There's no way I can actually buy a slave...

[thejeff]

Nefreet wrote:

Socalwarhammer wrote:

From my own study, there doesn't seem to have been any age when slaves weren't fully abused, mis-treated, tortured or killed. To argue otherwise is to do so in the face of a large body of historical evidence to the contrary.

Good thing Golarion's history is not Earth's history.

There is quite a spectrum with regards to how slaves in Golarion are treated, with probably a disproportionate amount of well-treated slaves compared to Earth's history.

Consider this: at no time in Earth's history were there ever large-scale organizations (or nations) that opposed cruel slavery as there are in Golarion. That fact alone would drive the ratio of cruelty-free slavery up, since nobody wants their home burned to the ground for having a house-trained Halfling.

Without cruelty, how do you keep these well treated slaves enslaved?

Elite, high status slaves in otherwise very unfree societies excepted. If you're a janissary in a strict caste society, escaping isn't going to get you anywhere better. But the mine worker slaves in that same society are going to need the abuse to keep the working.

[Nefreet]

nosig wrote:

Nefreet wrote:

Consider this: at no time in Earth's history were there ever large-scale organizations (or nations) that opposed cruel slavery as there are in Golarion. That fact alone would drive the ratio of cruelty-free slavery up, since nobody wants their home burned to the ground for having a house-trained Halfling.

bolding mine.

Not true. The Abolitionist movement in Britain is just one example...

I guess my focus was on the plural, and the scale.

Multiple organizations, and multiple nations, active during the same time, sending out groups to disrupt the slave trade, and preach anti-slavery.

And there are obviously humanitarian efforts today that oppose slavery as well, but still not on the scale that we see in Golarion.

[Bill Dunn]

Jane "The Knife" wrote:

check out the history of the Janissaries in the Ottoman Empire sometime.

or the Egyptian mamluks...

Check out the history of Janissary revolts and corruption sometime. Or the history of slave sabotage in the United States.

[Nefreet]

thejeff wrote:

Nefreet wrote:

Socalwarhammer wrote:

From my own study, there doesn't seem to have been any age when slaves weren't fully abused, mis-treated, tortured or killed. To argue otherwise is to do so in the face of a large body of historical evidence to the contrary.

Good thing Golarion's history is not Earth's history.

There is quite a spectrum with regards to how slaves in Golarion are treated, with probably a disproportionate amount of well-treated slaves compared to Earth's history.

Without cruelty, how do you keep these well treated slaves enslaved?

I think that's been covered quite well in this thread.

And I didn't say the majority of slaves in Golarion were well treated, but there is a much higher proportion than real life historical accounts.

[Jane "The Knife"]

Dave Setty wrote:

Jane "The Knife" wrote:

?? what ??

You don't trust me, because I'm a slave? what?
There is no more chance of my "switching sides" by being sold in the middle of a mission than one of my companions. Less in fact.

Say it's the middle of a mission, and you get a sending from your master. "You have been sold to Dorianna Ouidda. After your mission, meet her at [this here address] in Absalom. Do not inform the Pathfinders."

What do you do?

most likely the same thing you would do if in the middle of a mission you get a sending from your Faction Leader/Venture Captain/King/Mayor/Athority Figure that said "Due to changes in the political situation we are changing our approach. After your mission, meet me at [this here address] in Absalom. Do not inform the other Pathfinders. Oh! and bring this valuable thing you are likely to find on your current missing - without anyone else finding out you recovered it."

[thejeff]

Dave Setty wrote:

Jane "The Knife" wrote:

?? what ??

You don't trust me, because I'm a slave? what?
There is no more chance of my "switching sides" by being sold in the middle of a mission than one of my companions. Less in fact.

Say it's the middle of a mission, and you get a sending from your master. "You have been sold to Dorianna Ouidda. After your mission, meet her at [this here address] in Absalom. Do not inform the Pathfinders."

What do you do?

OTOH, the non-slave could be bribed or turn against the PFS when he realizes they keep slaves or be an agent of the Aspis from the start.

If a master sends a slave to join the society, you'd expect them to apply the same kind of security checks to who the master is as they do to other applicants. You wouldn't accept someone enslaved to a Aspis member. You wouldn't accept someone employed by an Aspis member. You wouldn't accept someone closely related to one.

Or for that matter, someone a member of another organization (Bellflowers? Hellknights? Just personally loyal to a country?) who might get orders from them counter to his PFS ties.

I'd also expect any slave loyal enough to be trusted to train to be a deadly combatant, travel alone around the world and work with anti-slavery groups to have some kind of relationship with master that wouldn't lead to him being sold lightly.

[Jane "The Knife"]

Bill Dunn wrote:

Jane "The Knife" wrote:

check out the history of the Janissaries in the Ottoman Empire sometime.

or the Egyptian mamluks...

Check out the history of Janissary revolts and corruption sometime. Or the history of slave sabotage in the United States.

I was not saying there is NO chance for treachery - there always is.

I was saying that there is not MORE chance for treachery from slaves than from freemen.

[Wei Ji the Learner]

nosig wrote:

Can we include Serfs/peasants/helots in that same group?

And also thralls/bondsmen?

[thejeff]

Nefreet wrote:

nosig wrote:

Nefreet wrote:

Consider this: at no time in Earth's history were there ever large-scale organizations (or nations) that opposed cruel slavery as there are in Golarion. That fact alone would drive the ratio of cruelty-free slavery up, since nobody wants their home burned to the ground for having a house-trained Halfling.

bolding mine.

Not true. The Abolitionist movement in Britain is just one example...

I guess my focus was on the plural, and the scale.

Multiple organizations, and multiple nations, active during the same time, sending out groups to disrupt the slave trade, and preach anti-slavery.

And there are obviously humanitarian efforts today that oppose slavery as well, but still not on the scale that we see in Golarion.

Fairly briefly in time and leading over a very short time historically speaking to the end of (institutionalized) slavery.

In the real world, the rise of anti-slavery sentiments led to the end of slavery. In Golarion, it doesn't appear to be doing so.

[Chris Mortika]

Dave,

How would a sending like that come about? Would another PC be casting the spell? Or are you suggesting the the GM would create an NPC (the master) and decide that NPC sends a message just to throw the PC off-mission, without any justification in the scenario?

[Incidentally, "enslaved to the Consortium, spying on the Pathfinders as a deep-cover mole" is a fantastic character background, but I don't know how it would ever be addressed in the scope of the game.]

Lots and lots of PCs have backstories with ties and commitments on the character. To name just one example, clerics are part of an organized hierarchy that might be at odds with the Society or the particular mission goal. Every single character who's part of a faction other than Grand Lodge might be tasked to do something off-mission.

If you're requiring characters to be free from all outside commitments, then you're holding PCs to an impossibly high standard.

[thejeff]

Nefreet wrote:

thejeff wrote:

Nefreet wrote:

Socalwarhammer wrote:

From my own study, there doesn't seem to have been any age when slaves weren't fully abused, mis-treated, tortured or killed. To argue otherwise is to do so in the face of a large body of historical evidence to the contrary.

Good thing Golarion's history is not Earth's history.

There is quite a spectrum with regards to how slaves in Golarion are treated, with probably a disproportionate amount of well-treated slaves compared to Earth's history.

Without cruelty, how do you keep these well treated slaves enslaved?

I think that's been covered quite well in this thread.

And I didn't say the majority of slaves in Golarion were well treated, but there is a much higher proportion than real life historical accounts.

I don't think it really has been covered, but I might have missed something.

[CORE "8255"]

Hi! I'm the guy who built 8255, a negative energy channeling halfling cleric of Abadar. It's worth explaining some things, I think, about the character and the thought process behind it.
For starters: 8255 is in no way intended to be a caricature or commentary on transatlantic slavery. Her story is still, absolutely, one of sadness and horribleness, one that in no way glorifies the practice of slavery in general. The choice of making 8255 a halfling was predicated primarily on my not having built a halfling prior, them having a +Cha stat mod (good for negative channeling) and the decision to make her a slave stemmed from it being a unique opportunity to tell a powerful story, not out of a desire to glorify or promote slavery in any form or fashion.
Not that I anticipate any of this is going to make matters any better. As with any issue of significant emotional weight, there will ever be a section of the population who reacts strongly and vocally.

[thejeff]

Wei Ji the Learner wrote:

nosig wrote:

Can we include Serfs/peasants/helots in that same group?

And also thralls/bondsmen?

Who really are slaves by another name.

The serfs and peasants are a slightly different story, though those in Golarion tend to be much better off than in real history, at least by the examples we see presented.

Still, there is a fine line and I've said in past discussions that some past slavery doesn't actually look so bad compared to how poor non-slaves of the period were treated. But that says more about how badly off they were than how well they treated their slaves. Doesn't make slavery less evil, just makes the society as a whole more so.

[Kalindlara]

Semi on-topic: I always liked the "other shoe" of the Hellknight Order of the Chain. They retrieve runaway slaves (which has its unfortunate parallels), but they also ensure the fair and decent treatment of slaves in many cases. (That's a pretty simplified summary, of course.)

The Hellknight orders tend to be very fascinating, philosophically.

[Wei Ji the Learner]

Kalindlara wrote:

Semi on-topic: I always liked the "other shoe" of the Hellknight Order of the Chain. They retrieve runaway slaves (which has its unfortunate parallels), but they also ensure the fair and decent treatment of slaves in many cases. (That's a pretty simplified summary, of course.)

The Hellknight orders tend to be very fascinating, philosophically.

There's an adventure scenario waiting to be written if it hasn't already...

'The Hellknight's Duty' (or some other)

Upshot, a Hellknight of the Chain has discovered that a particular slave owner may be mistreating the thralls in their charge. Unfortunately, due to location/politics/position/plot/etc they can't take action on it.

However, they do have ties to a certain organization (The PFS) who could do a proper investigation of the situation and then report back their findings in return for plot/story/etc....

[Kalindlara]

Wei Ji the Learner wrote:

Kalindlara wrote:

Semi on-topic: I always liked the "other shoe" of the Hellknight Order of the Chain. They retrieve runaway slaves (which has its unfortunate parallels), but they also ensure the fair and decent treatment of slaves in many cases. (That's a pretty simplified summary, of course.)

The Hellknight orders tend to be very fascinating, philosophically.

There's an adventure scenario waiting to be written if it hasn't already...

'The Hellknight's Duty' (or some other)

Upshot, a Hellknight of the Chain has discovered that a particular slave owner may be mistreating the thralls in their charge. Unfortunately, due to location/politics/position/plot/etc they can't take action on it.

However, they do have ties to a certain organization (The PFS) who could do a proper investigation of the situation and then report back their findings in return for plot/story/etc....

I know what I'm writing if I ever do a scenario. ^_^

(I'll put in a credit for you.)

[Wei Ji the Learner]

Kalindlara wrote:

Wei Ji the Learner wrote:

Kalindlara wrote:

Semi on-topic: I always liked the "other shoe" of the Hellknight Order of the Chain. They retrieve runaway slaves (which has its unfortunate parallels), but they also ensure the fair and decent treatment of slaves in many cases. (That's a pretty simplified summary, of course.)

The Hellknight orders tend to be very fascinating, philosophically.

There's an adventure scenario waiting to be written if it hasn't already...

'The Hellknight's Duty' (or some other)

Upshot, a Hellknight of the Chain has discovered that a particular slave owner may be mistreating the thralls in their charge. Unfortunately, due to location/politics/position/plot/etc they can't take action on it.

However, they do have ties to a certain organization (The PFS) who could do a proper investigation of the situation and then report back their findings in return for plot/story/etc....

I know what I'm writing if I ever do a scenario. ^_^

(I'll put in a credit for you.)

Wow, um, thanks!

[Dave Setty]

Jane "The Knife" wrote:

Dave Setty wrote:

Say it's the middle of a mission, and you get a sending from your master. "You have been sold to Dorianna Ouidda. After your mission, meet her at [this here address] in Absalom. Do not inform the Pathfinders."

What do you do?

most likely the same thing you would do if in the middle of a mission you get a sending from your Faction Leader/Venture Captain/King/Mayor/Athority Figure that said "Due to changes in the political situation we are changing our approach. After your mission, meet me at [this here address] in Absalom. Do not inform the other Pathfinders. Oh! and bring this valuable thing you are likely to find on your current missing - without anyone else finding out you recovered it."

Those situations are not equivalent, and whether or not you'd do the same thing I'd do is very much in question here. Seriously - you're now owned completely by a known, dedicated enemy of the Pathfinder Society. Do you go to the meeting? If you do, and Ouidda orders you to spy on and otherwise betray the Society for her, do you comply?

[Dave Setty]

thejeff wrote:

I'd also expect any slave loyal enough to be trusted to train to be a deadly combatant, travel alone around the world and work with anti-slavery groups to have some kind of relationship with master that wouldn't lead to him being sold lightly.

Sold lightly, no. Sold for the price (be it money or other considerations) that such a "Pathfinder" would be worth to the Aspis?

[Talonhawke]

Dave Setty wrote:

Jane "The Knife" wrote:

Dave Setty wrote:

Say it's the middle of a mission, and you get a sending from your master. "You have been sold to Dorianna Ouidda. After your mission, meet her at [this here address] in Absalom. Do not inform the Pathfinders."

What do you do?

most likely the same thing you would do if in the middle of a mission you get a sending from your Faction Leader/Venture Captain/King/Mayor/Athority Figure that said "Due to changes in the political situation we are changing our approach. After your mission, meet me at [this here address] in Absalom. Do not inform the other Pathfinders. Oh! and bring this valuable thing you are likely to find on your current missing - without anyone else finding out you recovered it."

Those situations are not equivalent, and whether or not you'd do the same thing I'd do is very much in question here. Seriously - you're now owned completely by a known, dedicated enemy of the Pathfinder Society. Do you go to the meeting? If you do, and Ouidda orders you to spy on and otherwise betray the Society for her, do you comply?

As Chris asked above where would that "sending" come from? I don't think any scenario would actually account for that premise without it coming up for more than just a slave. So since the judge can't just decide that it happens it's not going to happen. Now as far as between scenarios there is plenty of time for the character to wander off and preform other task for the master until the next time recruited for a mission.

[Dave Setty]

Chris Mortika wrote:

Dave,

How would a sending like that come about? Would another PC be casting the spell? Or are you suggesting the the GM would create an NPC (the master) and decide that NPC sends a message just to throw the PC off-mission, without any justification in the scenario?

It wouldn't in an actual scenario. It's just the first thing that would pop into the head of the Society's leadership if some guy showed up at the Grand Lodge saying "Master just gave me a three-year vacation, can I sign up?"

Chris Mortika wrote:

[Incidentally, "enslaved to the Consortium, spying on the Pathfinders as a deep-cover mole" is a fantastic character background, but I don't know how it would ever be addressed in the scope of the game.]

"Deep cover mole", slave or not, is something I've seen, but I'm talking more about who the Society would knowingly let in.

Chris Mortika wrote:

Lots a....andard.

So much excluded middle! (Sorry.)

"Any outside commitments" is a looong way from "owned by a particular person, and such ownership might change at any minute owing to a simple cash transaction". Clerics and paladins have to hold up their deity's tenets as they see fit, but Norgrober isn't going to come down and personally tell one of his clerics to slip laxatives into Ambrus Valsin's dessert or whatever. And the "shadow war for Absalom" hasn't been a thing for years - Season 5 was all about stripping the nationalist loyalties from the various factions, and all the faction heads are now considered allies, if not members, of the Society.

[Jane "The Knife"]

Dave Setty wrote:

thejeff wrote:

I'd also expect any slave loyal enough to be trusted to train to be a deadly combatant, travel alone around the world and work with anti-slavery groups to have some kind of relationship with master that wouldn't lead to him being sold lightly.

Sold lightly, no. Sold for the price (be it money or other considerations) that such a "Pathfinder" would be worth to the Aspis?

LOL! ok, as a thought exercise then.

My current Master is very happy with my services, and considers me a very valuable item. And had turned down several offers for me (some from well meaning members of the Society who mistakenly felt I was unhappy with my place in life). And as he, and his family is very much involved in the Society, and takes his obligations very seriously, I find this unlikely to happen. And so it would take a lot for him to have business dealings with the Aspis Consortium, let alone sell me off to them... but leaving all that aside. Say he is dominated and compelled to sell me. This could happen I guess...

Well, I would likely (try to!) become an agent working for the Aspis Consortium. Much like a (freeman) Eagle Knight who found that the Society was (gasp!) keeping slaves... and decided, on his own, to undermine the Society.

But, seeing as the sale of such a valuable property (me) would require paperwork to be filed (taxes you know), there would be a public record of the shift in my allegiance. Forms filled out, ownership established. You see, my Master (who ever that might be) is a matter of public record, and has to be. As my owner is responsible for my actions (as all slave holders are). If I cause trouble, damage things, or even kill someone ("murder hobo" after all), my owner is responsible. Just like if his horse or his children damage things. My loyalty (unlike that Eagle Knight above) is a matter of public record.

OH! and it would require more than just a sending spell to inform me of this change. Again, paperwork you know. Got to provide me with the proper ownership paperwork you know.

Kind of like a persons citizenship paperwork. Got to be able to show who owns you...

[thejeff]

Dave Setty wrote:

thejeff wrote:

I'd also expect any slave loyal enough to be trusted to train to be a deadly combatant, travel alone around the world and work with anti-slavery groups to have some kind of relationship with master that wouldn't lead to him being sold lightly.

Sold lightly, no. Sold for the price (be it money or other considerations) that such a "Pathfinder" would be worth to the Aspis?

Do I hold the same loyalty to my new owner? Why does my new owner also trust me to not betray her when I have every opportunity?

As others have noted, this is largely moot in PFS, since it isn't going to happen. Being a slave is just character backstory. Nothing will ever come of it.

In a home game, all the rest of this could become important. If it's really personal loyalty, then that might well not transfer. If the owner has some kind of hold over me, then that's exactly the kind of thing an adventuring party might try to deal with, especially when it's abused by trying to transfer it.

And again, not really significantly different than any character with strong loyalties outside the Society.

[Jasmine Henderthane]

Wei Ji the Learner wrote:

Kalindlara wrote:

Wei Ji the Learner wrote:

Kalindlara wrote:

Semi on-topic: I always liked the "other shoe" of the Hellknight Order of the Chain. They retrieve runaway slaves (which has its unfortunate parallels), but they also ensure the fair and decent treatment of slaves in many cases. (That's a pretty simplified summary, of course.)

The Hellknight orders tend to be very fascinating, philosophically.

There's an adventure scenario waiting to be written if it hasn't already...

'The Hellknight's Duty' (or some other)

Upshot, a Hellknight of the Chain has discovered that a particular slave owner may be mistreating the thralls in their charge. Unfortunately, due to location/politics/position/plot/etc they can't take action on it.

However, they do have ties to a certain organization (The PFS) who could do a proper investigation of the situation and then report back their findings in return for plot/story/etc....

I know what I'm writing if I ever do a scenario. ^_^

(I'll put in a credit for you.)

Wow, um, thanks!

I would love to give out such a briefing, as I am both a Venture Captain, and an Order of the Chain Hellknight ...

My duties to my Order also led to my being bestowed with the title: Eagle Knight but that is another story.

[Dave Setty]

Jane "The Knife" wrote:

LOL! ok, as a thought exercise then.

My current Master is very happy with my services, and considers me a very valuable item. And had turned down several offers for me (some from well meaning members of the Society who mistakenly felt I was unhappy with my place in life). And as he, and his family is very much involved in the Society, and takes his obligations very seriously, I find this unlikely to happen. And so it would take a lot for him to have business dealings with the Aspis Consortium, let alone sell me off to them... but leaving all that aside. Say he is dominated and compelled to sell me. This could happen I guess...

So your owner is an ally of the Society? That's, um, new information. But he's not a member - why are we trusting you with this sort of thing but not him? Why are we allowing an outsider to own one of ours? And if he is a pathfinder... I'm sorry, but NO. There's NO WAY that one Pathfinder OWNING another is compatible with the camaraderie that's at the core of the principle of Cooperation.

Jane "The Knife" wrote:

Well, I would likely (try to!) become an agent working for the Aspis Consortium.

Ayup.

Jane "The Knife" wrote:

But, seeing as the sale of such a valuable property (me) would require paperwork to be filed (taxes you know)

What paperwork? Where's it filed. You travel all over Golarion on missions - is your master based in Absalom? Cheliax? Kaer Maga - we all know what sticklers for paperwork those people are.

This is all so nonsensical. You've got a relationship that's 100% unlike any form of "slavery" that's ever actually existed on Earth or been depicted in any society on Golarion. Yet you insist on calling your character a slave - why? I can't figure out a damn reason for it other than shock value.

[LazarX]

Dave Setty wrote:

Jane "The Knife" wrote:

LOL! ok, as a thought exercise then.

My current Master is very happy with my services, and considers me a very valuable item. And had turned down several offers for me (some from well meaning members of the Society who mistakenly felt I was unhappy with my place in life). And as he, and his family is very much involved in the Society, and takes his obligations very seriously, I find this unlikely to happen. And so it would take a lot for him to have business dealings with the Aspis Consortium, let alone sell me off to them... but leaving all that aside. Say he is dominated and compelled to sell me. This could happen I guess...

So your owner is an ally of the Society? That's, um, new information. But he's not a member - why are we trusting you with this sort of thing but not him? Why are we allowing an outsider to own one of ours? And if he is a pathfinder... I'm sorry, but NO. There's NO WAY that one Pathfinder OWNING another is compatible with the camaraderie that's at the core of the principle of Cooperation.

Jane "The Knife" wrote:

Well, I would likely (try to!) become an agent working for the Aspis Consortium.

Ayup.

Jane "The Knife" wrote:

But, seeing as the sale of such a valuable property (me) would require paperwork to be filed (taxes you know)

What paperwork? Where's it filed. You travel all over Golarion on missions - is your master based in Absalom? Cheliax? Kaer Maga - we all know what sticklers for paperwork those people are.

This is all so nonsensical. You've got a relationship that's 100% unlike any form of "slavery" that's ever actually existed on Earth or been depicted in any society on Golarion. Yet you insist on calling your character a slave - why? I can't figure out a damn reason for it other than shock value.

That's exactly and the only reason.. Because it makes other people burn.

[Nefreet]

Let's take a broader look at slavery IRL as a specist institution, since I feel we're still focusing on its racial roots.

Do you eat meat? Have you ridden a horse? Do you own a pet? Have you worn a wool suit? Ever been to SeaWorld? Do you drink dairy milk?

If you answered "yes" to any of those questions, then you have engaged in a form of specist slavery, according to some groups. Sentience shouldn't be a factor, they argue. Raising an animal to be slaughtered can be seen as an atrocity. Being entertained by a captive dolphin can be seen as inhumane. Breeding and genetically modifying a species to produce the best/most hair/milk can be seen as playing god. "Tradition" shouldn't be an argument that supports the continued practice of these institutions in a moral society.

Does that make our modern day society and those institutions evil enough to warrant anti-"slavery" activism? Should pet stores be shut down, wool mills closed, and the use of dairy cows banned? I won't answer that, but if it's common enough practice for our society to engage in this behavior, and defend it, isn't it possible that the same mindset could exist in a world with literally hundreds of different species, and multiple practices of enslavement?

[Dave Setty]

thejeff wrote:

Fairly briefly in time and leading over a very short time historically speaking to the end of (institutionalized) slavery.

In the real world, the rise of anti-slavery sentiments led to the end of slavery. In Golarion, it doesn't appear to be doing so.

1787 - The Society for the Abolition of the Slave Trade is founded in Britain. Not till 1834 is slavery actually banned in the British Empire itself - slavery being banned worldwide, even on paper, takes a century after that.

In Golarion, Andoran has only been independent for 40 years. The Bellflower Network seems to have been around for about that long. The Freemen of Kaer Maga have only existed for 12. That's a short time - incredibly so on the scale of Golarion's history, where nations and institutions change far more slowly than on Earth.

[UndeadMitch]

*Walks back into room to see if the situation has improved, looks around, looks back, and dives out the nearest window.*

[ThePuppyTurtle]

Nefreet wrote:

Let's take a broader look at slavery IRL as a specist institution, since I feel we're still focusing on its racial roots.

Do you eat meat? Have you ridden a horse? Do you own a pet? Have you worn a wool suit? Ever been to SeaWorld? Do you drink dairy milk?

If you answered "yes" to any of those questions, then you have engaged in a form of specist slavery, according to some groups. Sentience shouldn't be a factor, they argue. Raising an animal to be slaughtered can be seen as an atrocity. Being entertained by a captive dolphin can be seen as inhumane. Breeding and genetically modifying a species to produce the best/most hair/milk can be seen as playing god. "Tradition" shouldn't be an argument that supports the continued practice of these institutions in a moral society.

Does that make our modern day society and those institutions evil enough to warrant anti-"slavery" activism? Should pet stores be shut down, wool mills closed, and the use of dairy cows banned? I won't answer that, but if it's common enough practice for our society to engage in this behavior, and defend it, isn't it possible that the same mindset could exist in a world with literally hundreds of different species, and multiple practices of enslavement?

Right, and members of hardcore violent animal rights groups generally do not go out adventuring with people who run slaughterhouses or animal research laboratories, or if they do, they do not get along one little bit.

I think this conversation has at least partially graduated into talking past each other territory. May I suggest that we all take a moment to state our positions clearly and with full nuance? For Example:

While I appreciate that there are legitimate role-playing reasons to buy a slave under very specific circumstances, it requires competent character-builders who take the role-playing at their tables very seriously. Absent that, it's usually pointless and there just for shock value.

Based on what I have seen on this thread, it seems like a lot of people are doing it primarily for shock value. While that is not bad in and of itself, it will sometimes lead to in-character conflicts with members of Liberty's Edge. Because such conflicts can be game-ruining at a table that takes its role-playing seriously, GMs will often be in a position where they must choose to force one player or the other to pick a different character. When one weighs a single item on your inventory sheet or element of your backstory to which faction you belong to, which effects what traits you are allowed and what goals you are working for to fill in your card, it seems obvious that the slaver's need to slave ought yield to the abolitionist's need to be an abolitionist unless both players agree that there won't be a problem.

And of course, if buy a slave just to irritate another player, or to irritate a PC and that irritates the player, you shouldn't be allowed at the table. That goes for anything you do just to irritate another player.

It confuses and slightly worries me that people seem to feel the need to actually apologize for the practice of slavery to defend the slave-holding of their characters. I don't understand why I'm seeing people try to say slavery isn't that bad or isn't as bad as is being asserted. First, that's false. Second, that's beside the point, which is that it is likely to cause a specific problem in-game at tables. Why can't you just say "yeah, slavery is f+#!ed up both in and out of universe" and then address the topic I originally set, which is the in-game effects of slave holding?

I also want to know what's to stop me from exploiting the fact that I can own a slave to farm for faction boons. It would go as follows:

Puppy and his friend Turtle both have characters who are members of Liberty's Edge. After colluding to do this, they both agree to make characters who own slaves. The next time they play, Puppy plays his Lib Edge character and Turtle plays his slaveowner. At some point during the adventure, Turtle deliberately leaves his slave unattended. Puppy immediately strikes the mantacles off of the slave and has them run away, earning him a boon. Turtle stays away long enough to ensure the slave is long gone by the time he'd notice.

Next week, Turtle brings his Lib Edge character and Puppy his slaveowner. The same occurs, with roles reversed. Rinse repeat. Granted, you could probably only do this once with any given GM before they'd realize you'd deliberately arranged it, but that might not be too big of a roadblock in some situations.

[phantom1592]

thejeff wrote:

Without cruelty, how do you keep these well treated slaves enslaved?

Elite, high status slaves in otherwise very unfree societies excepted. If you're a janissary in a strict caste society, escaping isn't going to get you anywhere better. But the mine worker slaves in that same society are going to need the abuse to keep the working.

What is the working definition of 'Slave'? In most FICTION, there is little difference between a person you 'own' and a person you 'employ'. Cohorts, Torchbearers, spearholders... they've been around for quite some time.

A lot of well known 'servants' aren't very different mechanically from slaves. The don't show a lot of free will, they do what they're told, when they're told and they're taken care of.

Batman has Alfred... Zorro had Bernardo... Iron Man had Jarvis... You never see Alfred or Bernardo cashing a paycheck. They keep things clean. Arrange for meals, Drive their employer where they need to go.... Then Live in a fancy house, eat the good food, and live a half-way decent life.

The difference between a servant and a slave is that a servant can quit and go whenever they want. If they choose to stay, the differences can be quite minimal.

Miners? Why would a 'well treated slave' mine? Why would ANYONE mine?? In order to be considered 'Well-treated' There has to be a sense of well being. They get fed, They get clothed, their families get taken care of, Any other prospects that they could flee to... don't look as good as what they have here. They mine to provide for themselves and their families, regardless of personal danger or working conditions.

[LazarX]

Butlers like Alfred and Jarvis aren't just servants, they're household managers. You don't see them cleaning up and dusting that much either.

[Nefreet]

ThePuppyTurtle wrote:

Based on what I have seen on this thread, it seems like a lot of people are doing it primarily for shock value.

We must be reading different threads.

Based solely on this thread, it seems like a lot of people are doing it primarily for roleplaying opportunities, while those that disagree are claiming that its primarily for shock value.

[phantom1592]

LazarX wrote:

Butlers like Alfred and Jarvis aren't just servants, they're household managers. You don't see them cleaning up and dusting that much either.

Jarvis yes, he runs the avengers mansion with full staff... But Alfred used to always complain about how much dusting the Cave took or how hard it was to get bomb debris out in the laundry.

[LazarX]

phantom1592 wrote:

LazarX wrote:

Butlers like Alfred and Jarvis aren't just servants, they're household managers. You don't see them cleaning up and dusting that much either.

Jarvis yes, he runs the avengers mansion with full staff... But Alfred used to always complain about how much dusting the Cave took or how hard it was to get bomb debris out in the laundry.

But when Bruce comes back from Tibet in "Batman", he's at least nice enough to loan him a car. :)

Also remember that in the 60's series, Alfred was Batman a couple of times.

[ThePuppyTurtle]

Nefreet wrote:

ThePuppyTurtle wrote:

Based on what I have seen on this thread, it seems like a lot of people are doing it primarily for shock value.

We must be reading different threads.

Based solely on this thread, it seems like a lot of people are doing it primarily for roleplaying opportunities, while those that disagree are claiming that its primarily for shock value.

Look earlier on in the thread. I was talking primarily about those people who clearly are doing it for shock value.

Also, could you do me a favor and define what exactly your overall position on the issue here is? I'm not meaning to be accusatory, I just think it'd help format the discussion. I have a feeling a lot of us are starting to talk past each other.

I need to find a group that's this serious about role-playing. If there are really people who put this much thought into their characters, and if those issues really come up in play, I wish I could play with them. (Not that the people of my local Game Store are not awesome, if they ever see this.)

[Liz Courts]

Removed a couple of posts and their replies. If this is a topic you feel strongly about and want slaves removed as a character's purchase option in the Organized Play Program, please contact the campaign staff.
In addition, please do not conflate somebody who doesn't have recorded PFS sessions as somebody who does not know the campaign setting or canon. This is not a good assumption to make, as many people may be aware of the setting's intricacies but have no interest in Organized Play; nor should the reverse be assumed. Please be civil to other posters, thanks!

[Jane "The Knife"]

Liz Courts wrote:

Removed a couple of posts and their replies. If this is a topic you feel strongly about and want slaves removed as a character's purchase option in the Organized Play Program, please contact the campaign staff.

In addition, please do not conflate somebody who doesn't have recorded PFS sessions as somebody who does not know the campaign setting or canon. This is not a good assumption to make, as many people may be aware of the setting's intricacies but have no interest in Organized Play; nor should the reverse be assumed. Please be civil to other posters, thanks!

Thank you Liz.

I have given up posting on this thread though..

[Nefreet]

Liz Courts wrote:

In addition, please do not conflate somebody who doesn't have recorded PFS sessions as somebody who does not know the campaign setting or canon.

That poster's comment was something to the effect of "PFS is racist for allowing slavery", to which the proper response would be "No, slavery exists in Golarion, and PFS takes place in Golarion".

It was a clarification that PFS was not the source of the existence of slavery, which as a non-member he seemed unaware of.

[Jane "The Knife"]

LazarX wrote:

Dave Setty wrote:

Jane "The Knife" wrote:

LOL! ok, as a thought exercise then.

My current Master is very happy with my services, and considers me a very valuable item. And had turned down several offers for me (some from well meaning members of the Society who mistakenly felt I was unhappy with my place in life). And as he, and his family is very much involved in the Society, and takes his obligations very seriously, I find this unlikely to happen. And so it would take a lot for him to have business dealings with the Aspis Consortium, let alone sell me off to them... but leaving all that aside. Say he is dominated and compelled to sell me. This could happen I guess...

So your owner is an ally of the Society? That's, um, new information. But he's not a member - why are we trusting you with this sort of thing but not him? Why are we allowing an outsider to own one of ours? And if he is a pathfinder... I'm sorry, but NO. There's NO WAY that one Pathfinder OWNING another is compatible with the camaraderie that's at the core of the principle of Cooperation.

Jane "The Knife" wrote:

Well, I would likely (try to!) become an agent working for the Aspis Consortium.

Ayup.

Jane "The Knife" wrote:

But, seeing as the sale of such a valuable property (me) would require paperwork to be filed (taxes you know)

What paperwork? Where's it filed. You travel all over Golarion on missions - is your master based in Absalom? Cheliax? Kaer Maga - we all know what sticklers for paperwork those people are.

This is all so nonsensical. You've got a relationship that's 100% unlike any form of "slavery" that's ever actually existed on Earth or been depicted in any society on Golarion. Yet you insist on calling your character a slave - why? I can't figure out a damn reason for it other than shock value.

That's exactly and the only reason.. Because it makes other people burn.

This is not true. I tend to avoid conflict with my fellow gamers, and often avoid threads where people respond aggressively to my posts. This thread for example drove me off the board for several hours.

I don't like argument... So I tend to avoid them.

[Dave Setty]

Jane "The Knife" wrote:

I don't like argument... So I tend to avoid them.

Normally, I'm not one for arguments either. It's just that the "roleplaying opportunities" I've endured over this subject have had me at the edge of quitting PFS more than once.

[UndeadMitch]

Liz Courts wrote:

Removed a couple of posts and their replies. If this is a topic you feel strongly about and want slaves removed as a character's purchase option in the Organized Play Program, please contact the campaign staff.

In addition, please do not conflate somebody who doesn't have recorded PFS sessions as somebody who does not know the campaign setting or canon. This is not a good assumption to make, as many people may be aware of the setting's intricacies but have no interest in Organized Play; nor should the reverse be assumed. Please be civil to other posters, thanks!

Just wanted to make a slight comment on this. I don't make assumptions about people that post on the boards here but don't play PFS, but I also don't want them to be trying to make decisions or influence what is and isn't allowed in PFS when they don't have a dog in the fight.

[Nefreet]

ThePuppyTurtle wrote:

I have a feeling a lot of us are starting to talk past each other.

That tends to happen in these sorts of threads, which is why they don't last long.

It's been my experience that people who spend in-game money on non-mechanical effects (slaves, in this case) usually do it for roleplaying purposes and/or to keep their character in theme.

IMO, it's no coincidence that the people arguing against any form of slavery in this thread likewise are the ones propagating the idea that people only purchase slaves to cause social strife.

In reality, they're the only ones in this thread that cite that as a reason. Nobody has actually stepped forward and claimed "I do it just to cause problems".

[Jane "The Knife"]

Dave Setty wrote:

Jane "The Knife" wrote:

I don't like argument... So I tend to avoid them.

Normally, I'm not one for arguments either. It's just that the "roleplaying opportunities" I've endured over this subject have had me at the edge of quitting PFS more than once.

And you reactions to my in character posts drove me off the board. And almost caused me to put you into my Ignore filter

[Wei Ji the Learner]

I'm actually considering a slave-owner character now, based on the wide-ranging discussion that has happened in this thread. Not to stir mischief, though, and respect of other player concerns at a given table would be foremost.

It occurs to me that there is a significantly vast number of rich story-reasons as to why someone might purchase a slave (or slaves) ranging anywhere from 'keeping a family unit together that they'd known since childhood' to 'I'm keeping them off the very dangerous streets of the Puddles in Absalom. They get food, lodging, and the chance to keep busy during the day' to 'Cheliax is too dangerous for these people and I needed to get them out, but I can't just release them in a strange place without getting them proper training so they can have happy productive lives of their own'.

Running them more as a 'weregild thrall' or a Roman slave (where they could own property/coin/etc) would also add a level to them as well. Depending on the fee that was paid for them, such an owner might even be persuaded by logical intelligent discourse by say, a member of the Edge or the Crusade to stop the practice.

NOTE: This is NOT a faction card credit-farming offer.

[Dave Setty]

Jane "The Knife" wrote:

Dave Setty wrote:

Jane "The Knife" wrote:

I don't like argument... So I tend to avoid them.

Normally, I'm not one for arguments either. It's just that the "roleplaying opportunities" I've endured over this subject have had me at the edge of quitting PFS more than once.

And you reactions to my in character posts drove me off the board. And almost caused me to put you into my Ignore filter

I'm sorry.

In particular, I apologize for getting aggressive with you when I was angry over stuff that had nothing to do with you.

[Liz Courts]

*offers cookies*
If you find yourself getting angry, please step away from the keyboard. Posting angry doesn't help the discussion or the community.