So, appearantly I got added to a 'list'

[Zumi]

I never join groups where the leader reserves gear for themselves. I am sure there are a lot more people who don't say anything they just don't join your group. If you ever wonder why your group is filling up slow its probably because you reserve gear for yourself and a lot of people just won't join groups like that.

[Eidolon]

I never join groups where the leader reserves gear for themselves. I am sure there are a lot more people who don't say anything they just don't join your group. If you ever wonder why your group is filling up slow its probably because you reserve gear for yourself and a lot of people just won't join groups like that.

Yeap! I'm ok with this, and I do much the same. 9/10 times, I'll usually just run a G>N party, and like I said - claim the item for myself as the party lead so that I have it already. The benefit of G>N is usually that I can switch to whatever class is needed x3

Still, this kind of unnerves me a bit. It's b asically saying, 'you'll play the way I want you to - or else!', but I guess I kind of agree with the other posters. These probably aren't the kinds of people I want to work with.

[Lunavi]

I never join groups where the leader reserves gear for themselves. I am sure there are a lot more people who don't say anything they just don't join your group. If you ever wonder why your group is filling up slow its probably because you reserve gear for yourself and a lot of people just won't join groups like that.

Personally I join groups like that if the player is of the same role as me and I can have the other stuff if it drops.

[Traek]

I never join groups where the leader reserves gear for themselves. I am sure there are a lot more people who don't say anything they just don't join your group. If you ever wonder why your group is filling up slow its probably because you reserve gear for yourself and a lot of people just won't join groups like that.

^ This.

More of these type of groups keep cropping up lately, and just has me shaking my head. Greed party locks especially. "Everyone come follow the rules, except myself, because I'm special and get ??? item." The guy should have just blacklisted and added to his silly list and moved on though. /telling and arguing was just straight drama lamaing.

The best way to *fairly* create a *lock party* would be to let every person lock one item for themselves, and either put that in the title, or macro the list for someone joining to see, with a descriptor in the title. *One item lock per person, everything else greed* type thing.

It is your party though OP, I just hope people stop joining and inadvertently supporting those type of parties.

You are free to make a PF but realize people will do what they want in a pick-up-group setting. Everyone has an equal right to the loot they want. In a FC, the consequence is being kicked and possibly blackballed from other allied FCs. In a PUG? It's silly to expect people to fear consequences.

While I don't agree with the way most lock parties are set up, this attitude is just as bad if not worse. There is agreed upon rules when joining any PF, whether it be gear levels, experience levels, or general loot rules. Just because you don't agree with them, doesn't mean you join and dick around with the 7 other people who joined expecting something from a run. The GMs made it clear they can and will act on these things, and they should. If you don't agree with the loot rules, don't join. Simple.

[Issac]

While I don't agree with the way most lock parties are set up, this attitude is just as bad if not worse. There is agreed upon rules when joining any PF, whether it be gear levels, experience levels, or general loot rules. Just because you don't agree with them, doesn't mean you join and dick around with the 7 other people who joined expecting something from a run. The GMs made it clear they can and will act on these things, and they should. If you don't agree with the loot rules, don't join. Simple.

As I have said, I wouldn't allow myself into an actionable situation to defy anyone's self-entitled rules. I'm just calling out the act of doing it in itself. It's selfish to lock out other participants just because they don't want to fairly lot against them. It's the attitude of a dictator. I might be going too far with that statement, but people that do this elicit nearly the same level of disgust in me as the idea of a dictator. Might be my ideals given where I grew up, who knows.

I firmly believe this kind of behavior is morally disgusting.

[LexSunfire]

I firmly believe this kind of behavior is morally disgusting.

diva alert.

[infinitezero]

As I have said, I wouldn't allow myself into an actionable situation to defy anyone's self-entitled rules. I'm just calling out the act of doing it in itself. It's selfish to lock out other participants just because they don't want to fairly lot against them. It's the attitude of a dictator. I might be going too far with that statement, but people that do this elicit nearly the same level of disgust in me as the idea of a dictator. Might be my ideals given where I grew up, who knows.

I firmly believe this kind of behavior is morally disgusting.

It's selfish, sure. Being selfish isn't a bad thing all the time though. I know a couple of people that are too kind and share too much to the point of their own detriment. And what do you tell someone like that? "You need to focus on yourself and what you want, and surround yourself with people who are supportive of your goals." That is the nature of these parties. That being said, what is more selfish? To think a total stranger should be worrying about what you want, or that they are more worried about what they want?

TL;DR: Hypocrisy.

EDIT: Feel free to refer to this in the future if you ever need an example of how to get your point across without berating people (something a lot of people see as disgusting behavior).

[Niwashi]

It's selfish, sure. Being selfish isn't a bad thing all the time though.

Perhaps not quite all the time, but it certainly is when you join a party in a multiplayer game.

That being said, what is more selfish? To think a total stranger should be worrying about what you want, or that they are more worried about what they want?

Once they join a group with you, of course they should be concerned with what you want, just as you should be concerned with what they want. That's the whole point of having group content as opposed to a completely single-player game. Whenever you're part of a group, your goal is to ensure that every member of that group gets what they need from it. If that's not your primary goal, then you shouldn't be playing a mulitplayer game.

The Party Finder has an advantage in that players can specify what they want in advance in order to ensure that everyone's goals are compatible with each other's. In the OP's case, he reserved the caster body to himself, but if nobody else in the party wants that piece anyway, then it's not harming them to let him have it. (This is assuming that in return he'll pass on whichever item each of them most want. Concern for your fellow party-members goes both ways.)

[Doo]

Whenever you're part of a group, your goal is to ensure that every member of that group gets what they need from it. If that's not your primary goal, then you shouldn't be playing a mulitplayer game.

I only care if they are in my fc/ls and if I like them.

[Mcshiggs]

I only care if they are in my fc/ls and if I like them.

You should really learn more about how to use these forums, that quote is not from me, it is from Niwashi.