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

[Kemrain]

9th level, you say... Is it possible to capture and plane-shift the bastards -- say, to the Hells for turnabout fair play?

I'm afraid between the 3 of us there's 1 caster level.

I have some Spell-Like Abilities, but Alter Self, Charm Person, Suggestion, and Detect Good aren't very transportative.

My 'caster level' is only 3 (Suggestion lasts 3 hours) and the save DC is 19, so, while useful I'm afraid that against 40 slavers they're not what we need.

- Kemrain the Half-Demon.

 

[John Morrow]

But I don't want this to be the only action on the table. If they're making a choice to do this, instead of something else, I want them to know the other options that they're not taking.

It sounds like (A) you are using alignment and (B) these particular slavers abuse their slaves. That suggests that at least those involved with the abuse are Evil. The D&D alignment system says that "Good characters and creatures protect innocent life." and does not say that Good characters are pacifists who cannot kill (though certain deities could certainly be pacifists). Clearly, at least some of these slavers aren't innocent and those involved in the cruel abuse of slaves should be Evil in alignment.

If the PCs have the ability to detect alignment, it should be possible to seperate the guilty (Evil) from those who are simply going along as part of their job (Neutral) without waking anyone up. I would argue that if the PCs don't take that extra effort to seperate the guilty from the innocent (i.e., "Good characters and creatures protect innocent life." and "Good characters make personal sacrifices to help others."), then they are being Neutral or even Evil, not Good. On the other hand, if they only single out the Evil for retribution, their actions would be Neutral or even Good, and not Evil, in my opinion.

Mallus, I agree with you, in practice. I just want to make sure they know they have options, so this is a dramatic choice, rather than them feeling railroaded into doing something evil.

I don't think that killing the slavers is Evil if the objectives are (A) to free the other slaves, (B) to make sure they don't buy and abuse slaves in the future, and (C) the slavers being killed are Evil and guilty of abusing slaves. I'd argue that it's only Evil if they don't make an effort to differentiate the alignment of who they are killing or go out of their way to be cruel to those they kill (the whole revenge as a path to the Dark Side thing). Nothing about Good says that you need to wake Evil up, put a weapon in its hand, and let it defend itself.

They want other options. They've been praying to their gods for them. I'm just looking for what to give them

The (now ex-)paladin in the game that I'm running was confronted with an injustice that he wanted to go off and fix that was Evil but relatively minor in the big scheme of things. I had his patron saint give him a vision (three versions of the same vision, actually, as time went on).

The first version involved a lone traveller on a road outside of a city being ambushed by cut-throat bandits. As he watched, his patron saint rode up to the scene--and kept going. As he looked up, his patron saint was tracking a dragon descending upon the city and rode past the cut-throats with his eye on that dragon, which he took down with a single (symbolic arrow). In the meantime, the cut-throats killed the lone traveller and robbed him, leaving the body on the side of the road. The patron saint came back and told him, with a tear in his eye, "No, it never gets any easier."

The second version involved the woman he fell in love with and married. As before, the patron saint rode by and he watched as the cut-throats descended upon her, abused her badly, slit her throat, and left her in the mud to die. The patron saint came back and asked if the paladin could make the same choice. He knew he couldn't, which is when he ceased being a paladin. That was all the player's call.

The third version, the paladin was cast in the role of the warrior saint and was given the choice. Having thought it through and come to terms with his priorities, he left his wife to die to save the city, understanding as before that it's not an easy choice and never will be. The now-liberator (long story) realized that he also couldn't live with himself if he sacrificed thousands to save his wife.

Basically, have their deities paint their choice for them, not only in the short term but also over the long term. Illustrate for them, in their dreams if their deities favor them, what the moral and long-term implications of their actions might be. Do you want to run a game about ending slavery in the realm? If not, what greater purposes lay ahead for the PCs? If they have a greater destiny to live out and slaughtering all of the slavers will distract them from that destiny, then paint out their choice in those terms.

Basically, if slavery is the greatest Evil in your setting, then it makes sense for the PCs to confront it. Don't stop them. If it's not the greatest Evil in the setting and their deities have greater things planned for them, then paint their choice in terms of lesser and greater Evils and make them pick a right to wrong on those terms.

 

[Aliro]

The problem we have here is one repeated many times over in games in which I have been involved: transferring twentieth century morals to a medieval setting. As you mentioned in your post, slavery is legal in this portion of your campaign world. This only leaves the question: Do the slaves have any rights, or are they simply property to be dealt with at the owner’s discretion? Does this include disposing of (read as destroying/killing/otherwise ridding themselves of) property for which they no longer see a use? If the slaves have no rights whatsoever, then no crime has been committed, legally, even if the child was abused. Morally, however, a serious crime has occurred, by our standards. If this is the case, the moral code for the region needs to be adjusted, and the treatment of the slave girl is only one symptom of the disease. Killing off the slavers is like treating a symptom while ignoring the disease. The disease will continue and probably grow worse, given time. Traditionally, slave-owning cultures have degenerated into a state where slaves are property to be dealt with as the owner sees fit. They might not start out that way, but that is where they wind up.

A good-aligned party should investigate whether the slave girl has any rights, and if so, were they ignored. If her rights were trampled upon, there may be legal recourse to punish the wrongdoer(s). If she has no rights, and no crime was committed, it may fall to the group to crusade to bring about changes, either getting rights for slaves or, better yet, getting slavery abolished. They may receive help in this from the surrounding, more enlightened nations where slavery is illegal. The abused slave may serve as a sort of poster-child for this crusade. The abusers may not even realize that what they are doing is morally reprehensible. This may have been learned as acceptable behavior. Even physical and sexual abuse can be reasoned away in such a fashion. It happens in the real world all of the time. It doesn’t make their actions right. It merely allows them to excuse themselves, internally, from any wrong-doing.

Finally, it is not your job as DM to force a resolution upon your group. If they decide to murder this group of folks, force them to deal with the consequences, in alignment and otherwise. This planned course of action is flat out evil, no question about it. Keep in mind the statement, “One may not do evil in order that good may result.” (I forget who said that, but it was one of the Catholic Church fathers from the Middle Ages, I believe.) Committing one evil act in order to stop another evil act does not solve the problem and only allows evil to grow stronger. A few subtle hints from you to your players, in the form of NPCs and such, should serve to head this situation off at the pass. If it does not, stronger action may be required in the form of a magical investigator hounding the PCs from as a result of the first murder (or perhaps thwarted attempt). If nipped in the bud, the violations may be handled with a few atonement spells and some other game-world appropriate consequences. If the group proceeds with this course of action, in spite of your warnings, alignment changes (with appropriate repercussions) and soldiers with strong ropes (and backed by wizards hired by the crown and the slavers) are predicted in your campaign. This is because slavery is considered legal and even taxed by the government. Even challenging the slavers to a fair fight would be illegal and get the PCs into hot water, though it would not be considered an outright evil act, like murder would.

Just a few thoughts. I hope this helps.

--Aliro

 

[Bagpuss]

This could be a whole new direction for the campaign if you want to play it. Basically, lead a slave revolt, like Spartacus and the gladiators aginast Rome.

When you go to free the slaves, have Bella, bring a cart full of weapons, you are going to have to invest somewhat. Kill only those guards you have to in order to free and arm the slaves then head to the hills. If you manage to over come the guard in time to arm the slaves before the alarm is raised it certainly evens the odds a lot since generally there are always considerably less guards than slaves (otherwise you never make a profit). If thier are 40 slavers that could be considered combatants then they should/would be guarding at least 100 slaves (if not 200 or more), if you can get swords/spears into the hands of even half of them, then you will easily win any battle.

(Historical note: Spartacus' revolt began only armed with kitchen ware.)

You then use that force to free more slaves from other camps, etc. While hidding out in the hills (like the Taliban) or a forest (if Robin Hood is more your thing). Eventually you can attempt to overthrow the government.

If you don't want the campaign to go so far in that direction then just lead the slaves to the border of a strong, slave free nation and then never adventure in the slave nation again.

 

[RandomUsernamehmimo71]

John Morrow, Good post, and I certainly appreciate the examples, but we don't use Alignment. It's too much of a cop-out for Moral stuggles for me.

And I agree that it could be a new direction for the campaign.
Sometimes, people need to do things that aren't good at all. If they could find more, it would be an interesting change.

Colin "Quick thoughts" Davis

 

[John Morrow]

If my character was left to her own morality, she'd kill them all in her sleep and feel bad that she might have killed someone who was relitively innocent.

Why doesn't your character Detect Alignment before killing? Or identify only those characters responsible for the abuse for killing?

However, given that her spouce is half angel and firmly Chaotic Good, this isn't a viable solution. It sucks when your conscience is your love.

I would think that the "Chaotic" half of "Chaotic Good" would consider slavery as much of an offense as murder, given that slavery is as much of an offense against the Chaotic part of the alignment as murder is to the Good part of the alignment. Read not only the "Chaotic Good" but also the "Chaotic Neutral" alignment descriptions, as well as the bit on what "Chaos" means.

Freeing the slaves is key. Preventing the slavers from harming other people is key as well. If we can formulate a plan that accomplishes both goals, without resorting to violence, all the better.

If you can free the slaves without killing the slavers, you can do that. Why? Because you only have to free the slaves. What about preventing the slavers from harming other people?

The question you need to ask yourself is whether killing the slavers (or doing anything else to them) will really accomplish that goal. Will killing these slavers really put a dent in the practice of slavery? Will it really improve the fate of the slaves in this realm? If not, then what's really solved by doing anything to these slavers?

It seems like you have a much bigger question in front of you. Are you willing to tackle the practice of slavery in this realm? If you aren't, then what's the point of killing these particular slavers?

In Voushta and it's surrounding lands, slavery is legal. It is heavily taxed, but very loosely regulated. The Voushtans treat their slaves very, very poorly.

It would be difficult to argue that this particular type of chattel slavery is anything but Evil.

Voushta is run by a city council with a figurehead baron (who is a doppleganger-esque shapeshifter, but we can't proove that.) Voushta's true power is in it's criminal organizations, especially one run by a gentleman my character is well aquainted with (though his position on slavers is unknown and probably pro, as it makes lots of money and he isn't a good fellow.) Voushta has recently been in 2 wars, and is still recovering from damage the first sieging army inflicted. They are politically weak, and economically very strong.

If your character really wants to do something about slavery, it sounds like you have two targets far superior to these slavers. The first strategy would be to uncover the doppleganger in such a way that the city council will, at the very least, improve the condition of the slaves (many historical forms of slavery granted slaves substantial rights). That's playing a very political game. The second strategy would be to help Diamondback, if you are on good terms with him, become the most powerful criminal organization in exchange for elminating slavery (that might be a bad bargain, though). The third strategy is a covert war against anyone who supports slavery until the majority of power lies in the hands of those opposed to slavery for one reason or another.

Your only other real option is to ignore slavery and focus on greater evils.

Not freeing the slaves is a bad idea, as Belle will try on her own and she will die. Given that she's family, I'd like to avoid that. Plus, allowing the slaves to remain in captivity would be an evil act, on that weighs heavily on my conscience.

Letting the slaves remain in captivity is only Evil if you have a reasonable chance of doing something positive about it in the big scheme of things. How many thousands of slaves exist in this city? If you think that not freeing these slaves is Evil, then you are pretty much stuck freeing all of the slaves on the same grounds.

The suggestion to use terror tactics to scare the slavers off might work, but it might have the opposite effect- causing them to ally with the other groups and form a guild. Plus, I can't keep up long term terrorist actions, as I have other world-saving things to accomplish. (Ah, the life of an anti-hero.)

If you try to free the slaves and fail, will the other world-saving things that you have to accomplish go undone and will the world be a worse place for it? If so, then you have your reason to not get involved with the slavers.

We can't bring the slavers to be imprisoned, we can't attack them with the law, we can't let them continue to ply their trade... If we can't kill them, what can we do?!

I think you are unnecessarily constraining your options. You most certainly can kill them -- at least the Evil ones. They are the ones most likely to abuse other slaves in the future, anyway. You can attack them with the law by framing them (e.g., Wouldn't it be awful if their taxes--Slavery is "heavily taxed", right?--never made it to the authorities and they were shut down for tax evasion?) or changing the law (e.g., politically manipulating the council or criminal organizations that run thigns). You can also do nothing, on the grounds that you can't do the job right and have more important things to do.

Melissa Corinth, Chaotic Neutral Half-Demon.

Again, you might want to read the description of Chaotic Neutral in the PHB or SRD.

 

[DungeonMaster]

Answer: Chaotic Good

I can guarantee you if I was playing a chaotic good character in that campaign (if it had alignment ) I would likely kill all the slavers. In fact, in real life I'm almost defined by chaotic good as it is and if I knew of slavers down the street, child slavery no less with abuse, I'de probably kill all the slavers. In real life. No joking. I'de be even more inclined if I had the equivalent of 9 hit dice and nearly superpowers.
I'de probably ask Belle to see if she knew of any sympathizers in the group of slavers first and spare those - making it abundantly clear why they were spared.

If this wasn't intended to be a major theme of your campaign your PCs clearly see it as that and hey, there's no better way to get the PCs involved when they're already interested! You basically have a great track for your campaign and a way to get the PCs emotionally involved with the NPCs of your world. Let them lead the revolts, take the government on and challenge the forces that put the laws in place.

 

[John Morrow]

(Historical note: Spartacus' revolt began only armed with kitchen ware.)

(1) Spartacus was also a trained gladiator and possibly (some think) a trained Roman soldier in his past. (2) He had other trained warriors in his ranks.
(3) Ultimately, he lost.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Letting the slaves remain in captivity is only Evil if you have a reasonable chance of doing something positive about it in the big scheme of things.

I disagree. Doing good where you can is what's needed. It doesn't have to be all or nothing, and deciding that it has to be ties your hands and prevents doing what good you can, most of the time. Just because you can't free ALL slaves doesn't mean you shouldn't free THESE slaves.

 

[ender_wiggin]

Here's what I would do, and you can agree or disagree with me:

I spoilered it in case on of your PCs are reading, because it's actually a plan, not an essay on converting modern morals to a medieval setting, like most people here have written...

Spoiler

1) When the PCs get there, the slavers are ready for them, and are prepared to defend themselves. Or rather, they've hired guards who are prepared to defend the slavers (if you have a high-magic world, some of these guards are spellcasters...). Good melee ensues, and you've just satisfied the hack-and-slash players. Now, since you don't want murder, the PCs should be forced to kill a few people in self-defense as they make their escape from a likely alternative of TPK (assuming acceptably intelligent/experienced players).

2) Now, there are social and political repurcussions. The PCs are accused of mass murder (for the ones they killed in self-defense), and they have to either go on trial or evade the law or do whatever they want to do. This can lead to a world of possibilities.

3) They also have to figure out how the slavers found out they were there. Maybe there's someone scrying on them. Again, there are lots of places you can take this.

4) (optional) Maybe have Bella caught and either executed summarily or sold back into slavery, forcing the PCs to re-evaluate their situation. Do they kill the raiders again? Or do they seek another solution.

THe point of this is to have a good time, with a secondary aim of teaching the PCs about how things work in this part of your world.