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

[Ronamo]

You can strip a mod from a BOE without it binding ..also you can mod a BOE with a BOE without it binding.

 

Really? I could have sworn that this were not the case.

 

EDIT: It might be that modding an unbound item with a bound mod binds the item. That's probably what I was running into.

Edited January 28, 2012 by Ronamo

[Soultranna]

I operate by a very simple set of loot rules:

 

1) if it's an upgrade to my current gear, I roll Need. Companion gear does not count.

 

2) If a companion could use it, I roll Greed. If it looks good as RP gear, I roll Greed. If it's something that might fetch a decent price on the market, perhaps a crew mission or a schematic or a companion gift, I'll roll Greed.

 

3) If there's someone else in the group that could benefit from it right then and there (my Need rule applied to them), I click Pass.

 

4) If everyone has Passed on something, then I'll swing back and pick it up for later sale or disassembly.

 

Note that there's actually a lot of Passing and Greed rolls to these rules. That's because I'm trying to reward my group for, well, getting us all to the point where we get the loot.

 

And yes, my backpack isn't as full as the guy who Needs on everything, or never passes. That's OK. And if someone jawa's an item that falls under Rule 1 for me, oh well. I can always rerun the instance later with another group. It's Not That Big A Deal.

[Maccaroth]

They can get rid of the need button and just boil it down to "roll" or "pass" for all I care. That would give everyone an equal roll wheter they need an item or not.

There is a reason why we have Need and Greed. To offer some sort of middle ground, a possibility to differentiate our approach to the loot. I don't need an item, but I can take greed to make use of it later - for sale, for a companion and so on - if no one else need it also. That's what greed is for. To roll on items of smaller value (not needed but usable).

 

It's not always about having an equal roll either. If I pass my roll on an item for the tank then tank would - in return - pass on gear that I'd need. That way we both have items we want, without random rolling. And if tank doesn't need it we both take greed and someone wins. The fact that some people don't see how beneficial social contract is (because for sure it is not a charity) doesn't mean that it's worthless.

 

Maybe they really should make need possible option only when it's gear for your class, but that will harm all those who can come to an agreement and settle matters on their own. What we have now is flexible even if exploitable by some.

Edited January 28, 2012 by Maccaroth

[Grecanis]

And if someone jawa's an item.

 

lol ..Ima use that

 

I'd group with you anytime!

[Diabloplayer]

Except the problem is that many of those who take issue with the equal roll idea(not idea actually, system in place) feel that someone who plays the game and prioritizes looks over stats, is pretty much wrong and should pass to those who are rolling for stats.

 

So passing because you want it for looks or a companion or the mods so someone else gets a better chance is the only way to make it respectful or courteous? Really? So that means the person who is going for stats has a sense of entitlement since he feels he should have a better chance at it rather than taking his chances with the dice, just like the person who would want it for looks does. Being courteous varies based on the person. For example, I feel it's DIS Courteous to just say "hi" or "how's it going" to a random stranger you walk past. Does that mean i'm right or wrong, no. That's just my opinion.

 

The system is the way it is, if there is no discussion because you have "moral" or "social" rules you follow, you cannot expect anyone to follow them too. Since the system is NOT the way you want it, if you don't speak up and make your position known, there is no right to complain.

 

And everyone is selfish in some way, out society would be far far different if that was not the case.

 

Well said.

 

I'd like to see someone logically counter this argument.

 

Also, saw some people slinging around words like, "Need" Vs "Want" -- frankly, this is a video game, everything is a want. Just we use the word "Need" when we feel entitled to an item for any specific reason (stats perhaps) - in which some cases you can justify your entitlement- with legit reasons, but don't fool yourself into thinking it's anything other than just that.

[Grecanis]

There is a reason why we have Need and Greed. To offer some sort of middle ground, a possibility to differentiate our approach to the loot. I don't need an item, but I can take greed to make use of it later - for sale, for a companion and so on - if no one else need it also. That's what greed is for. To roll on items of smaller value (not needed but usable).

 

It's not always about having an equal roll either. If I pass my roll on an item for the tank then tank would - in return - pass on gear that I'd need. That way we both have items we want, without random rolling. And if tank doesn't need it we both take greed and someone wins. The fact that some people don't see how beneficial social contract is (because for sure it is not a charity) doesn't mean that it's worthless.

 

Maybe they really should make need possible option only when it's gear for your class, but that will harm all those who can come to an agreement and settle matters on their own. What we have now is flexible even if exploitable by some.

 

I agree ..that option would not be my first choice either ..but it would remove the need for this discussion.

 

..adding a 60 minuet trade window would help those who are willing to hash things out.

[GeekNius]

Let's be honest here:

For most gear in SWTOR, there is no need, there's only GREED!

 

This is due to the existence of customizable gear, which you can get through quests, commendations, crafting, vendors, the GTN ... and fit to your needs using mods from - yeah, you guessed it - quests, commendations, crafting, vendors and the GTN.

 

Basically, except for being cheap, there is no ... NO! ... excuse for not being geared to the max already outside of operations. Which makes any single roll a Greed roll.

 

And thanks to PvP and crafting, there are really no slots where this argument doesn't hold true.

 

 

And a second approach to the original topic:

If you roll on something for the stats, and replace it in another couple days by the next improvement,

while another one rolls on that item for looks, swapping out the mods, and still wearing it a year down the road ...

Which of you had the greater need?

 

The ONLY way to get the base item you want to use if by actually rolling for it and winning it.

Stats though ... well, you can get them from anywhere. 'Really should have them already - if you didn't, you were actually making your party carry you through the instance ... and you can't seriously tell me that "I suck, so I deserve everything that drops" is a valid one, can you?

 

 

That being said, and in before "so you're supporting ninja'ing?":

No, i don't. I accept excactly two valid reasons for a Need roll. 1) non-mod'able gear that's an improvement over your current non-mod'able gear, 2) mod'able items being part of your finalized outfit.

Everything else, in my book at least, is being a loot wh0re.

And this thread, and its predecessor, and probably every one of its decendants to come, are loot drama threads.

 

 

Yeah, people might be confused about loot rules from other games. Other people might just be greedy d-bags. But this is what it comes down when you look at THIS game, and THIS game's mechanics.

So I'm pretty sure we'll see a consensus along the lines descriped here sooner or later - probably later though, since greed and drama are too strong a lure.

[Maccaroth]

Also, saw some people slinging around words like, "Need" Vs "Want" -- frankly, this is a video game, everything is a want.

When you're starving then you want and need to eat. When you want some chocolate after dinner then you simply want it but doesn't really need it. There is a difference.

 

So passing because you want it for looks or a companion or the mods so someone else gets a better chance is the only way to make it respectful or courteous? Really?

No. We don't do it for the sake of being respectful or courteous. We pass items for some classes (or consider them to have higher priority) so they would in turn pass items for our class. We do so to lower the need to roll against more players than it's necessary.

 

It's also very pragmatic - if someone need an item for its stats then he will increase his abilities and not only change his looks. He'll be better asset for the team than someone who take need for an item for its look. Of course when no one needs it then there is little to no debate if (s)he could take it or not - because there is no one really needing it (for stats) and there is someone who does (for looks).

 

I agree ..that option would not be my first choice either ..but it would remove the need for this discussion.

I agree with you. It'd make such discussions needless, but it'd also make our loot choices less clear and that's something I will like to avoid if we can.

Edited January 28, 2012 by Maccaroth

[Spymaster]

I don't care what other people roll on. I don't even pay attention. If someone in my group feels that he "needs" an item, for whatever reason, then it's his business, not mine.

 

If I need something, I roll need and let the random numbers settle the issue.

 

But then, I don't play in a group that often and threads like this are why. You wanted to play in a group with others.... but then you spend all this time watching the loot rolls to make sure people roll the way you want them to? LoL.... why do some of you even group at all?

Edited January 28, 2012 by Spymaster

[Gragus]

Sorry to break it to ya, but orange medium armor is anybody's grab.

 

You're absolutely right. That said, good luck getting repeat group invites.

 

ettiquette != rules

[RyuuHakumei]

i kinda agree with all the points here, except the one about needing for mods. if a custom chest drops, but the stats are overall worse then my chest, that dosen't mean that it won't increase my stats by a LOT should i take the mods out and mix them between my entire set of gear. i have been flames for doing this before. (despite the fact that the player who flames me wasn't my class, and the player of my class in the group was in my guild and was perfectly fine with me needing for this reason (it is afterall a big increase in stats for me)). i also got flames under similar circumstances, when i needed on a lower body peice, that was an upgrade for my current lower body piece, because i "didn't equip it immediately", when what i had done was strip the mods out and put them, en-masse into my current lower body piece. i think it is unfair that i shopuld get flamed, for needing on pieces that upgrade my stats, simply because i wish to keep the same apperance (and keeping a full set of custom gear statistically up to date is a lot more challenging than just replaing your gear every time a new bit drops, without getting flamed every time you need for mod upgrades).

[ispanolfw]

I agree ..that option would not be my first choice either ..but it would remove the need for this discussion.

 

..adding a 60 minuet trade window would help those who are willing to hash things out.

 

First, not necessarily directed at just you, just woke up and picked a post to reply to.

 

Considering all the bashing about people being antisocial, greedy, entitled and the like. You can guarantee they will? Don't get me wrong, i'm the type that passes for people who get a bigger stat upgrade out of it and the like. But who am "I" to say my stat upgrade is more important than their looks upgrade or companion upgrade. You or anyone else here can look at it any way they like, but that will never make your wants more important than someone elses. NEVER. They prefer looks over stats at the cost of slower progression? They get more benefit in the bulk of their gameplay by upgrading their companion with good gear? Who are these people who feel it's ok to just TRAMPLE on that because they FEEL this person is wrong and they are right?

Edited January 28, 2012 by ispanolfw

[Grecanis]

First, not necessarily directed at just you, just woke up and picked a post to reply to.

 

Considering all the bashing about people being antisocial, greedy, entitled and the like. You can guarantee they will? Don't get me wrong, i'm the type that passes for people who get a bigger stat upgrade out of it and the like. But who am "I" to say my stat upgrade is more important than their looks upgrade or companion upgrade. You or anyone else here can look at it any way they like, but that will never make your wants more important than someone elses. NEVER. They prefer looks over stats at the cost of slower progression? They get more benefit in the bulk of their gameplay by upgrading their companion with good gear? Who are these people who feel it's ok to just TRAMPLE on that because they FEEL this person is wrong and they are right?

 

Because from the practical PoV stats>aesthetics.

 

I may be fat, grey and balding, but you give me a pink Tutu with good stats and I can still stomp a mudhole in your a**

 

(eww ..the visual )

[Admoniter]

It is for that reason that I operate under this simple MO.

- If it is a direct upgrade for me, Need.

- If someone rolls need on it (and it makes sense for them to roll on it), pass.

- If no one needs it, greed.

 

Simple as that and thankfully it seems most people on my server follow rules similar to this so it has yet to be a problem. If however we run into a person that isn't as courteous and the rules were not agreed upon before hand we will bring it up with him if the majority of the group is not interested in what he is doing kick him. If the rules were agreed upon before hand and he breaks them anyway kick them immediately.

[terminova]

Because noone cares about appearance when they participate in social activities...

 

Before level 50, there is no "need". You are going to outlevel anything you find except for orange gear, and you can succeed at levelling without any particular piece of loot.

 

Yes, there is. There's even a button for me to press that says "need" on it. If I need it, then I need it and someone like you isn't going to tell me otherwise.

Edited January 28, 2012 by terminova

[ispanolfw]

Because from the practical PoV stats>aesthetics.

 

I may be fat, grey and balding, but you give me a pink Tutu with good stats and I can still stomp a mudhole in your a**

 

(eww ..the visual )

 

And that view still doesn't give you any right to tell someone who plays for looks over stats they are wrong. Especially since the orange item system emphasizes looks. You can set rules before hand to try and avoid the people with differing views, but otherwise all parties will have to deal with it if they do not wish to speak up.

Edited January 28, 2012 by ispanolfw

[Grecanis]

And that view still doesn't give you any right to tell someone who plays for looks over stats they are wrong. Especially since the orange item system emphasizes looks.

 

I'm betting you're in the minority with that opinion.

 

You really want that "special" look ..fine ..greed on it. If you lose the roll you will have other opportunities to get it. The stat a player needs at that time only comes at that time.

[Faulhaber]

Ultimately, the only loot rules that apply are the ones that you, as a group, discuss beforehand and agree to abide by.

 

I feel perfectly fine with this thought:

 

If you join a PUG and want to roll need on anything ("everything") you can, you should then state it beforehand and see if you can get your way with it.

 

Doing otherwise doesn't constitute exploitation of a game feature, but it's certainly an abuse of other people good faith.

[BinxDarkstar]

Ok, IMO this is a delicate issue. On one hand, yeah, you should be able to roll on whatever you want to roll on. On the other hand, the need/greed system was built for a reason. Common sense dictates that if you want an item not built for your class because you want to sell/replace the modifications, you do not NEED the item, so you SHOULD do a greed roll. Same thing if you want it for your companion, that's really a greed roll, not need. People who roll need on items they DON'T need make the game a lot less fun because they take items that other members of their group actually DO need. Personally, I don't think there should be a rule against it, but any way you look at it, because of the way the system is built and designed to give an advantage to people who need the item over those who just want it, it is very rude to click need when you someone else in your group needs it more. So, If you're running a group with 3 Sith and an agent, and come across bounty hunter stuff, I say it's free game, but if in that same situation, it's 2 Sith, a bounty hunter and an agent, please let the bounty hunter have the first crack. That's just etiquette.

 

Increased stats for your PC=Need

Increased stats for Companion=Greed

Stripping mods for sale=Greed

Replacing mods because you think the item looks cooler than what you have=Definitely Greed

 

You see what the difference is? The system was built that way for a reason. So, should it be against the rules to click Need on something you don't need or cross class items? No. But it is rude, and I don't see why anyone should have to put up with it, if they don't want to. IMO it is a perfectly valid reason to boot a PC from a group, and refuse to group with them for future missions.

[gurugeorge]

You fail to understand that not everyone care only about gear and appearance is important for some..

 

And you fail to understand the purpose and function of a Need/Greed system.

 

And I say this as someone to whom appearance is almost as important as stats, etc.

 

The word "Need" doesn't apply to you, the player, in vacuo, it applies to you the player as the player specifically in control of the the class that you are playing that helped your team win the instance or down the boss.

 

The stats on the item are either "needed" by the class you are playing or not. There is no "if","and"or "but" about it - it is pure numbers, pure logic, it's absolutely inexorable, there's no way of squirming out of it.

 

IOW, you should not (if presented with a Need/Greed roll) be asking yourself "Do I as a player of SWTOR Need this?" But "Does this character's class that I'm playing Need this?"

 

If it doesn't, then all the thousands of other reasons why you might want the item - companion, appearance, selling, etc., come under the heading of "Greed."

 

Well, I amend that slightly, there's some wiggle room for Companions in a game like this in which Companions feature so heavily. If you use a companion in the instance (i.e. if it was 3 players plus your Companion), then I think it's tolerable to have an option for "Companion Need".

Edited January 28, 2012 by gurugeorge

[Eldren]

People are overcomplicating things, attempting to subject people to a social contract they may not agree to using logic from previous MMOs, none of which have the two primary things that cause current behavior: equippable companions and upgradeable gear.

 

Because of equippable companions, any given piece of gear has a lot more use for a particular player than it would if they only had their main character to think about.

 

Because of upgradeable gear, we have a set of gear that people are going to want solely for appearance (because they can put mods in it to make sure the gear is appropriate for their class), and we have mods in gear they'd otherwise ignore because one or more of those mods are upgrades for existing mods they have.

 

As a result, the instances in which someone could roll Need using the common rules (i.e., it's an upgrade) increase. As a result, there's a lot more competition for any given piece of gear. That Sith Marauder might not need the item with Aim on it, but their companion Pierce does. That Juggernaut might not need the item with Willpower on it, but their companion Jaesa does.

 

Yes, this means there's more competition for each item, because we all use our companions. It's a feature designed into the game. Arguments against rolling Need on such items range from "The companion wasn't there, they don't deserve gear" to "Players should always come before companions", but the problem is none of the people offering those arguments can give objective reasons why this is, they can only present their own perspective and hope their vehemence cows their opponents into accepting it.

 

Barring an acceptance, they turn to threats of social exile, indicating people who behave in a fashion they don't like will get bad reputations on their servers and be unable to find groups. They ignore two primary factors: many people run Operations with guilds and don't require PUGs on a meaningful level, and most PUGs are more interested in going into the content than they are paying attention to a zone channel and remembering who's who on some individual's upset ninja list.

 

Have you seen most of the zones in the game? Right now, the chat channels are silent on all but the highest-population servers. Fleet and faction city channels are active to a degree, and if you have one person decrying another player as a ninja, they're as likely to be met with "So? LOL Umadbro? U lost a roll? lulz" to the accused indicating "Not so", and most people figuring it's drama they're best uninvolved in.

 

Sure, some players might manage to convince their whole guild to blacklist someone. That person doesn't care.

 

Malice is being ascribed to people who aren't acting maliciously, but they are acting in their own best interests. They see an upgrade for their character (and with their companions able to wear player gear, they count their companions as part of their character), and they roll Need on it, figuring they helped down the boss, and they have a right to roll equal to any other player in that group (which they do). Then someone else, upset over losing a loot roll, decides there was some conspiracy afoot (instead of just bad luck on a roll) and launches into a crusade to convince the person they shouldn't have done what that very complaining player was doing: staking a claim to the item.

 

A loot system in a game with players who have differing motivations needs to be as simple and impartial as possible. Need Before Greed became a standard in World of Warcraft, which has been the largest MMO experience of existing MMO players in the last 7 years. Players who are new to MMOs with TOR scratch their heads and keep quiet, figuring it'll work itself out, and not understanding why someone's so upset that another player lost a loot roll.

 

The problem is NBG isn't the simplest loot system possible, although it's the most impartial. Even simpler would be Roll/Pass. It's another source of the ire here: a tiered priority system wherein someone can stake a claim to a piece, someone else can likewise stake a claim of higher priority, and then the first person is upset that the second didn't choose the priority they thought that person should have.

 

It's as though players in this game think every single player they ever involve themselves with has to submit to their approval before doing anything with their character. I find the concept laughable. If you'd like to decide what to do with my character, offer to pay my subscription fee (which I won't let you do because I have a job and make my own money). Maybe you'd like to do my job so you can earn money and give it to me as an allowance? No thanks, that stopped after I graduated high school and entered the adult world, where I'm my own authority, and my parents are more my friends and advisors than anything else.

 

People are attempting to treat loot in TOR like loot in WoW or other MMOs that don't have equippable companions or upgradeable gear, and it doesn't work. New paradigm here, and people have to adjust to it. Some of the old "rules" (and so we're clear, they aren't actually enforceable rules) apply, others don't because they don't make sense any longer.

 

There are solutions to this problem. They range from the complex (add a companion loot box to each boss' loot table that players can roll on, and change all existing loot to have class requirements that prevent Need rolls from those not of that class) to the simple (move to Roll/Pass, removing all priority differentials in the rolling system; if you want the item you roll, if you don't you pass), and perhaps at some point BioWare will implement one of those options, or something entirely different. Until they do, we're left with Need Before Greed, and a couple simple realities:

 

1) If it's an upgrade for the player, whether companion or character, they should roll Need

2) No player, not a single one of us, requires others' approval to upgrade their characters how they choose

 

People can rage about how things "should be" all they like, but it's pointless if they choose, while raging, to ignore how things are.

 

Other players, unwilling to accept how things are, attempt to place additional rules on top of the existing system. They claim they're being altruistic, they claim they're working for the "betterment of the community", the reality is this: they're trying to, in some fashion, insure a greater chance of them getting the loot they want from a given boss' drops. Players go into group content and cooperate to down a boss, but they aren't going in to gear up other players, they're going in to gear themselves up. You cooperate to kill the boss, but you're each rolling individually. Unless BioWare changes that reality, this is the game you're playing, and these are the rules you have to work with.

 

Threaten to blacklist people all you like, make dire predictions of their future inability to join groups all you like, the reality stands: each player has the right to roll on whatever they like for whatever reason they like. You have no authority over them no matter how much you want it. You gear up your character, let them gear up theirs, and stop worrying what other players are doing with their options.

[Grecanis]

People are overcomplicating things, attempting to subject people to a social contract they may not agree to using logic from previous MMOs, none of which have the two primary things that cause current behavior: equippable companions and upgradeable gear.

 

Wall of text crits for 45769

 

..and still doest negate the fact that aesthetics are a want and not a need and should be a "greed" roll.

 

Again ..that special look you want will still be available after the other fellow player gets what they need.

[Saberlost]

No, because as much as ANYONE wants looting to work a certain way, it doesn't. You don't discuss and set rules beforehand, the rules are what is set forth in the game. And being as there are no written loot rules, and the system allows you to roll on anything you helped generate, yes, he's right in this case.

 

So as long as a "goverment" or in this case Bioware tells you what is rigth or wrong you can't tell by yourslef?

 

 

Just for the record. Just becouse you can use a item donsn't mean you should do that.

[ApLJack]

Honestly, I understand 100% where the Aesthetic people come from, but I generally follow the same rules as I did in previous MMOs.

 

If I need it for stats, I hit need.

Otherwise I hit greed, because... I am greedy, I'll sell it or companion it otherwise.

 

That includes orange gear. Why? If you can use it purely for looks, that FP will still be there 10 levels down the road, go in and solo the place a few times for the pieces. You all just made the point that you get orange gear through quests, leveling, crafting. Same goes for mods. Therefore, by that argument you have plenty of chances to orange out a companion on your own outside the FP as well. Looks can be switched for at any time, don't take the stat boosts a party member may need.

 

On that note, I tend to go into FPs 1-2 levels below the required for the gear. That orange that just dropped has better stats than I can even equip right at this time, I am rolling need on it. It saves me the hassle of re-modding most of it later, and gives me the stats I need. Do I worry about looks at all? Sure.

 

That's why I am always adding new BoP oranges into the cargo bay. I don't throw out the gear, because I may like to change my look once in a while. If an orange comes to me with better stats that what I am wearing, I switch out until I make the mods to refill the old stuff for looks.

 

Stats while leveling > Aesthetics. Aesthetics can be achieves at any time in the process, while stats on the items only benefit me in the process. I would never roll need over someone else on a item that didn't already fit my stats.

 

If I want it for the mods but isn't something I'd normally use, as I did with a regular lightsaber for my Double-Bladed, then I ask if I may need. If I want it for my companion, I ask if I may need.

 

As I said, I understand where the Aesthetic people are coming from in this, but the same arguments for needing on based for looks apply just as much for needing for the stats first.

[face_hindu]

People are overcomplicating things, attempting to subject people to a social contract they may not agree to...

 

First of all, did you not read what gurugeorge wrote? (and trust me, you don't want to argue "social contracts" with that man).

 

You wrote a whole lot of words in defense of Needing for companions who may or may not have been part of the group, but I assure you: the consensus is, if a companion was on the run and helped kill the mobs that dropped that gear, fine. If your companion was not on that run, the companion does not deserve to roll on that drop. I'm sorry you wrote so many words, but that's the consensus. Also - companion doesn't have feelings; person you took gear from is real, and just worked his/her butt off for that gear.

 

Needing on companion gear when your comp wasn't there for the run: indefensible. It's akin to needing for an alt. So not cool.