Selecting need for loot

In that situation an equal chance at the loot would be hitting NEED since the vanguard tank had already hit need. Telling the scoundrel that he cannot need is telling the scoundrel that he has no right to that piece of loot. Therefore, people ARE being told that they have no right to loot that they helped to produce and to claim otherwise is an outright lie.

The only person looking foolish here is you.

Foolish and argumentative.

A very mature response.

Trying to sound smart by stating a logical fallacy? Lol.

Social taboos aren't about "truth". They're about customs. There's no truth to deny here. It's quite obvious that rolling need for companion loot is considered, by most in the MMO community (certainly the most in this thread) is bad form. That's not a false truth. That is really what will happen.

You have your opinion of what is right as do I. That doesn't change the fact that your view is in the minority and you will probably get ostracized and kicked from groups for continuing that behavior.

Maybe you should spend a little more time understanding what is your trying to shove off as intellectual clout before you try using it as a weapon.

Rofl... so bad.

Argumentative perhaps, but there's certainly enough foolishness to go around.

Every time I criticize the status quo I get half a dozen people jumping down my throat screaming like a bunch of banshees and howling about how I'm an awful person. Not once do they stop to acknowledge the possibility(and actuality) that I abide by the community conventions in-game entirely, but would simply like to discuss the flaws of said conventions outside of the game itself.

The fact that I disagree does not make me a ninja-looter or whatever other boogieman you all have conjured up in your minds.

this is neither an argument nor a proposition. So that nice latin phrase bears no relevance to the topic at hand.
An example of argumentum ad populum would be "why is nudity offensive?" "Because most people are offended by it!!"

The fact is that the social convention means that most people would expect you to select need only for your character (unless it has specifically been stated otherwise). Like it or not - that is what it is.

So since most people expect you to behave a certain way, and knowing full well that others expect you to behave a certain way - you knowingly go against the social conversion (without warning) with the express intention of depriving others of what would have been a fair chance at the loot had you conformed to the social convention.

People who want to need for any other purpose can always ask the rest of the group if they find it acceptable to do so. But when they intentionally choose NOT to ask, but instead just take it for themselves by pressing need, then they are just selfish people taking what they want because they can - no different from the burglar who enters your house.

It is about courtesy, etiquette and basic respect for other people. Nothing less.

The thing is, it's being presented as unassailably correct. That "this is the best way to do it". The justification for that position that i keep hearing is "because that's how everyone else does it, so it must be correct". If that isn't an appeal to the majority, then I don't know what is.

No, equal chance happened before the loot dropped. This is where you're not seeing it clearly.

Say there are 10 quarters and you and I are going to flip the coins one at a time and see who gets them. If it's heads, then I get the quarter. If it's tails, you get the quarter. If I win the first 9 quarters, you seem to feel that you should get the last one, regardless of the pre-set rules. You also seem to think that even though it came up heads on the first quarter, that now we should roll to see who gets it.

So, think of the quarters as loot drop. There's 10 of them in an instance (this is an example so say there are 10 bosses). I'm a Marauder (Heads) and you're a healing Merc (Tails). The standing social standard of etiquette dictates that I get marauder drops (Medium Armor with dps Str stats) and you get healing merc drops (Heavy Aim armor with healing stats). The boss is killed (the coin is being flipped) and the loot comes up as a Medium Armor with DPS Str stats (it landed heads). That's where your "chance" occurs. But you seem to want to roll off again as if the first "chance" never occurred.

See the problem? You're completely forgetting the equal chance occurred BEFORE the loot was identified.

As I said before, sure, you are not exploiting anything in this game by rolling need. Even if the group AGREED to the social taboos in writing in the party chat beforehand, you are not getting banned for rolling NEED. That's exactly like a guildmate taking all the stuff from the gbank and gquitting. That's part of the rules that it's not in the rules. But it is in the social rules of etiquette that you're breaking.

Do you get it yet?

Say... wasn't this you?


Needing on loot indiscriminately reduces conflict in your part of the world, you say? How is that working for you?

It is assumed everyone knows. If they prove to not know then...
let me guess what you are going to say... "It should have been agreed upon before the start of the run." Right? no... Expectations exist... Just like when a person joins your group there is no rule that they have to tank, heal or DPS but you expect your 'tank' 'healer' and 'dps' to perform in those roles. Or are you advocating that those rules be discussed before hand too? Should you also go over AFK time limits? disconnects? You tread a dangerous ground by saying "Anything not explicitly decided upon at the start of a FP by the group as a whole is up to the individual to decide for themselves. And any actions by the group to punish any person in the group for doing whatever they want regarding the non explicitly decided upon rules, is not right."