Page 1 of 9
1
2
3
... LastLast
  1. #1

    They should let MM hunters 'sacrifice' their pets.

    The only reason I've never made a hunter (and the reason I never made a warlock until MoP) is because I despise pet classes. I love the idea of physical ranged DPS but I don't like pet classes. My idea is give MM hunters an option to get a buff to ranged damage in lieu of a pet. Say a pet does 5% of your damage (just a random number, I have no idea how much dps mm pets do), you could choose to either have a pet if you like pets or 'sacrifice' it for a 5% buff to ranged damage. It'd be similar to affliction warlocks are now where sacrificing your pet is pretty much the same as having a pet(in most situation) dps wise. Now that there's no minumum range on bows I see no reason not to have this option except you'd get some QQ from people who love pets and think everybody else should too. (You know, because god forbid people have a choice in playstyle) Hell, they could even make the sacrificing option a slight DPS loss in exchange for not having to manage a pet.

    EDIT: I DIDN'T ACTUALLY MEAN KILL YOUR PET FOR A BUFF. I used the word sacrifice because that's what the warlock ability is. I meant a passive aura that activates when you don't have a pet out or something.
    Last edited by Genooo; 2013-05-14 at 05:41 AM.

  2. #2
    This idea has been thrown around before. It would have to be something that isn't killing your pet though because thats not something a hunter would do. We tame and befriend them in a way, we don't enslave them.

    It is something I would like though. I feel it's silly MM has to use pets.

  3. #3
    Here, kitty kitty... TWISTYANECKFORDPS! Nah, doesn't sound like a hunter.

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by Okacz View Post
    Here, kitty kitty... TWISTYANECKFORDPS! Nah, doesn't sound like a hunter.
    ...I don't actually mean sacrifice, I just used the word because it'd be similar to the warlock ability of the same name. I mean just a passive aura buff for not having a pet out as an MM hunter.

  5. #5
    No, apart from the whole killing of the pet being totally against the Hunter character, it's just a copy of the warlock setup.

    If they were going to make a petless spec they'd have to re-do a whole spec and I don't know if they want to do that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Genooo View Post
    The only reason I've never made a hunter (and the reason I never made a warlock until MoP) is because I despise pet classes. I love the idea of physical ranged DPS but I don't like pet classes.
    Well sorry but WoW doesn't have a ranged physical DPS class without pets.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tojara View Post
    Look Batman really isn't an accurate source by any means
    Quote Originally Posted by Hooked View Post
    It is a fact, not just something I made up.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Mormolyce View Post
    No, apart from the whole killing of the pet being totally against the Hunter character, it's just a copy of the warlock setup.

    If they were going to make a petless spec they'd have to re-do a whole spec and I don't know if they want to do that.



    Well sorry but WoW doesn't have a ranged physical DPS class without pets.
    Holy shit, please reread the last line of my first post. And I know it doesn't, but why shouldn't it? Because YOU don't like the idea?

  7. #7
    The Lightbringer Charge me Doctor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Russia, Chelyabinsk (Tankograd)
    Posts
    3,513
    You remind me of Postal 2 game, where you could use cats as silencer.
    The problem is that the whole class (hunter) works around having bonds with nature. No pet - no bonds, you are not a hunter.
    It will be easier to make warrior a ranged class than hunter be a pure archer/gunman

  8. #8
    With them messing up warlock sac, dont count on it, ever.
    Trylb / Galesin
    Winners never quit, Quitters never win
    Nobody Said It Was Easy

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Charge me Doctor View Post
    You remind me of Postal 2 game, where you could use cats as silencer
    Here's another genius who didn't read the bolded, italicized, underlined, and capitalized line at the bottom of my post!

  10. #10
    Mechagnome Manabomb's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Probably laying somewhere frozen and cold.
    Posts
    725
    Quote Originally Posted by Okacz View Post
    Here, kitty kitty... TWISTYANECKFORDPS! Nah, doesn't sound like a hunter.
    Sure, it doesn't sound like a hunter, the but to me that's a poor excuse. A more refined answer would be "It doesn't sound like a beast master". To me, what a Marksman is, is a person that relies on speed, agility and stamina to deliver deadly ranged damage from afar, not "Go get em fido, I need you for the extra dps". And to be fair, it wouldn't even need to be a pet "sac", I've often toyed with the idea of allowing a marksman to "Fuse" with their pets Dragonballz style and run around with animalistic forms. Naga forms for snakes, bird forms for most birds of prey, ect. Granted the possibility of something this massive to go into the game for simply one spec and arguably the least represented spec is unlikely, still a fun idea.

  11. #11
    Yes, they should.

    But they obviously don't want an Archer in game.

    (The technical ability ability to use a bow doesn't make your class an archer, even if it's your favored weapon; if you have a pet, you're a ranger or a hunter. Not an Archer.

  12. #12
    The Lightbringer Charge me Doctor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Russia, Chelyabinsk (Tankograd)
    Posts
    3,513
    Quote Originally Posted by Genooo View Post
    Here's another genius who didn't read the bolded, italicized, underlined, and capitalized line at the bottom of my post!
    Bold part says that you don't want pet to be killed. In next sentence you say that you want a buff when you don't have a pet, so you want your pet either dead either in stables.
    They can't make pet-less spec for a pet-class without messing up class lore. Warlocks can sacrifice demons they summon to get benefits because they are evil and don't gives a shit about their demon because they will never die but just return to twisting nether where they will be summoned and tortured again.
    Hunter can't do that. It's like weapon-less warrior spec. Or magic-less mage class.

    Taken from wowwiki hunter lore:
    The hunter is one of the oldest classes in history. They represent a deep connection between man and beast, and the hunters of Warcraft are not merely individuals who track animals and slay them for food, but custodians of balance.

    If bolded part is removed - it is no longer a hunter class
    Last edited by Charge me Doctor; 2013-05-14 at 05:55 AM.

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by darkwarrior42 View Post
    Yes, they should.

    But they obviously don't want an Archer in game.

    (The technical ability ability to use a bow doesn't make your class an archer, even if it's your favored weapon; if you have a pet, you're a ranger or a hunter. Not an Archer.
    People keep saying stuff like this(WoW doesn't have an archer/non-pet ranged dps class and thats that!) but without giving any good reason why. "That's just the way it is" is not an acceptable reason, it's the equivalent of being asked a question and covering your ears like a child screaming "LALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU".

    They never give reasons because there is no logical reason to give besides "I don't like it and therfore it shouldn't happen!!"

    And for the people giving lore based reasons, blizzard forsakes lore all the damn time in favor of game development. Look at draenei death knights, or blood elf warriors.

  14. #14
    People complain about class homogenization and then demand we have the functionality of Warlock sac.

    3DS Friendcode: 0705 - 3279 - 0173
    Add me for Pokemon / Bravely Default
    Trainer Name: Bazlyn

  15. #15
    The Lightbringer nightfalls's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    3,690
    I sort of agree. An ability would be nice, such as "Free Ranger: When you do not have a pet out, you gain X bonus ranged damage/etc." You can then (perhaps) choose between calling a pet and losing some DPS for utility (for instance, if you need temporary utility) and dismissing him for your main DPS buff. Obviously a hunter wouldn't actually sacrifice/kill his pet.

    And unlike the whole "pet class" thing, restricting it to MM only means that there are still two trees which are intended to use pets and don't have the bonus. So it's not a case of "pet class going petless," but rather "2 pet specs, 1 pet-less spec with optional pet utility in exchange for DPS" Sounds good to me (also more spec differentiation).

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Mormolyce View Post
    Well sorry but WoW doesn't have a ranged physical DPS class without pets.
    Hmm, isn't that the whole point of this thread? Throwing that idea around?

  17. #17
    if you don't want pets then never tame one.
    'Words do not win wars. That is a tragedy.'

  18. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by sith View Post
    Hmm, isn't that the whole point of this thread? Throwing that idea around?
    Yes, the guy you quoted is one of those immature children who enjoys things the way they are and thinks other people having the option to play differently is unthinkable, because god forbid people CHOOOOOOOOSE the way they play. Nope.

  19. #19
    The Lightbringer Charge me Doctor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Russia, Chelyabinsk (Tankograd)
    Posts
    3,513
    Quote Originally Posted by voidspark View Post
    I sort of agree. An ability would be nice, such as "Free Ranger: When you do not have a pet out, you gain X bonus ranged damage/etc." You can then (perhaps) choose between calling a pet and losing some DPS for utility (for instance, if you need temporary utility) and dismissing him for your main DPS buff. Obviously a hunter wouldn't actually sacrifice/kill his pet.

    And unlike the whole "pet class" thing, restricting it to MM only means that there are still two trees which are intended to use pets and don't have the bonus. So it's not a case of "pet class going petless," but rather "2 pet specs, 1 pet-less spec with optional pet utility in exchange for DPS" Sounds good to me (also more spec differentiation).
    But MM spec works around hunter using his ranged-weapon skills with synergy with his pet. Survival uses nature-magic to enhance his shots and traps. BM relies on his animal-world bonds to tame stronger beasts.

    Hunter class is all about balance between tech progress (guns, crossbows), nature (magic) and FRIENDSHIP (a pet)

    Throwing away one part will ruin balance and it will no more be a hunter class.


    Honestly, i would like to see a rogue as ranged class. They have combat (some kind of duelist), assassination (poisons), subtlety (sequence of accurate strikes and strong finisher).
    They could make assassination spec to be an option to be a ranged class (poisoned arrows, bullets)
    Last edited by Charge me Doctor; 2013-05-14 at 06:12 AM.

  20. #20
    Herald of the Titans Uzi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Moravia
    Posts
    2,802
    I understand you didn't mean literal sacrifice, but the thought of that is entertaining

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •