Hunter spec without pet? (Cataclysm)

[Herecius]

Managing your pet is a primary part of being a hunter. If you get rid of the pet, you're just a mage with a bow instead of a frost bolt.

[Asmo]

1) Saying a hunter sans pet would be a mage with a bow is a terrible comparison. A Warlock without a pet ould be a mage, period. A hunter without a pet would be like the rangers and archers from WC3, which leads to

2) There is lore to support a petless hunter. Whoever said that is just wrong.

3) The management of pets at this moment in time is so minimal that having the pet out is no harder than keeping it dismissed. However, dismissing it permanently nerfs your DPS. The idea behind a spec supporting the loss of pet is to change the playstyle completely. With either more shots/bonuses or something else to compensate for the pet and the loss of those benefits with the pet out.

4) I know it's hard for some of you (due to what I can only imagine is minor brain damage or general stupidity), but maybe we can try to every now and then take a minute and not allow innocuous ideas and comments cause us to fly into nerd rage, decrying those that might want to experience a new way to play their class.

5) Demo sac was removed because it was ten kinds of boring, and also OP as fuck. Sac -> spambolt -> repeat. Not because Blizzard was like "OMG NO PET IS TEH SUCKZORZ".

It's not hard to be halfway civil, it's not hard to read a post all the way through, and it's not that hard to try and determine intent instead of assuming everyone is QQ'ing. If any of the aforementioned tasks [i]are [i] difficult for you, then you need to hop off of the forums for a bit, and lose a bit of that jaded personality.

[Fruitbat69kk]

imo make a hunter spec without the pet.

-Not because hunter pet management is too hard with one.
-Not to make it like a mage or other ranged caster (other abilities could be introduced).

This game is devoid of a Ranger class (which doesnt focus on taming wild animals or spells). Blizzard probably doesnt want to add a whole new class fullfilling this because it would water down hunters, but i think they should cater to fans of Rangers and Dark Rangers.

Would also explain (from a lore point of veiw) a few race/hunter combinations better.

-Blood elf hunter (Rangers, that ive never seen before using pets)
-Undead hunter (Lady Sylvanas)
-Riflemen

[TwistedPower]

that wouldn't be hunter... if you want to be ranged w/o pet roll a mage or warlock.

Becuase warlocks dont use pets 100% of the time?

[Ironicus]

I think that a similar change require a lot of pre-test for see if it's balanced, and let's imagine after they do it a lot of people going QQ because on PvP they are kicked in ass by these and those... Omg...
Plus, it's difficult to balance it imo, because pets got TALENTS and SKILLS that make them different and usefull/useless in various way (from player to player). I can't imagine myself without the web of my nasty spider 8)

PS: try play with a wolf passive with furious howl active Or roll a rogue or a mage. Btw, a lot of hunter abilities (and hunter way-to-fight) are related to a pet... And balancing job -> people QQ.
Plus, having a pet on a caster is always nice....
.... and disarm/web ftw!

[Valilor]

When I first started playing WoW, having never played an MMo before, I wanted to pick a ranged weapon, bow wielding class...and only 1 of the classes did this, the hunter.

At the moment we use mana, which makes no sence and we also use a pet. If we lost our pet now, because we use mana we would be a quite similar to a mage in mail. Not exactly but similar.

In cataclysm, the shift is to make hunters the "ranged weapon" experts - with a resource more like the Rogues energy, which will undoubtely leave us having to behave a little more like them too. With the emphasis on "ranged weapon experts" I don't see any reason why having no pet with a buff to compensate would be an issue. With no pet we wouldn't be like any other ranged class, so the same "roll a mage" arguement is nul and void.

Anyway, I have a feeling the majority of people here saying it's a bad idea aren't hunters, or don't have hunter mains - why not give us the choice? When has that ever been a bad thing?

[Xacez]

Anyway, I have a feeling the majority of people here saying it's a bad idea aren't hunters, or don't have hunter mains - why not give us the choice? When has that ever been a bad thing?

Destruction Warlocks in TBC

[Ironicus]

Maybe a passive stealth, that can be used only out of combat and hide you and your pet. Moving or taking other action cancel it (btw, like the NE racial except that work only out of combat). Like the camouflage they did before (but never implemented)... having first it for an hunter is good, but not like rogues.

[lollero]

there was that 0/21/40 spec for warlocks in tbc. then they removed demonic sacrifice and made pets even more appealing for destro/affli. even tho pets still sucks for affli except doomguard.

edit: point of this post is that the way blizz designs pet classes now is to rely on their pets more.

[Ekoor]

Personally, I would kill for a petless spec.

I love the fact I have a bow to shoot stuff with, I love the fact I'm not a caster per se and I love the play style of the "ranger"/hunter class. But having a silly excuse of a pet (a super weak one, if I might add) just ruins half the fun by getting in the way most of the time. Besides an NPC trying to do your job for you is as lame, boring, cumbersome (etc.) as game mechanics go anyway.

[Neb-X]

Personally I'd like to see a total overhaul of the hunter class with the following changes:

Beast Mastery: Pretty much as is

Marksmanship: No pet, longer range.

Survival: A lot more melee focused, like Rexxar. A little confusing since he's a Beastmaster and Beast Mastery is ranged dps.

Never going to happen, but I like to dream.

[zcks]

I wouldn't mind having MM have a talent that takes away your ability to use a pet but increases the damage you deal by a set % and reduces the cool down on several abilities like disengage, traps and a few other abilities.
Would shut up all those ppl asking for a ranger class without blizz having to make a whole new class, + it would mean you would have more survivability vs melee classes in pvp & in raids you wont lose any dps if your pet dies because you wont have one.

[Atty]

Your pet is 20-30% of your dps, you'd be crazy to dismiss the poor creature.

Closer to 10-15% actually.

[Soaringbiscuit]

No.

[Killerve]

imo make a hunter spec without the pet.

-Not because hunter pet management is too hard with one.
-Not to make it like a mage or other ranged caster (other abilities could be introduced).

This game is devoid of a Ranger class (which doesnt focus on taming wild animals or spells). Blizzard probably doesnt want to add a whole new class fullfilling this because it would water down hunters, but i think they should cater to fans of Rangers and Dark Rangers.

Would also explain (from a lore point of veiw) a few race/hunter combinations better.

-Blood elf hunter (Rangers, that ive never seen before using pets)
-Undead hunter (Lady Sylvanas)
-Riflemen

^^This...is this only person in these forums who understands people like ARCHER(RANGER) classes and dont give a bleep about or want a pet? I play a hunter because i love archery and rangers, not because i want a stupid pet. BTW- pet only does like 8-10%dps unless your BM. I dont even send mine in half the time and i still top charts. A hunter is a D&D ranger but instead of having a dual weapon/archery mixed spec they gave us a spec that focused on the animal companion side of the ranger. Normally you would have MM(archery) SV(two weapon fighting) and a third - the mix of the two.

Edit: Why do you think its QQ about micromanagement? is this the first time you people have ever played an RPG? jesus, go look at a d&d class book that every class in this game is taken from. what would be hard about making a hunter more like a ranger? nothing SV used to melee as it was..etc etc

[Johniefive]

Peronally I would like to see us gain a little more mele functionality, plus the ability to have different cc options. Nothings worste then having to rely on your pet to help you in a close quarters fight.
Usually when I die to a fight its because I have been in mele combat and just cant keep up with those classes. Especially now that you can have dk's death grip you in mele range and then keep you there for a few more seconds. Just having that option to not use a pet and be able to have more overall utilization would make the hunter class more wanted in both raids and pvp. Sorry guys but casters are getting over dominate in fuctionality.Yeah we can go in any raid and top dps, but its not always about just opening up and dpsing.

[Elmer Fudd]

I still believe that the next hero class will be one centered around the use of ranged weapons. Right now hunters are the only class in this game that is completely dependent on ranged weapons. Ranged weapons are merely stat sticks for everyone else that can use them. My bet is on Dark Ranger. I bet we see this hero class before we see blizzard give hunters a legitimate petless build.

[Recompence]

I think that if one of the trees was designed for the hunter to take on traits of the wild, where they get agility and strength boosts and things along those lines, rather than just be dependent on the pet. I mean I like the pet but I see what the op is getting at.

[afrokid53]

Cough* Ranger class, get the freekin hint Blizz better yet! Banshee Hero class, everyone loves Sylvannus.

[Bommer]

Hunters without pets ?

Now that's a LAME idea !

I, personally enjoy micromanaging my pet, as it increases my involvement in my gameplay.

Why is it that so many people want everything 'easy mode' ?

Is it just lazyness, or only desire for instant gratification ?

Hunters without pets ? That's just the same as a Shaman without totems. They are an integral part of the game, and damn sure should stay that way !