Ranger Pet Items

[NiteHawk]

Folder pointed out some things about rangers. I did fix what I thought needed fixing myself, but he brought up something about ranger pet items.

Mainly it is to do with ranger pet reviving and ranger pet healing.

Pet healing is an item. You can buy stronger items but they will heal X amount of hitpoints. Typically around 100-200 right now.
Pet reviving is an item that revives your pet at 20% health (used to be 50%).

The thing is, they are both separate items. So you need to hold reviving items, you need to hold healing items. You also need arrows, but not so much anymore because I raised the stack to 999, so that should generally be good for the whole day. Not sure if I will leave it that high but we will see.

The argument was that rangers shouldn't need those items to heal their pets, and it should simply be a skill that uses up a turn to heal or revive their pet. It wouldn't involve items, but you could generally heal your pet without any help. I'm not sure of what the amount would be, but I would assume it will be lower, and maybe only do-able when you aren't in cooldown. (maybe)

I however stated that I think that it SHOULD at least require one item to do so. I can entirely see merging the items into one item so you don't need to carry so many stacks. So a 'Pet Healing Item' that does both reviving and healing at X amount. The stack amount could be 20-25 and it could generally do about what it does now, but all in one item. I don't really think it should be 'free' to heal your pet.


I would like peoples input on it. What would people like out of these?

1. Remove pet revive and heal items, make it a command to heal your pet that takes up a turn.
2. Remove pet revive and heal items, make it a command to heal your pet that takes up a turn. You can only do this while not in cooldown. (not in combat)
3. Merge all pet items into one 'generic' needed item that heals and revives. You USE the item to heal or revive the pet, similar to how it is now, but requiring less inventory space.
4. Merge all pet items into one 'generic' needed item that heals and revives. You use a SKILL to use heal or revive. (this one is kind of wierd, using would be better, but keeping it here just for the sake of it.)
5. Keep it as it is now.
6. SOMETHING ELSE; State below.

Thanks 8)

[Cerebrus]

/feedpet
/mendpet

wouldnt be bad skills to learn for a ranger

[warvor]

since from what i read earlier the biggest complaint was inventory space i think making heal revive 1 item type and maybe a stack of say 20 .... side note raise arrows to max this way you should be able to clear up 4 spots in inventory ... me personally i currently buy 1 stack of 5 revive 1 stack of 20 food and 4 stacks of 400 arrows with 1 equiped so if you raised limit on arrows and did 1 item for heal/revive i would have 1 stack of 999 arrows outside equip and 1 stack of 20 heal/revive which would be plenty .... this is just my thoughts

well if you did the skill which i feel would be lame it should be as all other pet commands /pet revive and /pet mend or heal which ever would be prefered

[Folder]

You know my vote! Remove items. Make 2 skills. Feed/Mend uses an action, revive can only be used when not in combat.

Saves inventory space and simplifies gameplay. I don't think inventory management is fun gameplay. If the majority really wants items here then I think you should leave it at 2 items. Otherwise it's gonna look silly lore wise to use your automagical pet feeder/reviver item.

[daedroth]

Problem with new skills like that is, it would open up the argument to have similar skills for using on players by different classes.
/firstaid
/resuscitate
etc...
The pet skills would make things more convenient (and cheap), which I like but... see above.
In saying that though, the skill idea would get my vote (coz im cheap and its convenient), if not then the merged items.
The pet skills should be out of combat (all) though, with healing being one action and revive all actions.

[Folder]

I don't see how this opens up the argument for other heal related skills, that's totally separate imo (and not something I'd ever vouch for).

If you change pet heals to out of combat you're punishing the ranger pretty hard during leveling. In my experience a pet would die very often without in combat healing. It WILL die all the time, as it all stands now, when people are leveling with store bought items. Revive out of combat, sure, I get that. Make it take all your actions too if you want, I don't think that much matters though.

[daedroth]

Well, if you can heal a pet, why couldn't you heal a person (which would be easier since they can communicate)? And no I wouldn't want a first aid skill etc for people.
I like the idea of healing the pet through skills, but definitely out of combat, (unless it is a magical ability - which it wouldn't be), kinda hard to apply a band aid to something when something else is trying to eat you.

[NiteHawk]

Well, if you can heal a pet, why couldn't you heal a person (which would be easier since they can communicate)? And no I wouldn't want a first aid skill etc for people.
I like the idea of healing the pet through skills, but definitely out of combat, (unless it is a magical ability - which it wouldn't be), kinda hard to patch up something when something else is trying to eat you.

If it was skill based, reviving would be out of combat, but I think healing should be in combat allowed.

However, the difference would be that the heals would be based on some sort of stat, and it would heal less then what an item would. Healing items so about 250 per 8 seconds (8 seconds is one round really), so each heal cannot be 250 as you can do 4 actions per turn. It would be something like 50-100 per heal depending on a certain stat, but I'm no sure what yet.

I still need more then a couple peoples say though, skills vs merging it all into one simple needed item vs leaving it as is.

[Satsujin]

Well, if you can heal a pet, why couldn't you heal a person (which would be easier since they can communicate)?

For the same reason I wouldn't want a vet performing brain surgery on me. Just because you know how to treat an injury on your dog doesn't mean you know anything at all about treating a similar injury on a person.

[NiteHawk]

Well, if you can heal a pet, why couldn't you heal a person (which would be easier since they can communicate)?

For the same reason I wouldn't want a vet performing brain surgery on me. Just because you know how to treat an injury on your dog doesn't mean you know anything at all about treating a similar injury on a person.

http://i.imgur.com/u7d6HCv.gifv