A nice guy or a jerk?

[Spalding]

Good and bad...
Good because you're giving it to someone that needs it, almost like they get to roll twice.
Also lessens the chance of someone who doesn't need to, to get it.
Bad because there are other people rolling against it and them not getting it because they essentially don't need it as much as the person who you believed needed it more.
Take into account that most of the people there are for gear - for progression. If player X acquired that item, it may give his raid group the winning edge they needed in order to down a boss before enrage timer.. etc!

[snegro]

I'd call it a desperate cry for attention.

[Buckey407]

I say its a nice thing. As you said, most people just roll cause they can and leave. But if YOU win it, you are able to give the piece to someone in need, which wouldn't happen if Johny leave-early rolls need just because he can.

[Deleted]

I don't see how this is a dick move?

He just gave it to the one who would've won anyway...

It's not "nice guy" nor "jerk", it doesn't really make a difference .p

[SmokesTooMuch]

In my opinion, anyone who doesn't like the idea behind this are the ones right-clicking the boss and going for a smoke. I give loot to people all the time.

[Ariss]

Jerk. Who are you to decide?

[Deleted]

Kind of both really.

For rolls where there was a jerk who rolled just because he could and then he would sell it on or even leave it on the boss then it was a nice guy move, because it would then go to a person who needed it instead.

But for rolls where only people who wanted it were rolling for it then its just drawing out the looting and causing unneeded grief to the other rollers who then think that you want to be the 'lootmaster'

[Volbian]

Neither. If you have the ability to Need and win, what you do with the loot is your choice. I have mostly all 397+ gear, and now that Blizzard is deciding to nerf Normal and Heroics, it really doesnt matter anymore. If they want to make all players equal (casuals,raiders,hardcore), there's really no sense in these 3 different tiers of raiding.

So as long as your Need button is light up, Go for it, even if you have better. You deserve something for your time. What you do, if you win, is yours choice. Sell,Trade, or give it away to someone deserving, or whatever. Its not like your ever gonna see them again anyways.

[Hexotic]

if blizzards system tells you that you can roll need on an item and you do, and you win, you did nothing wrong.

[George]

If you were a nice guy or a jerk... well, that is subjective. I just know you didn't do anything wrong, you played within the rules of the game.

[davesurfer]

I'd call it a desperate cry for attention.

Yep this is my take. Let's see: Roll on gear he/she doesn't need, then give it to the person who would have won the roll, and now he feels good about himself/herself? Seems like someone needs attention in RL

As others said no rules were broken, but that wasn't the question now was it?

[zyx]

Yep this is my take. Let's see: Roll on gear he/she doesn't need, then give it to the person who would have won the roll, and now he feels good about himself/herself? Seems like someone needs attention in RL

You forgot the point. The point is he rolls on gear so other people who has no need for it doesn't get it.

In a perfect world where you would/could only roll need on an item if you legitimately need the item, then yes what the OP does would be useless. But have you never seen in a raid where someone needed on gear they didn't need? Or you think that's fine?

[Kalandrios]

I don't think it is a dick move. It isn't like you are MLing gear away, you have as fair of a chance as anyone else to win the gear, and you can do what you please with what you win. There are plenty of people in every LFR that are AFK/barely even playing that have every intention of rolling on gear, so it is nice to know that someone has the intention of giving it to someone that worked for it. Considering the ilvl requirement to get into LFR, no one should be doing less than 20,000 dps under any circumstance, so the people that are doing 10,000 or less clearly weren't playing.

[Jhoff]

In my opinion, anyone who doesn't like the idea behind this are the ones right-clicking the boss and going for a smoke. I give loot to people all the time.

Then your opinion is incorrect. What's the point in doing this? People that need it should press "need", people who don't should press "greed" or "disenchant". I don't agree that it's a smart move to need for others and play loot-god. Let random chance decide it. So someone gets the item for vendoring when you could have used it? Well it's probably gonna drop again, and I am not gonna put a lot into it

[davesurfer]

You forgot the point. The point is he rolls on gear so other people who has no need for it doesn't get it.

In a perfect world where you would/could only roll need on an item if you legitimately need the item, then yes what the OP does would be useless. But have you never seen in a raid where someone needed on gear they didn't need? Or you think that's fine?

And how does he know they need it or not? Many times you may use a piece that is a lower iLvL due to optimal stats. Have you never carried a piece of gear deep into the next tier? Or are we to assume that OP looks at the gear, runs simulations, and determines whether they need it or not? Or is it more likely he looks at iLvL? For example there are cloth gloves that drop, perhaps the person has on set gloves. I am pretty sure OP says they don't need it. But maybe those gloves allow the person to change the 4 pieces set by going with the other 4 pieces and puts on not set gloves. I could be the whole reason the person is there. But OP doesn't know that, now does he?

[QuizTIC]

Jerk move.

[zyx]

And how does he know they need it or not? Many times you may use a piece that is a lower iLvL due to optimal stats. Have you never carried a piece of gear deep into the next tier? Or are we to assume that OP looks at the gear, runs simulations, and determines whether they need it or not? Or is it more likely he looks at iLvL? For example there are cloth gloves that drop, perhaps the person has on set gloves. I am pretty sure OP says they don't need it. But maybe those gloves allow the person to change the 4 pieces set by going with the other 4 pieces and puts on not set gloves. I could be the whole reason the person is there. But OP doesn't know that, now does he?

That would be the only single legitimate flaw in this, with those few cases where it might be a minor upgrade (Like an optimizer gives it 10 points more), but those are rare in my life at least.
I would still say the positive outweighs the negatives against those who need only to vendor it.

[Deleted]

I would tell you exactly what I think of you, only last time I told someone what I thought of them on these forums, and why I got myself a ban. Read between the lines of that statement and you will get your answer.

[zyx]

I would tell you exactly what I think of you, only last time I told someone what I thought of them on these forums, and why I got myself a ban. Read between the lines of that statement and you will get your answer.

You could just try and restrict yourself in your wording and explain further.

[Deleted]

OP has no right to decide who gets what loot based on his Criteria, if he wants to do this then he should make a normal mode raid and appoint himself as Loot master stating the loot rules. However since this is not possible in the LFR system he feels that it is fine to remove the possibility of upgrades going to people that may need them. Regardless if he gives them to the second highest roller or not, it is not how the system is intended to be used.

What if the second highest roller is rolling on an item which gives a different stat-set, or is a side grade that he needs to be able to equip items in the bank, yet the OP looks at his gear and decides to give it to someone else. Not only is he (the OP) playing lootmaster in a raid where there is by design no lootmaster intended, but he is "ninja looting" an item to someone who would not normally have won it and so doing a piss poor job of being master looter.

This is the problem with the players lately, they seem to think that just because they can do something, it gives them the right to be able to do it. Not only after carrying out such an action they then go seeking permission, moral justification and praise from their peers in the gaming community as a whole, seeing themselves as being a modern day robin hood of sorts. However it was not so long back that if this type of action was witnessed in a raid then it would be seen as an act of ninja looting, and the perpetrator would gain a name for themselves on there home realm as someone never to be trusted to be in a position where they are in control of loot distribution.

It is only because they can get away with it due to the unlikely chances of ever being in the same group as another member of the LFR system that remembers them, that they can get away with this type of behaviour. The sooner blizzard introduces account wide ignores and these ignores then stop you from seeing people in the LFR system the better. Of course it will not stop the loot trading, Rolling for others, and other idiotic behaviour that I have witnessed in the system, But it will stop people from being in the same group as them in future.

The main problem is though that in the case of rolling for others and rolling to assign loot as you see fit, there is no way to know its being done as this is usually resolved via whispers, Guild chat, Vent etc. The only way for this to change is for the attitude of the players to change, However I really doubt that this is ever going to happen.