- Visiting a local tavern or inn. Is that non-SMA because nobles would never visit a common tavern? Or are these considered to be the medieval equivalent of a high-class establishment catering to the nobility?
- Is asking for a scribe note SMA? Is demanding a scribe note SMA? How about saying that since an official scout report wasn't provided via scribe notes, that there is no proof that someone was in a region? The medieval version of "Pics, or it didn't happen!"
- In the Lurian lands (not sure if this is common elsewhere) lords are often referred to by the region name, rather than, or in addition to, their personal names. So you call him Duke Giask because he's lord of the city of Giask, instead of Duke Frank because he's lord of a city and his name is Frank Jones. Is this "more SMA" or merely a local cultural thing?
- Is talking about "5,000 CS" of enemy troops non-SMA? Or is it OK because the game itself uses the term, and thus if the game itself uses it, it's acceptable?
1. Tavern- Depends on how your noble enters. If he enters, tosses out the peasants, requisitions the establishment, etc; or if he is insulted and disgusted to be there, fine. If he just hits up the tavern for drinks and tall tales... you're obviously playing a D&D character... which are aptly referred to as "Adventurers."
2. Asking for a scribe note is fine with SMA, IMHO. It is plausible that scribes could send details in some way if we posit that nobles have these vast legions of scribes (which we do). I have argued elsewhere that I think demanding a scribe note (as you aptly put it: "Pics or it didn't happen") is extremely non-SMA. It privileges peasant scribes over nobles, presumes a categorical difference between scout reports and letters of which characters would not be aware, and is an
unnecessary imposition on RP by game mechanics. Game mechanics trump RP, but such things are an example of one player wanting things to go his/her way, so imposes an extremely broad approach to game mechanics on other peoples' legitimate RP.
3. This is very SMA appropriate. It's far, far more appropriate than referring to nobles by their first name alone. If people dispute it I'm almost 100% sure I can find documented cases of it being done in at least France, some German lands, and England.
4. I generally try to give counts in terms of men, but I'm okay with CS for several reasons: 1. like scribe notes themselves, CS is a very useful convenience. I don't expect people to conjure up different explanations of scribe notes or make SMA explanations for why we have instant letters. You can't get around it; CS seems very similar. 2. CS is a reasonable assumption. If I say, "There are 300 soldiers," that's not what a professional scout (like the ones we hire) would actually tell me. He'd say something like "There are 300 soldiers; they look heavily armed, organized, led by nobles XYZ; looks like mostly armed thusly.... etc" But those details can be conveniently summarized as CS, especially since the game doesn't give details distinguishing between pikes, spears, axes, swords, armor types, etc.
----
Now for my own list:
5. Plate armor- I'm okay with the occasional lord who is a hero or cavalier walking around in plate. But when every other noble seems to be wearing 15th century top-of-the-line plate armor, whether he is from a backwater scrub forest or a recently elevated adventurer... not very SMA.
6. Republics and democracies- I say this with qualifications. I am find with republics and democracies, as long as they are not REALLY republics or democracies. As long as they are still elitist, governed on a hierarchical basis, categorically reject humanism (in the sense of all people being basically the same), etc. I play in two republics. I would say that in Terran we do a good job being a republic of nobles; we give great authority to Senators, are very militaristic, have no real "advocates of the people," and are obsessively preoccupied with culture and civilization and the refinements of life for which we fight so hard. I would say in Riombara, it's like playing an 20th century political simulator: peasants have rights, everything belongs to the State, taxes are as centralized as possible, judicial codes are framed around implicitly inalienable rights.... it's getting better; there are an increasing number of players in Riombara with a real interest in Medieval governance. But it's still a long way from anything remotely appropriate in BM. Which isn't to say it's not fun; it is fun to play in Riombara, I'd recommend it to anyone... just saying it could be much better, and isn't right for BM.
7. Inappropriate names- They still happen. They're more subtle now, though. Frequent obvious references to other settings, every religion that ever referenced Tyr and Zisa, characters named after extremely well known fantasy characters (I'm fine with somebody picking a minor reference; the Vellos family name is stolen from a faction in the space sci-fi game EV Nova, but few people notice), realm names that sound like Starcraft factions (Terran).... names. On this, I actually liked Solaria and Kabrinskia, because I could see motivations that, even if there wasn't a huge historical precedent, I could understand how a noble could arrive at those decisions within the medieval context.
8. Atheism- less common now, but still happens. Just as bad is apathy. I'm guilty of it too; but I don't really know how to fix it in regards to religion. I feel like I'm talking about RL....
