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

[Setanian]

oh so this is the troll thread, that explains why there is so much discussion about something which is pretty much taken for granted in most MMOs, i.e. doing the right thing and having a moral compass which is at least slightly functional.

 

i don't speak for everyone in the community but i think you will find the general consensus to be the same as mine, at least within the real world and within the actual game, not on a forum where people pose contrarian views just for the sake of being heard.

 

This MMo is completely different than your taken for granted MMOs. We have companions, other MMOs do not.

 

The general consensus I see, is probably 50/50 +/- a few.

 

But, that's all your opinion and you're entitled to it. As am I to mine.

[Setanian]

It made me check and I found this:

 

http://www.wowwiki.com/Loot_ninja

 

http://www.wowwiki.com/Greed

 

http://www.wowwiki.com/Need_before_Greed

 

Just for informational purposes.

 

Firstly, I take as it is for informational purposes.

 

Secondly, it is all from wowwiki. Another set of opinions by other players.

 

Thirdly, as I said many times, ToR is unique, in that we have companions which must be geared so we can level and do whatever we want to do in the game. That adds another dynamic which basically makes the accepted standard of NBG redundant.

 

EQ1 well before WoW had no 'need' button. Loot was won by typing /random which gave out the % of each player and the winning player looted the corpse. Later, deals were done between the players, if someone wanted a piece of loot they could get it free, or, quite regularly buy it off the winner.

 

In other cases, a player may just not roll because they were giving the other player a higher chance of winning.

 

That's all fine and works well. The problem here is some people attempting to dictate to me how I should play and how I should roll the dice.

[GweedoBane]

Can someone explain what 'need' does over 'greed'? I clicked on greed yesterday (as did my grpmate) when grouped with someone in an instance and the system duelly rolled on each item (I didn't win a single roll lol, but whatever).

 

But if I clicked on 'need' would I have automatically got the item? What if we both did? Then the system makes a roll for each of us and whoever gets the highest roll wins? (Much like greed I thought).

 

Just trying to get my head around this very touchy subject!

[Ronamo]

Can someone explain what 'need' does over 'greed'? I clicked on greed yesterday (as did my grpmate) when grouped with someone in an instance and the system duelly rolled on each item (I didn't win a single roll lol, but whatever).

 

But if I clicked on 'need' would I have automatically got the item? What if we both did? Then the system makes a roll for each of us and whoever gets the highest roll wins? (Much like greed I thought).

 

Just trying to get my head around this very touchy subject!

 

If even one person uses the "need" button, any "greed" rolls are automatically disqualified.

[GweedoBane]

Firstly, I take as it is for informational purposes.

 

Secondly, it is all from wowwiki. Another set of opinions by other players.

 

Thirdly, as I said many times, ToR is unique, in that we have companions which must be geared so we can level and do whatever we want to do in the game. That adds another dynamic which basically makes the accepted standard of NBG redundant.

 

EQ1 well before WoW had no 'need' button. Loot was won by typing /random which gave out the % of each player and the winning player looted the corpse. Later, deals were done between the players, if someone wanted a piece of loot they could get it free, or, quite regularly buy it off the winner.

 

In other cases, a player may just not roll because they were giving the other player a higher chance of winning.

 

That's all fine and works well. The problem here is some people attempting to dictate to me how I should play and how I should roll the dice.

 

Underligned, why can't we just have a system like this ingame? This same kind of thing was in swg as well, except the odd saber but they eventually removed that 'bounding' thing as well.

 

Just make it all available to pass on if the person who wins the roll chooses to I thought. That way a trooper who wins the roll for a great saber then places the item on the trade network for sale, to make money which they are entitled to. Or they give to a friend/guildie etc etc.

[jontyld]

Can someone explain what 'need' does over 'greed'? I clicked on greed yesterday (as did my grpmate) when grouped with someone in an instance and the system duelly rolled on each item (I didn't win a single roll lol, but whatever).

 

But if I clicked on 'need' would I have automatically got the item? What if we both did? Then the system makes a roll for each of us and whoever gets the highest roll wins? (Much like greed I thought).

 

Just trying to get my head around this very touchy subject!

 

If 1 or more people pick need they roll, winner gets the item. If nobody picks need, everyone who picks greed rolls and winner gets the item.

[Notsensible]

Can someone explain what 'need' does over 'greed'? I clicked on greed yesterday (as did my grpmate) when grouped with someone in an instance and the system duelly rolled on each item (I didn't win a single roll lol, but whatever).

 

But if I clicked on 'need' would I have automatically got the item? What if we both did? Then the system makes a roll for each of us and whoever gets the highest roll wins? (Much like greed I thought).

 

Just trying to get my head around this very touchy subject!

 

"Need" gives you priority roll, whereas "Greed" is like a baseline roll. The system will consider Need rolls first, if no one used it, it will follow with Greed, and if no one used either, it will just sit idle on the target for anyone (I think) to loot the corpse.

[sjmc]

Underligned, why can't we just have a system like this ingame?

Random distribution would be the most fair. Everyone goes home with a similar amount of loot -- and if they don't get exactly the pieces they want, they can sell the loot they do get and use the credits to buy what they need.

 

It would also increase the liquidity of the GTN.

[GweedoBane]

ty for clearing that up, tbh I actually avoid most instances for the reason that there is so much agro over loot. The attitude towards what people think they are entitled to is quite strange.....

[ispanolfw]

Not gonna read all the responses, but wanted to make these points:

 

1. people rolling on other classes' gear when in the same group is just wrong and should not happen. as OP correctly points out, this "prisoners' dilemma" option of screwing the other guy before he screws you actually turns out to be detrimental to all parties involved.

 

2. anyone who says it's okay because it's possible (or possible to merely be able to use the item) is just deluded. it's possible to steal your neighbours' mail and use their new credit card but does that make it okay? we still have moral responsibilities, and just because the game allows you to do something does not mean anything goes.

 

3. if you are the leader of the group you should immediately kick someone who does this. a corollary of this is to form more groups yourself so you have the ability to do this.

 

4. take heart in that it's not so much of an issue pre 50 where u will out-level the gear in a matter of game-hours, while at 50, people who do this will not be tolerated and it won't take long before the rest of the community knows not to group with them or have them in their guild.

 

1. This is just your opinion, don't force it on others. I won't force mine on you, it's rather similar in any case however.

 

2. Stealing someone's mail is most certainly theft, rolling on an item and winning is not. The item belonged to no one before the roll.

 

3. If you didn't set expectations before the run as the leader, and then kick someone later for not following expectations that you did not set, then you are the one in the wrong.

 

4. We shall see.

[jontyld]

I was going to suggest they use the same system of round robin type loot distribution that normal operations use, which would solve this issue, but then I thought it would actually hurt the players who can cooperate and agree on looting rules so forget it. I'll just add that I'm glad so few people are into the free for all that I've never had to deal with one in a group.

[ispanolfw]

oh so this is the troll thread, that explains why there is so much discussion about something which is pretty much taken for granted in most MMOs, i.e. doing the right thing and having a moral compass which is at least slightly functional.

 

i don't speak for everyone in the community but i think you will find the general consensus to be the same as mine, at least within the real world and within the actual game, not on a forum where people pose contrarian views just for the sake of being heard.

 

One person's moral compass is different from another. For example, you might find it polite for a random person to say "hi" or "how's it going?" to you as you walk past. I personally find it mildy rude, I don't know you, I have no desire to know you. I don't hate you either however, and if you had asked me a real question, not "How are you?" I would have responded normally. Or when someone opens a door for me when it's not needed, I get one of two things when I just walk in silently. Either they go about their business or they get upset because I didn't thanks them. I thank people when I ask them for something or to do something and they do so. If I do something of my own free will I want no thanks whatsoever, I did it to do it, not for thanks.

 

Many people have different mentalities, but it doesn't make them wrong and it doesn't mean yours supersede theirs.

[ZDProletariat]

The advantage of morality being the guidelines to societal interaction is that there actually is a right and wrong action to take in a given situation.

You can't excuse absolutely every opinion by using the tired old phrase "everybody is entitled to their opinion," or something similar.

You are of course entitled to an opinion, and if that opinion is wrong, we are entitled to point out how wrong, irrational, illogical, or immoral you are being.

It doesn't help your case to run from every debate by saying everybody has different opinions. We all know people do. It's just that yours is wrong.

[GweedoBane]

The advantage of morality being the guidelines to societal interaction is that there actually is a right and wrong action to take in a given situation.

You can't excuse absolutely every opinion by using the tired old phrase "everybody is entitled to their opinion," or something similar.

You are of course entitled to an opinion, and if that opinion is wrong, we are entitled to point out how wrong, irrational, illogical, or immoral you are being.

It doesn't help your case to run from every debate by saying everybody has different opinions. We all know people do. It's just that yours is wrong.

 

Huh? Very one sided attitude you have there......no wait only YOUR opinion is correct lol

[ispanolfw]

The advantage of morality being the guidelines to societal interaction is that there actually is a right and wrong action to take in a given situation.

You can't excuse absolutely every opinion by using the tired old phrase "everybody is entitled to their opinion," or something similar.

You are of course entitled to an opinion, and if that opinion is wrong, we are entitled to point out how wrong, irrational, illogical, or immoral you are being.

It doesn't help your case to run from every debate by saying everybody has different opinions. We all know people do. It's just that yours is wrong.

 

The problem is that opinions are beliefs and are not rooted in fact. Saying someones opinion is wrong requires you back it up with fact. And bringing morality is yet more opinions on what is right and wrong. We as a race may agree that we should do things in a certain way, but that in not way makes it not an opinion. And this is in a game, most of the people pushing against the "morals" crowd aren't even arguing an opinion, but that the "morals" crowd themselves are fighting against a morals agnostic system.

[Grecanis]

Now I agree that with a game like this, that Orange gear and Companions do complicate the issue - it's not quite so clear-cut as some of the hardliners here would have it, I agree. Perhaps the system could be cleverer in some ways. It may be that BW haven't quite thought through the ramifications of these two complications yet, as they've had bigger fish to fry to get the game up and running.

 

You are correct in that those two factors do complicate things. But I look at it more simplistically. The more I think on it the less I can bring them into the need catagory.

 

I mean sure, modable gear great to have, everybody wants them. Companions need to be geared ..but at the expense of the other members in the run?

 

I'm sorry, but I just can't convince myself that those are needs in any real sense of the word.

[AsheraII]

What? Orange gear is currently the ONLY fully mod-able gear in the game, followed by purple. The entire point of the orange gear is to allow it to be brought all the way from the start of the game to the end by swapping out those mods as you progress.

 

Yes, having the same 'look' is nice if you are sold on one and orange gear also fills that role if you can find a look in it that you like but the orange color in this case signifies 'custom' (It's even on the GTN under that heading) and not 'pretty'.

In that case, the Agent should've kept the one he got as a mission reward around lvl 17 already. Yes, orange gear is there specifically to look pretty, not for the stats. It's REALLY not hard to keep the mods within up to date. It's actually pretty simple to get them in advance, as preperation for when you hit your next level.

[ZDProletariat]

The problem is that opinions are beliefs and are not rooted in fact. Saying someones opinion is wrong requires you back it up with fact. And bringing morality is yet more opinions on what is right and wrong. We as a race may agree that we should do things in a certain way, but that in not way makes it not an opinion. And this is in a game, most of the people pushing against the "morals" crowd aren't even arguing an opinion, but that the "morals" crowd themselves are fighting against a morals agnostic system.

 

What? Opinions can easily be based on fact, and usually are. As are beliefs. I don't understand why you imagine opinions can't also be based on facts.

Also, we don't decide as a species what is right and wrong, we decide as a society. In an MMO, we have people from different societies coming together forming a separate community with a unique judge of right and wrong. But once the standard is set, that's what all actions are judged against. Your action can be right, and can be wrong.

[ispanolfw]

What? Opinions can easily be based on fact, and usually are. As are beliefs. I don't understand why you imagine opinions can't also be based on facts.

Also, we don't decide as a species what is right and wrong, we decide as a society. In an MMO, we have people from different societies coming together forming a separate community with a unique judge of right and wrong. But once the standard is set, that's what all actions are judged against. Your action can be right, and can be wrong.

 

Opinion

 

1.

a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.

2.

a personal view, attitude, or appraisal.

3.

the formal expression of a professional judgment: to ask for a second medical opinion.

4.

Law . the formal statement by a judge or court of the reasoning and the principles of law used in reaching a decision of a case.

5.

a judgment or estimate of a person or thing with respect to character, merit, etc.: to forfeit someone's good opinion.

 

You can base your opinion on facts, but the opinion itself is just that, an opinion. Needing an item for a stat boost being right is an opinion. Needing an item for looks being wrong is an opinion. Needing an item for whatever reason you deem fit, with the system in place now, is allowed. If you wish your run to have other restrictions in addition to the system as it is, say so. Otherwise don't punish others for following your way when it was never stated.

 

EDIT: And in said community there still may be people who disagree with the community's decision on what's right or wrong.

Edited January 30, 2012 by ispanolfw

[SnoggyMack]

This game isn't capable of having loot ninjas. So just change the word to Loot JAWAS.

 

Keeping in mind Jawas are kind of cool, even though every single one of us knows that they'll roll need on anything they can scavenge.

 

Loot Jawas. Pass it on.

[ispanolfw]

This game isn't capable of having loot ninjas. So just change the word to Loot JAWAS.

 

Keeping in mind Jawas are kind of cool, even though every single one of us knows that they'll roll need on anything they can scavenge.

 

Loot Jawas. Pass it on.

The funny part about that is if you look at the BH Jawa Companion, Blizz. He either is love or favorite with all gift types.

[Loendar]

In that case, the Agent should've kept the one he got as a mission reward around lvl 17 already. Yes, orange gear is there specifically to look pretty, not for the stats. It's REALLY not hard to keep the mods within up to date. It's actually pretty simple to get them in advance, as preperation for when you hit your next level.

 

The point being that it is the only gear that can be modded all the way to end-game. It is in for that purpose (and will happen more once you can remove the top tier mod from raid gear).

 

You are fundamentally wrong if you think orange gear is for dressing up.

[ispanolfw]

The point being that it is the only gear that can be modded all the way to end-game. It is in for that purpose (and will happen more once you can remove the top tier mod from raid gear).

 

You are fundamentally wrong if you think orange gear is for dressing up.

 

Yet another "my opinion is right, yours is wrong" person. Orange gear is most certainly for looks customization. They could have just had an odd mod slot here and here and there and had no oranges whatsoever for looks customization.

[dcgregorya]

This is why we need the wardec and looting system from Eve Online in this game. Stuff like that didn't happen on Eve because being a jerk meant you were stuck in the NPC corps where you were universally shunned.

[dcgregorya]

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?

 

Because it's required to clear the content and get the gear. I'm not grouping with randoms because I want to make your aquaintenance and be best friends forever. Whether implied or not the majority of people run the content to get the loot and that's why roll systems and etc exist. If people just wanted XP or credits they wouldn't drop gear to begin with or would just randomly distribute.

 

It's just etiquette and manners. I greed 90% of stuff that applies to my class anyway because my gear is up to date and better than what drops but I realize that other people want some of the gear for their own character and since I don't have Aspergers I acquiesce to make them happy as a sign of mutual respect.