People who ninja for their companions

and yeah, if you dont think my post was good enough because I called the jerk a jerk, then take this persons quote as truth because this is what is all about.

companions ARE NOT essential, if you need to gear them 100%, go to the GTN. Don't steal loot drops from other PLAYER characters that can put them to good use.

Rather than get embroiled in a pointless flamewar with you, let's focus on his question rather than his name-calling. This was the question he asked:

Therein lies the crux of the matter. I don't care whether it's fair to roll Need for your alts. It's up to the court of public opinion and beside the point. The problem is that we all have five different companions that have various gear requirements, which means you're entitled to roll Need every time an item drops.

So, is the answer yes, or no?

i vote a big and obvious NO to the above.

It would make it a broken system.

Need is intended by default for actual players only.

I agree, but I was actually expecting an answer from Setanian. Since he says it's ok to need on everything.

I'm finding the return of ninjaing in this game quite nostalgic.

Ninja-looting isn't all that common in this game from what I've seen. The only instances I saw came from playing on the Sith side, as that faction has attracted the largest number of immature players. Like this one *****hole I put onto my blacklist because he rolled need on medium armor even though he was playing a BH.

The whole concept of Need Before Greed or NGB is that if the toon actually there can use the item and it is an upgrade then it is need. If not then it is greed.

That sith assassin is a douche bag for rolling on an item that is NOT for his class. Greed is the way of the douche bag and those that support greed show that they are douche bags as well.


Companions are not a part of your overall character. Otherwise you could use them in Warzones, ops, etc. But you can't. Now granted you can use them in some FP's but in all honesty for that to work well you have already out leveled that FP anyways.

Now IF say it was a H2 quest and both party members were using companions. Then yes logically they could call need for the companions as the companions actually provided some benefit. But then it kinda ties into my very first sentence.

No matter how much people attempt to moralize this away by saying players should always come before companions, the fundamental reality of the loot distribution system remains: Need is there if you're going to use the item, Greed is there if you're going to sell it or otherwise not make use of it as an upgrade.

Companions are an additional set of upgrade slots that are attached to your character. They aren't an alt, they aren't a guild member, they're part of your character. Common sense would dictate that you only bother upgrading the two you use most of the time (some only use one most of the time), but it doesn't remove the reality that every single companion is an upgrade path, and if a particular player decides they want all their companions upgraded, that's their right, and no one has the right to tell them differently, or attempt to exert social pressure to the contrary.

As a result, NBG isn't an optimal system for this particular game. Roll/Pass would remove the drama altogether, but people would still complain about not getting as much gear. Companion loot boxes attached to each boss that use the intelligent loot system quests currently use to generate an upgrade for a companion attached to the player who won the box would be an option, but would only mollify the anti-companion crowd if all loot outside that, in FPs at least, had a class requirement attached to keep people from equipping their companions with it.

Until that comes about however (if it ever does), NBG makes for a system where companions are valid upgrade paths whose acquisitions are subject to the opportunities the players get for loot. People try to make it about what "should" be done, when the reality is there are people who are doing what can be done.

Loot is amoral. So is its distribution system. Attempting to attach moral significance to it is pointless. Attempting to attach moral significance to it in an attempt to force others' behavior is both pathetic and hypocritical, since I'd hazard a guess that the underlying motivation for this particular behavior is to simply improve one's own chances of getting loot by not having their probabilities diluted by others' additional upgrade options via companions.

Yes it is.