Curious about opinions re: large cash drop while afk

[Glenzig]

Originally Posted by Faron [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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]

Originally Posted by maskedmelon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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? [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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]

Originally Posted by fadetree [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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]

Originally Posted by kaev [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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]

Originally Posted by maskedmelon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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]

Originally Posted by kaev [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] 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]

Originally Posted by Enderenter [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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]

Originally Posted by Neyphlite [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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