Vulgar?

[Penchant]

There's a big difference between including vulgarity in a play or other work of fiction because it's appropriate for the context or makes a point, and including it for its own sake.

The vulgarity in Shakespeare's plays is there because it fits.

The vulgarity in Bowie's play is there because he wanted to be vulgar and insulting.

Regardless of the relative nobility of the two authors, that is what makes the difference between it being appropriate to criticize one for the vulgarity in his play, and laud the other.

I can't really argue against that, since I haven't read the latest play to know.

[Eldargard]

So, I have never reported a message vulgar, judged a message nor been accused of being vulgar. So this mechanic is new to me. With this in mind, I want to be sure I understand it's purpose, function and IC relation. Correct me if I am wrong, but this is what I gather from this conversation:

Purpose:
A means to encourage players to play their characters in a way fitting for a noble or, at the least, ensure that characters that are intentionally played as vulgar face realistic loss of honor while simultaneously gaining realistic repute.

Function:
If my character receives a message he would consider vulgar, click the button. The message is sent to another player (what is the criteria for who receives the message?) and if they agree the message is vulgar, the offending party loses a point of honor. Either way, news spreads that the offending character has tenancies that some consider unfitting of a noble. It is judged by characters, known by characters, spread by characters.

IC Relation:
If a character clicks on the vulgar button, it is as if he had talked to others within his social circle about how vulgar he found the offending character's words. News of this spreads. The fact that some random character receives a copy of the letter represents how the offending characters words have spread, with the aid of the reporting character.

If this random character agrees that the message is vulgar and clicks the appropriate button, it is as if he says to those around him, You would not believe what this guy said! Such words are terribly vulgar! This suggests that news of the offending characters deed has spread and that many find his words vulgar and results in a loss of standing.

[Penchant]

Maybe not a perfect description but very close to one.

[vonGenf]

"rape" is a game mechanic which our nobles orchestrate. How can it be considered vulgar to simply mention it?

The game does not prevent you from raping peasants, and it does not prevent you from being vulgar, but your "honour rating" may be lowered if you do either.

[Eldargard]

The game does not prevent you from raping peasants, and it does not prevent you from being vulgar, but your "honour rating" may be lowered if you do either.

Yes!

[Anaris]

If my character receives a message he would consider vulgar, click the button.

Close: If your character receives a message a noble should consider vulgar, click the button.

It has nothing to do with individual preferences—this came up at some point a year or three ago, when someone was marking messages as vulgar because of (I think) who was saying them, and when challenged on this, he said, "Well, my character finds that character vulgar in the extreme. Thus, anything he says is vulgar in my character's eyes."

It's about the general mores of the milieu.

[Sonya]

The game does not prevent you from raping peasants, and it does not prevent you from being vulgar, but your "honour rating" may be lowered if you do either.

The option "Rape Pillage and Burn" doesn't necessarily have to mean that you as Noble will dismount your horse and go Raping and killing, But you order your men (who are commoners) to do it. Because is a way to lower region morale, thing you want over the material damage that the action may cause. Remember that you are a Noble and WILL NOT lower yourself to do peasants things .

Now, if you do it, no one should know about it. In the case that one of those commoner women are brought to your Tent for your satisfaction, it would be only known by your troops or your close retainer, not everyone. And in some cases the victim would be murdered to avoid withness or Noble Bastards on commoner women. (Adventurers anyone?)

Remember that Orders are things you Order your Unit to do, Actions are things the Character do.

Check for reference:
Actions
Orders

[Vellos]

Close: If your character receives a message a noble should consider vulgar, click the button.

It has nothing to do with individual preferences—this came up at some point a year or three ago, when someone was marking messages as vulgar because of (I think) who was saying them, and when challenged on this, he said, "Well, my character finds that character vulgar in the extreme. Thus, anything he says is vulgar in my character's eyes."

It's about the general mores of the milieu.

Was that a year ago? Damn, time flies.

Yes, I was the chronic vulgarity abuser– both as a way of using the implied whisper-campaign as a foolproof random-leaking tool, and as a blanket character-directed action.

And yes, both of those are abuse (and of course, after the discussion about them, I promptly stopped both and reconsidered my use of the feature).

I think Unwin's description of the feature is pretty solid.

[Vellos]

Just re-read this thread.

It appears my vulgarity-as-leaking has already been noted.

I will point out again, as Penchant did: as soon as it was brought to my attention, I concurred and ceased. And on the blanket-reporting.

Where the debate grew lengthy was on the boundary between reporting "language" and "content." I still maintain (and I think this thread continues to prove) that this distinction is so subjective as to be nearly (though probably not entirely) meaningless. Distinguishing between "vulgar content" and "vulgar language" is very hard.

PS- About Shakespeare. He almost certainly WAS considered vulgar in his time. As noted theatre was generally thought vulgar. Shakespeare didn't come to be seen as high literature until well after his death. And vitally, he wasn't a noble. Nobles could patronize theaters– but being an actor would be very inappropriate. And beyond Shakespeare we're not even talking about the Middle Ages any more. Imagining a noble as a troubador or jester is a bit silly. A few nobles did write religious tracts; reading Henry-the-somethng-or-other's various religious invectives against this or that is fun, and it can be quite vulgar. Again proving the point that religion was an exception to the rule.

[Penchant]

After pming Tom about Silverfires letter, in which he said he found nothing obviously vulgar, he also stated his opinion wasn't that important though as the feature is player-driven. Now thus is a huge inference, but basically everyone is using the vulgarity feature incorrectly. You all are arguing things about history where that shouldn't matter. Within reason, vulgarity is meant to be what a noble would say, based on the social atmosphere IC/whatever IC is deemed vulgar, not OOC arguments about whether or not a medieval noble would be considered vulgar or not for some action.

[Gustav Kuriga]

Penchant, usually when everyone is doing something but you, that means you aren't the one in the right. There are certain arguments where that differs (religion probably being the biggest offender and exception to the rule depending on your viewpoint), but for the most part this holds true.

For example, if everyone else has to work for a living, but you find a loophole in the stock exchange laws that allows you to make a huge profit when you shouldn't, you can't start saying everyone else is doing it wrong when you're abusing the system.

[vonGenf]

You all are arguing things about history where that shouldn't matter. Within reason, vulgarity is meant to be what a noble would say, based on the social atmosphere IC/whatever IC is deemed vulgar,

We're only trying to use history as a guide as to what would be considered vulgar in the social atmosphere of medieval nobles. After all, we're not medieval nobles. History can help you to shape your character's IC reactions.

[Scarlett]

Within reason, vulgarity is meant to be what a noble would say, based on the social atmosphere IC/whatever IC is deemed vulgar

This isn't exactly wrong, but I wonder what we are meant to use as a basis for 'social atmosphere IC/whatever IC.'

Right on the front page of www.battlemaster.org, it says:

It is set in a low-fantasy middle-ages world

As such, 'middle ages' is my barometer. The fact that you can get a dozen or a hundred players who don't give a crap about it absolutely means that the bar for vulgar will get lowered. Nothing I can do about that. I certainly don't expect players to be medieval experts, but I do expect them to make a small amount of effort.

[Woelfy]

So...

I'm guessing that me getting a letter calling me a douche would be classified as vulgar.

Moderator action: deleted personal insult against another player.

If someone called your character a duche, use the vulgarity feature.

If someone called you, the player, a douche, then you should absolutely report them to the Magistrates. That is not playing with friends.

[Chaotrance13]

So...

I'm guessing that me getting a letter calling me a douche would be classified as vulgar.

Not only that but that's probably something that needs to be reported.