People who ninja for their companions

Also, with all due respect, there's really absolutely no reason to assume it would go to "need" for everything. It's pretty obvious it wouldn't. This type of argument is used constantly to stop progress out in the real world. Not saying that's what you're trying to do, just saying the assertion's really not accurate. I know it won't be true of me.

While I respect your opinion, I have to disagree. Personally I don't care if someone needs on an item for their companion. Unless there is a discussion about the loot rules before hand, why not? I've had people role need for their companion and win something that I could have used. Was I bummed? Sure but its a game and I got over it really quickly. for most people, myself included, companions are an integral part of the game. They are not a pet or vanity item and we need to keep them equipped. System is working completely as intended. Players are the issue here.

The only solutions I see for both sides of this debate are:
1. Discuss loot rules before you go killing things. I don't know what the policy of BW is, but most games will discipline those that go against the stated group rules as long as the rules are clear. Even if BW doesn't at least you would know what you are getting in for. If you don't like someone needing on an item for a companion you could quit group.

2. Get rid of the need v. greed all together and just have some type of random giveout of gear. Everyone has an equal chance of getting it regardless of what they can or cannot equip.


Really though, everyone should just discuss with their group the loot rules. It makes life easier and stops all of these silly accusations of ninjas. And yes I said silly, people are over using the word and using it in the wrong context.

I agree.

Personally, I think that it works fairly well in a small closed system (guilds, close friends, that sort of thing) but outside of that, it causes problems.

It would be foolish of me to really argue about whether "bound" is a good mechanic--I think the reasons for it are obvious and irrefutable. Still, your ideal system paints a pretty picture, and we should go back and think about it for at least a second.

I recently had a problem in a flashpoint where someone rolled Need on an item only I could use, because they thought they could use it. Honest mistake. He even tried to give it to me afterward, but couldn't because it was bound. It gave me an idea.

What if loot in flashpoints were to only become bound when you leave the instance?

I'm pretty sure all the highly sought-after loot drops inside instances (please correct me if I'm wrong), so wouldn't that alleviate at least some of the problems?

personally, I think this is the only real way to clear up loot drama...

but the idea of going in and winning loot is pretty ingrained in the mmo culture; it may be detrimental to the game to try and remove it.

fwiw, I agree that bound items are a terrible mechanic.

It's just a lazy way for the developers to get you on the hamster wheel.

Personally, I loved the idea in EQ that I could buy a gnome mask (one of the rarest items in the game, since it was from sleepers tomb and stopped dropping once the sleeper was awakened) if I could just find someone willing to sell it.

This thread is yet another reason I prefer to solo. You simply cannot control other people, and it's just going to end badly if you try. No amount of whining will change that.

Firstly, I agree the reasons for binding are obvious, but I think they're far from irrefutable. I can admit it helps in some pretty obvious ways, but overall, I think Binding has done more harm than good to MMOs. There are sacrifices people never think about in regards to these mechanics. I LOVED it before binding became the MMO norm.

But you're right, that's a different debate.

That said, In EQ2, when you win an item, you have a set amount of time to give it away before it's permanently bound to you. I think that's a decent compromise, although I preferred it when it didn't exist.

So, you'll be happy to group with 3 other players who roll NEED on every item that pops up? That's basically what you just said. Then why not just make it a NEED/PASS system

Then I adjust how I play to fit their expectations. I give them the freedom to roll on everything. If they decide to do so, then they are telling me that I have to do so as well if I want a shot at getting any loot.

The problem you think exists doesn't exist in the scenario you just described.