They should let MM hunters 'sacrifice' their pets.

[Blackmist]

Having played a hunter since Vanilla, you've no idea how good you've got it now.

I've had pets running the wrong way round Karazhan, being unable to jump down anywhere (always taking the long way and pulling anything as they go, this was fun in LBRS), being unable to attack because they're stuck, being unable to attack because the mob is too big, dying to AoE, pulling shit of their own accord...

A catalogue of fuck ups, that led to us being called huntards, and many groups insisting that we put pets away in dungeons. And it was mostly down to pet bugs.

They don't happen any more, and there's lots of classes that use pets. The pet is integral to the hunter feel. Without them, we're just rangers. Or Legolas. Which is worse, really.

[Deleted]

NO! Hunters are NOT Warlocks!!!!

[Scathbais]

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.

Sure, how about a rage aura when someone kills your pet? It buffs your damage by x% until another pet is called out.

But most likely Hunters would get a qq tears debuff that weakened all of their attacks because one of their beloved pets died :P

[Thirstblood]

warlock can get benefits from sacrificing a deamon and absorb his powers, it's a dark magic ritual after all,
but how a hunter can use anything related? He can use a little of nature magic, but anything related to sacrifice is merge in to a single entity, but again, it's a druids part.
I mean hunter is a bow+pet, you remove pet, now you start to shoot better? Or you eat his liver and become stronger?

fu-sion-ha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! >

[Xaxina]

Interesting Idea!

[Effinhunter]

If they wanted the lack of pet to fit into the lore, it would be pretty easy to do. You don't have to kill a pet to synergize with it, and you could do something that fits more into a druid-like attachment to a certain animal in your stable. For instance...

Primal Nature: You form a symbotic relationship with a target animal in your stable, honing your own instincts and reflexes with the animal's and giving specific bonuses to your stats. Your pet channels this stat gain from the stable and will not return while Primal Nature is active.

Cat: The agile feline guides your reflexes granting you 15% movement and attack speed (BAD ASS)
Dog/wolf: You inherit the strength of the pack, augmenting your own. You gain Call of the Pack, which summons ten wolves behind the target which will taunt, slow, and damage the target. This is independent of Stampede and on a similar cooldown.
Bear: You inherit the endurance of the bear, providing your raid with 10% less damage from all sources every 1 minute for 15 seconds.
Monkey: The monkey's inquisitive nature allows you to focus your insights into your weapon and armor to use them to the best of your ability. You gain 10% more damage and are 1% more accurate in hit and expertise.
Tall Strider: The cold stare of the strider looks into your enemies and informs you of their weaknesses. Your attacks apply a 5% armor and spell penetration for 15s from all sources to targets you hit. This stacks with other effects.


Now, before people go "THAT WOULD BE OP, YOU BIG IDIOT," I'm just throwing out examples of how the story could be that you gain a synergistic relationship to a pet in your stable who is channeling some animal instincts into you (and consequently cannot be fighting with you because they have to concentrate). The actual mechanics would be up to Blizzard and theorycrafting. I'd love to start playing MM again, and a synergistic pairing with stabled pets might be one way to do the pet-less version of the hunter.

[Well]

1) It's a copy of the Warlock's idea having no pet (which both classes traditionally have) for a damage buff.

2) Hunters are all about their pet. They have 50 stable slots as of 5.3. It is really silly to drop this huge aspect of the hunter class for one of their specs.

3) Even suggesting this, shows that you are no hunter in heart. BE GONE! /casts shoo spell.

[Ickabob]

Blizzard already regrets the whole warlock pet sac concept because of the can of worms it opened up with hunters. It's kind of like casting while moving: once you give such a mechanic to one class everyone will want it.

[Kennyloggins]

Blizzard already regrets the whole warlock pet sac concept because of the can of worms it opened up with hunters. It's kind of like casting while moving: once you give such a mechanic to one class everyone will want it.

Just a note, but Demonic Sacrifice has been in the game since WoW was released.

[Ickabob]

Just a note, but Demonic Sacrifice has been in the game since WoW was released.

Sorry if I wasn't clear enough, but I actually meant the Grimoire of Sacrifice. I am aware warlocks could sacrifice their pets for various reasons since launch.

[nightfalls]

Blizzard already regrets the whole warlock pet sac concept because of the can of worms it opened up with hunters. It's kind of like casting while moving: once you give such a mechanic to one class everyone will want it.

Right, but the idea (for warlocks) was implemented poorly to begin with. Right now, it's a talent that should be optional that is supposed to compete with two other pet talents, and available to all specs of warlocks.

Most suggestions as to a "petless hunter" involve one spec (usually MM), and with it being the main option (with perhaps taking a pet being secondary if you need utility from it), and pets being default for the other specs. Not "petless" competing with "pet spec" for the same spec at all. For that matter, if anything, it's what a petless warlock should have been.

[checking facts]

there should be a skill where your pet runs off to search for a nice hidden place to observe the enemy and tell you all of the enemy's weaknesses through radio, so hunters would get a crit buff or something

[crakerjack]

It's a dumb idea... why on earth would you not want a pet that does good damage and gives a buff depending on what you pick? There's no logical reasoning for it... In pvp you can have a spider that can snare people... in PvE you can use a tiger for a raid buff. Not using a pet is flat out... noobish. I understanding your thought pattern, but from a veteran standpoint and someone who knows the game very well... that's a bad idea. Hunters wouldn't be nearly as good without pets.

[darkwarrior42]

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.

Sorry for the delayed response, but... there's no reason given because it's self-evident. There is nothing about the concept of an archer that necessitates a pet, and in fact the idea of an archer needing a pet is not natural. To use a stereotypical example, Legolas is clearly an archer and has no pet.

Moreover, even if you don't like my example, there is no possible way to play an archer without a pet in WoW. That means players who want to be an archer have to deal with the pet, even if they don't want it.... for no good reason other than "HUNTERS HAVE PETS!!!111!!!".

Because amusingly, the only reason given for hunters having pets is.... that hunters have pets. I haven't seen a good reason to explain why hunters MUST have pets. "They're a pet class" doesn't really cut it, because that's circular argument: "they must have pets because they're a pet class, and they're a pet class because they have pets."

---------- Post added 2013-05-16 at 03:42 AM ----------

It's a dumb idea... why on earth would you not want a pet that does good damage and gives a buff depending on what you pick? There's no logical reasoning for it... In pvp you can have a spider that can snare people... in PvE you can use a tiger for a raid buff. Not using a pet is flat out... noobish. I understanding your thought pattern, but from a veteran standpoint and someone who knows the game very well... that's a bad idea. Hunters wouldn't be nearly as good without pets.

The whole idea of the suggestion is that MM would be able to function without the pet. Clearly the damage is not an issue then, because they'd be balanced around not having the pet. As far as raid buffs, there are numerous ways they could fix that if need be... and the loss of the other abilities (such as snare) would be part of the tradeoff (the gain being that you don't have to worry about your pet doing something stupid, like charging off into the mists on Magaera).

If you don't like the idea, that's fine, but saying it's a bad idea because hunters wouldn't be as good is assuming that the only change that would be made is to take pets away from MM. We can do that right now with dismiss pet, but that's clearly not the point.

[Charge me Doctor]

Sorry for the delayed response, but... there's no reason given because it's self-evident. There is nothing about the concept of an archer that necessitates a pet, and in fact the idea of an archer needing a pet is not natural. To use a stereotypical example, Legolas is clearly an archer and has no pet.

Moreover, even if you don't like my example, there is no possible way to play an archer without a pet in WoW. That means players who want to be an archer have to deal with the pet, even if they don't want it.... for no good reason other than "HUNTERS HAVE PETS!!!111!!!".

Because amusingly, the only reason given for hunters having pets is.... that hunters have pets. I haven't seen a good reason to explain why hunters MUST have pets. "They're a pet class" doesn't really cut it, because that's circular argument: "they must have pets because they're a pet class, and they're a pet class because they have pets."

Comparing hunter to an elven archer because they both use bows is the same as comparing car to a motorcycle.
If you want a ranged-weapon class without a pet - it's no more a hunter. You can't have a class-spec which have no connection to class part.

If a game lacks of what you want, you should play other game. What about players who want to be a tinker? Or a demon-hunter?

And again, rangers are weaker than hunters due to them not being able to use nature magic AND not having a companion that will chomp your legs while you try to hide.

Having an option to have an ranged pet is good thing to discuss

[cuervos]

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.

I'd like to see maybe instead of a combat pet, you can pull out a smaller type creature that helps you shoot, say a falcon to mark your targets. Maybe applies varying effects on your targets too. Could tie it into hunters mark as well.

[SodiumChloride]

Want petless physical range DPS? Reroll Rogue, spec Shuriken Toss. Done.

Lol, lore. Blood elves are supposed to shrivel up and die if they don't use mana, yet we have perfectly healthy looking blood elf warriors everywhere.

The game's lore is pretty much a mess, but that said BEs won't die without mana. Mana is just something they are addicted to. Those that lose their self control end up as the wretched - not sure how that works; but since when does things in WoW make much sense.

They have also learn to siphon it from their surroundings.

[zenyatta]

No pet, then your usefulness is minimal. You bring a single buff in Trueshot Aura. That's it. Unless hunters suddenly become uber top deeps (or the pet-free spec out dps-es every thing, and more on that next), then no one is bringing you, not when a DK can bring that along with extra damage.

Point two, if the petless spec is better than pet specs, the pet lovers will be shunned or will have to play a style that has never been required (past level 10). We gripe when they mess up long-standing core mechanics. Stop suggesting they do it to another one.

[Deleted]

You just skip posts where people suggests pet as a guardian, following hunter? not doing any dps, maybe some cds like stampade, masters call. thats it.
There are many.. many posts here: pet as guardian near hunter, crow on shoulder.. etc.. Great suggestions..

Noone wants to sacrifice or get rid of pet.. just dps spec, which depends on hunter 99%, pet 1% for utility.
If u enjoy your pet doing dps, go bm witch is based on pet.. or sv, where pets does 15%.. but mm could have pet as guardian.. sounds amazing

Stop compare us with warlocks.. No hunter want to sacrifice pet.. just pew pew pew spec!
Or entirely new physical ranged class, so we could choose from 2..

Thanks.

[DemoBytom]

even though I don't enjoy pet classes anymore (I was a lock for 2.5 expansions..) I have to say you can't just remove a pet from hunters. Pet hunting and collecting is too important for the identity of the class, the buffs they bring etc..
Instead I'd rather see a new ranged physical dmg DPS introduced that doesn't have a pet overall. I think there is a room for one ATM, since hunters are the only ones using bows/guns etc..