How does pet bone dragon sound?

After getting owned by the bone dragons I really though sheesh I want one of these as pet. I really think they should put some friendly bone dragon in since they would own in PvP.

They should also add a fire elementalist spell, Nuclear Armageddon. That would own too.

[ ]

*watches as everyone switches to Ranger 2ndary so you can have a 16 member team with 8 players and 8 dragons*

*then watches as smiting monks appear out of nowhere to kill all the bone dragons*

And Liek Rangers Shud Have A Nuceler Arrow Wit A Nucalar Arrowhead Tht Blows Op Evry1 N Thn They All Die Liek Lol! N Thn He Cud Ave Som Nuceler Protectionion Spell So He Was Ammune N He Didnt Die Bt Evry1 Else Does Lololrofl Yes That Wud Rule So Much Plz Plz Anet Make Ths Happen I Wud Be So Happy Yes!

yes it think you would have to have say 12 beastmastery to tame one. Beastmastery is rarely used at the moment for example just look at the build ideas on this site, i don't think any use beastmastery a lot

you have the dumbest ideas bud

Originally Posted by crow_killer
i find it hard in pvp, my lvl 20 ranger has good armour but can't handle more than one warrior at once. If you ask me i think the game needs a little more balancing...

It doesn't have to be powerful, but taming a Drake or a Dragon would be nice just for the cool factor.

Yeah. When I think "cool" I think about super-big pets lumbering into narrow passageways and cutting off the rest of the group from moving.

[ ]

Make it so that you can pass right through pets, that's what they did in D2 I think, solved a lot of problems.

Actually, thats a really good idea. i agree more pets need to be added, right now there isnt much incentive to use beast mastery(there are exceptions) Personally, i love the bear... but thats just me. Try suggesting that in the suggestion forums, then they could add bigger pets without problems like getting stuck arising.

A dragon pet would rock; but it would deffinatly need to be toned down for balance; maybe say, as a hatchling? The idea isnt that bad, and yes I deffinatly agree more pets would be nice.

Sounds like you have something against pets..

How about a god pet, wait no, 5 god pets because they would just rule in PVP. Wait no, what about if you could ride them, and if you were riding them you couldnt be hurt. And they should have 100000 life, and not be hurt by anything except holy damage...and wait, what if...

Oh my god... And I thought my english was bad... Now Inde can get off my ass about "the proper use of the English language". Go pick on him now...

Actually I have a bear and I love him. He has a cute bear butt. The thing I like least about him is the space he takes up.

I'm not opposed to a bigger selection of pets, but ANet's done a pretty good job of making each pet meaningful in its own way. Having lots of pets just for show with no substance or difference between them is wasteful. So you add a flashy new set of dragon pets. They breathe fire or acid or bark thunder or bleed meteors. That would be too powerful, so they do all those things but it does little or no damage. Now I have to deal with everyone running Rangers and Ranger subs so they can have the flashiest pimped-out pet west of Ascalon.

Yeah, I totally can't wait. Right up there with Nuclear Armageddon for elementalists. :P

[ ]

woah cool, a ranger with beastmastery!








(nice refund points btw )

I like beastmastery myself as well. My only issues with pets are that they should be resurrectable with a res spell like every other team member (which would possibly free one slot up, as you could have a monk healing them and rezzing them - the disabling skills on res is mostly I think because of the speed of the Comfort Animal, so wouldn't need to happen with a 8 seciond rez), that they block too much (they should bump oout of your way more, adjusting to the player's movement) and that they need some commands to make them easier to control (I described this in a suggestion thread) for example a "stay" or "continue what you are doing" command to keep them close when pulling (which could also double as the "continue attacking your target button), a release command to let them take off/switch to your target; displaying their current target as a secondary attack bar (so I can see who my pet is fighting and who I am fighting) and the ability to make them attack previous/next targets.

I disagree with using res on pets. I like that in order to be able to save your pet you have to sacrifice something. Heal skills work both ways, which should be enough. I don't really want to have people say "If I can res my pet with res, why do I still get an eight-second blackout when my pet dies? I don't get that when my groupies die!" I tend to coordinate with a ranger friend of mine; he'll bring res pet and his pet and I'll bring my pet. He doesn't need comfort since I'll heal and I don't need comfort since he can res. It works fine and saves us each a skill.

[ ]

Which is exactly why I suggested toning it down to a hatchling. Wont be too large, and since its still only a baby, that gives a.net the ability to make it as weak or as powerful as they want and keep to some sort of.....well i was gonna say realizim, but thats surpassing the bounds of fiction.

Wouldnt it be somthing if it was the weakest of all the pets?

Well anywho, im sure there are ways to work it out without overpowering it.

Well I think it would be great if it didnt HAVE to be a friendly animal - why cant the Ranger tame hostile creatures as well - as it is when u try to tame a friendly creature it turns on you anyway, so they might as well just let you tame a hostile?

That way it REALLY opens up the number of types of pets that Rangers can have as well as giving Rangers added individualism!

Plus, it makes exploring remote areas more appealing as you could find a rare creature to tame!

Comments?