Quote:
Originally Posted by Daldolma
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
It doesn't matter. The logic of doing NBG isn't the debate here. The group had previously established the fact that they would NBG the ring. It was a static condition of the group.
If you're going to defend a druid rolling need on a 10ac, +7 strength ring, I guess that's a matter of opinion. I don't see it. I think it's exceptionally greedy, I'd never do it, and I'd 100% agree with Zoolex if I was in the group when this happened. And as it turns out, the rest of the group does seem to agree with Zoolex. So I guess there's that.
|
Well I agree that the logic of NBG isn't up for debate. Though one could argue the point that perhaps the group wasn't NBG given his statement of "if you want GER roll". But supposing that it was a NBG group the argument is whether the druid has claim to "need". Statistically the rings were probably worse for the tank or negligible than what he had and they at least equal to negligible for the druid. So why not claim need.
I Don't see how a group member investing time into a group gets the tag "greedy" when wanting a fair shot at a valuable item which he worked for as equally as the tank did. While the Tank is not greedy for wanting outright loot privileges.