Are you sure when Dougal says that that he doesn't mean the quality of the weapon, and not his skill with it?
If he were a Ranger, there also would probably have been more obvious details. Melandru, perhaps a mention of a former pet. He doesn't really correspond to the GW2 image of a Ranger all that much, except for his use of a Longbow at one point. There's much more evidence to suggest a new profession.
He doesn't like crowds because of what happened in Ascalon City. It clearly traumatized him to the point where he wished to avoid involving others in his affairs. It doesn't suggest some desire to be closer to nature. It's characterization, not a clue.
It's never about the quality of the weapon, but that he finds it useless/doesn't know how to use it skillfully as a main weapon.
@Seraphim: Again, the book is 100% lore, no mechanics at all. There are no "weapon sets." There is no mandatory pet. And in lore, not all rangers worship Melandru.
If we can say anything about him and mechanical professions, the fact he uses a longbow says one of two things: 1) He's a warrior. 2) He's a ranger. It was explicitly stated that only 2 professions will be able to use bows - that's the warrior and the ranger - likewise only 2 professions can use guns (warrior and an unknown).
You're using halves of two sides of the argument and in turn contradicting yourself. Either it does take mechanics fully and he'd need a pet to be a ranger but would in turn have to be a warrior or a ranger, or it doesn't and he doesn't need to match mechanics perfectly to be a profession.
Also, the existence of lockpicks mean nothing. Anyone in GW1 can use lockpicks, after all.
Also, while swords don't really match rangers in GW1, swords is one of their main weapons in GW2 - so yeah, it does rather symbolize rangers well enough... as an agile fighter. Though Dougal is more of a tumbling rock trying to knock over a boulder half the time in the book - not matching any known profession that uses a sword.
Last edited by Konig Des Todes; 26-08-2010 at 03:21.
I think there's more than enough room in a book based on a game to have both lore (e.g. details about Charr and Sylvari culture) and mechanics (e.g. potions being crafted and used), but that's besides the point.
I will agree it's more than probable that Dougal is a Warrior or a Ranger. However, at the same time, there are hints at something else entirely.
As for the part about only 2 professions using bows, they said "at least", meaning this could have changed, or was not entirely truthful to begin with. Additionally, lockpicks could have a vastly different use in GW2. In the book they are never once used to open a treasure chest. But really, this is all idle speculation.
Ultimately, we don't know everything about GW2, and the answers will come with the next two novels and the eventual release of the finished game.
Potions being crafted and used would be included in the lore as well as mechanics. Something that is mechanics but not lore would be a necromancer's complete inability to swing a sword to damage enemies in GW2 - iffy lines are things like resurrection and map travel. The exact things that skills and the like do (mainly the numbers) are mechanics. Health and energy bars are mechanics (the lore side would be one's physical well being and one's stamina)
Any change in the use of lockpicks in GW2 is purely mechanical. Lockpicks are lockpicks and it doesn't use a skilled rogue or thief to use them. All you need to use them efficiently would be practice really.
Either you ignore mechanics completely, use them as a basis but allow flexibility for where mechanics might be just that, or you follow mechanics completely. The last would almost always produce incorrect information, the first would limit correct information to a degree as we don't know where the line is for every topic (see the iffy topics I mentioned), and the second is where I stand - I use mechanics as a basis but don't let them rule my observations. Of course this also produces potentially fallible information (for instance, do we know that in lore professions couldn't use weapons of other professions?).
Mechanic differences also don't rule lore changes between the games - for instance, in lore, secondary professions may still exist, or it may be a forgotten art, or it may turn out that secondaries was purely game mechanic from the beginning (but the last would require a retcon of in-universe articles such as An Empire Divided).
Last edited by Konig Des Todes; 26-08-2010 at 04:37.
The big points, lore-wise, that I keep coming back to are these:
If it doesn't take a skilled rogue to use them, why was Dougal the only one who did? For that matter, why was he the only one who could disarm traps? The Asura are certainly clever enough to accomplish such things.
Dougal muses on page 30 that the talents of each person in the party are "spellcaster(Killeen), muscle(Gyda), trapspringer, and leadership(Clagg)".
On page 38 or so, he even makes a point to say his job, his profession is to "spring locks and locate traps". Additionally, he carried tools other than lockpicks, including a "thin flat tool with an end like an asuran summation sign".
Clagg required his abilities specifically "I hired you for your mind, such as it is", P.29. If just anyone could do what he did, he wouldn't be such an important asset.
Those bits of information, to me, are the biggest hint that there is something more to him than your basic Warrior or Ranger. Maybe it's just the lore saying that he's a Warrior or Ranger who just happens to be gifted with tools, I could be wrong.
But enough things don't add up that it makes me suspicious. That's all I'm saying.
Traps is a ranger thing - and to our knowledge, has always been for rangers alone. And, technically, Killeen disabled a trap too. ;)
As to the lockpicks - it takes a person who knows how to use lockpicks, which isn't determined by one's profession/job. Just because most thieves are skilled with picking locks, it doesn't mean that everyone skilled with picking locks are thieves. For instance, there are the people who test the security of places in order to better the security (find the holes, exploit the holes, prove there are holes).
Profession doesn't mean mechanical professions. Professions are the same as jobs, really. An Empire Divided uses a good term for the professions we play: heroic professions.
You're going far too into the idea of professions, by the way.
Rangers make traps, not disable them. But I digress.
I'm merely suggesting there are some odd inconsistencies that could perhaps allow for a Rogue class, and if there is I would be very pleased with such an outcome :)
There isn't any explicit mention of what heroic profession Dougal is, so there's no way to be certain unless ANet comes out and confirms it.
Either way, I have most enjoyed our little debate and I'm looking forward to becoming more involved with the lore and mechanics as more information trickles through.
Wouldn't one who makes traps, know how to disable traps? And, for that matter, how to avoid triggering them. Rather common sense, in order to not trigger their own trap, or get caught by the thing they're experts in...
That would indeed make sense, though I can't recall an example in lore or mechanics where a Ranger has disarmed a trap.
Keeping in mind we don't have official confirmation that Dougal is a Ranger or not.
But yes, it would follow that someone who can make a trap can disarm it. That's just basic logic.