[suggestion] Yet another hunter(BM) spell ideas

[Hyde]

New spell suggestion;

Pack Master
Level 69 Beast Mastery hunter ability
Passive
You are master of the pack, allowing you to control 2 non-exotic pets at one time, but reducing both pets damage to 60% each while both are active. Both pets can only attack the same target. If you have only one pet active, your pet damage is increased by 120%.

This spell is the based on the idea of people, including myself, who wish to see BM as the duo-pet spec, and at the same time not penalizing people who want only one pet out as opposed to MM and Surv that can choose talents to be powerful without their pets. The restriction that only two non-exotic pets can be active at one time is to make up the fact it would be too powerful to have 2 exotic pets with 6 different spell at the same time.

With the lost of 'Aspects' toolbar, I think 2 bars for pet can be implemented, and the second bar would only place the second pet's family spell and or with other spells specific to the pet's talent such as Thunderstomp if the second pet is a tenacity pet. However, the we do not really need a secondary pet bar, as the secondary pet would only attack the primary pet's target, and it would follow the same stance, guard point or follow command of the first pet. The secondary pet's family skills too can be controlled by AI's auto cast, so Hunters wouldnt have to worry micro managing another pet, as the same control bar, controls both pets.

I would also like to suggest besides choosing Tenacity, Ferocity or Cunning specs, all non exotic pets come with 2 spells which can be switched around. For example, if you tame a cat, you can either choose 'Roar of Courage' or 'Rake''; Mortal Strike. The choices would be usually between a utility(turtle shell, fox's avoidance)/pvp(movement reduction/mortal strike) or buffs/debuffs to make all pet family useful in almost any circumstances.

Just like pet talent's, the secondary spell can only be switched with the primary spell to be activated while out of combat and not in bgs or Arena. I will post more on suggestion of choices of what other secondary spell that each non exotic pets can learn later.

[Deleted]

Could be cool, but then I'd wish for them to be able to attack 2 different targets (such as Windwalkers Storm, Earth, and Fire spell) to bring some proper cleave in to the class.

[Hyde]

Could be cool, but then I'd wish for them to be able to attack 2 different targets (such as Windwalkers Storm, Earth, and Fire spell) to bring some proper cleave in to the class.

With Beast Cleave + 2 pets, albeit the cleave damage would be lowered, it would be more spread out and more constant. At least, that how I see it.

[Deleted]

With Beast Cleave + 2 pets, albeit the cleave damage would be lowered, it would be more spread out and more constant. At least, that how I see it.

If they can only attack the same target it adds nothing but flavor (IE, 2 pets), but if they can attack different targets it actually provides some benefit.

[eschatological]

Warlocks have a two pet ability with GoService, but the 2nd is only temporary and, afaik, follows the AI of the first pet. I like the idea, but for it to be implemented the way you suggest, then they'd have to create a whole new "frame" so to speak, pet2, and pet2target and pet2focus and so on and so forth. I think they'd think that was a bit too resource intensive.

Not to mention they want to unclutter people's rotation and (presumably) push the difficulty towards the encounter itself, this goes against their design philosophy. Of course, their design philosophy was "bring the player, not the class" which they abandoned for Mythic, and to lower raid wide utility despite giving mages Amp Magic.

[Tehterokkar]

Warlocks have a two pet ability with GoService, but the 2nd is only temporary and, afaik, follows the AI of the first pet. I like the idea, but for it to be implemented the way you suggest, then they'd have to create a whole new "frame" so to speak, pet2, and pet2target and pet2focus and so on and so forth. I think they'd think that was a bit too resource intensive.

Not to mention they want to unclutter people's rotation and (presumably) push the difficulty towards the encounter itself, this goes against their design philosophy. Of course, their design philosophy was "bring the player, not the class" which they abandoned for Mythic, and to lower raid wide utility despite giving mages Amp Magic.

Not to mention such a system would probably not be supported by the game engine, and developing one if even possible would cost us another raid tier™

[Deleted]

It would work exactly like WW's Storm, Earth, and Fire, so the game engine and all that shouldn't really be a issue.

[Shockymonkey]

Cool idea I'm all for it but I still have to think how much of a pain it's to control one pet and now two.

[eschatological]

It would work exactly like WW's Storm, Earth, and Fire, so the game engine and all that shouldn't really be a issue.

The way you thought of would work like SEF. But Hyde was talking about a second pet bar, with their respective buffs/CDs, etc. I'm all for an SEF like ability. I don't know exactly how that works though, you attack one target, summon a clone, attack a second target, summon a clone on that one, attack a third, summon a clone on that one? Windwalker is like the only spec I've never played.

[Deleted]

The way you thought of would work like SEF. But Hyde was talking about a second pet bar, with their respective buffs/CDs, etc. I'm all for an SEF like ability. I don't know exactly how that works though, you attack one target, summon a clone, attack a second target, summon a clone on that one, attack a third, summon a clone on that one? Windwalker is like the only spec I've never played.

Oh yeah his suggestion would add some issues.


Yeah, you summon a spirit on a 2nd/3rd target and it mimics your attacks.

[Hyde]

Warlocks have a two pet ability with GoService, but the 2nd is only temporary and, afaik, follows the AI of the first pet. I like the idea, but for it to be implemented the way you suggest, then they'd have to create a whole new "frame" so to speak, pet2, and pet2target and pet2focus and so on and so forth. I think they'd think that was a bit too resource intensive.

Not to mention they want to unclutter people's rotation and (presumably) push the difficulty towards the encounter itself, this goes against their design philosophy. Of course, their design philosophy was "bring the player, not the class" which they abandoned for Mythic, and to lower raid wide utility despite giving mages Amp Magic.

All of warlock's spec has access for the secondary pet but my idea is a perma pet for BM only. Besides, demo warlock has wild imps; an almost mass summon, so BM hunter should have something of that in nature. My idea of Dire Beast to be exclusively BM was shot down, so I really want something visibly would make BM stand out besides only using exotic pets, and let's face it, a BM hunter isnt using an exotic pet in WOD, he is gimping himself.

The pets would attack the same target so I don't think there would have any problem regarding control and attack frame. Another idea is that, they won't be a secondary frame for the second pet; it would follow passively, and would have the same stance, guard point etc as your primary pet, akin when you start out of as a hunter before level 10 where you don't have the pet's control bar. The secondary pet's family skills too would be auto cast by AI.

[eschatological]

yeah, but you can't control the wild imps. It's not the idea itself I have issues with, it's the implementation of the permanent second pet with a second pet bar with the corresponding buffs and dashes and cowers and rabids, etc. I'm obviously not a Blizzard systems designer, but that seems like a lot of effort for one spec out of 34.

And if the second pet just followed the first pet, what's the point? Then you can't have the sEF implementation I really like from Joyful's post. And once you have the pet which doesn't "need" to be controlled, then you just have another dire beast with bad AI.

[Hyde]

yeah, but you can't control the wild imps. It's not the idea itself I have issues with, it's the implementation of the permanent second pet with a second pet bar with the corresponding buffs and dashes and cowers and rabids, etc. I'm obviously not a Blizzard systems designer, but that seems like a lot of effort for one spec out of 34.

And if the second pet just followed the first pet, what's the point? Then you can't have the sEF implementation I really like from Joyful's post. And once you have the pet which doesn't "need" to be controlled, then you just have another dire beast with bad AI.

The same way the idea of this second pet, you control it by controlling the first pet. What's the point? So that BM hunters have more spells such as debuff or buffs even though they are not using exotic pets and to add a different feel for a bm hunter. I understand that you not being a BM would not like 2 pets

I did not have problem controlling 5 pets while stampede, why would it be any problem to have a second pet all the time?

[eschatological]

I've played BM as my main spec since T14. Don't try and deflect valid criticism of your idea (which, btw, I like at its core) by trying to say I don't play BM. To me, the additional buff/debuff isn't a worthwhile ability, and this ability essentially becomes a +20% damage button.

And there's a metric shit ton of behavior I don't like about Stampede pets. If I switch targets even for a second to do something, they switch targets, even if I'm using /petpassive. You have to plan your Stampede around being able to tunnel one target with little movement so they don't lose uptime. These are the same issues a 2nd pet with no direct control by the hunter would suffer from, except you couldn't plan for it because the pet would always be active. So instead, you'd go for the one pet option because it's the same damage and you can fully control that pet.

[Windthorn]

2nd pet option as a Dps cd of some kind would be good. Not just press this and forget about it though, you'd need some flavour to it ofc

[Jekyll]

2nd pet option as a Dps cd of some kind would be good. Not just press this and forget about it though, you'd need some flavour to it ofc

That would be just dire beast

- - - Updated - - -

I've played BM as my main spec since T14. Don't try and deflect valid criticism of your idea (which, btw, I like at its core) by trying to say I don't play BM. To me, the additional buff/debuff isn't a worthwhile ability, and this ability essentially becomes a +20% damage button.

And there's a metric shit ton of behavior I don't like about Stampede pets. If I switch targets even for a second to do something, they switch targets, even if I'm using /petpassive. You have to plan your Stampede around being able to tunnel one target with little movement so they don't lose uptime. These are the same issues a 2nd pet with no direct control by the hunter would suffer from, except you couldn't plan for it because the pet would always be active. So instead, you'd go for the one pet option because it's the same damage and you can fully control that pet.

So, just use one pet, what's the hassle. And a secondary spell is worth it.

[anjan011]

questions -

1) If u cast KC, does both pet cast KC? if not which one u select?

2) if u macro MD, which pet gets it?

3) On ur auto shot crits, pets can gain focus, does that apply to both pets?

4) on ur pets basic attack, u gain focus, do u gain now double focus since now u have 2 pets?

5) u now also need to check 2 pets whether they have growl on.

these r some little bit of questions, which will add up to the balancing nightmare we have on every xpac.

Besides, dire beast is closest to which what we got for a 2nd pet.

[Hyde]

questions -

1) If u cast KC, does both pet cast KC? if not which one u select?

2) if u macro MD, which pet gets it?

3) On ur auto shot crits, pets can gain focus, does that apply to both pets?

4) on ur pets basic attack, u gain focus, do u gain now double focus since now u have 2 pets?

5) u now also need to check 2 pets whether they have growl on.

these r some little bit of questions, which will add up to the balancing nightmare we have on every xpac.

Besides, dire beast is closest to which what we got for a 2nd pet.

1. Both pets.

2. Default; your first pet if you are using your macro, unless you target your second one.

3. Unsure but basically, yes.

4.This would be balanced out just like how spirit mend stampede was balanced out

5. Hunters are not retards ad growl doesn't ruin anything but saves healers if anything.

6. Great, now dire beast can be our third pet.

[Nnug]

I don't see what the point would be for this, it adds literally nothing to our gameplay.

[Jekyll]

I don't see what the point would be for this, it adds literally nothing to our gameplay.

Aside asthaetic reasons, it would add tremendeous amount of gameplay such as focus Management and crit/ mastery priority when you choose gears and gems.