Curse

Super_Nerd0 · Apr 14, 2006, 07:54 PM // 19:54

Here is a expanding on the ranger beast mastrey idea-A Breeder.I made this idea because, if a ranger even wants a pet, they don't care when it dies.This class is not for the cruel hearted.If you dont take care of your pets(letting them die too often) the pets will turn against you and you will lose those pets for good.A Breeder is allowed 4 side pets and a mounted pet, or 5 side pets.Many people think that it is bad to have to take a skill to have a pet with you.I have made it so that every time you get a pet, it will be registered on your gloves, even when you get new gloves. This allows people to have the maximum skills possible for this class.The Breeder uses swords and only swords.
Affection-Chance that your pet(s) wont turn against you.
Here are his attributes-

Bonding
Increases the affection that your pet(s) have towards you.

Training
No inherent effect.Many Breeder skills, especially those that increase the speed, defence, and strength of pets, become more effective with Training.

Mounting
No inherent effect.Many Breeder skills, especially those that allow you to mount a pet, become more effective with Mounting.

Ownership
No inherent effect.Many Breeder skills, especially those that allow you to have animal companions, become more effective with Ownership.

Here are just some simple skills.

Training Skills

Scratchpost
Attribute-Training
Enchantment
Cast Speed-1 second
Cast Cost-10
Recharge-5 seconds
The next time a pet attacks, that pet deals an extra 15 damage and causes bleeding for (5...20) seconds.

Fetch!
Shout
Cast Speed-1/8 second
Cast Cost-15
Recharge-10 seconds
For the next 30 seconds, all pets and Breeders move 33% faster.

Mounting Skills

Mount Up
Enchantment
Cast Speed-10 seconds
Cast Cost-15
Recharge-30 seconds
Charm an animal to ride on. Only one mounted animal is allowed. THIS SKILL IS NOT NEEDED TO BRING ANIMAL INTO BATTLE.

Clawblade
Attack
Cast Speed-1 second
Cast Cost-10
Recharge-10 seconds
The next attack that you do on while mounted is added to the attack of the mounted pet and 15 more damage.

Ownership Skills

Friendliness
Enchantment
Cast Speed-15 seconds
Cast Cost-15
Recharge-15 seconds
Charm an animal to be your pet. Up to 5 pets allowed. THIS SKILL IS NOT NEEDED TO BRING PETS INTO BATTLE.

Herbal Tears
Enchantment
Cast Speed-1 second
Cast Cost-10
Recharge-15 seconds
The next time a pet's health goes down below 1/4, that pet is healed to full health.

Thats pretty much it. Plz Comment I would like to know what I could improve on this.

Mandy Memory · Apr 14, 2006, 08:51 PM // 20:51

*BANG*

Besides the fact that these are just upgrades to beastmastery, bringing 5 pets into battle is overpowered no matter how you look at it. Not only that but you have no drawbacks for them. You could easily have this as a secondary to a ranger just so you dont have to bring charm animal and get 5 times as many pets...who cares if they turn on you...get a new one.

If you had to bring a charm animal for each (Which would still be overpowered because of the sheer number of pets) and their health degenerated like a minions...I could see this being more balanced.

And who would ride their pet? It would most likely just look dumb. Also with the stupid pet AI you would be dragged off cliffs and aggro everything.

Also this is guild wars. Any class can use any weapon. That means your class can use anything, not just swords. He also couldnt use swords because he does not have swordsmanship thus making the sword pointless to even hold. (I guess it wouldnt matter when you have 5 pets though...you could stand still...it wouldnt matter)

Dougal Kronik · Apr 14, 2006, 09:40 PM // 21:40

Replace the Mounting Skills with something else and youmight have something to work with here.

Maybe have it so you can only have 2 pets, male and female (fits in with the breeding aspect of the profession). But you still need to have a Charm Animal skill of some sort on your skill bar.

Make Fetch last 5 to 15 seconds.

Change Herbal Tears to gain 50 to 100 health when ended. Full is just too powerful.

awesome sauce · Apr 14, 2006, 09:52 PM // 21:52

NOOOooooooo!
If I have to deal with w/b IWAY teams with five pets per person i will quit the game.

Dj Tano · Apr 14, 2006, 11:21 PM // 23:21

Well i actually find the idea quite cool, even though its just copied out from pokémon and cartoons like that. I was a huge pokémon fan, and i think i would like to play a game like that even now.

But giving you the ability to have more than one pet at a time would mean that you would need to have a lot more pets in the game for some variability. The thing with riding the pet is good for a huge game like wow, but here where you load a new map every 3mins its quite worthless. Then, having 5 pets is just too powerful. I know that having only 1 pet now is not really good if you dont have everything set on beastmastery, and even then its not as good as a bow ranger.

I think you should be able to take only 1 pet with you, and put up to other 5 in some kind of "pet club" that is located in every city. As weapons you should have some kind of wand and a whistle, wich without it makes your pet not very good. The pets should all be really good "weapons", since you yourself dont really deal damage with your wand. I think that casting the pet skills should take some time, but not longer then up to 5 seconds, because this way you would prevent overpowered iway builds.

That would mean that you should choose 1 of 6 pets you can have, have a wand and a whistle, have charm animal and many pet attack/defense/heal skills, and only this way the pet would be very good.

BahamutKaiser · Apr 14, 2006, 11:45 PM // 23:45

Having pets will always require a skill, it doesn't matter who you are.

Making another job with pets is simply not an option, Necromancers have minions, Rangers have pets, Ritualists have spirits, if there is another job as such, it will have something besides a pet, Like a Summoner, or a Beast Rider (I have no affection for bringing a summoner into GW, Necromancers are close enough).

The only part of this that has any merit is the Mounting skills. They could make a class that included mountable Beasts, which would be different then pet mastery. Being able to add a mountable beast without a skill, that's totaly bogus, it isn't even a discussion because it isn't balanced, unless the mount litteraly does nothing.

As for having a class that can mount beasts and command pets, that is more then easy enough with the option of /R, anything you can get from another class isn't an option, more specifically, any original, defining, identifying attribute/skill available to any other class isn't an option for a new class. I clarify that because I know some flaming newb will point out obvious generic self-healing and defensive skills.

Mounts arn't a bad idea, it could work very simular to a pet, but you would be mounted on it permenatly. I can forsee this being something like a permenant defensive and offensive boost to the character, or more specifically, the damage be halfed between you and your mount, but because your always mounted on the beast you would take serious damage from anything AoE, on you and your Mount, making it hard to survive bombardment attacks. This could be evolved from Dwarfs use of Ridable creatures, but it would obviously require some significant alterations.

Improvements which don't require skill slots are called armor and weapons, never confuse this, no amount of points is an attribute justify the use of anything unless it cost you a skill slot, otherwise having 16 points in any attribute would justify having an extra skill in that attribute, which obviously isn't happening, and nor would this (mountables via no skill slot, or any pets). Now I don't think having even 2 pets is broken, but the obvious trade off would be that you can't attack, or your attack is actually a pet (I just had an awsome Idea), getting several attacks of any magnitude can be overstacked with group improving support and spirits, IWay is already the simplest overpower build in the game, it is the only winning strategy which doesn't take real skill.

This suggestion is full of holes, salvage it and come back with something worth posting.

Super_Nerd0 · Apr 15, 2006, 04:49 PM // 16:49

I salvaged it and got 1 wood plank and a large pile of dung...
the mounting might be worth 3gold

Hunter Sharparrow · Apr 15, 2006, 05:11 PM // 17:11

Bringing more than one pet in would be too overpowering. The mounting idea is cool though. Maybe have 1 skill usage to bring the pet (pretty much the way things are now) then have to take another (upkeep) skill. When activated you get on your pet, your pet can no longer attack as long as your riding it and being a ranger you will have the higher ground advantage of doing slightly more damage also shoot farther. Maybe, but only maybe have bit of an armor boost. Your pet can still be attacked and killed while riding it and if it dies you still get your blackout while any action you were taken get interupted and you get knocked down. If you die then you fall off dead and your pet can begin attacking again.

The only thing is the only pet that I see as ridable are the birds. Chocobo riding

Super_Nerd0 · Apr 15, 2006, 05:22 PM // 17:22

hey, you can ride on wolves also,and if you tried to ride on a hog or coming up in factions, a crab, they would just become really big so that you can ride them

quickmonty · Apr 15, 2006, 05:54 PM // 17:54

I have a hard time visualizing a ranger on a spider.

Moa birds with saddles FTW

Super_Nerd0 · Apr 15, 2006, 06:12 PM // 18:12

i started a new thread that is only about the mounting idea.go here to post on it.
http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/s....php?t=3012316

fiery · Apr 15, 2006, 07:02 PM // 19:02

Mounting animals is soo.... soo.. WoW like.

Awesome Nuke · Apr 15, 2006, 08:28 PM // 20:28

Sry but I'm against implementing Mounts in GW. Would totally screw up the class balance

BahamutKaiser · Apr 15, 2006, 11:15 PM // 23:15

I hear alot of "this or that would unbalance the game", yet no justification. Obviously if they made mounts, they would be a balanced addition. And the addition of a mount is nearly the exact same thing as a pet, but have a more defensive improvement rather than an offensive one.

It could rather be done in several different ways and balanced. So would you mind explaining how mounts screw up class balance? Cause I can certainly contest that notion, and that's all it is without an explanation a notion. No explaination changes your claim from "would totaly screw up class balance", to "I think it might screw up class balance", accept less dignified.

Aeon221 · Apr 16, 2006, 02:18 AM // 02:18

+Speed, -Armor, and mounts would be okay

LifeInfusion · Apr 16, 2006, 02:31 AM // 02:31

Sounds like a children's game
... no...please...

We don't need any more "pet" stuff. Already got pets, minions, spirits flooding the map in Factions.

Mandy Memory · Apr 17, 2006, 05:03 AM // 05:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by BahamutKaiser

I hear alot of "this or that would unbalance the game", yet no justification. Obviously if they made mounts, they would be a balanced addition. And the addition of a mount is nearly the exact same thing as a pet, but have a more defensive improvement rather than an offensive one.

It could rather be done in several different ways and balanced. So would you mind explaining how mounts screw up class balance? Cause I can certainly contest that notion, and that's all it is without an explanation a notion. No explaination changes your claim from "would totaly screw up class balance", to "I think it might screw up class balance", accept less dignified.

Mounts would only screw up class balance if it gave good benifits and was linked to a primary attribute. (Which would be the only logical way to do it without making tons of new animation for every character.)

So yes...it can be unbalanced. Would it be? Not likely. Would it be worth it? Not at all...this isnt WoW and we shouldnt strive to be a lesser game.

HawkofStorms · Apr 17, 2006, 06:44 AM // 06:44

Well, I can see the balance issues in this idea. I sort of like the concept, but don't see it as being very fair.
Also, Galie has explictely said they do not plan on adding mounts to the game. You don't really need them like in WoW to get around faster, since you can just map travel anywhere in the game.

Awesome Nuke · Apr 17, 2006, 12:17 PM // 12:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by BahamutKaiser

I hear alot of "this or that would unbalance the game", yet no justification. Obviously if they made mounts, they would be a balanced addition.

I didnt take time to explain why this would unbalance the game because there are many other threads asking for mounts that a lot of people found balance issues that it wouldnt be worth it to work around the issues as there were too many

Rayne Nightfyre · Apr 17, 2006, 12:21 PM // 12:21

/Shoots this class down because I want to.