Ninja Looting Clarification

Hello,

It has come to my attention that ninja looting rules need to be clarified. Situation:

random dungeon event with 5 players participating (A, B, C, D, E). Let's say dps are ABC, tank D, healer E. An item with mostly healer specification drops (has spell power, intellect, however is in part suitable for other classes that need those stats). Need rolls are done by TWO DPS (A and B, that are in DPS spec, however the item grants spell power/int which is also used by them, but is not optimal for their classes or could be used for their OS) as well NEED roll was done by healer E.

The roll from Player A's view was done after seeing other DPS roll NEED and before A notices that the healer also rolled NEED. Player A rolls highest, receives item. DPS A trades Healer E the item straight away as Main Spec has priority over OS. However, DPS C blames DPS A for ninja looting and DPS A gets banned afterwards by the screenshot of winning the need roll on the item, EVEN THOUGH THE ITEM WAS GIVEN TO THE HEALER EVEN BEFORE THE PROTEST was said and healer confirmed that he received the item by putting it on and by text in chat.

Therefore, clarification needed:

Are both DPS classified as NINJA LOOTERS for pressing NEED or just the "unlucky" one who rolled higher? Even though the item can technically be used by both, however is not optimal for the spec.

Is player A considered a NINJA LOOTER if the item is given right after the rolls are done to the main spec Healer player E?

How is this situation reviewed - are the inventories checked or participating players asked about the situation?

Handing a ban on the above described situation seems to be a ban for "nothing", as per the rules:

IN-GAME NINJA POLICY
Example of forbidden acts:
Player need rolling (group loot) on items which he cannot even use. - Player A can use the item that he won.
In RDF needing on items for Off-Spec (unless everyone in party is explictly fine with this). - Player A gave away the item right after seeing the Healer need roll it.
Need rolling for other players to have 2 or more roll chances at one item. - Since the Player E who received the item from Player A was the only healer in the dungeon and technically was the only one eligible to receive it in the first place - the double roll rule shouldn't apply. If this would be considered a double roll - then technically DPS can roll items like that without being considered NINJA if I understand correctly? But if it was my judgement - I would say that since there is only one healer, then there is 1 out of 1 chance for him to receive the item, therefore double roll rule does not apply.

Could a GM please have a look and give an explanation for the questions stated? Seems there is a lot of confusion on what is ok to roll NEED on and what is not. Also if the offence is already made by not asking the party before rolling NEED for something not optimal for spec or used by OS (as sometimes there actually is not enough time due to pressure from mobs) and then getting the item sorted after the rolls are finished? I.e. getting the item passed over to the main specification healer as per the situation above? Seems like a "guilty until proven innocent situation" rather than "innocent until proven guilty" method is used here.

Thanks!

Only the evidence sent by the report is and will always be reviewed. Inventories or whatever aren't checked, nor if any item was traded. GMs simply don't have time to spare for some in-depth investigation like it was some real life crime. Your responsibility is to not roll Need when you aren't supposed to. If you do, win it and someone reports you with valid evidence, your account will get banned, period.

No need for in depth investigation, just a minor check to see if an offense actually took place before handing out bans left and right. Going back to the situation, as per the rules posted in WARMANE's code of conduct - it looks like the situation described above does not come in direct breach for any of the points stated there. So what would be considered the reason for a ban in a scenario like this? Moreover, if a player does not take screenshots for their defense in case they need to prove that they have given the item back - they can be banned for something that was not done? I'd say that is just lazy work by moderators giving bans left and right without proper checking and it harms good players.

If someone reports a situation like above, the evidence can hardly be considered "valid" if it does not represent the whole situation which happened. I am curious what actions are taken then if Player A appeals the ban? Would the Player E would actually be asked if the item was given to them? Or the same screenshot provided by the reporter is just looked at again without additional checking?

Even further, how is it decided that a player HAS or HAS NOT need for an item if it CAN be used by the said player? In example - the player is a DPS mana user and the item gives an intellect boost over the currently worn item, but also has mp5 which is considered more of a healer used item? So Player A should not roll Need even though the item would improve a stat currently used, even though it is not a first priority stat? Does not make much sense and gives a lot of room for interpretation then on who needs it more and this could cause fake reporting to GM's by parties who do not get the item, actually increasing GM workload.

So as per your reply - if the DPS players are users of at least one stat of the stats provided by the item are "supposed" to roll or not then? To me, as well as to many other players - this system seems to be unnecessary complex and actually can harm players who do not intend to do harm.

What was the item you think you got banned for? And what was your class and role in the dungeon?

You rolled Need on an item you shouldn't, you won the roll for it, the item was received by your character.
That's all there is to it, that's the situation that matters, and what a report has to prove.

This also isn't a court of law, there's no "defense." Appealing the ban means asking for a second chance, it isn't an opportunity for you to spin tales, share points of view, etc. If your account has had good behavior, the remaining duration of a ban will be pardoned, but it will remain on your record for future incidents. The only case anything you had to show would matter might be if you could show evidence that led to your ban was falsified in a way that got past GM scrutiny.

You are free to have your own opinion of the system, but disagreeing with it won't cause it to be applied differently on you.

Hello, @Arbiterone,

To keep along with the rules of this server ( I do actually read them lol), I would like to point that this post is not a ban appeal, does not reflect an actual situation, the intent of this post is only to receive clarification about a rule enforced and to receive answers to the questions posted (which still seem mostly unanswered).

Getting this out of the way - let us say that the group consisted of a tank player D (passed roll, does not matter), Player E healer holy paladin, player A retri paladin (with holy OS but as per the rules that does not have an impact), player B lets say Ench Shaman, player C Mage. Let us say the dungeon was Trial of Crusader Heroic and the drop from that loot table as an example was Kurisu's Indecision (cloth back armour item providing:

155 Armor

+42 Intellect

+52 Stamina

Requires Level 80

Equip: Improves hit rating by 44.

Equip: Improves critical strike rating by 33.

Equip: Improves spell power by 70.

So as per the previous situation NEED roll was done by Player A and B - DPS mana users, as well as the dungeons healer Player E. So would this item be considered to be used only by the healer due to the first two being melee fighters not getting that much impact from SP? Or were they also eligible to roll?

Let's expand - if said item would also have MP5 would they be considered no longer valid to roll NEED? ]

To add further - that the currently worn item on Player A was of a higher item level but more focused on strenght/attack power bonus. So having a different type item but of a higher item level makes the user ineligible to roll NEED on a weaker item but of different bonuses?

Thank you for your time having a look here, but I think this is questioned by a lot of the current players and confusion does arise often.

That's an item for caster DPS. Anyone who isn't a caster DPS who have rolled need would be eligible for the banhammer. Healers don't need hit, ench shamans or rpalas don't need intellect or spell power.
Mages, warlocks and SPriests are classes who can roll need.

Hey, @Obnoxious,

I appreciate you having a look at the questions posted, however I think you see that the intent of this post is to get a clarification on what are the items players "should" or should not roll NEED on then. Therefore, I would really appreciate if you could provide that information. As per the code of conduct - it is written that rolling for Off Spec is not okay if a player in a dungeon is against it. However, "Off-Spec" is not even defined in the rules. I.e. as per the example above - a DPS mana player may decide (from experience or experimenting) to focus more on mana regen, to keep more spells active keeping more uptime, reducing their strength bonus but compensating by not running out of mana. So would this still be considered rolling Off-Spec? I am sorry for being picky, but questions like these do arise if a player can get a week long ban for a rule so vague.

Moreover, there is no rule to obtain permission at the start of the dungeon from everyone to roll items "off-spec", or after the item drops or even after receiving the item. The rules just say that if nobody is against that only then it is ok. So if you found out somebody is against - you gave away the item but still got banned. Does not make much sense...

Getting back to the point - looking at what was written above, wouldn't it be prudent to ask the reporter of a ninja looter to provide evidence that the ninja person kept the item after being requested to return as it is not suitable for their character? I.e. "Player C: Hey, Player A, this item is for healers, you should give it to player H? - *Screenshot of: Player A leaves the party*" - then the ninja fact would be proven with valid evidence and prevent cases where salty players report someone and add workload to GM's and good players get banned? If the ninja loot fact actually happened - it would not be hard to prove by a screenshot of a player just leaving or even replying "nah, I am keeping it" or something similar.

I saw your other posts regarding cases like this and similar, and from your replies I know you are a reasonable person and do actually think that above ideas have validity. And that is what I invite to do in this thread - to have a civilized discussion, as I guess that's what forums are for.

Cheers

@Arbiterone,

Thanks for your detailed reply, it is really helping with the clarification! So in a scenario where such item drops, a person needs HIT rating (as they are below cap) but are a melee DPS class - they cannot NEED roll this item as it is meant for caster DPS? I think this is one of the root causes for confusion on who can and cannot roll NEED, as a player could actually be of class the item was not intended for but still receive actual benefit for it. And from experience a lot of times this caused confusion in dungeons.
So in short if an item has at least one stat that is of no benefit to a class - the said class cannot roll NEED on it ? (I.e. a warrior cannot roll need on an item that also provides intellect but would otherwise be an improvement to the current gear in terms of strength and stamina?).

This is what causes the confusion regarding who should or should not roll need. I think that after this is clarified - I will not have any more questions. Thanks

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by m3ntosas

Therefore, I would really appreciate if you could provide that information.

---

You won't get that from me. You want clarification about in-game rules, you should be asking the in-game arbiters for specifics, ie. the GMs, via in-game ticket.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by m3ntosas

it is written that rolling for Off Spec is not okay if a player in a dungeon is against it.

(...)

Moreover, there is no rule to obtain permission at the start of the dungeon from everyone to roll items "off-spec", or after the item drops or even after receiving the item. The rules just say that if nobody is against that only then it is ok. So if you found out somebody is against - you gave away the item but still got banned. Does not make much sense...

---

Why are you twisting what the rule says? It won't make how it works change, anyone can see through this attempt.

What does the part of the rule in question say? "unless everyone in party is explicitly fine with this." There's not a single word about being against it. It only "doesn't make much sense" with your backwards reading of how it works. There's no "if nobody says they are against" involved, YOU have to have their explicit okay beforehand. It's not the rest of the group that has to say anything, it's you who need their unanimous permission before rolling Need.

I'll crystallize this for you:

1. You can roll NEED if it's an upgrade for your spec(one with which you pressed "Accept" as when que popped).
2. You can roll NEED if you get four "yes" in chat from your group.
3. The end.

All the theories how no one needs it, who passed on it, how it will get DE'd, your actual MS, how no one minds, etc etc, it's all irrelevant noise in your head. It will get you banned sooner or later.

If you really want to ask specifics -- open a ticket in-game and directly ask the GM team for clarification. This forum section isn't to ask for staff replies after all. Just don't be a bother to them writing a huge wall of text trying to find some sort of loophole that you can abuse to need any item you see fit.

I'll just add, since I wasn't looking at this thread when you went on your finger-vomiting rampage (that got deleted) and you got banned too fast, that if our rules are that mysterious and beyond your comprehension, our servers simply might not be suited for you. I'm sure you can find what you want away from here.