No, You May Not Roll on Items for Another Class and Strip Out the Mods

[StonySpider]

Most of the difficult game content requires the use of a full party or an ops group, in which companions do not factor into the effectiveness of these groups. Thus the gearing of actual, player characters should take precendence over the gearing of companions, as it easier allows players to, you know, play the game.

 

Yes, gearing your companions will make questing solo easier, but the leveling experience is only one part of the game, and this is a massively multiplayer game. You play with other people, who need better gear to progress through the game, same as you. Taking gear intended for their chosen class in order to equip your companion hurts the party. For instance what if you needed healer gear for your companion and the healer in your party heals for a tiny bit less that what is needed to keep you alive? Yes, you may say that a small stat increase like that won't affect anything significant, but it won't effect your companion that much either, or be even less effective, because your companion will never be used as effectively as a decent human player can accomplish.

 

If Bioware intended everyone to need on something that they have use for, they'd never create class specific items, because the point will be moot, the chances of that class actually receiving that item will be astronomical. If you need something for purely monetary reasons, or to make your character look cooler, that is greed, and if you don't need or want it, you pass on it. It's not an upgrade, you NEED upgrades or you'll keep dying and not be able to progress through the game. The choice between wearing an ugly piece of armour or a weapon because it's better than what you have on versus wearing something that looks cool but is terrble for your character proves that.

[Setanian]

That's... your opinion and you're free to have it, although I feel you disregard it mostly because it doesn't suit your point of view. I only explain the reasons why people act one way of the other.

 

 

Um, No, it's fact. You want it to be an opinion, but, sad for you, it is actually fact.

 

 

Now I have to tell you to read what I write before posting something like that. Of course they aren't grouping to enhance my chances of gaining loot. They are enhancing their own chances to gain loot that will be the best for their character by - in turn - allowing me to have mine.

 

No-one 'allows' you to have it. If you win, you get it, if don't win, you lose.

[chton]

Stop telling people what they should and shouldn't do. If it's your right to need things over the people in the group that can use them as an upgrade, it's their right to boot you, badmouth you, get guilds to black list you and anything else they want to do to you.

 

 

Start playing right and those things won't happen.

 

I'm playing the way I like, contrary to what you claim is right and I have no problems with grouping or what not. Maybe if my server was tiny and people like you the majority, but guess what, I am not playing right and having a great time. No consequences, so do what you like, I say more power to you. Because I know I am and nothing you say or your empty threats matters.

[samht]

You need to accept, that there is no 'excuse' at all. People roll how they want because it is their entitlement to do so.

 

First, I myself never roll need for my companion, second I have no problem rolling against ppl a roll is a roll. Now, in wow I will Tull off spec, if 1 no one is rolling off spec, or 2 it's a 5-man that's been out for a while, in playing as a tank/heals and loot rules have been established.

 

Only ppl that care about rolling against others are self entitled children living with momy- others will treat ppl how they want be treated and don't qq if someone plays differently or set ground rules. Do quit you qqing

[Creed_Buhallin]

I have no idea why we are failing BUT I can see a direct correlation between the attitude towards loot being 'free for all' to the detriment of the whole and failing a mission.

 

Yes, it is hypothetical but not completely out of left field given the opinions expressed in this thread.

This is the Evel Knievel of logical leaps.

[VanorDM]

Most of the difficult game content requires the use of a full party or an ops group, in which companions do not factor into the effectiveness of these groups.

 

Yep, and once I reach a point where I no longer have any need for a companion I'd stop trying to upgrade them. Because they will no longer have any impact on my game play. Until that time I think it's completely fair to roll need on an item that will directly improve my ability to go though content.

 

Taking gear intended for their chosen class in order to equip your companion hurts the party.

 

So if a different player can use it, but it's a bigger upgrade for you then them, do you tell them they can't roll need on it? Because only the person who gets the most use out of it has the right to need it?

 

If Bioware intended everyone to need on something that they have use for, they'd never create class specific items

 

But there is class specific items in the game. There are items you can only use on a Jedi Knight, or Smuggler. Those items can not be used on a companion. Last night I saw a nice set of orange robes on the GTN. I bought them for my companion but found out she can't wear them, because they are JK/JC only robes and she's not a Consular.

 

In those cases yes, you shouldn't roll need on them, because your companion can't use them.

 

But if the item has the right armor type, and right stats for your companion, then they are fair game, because clearly Bioware set that item up in such a way that the companion could in fact wear it.

[Maccaroth]

Based on above, it seems kinda unlikely you'd be in a group where 3 of the people would have use of the same gear.

I would make use of gear for Bounty Hunters and Siths (light armor) if I'd like to equip my companions, because such are the items that my companions are capable of wearing. I am not sure how about the other classes.

 

Setanian - There is no point discussing when you don't have the context of what has been already told before (and what explains my current posts).

Edited January 27, 2012 by Maccaroth

[StonySpider]

I'm playing the way I like, contrary to what you claim is right and I have no problems with grouping or what not. Maybe if my server was tiny and people like you the majority, but guess what, I am not playing right and having a great time. No consequences, so do what you like, I say more power to you. Because I know I am and nothing you say or your empty threats matters.

 

Try playing that way in a guild, which you'll need to be in to organize a large enough group that can work together to do end-game content, and we'll see how far needing on everything gets you.

[Creed_Buhallin]

Not at all - the item is for their toon and not their companion.

 

And these aren't 'new rules' - or really rules at all. The concept that a primary toon should take precedence over a companion is at the core of the issue.

But that's not what you said. What you said was:

 

"selfishly rolling on gear that will only aid you when not grouped with other players"

 

By that reasoning, it doesn't matter whether the item is for me or my companion - the companion may be a specific example of an item which will only help when I'm not grouped, but it's far from the only one.

 

You're trying to come up with some way to separate an item for a companion from an item for the main - but there's no way to do it. The simple fact is, improving my companion improves me. You tried to do it by zeroing in on "Only claim items that improve what you're doing right now", but that has a HUGE number of holes in it. Unless you're going to start trying to measure the potential non-grouping use of an item for each person, you're going to have to find another distinction to justify why companions don't qualify.

[samht]

-nods-

 

Rolling for companions is a big part of this discussion. It comes down to trying to settle on the definition of need, which we all pretty much differ.

 

I agree, unless there is grind roles, definition of need varies. Also, I think veteran players forget that because there so use to the unwritten laws. I know in wow there almost an unwritten law that states rolling need for off spec is nijaing but as the 5 mans become older ppl don't qq. As much but then again I tell ppl I am only rolling off spec I can leave if you don't like it.Sometimes ppl r like you can roll on anything u want except this

[StonySpider]

So if a different player can use it, but it's a bigger upgrade for you then them, do you tell them they can't roll need on it? Because only the person who gets the most use out of it has the right to need it?

 

Yes, absolutely. The person who needs it the most gets it. If I'm in an FP with another Sage and I see the item that just dropped is a 20 willpower boost compared to the 5 willpower boost I'd get for completing it, they should ABSOLUTELY get that item. I just thought it was an unspoken thing, really.

[Setanian]

First, I myself never roll need for my companion, second I have no problem rolling against ppl a roll is a roll. Now, in wow I will Tull off spec, if 1 no one is rolling off spec, or 2 it's a 5-man that's been out for a while, in playing as a tank/heals and loot rules have been established.

 

Newsflash: This is SW;ToR not Wow..

 

Only ppl that care about rolling against others

 

Who else would they be rolling against? Themselves?

 

are self entitled children

 

Assumtion or do you have some facts to back this claim up?

 

living with momy-

 

So you know everyone personally, their living arrangements and what time they walk their dog I guess. Must be a heavy load having so much knowledge of everyone else. Me, I think you pulled that statistic out of somewhere smelly.

 

 

others will treat ppl how they want be treated and don't qq if someone plays differently or set ground rules. Do quit you qqing

 

I knew I should have stopped reading when you mentioned WoW, that told me all I needed to know.

[samht]

Try playing that way in a guild, which you'll need to be in to organize a large enough group that can work together to do end-game content, and we'll see how far needing on everything gets you.

 

Most guild I been in consider a roll a roll in 5 men and in raids they use a loot consoule or point system. I hate guilds that use a roll system because it's luck and sometimes you just end up gearing ppl before they move to guild that uses a better system.

[ClyntKeelan]

Reading this thread it's obvious that I'm far from alone in being upset about selfish Loot Snatchers. I think from now on I'm gonna warn any group I'm in that Loot Snatching will be rewarded with instantaneous Healer-Quit. Middle of the FP or not.

 

The good thing is you can see who's doing it - it's right there on the chat window.

[chton]

The more people you alienate the harder it will be for you to find people to group and play with. And flashpoints are usually done by four people's group. It's not the best idea to make enemies if there is no reason for it.

 

Also, don't treat this social contract as something that makes you forfeit your share of the loot for nothing. Remember that while you might be expected to not need some of said loot (when there are peope around who need it for their character) you'll be entitled to need the other parts and these will be the parts that will improve your character directly. Plus you'll greed anything else that the other players didn't need. You pass something, you gain something.

 

But I don't need your social contract. And I don't need anyone to "give up" loot for me. Since I don't expect anyone to give up anything for me, why would I give anything up for them?

[StonySpider]

I hate guilds that use a roll system because it's luck and sometimes you just end up gearing ppl before they move to guild that uses a better system.

 

You mean sometimes jerks use other people for their own purposes? Yes, I completely agree. And those people should be ashamed.

[Grecanis]

I'd say as long you had the discussion about what is acceptable looting beforehand, fire away if they break that agreement. If you are gonna grief someone over breaking an unstated rule, you are also outing yourself as a short-sighted jerk.

 

Feigning ignorance to justify poor behavior makes that person the jerk ..short-sighted or otherwise.

 

They deserve to be called out.

 

IMHO

[Eldren]

Yes, absolutely. The person who needs it the most gets it. If I'm in an FP with another Sage and I see the item that just dropped is a 20 willpower boost compared to the 5 willpower boost I'd get for completing it, they should ABSOLUTELY get that item. I just thought it was an unspoken thing, really.

 

No, it isn't. I'm not there to help others get items. If it's for my class and it's an upgrade at all, I'm rolling Need for it. If it's not for my class but it's still an upgrade for me or my companion (whether due to mods or the item itself), I'm rolling Need on it. The only way I'm going to roll Greed on something is if it isn't an upgrade for a companion or myself in some fashion.

 

If it's an orange item with three mods I don't make use of, but it has a look that I like and matches my armor type, I'll roll Need on it, and strip the mods out, replacing them with class-appropriate mods.

 

I'm in there to cooperate in downing bosses for a shot at loot that I can use. Many others are as well, and should have no issues in rolling on things they want.

 

That is what Need Before Greed is: if you want it, you roll Need. If you'd like it, but would be perfectly fine with someone else getting it, you roll Greed.

[Vydor_HC]

I agree, unless there is grind roles, definition of need varies. Also, I think veteran players forget that because there so use to the unwritten laws. I know in wow there almost an unwritten law that states rolling need for off spec is nijaing but as the 5 mans become older ppl don't qq. As much but then again I tell ppl I am only rolling off spec I can leave if you don't like it.Sometimes ppl r like you can roll on anything u want except this

 

-nods-

 

I've played these types of games since MUDS, and looting and looting rules have ALWAYS been one of the biggest sticky points in every game. Variations of NBG are always put in place, but there are always disagreements.

[Setanian]

Feigning ignorance to justify poor behavior makes that person the jerk ..short-sighted or otherwise.

 

They deserve to be called out.

 

IMHO

 

What ignorance exactly ?

[StonySpider]

But I don't need your social contract. And I don't need anyone to "give up" loot for me. Since I don't expect anyone to give up anything for me, why would I give anything up for them?

 

Because empathy, compassion and respect for equals are traits that a community, even an online one, collapses without?

[Eldren]

Because empathy, compassion and respect for equals are traits that a community, even an online one, collapses without?

 

Why is it "empathy, compassion and respect for equals" when you're rolling on what you want, but "greed" when someone else is rolling on what they want?

[Vydor_HC]

Reading this thread it's obvious that I'm far from alone in being upset about selfish Loot Snatchers. I think from now on I'm gonna warn any group I'm in that Loot Snatching will be rewarded with instantaneous Healer-Quit. Middle of the FP or not.

 

The good thing is you can see who's doing it - it's right there on the chat window.

 

Yup, thats the wise thing to do, talk about looting before you start.

[Grecanis]

But I don't need your social contract. And I don't need anyone to "give up" loot for me. Since I don't expect anyone to give up anything for me, why would I give anything up for them?

 

Because it's the right thing to do.

[VanorDM]

Yes, absolutely. The person who needs it the most gets it.

 

Fair enough, if that's the rules you want to go by, more power to you. However...

 

I just thought it was an unspoken thing, really.

 

This his far from true. Not everyone is going to agree with you on this. Even in WoW which so many base their opinions on, not everyone agreed that you could only roll need if it gave you the biggest boost.

 

A lot of drama I saw was based on the idea that someone needed the item more, because it was a bigger upgrade, so they were robbed out of it.

 

But taking your logic. If the item is a bigger upgrade for my companion the it is any other character, doesn't that mean I have a greater claim on it?