Why Are Ranger/Archer-esque Classes Always Paired Up With Nature Themes?
Kagome
I mean, can't there be an archer who DOESN'T involve themselves with the environment? I see this in a lot of RPGS that don't have a separation between archers and druids or shamans. It would be nice in GW2 if we see a ranged class completely different from an environmental based class.
Shayne Hawke
The simplest explanation I can conjure is this: Bows are hunting weapons, and good hunters should know their prey and their territory.
Dakka Dakka
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Shayne Hawke
The simplest explanation I can conjure is this: Bows are hunting weapons, and good hunters should know their prey and their territory.
|
/thread
Kagome
I guess so but Hunters also used spears (Para) and Swords (Warrior) to hunt with. And its kind of boring to have nature-y armor all the time for my ranger. :/ It should be more like Diablo and the Amazon.
Dakka Dakka
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kagome
I guess so but Hunters also used spears (Para) and Swords (Warrior) to hunt with. And its kind of boring to have nature-y armor all the time for my ranger. :/ It should be more like Diablo and the Amazon.
|
But fear not! I heard that ANET was considering not making armor class specific in GW2!! Wish I knew where
Thrain Galdwin
In my opinion, The class name "Ranger" itself implies a relation to nature.
Magic Wut Huh Asdf
You see bows a lot in nomad-type people too, mounted archers, but even that still has some aspect of wilderness with the whole taming animals type thing.
Kagome
I guess so but why bows? Nomads use swords, axes, and spears... and traps could easily be put with any other class.
I want a fancy, clean archer for once. Not a dirty, messy one. D:
I want a fancy, clean archer for once. Not a dirty, messy one. D:
Aeon221
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kagome
I guess so but Hunters also used spears (Para) and Swords (Warrior) to hunt with. And its kind of boring to have nature-y armor all the time for my ranger. :/ It should be more like Diablo and the Amazon.
|
Swords are for killing people.
Dorny
A ranger also has to be able to observe the wind movement when preparing to hit a target with a bow (deviation, varying distance of shot, etc.)
And it takes skillful planning to hide traps well enough to not make them visible.
And it takes skillful planning to hide traps well enough to not make them visible.
Kagome
I GUESS so but I'm still hoping for a more fancy archer. People also hunted with spears, throwing axes, etc. =/
FoxBat
Diablo 1 actually featured "rogues" as their bow class, which had zero connection to nature.
Anyway I think the problem is that there aren't any iconic pure archer heroes. Everyone's always impressed by the knights in shining armor or the great strength of barbarians, while archers are reduced to either thieves, nature guys (legolas), or both (robin hood).
Anyway I think the problem is that there aren't any iconic pure archer heroes. Everyone's always impressed by the knights in shining armor or the great strength of barbarians, while archers are reduced to either thieves, nature guys (legolas), or both (robin hood).
Kagome
Actually there were a lot of famous archers like Genghis Khan and English longbowmen and many samurai and none of them had to do with nature. :/ Knights = defense, barbarians = strength, archers = dexterity, mage = intelligence, cleric/mesmer = mind/knowledge/wisdom, etc.
Evasion Twenty
How about a bomber? I mean, special-ops can work.
moriz
genghis khan was a warrior first and foremost. it was just so happens that mogolian warriors were required to be expert marksmen also.
a bow is first and foremost a hunting weapon. even for the types of people whom you've just rattled off, the bow was primarily used for hunting. it wasn't afterwards that the military use was utilized.
after all, hunting people is about the same as hunting animals. easier, from what i've gathered.
a bow is first and foremost a hunting weapon. even for the types of people whom you've just rattled off, the bow was primarily used for hunting. it wasn't afterwards that the military use was utilized.
after all, hunting people is about the same as hunting animals. easier, from what i've gathered.
Nerel
Hunting with swords... wow, bunnybashing
A lot of Bow = Wilderness conceptions could also be blamed on cinematic representations of bow users... ie Blame Hollywood (Robinhood and his ilk).
Also, if the Ranger type classes didn't have pet/nature skill lines, they'd be a pretty empty profession aimed at only one thing ranged damage... kinda boring.
I suppose the bow wielder archetype could be linked to attributes based on mobility/speed and stealth... the Ranger in Guild Wars DID have a stealth attribute after all.
A lot of Bow = Wilderness conceptions could also be blamed on cinematic representations of bow users... ie Blame Hollywood (Robinhood and his ilk).
Also, if the Ranger type classes didn't have pet/nature skill lines, they'd be a pretty empty profession aimed at only one thing ranged damage... kinda boring.
I suppose the bow wielder archetype could be linked to attributes based on mobility/speed and stealth... the Ranger in Guild Wars DID have a stealth attribute after all.
Masseur
Robin Hood was in Sherwood Forest, forest is nature, etc... 
Kagome
Its just SO ugly... I really hope they change it in GW2 and make a druid or shaman class.
SpyderArachnid
Well don't forget about Vampire Hunters as well.
Instead of the woodsy look, they sported the gothic dark style. Weilding crossbows and such. Don't see why all Hunters/Rangers have to be associated with nature. They weren't.
But yeah it is basically a stereotype. Anything that has a bow, is always associated with nature. Elves were always the number one when it came to Hunters/Rangers just cause of their love for animals and nature. Just the way life has made them out to be.
But I would like to see a Vampire Hunter style Ranger. Long dark Trenchcoat with a wide brim hat. Either using a crossbow or a modified longbow.
Instead of the woodsy look, they sported the gothic dark style. Weilding crossbows and such. Don't see why all Hunters/Rangers have to be associated with nature. They weren't.
But yeah it is basically a stereotype. Anything that has a bow, is always associated with nature. Elves were always the number one when it came to Hunters/Rangers just cause of their love for animals and nature. Just the way life has made them out to be.
But I would like to see a Vampire Hunter style Ranger. Long dark Trenchcoat with a wide brim hat. Either using a crossbow or a modified longbow.
KZaske
I think the ranger profession is fine the way it is. As for Druids, they were first and foremost law givers (judges) and magi, which does not fit in the mytos of Guild Wars.
Kagome
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SpyderArachnid
Well don't forget about Vampire Hunters as well.
Instead of the woodsy look, they sported the gothic dark style. Weilding crossbows and such. Don't see why all Hunters/Rangers have to be associated with nature. They weren't. But yeah it is basically a stereotype. Anything that has a bow, is always associated with nature. Elves were always the number one when it came to Hunters/Rangers just cause of their love for animals and nature. Just the way life has made them out to be. But I would like to see a Vampire Hunter style Ranger. Long dark Trenchcoat with a wide brim hat. Either using a crossbow or a modified longbow. |
And about the druids... if they joined the game, archers would be a separate entity and would not have to be nature-y! ^_^
Seed of Yggdrasil
Garrett of the Thief games wasn't very nature oriented.
iToasterHD
You guys are completely missing the feudal/medieval look. In military combat, back when they used bows, warfare was not about camouflage and sniping. English Longbowmen would stand in formations and fire upon the enemy. Samurai would used specially customized Yumi for horse mounted attacks (to name just two of hundreds of examples). Instead of a nature oriented, heavily inspired by elves; why not just a clean cut military archer?
I've seen trained horse mounted archers, and they are pretty impressive. They can only attack 1 person at a time, but with precision and speed. If you can't hide, you keep moving, right?
I've seen trained horse mounted archers, and they are pretty impressive. They can only attack 1 person at a time, but with precision and speed. If you can't hide, you keep moving, right?
OutlawFMA
Whenever I think of a Ranger in a RPG standpoint, I think being attuned with nature.
Nerel
The 'real' archer based on actual medieval bow use was a WARRIOR, a professional or levy soldier who used a bow accompanied by more traditional warrior weapons (a short sword or polearm like a pike).
Garrett? Oh you mean THIEF, a THIEF character in a game entitled THIEF, ie NOT a ranger. Nothing to say Rogues can't use bows, of course... just, not a ranger.
The Vampire Hunter (aka long coat, broad rimmed hats etc) is based on the real world Witch Hunters with a healthy dose of Hammer film's Van Helsing archetype characters mixed in. Not really bow users, more likely to be armed with a brace of firearms (or a crossbow as technology permits). Not a bow user, not a hunter or ranger archetype... more suited to a rogue type.
The outdoor woodsy ranger archetype is very different, blame LotR/Tolkien, blame AD&D/Gary Gygax...
Of the options presented in the thread so far, the rogue archetype would make the most interesting replacement for the bow user in GW. Not that I have a problem with tree hugging rangers being followed around by their faithful animal companion.
Garrett? Oh you mean THIEF, a THIEF character in a game entitled THIEF, ie NOT a ranger. Nothing to say Rogues can't use bows, of course... just, not a ranger.
The Vampire Hunter (aka long coat, broad rimmed hats etc) is based on the real world Witch Hunters with a healthy dose of Hammer film's Van Helsing archetype characters mixed in. Not really bow users, more likely to be armed with a brace of firearms (or a crossbow as technology permits). Not a bow user, not a hunter or ranger archetype... more suited to a rogue type.
The outdoor woodsy ranger archetype is very different, blame LotR/Tolkien, blame AD&D/Gary Gygax...
Of the options presented in the thread so far, the rogue archetype would make the most interesting replacement for the bow user in GW. Not that I have a problem with tree hugging rangers being followed around by their faithful animal companion.
Kagome
But what IS a Ranger? There are no such things as Rangers in the real world so we can't use real life examples. I think the GW creators just made it because of the Legolas/elf theme. But with GW2 coming out, the Sylvari pretty much takes the place of the elf in RPG games. So I guess if they renamed the class to archer, it would work for all races. The Sylvari archer will be the most like GW1's Ranger.
drunk n angry
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kagome
I GUESS so but I'm still hoping for a more fancy archer. People also hunted with spears, throwing axes, etc. =/
|
. if you havent already.
HellScreamS
crossbow snipers ftw!
Nerel
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kagome
But what IS a Ranger? There are no such things as Rangers in the real world so we can't use real life examples. I think the GW creators just made it because of the Legolas/elf theme. But with GW2 coming out, the Sylvari pretty much takes the place of the elf in RPG games. So I guess if they renamed the class to archer, it would work for all races. The Sylvari archer will be the most like GW1's Ranger.
|
This use of the term predates both Tolkien's work and more modern fantasy cliches (Dungeon's and Dragons etc).
Obviously the term ranger has been adopted for military use since then.
drunk n angry
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Nerel
and depending on the period, either proficient with a bow, firearm or spear (in the case of boar hunting)...
|
gremlin
Fantasy tales gave us the Elven Archer so putting Bows and nature together.
In western military history the Bow was not a knightly weapon so the only people trained in its use were the peasantry again putting it into a hunting wilderness context.
It also took a lifetime to learn the bow so unless your living depended on it you wouldn't bother.
The crossbow would be the European military equivalent though even that became a hunting weapon.
Hope they add them for GW2.
Asura mechanical repeating crossbow.
Humans with a standard crossbow and the Norn with huge siege style weapons.
In western military history the Bow was not a knightly weapon so the only people trained in its use were the peasantry again putting it into a hunting wilderness context.
It also took a lifetime to learn the bow so unless your living depended on it you wouldn't bother.
The crossbow would be the European military equivalent though even that became a hunting weapon.
Hope they add them for GW2.
Asura mechanical repeating crossbow.
Humans with a standard crossbow and the Norn with huge siege style weapons.
komma
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Thrain Galdwin
In my opinion, The class name "Ranger" itself implies a relation to nature.
|
Nailed it right on the head.
Xsiriss
Nowdays especially, rangers tend to be people who protect/monitor forests and wildlife. Ranger's origionated as gamekeepers,but then the term coming to be used as soldier's who specialise in ambushes.This all requires good knowledge of your surroundings,tracking and environment,so using cammo and knowing the right paths etc.
So that's kind of the base for the fantasy rangers really,just the class takes a more...well fantasy feel.
So that's kind of the base for the fantasy rangers really,just the class takes a more...well fantasy feel.
imnotyourmother
A ranger can use any type of weapon. Change your SECONDARY and change you playing style. Or simply play a ranger with NO weapon at all??
What? Is this guy a loonie?
In the older days there were "touch rangers" These had nothing to do with nature.
Simply get your Exper to 16 attribute points and then get Necro as your secondary and BAAAAAM!
No more "nature" for this ranger. Touch them to death.. litterally.
So go and get the build for touch ranger...gather 3 more of your friends and go and try touchies in alliance battles. Its a blast. watch that Assassin shadow step to you and BOOOM in 2 seconds he takes 568 damage and he is dead dead dead.... Muwhahahah
What? Is this guy a loonie?
In the older days there were "touch rangers" These had nothing to do with nature.
Simply get your Exper to 16 attribute points and then get Necro as your secondary and BAAAAAM!
No more "nature" for this ranger. Touch them to death.. litterally.
So go and get the build for touch ranger...gather 3 more of your friends and go and try touchies in alliance battles. Its a blast. watch that Assassin shadow step to you and BOOOM in 2 seconds he takes 568 damage and he is dead dead dead.... Muwhahahah
The Scorpion Knight
You never know they might change Rangers to Archer in GW2 lol.
Faure
I think because in common fantasy setting the best bowers are Elfs, and they have a high relation to nature. Everything you see these days in mmorpgs (that are not based on some kind of world war or sf theme) are based on the fantasy realm. You can compare it to the LotR. There are always dwarfs who are brave but maybe not as smart, but excellent warrios. There are mages who are calm, and wise, but do massive damage through magic. There's the elfs who are the best bowmen plus a high relation to nature. Necromancers are dark, and are always somehow related to the death.
Etc. Imo it's just common fantasy-standards.
Imo this only applies for PvE. I wouldn't know why any PvP-er would care for the lore or background behind a class. It sees it as a role in a teambased play where it can function as front, mid, or backline. Screw the nature-relation.
Etc. Imo it's just common fantasy-standards.
Imo this only applies for PvE. I wouldn't know why any PvP-er would care for the lore or background behind a class. It sees it as a role in a teambased play where it can function as front, mid, or backline. Screw the nature-relation.
Deakon
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dakka Dakka
Those would work......though they would still have a Nature theme, Amazons were jungle hunters :/
But fear not! I heard that ANET was considering not making armor class specific in GW2!! Wish I knew where |
Quaker
Many RPGs follow a basic, traditional sword&sorcery model based loosely on things like the Lord of the Rings, Dungeons& Dragons, etc., etc.
So, therefore, Rangers are generally forest/nature based guys (often elves). Healers are generally Monks. Dwarfs are short warriors. Bad guys are ugly. Etc., etc.
So, therefore, Rangers are generally forest/nature based guys (often elves). Healers are generally Monks. Dwarfs are short warriors. Bad guys are ugly. Etc., etc.
Kagome
I guess so. I really just want a ranger in a tux or a dress. xS
Nerel
Have you considered making a ranger with a different primary profession, such as a Ritualist/Ranger bow caster or some similar build?
Edit...
"Necromancers are dark, and are always somehow related to the death."
Necromancy... DEATH PROPHECY. Somehow related to death? It's not such a leap. The term actually refers to some form of divination, using spirits/the deceased as a medium. The fantasy aspect is animating corpses/undead...
Edit...
"Necromancers are dark, and are always somehow related to the death."
Necromancy... DEATH PROPHECY. Somehow related to death? It's not such a leap. The term actually refers to some form of divination, using spirits/the deceased as a medium. The fantasy aspect is animating corpses/undead...