Sentient pets... an idea

[Slickrock]

So, there was some discussion in the polls regarding Gryphons and Wyrns being "too" sentient to be able to tame them. And we've heard the arguments here before about dragonkin in their various forms.

But having some members of these phylum be "tameable" would open up a lot of new options for hunters.

So..

How about an questline training that would allow you to "bond" with a an appropriate dragonkin or other semi-sentient creature, that's a higher level of relationship than our current taming of pets? While this wouldn't work for Malygos, it should work for proto-drakes, fey-dragons, and others. Perhaps these "pets" would require a higher level of maintenance.

Or another idea..

Perhaps you build the relationship with this creature so you can call on them once every hour or so to assist you (or whatever the appropriate cooldown would be).

[Lisaara]

I'd rather not tame any sentient beings. It's slavery.

[Slickrock]

I'd rather not tame any sentient beings. It's slavery.

The question is, where do we draw the line on sentience? I don't think you can, unless you use some specific criteria (spoken language, use of tools, etc.)

But what I am proposing I think would be above the basic taming that you see as slavery. It would much more be bonding.

[Qraljar]

I'd rather not tame any sentient beings. It's slavery.

I ehh.. what? He/she stated that it would be like bonding in that case. Slavery is something without own consent or will.

While it'd be nice, I wouldn't fuss over it. I also think there's not much chance of it ever happening, but that doesn't change that the idea is nice.

[Arthur]

It's a very nice thought, I love the idea of befriending a dragon. It's been one of my dreams since I started playing. I don't view Hunter pets as slaves or animals - they are my friends, and also my equals.

I understand it probably won't happen, but I'd be really happy if it did someday.

[Suicune]

It's a very nice thought, I love the idea of befriending a dragon. It's been one of my dreams since I started playing. I don't view Hunter pets as slaves or animals - they are my friends, and also my equals.

I understand it probably won't happen, but I'd be really happy if it did someday.

Exactly this

[Albain]

We already tame raptors.

Raptors, who are smart enough to build huts and make and wear their own jewelry..

Granted this is mostly Kalimdor raptors, Eastern Kingdom raptors don't seem to do the same and Outland raptors seem dumb as bricks, but Kalimdor's, even before Cata added Subject Nine's (nine? 5?) quests in, had quests questioning and demonstrating raptor intelligence as being at least on the murloc level.

And murlocs have their own language and /can/ cooperate with other beings just fine. Winterfin, the ones in Blasted Lands..

I ride around on a lot of drakes, which are just adolescent dragons. I'd put them into battle if I could. My hunter doesn't have slaves for pets - slaves can't be trusted. He needs to rely on all his pets as if they were flesh and blood brothers and sisters, because his life depends on theirs. And their lives DON'T depend on him, they lived in the wild without him just fine. He can't, without their aid.

Warlocks and death knights more likely have slaves than hunters. Warlocks even have talents - or used to - that sacrifice their pet for their own survival or just power. Death knights still do. Hunters are far more symbiotic with their pets.. calling it slavery does the class injustice.

I'd love to, on that note, tame wyverns or griffins. Or dragons. Dwarves would be great with griffins. Nelf hunters with their steadfast friend hippogryff, etc..

[GormanGhaste]

How about an quest line that would allow you to "bond" with a an appropriate dragon kin.

Perhaps you build the relationship with this creature so you can call on them once every hour or so to assist you (or whatever the appropriate cool-down would be).

Rhea's Last Egg

[Akyo]

Personaly im not buying that for the gryphons and wyerns.
For me they dont seem anny more sentient than our dear sabre cats, wolfs/worgs and raptors. And they have been mounts, pets and minipets for a long long time now.
I belive there is more quests where we talk to inteligent wolves(or hear stories about named wolves) than there is quests involving inteligent gryphons and wyerns.

I personlay feel its a more of a "we just doesnt feel hunters should tame it" than "oh its a special kind of animal, thus makes no sence" deal.

For the idea. Im not all sure. It does sound like something EVERYONE would/should be able to do as it seem similar to the frost sabre/raptor mount system.
Hunters are the masters of bonding with beasts, so i just dont see why they suddenly would have to do it differently with some other Beast, maybe lesser dragonkins( i want my mana serpent blizzard) but not other beasts. Though once tamed it should stay with your side constantly(like anny other hunter pet) and not once an hour or so.
If that was the case it would rather be a skill with long cd than a actual pet taking up a stable slot. But then again taht wouldnt feel like a pet.

[Slickrock]

We already tame raptors.

Raptors, who are smart enough to build huts and make and wear their own jewelry..

Granted this is mostly Kalimdor raptors, Eastern Kingdom raptors don't seem to do the same and Outland raptors seem dumb as bricks, but Kalimdor's, even before Cata added Subject Nine's (nine? 5?) quests in, had quests questioning and demonstrating raptor intelligence as being at least on the murloc level.

And murlocs have their own language and /can/ cooperate with other beings just fine. Winterfin, the ones in Blasted Lands..

I ride around on a lot of drakes, which are just adolescent dragons. I'd put them into battle if I could. My hunter doesn't have slaves for pets - slaves can't be trusted. He needs to rely on all his pets as if they were flesh and blood brothers and sisters, because his life depends on theirs. And their lives DON'T depend on him, they lived in the wild without him just fine. He can't, without their aid.

Warlocks and death knights more likely have slaves than hunters. Warlocks even have talents - or used to - that sacrifice their pet for their own survival or just power. Death knights still do. Hunters are far more symbiotic with their pets.. calling it slavery does the class injustice.

I'd love to, on that note, tame wyverns or griffins. Or dragons. Dwarves would be great with griffins. Nelf hunters with their steadfast friend hippogryff, etc..

This.

[Slickrock]

And not to mention I don't buy the "slavery" argument when it's used on beasts that we can't tame for being sentient, but can slaughter by the thousands for skinning AND cooking. If we can't tame for that reason, we shouldn't be able to skin and cook them either.

[Firesighn]

I don't view any of my pets as slaves, and when I think of "taming" I feel more like Ash Ketchum, I guess, because these pets are only coming with me if they want to. I don't go around throwing pokeballs or using some kind of magic to coerce these animals into following me around. Each of my pets has their own personality and preferences. Kal talks to his pets, and doesn't ever actually refer to them as pets. And, sue me, I go with having the actual Kri and Huhuran following me around. I don't RP with anyone but my own brain so it doesn't really matter. But Kal has actual conversations with them, even if everyone else is left wondering WTH all of the clicking and screeching is. His pets work more like a pack, and they can communicate well enough to function like any pack of wolves or pride of lions or what-have-you. I have a team.

[Kalliope]

How about an quest line that would allow you to "bond" with a an appropriate dragon kin.

Perhaps you build the relationship with this creature so you can call on them once every hour or so to assist you (or whatever the appropriate cool-down would be).

Rhea's Last Egg

I loved that zone's culmination.

[Makoes]

I always try to refer to our companions as "partner".

As much as I would love some sort of quest or something to allow me to befriend some of these "sentient" species...I know it wont happen since Blizz has already pretty much scrapped any quest that made classes unique.

However, I wouldnt mind the "exotic" ability becoming a core BM ability and the ability to tame certain unique species added as the 31 point talent (or in MoP case, lv 90 tier choice)


(besides, how is using these creatures already as beasts of burden and mounts any better then slavery? I've yet to strike up a conversation with my Gryphon as we fly over the land, and my drake certainly hasnt said a peep since I aquired it...heck I'd never even come across a talking fey-dragon till Cata Hyjal...Lore-wise they might be intellegent, but game wise they really dont much to bring it to light...Flight paths are a great example)

[Quiv]

I wouldn't be surprised if Spirit Beasts are sentient.

[Albain]

(besides, how is using these creatures already as beasts of burden and mounts any better then slavery? I've yet to strike up a conversation with my Gryphon as we fly over the land, and my drake certainly hasnt said a peep since I aquired it...heck I'd never even come across a talking fey-dragon till Cata Hyjal...Lore-wise they might be intellegent, but game wise they really dont much to bring it to light...Flight paths are a great example)

I don't know that I could call it slavery. Look at the teeth and claws on all the stuff we ride around on. Look how far from safety we usually are when on them. If they really didn't want us there... we wouldn't be. Either eaten ... or thrown off while a mile off the ground. Nothing's keeping the flightpath critters where they are. No chains, no ropes. Nothing. For an ingame explanation for OOC mechanics.. we go places because those animals, intelligent or otherwise, /allow/ us to.

Kinda scary when you think about it. 8D What happens if they decide they don't want to deal with you.

[Makoes]

Ahh, but I didnt call it slavery, I asked how it was any better THEN slavery

But what I am refering to the most is the Applied events...our mounts reguardless of spieces only come when we call them.
If Wyverns can speak orc, why dont we see the Flight master and the Wyvern conversing? Anyone can make the argument that some creatures are "to" sentient, however until Blizz actually starts applying this in-game, its a hyopthetical argument. (well, as hypothetical as a virtual game can be). besides out of game sources and in-game sources are so damn conflicting...its pretty much a free for all now.

Personally myself, I can see how some things like flappy gryphons, wyverns, or drakes would be more of a problem, but its more a visual issue then anything.

But I do like the idea of something happening to allow us [hunters] to tame certain otherwise untamable beasts.

[TygerDarkstorm]

I'd rather not tame any sentient beings. It's slavery.

I'm not necessarily for or against the idea, but this argument right here against it is just silly. This is World of Warcraft where on a daily basis we see in game slavery (trolls and goblins come to mind), genocide, homicide, etc etc. We're not playing a dainty little game where slavery doesn't already happen, and our characters don't commit more atrocious acts.

Not to mention, the idea proposed said nothing about enslaving the creatures and specifically said that the hunter would be forming a type of bond with the creature, more akin to earning its trust then forcing its hand. Which, in reality, is no different then the very way most of us hunters on these boards view our pixel pets currently.

[Turgus]

Sentience is a product of intelligence and runs on a spectrum.
This is obvious in the real world, and is evident in the WoW universe as well.

I view hunter pets as pets in real life.
Some people treat their pets like an equal, some treat them like a piece of furniture or worse.
Like this there will be hunters that view their pet as a tool, like a bow or a gun, that they carry around with them until they need it for something and others will view it as a friend and companion that shares in their adventures.

Because of this viewpoint I have no problem with hunters creating a bond of friendship with any beast, dragonkin, or race for that matter.
However my hunter running around with a tauren companion might be a bit .... off...
(Snickers at the thought of my goblin riding around on the shoulders of a tauren warrior)

I guess for this reason Blizzard has made some decisions about what "we" can and cannot tame.
What method they are using to determine what can and cannot tame is a mystery, as has been pointed out previously, raptors are intelligent, create structures, tools and jewelry, so "sentience" apparently is not the deciding factor, or raptors are the exception.

My musings on the matter....

[Ziarre]

While an interesting idea, I doubt we'll see a class quest of this type. Blizzard removed those, and the closest thing you get to a class quest anymore is something that gives you a piece of armor (or weapon) at...20 and 50, wasn't it? I'm neutral on the removal of them, for the record - mostly because I already have Rhok'delar (yes, I'm awful).