Small Rant on Seal Rolls in Hamlet parties

[Molly_Millions]

So what about folks who pay party members for the drops they get in a /random?

/snicker

[KiraHime]

I havent had time to read the entire thread, so i dont know if this has been pointed out.

But the person that won the seal wasnt just a random person that did no work, he spent 20 minutes of his life in that boring hell hole. he was entitled!

[nokinator]

you know they found spiders on mars yesterday, the worlds gonna end and there will be no more SEALS

[Hanabira]

I can see if the guy asked to change his lot after it fell. if you agree to the lot change, you cant complain about it afterwards. if you WON the lot by 3 points, would we have a 15 page thread about it? if for example, you join a linkshell's group for hamlet, and everyone in the group is giving the seal to 1 person unless you win, would you leave the group because if it?

because since if everyone wanted it for themself, or everyone gave it to 1 person, they all did equal work and they can do whatever they want with it. since your odds are the same, the only reasoning is that you dont want someone completing the stage faster than you. personally if theres such a group where everyone already has their seals, it sounds like a sound group that gets stuff done.

[Wynn]

Guys I just want to reiterate because several people either are getting the wrong impression or didn't actually understand what I've been trying to say. So I'd like to make one last comment to be clear.

This isn't about me not getting the seal though I do feel I should have won on that lot. As I said right in post one, I had already won a seal. This isn't envy or jealousy or anything like that.

I would have been very happy if they guy who actually won needed it and got it. I would have been very happy for the other guy rolling if he won. I would have been very happy for the guy that actually rolled a zero yet got the seal if he had legitimately won it in his actual roll.

My whole point was that I didn't feel that what happened was ethically sound based on not being upfront about what was going on. And I was curious to see what everyone else thought about what actually happened.

However, it doesn't seem like some people understand what actually happened.

We aren't talking about some pre-agreed upon set up or an entire party looting on something.

The scenario was three people rolling on an item. Just three. One of the other members changes their loot at the start of a run to that item without divulging that they planned to roll for one of the people who was already rolling on the item. This added an extra roll which reduces the chances of the other two players and doubles the rolls for the remaining player of the three. This is not equitable.

The omission of that information is what I had a problem with because I would not have agreed to it.

And of course, some of you do understand what actually happened and still feel what happened was ok. And while I think that is morally reprehensible, I expected at least some people to genuinely feel that way. I just didn't expect it to the level that we actually saw which was certainly interesting.

The purpose of this thread has definitely been fulfilled since I have my answers.

I thank you all for your responses.

[Hanabira]

i dont think its any of your business if he plans on keeping it or passing it to a friend. he doesnt owe you any explanation as to why he changes his lot, you said he could change it, he did and just so happen to have won. i can -almost- see if you said no he cant change, but then got out-voted. but cmon.. you said yes.

[Molly_Millions]

Here's a good way to look at it: When doing hamlet defense, always assume everyone will roll for a seal. When it turns out that only 5 are gonna roll (even when only 4 need it) you have better chances than what you expected.

Also, fighting over drops is a good way to lose friends.

[Bublex]

Greetings,

I would like to thank you all for your comments. We feel this thread has run its course, so it will now be closed.

Regards,