and would bring a lot to a range dps that uses bows, guns, or crossbows.

You must have a very up tight raid for them not 'letting' you play what you like. The specs are not that far apart from each other, MM being more so.

[Raldazzar]

I dont understand why some people rather passionately HATE this idea? I mean, It would be nothing more then a CHOICE. how is more options a bad thing ever? :P