Indentured servitude & equitable slavery in D&D

[TheAuldGrump]

I would research Roman Empire institutions and customs regarding slavery. I think that's what you would be most interested in. They do change as time went on, but for the most part you have a useful system.

At some points in the late Republic/Early JulioClaudian Empire where there were actually more laws protecting slaves than those protecting freemen. It was assumed that a freeman could protect himself within the laws, while a slave only had those rights granted specifically under the law - so beating a slave to death was against the law, because a slave could not defend himself, while a freeman was free to kick the snot out of you if you tried beating him to make him work harder. Likewise you were not allowed to work a slave to death, but a freeman could up and quit on you if you pushed him too hard.

Both earlier in the Republic, and later in the Empire this was no longer the case. Some of the strictest laws against the abuse of slaves were enacted under Nero - who later reversed course most drastically. Believe it or not he started off with a conscience, but Agrapinna quickly took that out of him.

Athens is also worth looking into for a relatively 'benign' slave state.

The Auld Grump

 

[HeavenShallBurn]

Basically EVERY civilization of the classical period had slavery in one form or another. Its a result of limitations of power source. They had wind, water, and muscle, under those conditions slavery was simply necessary for them to achieve the surpluses and specialization that define a civilization.

Like other posters look for examples in Rome, various Greek city-states especially Athens, Mesopotamia if you can find it. Early China is another place but it can be hard to find decent information on. If you're looking for less conventional systems there was slavery in the pre-Columbian Americas but that information is mostly in academic papers that are more difficult to find. Also the Meso-American and South American forms of slavery were generally far more harsh than what you're looking for and had a tendency to end in sacrifice so it's probably not worth checking out before covering other bases.

 

[frankthedm]

Should slaves be a commodity to be bought and sold in foreign markets?

Slaves are a commodity, though moving slaves to regions with worse treatment of slaves is where slave traders can rack up their evil. Good {leaning] nations that have to tolerate slavery in their borders should try to prevent slaves from leaving their borders since things can only get worse for a slave beyond whatever aegis the state extend to slaves.

 

[Keeper of Secrets]

When I think of slaves in a fantasy setting I think of 1) nations which have been invaded and 2) debtors who have defaulted (imagine if you missed your car payment three months in a row - the bank would have you working as a butler for the bank president).

 

[Phlebas]

I put Indentured slavery into my homebrew as a flavour thing, and had a few discussions with other players first to thrash it out in case a PC fell foul of it. In the end we based on the basic Hammurabi principle that every crime up to and including murder had a price, and you paid off your crime with cash if you had it, or Serfdom if you didn't.
(we also had tattooing of release date onto arms as a sign of serfdom, as it makes for an effective deterrent plus a sign of rank in the underworld....)
In this scenario, you'd be working towards your freedom when you had paid off your debt. we thought it made this form of slavery more morally ambiguous / acceptable, and also gave more options for story-telling based on abuse of the norms. It also made the chances of slave revolt much less as everyone knew they would be free (eventually). It also meant escaped serfs were criminals of some kind so capturing them was slightly less of a moral dilemma. Of course even today this system can be abused eg indenturing for several generations, but since my homebrew is based on a collapsed empire, it was easy to write a fairly liberal set of rules and rights, with the proviso that in the absence of the imperial authority the implementation of those rights will vary (often dramatically) from place to place.

I also have a fairly nasty humano-centric kingdom in my world, where they have all sorts of abuses & slavery for any non-humans / rebels in their territory. that gives me opportunities for robin hood 'free the slaves' adventures and a less ambiguous morale stance

So far it hasn't paid a big place IMC, but Its there if I need it.

 

[The Grumpy Celt]

Slavery with rights usually decays into outright chattle slavery and indenturied servatude decays into share-croppers, or near slavery.

 

[Ambrus]

Since my city-state doesn't have a history of aggressive expansion (i.e. no prisoners of war) then it'd largely limit the system to indentured servitude rather than outright slavery. So what might an indentured servant's yearly service be worth in D&D gold pieces for those who are in the market?

 

[Kahuna Burger]

Since my city-state doesn't have a history of aggressive expansion (i.e. no prisoners of war) then it'd largely limit the system to indentured servitude rather than outright slavery. So what might an indentured servant's yearly service be worth in D&D gold pieces for those who are in the market?

thats a pretty complicated question that depends a lot on your campaign world. And, obviously, on the potential IS's skills. In my example, a top tier gladiator occupied a social niche somewhere between a pro ball player and a champion racehorse - a very serious investment, in other words. A simple unskilled worker, significantly less...

I would work something out from the craft and profession income guidelines, figuring that while the IS no longer has to pay for their own food and lodging, the owner/employer won't have to worry about replacing them unless they die. Maybe an upfront payment of 1/4 of the wages the IS could otherwise reasonably expect to make at their current skill level? 1/8? In either case if the O/E trains the IS in new skills it's all profit over their initial investment.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

Slavery with rights usually decays into outright chattle slavery and indenturied servatude decays into share-croppers, or near slavery.

And righteous crusades usually decay into mercanery raids or wars of expansion, but we don't have to play it that way in our games.

 

[Pagan priest]

In Celtic Brehon law, even a slave had an honor price and a body price. If a king commited a crime against a slave, he was bound by the law to meet the proper price as a fine.

In Israel, all (Israelite) slaves were freed at a certain regular festival. Slaves could be prisoners of war, or they could be folks fallen on hard times who sold themselves for room and board.

Depending on the alignment of the region, it is possible that by law, all slaves have a way to buy themselves free and are protected from the worst abuses. More evil areas might have slaves for life. Then of course there is the gnoll model: a slave is a slave until they become lunch. That would be a chaotic evil take on slavery... as a slave, you have just as many rights as an old boot.

I would hold that even in a lawful evil society, slaves would actually have certain rights since doing so makes for a more productive society.

The big question is whether or not a good society can have organized slavery...