Please, Don't Roll on Items for Another Class in Your Team

This entire thread can be boiled down to this:

Who is entitled to what gear?

The Right answer:

The Player who wins the roll.

Everyone played an equal part in finding the gear, so whether or not it is an improvement for you, that does not entitle you to it's ownership. Does it suck to lose out? Yes. Is it unfair? Not in the slightest, everyone who wanted it had a shot at getting it and you lost. Can you then choose to not Group with them because you're upset? Certainly! Does it make them horrible people? No. They worked just as hard as you did to find that gear, and if you think you had more right to it than they did then THEY are not the selfish ones.

If the sorcerer is yours, then you are greedy, if it is someone else's, then you are bossy. EDIT: if the person with the "Playpet NPC" wanted priority over the sorcerer, rather than an equal chance at the loot, then they would be greedy

i tanked him all the way while you lay there dead from his first rage imma gonna take your loot to spite you.

From my experience NPC was always Non Playable Character, but not in terms of mechanics but actual roleplaying. If you can't roleplay your companion then it's still an NPC with some fixed story designed by creators (GM or BioWare in that example). From mechanical point of view companions aren't typical NPC's and you have some degree of control upon them, making them unique from all the other NPC's. They are very useful, but still I can't consider them NOT being NPC's (more or less controllable and useful).

That's at least my point, but I am roleplayer through and through.

I have a team, comprised of my main character and his companions. Sometimes some of them adventure together and sometimes they go on individual missions like diplomacy or flashpoints to bring back goodies for the group.

It could be arguable that companions are not "non-player characters", because they are characters operated by the player, but are "non player-characters" as they are not THE "player character", but rather part of him or associated with him (they do not get loot independently but must rely on the main "player character" to get geared).

If I was forced to categorise companions as NPC/PC, I'd have to go with PC since I have buttons on my screen which direct her actions. But I think they are actually a third category.

+1 for maturity.

That's perfectly acceptable.

I come from and era of the heyday of MuDs. I was part of the whole initial movement on Imaginary Realms, the birthplace of MuDs and MuDLibs. To this day I am still an arch-wizard on one of the top 5 muds in the world.

The term NPC came from that era. A Non Playing Character, used as a shop vendor or an aggressive/or no-aggressive killable mob (mobile).

The PCC interacts with the NPCs via shopping or killing or whatever other mechanic is inlace. Additionally to that are/were vanity pets. Objects coded to follow the PCC and if coded, aid them in battle.

From a historic point of view, companions are nothing new. We had them way back in the late 80's as player controlled objects which fought at the players side. As a side note, on the MuD I administer, it is deemed a crime to kill a players companion, a bannable offense.

Companions on ToR are much more than what I have spoken of. You the player are given the ability to gear them, to skill them and if it floats your boat, love them.

All of that when taken in a package raises the companion far and above the meagre NPC.

But still, you're role-play and decisions you make within the bounds of that role-play, may be to ignore the companion and lower them to a lower status within the playing environment.

How-ever, that is your choice and not one that can be forced upon others.

Only +1? Come on you can do better than that? It was worth a +5 I thought.

It's good to have an agreement then.

It certainly is

/bow