What is this fire pet?

[Dialga]

It's a shame we're promoting an exploit pet that really is against ToS. :/

I'm not entirely sure of that. Like I mentioned in an earlier post, I was able to target my friend's fire pet in a duel just fine. I haven't brought it into BG's, but I think I'll go test and see if my friend Ally side can target it if I'm flagged. If he can, then it's not an exploit, since PVP would be the only issue. Info coming soon!

EDIT:

Right - so I took ol Sparky out to Duskwood, flagged and my friend came down. In a duel, she could see his nameplate and target just fine. Out of the duel, no nameplate - but she could target through tab targeting and when it attacked her and grabbed her chara's attention, obviously. So the only snag would be for people in a BG, not being attacked by your pet, not using tab targeting.

[Azunara]

It's a shame we're promoting an exploit pet that really is against ToS. :/

I love how we're worried about this now.

We have a long, long, long line of taming pets against the ToS. We are taking advantage of something, yes? Exploiting?

I can name other exploits.

Worgen pet. You were taking advantage of the fact the server was lagging so it thought it was a wolf, but remained a worgen.

Appearance buff pets. Something is supposed to remove this buff. We are tricking it into thinking that it is not needed to be wiped.

Hunters have been exploiting and taking advantage of crap since the beginning of time. Until I hear solid evidence people were banned for this, it's not really that important. (Solid evidence for just taming, that is. If you take it into a BG, you're outta luck.)

[Aquillian]

A hotfix would require a server restart though, wouldn't it? The realms have definitely not gone down since I tamed mine, I've been online this entire time.

A hotfix is, by definition, a change made to live ("hot") servers ^_^ Just as a little sidenote! So anything called a Hotfix requires no action on part of the user to activate.

In other news this is awesome, haha. But I don't think I'll get one, since it is almost certainly exploitable for PVP. Sad! And this is a different sort of exploit to me, in that it provides a distinctive advantage. Quite different from, say, my oily worg.

[CrystalKitten]

It's a shame we're promoting an exploit pet that really is against ToS. :/

I'm with this. The difference between this and other appearence buff pets, or glitched tamings, is, as Dialga said, this pet is NOT easily targetable in pvp. You need to rely on tab target cycling. As to "it's doing no harm if it's outside of BGs"... That may be true. Until random hunter X sees that you have it... tries to click it to see what it is, realizes it's unclickable (or difficult to click.. or just does an internet search and finds this thread talking about how it's unclickable), and then asks you about it, or does a google search, finds out the trick, and then thinks "WOOO!". The problem too, is that taking advantage of exploits which DO affect gameplay, like an unclickable pet, could end up in Blizz saying "Okay... yeah, appearance buff pets were fun, but we can't trust you guys to report ones that alter game mechanics anymore, so sorry" It would probably take a lot of exploitation to get them to change their mind like that, but has anyone even bothered to report this to see if it IS an acceptable appearance buff yet?

Just my 2 cents.

[Dialga]

It's a shame we're promoting an exploit pet that really is against ToS. :/

I'm with this. The difference between this and other appearence buff pets, or glitched tamings, is, as Dialga said, this pet is NOT easily targetable in pvp. You need to rely on tab target cycling. As to "it's doing no harm if it's outside of BGs"... That may be true. Until random hunter X sees that you have it... tries to click it to see what it is, realizes it's unclickable (or difficult to click.. or just does an internet search and finds this thread talking about how it's unclickable), and then asks you about it, or does a google search, finds out the trick, and then thinks "WOOO!". The problem too, is that taking advantage of exploits which DO affect gameplay, like an unclickable pet, could end up in Blizz saying "Okay... yeah, appearance buff pets were fun, but we can't trust you guys to report ones that alter game mechanics anymore, so sorry" It would probably take a lot of exploitation to get them to change their mind like that, but has anyone even bothered to report this to see if it IS an acceptable appearance buff yet?

Just my 2 cents.

I'd gladly make a thread concerning the pet, but my previous experiences indicate that Blizzard doesn't really want that. They deleted the worgen question posts right and left during that fiasco, and I can't say I've ever seen much of an appearance pet thread roaming about - though I could be wrong.

Seems to me the best idea is to ask the lurker here, as Blizzard doesn't seem to like the glitches 'going public' on their forums.

[CrystalKitten]

Yeah, I wasn't thinking about doing it on the forums.. more was wondering if anyone had bothered submitting a ticket or something to ask about it.

[Azunara]

It's a shame we're promoting an exploit pet that really is against ToS. :/

I'm with this. The difference between this and other appearence buff pets, or glitched tamings, is, as Dialga said, this pet is NOT easily targetable in pvp. You need to rely on tab target cycling. As to "it's doing no harm if it's outside of BGs"... That may be true. Until random hunter X sees that you have it... tries to click it to see what it is, realizes it's unclickable (or difficult to click.. or just does an internet search and finds this thread talking about how it's unclickable), and then asks you about it, or does a google search, finds out the trick, and then thinks "WOOO!". The problem too, is that taking advantage of exploits which DO affect gameplay, like an unclickable pet, could end up in Blizz saying "Okay... yeah, appearance buff pets were fun, but we can't trust you guys to report ones that alter game mechanics anymore, so sorry" It would probably take a lot of exploitation to get them to change their mind like that, but has anyone even bothered to report this to see if it IS an acceptable appearance buff yet?

Just my 2 cents.

So, as long as it doesn't do a single thing to game play, it is perfectly fine, despite being an exploit.

But the second it affects game play, red flags go up and people start screaming, "IT'S BREAKING THE RULES!"? That seems kind of silly, if you think about it. The core thing is still the same: This pet, appearence buff pets and the like...They're all breaing the rules. One must "cheat the system" in order to get said pet. It is obvious they were never meant to have the effect when tamed.

Logic states that if this pet was gone, appearence buff pets should as well, following the path of the worgen. The Sholazar and Ghost Wolf pets were both within the game's boundries. For one, people found a way around it, for the others, Blizz screwed up.

This isn't Blizz screwing up, this is us cheating the system and purposely breaking it. Whether it affects game play or not, while important, should not be the defining, "Ban-worthy" factor for it. It should be, "Am I trying to break/cheat/exploit something in order to get to this?"


Furthermore, in reference to pets affecting game play: Tiny Beetle. Nigh impossible to see in a battleground, and what was said? Tab target. Yet as soon as this one is unclickable, it's "D: IT BREAKS EVERYTHING." I do find that a touch ironic.

In the end: We all know this pet will be fixed. We all know it breaks the rules. We all know people are going to be sad and wish something else had happened when they are changed back to tallstrider/raptor. And we all know appearence buffs also break the rules but will get left alone. *shrugs.*

[Dialga]

Yeah, I wasn't thinking about doing it on the forums.. more was wondering if anyone had bothered submitting a ticket or something to ask about it.

GM's are the essence of unreliable. Each one of them has a different opinion on it.

I placed a thread here http://us.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/3050125218#1 and it's done as professionally as I could muster. If you'd like to add or suggest anything, have at.

[Golden]

Yeah, I wasn't thinking about doing it on the forums.. more was wondering if anyone had bothered submitting a ticket or something to ask about it.

Thing is, GMs don't know about this stuff. You could send in dozens of tickets and have some answer that this is bannable, some that it doesn't matter and we'll get to keep them, some will admit they have no idea what to do with it and a couple will give you a pre-written answer about how they're working on fixing this issue.

We have our dear Noah who I'm very confident has already been sent a word about this, If not, he's bound to either stumble upon this thread or have it pointed out for him by Wain or someone else sooner or later. We have gotten quite the reputation for finding every glitch tame there is to find in the game, and I have no doubt someone from Blizzard actively checks here for any new findings.

[Aquillian]

How is it even remotely the same? One doesn't affect anyone in any negative way, one gives the owner a distinct advantage and puts every other PVP player at a disadvantage. O.o;

[Azunara]

How is it even remotely the same? One doesn't affect anyone in any negative way, one gives the owner a distinct advantage and puts every other PVP player at a disadvantage. O.o;

Tiny Beetle and Fire Pet: Both were untargetable. Fire patch can't be targetted by clicking, Tiny Beetle is rather tiny and hard to notice when you're about in PvP, so it is doubtful and unlikely you will click it.

Appearence Pets and Fire Pet: Both are exploits. You're breaking the system and making it think that it is normal when it is quite evident it isn't. (I.E. either having some oil coat buff or sword in head, or being a patch of, you know, fire.)

My point wasn't that Appearence Buffs and Fire Patch were the same because they both affected game play, but point was they were the same because they both broke the game's rules. It all boiled down to what Jessibelle had said, how we should be ashamed for promoting a pet that broke the rules, when we've talked about Appearence Buff pets for the honest time.

Or at least I assume you were talking to me.

And Dialga: Awesome for putting it up on the forums. I'm glad you did that as opposed to trying to keep it under wraps and secret and whatnot. (And completely off-topic, but Dialga was my favorite legendary ever. >>;)

[Lisaara]

How is it even remotely the same? One doesn't affect anyone in any negative way, one gives the owner a distinct advantage and puts every other PVP player at a disadvantage. O.o;

Tiny Beetle and Fire Pet: Both were untargetable. Fire patch can't be targetted by clicking, Tiny Beetle is rather tiny and hard to notice when you're about in PvP, so it is doubtful and unlikely you will click it.

Appearence Pets and Fire Pet: Both are exploits. You're breaking the system and making it think that it is normal when it is quite evident it isn't. (I.E. either having some oil coat buff or sword in head, or being a patch of, you know, fire.)

My point wasn't that Appearence Buffs and Fire Patch were the same because they both affected game play, but point was they were the same because they both broke the game's rules. It all boiled down to what Jessibelle had said, how we should be ashamed for promoting a pet that broke the rules, when we've talked about Appearence Buff pets for the honest time.

Or at least I assume you were talking to me.

And Dialga: Awesome for putting it up on the forums. I'm glad you did that as opposed to trying to keep it under wraps and secret and whatnot. (And completely off-topic, but Dialga was my favorite legendary ever. >>;)

and tiny beetle got fixed while the other appearance pets were left alone. You pretty much just proved the point that we should not be promoting the taming and use of this pet. The beetle wasnt as bad as this, even so. Why? Cause it was targetable.

And seriously, if we keep promoting bad glitches like this, we may end up losing ALL our appearance pets.

[Makoes]

Its interesting how people keep lumping everything together as if they really are the same thing. Its like saying ALL hunters are huntards and idiots.
Not ALL appearence pets are the same either. And quite often the method used to obtain them are different.

The beetle was a simple tame, not using any tricks at all.
The pets tamed via the macro where yet another method.
The pets tamed via the "kill" method are yet another.
And now we have a pet tamed via a QUEST item timing/reviving method.

They are NOT the same thing at all.
And most of these pets that we have been allowed to keep are because they Do NOT give advantage and they LOOK like pets.

However things like Garwal the worgen pet, that was removed and fixed because Worgen are NOT pets, they are humanoids, and Playable worgen class was in the making, the fix was understandable.
The slim/hydra are a unique case because them being tamable was an oversight and miss lable on blizzards part.
This "Fire" pet does NOT look like a pet, and it gives a distinct advantage to players in pvp situations, and as such SHOULD be fixed.

Appearence pets do not really violate the ToS, we've had Wain/Noah give us the "green" light on using them. However, the pets that kept "buffs" that gave advantages and such were given the "red" light.

As for reporting, well GM's dont really have much to do with this sort of thing, and with our resident lurker, I am sure that the situation has been brought to blizzards attention by now, or will be shortly, and it will be Blizzard that will tell US what is to be done about it.

[Azunara]

Technically, there isn't any buff. Yes, it is untargetable via clicking. It is still targetable by tabbing, if I remember right.

Jess: I'm not saying it will stay. I know it won't stay. That's that. I'm not trying to justify it to stay. I'm saying that it's just another pet in a long line of hunters getting different pets that weren't intended. It's not new, nor will it ever be. And no, it's pretty equal to the beetle. It was tiny and near impossible to click in a PvP situation. And it got fixed. Just like this pet will. End of story.

Also, love my brother. Meet Charizard the Flame Patch:

WoWScrnShot_081911_163936.jpg (174.24 KiB) Viewed 2809 times

[Kalliope]

I haven't seen anyone come in here and say that these pets aren't going to be fixed. No one is "promoting the exploitation" of them here. For many of the forumgoers here, these raptors (and the tallstriders) are novelty pets. Other sites got wind of the raptors beforehand and there is certainly an exploitable factor regarding targeting them that's been circulating. Certainly the PvP community has picked up on it prior to this thread being started here.

We know this is going to get hotfixed for that reason alone. Period. If people want to tame these pets for the lollavapoolpet novelty, let them. It's the PvP uses that aren't okay, and people will be risking their own necks at that point.

[Lisaara]

Going out and taming it yourself and bragging about it, showing it off on a public forum and In-game is promoting it, whether you are intending to or not. It's as if I'm wearing my Capt. Nemo's Cafe shirt when I'm not at work. The label is still promoting them like a walking billboard.

Anyway, I'm pretty sure the devs are gonna put a screetching hault to this within the next hotfix. *hugs her fire boar and oily wolf* Just hope everyones excitement wont make me lose Flambe or Loki....I'll be really upset if that happens.

[Azunara]

So, it all boils down to you're worreid about losing your appearence pets which you've argued and many have argued have no relationship whatsoever. :\

Seriously, sure. We're promoting the pet. It's not negative promotion, we're not saying, "PvP WITH THIS!" and besides, this forum has had many arguments over whether to keep things secret and it all boils down to this: Exploit or not, risk or not, we're a forum. We share info. We've said the risks, we know the risks if we take the exploit to far, and that's that.

[Lisaara]

Well then this topic has gotten off-topic considering the OP was just asking WTF it was and if it really was obtainable. Not a squee-fest of "omg we should go get this cause it looks cool!".

And all appearance buff pets have relation. Cause if they hotfix this one, they may end up hotfixing them all.

[Azunara]

Welcome to Petopia.

I dunno, I'm going to keep showing them off, because it's neat. I know the risks, so I won't PvP with it. That's it. *Shrugs.*

[Slickrock]

Worth taming one.. if they take it away, they take it away...

I'll dump Ghostcrawler for one..