Curious about opinions re: large cash drop while afk

[bulbousaur]

This past weekend my group worked its way to crypt camp in Seb. The Heiro wasn't up so we sat in his room and half the group went afk (we didn't know when he would spawn). He spawned a minute or so later and of course dropped the cloak.

We rolled and one player won the roll. A few minutes later another who was afk came back and asked if he should be able to roll seeing as he was afk when the mob spawned.

The general consensus was that he should - we didn't know the Heiro would spawn so quickly, and it's not like he'd been afk 20 minutes.

Well, he rolled and beat the previous winner's roll by 1.

The previous winner handed it over, but wasn't happy. Later he asked that the sale price of the cloak be split between himself and the last winner, although the second winner said that he would actually wear the robe.

I'm curious as to what the general community thinks about this situation?

[Enderenter]

In that situation, I think it was right to let everyone roll. If the group has been together for a while killing mobs and someone goes afk for a short period of time (somewhat subjective) they shouldn't be penalized.

[Bboboo]

Minus 10 or 100 from his roll.

[Jontheripper]

The winner should have given the previous winner whatever cloak he was using before.

[Faron]

Agree to rules upfront and then there's no question.

How many posts until "if this were on red. . . "?

[Kreylyn]

Agree to rules upfront and then there's no question.

How many posts until "if this were on red. . . "?

I'm gonna guess on the 5th one.

As for the OP question...

If all members helped get you to that point so that you could make the kill, does it matter that they were afk a moment for the kill?

Wouldn't to me.

If they didn't help at all, then that might be an issue.

Krey

[portbitch69]

since you were gonna let the afk'ers roll anyway, yall should have waited to roll untill everyone was back from afk

[Cecily]

The person AFK was a contributing part of the group. They deserved a roll and nothing forced you guys to sit in the room that had a spawn pending, knowing that all of your group might not be there.

The person who won deserves the cloak and has no further responsibility.

[fastboy21]

Agree to rules upfront and then there's no question.

^^^

There is no "right" or "wrong"---its all about adhering to what was agreed upon. If you agreed to NBG the cloak great. Random great. FFA great. All of them equally as "good", especially in a pick-up group.

Just agree on it before hand and don't break the rules. Don't cry if you don't like the rules after you don't get whatever loot drops. If you don't like the rules, don't stay in the group.

[Cecily]

This is a special case that you couldn't agree to beforehand.

[jturkydurk]

real life calls sometimes, dont penalize the guy for it

[fadetree]

Seems like it could have been agreed upon before anyone went AFK, for starters, since you guys were explicitly there for the cloak?

[bulbousaur]

We were there for the crypt camp, all of it.

[fastboy21]

This is a special case that you couldn't agree to beforehand.

I can see the issue of rules maybe not having been agreed upon yet...but that isn't necessarily how it had to be.

It seems to me that the aim of the group from long before the cloak dropped was to get into the crypt and get some loot. Rules for how loot would be handled should have been laid down before they cleared the first mob otw to crypt.

If a hypothetical situation arises where there truly isn't any time to establish loot rules, then I would have to say that the only fair way of distribute loot is a random...but I can't think of a single time this hypothetical situation has actually happened to me.

If there are no agreed upon loot rules its 99.99% likely that folks just never discussed it or forgot to discuss it before loot dropped.

[Secrets]

In that situation, I think it was right to let everyone roll. If the group has been together for a while killing mobs and someone goes afk for a short period of time (somewhat subjective) they shouldn't be penalized.

this so much.

[Jontheripper]

Nah when you go afk you dont go begging for loot dropped by mobs you didnt even help kill. But at the same time if someone in the group needs it to wear the only decent thing to do is pass it on to them

[wwoneo]

since you were gonna let the afk'ers roll anyway, yall should have waited to roll untill everyone was back from afk

^ This

[fadetree]

Nah when you go afk you dont go begging for loot dropped by mobs you didnt even help kill. But at the same time if someone in the group needs it to wear the only decent thing to do is pass it on to them

Nah, thats not a trivial place to get into and if you helped fight in, you shouldn't be robbed of a chance just because you had to go pee. It would not have even been a question in a group I ran. For a droppable, I would have held rolls until all were back. If it's nodrop, then you just gotta do what you gotta do. Even then I would have had somebody do an extra random for the other person, just in case they got back in time.

*edit* of course, it depends on why they went AFK and how long. If they said, 'well, i'll be back in a while, I gotta do something while we wait', and they were gone longer than a normal spawn and they missed it, oh well. But if they said, 'afk for a min, gotta pee' or the dog needs to go out or something like that I would have held rolls.

[maskedmelon]

Unless the fellow had just joined or stealth afk'd and nearly killed everyone as a result there is no reason should not be allowed to roll and the runner up is a jackass, though I can sympathize with the frustration of thinking you've something and then learning you have not and must cede the item to the actual winner.

On loot rules in general, random is the only equitable form of loot distribution, ever. NBG is either a cunning exploitation of common errors in logic or an utter failure of rational thought. Who would like to discuss further? :D

[kaev]

Any loot distribution method agreed to by the group is the best method, period. NBG works fine in a lot of cases (friends, guildmates, mix of friends/guildies and potential friends/recruits.) NBG on a super high demand item like a heiro cloak seems unlikely tho.

[Glenzig]

Agree to rules upfront and then there's no question.

How many posts until "if this were on red. . . "?

Nah. This stuff happens on red too. Had the same thing happen with HBB while leveling in MM. All went afk, some came back a couple minutes early and dhampire had spawned. Decided to kill it and cloak dropped. One rogue was still afk and we waited for him to roll. He beat the monk that was there for the kill. Monk was pretty upset, but that's life. There really is no red solution to that.

[Enderenter]

On loot rules in general, random is the only equitable form of loot distribution, ever. NBG is either a cunning exploitation of common errors in logic or an utter failure of rational thought. Who would like to discuss further? :D

No pug should ever be NBG, period. Many monks in KC on p99 tried to pull this with the Tstaff. (Or even non-Monks, arguing the monk should get the 100k item despite the fact there is no comparable item in the zone for any other class)

However, most guild groups or friend groups are in my mind implicitly NBG.

[Jontheripper]

Nah, thats not a trivial place to get into and if you helped fight in, you shouldn't be robbed of a chance just because you had to go pee. It would not have even been a question in a group I ran. For a droppable, I would have held rolls until all were back. If it's nodrop, then you just gotta do what you gotta do. Even then I would have had somebody do an extra random for the other person, just in case they got back in time.

*edit* of course, it depends on why they went AFK and how long. If they said, 'well, i'll be back in a while, I gotta do something while we wait', and they were gone longer than a normal spawn and they missed it, oh well. But if they said, 'afk for a min, gotta pee' or the dog needs to go out or something like that I would have held rolls.

Ya i didnt read OP closely enough, if the group went afk waiting on the mob to spawn then ya they just should have waited for everyone to get back before rolling..

[maskedmelon]

Any loot distribution method agreed to by the group is the best method, period. NBG works fine in a lot of cases (friends, guildmates, mix of friends/guildies and potential friends/recruits.) NBG on a super high demand item like a heiro cloak seems unlikely tho.

I agree that there are certain situations in which NBG can work, or even be ideal, but that does not make it equitable. It is inherently discriminatory.

Static groups and guilds rationally overlook this because the growth/advancement of the larger entity as a whole is generally preferable to that of one element, and the interests of the larger entity may not necessarily align perfectly with those of a particular constituent.

Individuals more often fail to recognize the inequity of the system because the are blinded by the the ethical validity of the conclusion and never question the premise of "need."

You see, in the context of NBG, one's "need" of an item is characterized as "is able to utilize immediately to a greater capacity than an existing possession and use reasonably reflects their class' intended role." "Greed" in this context is established as any use of the item other than the one defined for "Need" and that makes sense to most of us since we generally understand greed to be desire absent of need. Here is the problem though, the NBG concept of need neglects need altogether by disqualifying alternative methods by which one might benefit to an equal or greater extent.

To illustrate, consider a group at frenzy camp in Guk. This is a fantastic group consisting of a monk, a cleric, a paladin two rogues and an enchanter. It is raining xp and the named pops, dropping the highly valued FBSS. NBG would exclude the cleric and chanter from rolling straight up because they don't "need" it. The paladin and rogues are reasonably well equipped and the monk has shit for gear. Both rogues have haste items and are alts and decline to roll since they don't "need" it either. The paladin and monk roll and....



Tune in next time for "Debunking Fallacious Game Philosophies: A Case Study Part II!

[kaev]

I agree that there are certain situations in which NBG can work, or even be ideal, but that does not make it equitable. It is inherently discriminatory.

Static groups and guilds rationally overlook this because the growth/advancement of the larger entity as a whole is generally preferable to that of one element, and the interests of the larger entity may not necessarily align perfectly with those of a particular constituent.

Individuals more often fail to recognize the inequity of the system because the are blinded by the the ethical validity of the conclusion and never question the premise of "need."

You see, in the context of NBG, one's "need" of an item is characterized as "is able to utilize immediately to a greater capacity than an existing possession and use reasonably reflects their class' intended role." "Greed" in this context is established as any use of the item other than the one defined for "Need" and that makes sense to most of us since we generally understand greed to be desire absent of need. Here is the problem though, the NBG concept of need neglects need altogether by disqualifying alternative methods by which one might benefit to an equal or greater extent.

To illustrate, consider a group at frenzy camp in Guk. This is a fantastic group consisting of a monk, a cleric, a paladin two rogues and an enchanter. It is raining xp and the named pops, dropping the highly valued FBSS. NBG would exclude the cleric and chanter from rolling straight up because they don't "need" it. The paladin and rogues are reasonably well equipped and the monk has shit for gear. Both rogues have haste items and are alts and decline to roll since they don't "need" it either. The paladin and monk roll and....



Tune in next time for "Debunking Fallacious Game Philosophies: A Case Study Part II!

The above situation will invariably resolve to the monk being an RMTer who has bagged all his decent nodrop gear in order to appear poor in hopes of luring others into pity passes on valuable sellable loots. Note that the monk player has amongst his toons that DE cleric who insists on rolling "need" on the Helm drop in Mistmoore because he is overweight and that halfling druid who keeps gating away from his xp grind group to go sell all the shitty FFA loot he's constantly hoovering.

The important thing is that the other five players in your hypothetical group end up having great times for years as core members of a guild that takes down all the content the game/server has to offer, meanwhile that ever so clever sociop-, er, monk, slowly wastes away into a wizened little internet troll whose "friends" never come to visit unless there're free drugs to be had.

[maskedmelon]

The above situation will invariably resolve to the monk being an RMTer who has bagged all his decent nodrop gear in order to appear poor in hopes of luring others into pity passes on valuable sellable loots. Note that the monk player has amongst his toons that DE cleric who insists on rolling "need" on the Helm drop in Mistmoore because he is overweight and that halfling druid who keeps gating away from his xp grind group to go sell all the shitty FFA loot he's constantly hoovering.

The important thing is that the other five players in your hypothetical group end up having great times for years as core members of a guild that takes down all the content the game/server has to offer, meanwhile that ever so clever sociop-, er, monk, slowly wastes away into a wizened little internet troll whose "friends" never come to visit unless there're free drugs to be had.

That obvious huh? And here I was feeling bad about not finishing the story last night :p I like the twist at the end though with the emphasis on relationships ^^

[Whirled]

Next level of NBG. I tend to ask if ppl play more/less. If they're casual like me & something uber drops; I figure the dude playing more hours would benefit greater than my 0-3 hours a day. So it's a flip/flop kinda theory depending the situation.

[Yumyums Inmahtumtums]

NBG really shouldn't exist in PUGs unless it's for a class spell 51-54.

[Neyphlite]

No pug should ever be NBG, period. Many monks in KC on p99 tried to pull this with the Tstaff. (Or even non-Monks, arguing the monk should get the 100k item despite the fact there is no comparable item in the zone for any other class)

However, most guild groups or friend groups are in my mind implicitly NBG.

You seem to misunderstand what NBG actually is. If an item drops that your class can use and you would use as an upgrade then that is a need regardless of how much pixelated coin it goes for. It is NOT need if you simply want the item to sell for the coin.

PS - Tstaffs are only 30k on blue~

[Erati]

You seem to misunderstand what NBG actually is. If an item drops that your class can use and you would use as an upgrade then that is a need regardless of how much pixelated coin it goes for. It is NOT need if you simply want the item to sell for the coin.

PS - Tstaffs are only 30k on blue~

he i believe he talking about closer to when kunark came out and every monk in a PUG would go apeshit when T-Staffs would drop and it wasnt handed straight to them

[Yumyums Inmahtumtums]

I'd greed roll a tstaff all day long.

Wu's quivering staff when your groups 41 monk is using bamboo Bo stick? Sure thing.

Hierophants cloak when you got HBC? Shits getting rolled on.

[maskedmelon]

NBG really shouldn't exist in PUGs unless it's for a class spell 51-54.

NBG would be equally inequitable in those situations as well. Just as an enchanter has no "need" of a fungi, a monk has no "need" of torpor (within the context of NBG), but both could improve their character comparably by winning either because of the power of the free market to convert the latent value of those items into real utility ^^

Now if the spells or fungi could not be traded and the items were class restricted, then it would not make sense to award to someone who could not use it, nor would it even be rational for them to want it in the first place since their character would truly have no way to benefit from the item.

[Neyphlite]

he i believe he talking about closer to when kunark came out and every monk in a PUG would go apeshit when T-Staffs would drop and it wasnt handed straight to them

yeah i get that. If a PUG is NBG though and a tstaff were to drop it should be handed to the monk in the group that doesnt have one if there is one there. Saying that it should be an exception because it sells decently is just wrong.

[Yumyums Inmahtumtums]

NBG would be equally inequitable in those situations as well. Just as an enchanter has no "need" of a fungi, a monk has no "need" of torpor (within the context of NBG), but both could improve their character comparably by winning either because of the power of the free market to convert the latent value of those items into real utility ^^

Now if the spells or fungi could not be traded and the items were class restricted, then it would not make sense to award to someone who could not use it, nor would it even be rational for them to want it in the first place since their character would truly have no way to benefit from the item.

Think you're missing the point of 51-54 spells/Wu's staff vs fungi/torpor

[bulbousaur]

This was not a guild group, nothing was NBG, we all knew that cash loot was going to be rolled on. The question was whether the afk person should be allowed to roll.

Also everyone started rolling as soon as the cloak dropped. Nobody said "Hey is everyone back now so we can roll?" The /ran fingers were in a hurry...

[Yumyums Inmahtumtums]

Everyone should roll then, even the Afk.

[kaev]

Everyone should roll then, even the Afk.

^^

[Enderenter]

yeah i get that. If a PUG is NBG though and a tstaff were to drop it should be handed to the monk in the group that doesnt have one if there is one there. Saying that it should be an exception because it sells decently is just wrong.

Yeah, I'm not saying that is the exception, I am giving that as an example of why NBG should never be the rule (in random / pugs).

[Calibretto]

I'm rolling on everything that drops that is sellable or usable by me unless im with a group of friends or guildies or both. Sure, i'm a rogue and I cant use a Tstaff but the 32k i got for selling it sure as hell bought my epic MQ.

If I was the guy afk, I would expect to get a roll (as long as it wasnt a chronic 1 hour long afk or some shit) And if I was in the group I would let the guy roll.

[Daldaen]

Here comes the fun question.

Do you roll on a quest piece that is no drop and you can't use the reward from said quest, for purposes of selling the MQ, if there is someone in the group who needs the quest piece to actually turn in.

I'd imagine the best example is pawbuster in KC.

Come Velious though, I can't imagine PUGs in Kael. Clerics rolling on chain armor and Rogues rolling on Silk. Lolololol.

[maskedmelon]

Think you're missing the point of 51-54 spells/Wu's staff vs fungi/torpor

It is possible. What is the point that you are trying to illustrate? That altruism has a threshold based on relative wealth (i.e. You do not mind passing the lower valued items to someone else because it's value a insignificant compared to your total wealth) and/or you don't want to invest the time to sell lower value items in EC?

I can understand all of those attitudes, but that doesn't make NBG equitable. It just make you either a charitable, successful or lazy person ^^

The value of the item is inconsequential so long as it exists ( i.e. It can be traded)

[maskedmelon]

Everyone should roll then, even the Afk.

^^^

[wwoneo]

Here comes the fun question.

Do you roll on a quest piece that is no drop and you can't use the reward from said quest, for purposes of selling the MQ, if there is someone in the group who needs the quest piece to actually turn in.

I'd imagine the best example is pawbuster in KC.

Come Velious though, I can't imagine PUGs in Kael. Clerics rolling on chain armor and Rogues rolling on Silk. Lolololol.

Yes, you do roll on those pieces. The money you make from those MQs can be used to fund buying the MQs for the pieces you do need. It is the most fair way to distribute loot. It may take more time due to the transactions necessary to get the pieces you do want, but it prevents a myriad of other problems such as deterring geared people from grouping in said places that drop MQ items.

[wwoneo]

It is possible. What is the point that you are trying to illustrate? That altruism has a threshold based on relative wealth (i.e. You do not mind passing the lower valued items to someone else because it's value a insignificant compared to your total wealth) and/or you don't want to invest the time to sell lower value items in EC?

I can understand all of those attitudes, but that doesn't make NBG equitable. It just make you either a charitable, successful or lazy person ^^

The value of the item is inconsequential so long as it exists ( i.e. It can be traded)

^ this is true.

[kaev]

It is possible. What is the point that you are trying to illustrate? That altruism has a threshold based on relative wealth (i.e. You do not mind passing the lower valued items to someone else because it's value a insignificant compared to your total wealth) and/or you don't want to invest the time to sell lower value items in EC?

I can understand all of those attitudes, but that doesn't make NBG equitable. It just make you either a charitable, successful or lazy person ^^

The value of the item is inconsequential so long as it exists ( i.e. It can be traded)

That last is a statement of your position, not a given at all. All you're doing is illustrating the silliness of carrying any notion out to its (il)logical conclusion. "Principle" is the stupidest imaginable reason to ever do anything.

IOW, it's not uncommon for PUGs to NBG minor stuff and /ran the big(ger) ticket items, often decided on a case-by-case basis by the players involved at the time. It's not necessary to be bureaucratic about your social life.

[Enderenter]

Here comes the fun question.

Do you roll on a quest piece that is no drop and you can't use the reward from said quest, for purposes of selling the MQ, if there is someone in the group who needs the quest piece to actually turn in.

I'd imagine the best example is pawbuster in KC.

Come Velious though, I can't imagine PUGs in Kael. Clerics rolling on chain armor and Rogues rolling on Silk. Lolololol.

This, among other reasons, is why I no longer run with pugs. Personally, I would always give epic quest items away on a NBG basis.

[fadetree]

You are all wrong.

[kaev]

You are all wrong.

We're playing an emulated version of a 15 year old elf sim... how much more wrong could we possibly be?

[Cecily]

I like NBG. I'll take a big cash hit to seriously improve someone's virtual quality of life.
I like greed too!

[maskedmelon]

We're playing an emulated version of a 15 year old elf sim... how much more wrong could we possibly be?

And discussing it on an Internet forum when we're not actively playing it to boot ^^

[fadetree]

We're playing an emulated version of a 15 year old elf sim... how much more wrong could we possibly be?

lol, touche.

[Calibretto]

Here comes the fun question.

Do you roll on a quest piece that is no drop and you can't use the reward from said quest, for purposes of selling the MQ, if there is someone in the group who needs the quest piece to actually turn in.

I'd imagine the best example is pawbuster in KC.

Come Velious though, I can't imagine PUGs in Kael. Clerics rolling on chain armor and Rogues rolling on Silk. Lolololol.


I don't feel the same way about quest items that someone in the group legitimately needs for a quest. I'm not a huge fan of MQing shit to begin with and wouldn't mind them being nerfed.

[Dizey]

I've always hated the GBN on the server. Probably because I never experienced the behavior on live, not once. The worst is when someone wins a lore item that they're already wearing, and then they proceed to hold up the group to corpse the item so that they can loot another. I remember being pissed the first time I saw that happen in my group. That's just how the server rolls though. I don't like it, but I've learned to accept it. Hell, I've even benefited from it on a few occasions since then. I guess the argument is that everyone in the group is there putting in equal time and effort for an equal chance to obtain those high value items, and it's a valid one.