Talk:Guardian/Archive 1

Guardian

So, turns out Guardian really is the profession name, to everyone I disagreed with or said it'd be a different one, you were right xD No official word on this yet though, eh? 68.144.77.185 23:17, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

This is like the Necromancer, but ArenaNet has yet to exclaim whether we are supposed to keep this information up now it's out. - Infinite - talk 23:19, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

T'would seem that PC Gamer jumped the gun with this article, yeah? Well, it is nice for another tidbit. Would this necessitate modifying the Main Page as well as the professions page to reflect it? Or leave those until ArenaNet confirms? 68.144.77.185 23:20, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

You act like PC Gamer is a reliable source. Eive 23:26, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) It's best to leave that link to the offcial announcement. Currently it's 1 revert and 1 delete away from removing the Guardian here, that is manageable. (If we change a lot of articles now, we'll have to go revert them all if ArenaNet wasnts us to.

Reliable or not, it's still PC Gamer and they still have quite a name to themselves. This ball is in ArenaNet's court now. - Infinite - talk 23:28, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

PC Gamer is an incredibly bad source of information - see the past articles where they called charrs "live tigers", spoke about paragons in GW2 and stated that dungeons would be sold as expansions. This time, though, it appears they may be right: PC Gamer's editor mentioned in his tweet that it's legitm, so I would rather keep this article (for now). Erasculio 23:33, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Seems genuine to me. The author says he was in contact with ANet to make sure he was allowed to put the image with that name when they did into the article. I think the assertion that it is a soldier is perhaps a little forward - but fairly obvious so probably not worth disputing. -- aspectacle  23:41, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Hmm... it just seems "off".. to me. I'm not saying this is fake but I'm curious as to why Anet didn't release info before the user on guru did. Last time I checked, the company prefers to be the first one. Doesn't hrt to be unconfirmed though, Mesmer is. - Lucian Shadowborn 23:54, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Regina has confirmed it in this post on GWGuru, as well as a date for the reveal: Thursday 27th. --Wormwood 23:52, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! With that said.. - Lucian Shadowborn 23:57, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) Until next thursday, I suggest a slight change to this article. 1) No where is it stated it will be a playable profession. ATM, it is in the same category as mesmer. 2) Though it will be expanded upon, they also had expansions of lore on non-playable things before. 3) No where do I see it called a soldier profession, albeit it is likely to be the case. There is one thing confirmed: There is a profession, which is Logan's profession, called "guardian." -- Konig/talk 23:58, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Good point.... now I should prob revert my change. - Lucian Shadowborn 0:00, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

I care less what we rephrase it to, but this is confirmed to be a playable profession by ArenaNet as mentioned above, isn't it? - Infinite - talk 00:01, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Don't think so but find me a link and quote so I can just control f it. - Lucian Shadowborn 0:04, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) Fair enough. Personally I am filled with glee regardless of the state of release this profession is in right now. - Infinite - talk 00:04, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) x2 It probably is a playable profession given "We will have a full reveal of the guardian, along with all the goodies (pics, videos), next Thursday." But on the profession nav, it should still go to unconfirmed - while a confirmed profession, it's unknown which it would go under (is it soldier? Most likely, but it could, technically, be scholar (spell-caster), or adventurer (logan uses leather armor in the book if that has any credit)). -- Konig/talk 00:03, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

I haven't read the book, so that leather fact is new to me (or a clear indication that Mr. Baker voice-acts a lot of extremely gay characters). But the concept art of the BML is plate armor. That's what I based the soldier part on. - Infinite - talk 00:08, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

"But the concept art of the BML is plate armor" Who says that BML is the guardian? :P I don't recall Logan ever using a shield or a mace. Maybe that's old concept art and the BML's color changed - which would look like what happened to the necro asura seen in the Manifesto trailer and then the official release, would it not (looked more grayer in the trailer to me). -- Konig/talk 00:12, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) Damn. That's jumping to conclusions for me, right there! (I am pretty, pretty, preeeetty sure it is, but you're right, not confirmed to be the same profession!) - Infinite - talk 00:10, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Check out 1:04 in this video, Konig: Logan's clearly wielding a shield. --Wormwood 00:18, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Nit-picking here but Logan does use a warhammer (big mace) if that's any consolation? However, seeing as Logan is both wearing plate mail in the picture, is confirmed to wear it in the book, and is pretty much confirmed to be the profession being revealed, could we safely admit that there is enough official evidence lurking around to say he is, in fact, wearing heavy armour and therefore a soldier? 68.144.77.185 00:21, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

(Reset indent) (Edit conflict) IMO, if there's even 0.01% chance of it not being the case, it is speculation. At this point, due to there being no official confirmation, it is speculation. No matter how likely it is. To be clear, I think that the BML is indeed the guardian profession. And that it is a soldier. But again: Speculation until proven confirmed. Also, for the war hammer and armor references about logan from the book: books are not limited to mechanics. -- Konig/talk 00:30, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Oh, I was just using the book to show that it was confirmed he used it as his primary armour, not that he was unable to figure out how one puts on other types. And yes, I know and it's been stated repeatedly that the book does not give the mechanics but still, Logan wears plate in a cannonical book as his primary set, wears it in trailers, in gameplay, etc, kind of points heavily to a single point: he wears plate. However, seeing as how we only have to wait about 6 days, I won't push the point. (until Thursday) xD 68.144.77.185 02:16, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

I wouldn't really be surprized if its just another warrior with some flashy skills, ArenaNet could of showed us something more impressive, even the mesmer being close to Febuary's holliday. 74.171.163.219 06:21, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

"The guardian is a spell-casting fighter profession.[1][2][3] It utilizes spells with a blue aura."

I understand your revert, Konig. A second go I thought about it a little bit and said "OH! I guess the blue stuff IS spell-casting," since that was the reason I edited in the first place. However, I say we keep this page as simple as possible until Thursday, since it's possible (Maybe not probable, but possible)that some of the stuff from EoD (Which I DID read, by the way :D) might have been NPC-based and not guardian-based. Just some thoughts. ---~=Ѧrtaxerxes 00:10, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

No need to keep it simple when it's a solid fact that this is the case. -- Konig/talk 00:15, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Logan was confirmed to be a Guardian, ergo we can safely assume his normal skill behaviour is directly connected to this profession. :) - Infinite - talk 00:18, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) x3 Logan with shield; he has also been seen with a shield in a couple of trailers. Besides, he's wearing armor described as "heavy armor" at its concept art, and just looking at it is a very strong hint that it's heavy armor anyway. While there is very strong evidence that he's a soldier, though, I would like to avoid calling the guardians soldiers yet.

Likewise, I'm going to edit this article to remove the bits about being a spell caster and the blue aura spells. We don't know exactly how the profession works, we don't know if those are really spells, we don't know if they are really blue auras, and so on. The book isn't the best source for game mechanics, as seen on how Eirn could use hammers despite being a ranger. Erasculio 00:15, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm okay with the page as it is. I just don't want people to start adding random facts from EoD that may possibly be unrevealed guardian mechanics. EDIT: I agree with Erasculio :D ---~=Ѧrtaxerxes 00:21, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) I fail to see why official information shouldn't be documented. But I digress. I don't really care about these pages. I just loathe speculation to the nth degree, and that's gone (though facts are gone too, but like I said, I digress). Likewise to the spellcaster bit, we've seen him: use a staff, use a sword, and use a shield. However, this should merely be noted in notes, since the demo was outdated since the time we got access to it. I would say note the information from the book, however, books are not limited to mechanics. -- Konig/talk 00:30, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

This sounds kinda like the Dervish in GW because the Dervish is a Warrior Monk and Guardian is a Warrior Elementalist. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.70.56.195 (talk).

Yeah, I think the dervish was a fail though. If you look at the people that influenced the dervish, they're covered in deep scar tatoos and rings all over. If anything, the dervish should've used blood instead of energy (or lower energy requirement while bringing blood). Anet said at least one will return, at least one will come back with a different name, and at least one will be influenced by an old profession. We'll find out once all the professions are made public. - Lucian Shadowborn 0:28, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

wait is guardian a soldier or scholar?if its a scholar then u can kick mesmer out :/--Icyyy Blue 00:29, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Well, it is almost indefinitely the cover your eyes Konig, specula-DEATH ahead! a soldier, but it is unconfirmed for right now. Anyways, I have no idea how the IP figured out how this profession works without any gameplay videos. Eive 00:31, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

probably cuz blue aura thing is like water eleish? idk ha--Icyyy Blue 00:35, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

If we can draw anything from concept art (which we really can't(hah, draw, concept art)) there's going to be giant blue glowing weaponry. Though, in Logan's spic on the page for guardian his sheild looks a bit.. glowy... and blue.... either way, we can only hope that guardian isn't a wammo or psuedo-monk ( can though, hope that it's an imba).~ Reez 20:59, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Weapons?

Shouldnt we write down all the weapons that Logan have used and add that to this page? Or is it somehow possible that he's not using the weapons he should as a Guardian? --AdventurerPotatoe - 02:41, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

I think we should at least mention that he uses a Sword and Shield in the demo, and a hammer in the book. I would be more hesitant to mention the hammer if it weren't for the fact he heavily emphasizes his use of it (and over and over prefers to use it, using his magic with it). --Amannelle 03:02, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

DUH I just forgot to mention, we should also state he uses a staff in the demo too. :D --Amannelle 03:06, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

I would rather not mention anything. In the book, Eir often used a hammer, yet we know she's a ranger and that ranger cannot use hammers. The fact Logan uses a sword and a shield is made somewhat evident at the screenshot, so I don't think we should state it yet. Considering how we will get more information (including, very likely, a full list of weapons guardians can use) in less than one week, I think it's best to wait for now. Erasculio 03:13, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Hmmm... yeah, I see what you mean. :D It's for the best to wait (until next week, at least). :D --Amannelle 12:55, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Eir does'nt use hammers in battle she uses axes72.220.25.97 01:18, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Edge of Destiny, page 205: "The norn warrior rushed across the sands toward him, pulling a heavy mallet from her belt" (takes place during the arena fight between Edge of Steel and Dragonspawn's Destiny with Eir fighting Logan). Given, while this shows her using a hammer/mallet in battle, rangers in GW2 can't use hammers and (I can't believe I'm saying this, curse you Konig!) "the books do not reflect in-game mechanics". 68.144.77.185 02:02, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Or we can wait until we actually have that information considering its subject to change until announced. The demos were from a while back... even though I have the strong suspicion Guardians will still make use of the weapons mentioned, I don't think we should get too excited and start putting up speculative and possibly incorrect information. 66.176.28.250 02:21, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

I agree with 66.176, no use speculating. We have to just sit and wait 4 days. No biggy. - Lucian Shadowborn 3:56, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

BML is a Guardian, Izzy Cartwright confirms it

"My Guardian on Dev is now named "Bluemace Lady" <3." http://twitter.com/#!/IzzyCartwright/status/28647047158566914 It's like he's watching the debate on the Wiki. :P -- ᴥ GreyGhost (talk!) ᴥ 03:21, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

sorry about this peoples

YES YES YES YES YES YAY!!!!!!! WOOHOO :D OLÉ! AWESUM!--The Holy Dragons 07:37, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

</running in circles yelling yay Guardians!> (almost 3 hours later) --The Holy Dragons 10:22, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

ha im just glad they are telling us what it is (:--Icyyy Blue 10:36, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

same here but I LOVE the GW1 para's :D and I think I'll definetly love the Guardian ;3 --The Holy Dragons 10:36, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Imbardians! Ge4ce-Talk-Contribs 13:05, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

YEAH! but Ge4ce if you really love the GW1 para you should know there's more then just imba :D --The Holy Dragons 13:45, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Like man-skirts and shouting at random people! -- Konig/talk 14:12, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

"Can't Touch This!" Ge4ce-Talk-Contribs 14:14, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

MANSKIRTS we have Pants!! --The Holy Dragons 14:19, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Too bad it's only one set of armor... ;) At least with Guardian, it looks like you now have pants! - Lucian Shadowborn 16:38, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

yea true though I'm going to miss the angelic themed armors (though (aggain)who says Guardians don't have angelic themed armors too!!--The Holy Dragons 16:43, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Guardians do have angelic armors. So does every other race. It's called Seraph armor. And there's been human warriors wearing it. -- Konig/talk 22:40, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

yea but, last time I checked Seraph Armor wasn't for players? --The Holy Dragons 14:53, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Most, if not all, NPC armors will be available to players. I think Seraph armor was included as an "NPC armor." -- Konig/talk 16:07, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Yea anyhow I would LOVE Logan's armor on my Guardian! =D --The Holy Dragons 16:49, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

It would make sense to have NPCs that are essential to stand out from players, thus having their own customized armor. It would look similiar but the devil resides in detail. We'll just have to wait and see. - Lucian Shadowborn 3:57, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

In GW1 I always admired Ascalon Guards armor, and especially Ebon Vanguard armor, so it will be nice to have a chance to wear npc armor now Sklv55 21:33, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

As per source two above here

If guardian is in fact the profession of the BML concept art, we don't have to wait 'till the official reveal for the armor class; BML wears heavy armor, ergo guardians wear heavy armor. (Massive duhh, but still.) If anyone objects to adding this information to the article, though.

EDIT: Also note Heavy armor = Soldier - Infinite - talk 13:40, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Out of curiosity, do we know for sure that BML wear heavy armor? I mean, of course we know (and that the guardian is the second soldier, etc etc), but has any official source mentioned that? ~~

No. We merely know it looks like heavy armor. But there's been no official confirmation. :P I still say just sit and wait. 5.5 days won't kill you.-- Konig/talk 14:14, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Oh come on, poor Izzy went through all that trouble tweeting us that subtle confirmation, y'know! :P BML armor is almost identical to Warrior armor. But I'm fine either way~ - Infinite - talk 14:24, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

If the Guardian really is the 2nd Soldier, then players have a choice, such as raw attack + increase in dmg for party (Warrior) or attack + increase defence for party (Guardian) I nice contrast imo. 90.200.54.105 15:33, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

You really are the Speculator --The Holy Dragons 16:05, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Here's My Question...

...If Logan is able to use leather armor (presumable adventurer-level armor), could that mean that professions can use armor below their own? (Warriors can use heavy, medium, light; Adventurers can use meduim and light, Scholors can use just light) It would make a sort of sense.... Zolann The Irreverent 16:54, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

In the book Eir could use hammers, yet rangers can't use them. Not everything in the books translate exactly to in-game mechanics. Erasculio 17:02, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Eir's hammer was for sculpting, but yes, books don't have to follow game mechanics. - Giant Nuker 17:18, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

And of course, leather could be used to make low-quality heavy armor. -Alarielle- 14:27, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Since environmental weapons are prominent in Guild Wars 2, maybe Eir's mallet is considered just that. I mean, surely a one-handed sculpting mallet is about as different from a Devona-like warhammer than a great sword is from a long sword, and so it'd probably be classified with other hammers. 71.70.143.47 04:58, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, but it'd still be cool to mix leather armor with heavy armor xP Kaon Frostblade 20:07, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Or, like next to everything, it follows on from WoW?

Warrior (and other Heavy armour wearers) = Heavy, Med. Cloth.

Ranger (and other Medium armour wearers) = Med, Cloth

Mesmer (and other Cloth armour wearers) = Cloth (dduuuerrhp)

--Neil • 21:14, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Or, books just don't limit themselves to mechanics. Honestly, we're told that soldiers can wear only heavy armor. Also, that system predates WoW, or any Warcraft game. -- Konig/talk 21:18, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Konig's perfectly correct; Soldiers can *only* wear heavy armor, Adventurers can *only* wear medium armor and Scholars can *only* wear light armor. The books are not canon when it concerns professions and their limitations. - Infinite - talk 21:28, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Konig is right however, what about those stones that can use the appearance of one set of armor but have ratings of another (ie: Ranger who likes a warrior's armor)? Of course, I am not counting if it only applies within a particular profession. I forget what they're called but I know they will exist, either in-game or through in-game store. - Lucian Shadowborn 23:51, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Why people keep saying its copy of WoW, as if blizzard came up whit all that stuff and none of those things are acient folklore or random fairytail story's.

No offense or anything but does it really matter? I mean your gonna want to use the highest armor you can so that mean if your a soilder plate, Adventurer leather, Scholar cloth itts not like a tank would run around in cloth armor174.109.108.119 04:54, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

It has been made clear that each group can only wear one type of armor. It was also said right before GoA's release that the books do not reflect the game, obviously. Eive 06:59, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Off-topic, but I would like to reply to this: "itts not like a tank would run around in cloth armor". The guardian can spec attribute points into Intelligence and Willpower. As there is no "tanking" in GW2 (seriously, there is NO tanking in GW2, there is no bodyblock, so if the AI wants to move to the backline, it walks right through your "tank"), the guardian could -with the ability to wear cloth armor- probably gank with some super-duper strong spells. Albeit we don't know what kind of spells these are (offensive of nature, or just supportive, or other), cloth armor would boost such spells. That's why every profession class is limited to 1 armor class. - Infinite - talk 11:47, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

"the books do not reflect the game, obviously."THey do reflect the game lore... it's mechanics they don't. Just clarifying. @Infinite: You're assuming that different kinds of armor give different benefits outside armor rating. -- Konig/talk 14:59, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Not assuming: Magus Garment. They do. - Infinite - talk 15:17, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

EDIT: Compare with Apprentice Coat. - Infinite - talk 15:25, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

1) Your apprentice coat shows no documented stats - does this mean there are no stats or that we don't know them? And if the former: 2) Is that due to it's type of armor (i.e., light), or is it due to the kind of armor (i.e., magnus). Remember before Prophecies? We had different armor sets give different stats to the very same profession (i.e., Iceforged and Flameforged for elementalist gave different stats). For all we know, those stats will be available on heavy armor pieces. What would be a good evidence would be the Magus armor set for light, and the heavy armor equivalent - which we don't have thus cannot compare. Yet. -- Konig/talk 21:07, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

As for 1, there are no stats. If someone throws me necromancer and warrior charr footage with clear inventory investigation, I can compare it for you (I already know the outcome, but that's not my official call.) - Infinite - talk 21:40, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

I think you mean ranger, not necromancer. And you cannot take just any ol' medium or heavy armor set for comparison. It has to be the same set. E.g., the Heritage armor set, which is available in all three profession types, or if there's Seraph armor for all three types. Otherwise it would be like comparing apples to watermelons. -- Konig/talk 22:57, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Never heard of a appleon? :P j/k... - Lucian Shadowborn 1:15, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Hate to come across as annoyed, but you're flooding recent changes for something we have literally no ability to check at this time. When the game comes out, I'm sure it will become immediately apparent the answer to this question. Aquadrizzt (talk)(contribs) 01:49, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Centurion Set, Konig? ;D - Infinite - talk 13:46, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Though I dislike to continue this discussion, so final comment: Are they from the same NPC and considered the Heavy armor equivalent of the magus set? If not, how do we know there isn't a set for heavy armor that gives the same stats as the magus set? Your point cannot be proven with our limited knowledge. -- Konig/talk 16:53, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Both sets are character creation sets in the demo, they share variables in terms of stat boosts, level, etc. The only difference is there armor class, their defense, looks and stats boosted. They are safe to consider eachother's armor class counterparts. :P - Infinite - talk 17:12, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Guardian Reveal Date

will the guardian be revealed Thursday PST time? cause if so, hey Friday =_= —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Usernameisapain (talk • contribs).

I've moved your commen to it's own location and please sign your comments by using

--~~~~

And all I know is that it's being released on Thursday (UTC) I guess meaning it's between now and 30 hours ^^ --The Holy Dragons 07:33, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Why wouldn't they release on PST when they live in PST? -- Konig/talk 12:26, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

They really need to specify, they're a division of NCsoft West, Anet will almost always post in PST. What I don't get is, if they're PST, why is the wiki UTC or was GMT. :P - Lucian Shadowborn 14:38, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Probably since it's the 0 mark for time differences in common usage. PST is often referred to "-7 GMT", GMT or UTC is never referred to "+7 PST" or w/e the numbers of hour differences are. 16:51, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

That shield looks so boss

I want it 71.194.87.164 05:12, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

IMO it's just a blocking effect on his normal bladed shield. --The Holy Dragons 06:10, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

If that is the case then I think I have to make a guardian now. Also, as i saw on IRC, an epic looking skill used by Logan. Just thought I'd show that off here. Eive 07:48, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

In my opinion that shield looks like the Blue Aura I imagined reading Edge of Destiny. We will find out later today though.--Decoinferno 09:36, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

@ Eive and I already wanted to create a Guardian (hence my page) The Holy Dragons --95.97.106.133 10:31, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Some information

Courtesy of Eurogamer. [1] ShadowRunner 11:53, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

and I already loved this profession <3 The Holy Dragons --95.97.106.133 12:11, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Two apparent screenshots too. ShadowRunner 12:15, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

ok I'm adding you to my friends list , like it or not! <3 The Holy Dragons --95.97.106.133 12:17, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

I've only read the title, but... replaces monk? ...*eye twitches* --Odal talk 12:22, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

why? didn't you know the replaced them? though I preffer saying they replace Paragons ^^ --95.97.106.133 12:23, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

They aren't replacing them, and I'm not gonna argue this. They have a similar feel but hell, they've said the playstyle is more akin to the Necromancer. And shit, I'm glad I decided to make a Chardian. --Odal talk 12:25, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

A charr-guardian? =D, Though I'm really excited too!, my GW2 para was the first Guardian after all ^^ The Holy Dragons --95.97.106.133 12:29, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

About that interview, they stated that there as teasing about an assasin-roguish like proffesion coming. Where should that be mentioned?--Sierra84.196.119.34 12:56, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Bottom of the interview had a video of some skills (presumably the ones going up on the GW2 site later) but here's the video itself. [2] ShadowRunner 12:57, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

(Reset indent) So like, I heard this is now my most favourited profession, through sheer visuals alone. It looks mad imba, but that's the teaser part. :P - Infinite - talk 13:48, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Also, I SO called Aegis. :D - Infinite - talk 13:52, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Revealed

http://www.guildwars2.com/en/the-game/professions/guardian/ (Xu Davella 14:01, 27 January 2011 (UTC))

Yea, documenting on sandbox, currently. - Infinite - talk 14:12, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Some of the skill video titles seems to be messup up. There is no way that the skill in the last video is Hammer of Wisdom.--84.2.115.181 14:31, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Documented and moved over. Fill the rest in as we go. - Infinite - talk 14:35, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm getting that idea, too. :P - Infinite - talk 14:35, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Is it just me?

Is it just me or does the victim in the Zealot's Defense video look like a possible Mesmer? -- Ocarinamaster 14:48, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

NPC clothing, no. - Infinite - talk 14:51, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

i admit it looks kinda like a mesmer to me too XD 204.77.37.145 15:35, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

A Mesmer? Running from a single Centar? You best be joking!--Yozuk 17:22, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

You'll know it's a mesmer when it's the one guarding the guardian. ;) --Amannelle 17:37, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Because mesmers are the best profession ever. --'Mai Yi' talk 19:50, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Shield of Absorption

Bubble shield, deploied! --~~Lotus~~ 14:57, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Make a Guardian in GW2, and name him Master Chief xDD 67.188.200.38 23:40, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Best support prof so far

I know Anet is trying to get rid of the holy trinity, but this looks like the best support profession so far. When you get rid of dedicated healing class, being able to mitigate damage would be the next best thing. I bet every PuG would spam "GLF Guardian". It's kind of like how Imbagons/ST Prot are in GW1, difference of not having one would be like the difference between night and day. --167.167.15.254 15:42, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

In my opinion this won't be too much of a problem. While guardians have some defense, they also look like they'd be significantly less effective against large bosses which can easily bypass or ignore movement restrictions. Furthermore, they are looking to remove the "LFG" aspect of the game almost entirely, so they have a stated goal of allowing people to roll with what they have. -- Frozzen 16:12, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

No speculation here. - Infinite - talk 16:27, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

It kind of seems like a Warrior Monk Sklv55 17:39, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm glad that Anet decided to keep the protection side of what the Monk did have to offer, that was what, in my opinion, made the first one, different to other games.. 90.200.54.235 21:21, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Anet made a monk/ritualist/paragon/warrior class O.o . Awesome... I dub thee monktuagon...ior... or maybe just rituagon ~ Reez 21:26, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Monktuagon hahaha thats awesome. 108.75.73.62 03:47, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Finally...

Finally a true Protection class. I always loved playing a Protection monk in Guild Wars 1 but it always seemed like a lackluster healer with most prot skills healing in some way besides jsut preventing damage. With this calss it seems like we finally have a true protector. that and it seems that Protection monks get a hell of a lot more awesome and kick butt in Guild wars 2. 74.220.50.81 16:07, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Share the buff?

At the cost of losing your own? That's a very rewarding way to encourage people against using it.

Players: Guardian Please buff us please please? :(

Guardian: Nou! Screw you guys, I'm keeping my buffs to myself, you can all go die >:D

It's called having your cake(buffs) and eating it too(keep them) rather than share it(use and lose). Since this game can apparently be played solo, I will consider the Guardian's special abilities(like Eles have Attunements, Necros have Death Shroud etc) to be those awsome buffs just on myself, and never share them with others >:D because I would lose them on myself :(

It would have been better if they just put a downtime on the Virtues while the effect also stays inherent to the Guardian using it, then I wouldn't mind using it to help noobs around, but giving noobs my special buffs and losing them on myself? No way, no chance, nevah!

Think about it this way: If reviving another player is FREE, people wouldn't mind helping each other out, it is just a click of a button. Now change the rules to "revive target other ally at the cost of say 100g", and watch as nobody ever does it. Why should I spent MY 100g to revive YOU(noobie)? I have cake(buffs), why would give it to newbs(you)? Make the class more like Jesus who multiplies bread so that EVERYONE can share, including himself, that would be a way cooler and miraculous profession. ONLY Jesus and a few other people would mind giving YOU HIS bread while HE starves, most people(players) wouldn't... 99.244.36.38 16:50, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

You misjudge this virtue thing completely. - Infinite - talk 16:52, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

And you base this misjudging on what exactly? 99.244.36.38 16:54, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Read the articles in the Guardian category and see on what I based it for yourself. - Infinite - talk 16:55, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

I've gotten the same impression as the IP has, but then again, I just got onto page 2. Eive 17:02, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Courage: Every 30 seconds you are granted Aegis, blocking the next attack. Use this skill to apply Aegis to all nearby allies. (This disables your Courage for 120 seconds.) Explanation: Every 30 seconds I can block the next attack(my cake). Using this skill I can make all noobs around me block the next attack against them(I give them my cake). For 2 minutes, I do not get the passive effect anymore(I gave away all my cake, now I have none left). What did I misjudge? 99.244.36.38 17:07, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

*coughteamworkcough* --JonTheMon 17:10, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) You, good sir or madam, is someone who I would absolutely not want on my team. The guardian is a team player. Why would you not want to save all your allies instead of yourself. Ever hear the expression "take one for the team"? These virtues remind me of the signets, you sacrifice a passive bonus for something else. Also, it's only 30s-120s, just learn kiting or go kill stragglers attacking your backline if you are afraid of getting attacked. Venom20 17:11, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Boons wear off considerably fast. - Infinite - talk 17:13, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

*cough* this game can be played solo *cough*. GW2 is not completely a team game anymore like GW1. In a GW1 game where your party is fixed for a mission, you take a monk, you expect the monk to heal/prot you, even Infuse(sacrifice his own health to heal you) you. In a game where you see RANDOM people around you even if you are doing the same mission, you have absolutely no obligation to help them, specially if helping the "noobs" out involves breaking your own balls. EDIT: @Infinite, Boons have absolutely nothing to do with Virtues, go re-read please. 99.244.36.38 17:18, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) If you intend on playing solo, then I don't see why you'd be using the active bonus anyways (because you would be solo). If you encounter a team of people new to the game (noob?), I would say it to be common courtesy to assist them with your boons. If by noobs you mean selfish people who are so 1337 and gosu that they don't need to help people, well then ..... Venom20 17:24, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

@ the all-knowing IP . Boon -> Aegis -> Courage -> Virtue... (where's your statement now?) --The Holy Dragons 17:25, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

@Venom20 GW2 is not "I enter explorable area with my team and there will be ONLY me, my team and monsters in the area" like GW1 was. When you go somewhere, they might already be other people in the area. You can decide to help them, or you can just watch them die and lolz. It is your choice. It is your decision to cast your buff on them at the cost of losing your own, or watch them die, then take out the mob solo. @HolyDragon Courage gives you an auto-Aegis every 30 seconds if you dont use it, and you dont get the Aegis for 2 minutes if you use it. This is how i see the skill, whether what is casts on you is called Boon, or anything else. EDIT: I hope from this statement that it is obvious why I would not use it... 99.244.36.38 17:33, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) LOLOLOLOL. Aegis is a boon, the virtues merely apply them party-wide. l2facts - Infinite - talk 17:34, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

"bestow a temporary benefit to all nearby allies when those abilities are activated" Nearby Allies =/= Party-wide. Party-wide = my team. Nearby allies = random noobs who are also there and that I do not give a **** about. How about YOU l2facts? 99.244.36.38 17:38, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

The fact I use party-wide to state EVERY FUCKING ALLY THAT YOU'RE USING IT ON, still doesn't disprove my point. So bad retort is bad. - Infinite - talk 17:40, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

@Infinite. You have made no point so far, all you have said is I misjudge the effects of Virtue with absolutely no proof at backing what you are saying. GW2 will be something closer to AB rather than GvG. In AB, you only have reason to heal/prot an ALLY(yes ALLY, not party member) who is on another ally team if that player is HELPING the team(capping)win. If you see a Warrior(who is on one of the other 2 teams, not on yours) who is separated from his own team, and is in the middle of 2 shrines, getting ganked by 6 npcs(also known as Leeroy Jenkins Wammo), and instead of attacking the shrine to cap, he is attacking some random Dervish(on the opposing team) who is tanking him with Mirage Cloak, you dont have to save that Wammo because that would just be a waste of energy(he is not capping, he is not adding points to the timer, he is not helping you win, why should you waste your energy on him, rather than save the energy to heal yourself and your own team?). Same thing here, except that your own team is a team of 1(YOU). If you see random "noobs" around, why should you give them your buff, at the cost of your own? Now, like i said before, if that buff was free(it stayed on you as its passive effect) along with giving allies some help, people wouldnt mind. But given that it has a cost(you lose your buff), this is as much as throwing all your energy away to save the wammo above, which will produce no results which helps you win the battle. 99.244.36.38 18:02, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

I think the point everyone is trying to make is that the Guardian is a team player. You use your virtues tactically to help the team, not just yourself. So stop trolling. Kthxbai. --Odal talk 18:04, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Keep it civil, guys. Infinite, calm down, this is just his playstyle. And from what we know of most other professions, they'll do just fine without one solitary Guardian buffing them. 99.244, you're comments are getting close to the trolling point. As it stands, the point of the Guardian is that you can sacrifice yourself for your team, it's the idea of "one for all" and when they are all buffed up and you're back on the ropes, then it can become "all for one". I agree that during solo play you don't want to be giving out your edges (buffs) willy-nilly without considering the options, but during group-play it becomes that little extra bit of protection to keep your team from burning. As Kranxx would say, "if we work together we go from having no chance at all to having a very small chance". 136.159.70.7 18:06, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

I'll just repeat myself; virtues are skills which passively enhance the guardian, and actively transfer the effects (more or less) to allies in shout range. As such effects are applied via boons, it will wear off fast, so its use is limited to dire situations. I consider everyone on the battlefield with me a party member, even though the actual party mechanic is just a collection of players who might as well be on the other side of the world. Admittedly, virtues are not applied to them if said actual party members are out of range. Also admittedly, I should've phrased myself with the word allies, to keep IP away from borderline troll. I haven't lost my cool in this discussion, by the way. That is all. Have a good day and stop jumping to conclusions would help, too. <3 - Infinite - talk 18:20, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

I am sorry if i seemed to be trolling, I was trying to explain a point, being "why should I use this on you and remove it from myself?". In GW1, you see a player saying in Local Chat: "Someone Please give me 50k please please please." You show me how many players in that outpost who will actually give him 50k. Sure 50k is easy to farm, but will you farm it for him? Note that this is a player that you dont know, a complete stranger, who is asking for 50k. What you will get from him for giving him 50k is a thank you, and never hear from him again, and your 50k is gone(not much, you can make it back easily, but it is still GONE). I expect Guardian players to use this Virtue on random allies as often as giving away free 50k to a stranger. You should perhaps note that most GW players do not have Jesus-level of generosity...@Infinite If you think that everyone around you is a party member, good for you, do it. 99.244.36.38 18:25, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

To elaborate; I think this way because they're attacking the same targets, etc etc. Whether you want them to or not, they are there, so you might as well support them. - Infinite - talk 18:26, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

IIRC there is no "party" anyway. You wander around with whoever is nearby. Anyway: giving a random person 50k is a significantly greater investment than giving every person who is near you (all of whom are probably trying to achieve the same goal you are) a buff to sacrifice your own buff for 2 minutes. TWO WHOLE MINUTES of not getting protection to protect everyone else from an attack. I mean, what else is a guardian supposed to do/ isn't that the whole point of guardian, they can solo *or* they can help a group. Wait, that sounds like *every other profession*. Aquadrizzt (talk)(contribs) 18:32, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) Honestly, it seems like you have had a really bad experience with MMO's, so it's "look out for number 1". Which you can do. But that kinda takes away from the second M. Everyone else is trying to say "sometimes helping others will benefit you, since they (cumulatively) get a stronger buff than you by yourself". So, in short, realize that it is multiplayer, so things like turning your personal buff into an other-allies buff can be reasonable. --JonTheMon 18:36, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

(Reset indent) As much as I admit to have caused this, I must press upon everyone that the Wiki is not a forum and that we have a List of fansites with places better suited for discussions as these. Let's not speculate any more (here). - Infinite - talk 18:34, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

You might as well support them only if that makes it easier for you to kill that target(achieve your goal). But if you do not have a common goal(See AB example above where your goal is to win the AB match and Leeroy's goal is to kill that dervish who is tanking him, not caring one bit about the match), would you rather keep your buff on yourself or give it to them(this is not sharing, this is GIVING AWAY)? Sure if you can afford to, but surely not if you need it later. Example: They are killing a mob(farming) which you have no interest in. You want to kill the boss somewhat close to the mob(within 30 seconds walk). They have no interest in that boss(you want that boss's weapon say). Will you throw away all your 3 Virtues(giving it to them) then charge the boss solo with absolutely nothing to back you up? These guys arent gonna help you with the boss either, they are only here for the mob(drops). @Aquadrizzt No, 50k can be made in 10 minutes if you know how to, doesnt mean I will give it away to everyone though. 99.244.36.38 18:38, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) Infi, <3, this isn't speculation. It's a trollish/forum-ish discussion. 99.244 please either drop it or take it to a forum. Aquadrizzt (talk)(contribs) 18:39, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

lol it'z funneh cause ur almost trollin' --The Holy Dragons 18:40, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Look at it this way, guys and gals... The Guardian can be compared to a Warrior in that they are selfless. A warrior puts him/herself in the forefront to take the damage, hold an enemies attentions, and thus protecting his/her allies, as well as being a formidable damage dealer. The Guardian does the same thing, but in a different way... he/she puts themself at risk to protect the team by giving up their own protections, while also being a formidable damage dealer. This is simply the GW2 version of a Paladin. Kass Munroe 19:04, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

ITT: IP's a dumbass who wants to pick a teamwork-based profession for solo/doesn't understand some/most people might actually bother to help the team. Non-IP's try to get this through IP's head.--Gerroh 19:18, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Gerroh, please keep this civil Venom20 19:23, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Lets stay by our own (team or egocentric) gameplay please. No need to mess around. -- Cyan 20:40, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Ip sounds like a noob himself, it seems to me that the fact that the game adds enemies as there are more people in the area and that alone would be the reason to buff other players. I mean, lets see if I am with a ele and a ranger and they can do fire wall and spread shot to quicker kill what do I care if I buff them? They might need the buff so they can kill for longer. That in itself is the reward for buffing others. don't be a noob work together and own the game. Remember this is a primarily support class, so you go be solo and keep your buffs, I will buff others and laugh when you die. =D 108.75.73.62 23:43, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Seriously, if you do not see how more is more than less, you should probably not make a guardian. Actually, I wouldn't suggest getting GW2 at all, considering every profession, even warrior, is being made to support other professions. –~=Ϛρѧякγ (τѧιк) ←♥– 00:04, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

IMO the point isn't about sharing your cake. It's more like converting your cake into a lot of cakes but with the condition of only your friends eating from it. If an effect says for example: heal you 100 hp, and other effect says heal every other party member 100hp in a party of 8, you're transforming a virtual healing of 100 into healing 700hp. You aren't healed, but a team is more likely to win with a +700 hp overall than with just a +100. Also take into account that if your allies die, then you will be the focus of more damage, so your +100 doesn't help if you're under enough fire to attack a party of 8. You keep them safe, the damage is less heavy for each party member, they are easier to heal, and then you find you're surviving more time as a team player. About going solo, of course that you aren't going to share... your alone! And I think the main reason of them making it passive effects is to not penalize a team player profession when going solo (like paragons that need allies to gain energy). EDIT: It seems like in one of the videos he activates the aegis virtue because every ally gets the boon, and she also gets the boon, so maybe it applies even to the user one last time before going to recharge. EDIT2: Indeed. "These things do have a time limit, which is still subject to change as well. However, when you cast it you also receive the benefit as you are technically one of your allies."Lokheit 00:48, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

(Reset indent) hahahaha, "IMO the point isn't about sharing your cake. It's more like converting your cake into a lot of cakes but with the condition of only your friends eating from it." this line is pure win. I don't know if it's the lack of sleep talking or what, but this line is awesome!! Venom20 02:45, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

It's UP!

GOGOGO! Eive 17:05, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

what's up? Venom20 17:08, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

The sky the reveal? Eive 17:10, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

been up for hours ;) Venom20 17:12, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

yea I saw it round 2 o'clock :o (UTC) --The Holy Dragons 17:12, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Though I've een stalking the page the whol day O.o (I FREAKING LOVE GUARDIANS!) --The Holy Dragons 17:13, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

What? I just checked around 20 minutes ago and it wasn't there... Eive 17:14, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Pages won't always load @ GW2 site (I knowz) --The Holy Dragons 17:15, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

The videos would load for me during the first 40 minutes. I'm assuming too many people were accessing them. But yeah, been up for about two and a half hours I'd estimate (at least). Venom20 17:16, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

I've watched them all without problems (I may have been one of the first to see them though (so no view-spike)) --The Holy Dragons 17:19, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Future of guardianclass

Either the new D2 Paladin(lolHammerdin) or epiclynerfed motigon from what it seems :{, depends mostly of if reflects count as % or not...as otherwise basic raw dps melee (gladi) just claws thru it. Either way this and other classes alot remind me of Aion...(Necromancer's Fear skill is as if straight copy, and Guardian is nearly same as Templar...not to even go into "chain skills" etc...) 85.156.225.125 17:37, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Well, Aion is NCsoft... - Lucian Shadowborn 18:14, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

What's a class? Anyways, you choose to see the similarities. "Templars", "Paladin", or "Guardians" have been in most MMOs, and D&D. Chain skills were in GW1 (assassin) and, the only thing I can't comment on is Fear, because I never played Aion. Eive 20:52, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

But Arenanet isn't Ncsoft...--173.189.177.35 20:55, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Cough*cough*... might want to check... - Lucian Shadowborn 20:58, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

I play Aion regular, and I can say that the aspects of Fear aren't just a copy. There are some things they two have in common, but an Aion copy is just nonsense. -- Cyan 21:06, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

GW tanks were much sooner than the Aions Templar and this Guardian class ha a LOT more party defense abilities than the temps has in Aion. + Aion took a lot skill name and effect from GW too.

Guardian + others

I really dislike the use of wallpaper, why not use the Guild Wars 2 profession image? Like here for instance? Also have the others in the same way. - Lucian Shadowborn 19:40, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Definitely better than wallpapers, +1 --Neil • 19:42, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

I really love that image. It's just so brilliant. --Odal talk 19:59, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Agreed and saves waiting for Chris. - Infinite - talk 20:04, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

I like the pictures too. We can always have the art in a gallery like the Kodan page and whatnot. - Lucian Shadowborn 20:14, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't want to be the one who changes the pages, can someone do it? - Lucian 21:21, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Why don't you want to? --The Holy Dragons 21:29, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Well... actually, I don't know. lol.. - Lucian 21:32, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

This is sorta off topic, but thinking about the wallpaper makes me hope that that asuran soldier armor is modeled from an in-game design...cause I WANT IT. Zolann The Irreverent 21:49, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Chances are, it might be. - Lucian 21:54, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Abilities

The section about Virtues is redundant with the actual virtue pages. I question the need for it here. (And it fails to follow the general formatting of the other profession pages.) Aqua (talk|contribs) 01:59, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

I agree. There's also a double up of information about what virtues do (it's explained in the first paragraph and then explained again further down) (Xu Davella 02:02, 28 January 2011 (UTC))

Feel free to improve upon it. I would but have commitments to attend to at the moment. Eive 02:03, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

A trait

here, knocks enemies away when using Shield of Absorbtion--Corsair@Yarrr 10:25, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Find the actual link for us, please. <3 - Infinite - talk 12:43, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Just stumbled upon it [3], first reply. (Xu Davella 13:33, 28 January 2011 (UTC))

Whoops, sorry about that. I guess I got sidetracked in IRC while writing that. I meant to put the link Xu Davella put up. I'll just crawl away now...--Corsair@Yarrr 01:31, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

I really...

want to include "“…a good way to describe the guardian might be to call it a warrior steak with a side of monk potato and a small helping of ritualist carrots all covered in paragon gravy.”" from here, just because it's funny. - Lucian 5:07, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

I find it slightly less irritating then the official Ranger page quote. Aqua (T|C) 05:10, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Haha! Well... yes. At least put this in trivia. ;) - Lucian 5:17, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

trivia is a good place ha--Icyyy Blue 06:48, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

I like the idea of adding it to trivia, but I'd like to hear see more users' opinions. Eive 07:49, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Never really cared for trivia. Though it is a good way to put across what a lot of people are already thinking about the profession - on the main article. (Xu Davella 08:17, 29 January 2011 (UTC))

I would rather not add it - it's something ArenaNet quoted from a fansite, not something ArenaNet itself said; and I wouldn't be surprised if it had been quoted more due to being funny than to being accurate. We would have problems later if people were quoting the official wiki as "proof" that the guardian is GW2's paragon. Erasculio 08:33, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

that wasnt suprising.....--Icyyy Blue 09:27, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

I say do it :D!--Icyyy Blue 11:22, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

It's not particularly funny either. pling 23:20, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Paladin

Just what we need, another hammerdin remake. I look forward to anet convinving me otherwise.

I thought we had left this behind... --The Holy Dragons 11:08, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Think of it more like a Cleric from DnD.--Yozuk 17:16, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Am I going to be the first to say?

FINALLY! took your time Anet personally I wouldn't have minded waiting longer for the video, but hell months and months without sqaut! 92.16.230.117 12:45, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Overpowered in Groups?

Imagine playing WvW with a set up strategy with guardians using wards and shield of absortion by turns and with enough guardians to finish a cycle when the first one has his skills recharged again. Enemies won't enter melee combat and the shields of absortion will stop the projectiles. A coordinated team would be unstopable, and then you can use some Warrior banners to make your group nastier O_O Lokheit 13:17, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

If you use too many of any skill or profession it will potentially be OP. A bunch of rangers can trap an entrance to a fort. Necros can gang up and flood the field with minions. But the wards and shield of absorption are stationary effects if they're making the enemy invincible you can just move away from them. The guardians will either have to leave their defenses to attack or wait for someone dumb enough to approach. Besides you assume everything is either a melee attack or projectile. Poison cloud and similar skills will probably work just fine or you can use an elite like tornado to knock them out of their turtle formation.99.1.41.126 13:49, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

send in the explosive Minions! Who says zergging never works?....--Yozuk 17:19, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

PvP skills, anyone? --AdventurerPotatoe - 17:39, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

A lot of the skills have been warped because of the dodging and jumping capabilities (it took us 250 years to figure out how to do it and now we are more powerful than ever! ~dramatic music!~) so I doubt there'll be a need for PvP-versions of the skills. They also stated that all stats (and maybe skills?) will be buffed to a set level for WvW/PvP to keep balance so maybe that's their way of making new PvP skills? 68.144.77.185 20:46, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

ANet confirmed that there WILL be PvP skills. About buffs, they dont really exist. When you enetr organized PvP(not WvWvW) you will get access to every skill, race and profession so that everyone are equal on the battlefield. --AdventurerPotatoe - 22:44, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Although some of the Gaurdian's skills protect them against projectiles and Melee attacks, this doesn't protect them against spells that target the ground such as Mark spells. This could be a very important fact to note when setting up defenses. A good necromancer could force you out of your ward with some well placed skills causing you to be a bit more vulnerable. This tactic could end up being a pursuit game after this and in which case both the necromancer and the Guardian would be in danger of gaining attention from the others allies. I can go on and on about how the wall can be over come. But I think you get the idea.--Yozuk 01:43, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm hoping

That this isn't the profession catered to players who played a monk, as stated earlier. The paladin is not a monk, it is a wammo... FleshAndFaith 20:20, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

It IS that profession, and it is NOT a wammo. --'Mai Yi' talk 20:22, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Monk: lightly armored, uses spells for damage, supports their party. Guardian: Heavily armored, uses martial weapons for damage, uses supports their party. Not close enough. Wammo: Heavily armored, uses martial weapons for damage, supports themselves (mostly). Pretty damn close. FleshAndFaith 21:04, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

You confuse supporting and healing. The monk could support, but Protection Prayers always were lacking something and required intelligent thought so most monks just went WoH and spammed that instead of using any kind of true support. Wammos could only support themselves. When compared to a profession that is best in groups constantly helping everyone else, I don't see much of a similarity. Eive 22:27, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

That's just a generalization. And Healing, arguably, is support. A lot of the debate is simply semantics, but I would argue that by healing my allies, I am keeping them alive so they can do damage (aka supporting them). Putting semantics aside, I find the Guardian to be more like the Paragon (heavily armored, party-wide support, martial weapon user). That's why I just said, I would prefer the "Profession catered to past monk players" to be not the Guardian :). FleshAndFaith 22:38, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Whether you prefer it or not, this is the one. :) --Amannelle 22:40, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

^ That. - Infinite - talk 22:41, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Can I get a link or something where the Devs say this is said "monk" profession? FleshAndFaith 22:46, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

(Reset indent) They don't, infact they said every profession should be self reliant but also have the ability to heal allies when needed. - Lucian 22:59, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

I know, I'm saying, can I get a link to where the Dev's have said this is the "Profession catered to those who played as a monk". If not, then I will just blindly hope that this isn't it. I'm sure this is a good class, but I don't really want it to be their answer for monk players. FleshAndFaith 23:12, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

No dedicated healer in GW2 leaves prots and smite. Guardian has that. Ergo this is that profession. - 84.31.15.202 23:15, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

yeahh[4]. and i quote --In short, the Guardian evolves the Monk from Guild Wars 1. unquote...so basically he is a healer but not a dedicated healer he just got all the "good things" from the monk and more.--Icyyy Blue 23:32, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. I just never found that interview. I mean, I could see how he would be the monk's replacement, but I just had my preference in mind :). But, with how customizable the classes are, maybe this guy will be more fun than monking. FleshAndFaith 23:49, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Sounds like it. :) I'm just confuzzeled as to why the anet did not want the necromancer to summon spirits as well... Undead, and spirits are both, well, not alive. - Lucian 0:03, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Because making spirits has nothing to do with necromancy. Also, I expect this character to be somewhat fun to play and I greatly dislike playing paladins. I'm not sure if I would play it over warrior or not, but I'll probably know after the game comes out. –~=Ϛρѧякγ (τѧιк) ←♥– 02:12, 30 January 2011 (UTC)