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

[ThirdWizard]

Basically, what's going on there is that the Slavers got wind that Diamondback (the Crime lord, Above) sent a group of thugs to "Rough up" the slavers, as they haven't been paying protection money.

The slavers are starting to get sick of it, so a bunch of their groups gathered together to resist the team. They fought off the thieves, and are now at the camp the PCs are headed to.

Since the slavers have an enemy, Diamondback, then maybe the PCs can work with him, though he's obviously some kind of mafia figure. He's having problems with them, and they arn't paying up, even going so far as to kill(?) his lackies. Or maybe, they could go through with their plan, free the slaves, then pay Diamondback (from their spoils) to keep the authorities away, since he must have connections if he can actively work against them without reprocussions.

Morally ambiguous? Oh yeah! But, effective and less risky.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

While the specifics of this situation may or not be wicked, A good portion of the United States owned slaves before our own civil war. We had a very large industry of people who bought slaves (mostly Prisoners of war, originally), from Africa, and worked in a multimillion dollar instuestry (at the time, that was huge), to bring them to, and sell them in, the United States.

My family was here before the Declaration of Independence was signed, and I almost certainly have slave-holding ancestors. But they were still wrong.

Even after importation was banned, there were a Lot of people who bought and sold Slaves legally, and had no moral qualms about it. They went to church on Sunday, they worked to help the community.. And oh-yeah.. They had slaves.

It's not a moral issue for them. It's just the way things are.

Is right or wrong defined by what the person committing the acts thinks of them? By that standard, Jeffrey Dahmer was perfectly correct to eat the buttocks of Filipino boys.

Just because slave-holders were OK with it (and I'd assume they would be), that doesn't make it automatically right.

Even those people who /capture/ slaves aren't necessarily evil by any means. Keep in mind, capturing slaves is Legal

Legal and moral have always been two seperate things.

Look, I'm not saying that I agree with that principal, but you can't just apply our own morals to the situation, and decree that they're all inherently evil. It doesn't work that way.

But why? Because they feel good about themselves? In a world with angels and demons, surely there are some absolutes in morality.

As a made-up example, Jacob works as a handyman for the Slaver's farm. He's got a mother back in the city, and he needs some money. Sure, he doesn't approve of what they're doing, but it's legal, most people in Voushta own slaves, and he doesn't think about it too much.
He's just there to fix the wagons when they break.

Jacob chose to work there instead of on another farm. Ordinary people make decisions to not work for people they disagree with every day. Unless he's a slave himself, he's under no compulsion to help the slavers. That he chooses to them puts him in their camp.

Is he so wicked he deserves to die? Most certainly not.

I wouldn't argue "most certainly." I have to irisk Godwin's Law here and ask what we would think of Jacob if he worked in the motor pool of Auschwitz. Can we really argue that doesn't make him evil, even if he was doing something legal and (at least tacitly) accepted?

I don't see the world as a whole in terms of black and white, but sometimes, you find yourself looking at a zebra.

 

[el-remmen]

I think as DM what you need to worry less about the moral implications of what the PCs are goingto do and think about two things:

1) Plausible Circumstances that might change their minds or tactics

and

2) the short and long term physical consrquences of their actions.

As someone who has used slavery as a recurring theme in his campaigns I have had all sort of scenarios dealing with slaves and slavers and the PCs' interactions ith them.

Things to keep in mind:

- Someone's suggestion about an "underground railroad" is excellent. Having an experienced abolitionist explain that freeing the slaves could cause them more hard in the short term could have a very powerful effect. Remember, the penalty for attempting to escape or being caught free without leave was usually severe beating and even hobbling or death. From a certain point of view it could be reasoned that freeing slaves means being responsible for them until they can truly be free of harm.

- Not all slaves will want to be freed. Both fear and conditioning are powerfukl motivators, and a slave might accidentally or intentionally give them up. Who better than a slave to understand the consequences if they are caught revolting? Or knowing that there will be nowhere in this nation that will be safe for them and a trip to free lands could take days, weeks or even months. . . Is it winter? Is it summer? There are logistics for moving a large number of people overland safely, namely food, water and shelter.

- Legal Recourse: A lawful naion with strict slavery laws may have rules about treatment of slaves - i.e. limited rights for living property. They could bring the girl somewhere to file a complaint (make sure someone explains that to them - or havea PC with Knowledge (Law or Local History) makea check to remember that. Of course, that may mean she will have to be returned to slavery, but the slave-master might be punished by fine (i.e she might be awarded to someone else).

- Readiness - If the slavers are preparing for an attack by a crimelord's lackeys they will have guards and watches. Killing them all in their sleep will be very unlikely.

- Organization - Unless the slaves know ahead of time that they are going to be freed (even if they are all cooperative) getting them up and organized and out of there will be a nightmare, and by then could not a servant, loyal slave, or escaped slavery (are they sure there are 40? That is a big number could be 42 or 46 or 39. . ) could get to town and alert the authorities.

Basically, let the PCs do what they want to do and live with the consequesnces - just find and in-game way to remind them that the consequences can run deeper and start even more immediately than they imagine.

Also, if they do accidentally kill an innocent - that is a whole other religious kettle of fish for any pious members of the group.

 

[RandomUsernamehmimo71]

Is right or wrong defined by what the person committing the acts thinks of them? By that standard, Jeffrey Dahmer was perfectly correct to eat the buttocks of Filipino boys.

To simplify things.. We have a difference of opinion. I think that Right and Wrong is defined entirely (or at least mostly) by societal views. You don't.
We both have our own opinions on that one, and I'm no more likely to change you, than you are me We just have a difference of opinion.


ThirdWizard, getting Diamondback into things more is a Good idea.. If they could gain his support, it would be dangerous, but he does have connections. Thanks.

 

[GrayIguana]

So far, the best solution to this situation we have been able to come up with is to capture some ofthe guards and coerce them into telling us who among their ranks is the worst. - Kemrain the Repentant [Evil].

Perform alot of recon. Maybe you (the PCs) find that there is a core group of exceptionally evil slavers who get thier kicks from abusing slaves. The stakes might be raised if you witness more torture by these slavers. It may also be discovered that there is a section of more "moderate" minded owners. If you were to take out the abusers, and leave a message to the others, you may create a situation that doesn't haunt you too long. The exceptionally evil slavers will be removed, and hopefully others will think twice about their abusive standards. You can move on to your other heroic efforts and just check in from time to time.

Just another thought. Would it be that bad to be a wanted fugitive in this country? What hero isn't wanted dead by some group somewhere?

 

[ajanders]

Handling slavers

1. The law is an ass.
Specifically, (in most campaigns) laws are made by people, who can be evil or wrong. Either case might lead them to make evil laws.
In this case, that appears to be true, because the laws have made slavery legal. Obeying this law, therefore, is an evil act.

2. Take your moral relativism and stuff it.
If we can construct a culture where slavery is not "evil to them" , why can we not construct a culture where slavery is "evil to them"? If we cannot condemn the first culture for acting on their beliefs, how can we condemn the second culture?

3. Poetic justice is good.
Sap them in their sleep...or put a strength drain poison in their beer. This sounds like the kind of place that might sell incapacitating agents.
Put them in their own shackles, then sell them at the block. You may need to use a non-local block for this. There'll be a market. Give the ex-slaves the money to start a new life.

4. Survival is also good.
If you mount a night attack on the slavers -- or on any enemy, for that matter -- you're no more evil or dishonorable than the US Army. Arguably, paladins wouldn't join the army, but I find it hard to believe they would refuse to associate with it because it was evil.
And if you attack slavers at all, you're no more evil than the US army of 150 years ago. Or the British navy 250 years ago.
They may not be paladins, but they are neither evil nor dishonorable.

 

[Kemrain]

1. The law is an ass.
Specifically, (in most campaigns) laws are made by people, who can be evil or wrong. Either case might lead them to make evil laws.
In this case, that appears to be true, because the laws have made slavery legal. Obeying this law, therefore, is an evil act.

While I'd see it as a neutral act to live in a society that supports slavery, that's not the point. You have my agreement that stealing a slaver's 'property' isn't unethical.

2. Take your moral relativism and stuff it.
If we can construct a culture where slavery is not "evil to them" , why can we not construct a culture where slavery is "evil to them"? If we cannot condemn the first culture for acting on their beliefs, how can we condemn the second culture?

Moral relativism is part of the campaign, but not to the degree e1ven is describing. He's simply stating that a slaver can be a good person in every other aspect of his life, and not deserve a death sentance.

3. Poetic justice is good.
Sap them in their sleep...or put a strength drain poison in their beer. This sounds like the kind of place that might sell incapacitating agents.
Put them in their own shackles, then sell them at the block. You may need to use a non-local block for this. There'll be a market. Give the ex-slaves the money to start a new life.

This is more evil than barracading the doors and torching the building. This supports slavery, and sends the message that slavery is condonable. How can that be good? Justice doesn't need to be poetic, merely just.

We're trying to find a solution to the problem that is less evil than murdering them, and selling them into slavery is not it. It defeats the purpose of freeing slaves entirely. I do, however, intend to use anything of value I steal from the slavers to make the slaves' lives better. The poison idea is a good one, but it requires I get inside completely undetected, which is gonna be hard. I'm not sure if it will be feasable, but I'm hoping it will be. (I just so happen to have some injested DC 18 2d8/1d8 Wisdom damage poison, eheheh.)

- Kemrain the Soon to be Wanted Criminal.

 

[Doctor Shaft]

If anything, going from some of the other posts, it seems like the most important questions really is "Is the party ready to go through the whole mess of slavery."

It is far less heroic of the party if they simply look at one slavery outpost, say to themselves "Yeah, let's slaughter this one," and then wipe their hands clean as they head off on other adventures. If anything, that shows merely a desire to see things made right at for their benefit, regardless of the far reaching consequences their actions may have after they've killed so many slavers.

Indeed, if the whole thing simply ends with "And so the slavers died and you move on," then I guess it's like any other encounter.

But if their are far-reaching political implications following that... then your party is responsible for seeing that whole mess through. In a sort of lawful way.

 

[Mallus]

Are there non-wicked drug pushers as well?

Depends. Are we counting major beer manufacturers? What about microbreweries?

"Chasing Amy" was wrong (and a bad place to go for morality checks) -- the contractors working on the Death Star for the Empire were choosing to help create a weapon of genocide and thus were evil.

Don't you mean Clerks?

And Chasing Amy is fine place to look for moral answers, if you ask the right questions.

To me, angels are scary Old Testament alien beings with a hard edge and a lack of tolerance for gray areas.

Exactly right. Except replace "gray areas" with "any recognizable form of human morality". Consider the story of Lot, the visiting angel, and the pack of Soddomites...

 

[Mark]

How to Fix a Slavery situation without murder?

I'm not. I'm certainly willing to let the PCs do it this way. That's the game, and that's the part I like. Consequences for actions, yours and the worlds.

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.

Why would they believe that there is only one action on the table? Just present as complete a picture of the world/situation as you can, remind them that you are only their senses and to ask as many additional questions of details as they wish, and be sure they remember that you will also be adjudicating the consequences that come from their decisions. It's the players' province to explore potential solutions, unless you think they really can't handle what you are throwing at them (which I don't think you're saying).