Slaves now legal to own in PFS?


Pathfinder Society

1 to 50 of 368 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>
Dark Archive

Version 2.2 of the PSGOP lists under Adventurer's Armory: "Everything in this book is legal for play with one exception: a pseudodragon is not legal for purchase unless you’re a wizard with the Improved Familiar feat."

In Adventurer's Armory, there are 5 different types of slaves listed as available under the heading Black Market Items. This would seem to make it clear that slaves are now available for purchase and use within Pathfinder Society, or was there an oversight that needs correcting in the next version of the PSGOP?

Scarab Sages

There is the clause in the Player's Guide, that says each PC is allowed one, and only one 'companion creature'...

Lantern Lodge 4/5

Andoran faction characters often "purchase" as the most efficient means of "free the slaves!"

So I see nothing wrong with prices being given in Adventurer's Armoury, so GMs have a price to negotiate by when these situations arise.

Dark Archive

Snorter wrote:
There is the clause in the Player's Guide, that says each PC is allowed one, and only one 'companion creature'...

The actual phrase is: "During the course of a scenario, you may have one combat animal and as many non-combat animals as you like."

So, for role play functions, under the "You may use everything [in Adventurer's Armory]" and "one combat animal" rules, a character could have a (combat) mount and several (non-combat) slaves.

I'm just trying to verify that slaves are in fact legal for purchase in PFS, per the stated availability in PSGOP.

The Exchange 5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Slave are available for purchase in PFS. I would caution anyone who plans on buying a slave or slaves to think carefully about how they intend to use their purchase at the game table. Please keep in mind that your fun should not come at the expense of other players' enjoyment.

Dark Archive

Doug Doug wrote:
Slave are available for purchase in PFS. I would caution anyone who plans on buying a slave or slaves to think carefully about how they intend to use their purchase at the game table. Please keep in mind that your fun should not come at the expense of other players' enjoyment.

Yes, a good point. I was thinking more in terms of traveling in style with several work slaves carrying a sedan chair, or passing idle time at the Society lodge with several comely house slaves. IOW, purchasing them entirely for non-combat rp.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Doug Doug wrote:
Slave are available for purchase in PFS. I would caution anyone who plans on buying a slave or slaves to think carefully about how they intend to use their purchase at the game table. Please keep in mind that your fun should not come at the expense of other players' enjoyment.

Are slaves /really/ necessary for purchase in PFS? Do we really need to go there?

I'm just thinking about how much not-fun this is going to be to have to deal with this at my tables. I'll probably just spend 3 hours having the PC being chased by angry townsfolk and the table will be cancelled..you want zero xp and zero gold? Bring slaves to the table!

We've got a guy in our region, its rumored already, who gets-off a little too much on owning slaves. I think it's pretty sick.

This is retarded imo and should be removed from the game before it becomes a major issue.

jh


Buying slaves to own and use would probably drop your character into the evil range, alignment-wise, and having an evil alignment is not allowed in PFS play. Besides, good luck trying to keep the Andoren freedom fighter or the paladin in your party from freeing your slaves. :)

Grand Lodge 3/5

Actually an Andoran character would be powerless to do anything. Players are not to interfer with other players belongings.

However, I'm of the mind that a slave is a cohort by another name and therefor illegal as the Leadership feat is disallowed for play.

The Exchange 5/5 RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

Enevhar,

I can see how abusing slaves would drop someone into evil, but simply owning one?

Up front, let me say that (1) this is really not the kind of fantasy role-playing I want to participate in, and (2) this is a powderkeg of negative publicity. (Remember: "the media will instinctively flock to the worst-socialized person in the orgnaization. Lacking that, they will flock to the most slovenly dressed.")

But we in North America have a slanted view of slavery, because American slavery, racist and inhumanly brutal as it was, was not the norm for medieval slave-holding cultures. The norse had thralls, typically enemies captued in battle, who were integrated into the Norse social structure, and their children were freemen by law. The Roman Empire relied on slave labor, but the lifestyle of servants wasn't significantly worse than that of the freed citizens they worked alongside. Medieval European agriculture was supported by serfs, who were owned as parcel of the land they tended.

My objection to owning slaves in PFS is that slaves are, essentially, hirelings and cohorts. A slave-owner enjoys the benefits of the Leadership feat without having to take the feat itself. (Indeed, in PFS, it's a work-around against the prohibition of the Leadership feat.)

1/5

I think we have two different things going on here in this discussion. On one hand, I completely understand GMs being concerned about potential abuses and issues that might come up if this is allowed in PFS. That's just thinking ahead and making sure that no one does anything to derail how you run a scenario for a group when you sit down at an event.

On the other hand, the only faction in Pathfinder Society that is really against slavery is Andoren. Nobody else has a problem with it. Yes, traditionally, slavery is evil in d20 fantasy games, and I agree it should be. But once its the status quo of the society? Unless the character is abusing the slaves or treating them badly, that's just maintaining the status quo of the place they grew up in.

I'd say that's pretty much a "neutral" act, or a wash, especially if you buy them and treat them as valued servants.

So, to reiterate, on one hand, I wouldn't be so quick to jump on someone just for asking if this is legal for play and especially for RP purposes, but I can understand GMs being concerned about slaves being used as "workarounds" or potentially causing problems or even generating negative "heat" for Paizo.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Enevhar Aldarion wrote:
Buying slaves to own and use would probably drop your character into the evil range, alignment-wise, and having an evil alignment is not allowed in PFS play. Besides, good luck trying to keep the Andoren freedom fighter or the paladin in your party from freeing your slaves. :)

Slavery was accepted in the Living Arcanis campaign (with some major execptions for certain regions like Milandir and the Ellori nations) but only used in character background. I know of at least a couple of PC's who bought slaves and concubines. In the particular context slavery itself does not make a character evil. His treatment of them may, however.

4/5 5/55/55/5 ****

emirikol wrote:
I'm just thinking about how much not-fun this is going to be to have to deal with this at my tables. I'll probably just spend 3 hours having the PC being chased by angry townsfolk and the table will be cancelled..you want zero xp and zero gold? Bring slaves to the table!

If, for example, a GM responded a PC in such a way when they were playing through a common scenario that takes place in one of the many areas not antagonistic toward slave owners. I would really try hard to get that GM banned from running tables. Responding to a PC with a slave by destroying a table is not appropriate.

I don't doubt that there are those who would push it too far, but I do not think that it is a problem just with slaves. People can go into far too much detail as their character's dismember the bodies of the fallen. People might also have their character using very inappropriate bigoted words as well. There being slaves doesn't create the problem that other players might find ways to be especially disgusting.

Enevhar Aldarion wrote:
Buying slaves to own and use would probably drop your character into the evil range, alignment-wise, and having an evil alignment is not allowed in PFS play. Besides, good luck trying to keep the Andoren freedom fighter or the paladin in your party from freeing your slaves. :)

Honestly, if that happened in a game, I would feel compelled to remind the Andoren or paladin that player vs. player fighting in PFS games isn't allowed.

The Exchange 2/5

While I agree, out of game, that slavery is an absolutely horrible thing and shouldn't be tolerated for any reason, the Andorens are actually the only faction in the game that don't have slave-owning as a normal part of their regional culture. So, in game, most characters wouldn't have a regional abhorrance for it. Unless you were in the Andoran regions, I certainly can't see why angry townsfolk would be chasing you around for owning a slave.

1/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Herald wrote:

Actually an Andoran character would be powerless to do anything. Players are not to interfere with other players belongings.

However, I'm of the mind that a slave is a cohort by another name and therefor illegal as the Leadership feat is disallowed for play.

Not to mention, unless the adventure takes place in Andoren, you are hard pressed to find a place where freeing the slave isn't actually a serious crime.

The Exchange 5/5 RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

Although, KEJR, there are PFS adventures where "freeing the slaves" is either the Andoran secret mission, the Cheliax secret mission, or part of the Pathfinder assignment.

4/5 5/55/55/5 ****

Chris Mortika wrote:
Although, KEJR, there are PFS adventures where "freeing the slaves" is either the Andoran secret mission, the Cheliax secret mission, or part of the Pathfinder assignment.

Usually though, in those cases, the party is killing the owners along their way.

The Exchange 2/5

Chris Mortika wrote:
Although, KEJR, there are PFS adventures where "freeing the slaves" is either the Andoran secret mission, the Cheliax secret mission, or part of the Pathfinder assignment.

I've also seen one where there was a faction mission to stop slaves from being freed, though.

Dark Archive

Chris Mortika wrote:
Although, KEJR, there are PFS adventures where "freeing the slaves" is either the Andoran secret mission, the Cheliax secret mission, or part of the Pathfinder assignment.

To be fair, when it was part of the Cheliax secret mission, the purpose was to drive up the market price of slaves for the benefit of Cheliax. (And when I was in the party for this mission, we "freed" the slaves by directing them to a Chelaxian agent who it was assumed would free them right into the Chelaxian trade.)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Blazej wrote:


If, for example, a GM responded a PC in such a way when they were playing through a common scenario that takes place in one of the many areas not antagonistic toward slave owners. I would really try hard to get that GM banned from running tables. Responding to a PC with a slave by destroying a table is not appropriate.

Of course it's not. But neither is getting your role-playing kicks off on slavery.

..and we wonder why there's a perpetual shortage of GM's...

jh

Dark Archive

2 people marked this as a favorite.
emirikol wrote:
Blazej wrote:


If, for example, a GM responded a PC in such a way when they were playing through a common scenario that takes place in one of the many areas not antagonistic toward slave owners. I would really try hard to get that GM banned from running tables. Responding to a PC with a slave by destroying a table is not appropriate.

Of course it's not. But neither is getting your role-playing kicks off on slavery.

..and we wonder why there's a perpetual shortage of GM's...

jh

I'm striving to be civil here, but finding that this particular attitude really XXX me off.

"But neither is getting your role-playing kicks off on slavery."

hmm.

Substitute "slavery" with:

"murder","killing members of other cultures"
"grave desecration", "robbing tombs"
"racism","genocide","treating other races as though they should be killed or not just for existing"
"religious bigotry","acting as though your god is superior to any other god"
"trespass" "walking into others homes as though they had no right to live in peace"

I'm not sure what your particular deal with slavery is, but it has existed on this world for most of its history, and continues to exist to this day. Depending on the culture in which it has been practiced, it has ranged from an evil to a social norm. Slavery is not decried as evil in the bible (if you are a practising Christian or Jew and use this as your gauge of morality), nor in the Koran (if you are a Muslim).

Your role-playing is not my role-playing, and what you enjoy in a particular game may not be what I enjoy. As the PSGOP states "The Society places no moral obligations upon its members, so agents span all races, creeds, and motivations."

I play a huge range of characters. I play lawful good clerics who want nothing more than to make the world a better place. I play bards who are motivated by the joy of finding new experiences to form stories for their craft. I play bloodthirsty dwarf fighters who live for the fight. I play thoughtful loners, mourning for their lost loves, who wander the world looking to leave things better than they found them. Sometimes, I even play a hedonistic necromancer from a slave-owning culture.

I cannot help but think what a boring and lifeless role play it would be if we were all only allowed character motivations which none might find morally objectionable. We could all sit around playing Bunnies & Burrows, and complimenting each other on the softness of each other's fur.

Dark Archive 1/5

We're adults, or at least most of us are based on gaming demographics, and to deny the existence of slavery because it doesn't grate with your beliefs would be a disservice to those around you as well as yourself. Remember the presentation of slavery in the game is meant to show an aspect of society which would exist in a world similar to medieval or ancient Earth. Also you’re playing a character who very well might not share the same beliefs you have, which is part of the fun of role-playing.

While there are a few modules where slavery is mentioned they do not appear to be the norm. Second from my experience most players play with the intention of freeing slaves and very few strive to pursue anything along the other avenue so I don't see it as a real problem. Finally the inclusion of slavery as an option for buying, if allowed once Josh gets back from his vacation, would be in my opinion purely for role-playing and at that should only receive a cursory nod at best (since there are more important things to be covering during the session than buying slaves).

As a judge I’d rule them as back story and definitely not allow them to be used in the game. Mainly I’d exclude them for the reason that mistreatment (intentional or unintentional) would be viewed as an evil act. Also I’d hope the PC purchasing would be smart enough to not endanger a commodity that had lasting value, unfortunately in this case a slave. Why would someone risk that a slave might die after spending money on them, with the exception of someone determined to free them after purchase? Not to mention it might be illegal for slaves to be mistreated and what is deemed mistreatment may vary by region.

It should be pointed out that a lot of societies in history allowing slavery had very strict laws protecting them. Some societies even granted or set conditions for freedom once set obligations or a given time were completed. Which begs the question why is the person on the auction block a slave to begin with? Are they a criminal? A debtor? Maybe a prisoner/victim of war? Or just some poor idiot who drank too much and walked down the wrong ally?

Those situations lead to a few aspects which could and more often would hinder the purchase of a slave in game. Because of how he/she came into slavery would they willingly cooperate? Can they be trusted? Not just to not stab you in the back at the first chance, but to not steal. Does the slave even speak a language the PC understands? Outside of magical communiqué how would the PC communicate with a slave in order to make them obey? Actually once you start thinking about it there isn’t enough time to role-play everything in a PFS session beyond ‘I’ll buy the slave and set him free’ or ‘I buy the slave and have him sent to my estate.’

The biggest reason for not worrying about slavery being allowed for the PCs comes down to the PCs themselves. Most are carefree and reckless individuals who probably don’t want to have to worry about having to take care of someone or have someone under foot all the time while they’re out exploring. Owning slaves might be something they think about for when they retire with all their treasure, but for now they’re too busy seeing the world and living the adventure to own slaves. Again that’s most PCs, but there will be exceptions.

I know they cover slavery a little in the gazettes to some extent but perhaps someday Paizo will put out a product which will explain the types of slavery practiced within the various regions of Golarion as well as examples of laws pertaining to it. A PF version of the Book of Vile Darkness could do that. As for its place within the campaign I see no reason to excluded it since as I mentioned it’s just not feasible to role-play it beyond "I buy one" or "I walk on."

Just remember it’s a game and try not to let it become more than that as once it does it stops being fun, not just for you, but for everyone.

Liberty's Edge

You have to realize it's medieval times setting. Yes slavery is wrong in real life but in those times if you treated a slave well then they are pretty much better off then the common folk. Have shelter, food, clothing. It's not pretty but the fact is in that sort of setting they had alot better options then if they were free. It's just the way things were back then. Personally a group could decide that they don't want slaves in their group and that would be fine it's personal choice how you want to run a campaign and if you are stuck with that situation at a con then you can choose to not go that con or just accept it as part of the character as long as the person isn't violating their alignment on how they are treating the slaves. I personally wouldn't own one but that's just me.

Grand Lodge 3/5

At this point we are having two discussions and one should be broken out into a new thread outside of this area of the messageboard.

"The Ethics of Slavery in RPGs" should go into general discussion.

Is Slave ownership legal for PFS?" should remain here.

Josh should be back in a couple of days and I'm sure that we will either hear; "Yes it's legal, as I said everything is legal in the AA except the psuedodragon." or he will explain how slaves are an exception.

Let's just give it some time.

Sovereign Court 5/5 RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

My two C-bills

Spoiler:

Ok, I'm going to go out on a limb and say 'no big deal' on PF Slaves. In the Society they serve the same function as a harrow deck, or a shaving kit, or perfume. If a PFS player wants to spend the gold on the slave, or the items, knock yourself out. About the only mechanical use I could see would be to use them on aid another attempts on research. Thus if someone wants to spend 500 GP (for a specialized slave) for a +2 bonus on their craft checks. Or 100 GP (for a halfling slave) for a +2 on Diplomacy check (as he helps you get dressed for a ball) or +2 on profession (cook), knock yourself out.

Fun question, do you lose slaves if you draw the Ruins card from a Deck of Many Things? ;-)

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Matthew Morris wrote:

My two C-bills

** spoiler omitted **

Fun question, do you lose slaves if you draw the Ruins card from a Deck of Many Things? ;-)

if it means lose ALL your posessions, they would fall under that category.


My two cents: I don't care how many slaves a PC owns (or claims to own) as long as they get left at home when the adventure starts. Because I don't want to deal with the hassle of coming up with stats for them (and possibly having to argue with the DM about it).

Dark Archive

Herald wrote:

At this point we are having two discussions and one should be broken out into a new thread outside of this area of the messageboard.

"The Ethics of Slavery in RPGs" should go into general discussion.

Is Slave ownership legal for PFS?" should remain here.

Josh should be back in a couple of days and I'm sure that we will either hear; "Yes it's legal, as I said everything is legal in the AA except the psuedodragon." or he will explain how slaves are an exception.

Let's just give it some time.

Thoroughly agree. My original intention in starting this thread was to either verify or falsify the 'everything in Adventurer's Armory is legal for play' statement.

An official yea or nay would be most welcome.

The Exchange 5/5

Brother Elias wrote:

An official yea or nay would be most welcome.

The Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play, v2.2 wrote:


Page 30: Everything in this book is legal for play with one exception: a pseudodragon is not legal for purchase unless you’re a wizard with the Improved Familiar feat.

And Page 17:
We’re all friends here and we’re all playing a game together
with the singular purpose of (hopefully) having a wonderful
time... Extreme forms of dysfunctional play will not
be tolerated.

I think the Guide speaks for itself and there's a lot of hand-wringing going on over nothing. Play nice, don't be jerks, and have fun.

Sovereign Court

Slavery doesn't pay in PFS. Hirelings are much cheaper in the short term, since you'd need to pay for a trained hireling's services for 250 days before you spend as much as the price of even the cheapest slave, and more than four and a half years for the price of a slave with comparable skills. Chances are, your character will be retired before they get their money's worth.


Doug Doug wrote:
I think the Guide speaks for itself and there's a lot of hand-wringing going on over nothing. Play nice, don't be jerks, and have fun.

But leaving aside issues of taste and morality, there really aren't any rules for slaves. For instance, can I choose what class my slave is? What level? What feats he might have? What skills? What ability scores?

Dark Archive

hogarth wrote:
Doug Doug wrote:
I think the Guide speaks for itself and there's a lot of hand-wringing going on over nothing. Play nice, don't be jerks, and have fun.
But leaving aside issues of taste and morality, there really aren't any rules for slaves. For instance, can I choose what class my slave is? What level? What feats he might have? What skills? What ability scores?

Fine questions, and I had wished the Adventurer's Armory had had more crunch than fluff (lots of item descriptions without any real mechanics). I've got a similar problem in trying to find stats for the ox and yak listed for sale. That's the more pressing of my problems.

With the issue of buying slaves, I'm purely asking for role-play, not game mechanics purposes. I have no expectation of achieving any real crunch value out of them, but I could definitely see a Chelaxian hedonist making reference to them during the course of any role play.


hogarth wrote:
Doug Doug wrote:
I think the Guide speaks for itself and there's a lot of hand-wringing going on over nothing. Play nice, don't be jerks, and have fun.
But leaving aside issues of taste and morality, there really aren't any rules for slaves. For instance, can I choose what class my slave is? What level? What feats he might have? What skills? What ability scores?

...I'd just say they'd use the 1st level NPC 'commoner' stat-block and never advance.


Piety Godfury wrote:
...I'd just say they'd use the 1st level NPC 'commoner' stat-block and never advance.

Which stat block is that? What book is it in?


hogarth wrote:
Piety Godfury wrote:
...I'd just say they'd use the 1st level NPC 'commoner' stat-block and never advance.
Which stat block is that? What book is it in?

At work... I thought there was 1st level NPC write-ups in the Pathfiner book... I may be thinking 3.5, sorry

Dark Archive

Piety Godfury wrote:
hogarth wrote:
Piety Godfury wrote:
...I'd just say they'd use the 1st level NPC 'commoner' stat-block and never advance.
Which stat block is that? What book is it in?
At work... I thought there was 1st level NPC write-ups in the Pathfiner book... I may be thinking 3.5, sorry

Pathfinder Core Rules pg 449, Commoner.


Brother Elias wrote:
Pathfinder Core Rules pg 449, Commoner.

What feat and skills does the stat block have?

Dark Archive

hogarth wrote:
Brother Elias wrote:
Pathfinder Core Rules pg 449, Commoner.
What feat and skills does the stat block have?

Commoner

Alignment: Any.
Hit Die: d6.

Class Skills
The commoner’s class skills (and the key ability for each skill) are Climb (Str), Craft (Int), Handle Animal (Cha), Perception (Wis), Profession (Wis), Ride (Dex), and Swim (Str).

Skill Ranks per Level: 2 + Int modifier.

Class Features
The following is a class feature of the commoner NPC class.
Weapon and Armor Proficiency: The commoner is proficient with one simple weapon. He is not proficient with any other weapons, nor is he proficient with any type of armor or shield.

+0 BAB
+0 on all saves

Basic NPCs: The ability scores for a basic NPC are: 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, and 8.

For an non-caster, non-fighting NPC, it would probably have a selection of one feat from:

"Skill (most NPC classes): Armor Proficiency (all), Great Fortitude,
Improved Initiative, Iron Will, Lightning Ref lexes, Martial Weapon
Proficiency, Run, Shield Proficiency, Skill Focus, and Toughness." (humans would have 2 feats)

Gear- probably none. (maybe 1 set of very poor commoner clothes, otherwise entirely paid for by pc)

I would venture to guess that the "slave, specialized" might be a level 1 expert rather than a level 1 commoner, but without any guiding text, that is merely conjecture.


That's not a stat block, of course; it's a class description and some bits of advice.

Sovereign Court

I'd imagine that the stat block, much like the variable aspects of magical items, would be up to the player who made the purchase.

Grand Lodge

Just curious but what difference does it make what the stat block might be (assuming 1st ish levels)? By the time anyone has the cash handy and not set aside for other more useful gear the slave would be a liability in any adventure. If I am in Tier 2 or higher I certainly don't want a slave following me around. The poor thing would never survive an encounter! Then my hard earned gold is wasted for nothing.

I can see SOME benefit at Tier 1, but most people are going to use their money for other things before they spend it on luxuries like a slave. Not ALL will, of course. Then they have a pet that comes along like anyone else. But if it gets killed there goes your gold!

And a 1st level statblock is not really going to make or break a game. I seriously doubt slaves are going to be tossing around fireballs and casting Wish.

Dark Archive

Krome wrote:

Just curious but what difference does it make what the stat block might be (assuming 1st ish levels)? By the time anyone has the cash handy and not set aside for other more useful gear the slave would be a liability in any adventure. If I am in Tier 2 or higher I certainly don't want a slave following me around. The poor thing would never survive an encounter! Then my hard earned gold is wasted for nothing.

I can see SOME benefit at Tier 1, but most people are going to use their money for other things before they spend it on luxuries like a slave. Not ALL will, of course. Then they have a pet that comes along like anyone else. But if it gets killed there goes your gold!

And a 1st level statblock is not really going to make or break a game. I seriously doubt slaves are going to be tossing around fireballs and casting Wish.

For my purposes, the stat block is completely irrelevant. My character's slaves would be for entirely non-combat roleplay purposes. Others might have other reasons. Whatever the reason someone has, a stat block for each of the five slave types that can be bought would be helpful to have.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
emirikol wrote:

Are slaves /really/ necessary for purchase in PFS? Do we really need to go there?

I'm just thinking about how much not-fun this is going to be to have to deal with this at my tables. I'll probably just spend 3 hours having the PC being chased by angry townsfolk and the table will be cancelled..you want zero xp and zero gold? Bring slaves to the table!

We've got a guy in our region, its rumored already, who gets-off a little too much on owning slaves. I think it's pretty sick.

This is retarded imo and should be removed from the game before it becomes a major issue.

jh

I find it amusing that you're so adamantly against slavery even being represented in a fantasy context, but still use the word "retarded" to reflect something as being negative. Bizarre.

As for this entire conversation, yes they can be purchased. Your character cannot use them in combat. They have no stat blocks. They are pure fluff for those who want that sort of fluff. Slavery exists in our campaign world just as it did/does in the real world. 'nuff said.

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

Joshua J. Frost wrote:
emirikol wrote:

Are slaves /really/ necessary for purchase in PFS? Do we really need to go there?

I'm just thinking about how much not-fun this is going to be to have to deal with this at my tables. I'll probably just spend 3 hours having the PC being chased by angry townsfolk and the table will be cancelled..you want zero xp and zero gold? Bring slaves to the table!

We've got a guy in our region, its rumored already, who gets-off a little too much on owning slaves. I think it's pretty sick.

This is retarded imo and should be removed from the game before it becomes a major issue.

jh

I find it amusing that you're so adamantly against slavery even being represented in a fantasy context, but still use the word "retarded" to reflect something as being negative. Bizarre.

As for this entire conversation, yes they can be purchased. Your character cannot use them in combat. They have no stat blocks. They are pure fluff for those who want that sort of fluff. Slavery exists in our campaign world just as it did/does in the real world. 'nuff said.

Not quite "'nuff said" though.

Since Evil characters are still not permitted in the PFS, would buying a slave be considered an evil act?


Lord Fyre wrote:
Joshua J. Frost wrote:


I find it amusing that you're so adamantly against slavery even being represented in a fantasy context, but still use the word "retarded" to reflect something as being negative. Bizarre.

As for this entire conversation, yes they can be purchased. Your character cannot use them in combat. They have no stat blocks. They are pure fluff for those who want that sort of fluff. Slavery exists in our campaign world just as it did/does in the real world. 'nuff said.

Not quite "'nuff said" though.

Since Evil characters are still not permitted in the PFS, would buying a slave be considered an evil act?

I would have thought Josh would have mentioned that if the owning/purchase of slaves was in and of itself an evil act that he would have stated it here.

He has said that a character can purchase a slave for fluff reasons. If this was an evil act he certainly would have mentioned that although a character can buy a slave it would be considered evil act and therefore not allowed under PFS rules.

The Exchange 2/5

Lord Fyre wrote:
Joshua J. Frost wrote:
emirikol wrote:

Are slaves /really/ necessary for purchase in PFS? Do we really need to go there?

I'm just thinking about how much not-fun this is going to be to have to deal with this at my tables. I'll probably just spend 3 hours having the PC being chased by angry townsfolk and the table will be cancelled..you want zero xp and zero gold? Bring slaves to the table!

We've got a guy in our region, its rumored already, who gets-off a little too much on owning slaves. I think it's pretty sick.

This is retarded imo and should be removed from the game before it becomes a major issue.

jh

I find it amusing that you're so adamantly against slavery even being represented in a fantasy context, but still use the word "retarded" to reflect something as being negative. Bizarre.

As for this entire conversation, yes they can be purchased. Your character cannot use them in combat. They have no stat blocks. They are pure fluff for those who want that sort of fluff. Slavery exists in our campaign world just as it did/does in the real world. 'nuff said.

Not quite "'nuff said" though.

Since Evil characters are still not permitted in the PFS, would buying a slave be considered an evil act?

Since that would make it impossible for player characters to buy slaves for the purpose of freeing them and that's been done on multiple occasions in PFS scenarios, I'm guessing the answer to this one is no.

(and believe me, I'm behind that one. I'm still a little torqued about my Lawful Good cleric getting zapped with that sort of silliness in another game system. Bought a slave for the sole purpose of freeing him so that I could do it without breaking any laws and lost all my cleric powers because buying him was "an evil act". If I'd murdered the auctioneer, that wouldn't have cost me an atonement, but legally buying the slave did. Very stupid, in my opinion. Would much rather be able to just buy the slave and free him or her legally.)

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

IronWolf wrote:
Lord Fyre wrote:
Joshua J. Frost wrote:


I find it amusing that you're so adamantly against slavery even being represented in a fantasy context, but still use the word "retarded" to reflect something as being negative. Bizarre.

As for this entire conversation, yes they can be purchased. Your character cannot use them in combat. They have no stat blocks. They are pure fluff for those who want that sort of fluff. Slavery exists in our campaign world just as it did/does in the real world. 'nuff said.

Not quite "'nuff said" though.

Since Evil characters are still not permitted in the PFS, would buying a slave be considered an evil act?

I would have thought Josh would have mentioned that if the owning/purchase of slaves was in and of itself an evil act that he would have stated it here.

He has said that a character can purchase a slave for fluff reasons. If this was an evil act he certainly would have mentioned that although a character can buy a slave it would be considered evil act and therefore not allowed under PFS rules.

Nope.

Neutral characters sometimes do the occasional "evil act" without becoming evil.

Liberty's Edge 1/5

"Evil" is a relative term. What one society considers evil and wrong, another can see it as normal. Andorans will see it as evil I think, chelaxians....not so much. Osirion and Qadira would have a slave caste. In modern day, real world society, most consider it "evil", but in that fantasy world, it is present and accepted in some places.

To the person saying they would disrupt the table if someone had a slave, that would be a serious violation of the spirit of organized play in my opinion, and would lose you a lot of players.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Joshua J. Frost wrote:


I find it amusing that you're so adamantly against slavery even being represented in a fantasy context, but still use the word "retarded" to reflect something as being negative. Bizarre.

Yes, the word is a negative and it describes what I think of the whole issue. I know we're not demeaning my terminology in order to make a point, whereas I'm trying to bring up the issue that we GM's are now faced with.

I consider slavery to be an evil act that doesn't belong in the game and that it cannot be justified because we "kill evil monsters and take their stuff, hence all other evil actions are thus justified."

The problem I have of course is not about slavery or evil PC's. It's about what situation a GM is suddenly thrust into. As a GM, I'm told that player characters cannot be evil..but suddenly slavery (rape and kidapping and all the other things that go with slavery) and murder of innocents could suddenly officially sanctioned by Paizo and Pathfinder Society by players and the GM's can't do a dang thing about it.

I can't tell you how much I'm really looking forwards to my first table here in Denver with African American players and "impressionable players" at the table and slavery is suddenly flung to the forefront. Thankfully, most of my black friends play WFRP I guess. I've already noted that it's seen as an issue about our local who gets off on this stuff. Officially, I can be banned as a judge for not allowing it? What the heck?

Where does this end and how much leeway as a GM do I have to disallow evil actions? What happened to the "no evil characters rule?" Or is that just lip-service?

Anyways, I moved to an off-forum area to discuss this touchy issue as a whole (since this is probably getting off topic): http://forum.rpg.net/forumdisplay.php?f=89

Joshua, in a sense, what we just need as GM's is clarification. If you're going to open that can of worms and say that Paizo officially sanctions slavery as a non-evil act in Open Play gaming, then this issue needs to be dealt with in a bit better fashion than "..They're legal. You just can't use them in combat.." Hush hush doesn't work. I've been GMing convention games far too long to expect that out of open play/Living gamers.

Thanks,

Jay Hafner
Lakewood, Colorado

1 to 50 of 368 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Slaves now legal to own in PFS? All Messageboards