Selecting need for loot

[Elyssandra]

So quick question on etiquette since this appears to be the thread; why does everyone say to roll "greed" on stuff like speeders from ops bosses and rep tokens from strongs?

 

For stuff like speeders, dwedtoof, deep wriggler, etc.

Usually as ops leader, I provide direction on how to roll on such items. However, if I am in someone else's group and no direction is provided - I take my direction from what the group is doing.

 

Say the tank speeder drops and everyone greeds, then I would also greed.

If everyone needs, then I would also need.

 

The key is not to be the one cochon needing it while everyone else greeded.

 

However, if I already have the item I pass - even if I didn't win it with the current group. I cannot use more than one pet or speeder and me rolling on it to vendor or put on the GTN, while other group members still haven't received it, is not something I would personally do.

 

I also know a guild that allows all their ops members to roll need each time a high end vanity item such as dwedtoof drops, until each member wins it ONCE.

What each person does with their one pet, once they win, is up to them - they can put it on the GTN or use it.

That too is fair IMHO.

[Ratajack]

okay... I always need credits. So everytime I group with you I will just select need on everything kay?

 

I have no problem with that. Knock yourself out. You can even expect me to vote no if they try to vote kick you.

[TUXs]

It's already been explained why it's a social taboo. Social taboos exists because the majority find it taboo within the context that the community exists in. There's no way you're going to convince the majority.

 

However, now that you know what the majority feel, you just need to accept that you will either follow in suit or not follow and get ostracized. And if you choose to not follow suit because you feel you're making a statement against some general rule of thumb that you feel is bad, feel free too. And you'll continue to get kicked from groups and BW (and any other company that hosts an MMO that you go to) will continue to shrug their shoulders at you.

 

So, are you done now?

 

Great reply.

[Elyssandra]

errr what do you do with the extra helixes then?

 

Que

[cidbahamut]

Where in your post did you say you told them upfront? I read you posts a few times not once in the post did you mention you talk to them before hand and that the agreed to your selecting need on a companion.

 

Your Post in case you forgot what you said:

 

I am not the OP.

 

Please read more carefully in the future. It will help you to not look foolish.

[Elyssandra]

Or. He's the type of person that knocks Ice Cream out of the hands of children, walks into churches and swears loudly, cuts off other drivers in traffic, Walks to the front of the line in a convenience store, Calls his coworkers names, Flips the bird to passing cops, and goes to depression meet up groups to tell people their lives are worthless. All because he can, has the right to, and isn't breaking any rules or laws.

 

Made me lol in rl

[cidbahamut]

It's already been explained why it's a social taboo. Social taboos exists because the majority find it taboo within the context that the community exists in. There's no way you're going to convince the majority.

 

However, now that you know what the majority feel, you just need to accept that you will either follow in suit or not follow and get ostracized. And if you choose to not follow suit because you feel you're making a statement against some general rule of thumb that you feel is bad, feel free too. And you'll continue to get kicked from groups and BW (and any other company that hosts an MMO that you go to) will continue to shrug their shoulders at you.

 

So, are you done now?

So...argumentum ad populum is it?

[Elyssandra]

If you want something you should hit need. There is time to fix mistakes afterwards.

 

Yes there's always time afterwards to fix mistakes like by kicking the idiot who rolled need instead of greed.

[BaronV]

okay... I always need credits. So everytime I group with you I will just select need on everything kay?

 

I have no problem with that. Knock yourself out. You can even expect me to vote no if they try to vote kick you.

 

And there you have it folks! Ratajack's position is that people should just be able to select need however and whenever they want without consideration for anyone else - and no one has the right to chide them for it!

 

I think im done here. At this point its totally pointless to continue with this discussion...

Edited March 20, 2013 by BaronV

[TUXs]

So...argumentum ad populum is it?

 

It's the social norm, either accept it or deal with your actions. This is a multiplayer game - actions have consequences.

[Ratajack]

That is exactly what people are being told. A scoundrel healer and vanguard DPS are in a group. A defense chest piece with aim drops. The vanguard wants it and rolls need. Are you going to tell me that the group isn't going to tell the scoundrel he has no right to roll need since his CHARACTER uses cunning?

 

an equal chance to the loot is selecting greed.

 

Selecting need invalidates the roll of everyone who selected greed - therefore selecting Need is NOT giving the others an equal chance to the loot.

 

Therefore NEED should only be used in a manner accepted by the entire group - which when is not stated is fair to assume that it is the social convention.

 

It is no different that queueing up at the checkout counter of your local supermarket. Why dont you just cut right into the front past the 80 year old lady?

 

You dont have to agree with it, but that is how the majority view this issue. That is the very definition of "social convention"

 

In that situation an equal chance at the loot would be hitting NEED since the vanguard tank had already hit need. Telling the scoundrel that he cannot need is telling the scoundrel that he has no right to that piece of loot. Therefore, people ARE being told that they have no right to loot that they helped to produce and to claim otherwise is an outright lie.

[Elyssandra]

I am not the OP.

 

Please read more carefully in the future. It will help you to not look foolish.

 

The only person looking foolish here is you.

 

Foolish and argumentative.

[RLWalker]

Yes there's always time afterwards to fix mistakes like by kicking the idiot who rolled need instead of greed.

 

A very mature response.

[Lostpenguins]

So...argumentum ad populum is it?

Trying to sound smart by stating a logical fallacy? Lol.

 

Social taboos aren't about "truth". They're about customs. There's no truth to deny here. It's quite obvious that rolling need for companion loot is considered, by most in the MMO community (certainly the most in this thread) is bad form. That's not a false truth. That is really what will happen.

 

You have your opinion of what is right as do I. That doesn't change the fact that your view is in the minority and you will probably get ostracized and kicked from groups for continuing that behavior.

 

Maybe you should spend a little more time understanding what is your trying to shove off as intellectual clout before you try using it as a weapon.

 

Rofl... so bad.

[cidbahamut]

The only person looking foolish here is you.

 

Foolish and argumentative.

Argumentative perhaps, but there's certainly enough foolishness to go around.

 

Every time I criticize the status quo I get half a dozen people jumping down my throat screaming like a bunch of banshees and howling about how I'm an awful person. Not once do they stop to acknowledge the possibility(and actuality) that I abide by the community conventions in-game entirely, but would simply like to discuss the flaws of said conventions outside of the game itself.

 

The fact that I disagree does not make me a ninja-looter or whatever other boogieman you all have conjured up in your minds.

[BaronV]

So...argumentum ad populum is it?

 

this is neither an argument nor a proposition. So that nice latin phrase bears no relevance to the topic at hand.

An example of argumentum ad populum would be "why is nudity offensive?" "Because most people are offended by it!!"

 

The fact is that the social convention means that most people would expect you to select need only for your character (unless it has specifically been stated otherwise). Like it or not - that is what it is.

 

So since most people expect you to behave a certain way, and knowing full well that others expect you to behave a certain way - you knowingly go against the social conversion (without warning) with the express intention of depriving others of what would have been a fair chance at the loot had you conformed to the social convention.

 

People who want to need for any other purpose can always ask the rest of the group if they find it acceptable to do so. But when they intentionally choose NOT to ask, but instead just take it for themselves by pressing need, then they are just selfish people taking what they want because they can - no different from the burglar who enters your house.

 

It is about courtesy, etiquette and basic respect for other people. Nothing less.

Edited March 20, 2013 by BaronV

[cidbahamut]

Trying to sound smart by stating a logical fallacy? Lol.

 

Social taboos aren't about "truth". They're about customs. There's no truth to deny here. It's quite obvious that rolling need for companion loot is considered, by most in the MMO community (certainly the most in this thread) is bad form. That's not a false truth. That is really what will happen.

 

The thing is, it's being presented as unassailably correct. That "this is the best way to do it". The justification for that position that i keep hearing is "because that's how everyone else does it, so it must be correct". If that isn't an appeal to the majority, then I don't know what is.

[Lostpenguins]

In that situation an equal chance at the loot would be hitting NEED since the vanguard tank had already hit need. Telling the scoundrel that he cannot need is telling the scoundrel that he has no right to that piece of loot. Therefore, people ARE being told that they have no right to loot that they helped to produce and to claim otherwise is an outright lie.

No, equal chance happened before the loot dropped. This is where you're not seeing it clearly.

 

Say there are 10 quarters and you and I are going to flip the coins one at a time and see who gets them. If it's heads, then I get the quarter. If it's tails, you get the quarter. If I win the first 9 quarters, you seem to feel that you should get the last one, regardless of the pre-set rules. You also seem to think that even though it came up heads on the first quarter, that now we should roll to see who gets it.

 

So, think of the quarters as loot drop. There's 10 of them in an instance (this is an example so say there are 10 bosses). I'm a Marauder (Heads) and you're a healing Merc (Tails). The standing social standard of etiquette dictates that I get marauder drops (Medium Armor with dps Str stats) and you get healing merc drops (Heavy Aim armor with healing stats). The boss is killed (the coin is being flipped) and the loot comes up as a Medium Armor with DPS Str stats (it landed heads). That's where your "chance" occurs. But you seem to want to roll off again as if the first "chance" never occurred.

 

See the problem? You're completely forgetting the equal chance occurred BEFORE the loot was identified.

 

As I said before, sure, you are not exploiting anything in this game by rolling need. Even if the group AGREED to the social taboos in writing in the party chat beforehand, you are not getting banned for rolling NEED. That's exactly like a guildmate taking all the stuff from the gbank and gquitting. That's part of the rules that it's not in the rules. But it is in the social rules of etiquette that you're breaking.

 

Do you get it yet?

Edited March 20, 2013 by Lostpenguins

[Elyssandra]

Forget about the names on the buttons.

 

Say... wasn't this you?

The "need" button should probably be re-labelled "want"

 

 

 

If hitting need leads to less conflicts then it should be done, regardless of what reason you have for wanting the loot.

 

Needing on loot indiscriminately reduces conflict in your part of the world, you say? How is that working for you?

[Emencie]

Please clarify for me as to whether the the social norm of greed if it isn't an upgrade for your character was discussed and agreed upon before the start of the run, or if some members of the group simply assume that will be the rule.

 

It is assumed everyone knows. If they prove to not know then...

1) Confront - ask them why they did it and explain the social norm to them.

if they are apologetic, and adhere the rest of the run, then all good.

If they don't, on to step 2: kick the jerk.

 

Because if they either act like they can do whatever they want or don't talk at all, chance are they will do it again and ruin the FP for everyone else.

 

let me guess what you are going to say... "It should have been agreed upon before the start of the run." Right? no... Expectations exist... Just like when a person joins your group there is no rule that they have to tank, heal or DPS but you expect your 'tank' 'healer' and 'dps' to perform in those roles. Or are you advocating that those rules be discussed before hand too? Should you also go over AFK time limits? disconnects? You tread a dangerous ground by saying "Anything not explicitly decided upon at the start of a FP by the group as a whole is up to the individual to decide for themselves. And any actions by the group to punish any person in the group for doing whatever they want regarding the non explicitly decided upon rules, is not right."

[Elyssandra]

A very mature response.

 

Thank you I'm glad you think so.

[UriahF]

Just me, but doesn't need rolling only really present a problem if the player is needing every roll? What's so hard about talking with your group? Also we have bind timers for a reason. Nobody in this game is consistently playing with the same loot ninja over and over are they? I'd say any groups that are having issues with loot rolls need to stop, take a breath, and....gasp, communicate. Problem solved.

 

EDIT: I guess my point is there is no "silver bullet" for looting issues and it will always be a situational thing, no matter how right you feel about your stance.

Edited March 20, 2013 by UriahF

[Lostpenguins]

The thing is, it's being presented as unassailably correct. That "this is the best way to do it". The justification for that position that i keep hearing is "because that's how everyone else does it, so it must be correct". If that isn't an appeal to the majority, then I don't know what is.

Even though I feel I'm right, I'm not saying I'm right simply because everyone else agrees with me.

 

My posts at the beginning aren't talking about right or wrong. It's talking about what will happen if you decide to break social taboos. Do you agree or disagree that when you don't adhere to social standards of a community that you will most likely get ostracized and ignored? If you agree, then there's nothing to argue here.

 

The truth is that it's a social taboo within the MMO Community of Tor. Do you really want to argue that it isn't a social taboo? Do you really want to argue that it's not the majority view? My arguing that it's right or wrong is a secondary argument. My original position:

 

OP and Ratajak: I really hope you're trolling, if not, then it's as simple as this: you're breaking the general code of etiquette in the gaming community. It doesn't matter if you don't agree to it. It doesn't matter if it's official or not. That's a simple rule of life. You break a general rule of etiquette and you will be ostracized by the community.

 

You can either:

1) Change

2) Continue to play that way and wonder why people reject you

3) Find like-minded people to continue this behavior

Please point me to anywhere in my statement that you're arguing against because nothing in there says that you're wrong for believing what you believe. You're just wrong to assume that going against the grain will make you free of community backlash.

[BaronV]

In that situation an equal chance at the loot would be hitting NEED since the vanguard tank had already hit need. Telling the scoundrel that he cannot need is telling the scoundrel that he has no right to that piece of loot. Therefore, people ARE being told that they have no right to loot that they helped to produce and to claim otherwise is an outright lie.

 

Loot is the property of the group.

 

If the rules of the group (implied or explicit) mean that he has no right to select Need on that piece of loot, then that is the way it is. You can choose to interpret that as saying that the scoundrel has no right to the loot if you wish.

 

He still has the choice to ask the group "Can i please chose need and compete with the vanguard for the chance to get this loot?" If the group says yes than in that scenario the rules have been stretched to accommodate his request.

[RLWalker]

Say... wasn't this you?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Needing on loot indiscriminately reduces conflict in your part of the world, you say? How is that working for you?

 

I said that to enable people to think about the mechanics of what the buttons do without preconceptions.

 

I never said one should need indiscriminately. And yes, it does lead to less conflict because in most cases there is no one that "needs" it according to your definition. Therefore the need button can also separate the people who can use it for some other reason vs. people who will sell it to a vendor.

 

P.S. I do not mean conflict as in a shouting match. I mean that multiple people claim an item and it needs to be resolved.