Quote:
Originally Posted by YendorLootmonkey
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
And so is the group, in terms of "Need Before Greed".
Exactly. But that suddenly wasn't good enough for the group. Suddenly, the "NBG" got further refined to melees only without the druid knowing.
If the druid had known the group's definition of "need" was melees only up front, a) he probably wouldn't have rolled, creating this situation in the first place, and b) he could have decided at that point that the group wasn't for him. In which case, as someone said above, good luck getting any healers to join in your PUG if they have zero chance at rolling on the rare droppable item that they can sell for something they could use.
The fundamental issue is that "need" is subjectively defined. The druid genuinely felt he "needed" the ring. Who are we to judge on that? Maybe he needs the STR for encumberance issues. Maybe he needs the 10 AC for some damage mitigation while he's playing ghetto CC by rootparking or to take a few hits before an evac, I don't know. And we don't know either.
Hence the problem with "NBG" rolls in pickup groups...
|
I get your point, and it'd hold water in a lot of NBG debates, and it's a good reason why NBG shouldn't generally be used. But this isn't one of those situations. This is a druid calling 'need' on a 10ac, +7str ring. It's horseshit, and everyone in the group knew it. Limiting that ring to melees for NBG isn't some arbitrary distinction. It'd be like limiting GEBs to casters. I'm sure a paladin could un-equip his boots and claim he needs the 5ac and 9 wisdom upgrade, but we all know that that's not a legitimate example of NBG. There really isn't any ambiguity in this case, or the GEBs example.
There is ambiguity as to who really 'needs' certain items. This isn't one of them.