draxynnic.3719

> @"Sobx.1758" said:

> Pretty sure she knows that, but she just doesn't want to admit it because it's obviously undesired in this type of game. She enjoys builds that play themselves (like bunker minion/turret builds -hence the completely unneeded change to the aggro system in raids btw.) despite trying to claim they're not really passive.

Eh. She's proposing changes to the aggro system in raids to make it MORE active. At the moment, it's pretty much "whoever has the highest toughness gets the aggro" (which is pretty much forcing the boss to hold the idiot ball and generally attack the PC that's hardest to kill) so that all the tank needs to worry about is surviving and moving the boss to where it needs to be moved. What she's proposing there is to make holding aggro require active skill use rather than simply being gear-based.

Which is a bit harder to do than in some games because GW2 was never designed with the concept of aggro management in mind, but things like taunt and fear and so on could probably be set up so that they influence aggro.

> @"Lily.1935" said:

> Your guys's scarcity mentality is weird. There doesn't have to be a scarcity of builds at all times, that's a result of poor balance. THinking that something has to get worse for something else to get better is insane. And that line of thinking is not how I think nor is it how you should think either because its not true.

I think the problem is that you're comparing to the builds that are considered to be the best at a very specialised role (usually DPS at the expense of everything else). There's ALWAYS going to be that one build that benches just a little bit better, whether it's a difference of 1% or 20%. Minionmaster - or whatever - is not going to be among those ranks unless it's the best at a particular role than anything else necromancer has to offer... which DOES, unfortunately, mean displacing something else. There can only be one build that is the absolute very best at a particular role that a given profession has to offer.

And if a build with decent all-rounder capability is out-DPSing a dedicated DPS build, then there'd be something off.

None of which is to say that underperforming builds shouldn't be brought up, or that future encounter design can't be tweaked to introduce new roles. But comparing to meta builds is aiming to be the best at some very specialised roles, and that generally calls for specialised builds rather than all-rounders. All-rounder builds are for open world, solo, and to a certain degree, competitive.

> @"Ganathar.4956" said:

> > @"Kichwas.7152" said:

> > One of the other main MMOs I play is Elder Scrolls Online.

> > You have classes like Dragonknight, Warden, Templar, Sorcerer, Nightblade, Necromancer.

> >

> > Some people log in and assume:

> > Dragonknight = WoW warrior tank

> > Templar = WoW paladin tank

> > Sorcerer = WoW Mage

> > Nightblade = WoW Rogue

> > Necromancer = WoW Warlock

> >

> > I'm phrasing like this on purpose. Stop thinking of WoW everytime you jump MMOs. The above analogies are as wrong there as this mapping of WoW to GW2 is.

> >

> > Guardian = WoW Paladin tank

> > Warrior = WoW Warrior tank

> > ...

> > no... we all know that's not true. And, yes, some players log in and assume that. But then they stop trying to play WoW here, and re-adjust.

> >

> > Very few people have this issue after a little time in. The game is NOT suffering for failing to be a WoW clone... so... why would it want to try and be a WoW clone.

> >

> > There's only one "WoW Clone" on the market that did well, FFXIV, and it only did that because of where it differed and when it did so - it focused on story at a time that WoW was massively fumbling with story...

> >

> > There's no need to expect that new players can only play WoW in every MMO they try. If they're here - it's probably because they didn't want to play WoW in that moment. This game can then try to keep them by... not being WoW...

> >

>

> This has nothing to do with WoW. It's about the common archetypes that that these classes represent in general across the fantasy genre. Btw, even Anet claims that elementalist should be good at ranged. Their atrocious balancing has just resulted in almost every good ele build being melee with a toothpick of a weapon, on the squishiest class. I actually like that classes have more options, and I don't mind melee being a good option for ele. However, it should not completely overshadow what is supposed to be the class' main archetype. This goes for all classes.

>

> 

>

>

Elementalist favours range. Weaver and Tempest, not so much.

The statement is actually fairly accurate. Staff elementalist gives up _less_ in terms of damage potential than going ranged does on most other professions. Instead of giving up damage for range, switching to staff or scepter instead of dagger is more of a matter of giving up mobility and, for want of a better word, responsiveness (staff and to a lesser extent scepter have several backloaded skills, dagger is better at inflicting damage or debilitating effects immediately) rather than damage potential. Yeah, staff got nerfed... but that's because it was god-tier DPS for a long time, scepter is still being used in at least one raid build, and even daggers are technically ranged (albeit fairly short in range). Core elementalist DOES have a range focus.

Thing is, if that's the hill you're going to die on... if you're talking raid conditions, that usually means you're in a nice tight ball with your subgroup so you can get heals and buffs. So there's not a lot of benefit to come from pulling out a ranged weapon - as opposed to, say, open world events. At the time when staff ele was being used in raids, it was still usually pretty much at melee range anyway.

Similar comments apply to rangers.

People who focus on just one (or two, or three) professions tend to exaggerate how bad their profession is and how good their rivals are. This isn't even necessarily out of being duplicitous - if you don't play a profession, it is easy to be ignorant of that profession's weaknesses while being all too familiar with its strengths.

It also depends on context. For example, last I checked, the sPvP meta was basically necromancers, engineers, elementalists, and thieves. The latter two basically make it in because they perform useful roles (thieves are the best roamers, tempests took over from firebrands as the best support due to the latter being nerfed). For other roles... well played necros and engis with the right builds can roll over pretty much anyone.

For high end instanced PvE, the most in-demand professions tend to be the heavy professions (although warriors are mostly wanted for banners), rangers, and mesmers. Holosmiths have worked their way back back into DPS roles due to some recent buffs. Other professions tend to be brought for specific utilities rather than being a staple of team setups (although elementalists are pretty good in DPS and heal support and are perfectly viable, they're just not considered _optimal_).

Solo PvE has its own considerations - for instance, necromancers are fairly strong there for basically the same reason that they're weak in high end instanced PvE (they're good at buffing themselves up, which means they're good on their own, but don't benefit from team boons as much as other professions).

WvW has its own distribution of which professions are good and which are... not so useful, but I don't play that mode enough to really comment.

Ultimately, though, it depends in part on format. That said, there are some professions such as guardian that are always at least decently solid, if not always as powerful as people claim, and others that swing from being god-tier to being trash-tier from one balance patch to another.

> @"Konig Des Todes.2086" said:

>

> The idea of the Ministry of Purity running a propaganda campaign and hiding the existence of the survived plague is just the above, but swap "Joko" for "Ministry of Purity". It's a redux plot, and even when going after ANet, they don't do such obvious redux plots.

Balthaddon will burn out your eyes!

But yeah, it probably is too hot-on-the-heels even by ArenaNet's standards, despite how much they do like "oh, that thing you thought was fixed in a previous campaign? It's not fixed" plots.

@"Thornwolf.9721" I don't think it's true that ALL of the ancient Ritualist techniques were lost. From memory of the source, it states that the old ritualist teachings were combined with the magic released from the Bloodstones, and that there's little information remaining about exactly how the ancient ritualists operated - but this seems to be more of a case of some specific aspects falling out of favour because the newly released magic was more efficient to use. Those practices that were worth keeping were kept, those that were rendered redundant by greater availability of magic fell out of favour.

When it comes to the Ministry of Purity persecuting assassins, mesmers, ritualists, and necromancers? Gonna have to call "citation please" on that one. Profession was one of the few things the Ministry didn't persecute on, and there's a mesmer and a ritualist among the significant characters in that arc. They'd have no qualms about persecuting organisations (including profession-based organisations) that oppose them, but they welcomed members of all professions into their own ranks.

Butter me up the other side and pan-fry me, ~~Vekk~~!

I have a few posts scattered around, but now that you mention it, it could well be an interesting project to figure out a set of possibilities and consolidate them into a series of articles. 'Bout time I got back onto the wagon of writing my own rather than editing and mentoring.

> @"Vyriis.6258" said:

> You're right; Shroud "could" act like an urn and then summon spirits, but why would you want it to? Shroud can go in so many different and unique ways; why would you want to simply turn it into an urn or as a proxy to summon more spirits? This would also make it feel like Desert Shroud again as it would most likely not put you into an actual shroud and you'd be throwing out stationary allies. And no, the Necromancer does not use magic from the mists, they can use spirits but not from the mists itself. Spirits, and traces there of, remain on the physical plain and can be tapped into via death magic. The only time we see Necromancers tapping into the mists is through actual rituals.

You do know that this is pretty much the main argument that is being levied against the "give Revenant yet another Ritualist-inspired elite spec" push, right? Revenant can go in so many different and unique ways; why would you want to simply turn it into a ritualist proxy?

in Guild Wars 1, there _was_ a clear delineation between necromancer and ritualist. Necromancer, outside of a few skills like Spiteful Spirit which were largely conceived before the ritualist was, deals with corpses and manifestations of death in the corporeal world. Ritualist, on the other hand, dealt with spirits and the spirit world.

In Guild Wars 2, though, this clear line is _gone._ There's an entire branch of 'spectral' skills, and several weapon skills have names or descriptive text that points to them being spectral in nature (and given how little fluff there generally is regarding skills, that's pretty much all we can expect). Summon Shadow Fiend is pretty unsubtle. Elite specialisations bring us things like Ghastly Breach, and even Reaper and Death Shroud could be viewed as channeling manifestations of death in a similar manner to revenants channeling legends, just powered by life force rather than energy.

Theme-wise, with the broader themes of GW2 professions over GW1 professions, it's fitting to merge death-related themes into one profession that's a master of death both in this world and the next rather than splitting them in two as they were in GW1. Mechanics-wise, necromancer is a much closer fit to ritualist than revenant is, for reasons I discussed in an earlier post in this thread. They already have minions, so they other parts of the ritualist that could be included are weapon spells and urns.

If weapon spells are treated like venoms, then in all honesty, the mechanic is also reflective of something that necromancer had in GW1 but lost in GW2 - namely, Orders. So there's precedent to giving that mechanic to necromancer.

If weapon spells or urns are treated like weapon conjures, then because of the way revenant works, the only way you'd be able to give them to revenant would be to overload it by giving them ALL the options in one build on top of the two full skillbars they already have. Unless, I guess, they use traits to determine which they get as an F2 skill. Necromancer having regular utility skills, though, means that a necromancer could potentially have them as utility skills similar to elementalist conjures or engineer kits (probably the former for balance reasons), allowing them to have just one or two rather than a whole bar of them (which is what usually happened with those skill types in GW1).

Heck, with necromancer, you could potentially combine both weapon spells AND urns into a single elite specialisation. Make the urns behave like weapon skills and slot into utility skills, while venomlike weapon spells replace the death shroud mechanic as a set of support options.

Healbrand uses Virtues as well.

And that's just considering raid and fractal environments, where builds are usually ultra-specialised, often towards single-target DPS. Taking the Virtues line pays dividends in solo and open world PvE. It's just that when you're looking to maximise DPS in a specialised DPS role in raids, fractals, strikes, and so on, Zeal and Radiance are more important.

I don't think there's a need for charges on virtues. Making Unscathed Contender provide a lingering bonus after Aegis is lost is probably worth considering. The others, I'm not convinced about. Putting too many damage modifiers into Virtues could just end up making it so that some other traitline ends up being the traitline that people just can't quite manage to fit into DPS-specialised builds.

> @"Lily.1935" said:

> Nostalgia is blinding people to the complications of Revenant's design that would make a "Ritualist" a terrible idea for them. Its not a good nostalgia either as the people pushing for it don't have an accurate look at what the ritualist was in GW1 or why it could never be properly served by a spec like revenant. I myself love the Ritualist and would love to see it return to Guild Wars 2. However, It needs to be served properly and the closest any profession gets to serving it properly is the necromancer. And even then I'm more interested in Acquiring Missing Elements of necromancer than trying to recapture a whole other class from the first game.

Personally, if anything, it's nostalgia that tells me that Ritualist as a Revenant elite _wouldn't_ work. Ritualist was, possibly, the profession that allowed for the most diversity of builds before considering secondary professions of all the GW1 professions, having a wide variety of distinct skill types (some particular to the ritualist, some general) and able to slot in to a wide range of roles (healing, protection, regular damage, armour-ignoring damage, control, buffing damage of allies, condition removal). Revenant, by contrast, is probably the profession with the _least_ ability to customise its build. While it'd be unfair to say that you can pretty much derive the rest of a revenant's build just off the legends, it's not all that far off.

Trying to squeeze ritualist into revenant is trying to squeeze all that ritualist entailed into what is effectively one skill bar. Three (fixed) utility skills, one elite, one heal, five (or less) weapon skills, and up to four skills on function keys. That's it. And, by the revenant's design, it's going to spend a lot of time swapping into a core legend, and unless that legend is Ventari (and I don't think revenant really needs another support-oriented elite, which any elite designed to work with Ventari is likely to default to becoming), it's not going to feel much like a ritualist at all after swapping.

If ritualist as an elite specialisation is really going to even be a thing, it really needs to be based on a regular profession which already has some ritualist-like features so it has that opportunity to mix and match between what's in the elite specialisation and what's in the core profession to get that feel of build versatility. Necromancer works well - honestly, there's not much mechanically in the necromancer that I couldn't see working as ritualist instead, although ritualist would likely have had different visuals. Guardian works, but I don't think it works as well since core guardian still has a melee focus (_but not as much as core revenant!_) and shouts weren't really a ritualist thing. Ranger, possibly with the pet replaced by some kind of spirit familiar, sits somewhere in between.

> @"Taril.8619" said:

> > @"draxynnic.3719" said:

> > This would allow, for instance, for mesmers to have PvP builds that are _not_ built primarily around shatter spikes, and thus are more suitable for sustained fighting.

>

> As if a persistent Phantasm reliant build would ever be even remotely close to be usable in PvP/WvW.

>

> When **even now** with a heavy focus on Shatters, Mesmer is not great in PvP/WvW because Phantasms and Clones die too easily.

>

In an elite spec without shatters, ArenaNet would be able to rebalance without needing to keep the spike potential of shatters under control. Which could include increasing the durability of phantasms. And, for that matter, the mesmer themselves through utilities and replacement function key skills.

In PvP contexts, it'll probably still have the issue of being AI-controlled entities in PvP, but they're not as bad with mesmer in general due to illusions having specified targets.

> @"Hibiskus.8294" said:

> Again: I never saw someone afk as a mesmer with a phantasm

Have to admit, I've done it myself, but it was due to a bug where a story boss in season 2 wasn't phasing when it was supposed to, and the boss was immune to all of my attacks but not to the phantasms. The boss in question also had fairly low damage in the phase it was stuck in, and I had a fairly tanky set of phantasms between traits and using Phantasmal Defender.

Generally speaking, though, like ranger pets, you still wanted to be actively fighting even with a phantasm build.

> @"Lonami.2987" said:

> I think ritualist will be a guardian elite specialization. After all, guardians are ritualist/monk hybrids in lore, and the revenant has no connection to ritualists whatsoever, aside from the blindfold and a misplaced PvP title.

>

> Also, renegade already has some sort of totem/turret gameplay that would clash against classic ritualist spirits, so even less reasons for it.

To be fair, there's more to the revenant/ritualist connection than that. Fluffwise, they're both about communing with entities in the Mists. The distinction is that the ritualist operates like a scholar, usually summons multiple relatively weak spirits at a time, and keeps them at arm's length while mostly fighting at range with spells. Revenants are a soldier profession that mostly fights in melee, channeling some of the strongest legendary entities they can control in order to empower their own fighting capabilities.

The key thing to note here is that, at least from a mechanical perspective, _revenant was never meant to be a ritualist replacement._

Engineer is. This is, honestly, beyond reasonable doubt to anyone who's read through all the material available on their development. Ritualist was originally conceived as a way to have an engineer playstyle in a low-technology setting, and engineer turrets and weapon kits are essentially the GW2 equivalent of spirits and urns. People could argue over how well the engineer serves as a replacement for the ritualist, and ArenaNet generally denied that it was a replacement _per se,_ but it was clearly intended to be the translation of the ritualist playstyle into GW2 mechanics.

If you chase down the archives of the old forum, though, you'll find pretty much exactly where the revenant came from. It's essentially a dervish playstyle with ritualist-like fluff. People had identified that dervish was the one GW1 playstyle (apart from dedicated healer, which back then was something that was never expected to come back) that hadn't transferred into GW2, but dervish's god-aligned fluff was something that didn't fit into multiracial GW2. However, they'd also noticed that the ritualist's Mists communion fluff had been left out of the GW2 professions. So people were asking for a kind of "spirit warrior" which was basically a dervish, but instead of channeling god avatars, it would channel powerful spirits into itself to gain their strengths.

Sound familiar? The revenant isn't exactly what people were envisaging, but it's _close enough._ It's anyone's guess whether ArenaNet was actually influenced by what people were saying on the forums or whether it was simply a matter of convergent thinking, but it's pretty much a dervish that gets its power from the Mists rather than the gods.

The problems with the 'make revenant into ritualist' drive is that it's just going to disappoint everyone involved. There's no way I can see that "ritualist" could be fit into a single legend in a satisfying fashion if Kalla hasn't already done so. Spirits were the core of what ritualist had, and getting the full spread of what was in ritualist just doesn't seem possible when all you've got to play with are a weapon or two, five legend skills, and a function skill or three... all on a core profession which is based on spending half its time on another legend which is melee-oriented (unless it's Ventari). I've seen people acknowledging that the spirits are in Kalla and asking for something urn-based, but... what would urns be, precisely? The most obvious interpretation for something that replaces your weapon and which boosts some skills in GW1 would be something like a kit or a conjure, but I _really_ don't see ArenaNet making a legend which brings multiple conjures or kits. Another interpretation would be that urns are something that gives you a boost while you're holding them and has a stronger effect when dropped, but that's already been done with Glint's facets. To me, a ritualist elite specialisation would work much better applied to a profession whose core already has some playstyle similarities to ritualist, such as necromancer or guardian, than to revenant which, for all the fluff is similar, is _very_ different in playstyle.

Meanwhile, it would be squandering the unique potential that revenant has to do something unique that doesn't fit into _any_ of the professions. The other professions are all limited within the bounds of humanoid magic, technology and training. Revenants have the potential to draw inspiration from basically _everything_ for a legend, so why stick to humanoids with normal professions when you don't have to?

> @"otto.5684" said:

> @"draxynnic.3719" Again, vast majority of shattering phantasm was trying to pull off 1 shoot in PvP. Other than that, in some niche situations in PvE it was useful, but most of the time it was working against. If this was a major trait, no one would use it in PvE.

>

> Even if there was a trade off, it was bad design in all game modes (for different reasons) and was removed. It should never come back.

The whole point is that shattering could be _removed,_ and the elite specialisation could then be balanced accordingly. The problem with the old mesmer was that it was trying to balance having _both_ the option to have sustained damage through keeping the phantasms out _and_ to have spikes through shattering, but these interfered with each other. Keeping the phantasms out usually did more damage than shattering them, but the profession needed to be balanced on the basis that it always _could_ shatter for a big spike. Packing it into an elite specialisation without shatters (but with something else in the F1-F4 slots) would solve that problem.

A lot of people have said that they enjoyed the old mesmer more than the new mesmer. You evidently disagree, but one elite spec that isn't for you won't kill you.

Depends on what you want to do, really. Necromancer is one of the professions where all the trait lines are good enough that you usually genuinely do feel like you're giving something up by taking an elite specialisation. Core necro sees play in competitive modes, and it serves well in open world and solo content as well.

It's overshadowed by reaper and scourge in high-end instanced group PvE, but let's be bluntly honest here - _Necromancer as a while_ is overshadowed by other professions in high-end instanced group PvE. Generally speaking it's brought for Epidemic and _maybe_ barriering up against certain mechanics and that's about it.

> @"otto.5684" said:

> > @"Tayga.3192" said:

> > > @"Kodama.6453" said:

> > > It's a weird trade off, considering that half of the shatter abilities are supposed to be damage sources.

> > > So your statement boils down to "if you want damage, don't use these damage skills".

> > >

> > > Mind wreck and cry of frustration become pointless because of this, since their purpose is to deal damage, yet if you want to maximize damage you have to avoid using them.

> > > It makes no sense.

> >

> > Now you must rely on shatters and "fire and forget" phantasms for damage.

> > Before you could make a shatter mesmer or a phantasm mesmer.

>

> First, the old system never worked well in PvE. You had to wait for them to finish your attack before you shatter. That is why it changes to begin with. Mesmer did not have a single functional dps build, in PvE, till PoF for a reason.

>

> Second, sword, focus, GS and pistol phantasm all deal more damage than they ever did at any point before in PvE. So... nothing missing here.

>

> The only advantage the old system offered was the ability to shatter phantasm, which was primarily used to pull off a quick full F1 shatter in PvP. And mostly paired with invisibility so You can pull off one shooting the target, before they has no can react.

>

> And phantasm were always one skill you use that summons a clone in the end. There is nothing different about it now than before, except the phantasms do not shatter.

>

> The old system was terrible. It was a hinderance in PvE and in PvP only fed designs in that need to be removed to begin with. This should never ever come back in any form. Just admit you want easier way to one shoot people in PvP. That’s all what is to it.

Your finishing line here is disingenuous - the OP seems to be inclined towards removing shatters altogether, therefore no opportunity to speed up a spike by shattering phantasms prematurely.

The old system did have a tradeoff. You could shatter phantasms along with your clones for a spike, or you could leave the phantasms out for sustained damage. In PvE, leaving your highest-damage phantasms out usually resulted in more sustained damage in the long term than if you shatter. In PvP, you usually wanted to shatter because the phantasms wouldn't last long enough to ramp up anyway, and even if they did, usually you want to spike in PvP.

The current system removes that tradeoff. Even PvE mirages usually want to shatter, since if they time it right they'll have a new set of clones back up basically immediately altogether.

Making it an elite specialisation would mean that instead of it being a choice you make during the combat, it's a choice you make at the build level. If the shatter skills are replaced, persistent phantasms would no longer be balanced around the fact that the build always has the option to shatter for a spike to finish off the target as well. This would allow, for instance, for mesmers to have PvP builds that are _not_ built primarily around shatter spikes, and thus are more suitable for sustained fighting. Or just having a different way of fighting enemies in PvE.

@"otto.5684" Sure, hammer's in a bad place at the moment... but I'd really rather see Arenanet fix it rather than try to replace it with something that does the same job. Fixing the core weapon helps the entire profession, while introducing a new weapon with an elite specialisation only helps the elite specialisation it comes with. Plus, making the weapon power implies that the legend will also be power-based, and... don't we already have enough of those? Mallyx is currently the only legend that's really condi-oriented, the other legends that get used with condi builds are all cases of "sure, they can _support_ a condi build, but they're really more oriented towards power." (Yes, that includes Kalla. The bleed spirit is rarely worth the energy, and with ArenaNet having chickened out on giving _Ice_razor synergy with Abyssal Chill, everything else with the Kalla legend is power-based.)

> @"Taril.8619" said:

> I highly doubt this would ever happen. Shattering is too integral to Mesmer as a whole, just look through their traits, most of them are related to using shatters.

I think it's possible if the shatters were replaced with something that worked with phantasms in some way.

The bigger problem would be that of what happens with the existing clone skills if clones were removed. A possible approach could be to swap around the current approach: Phantasms are limited to a certain maximum number, while clones are theoretically unlimited _but_ have a limited lifespan before they pop on their own. And, as I said, shatters are replaced with skills that influence phantasms. So phantasm skills are still worth using since they renew the phantasms, but you avoid the problem old mesmer had of not wanting to use clone skills because the clones would overwrite phantasms.

> @"Silesium.5623" said:

> Revenant = Use legends to power up x Dervish = Use gods to power up

> Herald = Use Special Support Buff x Paragon = Use Special Support Buff

> Kylla = Summon Charrs (spirits) x Ritualist = Summon Spirits

> So prop now they will make elita with assassin class mechanic.

Shiro is pretty much already assassin - it's even called Legendary Assassin Stance (even if I think it should possibly have been Legendary Envoy Stance). Personally, too, I'd also regard herald as being more dervish than paragon: the facets basically follow the theme of "bring up an enchantment, then consume the enchantment for an effect". I did a writeup back before HoT on how a dervish-like playstyle could be incorporated into GW2, and the Glint facets could well have used it as a design document. (I'm not saying they DID, it's much more likely that it was just convergent ideas, but still...)

Jalis and Mallyx are also both a bit dervish-like, albeit more in the sense of being AoE-focused melee combatants.

> @"otto.5684" said:

> It is hard to predict then next spec for rev. Herald never worked in PvE. Thematically it is supposed to be support, but it is not. Renegade is a mess of dysfunctional designs that work through sheer buffs. It is now the leading power, condi and support build. Also, strongest range option.

>

> Anet hamstringed themselves with locking utilities. Anything comes have to ensure it does not double-up on shiro’s mobility or jailis sustainability (though the later has many design issues).

>

> Ranged power weapon would be ideal. Like guardian scepter. As much as people keep hammering on GS, I don’t think it is coming, ever. Thematically, does not work well with rev. From game play, ranged power is what is missing from rev arsenal. Could we see a change in how the new elite uses utilities? Would be nice, but I doubt Anet will be that creative.

>

Rev _has_ a ranged power weapon, it's core's only ranged weapon in fact, ArenaNet just needs to make it worth using outside of WvW.

Heck, even shortbow works fairly well with power builds.

> @"Thornwolf.9721" said:

> > @"draxynnic.3719" said:

> > Personally, I'd consider it a bit of a waste if the legend is anything that maps directly onto a profession, whether GW1 or GW2.

> >

> > I mean, look at the existing ones. Mallyx, Shiro, and Glint transcended regular professions. Ventari and Jalis were more normal in life (although I don't think we know what specifically Ventari was) but when you channel them, you're not really channeling their abilities but the effect of what they did. When you channel Ventari, you're _really_ channeling Ventari's effect on the sylvari. When you channel Jalis, you're really channeling the Great Dwarf, Jalis is just the focal point. Even in Kalla's case, you're basically channeling the entire revolution and its effects on the charr.

> >

> > If someone's claim to fame is "they were a really good (profession)", then ditch that noise. We have warriors, guardians, thieves, rangers, necromancers, and elementalists in game already, we don't need the revenant trying to pretend to be one... and, honestly, I don't think there's any way they can bolt "ritualist" onto core revenant that's actually going to satisfy the people who want it. Ritualist themes would work much better as an elite spec attached to a regular profession that's already a bit ritualist-like in playstyle and which allows the ability to pick and choose utilities like guardian or necromancer, rather than bolting it on to a profession where the ritualist elements would be fixed into a set five skills and it's going to spend half its time being something completely different.

> >

> > If the new legend is to be Canthan-themed at all (which I don't think it has to be), then let's go crazy and come up with something we'd never see from a conventional profession. Zhu Hanuku, say. Zunraa, perhaps, although that's probably a bit on the weaker side. Urgoz, maybe. Possibly push aside Kanaxai since we already have a Legendary Demon Stance, but maybe it could be a Legendary Oni Stance instead. And that's just off the top of my head. I'm _sure_ Arenanet can come up with something more interesting for a legend than pretending to be some other profession!

>

> What about Urgoz? I mean he could fit and would fit the dark nature of the forest. Heck Id even take one of the envoy's and have them bring in what an envoy is and as they are an envoy the fluff for the spec could be, rather than channeling the legend we are channeling them. So we basically become their aspect; Physically manifested and made flesh upon the waking world? But I think Svanir, Asgeir or even Olaf are more likely candidates.... their ramifications and reputations as well as the effects they had on their people and the world is profound. (Svanir specifically)

>

> Zinn, Vheek, Oola, Gadd are all great canidates too as ALL of them had huge effects on the story. Or hell go full hog on it and do one of the emperors of the past? Perhaps even... the one Shiro killed? Or one even further back, and give us some dragon-emperor vibes? Id take ANYTHING over a ritualist spec that would be done better, and do more for an existing class (Give the guardian, a selfish condi spec.... Like they have DH which is a selfish power spec. They now have a support... give the poor kids another way to play...)

I did list Urgoz in there. Probably not my first choice, since it'd be another bow legend right after Kalla, and both bosses kinda share a theme with Dragon's Lair that a lot of the problem is through environmental effects and therefore they might be a bit similar to Glint.

Envoys are an interesting possibility. They're largely blank slates, so ArenaNet could do what they like with them. Torivos could be a good possibility, since that would present the possibility of mainhand axe.

Olaf, Zinn, Oola, and Gadd all have the issues of essentially having regular professions (unless it's all going to be golem-based in the case of the latter three, but I'm not sure that I'd regard a golem-based spec as appropriate for revenant). Vheek I don't recognise, and neither does either wiki. Asgeir, while norn, is enough of a blank slate that they can probably do _something_ with him, while Svanir actually makes for a good candidate since he had a solid set of monster-only skills that could be used to build a legendary stance around.

Before jumping to too many conclusions regarding Lyssa, it is worth noting that in Kormir's journal, she mentions that Lyssa was mocking Kormir for staying behind. Which implies that, whatever Lyssa's past thoughts might have been in Arah, she's now in favour of leaving. (Keeping in mind that it was also Lyssa that was the spokesperson for the "this world is yours now" speech near the end of Nightfall). It's possible that events since the gods were in Arah (particularly the destruction that happened during the war with Abaddon) has caused her to shift perspective.

That said, it's also possible, particularly given that it's _Lyssa,_ that her mockery of Kormir was intended to disguise her actual feelings on the matter, and possibly to get Kormir out of the way so she could proceed with her own plans. Still, it is worth noting that there are inconsistencies with the narrative that Lyssa still holds the views she did over a thousand years ago.

Personally, I'd consider it a bit of a waste if the legend is anything that maps directly onto a profession, whether GW1 or GW2.

I mean, look at the existing ones. Mallyx, Shiro, and Glint transcended regular professions. Ventari and Jalis were more normal in life (although I don't think we know what specifically Ventari was) but when you channel them, you're not really channeling their abilities but the effect of what they did. When you channel Ventari, you're _really_ channeling Ventari's effect on the sylvari. When you channel Jalis, you're really channeling the Great Dwarf, Jalis is just the focal point. Even in Kalla's case, you're basically channeling the entire revolution and its effects on the charr.

If someone's claim to fame is "they were a really good (profession)", then ditch that noise. We have warriors, guardians, thieves, rangers, necromancers, and elementalists in game already, we don't need the revenant trying to pretend to be one... and, honestly, I don't think there's any way they can bolt "ritualist" onto core revenant that's actually going to satisfy the people who want it. Ritualist themes would work much better as an elite spec attached to a regular profession that's already a bit ritualist-like in playstyle and which allows the ability to pick and choose utilities like guardian or necromancer, rather than bolting it on to a profession where the ritualist elements would be fixed into a set five skills and it's going to spend half its time being something completely different.

If the new legend is to be Canthan-themed at all (which I don't think it has to be), then let's go crazy and come up with something we'd never see from a conventional profession. Zhu Hanuku, say. Zunraa, perhaps, although that's probably a bit on the weaker side. Urgoz, maybe. Possibly push aside Kanaxai since we already have a Legendary Demon Stance, but maybe it could be a Legendary Oni Stance instead. And that's just off the top of my head. I'm _sure_ Arenanet can come up with something more interesting for a legend than pretending to be some other profession!

> @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > @"Kodama.6453" said:

> > > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > Here is what I anticipate:

> > >

> > > 1. Seems to me lots of what Engi offers has straddled condi and Direct Damage. Maybe that's intended, since that isn't subtle, Anet has made condi-focused builds for other classes and actually changed things to enforce that straddling (FT for example)

> > > 2. I don't think a condi-focused espec will outperform current specs anyways because of the structure of the Firearms traitline. Holo corners the market on burning and the bleed traits are directly tied to crit.

> > >

> > > Assuming Anet wouldn't create a new damaging condition (hey, maybe ... that would be cool) ... I think a condi-focused spec would be a wasted opportunity.

> >

> > Not entirely condition focused.

> > We should get a boonshare support next that utilises some condition damage.

> >

> > Basically how scourge also added condition damage to necromancer, while primarily being a healing support (replacing actual healing with barrier application).

> > Important boons are missing for engineer to become a viable healer in high end PvE content, our healing is enough for that role already.

>

> So your suggesting the next espec contain boonsharing just allow Engi to fill healer role in teamed PVE? We already have the condi damage part of that. I could see boonsharing ... though if engi generates too many boons, I doubt it would happen ... Anet hasn't exactly succumbed to the idea that every class/espec fills some significant role for endgame PVE and slapping a boonshare on a strongly boongenerating class would be a disaster for it.

>

> Honestly, I just hope whatever they do, it's as clever as the last two especs.

I think ArenaNet _has_ looked towards breaking monopolies and making professions more versatile, though. Prior to PoF, for instance, guardian in endgame PvE was pretty much just power damage - now it's one of the most versatile professions in high-end PvE, and the firebrigade team broke the chronomancer monopoly on quickness and alacrity. I could see an objective of a new wave of elite specialisations being to spread those boons around to more generators and to bring new roles to professions that are currently fairly limited in options.

How well they'll _succeed,_ mind you, is another question.

> @"Kodama.6453" said:

> > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > Here is what I anticipate:

> >

> > 1. Seems to me lots of what Engi offers has straddled condi and Direct Damage. Maybe that's intended, since that isn't subtle, Anet has made condi-focused builds for other classes and actually changed things to enforce that straddling (FT for example)

> > 2. I don't think a condi-focused espec will outperform current specs anyways because of the structure of the Firearms traitline. Holo corners the market on burning and the bleed traits are directly tied to crit.

> >

> > Assuming Anet wouldn't create a new damaging condition (hey, maybe ... that would be cool) ... I think a condi-focused spec would be a wasted opportunity.

>

> Not entirely condition focused.

> We should get a boonshare support next that utilises some condition damage.

>

> Basically how scourge also added condition damage to necromancer, while primarily being a healing support (replacing actual healing with barrier application).

> Important boons are missing for engineer to become a viable healer in high end PvE content, our healing is enough for that role already.

Firebrand is another good example for giving both support options and expanded condition options.

I would note here that, strictly speaking, spellbreaker is closer to dervish than paragon. Yeah, there's the symbolism of the broken spears... but the skill names and effects associated with spellbreaker are closer to dervish than anything paragon had. Guardian is still the spiritual successor to paragon, spellbreaker is just something that grew out of the ashes of the Sunspear Order (which, symbolism aside, wasn't ALL Paragons).