Selecting need for loot

If you wish to call it "renegotiation" of rules, go ahead. I choose it call it lessening the chance for drama.

But then, some people feel their opinion is the ONLY valid opinion, and anyone who does not share their opinion is on some "high horse". Those people usually think it is up to everyone else to meet their standards, and that any fault arising from things not going as they think they should falls on someone else and not them.

Well it only took 100 pages, but you seem to have run out of valid arguements. You response is simply "no YOU are".

100 pages with easily the majority, including dev quote, simply stating that asking before needing for a comp. An easy and reasonable system. Why you insist that it is unreasonable I guess we will never truely know.

You talk about meeting standards and forcing opinions. The vast majority agree, yet the few who disagree and do not like the consequences want to force the rest to validate their opinion. Try seeing both sides.

Ratajack, a social convention is the default, expected behavior. That's why it's called a social convention, because it's conventional.

You don't have to ask people to conform to conventional modes of behavior. It's expected that they will.

The burden of communication is on the person who wants to do things differently. Want to cut ahead of me in line? Ask. Don't expect me to be okay with you just doing it.

I thought the fact that I roll greed for my companion and need for my character was a pretty good indicator that I saw both sides. Maybe you should take your own advice instead of hiding behind the defense of "I'm in the majority".

I'd love to see how you react if someone cuts in front of you in line. I'm betting that like most people who find themselves in that situation, you would be upset, but probably not even say a word. I really doubt that you react in real life anywhere near as vehemently as in game. That might have something to do with the anonymity of the internet.

If I'm wrong and you do take matters into your own hands in that situation, I would not be surprised to find you explaining yourself to the authorities on a regular basis. How does that "he violated social convention" line work for you in that case?

Most people aren't rude enough to cut in line without asking first, either.

Nice little sidestep there.

Wait, what is ratajack's point? Right now it just seems like he replies saying "what if x..." but I don't understand what he is trying to get across. That needing for companion loot is okay?

@Ratajack,

Yesterday, a couple of people posted how they've needed for Companions, but announced their intention to do so at the beginning of the run or right before doing it. The responses to their post were favorable.

It seems this is the sanest resolution to this problem.

The argument you make that the rest of us should also announce loot rules at the beginning of EVERY run is silly. Even if someone took your advice to heart and started doing that, it's only going to take a few runs of everybody else saying "d'oh we know" before they stop.

If someone is new to the game, nobody should be rude to them. Simply explain that most people only Need on main toon upgrades, and if they want to Need for another reason, just tell the group first.

If somebody already is aware of this approach to handling loot, and they see some loot they want for their companion and wish to Need on it, they just ask first.

This is such a simple, easy, clean, logical approach to this situation. People will get along better in-game, groups will go smoothly, it's just a good thing.

If someone has a different viewpoint, i.e. not only should they Need for anything they want, but they don't have to ask first, such people have to recognize that it is considered rude behavior.

Isn't it just this simple?

It seems simple to you and me. The truth is that nor everyone sees things the same way you do , the same way I do or the same way johnny does. That is why communication and not assuming everyone is on the same page is so important. It's easy to say that it's up to the "other guy" to make his intentions known, but much more difficult to face up to the fact that we could have done something differently and avoided the drama.