Every group is full of greedy ninja companion looters.

[CaptainHagbard]

So there are obviously two fundamentally opposite opinions on this subject. So I suppose, people need to sort this out before the group starts. That still doesn't protect you from real ninjas, but the basically honest players, who just have a different take on loot-distribution would be protected from witch hunts based on a misunderstanding.

[SySnootles]

To be honest i never encountered any of this ingame. In all the groups i´ve been in, Heroic 2+, 4 and flashpoints, everyone´s been polite, considerate and asked if we minded if they needed the item for their companion.

 

Maybe im just lucky or my server is filled with awesomeness

[sybaf]

I'd understand the anger if the game was older but its three weeks old a lot of the newbies have no idea why its not acceptable until they are told and ignoring them instead of (gently) educating them doesn't make anything better.

[Blackweb]

To be honest i never encountered any of this ingame. In all the groups i´ve been in, Heroic 2+, 4 and flashpoints, everyone´s been polite, considerate and asked if we minded if they needed the item for their companion.

 

Maybe im just lucky or my server is filled with awesomeness

 

I feel the exact same way when it comes to my server and side (Bloodworthy/republic), haven't had a single bad experience yet at lvl 29. (done every flashpoint at least twice so far)

 

Or maybe I'm just not looking for a reason to whine? Who knows

[Errathe]

I don't really understand or agree with this mentality that 'the community' gets to decide on who is allowed to do what. That's just mob-rule.

 

Generally-speaking, as good-natured human being, I would rather see another player happy if the item in question is a serious upgrade for their character. Especially when dealing with the level 10 Flashpoints.

 

It's just virtual items at the end of the day, and if I don't get the item, I can just form another group and try again.

 

I could even subscribe to a 'gentleman's agreement' that if a companion is not present in the group, then they should not be rolled for.

 

But to simply turn around and throw a fit, and lecture me that I may not Need on an item because I want it for a companion is, quite simply, wrong, insensitive, selfish and disrespectful.

 

I agree with the few people here, who are posting logical arguments and getting flamed for it: the companion system is an integral part of SWTOR.

 

To be blunt, I do not believe it is disrespectful or selfish to Need on an item that I, or my companion, can use, since both are integral to my character's progress.

As has been stated, I was there doing my fair share of the encounter. Who has the right to tell me that I may not have a chance to win something for my effort?

 

Now picture that my companion is present to make up the numbers. I am now effectively controlling TWO characters! Then to be told that 'it is wrong to Need on companion items, and you are a bad person' - that's just unacceptable.

 

Clearly, the only way to continue is to communicate with the group at the start, and if the group's rules are unacceptable, simply wish them 'happy hunting' and retire from said group.

 

In my opinion, the Greed button should simply be removed. Just Roll/Pass/RE. If you want something, you want it. There should be no degrees of 'want'.

[sybaf]

So there are obviously two fundamentally opposite opinions on this subject. So I suppose, people need to sort this out before the group starts. That still doesn't protect you from real ninjas, but the basically honest players, who just have a different take on loot-distribution would be protected from witch hunts based on a misunderstanding.

 

I'm of a third opinion. I am totally new to MMO's and it never dawned on me that selecting need for a companion would be bad because I presumed everyone who needed it could select need and have equal chance, after all, we all worked hard at the flashpoint.

 

Now I know otherwise, I apologised and tried to give the item to the other player. I won't do it again without checking first but that won't get me off three peoples ignore list and won't take away the rather harsh bollocking I got. Less thick skin newbies might be put off playing the game altogether if the community is this harsh on people who really don't know. If there's no apology/remorse then feel free to be harsher but telling a new player that ignorance is no excuse and ignoring them and encouraging others to do so too is a bit far in my opinion.

[Viikuna]

Eldren;

World of Warcraft supports dual-specs, which means you have 2 builds and with click of an button can change between them. In that game, just like in this one, different builds prefer different stats (thus different gear). That secondary off-spec is part of your character right? For most of the classes it's also the build that they use for solo content (tanks/healers at least). Yeah, just like your companion is part of your character and tool for solo content.

 

However, try your luck and start needed stuff for you off-spec (equals to your companion here) over someones main-spec (equals to your actual character here), and you'll end up blacklisted fairly quickly, and kicked out of the group. And changes are very high you will not end up grouping ever again with the same people. Also, if you happen to be in any kind of decent guild, and it's server build instance/raid run, you will end up beging reported to the guild leader and kicked out of the guild. (seen that too)

 

(during DFT instances, if you ignore someone, the tool wont put you in the same group with that person ever again)

 

In that game i've seen couple people like you, and never seen them again after that. Thanks to the ignore function and how it works with dungeron finder.

 

 

Slightly off-topic;

Eldren, you're the most selfish, arrogant and greedy type of person i've maybe ever seen in game forums, when it comes to things like this. It is not meant as a insult, even though it might sound like one.

 

Your kind is the reason why there is wars at all. Really, that is true. Why you think there has been wars? Becase faction X or Y doesn't simply like the other? No, there is always resources/money/power/lands involved in it. The greed that is strong in you too.

 

I've never needed an item for off-spec in WoW (~7 years of it even) over someones main spec. I've never needed gear in this game over actual players, just because my companion can use it and it's better than it does have. I've never had any need to have best in slots items for my companion while leveling, i'm doing fine with commendation gear (with left over comm's) as well as mission rewards. Or in some cases by crafting the gear my self (droids and cybertech).

 

If none needs on a item, I always ask if it's ok to need for X or Y reason.

 

You're doing group content, the items there are meant to make that group content and other of equal levels easier. Your companion is part of your solo gameplay, which gives you rewards that are meant to make solo content easier. Use those for your companion(s), those are more than enough.

 

Also, if you were about to do that flashpoint again with the same group, you would have gained nothing from the last run, because the possible upgrades are now on your companion and not on the people doing the flashpoint. Instead of people doing more dmg / taking less dmg and so on, making the next run easier and faster.

Edited January 5, 2012 by Viikuna

[Iznigoe]

I don't really understand or agree with this mentality that 'the community' gets to decide on who is allowed to do what. That's just mob-rule.

 

Generally-speaking, as good-natured human being, I would rather see another player happy if the item in question is a serious upgrade for their character. Especially when dealing with the level 10 Flashpoints.

 

It's just virtual items at the end of the day, and if I don't get the item, I can just form another group and try again.

 

I could even subscribe to a 'gentleman's agreement' that if a companion is not present in the group, then they should not be rolled for.

 

But to simply turn around and throw a fit, and lecture me that I may not Need on an item because I want it for a companion is, quite simply, wrong, insensitive, selfish and disrespectful.

 

I agree with the few people here, who are posting logical arguments and getting flamed for it: the companion system is an integral part of SWTOR.

 

To be blunt, I do not believe it is disrespectful or selfish to Need on an item that I, or my companion, can use, since both are integral to my character's progress.

As has been stated, I was there doing my fair share of the encounter. Who has the right to tell me that I may not have a chance to win something for my effort?

 

Now picture that my companion is present to make up the numbers. I am now effectively controlling TWO characters! Then to be told that 'it is wrong to Need on companion items, and you are a bad person' - that's just unacceptable.

 

Clearly, the only way to continue is to communicate with the group at the start, and if the group's rules are unacceptable, simply wish them 'happy hunting' and retire from said group.

 

In my opinion, the Greed button should simply be removed. Just Roll/Pass/RE. If you want something, you want it. There should be no degrees of 'want'.

 

I really hate players like you. By level 50 you have 1 of every class (or close) companions so in your logic players that help complete the flashpoint (healer/tank/dps) should roll against your companions even if its an upgrade for them and the item will improve their ability to perform their class role in groups. Okay! Good luck finding decent geared groupmembers then.

Edited January 5, 2012 by Iznigoe

[Miothan]

I only run Hardmodes with my guild now, anyone ninjaloots anything, they get kicked asap.

 

I guess i just dont trust random players, and i rather spend my time with players i know(well as good as you can know a voice from Vent/TS3 anyway) and i never have any ninjaloot drama anymore, which is incredibly nice.

 

I do not agree that it needs a fix, it is the players that would need a "fix", since their common sense differs from yours , which means that they were raised to not give a **** about anyone other than themselfs(tho im no pshycologist, just my own oppinion

[Maccaroth]

But to simply turn around and throw a fit, and lecture me that I may not Need on an item because I want it for a companion is, quite simply, wrong, insensitive, selfish and disrespectful. I agree with the few people here, who are posting logical arguments and getting flamed for it: the companion system is an integral part of SWTOR. To be blunt, I do not believe it is disrespectful or selfish to Need on an item that I, or my companion, can use, since both are integral to my character's progress. As has been stated, I was there doing my fair share of the encounter. Who has the right to tell me that I may not have a chance to win something for my effort?

It is situational. If there are no players needing specific item I would gladly let you claim it, because you'd put it into use. But if there are the others who could use such an item then I see it wrong to take it away from them and give it to companion. There are higher and lower priorities. You have point - and a good one too - but in the end you do quest with the whole group and hurting your co-players (and you do hurt them when you need items for a companion if someone else could use it) is never a good idea and, in the end, it makes you look egocentric and childish. It's nothing personal.

 

In my opinion, the Greed button should simply be removed. Just Roll/Pass/RE. If you want something, you want it. There should be no degrees of 'want'.

Why? Someone can really need it while the others can greed it to sale or for their companion or try to roll between themselves and use it however they see fit...

Edited January 5, 2012 by Maccaroth

[KrelosDarksky]

but as there is no LFG, this cant be happening.....

 

you know that "community" which results from chat spam grouping where everyone gets along, becomes best friends in groups and nothing like this can possibly happen....

 

 

 

oh yeah, and LOL.

 

What were BW saying about the players should create the community again? hmmm?

 

Your sarcasm is just lame.

 

Even if you got your gloryhole LFG tool you'd still have this same loot drama.

[KrelosDarksky]

Look, here's the bottom line: if a piece drops that's an upgrade for my companion but not for me, I'm going to roll Need on it.

 

Hell, I'll even roll Need on it if it's four players in the group. My companion needs to keep their gear updated just like I do, so their output is acceptable while I'm out questing on my own. I spend the majority of my time questing on my own. I'm in a Flashpoint for 30 minutes tops.

 

Companions are extensions of the player characters. It isn't going to change. I'm not going to roll Need on an item that requires a specific class and alignment unless I'm both of those things. But if a piece drops for, say, Jaesa (light armor with Endurance and Willpower), and it doesn't put a class or alignment requirement on it, and it's an upgrade from what she currently has in that slot, I'm going to roll Need on it.

 

I was in there, I helped down the boss, I have as much right to a piece of gear as any of the other players. It's no one else's business what I do with that gear.

 

 

EXTREMELY well said.

 

 

 

.

[xrodney]

Eldren;

World of Warcraft supports dual-specs, which means you have 2 builds and with click of an button can change between them. In that game, just like in this one, different builds prefer different stats (thus different gear). That secondary off-spec is part of your character right? For most of the classes it's also the build that they use for solo content (tanks/healers at least). Yeah, just like your companion is part of your character and tool for solo content.

 

In WOW you can manage solo content without switching builds, in SWTOR however companions are integral part of game-play and you cannot progress without them (unless grouped all the time and that's next to impossible)

[Errathe]

I really hate players like you. By level 50 you have 1 of every class (or close) companions so in your logic players that help complete the flashpoint (healer/tank/dps) should roll against your companions even if its an upgrade for them and the item will improve their ability to perform their class role in groups. Okay! Good luck finding decent geared groupmembers then.

 

So you hate people like me, even though I made it quite clear that in general I default to the needs of other players above myself?

 

Little harsh, don't you think?

 

You don't even know me, or anyone like me, so please explain your hatred.

 

I am simply here to discuss and debate an important aspect of SWTOR's game play.

 

So far, I have had only one misunderstanding regarding the loot system. And, again, that was down to other player's assumptions that 'the mob' gets to make the rules. Other than that, I have had nothing but highly pleasant experiences. Actually, the best PUG experiences I have ever had in a MMO.

You can ask anyone that has grouped with me, and I am sure they will tell you that I am nothing but a polite team-player, who will often Pass simply so another player can have a nice piece of 'shiny'.

 

But, the question still remains: If I do the work, why should I not be allowed a chance at the rewards? Why am I any less important than you?

 

So far I haven't really seen any logical (barely any polite) answers to these questions.

[KrelosDarksky]

To be honest i never encountered any of this ingame. In all the groups i´ve been in, Heroic 2+, 4 and flashpoints, everyone´s been polite, considerate and asked if we minded if they needed the item for their companion.

 

Maybe im just lucky or my server is filled with awesomeness

 

 

Same for me .. everyone I've grouped with has always been courteous and considerate.

 

The only AZZHATS I've encountered have been in PvP warzones.

 

 

.

[archifikoss]

Hurray for gear driven games, where greed over virtual items brings out the worst in players. Sigh...

 

Is it so difficult for people to ask "May I need <insert item here>?", irrespective of whether it's for them or their companion, and actually communicate with their teammates before taking action? Or are teammates simply means to an end?

[Viikuna]

In WOW you can manage solo content without switching builds, in SWTOR however companions are integral part of game-play and you cannot progress without them (unless grouped all the time and that's next to impossible)

 

True, you can, just like you can here (some people are doing it). But i much prefer to change to my off-spec (dmg) and kill the mobs in few seconds, over staying in my healing spec and take 20 secs to kill that very same mob.

 

Heck, even i've done stuff without companion at lower levels because he's running UW trading missions while i quest.

 

Heck as far as i remember on my commando, at least up to tatooine, my companion got like a shot or two off before i had killed the group. So he was really doing nothing for me.

 

Ps. Grouping all the time is not impossible. I've IRL friend i play with when i'm playing my vanguard = i'm always grouped.

Edited January 5, 2012 by Viikuna

[Skyrulian]

I most humbly apologize for the length and long-windedness of this post. I have read through this topic for a while now and it has intrigued me. I have not experienced this problem yet myself, but based on the common responses I have to assume that at some point in time, I will. I doubt that any one poster can formulate an argument well enough to sway those of the opposing viewpoint, but hopefully I can add a little clarity to some things.

 

After reading through the prior 43 or so pages of this argument, I have found that the responses in support of rolling for companions all read very similarly; “I, I, I, me, me, me, and I am not being selfish because x (i.e. at 50 classes have a number of companions and can technically utilize each armor and weapon type, allotting the use of all viable drops.)”

 

Though most arguments against this behavior are simply name-calling, there does appear to be an obvious paradox in this logic that holds true: if one’s argument revolves solely around self-benefit, it is the very definition of selfish.

 

Selfish: devoted to or caring only for oneself; concerned primarily with one's own interests, benefits, welfare, etc., regardless of others. - Dictionary.com

 

Thus, we can solidly declare that this argument is not so complexly about loot, but the merit of selfishness.

 

What is wrong with selfishness?

 

The problem with selfishness is that it festers and becomes contagious, altering the mindset of others to a perpetual belief in self-survival rather than humanitarian camaraderie. In fact, there is likelihood that many of the individuals in this thread arguing for the prerogative of sole personal gain suffered from this in the past and are a by-product of this contagion, or negative environment. The behavior becomes difficult to stop because, while others often reinforce it, it perpetually reinforces itself through temporary gratification. It is easy to remove a target behavior, such as greed, if one can simply stop reinforcement. Unfortunately, this is not the case. This is also why many of the individuals focusing egocentrically on their needs fail to see anything wrong with it, because the positive emotional reinforcement (i.e. victory) outweighs the negative emotional reinforcement (i.e. the loser complaining). Hopefully this can answer the question of why there is not something more “obviously” wrong with it to those who do not see it as wrong. In case you are wondering (and based on some posts, some are), this is much more prevalent in American society, where we are nurtured into an individualistic perspective on life based on success of our self over others rather than with others (this can be seen strongly within Capitalistic practices).

 

But if those arguing in support of rolling need for companions would please take a moment to kick off their shoes and look at things from a less egocentric point of view for a moment (I know that sounds rude, I swear I am not trying to be, it is merely the most fitting word), here are a couple of over-explained things to consider:

 

1. One thing to consider in this argument is the arbitrary measure of frustration duration from loss. Based on prior experience gained from colleagues, friends, rivals, and myself from life and prior MMOs, frustration is increased based on how much it most directly affects you.

 

A prime example would be Warcraft in vanilla: Let us say that you are running Stratholme as a Warrior and the Bind on Equip Bracers of Valor drop. The main tank rolls Need on them and loses them to an individual who wishes to use them on their alternate spec. The Warrior naturally grows devastated and is frustrated long after the run is over, perhaps for hours and hours. This frustration could remain for months and manifest itself through refusal to group with certain individuals or generalizations about the populace being greedy, when it was simply one individual. If the individual who rolled on them for less direct purposes loses, the individual generally feels frustration for a few moments. The problem is that these are arbitrary measurements and easily argued against, even when the general consensus is in agreement; though some will immediately understand this argument, there will be some that discard it due to lack of evidence. Assuming there are players in SWTOR that played Warcraft prior to Wrath, when people began to become more egocentric, this example may even apply to you personally.

 

Essentially: negative emotions from a direct character loss are significantly stronger than negative emotions from indirect character loss (i.e. companions, alts, monetary gain). A person taking loot for their companion over a player harms the player’s emotional state more than the player taking loot that will improve their performance over the person’s companion. Thus, looting for a companion also shows a greater focus on a small amount of pleasure for oneself over a greater amount of pleasure for others; this speaks volumes of negativity about an individual’s interpersonal relationship with humans.

 

2. Utilitarian principle; the way the world is generally governed (Law and Democracy). The greatest good is the good that affects the greatest number of people. This principle can also be found in raiding scenarios and most group activities within games. Loot is not assigned based on the personal gain of an individual, but the gain for the group. Because companions are not present in most group / raid exercises, they are placed behind players for utilitarian gain.

 

Essentially: a well geared player in a full group / raid yields a direct gain in performance without a companion present, whereas a poorly geared player in a full group / raid yields no gain in performance without a companion present. A decently played character will always outperform a companion character, making it optimal to bring a player over a companion, often resulting in full gatherings with no companions present. I foresee this being the dominant experience most players will find at 50. Thus, it is more beneficial to quantities of more than a single player to gear the player directly over a companion.

 

3. An understanding of the other side. I actually agree that companions are more than merely a pet such as a charmed wolf or Gabartik (EverQuest), an abomination (DAoC), or Hunterpet6000042 (WoW). This game has done something neat with them, allowing you to strengthen and customize them over time. However, they are artificial and have no actual emotions. They are not sad when they do not receive gear. Yes, they do further your solo experience in gameplay, but they are not more potent than you. Someone posted earlier that they felt secondary to their companion at times and all I could think was that someone may have chosen the wrong class. I always feel dominant to my companions, as should others. BioWare designed the game with companions as lesser versions of players built to stand in, but not be as affective in order to promote social longevity; that was one of the neat selling points of the game. But as stated, companions are not emotional, nor as potent as an equally geared player in that role.

 

Essentially: although a companion is a big part of your character, but they are not an equal. They are a lesser degree of a player, designed to aid you in situations where a player is not available. However, due to the decent player-base and population it is relatively easy to find players to aid in gameplay. Thus, to view loot as more useful to your occasionally used companion rather than an always used player character is generally going to fall into a range of egocentrism, a less than complimentary term.

 

Food for thought, I suppose. Thank you kindly if you took the time to read any of it.

[Errathe]

It is situational. If there are no players needing specific item I would gladly let you claim it, because you'd put it into use. But if there are the others who could use such an item then I see it wrong to take it away from them and give it to companion. There are higher and lower priorities. You have point - and a good one too - but in the end you do quest with the whole group and hurting your co-players (and you do hurt them when you need items for a companion if someone else could use it) is never a good idea and, in the end, it makes you look egocentric and childish. It's nothing personal.

 

 

Why? Someone can really need it while the others can greed it to sale or for their companion or try to roll between themselves and use it however they see fit...

 

I respect your opinion, even though I do not fully agree.

 

Unless discussed beforehand, I do not believe there are priorities. Prioritising assumes that some people are more important than others. Now, if priorities are agreed upon before the content begins, then fair enough. As a team-player, you follow those priorities.

 

What I still do not understand fully is the attitude that companions are somehow invalid when it comes to loot rolls. As I have said several times already, I would rather see a nice item go to a player anyway, because it's nice to see other people happy. My companion, while an integral part of my character's progress, won't hug me if I get them a new blaster.

 

What I have a problem with, is being told that - with no prior agreement - that I may not roll Need on something that I need/want/require. That implies that my work in the instance is of less value.

 

I am also of the opinion that there should not be 'degrees of need'. Naturally, it is polite and friendly to inquire as to another's desires, but if you want something, you want it.

[Maccaroth]

But, the question still remains: If I do the work, why should I not be allowed a chance at the rewards? Why am I any less important than you?

 

So far I haven't really seen any logical (barely any polite) answers to these questions.

I try, but my posts seems to remain behind on the other side when another one pops up while you're answering.

 

Back to the matter at hand - you're allowed to get the rewards, but there are higher and lower priorities and it's very situational case; a man in my group asked if he can need an item for his companion. I looked what it was exactly and said: "It's fine by me". Other saw no harm in it either and the whole quest was done gentle and smoothly. So far ninjas are quite rare (I met one and only in the first flashpoint) and most of the people are OK.

 

It's mostly common sense, not "mob rules"; if people in my team would start acting stupid (like needing every single item for no reason or "for companions" without even trying to consider if other teammates might need such equipment more) then I would simply quit, ignore and add them to my black list. There is no need to play with such people and community will force them to change their ways, because most people don't like it. If someone think that he is allowed to need ANY item at ANY given time then he should start a guild of ninjas and we'll see how that would work out.

[Viikuna]

 

What I have a problem with, is being told that - with no prior agreement - that I may not roll Need on something that I need/want/require. That implies that my work in the instance is of less value.

 

But when no one else needs for companions, and yet you do, wont that imply that you keep your work more valued than others in the group?

 

edit:

What i mean is; If no one else needs for companions. You do and are asked not to. That doesn't make your work less valued than others, that makes it equal. As they are not doing it either.

 

If everyone else would be needing for companion gear, and would ask you not to. THAT would mean your work would be in "less value".

Edited January 5, 2012 by Viikuna

[Shuno]

Every group i've been in, they ask first before needing for companions and that's only when no-one else can use it, or it isnt an upgrade.

[Maccaroth]

Unless discussed beforehand, I do not believe there are priorities. Prioritising assumes that some people are more important than others. Now, if priorities are agreed upon before the content begins, then fair enough. As a team-player, you follow those priorities.

Well, let's say that class item dropped out - one you can't use but your teammate can (who take need for it) and your companion. I'd say that player's need outrank companion's need. Players needs are equal to each other as are companions needs.

 

What I still do not understand fully is the attitude that companions are somehow invalid when it comes to loot rolls. As I have said several times already, I would rather see a nice item go to a player anyway, because it's nice to see other people happy. My companion, while an integral part of my character's progress, won't hug me if I get them a new blaster.

When you make full groups with four people then denying them an item will hurt your real teammates (and maybe even you) later on. That's why needing items other classes or players need is seen as unwelcome.

 

What I have a problem with, is being told that - with no prior agreement - that I may not roll Need on something that I need/want/require. That implies that my work in the instance is of less value.

No. You're free to do as you see fit. The group members, however, will decide - each to himself - if you have reasons to do so. It's not that you may not need what you need/want/require. It's that "Should you need that item? For a companion? Aren't there people who need it more than your companion?". Your needs are equal to that of the others, but needs of your companions aren't equal to that of the other players. Needs of players companions are. That's my point.

[J-Sheridan]

If you want it then you select Need

If you would LIKE it then you select Greed

If you dont like or want it you Pass

 

That is how the system works and that is how it is supposed to work.

 

Wether someone wants an item for their companion or because they want the COSMETIC appearance of the item is irrelevant.

They want it , they select Need

 

How or what they intend to use it for is of no importance to the loot system. That is a result of social entitlement expectation stupidity.

 

If you dont like it then: Tough

Find a group of people that have the same social rules as you and run with them.

 

If you decide to join a PUG or make one: Make it clear what the rules are before you start. Do not expect everyone to automatically hold the same social rule set as you.

 

 

This is the same stupidity that results in people getting hissy because 3 people choose the dark side option and 1 chooses light side. WAAA WAAA wou chose the side that makes us do more work... you suck blah blah.

 

You gonna start kicking people if they dont choose the same morality choices as you ?

[Viikuna]

If you want it then you select Need

If you would LIKE it then you select Greed

If you dont like or want it you Pass

 

That is how the system works and that is how it is supposed to work.

 

Wether someone wants an item for their companion or because they want the COSMETIC appearance of the item is irrelevant.

They want it , they select Need

 

How or what they intend to use it for is of no importance to the loot system. That is a result of social entitlement expectation stupidity.

 

If you dont like it then: Tough

Find a group of people that have the same social rules as you and run with them.

 

If you decide to join a PUG or make one: Make it clear what the rules are before you start. Do not expect everyone to automatically hold the same social rule set as you.

 

 

This is the same stupidity that results in people getting hissy because 3 people choose the dark side option and 1 chooses light side. WAAA WAAA wou chose the side that makes us do more work... you suck blah blah.

 

You gonna start kicking people if they dont choose the same morality choices as you ?

 

 

Want != Need

 

Want = Greed

 

Edit:

Yes, wanting something and needing something are 2 different things, incase you didn't get it.

Edited January 5, 2012 by Viikuna