I would like to see the dragon hunter as the next class.

OrderoftheDarkness

There must always be a hunter and a victim. For example guild of magicians and sorcs do not like necromancy it is very noticeable ^^.
You could use special traps for class identity (stam or mage), but not in the same way as in GW2 (the elite specialization of dragon hunter). In all games there are necromancers, this does not mean that someone has сopy anyone. Your necromancer is very unique, as in other games. Your other classes are also unique. That's what a dragon hunter can be.

Aigym_Hlervu

I don't think this would be a good idea to make a class based on a certain activity of that sort. What if a Dragon Hunter never meets a dragon - is he still considered to be a Dragon Hunter? No, I guess. Whatever class you are, if you hunt down a deer - you become a Deer Hunter . Classes do not work that way unless the entire game is based on a certain activity of Dragon (or whatever) slaying. You have to achieve something to become someone. The same way I think it was a bad idea to make the Necromancer a distinct class because Necromancy is only a branch of Magic. A science based on the intersection of the Conjuration, Enchantment and Mysticism disciplines, should we use those Shad Astula Academy terms here. A certain line of spells in Soul Magic skill line and/or in Sorcerer class spells should be enough I think. I remember Devlin Arcanus - the only Necromancer I respect. He helped me much on Enroth without any dead raising. But still he was considered to be a Necromancer.. Ah, those devs made the race of Dark Elves a distinct class there, so no surprise they've created a Necromancer who has never raised a deadman in my play sessions there.

There is a certain Dragon Hunter achievement among the seven other. You want to become a Dragon Hunter - go kill 50 dragons out there and become one.

WrathOfInnos

In one of the best games of all time, Dragon Hunter was the progression of the mercenary class. You basically just advanced from protecting farmers from wildlife to taking on tougher monsters for large sums of gold. And got to wear some cool armor in the process.



Whenever dragons are a threat, they see an opportunity for profit, but that doesn’t mean they are an improbable class because dragons have been absent, just a new one.

OrderoftheDarkness

Cygemai_Hlervu wrote: »

I don't think this would be a good idea to make a class based on a certain activity of that sort. What if a Dragon Hunter never meets a dragon - is he still considered to be a Dragon Hunter? No, I guess. Whatever class you are, if you hunt down a deer - you become a Deer Hunter . Classes do not work that way unless the entire game is based on a certain activity of Dragon (or whatever) slaying. You have to achieve something to become someone. The same way I think it was a bad idea to make the Necromancer a distinct class because Necromancy is only a branch of Magic. A science based on the intersection of the Conjuration, Enchantment and Mysticism disciplines, should we use those Shad Astula Academy terms here. A certain line of spells in Soul Magic skill line and/or in Sorcerer class spells should be enough I think. I remember Devlin Arcanus - the only Necromancer I respect. He helped me much on Enroth without any dead raising. But still he was considered to be a Necromancer.. Ah, those devs made the race of Dark Elves a distinct class there, so no surprise they've created a Necromancer who has never raised a deadman in my play sessions there.

There is a certain Dragon Hunter achievement among the seven other. You want to become a Dragon Hunter - go kill 50 dragons out there and become one.

Dragon Hunter is not only an occupation, it could be a class identity. If so approach to viewing activities class, then Warden at all should not exits from forests and DK all time should is in a castle as guard the king.
I don’t think that necromancy should be a line of Soul Magic or an additional branch for Sorc, because the question arises, what can Stam be given to "fill a glass of water".

WrathOfInnos wrote: »

In one of the best games of all time, Dragon Hunter was the progression of the mercenary class. You basically just advanced from protecting farmers from wildlife to taking on tougher monsters for large sums of gold. And got to wear some cool armor in the process.



Whenever dragons are a threat, they see an opportunity for profit, but that doesn’t mean they are an improbable class because dragons have been absent, just a new one.

I agree with the unlikely scenario to develop in this way. Developers can turn the script very efficiently, after the end of the era of dragons, dragon hunters appeared who kept in the background all the time.
My opinion is that dragon hunters are elite fighters or magicians, which could easily be a whole class. Dragons will tear apart ordinary mercenaries into pieces.

Aigym_Hlervu

OrderoftheDarkness wrote: »

Cygemai_Hlervu wrote: »

I don't think this would be a good idea to make a class based on a certain activity of that sort. What if a Dragon Hunter never meets a dragon - is he still considered to be a Dragon Hunter? No, I guess. Whatever class you are, if you hunt down a deer - you become a Deer Hunter . Classes do not work that way unless the entire game is based on a certain activity of Dragon (or whatever) slaying. You have to achieve something to become someone. The same way I think it was a bad idea to make the Necromancer a distinct class because Necromancy is only a branch of Magic. A science based on the intersection of the Conjuration, Enchantment and Mysticism disciplines, should we use those Shad Astula Academy terms here. A certain line of spells in Soul Magic skill line and/or in Sorcerer class spells should be enough I think. I remember Devlin Arcanus - the only Necromancer I respect. He helped me much on Enroth without any dead raising. But still he was considered to be a Necromancer.. Ah, those devs made the race of Dark Elves a distinct class there, so no surprise they've created a Necromancer who has never raised a deadman in my play sessions there.

There is a certain Dragon Hunter achievement among the seven other. You want to become a Dragon Hunter - go kill 50 dragons out there and become one.

Dragon Hunter is not only an occupation, it could be a class identity. If so approach to viewing activities class, then Warden at all should not exits from forests and DK all time should is in a castle as guard the king.
I don’t think that necromancy should be a line of Soul Magic or an additional branch for Sorc, because the question arises, what can Stam be given to "fill a glass of water".

This is not true, OrderoftheDarkness. Regarding DK no king is needed to be protected after the death of Reman III: according to the Legacy of the Dragonguard, some of the members of the disbanded Order became roving adventurers, selling their services as combat trainers or swords-for-hire. One of these was a former Dragonguard whose name is now lost, and is known only to author of the book as the Grandmaster. He took it upon himself to ensure that the martial and mystical arts of the old Akaviri would survive into the new and turbulent Second Era. However, he would teach his skills only on condition that those he taught would go on to teach others. This was the origin of those whom we now call "the Dragon Knights." The same way it regards Wardens. Please, read this book.

Your Dragon Hunter could be incorporated into the game the same way but it isn't. Moreover, I have already written of why it shouldn't be, this is why my opinion is more correct here than yours now. Argueing on the Dragon Hunter class incorporation into the game is pointless - the Devs decide it. Until they make the DH the next class and incorporate it into the lore properly, so we could understand what a DH in the lore is, I will be right and you're wrong. If they make it the same way they did Warden and DK then I will agree with you. Until then your proposal is illogical, because we have only one lore-wise Dragon Hunter description and this description fully supports my opinion - today a Dragon Hunter is the one whom he is supposed to be, the one who kills 50 dragons.

OrderoftheDarkness

Cygemai_Hlervu wrote: »

OrderoftheDarkness wrote: »

Cygemai_Hlervu wrote: »

I don't think this would be a good idea to make a class based on a certain activity of that sort. What if a Dragon Hunter never meets a dragon - is he still considered to be a Dragon Hunter? No, I guess. Whatever class you are, if you hunt down a deer - you become a Deer Hunter . Classes do not work that way unless the entire game is based on a certain activity of Dragon (or whatever) slaying. You have to achieve something to become someone. The same way I think it was a bad idea to make the Necromancer a distinct class because Necromancy is only a branch of Magic. A science based on the intersection of the Conjuration, Enchantment and Mysticism disciplines, should we use those Shad Astula Academy terms here. A certain line of spells in Soul Magic skill line and/or in Sorcerer class spells should be enough I think. I remember Devlin Arcanus - the only Necromancer I respect. He helped me much on Enroth without any dead raising. But still he was considered to be a Necromancer.. Ah, those devs made the race of Dark Elves a distinct class there, so no surprise they've created a Necromancer who has never raised a deadman in my play sessions there.

There is a certain Dragon Hunter achievement among the seven other. You want to become a Dragon Hunter - go kill 50 dragons out there and become one.

Dragon Hunter is not only an occupation, it could be a class identity. If so approach to viewing activities class, then Warden at all should not exits from forests and DK all time should is in a castle as guard the king.
I don’t think that necromancy should be a line of Soul Magic or an additional branch for Sorc, because the question arises, what can Stam be given to "fill a glass of water".

This is not true, OrderoftheDarkness. Regarding DK no king is needed to be protected after the death of Reman III: according to the Legacy of the Dragonguard, some of the members of the disbanded Order became roving adventurers, selling their services as combat trainers or swords-for-hire. One of these was a former Dragonguard whose name is now lost, and is known only to author of the book as the Grandmaster. He took it upon himself to ensure that the martial and mystical arts of the old Akaviri would survive into the new and turbulent Second Era. However, he would teach his skills only on condition that those he taught would go on to teach others. This was the origin of those whom we now call "the Dragon Knights." The same way it regards Wardens. Please, read this book.

Your Dragon Hunter could be incorporated into the game the same way but it isn't. Moreover, I have already written of why it shouldn't be, this is why my opinion is more correct here than yours now. Argueing on the Dragon Hunter class incorporation into the game is pointless - the Devs decide it. Until they make the DH the next class and incorporate it into the lore properly, so we could understand what a DH in the lore is, I will be right and you're wrong. If they make it the same way they did Warden and DK then I will agree with you. Until then your proposal is illogical, because we have only one lore-wise Dragon Hunter description and this description fully supports my opinion - today a Dragon Hunter is the one whom he is supposed to be, the one who kills 50 dragons.

I'm not saying that my proposal is good, you're saying that you don't like my idea, it doesn't mean that what you don't like can't be logical. As you can to speak about logic your opinion, if you so and not gave the answer why Wardens go from forests and Dragon Knights began its journey. Your proposal about Soul magic and lines skills Sorcs associated with necromancy here is this very not is logical.
That concerns dragon guardians of, I now staying in city of and NPC shouts that dragon guardians of assures that in city of now very quietly and you say the king no longer needs the services of the dragon guard.
I read these books, everyone understands their meaning in different ways, 10 people will read the same book, each will have his own kind of retelling.. You shared what you understood, now I'll tell you what I understood. The book about the dragon guard described to us the greatness of Dragon knights as an order, before its fall as it happens with great orders such as Templars in real life. This does not mean that their services are no longer needed.
P. S. I will clarify the situation as a whole, why try to look for logic in a topic with the name - I would like to see ... Only forums constantly talk about logic, you probably forgot that there is another feeling and it was with you before the appearance of logic in you, this is called intuition. The fact is that a person who claims that his opinion is more correct is initially deprived of such a feeling as intuition. Understand that in the end after us there is no logic, only intuition. I haven't read a book about Wardens, thanks for that.

Aigym_Hlervu

OrderoftheDarkness wrote: »

Cygemai_Hlervu wrote: »

OrderoftheDarkness wrote: »

Cygemai_Hlervu wrote: »

I don't think this would be a good idea to make a class based on a certain activity of that sort. What if a Dragon Hunter never meets a dragon - is he still considered to be a Dragon Hunter? No, I guess. Whatever class you are, if you hunt down a deer - you become a Deer Hunter . Classes do not work that way unless the entire game is based on a certain activity of Dragon (or whatever) slaying. You have to achieve something to become someone. The same way I think it was a bad idea to make the Necromancer a distinct class because Necromancy is only a branch of Magic. A science based on the intersection of the Conjuration, Enchantment and Mysticism disciplines, should we use those Shad Astula Academy terms here. A certain line of spells in Soul Magic skill line and/or in Sorcerer class spells should be enough I think. I remember Devlin Arcanus - the only Necromancer I respect. He helped me much on Enroth without any dead raising. But still he was considered to be a Necromancer.. Ah, those devs made the race of Dark Elves a distinct class there, so no surprise they've created a Necromancer who has never raised a deadman in my play sessions there.

There is a certain Dragon Hunter achievement among the seven other. You want to become a Dragon Hunter - go kill 50 dragons out there and become one.

Dragon Hunter is not only an occupation, it could be a class identity. If so approach to viewing activities class, then Warden at all should not exits from forests and DK all time should is in a castle as guard the king.
I don’t think that necromancy should be a line of Soul Magic or an additional branch for Sorc, because the question arises, what can Stam be given to "fill a glass of water".

This is not true, OrderoftheDarkness. Regarding DK no king is needed to be protected after the death of Reman III: according to the Legacy of the Dragonguard, some of the members of the disbanded Order became roving adventurers, selling their services as combat trainers or swords-for-hire. One of these was a former Dragonguard whose name is now lost, and is known only to author of the book as the Grandmaster. He took it upon himself to ensure that the martial and mystical arts of the old Akaviri would survive into the new and turbulent Second Era. However, he would teach his skills only on condition that those he taught would go on to teach others. This was the origin of those whom we now call "the Dragon Knights." The same way it regards Wardens. Please, read this book.

Your Dragon Hunter could be incorporated into the game the same way but it isn't. Moreover, I have already written of why it shouldn't be, this is why my opinion is more correct here than yours now. Argueing on the Dragon Hunter class incorporation into the game is pointless - the Devs decide it. Until they make the DH the next class and incorporate it into the lore properly, so we could understand what a DH in the lore is, I will be right and you're wrong. If they make it the same way they did Warden and DK then I will agree with you. Until then your proposal is illogical, because we have only one lore-wise Dragon Hunter description and this description fully supports my opinion - today a Dragon Hunter is the one whom he is supposed to be, the one who kills 50 dragons.

As you can to speak about logic your opinion, if you so and not gave the answer why Warden go from forests and Dragon Knight began its journey. I'm not saying that my proposal is good, you're saying that you don't like my idea, it doesn't mean that what you don't like can't be logical. Your proposal about Soul magic and lines skills Sorcs here is this very not is logical.

First, incorporating Necromancy as several spells into the Soul Magic line was just an example of how I see it. It was only an example and I'm not posing it as the Truth to be accepted. Let's leave it. Second, why do you ask me questions and blame me of not giving you answers regarding the DK and the Warden while I've already written it to you? I've written too much for you to understand it there, but you just mock? Read my post above again slowly, read those books I've given you the links to. And I'm not going to argue with you here. You either seem to have a booby's look while consulting a book or having some trouble to get your point across. Best regards, I hope you find your answers using the information given to you.

OrderoftheDarkness

Cygemai_Hlervu wrote: »

OrderoftheDarkness wrote: »

Cygemai_Hlervu wrote: »

OrderoftheDarkness wrote: »

Cygemai_Hlervu wrote: »

I don't think this would be a good idea to make a class based on a certain activity of that sort. What if a Dragon Hunter never meets a dragon - is he still considered to be a Dragon Hunter? No, I guess. Whatever class you are, if you hunt down a deer - you become a Deer Hunter . Classes do not work that way unless the entire game is based on a certain activity of Dragon (or whatever) slaying. You have to achieve something to become someone. The same way I think it was a bad idea to make the Necromancer a distinct class because Necromancy is only a branch of Magic. A science based on the intersection of the Conjuration, Enchantment and Mysticism disciplines, should we use those Shad Astula Academy terms here. A certain line of spells in Soul Magic skill line and/or in Sorcerer class spells should be enough I think. I remember Devlin Arcanus - the only Necromancer I respect. He helped me much on Enroth without any dead raising. But still he was considered to be a Necromancer.. Ah, those devs made the race of Dark Elves a distinct class there, so no surprise they've created a Necromancer who has never raised a deadman in my play sessions there.

There is a certain Dragon Hunter achievement among the seven other. You want to become a Dragon Hunter - go kill 50 dragons out there and become one.

Dragon Hunter is not only an occupation, it could be a class identity. If so approach to viewing activities class, then Warden at all should not exits from forests and DK all time should is in a castle as guard the king.
I don’t think that necromancy should be a line of Soul Magic or an additional branch for Sorc, because the question arises, what can Stam be given to "fill a glass of water".

This is not true, OrderoftheDarkness. Regarding DK no king is needed to be protected after the death of Reman III: according to the Legacy of the Dragonguard, some of the members of the disbanded Order became roving adventurers, selling their services as combat trainers or swords-for-hire. One of these was a former Dragonguard whose name is now lost, and is known only to author of the book as the Grandmaster. He took it upon himself to ensure that the martial and mystical arts of the old Akaviri would survive into the new and turbulent Second Era. However, he would teach his skills only on condition that those he taught would go on to teach others. This was the origin of those whom we now call "the Dragon Knights." The same way it regards Wardens. Please, read this book.

Your Dragon Hunter could be incorporated into the game the same way but it isn't. Moreover, I have already written of why it shouldn't be, this is why my opinion is more correct here than yours now. Argueing on the Dragon Hunter class incorporation into the game is pointless - the Devs decide it. Until they make the DH the next class and incorporate it into the lore properly, so we could understand what a DH in the lore is, I will be right and you're wrong. If they make it the same way they did Warden and DK then I will agree with you. Until then your proposal is illogical, because we have only one lore-wise Dragon Hunter description and this description fully supports my opinion - today a Dragon Hunter is the one whom he is supposed to be, the one who kills 50 dragons.

As you can to speak about logic your opinion, if you so and not gave the answer why Warden go from forests and Dragon Knight began its journey. I'm not saying that my proposal is good, you're saying that you don't like my idea, it doesn't mean that what you don't like can't be logical. Your proposal about Soul magic and lines skills Sorcs here is this very not is logical.

First, incorporating Necromancy as several spells into the Soul Magic line was just an example of how I see it. It was only an example and I'm not posing it as the Truth to be accepted. Let's leave it. Second, why do you ask me questions and blame me of not giving you answers regarding the DK and the Warden while I've already written it to you? I've written too much for you to understand it there, but you just mock? Read my post above again slowly, read those books I've given you the links to. And I'm not going to argue with you here. You either seem to have a booby's look while consulting a book or having some trouble to get your point across. Best regards, I hope you find your answers using the information given to you.

I say you came into this world to be logical guy on the forum, good luck in your journey.

Aigym_Hlervu

I think I understand what you mean, though it's hard to read your posts for me. I'll qoute myself again here:

Cygemai_Hlervu wrote: »

Argueing on the Dragon Hunter class incorporation into the game is pointless - the Devs decide it. Until they make the DH the next class and incorporate it into the lore properly, so we could understand what a DH in the lore is, I will be right and you're wrong. If they make it the same way they did Warden and DK then I will agree with you. Until then your proposal is illogical, because we have only one lore-wise Dragon Hunter description and this description fully supports my opinion - today a Dragon Hunter is the one whom he is supposed to be, the one who kills 50 dragons.

We already have a DH now, though it's not a player class. You want to become a DH - go and slay 50 dragons. It's simple. You want to dream of a certain class - ok, go on. But don't argue when you are told your dreams contradict the present reality.

OrderoftheDarkness wrote: »

I say you came into this world to be logical guy on the forum, good luck in your journey.

Mind your words here, brainbox, or I'll speak of your real life goals the same way but way more rude. I urge you to stop at this point before we make it personal.

OrderoftheDarkness

Cygemai_Hlervu wrote: »

I think I understand what you mean, though it's hard to read your posts for me. I'll qoute myself again here:

Cygemai_Hlervu wrote: »

Argueing on the Dragon Hunter class incorporation into the game is pointless - the Devs decide it. Until they make the DH the next class and incorporate it into the lore properly, so we could understand what a DH in the lore is, I will be right and you're wrong. If they make it the same way they did Warden and DK then I will agree with you. Until then your proposal is illogical, because we have only one lore-wise Dragon Hunter description and this description fully supports my opinion - today a Dragon Hunter is the one whom he is supposed to be, the one who kills 50 dragons.

We already have a DH now, though it's not a player class. You want to become a DH - go and slay 50 dragons. It's simple. You want to dream of a certain class - ok, go on. But don't argue when you are told your dreams contradict the present reality.

OrderoftheDarkness wrote: »

I say you came into this world to be logical guy on the forum, good luck in your journey.

Mind your words here, brainbox, or I'll speak of your real life goals the same way but way more rude. I urge you to stop at this point before we make it personal.

Do not talk nonsense. Intuition or logic is not the value of life it is a choice. I understand that you can do everything on the Internet since you will not answer for your words, but be careful. The fact that you called your opinion true is even more rude because you agreed with yourself. You let me talk about my dreams, this is the highest point of arrogance. I don’t think that a logical guy from the forum can predict such things.
You have too big an opinion of yourself if you think that I will switch to a personality on the Internet. How can you answer for your words without looking into your eyes or me? In truth, in your first post you turned to personality.

WrathOfInnos wrote: »

In one of the best games of all time, Dragon Hunter was the progression of the mercenary class. You basically just advanced from protecting farmers from wildlife to taking on tougher monsters for large sums of gold. And got to wear some cool armor in the process.



Whenever dragons are a threat, they see an opportunity for profit, but that doesn’t mean they are an improbable class because dragons have been absent, just a new one.

This is the post of the person who did not make it personal.

Aigym_Hlervu

OrderoftheDarkness wrote: »

Cygemai_Hlervu wrote: »

I think I understand what you mean, though it's hard to read your posts for me. I'll qoute myself again here:

Cygemai_Hlervu wrote: »

Argueing on the Dragon Hunter class incorporation into the game is pointless - the Devs decide it. Until they make the DH the next class and incorporate it into the lore properly, so we could understand what a DH in the lore is, I will be right and you're wrong. If they make it the same way they did Warden and DK then I will agree with you. Until then your proposal is illogical, because we have only one lore-wise Dragon Hunter description and this description fully supports my opinion - today a Dragon Hunter is the one whom he is supposed to be, the one who kills 50 dragons.

We already have a DH now, though it's not a player class. You want to become a DH - go and slay 50 dragons. It's simple. You want to dream of a certain class - ok, go on. But don't argue when you are told your dreams contradict the present reality.

OrderoftheDarkness wrote: »

I say you came into this world to be logical guy on the forum, good luck in your journey.

Mind your words here, brainbox, or I'll speak of your real life goals the same way but way more rude. I urge you to stop at this point before we make it personal.

Do not talk nonsense. Intuition or logic is not the value of life; it is a choice. I understand that you can do everything on the Internet since you will not answer for your words, but be careful. The fact that you called your opinion true is even more rude because you agreed with yourself.

All I wanted is to help you to become that Dragon Knight using the current lore and game mechanics. That's all. I apologize if my words offended you. There was no intent to do it and I'm sorry there. You haven't said it directly the same moment instead you started mocking at me and argueing using an appeal to your "intuition" while the matter we discussed is stated in the lore and is clear enough. I would have apologized for being rude earlier. I had no point to discuss your "intuition" - read the first sentence of this reply again to understand why. So, once again, I'm sorry if my intent to help you offended you somehow due to its form of expression.

Regarding your last words: be careful yourself, brave Internet-warrior. You are the only one here who bears no responsibility for the words said but dares to accuse me in it. I warn you politely for the second time not to make it personal if you don't want to get the dungball back in your face at least.

OrderoftheDarkness

Cygemai_Hlervu wrote: »

OrderoftheDarkness wrote: »

Cygemai_Hlervu wrote: »

I think I understand what you mean, though it's hard to read your posts for me. I'll qoute myself again here:

Cygemai_Hlervu wrote: »

Argueing on the Dragon Hunter class incorporation into the game is pointless - the Devs decide it. Until they make the DH the next class and incorporate it into the lore properly, so we could understand what a DH in the lore is, I will be right and you're wrong. If they make it the same way they did Warden and DK then I will agree with you. Until then your proposal is illogical, because we have only one lore-wise Dragon Hunter description and this description fully supports my opinion - today a Dragon Hunter is the one whom he is supposed to be, the one who kills 50 dragons.

We already have a DH now, though it's not a player class. You want to become a DH - go and slay 50 dragons. It's simple. You want to dream of a certain class - ok, go on. But don't argue when you are told your dreams contradict the present reality.

OrderoftheDarkness wrote: »

I say you came into this world to be logical guy on the forum, good luck in your journey.

Mind your words here, brainbox, or I'll speak of your real life goals the same way but way more rude. I urge you to stop at this point before we make it personal.

Do not talk nonsense. Intuition or logic is not the value of life; it is a choice. I understand that you can do everything on the Internet since you will not answer for your words, but be careful. The fact that you called your opinion true is even more rude because you agreed with yourself.

All I wanted is to help you to become that Dragon Knight using the current lore and game mechanics. That's all. I apologize if my words offended you. There was no intent to do it and I'm sorry there. You haven't said it directly the same moment instead you started mocking at me and argueing using an appeal to your "intuition" while the matter we discussed is stated in the lore and is clear enough. I would have apologized for being rude earlier. I had no point to discuss your "intuition" - read the first sentence of this reply again to understand why. So, once again, I'm sorry if my intent to help you offended you somehow due to its form of expression.

Regarding your last words: be careful yourself, brave Internet-warrior. You are the only one here who bears no responsibility for the words said but dares to accuse me in it. I warn you politely for the second time not to make it personal if you don't want to get the dungball back in your face at least.

What are you, what are you, of course I apologize to you, you have a peculiar style of trolling on the Internet. Themselves realize man in every post says about logic and about how that he likes its opinion and it is true. Sorry that you might think that I was talking about personal, it's just observation.

Aigym_Hlervu

OrderoftheDarkness wrote: »

Cygemai_Hlervu wrote: »

OrderoftheDarkness wrote: »

Cygemai_Hlervu wrote: »

I think I understand what you mean, though it's hard to read your posts for me. I'll qoute myself again here:

Cygemai_Hlervu wrote: »

Argueing on the Dragon Hunter class incorporation into the game is pointless - the Devs decide it. Until they make the DH the next class and incorporate it into the lore properly, so we could understand what a DH in the lore is, I will be right and you're wrong. If they make it the same way they did Warden and DK then I will agree with you. Until then your proposal is illogical, because we have only one lore-wise Dragon Hunter description and this description fully supports my opinion - today a Dragon Hunter is the one whom he is supposed to be, the one who kills 50 dragons.

We already have a DH now, though it's not a player class. You want to become a DH - go and slay 50 dragons. It's simple. You want to dream of a certain class - ok, go on. But don't argue when you are told your dreams contradict the present reality.

OrderoftheDarkness wrote: »

I say you came into this world to be logical guy on the forum, good luck in your journey.

Mind your words here, brainbox, or I'll speak of your real life goals the same way but way more rude. I urge you to stop at this point before we make it personal.

Do not talk nonsense. Intuition or logic is not the value of life; it is a choice. I understand that you can do everything on the Internet since you will not answer for your words, but be careful. The fact that you called your opinion true is even more rude because you agreed with yourself.

All I wanted is to help you to become that Dragon Knight using the current lore and game mechanics. That's all. I apologize if my words offended you. There was no intent to do it and I'm sorry there. You haven't said it directly the same moment instead you started mocking at me and argueing using an appeal to your "intuition" while the matter we discussed is stated in the lore and is clear enough. I would have apologized for being rude earlier. I had no point to discuss your "intuition" - read the first sentence of this reply again to understand why. So, once again, I'm sorry if my intent to help you offended you somehow due to its form of expression.

Regarding your last words: be careful yourself, brave Internet-warrior. You are the only one here who bears no responsibility for the words said but dares to accuse me in it. I warn you politely for the second time not to make it personal if you don't want to get the dungball back in your face at least.

What are you, what are you, of course I apologize to you, you have a peculiar style of trolling on the Internet. Themselves realize man in every post says about logic and about how that he likes its opinion and it is true. Sorry that you might think that I was talking about personal, it's just observation.

No trolling was intended here, no trolling, man. Of course, I might be wrong at some points, but if I speak of lore and game mechs, I welcome lore and game mechanics points as a proof of my wrongness. I haven't catched the idea those features were not the point of your post. The truth I realize now, we've just discussed different things here, it was a misunderstanding. Thank you for accepting my apologies, I also accept yours. I'm glad we've finally settled it. Have a good day!

P.S. Your way of phrase building is quite interesting and familiar to me. I'm sure it's not German (I guess I'd see it at the start), but I think I guess what language is native to you. I might know it a bit, but it is a matter to be discussed privately, I think. The only question regarding it here is do you understand the word "zaschshischshajuschshikhsja" (it's not rude, trust me on that, please)? My respect and my hat are off to you if you do .

OrderoftheDarkness

Cygemai_Hlervu wrote: »

OrderoftheDarkness wrote: »

Cygemai_Hlervu wrote: »

OrderoftheDarkness wrote: »

Cygemai_Hlervu wrote: »

I think I understand what you mean, though it's hard to read your posts for me. I'll qoute myself again here:

Cygemai_Hlervu wrote: »

Argueing on the Dragon Hunter class incorporation into the game is pointless - the Devs decide it. Until they make the DH the next class and incorporate it into the lore properly, so we could understand what a DH in the lore is, I will be right and you're wrong. If they make it the same way they did Warden and DK then I will agree with you. Until then your proposal is illogical, because we have only one lore-wise Dragon Hunter description and this description fully supports my opinion - today a Dragon Hunter is the one whom he is supposed to be, the one who kills 50 dragons.

We already have a DH now, though it's not a player class. You want to become a DH - go and slay 50 dragons. It's simple. You want to dream of a certain class - ok, go on. But don't argue when you are told your dreams contradict the present reality.

OrderoftheDarkness wrote: »

I say you came into this world to be logical guy on the forum, good luck in your journey.

Mind your words here, brainbox, or I'll speak of your real life goals the same way but way more rude. I urge you to stop at this point before we make it personal.

Do not talk nonsense. Intuition or logic is not the value of life; it is a choice. I understand that you can do everything on the Internet since you will not answer for your words, but be careful. The fact that you called your opinion true is even more rude because you agreed with yourself.

All I wanted is to help you to become that Dragon Knight using the current lore and game mechanics. That's all. I apologize if my words offended you. There was no intent to do it and I'm sorry there. You haven't said it directly the same moment instead you started mocking at me and argueing using an appeal to your "intuition" while the matter we discussed is stated in the lore and is clear enough. I would have apologized for being rude earlier. I had no point to discuss your "intuition" - read the first sentence of this reply again to understand why. So, once again, I'm sorry if my intent to help you offended you somehow due to its form of expression.

Regarding your last words: be careful yourself, brave Internet-warrior. You are the only one here who bears no responsibility for the words said but dares to accuse me in it. I warn you politely for the second time not to make it personal if you don't want to get the dungball back in your face at least.

What are you, what are you, of course I apologize to you, you have a peculiar style of trolling on the Internet. Themselves realize man in every post says about logic and about how that he likes its opinion and it is true. Sorry that you might think that I was talking about personal, it's just observation.

No trolling was intended here, no trolling, man. Of course, I might be wrong at some points, but if I speak of lore and game mechs, I welcome lore and game mechanics points as a proof of my wrongness. I haven't catched the idea those features were not the point of your post. The truth I realize now, we've just discussed different things here, it was a misunderstanding. Thank you for accepting my apologies, I also accept yours. I'm glad we've finally settled it. Have a good day!

P.S. Your way of phrase building is quite interesting and familiar to me. I'm sure it's not German (I guess I'd see it at the start), but I think I guess what language is native to you. I might know it a bit, but it is a matter to be discussed privately, I think. The only question regarding it here is do you understand the word "zaschshischshajuschshikhsja" (it's not rude, trust me on that, please)? My respect and my hat are off to you if you do .

Seriously I'm apologize without trolling it's just a difference of mentality. I must have taken it the wrong way. Yes, most likely we are in different countries, I do not know English well. I'm just interested in the topic, what's the next step ZoS if they are going to create a new character. Perhaps I simply was mistaken partition, for me DH this not panacea. I already have a main character and I won’t change it, even for a new one. I just wanted to talk about how people want to see the next class, with the exception of the standard bard, berserker etc. Although these heroes are good too, they can also be discussed.

Aigym_Hlervu

OrderoftheDarkness wrote: »

Seriously I'm apologize without trolling it's just a difference of mentality. I must have taken it the wrong way.

Me too, friend, me too.. It's a cultural difference, I think, though some points tell me it is more a lingual matter. Ah, English became official in England in 1731 only .. I think only Shakespeare and Byron knew it well .

Well, personally I don't see any necessity to make a DH class the next and thus I have no ideas how could it be depicted, so I won't interfere in this discussion further on. Have a good day and see you around !

OrderoftheDarkness

Cygemai_Hlervu wrote: »

OrderoftheDarkness wrote: »

Seriously I'm apologize without trolling it's just a difference of mentality. I must have taken it the wrong way.

Me too, friend, me too.. It's a cultural difference, I think, though some points tell me it is more a lingual matter. Ah, English became official in England in 1731 only .. I think only Shakespeare and Byron knew it well .

Well, personally I don't see any necessity to make a DH class the next and thus I have no ideas how could it be depicted, so I won't interfere in this discussion further on. Have a good day and see you around !

Yes, I understand this phrase. It was nice meeting you too friend, gl hf. You have a very smart approach, you guessed it through the mentality.
This topic is not only about DH, I just wanted to see other opinions about other classes.

ArchMikem

Too similar in name and theme to DragonKnight.

Shanehere

There's already a 'Dragon' class.

robertbmilesb14_ESO

The fighter's guild leans towards what you're talking about.

However, I have always thought a "physical" class would be a nice addition to the game like you're talking about.

They could just call it a Mercenary, Hunter, Arms-man, Sell-sword, Rogue, Gladiator, etc.

There's plenty of names.

They could include a unarmed skill line in it to full-fill desires by others for a "monk" class too.

Kesstryl

We already have Dragon Knights, this would be redundant.

Konstant_Tel_Necris

Actually I was badly surprised that's ZOS didn't include Dragonguard as joinable guild in Dragonhold with own skills like Thieves Guild or Dark Brotherhood or Psijic Order, there are many features that's logically count toward this.