In Which I QQ About Pew Pew

I have no doubts that the silhouette on the far left is a charr with a gun. I have no doubts that he is an adventurer class. He is NOT a gunner. There is no gunner, there isn’t going to be a gunner. (I might have to eat crow on this but until then…)

The term ‘gunner’ implies a specialist in the use of guns. It’s a very restrictive term. Please allow me to teach by example.

The Ranger is not a Bowyer. He is not solely an expert in all things bows, he is much more well-rounded than that. He is also more than an expert in all things ranged. He is called ranger because he ranges far and wide, exploring the wild, understanding it, living with it. Communion with nature is the Ranger’s thing, not bows, not pew pew, not hurling axes at Ogre groins. (as awesome as that last one may be)

By the same token calling the class that uses guns a gunner is woefully short-sighted and restrictive. I give ArenaNet more credit than that.

As for this:

She’s got a scope on that rifle and is wearing leather armor (It could even be cloth!). That doesn’t mean anything. Who’s to say she’s not an assassin?

Assassin does not equal daggers. Assassin equals assassinations. Daggers in the back, yes, but also poison in your soup, sabotaged vehicles, concealed explosives, and shootings from the grassy knoll.

A gun with a scope speaks more strongly towards an Assassin than it does to any gun-toting lunatic whose only claim to uniqueness is running off half-cocked. (That’s the image that comes to my mind when I see the title ‘Gunner’)

For the record, I’m excited about the addition of guns to Tyria, but there’s little that gets under my skin as much as this insistence that there will be a class devoted to them. Whenever I talk about Assassins I make sure to predicate it with a description. For some people Assassin=WoW Rogue with stun-lock, for some it’s a shadow-formed unstoppable crit-machine, for me it’s a fast mid-to-close range physical damage dealer, possible poisons specialist, and possible sniper.

Using such a restrictive term as ‘gunner’ isn’t fair to Arenanet and it isn’t fair to whatever that ‘class that uses guns but will obviously have some special, unique, and awesome mechanic BEYOND GUNS’ ends up being. ‘Gunner’ to me sounds like nothing more than a gimmick. It’s a “Hey, we have guns now, look at this class it shows you we have guns!”

Please. The Warrior can use a rifle, I get it, there’s guns.

To be perfectly fair, I’m not sold on calling the second soldier a Cleric either. Cleric implies strong buffing and healing. That’s BORING. Magic-weilding Melee is much more broad and interesting.

For the sake of expedience, in the sense that a ranger, as opposed to being all about ranged, is a lover of nature, I’m willing to split the difference with you gunner folks and say the third Adventurer could be a type of engineer, in the sense that he is concerned with all things technological. That opens up the door for steampunk industry and even asura-esque magic-technological mayhem. There’s that predicated description again though. Seems I can’t quite help myself.

I’m also a fan of ‘Swashbuckler’ or ‘Buckaneer’.

So that I don’t end this on a completely sour note, frothing at the poor commenter who inadvertently set off this firestorm (you’re awesome Remedy, don’t let me tell you you’re not, I’m glad you’re here!), what should we call the asuran aesthetic?

The charr we can safely call steampunk, and even further narrow it down by calling it industrial-punk. I’m tempted to label the asura with cyber-punk, but they’re not dealing with circuit boards. What about arcane-punk? Magic-punk sounds too hokey to me.

  • Trackback are closed
  • Comments (9)
  1. cleric fits better than awful names they could be using like paladin. ugh. plus we know its going to be a buffing class so i’m cool with calling it cleric. you’ve just about opened up new can of qq on my blog.

    • Dex
    • September 16th, 2010

    I agree with the ‘Gunner’ aggravation; not only does it show a lack of imagination, but it just sounds dorky. I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s a class that specializes in the use of guns, but, I don’t think I’ve heard any names yet that really strike me as something they’d actually use.

    I totally agree that that piece of concept art could be an Assassin, too. In fact, that was my first impression — even of the art of the gal holding two pistols. The Warrior now is a formidable enemy at range, what’s to say that the Assassin type won’t also be a cloak-and-dagger style fighter that, at range, can whip two pistols from their holster and shoot away? The idea vaguely reminds me of the Witch Hunters from WAR, who were a stealth class with pistols.

    Not sure about the term Cleric, I’d prefer Templar or Champion or something a bit more “beefy” sounding. Though… that’s just me, spouting personal opinions/hopes. 🙂

    • remedy
    • September 16th, 2010

    sorry if i’m not well read on these debates. i know gw2 guru exists but i refuse to read a games primary forum prior to launch (did it with warhammer) because i cant be bothered listening to hundreds of people complain about every bit of minutia. i prefer sabre wolfs videos, podcasts etc…

    i agree gunner is a bad name. what i believe is there will be a class that deals physical damage, from range, with guns and possibly bows as its primary strength. there has always been a large demand for classes like this. anets response of “if you dont like pets find another class” concerning the ranger leaves me hoping they dont mean take an obvious melee class like warrior and run around gimped shooting guns. i envision the unnamed, unconfirmed class to have a rifle with scope as its “stationary” weapon (longbow) and pistols as the kiting mid range (shortbow) weapon.

    now the real question to me is what kind of group utility could this class offer? i think it would make sense to have it as a strong debuffer with different types of shots. incendiary rounds, armor reduction blah, blah, blah. as well as control elements like knockdowns and interrupts.

    just my thoughts.

      • Tigerfeet
      • September 17th, 2010

      That I can absolutely believe 🙂 I’m sure they’ll have another ranged-damage class without pets for those old Guild Wars ranger types. The only problem is I don’t think it will be nature-oriented, and I know that’s a big thing for some people.

    • BarGamer
    • September 17th, 2010

    Asura? I call them little-punks.

    • Ven
    • September 18th, 2010

    Hey! I feel like you’re talking about me on this post Tig! I can’t help it if I like the pew pew! ;_;

      • Tigerfeet
      • September 18th, 2010

      Just don’t call it a ‘gunner’ and we won’t have to go rounds 😉

        • Ven
        • September 18th, 2010

        I’ll just call it the “Gunner build” =P

    • Verrda
    • September 19th, 2010

    I completely agree with this gunner broohaha nonsense.

    as far as suggesting names
    why has no one mentioned just a plain old Hunter? it’s very broad and would fit a gun toting maniac that can slash you with an axe

    and this “cleric”?
    or to simplify things further and remain broad..Guard

    on a side note I personally thought that pic was an assassin type class.
    I mean look at the feathers and the way they are colored. if that doesn’t scream I come from a poisonous species I don’t know what does. 😛

Comments are closed.
%d bloggers like this: