WoW Petopia Community

Definitely agree with the above. Taming Takk today made finding a raptor interesting and amusing, and planted the possible seeds of a bond with Azrak. Low-flying mount + high-leaping raptor = hilarity.

Royi wrote:

Vephriel wrote:• b) I decide to tame a certain model of pet, and if that model comes on a rare I may go for that one specifically since it feels like more of an identity tame. Nothing to do with bragging rights over the rare, but I feel like I can bond more when I have a single beast to aim for. It doesn't even have to be a rare pet, I will do the same with named mobs as well (Tyrantus, Count Ungula, etc). They are not rares, but they have their own existence that separates them from a cluster of mobs who would share the same model.

I agree here. I am 100% more inclined to release or give up on a pet if its just a random Frostwolf in AV, compared to either Lupos or Timber (whom I use currently). Timber = awesome sauce, regardless if his skin is unique or not. Froswolf = boring regular mob.

Very true, though at the same time that's not always the case. One of my closest pets, Azzam, was just a plain Dreadsaber from Sholazar Basin. Admittedly he wasn't a planned tame at all, so perhaps back then if I had been going out to intentionally tame that skin I would have selected Shango for the name aspect (when he had the Dreadsaber model). Anyways though, sometimes a regular pet will just call out and choose you rather than the other way around.

Sometimes I have such silly complex reasonings for taming the mobs I do. If I'm not going for a particular Named creature, then I might look at the NPC names of the mobs that use the model I want. I will pick the one who's NPC name fits with the personality of the pet I'm after. [Example: I once wanted a yellow scorpid named Rocky. Available mobs that used the yellow skin were Scorpashi Snapper, Duneclaw Matriarch, Stonelash Pincer, and Sand Scorpid. I went after the Stonelash Pincer because it had the word 'stone' in it, aka 'rock'. x)] Or at times I'll choose a certain mob within a group of identical ones who shows some sort of behaviour that separates it from the rest, or one that might be off by itself. Another method is actually just taming the very first creature that loads in to my line of sight when I head in their direction.

In the end, everyone will have their own process for choosing a pet. The only thing that I personally don't care for is the intent or attitude behind hunters that will go after a unique rare for no other purpose than to stand in a city or brag about it and have no feelings/attachment whatsoever. People who will drop that pet without a second thought as soon as the next shiny rare comes out. Again, it's not an issue of people going after those rares in general....it's the hunters who don't have any connection to their pets at all and only use them as a plaque, a trophy, a piece of bling. Yet even still that will not affect my own playstyle at all, it's simply a thing that I find distasteful, and that's due to my own views on hunter pets and how much they mean to me.

What amuses me is that this poll doesn't take into consideration bosses and their tags. As many of us know, taming a raid boss can be as difficult as finding a rare spawn. DaBeast is offended (and doesn't care that he's no longer a raid boss)! As has already been stated, there are unique-skinned non-rares out there who wouldn't be covered by any of the above-mentioned changes.

I voted against any changes. Trophy-hunters have enough rares with unique skins they can hunt if that's all they care about. If they can't bring themselves to tame a skin they personally like because it wouldn't appear to be rare to others, then that's their problem.

I prefer my non-rare pets who stand out from the pack because everyone else is after the rares. The rares I have, I have because they and I have bonded in some way - or, quite simply, they're the only available instance of that particular skin.

I just don't see why I should be stuck with some of my pets looking different from others just so the trophy-hunters can show off their prizes.

Just my two cents.

Kalliope wrote:What amuses me is that this poll doesn't take into consideration bosses and their tags. As many of us know, taming a raid boss can be as difficult as finding a rare spawn. DaBeast is offended (and doesn't care that he's no longer a raid boss)! As has already been stated, there are unique-skinned non-rares out there who wouldn't be covered by any of the above-mentioned changes.

I voted against any changes. Trophy-hunters have enough rares with unique skins they can hunt if that's all they care about. If they can't bring themselves to tame a skin they personally like because it wouldn't appear to be rare to others, then that's their problem.

I prefer my non-rare pets who stand out from the pack because everyone else is after the rares. The rares I have, I have because they and I have bonded in some way - or, quite simply, they're the only available instance of that particular skin.

I just don't see why I should be stuck with some of my pets looking different from others just so the trophy-hunters can show off their prizes.

Just my two cents.

I think I love you.

Royi wrote:I agree here. I am 100% more inclined to release or give up on a pet if its just a random Frostwolf in AV, compared to either Lupos or Timber (whom I use currently). Timber = awesome sauce, regardless if his skin is unique or not. Froswolf = boring regular mob.

And yet it goes both ways. One of my favorite worgs was a Frostwolf, and they're not any easier to tame than Timber or Lupos. You either get to sneak through a battleground that is more often than not packed with people looking to kill you, ooor sit on your butt and wait for a rare to spawn.

It really doesn't matter. A mob is more special than what their name or tag implies. When you strip them of their rare status and squealing fangirls, Loque and Karoma and Krush are really no more important than a raptor or a boar from Durotar. What you turn that pet into when you tame them - that is what should be special, not their skin or their tag.

Edit: Oooof course this is just my opinion, though. :P

I guess I'll cast my ballot.

J (Other) - Lets face it, the main reason we're having this discussion is cause of Miss Madexx. So heres my fix: keep brown Madexx, and change the color scheme (or even just the tone) of the brown Venomscale Spitter to something other than Madexx's brown, red, blue, green, or black. Problem solved.

Teevo wrote:I guess I'll cast my ballot.

J (Other) - Lets face it, the main reason we're having this discussion is cause of Miss Madexx. So heres my fix: keep brown Madexx, and change the color scheme (or even just the tone) of the brown Venomscale Spitter to something other than Madexx's brown, red, blue, green, or black. Problem solved.

Dammit, I fail at being an e-detective!

For the record, I wasn't really that offended, but I just hate it when I'm getting equaled to the lowest denominator.

Tyger, it's kind of hard to misread "In my opinion, trophy pets entirely miss the point of being a hunter. Utility>bling. Our class fights enough ugly stereotypes as is without adding "shallow" to the mix.". It was probably said badly, but essentially Iyor was saying that if you have a trophy pet, then you are just being shallow. I also get the feeling that a lot of people don't remember that for a while there BM was considered the 'Pokemon' spec, where that was pretty much the only real point of it. To have those trophy pets out in Dalaran to show off to people. I never agreed with that logic, mind, but Ghostcrawler himself said that was the main point back during Wrath.

There is a difference in having a pet that you like because they are pretty, and a pet you like because they are functional. There is NOTHING WRONG with having a pet just because they are a trophy. It is not shallow, it is not vapid or vacuous. Its just being proud of your pet. The hunter class has a lot more problems then people with trophy pets, I can assure you. That is the least of our problems.

Small addition: We have TWENTY FIVE stable slots now. That is a lot of room for pets. More then enough to cover all of your utility, and still have plenty of room for pets to just show off. TO have just because they are pretty.

Loethlin wrote:For the record, I wasn't really that offended, but I just hate it when I'm getting equaled to the lowest denominator.

Eh..? I are confused. Nothing I said was meant to offend you or anyone.. I keep reading it over and over, dont see how anything I said can be taken offensively to be honest, lol. Hope we're all good! rawr.

No, not you, lol!
Sorry >.<
Guys on the 2nd page of this thread. Don't worry bout it.

Palladiamorsdeus wrote:Tyger, it's kind of hard to misread "In my opinion, trophy pets entirely miss the point of being a hunter. Utility>bling. Our class fights enough ugly stereotypes as is without adding "shallow" to the mix.". It was probably said badly, but essentially Iyor was saying that if you have a trophy pet, then you are just being shallow. I also get the feeling that a lot of people don't remember that for a while there BM was considered the 'Pokemon' spec, where that was pretty much the only real point of it. To have those trophy pets out in Dalaran to show off to people. I never agreed with that logic, mind, but Ghostcrawler himself said that was the main point back during Wrath.

There is a difference in having a pet that you like because they are pretty, and a pet you like because they are functional. There is NOTHING WRONG with having a pet just because they are a trophy. It is not shallow, it is not vapid or vacuous. Its just being proud of your pet. The hunter class has a lot more problems then people with trophy pets, I can assure you. That is the least of our problems.

Small addition: We have TWENTY FIVE stable slots now. That is a lot of room for pets. More then enough to cover all of your utility, and still have plenty of room for pets to just show off. TO have just because they are pretty.

I think what people have been trying to get at is that we feel to have a pet for nothing but show, just to dump it for the next "must have" pet is shallow. If you tame pets only to have them as unused trophies, then some of us think that's missing the point of the hunter class. Being a hunter is like getting to have the ultimate bond with an animal. A wild creature that no other person in the world can control. We're privy to some wonderful companions and it's sad to know that some people don't see it that way; that they're pet is no more a tool than a piece of gear--the next "epic."

And by the way, just because BM wasn't EJ's recommended spec for WotLK and Blizzard never knew how to balance it for both PvE and PvP doesn't mean it wasn't ever more than a "Pokemon" spec. That's an incredibly narrow minded view and those of us hunters who adore the BM spec, it's offensive. I know that I personally have always adored BM spec and topped charts during WotLK.

So we ARE going post tame?

Post tame, there should be nothing different. No tags, no dragons, nothing. Your Humar with his pretty tag would be in no way different than my Pitch, except you may have stood around waiting longer. Same attack speed, same abilities, same colour. I'm glad you got the one you were after, but gloating about how you have your shiny tag with your cat's name/portrait just makes you seem a type of elitist. We're trying to stop that behaviour, not encourage it.

Though, granted, lot of times people have a rare because that's the ONLY way to get the skin they want (green devilsaur, fire turtle, white saber cat...). I don't park myself in Org with Krush out, I use him when I want to be with a pet that has a skin I love. Trust me, I wish he wasn't a rare. In fact, I have a lot of rares for what I just said; I have no other choice if I like that colour. They aren't trophies (though you might argue the spirit beasts), they're the colours I want. If I was after trophies, I'd have Terrorpene (but I dislike the skin), or Sambas (I have 4 cats and no desire to tame him), or Rak'Shiri or... list goes on.

We are pigeon-holed into rare camping for certain skins. It happens. (Especially when you seem to have a THING for green pets)

Cozzene wrote:So we ARE going post tame?

Post tame, there should be nothing different. No tags, no dragons, nothing. Your Humar with his pretty tag would be in no way different than my Pitch, except you may have stood around waiting longer. Same attack speed, same abilities, same colour. I'm glad you got the one you were after, but gloating about how you have your shiny tag with your cat's name/portrait just makes you seem a type of elitist. We're trying to stop that behaviour, not encourage it.

Though, granted, lot of times people have a rare because that's the ONLY way to get the skin they want (green devilsaur, fire turtle, white saber cat...). I don't park myself in Org with Krush out, I use him when I want to be with a pet that has a skin I love. Trust me, I wish he wasn't a rare. In fact, I have a lot of rares for what I just said; I have no other choice if I like that colour. They aren't trophies (though you might argue the spirit beasts), they're the colours I want. If I was after trophies, I'd have Terrorpene (but I dislike the skin), or Sambas (I have 4 cats and no desire to tame him), or Rak'Shiri or... list goes on.

We are pigeon-holed into rare camping for certain skins. It happens. (Especially when you seem to have a THING for green pets)

Hate to say this but having a show-offy pet isnt elitist. Being Elitist is saying BM is crappy compared to MM or SV. I strut my pets out and I love it when people ask me about them. Not only do I feel good, but I feel even better when I can give them the information they seek. Some of us just like being rare hunters. Just because YOU don't like it doesnt mean many others have the same feelings. And by 'many others', I mean others outside of this forum......a lot of hunters that I know on Moon Guard want a silver portrait so they can separate the rares from the normals.

EDIT: So looking at the poll, if we make it simple....22 people dont care. 30 people do care and feel they should have SOMETHING unique about them.

I wouldn't mind at all if they where a little bigger to be honest.

Deleted a bunch of argumentative posts. Keep it civil and clean, kids, or we'll have to lock the thread entirely.

Yes, this is a subject many of us are passionate about, but there's no excuse for attacking each other's playstyles.

I would like to reiterate that I think 'C' is a win-win choice for everyone. The people that Like to camp rares would be assured of recognition of the time they spent hunting down their pets, and more importantly, there would be no reason for rares to need rare skins any more, so all those difficult-to-get looks could be made available on common mobs for the people that Don't like to camp rares, like me.

I don't mind things the way they are. However, I would like rares to be bigger.

Actually, some pet families could do with a size boost anyway.

Celi wrote:...some pet families could do with a size boost anyway.

Agreed.

Teevo wrote:

Celi wrote:...some pet families could do with a size boost anyway.

Agreed.

Hee, I wish there was some more standardization when it comes to particular species. Nearly all of the spider models, for example, are around the same size, yet the spiked ones remain so tiny. They're beautifully detailed, I've always wished they were at least as large as their cousins.