[SUBMITTED 18/12/18] Don't You Know Who I Am?

[Candlewhisper Archive]

THIRD:

TITLE:

Don't You Know Who I Am?


VALIDITY:

slavery, no mandatory nudism,



DESCRIPTION:

House slave @@randomalename@@ was recently mistaken as being the Crown Prince of Kawandaland, a situation likely not helped by his owner's habit of dressing the man in velvet finery. Your Diplomatic Corps made a fool of themselves thinking they were rushing out to greet a surprise royal tourist, and now their faces are as red as the carpet they rolled out for him.



OPTION ONE

"How dare this slave masquerade as royalty?" growls Minister of Protocol @@randomname@@, who had wasted four hours donning his ceremonial jeweled girdle. "The problem here is slaves not being readily recognisable as such. We must insist on obvious visible identification of the owned classes, perhaps in the form of a brightly coloured piece of cloth bearing an easily-recognisable symbol."

OUTCOME:

slave leaders wearing yellow armbands cry out "Let My People Go!"



OPTION TWO - IF BODY MODIFICATION LEGAL

"That would be too easy to miss and too easy to remove," fumes Diplomatic Envoy @@randomname@@, who if anything seems even angrier than the minister. "No, what you need is a permanent brand on the shaved head of every slave. Actually, make that two brands, front and back, so we can't get confused by a slave facing the wrong way."

OUTCOME:

freedmen are identifiable by their voluminous wigs



OPTION THREE

"You know, he does look a lot like the Kawandalandian prince," murmurs Robin Goodfellow, Director of Disinformation. "Perhaps we could disappear him into the ranks of our intelligence services, where he could be a useful asset in creating various faked media. Of course, we'd need to bury any knowledge of this recent incident first, if he's to be of any use. Leave it with me, and this will be no more than a passing dream."

OUTCOME:

various world leaders are rumoured to hang out at a secret military base in the @@@DEMONYM@@ desert



OPTION FOUR - FOR NON-MONARCHIES

"Oh really, it's much more than simply looking like a prince," interjects a strange fey-seeming gentleman with thistledown hair. "I'd say he has a bearing that reveals true royalty. Indeed, I'd say that it must be right that he is the rightful king of @@NAME@@. Install him as our monarch at once, and fall prostrate before him! Long Live the King!"

OUTCOME:

a rise in the national incidence of arthritis has been attributed to excessive kneeling

SECOND:

TITLE:

Don't You Know Who I Am?


VALIDITY:

slavery, no mandatory nudism,



DESCRIPTION:

House slave @@randomalename@@ was recently mistaken as being the Crown Prince of Kawandaland, a situation likely not helped by his owner's habit of dressing the man in velvet finery. Your Diplomatic Corps made a fool of themselves thinking they were rushing out to greet a surprise royal tourist, and now their faces are as red as the carpet they rolled out for him.



OPTION ONE

"How dare this slave masquerade as royalty?" growls Minister of Protocol @@randomname@@, who had wasted four hours donning his ceremonial jeweled girdle. "The problem here is slaves not being readily recognisable as such. We must insist on obvious visible identification of the owned classes, perhaps in the form of a brightly coloured piece of cloth bearing an easily-recognisable symbol."

OUTCOME:

yellow armbands bearing six-pointed stars are worn by the most abused members of society



OPTION TWO - IF BODY MODIFICATION LEGAL

"That would be too easy to miss and too easy to remove," fumes Diplomatic Envoy @@randomname@@, who if anything seems even angrier than the minister. "No, what you need is a permanent brand on the shaved head of every slave. Actually, make that two brands, front and back, so we can't get confused by a slave facing the wrong way."

OUTCOME:

freedmen are identifiable by their voluminous wigs



OPTION THREE

"You know, he does look a lot like the Kawandalandian prince," murmurs Robin Goodfellow, Director of Disinformation. "Perhaps we could disappear him into the ranks of our intelligence services, where he could be a useful asset in creating various faked media. Of course, we'd need to bury any knowledge of this recent incident first, if he's to be of any use. Leave it with me, and this will be no more than a passing dream."

OUTCOME:

various world leaders are rumoured to hang out at a secret military base in the @@@DEMONYM@@ desert



OPTION FOUR - FOR NON-MONARCHIES

"Oh really, it's much more than simply looking like a prince," interjects a strange fey-seeming gentleman with thistledown hair. "I'd say he has a bearing that reveals true royalty. Indeed, I'd say that it must be right that he is the rightful king of @@NAME@@. Install him as our monarch at once, and fall prostrate before him! Long Live the King!"

OUTCOME:

a rise in the national incidence of arthritis has been attributed to excessive kneeling

FIRST:

TITLE:

Don't You Know Who I Am?


VALIDITY:

slavery



DESCRIPTION:

House slave @@randomalename@@ was recently mistaken as being the Crown Prince of Kawandaland, a situation likely not helped by his owner's habit of dressing the man in velvet finery. Your Diplomatic Corps made a fool of themselves thinking they were rushing out to greet a surprise royal tourist, and now their faces are as red as the carpet they rolled out for him.



OPTION ONE

"How dare this slave masquerade as royalty?" growls Minister of Protocol @@randomname@@, who had wasted four hours donning his ceremonial jeweled girdle. "The problem here is slaves not being readily recognisable as such. We must insist on obvious visible identification of the owned classes, perhaps in the form of a brightly coloured piece of cloth bearing an easily-recognisable symbol."

OUTCOME:

yellow armbands bearing six-pointed stars are worn by the most abused members of society



OPTION TWO

"That would be too easy to miss and too easy to remove," fumes Diplomatic Envoy @@randomname@@, who if anything seems even angrier than the minister. "No, what you need is a permanent brand on the shaved head of every slave. Actually, make that two brands, front and back, so we can't get confused by a slave facing the wrong way."

OUTCOME:

tattoos are seen as being for the lower classes



OPTION THREE

"You know, he does look a lot like the Kawandalandian prince," murmurs Robin Goodfellow, Director of Disinformation. "Perhaps we could disappear him into the ranks of our intelligence services, where he could be a useful asset in creating various faked media. Of course, we'd need to bury any knowledge of this recent incident first, if he's to be of any use. Leave it with me, and this will be no more than a passing dream."

OUTCOME:

various world leaders are rumoured to hang out at a secret military base in the @@@DEMONYM@@ desert



OPTION FOUR - FOR NON-MONARCHIES

"Oh really, it's much more than simply looking like a prince," interjects a strange fey-seeming gentleman with thistledown hair. "I'd say he has a bearing that reveals true royalty. Indeed, I'd say that it's apparent that he must be the heir apparent of @@NAME@@. Install him as King of @@NAME@@ at once, and fall prostrate before him! Long Live the King!"

OUTCOME:

a rise in the national incidence of arthritis has been attributed to excessive kneeling

[Verdant Haven]

What would be the consequence of Choice 4 here, with regard to government? Whether or not the nation is actually a monarchy, "King" and "Kingdom" are still titles players can use, so it might be a bit of an overlap. Basically, it would seem like a choice that replaces the player. Perhaps the individual should be installed as a prince in a sub-region, or you can try to install him as the real King of Kawandaland in place of the current one?

[Candlewhisper Archive]

What would be the consequence of Choice 4 here, with regard to government? Whether or not the nation is actually a monarchy, "King" and "Kingdom" are still titles players can use, so it might be a bit of an overlap. Basically, it would seem like a choice that replaces the player. Perhaps the individual should be installed as a prince in a sub-region, or you can try to install him as the real King of Kawandaland in place of the current one?

It'd turn the nation into a Monarchy, and make this unnamed character the king. My own read on it would be that it would represent a rule-by-monarchy rather than a constitutional monarchy, but I'd leave that up to whichever editor codes the issue.

Note that the titles of leaders and nation categories aren't considered to represent a nation's political structure. For example, the Democratic People's Republic of North Korea doesn't get categorised as a democracy by having the word Democratic in its name...

The player field for leader name will never get changed by an issue. It's up to players whether they want to change that field to represent the new king (who I have intentionally not named so they can do that) or if their headcanon wants to name their current @@LEADER@@ as the power behind King Nameless.

[Verdant Haven]

I realize those titles don't actually mean anything - I'm just curious from an RP perspective what would be implied, especially in nations that have a leader name chosen. Option four is basically suggesting dumping your current meta and taking over as this individual.

The other question I have about it is, to whom is he heir apparent? That implies a previous holder of the title, and in a non-monarchy in particular... Eh? Since an heir apparent is a legal shoe-in for "next in line" I believe it also implies a living current holder. Perhaps calling him the "rightful King of @@NAME@@" would leave that more neutral?

I actually really love this option - I'm not trying to nitpick it to death. I'm just doing my best to wrap my head around it and shape it in to something I could see myself choosing!

[Rkr]

What would be the consequence of Choice 4 here, with regard to government? Whether or not the nation is actually a monarchy, "King" and "Kingdom" are still titles players can use, so it might be a bit of an overlap. Basically, it would seem like a choice that replaces the player. Perhaps the individual should be installed as a prince in a sub-region, or you can try to install him as the real King of Kawandaland in place of the current one?

Installing them as the king of Kawandaland would be option three

[USS Monitor]

Perhaps calling him the "rightful King of @@NAME@@" would leave that more neutral?

I agree with this.

Also think the effect line for option 2 could be funnier, though I am drawing a blank on what to replace it with.

This is a fun premise, though.

[Verdant Haven]

Also think the effect line for option 2 could be funnier, though I am drawing a blank on what to replace it with.

Perhaps something like "tattoo artists regularly find themselves mistakenly clapped in irons"?

[Candlewhisper Archive]

Nice, though I'm not sure that works too well, as tattooists need not be tattooed, and it seem unlikely they'd tattoo themselves as slaves.

I've put up a second draft with an alternate effect line.

Re heir apparent, I was mostly playing with the "apparent that he's the heir apparent" whimsy, but "right that he's the rightful king" works too. Amended into second draft.

[Jutsa]

Small notes:
1) This issue'd probably not appear for nudist nations.
2) Option 2'd not really work for nations that ban body modification.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

Good points.

I'll add nudism to the validity check list. As for body modification, I'll flag that as validity for that option only.

[Australian rePublic]

Couldn't you quickly Google the Kwandalandian Royal Family? You're a diplomat, you should know to do that. Also, what would prevent a free person from pretending to be royalty? Also, if you brand slaves, how will you knkw which were freed? What if the slave owner refuses to brand the slaves?

[Caracasus]

I would argue that the 2nd option would work for nations that ban body modification. One of the key parts of slavery as it's largely been practised in modernity is that slaves aren't people.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

I would argue that the 2nd option would work for nations that ban body modification. One of the key parts of slavery as it's largely been practised in modernity is that slaves aren't people.

True, though at the same time, they still have bodies. The three activations of the policy all have narratives that "ban all body modification", which would suggest a wider remit than just stopping this practice on citizens / real people.

[Caracasus]

I would argue that the 2nd option would work for nations that ban body modification. One of the key parts of slavery as it's largely been practised in modernity is that slaves aren't people.

True, though at the same time, they still have bodies. The three activations of the policy all have narratives that "ban all body modification", which would suggest a wider remit than just stopping this practice on citizens / real people.

Eh, I'd argue otherwise myself (after all, I am fairly certain that the no body modification policy wouldn't mean that said nations would stop branding cattle or castrating pets) but obviously your issue.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

Oh no, not at all. When you edit this, I'll leave the decision entirely to you.

[USS Monitor]

I would argue that the 2nd option would work for nations that ban body modification. One of the key parts of slavery as it's largely been practised in modernity is that slaves aren't people.

True, though at the same time, they still have bodies. The three activations of the policy all have narratives that "ban all body modification", which would suggest a wider remit than just stopping this practice on citizens / real people.

Couldn't you just have that option reverse the no body modification policy, rather than making it invalid?

[Candlewhisper Archive]

That's entirely possible, though of course has other implications, like needing a stat doppelganger depending on starting position, and the worry that a "side effect" reversal creates unexpected effects.

My personal feel is that if the issue has integrity without that option present, then there's no need for it to be present for every nation.

[Trotterdam]

Eh, I'd argue otherwise myself (after all, I am fairly certain that the no body modification policy wouldn't mean that said nations would stop branding cattle or castrating pets) but obviously your issue.

Castrating pets is banned under Judaism.

I'd say treat the policy as only explicitly applying to "real people", though, and if players want it to have wider remit then they simply won't choose the option to brand slaves.

Mind you, well-dressed people being mistaken for a higher social class hasn't been an issue only among slaves... Note that real-life "solutions" have tended to be exclusive (i.e., forbidding lower classes from wearing certain types of clothing) rather than inclusive (i.e., requiring lower classes to wear some particular piece of clothing but otherwise letting them wear what they want so long as it remains visible).

[Candlewhisper Archive]

Cor, that's interesting stuff. Sumptuary law, eh?

I'd heard about the Imperial purple thing in Rome, and knew about Cromwell opposing finery, but not the other examples.

The Puritan laws on sumptuary consumption under Cromwell would make a good inspiration for a different issue, for sure.

[Trotterdam]

Cor, that's interesting stuff. Sumptuary law, eh?

You know what I really find funny about sumptuary laws?

Rulers tended to pass them under the pretense of preserving "morality" by forbidding vanity. However, when you look through historical examples, you'll find that surprisingly many sumptuary laws throughout the ages made an explicit exception for prostitutes, on the basis that since they attract customers based on how pretty they are, for them pretty clothes are tools of the trade, and so not vanity. One has to wonder about the mindset of someone who can, in the same breath, claim to support such a strict no-fun-allowed notion of morality while also endorsing prostitution.

Obviously this is because the real reason for those laws is that nobles didn't want untitled merchants homing in on their turf, and the whole "morality" thing was just an excuse.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

It'd be a fun issue in a nation with legalised prostitution for a discussion to be had about how prostitutes should dress.

[Fauxia]

yellow armbands bearing six-pointed stars are worn by the most abused members of society

Is this effect line going to be okay?

[Australian rePublic]

I would argue that the 2nd option would work for nations that ban body modification. One of the key parts of slavery as it's largely been practised in modernity is that slaves aren't people.

True, though at the same time, they still have bodies. The three activations of the policy all have narratives that "ban all body modification", which would suggest a wider remit than just stopping this practice on citizens / real people.

Yea, but I'm sure that "No body modification" doesn't apply to non-humans, such as animals. It's the same as the "no murder" law and how it doesn't apply to animals. If you're a scum bag who considers that a slave is not a human, then you're probably gonna be the same scumbag who doesn't think that slaves should be under the same jurisdiction as freepersons. Also, I don't get how that works, is a slave who is freed automatically a human being? Slavery is such an evil institution.

[Candlewhisper Archive]

yellow armbands bearing six-pointed stars are worn by the most abused members of society

Is this effect line going to be okay?

I don't know, to be honest. Was thinking that when I drafted it, and thought, well, if it's not, someone will ask that question.

I've avoided mocking the holocaust in any way, but at the same time, is it automatically a no-go to reference antisemitism in humour, even when using it as an example to show how evil a decision you've just made is?

maybe:

slave leaders wearing yellow armbands cry out "Let My People Go!"

That's more obviously highlighting the struggle rather than the victimhood, right?

[The Sherpa Empire]

Is this effect line going to be okay?

I don't know, to be honest. Was thinking that when I drafted it, and thought, well, if it's not, someone will ask that question.

I've avoided mocking the holocaust in any way, but at the same time, is it automatically a no-go to reference antisemitism in humour, even when using it as an example to show how evil a decision you've just made is?

maybe:

slave leaders wearing yellow armbands cry out "Let My People Go!"

That's more obviously highlighting the struggle rather than the victimhood, right?

I kind of prefer the more subtle reference.