Small Rant on Seal Rolls in Hamlet parties

[Aion]

lets change the perspective

I have all the seal I need, but I need more seal to help my friend. << unethical?

[Shougun]

lets change the perspective

I have all the seal I need, but I need more seal to help my friend. << unethical?

In my opinon, depends on how loot was set up in the begining.

No loot system set up, do whatever you damn well please - though that will often hurt peoples feelings (still doesnt matter.. because you should get screwed yourself if no one made the effort to organize it all).

Loot system set up to give only people that need it loot - tell everyone you dont need them but you are here for your friend. If everyone lets you stay then everyone needs to stfu if you get your friend an item.

If you dont tell people and just shuffle it near the end it is very underhanded as the expectation of the group was a fair need seal rate.

[IBloodmoon]

The only reason anyone is up in arms over this is because it involves seals. If this was over a militia subligar or one of the gather's AF helm this post would not even exist. I'm still waiting for someone to give a real explanation of how it is shady or unethical to give up your own chance for loot to help out a friend with something they need; how it negatively affects your chances of winning the lot if 4 people need a seal and are rolling for it compared to if 2 people need the seal and 4 are rolling for it. Why should anybody be forced to help out a bunch of people, they don't know, get seals with no reward for themselves. Are you really saying that if I don't need or want anything from Hamlet, I can not help a friend get what they need/want?

It was agreed that the person could switch lots by the OP. That is the end of the story. If he didn't want his chances lessened by the extra lot, then he should have said no to allowing the switch.

[Aion]

the case is, the person asked to change his loot preference, and the party agreed,didnt it? So for that run he had equal right to claim the reward. whether he does need or not for himself its irrelevant. sorry if its not the case.

[axemtitanium]

Let's say hypothetically, the guy and his helper friend was actually dual-boxing (remember: hypothetical). Thus, one person is effectively contributing twice as much to the success of the hamlet as any other person. Should he be allowed a second chance at his chosen piece of loot? Of course he should. That's obvious.

Now let's say that the two people are married. They are deeply in love and have declared to be "as one" in their wedding vows. The two people are both pulling their weight in hamlet but only one of them wants/needs seals and the other is willing to sacrifice his/her own loot roll for the spouse. Should that person be allowed to roll on the seal? Of course. How could you deny them?

The two people are best friends in the whole wide world. They are willing to give their lives for each other because their friendship runs so deep. Guy A asks his best friend to help him with seals in hamlet and Guy B agrees to give up his own loot roll to help him. Because that's what friends are for. Why should these two gentlemen be denied rolls on loot if they collectively have contributed twice as much to the hamlet as any other individual?

The OP seems to have gotten caught up on individual loot chances when this situation actually deals with collectives. The two players in question cease to be individuals, with respect to loot rolling, but a unit that has contributed to 25% of the success of the hamlet. As such, this unit should be granted a 25% chance at the spoils, in accordance with their contribution. Pure math, as the OP is wont to say.

[Mamba]

To be honest...
OP, I think this post you made is unethical.

You are saying that people should join and help with Hamlet for free if they didn't want anything for themselves or if they just wanted to help a friend?

I think it is moraly wrong for you to start a pointless thread over such a stupid thing...

Would you have been happier if the guy just kept the seal to himself? Cos... that makes the situation different how?

[BobbinT]

I personally don't have problem if I can/need to roll seal for another person. But i guess checking with pt policy kinda important too if some of them disagree.

There's also another case tho like me: since lately I'm doing hamlet just for gear loots, I've practically done with Aleport and Golden Bazaar. Even Hyrst coming soon since there's only 1 more loot worth left, which is trousers. But in case another member want to invite me to help while I'm free atm, I don't see the reason I need to reject. But I do want my effort somehow worth something. So in case I was invited to Aleport or Golden Bazaar even tho there's no loot left for me to get, should I reject? Mind u that getting member for hamlet pt are getting scarce these days on my server.

And yes, for the past few weeks ppl been asking me just to fill spots for hamlet. How can I refuse? ;D

Can u afford refusing help by sticking to no-share-seal loot?

[UmJammerSully]

There is absolutely nothing wrong with what that guy did. You agreed to let the seal be his roll of choice, he won the seal and since it belongs to him he can do whatever he wants with it.

[RoxyLalonde]

Umm... I don't think unethical is the word you're looking for...

[Arcell]

There's absolutely nothing SE can do to ensure this doesn't happen, except maybe make it impossible to obtain seals once you have 3 from that zone.