PDA

View Full Version : Olde Time Manners, or Decorum for Adventurers



WarKitty
2011-07-28, 05:22 PM
Many of our fantasy games are set in a pseudo-medieval setting. I have always thought adventurers needed a good guide to manners, "Hey you" not being an appropriate form of address. That being said, I thought the playground could compile a manners handbook for the well-bred adventurer.

Lesson 1: Forms of address.

Nobles should be addressed as Lord/Lady so-and-so. In cases where their rank is known, those above knight should be addressed by that title. Spouses are addressed as Lord/Lady so-and-so, or as Lordship/Ladyship (without the name). Children may be addressed as The Honourable so-and-so.

Those lacking titles may be addressed as Goodman/Goodwoman so-and-so. In the case of guild members, their occupation may also be used as a form of address. If they have rank in the guild, they should be addressed by that title.

Clergy should be addressed as Father/Mother (name optional). The head of a religious order is addressed similarly, if not bearing higher rank. Those of the rank of bishop or high priest should be addressed as Lord (title) so-and-so. Those within religious orders but not ordained should be addressed as brother/sister. Religious titles take precedence over secular, such that a noble lady, upon taking vows, is addressed as sister and never lady.

Children of common birth are addressed as master/mistress. Servants may be addressed by their given names, but nicknames or diminutives should be avoided. In cases where a servant's name is not known, they may be addressed as "My Good Man/Maid." It is impolite to inquire about their name if your host has not provided it to you.


So there's the lesson. Disputes or additions from those more knowledgeable than me are welcome!

Eldan
2011-07-28, 05:25 PM
Table Etiquette: I had a book somewhere which had translated a few books from a Medieval etiquette guide, but the only two I remember right now are:

-Do not eat from someone else's plate.
-If you take a bite from something, do not put it back in the bowl.

navar100
2011-07-28, 05:32 PM
This is what Diplomacy is for. Modifier + roll = good enough DC means the character knows the proper words to say. No harm for the player to roleplay using the words, but even if the player is a dolt, a good enough Diplomacy roll means the character is not. A player could have been part of the Royal Court of England and regularly had tea with the Queen herself, but if he's playing a character with 8 Charisma and no ranks in Diplomacy, his character will faux pas continually, barring the occasional lucky roll of 16-20.

WarKitty
2011-07-28, 05:40 PM
This is what Diplomacy is for. Modifier + roll = good enough DC means the character knows the proper words to say. No harm for the player to roleplay using the words, but even if the player is a dolt, a good enough Diplomacy roll means the character is not. A player could have been part of the Royal Court of England and regularly had tea with the Queen herself, but if he's playing a character with 8 Charisma and no ranks in Diplomacy, his character will faux pas continually, barring the occasional lucky roll of 16-20.

Who says manners are only for situations where you're using diplomacy? I find it as interesting how the character speaks with the smith he's ordering weapons from, or the boy he hires to hold the horses. Even with high nobles not every situation will be resolved with a diplomacy roll - and even those that do should be roleplayed out. Who said roleplaying is just for when you want something?

TheThan
2011-07-28, 06:04 PM
Yet another reason why i like barbarians.
You can get away with being very rude and either your party will cover for you, or you'll be dismissed as a lowly barbarian that doesn't know anything about Etiquette and protocol.

not to mention barbarians are always the life of the party; just as long as it's not one being put on by nobility. :smallcool:

kamikasei
2011-07-28, 06:24 PM
I like the idea of working out some social conventions in character to aid immersion, so long as players aren't too heavily penalized for not adhering to them perfectly all the time. However, I'm pretty sure actual historical examples would vary considerably with time and place, and trying to smoosh together whichever ones happen to come to mind is likely to hurt immersion by damaging consistency. I'd suggest a little research for each game and setting some things out at the start of a campaign rather than trying to have a one-size-fits-all approach applied across all games.

Heck, there's every chance that conventions may differ in different places within a single game. Maybe in one city it's polite to address all middle-class merchants and suchlike as if they were minor nobility while in another the lords are jealous of their privileges, and so on.

WarKitty
2011-07-28, 06:46 PM
I like the idea of working out some social conventions in character to aid immersion, so long as players aren't too heavily penalized for not adhering to them perfectly all the time. However, I'm pretty sure actual historical examples would vary considerably with time and place, and trying to smoosh together whichever ones happen to come to mind is likely to hurt immersion by damaging consistency. I'd suggest a little research for each game and setting some things out at the start of a campaign rather than trying to have a one-size-fits-all approach applied across all games.

Heck, there's every chance that conventions may differ in different places within a single game. Maybe in one city it's polite to address all middle-class merchants and suchlike as if they were minor nobility while in another the lords are jealous of their privileges, and so on.

True. Though in my experience most DM's don't have much of an idea what constitutes polite address either. And a character might adhere to whatever the customs of her upbringing are absent the appropriate knowledge to know otherwise, or in cases where customs are mixed. For that matter, a guide might be a handy starting place for DM's.

What's particularly interesting to me is how the fellow members of the party would be addressed, particularly in the beginning.

Analytica
2011-07-28, 09:45 PM
This is an area where you can get good game immersion results. Design a set of phrases that are specific to the game world, construct new terms for relatives, business associates or nobility, draft things from non-western cultures. Make up sayings relating to game world religion. Do not touch Shakespeare with a ten-foot pole unless you really, really know what you are doing.

Initially it seems artificial, but once it gets going, it can make for keywords that tie a social situation into the setting, like code words for being in character. Eberron has some things like this. Robert Jordan managed it well too, and I would say Sigil cant is another good example.

EDIT: For barbarians, I've seen several tribal groups in LARP settings that felt very much a part of the world, simply by not using any personal pronouns at all. A very different feel appears if only the term "you" is dropped. Japanese does interesting things by using honourifics, as well as few personal pronouns, and context-specific things.

WarKitty
2011-07-28, 10:01 PM
This is an area where you can get good game immersion results. Design a set of phrases that are specific to the game world, construct new terms for relatives, business associates or nobility, draft things from non-western cultures. Make up sayings relating to game world religion. Do not touch Shakespeare with a ten-foot pole unless you really, really know what you are doing.

Initially it seems artificial, but once it gets going, it can make for keywords that tie a social situation into the setting, like code words for being in character. Eberron has some things like this. Robert Jordan managed it well too, and I would say Sigil cant is another good example.

EDIT: For barbarians, I've seen several tribal groups in LARP settings that felt very much a part of the world, simply by not using any personal pronouns at all. A very different feel appears if only the term "you" is dropped. Japanese does interesting things by using honourifics, as well as few personal pronouns, and context-specific things.

So what do you advise if none of that is present in the world? I will say I have a particular character in mind that this is for. Thing is, the DM isn't giving us any info other than "standard generic medieval."

Katana_Geldar
2011-07-28, 10:02 PM
It is customary to disarm when entering the residence of a lord or some other noble, this is because you are a guest under his protection and he is not fulfilling his responsibility to you if something happens. Also, not disarming means you don't trust them to do this.

Kojiro
2011-07-28, 10:10 PM
Hm. I was thinking that this would be sort of etiquette between adventurers in worlds where that sort of thing was common. Things like universal signs to mark "dungeons" with to signify that they've already been raided (putting one up when it wasn't emptied so that you have all the time you need would probably get some impromptu justice) and the like.

"Actual" etiquette, though... Well, hm. Give me some time to think about that.

Lord Raziere
2011-07-28, 10:15 PM
yea, hospitality is big in the old world cause its an agreement not to start killing each other and such.

navar100
2011-07-28, 10:21 PM
Who says manners are only for situations where you're using diplomacy? I find it as interesting how the character speaks with the smith he's ordering weapons from, or the boy he hires to hold the horses. Even with high nobles not every situation will be resolved with a diplomacy roll - and even those that do should be roleplayed out. Who said roleplaying is just for when you want something?

If how and what you say is important enough such that there are consequences, then that's a diplomacy roll. If you're just going to talk to the smith or boy who watches the horses for the sake of just talking to them, then "manners" are irrelevant. Obviously you don't roleplay insulting the person, but minutae detail of manners won't mean anything. If you are trying to get particular information the DM could just roleplay it out, but that's also a roll, Gather Information for 3E, Diplomacy for Pathfinder.

There's nothing wrong with roleplaying manners, but insisting on it is unfair since you don't insist on a warrior player swinging a real sword in your house, and I'm quite certain you don't want a spellcaster player throwing bat poo and light stuff on fire.


yea, hospitality is big in the old world cause its an agreement not to start killing each other and such.

That is how shaking hands as a greeting and sign of friendship developed. Providing your outstretched arm with an open hand shows you don't have a weapon in it.

Analytica
2011-07-28, 10:24 PM
So what do you advise if none of that is present in the world? I will say I have a particular character in mind that this is for. Thing is, the DM isn't giving us any info other than "standard generic medieval."

Adress only equals as "you". Lessers are "he/she/it/title/job function/that person". Highers are various "your honour".

Or prefix everyone's name with their title or function. "Goodman Charl", "Soldier Jehana", "Honoured Lord Celestyn"...

Honestly, I think your list above is good, though. Keep doing it and if you do it consistently, the DM will catch on and make NPCs follow the same pattern, as might the other players. If you know the names and properties of the deity(s), you can make phrases around them.

WarKitty
2011-07-28, 10:25 PM
If how and what you say is important enough such that there are consequences, then that's a diplomacy roll. If you're just going to talk to the smith or boy who watches the horses for the sake of just talking to them, then "manners" are irrelevant. Obviously you don't roleplay insulting the person, but minutae detail of manners won't mean anything. If you are trying to get particular information the DM could just roleplay it out, but that's also a roll, Gather Information for 3E, Diplomacy for Pathfinder.

There's nothing wrong with roleplaying manners, but insisting on it is unfair since you don't insist on a warrior player swinging a real sword in your house, and I'm quite certain you don't want a spellcaster player throwing bat poo and light stuff on fire.

So...if it's important, roll for it, if it's not important, ignore it? That doesn't sound very much like a roleplaying game to me.

Edit: I find these things very important in establishing the character. Not whether they "get it right," but whether they actually try. As a DM, that's what I insist on - not that players get all the strictures of manners right, but that they make an effort to interact with NPC's as though they were other members of the world rather than moving interfaces. Same thing on diplomacy and other social rolls - you're expected to make some attempt at roleplaying, even though you're using whatever social skill.

As a player (which is what this thread was made for - players), I prefer to have a consistent, roughly period-appropriate set of social responses given the character and their background and training. Since I tend to prefer urban characters, this often includes at least some grasp of manners.

NikitaDarkstar
2011-07-28, 10:28 PM
Initially it seems artificial, but once it gets going, it can make for keywords that tie a social situation into the setting, like code words for being in character. Eberron has some things like this. Robert Jordan managed it well too, and I would say Sigil cant is another good example.

I'd add Steven Erikson to this list, even if it's gotten to the point where I've started to adopt some of his in-world sayings/expressions IRL, very frustrating to check myself. (But also a testament to how natural they feel.)


Anyway, on the disarming question, the same goes for churches, weapons were to be left in the church porch (aka weapon house). While it certainly wouldn't go for ALL deities in D&D it would most likely apply to some.

Knights were almost always educated in poetry and song, even those who were "only" knighted. (Which was a lesser form of nobility than the inherited one which had significantly more education and influence.)

Please note that I'm going on Swedish sources that may differ from other regions of "generic medieval." (fairly certain most people mean the English customs and manners and general setting when using that phrase.)

Narren
2011-07-28, 10:38 PM
Many of our fantasy games are set in a pseudo-medieval setting. I have always thought adventurers needed a good guide to manners, "Hey you" not being an appropriate form of address. That being said, I thought the playground could compile a manners handbook for the well-bred adventurer.

Lesson 1: Forms of address.

Nobles should be addressed as Lord/Lady so-and-so. In cases where their rank is known, those above knight should be addressed by that title. Spouses are addressed as Lord/Lady so-and-so, or as Lordship/Ladyship (without the name). Children may be addressed as The Honourable so-and-so.

Those lacking titles may be addressed as Goodman/Goodwoman so-and-so. In the case of guild members, their occupation may also be used as a form of address. If they have rank in the guild, they should be addressed by that title.

Clergy should be addressed as Father/Mother (name optional). The head of a religious order is addressed similarly, if not bearing higher rank. Those of the rank of bishop or high priest should be addressed as Lord (title) so-and-so. Those within religious orders but not ordained should be addressed as brother/sister. Religious titles take precedence over secular, such that a noble lady, upon taking vows, is addressed as sister and never lady.

Children of common birth are addressed as master/mistress. Servants may be addressed by their given names, but nicknames or diminutives should be avoided. In cases where a servant's name is not known, they may be addressed as "My Good Man/Maid." It is impolite to inquire about their name if your host has not provided it to you.


So there's the lesson. Disputes or additions from those more knowledgeable than me are welcome!

I like this. For even more immersion, you could have forms of address and customs vary (subtly and/or wildly) from kingdom to kingdom.

My group (myself included) often ends up speaking in a more modern tone, even when role-playing. Not a problem in every game, but it does feel anachronistic (not really the right word, but you know what I mean) in a D&D game.

(I really need to stop with all the parenthesis)

Katana_Geldar
2011-07-28, 10:49 PM
It was not polite in the middle ages to wipe one's nose with your hands. That's what your sleeve is for.

WarKitty
2011-07-28, 10:56 PM
It was not polite in the middle ages to wipe one's nose with your hands. That's what your sleeve is for.

Wouldn't they have handkerchiefs?

NikitaDarkstar
2011-07-28, 11:52 PM
Wouldn't they have handkerchiefs?

Depends on what medieval century you're going for, but from what I've read it seems that the popular theory is that King Richard II of England invented it so it would date to late'ish 14'th century, and most likely not have been something everyone used.

WarKitty
2011-07-29, 12:13 AM
Depends on what medieval century you're going for, but from what I've read it seems that the popular theory is that King Richard II of England invented it so it would date to late'ish 14'th century, and most likely not have been something everyone used.

I'd probably stick with them. I've been trying to strike a balance between being too anachronistic and being too "weird." So it's not entirely historically accurate - for example I refrained from the use of "mistress" except for children because of modern connotations. In my experience most players have difficulty accepting things that directly contradict their ideas of manners. It's a bit of a line - I'm trying to create an idea of something that feels sufficiently immersive without coming across as gross or freaky where not called for.

NikitaDarkstar
2011-07-29, 12:39 AM
Yhea, that makes sense, some things would just be odd and pointless to stick to. (Such as the lack of forks in "the generic medival" time period and area...)

Katana_Geldar
2011-07-29, 12:56 AM
They didn't have underwear either back then, not as we know it. Just sayin'. :smallbiggrin:

Yanagi
2011-07-29, 12:59 AM
Table Etiquette: I had a book somewhere which had translated a few books from a Medieval etiquette guide, but the only two I remember right now are:

-Do not eat from someone else's plate.
-If you take a bite from something, do not put it back in the bowl.

Read about Richard II of England trying to introduce manners to his court: it was stuff like--"wash your hands before eating, or at least scrape away the big stuff" "don't stick your hands in the food (served from a common plate)" "try a spoon--it's not as hard as it looks!"

...and let's not even get into "old timey" mores about bodily functions--I have zero problem with my fictional worlds being anachronistic about the casualness with which bodily excretions were deposited where-ever.

averagejoe
2011-07-29, 01:04 AM
Nobles should be addressed as Lord/Lady so-and-so.

Smart-arse senses tingling. :smallamused:

It seems like in RPG's there should be rules governing the acquisition and distribution of treasure. Stuff like, "If you have an item that is totally sweet, but that you have no personal use for, give your teammates a chance to acquire it before you sell it at a loss."

WarKitty
2011-07-29, 01:14 AM
Read about Richard II of England trying to introduce manners to his court: it was stuff like--"wash your hands before eating, or at least scrape away the big stuff" "don't stick your hands in the food (served from a common plate)" "try a spoon--it's not as hard as it looks!"

...and let's not even get into "old timey" mores about bodily functions--I have zero problem with my fictional worlds being anachronistic about the casualness with which bodily excretions were deposited where-ever.

Although iirc England was a bit of a provincial backwater in terms of medieval courts.

As far as bodily functions and such, I use the "campground" rule. Lower-class areas should be around the same level of cleanliness as a bad campground. Upper-class areas are more like a decent cabin in the woods, sans electricity or plumbing. So, upper-class house = chamber pot in the bathroom. Lower class house = outhouse.


Smart-arse senses tingling. :smallamused:

It seems like in RPG's there should be rules governing the acquisition and distribution of treasure. Stuff like, "If you have an item that is totally sweet, but that you have no personal use for, give your teammates a chance to acquire it before you sell it at a loss."

Actually I'd ideally like a whole section on "being polite to your teammates." An in-universe guide to how to get along with that guy you hate, how to properly address party members, what the distribution of treasure ought to be...

Ravens_cry
2011-07-29, 01:43 AM
It is customary to disarm when entering the residence of a lord or some other noble, this is because you are a guest under his protection and he is not fulfilling his responsibility to you if something happens. Also, not disarming means you don't trust them to do this.
Which, to state the obvious, is a huge insult.
In a world with magic been a known factor, mages will be asked to similarly divest themselves of the tools of their trade.

icefractal
2011-07-29, 04:08 AM
It is customary to disarm when entering the residence of a lord or some other noble, this is because you are a guest under his protection and he is not fulfilling his responsibility to you if something happens. Also, not disarming means you don't trust them to do this.

Which, to state the obvious, is a huge insult.
In a world with magic been a known factor, mages will be asked to similarly divest themselves of the tools of their trade.
The one thing to be careful of here is that players are more often than not going to be rather paranoid about this, and will remember the one time it bit them in the ass infinitely more so than the twenty times it didn't.

So don't pull any tricks the first time. Or the second, or the third, for that matter. In fact, wait quite awhile before you pull any tricks at all, and even then be very sparing with them. And make sure the players notice some positive effects from good relations with the nobility. Think of it as disarming a bomb - that bomb being the pervasive tendency toward paranoid murder-hobos. :smallwink:

Eldan
2011-07-29, 04:18 AM
There are, however, varying degrees of "unarmed". After all, your twelve inch dagger is for eating, removing lice, scratching your back, trimming your fingernails and shaving. Not really a weapon.

Ravens_cry
2011-07-29, 04:20 AM
@icefractal
Oh absolutely. For most scenarios where they appear at court or such, everything, at least from a combat perspective, should go smoothly.

Kojiro
2011-07-29, 04:42 AM
There are, however, varying degrees of "unarmed". After all, your twelve inch dagger is for eating, removing lice, scratching your back, trimming your fingernails and shaving. Not really a weapon.

You're a dagger user and you don't have it hidden? What's the matter with you? Any weapon they can't find is one that, for all they know, doesn't exist. This includes spells that lack material components you can't disguise as normal pocket junk or something else.

Huh. Topic about respect and etiquette, and my first instinct is to figure out how to get around it. Probably not a surprise that one of my favorite classes is Rogue.

Also, this is on the side-topic of technology, but considering that A. In real life that tech existed a while, even though it was lost admittedly, and B. Magic, there could be rudimentary plumbing in very nice areas, like cities and such, if it fits your world (like it's one with airships and junk). Good for fountains as well as... Well, you know. Country people still have to make do with a hole, though.

Ravens_cry
2011-07-29, 05:02 AM
Just because you are a Rogue doesn't mean you are a rogue. One build I intend to try soon is fluffed as a mundane healer, using a knowledge of anatomy to explain sneak attacks. Another idea was a slightly foppish young noble of broad education with a passion for duelling.

Kojiro
2011-07-29, 05:04 AM
That is actually not what I was implying; I was drawing a tie between my favored class and how I like sneaky, clever, and/or underhanded tricks, which my favored class is good at. There was also some amount of joking in there. But that's getting off-topic.

Let's see, proper etiquette. You guys have gone over nobles and such, but if not commoners, then at least merchants and other people who produce what you need should get some measure of respect, even if you're planning on emptying out their tills while they aren't looking. Perhaps not the same level of respect as a noble if you're being... "Traditional" about it, but still.

Eldan
2011-07-29, 05:12 AM
Honestly, judging from most medieval pictures I've seen, not carrying a dagger at all times would be more suspicious than the other way round. It is, after all, your hygiene instrument, piece of cuttlery, dress ornament and multi-purpose tool.

Kojiro
2011-07-29, 05:16 AM
It's my short, sharp, metal walking stick. (http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=922) If that doesn't work, give it to the halfling and say it's his. Don't specify on whether it's his walking stick or weapon.

Edit: I really want to add more to the actual topic here, but I can't think of anything worthwhile, sorry.

Edit again: Rather than add another contentless post, I find it interesting to think about how magic, multiple sentient races/species, and the like would affect etiquette and such. As someone mentioned earlier, a spellcaster leaving the physical spell tools they possess with the rest of the group's weapons is reasonable (although demanding a Cleric's holy symbol seems rude), but beyond that, how would it affect things? You can't just check medieval references for this sort of thing; it's speculation to an extent, really, but it's also interesting to think about.

Ravens_cry
2011-07-29, 05:22 AM
Honestly, judging from most medieval pictures I've seen, not carrying a dagger at all times would be more suspicious than the other way round. It is, after all, your hygiene instrument, piece of cuttlery, dress ornament and multi-purpose tool.
Yeah, but it wasn't a foot long short sword either.
Of course, the level of cutlery sophistication is pretty much entirely up to the DM. You might have backwoods barony where it's just knives and bread trencher or effete nobility with the whole modern set and then some in the same campaign. Or heck, a world where knives, forks and spoons are common at all levels and classes.

That is actually not what I was implying; I was drawing a tie between my favored class and how I like sneaky, clever, and/or underhanded tricks, which my favored class is good at. There was also some amount of joking in there. But that's getting off-topic.
All right, I am willing to leave it at that.

Story Time
2011-07-29, 05:35 AM
These are only a few:

It was often considered customary to bring a gift the first time a guest visited a home.

Widows never traveled or attended social functions for twelve months after the death of their husband.

Guests entering a home would often surrender their coats and coverings to a servant to be put in a cloak room. In certain cases this would include riding boots. ( And servants were expected to memorize what the arriving guests wore. )

Male hat-wearing travelers would tip the brim of their hat, with a hand, to acknowledge a female citizen. Males would not do this toward other males. Instead they would nod or shake hands. Hats were taken off when entering a church or a private residence. This rule had flexibility, depending on the nature of the visit. However, when entering a private study, private office, or lounge area for conversation the hat definitely came off. If a hat was held or rested near the guest, instead of in the cloak room, it was rested top-down.

Expectoration, of any kind, was always done behind a hand or other barrier when in the presence of a female. Offering a female an alcoholic beverage, of any kind, was considered rude among the more rules-heavy societies.

When meeting some person for the first time introductions were formally held. If a mutual acquaintance was present it was proper for that acquaintance to make the introductions. To refuse to make introduction, in any fashion, was considered rude. This rule included enemies on opposite sides of a war.

Guests did not simply show up at a person's house. Often a letter or messenger was sent ahead of time. Also, those who had the means to do so were expected to keep a minimum of one spare bedroom prepared for unexpected guests.

Women always sat, or were seated, first in Anglican societies. Males occupying a chair when a female entered a room were expected to stand and surrender it. Similarly, hosts and hostesses would provide the best chairs for their guests while they would take lesser chairs or stools instead.

hamishspence
2011-07-29, 05:39 AM
Yet another reason why i like barbarians.
You can get away with being very rude and either your party will cover for you, or you'll be dismissed as a lowly barbarian that doesn't know anything about Etiquette and protocol.

Some barbarian societies might be exceptionally polite, because, as someone (Heinlein? Howard?) put it - knowing you might get your head split in half for rudeness tends to make you mind your manners.

Story Time
2011-07-29, 05:44 AM
Contrary to popular belief barbarian cultures did not have fewer rules. Their manners and etiquette simply focused in different areas.

Martin Greywolf
2011-07-29, 06:07 AM
Well, etiquette varied quite a lot both across time and region, even in Europe. For example, Spain took quite a lot of customs from moorish turks, especially shortly after reconquista.

As for hospitality, yes, you were expected to disarm yourself, but, especially in slavic regions (middle, eastern and north Europe, including, ironically enough, Hungary), the host was expected to greet you in some manner, in this case with bread and salt. If he didnīt, you were not considered a guest.

Also, there were very few inns, and only on major roads. It was quite common, especially in border regions (balkan during renneisance, what with eastern orthodox, islam, catholic and mongols all trying to control the region), to just come to a village and ask for hospitality for one night. You werenīt (mostly) even expected to pay, or not that much, and payment often had a form of news from far away (read: more than the next town) lands.

And, as a host, you really didnīt want to break the laws of hospitality, as your familly could never live it down for a few dozen generations. If you read Song of ice and fire, remember
the flak Freys got for their cute little wedding...

Story Time
2011-07-29, 06:26 AM
That's really interesting! And specific! :smallsmile:

Ormur
2011-07-29, 10:18 AM
This is what I use (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forms_of_address_in_the_United_Kingdom), although I don't penalize players for not using it.

Eldan
2011-07-29, 11:39 AM
Wouldn't they have handkerchiefs?

Well, what did you think all those lacy cuffs were for?

WarKitty
2011-07-29, 02:07 PM
Merchants (depending on the era) could be interesting...they weren't ranked, but they weren't exactly commoners either. In a fantasy world adventurers might fall into a similar class, at least higher level ones - given that your standard adventurer might have as much or more money as a landed noble.

I have been assuming a D&D-esque world in terms of gender roles rather than a strict medieval setting, simply because that's what most people I've seen prefer to play in. And I don't think a lot of the etiquette concerning ladies works very well when you have a female adventurer in your party.

NikitaDarkstar
2011-07-29, 02:21 PM
I have been assuming a D&D-esque world in terms of gender roles rather than a strict medieval setting, simply because that's what most people I've seen prefer to play in. And I don't think a lot of the etiquette concerning ladies works very well when you have a female adventurer in your party.
It depends, on both the campaign and the player. But it could be interesting to have a "she's just one of the guys" attitude among adventurers, commoners, possibly even military and such, but the nobility (or at least parts of it) is still stuck in the whole "act like a lady" mentality due to old and rigid traditions and such.

But that's one I wouldn't use to often. Or not use at all depending on the players.

Knaight
2011-07-29, 02:32 PM
In a world with magic been a known factor, mages will be asked to similarly divest themselves of the tools of their trade.

Not necessarily. If the magic is restricted to being a weapon and little else, and there are tools of the trade, then it will be treated as a weapon. However if weaponry is just one small part of what magic is, and it is instead a largely utilitarian tool, it will be treated like other utilitarian tools that can also kill people. Consider the knife*, which was pretty much always used at the table, because you ate with it. You could also stab someone with it, which is the violent end, use it to cut ropes or some such, which is useful in transporting goods, and use it for any number of other things.

*Which everybody has already been over.

Yanagi
2011-07-29, 02:43 PM
Although iirc England was a bit of a provincial backwater in terms of medieval courts.

I was suggesting reading it because it's hilarious.


Merchants (depending on the era) could be interesting...they weren't ranked, but they weren't exactly commoners either. In a fantasy world adventurers might fall into a similar class, at least higher level ones - given that your standard adventurer might have as much or more money as a landed noble.

A cross-cultural trend is that the rising merchant clash appropriate the rituals and consumption behaviors of the noble classes--clothes, etiqueete, habits, foods--and the nobles hiss and spit furiously. Then come the sumptuary laws (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumptuary_laws).

WalkingTarget
2011-07-29, 02:47 PM
I'm a big fan of the ancient Greek system of xenia (as I understand it from the Odyssey).

If things work out properly - you're a traveller and you need a place to stay. You arrive at somebody's household and present yourself at the door/gate. The host welcomes you in, offers you food and drink and usually some sort of gift. It was up to the guest to volunteer his name and/or reason for traveling. It's polite to do so, but not mandatory.

A major reason for doing this is to establish a network of associations (not quite obligations) that can last across generations so that travelers could rely on being able to, metaphorically, crash on somebody's couch if they needed to go somewhere in the days before inns.

The Odyssey shows this both working properly:

Telemachus greeting Athena near the beginning, Telemachus/Penelope hosting the suitors in general, Menelaus hosting Telemachus, the Phaeacians hosting Odysseus (although he pushes things by not revealing who he is for a long time), and Eumaeus the swineherd greeting Odysseus upon his return to Ithaca (despite being in disguise)

and how it fails to function:

the suitors overstaying their welcome/planning on killing Telemachus and pretty much every adventure Odysseus has along the way.

----

My gaming group never really enforced any kind of proper/formal speech requirements (other than adopting Japanese honorifics when playing L5R - even then it was pretty much just -san -sama -chan and -kun) because we didn't play in historical settings. If the setting is fictional, then we saw no point in arbitrarily trying to model our speech after real-life. Zelazny wrote fantasy in a modern voice, that's good enough precedent for us.

Nepenthe
2011-07-29, 05:47 PM
It is customary to disarm when entering the residence of a lord or some other noble, this is because you are a guest under his protection and he is not fulfilling his responsibility to you if something happens. Also, not disarming means you don't trust them to do this.

Apparently this varies by region. I was reading a Scottish lay recently wherein guests were expected to defend the host's home as if it were their own. This held true even if one accidentally sought hospitality at the home of a mortal enemy (which was the context of the lay).

hiryuu
2011-07-30, 01:20 PM
I run a more modern setting, but they've had adventurers in it for long enough for them to have developed a subculture and slang; there are a lot of rules of decorum and politeness that sound rude to those outside it. I read the first post in the mindset and had to clear it out, mostly because no adventurer would ever refer to someone by their title or by any proper-sounding epithet, notably because those things connote respect, and when you live by the strings of your purse and in the teeth of monsters every day, you stop caring about taking the time to remember which spoon you're supposed to use. Your humor also turns really dark.

Let's see, other rules off the top of my head, most of which are unspoken due to their age...

Always try to find work, even if temporary, and always seek out jobs nobody wants. By doing so you not only help a business along, but ensure employment should you return to that town again.

Do not allow yourself to become a stupid drunk and set a bad example for locals' treatment of other adventurers

Anything cloth is potentially clothing.

If you can avoid killing someone, do so. It's too much hassle to deal with. If you get into a fight and the other party gives up, you win. If you catch them in the same act again, you can kill them.

However, don't forget to roll the bodies.

Help all runaway children, and try to induce them to return home.

Do not cause problems in a train yard. Other adventurers will need to come through the train yard. Respect the workers. If asked for help, give it. You are essentially free labor if you are in the train yard.

If you're staying in someone's house, offer to sleep in the carport or shed rather than a room.

Ravens_cry
2011-07-30, 03:27 PM
Not necessarily. If the magic is restricted to being a weapon and little else, and there are tools of the trade, then it will be treated as a weapon. However if weaponry is just one small part of what magic is, and it is instead a largely utilitarian tool, it will be treated like other utilitarian tools that can also kill people. Consider the knife*, which was pretty much always used at the table, because you ate with it. You could also stab someone with it, which is the violent end, use it to cut ropes or some such, which is useful in transporting goods, and use it for any number of other things.

*Which everybody has already been over.
The trouble is ascertaining you are not bringing a bomb into the kings court without been an invasion of privacy. If magic is mostly useful things and harmless tricks, sure. But if it is mostly a combat or combat related tool, like much of D&D spells, it is rather different.

randomhero00
2011-07-30, 06:27 PM
Forms of address: If the rank is totally unknown but most likely not royalty its "Hail, m'lord. /or m'lady"
Notice the lower case 'lord' not Lord. Saying m'lord isn't actually calling them a lord, but it is the politest way, kind of giving them the benefit of the doubt. It's kind of hard to explain. edit: but its not saying they're NOT a Lord or Lady either.

If dealing with royalty, but unsure of their rank, or simply being slightly less formal (which is common) then you'd use "Your Grace/His Grace/Her Grace/etc."

Katana_Geldar
2011-07-30, 06:38 PM
No, your Grace is for Dukes. Royals would be Your Majesty, Your Highness or Sire. Though I think ma'am (rhymes with palm, not ham) or madam is fine for queens.
One thing you have to consider with manners is if a character has knowledge of ettiquite or is likely to use them. Bards and Paladins would probably be best knowledgable about such things and probably clerics as well.
B

hamishspence
2011-07-31, 06:21 AM
No, your Grace is for Dukes. Royals would be Your Majesty, Your Highness or Sire. Though I think ma'am (rhymes with palm, not ham) or madam is fine for queens.

Depends on the era. I'm told that "Your Grace" was normal for monarchs until the reign of King Henry VIII- who introduced "Your Majesty".

That was according to the historical novelist Nigel Tranter, though.

Specifically, in the dedication to book 3 in the Robert The Bruce trilogy (The Price of the King's Peace):

For Andrew Haddon, who, too late, pointed out to me that the English monarchs only became majestic from Henry the Eighth's time, an eminence to which their merely gracious Scots counterparts never aspired.

Wikipedia also supports this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Style_of_the_British_sovereign

suggesting that while it might have cropped up occasionally, it was Henry VIII who first started using it regularly.

Martin Greywolf
2011-07-31, 07:43 AM
Apparently this varies by region. I was reading a Scottish lay recently wherein guests were expected to defend the host's home as if it were their own. This held true even if one accidentally sought hospitality at the home of a mortal enemy (which was the context of the lay).

Well, yes, that is pretty customary. I recall one battle from Hussite wars (I think it was burning of Nový Jičín, but Iīm not sure) where lord of a nearby castle had a few Teutonic knights as guests when hussites came to kick a** and take names (which they would probably mispronounce...).

They not only took a part in castles defense (pretty logical thing to do), but fought under the lords command when he went to field to save some townsmen.

Also, there is one little detail that, should someone attack a village/fortress where you are as guests, he can hardly tell you apart from the ordinary inhabitants. Let the sheanigans begin! ("Letīs imprison ourselves to escape our imminent slaughter!").


As for the social status of adventurers, they would hardly be in merchantīs class (which was a distinct class lot of the time, as merchants were generally townsmen, or burghers, and had some privileges). They would be mercenaries, bandits or robber-knights (bandits with a title and/or castle).

Which doesnīt mean lack of social interaction, as mercenaries were pretty popular and powerful in Europe - well over a half of Teutonic orderīs army were mercenaries with long-standing contracts, merchantīs escorts were from mercenary guilds, and there were also italian condotieri (Iīm sure I misspelt that).

Wardog
2011-07-31, 03:55 PM
Apparently this varies by region. I was reading a Scottish lay recently wherein guests were expected to defend the host's home as if it were their own. This held true even if one accidentally sought hospitality at the home of a mortal enemy (which was the context of the lay).

I read somewhere that when you were a guest, you were expected to divest yourself of your main weapons.

However, because it was a dangerous place, and there was always a risk of bandits or reavers (not those ones) attacking, it was sensible to keep your concealed dagger with you at all times.

However, out of respect for your host, and to demonstrate you didn't have ulterior motives, you would unconceal it.

Edited: source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skean_dhu#Origins)

***

Regarding the earlier comment about addressing children, I'm not sure "master"/"mistress" would be used universally. In the time periods that D&D normally approximates, I think that would only be used for children of the nobility or gentry. You wouldn't use it for John Commoner's son.

Edited to add: according to this article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_%28form_of_address%29), using master for children is Victorian in origin. In previous ages, it had varying use among adults.

***

If you want to be properly archaic, you should use you/your (or ye) when addressing superiors, and thee/thy/thou when addressing children, friends, and inferiors.

Worlok
2011-07-31, 04:29 PM
Yet another reason why i like barbarians.
You can get away with being very rude and either your party will cover for you, or you'll be dismissed as a lowly barbarian that doesn't know anything about Etiquette and protocol.
Actually, depending on how "olde" the time is your setting tries to emulate, you might be spot on with barbaric behavior, anyway, though. I mean, in Medieval Europe it was commonly considered rude and bad fortune to not let out a monstrous roaring belch after dinner. A certain religious reformer, for one, has been (falsely) quoted as saying "Warum rülpset und furzet ihr nicht, hat es euch nicht geschmacket?" (Transl: "Why aren't you belching and farting, was the meal not to your tastes?") - So make of that what you will. :smallredface:

WarKitty
2011-07-31, 05:00 PM
Interesting...how would adventurers fit in the hierarchy of a pseudo-medieval world. Mercenary was certainly a respected profession. Does anyone have any more info on how they would have been addressed, treated, etc.?

Analytica
2011-07-31, 05:11 PM
Interesting...how would adventurers fit in the hierarchy of a pseudo-medieval world. Mercenary was certainly a respected profession. Does anyone have any more info on how they would have been addressed, treated, etc.?

Look up condottieri or other mercenary groups from Renaissance Italy. There may be information there.

For children, I would go with "young master/mistress" until they formally reach maturity. Maybe everyone who is an adult wears some form of non-coif headgear, so you can see that they are, in fact, adults, and know to address them?

Kojiro
2011-07-31, 05:33 PM
Interesting...how would adventurers fit in the hierarchy of a pseudo-medieval world. Mercenary was certainly a respected profession. Does anyone have any more info on how they would have been addressed, treated, etc.?

I can't give any real evidence, but considering how absolutely vital adventurers can be in D&D type worlds, considering all the crazy monsters and other things that can waylay caravans of supplies, dealing with this or that major threat, and so on, I wouldn't be surprised if they were respected despite being glorified mercenaries and assassins. Opinions could run the gamut; on the one hand, they're mostly wanderers and swords (or staves, bows, and so on) for hire, with no stable job (unless you're in a group that values roleplay enough to drop a few points into Craft or Profession), and who probably smell, even by the standards of the day. On the other hand, they're very powerful, in some cases probably smarter than anyone in your court, and of course they could probably kill you without putting out any real effort. Again, personally, I think it would vary from person to person, depending on social position, upbringing, personal experience, and so on. One noble could respect them and welcome them into his halls, even the barbarian, while another would look down his nose at both them and his neighbor for associating with them.

WarKitty
2011-07-31, 07:03 PM
I can't give any real evidence, but considering how absolutely vital adventurers can be in D&D type worlds, considering all the crazy monsters and other things that can waylay caravans of supplies, dealing with this or that major threat, and so on, I wouldn't be surprised if they were respected despite being glorified mercenaries and assassins. Opinions could run the gamut; on the one hand, they're mostly wanderers and swords (or staves, bows, and so on) for hire, with no stable job (unless you're in a group that values roleplay enough to drop a few points into Craft or Profession), and who probably smell, even by the standards of the day. On the other hand, they're very powerful, in some cases probably smarter than anyone in your court, and of course they could probably kill you without putting out any real effort. Again, personally, I think it would vary from person to person, depending on social position, upbringing, personal experience, and so on. One noble could respect them and welcome them into his halls, even the barbarian, while another would look down his nose at both them and his neighbor for associating with them.

The role of mercenaries in the medieval society was already very different from the modern perceptions of them. It was at least considered a respected trade. Many areas lacked a standing army or had a very small one - wars were often fought with mercenary troops rather than native fighters. There were of course at least some expectations of loyalty - a mercenary who double-crossed his employer was at the very least not going to see any more contracts, and at the worst might be executed.

Katana_Geldar
2011-07-31, 07:59 PM
Yes, but being a merc was not considered particularly honourable. Particularly if mercs were alongside vassals in a fight.

WarKitty
2011-07-31, 08:05 PM
Yes, but being a merc was not considered particularly honourable. Particularly if mercs were alongside vassals in a fight.

It wasn't honourable for a noble, but it wasn't from what I understand any less honourable than being a merchant or tradesman.

Martin Greywolf
2011-07-31, 08:13 PM
If we asume that our adventurers are halfway decent people, who at least wonīt rob merchants and such, then there are a few cases, depending on their origin.

Commoner background:
Basically, they are considered a small group of bodyguards (or thugs, guild wars were pretty common) for hire. Merchants hire them as escorts, they may join a bigger campaign and so on.

If merchant hires them, forms of adress depend on him, as he is paying their wages. Most merchants are at least not complete jerks, as they are well aware that if their bodyguards dump them in the middle of bandit-infested wilderness...

In war, they will be a part of a unit, so you have that covered. Some sargeant will probably just call them Ramirez and demand that they go and secure something.

Commoners will be very polite and, if adventurers are friendly, curious. They could get easily violent (if they will do something inappropriate) or grumpy (overstaying their welcome).

Townsmen are a different story. They know that well-armed people bring 1)money and 2) trouble. Imagine your typical wild west "We donīt want your type here," after all, wild west and renaissance baltic had a lot in common (including, funnily enough, trappers).

Noble background
This can happen easily if one of the group is a fifth son of a noble, thus having little inheritance except arms, armor and horse (and maaaaybe some money). In this case, he will be adressed with respect and as per his status (however, people must know he is noble, he must carry his colors or something). Even in war, he will be regarded somewhat higher.



Itīs also quite possible that people will adress even commoner adventurers as nobles if they have fine arms, or mistake mud-covered noble for ordinary soldier. Also, some false nobles can, and will, crop up (oh, my father was TOTALLY from de Medicci family, you can go all those 2000 miles and ask).



tl;dr
Adventurers/mercenaries are somewhat above commoners and pretty close to merchants, how close depends on safety of the region and actual person (can be both more or less respected than your average merchant).

Edit:
Huh? Why wouldnīt it be honourable? Maybe in Japan what with the ronin status, but in Europe, it was literally job like any other. If you were honourable was up to you...

Katana_Geldar
2011-07-31, 08:20 PM
I have heard stories of mercs laying off fighting so they can loot instead. There's also stories of mercs being paid to open the gates in sieged cities, though citizens did this as well.

Also, mercs are less likely to fight a hopeless fight, as dead men don't get paid.

WarKitty
2011-07-31, 08:32 PM
I suspect mercenaries came in different classes as well. The Swiss Guard, for example, was often considered more reliable than the units of the regular army - to the point where they were employed as royal guards in several nations.

The other major social change would be that adventuring worlds are often assumed to be polytheistic - which would change the role of divine classes in society.

Martin Greywolf
2011-07-31, 08:41 PM
I have heard stories of mercs laying off fighting so they can loot instead. There's also stories of mercs being paid to open the gates in sieged cities, though citizens did this as well.

Also, mercs are less likely to fight a hopeless fight, as dead men don't get paid.

Yes, well, you know who else did all that? Soldiers and nobility. Just look at the disaster that was Mohacs and the treason of János Szapolyai (basically just like battle of Ostagar from Dragon Age if you substitute János Szapolyai for Loghain, Louis II for Cailian and archdemon for Suleiman the Magnificent).

My point being that while yes, there were dishonourable mercs, mercenaries werenīt looked upon as dishonourable profession. Knightly orders had most of their armies made of mercenaries and they were quite successful. Holding off the mongols is a pretty big success, after all...

Story Time
2011-08-08, 05:09 AM
This is unrelated to the Mongoloid Horde, but I was having a discussion with a person more wise than I am. It was pointed out to me that bedroom scenes which were televised before a certain time period always depicted the couple as using separate beds for sleep.

And I found that fascinating.

Pyrite
2011-08-10, 01:52 AM
As someone who frequently plays L5R, a game full of subtle codes of behavior and etiquette, where misbehavior can frequently lead to ritual suicide, I think that adherence to these sorts of things in roleplaying should be a thing carefully considered by the group and GM, and never just expected of the players by the GM without explanation. And very little can be more annoying than another player who is more familiar or more fascinated by the culture correcting you at every sentence.

This is especially true when it comes to things like modes of speech and the mandatory use of titles and so on. To many players, this kind of thing feels unnatural, and is something they'd rather avoid. I've been in groups where just expecting some players to refrain from openly insulting the Empress was all you could ask of them. In those sorts of games, we usually just let the die roll determine how respectful the character is actually being.

lerg2
2011-08-10, 09:16 AM
I didn't read the whole thread, but I got to the disarming before going inside bit, and it reminded me of this: http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=1331

:smallbiggrin:

WarKitty
2011-08-10, 12:55 PM
As someone who frequently plays L5R, a game full of subtle codes of behavior and etiquette, where misbehavior can frequently lead to ritual suicide, I think that adherence to these sorts of things in roleplaying should be a thing carefully considered by the group and GM, and never just expected of the players by the GM without explanation. And very little can be more annoying than another player who is more familiar or more fascinated by the culture correcting you at every sentence.

This is especially true when it comes to things like modes of speech and the mandatory use of titles and so on. To many players, this kind of thing feels unnatural, and is something they'd rather avoid. I've been in groups where just expecting some players to refrain from openly insulting the Empress was all you could ask of them. In those sorts of games, we usually just let the die roll determine how respectful the character is actually being.

I was actually intending the thread more for players than for the GM. I always felt horribly awkward trying to play a noble character without knowing any sort of titles - whatever I said just sounded wrong, no matter what my diplomacy and charisma say.

Martin Greywolf
2011-08-10, 05:46 PM
I was actually intending the thread more for players than for the GM. I always felt horribly awkward trying to play a noble character without knowing any sort of titles - whatever I said just sounded wrong, no matter what my diplomacy and charisma say.

Well, ask your DM beforehand.

As I have been DM for some 8 years, and player only rarely, I can tell you that most of DMs will jump at the opportunity and feel a warm glow inside, knowing that a player is actually interested in that title system they made in Excel ages ago :smallwink:

Point here is that titles are many in all cultures. Kings of Spain were refered to (and thatīs short form iirc) at one time as "Lord of Castille, Spain and Andalusia", and chineese emperors had different titles before and after death (just look up some more recent one on wikipedia, for example emperess dowager Cixi, she is an interesting figure).

Mostly, going by sir, lord and lady (or your majesty in case of kings and queens) will be enough, a peasant may call even a merchant "my lord", while a well-armed (and thus somewhat rich and powerful) mercenary might ignore a lesser noble, just calling him "hey, you".

Resolving this is a different matter, related more to DMs than players (how do the people react to unintentional insults, they have been known to start wars irl), but basically, what Pyrite said.