Situation - playing a paladin of Sarenrae - basically taking the idea of trying to redeem the world - patiently.
Those of you who have read the 'code' in the splat books might note that Sarenrae (unlike say... Iomede) expects the Paladin to play smart and try to find the good in a situation or person (generally). I chose this path specifically because of how Sarenrae has no issue with interaction with other faiths - always being patient in the hopes of turning evil.
It seemed a great fit without beaming the rest of the party over the head with the lawful stupid stick.
Now one of the party members has purchased a slave - (it is lawful where we are currently) and I'm trying to find some guidelines in how to handle this... so... thoughts?
Have they purchased the slave for the purpose of freeing him/her? Or when in a land where slavery is illegal could you not help the slave start over? After all in a land where slaveery is outlawed their are no slaves. ;-)
Situation - playing a paladin of Sarenrae - basically taking the idea of trying to redeem the world - patiently.
Those of you who have read the 'code' in the splat books might note that Sarenrae (unlike say... Iomede) expects the Paladin to play smart and try to find the good in a situation or person (generally). I chose this path specifically because of how Sarenrae has no issue with interaction with other faiths - always being patient in the hopes of turning evil.
It seemed a great fit without beaming the rest of the party over the head with the lawful stupid stick.
Now one of the party members has purchased a slave - (it is lawful where we are currently) and I'm trying to find some guidelines in how to handle this... so... thoughts?
I dont know why killing this character is even on the radar... while slavery might be disgusting and horrible, as long as they haven't mistreated their slave and haven't broken the law, they technically haven't done anything wrong. Or at least wrong enough you can really take direct action.
You might try pointing out in character though, how freeing this person and offering them good treatment and fair wage might allow for true loyalty in the future, as opposed to mere obediance.
At the very least, your character should be vocal about their opinion on slavery and the fact that you find it deplorable and wrong; doing nothing (since they haven't broken laws etc.) is one thing, allowing it to go without at least trying to make a difference would be another.
Also, consider that once you're anywhere its not legal to own slaves, you'd be perfectly within your rights to simply free this slave. Perhaps you can engineer a situation where doing so is an option? Ignore the objections of your party mate, if necessary. And while it might not be the most 'Knight in shining armor' option, who knows what could happen in the middle of the night?
"Oops, it appears your slave escaped in the night. (Note: Perhaps mention to the slave when you are going on watch, and how sleepy your feeling, and how its going to be difficult to keep watch on, say, that direction over there while you're looking out for nasty monsters and such.) Maybe someone was careless? Or perhaps you drank too much and freed them. Who can say, no great loss, off to adventure and all that right? No time to worry about this triviality, certainly."
I dont know why killing this character is even on the radar... while slavery might be disgusting and horrible, as long as they haven't mistreated their slave and haven't broken the law, they technically haven't done anything wrong. Or at least wrong enough you can really take direct action.
I'm being a bit dramatic as I don't think my Paladin would directly take action against him in a land where it's lawful to own a slave.
As to his intentions - I'm unsure yet - I've tried to find material that expounds on how the good deities interact with slave traders and nations where it is legal - as there does seem to be slave trade in quite a few places so I'm sure that it is at least tolerated (mostly as at least one good deity has freeing slaves as a primary motivation).
So I'm trying to decide how to rollplay the issue - as I am having a block about it (due I'm sure to my modern day perspective) and it's actually something I didn't expect.
Our group discussed the issue and how slavery is represented throughout the world and it seemed odd that there isn't a bit more in the faiths splats about how the good gods deal with the subject as widespread as it seems to be throughout the campaign world.
The larger issue is - as we are already in the middle of a trip - it won't come up for a while - however I'm unsure if I'd be able to (playing the character as I've envisioned his personality) continue to adventure with another character that is a slave owner once we are finished with this quest.
So ... in a word I'm struggling :)
I would imagine your party member could just as easily have a hireling. They're really cheap (like a silver a day?). If it's going to be a point of contention, you guys should find a compromise. I've been in games where I'm uncomfortable with the content, and letting the responsible party know about it is a good idea. Most people are willing to work it out.
I agree with what KrispyXIV wrote - voice an objection now but don't act until your party ends up somewhere where slavery isn't as accepted. Then an 'escape' in the middle of the night with a pouch of gold takes care of the situation. You might want to speak to the GM privately on this one and take care of any necessary rolls then, which allows the GM to say, "Okay, you wake up. Dude, your slave is gone. His collar is on the ground and you quickly lose his tracks on the rocky terrain. Did anyone see him leave? (chorus of noes) Well, what do you want to do?"
Isn't freeing all slaves no matter what chaotic, anyways?
I thought the Andorans were CG.
Isn't freeing all slaves no matter what chaotic, anyways?
I thought the Andorans were CG.
No matter what? I'd say so... taking the opportunity to free a slave in a land where it's no longer legal... I'd say that's Lawful.
That's actually playing to the strength of a LG character IMO - using the law to do as much good as possible.
So Mr. Fishy freed the the party's horses last night because horse should be free. Horse are born into slavery...just saying.
If the land of the land allows slave and the slave isn't miss treat you do really have a leg to stand on and wanting to free the slave late in a slave free zone is questionable at best. Speak with the slave and his owner seek compromise. Do "free" the slave will be seen as a betrayal of trust and may cause a problem. Patient and compassionate.
... Now one of the party members has purchased a slave - (it is lawful where we are currently) and I'm trying to find some guidelines in how to handle this... so... thoughts?
NOTE: PLEASE READ WHAT I AM ACTUALLY WRITING ABOUT IS HISTORICAL ATTITUDES. I AM NOT AND NEVER WILL BE IN FAVOR OF SLAVERY IN ANY WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM!!!
First I would ask the GM how slavery is handled in the various parts of this world. There can be a huge swing. Look at real world history. Slavery was an established and accepted fact in many cultures of the world through out most of recorded history. It also usually wasn't nearly as bad until recent history when the Americas got into the act (yes, I am an american WASP). There were alot of times and places in history where slavery was actually less awful than serfdom. There were places and times where people would voluntarily choose to sell themselves into slavery as a way to work off debt or to learn a particular trade. Partially because they were actually treated well and it wasn't permanent. IIRC 10 years was often the limit on slave status and then you were automatically free again. It was sometimes used as a minor punishment for minor crimes. Sometimes for a limited time with prisoners of war. There is literally a huge variation. In ancient history, the word slave was not nearly as emotionally loaded as it is in modern society.
If it is slavery like in the 1800's north american south east, I would say a paladin would try to reform the slave owner and if that didn't work, free the slave.
If it is slavery like the ancient greeks, a paladin might very well have no problem with it at all.
However, alot of people can not get past the feelings the word has now. Therefore I would be very careful about allowing a player to own a slave. I have seen at least 1 group where IC activity like this tore up a RL group of friends. You have to be sure your group is capable of handling this. Some are not.
|
Our group discussed the issue and how slavery is represented throughout the world and it seemed odd that there isn't a bit more in the faiths splats about how the good gods deal with the subject as widespread as it seems to be throughout the campaign world.
It's interesting that you noted that your group discussed the game rules, the campaign rules with your group. And it seems that you all also discussed that in our "modern" world, slavery is wrong. Perhaps, your are too close to the situation.
Slavery is a rotten act. No doubt about it. Even in cultures where it is "common" there were/are people who see it's dehumanizing, spiritually corrupting, and socially destructive effects and seek to avoid participation in it and some even make the attempt to stand up and change their laws and culture. In Pathfinder slavery is present to allow the subject to be explored and re-affirm that heroes take a stand against it.
So, the question that I think has been asked is, "Why did your fellow player feel the need to have his character buy a slave?" Sure, it's legal, but so is buying horses and buying season tickets to the Chelaxian opera. We don't do everything that's legal just because it is. Was the acquisition of a slave an expression of something vital to the personality of his character? Is this a way to bring his character to the spotlight of the campaign by forcing a confrontation with your character?
Your answer is there, in your fellow player's motive. Just like your paladin, seek to change the damaging behaviors by addressing the need. Why did he need to poke the bear with the pointed stick?
|
Isn't freeing all slaves no matter what chaotic, anyways?
I thought the Andorans were CG.
No matter what? I'd say so... taking the opportunity to free a slave in a land where it's no longer legal... I'd say that's Lawful.
That's actually playing to the strength of a LG character IMO - using the law to do as much good as possible.
Unless the paladin is appointed as a legal authority he has no right to punish the slave owner or free the slave. The same way your neighboor cannot arrest you because you drove too fast= (hopefully because it would be Chaos)
So i'd say freeing the slaves would be a really good act but a chaotic one still.
A lawful act would be to contact legal authorities of the land who can judge lawfully the illegal slave owner.
This is truly lawful good...
Unless the paladin is appointed as a legal authority he has no right to punish the slave owner or free the slave. The same way your neighboor cannot arrest you because you drove too fast= (hopefully because it would be Chaos)
So i'd say freeing the slaves would be a really good act but a chaotic one still.
A lawful act would be to contact legal authorities of the land who can judge lawfully the illegal slave owner.This is truly lawful good...
Taken to the extreme the Paladin has no right to swing his sword. Simply if the law says slavery is illegal and the Paladin encountered a slave caravan moving through the such a place - he could choose to demand the freedom and stop the enterprise without being 'chaotic'.
Freeing the slave in the night - is dishonest. Specifically however Sarenrae has no issue with the Paladin being dishonest if it accomplishes the greater good.
In this particular case freeing the slave and giving the owner a chance at being a better person - without putting him in chains (and thus really reversing the situation that you were trying to right in the first place).
My opinion anyway.
*edit* and at least in the US - all states give citizens the right to arrest - this varies from state to state - some even allow it for minor crimes - as long as you witness the crime. Use of restraint (such as cuffs) in these cases are allowed even - just because it doesn't happen doesn't mean it's 1) unlawful or 2) leads to chaos - obviously your average villager isn't out trying to be a goody goody and arresting people - a player character by the very definition is already a busy body and gets involved when most of the population would not
|
Now one of the party members has purchased a slave - (it is lawful where we are currently) and I'm trying to find some guidelines in how to handle this... so... thoughts?
Although its hardly politically correct to say it today one can make a fairly cogent argument that slavery, in and of itself, is not inherently evil. For example, is selling a convicted felon to work in the fields any worse than forcing a prison inmate to make license plates?
I think that a great deal would hinge on how the character treats their slave. I don't see even a paladin having a particular problem with a slave who is a well treated servant.
But if the character is sexually abusing their slave or using it as a trap detector then my personal opinion is that the palladin should react in EXACTLY the same way as they would if the other character kidnapped a child for that purpose
Isn't freeing all slaves no matter what chaotic, anyways?
I thought the Andorans were CG.
Manipulating the law, and acting toward the spirit of the law up to the very boundaries of that law, is in my opinion still lawful. The key is, you normally see LE pushing things more than you do LG (because being good generally means acting to the spirit of the law above the letter).
I think the Paladin/Lawyer in an LE land might actually do well, honestly :) I may have to play such a character just for the opportunity to shout "OBJECTION!" at badguys.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not every law is lawful. Understand this and everything becomes so much simpler.
Isn't freeing all slaves no matter what chaotic, anyways?
I thought the Andorans were CG.
Manipulating the law, and acting toward the spirit of the law up to the very boundaries of that law, is in my opinion still lawful. The key is, you normally see LE pushing things more than you do LG (because being good generally means acting to the spirit of the law above the letter).
I think the Paladin/Lawyer in an LE land might actually do well, honestly :) I may have to play such a character just for the opportunity to shout "OBJECTION!" at badguys.
Should he maybe have Phoenix as a patron? And maybe, he's even always "wright"? :)
EDIT: Also, Cheapy, Andoran is NG, not CG. ALSO, also, if this Paladin comes up with a contrivance to go through the River Kingdoms with his crew, the problem solves itself...
I would recommend that the paladin simply treat the slave as if he/she were a person instead of property. You don't need to start striking off chains and "giving" the slave freedom. I think Sarenrae would want a slave to rise up and cast off their shackles by choice not by happenstance.
Your character has plenty of things they can do before they start resorting to a monkey knife fight (my terminology for player vs player combat). Argue for their share of treasure, protect them from brutality, give them aide and succor as if they were any other potential member of Serenrae's chosen people. If the slave chooses to escape in the night while the paladin is on watch? Give em a waterskin and some rations and send them on their way. If the slave chooses to remain a slave through innaction and fear, then that is their choice (even if it makes your paladin angry at the party member and sad for the slave). You can also do things like teach the slave to read (assuming the stereotypical no reading allowed rule is in effect), teach them the words of your god, and hope that in time they decide they've had enough of being owned.
Who knows, they might cease to be a slave, become a cohort for the paladin, and no party blood need be spilt!
And if the other player gets in your character's face for fraternizing with their property you don't need to answer with any violence. Just continue to be unflinching with the assertion that "I see no slave, only <insert slave's name here>." If the other player seeks to cause you harm, rather than throw down with them you can simply walk away from the fight and be an example of how little is accomplished by fighting an ally. If the ally in question just won't back down, then I'm sure the other party members would be willing to back you up. And if not? Maybe it's time to find a less CN party (ie have an out of game talk with the other players consisting of "really guys? really? I'm being reasonable here, can we just stop with the slave trading and get on with the adventuring already?)
I think this can be handled in-character, honestly. "It bothers me that you purchased a slave. I understand that it is legal here, but that doesn't mean it is right." It shouldn't be unreasonable to try and find a compromise. Now, if the other character mistreats the slave, then more direct action (literally freeing the slave, etc) could be justified.
OK you have a few issues here
Slavery in the campaign. First, LG means you operate within the law, even if it appears to be immoral. You still have your lawful ethics. Note that some societies, until recently, imprisoned people for debts and that was defacto slavery. Think Georgia in the North America, and Australia. Slavery was practiced through out Europe during the Middle Ages. If you are LG and there is slavery, you may not like it, but you are not going to go 'Sparticus on Rome'.
Second, there may be slavery but that does not mean you can mistreat a slave. Rome ran on slave labor and conquest but a master could be publicly humiliated for mistreating a slave. The master still could punish or kill a slave, there could be retribution, even for a noble. In Colonial America, hired Irish immigrants often got the more hazardous work because they were hired help, without a significant investment. Its all about money and status.
Third, if the slave was bought to be disposable, well, there you have it. What is the circumstance of his enslavement? Think about buying the slave and making him a freedman if he is deserving. Or make a bet with the owner . . .if this, then the slave recieves manumission to freedman status.
Fourth, you. Sometimes its hard to screw on the personality of someone medieval. For instance, the murder rate today is less than 1% of what it was during the Middle Ages. The leading cause of death was murder, not disease, in adults. Think Afganistan, living in a mud hut, depleted land for cultivation, doing what you have to do while a war goes on. Thats the reality of most RPG/D&D/PF peasants.
Playing a paladin is HARD but can be rewarding. Just make sure everyone KNOWS that you are RPing.
I think this can be handled in-character, honestly. "It bothers me that you purchased a slave. I understand that it is legal here, but that doesn't mean it is right." It shouldn't be unreasonable to try and find a compromise. Now, if the other character mistreats the slave, then more direct action (literally freeing the slave, etc) could be justified.
Don't trust him! Just look at his NAME!
Over all, read the following posts:
* Kydeem de'Morcaine
* pauljathome
* Herbo
* Lyingbastard
* NeonParrot
Find some blend of them that work for you. They basically tell you how Golarion and its gods look at slavery - it can be terrible, and usually is, but it doesn't have to be (though I think James Jacobs disagrees with this, oddly*).
The River Kingdoms (a Chaotic Neutral collection of small, independent city-states held together by River Freedoms) has a standing law that prohibits slavery of all forms. All slaves that enter those lands are instantly freed by virtue of entering those lands. Any who hold or traffic slaves there will be brutally punished. If you need an out somehow, contrive to get your party into one of those places. You could even work with your GM to figure out how and why.
Alternatively... and hear me out here... purchase the slave yourself, from your party member. Then proceed to do exactly as Herbo said. I don't necessarily recommend this, but it's one possibility if all else proves for naught.
Really, since this bothers you, it needs to be discussed out of character to get motivations and clarification - understand why your fellow player had his character do what he did. And sometimes, and this might be one of them, it's time for metagame thinking, and using that thinking to behave in game in a way different from how your character is described "in the players head". Either you, or your fellow player, or both.
* James is basically inherently right about Golarion as a published setting, however as-written, the over-all presentation is as I've said above. I don't know what his stance is for sure, but from the things I've seen him write down, it seems that he believes that all good people are against slavery... even though the only two countries who decry it consist of one NG country (Andoran) and one CN country (the River Kingdoms).
If the laws of the society demanded respectful treatment of slaves, gave them rights, and protected them from things like violence, neglect or sexual abuse, I can see slavery as being a part of LG society.
I can see a Paladin owning a slave. Said paladin would feed the slave well, treat them well, respect the slave's opinion and so on. The only reason the paladin would pull the "obey me" card is if the slave were being bad or harmful.
Slavery merely means ownership of another person. How that ownership plays out is a matter of morality, not the ownership itself.
Hmmm if the paladin frees the slave in an area where slavery is illegal, what happens if the party goes to an area where it is legal to own slaves?
Can the person who was deprived of a slave appeal to the local authorities to punish the paladin? And would the paladin recognize the right of these authorities to punish the paladin?
Its highly unlikely the local authorities could charge you or prosecute you for (non)-crimes commited in another land. They dont have any power there.
Exactly as KrispyXIV says. Unless they have some sort of prior arrangement, nothing is going to happen. And, with the River Kingdoms, there is no possible other prior arrangement.
EDIT: sunbeam, we have no idea what kind of character his fellow player has made. So we have no way to judge that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A law that does not work toward a good and orderly society needs to be changed. A law that works against the well-being of people in society needs to be actively opposed and otherwise ignored. Yes, a law needs to be respected in some way because it was created in an orderly fashion, by the right people, mindful of what was intended and what the consequences would be, but a law that was couped through would be a non-issue.
NOTE: PLEASE READ WHAT I AM ACTUALLY WRITING ABOUT IS HISTORICAL ATTITUDES. I AM NOT AND NEVER WILL BE IN FAVOR OF SLAVERY IN ANY WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM!!!
/stuff
In ancient history, the word slave was not nearly as emotionally loaded as it is in modern society.
/stuffIf it is slavery like the ancient greeks, a paladin might very well have no problem with it at all.
/stuff
This is key, I think. It depends on the type of slavery. Drow slaves are usually maimed to be unable to escape, and are kept for life, for example. This is a type of slave a paladin would want to free. If the slavery is more like Mass Effect, where a servant can opt to be bought, or can be forced to be sold, to pay off debt or what have you, then the paladin should have no issues with this at all given that it is the custom in their land and is not particularly evil and possibly even consensual.
Ninja ha! I used my Wu Shu Mastery!
What Mal said . . .now I could see a NG cleric of Sunny and the said paladin getting into an arguement. The Paladin might have to DEFEND slavery as LEGAL and RESTRAIN the NG cleric from getting into trouble!
Hmmm if the paladin frees the slave in an area where slavery is illegal, what happens if the party goes to an area where it is legal to own slaves?
Thats why you have a referee and Profession: barrister! Btw, I have a rogue who is a barrister and the DM had conniptions dealing with this. EEK! Maybe a rogue and paladin could work the inside angle on this . .
Can the person who was deprived of a slave appeal to the local authorities to punish the paladin? And would the paladin recognize the right of these authorities to punish the paladin?
Yes and yes! Paladins know that thier life is forfeit on demand, but not without a fight and maybe not the fight that is expected. Hey, my rogue will defend you in court . . . they might just exile you and the entire party as too much trouble! Damned furrinners!
I would recommend that the paladin simply treat the slave as if he/she were a person instead of property. You don't need to start striking off chains and "giving" the slave freedom. I think Sarenrae would want a slave to rise up and cast off their shackles by choice not by happenstance.
Your character has plenty of things they can do before they start resorting to a monkey knife fight (my terminology for player vs player combat). Argue for their share of treasure, protect them from brutality, give them aide and succor as if they were any other potential member of Serenrae's chosen people. If the slave chooses to escape in the night while the paladin is on watch? Give em a waterskin and some rations and send them on their way. If the slave chooses to remain a slave through innaction and fear, then that is their choice (even if it makes your paladin angry at the party member and sad for the slave). You can also do things like teach the slave to read (assuming the stereotypical no reading allowed rule is in effect), teach them the words of your god, and hope that in time they decide they've had enough of being owned.
Thank you - this is along the lines of what I was thinking but I couldn't figure out how to express. Again this is what drew me to the character and the concept of a Paladin that only drew steel when there was no other choice - and always thought that good could come of a situation.
I just was having a very hard time coalescing this idea because the entire scenario surprised me.
I appreciate the different opinions offered throughout this thread - you have all responded and given me things to think about.
Hopefully you all understand that as a player I'm not mad at this for happening - in fact *I* am kind of excited to see how it plays out - but that's because I always find the best games are the ones where the characters relationships grow out of the unexpected things they do to each other.
Even at the end of the day - if my Paladin actually found it impossible to continue on (because he's not going to come to blows unless things get abusive - given that no one is playing evil I really don't expect that to happen) as a Player I won't be upset at the outcome - characters are after all only scribbles on a piece of paper. I just needed a bit of a nudge to get the concept down.
Thank you :)
Why are you so sure you are going to win a fight anyway? Unless your opponent is evil, you aren't going to be able to smite them.
If your opponent is a non-evil fighter type you may bite off more than you can chew.
Because Paladins fight for truth and justice, unless it's against fighter types?
If you need a good lawyer, look up Malcolm Vancouver in Almas. You can find me on 221B Baker Street . . .ask any of the street urchins, they can tell you. Bring your pipe and favorite tobacco, and we talk about it.
Because Paladins fight for truth and justice . . .
And thats why you need a good lawyer! :P
...Its highly unlikely the local authorities could charge you or prosecute you for (non)-crimes commited in another land. They dont have any power there.
Historically, that actually has happened quite a bit. It could be difficult to enforce and start an international incident. But it does happen.
...Its highly unlikely the local authorities could charge you or prosecute you for (non)-crimes commited in another land. They dont have any power there.Historically, that actually has happened quite a bit. It could be difficult to enforce and start an international incident. But it does happen.
*points up* damn furriners!
Historically, that actually has happened quite a bit. It could be difficult to enforce and start an international incident. But it does happen.
Yes, it has. I have a hard time picturing an adventuring party starting an international incident over one slave, however.
|
Situation - playing a paladin of Sarenrae - basically taking the idea of trying to redeem the world - patiently.
Those of you who have read the 'code' in the splat books might note that Sarenrae (unlike say... Iomede) expects the Paladin to play smart and try to find the good in a situation or person (generally). I chose this path specifically because of how Sarenrae has no issue with interaction with other faiths - always being patient in the hopes of turning evil.
It seemed a great fit without beaming the rest of the party over the head with the lawful stupid stick.
Now one of the party members has purchased a slave - (it is lawful where we are currently) and I'm trying to find some guidelines in how to handle this... so... thoughts?
Well, Sarenrae is the patron deity of the Empire of Kelesh ... where slavery is both legal and considered normal. Plus slavery is the rule in the Inner Sea Region, not the exception. So depending on where your paladin is from you've got a lot of wiggle room in how you want to play your character. Specifically how your character looks at the world and at slavery's role in it.
There are other threads about Sarenrae and slavery that might be useful to you. You could also look at the history of non-violent opposition to slavery (Joseph Sturge, the Pennsylvania Abolition Society, etc) for some ideas about how you could play a character who opposes slavery but lives in a region where slavery is the norm.
Historically, that actually has happened quite a bit. It could be difficult to enforce and start an international incident. But it does happen.Yes, it has. I have a hard time picturing an adventuring party starting an international incident over one slave, however.
What? Heroes are all about standing their ground over things like one person.
First, LG means you operate within the law, even if it appears to be immoral. You still have your lawful ethics.
“I’m sorry, but I can’t help you track down the goblins that burned down this village. Their chief passed a law saying that Paladins were not allowed in their lair”
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
First, LG means you operate within the law, even if it appears to be immoral. You still have your lawful ethics.
No, that's not what it means. LG is lawful good, not just lawful, which means that an LG character will try her best to stay on the path of both good and law, but that good will win out if the two conflict and every attempt to follow both good and law fails. If law won out over good, the character would be LN. What differentiates LG and NG is that NG will just break the law, while LG will do her best to uphold it, then break it when she realizes that, in this circumstance, she cannot in good conscience uphold the law. An LG character is not bound to never, ever, ever violate the law. If she was, she's never be able to fight an LE character. For an example of an LG character going against the law, look at Captain America in Marvel Civil War. He's as LG as they come, but he rebels, and the reasoning he gives for rebelling is the exact reasoning I can see any LG character giving for going against the law.
What? Heroes are all about standing their ground over things like one person.
Heroes, yes, for the rights of a person. Minorly put-out disenfranchised slave owners to get their slave back? Not as much. If the PC slave-owner really fights hard enough to create an international incident over one slave? Something is seriously wrong and the paladin should begin scanning him for evil again. Repeatedly.
I think you took what I was saying and applied it to the opposite people that I was applying it too!
Effectively:
1) Slave-owning-PC has a slave, and, with Paladin, they go to new place
2) Via being in new place, slave is legally forced into freedom (and likely leaves)
3) PC and paladins leave new place without ex-slave... what happens?
I'd say nothing. This was my point, though I may have been misreading what had gone before. I was saying that, from the slave-holder's perspective, it wouldn't be worth the hassle.
I think you took what I was saying and applied it to the opposite people that I was applying it too!
This.
Oops?
LOL. But yes, you are correct.
Lawful can have different interpretations, for example your paladin could be true to his principles and comands of his religion, even though he is in an evil country, and thus not follow those local laws. This is most often the case with religious fanatics.
Problem is that he would have to be consistent, and free all slaves, not just the one he happens to be close to. So it is a DM problem, he either have to rule that your deity/faith allows slaves, or accept that he put his player in a warzone, litterally up against an entire nation.
So, explain to your DM that it is his responsibility. The other player might be needing to think IRL why he wanted a slave (I assume he is young and challenging conventions, it is harmless in a game), but he is not really the problem.
I really don't see it playing out that way in fact I'd say most likely:Slave owner goes with Paladin to place where legally they can't own slaves.
Slave owner refuses to acknowledge their authority over him.
Slave owner and party become fugitives in country and probably all die.
See, your final point is where we differ greatly. After the slave is legally and fully free, what occurs? We know next to nothing about this PC except that they bought a slave. We don't know why, we don't know who, and we don't know what.
We know: there is a PC (of some undefined gender - probably male -, race, non-evil alignment, and class - I believe the player is male) who purchased a slave (of some undefined gender, race, alignment, and class) and that bothers a paladin PC (via their player, whom I've inferred is male, and is obviously lawful good).
My supposition comes into play with a PC that is anything other than chaotic or evil. The paladin would be morally and ethically obligated to allow the slave to escape and even assist in said situation, given the player's personal creed and ethics. IF the PC owner refused on all counts to allow such a thing to happen they will either find some way to work it out or come to blows. I find it very unlikely that the Paladin in such a case would not only go on with a slave owner, but becoming a fugitive for the express purpose of allowing the slave owner to maintain their status as a slave owner. That's hugely violating the Paladin's personal ethos and morals from one end to the other.
Your supposition is based entirely on the idea that the slave owner is chaotic, foolish, or both and the party goes along with it. There is zero current reason for anyone except the slave owner to become a fugitive. We don't even know how many people there are in the party or how the other(s) feel about it paladin-player (and thus paladin) aside.
My supposition is based on the idea that the paladin player has explained that he doesn't want the slave to continue to be a slave in the party. Sure, the slave owner doesn't want to lose their money (we don't know how much was spent), but the question of inter-party conflict is a real one, and will it be worth the hassle? I would say "no". BUT, that's just a guess and you may be right. :)
ANYWAY, OP: one more idea is make constant appeals to (and diplomacy rolls at) the slave owner. Sway them to your thinking over time. It seems you've found the way you prefer though.
@KrispyXIV: no prob, it's cool! :)
Slavery in any form is one of the most indefensible evils I can conceive of - arguments about the legality of the institution or the treatment of slaves in fantastical settings wither on the vine.
A stern lecture to a rogue about respecting personal property or restraining a drunken barbarian intent on inciting a tavern brawl are roleplaying tensions I can relate to with a Lawful Good PC - tolerating irredeemable wickedness on the part of a fellow party member is not.
Explain the value of self-determination and freedom to your fellow PC - allow him to liberate this wretched soul on his own. Failing that, free him/her yourself. If your companion persists in his vile behavior, either cast him out or smite him so that he may sin no more.