Revised Angry Goblin Player Made Agreement

[Jontheripper]

2 negative options, one positive option = absolute garbage poll and cannot be used for anything except on how not to create a poll.

[Croco]

Unfortunately the extremely vocal minority will never let this become a thing and the vast majority of people who would be in favor of and benefit from an agreement like this will never see this post.

[enjchanter]

everyone loves uninstanced content and competition till they lose a roll one too many times

[BarbaricSheep]

You guys do realize that it doesn't say anywhere in the proposal what you can or can't do with your ring once you have completed the quest right? You would still be able to MQ your ring if you wanted to...

[Jomar]

Originally Posted by BarbaricSheep [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You guys do realize that it doesn't say anywhere in the proposal what you can or can't do with your ring once you have completed the quest right? You would still be able to MQ your ring if you wanted to...

That's fine if the "Players may only win the roll once per character." were enforced, as either way they only get the one win. Ring isn't a BiS item (though it's obv very good for many classes), so makes sense for those that don't need it to be able to sell/allow someone else to skip the rolls.

The proposed agreement looks pretty reasonable for the intent, but a support staff rep does need to sign off on it too or else it's kind of pointless. Again, the current agreement works for all parties (aside from being collectively a monstrous waste of time), but the proposed agreement will just be a high-turnout shitshow if there are no repercussions for breaking the terms.

[SantagarBrax]

Originally Posted by Jomar [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

That's fine if the "Players may only win the roll once per character." were enforced, as either way they only get the one win. Ring isn't a BiS item (though it's obv very good for many classes), so makes sense for those that don't need it to be able to sell/allow someone else to skip the rolls.

The proposed agreement looks pretty reasonable for the intent, but a support staff rep does need to sign off on it too or else it's kind of pointless. Again, the current agreement works for all parties (aside from being collectively a monstrous waste of time), but the proposed agreement will just be a high-turnout shitshow if there are no repercussions for breaking the terms.

If agreed upon by the player base and staff, it would become part of the PnP and any violations would fall under that. There would be teeth to this punishment for those that wish to attempt to subvert the agreement.

@Everyone - Keep Voting!

[Samoht]

lol @ this con artist

bought and sold his ring MQ and is getting angry that he can't get angry

now nobody should get angry because he's angry

[SantagarBrax]

@Samoht

I see you do not possess the capability, composure, nor maturity to contribute to this topic and will no longer engage you to feed your ego.

Have a nice day.

[Samoht]

Originally Posted by SantagarBrax [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

@Samoht

I see you do not possess the capability, composure, nor maturity to contribute to this topic and will no longer engage you to feed your ego.

Have a nice day.

You cannot address the concerns. What happened to the ring you received when you bought your SWC MQ? Did you sell it? Or did the account already have SWC when you bought it so you don't know? Why do you deserve a second angry goblin ring when nobody else does? This request is obviously self-serving and greedy.

[xdrcfrx]

biggest issue with this setup will be tracking the time of death. I think the variable spawn makes it hard to have a roll on window opening. One person fails to update the time of death, and then no one but that person knows the actual window for the next one. How will you deal with people showing up after the roll has taken place claiming to be on time for the window opening?