Titles

Predator

19-10-2006 07:24:41

This is just a general question to be thrown out to the court so to speak.

"Should fictional titles be controlled?"

The titles I refer to are ones like Knight, Baron, Duke, Commander, General, Admiral.

I have noticed that every man and his dog seems to have sort of title in his signature.

Clearly ones that have been earned such as rank or position are fine and even ex titles are ok but Baron, Duke? These are very high ranking titles and many are held by very low ranking members.

I don't think this should really be a DB wide controlled thing but maybe it could be a clan controlled thing, i.e you cannot have Baron on your Sig unless first cleared and earned from your clan.

I noticed a couple of sigs that had about 15 lines most of which were either pointless (funny titles are fine) or made by

Personally I would like to see some control (i.e lock off the top titles and leave the rest)

Thoughts???

Kaine Mandaala

19-10-2006 07:37:29

I don't think anyone should have a title. Maybe when the prestege system comes around titles can be wiped out and people would have to actually spend points to earn them.

As it is people have free reign to call themselves whatever they want with no impact on their standings in the DJB. Fictionally it may be harder to explain why someone who is/was a Duke/Baron takes orders from a QUA...

As for the "funny" ones - they're retarded. On par with spam in my book.

Baron Zarco

19-10-2006 08:11:45

WTF

Has anyone ever thought that "Baron" is a name?

I suppose some "Dark Side" adherents are consumed with jealousy and upset a la emo anger with Anakin being the poster child for emo angst. That notwithstanding, is not one's time better spent doing something in a competition or helping one's team, house or clan than being a crybaby about the name or signature line that someone uses?

Also, signature lines aside, DB names are, to my knowledge, screened and approved (or disapproved) upon joining.

Zeron

19-10-2006 08:51:27

i dont clearly see why its bad if someone calls himself a baron or duke? Firstly, the title has a value when someone accepting/supporting it. I can declare myself the Duke of every Man. Until someone else says i am the duke of every man, then my title has no value. Also Just because someone calls himself a Duke/Baron (example) doesnt mean that title is higher then the brotherhood position...

So i dont really get your point...

Sith Bloodfyre

19-10-2006 09:41:44

They may not be talking about you, Zarco. He's talking about people who, in their signature lines, put stuff like, "The 221st Earl of Vandermeir." And [Expletive Deleted] like that.

Zeron, if you labelled yourself as "The Duke of Zanderwagen," that has no meaning in the Brotherhood, but that still says to other people (i.e. those who don't know enough) that "Oh, he's royalty. He's nobility. He's a Duke! I should bow down to my leige." It happens. People suddenly believe that you are something "special" based off of title alone. It's ridiculous.

The problem is, too many people are disconent to just be "Apprentice Wah Blah." They want to be someone who is powerful and important. They want to shoot lightning bolts from their asses. They want to rule over the affairs of men. Again, ridiculous.

Andan Taldrya Marshall

19-10-2006 10:14:15

I think an argument could be made for granting a few titles such as Sir (Knight) at DJK, Master ad DJK, and Darth at GM. The last two already happen, if only informally. Other titles of nobility should, if anything, be restricted to the summits of the various clans. For example, a CON could be given the title of Duke of (whatever planet/system the clan commands) and QUAs could be given the title of Count of (their house's planet). I'm suggesting that titles of nobility be restricted to the summits because, as Kaine said, it's pretty hard to explain why a Grand Duke is taking orders from anyone. Giving these titles would be, of course, at the descression of the individual clans.

One of the fictional requirments for joining the DB is leaving your past life. This is to keep people from saying that they commanded a pirate fleet before they joined so they should still have access to those ships and such. This would also apply to any titles that a character held before they joined. If APP Whosamawhatsit wants to say that they're the former Baron of Bramb to try to make themselves look more important that's one thing, but of that same APP claims to STILL be a Baron then that's something that should be dealt with.

Military titles are a little harder to deal with. A little before the GJW started, Taldryan finalized our Order of Battle and assigned our ships to either a Home Guard or a Battlegroup for each of our houses. There was a provision in that plan to name Captians for each ship and Commanders for each squad, but that was mostly put on the back burner while the GJW happened. I see no problem with a system like this; people using military titles and ranks that have been given to them by their clan summit to be used in ROs and fiction. The fact that, technically, I am a Rear Admiral, Major the Battlegroup and Battalion Executive Officer for Battlegroup Ektrosis and the Captain of the M/FRG Suppressor makes absolutely no difference in my every day DB life. It just legatimizes the fact that I'm sitting in the big boy's chair of the Suppressor and give orders to Ektrosis' fleet and ground troops when we do a RO.

The only title that I have that makes any difference what-so-ever in my day-to-day DB life is that I was given Taldryan's clan name. Coincidentally, that is the only title that I use in my forum signature. In emails I sign as the a Son of Taldryan, Aedile of Ektrosis and Magistrate to the DGM.

Fictional titles should be used in fiction only; titles that are effected by day-to-day DB happenings (ie. positions or a clan name) should be the only titles used on a day-to-day basis.

Shadonyx

19-10-2006 12:18:04

Like I've said in the "Order Leader" thread and what others have said here, people do this to enhance their own self-worth and sound really important. The simple fact is that you cannot be any sort of nobility while being a member here, since being a member here requires you to remain with your Clan - so, how can you perform the required duties of nobility?

Also, I find it hard to believe that every planet in the Galaxy has some sort of nobility system that would afford such titles. Titles given through a Clan system (not unlike Plagueis' feudal system) are permissable, of course, and any Brotherhood-wide system is fine. But coming up with fancy titles for yourself really serves only to a) make your character unrealistic and B) continue the never ending pissing match of "I'm more important than you."

Dalthid

19-10-2006 17:45:29

holy crap - herein is a gaggle of the LAST people I thought I'd ever agree with :P And knowing that I do may severely change their stance - LOL.

My corner of the DB is infested with this nonsense, but we've got 'digits' to help us sift through the BS...so that helps me sleep at night, hehe. I'm a big fan of 'earning' any extra names and I know I'm getting a little title happy in the ACC as of late with SCH, CH, ACE and BRN - but rest assured, I'm almost done. Soon (hopefully) the 'ranks' will be split from the 'positions' and even the ranks themselves will prolly be loosing their 'names'.

Outside my little corner though, when I get mail from members - I'm always in awe at the length of their signature blocks - if they have the common sense to have them there in the first place...a billion lines of utter trash; master of this, overlord of that...meh, it's kinda retarded when the JH sounds like they outweigh teh jac...

Sephiroth Kali

20-10-2006 04:22:33

You wouldn't be talking about my old sig would you now? Look, personaly, i don't care if you want to call yourself god of all and everything. We all know what titles exist in the DB. If you don't like what someone calls themself, ignore it. you don't have to read it.

Sith Bloodfyre

20-10-2006 12:53:24

We're not talking about all titles, Sephiroth. And it's less about titles born from some action (i.e. calling yourself the "Scourge of Athenar" for having been the person who destroyed that family, or being named the "Bane of Brahktar" for some act you performed on that world). It's more about people who are making themselves nobility. There really are people who can't handle being "unimportant."

Andan Taldrya Marshall

20-10-2006 14:21:56

Exactly. Titles relating to some fictional act aren't so bad, as long as there's some sort of basis for them (i.e. either as a part of your history or an award from a comp).

For example, around Christmas last year Ektrosis ran a comp in which participants wrote a story about killing the light Jedi Santa Clause. In addition to the normal crescents that were awarded for the comp, the first place winner also was awarded the title Santa Slayer and while I don't think that the winner uses the title anymore, they had for a while.

That is a perfectly legit title; it was given to the person by someone with a position of authority to reflect the fact that this person had performed a fictional action which resulted in the death of Santa (based on the fact that when there is a story comp the winning story is usually believed to be the version of the events that "actually happened"). They didn't just take the title for themselves without a proper explination of how it happened.

I'm not going after these kinds of titles at all. I think that, as long as they're awarded responsibly like all other awards they can be a fun alternative, or suppliment, to crescents. There is also a growing move in the DB to include more of the fictional element (i.e. creating the RP system...eventually...) and this fits in nicely with it.

It's the people who are Journymen and for some reason are also a Baron, Earl, Emperor of the Known Universe, etc. That I, any the others arguing against these types of titles are after.

Take a title if you want, but make sure that you explain how you got it.

Shadonyx

20-10-2006 14:59:33

You wouldn't be talking about my old sig would you now? Look, personaly, i don't care if you want to call yourself god of all and everything. We all know what titles exist in the DB. If you don't like what someone calls themself, ignore it. you don't have to read it.



And herein lies the reason why this title nonsense has gotten out of control.

"Eh, doesn't affect me... so why should I care..."

People giving themselves spurious titles, nobility or otherwise, undermines the fictional basis of the DJB and on a more broad level, Star Wars. While we can play fast and loose with canon, the fact is that this desire to be important has, rather than manifesting itself in a motivation to be productive and contributing to the Brotherhood to attain notice, instead manifested in personal title grubbing. It is absolutely preposterous for anyone below the Elder level to have a title of nobility. What sense does it make for a Duke or a Baron to eschew a life of luxury and power to become an Apprentice in an obscure Dark Side cult? I highly doubt that a Jedi Hunter would have the ability or the prowess to be the Scourge or Bane of anything. And yet, I'm sure if I did a search through the forums, I'd find plenty of Journeymen and Equites making claims to greatness and power that would make Palpatine arch an eyebrow.

That said, I place the blame on our Elders and past Grand Masters, some who feel/felt the need to fictionalize everything done in the Brotherhood to the point of being so fantastical that it could fit into a Grimm fairy tale. Don't believe me? Do some research on Paladin and Khyron; two Grand Masters, if you go by their personal profiles and pronouncements, could move whole mountains with the Force; Zoraan is another excellent study in supreme egotism. And "The History of the Brotherhood"? One of the best pieces of fiction I've read in a while. Not much truth in it, but a great piece of fiction.

I think it would behoove the Dark Council to begin to move our Brotherhood into a more realistic framework. Our Grand Masters are not Palpatine doubles, nor should they be (Sorry, Jac, but the idea of you making a sentient clone to do more work is laughable). Our Elders cannot warp the very fabric of reality and make life the way they like it. If our Brotherhood could do half of what we say we can, the Yuuzhan Vong would have packed up camp and went to pick on another Galaxy. I'm all for fiction and all for enjoyment, but I'm convinced we've gotten carried away with our egos and it's high time we moved away from telling tall tales and more useful, historical, accurate ones.

Sephiroth Kali

21-10-2006 00:23:55

And herein lies the reason why this title nonsense has gotten out of control.

"Eh, doesn't affect me... so why should I care..."


With all do respect, I t does affect me, I wasn't trying to say it didn't, or else I wouldn't have posted anything.

Andan Taldrya Marshall

21-10-2006 10:41:11

So what's your argument for allowing titles then? It seems like you want to say that it's going to happen no matter what you do and if you don't want to see them don't read anybody's signatures.

Is that correct? I want to make sure I'm on the right page before I argue that angle. If that isn't it then please explain why you think titles should be allowed and how you'd allow them.

Sephiroth Kali

21-10-2006 23:55:44

I don't want to say that it's going to happen whatever we do, I belive firmly that if we decide to do one thing or the other, that it should be inforced.

However, before I answer, I have to verify, are we talking about people using titles everywhere in the DB, meaning, Email, MB, IRC, ect. or specificly in fiction?

Sith Bloodfyre

22-10-2006 00:09:59

Seph, we're not talking about people using titles in general, we're talking about certain titles that people overuse, and often, inappropriately use. Specifically, titles of nobility. Most of us recognize the use and advantages of some titles, just that people are going overboard, and not putting enough thought into what they're wanting to make themselves out to be. And so on, and so forth.

khan

22-10-2006 04:38:27

There's only one title that matters in our world anywya and it's Dark Lord of the Sith, period. Below that you are just a pawn heh

silverRaven

22-10-2006 11:48:58

I think I'm going to have to pick on Yilth here.

Yilth Romanae I find a great example who used a title in a proper way. His history identifies him as Draken-Korin, the last Drageneral of the Valheru. Although within that culture it's a very high title, what power is that if everyone of that civilization is dead? Yilth doesn't use this title for power, only for character development, and this I feel is a proper use of a title.

I don't however, feel we need to worry about such titles. The boastfullness wears off as they gain rank, and become reasonable members, and the name wears off, or it becomes a way of developing their character. The rest of the n00bcakes die away. There really isn't a problem above about DJK or so, and as such, we don't really need to moderate it yet. Or anymore than we already do.

Andan Taldrya Marshall

22-10-2006 12:55:08

Raven, I think it's rather naive to think that any problem will simply go away in time. Coming from the prospective of a psychology major, untreated problems tend to lead to much more serious issues (i.e. untreated depression leading to suicide attempts). I don't think that I'd be putting words in anybody's mouth to say that a lot of the people who have posted on this thread think that titles are, on some level, a problem; there's disagreement as to exactly where the line is between ok titles and bad ones but the fact remains that people agree that they are causing problems.

My question to you, then, is would you rather deal with the problem whe it first presents itself or wait until it's been going on for a while and doesn't simply go away on its own. You don't want to see if cancer will just go away, you go after it and make sure it goes away and that's what we need to do here. It's much easier for the summits to send an email to a member asking them to stop using a title when it first happens rather then when they've been using it for a few months; people get attached to the titles and they don't want to give them up.

I don't know if you were around when we split from the EH, but that was another case where we were faced with a major problem that didn't just go away. We had to actively work to rid ourselves of the thing that was causing the problem, namely the EH and it's leaders.

RevengeX

22-10-2006 13:11:51

My opinion on this is that I personally think it's a problem, but nothing incredibly extensive that should be constantly monitored. People who use these titles of nobility are just trying to boost their self-esteem. ;) While I can understand that this can get out of control, I don't think it's a big deal because people just have to realize that they may not be as important as they want to be (not trying to shoot down anyone here, just stating my opinion).

Anonymous

22-10-2006 15:03:04

Having had a wife that died of cancer and having been "depressed" after living that event and the treatment leading up to it, I am a little off-put by analogizing anything, especially anything that goes on in a Star Wars fan club, to a cancer, or even depression. I tend to think that Rasilvenaira's point is well-made. The proof of the pudding is in the eating. If someone is high and mighty and does not pack the gear then call him or her out and bust their a** in the ACC or in the other gaming forums. This is so petty I cannot even believe I have posted twice in this thread!!!

Baron Zarco

22-10-2006 15:05:09

Whoops! I made that prior post before I had logged in. Now I have posted three times in this thread. To quote Charlie Brown, "Aaaarrrrggghhhhh!"

Shadonyx

22-10-2006 16:52:27

"Having had a wife that died of cancer and having been 'depressed' after living that event and the treatment leading up to it, I am a little off-put by analogizing anything [...]"

As another Psychology major, we do this because we, unlike the rest of Humanity, have a profound understanding of how people think. And the "proof in the pudding" is the reams of research showing and demonstrating biases that amount to this:

People are egocentric, self-serving whores.

That said, the reason why we analogize is because if we didn't, the vast majority of people here wouldn't get the issue at hand. The way I see it, we've got two options: presenting analogies or slamming heads into steel walls.

Frankly, the analogies are appropriate, whether you happen to like them or not. I've had a Grandmother die of cancer, an Aunt with breast cancer, and my Mother had cervical cancer. I suffer from periodic depression and the occassional anxiety, as well do my Mother, and I've an Aunt with bipolar disorder, type I. So I recommend, before you present such information as a reason as to why you feel analogies are inappropriate, consider for a moment that there are other who have experienced similar issues and do not.

And by your DB name, it seems you're one of the perpetrators of this title nonsense we're referring to.

Anonymous

22-10-2006 17:36:33

Your personal experiences and those of others are precisely why analogies should be used with care.

You write, "That said, the reason why we analogize is because if we didn't, the vast majority of people here wouldn't get the issue at hand. The way I see it, we've got two options: presenting analogies or slamming heads into steel walls." Are those really the only two speeds you have? If so, that is pitiful.

You also write, "we...unlike the rest of Humanity, have a profound understanding of how people think." OMFG, you sound like a bishop or priest or Pope. Is that what your profession is? Is it a godless replacement for the same type of hegemony that ran amok in the middle ages?

You close by writing,"And by your DB name, it seems you're one of the perpetrators of this title nonsense we're referring to." First of all, if you were really as educated and all-knowing as you claim to be, you would know better than to end a sentence with a preposition. Second, while you may see the attitude of a "perpetrator" in a name I clearly see one in how you write.

Finally, you opine, "People are egocentric, self-serving whores." Your post goes a long way towards proving your opinion.

Thank you for your god-like, all-knowing post. I wish I was as educated as you are. Gee Mr. Wizard you make me feel so stupid.

Baron Zarco

22-10-2006 17:37:51

My log-in had expired when I wrote that. I claim the above post. Eat it.

Alanna

22-10-2006 18:07:17

Not every title is a result of ego. I regularly call myself Lady Alanna, even though it's not part of my DB name. The title didn't even come from me - my Dad was trying to register me an e-mail account, and 'Alanna' was gone, so he registered 'Lady.Alanna'! Because it was in my e-mail address, people started to refer to me using my title, and my DB persona developed around that. Alanna's nature and demeanor (and even her picture that Chi drew) have developed from the title, and as such I would be upset to lose it.

I understand that for many people this isn't the case, but please don't accuse us all of being "egocentric, self-serving whores".

Sith Bloodfyre

22-10-2006 20:14:43

"Lady" isn't exactly the kind of title (as far as I know) that's been discussed. That's formal, but very generic. It's not like, "Lady Alanna, Countess of Burgenshire, third Princess of Aldensphere, Queen of all you wretched Plebes."

Baron Zarco

22-10-2006 20:25:52

Well, "lady" and "baron" are the same. Actually, as I understand it, "lady" would be higher than "Baron" as "lady, again if I understand correctly, is tha feminine form of "Lord." "Lord," hmmmm, I suppose that opens a whole can of worms.

I could write more but, frankly, I am tired of being called a "wh*re" by one who is so sure that he knows so much more about the "rest of Humanity" than we do just because he pursued an educational path that has him thinking that only he and those like him can understand "the rest of us."

BTW Shadonyx, I know a little bit about your profession. The deceased wife to which I referred was a psychiatrist. I lived and worked with her for twenty years. Maybe you do not really know it all.

Shadonyx

22-10-2006 20:46:10

Well, "lady" and "baron" are the same. Actually, as I understand it, "lady" would be higher than "Baron" as "lady, again if I understand correctly, is tha feminine form of "Lord." "Lord," hmmmm, I suppose that opens a whole can of worms.

I could write more but, frankly, I am tired of being called a "wh*re" by one who is so sure that he knows so much more about the "rest of Humanity" than we do just because he pursued an educational path that has him thinking that only he and those like him can understand "the rest of us."

BTW Shadonyx, I know a little bit about your profession. The deceased wife to which I referred was a psychiatrist. I lived and worked with her for twenty years. Maybe you do not really know it all.



This entire post absolutely reeks of sour grapes, and frankly, it's off topic. If you've got something more to say to me in regards to my previous post, send it through a private message and let's keep this thread on form.

That said, it seems that "Lord" and "Lady" are generic titles of address for men or women of nobility. According to this WikiPedia article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Styles_and_titles_of_peers), Earls, Viscounts, et cetera may all be referred to as Lord or Lady when addressing them.

Khobai

22-10-2006 22:32:27

I dont think it matters if Alanna has a title. She's an elder and a former KHP. I think that's entirely plausible. The problem is with lower-ranking members adopting titles to artificially inflate the importance of their characters. Titles of nobility should be restricted to the elder ranks... if youre not an elder youre not important :P

Alanna

23-10-2006 04:05:06

The titles 'Lord' and 'Lady' can apply to anyone with a peerage except a duke or duchess. So while it's a generic title, it does presuppose that my character is either a Baroness, Duchess, Marquess, Countess or a female viscount (not sure what the correct title is there :P).

Also, I adopted the 'Lady' prefix very early in my DB career, so while it isn't an issue now, it would still potentially have caused problems when I was lower ranked. And my point was that even when I was merely a pleb, I didn't adopt the title to 'artificially inflate my importance' (although I acknowledge that some do).

Sephiroth Kali

23-10-2006 07:06:43

Plain and simple, can't we leave it up to the Clan Summits to decide what titles thier members can use at what level? I mean, I don't think that anyone has a problem with Alanna using the title "Lady". One the other hand, I didn't even notice Zarco had the word Baron in his name. Then again he's not running around saying "I am the Baron of zigytota! Bow before me!" I say leave it to individual clans.

Khobai

23-10-2006 10:58:21

If you leave it upto clan summits determine who can have a title the standards wont be consistent across the board.

Andan Taldrya Marshall

23-10-2006 11:30:11

If you want the clan summits involved in giving out titles then the best way to do it would be to establish a set of rules that apply to every clan and within those rules give the power to dole out those titles to the clan summits. Sort of like clan names.

That is, of course, assuming that nobility titles aren't banned outright due to lack of relivance to the club.

Vath

23-10-2006 20:04:34

I think I'm going to have to pick on Yilth here.

Yilth Romanae I find a great example who used a title in a proper way. His history identifies him as Draken-Korin, the last Drageneral of the Valheru. Although within that culture it's a very high title, what power is that if everyone of that civilization is dead? Yilth doesn't use this title for power, only for character development, and this I feel is a proper use of a title.

I don't however, feel we need to worry about such titles. The boastfullness wears off as they gain rank, and become reasonable members, and the name wears off, or it becomes a way of developing their character. The rest of the n00bcakes die away. There really isn't a problem above about DJK or so, and as such, we don't really need to moderate it yet. Or anymore than we already do.



I agree with Raven on this one Titles are often only used for charecter development , in my opinion should only be used as such. I personaly have one 'title', but it is not a title of nobility and it means very little and was only used in one rp although I plan on useing it in the future.

Vodo

23-10-2006 23:58:32

I support the use of Clan authority to dole out the titles. I have made fun of you Zarco for your name, and because you've explained your name to me, I'm sorry. It was all in good nature though. But I do know of members of this Brotherhood who do go overboard on the title scheme. A clan title, or a BT title is fine in my opinion to toss on your tag IF you have earned it. But the question of every new comer being a royal or nobleman, is complete crap.

When I joined, the thought of creating a noble born character never once crossed my mind, and when i see new members announce themselves as the High Grand Lord of The almighty planet such and such, it irks my sense of moderation.

I believe the United States Government could grant us wisdom on how legislating a subject like this could be done. When a law is passed at the Federal Level (Dark Council for us), it's passed to the states (the clans) for ratification or modification. So here, in the Brotherhood, i believe the Clans should be the ones to administer ALL titles, fictional or otherwise, but would be governed by a set of rules set by the DC and approved by the clans.

This would make it fair for those of us who look down on royal titles, and those who wish to possess them.

[as a note, I always thought the 'Lady' title referred to your rank as (former) Krath High Priestess... So it was never a problem]

Sith Bloodfyre

24-10-2006 01:19:41

I said it before on the Order Leaders thread, I'll say it here, too. Let it go.

Oberst

24-10-2006 02:52:21

The titles 'Lord' and 'Lady' can apply to anyone with a peerage except a duke or duchess. So while it's a generic title, it does presuppose that my character is either a Baroness, Duchess, Marquess, Countess or a female viscount (not sure what the correct title is there :P).




Viscountess.

khan

24-10-2006 07:11:23

The irony of this whole treat is amusing. Royalty titles are something ever civilization made up to justify the rule of a certain, relatively small, circle of person over the majority of the population of their and eventualy other groups.
Now, this is the Dark Jedi Brotherhood and in the SW that means even the little NOVs and ACOs have already something above johnny Average Guy. Why someone with the power of the Force at his disposal whould even bother with "mortals's" titles is behond me.

armus

24-10-2006 13:53:23

The irony of this whole treat is amusing. Royalty titles are something ever civilization made up to justify the rule of a certain, relatively small, circle of person over the majority of the population of their and eventualy other groups.
Now, this is the Dark Jedi Brotherhood and in the SW that means even the little NOVs and ACOs have already something above johnny Average Guy. Why someone with the power of the Force at his disposal whould even bother with "mortals's" titles is behond me.





First of all. I don't think Force use = Immortality.

Secondly, titles and social structure exist to institutionalize authority. Ruling by intimidation might work in the short term, but having at least the acceptance of a subject population of your right to rule, if not cooperation is much more useful.

Remember: You can indimidate somebody into doing your bidding, but after that, you must never let that pressure up, or they would turn on you. Cooperation is much preferred.

Armus

khan

24-10-2006 14:07:08

Buddy I'm not talking about this and I never intended moratals in that way. Sure for controlling non-force users it works much better to be some kind of recognized head figure, I'm talking about members from every rank bragging about their titles while dealing with each other.

Etah

17-01-2007 00:23:20

Fictional titles should be just like fictional histories; they should observe common sense and have some kind of flow.

It would be completely plausible for a Duke or a Baron to come to study the dark side of the force in the brotherhood. Since there are trillions of NPCs in the galaxy and just over 2,000 PCs here in the brotherhood each and every one of them could be a noble of some planet.

Also for the record; Baron is the second lowest hereditary title in the Feudal System just over Knight Baronet. For a time the Barons achieved great power in Briton where they actually forced the King to sign the magna carta, but in every other country, in every other time period Baron was a relatively low title.

Duke however was a high title. It started as the latin Dux, which was the equivalent of a Field Marshal during some time periods in the Roman Empire. In Briton Duke was often the Kings younger brother and in many countries Grand Dukes ruled autonomous countries.

StarLion

17-01-2007 09:47:40

More resurrecting of dead posts.....

It would be plausible, yes. However, to allow anyone to decide completely at random that all of a sudden they're the Duke or Baron or King or whatever honorific you want to use is somewhat ridiculous. To write rules, such things would have to be more blanketing than specific.

'Knight' should certainly not be allowed, as it belies a rank within the Brotherhood (Dark Jedi Knight). Likewise, 'Champion','Baron', and 'Ace' are all titles within the ACC, and should not be available for honorifics.

For the purposes of RP? If you specifically describe the background in your history, dont use any of the titles that would conflict with Brotherhood titles, and dont make a claim that is refuted by a clan's holdings (for example, i cant say i run the Orian system, because that particular title is held by Clan Naga Sadow's front, the Dlarit Corporation. I also cant say that i'm the Viceroy of Dlarit because that title is specified to a person in the history files (Tron, specifically)).

As long as the title doesnt violate those guidelines, i dont see a particular problem with it. How the player *uses* the title, however, would have to be monitored by the Quaestor/Summit above them.

Zeron

17-01-2007 13:45:09

ACC titles are not that common to have them mistaken with others. Also the title of Baron is not enough. You must say Baron of Corellia etc. You are not a baron (example) but a Baron of something.

Fire-Knight

17-01-2007 15:46:11

Previous Last post: Oct 24th....

This Topic Died then. The art of Necromancy has long been lost, please do not post on a thread that is dead. If you really want to up your post count, make a topic that is worthy of talking about.

Andan Taldrya Marshall

17-01-2007 16:06:56

And just to lay this to rest once and for all here is a list of the officially accepted titles/honorifics that can be used within the DB: http://www.darkjedibrotherhood.com/wiki/in...php?title=Title

In addition, it is also accepted practice that anyone who joins the DB gives up the life that they had before joining, in a fictional sense. Any fortune that a member had is considered forfit, the same goes for fleets and, most importantly right now, titles.

Any titles that someone had before they joined the DB can only be used as Former _____. So any titles that are being used in the DB are ones that have been awarded within the DB. The only people with legitimate authority to award those titles are house/clan summits and the GM/DGM (except for ACC titles). Unless your title has been awarded by one of those people then you have not been granted permission to use that title and you shouldn't be using it.