Putting things up for roll

[Ebonta]

Honestly, rolling on a +4 INT Tome while there are Wizards in the party is poor form. Especially when you're TR'ing into a Barbarian. I would have passed it to the Wizard as well.

[balforofthenis]

Honestly, rolling on a +4 INT Tome while there are Wizards in the party is poor form. Especially when you're TR'ing into a Barbarian. I would have passed it to the Wizard as well.

This all day long as others have pointed out also...

[Alkindus]

Honestly, I can see no real benefit that a barbarian would recieve from a +4 int tome. I would have ignored your roll too, and passed it to the highest rolling wizard. Most people wouldn't put things up for roll so someone can recieve the same benefit as they would from the item. Loot should always be need before greed. For example, I put up a +4 con tome on my fvs for roll to any high-tiered tank-type melee earlier this month even though I could have used the hp. I applaud the cleric who used better judgement and did the right thing with the tome.

[muffinlad]

I know that this may challenge a game convention...but I would argue that there was no point to putting the object up for roll at all, or any loot object up for roll.

The only way to fairly distribute loot....dance off.

Dance Fever...yeah.

muffintarrio.

[Braegan]

I've gotten in the habit of limiting eligibility on certain tomes/BTC loot I put up for roll to specific classes due to cases just like this. In the past I would normally never thought I needed to explain that a Wizard needs an Int tome more then a Barb...but then comes along a story like this that reminds me that I still need to do so.

Op you've garnered no sympathy from me.

[Xaxx]

Personally OP, if I was on cannith I'd ask you for the names of every toon you had.... so I could squelch or at the very least black list all of them.

A fighter, one tring into a barb at that rolling on a +4 int tome with casters in the group...... even rolling on it..... even thinking about rolling on it should get you blacklisted by everyone who was in that raid.... you coming to the forums to gripe about it.... please be nice and list all your toons, and I would advise everyone on Cannith to never group with the greedy little so and so ever again.

Let me as you op... how would you like to loose.. oh let say.... shard of the epic sword of shadows should it go up for roll to a wizard because he said *well with the +10 to hit of the sword i might be able to hit a few things finally*????

I'm gonna guess you'd come to the forums out of your damned gord moaning and complaining that a wizard should know better than to roll on something like that... well here we are the other way around so let me inform you since you aparently dont realize it.... it works both ways. Now please people... black list him.

[CaptainPurge]

That's too bad. Think of all the extra skill points the OP could've put into Jump on his pure barb next lfe.

[Lithic]

I would somewhat accept that as an end-game toon....i.e. TRs done...(again we are talking +2 skp per level...10 total) but the OP didn't state anything about a mix; in fact, he stated a "pure" barbarian". Again, I'm not judging but I would never roll on it given the information at hand. I'm not absolving the original puller either. That player should have clarified pre-roll the stipulations. To make a stink of it though, with the information at hand, is "hinky" to me.

I disagree. I'm much to lazy to put all my stipulations upfront before I say "XXX is up for roll, use /roll d68". If I think a 20 sorc, who spent most of the time dead in the corner doesn't deserve tharnes goggles or the madstone boots, i'm going to ignore his roll, tell him hes an idiot, and congratulate the 2nd highest. A Fighter, TRing into a Barb would be about the same for a +4 int tome on the "no way" scale.

If anyone whined about it, I'd say fine, and loot it myself.

Then again, I'd never have put any tome up for roll unless I had used one, and had 2 extra copies in the bank in case of more classes coming out!

[Ninety0ne]

Dear OP
Never hit any of my lfm's. Thank you

[karnokvolrath]

Foolishly or not and sometimes in haste i put things up for role(EV6 this happens alot), with the hope that people wont roll on something they wont use.

More then once ive done exactly what the guy did to you, a wizard in DQ rolling on maralith chain and won. I flat out told him "Your role is excluded, due to bad form".
He was all furious, and i happily let him squelch me, id rather get rid of someone like that in a lame DQ at lvl pug then worry about him at a later date.

Also....i have let people make a case for themselves. A barb got kundark goggles because he made a complelling case about his TR plan, and was already on his 4th life so i took his word for it.

I understand the "if you put it for roll it aint yours argument", but god forbid i expect people to use there brain and expect common curtisy on our game......some people i swear...*eyeroll*

Sorry OP but im not on your side on this one.....but again, its hard to know the whole story on the forums....just my 2 cents.

tossin some +1's around to people that enjoy thought

[Miahoo]

snip

Oh boy, lucky for us all we dont have you here on Cannith.
Please go back to Ghallanda and stop with those hate posts over Cannith forums.

-----------------------

OP,
I hope you understand your mistake, so you wont repeat it in the future. If you do, you're welcome to my groups to have fun w/o greed (but just need!).

[Ninety0ne]

[QUOTE=MiahooJunk;3852859]Oh boy, lucky for us all we dont have you here on Cannith.
Please go back to Ghallanda and stop with those hate posts over Cannith forums.

-----------------------


Theres plenty on cannith that think this post is fine. Actions have consequences. Holding people accountable for their bad behavior is hardly a "hate" post.
But to further the dialogue as the OP feels this was a bad move if he would kindly post the names of his characters it would help him avoid the "minority" that hold his behavior poor and his forum whining about it to be comical. I mean how often do people troll themselves in one post?

[seobanio]

The person who received the loot is a guildie of mine. After the tome was looted the OP started sending another guildie of mine tells asking if he was an officer and what our guilds loot policies are. Pretty lame imo to cry about loot in the first place, let alone to go to the forums and act as if you were wronged in some way. You can be sure the guy who got the tome would not have come to the forums to complain if the fighter had been given the tome, even though its kind of dumb to give it to a fighter.

Anyway, to the OP who was bugging my guildie last night... On the subject of Tribe's loot rules:

I don't know that we have set out "rules" about loot. We're not a rules kind of guild. But in general our attitude is: (1) no crying about loot and (2) your loot is your loot, pass it, put it up for roll, whatever. Its yours.

[Yalina]

I dont blacklist players. People can learn/improve/change - except a few - and probably lesson learnt here as well. Squelch those people who blind invite you 10 times in a row in Harbor, otherwise just tell them what they are doing wrong.

[Zion_Halcyon]

Did an epic Demon Queen raid tonight where I won the roll for a +4 int tome. I was playing my warrior that's going to be TRed into a pure barbarian very soon.

When I won the roll, the person who put it up for roll decided that I couldn't get the tome because people who rolled lower rolls were more qualified because of their class.

The person who got the tome looted it of course. No second thoughts there, hehe.

But really, what I'm saying is it would be nice if people who put stuff up for roll would be more clear in who can actually roll for the item BEFORE they put it up for roll. Similarly people who receive an item in an awkward way could think twice before looting it ;-)

Anyway, just wanted to make this something people could think about since this 'trade' happened between two prominent guilds on Cannith. I felt mildly neglected in that trade, tbh.

If anyone doesn't believe it send me a tell and I'll share the video.

I had the opposite happen. I needed a barb belt from TOD, a paladin pulled it, and decided to keep it for the +6 Con.

So maybe its karma in the universe balancing out?

[seobanio]

I had the opposite happen. I needed a barb belt from TOD, a paladin pulled it, and decided to keep it for the +6 Con.

So maybe its karma in the universe balancing out?

The belts are extremely easy to get. A lot of people use whatever con or con/gfl belt they happen to pull first, at least until they get their rings.

This post combined with the op's post give me a headache. It is part of an attitude where people think they are entitled to someone else's loot. If your name is not next to the loot, then it is not yours.... when your name IS next to the loot, then you can decide what to do. Until then, no one owes you anything and you never deserve someone else's loot.

/rant off

[Vyrn]

That other day, I rolled for an esos shard on my cleric. They laughed at me. Please blacklist everyone in Templar! They have common sense, how rude!

[jandhaer]

I must pat myself on the back for showing uncharacteristic restraint when I started recieving the tells from the OP tattling on my Oh so greedy guildy who looted the Tome lolz i was like REALLY? your serious? am i being punked? It was all so absurd. Was busy healing a Eclaw and he starts getting testy that i wasn'y replying fast enough for him (how rude of me) and threatened that if i didn't explain my guildies actions and our Loot Rules that he was gonna ..... (cue dramatic music).... post his tale of woe and frustration on the forums OOOOOOOOH NOOOOOOOs if only i had been there to pass him all my loot too lols

[CaptainCameo]

I think that people aren't really understanding what "up for roll" means. If someone wins said roll, no matter the class, then that means that the person who won, gets it. If someone's excluding others based on class, then they should shove a sharp pointy object up one of their orifices for being discriminatory.

End of story.

And before anyone says anything else



***!!!END OF STORY!!!***

[Paleus]

Until the loot is listed in your name in the chest it is not yours. Its distribution is bound up by social conventions and norms that vary from person to person. In this case, one social norm (give the player that won the roll the loot) appears to have been trumped by another social norm (dont roll on something that the player base deems you cannot use to sufficient effect).

Now, given that norm 2 is often assumed, people will typically not go into lengths listing out their prejudices about who can and cannot roll for something, its assumed to be common sense. In the rare cases where someone doesnt seem to operate under the acepted common sense, the player base tends to try to evaluate their rationale. Why did the caster roll on those madstone boots? Lets see if they truly understand the implications. They will then either A) agree with that person and give them the loot that they won the roll on or B) argue that the person wasnt acting under common sense and give the item to the next highest winning roll that was applicable. Unfortunately, this is a breach in social norms on both sides, the roller broke the common sense rule and the passer the norm to go by the rolls. At this point, both parties can either hold a grudge because someone broke the social norms, or agree that an unexpected exception came up, but that it was resolved.

I personally think that in this case the passer was justified. While it would be nice for people to always list their loot preferences, it doesnt happen as a given rule and people typically rely on common sense to prevail in looting conventions. When it doesnt, we try to resolve it as equittably as possible, and the passer does have final say in these things.