Reasons why trading yourself items/gold across rosters on your own account COULD be considered fair game/legal (grey zone)

Hi all,

(Before the thread starts, I’d like to point out that anything you do on your account is fully bound to your own responsibility. Do not take this thread as 100% true and go out and risk your account. It is in fact still a grey zone because my arguments could not be applicable for one reason or another. What is necessary here, is an official amazon response with a clear YES or NO (it’s not allowed) to that matter.)

Recently I have joined a new server for various reasons and obviously been curious whether sending yourself gold (or items if you’re into that) across different rosters is a ban-able offense. Many people have already asked that question and it seems it is yet a grey zone.

On this thread, a forum moderator has mentioned it could be possibly considered to be breaking Amazon Games Terms of Use under point 2.5 Restrictions. I will explain this matter more closely and discuss why it possibly does NOT break those terms. (Thread: Verdict? Are we allowed to transfer gold between rosters on the same account?)

Firstly, the rule in question. The game does not allow more than 6 characters per roster to earn gold through dungeons.
The argument: Sending yourself gold or items could be considered a circumvention of this restriction and be ban-able as a result: ( (…) or (iv) interfere with or circumvent any feature of the Games, access or use the Games in a way intended to avoid fees or restrictions, or otherwise exploit the Games(…)). (src:

Here is the thing. The act of sending yourself items or gold across different rosters (on the same account!) DOES NOT change the matter, that the destination roster still only has 6 characters that can earn gold. Each roster is considered to be separate. And it is perfectly fine to earn gold on multiple rosters. What happens to this gold afterwards is up to the player. You don’t circumvent the rule because you have 2 different rosters, which still have a maximum of 6 characters eligible for earning gold. (Plus you can earn gold through more means than just dungeons :p)

Two arguments vouching for this are as follows:

  1. If the game did not want you to earn more gold, they could simply restrict it account wide. It would be a lowkey “dumb” move because it’s too restrictive since it would damage those players who would play on multiple servers without transferring.

  2. The forum moderator mentions that this use case of the AH could be considered an unintended use of the AH. This, however, at least in my opinion, is false. The AH does not exist to trade items between players. The AH exists in order to trade items between characters. If a player was not supposed to trade items with their own characters (regardless of which server the roster is on), then the game would not even display your own items to yourself in the AH. It’s as simple as that. → If that were the case and you would use a middle man (say on your own server) who THEN makes the purchase from your own character on the destination roster, that is definitely considered a violation (by circumvention) of term 2.5.

These are my thoughts about the ruling conditions. In my opinion it looks like fair game. However, I am not done here just yet. I’d also like to touch upon the game design and balance perspective of the roster earn limit.

Now it is somewhat obvious why they would limit gold earnings to 6 characters per roster. You can have up to 18 characters in a single roster (wow). If you were able to earn with these many characters, it would severely damage the economy in many ways. You would most likely see super super high prices on most AH items and any new player would barely have a chance to buy higher tier items they need (decent accessory or engravings). The issue here is that it would be way too easy on the same roster especially with all the (stronghold) honing buffs, the already existing engravings on your roster, roster storage, shared currencies etc. etc…

However, if you start on a new roster, the only two things you get are your crystalline aura (if you have that) and your Royal Crystals. The rest has to be earned again through gameplay (or powerpass) and all horizontal progression needs to be done again. The player is thereby rewarded by doing extra work from 0 (and the game is very huge in quests and horizontal content that it takes a ton of time and dedication) and that is desirable, especially when it makes the player more likely to spend money extra on that roster (perfect example: Level Complete Pack (Lv. 50)).

This game is well structured (including in technical matters that you notice during your gameplay). If this was not supposed to be a thing, it probably wouldn’t be.

All of this makes me think it is fine to transfer items and gold across rosters on your own account. However, even with everything I have brought forward, it is still on amazon’s end how they execute their own terms of use. If they banned someone for this, they would be perfectly in their right to do so with that reasoning as it’s their own interpretation (unless you wanna go to court which… eh…?). What it still needs is a clear yes or no from amazon themselves.

Or you know what, I’d also just love a roster transfer because friends are on different servers and yyyyeah… that can kinda kill it sometimes.

So yeah, I’d love to hear opinions on this, maybe some more light can be shed on this. For now I would still keep away from it because you never know.

im not going to read it but dont forget grey zone is not green zone we had cm telling us this is not alowed so try if you want if you get ban your loss

1 Like

I mean KR does it but where not as cool as KR so :person_shrugging: maybe someday we’ll be as cool as KR :cry:

Well yeah it’s under a different publisher

yea but just one of them competent :upside_down_face:

And then you allow the same situation where people with either huge amounts of time and/or money turn this into another archeage which makes not only main roster require alts but alt rosters with more alts making it mandory gameplay.

Doesnt this game have enough forced grind already? I cant understand people complaining about grinding while wanting to make it more grindy.

1 Like

You are overdramatizing the scales here. There wouldn’t ever be a situation where these small amounts of players who actually have this much time (or money) to ruin situations. Like you want to punish players who want to play even more?

Also it’s not just about grind. It’s about dailies (and weeklies). And the limit to 6 characters already does a good job of having somewhat a fine balance between how long you need to play per day and how much time people have, given they are willing to do these chores (because that’s what they are). And if you don’t want to you can do them every 2 days with resting bonus to get the most out of your time.
The people who want to have multiple rosters already probably do so you’re not making any sense there, nor would this small number of players ever make a difference in the economy because all their income is being reinvested.

Bots are a way bigger issue which amazon/smilegate have done an amazing job at countering so far although the fight is not over yet (June?).

And don’t tell me horizontal content is grind. You grind if you want to get done a lot of stuff in x amount of time but the game doesn’t force you to do it to progress.

I heard SG considers that a permanent suspension. Just don`t try to create loopholes in the system if you value your account.

If it was actually not supposed to be a thing then they should simply remove the ability to see your own items from in the AH that you can’t buy them in the first place as I said.

May sound rude but that answer shows more or less a lack of common sense and ethics.

The game is so well structured and that includes restrictions being on point (ever noticed how certain actions won’t let you do other actions?).

You talk about ethics yet you don’t even say in which way it would be unfair or unethical towards others. (Wow! This person spent more time than me in a video game and got more ingame currency! How unfair!)

“Common sense” as in you don’t understand that fixing this issue requires additional 2 lines in the SQL statement loading items from the AH. You have absolutely no knowledge of the functional aspects of games in the background.
If they didn’t want this to exist, then it wouldn’t. Unless of course it would be a huge oversight that it is even possible in the first place after this many years.
It’s only truly a loophole if you do it on multiple accounts which would be considered even less ethical from your standpoint, IF multi accounting could just be a reason to ban if the game (or amazon) forbids you to (honestly don’t know if it is, am not gonna try or bother). Else it’s fair game.

If it was an issue and become meta, SG would’ve LOOOOONG fixed it.

Hell. If it’s an oversight, that would be ridiculous.

I would be extremely surprised if it is breaking any rules and since presumably they can also see IP addresses for the connections there should not even be any risk of false positives mistaking as an RMT.

1 Like

Like in real life and people trying to exploit those systems.
They will proably fix it if gets to be a problem and in the way will punish the people who trying to exploit the system.
If you try to be smart in a way first think why there is a limitation on gold earning characters per roster.
Hint: If you don’t get to the conclusion that it’s not a good idea to trade gold between different roster with the same owner then you are just here to fish your very own advantage over other players.


You obviously didn’t read my post.

I appreciate your viewpoint as its very similar to mine. The games code is the strict ruleset to play within and if it allows it then its free game for players to choose how to interact with it. Its up to the programmers to remove the possibilities if they don’t want it in the game. Which they can very easily. Arbitrary rules created outside of the game are very problematic for everyone involved since its largely unenforceable

1 Like