Ranger Archive

I am a Ranger and I don't want a pet. But if I did, I could always buy one from a CH.

CH get level 60 pets. 60.

Now we'rre asking for 1/3 to 2/3 of that. And I'm saying it should be a wolf type animal or dewback type..something that would be more in touch with what those roleplayer sorts want =P (Like your nickname, RPers? )

Now lets look at how it is now.. People who invest that 6 points can get a level 60 pet as it stands(Being FIXED-not nerfed- now) So why not let Master Rangers get a companion? I mean christ.. it fits with the class from a roleplay sense. More than turret protected camps or crafting station camps..

Just because she thinks CHs should have a pet, how does that make my "spend the points" argument flawed? Why would you rather WASTE potential Ranger skill boxes on something that is readily avaible to you as a Ranger via the CH profession? Why should Rangers just be handed the ability to tame/train/manage a pet when it takes CHs 63 points to master this? I am comparing oranges with oranges when you are trying to take the abilities of another profession, one that you can easily invest skill points in at that.

It's really simple people, if you want a low level pet then just buy one already trained from a CH. If you want to train it yourself (and its going to be low level like your saying), then invest 6 freakin skill points to do it. I would much rather see things like Tracking, Luring, and Conceal taking up Ranger skill boxes.

Wayness:

I totally disagree that skill point expense is more critical. You can readily trade skill points however you like, but its totally at the cost of xp.... and xp is exactly what holds you from going back up skill trees once you come back down them. However, if what you say is true, then you only prove my point -why waste Ranger skill boxes that can be used for other skill suggestions for something that you can already readily get as a Ranger (ie pets)?

As a player (and customer), my input is just as valid as yours, so if you don't want to be called an idiot then don't invalidate myopinions. As for the rest of your post:

Its not a simple matter of investing 6 points in Novice CH .

But it is, if all your proposing is a simple low level pet (however you want to define "low") to follow a Ranger around yet is not something to take away from the CH profession. Additionally, what are you trying to accomplish in your request? Do you just want a pet to roleplay with? You don't even have to be a CH to accomplish that since they will be allowing anyone to have a simple pet pretty soon (assuming you find a CH to sell one of course).

How would a Ranger heal a pets mind wounds without Trick?

Simple, there are stimpacks being planned for the BE class. This has all been brought up byC3PO on the CH boards in fact. You said you read those boards? Plus, how would a Ranger be able to perform this action? Are you suggesting a Ranger should not only have a pet but also be able to heal it? Just how much of the CH class are you trying ot hand the Rangers? Or should I ask just how much of the Ranger skill boxes are you trying to waste on what you can already get as a CH?

Give even simple commands without a bit of Manage?

Read above.

You have still not stated how this would impair the CH profession. I would be interested in hearing your reasoning if you could do so cordially.

It would more impair the Ranger class more then the CH class actually. For Rangers that wants pet, they have easy access to them via the CH profession. For Rangers that dont want pets, they now have skill boxes that have been wasted on them that could of been used for more uniques skills as I stated above.

As for CHs, it impairs them by stripping away another potential market of clients to sell tamed pets to - the Rangers. It also strips away their uniqueness for the number 1 thing they do, tame pets. As for the CH boards, I only read them passively at best. I am a Ranger who loves pets, a Master Ranger and CH with enough points to spare to respectively train in weapons. So my heart is in this profession, and I would hate to see something that is already avaible to us consume our skill boxes as Rangers.... its that simple.

1st PBDL

I agree, keep pets in the realm of CH or purchased from a CH. I'm nearing Master Ranger and would like to see the profession get some much needed attention along the lines of the description in the game manual. I only bought novice CH so I could have a roleplaying pet. I may drop CH once the "big patch" goes in though.

Obedaia Jetletter
Trap Master et al.
Wanderhome

So.. let me get this straight.. if someone doesn't agree with you - then they are an idiot?

I don't believe I ever said that. I said stop invalidating my opinions just because you don't agree with them. Dont twist words.

Hmn, does that work for everyone- or are you special in that regard?

Better then same rudeness and sarcasm in this question that you are accusing me of.

she did not, as you say, "invalidate your opinions". YOU however did that to her.. and more.. by calling her an idiot.

You obviously didn't read her post where she said everything I wrote was pretty much invalid... need glasses?

The 'spend the points' argument is flawed because she had said she already spent the points to be a CH as I had stated. And, why oh why, would any skill boxes need to be 'taken up' for rangers to have a low level pet. Could a basic pet not be added to one of the skill trees? Why would something have to be taken away?

Well, just how many skills do you plan to assign to a box? I never said anything about anything being taken away, aside from the potential to put something more unique in the Ranger skill boxes other then what we already have access to since CH pre reqs have already been filled by a Ranger - something which you seem to avoiding as a hard truth and VERY valid point against wasting Ranger skill boxes on pets.

"Why should Rangers just be handed the ability to tame/train/manage a pet when it takes CHs 63 points to master this?" No here said anything about mastering anything! Not once in this thread has it been even implied that we are looking for high-level pets, or full CH abilities!

It didn't say master either, but taming, training, and managing pets are pretty much what all 4 skill trees of the CH class are about. So again, if its not high level pets you are after, why waste a box on on pets when you can have this without any skills? You can acquire a non high level pet from a CH just as easily as you can acquire a droid from a DE. If not now, then in the near future as stated by C3PO.

Oh, and uh - CHs are getting handed a ranger skill - you do remember that right? You know, the challenge con thing that Q said was a 'good idea'? By your argument shouldn't all creature handlers have to get ranger and work up that skill tree to get that Ranger skill?

Absolutly. Challenge Levels come with creature knowledge, which is acquired through the Ranger class.

I am not disagreeing with your other points about Tracking, Luring and Conceal, they should be incorporated into the Ranger profession - but that is no reason why a low-level pet couldn't be addedas well.

Sure it is, you are wasting skill boxes that can be used these very abilities... on something you can have with no skill for that matter.

"As for CHs, it impairs them by stripping away another potential market of clients to sell tamed pets to - the Rangers." Could this be the real reason why you are so against this? Perhaps you are afraid that you might miss out on selling a lowlevel pet to a ranger?

I could care less as a Ranger and a CH. But I do care for other players who may only be CHs. Ive stated my main concern repeatdly about doing this... its a waste of pontential Ranger growth space for other skills.

The percentage of rangers to Creature Handlers on each server is remarkably small. The chances of an individual CH ever selling a pet to a ranger is minuscule, sure some CH on your server may sell one to a Ranger. But do you think thattiny percentage of the potential pet market is really a valid argumentnot to let Rangers have a pet?

I noticed how you side skirted my concerns about how this primarily nerfs the Ranger class.

I am done with this discussion, the original post I made was to say that I thought a low-level pet was a good idea, and topoint out the fact that you were rude, and it was un-necessary. People have differing opinions, and if someone has one that you do not agree with, that does NOT make them an idiot.

Twist of words... I made a general statement of you would have to be an idiot and you can't seem to see past that, but whatever.

These boards are for discussion, and that is what we are doing, when they break down to name calling and flaming they become useless. I do find it interesting that in your reply to Wayness' post there wasn't even a hint of an apology. More of an attempt at turning the fact that you were rude to her without justification into a joke. Sorry, I for one, wasn't laughing

I don't apologize to people who lash out with sarcasm and rudeness themselves, get over it. Its the message boards, and debates will get heated just as easily as they can remain calm.