Because "Waltz of Nations" is a game of social and political intrigue, how to behave properly (and more importantly, how to misbehave properly) is a matter of interest to all players. This brief guide is intended to give players advice on how to interact with each other, and also how to respond to the interactions of others.
Players should not be daunted by the prospect of acting out the manners and morals of an era almost two centuries on the past. Indeed, the manners and morals of the early 19th century bore a strong resemblance to a better-known and more recent period of history: the Roaring Twenties. In both cases, women's fashion had changed dramatically, with loose flowing dresses replacing the stiff and constricting fashions of earlier decades. The loosening up of ladies' dresses reflected a more general loosening up of acceptable standards of behavior. In both the early 19th century, and in the 1920s, standards of "proper behavior" and "decency" were considered decidedly old-fashioned. Far more important were wit, charm, style, and good looks. If one possessed all those qualities, then society would overlook much in one's behavior. Indeed, as in the '20s, witty repartee that verged on the cruel and nasty was considered both acceptable and amusing, provided that it was done well, to the amusement of onlookers.
Similarly, love affairs, drinking binges, and money troubles could all be overlooked by one's friends if one carried them off with style and panache. Love affairs, in particular, were not only accepted, but expected. The faithfully monogamous Lord Castlereagh, the British Foreign Minister who was devoted to his wife, baffled the Austrian Secret Police, and society at large, by his lack of a mistress. Everybody had a mistress, didn't they? On the other side of the coin, nobody liked a boor, and perhaps the greatest sin in the society of the Congress of Vienna was to be regarded as boring, rude, and tiresome. Nothing could get one excluded from all the best parties faster than bad manners and an annoying personality.
There were, however, a few important differences between the standards of behavior in the early 19th century, and in the 1920a. We'll address them one by one:
Rank
The importance of rank was far greater in the 19th century. Everybody knew how everyone ranked in relation to everybody else (this was known as precedence) and nobody ever let anybody else forget it. Of course, if one was a great wit or a great beauty, those of rank usually would be happy to accept one (as in the case of Friedrich von Gentz, one of the most influential men of the Congress, mainly on the strength of his friendship with princes and heads of state, but with no meaningful title of his own). But if the wit ran sour, or the beauty faded, one could find oneself dropped, or cut (see below). One always addressed people by their proper title (see guide below).
Being a member of royalty allowed one plenty of leeway in society. Tsar Alexander I is a great example � he carried on any number of flagrant affairs, was boorish to his wife, rude to other heads of state, and widely regarded as a bit of a religious weirdo. But he was also handsome, wealthy, a leader of the alliance that had conquered Napoleon, and, most importantly, Tsar of all the Russians. Of course, even royal privilege had its limits: George, the British Prince Regent, was so loathed by his subjects for his profligate and scandalous lifestyle that he had to go about London in unmarked carriages, lest he be pelted with rotten vegetables. (But the British middle classes were oddly obsessed with "respectability", an idea which would flower in the later Victorian era).
And, while early 19th century society was very open and accepting of all manner of behavior that we would today regard as unacceptable socially � carrying on multiple love affairs, running up huge debts, indulging in nasty backbiting gossip � there were some hard and fast lines that simply were not crossed, and woe betide the person who did.
Honor and Dueling
First and foremost, one's reputation for honor was considered sacrosanct; to impugn another's reputation with accusations of dishonorable behavior was a very serious matter indeed. For gentlemen, there were four big accusations that were unacceptable: failings in family honor (including and especially circumstances of illegitimate birth), cowardice on the battlefield, failure to repay debts, and cheating at cards. For ladies, the suggestion that a woman was promiscuous or unfaithful to her husband, regardless of how true it might be, was never made directly. If any man were so foolish as to make such insulting accusations about another, he risked being called out, by the gentleman himself if a man were the subject, or by a lady's kinsman or "protector" (a male friend who may or may not have been lover) if the accusation were leveled at a lady.
Being called out, or being challenged to a duel, was falling out of favor by the early 19th century. It was regarded as beneath the dignity of heads of state, and scandalous behavior for high-ranking statesmen. Nonetheless, it did indeed happen. Tsar Alexander, famous for his dislike of Metternich, is reputed once to have proclaimed his intention to call the Austrian chief minister out, until his advisors pointed out how injurious this would be to Russian imperial dignity. Similarly, Lord Castlereagh, the British Foreign Minister, did actually fight a duel in 1810, with a political rival. The ensuing scandal derailed his political career for a brief time. To put it in modern terms, people in the early 19th century regarded dueling much the same way we today would regard a fistfight over a matter of honor. Some people think it is never acceptable; others think it is a virtual obligation if one is wronged; and most people fall somewhere in the middle, depending on the circumstances � far more people would like to see a notorious loudmouth get a comeuppance than would like to see a bully push somebody around. Unlike fistfights today, though, dueling had a definite cachet of old-fashioned nobility. In practical terms, most duels were fought with pistols, although duels with rapiers were not unheard of.
Like anything else, dueling, and particularly calling someone out, was best done with wit and style. To say bluntly "You have offended me, sir, and I challenge you to a duel" is quite crude, though technically acceptable. Far better to say something oblique, such as "If you wish to stand by that statement, sir, then this conversation would best be continued through our friends"(a reference to the seconds who arranged the duels). Of course, the offending party may not realize he has offended (if he is a boor), and so an oblique suggestion that a comment was of sufficient gravity as to merit a call out might induce him to apologize. It was required that, if an offending comment was officially withdrawn by apology, that the challenge also had to be withdrawn.
The Cut
One did not call ladies out. Any physical aggression against a lady, in fact, was considered unspeakably barbaric. This immunity from the direct physical consequences of unkind words meant that ladies were frequently the shock troops in verbal warfare. A woman who made too great a habit, though, of uttering nasty and offensive things was likely to put off her friends and associates, and to find herself excluded from society.
Women had other weapons at their disposal to express their displeasure with a rival. The most severe, the female equivalent of a call out, was the Cut. Cutting was the act of refusing to acknowledge a person who had committed an offense against you. The Cut could take several forms, from simply avoiding a person to making patently lame excuses to leave conversation groups in which the offending person had been introduced, to the most serious, the Cut Direct. To perform the Cut Direct, a person made eye contact with his or her target (men could use cutting as well!), make sure the target knew that eye-contact has been established (and preferably make sure everybody around knew as well), and, just at the moment when words of greeting normally would be exchanged, the person making the cut would turn his or her gaze away, and (sometimes literally) turn a shoulder to the target. This was also known as Cutting Someone Dead, and it was a devastating social insult, often the first salvo declaring a war of gossip and innuendo between two parties.
Finally, formality is always de rigeur, especially when one is feuding socially with someone else. Indeed, the more you loathe someone, the more formal your speech should be to that person. Very formal speech patterns can indicate that the speaker is somehow upset with you. Of course, it can also indicate that they have a deep and abiding respect for you! It's up to you to figure out which it is! (Tone of voice counts for a lot.)
So, to sum up:
That all having been said, gossip, rumor, and innuendo are the lifeblood of social conversation. Do it well, and you'll go far. And remember, words can wound your enemies far more gravely than any sword or pistol bullet.
Suggestions for further inspiration: The novels of Jane Austen are a goldmine for tidbits about society during the period. The dialogue, the concerns of the people at the parties, the whole milleu, is wonderful. Since several of Austen's books have been made into film in recent years, viewing one or more of them will give you a great sense of the look and feel of society during that period.
Finally, what do you call these people?
A guide to rank, title, and forms of address
A king, queen, emperor or empress is addressed as Your Majesty. The one character in the game who merits this address is Empress Marie Louise, even though she is technically no longer Empress of the French
A prince or princess is addressed as Your Highness
A cardinal is addressed as Your Eminence
A duke or duchess, or a bishop, is addressed as Your Grace
Other nobles (counts, countesses, earls, barons, baronesses, etc.) are addressed as Your Lordship/Ladyship or My Lord or My Lady
Ambassadors are addressed as Your Excellency (unless they have another title that supercedes that)
Individuals without a noble title are addressed as Monsieur or Madame (surname) or simply Sir or Madam.
There is one exception to these above rules: Sir Percy Blakeney holds that unique and peculiar British rank of baronet. Sir Percy is addressed as "Sir Percy" (not as "my lord") while his wife is addressed as "Lady Blakeney" (not as "Lady Marguerite").
The final version of the cast list will include forms of address appropriate for each character.