Talk:Adventurer

I'm expecting these to be ranger/rogue type classes that use this archetype. Damage spiking with melee or ranged with skills that allow them to escape from combat. RandomTime 22:06, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Adventurer (and Scholar and Soldier) are just fancy terms for "medium armor" (and "Light armor" and "heavy armor" - respectively). I.e., GW1's "Adventurer" professions were Ranger, Assassin, and Dervish. I'm expecting the same, more or less. -- Konig/talk 22:14, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm not. No scythes have been annnounced, and there is Thief art on this site. Arnout aka The Emperors Angel 09:15, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

No Scythes announced, true but there are spears. I'm thinking there might be a possibility of a Pike-type fighter. Kind of like a Dervish but with spears at melee range with reach instead of thrown. --Spigs 03:28, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

There are no spears.-- Shew ♠♠♠ 03:42, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Lets just wait and see. I expect by at least wed--Knighthonor 04:48, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

No scythes or spears. And why Wednesday, pray tell? --Kyoshi (Talk) 06:27, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Hm, I see. But what's the weapon on the far right then? Looks like a spear to me. :/ I was hoping maybe it'd be a pike-like weapon. Maybe it goes along with greatsword? --Spigs 15:32, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Tyria. 'ERE BE PIRATES.

Never thought of it? We can wield a sword in one hand, a pistol in the other, we've got a concept art of a Pirate Norn, we have Lion's Arch as a free pirate city...? We be havin' "Pirate" as class, ye scallywag! </endjoke>. --Naoroji 17:15, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Or a witch hunter :P. Sword/Pistol combo. Look at the human class on Warhammer online :P --aut (t) 17:35, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Well, they also have done some artwork of "thieves", so whether that follows the same line of thought or not, who knows? ^^ --Amannelle 19:36, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Oh A-net, please do not fail us, we want our pirates damn it all. Celle<3talk

I love the idea, since it would greatly take advantage of sea-travel (or at least coastal "residence"). I think Pirates should be put into the game. ^^ --Amannelle 15:16, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

WE should make a pettition. /signed Celle<3talk

Oh, um... ^^ Well, I'm afraid it's much too late for something like that. And besides, we don't know whether there is or isn't a pirate profession (my guess is isn't, but who knows? ^^) --Amannelle 15:30, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Hehe here are 3 more pics for you to see regarding pirates that have been done by ANet... However, whether they are for GW2 or simply from GW1, I cannot say. --Amannelle 14:46, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

They could just be NPCs, you never know. Although, a Pirate class would be awesome. Everything's Better With Pirates. Zolann The Irreverent 16:21, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

If there's both pirates and assassins ingame, the gamer humour will be completely unbearable.-- NilePenguin 19:07, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Lol the PvP would be epic, though xD --Amannelle 19:19, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

No such thing as pirates in Guild Wars. They be Corsairs. -- Konig/talk 04:20, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

My ears be burnin', someone must be talking about me, oh... corsair is a french word for pirate, I believe. Regardless of the possibility of a pirate profession, I will find a way to make my human adventurer dress like one.--Corsair@Yarrr 04:37, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Aware of that, just saying that Tyrian/Elonian pirates, at least, are called corsairs and bandits. Not pirates. -- Konig/talk 05:03, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

ARRG Eive 08:53, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Sins?

Would sins be back? One of the silhouettes on the front page looks like one.

If they do come back, they BETTER have emo hair like they do in GW1, or I will not be a happy camper... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 98.193.64.52 (talk) at 20:59, 20 June 2010 (UTC).

Emo Sins kill themselves. We don't know, but judging by some concept art and daggers, I think they will be there. :P I mean, no way in hell they won't include a light melee DPS. --Super Igor 21:32, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

• Cough* Stealth was announced. so Duh. assasins will return. though 'Coffin Jockey' is a much better name for them... </gw1mesmer> --Neil • 22:21, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Anyone have a source on this claim? I haven't read anything that states stealth as a definite. --142.162.169.229 05:30, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Sins are back, however, renamed as Thief. --70.145.246.222 21:48, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

But what about emo hair? 71.194.87.164 10:39, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Ranger not actually confirmed

Anet hasn't actually confirmed that ranger is adventurer, that's mearly a sermise. Ramei Arashi 21:26, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

adjusted Venom20 21:28, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Please list source confirming the ranger is in fact and adventurer. Yes we can probably assume so (within 0.95), but without confirmation it is still considered speculation. Venom20 03:48, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Reference

Do we really need a reference on this page that the Ranger has been confirmed to be an adventurer? I find it a bit over-the-top. - Infinite - talk 21:28, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Phnzdvn worked hard to get that! Eive 21:44, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

And before the reference, we had several discussions over it. Best off keeping it. Shadow Runner 21:48, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm not saying it there shouldn't be a reference, but perhaps not on this page, rather just the Ranger's page? ;)

EDIT: This is why: Scholar (No reference for the Elementalist on that page either. Besides, it looks sloppy to have the reference number next to the Ranger on this page. - Infinite - talk 00:08, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

I did work hard to get that!  ;-). But on a more serious note; I think it should stay a reference for now at least, since it isn't confirmed anywhere else and I would like to avoid any further debate on the subject. --hnzdvn 02:55, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Oh and I forgot to add that I think it should be on both pages for the time being. --hnzdvn 02:56, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Druid?

In the trailer, there was (probably) a sylvari that appeared to be "awakening" (or something) an oakheart. Is it possible the third will be a druid, or is that too close to Ranger? 198.174.37.44 04:40, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

there is bound to be a profession dealing with summoning or mechanics, in one of the novels an Asuran was riding inside a golem, and in one of the videoes a charr fights an asuran and the asuran is ejected when the golem falls. Expect the final adventurer to be something along those lines. 203.109.170.204 05:05, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Races habe their own skills, one Sylvari skill will summon that druid-thing. I doubt the last adventurer will summon anything along those lines. --AdventurerPotatoe - 07:53, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Picture

I copypasted the adventurers reveal images and made this out of it yesterday.

Then now I just got an idea now, couldnt we put this image on the page? --AdventurerPotatoe - 17:32, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

I do like it and I say yes we could. it may not be 100% official but it does show all the adventurers in one pic. I'd say add it. --The Holy Dragons 17:53, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

I was thinking the same, though, the only way of getting a picture that represents the adventurers well is to put them together yourself. --AdventurerPotatoe - 18:06, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

I say we should. I'm pretty sure we've done something like this on GWW, and I can't imagine why we couldn't. - 18:13, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

So, if I can add my images to the pages, does anyone know how to rename it so its not "mine" anymore? --AdventurerPotatoe - 21:34, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm guessing you have to move it to another page? But other than that, I really like this image! :) --120.153.215.152 12:22, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Description of adventurers needs work

"They are all given access to ranged weapons, and in most cases would belong to traditional midline roles in combat. Lore-wise they possess arts developed over centuries since the original Guild Wars, and are perhaps the most "modern" category of professions, capable of using firearms as weapons." Every profession has a ranged weapon not just Adventurers. More importantly rangers don't use firearms, because they don't like modern technology. Ramei Arashi 04:30, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Only 5 classes have access to ranged weapons: Warrior, Engineer, Ranger, Thief, Mesmer. You'll notice that all the adventurers are in that list. That being said, ranged weapons are the bows and firearms. The Guardian, Necromancer, and Elementalist do not have access to these weapons. That being said, they all have access to ranged attacks, but not ranged weapons. There is a discernible difference there. Also I don't understand your comment about rangers not liking modern technology. I suppose in the sense of saying that they do not use firearms that can make sense, but I suppose we can then say that guardians, necromancers and elementalists also dislike modern technology. You may need to elaborate on your statement. Venom20 06:05, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

• ponders* Are staves and wands no longer ranged? They give ranged spells, at least. So in a way, they are ranged weapons. "Also I don't understand your comment about rangers not liking modern technology." It's the very soul of the profession - a nature-based profession which does not rely on technology, one that in fact distanced itself from technology (the complete opposite of an engineer, basically). I don't recall exactly where this was stated, but it was around the time of the ranger's release. The other professions were not stated as such. Konig/talk 06:37, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Since the weapons (staves and wands) are not used in attacking directly, I did not believe they were considered to be attacks. If that is the case, then I suppose the sword is ranged since the guardian can throw his/hers (Binding Blade). Venom20 13:19, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Adventurers cannot access heavy melee weapons (hammers nor maces) nor any of the magical weapons (staves, scepters, foci nor tridents). This makes them most suitable to ranged combat as well as shifting in and out of the fray. They have many skills which aid in their quick positioning (Jump Shot, Swoop, Steal) to accomplish this. And when it comes to firearms, more than half of the professions in this class use firearms. In other armor classes there is only one profession with access to firearms in each. It also contains two out of four new professions, thus justfiying the "modern" description. We should not forget that rangers never were primarily melee weapon users 250 years ago, but they can now be. That is evolving, too. Mediggo 13:37, 31 January 2012 (UTC)