People who ninja for their companions

Ahhh, and here we go with the false dichotomies again. I recommend, if you're still in some manner of ongoing education, not ever entering debate as a pursuit. I have a feeling you'd be torn apart and demoralized rather quickly.

You can't objectively point out my position as being either "selfish" or "inefficient". You can't appeal to the morality side of it ("selfish") because morality remains subjective, and also, on a more objective level, because the instant anyone rolls against another player on a piece of gear, they're placing their own needs above that player's, and are thus being, in a textbook literal definition, "selfish". If you've never done this, you can claim altruism and selflessness. But I have a feeling you have rolled against other players for gear, in which case you have then been selfish. It removes any ability you might have had to lambaste someone else for the same behavior. "Don't point out the speck in your neighbor's eye before you remove the plank from yours."

You also can't appeal to the objective notion of efficiency, because a) resources are infinite (removing any application of efficiency principles) and b) you have no objective data with which to back up a claim like that.

Second strike. Care to try for a third?

Here's a suggestion. If you need on gear that your avatar doesn't need, but is useful to your companion, there will be several repercussions.

1). You'll irritate your group
2). If you do it consistently in groups, you will become black listed on the server as a ninja looter by the server community (whether or not you agree with that definition).

The choice is yours, and you can be as bullheaded as you like about it, but you definitely won't make any friends, and will likely sacrifice your chances of playing the multi-player side of this MMO. Due the focus on server specific group play.

Honestly, I'd like to point out that you've approached this from your debate perspective, which is fine, you're obviously a....naturally verbose and argumentative person. But I've been trying to actually communicate to you the motive and reason why people feel this way, and why it truly serves the community better. Yes, it's a matter of opinion. You win. Icant objectively prove it. End of debate.

Now, think about it. The actual human element. The issue. Do you really not think it's greedy? Selfish? Self serving?

You are taking a small gain when someone else could have a large gain.

That is the point.

To ninja is to take an item that you cannot use, did not legitimately earn, or take without allowing other players the chance to win said item. Since companions are part of your overall character, the person who won played his part in the instance, and you had the opportunity to win the item via roll, your situation is not a ninja situation.

O.o

Eldren, I suggest you just keep trying it out. I tend to put people like you on /ignore and then warn guildies to put you on their list, if you repeatedly need in a group for items you don't need.

Your assuming confrontation is necessary to black list. A lot of us don't bother with confrontation, we just hit the ignore button.

Ahhh, and here we go with the false dichotomies again. I recommend, if you're still in some manner of ongoing education, not ever entering debate as a pursuit. I have a feeling you'd be torn apart and demoralized rather quickly.

You can't objectively point out my position as being either "selfish" or "inefficient". You can't appeal to the morality side of it ("selfish") because morality remains subjective, and also, on a more objective level, because the instant anyone rolls against another player on a piece of gear, they're placing their own needs above that player's, and are thus being, in a textbook literal definition, "selfish". If you've never done this, you can claim altruism and selflessness. But I have a feeling you have rolled against other players for gear, in which case you have then been selfish. It removes any ability you might have had to lambaste someone else for the same behavior. "Don't point out the speck in your neighbor's eye before you remove the plank from yours."

You also can't appeal to the objective notion of efficiency, because a) resources are infinite (removing any application of efficiency principles) and b) you have no objective data with which to back up a claim like that.

Second strike. Care to try for a third?

Morality is only subjective to weak people who can't get it through their skulls that we live in a world of interdependence and taking more than your share or not caring at all for your fellow beings is destructive to life as a whole.

And no individual has the right to make a decision of that magnitude.

You're going to have to show me how either are going to happen consistently enough to produce results meaningful and impactful enough to deter a given set of behavior. I mean, earlier in this thread we had someone noting they've been doing an experiment on their healer and rolling Need on everything in group content. They've yet to hear a single complaint, or to experience any meaningful effects of a purported blacklisting.

I'm not saying this is how it ought to be done. I'm pointing it out as a possible and meaningful counterpoint to your argument, however. I can say this: so far in my group content experience, I have rolled Need on items for my companions. Immediate recollections in my admittedly research paper-addled mind point towards this being in an approximately 50/50 split with the number of times I've rolled Need on items for my companions and asked first. The actual hard numbers aren't available to me, as I haven't been keeping hard statistical data on every Flashpoint I've run or instance where, while grouped with someone else, I chose a loot option for a green, blue, purple or orange drop. I've yet to experience any complaints personally, and have on several occasions experienced praise for my performance. Draw from this what you may. Perhaps your experiences in the game have simply been radically different from mine.



The human element is an element I consider valid when properly informed by logic and hard facts. Emotion is not a valid foundation from which to make a decision. Emotion informed by logic is a valid tool, but still not a valid foundation in and of itself. Logic informed by emotion becomes squishy (pardon the vulgarity) and less-reliable.
The degree of gain is inconsequential. A one-point upgrade to a single stat with no upgrades or downgrades to other stats for a piece in the same slot is still an upgrade. On that basis alone, it's viable to roll Need.

I again point out what I've said before: we cooperate with each other in PUGs in order to down bosses. Once the bosses are downed, we stake a claim on the drops from that boss for ourselves. We don't bypass an upgrade for ourselves so someone else can upgrade. Whoever receives the upgrade will benefit the group (if it's for them and not a companion) only so long as the party is together. Once they break up, the only one receiving the benefit is the player who got the item.

It's very different in guilds, yes. It's why guilds aren't an issue for this discussion.