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

[Darkness]

Wwcd

What would Conan do?

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I didn't say it has to be all or nothing. I said that you need to evaluate the big picture. What's the implication of a killing a few dozen slavers and freeing their slaves? It doesn't sound like these slavers are so isolated their their deaths and the freedom of their slaves will be ignored. If the PCs kill these slavers, will they (and the slaves they freed) wind up being hunded down by either the authorities or a powerful crime sydicate?

It doesn't sound to me like they'll be able to just free the slaves and walk away from the situation and live happily ever after.

So? Doing the right thing isn't conditional on knowing you'll be able to get away with it.

These are (apparently) rootless adventurers. Assuming they're even recognizable, they can just cross the border (to where slavery is illegal) and just be more selective about when and where they return to this country.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

What would Conan do?

Stick a broadsword through the chest of the high priest, steal the gem out of the statue's eye, and sleep with the queen, duh!

 

[John Morrow]

So? Doing the right thing isn't conditional on knowing you'll be able to get away with it.

It is conditional on knowing that you are actually doing the right thing, which is all about implications.

These are (apparently) rootless adventurers. Assuming they're even recognizable, they can just cross the border (to where slavery is illegal) and just be more selective about when and where they return to this country.

The examples suggest that they are not rootless adventerers but, instead, have ties to various governments and groups in the setting. It also sounds as if they cross the border and the city with slavery suspects that their actions were sanctioned by the city without slavery that it could start a war or at least other problems.

 

[FCWesel]

Well, if there are suddenly 28 extra guys there, they might have even less to do with the current situation of that camp. Why not let the Diamondback do his thing, let the 40 dwindle down to its proper number and THEN move on the camp?

During that time they could head to that Paladin's realm and ask him for his help. Heck, the realm might not be able to go to war, but they might be able to offer them asistance; magical or mundane or military.

As a side thing. By "moral fantasy storytelling" methods, one huge theme is that evil always feeds upon evil. Can the heroes spin it to one evil group that "that slaver camp slaughter" was another evil guy's going and not thier own?

Whatever the end, you have a interesting dilema. Keep us informed.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

It is conditional on knowing that you are actually doing the right thing, which is all about implications.

Poppycock. We're not talking about a game of chess here -- thinking things out 10 steps into the future means that, at this moment, preventable evil is going on with the players' permission.

The examples suggest that they are not rootless adventerers but, instead, have ties to various governments and groups in the setting. It also sounds as if they cross the border and the city with slavery suspects that their actions were sanctioned by the city without slavery that it could start a war or at least other problems.

Unless they're extremely reckless, I doubt the slaver nation would simply leap to that conclusion. And even if they did, why is going to war with them a bad thing? The status quo there needs to be overthrown, and it will almost certainly require force to do so at some point.

But in a world with Commune spells, the odds of a nation going to war without figuring out who's responsible for the raid -- assuming that the raid is significant enough to go to war over -- are pretty small. The adventurers are more likely to have to deal with assassins paid with slaver money coming after them, which is all in a day's work, sort of Evil's way of saying "job well done, heroes."

 

[Kemrain]

What this all comes down to is To Kill or Not to Kill. We aren't a ligitimate government, so we aren't executing the convicted, we're planning to murder human beings. These human beings have done terrible things, and many would agree that they deserve death for their sins against their fellows. Speaking as my character, I am among those who would see them killed. However, as I have the morality of an Angel to live up to, which I agreed willingly to do, killing them is no longer an act I can perform without pause. Yes, some of them have earned death for their crimes and hell after that, but we do not and cannot truely know who among them is this guilty.

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. Their leaders are certanly Guilty, but those who enjoy their cruelty must go as well. We'll subdue the guards we captured, if they aren't among the Guilty, and get to killing those we've discovered were the worst after we free the slaves. If slavers die in the process of freeing the slaves, in combat, so be it. The slaves should be able to finger other slavers for death, but as they're children we'll have to take their words with a grain of salt.

For covering our trail, and pointing the blame on others, nothing beats eyewitness reports of demons. My Change Shape ability will let me look the part, and anyone we leave alive will flee to the city with the names of 'those who sent us' on their tongues. If it's decided that's an unwise decision, I can look like somebody else so the blame passes onto people who don't exist.

If we lose the element of suprise and stealth fails us, burning their buildings to the ground would, at least, delay their efforts in restoring their business, and allow us confusion under which to escape. We hope to steal a wagon or two for transporting the children north to Grensha, which we'll need to do very quickly, to avoid being tracked. Getting in contact with friends in Grensha might allow us to be met part way with supplies, and it could allow us to leave the children with them.

We have a plan of action, and intend to set up reconnaissance for at least 24 hours before we strike, unless we wander into the perfect opportunity. We have very little magic, but one thing we do have on our side is the ability to communicate in real time with someone in a safe location who's using a powerful scrying tool. With this, we should be able to defeat their superior knowledge of the terrain and layout, and strike them wherethey're least expecting it.

All this said, we are still desperately trying to come up with a better way of dealing with the situation. Killing an evil man is evil, but it's sometimes the least evil choice you have. We speak in terms of the DnD alignment system, but we're not using it as written. Detect evil detects the Evil subtype and unholy objects, not wicked men. We won't truely know if we're killing people who deserve it unless we witness their cruelty, and if that happens something has gone horribly wrong. We're comitted to freeing the slaves and making sure these slavers don't hurt anyone anymore, we just wish there was a way to accomplish this that didn't rely on evil means.

- Kemrain the Repentant [Evil].

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I'm confused as to how there can be non-wicked slavers. Are there non-wicked drug pushers as well? Non-wicked pimps? Non-wicked executioners?

You don't accidentally slip and enslave someone. This isn't something you can blame on a genetic defect or bad brain chemistry.

If we were talking about someone making budget allocations we disagree with, we can argue that's a gray area. But slavery? "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. The slavers in camp, down to the quartermaster and hypothetical non-slave stablemaster are all partners in this evil -- they're accessories before and after the fact, in modern terms.

And angelic morality apparently means something different to different people. To me, angels are scary Old Testament alien beings with a hard edge and a lack of tolerance for gray areas. The angels I think of would pull out a flaming sword and send the slavers off to meet judgement post-haste. Angels are more fire and brimstone and less Alan Alda, in other words.

 

[RandomUsernamehmimo71]

Add an example

I'd argue, that Yes, there are non-wicked slavers.

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.

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.

Even those people who /capture/ slaves aren't necessarily evil by any means. Keep in mind, capturing slaves is Legal, and morally accepted in their country.
In their minds, it's an extension of Vigenantee-ism. Escape slaves are trying to get away, which is Evil of THEM! (at least as far as the slavers are concerned) (Theft of property)

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.


That said, I doubt that you would argue that all of the people living in a house/farm with Slavers are necessarily evil.
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.

Could Jacob be a better person, if he were to stand up, and leave the job because they're capturing slaves? Sure. But he needs a job, and what they're doing isn't hurting him.
Is he a bad person? Debatable. Is he so wicked he deserves to die? Most certainly not.

But Enworld has had a lot of ethics threads already. We don't necessarily need another one

Colin "Sliding Scale" Davis

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

And regarding the party not being a legitimate government, these slaves don't have a legitimate government to turn to. Since you've already decided that slavery is wrong, even if it's legal, then you are choosing not to recognize the government as a legitimate authority. I'd agree with this -- a legitimate authority has to make its citizens' welfare a priority, if for no other reason but to keep the nation alive.

In the absence of a legitimate authority the slaves can turn to for succor, there's you.

If you don't free them, who will? If you decide not to help these people because you can't help all the slaves, you're leaving them to a life (and probably a short and horrible one) of slavery.

In the absence of a just and legal authority that would put these slavers to death, it's incumbent on you to do it. It's not murder, it's execution.