Epic Shard Handoff - Cool or not Cool?

[Waukeen]

Double rolling on items is disgraceful, and leads to should lead to listing IMO.

I advocate your loot is your loot.

I am cool with limited or guild only rolls.

I am cool with passing to a guildy, friend, or whoever you deem fit.

I am indifferent on the topic of selling raid/bound items via /tells. I do not participate in this, but I get why people do it.

Entering into a /roll 1d-- situation only to be doing it as backup for a guildy in a PuG is just bush-league behavior.

This topic has been beaten to death, but +1 for investigating and posting screens.

[soupertc]

yeah that's not ok in my book.

I will pass stuff to guildies or friends if I actully looted it. But rolling to pass it is a big no-no. I don't know why people do that kinda stuff.....even if it was a SUPER UBER Shard there is simply no was to justify something like that.

Sucks it happened OP...but now you know...so does your Server and I saw the raid leader post something as well...so looks like they screwed themselves...and that is justice right there!!!

[Buggss]

This came up once a long time ago and the only reason it still happens is because anyone that puts the name of the protaganists in the general channel or any other channel are considered to be doing something worse than the dodgy ones doing the deal.

The only ones who claim it's acceptable are those who have benefitted from it or been caught out doing it publicly.

Even those guilds who always roll between themselves on raid loot are seeming more reasonable these days, at least the ones who tell you it'll happen when you join the group. Those who don't tell everyone should do but you only tend to make that mistake once.

[Buggss]

After a little reflection on the thread, perhaps there should be an option on the dropdown menu that allows you to transfer ownership to another player of a /roll.

Once you've selected this you'd get an option to roll appearing on all other players in the group. You could either choose to roll or not. The game would then look from highest to lowest of the rolls made and offer one at a time the chance to accept the ownership of the item.

Not sure where it would come in the priorities of the game but it does seem to appear in the forum and threads fairly regularly and that kind of change shouldn't be any more complicated than the original loot distribution changes made years ago.

[Mobeius]

BTW this happened to before on VOD run with a certain racial guild of defenders (defenders of loot i suppose).. 3 people rolled, I won, and then 30 seconds later the Wizzy rolls for it and wins..

They tried to BS me this was an accident and so forth and the person went afk etc, etc, etc... the gist is they wait for everyone to recall out and break group and then after me sitting there for ten minutes they finally switch the item over to the other guy. Then after i made my objections to that, they make a slew of excuses why this happened and its just some misunderstanding.

[Vallin]

BTW this happened to before on VOD run with a certain racial guild of defenders (defenders of loot i suppose).. 3 people rolled, I won, and then 30 seconds later the Wizzy rolls for it and wins..

They tried to BS me this was an accident and so forth and the person went afk etc, etc, etc... the gist is they wait for everyone to recall out and break group and then after me sitting there for ten minutes they finally switch the item over to the other guy. Then after i made my objections to that, they make a slew of excuses why this happened and its just some misunderstanding.

Wow, WTG with necro-ing this and calling out my guild a second time in a public forum for an unfortunate series of mis-steps and a misunderstanding that happened over a year ago. That issue is so old it is on the second page of some other forum, lol.

We acknowledged that there were some things that we could have handled with greater care and the public apology and explanation of what happened during the incident was well documented.

Seems that you still haven't gotten over it. I'll tell you what - I will take my cleric and we will two man VoD until you get your goggles. We already tried apologizing about the misunderstanding but I guess the sting is still there for you. PM me when you want to roll VoD.

I'll get you some goggles. It will all be ok.

Vallin.

[Ripper_WL]

Wow, WTG with necro-ing this and calling out my guild a second time in a public forum for an unfortunate series of mis-steps and a misunderstanding that happened over a year ago. That issue is so old it is on the second page of some other forum, lol.

We acknowledged that there were some things that we could have handled with greater care and the public apology and explanation of what happened during the incident was well documented.

Seems that you still haven't gotten over it. I'll tell you what - I will take my cleric and we will two man VoD until you get your goggles. We already tried apologizing about the misunderstanding but I guess the sting is still there for you. PM me when you want to roll VoD.

I'll get you some goggles. It will all be ok.

Vallin.

Not only an old subject, but he also kept (and keeps) joining the runs of that guild... I was actually very surprised to see him joining another VoD run with the same ppl less than 1 week after the incident. IMHO, the problem was solved and the apologies accepted.

[Delt]

After a little reflection on the thread, perhaps there should be an option on the dropdown menu that allows you to transfer ownership to another player of a /roll.

Once you've selected this you'd get an option to roll appearing on all other players in the group. You could either choose to roll or not. The game would then look from highest to lowest of the rolls made and offer one at a time the chance to accept the ownership of the item.

Not sure where it would come in the priorities of the game but it does seem to appear in the forum and threads fairly regularly and that kind of change shouldn't be any more complicated than the original loot distribution changes made years ago.

Haven't bothered reading the whole thread, but all these issues would be simply solved by allowing the transfer-in-chest-pull-down menu to only work for the original item puller (and stay active even after loot is transferred). In effect, it would:

- prevent shady /rolling practices
- allow reassignment due to mistakes/late rolls (I always misassign stuff and it sucks when they are no longer in the raid)

Two main issues, easily cleared up with a simple change.

Back on topic - ya, it's shady and lame.

[Angelus_dead]

Double rolling on items is disgraceful, and leads to should lead to listing IMO.

I advocate your loot is your loot.

But that's self-contradictory.

To say "your loot is your loot" implies that if an item is in the chest with your name on it, you can do whatever you want with it. That would include passing it along to a friend after you won it in a roll.

This dispute arises because when most people say "Roll 1d100 for shard", what they really mean is "Roll 1d100 if you want to loot this shard into your inventory". It would take too long to spell it out fully, but that leaves ambiguity there for a person to double-up the rolls of his buddy.

[Waukeen]

But that's self-contradictory.

To say "your loot is your loot" implies that if an item is in the chest with your name on it, you can do whatever you want with it. That would include passing it along to a friend after you won it in a roll.

This dispute arises because when most people say "Roll 1d100 for shard", what they really mean is "Roll 1d100 if you want to loot this shard into your inventory". It would take too long to spell it out fully, but that leaves ambiguity there for a person to double-up the rolls of his buddy.

Let me further explain myself then.

Your loot is what literally drops for you in the chest.

If you roll on something and win, you must take it or bow out and reassign to next highest roll.

A roll is a social contract IMO. Double rolling for a friend, betrays the trust that the loot owner had in allowing a roll of any type. (friends only, guild only, class restricted, etc.)

Moreover, if a player wins tharne's goggles via roll for instance, then a late rolling toon that already has them high rolls and passes to someone that lost their shot.

That is disgraceful, and a form of unscrupulous play.

To me there really isn't much ambiguity because adhereing to a roll is common conduct.

It is evidenced by how people who do this either make the shift super fast and drop group, or wait until almost everyone has left. They know it is wrong and make a childish attempt to cover their tracks, or beat it out of there.

[HumanJHawkins]

But that's self-contradictory.

To say "your loot is your loot" implies that if an item is in the chest with your name on it, you can do whatever you want with it. That would include passing it along to a friend after you won it in a roll.

It depends. Your loot is your loot unless you make a deal to the contrary. If you join a group under a deal where some piece of loot goes to some particular person, then you made that deal and should stick to it.

By the same token, if you roll for something under the pretense that you can't roll for someone else, then you should stick to that as well.

In this case, the sneaking around shows that the players involved knew the deal and were conspiring to commit fraud. Circumstantial, but enough to win a civil suit. And way more than enough to win in the court of public opinion.

All of this lawyering is academic though. The bottom line is, they were being ass-clowns.

[shablala]

It depends. Your loot is your loot unless you make a deal to the contrary. If you join a group under a deal where some piece of loot goes to some particular person, then you made that deal and should stick to it.

By the same token, if you roll for something under the pretense that you can't roll for someone else, then you should stick to that as well.

In this case, the sneaking around shows that the players involved knew the deal and were conspiring to commit fraud. Circumstantial, but enough to win a civil suit. And way more than enough to win in the court of public opinion.

All of this lawyering is academic though. The bottom line is, they were being ass-clowns.

The defense is found guilty as charged. We the jury sentence them to lifetime on the DNP list, with no chance of parole.