Greed of scrolls,artifacts

Sharkith · Post by **Sharkith** » Wed Sep 28, 2005 4:55 am

Xcerus,

if you were there maybe you can confirm if there was a rule that stated that in the event of a tie the first person to roll would get the scroll? It would be nice to hear from you since you said that no-one here knows since they were not there.

so lets go through what has happened. Anikin rolls a tie for MT 3of3 he misses the scroll because of some rule he was not made aware of. There must have been some debate in the bg which we know nothing about of course - so Anikin goes for the next best thing SOM 3 of 3 knowing he can sell it to help finish his template (which is exactly what he said in /gu). Ok now answer this - does Anikin 'need' the scroll? At that point in time it looks like he does and I can see the reason I can equally see that his claim of need is valid.

Not because he needs to active SOM but because he has other stuff he 'needs'.

In the end he seems to have been bullied into removing it from his CM and we have another public hanging. I am going to contact him in game to ask him what has happened since and I will come back here and report what he has said.

Sharkith

Cryn · Post by **Cryn** » Wed Sep 28, 2005 9:31 am

I'm not gonna say directly about Anikin, what he should or shouldn't do etc, because this seems a complex situation. Also, Anikin has always been trustworthy on the arti hunts.

However, Shark, I do think it would be risky to start the kind of sophistry that leads to people being able to say they "need" a scroll because they need the money. If we go down that road, we are back to everyone rolling for everything. For future reference, anyone on any of my raids must need the scroll to actually use rather than just needing money.

Kallima · Post by **Kallima** » Wed Sep 28, 2005 10:18 am

Personally I favour only rolling to use not to sell. Since I have a large 'family' I also limit mine to only rolling for important stuff for a couple. Most of them get stuff I can hunt solo, buy or that no one else is interested in.

What happened in this case seems an unusual thing. Whenever there has been a tie on the roll, people have rolled again. I've never come across this first to roll rule. If someone had not been told the rule in advance then I can understand them feeling aggrieved. I can also see why someone who really did need the scroll feels aggrieved. Confusion on rules is always likely to cause problems.

I assume that there isn't a post on the forum organising the raid where the raid rules are included or that would have been said already. I'm curious who the raid leader was and if they are sticking to the first to roll rule in the future. I'd like to be aware they have that rule before joining their raids.

Xcerus · Post by **Xcerus** » Wed Sep 28, 2005 2:19 pm

I can confirm that the first person to roll the highscore rule was stated at the beginning of the raid.

Also by needed it was very obvious that what was ment was "intend to use to activate an artifact" not "need to sell for plats so i can get a scroll that i need."
Totally different, - Sharkith on /gu: Any one need battler 3/3 i got 4 on a farm and dont need them.
<responce> /gu yea i need one to sell for cash so i can get a scroll i need more......

Yea I can totally see the result of that conversation being you giving whoever responds the scroll for nothing.

Cryn · Post by **Cryn** » Wed Sep 28, 2005 2:46 pm

Who was the leader of the DV hunt in question, Xcerus?

Mojo · Post by **Mojo** » Wed Sep 28, 2005 2:46 pm

Cryn wrote:Who was the leader of the DV hunt in question, Xcerus?

Mytmaril

Cryn · Post by **Cryn** » Wed Sep 28, 2005 2:57 pm

And Myt hasn't said that the "who rolls first can choose" rule was announced at the start.

I'd be inclined to trust Anikin if he says he saw no such announcement. He's been trustworthy in my dealings with him when items were at stake.

That's a really strange rule anyway. Hardest thing you find on raids is getting people not to role for everything. If you tell them first roller wins, you're pretty much encouraging them to spam /random 100 before even reading the item delve.

Mojo · Post by **Mojo** » Wed Sep 28, 2005 3:07 pm

Cryn wrote:And Myt hasn't said that the "who rolls first can choose" rule was announced at the start.

I don't suppose that matters as the issue here seems to be about re-selling supposedly needed items, not about rolling rules.

Sharkith · Post by **Sharkith** » Wed Sep 28, 2005 4:03 pm

Xcerus wrote:I can confirm that the first person to roll the highscore rule was stated at the beginning of the raid.

Also by needed it was very obvious that what was ment was "intend to use to activate an artifact" not "need to sell for plats so i can get a scroll that i need."
Totally different, - Sharkith on /gu: Any one need battler 3/3 i got 4 on a farm and dont need them.
<responce> /gu yea i need one to sell for cash so i can get a scroll i need more......

Yea I can totally see the result of that conversation being you giving whoever responds the scroll for nothing.

Thanks Xcerus like I said before I will ask Anikin about this. I am glad you recognise that the semantics are crucial this thread started on the premiss that Anikin was greedy but the truth is he was aggrieved by this rule. This does not excuse breaking a raid rule it explains it thats all I am saying. It does not make him greedy - since by all accounts he stated that he 'needed' the cash to finish his template. Which brings me to the problem of need..

Cryn wrote: However, Shark, I do think it would be risky to start the kind of sophistry that leads to people being able to say they "need" a scroll because they need the money. If we go down that road, we are back to everyone rolling for everything. For future reference, anyone on any of my raids must need the scroll to actually use rather than just needing money.

Cryn I really wanted to avoid discussing need here. Just to be clear I have nothing but respect for the 'idea' that people should only roll for what they 'need' but the whole idea is very impractical because you get people with 6 toons 'needing' everything. So the system is already sophistic anyway. Despite yours, mine and anyone else's good intentions.

How many times have you noticed the character hungry person who lives in the game will spam roll for everything because he or she can claim they need it. I have sat back in a lot of raids and watched just this happen what seemed to be very suspicious rolling - there's a SoM 3 of 3 'hey I need that for my vamp'. Theres a MT 3 of 3 and the very same person spamming 'Hey I need that for my BM' or Love story 3 of 3 "I have a druid I need that too" and so on. This is not a hypothetical example either I have seen it several times and it always leaves a bad taste in ones mouth. Not because I could have rolled for example but because the claim of need is not as genuine as it seems.

'Need' is one of those funny words. It looks like it refers to something 'essential' something you cannot live without but in fact all we see are 'claims of need'. Like I said above once more the semantics are crucial. I have went on a number of ML raids where this was the rule and I found the tension very tangible during those loot splits - it caused lots of disputes because to be frank it is so easy to abuse the term. Trust me I wish things were different but when it comes to claims of need people always suspect dishonesty - otherwise why in this instance did they go and check Anikin's CM ? How many other threads have been started here because of similar suspicions?

I hate to say it but the most 'honest' raids I have been on have been the ones where it was basically a free for all lotto or even those mad raids by that dude from Excal who ran all the way through the Sobekite enternal temple in like and hour and a half. There have been none of the semantics of need none of the suspicion that what the person is rolling for is what that person 'needs'. most of all there have been NO THREADS ON PRYD ABOUT GREED AND NEED.

Still its done now and I will chat with Anikin to see how he feels about it. I am just sorry that this thread started with someone calling someone greedy and now we discover that just liek the resat of us in ToA he is needy and the whole thing is much mroe complicated than it seems.

kind regards

Sharkith

Xcerus · Post by **Xcerus** » Wed Sep 28, 2005 6:31 pm

I believe anikin's cm was checked because Myt was intending to buy rs 3/3 and noticed that it was infact on Anikin's cm not through intentional suspision However that is somthing you will have to ask Myt.