Quandary wrote:
Good and Evil in Pathfinder are Cosmological facts, independent of what any one culture feels about a certain thing.
So discussion of what this or that historical culture felt about a certain thing, vs. modern day America, is irrelevant.
I think that active slaving is certainly an Evil act IN PATHFINDER, and active participation with that as well.
So what you're saying is that your discourse (which are obviously affected by the world around you), should be applied to Pathfinder, and not just to Pathfinder, but to everyone playing this worldwide campaign.
Quandary wrote:
But AFAIK, the OP's case was a player who stated they were going around capturing NPCs to enslave.
'Because the NPCs deserve it' or acted hostiley to the PC in question isn't really a good enough reason to avoid Evilness IMHO, especially when the PC in question is knowingly seeking out these situations, and knows that their above average capabilities make such situations much less dangerous than for the average NPC, so the looting of slaves isn't much different than the looting of gold for them.
Ulzef was not actively seeking out these situations. It tends to be part of his Venture-Captain's (in the OP's case, Shiela Heidmarch's) orders. Ulzef takes considerable pains to ensure that enemies are taken alive, to the point where the rogue/fighter/dualist has taken Improved Unarmed Strike, and dropping money on amulet of mighty fists etc...
When I adventure with Ulzef, the bodycount is generally much lower than any other time.
Quandary wrote:
As mentioned, one Evil act doesn't necessarily shift your Alignment to Evil, and PFS includes many opportunities for Evil acts including faction missions... it one's character concept involves doing those Evil acts at every turn, then you will sooner or later become Evil. That isn't a conflict with the PFS rules, that they allow you the opportunity to commit Evil acts and disqualify your character (by doing act that many in-game cultures may not even disapprove of) just means you are being given the freedom to play your character, but that consequences for your actions still apply.
Conjecture and opinion. Ulzef is aware that consequences do apply. In the OP's case, he was socially shunned. It has been posted elsewhere that failure to render aid does not constitute PvP, and Ulzef is clearly aware of this. He is prepared to forgo any assistance from PCs who find his character reprehensible.
It turns out the "Many in-game cultures" you're referring to (Andoran and the River Kingdoms) is VASTLY outnumbered by those in-game cultures that permit it: ( Cheliax, Corgunbier, Geb, Hagegraf, Irrisen, Jalmeray, Katapesh, Realm of the Mammoth Lords, Molthune, Osirion, Qadira, Sargava and The Shackles). It is interesting to note that a large majority of these cultures are neutrally aligned. See http://www.pathfinderwiki.com/wiki/Slavery for more information.
Quandary wrote:
Is there any source for the idea that slavery (of the capturing, not legal limited punishment for specific crimes, type) is NOT an evil act, in the PFS context? I've seen people mention opportunities to do so/game features that reference it, but those don't seem to actually say it is not Evil, they just don't mention that fact...? The game also also allows/includes other clearly Evil acts, so inclusion of slavery does not mean it isn't Evil or that the consequences for that don't apply - not every game feature has to spell out every consequence.
That's putting an interesting "guilty until proven innocent" stance. There's no source that says that casting Cloudkill in the centre of a crowded street is an evil act, or that channeling positive energy in an orphanage is not an evil act either.
The social consequences are clear. Ulzef accepts them.
This case requires no further discussion.
May the Prince of Law bear me witness,
Deceased Estate
Chief Attorney for Ulzef.
