It is a widely known, but not documented, fact that a notable population of MMO players display less than enlightened behavior.  Self-serving, rude and just plain idiotic actions abound in pretty much any digital universe.  Ninety percent of the time they do not bother me.  I can simple ignore the knuckle-draggers and loudmouths during the day-to-day grind and questing.

My theory is that those players, other than being chronically stupid, don't have an incorrect perspective on the way an MMO is meant to be played.  They seem to treat it like a single player game. 

Since the time when two paddles and a ball where cutting edge, the player's actions were the center of that reality.  No matter who the Player Character was, the world revolved around their actions, and ultimately they were the hero of the day when the game ended.

This format gives a person a strong sense of self-importance.  Which is good in the right context.  But that context is not on a server with several thousand other players.  Your single character, even with top armor and level,  isn't even as strong as many epic NPC's, let alone Bosses.  But some people won't acknowledge this fact in their behavior.

So how do we become truly a force to be reckoned with?  Well, l that is the basic key to any MMO, the cooperation between players is where true strength resides. This is where I have the greatest issue with MMO's, or specifically the slackjaw portion of the population that reside within them.  This "Single Player Mentality" has no place in, and will be the death of, any good party.

So that why I choose to start this guide acknowledging this problem.  The specific dilemma is that it is hard to know if a player has SPM until you have worked with them for a bit.  Here are a few signs I have noticed in WoW, but similar traits will probably show in other games as well.

• Do they Need Loot on anything they really didn't need?
• Do they Greed Loot every single time even though they would have no use, what-so-ever, for that item?
• Do they act without or against orders from the group leader lacking clear reason or explanation?
• Have they repeatedly ignored party HP and MP levels and just keep jumping into new conflicts?
• Did they send an invite to a total stranger without talking first? (this one is just bad manners, and a personal pet peeve)
  

So now that we know who not to invite to a party, we have to set out a foundation structure. 

It is a sound idea to set initial limits on the party so that players joining will know where they will be going, and for how long.  This will prevent mid-mission departures and unmatched player levels.  Even though running a 23 level player through a 30 level instance would be sweet xp for them, the amount and radius of aggro they will naturally draw would be highly undesirable for a controlled run.

So here are the two  things you should clearly lay out when forming a party:

• Time limit:  hour of expected disband in PMT.
• Level Limit:  I would never go less than 5 below instance average.
  

Here is where you would expect me to lay out what each class should do in a party.  But the fact is that if you are at least slightly intuative you already know what you should be doing.  The key is coordinating those actions between 5 players.  So lets talk about the two basic roles in a party.  Leader and Grunt.

Leader:  Every party has one leader, if you feel like you could do a better job as leader, go start your own party.  The second you have more than one person taking charge, everyone is screwed.  The leader needs to be the singular voice of command.  With that in mind, the leader has to have a wide perspective on the entire conflict so cannot be anywhere near melee combat.  Sorry all you Warriors, Rogues, Pallies, and Druids but leadership is not for you, the nice part is you can be masterful grunts.

So this leaves several classes that can be possible leaders. 

Hunter and Warlock both are fairly natural leaders since they have been training since level 10 to work with another entity in battle.   My concern with their role as leader stems from their attention possibly being spread too thin across all players as well as keeping their sidekick properly instructed.  But a truly clever Hunter and Warlock can manage this hiccup.

Priest and Shaman have a similar issue.  Their attention is already on keeping HP up and Totems balanced so it is an extra chore to also keep the group monitored and issue orders. But like before, talented players can jump these hurtles.

An additional problem Hunters and Shaman have is the temptation to enter Melee.  As implied before, I think it should only be an act of desperation for a leader to enter physical combat.  A leader needs to keep overall perspective and not have their attention drawn into one-on-one combat. 

Which brings me to my favorite class for leadership, the Mage.  Besides the fact that most every Mage is pretty much incapable of physical combat, the Mage is naturally suited for leadership.  Since level one, a Mage has had to preread each encounter to find the path of least resistance.  A Mage who doesn't preplan everything spends a lot of time running back to their body, and subsequently probably won't get much past level 20.  On top of that add the sheer mind-numbing variety to their combat strategy.  From this you get a person who has been playing very precisely since they were slaying level 2's with various bits of arcana.

Preferredly, a Mage should not draw aggro.  In a perfect situation, they are the seasoning to the combat.  Where the Melee, Buffs, and Healers are the meat and potatoes.  They grease the wheels and add a splash of magic here and there to keep the battle operating smoothly.  So they are already minding the details as well as trying to keep a overall perspective of the battle, in my mind that is the natural starting position for a leader to be in.

I would highly recommend, and in some cases insist, that all the Mages out there consider a consistent role as party, and ultimately raid, leader.   As for Hunters, Warlocks, Priests and Shaman it would be wise to develop a leadership style for those times where you would be called upon to lead.  

My final thing to say on Leadership is that communication is your best tool.  No matter who is in your party, if they don't know your overall approach to  tactics for combat,  educate them.  I would highly recommend storing your personal play book either on a personal or guild site.  In the case of a guild site it would be a strong recruiting tool.  And if someone actually goes and reads tactical write ups, they are definitely worth recruiting.  Also, I don't think I need to go into the whole Ventrillo issue, do I?

Grunt:  This term covers anyone who is not the leader.  It is not at all intended to belittle a player, just humble those people with SPM.  The term implies that you have a certain set of actions and instructions you must execute.  Personal initiative should be constrained within orders and instructions given by the group leader.  These are things that need to be done, and a good Grunt quickly and efficiently gets them done.  If they didn't the party would fail and the best leadership is wasted.

It is also the Grunt's job to let the leader know their capabilities so they can best use them, and perhaps how not to use them.  For example; Pallies, Shaman and Druids can heal, but unless spec'd for it they would make a poor primary healer.  Where as a properly built Rogue can rock the DPS counter like a hurricane, and can be a great help to the main tank.

This whole principle leads back to having a nice storehouse of friends who know eachothers' abilities and styles, and dipping into that well to make the bulk of any party.

 Your own personal style of group interaction and leaderships will vary accourding to the vast factors that go into each party.  It is my hope though, that I have provided a base concept to your future party building.