Ninja looted by Zoolex

[YendorLootmonkey]

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

No, obviously there is debate over this because Zoolex himself said roll if you want it.

This. The group was told to "roll if you want." Druid wanted. Druid rolled and won. Anything beyond that is backpedalling.

Give the GER to the druid, and next time pay attention to your instructions to the group when something drops... i.e. if the GER was supposed to be NBG, do not say "roll if you want it". Instead, perhaps you should say "NBG roll on GER, melee classes only." if that's in fact what you meant.

Besides that, all of these arguments since Kunark has been released have seemingly been over the concept of "NBG". It's stupid. NBG in your guild groups where you have a vested interest in the person needing it most getting it. One man's "need" is another man's "why the F would you need that??!?!?!? /petition!!!!!!!"

[Daldolma]

Why wouldn't he say it? How do you call for a roll? He was just calling for a roll. I guess 'roll if you need it' would have been more appropriate, but you're playing semantics. Three people asked why a druid was rolling. Then the druid explained himself in terms of NBG. Then Zoolex got pissed that a druid rolled and decided to ninja loot the ring. Despite the fact that 4 different people in the group commented on the fact that it was NBG, not including Zoolex, you're claiming it's debatable based on the fact that Zoolex said 'roll if you want it'? Everyone in the group -- again, including the druid -- seemed to understand that it was NBG. I don't think there's any legitimate debate over that fact.

[YendorLootmonkey]

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

I guess 'roll if you need it' would have been more appropriate, but you're playing semantics.

And so is the group, in terms of "Need Before Greed".

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

Three people asked why a druid was rolling. Then the druid explained himself in terms of NBG.

Exactly. But that suddenly wasn't good enough for the group. Suddenly, the "NBG" got further refined to melees only without the druid knowing.

If the druid had known the group's definition of "need" was melees only up front, a) he probably wouldn't have rolled, creating this situation in the first place, and b) he could have decided at that point that the group wasn't for him. In which case, as someone said above, good luck getting any healers to join in your PUG if they have zero chance at rolling on the rare droppable item that they can sell for something they could use.

The fundamental issue is that "need" is subjectively defined. The druid genuinely felt he "needed" the ring. Who are we to judge on that? Maybe he needs the STR for encumberance issues. Maybe he needs the 10 AC for some damage mitigation while he's playing ghetto CC by rootparking or to take a few hits before an evac, I don't know. And you or the group doesn't know either.

Hence the problem with "NBG" rolls in pickup groups...

[Daldolma]

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

And so is the group, in terms of "Need Before Greed".



Exactly. But that suddenly wasn't good enough for the group. Suddenly, the "NBG" got further refined to melees only without the druid knowing.

If the druid had known the group's definition of "need" was melees only up front, a) he probably wouldn't have rolled, creating this situation in the first place, and b) he could have decided at that point that the group wasn't for him. In which case, as someone said above, good luck getting any healers to join in your PUG if they have zero chance at rolling on the rare droppable item that they can sell for something they could use.

The fundamental issue is that "need" is subjectively defined. The druid genuinely felt he "needed" the ring. Who are we to judge on that? Maybe he needs the STR for encumberance issues. Maybe he needs the 10 AC for some damage mitigation while he's playing ghetto CC by rootparking or to take a few hits before an evac, I don't know. And we don't know either.

Hence the problem with "NBG" rolls in pickup groups...

I get your point, and it'd hold water in a lot of NBG debates, and it's a good reason why NBG shouldn't generally be used. But this isn't one of those situations. This is a druid calling 'need' on a 10ac, +7str ring. It's horseshit, and everyone in the group knew it. Limiting that ring to melees for NBG isn't some arbitrary distinction. It'd be like limiting GEBs to casters. I'm sure a paladin could un-equip his boots and claim he needs the 5ac and 9 wisdom upgrade, but we all know that that's not a legitimate example of NBG. There really isn't any ambiguity in this case, or the GEBs example.

There is ambiguity as to who really 'needs' certain items. This isn't one of them.

[justin6764]

Basically your trying to lie your way out of this I see.

[Bruno]

The best part about all of this is that regardless of who is going to end up with it/did end up with it, it's getting sold in EC if it hasn't been already. The tank will buy tank gear or the druid will buy wisdom gear. The dude shouldn't have taken the ring after he lost the roll.

[rsynweap84]

Ok screw need shit, fact of the matter is:

Stupid guy says anyone can roll.
Stupid guy loses roll.
Stupid queer then ninja's the drop.
And then some of you idiots defend the ninja.

Srsly some of you should be the poster children for abortion, curse your wretched wench mothers for having you!

[Daldolma]

Where does he say anyone can roll? He said 'roll if you want' in an NBG group, where everyone knew it was an NBG group. He lost the roll to a druid that didn't have a rightful roll, then "ninja looted" an item that nobody else should have rolled for. The only person butt-hurt is the druid that tried to claim need on a 10ac, 7 strength ring. Nobody else in the group was upset by the "ninja looting". In fact, two of the people from the group have posted defending Zoolex in this very thread.

You've literally got everyone in the group on one side of this argument, and then a druid claiming need on a 10ac, 7str ring on the other. If nothing else, wouldn't you guys agree that the people in the group would be in a better position to know?

Like I said, the group should have just disallowed the roll. It's not "ninja looting" if the majority of the group agrees you should get the item, based on the group's pre-established rules. It's democracy. Like America. And I for one am not going to stand here and listen to you bad mouth the good people of the United States of America.

[baalzy]

trade-able items should always be greed roll in non-guild group situations.

Period, everyone fighting contributed to making it drop therefore everyone deserves a chance at it.

[Daldolma]

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

trade-able items should always be greed roll in non-guild group situations.

Period, everyone fighting contributed to making it drop therefore everyone deserves a chance at it.

That's your opinion. The majority of the group apparently disagreed. If the majority of the group votes NBG, it's NBG. If that's a problem for someone, they can leave -- but they can't bullshit 'need'.

Can't believe how many people are defending a druid claiming 'need' on a 10ac, +7 strength ring, even after two of the other members from the group come and claim Zoolex was in the right. There was no ambiguity over whether or not this was an NBG group -- put that out of your minds. Everyone knew it was NBG, including the druid. Two non-Zoolex members of the group have already posted in this thread confirming as much, despite the fact that it's obvious from the group-chat.

The only issue is whether or not the druid had the right to roll 'need' on this ring. He obviously didn't. Dude is just greedy.