Thoughts for Aspiring WLs?

[ShiffDrgnhrt]

Well, I have been wondering for the longest time what the Team looks for in potential WLs.  Not so much things like what Quest you've been on or how many levels you have, but just everyday things.

• Do you look for those who RP with new people/players?
• Do you look for those who try to run events for plot related things, or even just for community gatherings?
• Do you look for those who properly RP their alignment?
• Do you look for those who conduct themselves well IC AND OOC?
• Do you look for those who are spotless as far as rules go?
• Do you look for people who love Layonara and want to have a greater postive impact on it?
• Do you look for those who do their best to make sure others are having fun too?
• Do you look for those who donate?
• Do you look for those who have experience working with the Team? (it can be noted a number of Current WLs are or at one point were DMs/Team-members, as well as 'retired' WLs having been or are DMs/Team-members)
• Do you look for those who's character fits into an empty niche?  (Like Rhizome being a/the Heirophant; Quillwen being an Emerald of Beryl)

Just some of my thoughts/questions.  As most of the people who know me know I aspire to be a World Leader, despite some bumps in the road.  Any further comments are good and if you want to answer my impromptu Survey you could.

[Lynn1020]

You want just GM's reply or anyone's opinion?

[ShiffDrgnhrt]

Anyones!    Sure, fitting the Teams profile is good for getting the WL hat, but being WL is something that involves the community, meaning the players.  If you do what the Team wants but don't make anyone else happy...  not much of a WL...  

I guess that means this is the same as the others, but I mean it as what would you guys see in another player/character that you think would make you want them to be a WL?  

(I sure hope I didn't start a superfluous thread...)

[Dorganath]

Well, I have been wondering for the longest time what the Team looks for in potential WLs.  Not so much things like what Quest you've been on or how many levels you have, but just everyday things.

• Do you look for those who RP with new people/players?

Yes, but take out "new".  The key word is "involvement"

• Do you look for those who try to run events for plot related things, or even just for community gatherings?

It doesn't hurt.

• Do you look for those who properly RP their alignment?

Always, whether an aspiring WL or not.

• Do you look for those who conduct themselves well IC AND OOC?

Yes, of course.

• Do you look for those who are spotless as far as rules go?

Preferred but not mandatory. "Spotless" is a difficult standard, and whatever infractions there may be are looked at in a broad scope. There's no "one strike and you're out" sort of policy

• Do you look for people who love Layonara and want to have a greater postive impact on it?

The former always helps and the latter is among our key criteria

• Do you look for those who do their best to make sure others are having fun too?

Contributing to fun is a better way to put it.  One's idea of fun may differ from another's, but it's important that someone is not taking away from the fun of another player.  This of course goes beyond WLs, potential or current, and applies to the entire server population.

• Do you look for those who donate?

Absolutely, positively not.  

This is not a pay-to-play sort of situation. At the very least, it would violate the EULA for NWN and put us in some serious legal troubles.  Beyond that, we simply would not give status just because someone sent us money.

This does not, has not and can not happen.

• Do you look for those who have experience working with the Team? (it can be noted a number of Current WLs are or at one point were DMs/Team-members, as well as 'retired' WLs having been or are DMs/Team-members)

By definition, those who have been involved in quests have experience working with the GM team.   It's more a matter that WLs and GMs both possess many of the same qualities, thus the high incidence of people belonging to both groups.  It's not a requirement to have worked with the Team, however.

• Do you look for those who's character fits into an empty niche?  (Like Rhizome being a/the Heirophant; Quillwen being an Emerald of Beryl)

It's more the other way around.  Rhiz is the Heirophant because (in part) of WL status.  He is not a WL because he is the Heirophant.  Quil's status as Emerald was the result of his WLDQ, not the other way around.

When WLDQs are designed and planned, more often than not, the status one achieves is crafted based on the character and the results of the quest. We don't have a list of stuff that needs players to fill it.

[Lynn1020]

Just my personal opinion here... It is easy to sit back and say what you think should or should not be.

World Leaders should be very involved in the world (not just during quests). They should be out to be seen by others, to give characters a chance to approach them. They should be there to help players IC as well as OOC. When I say help them, I am referring to showing them the ropes, answering questions etc.

If you are World Leader material then most of the players/characters should know you or should have at least have heard of you. Just like in RL... you recognize the names of people that have had an affect on our world. Whether it be good or bad... correct??

I really wish there were a way for characters or players to have a say in who their world leaders are, but I can see how that could turn into a mess.

What I do not like seeing is a WL on a quest that takes control and does not allow others a chance to be involved, (Which I have not seen very often except on plot quests) although I guess that applies to all players.
 World Leaders must play their alignments and deities correctly! It looks really bad for a WL to be best friends with someone who worships a deity that is an enemy or unfriendly to their own god. Although I understand that everyone makes mistakes even the "High and Mighty" ones. *grins*

World leaders should set the example for other players, both in game and on the forums. That may sound unfair but that is part of the commitment that comes with the title of World Leader.

[Dorganath]

Just my personal opinion here... It is easy to sit back and say what you think should or should not be.

World Leaders should be very involved in the world (not just during quests). They should be out to be seen by others, to give characters a chance to approach them. They should be there to help players IC as well as OOC. When I say help them, I am referring to showing them the ropes, answering questions etc.

Agreed. Very important for after the WL title is granted, though ideally before as well.  

If you are World Leader material then most of the players/characters should know you or should have at least have heard of you. Just like in RL... you recognize the names of people that have had an affect on our world. Whether it be good or bad... correct??

Correct.  One of the key, if perhaps the most important criteria is that the player has had a positive influence on the world in general.  This does not mean the character has to be a bastion of good deeds or a knight in shining armor (though we've had a couple of those). It means that the player has been a positive force in the community, such as in their presence and conduct on the forums, IRC and their conduct as a player in-game.  That's not to say their characters have to be positive, helpful or even nice.  The contributions of the character can be seen as "bad" or negative surely, but that is still a positive impact on the game world.

I really wish there were a way for characters or players to have a say in who their world leaders are, but I can see how that could turn into a mess.

In a way, they do. Players could encourage friends or to apply.  A voting process would probably be counter-productive and, yes, turn into a mess.  Remember that World Leaders are not necessarily "leaders" in an IC sense in how the term is generally applied.

What I do not like seeing is a WL on a quest that takes control and does not allow others a chance to be involved, (Which I have not seen very often except on plot quests) although I guess that applies to all players.

At the risk of side-tracking this thread (and yeah, this is probably worthy of its own, but hopefully not), this is another issue where there are two sides and two (at minimum) ways of perceiving things.

Speaking for myself as a GM (and yes, once upon a time, I ran quests), I tend to "reward" initiative with attention. There is often an inherent confidence which results in a player moving his or her character to the forefront.  Some players are naturally timid or need to grow into their confidence.  As a GM, I've seen the involved and the wallflowers.  As a player, I've been hesitant to speak up or step forward, especially in the presence of high-level characters (yes, this was a long time ago).  More recently, I've been on quests where everyone turns to Connor and asks "What should we do?" even though he's not really looking to be a "leader" in that situation or really knows any better than anyone else.

So yeah, it applies to all characters, and there's more at work there than just WLs dominating quests. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but it's more complex than someone being a glory hog.

World Leaders must play their alignments and deities correctly! It looks really bad for a WL to be best friends with someone who worships a deity that is an enemy or unfriendly to their own god. Although I understand that everyone makes mistakes even the "High and Mighty" ones. *grins*

Agreed!

World leaders should set the example for other players, both in game and on the forums. That may sound unfair but that is part of the commitment that comes with the title of World Leader.

Agreed!  And it's not unfair.  As you said, it's part of the "contract" and responsibility of every WL player.

[ShiffDrgnhrt]

Sheesh, I'm starting to wonder if they'll ever let me be a WL now...  =P

[s0ulz]

What I do not like seeing is a WL on a quest that takes control and does not allow others a chance to be involved, (Which I have not seen very often except on plot quests) although I guess that applies to all players.

While I see your point, I'd expect dominance from most WL-s if they happen to have expertise in the area or even if they're just the most experienced in similar situations. Naturally this shouldn't mean the WL cutting everyone else off, but they are leaders for the most part. I'd actually like to see more counsil requested from WL-s. That'd help both with immersion for the WL and for being approachable for the community.

In a way, they do. Players could encourage friends or to apply.  A voting process would probably be counter-productive and, yes, turn into a mess.  Remember that World Leaders are not necessarily "leaders" in an IC sense in how the term is generally applied.

I would hereby like to send a reminder to Dezza that he said he would apply for WL with Sasha, if Fenrir succeeds on his WLDQ. Time has come my friend, so everyone, let's encourage Dezza to go for it! Enough of these new characters that only fill the holes for so long, I demand WLDQ goodness!

Go Dezza!

(Thank me if you agree!)

[Lynn1020]

While I see your point, I'd expect dominance from most WL-s if they happen to have expertise in the area or even if they're just the most experienced in similar situations. Naturally this shouldn't mean the WL cutting everyone else off, but they are leaders for the most part. I'd actually like to see more counsil requested from WL-s. That'd help both with immersion for the WL and for being approachable for the community.

I agree with this. But often when the WL on the a quest starts to do something everyone just steps back and gets quiet.  So at the same time they should try to pull in the others that are there. If nothing else.. "*Looks to the quiet man in the back of the group* So what do you think we should do? "

It gets boring watching a quest where only one person is doing their thing.  That is what CDQ's are for.

[Honora]

I agree.  By my definition (and most business definitions as well) a leader is the person who gathers consensus from a group of specialists.  So the job of a WL would be to encourage each person to be involved, voice their opinion, use their talents, then be the guiding voice in putting all the pieces together.  When Honora was active she very much would involve most (I do say most, as RP did create conflicts) of any group she ended up leading.  So for someone who is aspiring to become a WL, when you quest you involve everyone as much as they'll let you.
 
 Regarding this specific portion of WL-ship, the GMs also come into play (and the limits of the game engine).  As world leaders are often some of the highest level characters in a quest, thier skill and attribute rolls often outshadow a lower level's by stupid amounts.  Given that, it's also the GM's responsibility to not automatically assign the hint or answer to the highest number but to distribute the information so as to encourage group behavior.
 
 My 2 True

[Lynn1020]

*grins* You said what I wanted to, but so much better!

I agree.  By my definition (and most business definitions as well) a leader is the person who gathers consensus from a group of specialists.  So the job of a WL would be to encourage each person to be involved, voice their opinion, use their talents, then be the guiding voice in putting all the pieces together.  When Honora was active she very much would involve most (I do say most, as RP did create conflicts) of any group she ended up leading.  So for someone who is aspiring to become a WL, when you quest you involve everyone as much as they'll let you.
 
 Regarding this specific portion of WL-ship, the GMs also come into play (and the limits of the game engine).  As world leaders are often some of the highest level characters in a quest, thier skill and attribute rolls often outshadow a lower level's by stupid amounts.  Given that, it's also the GM's responsibility to not automatically assign the hint or answer to the highest number but to distribute the information so as to encourage group behavior.
 
 My 2 True

[Falonthas]

 ....As world leaders are often some of the highest level characters in a quest, thier skill and attribute rolls often outshadow a lower level's by stupid amounts.  Given that, it's also the GM's responsibility to not automatically assign the hint or answer to the highest number but to distribute the information so as to encourage group behavior.
 
 My 2 True

this was shown the best in the quest that ended the dark ages. out of everyone at Ozlo's tower , all the major players  present with their super roll modifiers for all being epic,and a little unknown druid who could only shift into a badger got to bite off the finger and help complete the spell.

[Lynn1020]

*digs up old post*

After the recent posts on denial/try again later WL threads.. it got me thinking... (scary I know ) Maybe those that apply and are told to try again later should be shown the threads that are posted discussing their WL  application. Use Shiff...for example... if he was shown the threads on his WL application maybe it would help him make the changes that would get him approved to try for WL. It would answer a lot of questions like the ones that he asked here. GM's that apply can see the discussions on their WL submissons... isn't it only fair that everyone can as well?

I know they are sent a pm kindly explaining the reasonings behind the decisions but are they really told everything? If that is the case then there really shouldn't be an issue about showing them. If not, how can they improve. I'm not saying everyone should see the discussions.. just the one that is applying.  I could be made into a private thread like the WL's are given to discuss/planning of their WLDQ once approved to try for it.

  I know if it was me I would want to know.

[Dorganath]

I know they are sent a pm kindly explaining the reasonings behind the decisions but are they really told everything?

Honestly, yes.  They're not shown every single post in the discussion, but every negative point that is raised is communicated to the player as well as the positive ones, meaning those things that the WL applicant has done right and that the team sees as helpful to approval.  We describe what we want to see more of, what we want to see less of and the like. We also often give suggestions on how to improve. Several times, the applicant has asked follow-up questions and those questions have been answered.

I can tell you honestly, many of the posts say similar things, such as a reinforcement of the positives and negatives.  About the only additional thing that would be revealed by exposing the thread to the applicant is which GM made which comments, and I'm not sure I see a benefit to that.

(The opinions expressed above are my own, and are in no way an official word on the matter.)

[Lynn1020]

I guess to put it bluntly... the benefit would be the player would know how each team member really feels about them as a player in the community without it being sugar coated.  *shrugs*  

Like I mentioned.. GM's get to see the post that are made about their applications correct?

[Rowana]

Like I mentioned.. GM's get to see the post that are made about their applications correct?

The Applications for the GM team? No, they don't. None of us has any idea what was said about us prior to us joining the team. I don't see that changing either.

~row

[Lynn1020]

No, I mean their applications for WL. Sorry about that.

[ycleption]

I guess to put it bluntly... the benefit would be the player would know how each team member really feels about them as a player in the community without it being sugar coated.  *shrugs*

Is that really a benefit? It seems far more likely to engender bruised feelings and to inhibit the team from being honest with one another in their assessments of other players.

[Rowana]

Hopefully they don't. I don't see why we should sit on GM members and see if they are peeking but hopefully they are as blind to that discussion as any other player would be. Peeking into it would be abuse of GM powers. No GM is supposed to used their status and access to better their own personal situation. That's pretty stock and card. Hopefully no one on the team is breaking that trust so blatantly. (I've never seen it happen so I am faithful that the team is trustworthy)

~row

[Dorganath]

I guess to put it bluntly... the benefit would be the player would know how each team member really feels about them as a player in the community without it being sugar coated.  *shrugs*  

Like I mentioned.. GM's get to see the post that are made about their applications correct?

Would they? Or would it encourage GMs to be less forthcoming?

I do see your point.  Don't get me wrong. For me, personally, it's more important to know what is said about me than who said it when the feedback is intended to be constructive.

But there's sometimes another problem at work. Well...two...and they both often circle around the nature of text-only communication.

There are those within this community who believe that one or more members of the GM team "has it in" for them and that they are disliked by the same GMs or by the team as a whole.  Whether this is true or not, it leads to a secondary belief, in that the GM/GMs/GM Team in general will do everything they can to make things difficult for the player, with some even going so far as to believe it's just an institutional fact of life and that we as a team sanction that sort of thing.

Whether there are real dislikes of players among the GM team is not something I can say with any certainty.  We are human like everyone else, with likes and dislikes, opinions that may be well-founded or not.  Regardless of this, we strive to maintain a level of professionalism toward the players.  

Now, speaking of WL applications specifically...

Let's say for the sake of argument that I don't personally like you, Lynn1020 (which is false, in case you're curious), that you somehow knew this or had the impression of it, and that you had applied for Amanda to become a WL.  Let's say also that I raised a legitimate concern about Amanda...maybe she wasn't "out there" enough...not as active as we like to see as a WL.  Let's say I can point to documented instances to support my assertion.  Maybe other GMs share this view as well.

Continuing the example, Amanda's WL application eventually gets denied and you get access to the discussion thread for your application.  There I am, stating my reasons why I don't think Amanda is ready (yet) to become a WL.  Knowing that I don't like you, what would you think? Would you think that I worked to sabotage your application and that other people joined on the bandwagon because I'm so persuasive?  Would you tell other players, "See? Dorg hates me. All that bad stuff I've said about him is true!"?

Maybe you would, and maybe you wouldn't. It depends on your personality of course...on how you respond to criticism and so forth.  I believe that some would be able to handle it, but others would not.

Steering out of the theoretical again, there's two more points that I want to raise.

First, there have been several times where an applicant has been contacted during discussions to contribute more information.  Sometimes this the answers have resulted in an acceptance of the candidate and in others there have been denials. Either way, there are always lines of communication between the team and the declined applicants.  They are free to ask questions about their denials, seek advice and all that.  We won't say "Do this (with specifics) and you'll be accepted," but we do advise people, and this is more important to the applicant than whether or not someone is liked or disliked by any member(s) of the GM team.

Second, when a personal conflict of interest exists or if a GM feels he/she cannot be objective, that GM  excuses himself/herself from the discussion.  Depending on the reason, this can be a cause for concern, but as far as I remember, no one has ever been denied a chance at becoming a WL because someone or someones on the GM Team disliked the applicant.  I can even think of one case at least where if personal opinions were going to come into play, they would have caused the applicant to be denied, but that applicant was accepted all the same.

---------------------------------------

GMs can see the discussion on their applications, if they choose to look. I don't know if they do, however.  They don't contribute to them, either.