Rape, Murder, Pillage

[De-Legro]

Most my characters would think both sides of the argument are spending far too much time thinking about peasants.

[Constantine]

On some islands, in most circumstances, most of my characters would agree. On the war islands, I couldn't care less.

Fair enough.
I don't see why people who do care should be getting any grief either.

Most my characters would think both sides of the argument are spending far too much time thinking about peasants.

It's never about peasants. It's about honourable conduct.
Likewise animal cruelty laws are there not because animals have any rights, but because people who abuse them in certain ways offend public morality.

[De-Legro]

It's never about peasants. It's about honourable conduct.
Likewise animal cruelty laws are there not because animals have any rights, but because people who abuse them in certain ways offend public morality.

Honourable conduct often only applies to actions against certain sub groups. It is completely possible to view rape of a noble women as a heinous crime, and rape of a peasant as mere sport. Both sides of the argument are completely valid, depending on the culture and morale norms that the characters are from. If your realm views peasants as a resource, particularly if they don't attach much importance to that resource, then they are likely not going to view rape as a crime. If your realm views peasants as simpletons that are cursed by birth and require noble leadership, but in other regards are not that unlike nobility, then arguments against rape would make sense.

The problem I see on both sides is this assumption that there is only one "honourable" course. Honour is the same as ethics and morality, in the end it is all about perspective and the collective accepted norm.

[Constantine]

Honour is the same as ethics and morality, in the end it is all about perspective and the collective accepted norm.

I'd buy the "morals are all subjective" argument if you could name me one country in feudal Europe where systematic murder of innocent civilians and mass-rape were not seen as evil acts.

[De-Legro]

I'd buy the "morals are all subjective" argument if you could name me one country in feudal Europe where systematic murder of innocent civilians and mass-rape were not seen as evil acts.

And I would say to you, this is not a medieval Europe simulator. That said it doesn't take much searching to know that rape and mass killings were pretty common place after a long siege, just as looting was part of the expected pay in many armies. Looking at papers like Rape in Medieval England: A Legal History, 1272-1307 they suggest that even when rape was legislated as a crime, the Male jurors and the courts in general where generally against the victims and punishments were few. This shouldn't be much of a surprise, there is a reason why rape is so under reported in this supposedly "enlightened" age.

If the women of their own countries were supposedly rarely awarded legal protection, what hope to those of a hated enemy have? You need only look to modern conflicts to see how quickly the civilians of a foe can easily be subjected to treatment that would not be deemed acceptable outside of the war environment.

[Constantine]

I think you are missing the point. Rape and massacres have always been there. No one is denying that.
What started this discussion was Sacha's post where he obviously insinuated that those who call warlords wild beasts and villains for committing KRB possess poor understanding of medieval realities. I really don't appreciate that.
Yes, you could often get away with heinous crimes if you were of noble blood. Doesn't mean you will not be branded a dishonorable cur by many of your peers.
If this is not a medieval Europe simulator, there is even less reasons to teach me how to react to in-game actions of other characters.

[De-Legro]

I think you are missing the point. Rape and massacres have always been there. No one is denying that.
What started this discussion was Sacha's post where he obviously insinuated that those who call warlords wild beasts and villains for committing KRB possess poor understanding of medieval realities. I really don't appreciate that.
Yes, you could often get away with heinous crimes if you were of noble blood. Doesn't mean you will not be branded a dishonorable cur by many of your peers.
If this is not a medieval Europe simulator, there is even less reasons to teach me how to react to in-game actions of other characters.

If we are talking OOC then it is mostly a pointless argument. It is widely accepted that armies throughout the ages raped and pillaged. It is often less clear if this was ordered by the commanders (in this case nobles and knights) or tactically acknowledged as something they couldn't prevent. It is also a lot harder to say if nobility in general participated, or if that was a rarer occurance. Generally if we are talking about honour, there are plenty of examples of claiming a enemy (either in war or politics/influence) was dishonoured by such acts, just as it was something largely ignored by allies. I can not remember a Western European reference that would acclaim someone for the act though. Really though in game terms of honour I see no reason why both extremes and everything in between cannot exist. Be hypocritical and decry your foe's wanton passions while excusing the excess of your allies. Be a paragon of virtue that bravely champions the cause no matter who perperates the act, whatever. Let the collective opinion of the relevant influential characters dictate the outcome, regardless of if hey truly believe it to be dishonourable or if they merely seize the opportunity to further another agenda.

Now if the problem is of the inclusion of such a option is socially acceptable today, or if it is insensitive or harmful to those is our player base who have direct or indirect experiance with such things in RL, that is something I am compleletly unqualified to weigh in on.

[Kai]

Has anyone ever complained about KRB affecting them personally?

[De-Legro]

Has anyone ever complained about KRB affecting them personally?

Officially? No idea. Unofficially I know of a few from years ago, though the players as far as I am aware no longer play.

[Sacha]

Thanks for not putting words in my mouth, Constantine.

I'm just pointing out that every time there is KRB, we get the same old argument. People write the most graphic and brutal RPs about battles and torture and nobody says anything, but rape is always a no-no. Like, literally, having your character wear the skin of his enemies as a cape is perfectly acceptable, but turn your soldiers loose on a village and suddenly you're the vilest cretin ever to walk the earth. That is my point.

And as for being dishonored, this is the war island. Everyone who is not a realm mate is an enemy for life. Who cares what the enemy thinks? As far as Taselak is concerned, the ones who complain about it are the weird ones.

[Kai]

Officially? No idea. Unofficially I know of a few from years ago, though the players as far as I am aware no longer play.

Cool just wanted to make sure we weren't all discussing theoretical people.

People seem ok with bestiality, so maybe we can just specify the rape is nonhuman.

[Indirik]

People seem ok with bestiality, so maybe we can just specify the rape is nonhuman.

Not OK with it, so much as we all know that it's the Ikalak national sport.

[Constantine]

Thanks for not putting words in my mouth, Constantine.

Wait what?
The rest of your post actually proves that I did not at all misinterpret your vague snarky attack at your fellow players.

I'm just pointing out that every time there is KRB, we get the same old argument. People write the most graphic and brutal RPs about battles and torture and nobody says anything, but rape is always a no-no. Like, literally, having your character wear the skin of his enemies as a cape is perfectly acceptable, but turn your soldiers loose on a village and suddenly you're the vilest cretin ever to walk the earth. That is my point.

Your point is invalid.
My character has all the rights in the world to tolerate war, bloodshed and battle trophies yet to despise rapists and sadists.
You don't get to call players out on hypocricy for playing their characters a certain way. Keep in-game stuff in game.

[Kai]

inb4

[Sacha]

Well, Constantine, the irony here is that I'm probably one of the last remaining people who haven't brought the KRB issue up in OOC letters. Sure, characters can chastise Taselak all they want, but if they can't stop us, then why should we even listen? And why can't we chastise weaklings for crying foul but not having the strength or the spine to put a stop to our evil?

That is the point I'm making. Keep the rage IC, and keep it appropriate.