Comments on: it still feels so right, it still feel so wrong aka here we go again http://www.righteousorbs.com/?p=1058 In My Sissy Robe & I Deathard Thu, 09 Sep 2010 11:04:06 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Hinenuitepo http://www.righteousorbs.com/?p=1058&cpage=1#comment-5870 Hinenuitepo Mon, 30 Nov 2009 19:45:40 +0000 http://www.righteousorbs.com/?p=1058#comment-5870 Meh, been out of town. So, anyway, I have to resurrect a thread or two. I'm leaving my current guild (95% probability). We get heroic10 Twins down for the first time. Reckoning drops. It's a decent upgrade for me, if only because it allows me to wear a better belt now that I won't be massively over expertise cap. My tank DK buddy wants it too. Technically, it's a dps weapon. He offers it to me. I offer it back. He wants me to take it. I'd feel guilty looting anything at this point since I'm probably leaving. RL gives it to him. He offers in /w several times to give it to me. I'm steadfast. Not gonna loot and run. Meh. Meh, been out of town.
So, anyway, I have to resurrect a thread or two.

I’m leaving my current guild (95% probability).
We get heroic10 Twins down for the first time. Reckoning drops. It’s a decent upgrade for me, if only because it allows me to wear a better belt now that I won’t be massively over expertise cap. My tank DK buddy wants it too.

Technically, it’s a dps weapon. He offers it to me. I offer it back. He wants me to take it. I’d feel guilty looting anything at this point since I’m probably leaving. RL gives it to him. He offers in /w several times to give it to me.

I’m steadfast. Not gonna loot and run. Meh.

]]> By: Zyfrain http://www.righteousorbs.com/?p=1058&cpage=1#comment-5727 Zyfrain Wed, 25 Nov 2009 22:14:26 +0000 http://www.righteousorbs.com/?p=1058#comment-5727 I regret my frequent and pointed use of the pronoun 'you'. I certainly didn't intend my statements as a personal attack. The addition of the loot trading has certainly opened this for discussion, and people are interpreting the morality of rolling on loot differently. The correct solution, as usual, is to clearly communicate loot rules prior to a run. While trying to rebut the discussion of Propositions 4-6, it occurs to me that the conflict can be focused on when and how ownership of the pretty pixels attaches. If one wins a roll and later decides that they do not wish to wear the item, are they obligated to turn the item back over to the group for redistribution or are they free to do with the item as they wish? I argue that they are obligated to return the item. Implicit in the ‘NEED’ roll is the assertion that one will personally use the item, usually for their main spec. Once this is no longer true, it would become easy to treat the item as if it were a ‘GREED’ category item – available to be freely traded or sold. However, it is improper to do so, as it is unfair to the other group members who legitimately need the item. I sympathize with the usually generous desire to withdraw a claim on an item due to another group member’s superseding need, and fully recognize that often the decision to roll need is made quickly and without full contemplation of the implications. The new rules provide the opportunity to correct the situation, and they should certainly be utilized. Should there happen to be more than one NEED roller remaining once one has withdrawn their winning claim, the item should be distributed between them following the loot system in place for the raid. That system is typically implemented to avoid the favoritism described in the original post. At the risk of sounding pretentious, it has been my experience that intent doesn’t determine whether an action is right or wrong, but instead indicates just how right or wrong that action is. I regret my frequent and pointed use of the pronoun ‘you’. I certainly didn’t intend my statements as a personal attack.
The addition of the loot trading has certainly opened this for discussion, and people are interpreting the morality of rolling on loot differently. The correct solution, as usual, is to clearly communicate loot rules prior to a run.
While trying to rebut the discussion of Propositions 4-6, it occurs to me that the conflict can be focused on when and how ownership of the pretty pixels attaches. If one wins a roll and later decides that they do not wish to wear the item, are they obligated to turn the item back over to the group for redistribution or are they free to do with the item as they wish? I argue that they are obligated to return the item.
Implicit in the ‘NEED’ roll is the assertion that one will personally use the item, usually for their main spec. Once this is no longer true, it would become easy to treat the item as if it were a ‘GREED’ category item – available to be freely traded or sold. However, it is improper to do so, as it is unfair to the other group members who legitimately need the item.
I sympathize with the usually generous desire to withdraw a claim on an item due to another group member’s superseding need, and fully recognize that often the decision to roll need is made quickly and without full contemplation of the implications. The new rules provide the opportunity to correct the situation, and they should certainly be utilized. Should there happen to be more than one NEED roller remaining once one has withdrawn their winning claim, the item should be distributed between them following the loot system in place for the raid. That system is typically implemented to avoid the favoritism described in the original post.
At the risk of sounding pretentious, it has been my experience that intent doesn’t determine whether an action is right or wrong, but instead indicates just how right or wrong that action is.

]]> By: Tamarind http://www.righteousorbs.com/?p=1058&cpage=1#comment-5722 Tamarind Wed, 25 Nov 2009 19:02:52 +0000 http://www.righteousorbs.com/?p=1058#comment-5722 It doesn't sound trollish at all and I see your points, although I will take issue with this: "you are violating the fairness, consistency, and transparency of the loot system." Does you mean 'you' in the specific sense of me personally or you in the general sense of 'one'. Given that this was specifically framed as a batting ideas around post rather than a "this is what I do with my loot when I get it post", then if it's the former you're being slightly unfair to me, since I am not yet so rolling purples as to be more interested in making myself master looter than actually, y'know, having and wearing and licking the loot :) As for my personal position on loot, I roll when I want to wear it, hug it and lick it, but, having done so, I have on occasion traded it to the other person if they've made a good case for why they should have it and not me. Or, y'know, whined about it because quite frankly I can't be arsed with the hassle. However, what I was trying to highlight in this post was that now that now loot can be traded it has introduced grey areas into what was previously quite a clear cut system. And you may conclude that trading loot under any circumstnaces is never okay but ultimately I think it still has to be recognised that people are in fact shifting loot around and will continue to do so. And will do so NOT because they are ninjas or control freaks but for the BEST reasons not the WORST. It doesn’t sound trollish at all and I see your points, although I will take issue with this: “you are violating the fairness, consistency, and transparency of the loot system.” Does you mean ‘you’ in the specific sense of me personally or you in the general sense of ‘one’. Given that this was specifically framed as a batting ideas around post rather than a “this is what I do with my loot when I get it post”, then if it’s the former you’re being slightly unfair to me, since I am not yet so rolling purples as to be more interested in making myself master looter than actually, y’know, having and wearing and licking the loot :)

As for my personal position on loot, I roll when I want to wear it, hug it and lick it, but, having done so, I have on occasion traded it to the other person if they’ve made a good case for why they should have it and not me. Or, y’know, whined about it because quite frankly I can’t be arsed with the hassle.

However, what I was trying to highlight in this post was that now that now loot can be traded it has introduced grey areas into what was previously quite a clear cut system. And you may conclude that trading loot under any circumstnaces is never okay but ultimately I think it still has to be recognised that people are in fact shifting loot around and will continue to do so. And will do so NOT because they are ninjas or control freaks but for the BEST reasons not the WORST.

]]> By: Zyfrain http://www.righteousorbs.com/?p=1058&cpage=1#comment-5719 Zyfrain Wed, 25 Nov 2009 17:43:22 +0000 http://www.righteousorbs.com/?p=1058#comment-5719 I apologize if the tone of this post is too aggressive or trollish. I appreciate the discussion of this topic, as it seems quite timely given the impending implementation of daily raids and the associated PUGs. The gray area you're proclaiming and the uneasy feeling that you're communicating are easily explained - you are violating the fairness, consistency, and transparency of the loot system. The NEED/GREED loot system, at its foundation, relies on the dictum that you NEED an item that you will wear as an upgrade, you GREED an item that you won't wear or don't particularly care about, and PASS on items you don't want cluttering up your inventory. By rolling NEED on an item that you will not wear, to be clear, you are ninja-ing that item. It does not matter what your intent is. The key indicator that your argument is justification is the frequent invocation of the 'super-bad' player as recipient of the loot loss. The NEED/GREED loot system in a PUG is not the place to pass judgment on a players performance. If a player is AFK in the hallway, boot them from the group. At the very least, inform them that they will not be getting loot from a boss due to insufficient performance prior to the kill or the rolls. This is the RL's job, not yours. To address your Propositions: 1 - Clear ninja. In the statement of the proposition you assert that you don't NEED the item. 2,3 - This isn't different then selling a BoE blue item on the auction house or in trade. This is and always has been a GREED option, and the added ability to trade within the group doesn't change that. 4, 5, 6 - These scenarios, it seems, are where the confusion is originating. Just because you accidentally or intentionally rolled NEED on an item that you do not intend to wear, and won the roll, does not make you a de-facto loot master for that item. There are no 'My Friend Points' to be spent obtaining that item from you. The system is configured to allow group members who participated in the boss kill an opportunity to win a drop from that boss, competing against other group members who NEED that item, as commonly defined. If you are removing yourself from the set of people in the group who qualify to NEED the item, magnanimously or indifferently, the item must go to the next highest roller. It is up to them to agree to emulate your charity or indifference. It isn't your decision to make. I apologize if the tone of this post is too aggressive or trollish. I appreciate the discussion of this topic, as it seems quite timely given the impending implementation of daily raids and the associated PUGs.
The gray area you’re proclaiming and the uneasy feeling that you’re communicating are easily explained – you are violating the fairness, consistency, and transparency of the loot system.
The NEED/GREED loot system, at its foundation, relies on the dictum that you NEED an item that you will wear as an upgrade, you GREED an item that you won’t wear or don’t particularly care about, and PASS on items you don’t want cluttering up your inventory.
By rolling NEED on an item that you will not wear, to be clear, you are ninja-ing that item. It does not matter what your intent is.
The key indicator that your argument is justification is the frequent invocation of the ’super-bad’ player as recipient of the loot loss. The NEED/GREED loot system in a PUG is not the place to pass judgment on a players performance. If a player is AFK in the hallway, boot them from the group. At the very least, inform them that they will not be getting loot from a boss due to insufficient performance prior to the kill or the rolls. This is the RL’s job, not yours.
To address your Propositions:
1 – Clear ninja. In the statement of the proposition you assert that you don’t NEED the item.
2,3 – This isn’t different then selling a BoE blue item on the auction house or in trade. This is and always has been a GREED option, and the added ability to trade within the group doesn’t change that.
4, 5, 6 – These scenarios, it seems, are where the confusion is originating. Just because you accidentally or intentionally rolled NEED on an item that you do not intend to wear, and won the roll, does not make you a de-facto loot master for that item. There are no ‘My Friend Points’ to be spent obtaining that item from you.
The system is configured to allow group members who participated in the boss kill an opportunity to win a drop from that boss, competing against other group members who NEED that item, as commonly defined. If you are removing yourself from the set of people in the group who qualify to NEED the item, magnanimously or indifferently, the item must go to the next highest roller. It is up to them to agree to emulate your charity or indifference. It isn’t your decision to make.

]]> By: Tamarind http://www.righteousorbs.com/?p=1058&cpage=1#comment-5717 Tamarind Wed, 25 Nov 2009 16:12:10 +0000 http://www.righteousorbs.com/?p=1058#comment-5717 Although I was aware that loot can be a pretty fraught issue I had no idea even *writing* about it would throw up some much contention. To be honest, I think it gets more and more complicated when you go for mixed groups, since the interaction between guilds and pugs is a little tense anyway. But within guilds, yes, definitely you want everything to be absolutely fair and above board. You can't comfortably have a situation where guildies are buying things from other guildies unless it's, arguably, a vanity item like a mount or a comedy hat or something. I think it's a bit more blurred with pugs though - I mean then I think it comes down to individual choices, I suspect? If one stranger buys something off another stranger, even though they rolled on the item becuase they could have used it - that doesn't strike me as too problematic? Because we can all buy and not buy things from each other. Our current rule is that you don't roll for trophies unless you have enough emblems but it's basically an honour system. Pugs can get pretty snippy about it, too, even though we always announce it at the beginning of the run. Somebody flounced off in the middle of TotC-25 because of it. Sigh! I think you're right about the reward/tool distinction. I like getting loot but I'm a complete soft-touch when it comes to getting it. All it takes is for somebody to exclaim really enthusiastically over something and there I am passing. After all, it's got to the stage where it's *improving* performance, rather than *enabling* it. So even NEED is a relative term. And, yeah, self-service check outs are generally rubbish. The temptation to yell at them is overwhelming. The item in the bagging area is completely expected!!! Although I was aware that loot can be a pretty fraught issue I had no idea even *writing* about it would throw up some much contention. To be honest, I think it gets more and more complicated when you go for mixed groups, since the interaction between guilds and pugs is a little tense anyway. But within guilds, yes, definitely you want everything to be absolutely fair and above board. You can’t comfortably have a situation where guildies are buying things from other guildies unless it’s, arguably, a vanity item like a mount or a comedy hat or something. I think it’s a bit more blurred with pugs though – I mean then I think it comes down to individual choices, I suspect? If one stranger buys something off another stranger, even though they rolled on the item becuase they could have used it – that doesn’t strike me as too problematic? Because we can all buy and not buy things from each other.

Our current rule is that you don’t roll for trophies unless you have enough emblems but it’s basically an honour system. Pugs can get pretty snippy about it, too, even though we always announce it at the beginning of the run. Somebody flounced off in the middle of TotC-25 because of it. Sigh!

I think you’re right about the reward/tool distinction. I like getting loot but I’m a complete soft-touch when it comes to getting it. All it takes is for somebody to exclaim really enthusiastically over something and there I am passing. After all, it’s got to the stage where it’s *improving* performance, rather than *enabling* it. So even NEED is a relative term.

And, yeah, self-service check outs are generally rubbish. The temptation to yell at them is overwhelming. The item in the bagging area is completely expected!!!

]]> By: Tamarind http://www.righteousorbs.com/?p=1058&cpage=1#comment-5709 Tamarind Wed, 25 Nov 2009 14:41:39 +0000 http://www.righteousorbs.com/?p=1058#comment-5709 Ah yes, meta plots are always much more interesting than, err, actual plots. Usually I just feel guilty if I’ve rolled need on something for myself and then discover it was a pretty major deal for someone else. I did that accidentally on a caster mace from Anub in TotC-10 and I still remember it with shame. I just saw oooh shiny purple joy and was all like “yay” and everybody was very nice about it, but a bit “never mind, dude, next time, eh’” to the paladin. And it turned out he’d been trying to get it for weeks and weeks and weeks and it had finally dropped and a random PUG (me) had just walked off with it. So I traded it to him with no problem at all but it was all a bit English: “Oh no, I couldn’t!” “After you” “No, after you.” “JUST HAVE THE FUCKING MACE.” Etc. :) Ah yes, meta plots are always much more interesting than, err, actual plots. Usually I just feel guilty if I’ve rolled need on something for myself and then discover it was a pretty major deal for someone else. I did that accidentally on a caster mace from Anub in TotC-10 and I still remember it with shame. I just saw oooh shiny purple joy and was all like “yay” and everybody was very nice about it, but a bit “never mind, dude, next time, eh’” to the paladin. And it turned out he’d been trying to get it for weeks and weeks and weeks and it had finally dropped and a random PUG (me) had just walked off with it. So I traded it to him with no problem at all but it was all a bit English:

“Oh no, I couldn’t!”
“After you”
“No, after you.”
“JUST HAVE THE FUCKING MACE.”

Etc. :)

]]> By: Tamarind http://www.righteousorbs.com/?p=1058&cpage=1#comment-5707 Tamarind Wed, 25 Nov 2009 14:35:47 +0000 http://www.righteousorbs.com/?p=1058#comment-5707 Ah, yes, there's always something satisfying in being at the stage when you can just squish epics into their mats for fun and profit :) Ah, yes, there’s always something satisfying in being at the stage when you can just squish epics into their mats for fun and profit :)

]]> By: Tamarind http://www.righteousorbs.com/?p=1058&cpage=1#comment-5705 Tamarind Wed, 25 Nov 2009 13:45:09 +0000 http://www.righteousorbs.com/?p=1058#comment-5705 Truthfully I've always secretly wanted to be a disc priest ... flagellation aside. How can you not love an ability called matyrdom. Ahaha, enlightening? Some people clearly think I'm crazy for evening thinking about it. I am starting to come to the conclusion that it's all about perspective - whether you see loot as something entirely acquired in a vaccuum, i.e. entirely about your individual progress, or as something that is, to an extent, a community resource - something to be used in a way that will best benefit your guild as a whole. I think I'm going to stop talking about loot for, well, a long time. It's a bit too fraught :) Truthfully I’ve always secretly wanted to be a disc priest … flagellation aside. How can you not love an ability called matyrdom.

Ahaha, enlightening? Some people clearly think I’m crazy for evening thinking about it.

I am starting to come to the conclusion that it’s all about perspective – whether you see loot as something entirely acquired in a vaccuum, i.e. entirely about your individual progress, or as something that is, to an extent, a community resource – something to be used in a way that will best benefit your guild as a whole.

I think I’m going to stop talking about loot for, well, a long time. It’s a bit too fraught :)

]]> By: Tamarind http://www.righteousorbs.com/?p=1058&cpage=1#comment-5703 Tamarind Wed, 25 Nov 2009 11:11:50 +0000 http://www.righteousorbs.com/?p=1058#comment-5703 Loot is such an insanely emotive issue. Currently it seems divided down people who think that it's grey, in which case this has relevant, and people who think it is entirely black and white, in which case it's nonesense. Reading your comment and others, the more I think it's a different in perception between loot as something entirely individual and loot as a community resource. If you view it as the former (which it seems you and I don't) then all you roll on anything that may be an upgrade, no matter how slight, but if you consider the latter then you roll, or don't roll, within the context of the group, the guild etc. etc. You're the second person to mention vigilante justice, which is fascinating actually because it does make perfect sense as a way of looking at it. The thing is, both seem, on some level, 'wrong' to me - it seems wrong to unfairly to unbalance the scales, and it seems that people who don't 'deserve' loot to get it, and it seems wrong for someone to judge what counts as someone else 'deserving' loot. But equally, I suppose, it's fair to conclude that, by signing up to run something, you are implicitely committing to a certain level of contribution i.e. not dying in the first 5 seconds and not spending the fight afk in the hall. I could just talk myself in circles ... Loot is such an insanely emotive issue. Currently it seems divided down people who think that it’s grey, in which case this has relevant, and people who think it is entirely black and white, in which case it’s nonesense.

Reading your comment and others, the more I think it’s a different in perception between loot as something entirely individual and loot as a community resource. If you view it as the former (which it seems you and I don’t) then all you roll on anything that may be an upgrade, no matter how slight, but if you consider the latter then you roll, or don’t roll, within the context of the group, the guild etc. etc.

You’re the second person to mention vigilante justice, which is fascinating actually because it does make perfect sense as a way of looking at it. The thing is, both seem, on some level, ‘wrong’ to me – it seems wrong to unfairly to unbalance the scales, and it seems that people who don’t ‘deserve’ loot to get it, and it seems wrong for someone to judge what counts as someone else ‘deserving’ loot. But equally, I suppose, it’s fair to conclude that, by signing up to run something, you are implicitely committing to a certain level of contribution i.e. not dying in the first 5 seconds and not spending the fight afk in the hall.

I could just talk myself in circles …

]]> By: Tamarind http://www.righteousorbs.com/?p=1058&cpage=1#comment-5702 Tamarind Wed, 25 Nov 2009 11:03:30 +0000 http://www.righteousorbs.com/?p=1058#comment-5702 I think we've pretty much comprehensively established that fairness and consistency and transparency are the most important principles of any loot system. I guess I was thinking about guild runs more than pugs. I think we’ve pretty much comprehensively established that fairness and consistency and transparency are the most important principles of any loot system.

I guess I was thinking about guild runs more than pugs.

]]>