The Dink Network

Reply to Re: What would you rather?

If you don't have an account, just leave the password field blank.
Username:
Password:
Subject:
Antispam: Enter Dink Smallwood's last name (surname) below.
Formatting: :) :( ;( :P ;) :D >( : :s :O evil cat blood
Bold font Italic font hyperlink Code tags
Message:
 
 
June 6th 2007, 01:25 PM
wizardb.gif
Kyle
Peasant He/Him Belgium
 
I don't think it has to be medieval swearing, but the more classic swearing. I'll try this example, but it's possible any kind of swearing filter will screw that up

A character in a medieval game could, imo, perfectly say: "God dammit, things have gone to hell!".
But not: "For f uck's sake, I'm royally screwed!" (forgive me for bypassing the filter here)

Note that both include swearing, but the type is different. "Dammit" is more acceptable than "f uck" in my mind, simply because it focuses more on the thought behind it than on the actual swearing itself.

This example also illustrates the difference between "old" and "modern" swearing. One might say the first example uses a more general style of swearing, whereas the second example is related more to a specific group of society (internet slang, younger people). I've never heard a 50 year old man say "For f uck's sake", but I've heard them say "Dammit". And I've heard young people say both, which proves that the first example is much more universal. You never know who will play your game, but by using only the universally used swear words there's not much you can do wrong (unless you're one of those people who just can't stand the use of any swearing, at all).