A New Need-Before-Greed Loot Setting Proposal

[MongoJerry]

This will be posted on the official Blizzard general and suggestion forums -- as soon as I can figure out how to login to the forums to post. I keep getting an error message of "Login Server Down."


A NEW NEED-BEFORE-GREED LOOT SETTING PROPOSAL

Background

During the early days of the closed beta, there were three settings that one could choose to govern the distribution of loot dropped by mobs -- Round Robin, Free-for-All, and Master Loot. Under round robin, the choice of who got to loot the next mob corpse rotated among the partymembers. Under free-for-all, anyone could loot any mob body at anytime, meaning that some partymembers would get more loot than others, and at the furthest extreme, Master Loot allowed only the designated master looter to loot any mob corpses. Except for a few special situations, most groups chose to use Round Robin as the fairest way to distribute loot.

But then came the problem of boss loot. Under Round Robin, a person could know whose turn it would be to next loot a mob corpse, and if the mob coming up was a boss, then people might be upset that they wouldn't get a chance to loot the potential uber treasure. Worse, the boss drop might be best for a completely different class of character than the person whose turn it was to loot. Spellcasters in the party would get upset if a warrior looted some valuable caster robes just to sell them to the vendor, for example.

So the principle of "Need Before Greed" (NBG) came about. That is, the loot setting remained on Round Robin. However, if a green, blue, or purple item dropped from any mob, then it was separately and manually distributed. First, people could declare if they "needed" an item -- that is, that the item would be used by the person's current character. If only one person needed an item, then that person got to loot the item. (Note: Under Round Robin, if the person whose turn it is to loot stands up without looting the corpse, the corpse becomes lootable by everyone in the party). If more than one person needed the item, then those people would roll for it, using the in-game random number generator ("/rand 100"). If no one in the party needed the item, then it became a "greed" roll. That is, anyone could roll on the item to sell to a vendor, to disenchant, or to give it to a friend or alternative character. The principle of "Need Before Greed" became the default way to distribute green, blue, and purple items in the beta, and players who broke the rule became pariahs, labeled as "ninja-looters" (A WoW server is a smaller community than many players realize).

There were some flaws with this system, however. First, it really slowed down an instance run to do this manual distribution of loot every time something of value dropped. Second, while ninja-looting was a fairly rare occurrence, it did still happen, and players wanted a way to at least give themselves a chance to stop a ninja-looter from stealing their precious items. So Blizzard answered with a new loot setting called "Group Loot," which works like Round Robin except that whenever a green, blue, or purple item drops, everyone in the party is given a chance to roll for the item.

In principle, "Group Loot" is a fair way to distribute items, but it presents a problem in that one can't be sure if someone is rolling for an item because the person "needs" the item or just because the person just wants to sell the item for cash. Thus, one still has to talk things over in the party chat to figure out what people are doing -- slowing down an instance run. Because of this, two contrary systems for distributing loot under Group Loot have emerged:

1. Players are asked only to roll on items that they "need." If everyone passes on an item, then the item is distributed manually, usually via the use of the in-game random number generator ("/rand 100"). This is a fair and consistent system, but it still has the flaw of slowing down a party.<>
   
2. Players are told to roll on everything that isn't bind-on-pickup. If a person "needs" an item, then it's incumbent on that person to tell the group that they do. If more than one person needs the item, whichever had the highest roll on the automatic roller wins the item (if the person who won the roll didn't "need" the item, then they must give the item to the highest roller who needs the item). With bind-on-pickup items, people are asked to wait to make certain that someone doesn't need an item before rolling on the item for "greed." This system has the benefit of being fast -- everyone rolls on everything, little or no discussion needed -- but it has the downside of more mistakes being made. Many minibosses look like normal mobs, and it's easy for someone who's tired to unthinkingly roll on a bind-on-pickup item that they don't need. Group Loot doesn't warn a person that he or she is rolling on a bind-on-pickup item, and there's no way to retract one's roll once one has already chosen to roll. I've seen this situation happen more than once, and it can be a bad situation that causes a lot of bad blood.<>
   [st]
   Group Loot was a good start along the way to making a fair and fast way of distributing loot, but it's still not perfect. It seems to me that if the majority of players want to distribute loot via the principle of "need before greed," then there should be a loot setting to reflect that, and my proposal here is to create a such a loot setting.
   
   For completeness sake, I'll mention that there is a loot setting called "Need Before Greed," but in reality, it is just Group Loot with the restriction that players who can't equip an item can't roll on the item. That is, a mage couldn't roll on a plate chestpiece, but a warrior can still roll on a cloth robe (since the warrior technically can wear it). I have never seen any pickup groups use this setting, and I suggest that it be replaced with the new loot setting I propose below.
   
   The New Proposed "Need Before Greed" Loot Setting
   
   Since most players want to distribute loot via the principle of "Need Before Greed," (NBG), I propose that a new loot system be created to reflect that. Whenever a green, blue, or purple item drops, all partymembers should receive a popup dialog box that gives them three choices:
   • Need<>
     
   • Greed<>
     
   • Pass<>
     [st]
     When players make their choices, the party chat channel should show messages like "So-n-so declares NEED," "So-n-so2 declares GREED," and "So-n-so3 declares PASS."
     
     Once all players have declared Need, Greed, or Pass, then the server should roll and distribute the loot accordingly. That is, players who declare Need get priority over players who declare Greed. If no one declares a Need for the item, then the server should roll for those who declared they wanted the item for Greed reasons. Finally, if everyone passes, then the item stays on the corpse. (Note: The server should also automatically roll again to break any tie rolls. For some reason, that doesn't happen with Group Loot now).
     
     This system would be fast, less prone to mistakes, and best of all, reflect the loot distribution wishes of most WoW players. I urge the developers at Blizzard to implement this system as soon as it can reasonably be done.

[Treesh]

The New Proposed "Need Before Greed" Loot Setting

Since most players want to distribute loot via the principle of "Need Before Greed," (NBG), I propose that a new loot system be created to reflect that.&nbsp; Whenever a green, blue, or purple item drops, all partymembers should receive a popup dialog box that gives them three choices:

• 
  <>
  
• Need
  
  <>
  
• Greed
  
  <>
  
• Pass
  
  <>
  [st]
  When players make their choices, the party chat channel should show messages like "So-n-so declares NEED," "So-n-so2 declares GREED," and "So-n-so3 declares PASS."
  
  Once all players have declared Need, Greed, or Pass, then the server should roll and distribute the loot accordingly.&nbsp; That is, players who declare Need get priority over players who declare Greed.&nbsp; If no one declares a Need for the item, then the server should roll for those who declared they wanted the item for Greed reasons.&nbsp; Finally, if everyone passes, then the item stays on the corpse.&nbsp; (Note: The server should also automatically roll again to break any tie rolls.&nbsp; For some reason, that doesn't happen with Group Loot now).
  
  This system would be fast, less prone to mistakes, and best of all, reflect the loot distribution wishes of most WoW players.&nbsp; I urge the developers at Blizzard to implement this system as soon as it can reasonably be done.
  [right][snapback]63984[/snapback][/right]

But wouldn't the people who are greedy anyway just lie and declare NEED anyway, regardless of if they need it or not? What about the people who decide they need it for an alt and declare need despite the fact that a character in the group needs it for an immediate upgrade? These are a couple of problems I can see with allowing the players to choose if they are needy or greedy. Solutions? Without putting in better decision making code that doesn't rely on players' good wills (which may end up screwing over some people who make some odd roleplaying builds), I don't really have any solutions to the questions I just asked. Sorry. I have no idea how to make the looting more fair without having to rely on people in your group being decent people.

Edit: Reworded to express myself slightly better.

[--Pete]

Hi,

Looks reasonably good, although I really don't see a need for 'pass'. Seems like anyone who doesn't need an item could still use it just for cash. Eliminating 'pass' simplifies the processes in two ways. First, a simple "Need: Yes/No" selection would suffice, possibly making it easier and faster to choose. Second, everyone not in 'need' is in 'greed' which makes selecting the people in the second round of 'rolling' (if there is one) easier. In selling this to the Blizzard developers, having an easier (and thus more easily implemented) solution may be desirable.

As an aside to Treesh: I doubt that it is even possible to do more than a rough job of detecting 'need' algorithmically, especially when dealing with roleplayers. Ultimately, the way to have a good game is to play with good people -- and that is what the 'friends' are for :)

--Pete

[MongoJerry]

But wouldn't the people who are greedy anyway just lie and declare NEED anyway, regardless of if they need it or not?  What about the people who decide they need it for an alt and declare need despite the fact that a character in the group needs it for an immediate upgrade?  These are a couple of problems I can see with allowing the players to choose if they are needy or greedy.

Treesh, it's like I'm proposing a better apple picker, and you're countering with, "But that won't help pick oranges better!" Yes, you're right, but that's not the problem I'm trying to solve. I am not proposing an anti-ninja-looting system. I am instead trying to make the normal distribution of loot in a functioning party easier. I am trying to improve upon Group Loot, which does only a little about ninja-looting as well. (Group Loot and my proposed NBG system does have the advantage over Round Robin in that at least you have a chance to roll higher than the attempted ninja-looter).

If someone declares "Need" when their character does not in fact need the item, then one would still use the normal mechanisms available now -- that is, boot the person from the party, label them as a ninja-looter, never party with that person again, and tell others about that person. It may sound like an ineffective method, but by the time a person gets to level 60 instance groups, a ninja-looter will find his or her choices of groups very limited. Certainly, they'll find that they can't get in any of the better instance groups where the best loot can be found. I knew several people in the beta who ended up deleting their level 60 characters, because they realized how few people would group with them anymore. And they could forget about joining raid groups, because if the person ninja-looted a few times, then chances are *someone* in the 40-person raid party would have seen it. It would be nice to have an additional "blacklist" interface to make the sharing of such information easier but even so, word-of-mouth can be effective. As I said, the community on a WoW server is smaller than many people realize.

[Treesh]

Treesh, it's like I'm proposing a better apple picker, and you're countering with, "But that won't help pick oranges better!"&nbsp; Yes, you're right, but that's not the problem I'm trying to solve.&nbsp; I am not proposing an anti-ninja-looting system.&nbsp; I am instead trying to make the normal distribution of loot in a functioning party easier.&nbsp; I am trying to improve upon Group Loot, which does only a little about ninja-looting as well. (Group Loot and my proposed NBG system does have the advantage over Round Robin in that at least you have a chance to roll higher than the attempted ninja-looter).

[right][snapback]63992[/snapback][/right]

Fair enough. I must have misread your intent. Feel free to ignore my post.

[Treesh]

As an aside to Treesh:&nbsp; I doubt that it is even possible to do more than a rough job of detecting 'need' algorithmically, especially when dealing with roleplayers.&nbsp; Ultimately, the way to have a good game is to play with good people -- and that is what the 'friends' are for :)

--Pete
[right][snapback]63989[/snapback][/right]

And that was exactly my point. :)

[MongoJerry]

Looks reasonably good, although I really don't see a need for 'pass'.  Seems like anyone who doesn't need an item could still use it just for cash.

Some groups also like to evenly distribute the greed loot, so a person who has won a couple of greed items might want to Pass to make sure that others who have been less lucky get a better shot at getting some of the greed loot. Also, I've played in some parties (with mostly Amazon Basin people), where we agreed that I would get all greed items to disenchant, and then I, in turn, would enchant my partymates' items with the resulting collected material. In this case, my other partymates would all want to pass if they had no need for the item. I don't think having three choices overcomplicates things.

[--Pete]

Hi,

Some groups also like to evenly distribute the greed loot, so a person who has won a couple of greed items might want to Pass to make sure that others who have been less lucky get a better shot at getting some of the greed loot.&nbsp; Also, I've played in some parties (with mostly Amazon Basin people), where we agreed that I would get all greed items to disenchant, and then I, in turn, would enchant my partymates' items with the resulting collected material.&nbsp; In this case, my other partymates would all want to pass if they had no need for the item.&nbsp; I don't think having three choices overcomplicates things.
[right][snapback]63997[/snapback][/right]

OK, that sounds good and reasonable. You might want to put something along those lines in your post to Blizzard in order to support your request for three options when, at first thought, two appear to suffice.

--Pete

[vor_lord]

Some groups also like to evenly distribute the greed loot, so a person who has won a couple of greed items might want to Pass to make sure that others who have been less lucky get a better shot at getting some of the greed loot.&nbsp; Also, I've played in some parties (with mostly Amazon Basin people), where we agreed that I would get all greed items to disenchant, and then I, in turn, would enchant my partymates' items with the resulting collected material.&nbsp; In this case, my other partymates would all want to pass if they had no need for the item.&nbsp; I don't think having three choices overcomplicates things.
[right][snapback]63997[/snapback][/right]

I have to agree wholeheartedly. The party I generally play with are all good about sharing, and your system would make it easier to do a good job of the sharing. As a full party of 5 we ran the Deadmines and the Stockades last night, and as usual most of the drops were greed for everyone, but one of our guys rolled 3 times in the 90's for items that were need for him and one other--he then passed on the rest of items that were 'need' for the two casters due to his streak of luck.

What your system offers above our current ad-hoc system is that it eliminates the need for conversation as to whether someone needs an item. We use teamspeak to make that somewhat easier. I really like your proposal, even though I don't play in pickup groups that often and we use teamspeak. It sounds even better for pickup groups.

[JanusTich]

Your three-way prompt is a nice suggestion. I have two problems with Group Loot that your post didn't mention - the lack of a Bind on Pickup confirmation for winners, and the glitter on corpses for coins. I used to be a round robin hater because it slowed down grouping as you mentioned, but it's all I use now for instances with these house rules:

1. Anything that drops on the corpse for your round is yours. In other words, vendor/enchanting loot is not manually rolled for. The random distribution inherent in the round robin cycle is sufficient for vendor loot.

2. If you see something that drops that you want or can use, just say so and it's yours. If there are two or more who want it, they manually roll.

3. Decline all Bind on Pickup item prompts so the group can discuss who gets it or gets to roll on it.

This solves Group Loot's lack of a BoP confirmation for winners while being fast (usually we only need to discuss loot on a boss drop). Rule #2 certainly opens the door for players to lie and say they need when they don't, but it hasn't been a problem so far and it doesn't take long before a pattern of greediness can be seen.

If Blizzard fixed those two problems, I would find a use for Group Loot. If they fixed those two problems and put in your three-way prompt, that's all I would use.

In reply is my original worldofwarcraft.com post that goes into more detail of why Group Loot is flawed.

[JanusTich]

I was originally going to post this as a reply to the older General thread that advocates round robin looting but realized I don't want to preserve the round robin status quo that exists in high level instances. What I want is for group loot to be fixed so that it becomes the new standard.

Here's what needs to be done:

1. Bind on Pickup (BoP) items should always bring up a confirmation box of "Are you sure you want to loot this Bind on Pickup item?", even to the winner of a dice roll. This allows someone who accidentally rolled to back out of their mistake and discourages ninja looters from using the "accidentally clicked" excuse since it relies on the same confirmation step that round robin uses (it’s plausible to accidentally click on the dice, but much harder to accidentally click on both the dice and a warning prompt).

If the winner of a dice roll says 'no' to that prompt, the item should remain on the corpse for anyone in the group to loot (similar to what happens when the person who wins has a full inventory) so that the group can stop and discuss who gets the item. There is no need to reroll since everyone can see who rolled and can assign the next highest roller to be the winner.

Any and all attempts to loot a BoP item should always prompt a confirmation.

2. The glittering stars should be changed so that it works the same way as round robin - only show stars for the corpse in your round. In round robin, only the one corpse that you can loot for money and items glows. Group loot as it is currently implemented shows glittering stars for any corpse with money on it, which in practice means that almost every corpse is glowing. This makes it difficult to figure out which corpse for items is yours in the round, and results in everyone running around attempting to loot every corpse.

Also, possibly related to the above, please fix the problem where an attempt to loot a corpse with glittering stars results in the "that would be stealing" error message. Round robin does not seem to have this problem, so again, please change this aspect of group loot to the way round robin behaves.

Let me answer some inevitable questions and comments to follow:

"Your proposed changes sound like you just want to make Group Loot work like Round Robin. Why not just use Round Robin to begin with?"

The problem with Round Robin is that it is slow. Every green item and up causes the group to stop, link it in chat, discuss it, and /random 100. Often, a group member will already have auto-looted some green items by shift right-clicking (a convenient feature when soloing that can understandably become a habit), who then has to link them in chat, asks who wants to roll on them, and then takes up further time by having to open a trade transaction to the winner. These are some of the common conversations and pauses you’ll see with Round Robin in an average pickup group:

“Did everyone roll for the pants?” “Oh, I didn’t roll yet.” “k, roll” “Grats Krypto, nice pants.” <pauses for Krypto to go loot the corpse or for one of the party members to walk up and open a trade transaction window>

“Hey Misty, roll.” “I did roll, scroll up.”

“Wait, what are we rolling for?” “The boots.” “Oh, I thought we were rolling for the ring of ultimate power. That’s what I rolled for. I pass on the boots. Do I have to roll again?”

“Grats on the cloak of invisibilty” “Thanks, where is it?” “On the lizard, over here.” “Where?” “Come here, come to me.”

The obvious way to solve this problem is to agree to roll on green items after finishing the instance/group. This of course has its own set of problems, namely having to some degree manually track who looted what (since round robin will result in everyone getting allocated some green+ items) and otherwise causing general suspicion of someone conveniently forgetting to list an item afterwards.

The concept of Group Loot, which is Round Robin for all regular items and a dice prompt for green and up (or whatever the threshold is set at) is great but the implementation in practice makes it less than useful.

My two proposed changes actually reflect intended design already in place by the developers - Bind on Pickup items already have a confirmation step when attempting to loot, so this simply needs to be grafted onto the dice winner step. Regular items (those below the threshold) in Group Loot are using the Round Robin system to begin with and since money is always split, in both Group Loot and Round Robin, there is no need to indicate which corpses have money to be looted other than the one in my round.


"It’s your fault for grouping up with strangers! This is why you should always group up with friends you trust.”

I play with a regular group of friends and we could viably use any of the current looting systems without much frustration. We usually use group loot because of its convenience, despite its broken state. But most people aren’t so lucky to have a regular group to play with. And sometimes our group needs pickup members, or I end up in a pickup group for an instance. Regardless, there’s no need to force manual control over loot on players when a sensible system can be created that takes care of the majority of normal loot transactions. That’s one reason why people are using Round Robin over Free For All in the first place, because Round Robin ‘automates’ the distribution of normal items (linen, murloc fins, that amazing rusty cutlass) by round robin. I want a loot system in place so that all of the items, particularly the large pool of green ones that drop, can be dealt in a similar fashion of convenience and control.

And never did I say to abandon the social practices that people are already using with Round Robin to keep people in line, which leads to the next question:


"How is relying on the above system going to stop ninja looters? What stops someone from rolling on a bunch of green items and then refusing to give them to the appropriate class in the group that needs it?"

I never said that any automated loot system is supposed to replace standard, social intervention. Round robin doesn’t solve any of the above problems in and of itself, either. All of the manual practices that groups are already using for Round Robin can be adapted to Group Loot:

• a need before greed philosophy by passing on items that you can’t/won’t use and someone else needs.<>
  
• if an item isn’t needed by anyone, those who would normally be eligible (melees for +str/sta/agi items or casters for +int/spir/sta items, for example) can quickly say ‘don’t need, roll everyone’ or the like so that everyone can roll for the vendor sale or left to enchanters. This can be agreed upon beforehand so people know to wait briefly before rolling or passing.<>
  
• any items mistakenly looted (that aren’t Bind on Pickup, of course) can be given to the appropriate person afterward.<>
  
• anyone refusing to do the above when they have no justification for doing so can be reprimanded, kicked out of the group, and/or guild blacklisted.<>
  
• similarly, with my proposed change in place, anyone that loots a Bind on Pickup item despite the warning prompt can be reprimanded, kicked out of the group, and/or guild blacklisted.<>
  [st]The ideal loot system is one that would balance the convenience of automating most loot while retaining enough control for the exceptional cases. The Group Loot system with the fixes I propose would round robin normal items, automate dice prompts and inventory placement for green+ items, and provide a safety clause for Bind on Pickup items. The current systems all have a failing or two - Round Robin, in the manner that most high level instance groups use it, sucks in the convenience department because it requires manual intervention for almost every step; Group Loot doesn’t provide a safety clause for Bind on Pickup items as well as possessing the aforementioned quirks.
  
  
  ”I hate group loot cause everyone in front gets all the good stuff and I’m stuck in the back getting the shaft.”
  
  It seems a lot of people are confused with the way the current loot systems are implemented. I'm going to reply to this post with a brief summary of the various looting systems, but in the meantime, I'll address this one directly:
  
  Group Loot, in regards to normal items like linen and potions, is exactly the same as Round Robin. A lot of people don’t think so, but my guess is that’s because of the ‘seeing stars on every corpse because of money’ characteristic that I talked about earlier. So that means in a group of five with Group Loot, you’re gonna get a chance to loot items like silk and claws one in every five kills, just like you would if the loot was set to Round Robin. It doesn’t matter if you’re in the front or the back, because the monster that has items you can loot is ‘assigned’ to you when your round in the group comes up.
  
  In Round Robin with a group of five, you get the technical right to loot every fifth monster killed, including any green or blue items that are there. Group Loot works the exact same way as Round Robin, except it gives a dice prompt on green or higher items to the entire group if they’re close by.
  
  
  "What about someone who is too far away to receive a dice prompt or dead? Doesn’t it screw them?"
  
  Again, just because you’re using Group Loot to automate most of your normal loot transactions, doesn’t mean that you throw normal intervention out the window. What would happen in the situation described using old school Round Robin?
  
  “Hey, don’t loot yet. Talbain died. Wait for him to rez first.”
  
  “Oh schnap, the Crimson Breastplate of Craziness dropped.” “Wait up, Kasi isn’t here – hey Kasi, you rolling for that?” “Yeah, I’ll roll, I’m on my way.”
  
  You can do the same in Group Loot for this kind of special circumstance by having everyone pass on their roll so that it can be rolled manually afterward:
  
  “Everyone pass on the roll since Maia is dead. We’ll do a manual /random when she gets here.” <everyone passes, and the item stays on the corpse> (if someone accidentally already rolled on an item, that can be fixed afterward by giving to the winner if the item is tradable, or on a Bind-on-Pickup item, that person can click ‘no’ during the confirmation step).
  
  (with my proposed change for BoP items given a prompt to the dice winner): “Oh schnap, Dorothy’s Ruby Slippers dropped.” <everyone rolls except Janus> “Janus? You rolling?” “He must be out of distance, say no to the prompt and we’ll get his roll manually when he arrives.” “It’s alright, I pass, Ruby Slippers probably don’t fit me anyway.”
  
  Is it harder to make a mistake using Round Robin? Yes, perhaps, but it’s also a bigger inconvenience with the lack of automation. I will say that until Group Loot gets fixed (if ever), I recommend along with most others to use Round Robin and manual rolling in pick up groups.
  
  
  The inadequate state of the current loot systems affects both high level instance groups and to a greater degree, casual pickup groups where often the inexperience of the players regarding the looting system causes arguments and frustration. Group loot provides a good interface for quick rolling and loot distribution but needs to be refined in the ways I described to be useful.

[Malakar]

I'd also like to see NBG loot setting fixed. Warriors rolling on cloth is ridiculous. If it got fixed that'd be my preferred loot setting for grouping with strangers.

[MongoJerry]

I'd also like to see NBG loot setting fixed. Warriors rolling on cloth is ridiculous.

The trouble with that is that removing that possibility also removes the ability for people to make oddball builds. For example, a warrior might choose to wear robes and/or all cloth armor.

But even with non-oddball builds, where one draws the line can be hazy. For example, I got some strange looks when I rolled on some cloth items for my hunter in the beta. While I would have prefered to wear leather -- and after level 40, mail -- sometimes some cloth items dropped that had a lot better stats on them than the leather and/or mail items I had. I don't think these kinds of judgements are best made by the game. I think they should be made by the individual player and the individual players in the party. The best anti-ninja-looting system isn't a good loot system -- it's a good blacklist system. But what constitutes a good blacklist system is a whole different discussion.

[Malakar]

It's still up to the group to decide what loot setting they want. I just want this to be a reasonable option. Mainly for those groups with strangers where some of them are rolling on everything.

As it is now, I don't consider it an option. It's unfair to the cloth users in a larger way than it is to leather/mail users. Cloth users have no choice to use good stat leather or mail, whereas leather/mail users have more options. If a leather/mail user takes the good Stamina/Spirit cloth stuff, the cloth user just got jacked. Granted, certain cloth items are better for casters and others not very useful. But this is something I'd rather discuss with the group at the time, which is possible for most items, but not all unfortunately.

It's not perfect, and it never will be. But I'd like it to at least be a usable option for certain situations.

On second thought, they could even integrate your Need/Greed/Pass system into this loot setting as well. That way the game would give first dibs to cloth for cloth users, etc, but if those players select Greed/Pass, other players get Need/Greed/Pass options.

Either way, in order for this loot setting to have any purpose, the cloth/leather restrictions need to be in place.