Creed_Buhallin Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 You neglect to say which mods are in the armor, but since both Marauders and Juggernauts prioritize Strength, I say if there are Strength mods in it, then yes, the Marauder can roll on it, as the mods in it are an upgrade for them. They were both there to down the boss, they're both Sith Warriors and thus meet class requirements for the item, and they both use the item's stats. You're right - the assumption was that both could use it. Gave up clarity for brevity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galbatorrix Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 (edited) Let's ignore companions and appearance for a moment, and focus on mods. I've presented this several times, and nobody seems to want to address it, but we'll try again: A Juggernaut and Marauder are in a mission. Both have orange armor. A piece of heavy orange armor drops. Can the Marauder roll need on it? Please, explain why or why not. He can do whatever he wants. If I'm the Marauder, I'd pass if the Jugg Needs it. But again, that's just me. But, if you are that Marauder, be prepared to get flamed by the Jugg. You may not like it, because you personally think the Marauder has equal claim. But, just like some of you believe the game gives you a need button so that you can need anything that you feel is beneficial, regardless of the group, some people believe that the person getting the most use out of the item should be the only one that rolls (EVERYONE I've grouped with has felt this way without ever having to say it. They just always roll this way in my play experience) So, if the Marauder wins it and the Jugg complains, the Jugg's philosophy makes it to were he has that right. Just like you think the Marauder has the right to roll on heavy gear for the mods. In other words, if it's going to work, it has to work both ways. Play the way you want. I personally have to fight the urge to need on items for companions/mods/appearance and you have to get into arguments with your group mates on who should have gotten what. Those are both sacrifices we have to be willing to make to play our chosen ways. I will say this though, playing my way, I bet I'm never kicked from a group. I can't say the same for your way. Edited January 30, 2012 by Galbatorrix Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loendar Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 No, the system in place is more fair than your view on how looting should work. It doesn't differentiate anyone in the group for any reason. It gives them all the same options and the same chance. Assuming everyone agrees that your system is the way it should work. Clearly not everyone does so you aren't any more 'fair' than any other way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ispanolfw Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 Assuming everyone agrees that your system is the way it should work. Clearly not everyone does so you aren't any more 'fair' than any other way. I don't assume anything, it does work that way. Your group kills a boss, one or more items drop. You ALL have the same options. You all have the same chances to hit need/greed/pass. Beyond that it's choice, opinion, morals, whatever you wish. But that IS the system in place. And I still need to put this into notepad so I can paste it at will. I do not roll need on everything. I haven't even rolled need once in any group i've been in in this game. I look at the other contenders to see if they benefit more. And i've also stated this before, that view of mine doesn't prevent me from accepting the system for what it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ferroz Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 (edited) Assuming everyone agrees that your system is the way it should work. Clearly not everyone does so you aren't any more 'fair' than any other way.No, it's fairer whether everyone agrees or not. it's fairness is in the fact that everyone has the choice. It doesn't matter whether you agree or not, you still have that choice. It doesn't matter if you exercise that choice or not, you still have that choice. Edited January 30, 2012 by ferroz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daemian Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 (edited) What's more fair? Forcing everyone to do it your way, or giving everyone an equal chance? Edited January 30, 2012 by daemian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keihryon Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 Let's ignore companions and appearance for a moment, and focus on mods. I've presented this several times, and nobody seems to want to address it, but we'll try again: A Juggernaut and Marauder are in a mission. Both have orange armor. A piece of heavy orange armor drops. Can the Marauder roll need on it? Please, explain why or why not. It falls to the Marauder to discuss it with the Juggernaut "before" he hits need. Since the gear, in its entirety, cannot be used by the Marauder. That is the key phrase when doing group missions with other players "can I use this item in its entirety?", that should determine who should have first option on anything that drops through co-operative play. If that armor drops, and there is no Jugg, but you have a BH, tanking. Common courtesy would be that everyone rolls greed, because no-one in the group can use it, in its entirety. Or again, ask the group before you hit need, "hey, mind if I need this for the mods?". 9 times out of 10 they will say go for it. I know this will fall on deaf ears...but it courtesy. I don't think I will ever put common before that word again. Because it seems that is no longer the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Creed_Buhallin Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 He can do whatever he wants. If I'm the Marauder, I'd pass if the Jugg Needs it. But again, that's just me. But, if you are that Marauder, be prepared to get flamed by the Jugg. You may not like it, because you personally think the Marauder has equal claim. But, just like some of you believe the game gives you a need button so that you can need anything that you feel is beneficial, regardless of the group, some people believe that the person getting the most use out of the item should be the only one that rolls (EVERYONE I've grouped with has felt this way without ever having to say it. They just always roll this way in my play experience) Okay, you talk about how the Jugg could get upset and you think he should, but not WHY. What happens after this is over? If the Juggernaut wins it, he pull the mods out of the piece that dropped and puts them in his current orange item, giving him an improvement. If the Marauder wins it, he pulls the mods out of the piece that dropped and puts them in his current orange item, giving him the improvement. Neither is going to use the actual container the mods came in, both would see improvements in their stats. How are those two things any different just because they started in a box that said "Heavy Armor"? This is the point that (at least some of us) are trying to make. The systems in SWTOR have far more variables than what people are accustomed to in other games. This scenario is the simplest, most boiled-down version of it, and foundational. So, I'll challenge you again: WHY is it more right for the Juggernaut to have the item in this scenario, much less why is he justified in feeling the Marauder stole it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jontyld Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 I don't assume anything, it does work that way. Your group kills a boss, one or more items drop. You ALL have the same options. You all have the same chances to hit need/greed/pass. Beyond that it's choice, opinion, morals, whatever you wish. But that IS the system in place. And I still need to put this into notepad so I can paste it at will. I do not roll need on everything. I haven't even rolled need once in any group i've been in in this game. I look at the other contenders to see if they benefit more. And i've also stated this before, that view of mine doesn't prevent me from accepting the system for what it is. I would argue that before the boss is killed everyone has the same entitlement. But when the boss dies and does an internal roll to see what loot drops, thats when in my opinion one should at least defer to the member(s) of the group whose primary stat and armor type align with that piece of gear. People can do whatever they want, be that need on any item they feel they have the right to, or kick someone out of the group who needed on whatever they felt they had the right to. I would suggest that everyone try and group with people who agree on that kinda thing, and I feel the everyone has 1/4 claim to all loot people are in the minority and should probably go ahead and make their intentions clear at the start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loendar Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 I don't assume anything, it does work that way. Your group kills a boss, one or more items drop. You ALL have the same options. You all have the same chances to hit need/greed/pass. Beyond that it's choice, opinion, morals, whatever you wish. But that IS the system in place. And I still need to put this into notepad so I can paste it at will. I do not roll need on everything. I haven't even rolled need once in any group i've been in in this game. I look at the other contenders to see if they benefit more. And i've also stated this before, that view of mine doesn't prevent me from accepting the system for what it is. It doesn't. It is fair to YOU because it is the system you prefer. I don't feel that rolling for companions or appearance is fair against other players at all. Just because it is your system does NOT make it any more fair than mine. It is fair in your eyes because it matches your playstyle. Nothing more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racsofp Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 3 threads. 270+ pages. It should be clear to everyone now that there is no accepted norm. There is no status quo. There is no common plan that all decent people throughout the world are aware of (whichever plan you like is the good one, btw). There is in fact a great divide over rolling need for companions. Discuss the loot rules as a group before leaving for the quest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Creed_Buhallin Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 It falls to the Marauder to discuss it with the Juggernaut "before" he hits need. Since the gear, in its entirety, cannot be used by the Marauder. Okay, this is an interesting concept, and one that I don't believe anyone has explicitly presented (or at least that I've seen). Because now we're getting into the idea of "Who can use it more". What if it's an improvement for all the Marauder's stats, but only a few points of Endurance for the Juggernaut? And as presented, both the Juggernaut and Marauder would pull the mods to put it in their current items, so both would use it equally - why, under your "use it completely" does that fall to the Marauder? Do you really do this in every PUG you're in when an item drops that multiple people can use? Do you analyze the stats, ask people which stat they need more of (because even if it's only +3 END, maybe that's what I really need right now) or whether they're building Crit or Power? All while that little bar is ticking down? I'll admit I don't PUG a lot (yeah, I know, shocking that narcissists like me have guilds) but none of them I've been in have ever done this. There's an item multiple people can use, I don't inspect someone's stats and then berate them because it's a +2 increase for them when it would be a +7 increase for me. Do you actually do that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ispanolfw Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 It doesn't. It is fair to YOU because it is the system you prefer. I don't feel that rolling for companions or appearance is fair against other players at all. Just because it is your system does NOT make it any more fair than mine. It is fair in your eyes because it matches your playstyle. Nothing more. I didn't make this game. I didn't make the game give everyone the same options. I didn't make the game give everyone the same chance on items that drop in a group. I've posted this before, but anyways. Dictionary.com ~ Fair 1. free from bias, dishonesty, or injustice: a fair decision; a fair judge. 2. legitimately sought, pursued, done, given, etc.; proper under the rules: a fair fight. Merriam Webster ~ Fair 1: in a manner that is honest or impartial or that conforms to rules : in a fair manner <play fair> See all the references to being free of bias, proper under the rules, impartial? Those mean something. The game has specific rules. Before ANYONES view comes into play, those are the rules nonetheless. that includes my views, which are more similar to yours then you seem to think. But the system is this way, whether you like it or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loendar Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 I didn't make this game. I didn't make the game give everyone the same options. I didn't make the game give everyone the same chance on items that drop in a group. I've posted this before, but anyways. Dictionary.com ~ Fair 1. free from bias, dishonesty, or injustice: a fair decision; a fair judge. 2. legitimately sought, pursued, done, given, etc.; proper under the rules: a fair fight. Merriam Webster ~ Fair 1: in a manner that is honest or impartial or that conforms to rules : in a fair manner <play fair> See all the references to being free of bias, proper under the rules, impartial? Those mean something. The game has specific rules. Before ANYONES view comes into play, those are the rules nonetheless. that includes my views, which are more similar to yours then you seem to think. But the system is this way, whether you like it or not. What you continue to fail to understand is that you claim 'fair' out of one side while forcing others to comply just to compete. It is inherently 'unfair' in my opinion to allow rolls for appearance and companions over a player. The moment you decide that my opinion on that doesn't matter and make roll that I wouldn't make you are imposing your system on me and making it completely 'unfair' to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grecanis Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 Let's ignore companions and appearance for a moment, and focus on mods. I've presented this several times, and nobody seems to want to address it, but we'll try again: A Juggernaut and Marauder are in a mission. Both have orange armor. A piece of heavy orange armor drops. Can the Marauder roll need on it? Please, explain why or why not. My vote would be no as the Jug wears heavy. On the flip-side ..If Medium + Str drops I would give preference to the Marauder as his choices are more limited. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ferroz Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 It is fair to YOU because it is the system you prefer.False. It's fair because it gives every player, not just me, the choice to determine need for a particular loot drop without someone's arbitrary rules that are designed to prioritize gearing a character in a timely fashion over fairness. I don't feel that rolling for companions or appearance is fair against other players at all.Then don't choose that. But that doesn't change the fact that equal rights is fair, and that that fairness has nothing to do with play style, or what you personally choose. It doesn't change the fact that an equal chance at loot is fairer than arbitrary rules that benefit a particular playstyle at the expense of any other playstyle. Just because it is your system does NOT make it any more fair than mine.It's not his system. It's not my system. It's BioWare's system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ispanolfw Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 What you continue to fail to understand is that you claim 'fair' out of one side while forcing others to comply just to compete. It is inherently 'unfair' in my opinion to allow rolls for appearance and companions over a player. The moment you decide that my opinion on that doesn't matter and make roll that I wouldn't make you are imposing your system on me and making it completely 'unfair' to me. I'm not forcing you to comply. Those with views differing from the established rules are welcome to challenge those rules or request the use of different ones. And this is what I mean. You and someone who rolls for say looks is in the same group. The system rules in place give everyone the same equally fair chance to roll on anything that drops. The person who rolls for looks understands and is ok with that. You understand it, but do not agree so you run with different rules. Ok good, now you don;t say anything about it, then they roll need against you and win the item. Are you in the right to rage at them? Demean them? Why? You said nothing about your desire for more restrictive rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vydor_HC Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 (edited) 3 threads. 270+ pages. It should be clear to everyone now that there is no accepted norm. There is no status quo. There is no common plan that all decent people throughout the world are aware of (whichever plan you like is the good one, btw). There is in fact a great divide over rolling need for companions. Discuss the loot rules as a group before leaving for the quest. Yup, the only real norm if there is one is that you better discuss the loot rules prior, no matter what your opinion of need is. Edited January 30, 2012 by Vydor_HC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ferroz Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 (edited) What you continue to fail to understand is that you claim 'fair' out of one side while forcing others to comply just to compete.Not true at all. You still hit need on the items you want and not need on the items that you don't want. You don't have to change anything. There's no forced compliance. You aren't now forced to roll for appearance, or for companions, or anything else. You don't have to change anything... you just no longer get to control what other people prioritize. It is inherently 'unfair' in my opinion to allow rolls for appearance and companions over a player.Why Rolls for appearance are rolls by a player. Rolls for companions are rolls for a player. Why do you think it's unfair for rolls for one player and not the other? The moment you decide that my opinion on that doesn't matter and make roll that I wouldn't make you are imposing your system on me and making it completely 'unfair' to me.The only thing that imposes on you is the lack of the ability to control other people's loot decisions. I'm sorry that you think you're entitled to control other people's loot decisions. But you aren't. The fair system is where you don't get to control what other people to, and they get to control what they do. I'm not really sure what to tell you if you think it's more fair for you to be able to control what other people do; I think that attitude is kind of delusional. Edited January 30, 2012 by ferroz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loendar Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 False. It's fair because it gives every player, not just me, the choice to determine need for a particular loot drop without someone's arbitrary rules that are designed to prioritize gearing a character in a timely fashion over fairness. Then don't choose that. But that doesn't change the fact that equal rights is fair, and that that fairness has nothing to do with play style, or what you personally choose. It doesn't change the fact that an equal chance at loot is fairer than arbitrary rules that benefit a particular playstyle at the expense of any other playstyle. It's not his system. It's not my system. It's BioWare's system. Your choice - whether intentional or not - colors my choices. If you decide to need everything (I know you don't, but most) and I don't conform along with you then I'm going to watch you reap everything from the rest. It works for you - I get that. But you aren't making a choice without consequence and turning a blind eye to the way others play/equip is no better than any other method. I will not dispute that everyone always rolling need on everything couldn't be any more fair. But that goes against the grain for a lot of us that want to progress without being held captive by our group mates whims. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VanorDM Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 My vote would be no as the Jug wears heavy. Yes but in this case, neither one is actually going to equip the item, just use the mods in the item. So heavy/med shouldn't factor into this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigBadEdward Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 If you're a decent person, you'll be fair and pass on items that will better benefit other people's PC. If you are inconsiderate and only think about yourself, you'll need on those items as well for less important reasons (mods, companions, appearance, etc). This is MY opinion and it's the way I play the game. When I'm in a FP and Willpower drops and the Sage needs it, I pass and congratulate him. I'd feel like a total tool taking that item for Kira. Between quests and the GTN, she stays geared up perfectly fine and she doesn't care either way. The sage on the other hand likely would, so I play nice and pass. Again, play how you will. This is the way I play and I appreciate people that show me the same courtesies. That's the way I play too, I pass on stuff I actually need if a lot of the greed rolls have been going my way. However, it doesn't change the simple fact that no one in a group has a higher right to any piece of dropped gear than anyone else. That's the biggest problem I have with most people's attitude, they feel like that the random fact of what character class they rolled give them some kind of devine right to any dropped gear they can use. We simply wouldn't be having this conversation, in what seems like the 50th thread, if there was no Need option. There simply will NEVER be a concensus on this issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Creed_Buhallin Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 My vote would be no as the Jug wears heavy. On the flip-side ..If Medium + Str drops I would give preference to the Marauder as his choices are more limited. And my disagreement with this is the core of the issue, at least for me. If both players do exactly the same thing with the item, with exactly the same results, why does one "need" it more? For all the people saying "We're just doing it like every MMO always has", I believe the entire concept of "Need Before Greed" has become horribly perverted. Originally, "greed" meant something you were going to take to sell for money. "Need" meant something you were going to use. Somewhere along the way, we've thrown a ton of other restrictions on it. Now you have to use EVERYTHING in the drop, or it has to be specifically for your class before you can use it, even if you'll get exactly the same benefit out of it. Or, even worse, we've got people deciding whether or not your need is needy enough. "Need" meant "I can use this." But it's gotten so twisted that even if two people will use it for the exact same thing, with the exact same benefit, one has a claim on it and the other doesn't, and not only that but the first will, by some evaluations, be perfectly justified in kicking the other out of the group, blacklisting them, and screaming to the entire fleet what a ninja looter they are to ruin their game. Nobody else sees a problem with this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galbatorrix Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 No, it's fairer whether everyone agrees or not. it's fairness is in the fact that everyone has the choice. It doesn't matter whether you agree or not, you still have that choice. It doesn't matter if you exercise that choice or not, you still have that choice. You think it's more fair due to game design and others think it's unfair due to loot design. How does one design have so much more sway than the other? Each FP has loot designed for each class. That's how the game was designed. Also, Jugg Mods and Marauder Mods have different priorities. Jugg Mods prioritize Endurance where Marauder Mods prioritize Str. So, the Marauder is kind of gimping himself there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ferroz Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 Your choice - whether intentional or not - colors my choices.No, it doesn't If you decide to need everything (I know you don't, but most)Who are you claiming does this? and I don't conform along with you then I'm going to watch you reap everything from the rest.So? You didn't want that other stuff anyway? It sounds to me that you're just upset that you no longer get to control what other people do. Sorry, but you're not entitled to control what they prioritize. But that goes against the grain for a lot of us that want to progress without being held captive by our group mates whims.Again, prioritizing your personal progression over equality is less fair than the reverse. I think it's pretty clear that this is the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts