User:Shai Halud/Mounts as Companions and More...

The premise of this idea is fairly simple: combine companions and mounts. Preposterous as it sounds at first, this actually solves several problems posed by incorporating companions and mounts separately. ''Those of you in need of little or no convincing can skip to the last section for details on the idea. ''

As a side note, I've also descided to make this idea compatible with my idea for Customizable Race Specialization, and my Action Battle Control Scheme for those of you who are interested, so read on.

Problems of Mounts and Companions
First, let us deal with a few of the problems caused by mounts. Number one is how to deal with the needs of several races, of different sizes and with different cultures who would all need mounts which suited them. Asura are easy, they could ride golems. Humans could ride anything. Sylvari might ride animated plant constructs, but it would be a pity if those couldn’t fight on their own.

The Norn, however, are too big to ride just about anything I saw in the original GW games short of a hydra. Not to mention the fact that Norn will be capable of transformations in the next game and will either be forced to choose between using mounts or transformations or be force to deal with the sight of a giant bear-man riding a horse.

The Charr have a similar problem. They would look silly riding just about anything other than their siege beasts, and what sense does it make to be toeing around a siege devourer if you can’t lay siege to something with it. That, however would give the Charr an unfair advantage unless all the other mounts were capable of something similar, but if you have that and a companion by your side who also will need a mount to keep up with you, and how is that different from having three companions?

Then there are even worse problems caused by companions. Firstly, we can’t have 3’000 Dunkoros running around in a continuous world. That’s just ridiculous. We could be capable of customizing their appearance, but that still leaves us with the other problems. Another problem is the question, “Why can we only have one companion?” It really doesn’t make a lot of sense to have a party of just two. More than that, why should they not count as part of our party but rather as part of our character? That would mean parties of sixteen, and if mounts can fight then that would turn a party of eight players into a party of forty-eight combatants roving the plains. Lastly, why would we be compensated for not using a companion? It makes no sense. Do companions suck the life force out of our characters to sustain themselves?

Granted, many of these problems do not need to be fixed in order to have a running game (technically, you could have 3,000 Dunkoros roaming the plains) but why put up with a problem when there is a simple way to fix it: combine companions and mounts.

Combining Companions and Mounts
This is all based off if the idea that there is no real difference between a mount that can fight while you’re not riding on it and a companion. Besides that, it answers all of the aforementioned questions and problems. No one will ask questions if 3’000 mounts who look alike are roaming the field. It makes sense that you would not be able to bring more than one mount wherever you go, and of course they wouldn’t count as part of our party: they’re mounts. Their ability to combine with your character as well as their sub-par fighting capabilities could compensate for their propensity to double the size of your party. Finally, the benefits lost by bringing a mount could be seen as a representation of the extra energy needed to maintain control of a mount in battle.

It is perfectly natural to assume that Charr would both fight alongside their siege beasts and use them as mounts. As for the Norn, they would need neither mounts nor companions. They would need to be compensated for their lack of a companion, but it makes sense that the Norn would travel alone. Also, they are a bit too large for any mount and they could be made capable of running at increased speeds over set distances on account of their superior physique. Their transformations would also compensate for the combat abilities denied them by their lack of mounts.

The unique nature of mounts made for each race would add variety to the game and could be used as part of the race advantages system. As each mount would be different, each could have different abilities. All of them would need to be capable of equitable speed so that parties could stay together, however, their combat and defensive capabilities could vary widely.

Each should complement the advantages and disadvantages of each race and be suited to each races attitudes and customs. For example, the Asura, being magically adept, would probably need their golems to protect or heal them in battle while they cast spells. Some golems might also augment the strength of Asura warriors who ride them into battle, compensating for their physical weaknesses. Sylvari could meld with their constructs and fight as Juggernauts. Charr could lay siege to their enemies, and humans could trample their enemies or fight from horseback, severely limiting the effectiveness of AoE and dps spells used against them.

I will post links to pages proposing more specific ideas for each race both here and on my personal suggestions page if you are interested in finding out more.

Norn: Transformations

Asura and Sylvari: Golems and Jagganathen

Humans and Charr: Calvary and Siege Beasts

As for Those Who do not Wish to Bring Companions...


 * Why this is a good idea
 * Solves several problems associated with both companions and mounts as mentioned above
 * Adds variety to the gaming experience, providing motivation to try playing as each of the races
 * Gives a reason to bring mounts into the field as map travel will make long-distance travel not an issue


 * Why it may not work out
 * Anet may have already worked out what they want to do with companions and mounts
 * Anet has not confirmed the inclusion of mounts in GW2
 * Mount companions would be unable to use player character skills (though this may be of no concern if GW2 incorporates an action battle system as I am persuaded at this point to believe they will.)
 * Loss of story-telling abilities afforded by human companions.