Playing the Blame Game

For many frustrated raiding groups, there are boss NPC encounters that stump them so many times. Those bosses might allow only a small margin of error; no matter how much knowledge and experience those players possess, a simple mistake made by any of them can snowball into a wipe. While still existing in all encounters, it is these ones that causation is most evident.

Simply, causation is the relationship between an event and its effect, such that the event causes the effect. Using this concept while diagnosing a raid wipe, the effect of the wipe can be credited to the event of a particular person's (or persons') misconduct (and therefore can be identified as something to avoid next attempt) if a causal relationship can be established.

Consider the following...
To demonstrate this type of troubleshooting, I will use a theoretic (though still plausible) attempt under the Archimonde encounter in the Battle for Mount Hyjal raid, the encounter in which causation may be the most evident. It would be important to note that, at level 70, the typical nontank health is ~7500. Archimonde has the following abilities:

• Air Burst; Tears of the Goddess. The affected will die from fall damage if the fall is not interrupted.
• Fear
• Doomfire
• Soul Charge/Soul Charge/Soul Charge; Archimonde casts one of these any time after he gains a Soul Charge buff from a player death.
• Grip of the Legion, producing a curse-dispellable debuff.
• Finger of Death and Hand of Death, which Archimonde cast to expedite the wiping process. (I have had my share of crude jokes about these abilities.)

Consider the following plausible scenario, where A is Archimonde, B and C are dps, H is a tank healer and T is the tank:

A casts Air Burst on B. B fails to break their fall (using Tears or otherwise) and dies from fall damage. Archimonde gains a Soul Charge (the silencing sort), which he immediately uses and cuts every nontanks' health by half. A then inflicts H with Grip, which C, who is the only curse dispeller in range, cannot dispel under the silence. A then casts Fear, making H run out of range of C into a Doomfire. H cannot heal through this much damage and dies. T is left vulnerable and A gains another Soul Charge. A uses it and kills both T and all melee dps. A starts spamming Finger of Death, eventually leading to a wipe.

Follies in diagnosing the raid wipe
The raid, diagnosing this wipe, would reasonably ignore all events after the tank's death and attribute the fault to the healer, who caused T's death by insufficient healing. (In the extreme case, T would be blamed for the wipe because they died!) Unfortunately, doing only this will not provide a full picture of the attempt. The insufficent healing was under extenuating circumstances, after all!

Diagnosing the raid wipe by buck passing

A buck and a set of playing cards used in poker.

H is now said to hold the buck. If H can attribute their fault to someone else's fault through causation, they are said to pass the buck, with such an action being called buck passing. Under buck passing between players, the buck will ultimately stop at a single player or group of people, who can be deemed ultimately at fault.

It would important to note that the effect of a preceding event is also the event of the succeeding effect. The following series of events can be constructed from the scenario, ordered according to reverse chronology and linked by causation:

1. There is no one in melee range alive after the second Soul Charge and, after A's spamming Finger of Death, the raid wipes.
2. T fails to receive sufficient healing and dies.
3. H suffers unhealable Grip and Doomfire damage and dies.
4. C is silenced from the Soul Charge and H is Feared out of range, so C cannot dispel H's Grip.
5. B fails to break their fall when A casts Air Burst on them and dies, earning A a Soul Charge.

From this, the following series of causation can be derived:

1. The raid wiped because the T was dead and not reducing A's damage to the raid in general.
2. T was dead and not reducing A's damage to the raid in general because H was dead and not healing.
3. H was dead and not healing because H suffered unhealable damage from Grip and Doomfire, which would have been healable if C dispelled Grip.
4. H suffered unhealable damage from Grip and Doomfire, which would have been healable if C dispelled Grip, because C was silenced by the Soul Charge from B's death, and by the time C could cast spells again, H was feared out of range.
5. C was silenced by the Soul Charge from B's death, and by the time C could cast spells again, H was feared out of range because ...

The series of events and causation can be merged into a chain of fault, which allows for a buck to be passed along it. By the time the diagnosis reaches point 5., the buck would have stopped at B, where B cannot blame anyone else. Here is where the ultimate fault rests, because if it were not for this player's action, the whole chain of events would not have happened! The raid would then consider this something to learn from and maybe would even discipline the player at ultimate fault.

Junctions of preceding causations
Could anyone along the series of events have introduced their own fault along the way, continuing the chain of events? If they did not introduce the fault, could the chain of events have terminated? Certainly (e.g. considering event 4., if C did not notice a 0.5 sec window of opportunity to dispel the curse from a H barely in range), but these can be ignored for any of the following reasons:

• The preceding causation would have made it unreasonable for this person to have acted properly, e.g. if C was too distracted at considering the Soul Charge that they did not notice said window of opportunity.
• A properly established causation can make said fault insignificant, and the chain of events would proceed the same way even if it did not exist.
• For all practical purposes, the possible said fault is unlikely to happen. Whether it actually does is out of the scope of ordinary World of Warcraft raiding and can (depending on disposition) be predicted by divination or actuarial science.

What if a proper causation holds yet the extra fault stays significant, if both (or more) were required for the series of events to continue? For example, considering event 3., there was in fact a second healer nearby (named J) which made the damage unhealable because they were not healing H? 3. then becomes a junction of two preceding causations: had C dispelled H's curse, J's healing would not have been needed, and had J healed H, C's dispel would not have been needed (at least for the meantime). Here, the buck splits into two, and they are passed up two separate branches of series of causation: while the raid figures out why Grip was not dispelled, they are, at the same time, figuring out why J was not healing H. The chain of fault then becomes a tree of fault.

Groups at fault
Consider causation 5. Say that B, while Air Bursted, was whispered to by another player D who was warning them (at the very last minute!) that they were airborne. This whisper distracted B so B ended up not interrupting their fall. There is then this following segment of the chain of events:

1. B fails to break their fall when A casts Air Burst on them and dies, earning A a Soul Charge.
2. D whispers to B about the Air Burst and B becomes distracted.

There is then the following chain of causation:

1. B fails to break their fall when A casts Air Burst on them and dies, earning A a Soul Charge because D whispered B about the Air Burst, distracting B from breaking their fall.
2. D whispered B about the Air Burst, distracting B from breaking their fall because D anticipated B to fail to break their fall when A casts Air Burst on them and die, earning A a Soul Charge.
3. B, as a matter of fact, fails to break their fall when A casts Air Burst on them and dies, earning A a Soul Charge because D whispered B about the Air Burst, distracting B from breaking their fall.
4. D whispered B about the Air Burst, distracting B from breaking their fall because D anticipated B to fail to break their fall when A casts Air Burst on them and die, earning A a Soul Charge.
5. B, as a matter of fact, fails to break their fall when A casts Air Burst on them and dies, earning A a Soul Charge because D whispered B about the Air Burst, distracting B from breaking their fall.
6. etc...

In this case, the buck is endlessly passed between B and D! This signifies that a group of people are at ultimate fault, where the faults of these people (in this case, B's and D's) are mutually dependent on each other. This is despite that the chain of events does have a definite beginning. Inspecting the series of events overall, it can be observed that if this group had not been at fault, the whole series of events would not have occurred! The raid would then consider this something to learn from and maybe would even discipline the group at ultimate fault.

Of course, another person or group could have caused said group to be at fault; the group does not need to be at ultimate fault. This would extend the chain of fault further.

Methodology
The person or group at ultimate fault is the person/group who started the chain of events, and had they not done so, the chain of events as it is known to have occurred would not have existed. To find this person/group under buck passing:

1. Construct a series of events from the wipe backwards. Each event should involve a single player's actions that make them at fault, and should exclude any actions beyond player control (e.g. the boss' behaviour).
2. Construct a series of causation, connecting events together using "because" or "causes". Note where (if at all) the buck seems to pass between the same people and deal with it (no pun intended) accordingly.
3. Merge the series of events and series of causation into a chain of fault. Analyse for any junctions (where an event joins several preceding causations) and groups at fault (where members are blaming on each other) and amend the chain of fault accordingly.
4. Pass the buck up the chain of fault. Where the buck(s) stop(s), the person(s)/group(s) holding it/them are deemed to be at ultimate fault.