Scout Roll: Can roll for others?

[Rivera]

This really has all the ingredients for an RNF thread now.

Move please.

[Freakish]

When is scout?

[ErlickBachman]

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

Didn't think this was the case but wanted to clarify.

Today Aikons from AM won the roll and turned in tools, but let Sovs from AM (who rolled and lost) loot the gear.

From my understanding, the winner of the roll turns in tools and loots gear. The fact you rolled is your agreement to the player-made agreement. Am I wrong in understanding how this works?

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

Roll is just for turn in (needs tools) / "ownership" of spawned mob, that person can then decide whatever to do with loot including looting, giving, or even destroying if thats what they really want in life.

The fact that this is how it is is exactly why the roll format is shit. What I've been saying all along.

[loramin]

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

The fact that this is how it is is exactly why the roll format is shit. What I've been saying all along.

Here's the thing: there's the server we want, and the server we have. If I phrased a poll the right way I'm willing to bet 10k plat I could get a majority to say that they (like me) want a server that goes to PoP ... but it wouldn't matter, because the devs will never even go to Luclin.

Same deal here: many people want a fair GM-enforced mechanism that prioritizes the people who most deserve the spawn to get it. That's a great idea, and I fully support the spirit in which my awesome guild mate Glitter proposed it ... but it can't happen because the staff won't go for it (if only because they are 100% volunteers and are busy enough without having to add more work for themselves).

Because of this, any agreement whatsoever has to be opt-in: whether we like it or not that's how this server works. This is why even the roll agreement is tentative: if assholes (not naming any names) don't agree and want to have a click-fight, they can.

However, as I pointed out in the other thread, there's one other piece here, and that's the fact that the players involved also "opt-in" to helping whoever wins the roll with their fight. Now if that player isn't doing the fight for themselves, all those other players may not want to help them, and they have a 100% legitimate right not to do so.

TLDR: Here's what I suggest. Leave the roll itself as is, not necessarily because it's what anyone wants, but because we can all agree that it's better than a click fest (and we can't agree on anything else). But when it comes time to fight after, everyone helping should demand that the roll winner say who they're doing it for. If they lie and people help them they've violated the server rule on defrauding. But if they are doing it for themselves they get to see the great spirit of this server with free help from kind people.

I'm not saying it's the best possible option, but it seems like the best possible option for our server, with it's limits.

[ErlickBachman]

I feel like I needed to break down your post one-by-one, and offer rebuttals. So here we go:

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

many people want a fair GM-enforced mechanism that prioritizes the people who most deserve the spawn to get it.

Will never happen because there is no way to truly prioritize "who most deserve."

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

Because of this, any agreement whatsoever has to be opt-in: whether we like it or not that's how this server works. This is why even the roll agreement is tentative: if assholes (not naming any names) don't agree and want to have a click-fight, they can.

These "assholes" are people who keep the spirit of classic alive, which is the key founding element of this server.

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

However, as I pointed out in the other thread, there's one other piece here, and that's the fact that the players involved also "opt-in" to helping whoever wins the roll with their fight.

And what stops this from happening during the classic click-fest? Besides the people who feel like they're entitled to loot because they can't EQ as well as other players.

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

Now if that player isn't doing the fight for themselves, all those other players may not want to help them, and they have a 100% legitimate right not to do so.

There is no definite way to figure out whether or not someone is doing the fight for themselves. So this point is about as sharp as a spoon.

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

TLDR: Here's what I suggest. Leave the roll itself as is, not necessarily because it's what anyone wants, but because we can all agree that it's better than a click fest (and we can't agree on anything else). But when it comes time to fight after, everyone helping should demand that the roll winner say who they're doing it for. If they lie and people help them they've violated the server rule on defrauding. But if they are doing it for themselves they get to see the great spirit of this server with free help from kind people.

If you wanted a roll rule, then it should be only ONE roll per GUILD. This was a suggestion by a dude a while back at Scout that didn't make much sense to me at the time, however, based on OP's complaint (amongst other compliants, similar, from other players), this is probably the most logical player agreement that could be made. I say this, because it prevents Asshole Soandso and his band of 10 to 30 dingleberries from tipping the scale in their favor. It would make a fair chance across the board, and people could still assist in the fight. And at that point, if a guild wanted to decide who the loot would go to, they could without other people being salty about it.

Buuuuuuuut, people on this server don't understand logic, so it'll never happen. Therefore, I stay in favor of the click-a-thon.

[loramin]

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

There is no definite way to figure out whether or not someone is doing the fight for themselves. So this point is about as sharp as a spoon.

But there is, and it doesn't require any new rules to implement. Let me walk you through it:

Bob: I won the roll
Fred: Congrats! I will help you if you are doing this for yourself; are you?
Bob: Yes

Bob: *wins fight with Fred's help, let's Chris loot the corpse.*

Fred /petition Bob just violated server rule 4.9

Originally Posted by 4. Global Server Rules

4.9. You may not defraud other players.
Fraud is defined as falsely representing one's intentions to make a gain at another's expense.

[Maner]

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

But there is, and it doesn't require any new rules to implement. Let me walk you through it:

Bob: I won the roll
Fred: Congrats! I will help you if you are doing this for yourself; are you?
Bob: Yes

Bob: *wins fight with Fred's help, let's Chris loot the corpse.*

Fred /petition Bob just violated server rule 4.9

But how do you know Fred actually looted it without petitioning and having the GMs look into it?

[ErlickBachman]

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

But there is, and it doesn't require any new rules to implement. Let me walk you through it:

Bob: I won the roll
Fred: Congrats! I will help you if you are doing this for yourself; are you?
Bob: Yes

Bob: *wins fight with Fred's help, let's Chris loot the corpse.*

Fred /petition Bob just violated server rule 4.9

So your solution to Scout is to require the GMs, who created and assist this server out of the kindness of their hearts, to babysit more than what they already do now? Pretty sure Rogean & Co. don't want to, nor do they truly give a shit about Scout Charisa and the dramatic bullshit it carries. Which is why its been a click FTE mob since the beginning, as it was on live EQ some nearly 17 years ago.

[Check12345]

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

I feel like I needed to break down your post one-by-one, and offer rebuttals. So here we go:



Will never happen because there is no way to truly prioritize "who most deserve."



These "assholes" are people who keep the spirit of classic alive, which is the key founding element of this server.



And what stops this from happening during the classic click-fest? Besides the people who feel like they're entitled to loot because they can't EQ as well as other players.



There is no definite way to figure out whether or not someone is doing the fight for themselves. So this point is about as sharp as a spoon.




If you wanted a roll rule, then it should be only ONE roll per GUILD. This was a suggestion by a dude a while back at Scout that didn't make much sense to me at the time, however, based on OP's complaint (amongst other compliants, similar, from other players), this is probably the most logical player agreement that could be made. I say this, because it prevents Asshole Soandso and his band of 10 to 30 dingleberries from tipping the scale in their favor. It would make a fair chance across the board, and people could still assist in the fight. And at that point, if a guild wanted to decide who the loot would go to, they could without other people being salty about it.

Buuuuuuuut, people on this server don't understand logic, so it'll never happen. Therefore, I stay in favor of the click-a-thon.

what

[ErlickBachman]

Originally Posted by Check12345 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

what

You don't quote so well. lol