theworldofdreams.com

Celeste wrote:I have noticed a significant drop in the "clique" count on the shard as of late

First of all, because 'clique' is used as a noun, I have provided this definition for the sake of clarity, and for those who aren't sure what the word means.

Clique (klk, klk) n. A small exclusive group of friends or associates.

However, I am most certain you are looking to use it in this way, (as a terse verb)

\Clique\, v. i. To To associate together in a clannish way; to act with others secretly to gain a desired end; to plot; -- used with together.

Source: Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, © 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc.


Celeste,

I have been rather apprehensive on approaching this subject, due to the volatile nature of the forums as of late. However I cannot, in good conscience, remain silent on the matter. If you would allow it, I would present my thoughts on the matter, then encourage you to do the same, so we might have an end to this business about 'cliques'.

I cannot say for certainty whether these 'cliques' exist, for I do not play twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week from since the shard's conception to it's death. I cannot say that I have interviewed, intimately, every single person both active and retired, and discovered what motive existed for their choice of social structure, what laws they held in place to maintain that cohesion and nor can I say that I understand the human mind in any intimacy.

What I can say is, that I can make broad, sweeping strokes and vague generalisations about the shard, from which I can make conclusions, based on observation and experience. This too, I would veture, is where your point of view comes from, as least as far as it appears. And that, for the sake of argument, is the best we can do, but I, nor you, nor anyone else has the right to understanding the WoD nature insofar as we do the 'real' society or societies in which we live.

I will allow, that yes, there are social groups in WoD. Because in any society, these exist. Whether family, friendship-based, occupationally-based (workmates), romantic or otherwise, people will band together for a multitude of reasons, based on their interactions at the time, the nature of how they're feeling and their general personality and disposition attributes. One cannot argue that everyone bands together with totally selfish or noble motives, but rather, a delicate combination thereof. To generalise and simplify, most people find comfort and enjoyment with good friends and a positive social atmosphere on varying levels of intimacy.

To take it to a deeper level, I find that when I first came to WoD, I could say that I might be persuaded otherwise by your arguments. Yes, it does appear that cliques exist. But therein the similarity ends. What has been - and poorly so, in my opinion - labelled as 'cliques' are rather 'friendship' groups, based on people who have met prior in time to the present, and have formed a relationship.

In this, we might look at a real-life example: Imagine a party. I speak of a general gathering of friends. Imagine then, that there are a group of people who have lived in the area for their lifetimes, and have become close. Imagine too that there are the new neighbours, only recently there (perhaps why the party is being held: hypothetically, of course), and then there are the friends of friends, and the parents or relatives of anyone assembled, or their partners, and such.

Are these people each in their 'cliques'? Would we classify them as 'newbies' and 'oldbies'? Would these new arrivals feel vindicated and ostracised because of their relative lack of experience?

One would hope not.

What I find most upsetting is the desire to label and classify people into various social groups. It is a personality trait that finds us, as humans, looking for patterns so we might understand. I would imagine that most can recall (or relate) this to their high school experience: There are the Cool Guys, the Nerds, the Losers and so on. What we find, after moving from our broad generalisations of these social groups is that these people are not 'cliques' but rather associated through common interest, friendship or even fate. While I am most certain at one point, some band together for a common cause, I am highly doubtful that most people who have genuine and treasured friends "decided" to be their friend - it was simply fate. I am also most certain that it is not the intention of the large majority of WoDians to form cliques for no other reason than to remain socially exclusive and distanced from the whole of the shard.

From this point, I would especially say that this would be easily defined as a sort of -ism in our society: sexism or racism, perhaps. Especially in this age of globalisation and multicultural societies, I would say that this kind of behaviour would not be tolerated by the informed public, especially anyone who considered themselves not an ignorant person.

But because we find that groups exist, and we cannot find a way to enter or join them, many of us might feel that we're being restricted in some way. I speak from experience when I say that when I arrived, I felt certainly that there was an 'oldbie'/'newbie' line, but now that I see that it is not as stark as it seems. In the WoDian society, there are always going to be strangers and new arrivals, just as there are in any social environment. We cannot claim to form intimate social relationships with these people upon their arrival, for that is shallow and insincere. What we must do, is grow with these people, and learn from them, and come in time to find our friends. Whether they have more experience, more 'fame' or anything else 'more' than us is merely seniority; though just as we are jealous of successful people in life, so too are we virtually jelaous of virtually successful people.

To clarify, there is a line between strangers and people who have been together for a length of time. But to classify these as 'newbies' and 'oldbies' really is ignorant and rude, just as labelling people by their skin type, or heritage and sexual orientation - each of which I need not repeat here.

To say again, labelling people as oldbies and newbies is derogatory, as is the labelling of cliques. This type of 'classification' stems from an attempt to put people into contextual groups for the sake of argument, and I am fiercely opposed to this matter.

However, the most important point of this argument is to reinforce the idea that cliques do not exist on WoD as a whole, as a generalisation that as an opinion, might be considered 'true'. It is not, however, true, and nor is it entirely an educated statement. It is also of the utmost importance to have the word 'cliques' not used as a derogatory statement, because for better or for worse, people may choose to do this.

It is unfair, I believe, to use this as a catch-all to describe different friendship groups. I will not deny that cliques do not exist at all, because I am certain that people band together for a common purpose, and I would be certain that the Order Guards would most likely typify this in a most positive way. I have the utmost respect for the Order Guards, and I cannot find any problem with them acting as a 'clique', for any objective-oriented organisation or group will behave thusly. Microsoft is a clique. The Australian Police Force is a clique. The Armed Forces of any nation is a clique. And so on.

Celeste, I urge you to come forward with your definition of what a clique is, where and how you see them existing in WoD, whom they are comprised of, and what social behaviour you find dissatisfying with them, with examples. It is certainly one thing to throw around definitions in a contexually-based arena like the forums, and I believe it is another to stand up and explain them.

If you would have it, I would debate you on this matter, so once and for all the issue of 'cliques' is resolved, and the positive social and intellectual environment of WoD can continue to grow as it always have, and less-informed, blaise and rather ignorant remarks based on uninformed generalisations (to which I do not attribute you to at all) can fall by the wayside. I look forward to your rebuttal, for long have you been a strong supporter of the "cliques" argument theory, and I would love to have you voice your matter on the issue, so we might resolve it in full.

- Marius the Black
Member of the WoD Society

Ok... now, I honestly didn't think that I had upset anyone by stating that there were cliques on the shard, but I obviously did, for which I AM sorry... I completely understand how it may seem like I'm in some way attempting to downplay, or "dis" the shard. For anyone who might think that this was the case, all I can say is please, please, please don't think I would do that. That is not, was not, and never will be my intention. I was making a statement based upon observation, and conversations I held with many different players, from many different view-points on the subject.

Firstly, however, I should have thanked Marius for the insight and desire to clear this matter up, as I honestly did not realize it had become a "matter" for clearing. Sincerely, thank you, and I DO apologize if I offended you with my statements.

Next, (and please don't think I'm going to do some clever retort section here... I'm not... this is a valid issue that some people feel very strongly about, and it warrants explanation), I received quite a few pm's through these forums concerning my original post in which I stated something about "cliques" on the shard. I have quite a few of them saved in my save box, and all of them have one thing in common: they ALL say something to the effect of "you are not alone in the way you feel about this issue". Obviously, I was not, and am not alone in feeling that. I also, as recently as 2 days ago, had conversations with people in-game in which certain things were said concerning omitting the participation of other players.

I shall explain this one, before it is taken the wrong way... The other night, lots of [controlled] people started attacking civilians in Britain. A group of us who were at the bank ran out and started taking care of them. After about a half hour, several of us ended up back at the bank. We stood there talking about what just happened, etc. and 2 people walked up to the bank who hadn't been there when the disturbance took place. They asked what was going on, and we proceeded to tell them. It was then that someone told them to go check out the area near the haunt for more [controlled] people. The 2 ran off in that direction, and I asked the person who sent them there if there were more [controlled] over there we hadn't elimnated. The answer was "No, there's none left, but those guys will want in on the whole she-bang". I immediately messaged the two, and told them to come back to the bank, as we were looking through our bags to see if any other notes were found, etc. and that there were no [controlled] left to kill. I told the person who had sent them off that way that there was no reason to exclude them just because they hadn't been there when it "started", and that in all reality, we very well may need as much help as we can get if the event progressed. Alas, it didn't, and we were left to ponder the meaning behind these mind-controlled citizens. My point, or where I'm going with this, is that there definitely ARE a LOT of people who feel the way that this particular person did- if those guys weren't here when it started, leave them out. Unfortunately, even though as of late things have gotten MUCH better in this department, this still seems to permeate some people's thoughts on "quest" type issues. I, personally, do not agree with this, as I am sure a lot of other people do not. This shouldn't be the way these people think about the subject... but, it obviously still is, at least in some cases.

By bringing up the issue, initially, this really was my only intention- to maybe get some people to realize the error of their ways in thinking about "quest" type situations. I didn't want to start flame wars, or upset people.

Now, I would not EVER presume to say that the administration was favoring any player(s), or groups of players in any way. It seems a lot of people took that to be what I was initially saying when I mentioned cliques... I did NOT mean that. I was told, in a post I think, quite a while ago, that seers, etc, do quest events when the most people are online because if there are only 10 people online, chances are 5 or 6 of them are macroing, 2 or 3 are off hunting, and the chance that the last guy actually wants to do the quest is fairly slim. Fair enough. But you also have to look at the fact that if there are 40 people online, chances are that 8 or 9 of them are macroing, 10-15 are off hunting, another 10 might be off doing t-maps, or whatever, and the last few guys are checking the auction or something... and unless an NPC walks right up to these people and almost blatantly states a quest is about to take place, a LOT of people pay no notice. I am just as guilty of this as most, so I'm not pointing fingers here. If I'm out hunting, and a seer were to "place" a note of some kind on a MOB I just killed, I probably wouldn't even notice until I got back a few hours later to sell my bags of loot. This is one point that has significantly improved over the past weeks. When something "starts", a LOT of people are getting pm's from other players to get to the bank, or wherever they happen to be, so they can go on it with the group. I, myself, spent 10 minutes pm'ing everyone online when the last event took place. I simply said "There are [controlled] people attacking in Brit. Help needed." A LOT of people turned out to fight them off. ***side note: this last bunch of [controlled] were a LOT stronger than the ones the other night... and sounded like daemons when they were banging on you...

Now, of course... no, I'm not doing one of those "Well, *I* do it THIS way, so you should too, things. That would be ridiculous, and just plain obtuse. What I'm saying is, if a seer happens to pick your little hunting group to drop that map on, or note saying so-and-so has been kidnapped... I know *I*, personally would message everyone else and let them know what was up... the more, the merrier, no? And the attitude of some people, (and PLEASE mind you I'm not pointing fingers or trying to berate anyone in any way- just stating facts) that just because someone wasn't in the group at the onset of an event means they should be excluded needs to change. No, there are not a lot of people with that attitude, and, like I said earlier, I've seen a LOT more teamwork with these events and things over the past several weeks- so it is improving.

I would also like to point to my reply on my other post concerning my offer of assistance to anyone who needs it. I hope it clarifies what I was trying to say there. I really don't want to upset anyone- I just want everyone to play and have a good time and get along. And, the way I look at it, if you're not online when an event takes place, there's really nothing that can be done to help that. But if you ARE on, there's no reason you shouldn't have the opportunity to participate. That's why I'll continue to take that 10 minutes to send pm's to everyone online when I see something start...

****Lastly, nothing in this post was intended to be taken sarcastically, or in any way as some kind of "bash" on anything at all. I once again thank Marius for his inquiry, and hope that I have made my view on the subject clear to everyone. I'm not starting flame wars, or trying to get people in an uproar. And I'm not just rying to be a bitch either... LOL. I really just want my friends, and even those I don't know yet, to have a great time playing in the World of Dreams.

Thank you for taking the time to read this rather long-winded post.

I hereby nominate Marius and Celeste as the unofficial WoD Board Champions of Being Long-Winded.

Any seconds?

I wouldn't be lying when i say they wrote more in a single post each than I wrote in my maths book throughout the entire year last year

I think they are trying to form some sort of clique.

Celeste, from what I read of your post, your issue isn't with 'cliques' insofar as it is with 'quest ettiquite'. From all that I can read, I find all the examples relate to questing in some way. And because 'questing' is a time-honoured tradition on our WoD shard, and almost a symbol of status to some, there are always going to be people who act selfishly, and others who do not. There will be people who believe that a quest presented before them, is to be taken upon their shoulders only, whilst others may believe that Britannia must unite to drive away any such foe.

But what it comes down to, no matter how much we desire, we cannot possibly hope to police human behaviour, because a subjective and rather situationally-based element such as that cannot possibly be regulated by impartial, non-present officials, in my opinion.

I find that the core of the issues you have (and the 'anonymous' support crowd you mention often) seem to have the biggest issue with this line of reasoning:

"if those guys weren't here when it started, leave them out"

Please note that I left your name out, because you weren't making that point. I am, in fact, simply drawing upon the context of the statement. A quote of a quote, if you will.

Now, as far as the 'hidden' rules of WoD apply, most would find this reasoning unfair and rather rude. However, there are times when it is simply not viable to wait for everyone in WoD to arrive, and the logistics of gathering 'everyone online' to one point, just so a quest can start is often detrimental to the 'excitement' of the quest: the sporadic urge to rush off and 'save the day'.

What we must all remember, as players, is that we cannot all go on every quest, and it is not by virtue of malice that players are driven away from quests (though there is apparently exception to that rule). However, Celeste, I am to understand that you represent - vocally - a group of players who wish to remain anonymous about a subject that we, as players, really have no power to pursue.

Were I in your position Celeste, what I would suggest you do, is to continue setting a good example. However, I would warn you that while your zeal, for better or for worse, may have an impact on WoD, stating that you *always* spend time informing people on quests may result in people being upset with you when the odd time comes that you do not. While I cannot be certain, I imagine that there may be people who choose not to go on quests, though I can see no reason why they simply would not wish to simply state it in a response to your PM.

Though this is not for this forum, I would like to make a comment about this point

Celeste wrote:If I'm out hunting, and a seer were to "place" a note of some kind on a MOB I just killed, I probably wouldn't even notice until I got back a few hours later to sell my bags of loot.

If perhaps it were able to be scripted *a note* to come up, rather than *yoink*, I am sure anyone would take much more notice. But you are right about people not knowing about quests until they are blatantly announced (unquoted), but that is the nature of players, and the game, I think.

Now that we have settled the matter of the blatant (and unneeded) use of the word "cliques" in our community, I would like to press further into the dilemma that seems to be apparently waylaying a significant fraction of the WoD community. In relation to this 'quest ettiquite' issue, it is tricky one indeed. For as I stated much earlier, human behaviour is a difficult thing to police. While we may desire as we might a peaceful, team-oriented world where everyone is happy and Drocket showers us all with ten million gold (or whatever), that's simply not going to be so.

But what is important is to remember that we each have a part in the WoD community, and that makes and shapes our experiences. Certainly, there are going to be bad times, and most certainly, there are going to be people you (or I) don't get along with. That is almost certain. However, each and every person has a right to enjoyment and fulfilment, to quest or to not quest and to take from WoD what they wish and desire, so long as it is not to the detriment of others.

And for those amongst the anonymous, I have two things to say: First is that we are incredibly blessed with a beautiful shard, a wonderful admin and a remarkably placid player base. If you have migrated from OSI, or any 'punk' shard out there, you would know that I am incredibly sincere in my statements. What we have here; the opportunity to roam free, to own statics, to quest frequently, to share thoughts and ideas, to develop relationships.. these are all things that are part of a very rare, and special community. All of our lives are enriched by WoD, despite how much we may deny it to ourselves (for a time ), and it is this growth and togetherness we must foster. That we are accepted, despite our failings, into this haven, is a blessing, and not something to be taken for granted.

The second point I wish to make is: Take responsibility for your actions. The discussions I have had with the staff towards the attitude(s) of the players is "WoD is what you make it". You are not, at any point, beholden by other players to inform you of quests. I myself was simply roaming Britannia - the maze, of all places - when a quest found *me*. Also, I was at my very Tower of Scorn when Corona came and *personally* attacked me.

Certainly, these are the exceptions of the rule, but I am most certain that if you (the anonymous) are to sit at the bank and wait for people to inform you of quests, you will certainly find dissatisfaction. Take initiative and roam and venture, and quests will come to you. I cannot walk around in Britannia anywhere more than the length of an hour (unless I roam very lonely places) without finding a quest. Controlled people, fire monsters, and all sorts of horrors await the avid gamer.

Similarly, quests are not the be-all and end-all of the shard. There is more than enough excitement, adventure and cameradie for the adventurer, because all in all, it comes down to fun. Francis Greye and I (as Belmont) had a hearty time fending off the horrors of Yew between us. It certainly wasn't a quest, to be sure, but I had more fun on that adventure than I have had in a long time, and it gave me a new perspective of life in WoD.

Celeste; thank-you for clarifying this issue. Certainly, there is merit to your words, and I do not deny the truth of your statements. I believe that there are definately people who have had bad experiences in WoD, but unfortunately I cannot claim responsibility for that, nor suggest any suggestion beyond what I have already in the Tech Forum (refer to mentioned forum for more information).

I thank you kindly for explaining that issue, and hopefully the issue is now resolved. I am certain that it will not come up in the future in the negative light it has been associated with lately. I admire your post in response to my topic, and your concern for other players is a very positive element of WoD.

Let us all continue to grow and become better people, as well as becoming a better society.

-M

If perhaps it were able to be scripted *a note* to come up, rather than *yoink*

Actually this already is the case with notes, and possibly books, though not sure about those.

Azzo Ranar wrote:I think they are trying to form some sort of clique.

GREAT response! Leave it to Azzo to sum it up for us.

I must say i am considerably displeased with the soul who sent them off to the Haunt. That was rude and ignorant because WoD isn't about the shineys that you accumulate. At the same time i would have hoped that the two latecomers to the quest would have had the grace to decline a share of the loot as they had missed any of the pain involved in gathering the loot.
A little consideration goes a very long way in WoD.
As to the clique thing it's nice to hunt with your friends and oft times difficult to arrange a hunt like that as time is short and people have rl things which eat away at their time. Over the years i have spent a fair chunk of time "training" players to hunt in WoD which oft times consists of ressing them and trying to explain how what worked elsewhere is a suicide tactic here. It's nice not to have to worry about your fellow hunter turning out to be a bigger threat to your wellbeing than the mobs.
when you quest especially for the first few times if you watch there are some players who will proceed through the most godawful things without dying or even being unduly inconvenienced. it's a long list and the odds are pretty decent that there will be a few of them on any given quest. stay with them and emulate them as best you can and your quest enjoyment will be enhanced quite a bit. assuming you don't get you jollies by Oooohing etc

Ehran wrote:Over the years i have spent a fair chunk of time "training" players to hunt in WoD which oft times consists of ressing them and trying to explain how what worked elsewhere is a suicide tactic here. It's nice not to have to worry about your fellow hunter turning out to be a bigger threat to your wellbeing than the mobs.

I prefer doing it this way:

Kid (noob): "What happens when I stick this penny in this socket?"

Dad (me): "Go ahead and find out"...*waits*...*resses kid* "There, now you won't do something as stupid as that anymore."

Ehran wrote: It's nice not to have to worry about your fellow hunter turning out to be a bigger threat to your wellbeing than the mobs.

Exactly, Ehran.

And yer consideration comment is right on the mark, too.

that's how the process tends to work shadowstone. the explanation seems more relevant somehow if it happens while a person is putting their gear on after being ressed somehow.

be nice if we could res people in real life but i guess then there would be no improvement of the species.

I am curious Celeste about one thing you mentioned. You seem to feel a large % of woddians are macroing at any given time. hmm a large % of the woddians who are online would be better way to phrase that. This has not been my experience with wod in the past and i am curious why you would think it was the case now?

Actually, there's usually not very many macroers online. Part of that is that it seems like not many people are (for lack of a better word) 'macro-inclined'. Most people rarely/never macro, while there's a small number who seem to macro almost all the time. They're usually not very successful most of the day and evening because there's usually a GM popping around, so they (the macroers) tend to develop, um, 'connection issues' So they usually get most of their macroing done in the middle of the night.