Slavery [My player's stay out !]
- Thread starter Trainz
- Start date
Rome gave peace, order and laws to much of the world for hundreds of years - its fall was much worse for its inhabitants than its continuation had been. A society can have evil elements without being evil per se IMO - in the 550 AD Codex of Justinian it's recognised that slavery is evil (un-Christian) but a universal fact, so what can you do...
It's easy to classify rulers as evil (Caligula, Tamerlaine) but I don't really think any historical state can be classified as evil over very long periods of time - maybe the Aztecs. Stalinist Russia was certainly evil. Was Brezhnevite Russia evil? It wasn't a nice place, it would very much have liked to conquer the West and create a universal communist totalitarian state, but I don't really see it as Evil in D&D terms - LN(E) is probably closest.
It's easy to classify rulers as evil (Caligula, Tamerlaine) but I don't really think any historical state can be classified as evil over very long periods of time - maybe the Aztecs. Stalinist Russia was certainly evil. Was Brezhnevite Russia evil? It wasn't a nice place, it would very much have liked to conquer the West and create a universal communist totalitarian state, but I don't really see it as Evil in D&D terms - LN(E) is probably closest.
MaxKaladin said:
The idea that the Celts were a bunch of happy-clappy peace & love hippy types is what really bugs me. I don't know why people think they were better or worse than any other tribe (the rival Germanic or Latinate peoples, say). They were good warriors, albeit not so well organised, and produced nice artwork and a strong oral tradition. They had slavery just as the Romans did, just as the Germans did also. Indeed slavery lasted much longer in Celtic areas such as Ireland, Wales and Scotland than in Normanised England which abandoned it at the start of the 12th century - the rest of the British Isles had it until circa the 15th. The Norman feudal system ended the earlier tribal slave-system of the Celts & Saxons.
Kichwas
Half-breed
This makes it lawful. Which is not the same as good or evil.S'mon said:
Frankly by DnD standards nearly every society on earth -even modern ones- will come out as evil. At best there are a few native american villages (I've got a list of one in my mind that had the right kind of society) or pacific islanders that might show up as good. Possibly the odd african tribe (I think pigmies). No major society will pass the test, nor will any society with any large amount of contact with outside groups.
This is simply a problem in how DnD defines the alignments. If you read out what they say, and apply it to history -almost everybody fails.
One should note that any statement that slavery is un-Christian is in direct conflict to the words of Jesus himself, unless sections of the Bible are to be seen as forgeries (a belief I hold with some sections that seem suspiscious, but not these one as yet). Unless someone can find me a condemnation of the practice, all I find is commentary on how slaves should behave. One could possibly extract it from the do unto others statement though -which is probably where modern morality justified itself to the religious community during the transition in moral thinking. I certainly would like to see it that way, though I find counter evidence as well.
Last edited:
LuYangShih
First Post
I would say most Human civilizations have been evil, yes. As for "acceptable realistic settings", define realistic. If you mean a model of medieval society in our own world, yes, that is very hard (if not impossible) from a D&D standpoint. And that is not majorly because of the alignment issues, though that would contribute to the difficulties.
As for the religious commentary, I would add my thoughts, but this seems a good thread, and rules are rules.
As for the religious commentary, I would add my thoughts, but this seems a good thread, and rules are rules.
Trainz
Explorer
Yeah, please avoid religious debates. I like your insight on slavery Arcady, and I agree, but throwing holy gasoline on the religious fire will only get my thread closed. I do want your insight though, you're doing a great job.
NOW...
After all is said and done, I feel that it is possible to have a neutral society with slavery in D&D. Even if by regular standards slavery is evil, D&D would allow such a thing, if only because there is examples of non-evil slavery in fantasy litterature and movies. In such a context, slavery is only a state, and the way it is applied defines if it is evil, neutral, or even in smoe rare case, good.
WYSIWYG !
NOW...
After all is said and done, I feel that it is possible to have a neutral society with slavery in D&D. Even if by regular standards slavery is evil, D&D would allow such a thing, if only because there is examples of non-evil slavery in fantasy litterature and movies. In such a context, slavery is only a state, and the way it is applied defines if it is evil, neutral, or even in smoe rare case, good.
WYSIWYG !
Last edited:
Wombat
First Post
Rome extends political franchise and involvement to non-Romans -- generally considered a "Good" act.
Romans had gladiatoral games, evil; Rome ban direction human sacrifice, good.
Rome has lots of laws, Lawful, but has a tiny bureaucracy, Neutral.
Rome expects loyalty to state, Lawful
These (and many, many others) are labels we can apply all day. But let us consider this -- could Rome have been considered Evil by any prevailing standards of its time and place? No. If anything, they were flaming liberals just for extending political franchise. And many of the so-called "germanic" tribes wanted to get into Rome and become Romans because they saw it as a far better way of life.
So here is the conundrum: by what Moral Absolutes are we to judge any historical culture? And are to expect any culture prior to our own to match the standards of our society?
Slavery being "Evil" is a pretty modern notion; in 1800 you would have found a fair minority that would have agreed with you, but only a minority; in 1700 that number was far smaller, almost negligible; in 1600, nearly nonexistent.
Human sacrifice? Many cultures at one point or another thought it was absolutely necessary.
What standards that we accept at this very moment will be labelled as Evil in 200+ years? Is there any way we can abide by the standards of that future time?
The alignment system does not work for the RealWorld (tm). Don't even try to apply it. Keep it where it belongs, in pure fantasy books.
Yes, I realize I made most of these points before, but I think some of them were missed
Romans had gladiatoral games, evil; Rome ban direction human sacrifice, good.
Rome has lots of laws, Lawful, but has a tiny bureaucracy, Neutral.
Rome expects loyalty to state, Lawful
These (and many, many others) are labels we can apply all day. But let us consider this -- could Rome have been considered Evil by any prevailing standards of its time and place? No. If anything, they were flaming liberals just for extending political franchise. And many of the so-called "germanic" tribes wanted to get into Rome and become Romans because they saw it as a far better way of life.
So here is the conundrum: by what Moral Absolutes are we to judge any historical culture? And are to expect any culture prior to our own to match the standards of our society?
Slavery being "Evil" is a pretty modern notion; in 1800 you would have found a fair minority that would have agreed with you, but only a minority; in 1700 that number was far smaller, almost negligible; in 1600, nearly nonexistent.
Human sacrifice? Many cultures at one point or another thought it was absolutely necessary.
What standards that we accept at this very moment will be labelled as Evil in 200+ years? Is there any way we can abide by the standards of that future time?
The alignment system does not work for the RealWorld (tm). Don't even try to apply it. Keep it where it belongs, in pure fantasy books.
Yes, I realize I made most of these points before, but I think some of them were missed
Wombat said:
1. Breast implants (at least, will be regarded as similar to Chinese foot-binding as a weird mutilation fetish)
2. The BBC license fee (in the UK, if you want to own a TV you have to pay the BBC over £100/year).
Vivisection of chimpanzees & gorillas & battery farming of birds & mammals are likely also to be regarded as evil - many think so now. There are lots of other things that might or might not be, from capital punishment to meat-eating.
LuYangShih said:
Well, I agree that the way the rules define good and evil, they're probably on your side in this assessment. However, no damage would be done to the game mechanics at all if we defined good and evil in a way that was more culturally relativistic in a particular campaign. Certainly, that's the basis on which I've proceeded. I couldn't tolerate D&D if the mechanics required that I conflate the ideas of modernity and goodness. If I were required to interpret "good" in the politically correct modern liberal fashion some D&D books seem to demand (and I'm thinking about the FR setting in particular here), I wouldn't play the game at all. It's enough just to tolerate the mechanic.
megamania
Hero
In Darksun campaign world Slavery is extremely common. I used the character's alignments to answer these questions (vs the cirt / society general alignment).
Some justify slavery since the person will die living off of the streets.
Others justify it as it allows for shelter, food and some comforts that a "average" person would not.
Some justified it as they have an issue with it, they'll escape.
Think about how the slaves are treated by owners, by onlookers and what the puropse of the slave is. Manual labor, warfare, sex or just to have as a sign of money.
In many ways, we are all slaves. We have free choice but is there a true choice in " I'll go on vacation rather than pay my expensive taxes" I didn't think so.
Some justify slavery since the person will die living off of the streets.
Others justify it as it allows for shelter, food and some comforts that a "average" person would not.
Some justified it as they have an issue with it, they'll escape.
Think about how the slaves are treated by owners, by onlookers and what the puropse of the slave is. Manual labor, warfare, sex or just to have as a sign of money.
In many ways, we are all slaves. We have free choice but is there a true choice in " I'll go on vacation rather than pay my expensive taxes" I didn't think so.
