Pricing/claiming discussion

Satyn · Post by **Satyn** » Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:45 pm

I think discussions like this are intresting to read cos then you see new and diffrent idea's etc but I also think that discussions like this make it for raidleaders very hard to run a raid. And it might even hold them back from wanting to lead something.

Aran_Thule · Post by **Aran_Thule** » Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:59 pm

Hemuli wrote:About this claiming thing.. It's ok to claim 1 item from any ml raid aslong it's not ml5 and ml10

I dont see the problem with claiming from ML5, when i did it a spent a week getting groups through the group steps before taking everyone to do 5.9 and 5.10

When i had organised and posted about it i had stated that my intention was to claim the RoSO if it dropped (as i needed it for template)
It dropped and i claimed, but even though i had posted on the forum a week before and explained to the /bg when we started that raid i still had people complaining.

As for ML10 if its the end of a ML run i dont see why they cant say they want to claim something be it weapon, armour set ect.
After all the effort they have put in i wouldnt complain, but then again thats just my view.

As always its a case of if you disagree with the rules dont go.

Cryn · Post by **Cryn** » Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:28 pm

Finolin wrote:You say that as though it's a bad thing? I personally think that's the fairest way, in that items are then either used by the person who wins the roll, or sold by them to someone who does.

If I bring a bard I rarely play on a raid and win a flute that I will therefore hardly ever use, how is that better than a hero winning the same item and selling it? Using "need" to determine if someone should be able to win an item is hugely subjective, as everyone can define "need" in their own way. And on a practical level, it's also largely unverifiable - I have alts that can use nearly every high value items that could possibly drop. But instead of having everyone justify how they would use an item, on my ML10 farming raids everyone is encouraged to roll for everything. Either they use an item directly on one of their characters or they can sell it to buy something they can use.

As for everyone becoming an accountant or a merchant - everyone is already both an accountant and a merchant. Items have values in an open market, and are fungible* with regards to platinum and therefore other items. In small groups of people who all know each other, sometimes we choose to act otherwise because under those circumstances there are things that are more important and it all works out in the end. But at a realm level, if you are on a raid, as far as I'm concerned you have earned the right to roll for any item that's up for lotto.

Finally, this is how I think loot should be split, and it is how I run my raids. I don't expect to convince someone who thinks differently. However, when I go on raids where leaders have different philosophies with regard to loot splits, I respect them (or I choose not to participate). Plac was very clear about claiming an item, and I believe he has a "free for all" loot split policy which implies anyone is free to sell anything they win. If people don't like that, there are certainly other raids going.

And yes, I believe Sharkith and I are thinking along the same lines, so apologies if I'm repeating anything he's already stated.

* fungible means that you are welcome to give any high value items to Fung, one of my animists.

I do think everyone rolling for everything is a bad thing. That is the epitome of greed and leaves no room for people to be generous. This might sound like wishy washy claptrap to some people (it kinda does to myself when I SAY it) but I'm a firm believer that being nice is contagious. In a society (or group of people) where people are visibly displaying the better aspects of being human, others feel positive and are more inclined to do it too.

The flipside of this is that if your system leaves no room for displays of kindness, everyone starts seeing everyone else a rival, and from that point people are more inclined to treat people with hostility.

Randoming for everything is definitely an absolutely fair system. It is also an absolutely blind system, and therefore can be unnecessarily harsh. A system that relies on judgement and trust can be very fair whilst allowing room for compassion for the needy. The only way the latter system can perpetuate is if it remains fair, so it is quite self-regulating.

When I said we all become merchants and accountants, I meant we all begin to think like them. Sure, we all sell items in game under almost any system, but for many of us it is not a money-making venture. A lot of us don't care how many plats we have. If you make plat accumulation the ONLY source of items, then everyone becomes fixed on money. Money is an abstract, so once again we would be removing the human side of things.

Don't get me wrong, I am not suggesting my method of lootsplit is the only one. It may not be suited to every raid or every leader. I was mainly posting it in response to people saying that a "need before greed" system cannot work.

Shark, if your issue boils down to "how do we define need" as it seems to, then my answer is people are on their honour to use their best judgement. People DO know when they are being greedy and when put on their honour, I have found most people will attempt to avoid letting greed rule their decisions.

Ankh Morpork · Post by **Ankh Morpork** » Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:39 pm

Dunno about you guys, but the /random 1000 - highest pics first is imo really anoying as it reduce your chance to win anything good if your unlucky on the roll. Sure it increse the loot split time greatly but I personally prefer the 1 item at the time version.

The "Need before Greed" is the best system imo, only problem is that people have 10-15 alts atleast so they can ALWAYS say that they actually need an item

but apart from that - it rocks.

I still think it would be better if we paid the raidleader before a raid if he just wanna claim an item to sell. 500-1000g is to me a fair price for it.

/Ankh

Cryn · Post by **Cryn** » Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:52 pm

If you pay a raid leader he moves from being a well-meaning free agent to being your employee (in a sense). Don't think that's a good move

Ankh Morpork · Post by **Ankh Morpork** » Thu Oct 20, 2005 6:53 pm

[quote="Cryn"]If you pay a raid leader he moves from being a well-meaning free agent to being your employee (in a sense). Don't think that's a good move ]

Sure it is!!!! Its not that big difference from claiming an Item!

/Ankh

Finolin · Post by **Finolin** » Thu Oct 20, 2005 7:23 pm

Cryn wrote:Shark, if your issue boils down to "how do we define need" as it seems to, then my answer is people are on their honour to use their best judgement. People DO know when they are being greedy and when put on their honour, I have found most people will attempt to avoid letting greed rule their decisions.

I disagree. I think people know when they are being greedy by their own standards, but there is no agreed upon standard for what constitutes need or greed. One person's need is another person's greed. So if I say I "need" an item for my 10th level 50 that dinged today, that could easily be seen as "greed" by someone who only plays one character (or as perfectly reasonable by someone who has 20 level 50 characters). Anytime you leave things such as this up to an individual's sense of honour, I think you'll find yourself disappointed when your sense of honour isn't the same as that of the person who beat you at the /random.

And to be completely honest, I think a need before greed system would be workable if everyone was as honourable as you are. Where I believe we differ is that you like to think this could or should be the case, and I feel certain that it is not.

But as we've both said, it's the raid leader's decision as to how to run the lotto. I'm quite happy to go on raids with no expectation of loot if it's worthwhile because I like the group, leader, or encounter. But at the same time on my raids I want everyone to roll and to do with the items as they see fit, giving each winner an opportunity to be generous or greedy at their own discretion.

Hemuli · Post by **Hemuli** » Thu Oct 20, 2005 7:26 pm

And aswell, about that claiming thing. Runned many ml raids at mid/exc while played a lot there and if I claimed something from raid I said what im gonna claim and if it doesn't drop I won't claim anything.

Imo that is aswell nice idea etc. Becouse it's a bit funny:

"Are you going to claim something?"
"Yes, I need 1 item from here if it drops I will take it"
"What is that item?"
"......."

Oh yeah pld.

Bugzy · Post by **Bugzy** » Thu Oct 20, 2005 7:31 pm

Finolin wrote:(or as perfectly reasonable by someone who has 20 level 50 characters).

His name is Ankh.

Sharkith · Post by **Sharkith** » Thu Oct 20, 2005 7:42 pm

Cryn wrote: Shark, if your issue boils down to "how do we define need" as it seems to, then my answer is people are on their honour to use their best judgement. People DO know when they are being greedy and when put on their honour, I have found most people will attempt to avoid letting greed rule their decisions.

Yes thats what I am driving at. It is a personal decision to decide when your being greedy and therefore it is a fundamental error to make it a community rule.