How to Fix a Slavery situation without murder? (Solved!)

[kigmatzomat]

I've only got one question for the DM: What did you expect to happen? Maybe you can get back on track once you know what you wanted.

But to address the issues at hand:
Neighboring kings, even a Paladin-King, have responsibilities. Their first responsibility is to their vassals, then to the world. So if the king won't win he only throws his subjects' lives away. Thus, a Paladin-King will refuse to start open war.

Now a subtle war is a different matter. Maybe you can get support from the Paladin-King for the underground railroad. If it's legal to go slaving abroad in Badonia it's completely legal to go un-slaving abroad in Goodlund. And a Paladin-King will have a large information network that could feed info to these suicidial heroes.

Then turn this incident into a giant PR extravaganza. Look, you've got slavers who abuse children. These people are so bad they have the local mob preparing to wage war. (Sure, it's due to non-payment of protection money but that's not as good a message)

The "Neutral" and "Good" slave-owners (I put it in quotes for those who can't swallow the idea of a good person owning slaves) will be horrified or at least find it utterly distasteful. Properly parlayed into "political capital" it should be able to buy the slaves freedom and set them up with some kind of fund.

The heroes can then seek to expose the ugly side of the slave trade as the medieval investigative reporters of the day. Of course they'll make enemies and get lots of fun combat in self-defense where they can kill or not kill at their whim for the less moral factors. And they'll have the backing of a Baron to ensure the greedy ones will feel like there is compensation involved. Oh, and the looting of the slavers illicit activities.

Let's face it, if every angel that looked at hell decided to attack its evil solo there'd be no angels left. They have to know that you can't fight all evils head on but that an indirect fight is still fighting evil.

 

[RandomUsernamehmimo71]

Snarkiness Mode: On.

Killing people in their sleep is evil?
Reread the definitions of "good" and "evil" in the Core books. Killing people in their sleep isn't evil. Probably not even chaotic. As long as these are slavers, the PCs are A-okay IMO.

Not everything is as simple as D&D would make it seem. Good, Evil, and Chaotic aren't nice clearly defined layers, like D&D would make them seem. Life is Grey. Games can be Grey.

And just becuase something is legal, that doesn't make it right. Insert your favorite real world example here.

Of that, we agree. The question, and the thread, are about the ethics of doing something that many would argue is murder (slitting throats in one's sleep), for your idea of a greater cause (freeing slaves).

You're valuing Slavery as more bad than murder. Or, you're not thinking about it, and just acting.

I'm not understanding the problem here.

Apparently.

Beyond the moral and ethical issues, and the political ones mentioned in the thread, you have the debate over if doing an evil act to stop another evil act is good.
Hell, I just wanted advice on other options, and I'm damn impressed with some of the one's people have come up with.

"If you want a low-magic game, play something else! Stop modifiying D&D! You're forcing a SQUARE PEG in a ROUND HOLE! " -Me

For the record, this assertion sucks. Everything in the world is designed around modifying other things. All music is influenced by all music before it, and so forth.
All D20 is, at it's core, is a "Roll a d20, add a stat mod, add another mod, hit a DC" system. The rest is flavor, and helps to fill it out.
There is nothing about D20/D&D that makes it particularily unsuitable for a low-magic game. You can entirely swap out the Magic system, with one like EOM, and do whatever you want.

Further, just because you don't want mod D&D, doesn't mean other people shouldn't. It's a good system, but everyone can mod things as they see fit. If you think it's too much work, then don't do it.
Yelling that everyone should "play something else!" is just counter-productive.

snarkiness mode: off

 

[RandomUsernamehmimo71]

I've only got one question for the DM: What did you expect to happen? Maybe you can get back on track once you know what you wanted.

To be honest? I wanted them to "deal with the situation". They've known about it for a while, and they're in this territory. Because of things that are happening in the background, I knew Belle would be escaping, and using the road the PCs were on.

I'm not looking for any particular action. If they want to kill them, fine. If not, fine. If they want to kill Belle (the escaped slave), so be it.
I just want them to make a choice, and know that it's a choice they are actively making.

Colin "I'll try to be less of an jerk. Sorry." Davis

 

[Kemrain]

I'd hate to see this thread dissolve into a flame war. I think many of the recent posts have been a little off topic and, while that's ok, they've come off as more than a little hostile, which isn't so good. I want to thank those who've offered advice and assistance, as it's gone a long way towards making me think out the actions of my character and the possible consequences ofthose actions. That said, Game isn't for a few more days, and I think the situation could be looked at some more.

I'd like to apologise for not making positions clear from the beginning. In the game we're playing, characters make statements like "That's evil." and "That's good" all the time, but they're speaking from their hearts, not of an abstract and quantifiable system of morality. Melissa thinks killing the Slavers is a good idea, but also thinks that it's Murder unless she kills them in self-defense. She's willing to do that, but her spouse, the Angel, isn't willing to unless it is truely the most goodly action they can come up with. So far, it still is, but I've realised I need to take care as to how the slaves escape the area, and need to make sure they're cared for once theyre out of my hands. This has become priority number 1, as if we can't bring the children to Grensha safely, freeing them is the same as killing them.

For those who expressed consern for the morals of the Angel in question, I offer this bit of information that, at first, I hadn't thought to include because it's setting material and not directly related to the issue.

Angels follow 2 of the 7 Gods. There are Angels who follow Alerum, the god of Justice and Good, and there are Angels who follow Nomos, god of Progress and Law. Some Angels are very Old Testiment and would kill you for transgressions, but they mostly follow Nomos. Alerum follows a more New Testiment set of values, and would see sinners firgiven and spared before putting them to the the sword. This isn't to say they're pacifists, for once an Angel of Alerum takes up the blade, it will not be lowered until justice is served. The Angel is question is of the Alerum persuasion, and is also only a Half-Angel, prone to human emotions and morality.

Given all of that, I again want to thank the posters to this thread for widening my vision and reminding me of the consequences of my actions. I hope this thread can contnue to offer guidence and suggestions, and the results of the game, for good or ill, can be shared with the community.

- Kemrain the Grateful.

 

[ThirdWizard]

In my Grey Area campaign, the PCs were dealing with weapons dealers for a while instead of slavers. They ended up ruining them financially and severing the ties that they had. In that case, it meant that they couldn't sell their weapons anymore, and it might parallel this situation. Make it so that they can't sell slaves anymore, destroy their credibility, and run them financially. Easier said than done, and it would take longer and be much more involved, but you wouldn't be killing them, and when all is said and done they might sell you the remaining slaves for very little since noone else will buy from them.

Diamondback might be able to help you with this, although he sounds evil from what I gather. The slaves would be enslaved longer, and some might be sold off in the meantime, so it isn't a perfect solution by any means. But, it wouldn't start a war.


I have to add this.

There seems to be more of a semantic difference between killing them in their sleep and forcing them into a fight so you kill them in self defense, assuming they don't have much of a chance in a fight. Mentally, the character will only be fooling themself into thinking the situation is different, which in the end can lead to the same kind of moral conflict as they realise what they've done (if they realise it, depending on the character). One way they're litterally helpless and the other they're figuratively helpless. I'm not passing any judgement on the decision, I'm saying that the characters might still feel guilty for their actions. Consider it a roleplaying opportunity if you do kill them.

 

[VirgilCaine]

Snarkiness Mode: On.

Not everything is as simple as D&D would make it seem. Good, Evil, and Chaotic aren't nice clearly defined layers, like D&D would make them seem. Life is Grey. Games can be Grey.

Good and Evil are simple in [my] D&D--they are given absolute, clear definitions in the core rules.
[Law and Chaos are another matter entirely, but we are talking about Good and Evil primarily here. ]

Of that, we agree. The question, and the thread, are about the ethics of doing something that many would argue is murder (slitting throats in one's sleep), for your idea of a greater cause (freeing slaves).

You're valuing Slavery as more bad than murder. Or, you're not thinking about it, and just acting.

Beyond the moral and ethical issues, and the political ones mentioned in the thread, you have the debate over if doing an evil act to stop another evil act is good.

The definition of murder and killing depends on the victim/target, not the method used.

Slitting throats, murder? Is sneak attack evil? Is a coup de grace evil? Is using a garrote evil? Poison? How are these different from killing someone in their sleep?

 

[Elephant]

You might want to check out the Guardians of the Flame series, by Joel Rosenberg. Besides being a hilarious read, the plot of the first four books or so seems remarkably applicable here.

 

[fusangite]

I'd hate to see this thread dissolve into a flame war.

A good way to avoid that is to specifically respond to the non-hostile suggestions like mine. I have no idea whether my suggestions fit with your world or what I could do to provide further assistance.

I think many of the recent posts have been a little off topic and, while that's ok, they've come off as more than a little hostile, which isn't so good. I want to thank those who've offered advice and assistance, as it's gone a long way towards making me think out the actions of my character and the possible consequences ofthose actions.

Maybe you could give those of us who offered advice a sense of which parts have been useful.

 

[jasper]

Ok grey campaign. Hmm
Short term the con job. Kemrain dons his dark sunglasses and high price suit. “Greetings Slaver 1. I am Kemrain flashes a badge “Slave Health and Welfare Department six. Our bureau has received reports about bad quality slaves being sold by your business we are going have to check it out. Etc” Basically con the slavers into sell the product and get the product across nation borders.
2. Use the haunting suggestion but don’t kill the slavers and con them into releasing the slaves.
Follow some of other suggestions in this thread.

Long term this is the campaign itself.
Set up a “noble” baron who leaves near a border. Set up a rival organization which deals mainly with slave prisoners who you think are evil (criminals murders thugs) but will buy the occasion normal slave to funnel to the baron who is being plague by slave freedom groups from across the way. In fact the baron is letting the slave go and complain to local authorities hopefully you double dip by getting paid by the local government for your loses.
Small raids against rival suppliers. Sorry Lord Jasper that your granary and root cellar burn down at you pen house number 9. I will give you 5 sp to gp for the stock you won’t be able to feed.
Robin Hood the slave caravans keeping the body count low. Let the stock go free but don’t aid them in running, and steal the cash box and guards weapons.

 

[Enkhidu]

Has it occured to the PCs to simply play this one straight?

For a moment, assume that the PCs know why the slaver garrison has increased in number, and that they expect to be in for a heck of a fight. Then, approach the slavers openly (buffed to the gills with long term buffs, but openly), let them know that you know what they are afraid of, and then offer to buy the slaves (at a greatly discounted rate) so that their stock isn't a total loss when they get attacked. Hefty doses of diplomacy (or possibly intimidation) might prove useful here. If the slavers sell the slaves, then scoot before they get attacked and cart the kids off somewhere safer (possibly to get them homes).

Or, if the PCs don't know why the garrison is bigger, then approach them (once again, buffed to the gills and prepped to cast a bunch of short term buffs), let them know that you know what they've been doing to their slaves, and warn them of the consequences if they don't immediately give up the slaves onto your care (either for the above discounted price or for free). At this point, you've given them enough warning that the LG PC shouldn't have a problem with busting into the place in the dead of night, ferrying off the children, and taking whatever actions are necessary to ensure their release and safety (maybe burning down the building and capturing the slavers as they escape the flames, leaving the survivors behind stripped of gear and bound).

Or, if the PCs know about the mob, contact the mob and move up the timetable for their attack to coincide with the PC slave break. This will likely be distatefuil for the LG PC, but the CGs shouldn't have issue with it.