Ding! Hireling has joined your party

[EKKM]

I'd like to think the people adding the hireling are doing so out of generosity rather than just being inconsiderate.

For the first few weeks hirelings are active situations like this will occur, eventually people will learn what is or is not rude and the occurences will decrease . Hopefully people are understanding and kindly explain why taking up a party slot without getting the ok of the leader is rude (even if obvious to you), its possible they just dont understand.

For example, usually when I get a blind invite I send a tell letting the person know it is considered rude, that way they know why they are being rejected or even squelched.

[KoboldKiller]

I must agree with the poster about him bringing his own healing, it was rather creative. But yes you should ask prior however that hireling can heal the whole party if directed to do so. I for one am looking forward to having a hireling follow me through chains that are hard to get groups for like TR, or Co6 and such. Yes I know people will say those are easy to get groups for but in my experience these seem to take forever to form.

[Gunga]

The person who activated their Hireling paid for the services which would ultimately help out the group...pretty nice of em. I don't suppose that Ghostie told the group not to use hirelings, so the doom scenerio that wildcard puggers will overtake stormreach with their spamming of mercenaries is a bit of an overreaction.

[WeaselKing]

The person who activated their Hireling paid for the services which would ultimately help out the group...pretty nice of em. I don't suppose that Ghostie told the group not to use hirelings, so the doom scenerio that wildcard puggers will overtake stormreach with their spamming of mercenaries is a bit of an overreaction.

I'm pretty sure the OP is mostly trying to point out a bad mechanic that takes some of the party leaders ability to form their own group away from them and should probably be readdressed before final hireling release. His post also helps point out to other players that there is an etiquette issue with hirelings at least until this is fixed.

And no I don't suppose that Ghoste told the group not to hire hirelings but he knows to from now on.

[Montoya]

I didnt take any real negativity or anger from the OP. It seemed to me that he was stating a very valid concern. Maybe a good idea, before posting insulting or negative comments about perceptions of the OP's anger , would be to ask if he actually is angry or if you misread his post.

I think it would be disrespectful to use party resources (number of slots available in dungeon) without asking the party if there are any objections. Just my take on the situation.

[EightyFour]

Would be nice if a party leader could boot a hireling at any time. I mean they are not their to replace real players right? They are just their to stand in for one if one is not available, right?

Most of the time I imagine that most people we be willing to handle it themselves, and drop the hireling, but I do for see a small group being problem causers.

[Gunga]

Would be nice if a party leader could boot a hireling at any time. I mean they are not their to replace real players right? They are just their to stand in for one if one is not available, right?

Most of the time I imagine that most people we be willing to handle it themselves, and drop the hireling, but I do for see a small group being problem causers.

That doesn't make sense if the leader did not pay for the hireling. One solution is to only allow the leader to hire them into the group. Can you trade them currently?

[Lithic]

That doesn't make sense if the leader did not pay for the hireling. One solution is to only allow the leader to hire them into the group. Can you trade them currently?

Allowing the leader to boot hirelings makes perfect sense, though since by definition a hireling must be in a quest area there might be a problem letting leaders boot hirelings but not players inside an instance.

Sure the leader didn't hire the hireling, but the player who gets his dismissed doesn't lose anything. He still has the contract, and a rest shrine or minute in tavern later they can resummon the hireling. You can't say the leader costs them the contract cost as the player already lost that, and if they cannot make good use of it in the leader's party they can go do something else. NOT allowing the leader to boot a hireling means a much more annoying process to get rid of the offending player and hireling (especially in quests far from a safe area to recall to), though at least the uncooperative do show themselves early in the quest rather than when they go afk and hide for the boss fight, waiting on a chest to loot.

In any case, making the leader summon the hireling would require reworking the 1 hireling per person rules.

[Bekki]

I talked to a fellow Player and did find out something.

You Can direct the Hireling Cleric to actually Heal the entire party.

But you would do this By Highlighting the Character
you want to Heal Specifically doing so.

Which could have you effectively running TWO characters.


but This could prove difficult in a Very challenging dungeon...

Just something to consider.

[Impaqt]

Pop up window to the Party leader when someone activates a Hireling.

DING! XXX would like to activate Hireling: XXXX To Join your Party. Accept/Deny

If Denied, the Hireling stays in the backpack, If accepted appears in group.

[twix]

Pop up window to the Party leader when someone activates a Hireling.

DING! XXX would like to activate Hireling: XXXX To Join your Party. Accept/Deny

If Denied, the Hireling stays in the backpack, If accepted appears in group.

seems reasonable to me /signed

[Gunga]

Pop up window to the Party leader when someone activates a Hireling.

DING! XXX would like to activate Hireling: XXXX To Join your Party. Accept/Deny

If Denied, the Hireling stays in the backpack, If accepted appears in group.

Nice. /Signed.

[Phidius]

How about if it follows the normal process for people requesting to join? Instead of a pop-up that could be annoying, just have it appear in the chat tab and in the Join Requests window (if the leader has the window open). I'd prefer that the Hireling's name be followed by the sponsor's name, just in case the sponser who summoned them failed to mention it to the leader.

[Mani]

Duhhhh? You have the star, just right click and remove.

[Impaqt]

Duhhhh? You have the star, just right click and remove.

Duh, ya cant activate the hireling until your In the Quest... Ya cant dismiss anyone in the quest......

[Alavatar]

Gosh Ghoste, maybe it is because of what you posted originally.



I guess you are just trying to be witty and have fun and all of that. But see the exclamation marks in your post (Oh, it's a hireling! and Well too bad!)? Those indicate emphasis and, given the other parts of your post (...wait a minute... and ...how did that cleric just join the party? I had the star and didn't see any join request... and ...Oh, it's a hireling! and ...wait a minute... and Joe pugger can now fill a slot in your party with a cleric that will only heal him because he looked at his build, realized he sucks at self healing, but really wanted to do the quest you posted for anyways.) -- well, it is pretty hard to see what you are saying as funny instead of angry. Moreso because there are and and and available to indicate when you are trying to be light-hearted.

But, given your choice of words and the lack of emoticons to indicate differently -- my read is that you were ticked off. My take on your subsequent posts is that you are trying to diffuse that so it looks less like a rant and more like a serious evaluation of a possible problem. And, I think you didn't really like it when I mentioned that Joe did what you asked him to do and you look stupid complaining about it.

But hey, clearly not the situation at all.

(BTW, I chose red to highlight your words because I really do have anger issues. )

Woe be the day when emoticons are grammatically required for written communication in lieu of reading comprehension.

There was no tone in the OPs post. Any tone assumed by the reader is merely an assumption on the reader's part. I recommend asking for clarification before jumping to conclusions.

Ghoste, thank you for pointing out this mechanical problem. I hope the Devs make note of it as well.

[Ghoste]

Gosh Ghoste, maybe it is because of what you posted originally.



I guess you are just trying to be witty and have fun and all of that. But see the exclamation marks in your post (Oh, it's a hireling! and Well too bad!)? Those indicate emphasis and, given the other parts of your post (...wait a minute... and ...how did that cleric just join the party? I had the star and didn't see any join request... and ...Oh, it's a hireling! and ...wait a minute... and Joe pugger can now fill a slot in your party with a cleric that will only heal him because he looked at his build, realized he sucks at self healing, but really wanted to do the quest you posted for anyways.) -- well, it is pretty hard to see what you are saying as funny instead of angry. Moreso because there are and and and available to indicate when you are trying to be light-hearted.

But, given your choice of words and the lack of emoticons to indicate differently -- my read is that you were ticked off. My take on your subsequent posts is that you are trying to diffuse that so it looks less like a rant and more like a serious evaluation of a possible problem. And, I think you didn't really like it when I mentioned that Joe did what you asked him to do and you look stupid complaining about it.

But hey, clearly not the situation at all.

(BTW, I chose red to highlight your words because I really do have anger issues. )

What can I say other than that you misunderstood? I was indeed using emphasis, but to make the point that it COULD create drama, not that it DID. If that's not clear to you, read my last post about changing from what happened to hypothetical. The part you yourself pointed out was not talking about what actually happened.

Another point you misunderstood was that I was not trying to pass my post off as humorous, I was saying your response and misinterpretation were. And for that matter, so is your persistence in misinterpreting my posts.

[WeaselKing]

What can I say other than that you misunderstood? I was indeed using emphasis, but to make the point that it COULD create drama, not that it DID. If that's not clear to you, read my last post about changing from what happened to hypothetical. The part you yourself pointed out was not talking about what actually happened.

Another point you misunderstood was that I was not trying to pass my post off as humorous, I was saying your response and misinterpretation were. And for that matter, so is your persistence in misinterpreting my posts.

I think everyone thinks you're mad because of your scary looking avatar.




Still loving that sig btw.

[Lifespawn]

i was in a group of 4 ppl i summoned a hirling and then looked at the lfm it stayed up and still only showed 4 ppl maybe the player joining/boots hireling function is already there?

[Gunga]

Still loving that sig btw.

Me too. Love the free shout out, Ghostie. My man.