Curse

TheUndertaker · Aug 15, 2005, 05:08 PM // 17:08

I'm building a R/?? and I want to have a pet. I've noticed practically no one at high lvls uses pets. Why is this? Do they suck that bad? I want to use marksmanship, wilderness surv, and beast mast, and 1 attr from a second prof. Also, what is a good secondary profession for a ranger who want to solo some?

wolfy3455 · Aug 15, 2005, 05:33 PM // 17:33

They don't suck, but they do require an investment. If you want to mix your stats up, don't bother. People who try to only use charm+comfort while using a bow and wilderness tend to find them useless because your wasting two slots on something you're not using effectively. Non-trappers really can't solo very well though.

White Designs · Aug 15, 2005, 05:55 PM // 17:55

In PvE its not a bad idea to capture a pet and then just ignore the pet line and make a normal Ranger. The pet just gives you a little added bonus. In PvP the Pet likely makes you worse overall just by existing.

Etaisella · Aug 15, 2005, 05:59 PM // 17:59

the search option is your friend

Shwitz · Aug 15, 2005, 06:05 PM // 18:05

I agree, the search option is your friend. There are several threads on the use of pets. To the original poster, though, I'd like to point out that ignoring the Expertise line is probably not the best idea for any ranger, and that pets require a large skill bar investment to be effective. Without a major attribute investment in Beast Mastery, and devoting at least half of the skill bar to pet-related skills, your pet will become more of a nuisance than a boon. Especially if the pet happens to die in combat. When a pet dies, all of your skills (read: ALL OF YOUR SKILL BAR) are disabled for a period of time, I believe 8 seconds. There are beast masters out there, but they're hard to find.

ShadowWrath · Aug 15, 2005, 06:12 PM // 18:12

I tried for PvP with a spider. It didn't work very well.

Myodato · Aug 15, 2005, 06:17 PM // 18:17

Pets aren't as bad as most people think, but I don't even the biggest pet fans would claim they were great.

The problem is, to make pets even viable, you need lots of points in beast mastery, and lots of pet skills. Do that, and you'll soon find that your pet is more important than you are. Then take into account that pets are useless at target switching, and don't know when to run away, and becomes very hard to believe that putting all that effort into the stupid little *******.

On the other hand, pets have some of the best and energy efficient skills in the game, but good luck getting them to work in a balanced build.

Winterclaw · Aug 15, 2005, 06:27 PM // 18:27

Pets are useful...

As emergency food rations.

jopapa1267 · Aug 15, 2005, 06:31 PM // 18:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winterclaw

Pets are useful...

As emergency food rations.

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOLLLLLLLLLL

Ollj · Aug 15, 2005, 08:23 PM // 20:23

Pets are good.
Just because barely any player uses them doesnt mean they are worse than no pet.

Pets are like one more melee warrior BUT you can give it a skill that matches each of the profesions.

The funny thing with pets is that you use the skill, while the pet does the attack, this is important on later strategies.

If you want to use pets for more than just necromancer food, use 11-13 beast mastery, not more, not less, then give it 2-3 pet skills.

Kool Pajamas · Aug 15, 2005, 09:44 PM // 21:44

I think pets should be fixed to make them more controllable. If you could get them to change targets better and run away, then they might be worth it. I think some pet skills should use adrenaline like warriors also.

ScubaClassGuy · Aug 16, 2005, 02:25 AM // 02:25

i think melandarus stalker is a qtttttttttttttttt

Tuna · Aug 16, 2005, 03:36 AM // 03:36

The pets and their skills aren't bad, just their AI is. And when I say its bad, I mean it horrible. Also you have to consider that attribute distribution. Pretty much every ranger needs expertise. If you want to use a bow you need marksmanship. Then you're left with one more line to choose from (or 2 if you like to strech). This usually means either wilderness surival, beastmastery, or something form your secondary. If you consider it worth it to pass up the buffs from wilderness or whatever your secondary holds for a pet, go for it. Be prepared to pull out your hair and yell at the dumb animal though

Also, warthogs ftw!

Sharpsight · Aug 16, 2005, 04:39 AM // 04:39

I haven't tried it yet, but aren't pets pretty good targets for a smiter? Nobody usually bothers with pets, so there might be some good surprise smite dmg at the start of a round. Plus, if you're running spirits, you may want 16 beast mastery, in which case you may want to bring your pet to attack while you're busy spamming fertile or whatever.

Note, I've never played a ranger, so I may be out to lunch.

Tuna · Aug 16, 2005, 05:03 AM // 05:03

Yes, you can smite quite easilty with a beastmaster. It not exactly like a e/mo though. You are still going to use pet attacks for extra dmg + conditions. You're going to want to take ferocious strike as your elite and use a staff.

cookiehoarder · Aug 16, 2005, 11:11 AM // 11:11

I assume no one has ever heard of the pet build? I fought them once in halls..All pets if I recall right. They won hall several times that week.

Slade xTekno · Aug 16, 2005, 09:35 PM // 21:35

Pets are only viable if you build around them, not just drag them along.

I believe the easiest way to makes pets viable is to make Call of Protection and/or Symbiotic bond available earlier. That, or combine Charm Animal and Comfort Animal.

Ensign · Aug 16, 2005, 11:47 PM // 23:47

Pet skills are excellent.

The only real problem with pets is how terrible their AI is. If that was cleaned up pets would be much more popular.

As is, they're only really good in specialized GvG builds.

Peace,
-CxE

Dame&Beast · Aug 17, 2005, 12:01 AM // 00:01

Pets are not a complete and utter waste... I am a R/E, and I do not use a pet for the simple fact that I prefer to have all of my skills be attack related...Having a pet here is kind of like having one in real life... a lot of care and time and they are great....for somethings

So, consider the 2 skill slots you lose and all those oh so important attribute points

Yukito Kunisaki · Aug 17, 2005, 04:52 AM // 04:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

Pet skills are excellent.

The only real problem with pets is how terrible their AI is. If that was cleaned up pets would be much more popular.

As is, they're only really good in specialized GvG builds.

Peace,
-CxE

/salute

If they switched targets the way henchies did. [I thought they got smarter ^_^] then we'd have an awesome use of an extra body on the field.