Do Your Characters Engage in Slavery?

[jasamcarl]

This actually has come up in my campaign. The backdrop is kinda gritty, so slavery is an accepted and even essential institution. The players presumed it was evil, which was my fault. I really didn't give them background and implied it was going to be a traditional campaign (told them even). So the assumption I make is that their cultures are repulsed by the practice. It provides decent dramatic tension, while it saves me a bit of world building.

 

[Norfleet]

It entirely depends on how it's treated in the campaign. My characters generally tend towards neutral or evil (because good is dumb), and so would have little or no objection to slavery as a general institution, and would therefore, if beneficial, keep or trade slaves. At the same time, if similarly beneficial to me, I would also free slaves which I encountered. It's not about whether the institution of slavery is good or bad, it's about whether it is beneficial to me and helps to accomplish the mission objectives. If the mission objectives and character advancement benefit from the practice of slavery, then I do so. If freeing slaves is helpful, then I do so.

In general, however, I don't engage in the practice of actually keeping slaves, not because of any silly moralist objections to the matter, but because it's simply not practical to tote around around unwilling servants in a zone where everyone must be able to defend themselves against attackers, and therefore, against anyone trying to hold them against their will. It's not about whether it's good or bad, it's about whether or not it's practical and useful.

 

[David Argall]

no slaves, lots of slaves

Don't think I have ever played a PC slave owner since I almost entirely play CG, and slavery is LE.

Now in some games I have run, there have been quite a few slave owning PCs. One current PC is a professional slaver who recently enslaved a man who tried to blackmail her into some sack time.

 

[Zarthon]

My group was captured and sold into slavery when they where 2nd level, now they kill slaver traders on sight, a couple of times they have sold the slavers as slaves, some sort of ironic justice I think

 

[RigaMortus]

This brings up an interesting question... While I too feel slavery is an "evil" act, what happens when you imprision an enemy and the local authorities "put them to work" as part of their punishement. Would that be considered slavery or part of their prision sentence?

 

[RigaMortus]

some sort of ironic justice I think

ironic EVIL justice

 

[Sixchan]

It would usually depend on what slavery is in the campaign world. If slavery is of the sort where there are strict limits on how you can treat your slaves (i.e. a minimal amount of physical punishment, required to provide an adequate standard of living, manumission at a certain age, etc.), then even good characters would engage in it. I once had a LG character who bought a slave in his late teens who was being ill-treated so that the boy would be his gear-carrier and also look after his mount. He treated him very well, sharing food, and giving him some of the treasure, but the boy was nevertheless his slave, and had to completely obey the character's orders, and couldn't stop working for the character until he was manumitted. I didn't consider this particularly evil.

OTOH, in a situation where slavery is of the like that you can beat your slaves to death, starve them, etc. then that would be a situation where good characters should be doing everything they can to stop it.

 

[largeXgoat]

i have a slave

i have a litle slave its a dog about 6 inches high. sharp little teeth. very anoying, i think my dm gave it to me slyly as a punishment though, and it eats all the food i buy! it usualy goes and bites the heels of things im attacking for .25 points af damage that gets rounded down

i also have another salve that does nothing and i dont care because im perfectly able to pick up my dire flail on my own
i think he just sticks around for the free food (gues rotting monster meet tastes good to kobolds)

 

[S'mon]

Another question: do those of you who think that it's okay to kill the women and children of an evil race also think it's okay to enslave them?

I get the impression that according to modern American 'heroic fantasy' moral values, enslaving people is MUCH worse than killing them. For historical reasons, in American culture there's a much bigger taboo mark against the word 'slavery' than against 'murder'. Imprisonment and forced labour for life are ok as long as you don't call it slavery, though.

I like America, I'm married to an American, but I do think it's a noticeable quirk in American culture, although an understandable one. In the modern world hopefully we all disapprove of both slavery and murder. In a fantasy world (especially of the sword & sorcery ilk) based on pre-modern cultures, slavery is likely to be prevalent in many cultures and not regarded as evil. OTOH murder is likely to always be regarded as a crime, but its definition and its seriousness may well vary by culture.

Of course you can base the culture of your fantasy campaign world on modern American culture if you like, nothing wrong with that (IMO).

(edited for spelling)

 

[Fenes 2]

I don't consider slavery itself an evil act in D&D - and since the leader of one of the biggest slave-owning nations in Faerun, the pharao of Mulhorand, is a paladin I guess at least the FRCS agrees with me on that point.

Most of my PCs would rather be enslaved than killed as well, and in most feudal countries the difference between a slave and a serf is purely semantic.