Author Topic: One of us clearly does not have a clue of IC and OOC, and about roleplaying  (Read 6948 times)

egamma

  • Guest
I think the annoyance was not about lord/earl, it was about [region name] vs [character name]. Almost nobody that I see uses the region name honorific.

Also, Earl (or the other correct title) is the preferred mode of address; Lord is the vague, "I know you're important but I don't know why" failsafe mode of address for someone you don't know at all.

Tiridia

  • Knight
  • **
  • Posts: 76
    • View Profile
I think the annoyance was not about lord/earl, it was about [region name] vs [character name]. Almost nobody that I see uses the region name honorific.

Oh, if we go to such specifics, the annoyance of my character was really just about the content of the response by X. Here the little earl shares his interest in such and such values, and asks the newcomer whether he shares those values, and gets a response that translates roughly to "haha, I couldn't care less about your stupid values!" So, of course he can not admit _this_ is what got his precious feelings hurt, so he goes on nitpicking on a preferred form of address that the newcomer has no way of knowing he preferred.

Also, Earl (or the other correct title) is the preferred mode of address; Lord is the vague, "I know you're important but I don't know why" failsafe mode of address for someone you don't know at all.

This might be a language thing then, since English is just something I picked up along the way and found useful. I do not have very intimate grasp of it. In my mind I imagined using "Lord" would be indicative of appreciation beyond the ordinary title. Perhaps I have confused its usage with what you would have in military, ie. a captain could call a sergeant just that, "sergeant Jackson" and it would be quite fine. But if a private did that, there might be a hell to pay, so the private says "Sir" instead. Now of course the convention in BM is a bit different, but just as a duke might call his earl "Earl Kepler" or just plain "Earl", I thought a lower rank might not get away with it.

Similarly addressing government members and such you might (or so I thought) use forms such as "Lord Treasurer X" or "Lord Marshal". So, I figured, apparently erroneously, that "Lord" holds more weight than a specific title. Thus my little earl insisted on that form. In my native language this would make sense, but perhaps it does not translate all that well. Still, even if not grammatically or otherwise coherent, the main point was really to force a specific form, even if it were completely arbitrary, on the perceived lower ranking imagined offender as a response to something the character found insulting.

My characters tend to be a bit edgy. But from the replies gained here I have concluded that the new characters ought to get some slack before being introduced to the depths of one of their more challenging personalities.

Gustav Kuriga

  • Guest
Perhaps I have confused its usage with what you would have in military, ie. a captain could call a sergeant just that, "sergeant Jackson" and it would be quite fine. But if a private did that, there might be a hell to pay, so the private says "Sir" instead.

The sergeant would give the private latrine duty and the night watch for calling him "sir"...

Now since your argument isn't one of correctness of title, but rather one of proper etiquette, it is in fact proper for a knight to use Earl when talking to a lord of a region. if he were talking to a duke or higher, there might be a reason to be miffed.

Stabbity

  • Marketing
  • Mighty Duke
  • *****
  • Posts: 1336
  • Formerly the Himoura Family. Currently ?????????
    • View Profile
Often yes it is stated as equal, but his character might prefer Lord instead of Earl so conflict. Some might not care if they get any title, some like him for instance might be really specific on their title.

Referring to a Earl specifically as a Earl is actually more respectful than calling hi  Lord XYZ. Not all lord ranks are equal. In terms of hierarchy it went like this:
Margrave > Count/Earl > Viscount > Baron.

Therefore by calling him Earl it is a quiet way of acknowleding his superiority to the Viscounts and Barons of the world.
Life is a dance, it is only fitting that death sing the tune.

Tiridia

  • Knight
  • **
  • Posts: 76
    • View Profile
Given the overall consensus and the absolute lack of any dissensus on the matter, I hereby conclude my previous understanding of the usage of the word "lord" inadequate and erroneous, and consider the use of form "Earl A" appropriate for knights to use in the future. This applies to my character as well. Thank you all for you input. It has been immensely valuable. You live and learn.

Blue Star

  • Noble Lord
  • ***
  • Posts: 418
    • View Profile
Tiridia

If your on Dwilight I can see you getting worked up over this, however, if he calls you lord or earl does it really matter. If your not on a SMA continent long as he refers to your status I deem that appropriate. If you get worked up at a new player over that or a returning I think you should settle down some.

Isn't Dwilight the only SMA?

Personally I see very little different in: Earl, Baron, Count. Trick around it is to call everyone Lord or Lady... I'd only call by actual title if I new them or I myself were a lord. (see I used lord there)
I think like a sinner. Curse like a sailor. Smile like a saint. :)