Slavery

[BigJ]

From the rules of Sshamath :

6). Slavery works differently in Sshamath relative to the rest of the underdark. Slaves are considered property but it is frowned upon to starve or casually sacrifice them, unless they are rebellious. Individuals who are not of a monster-race cannot be enslaved. Instead they may become indebted servants, whose contracts may be sold as if property, yet who are not property themselves.

RP of slavery in Sshamath is possible, albeit different from the rest of the Underdark. Remember this is STILL A PG 13 server, so like it says no sacrifices or other such stuff, but instead punishment of your slave in smaller measures.

Also whilst only non-arcane casting monster races can be ENslaved and become slaves, any race / PC can sign a contract to become an indebted servant. This still requires co-operation from both parties and an RP out if needed (Ie, sell-on contract).

The reason I mention this is some of the best RP I've witnessed in the UD has been by slave/indepted RP'ers. Especially by grymhild and his tanarukk that Barbaccas use to call Two-brains, who was owned by Schezelle for a while but then she got IC'y fed up with her so did an impromptu auction in the marketplace to get rid, a Dev'lin bought him I think?

Anyway, just wanted to highlight this as an RP avenue.

BigJ

[Glowfire]

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=45816

Slavery
Slavery is not allowed among PCs. This has in the past led to RP that is outside the PG-13 rating of the server and as such has been banned.

Maybe there is a conflict of rules in this?

I don't mean to bring on a rule battle but I recalled seeing that ruling.

[Tsidkenu]

As the player involved in the aforementioned RP, I have received a metaphorical rap on the knuckles from the DMs for engendering slave-master RP before so I can confirm it is heavily frowned upon by staff even when being undertaken by two considerate and consenting parties.

And given how easily it is to cross the blurry PG13 boundary I both agree and support the current rule as it stands although I also agree it is rather detrimental to certain aspects of UD 'culture' and 'immersion'.

I believe the old version of the rule mentioned 'Indentured servitude' which is basically the same as slavery (with more of a nuance on a 'debt' to be repaid rather than forced or violent servitude). I do believe this has been removed from the rule and all forms of slavery/indentured servitude RP has been completely banned now.

[BigJ]

As the player involved in the aforementioned RP, I have received a metaphorical rap on the knuckles from the DMs for engendering slave-master RP before so I can confirm it is heavily frowned upon by staff even when being undertaken by two considerate and consenting parties.

And given how easily it is to cross the blurry PG13 boundary I both agree and support the current rule as it stands although I also agree it is rather detrimental to certain aspects of UD 'culture' and 'immersion'.

I believe the old version of the rule mentioned 'Indentured servitude' which is basically the same as slavery (with more of a nuance on a 'debt' to be repaid rather than forced or violent servitude). I do believe this has been removed from the rule and all forms of slavery/indentured servitude RP has been completely banned now.

Wow, from what I saw of you two it was just a verbally RP'd representation of the master/servant relationship, I never saw you do anything more than that.

Guess some staff can't tell the difference between 'slave' and 'indentured servant' (there is one) but regardless they really should update server rules / Sshamath rules / Sshamath lore, rather than just a couple of lines in DM Rulings. Btw I fully agree with upholding the PG13, I just never saw anything that breached it.

Man i was just getting into a grove too but with this and everyone sitting around a round table in equality I think might play some good guys on the surface, it just seems to 'nice' in the UD. It perhaps does explain though why I haven't seen many of the 'old-pro' drow players around much.

Hmm, on that note if we are not going to have a lore appropriate drow city then maybe have the Eilistraeens stage a coup and take over? I mean this seriously, it will help stay within the PG 13 and DM's can play the more evil drow as protagonists against the city. Just something to think about.

BigJ

[DM Hera]

I do not think drow need slavery played by players against players to show the evil or darkness. I know the statement is odd but bare with me. I have no problem with a house saying it owns slaves. That is lore. That is the setting. That is not against PG-13. A drow house may comment their opinions about the slaves and their view of their slaves. "I wish we had goblins instead of those slime things."

What can not be allowed is a slave master relation where both sides are players. This is just to protect everyone.


I also like to stress the city of dark weavings is very forward on the slave issue. A number of usual races they inslave can't be owned by citizenry. Humans elves and dwarves. I also suspect this has to do with economics. That the city discovers it's cheeper to pay a wage then to feed clothe and shelter a slave. The very fact that drow break down intelligent life to economic value is very dark and twisted when you think about it. What else do they apply life and economics too?


Of the grand scheme of things. Everyone knows there are slaves. They are in the game. Though most of all they are seen and not heard. That is how drow like them.

[JCVD1]

The problem with that stupid rule is stupid players.

The DM team claim that Slave RP leads to ERP and rape RP.

The problem is NOT slave RP.

The problem is players unable to play their character with the consequances of their choices(slaves), and other players unable to follow the same rule we all have to follow. (no ERP rape.)

Saying that rule is in place to protect everyone is just not true. IT's a rule that acts like a 10 miles larde shield to protect a halfling from a pebble.

Slavery RP for evil is to Orphanage RP for goodies: We know they exist no need to make event, rp or story out of it, right?

Slavery being not allowed hinders only one side of the RP spectrum. Thayans unable to have their gladiators, Darkhold their slave markets, Drow allowed to be drow.

[Empoweredfan]

I'll throw in the lore card then. The slave market in sshamath, consists of one tent in the bazaar. Where monster races, generally viewed to have no talent with magic (evidence be damned). It also serves to not alienage different customer groups that visits the city. Besides, in a city of mages, it would make much more sense to use golems.

As for the thayans, which have an embassy within the trade city of Baldur's Gate, I am sure that they don't want to remind people about what they actually do back home.

From an OOC perspective though, it just seem to be another case of what haven't worked before. And considering how quickly servers such as Tales of Amn, Tales of Amn 2, Port of Shadows and Realm of Shadows go down, I think we can assume that too much freedom about what you can do to others might not be the best of options. Mind I speak only from the perspective of having logged in for the first time in over a month, and finding a hundred arrows on the ground, listing every eilistraeean on the server.

[BigJ]

Mind I speak only from the perspective of having logged in for the first time in over a month, and finding a hundred arrows on the ground, listing every eilistraeean on the server.

Ok, firstly whoever did this, if you are reading, you are an idiot. You also broke server rules by bringing OOC info IG.

As for the other stuff you mention EF, not really relevant. The fate of other servers doesn't reflect some notion slavery rp kills a server, they may have failed for other reasons. Also the other popular server for nwn2 is PG-18, and the most popular server for nwn1 is PG-18. I am not saying BG should be PG18 before anyone jumps on me, just highlighting its a pointless comparison.

As for playing the lore card, the lore is there are slaves in Sshamath and, in order not to alienate different customer groups, visitors are allowed to bring slaves of ANY RACE, not just monster races. Of course if a human slave can cast arcane spells, he is free in the eyes of the law. That's lore.

That aside, I am not campaigning for slavery itself to be allowed between players, but the 'Indentured Servant' clause that was there before at least allowed for some measure of a strict Master/Servant type RP via a contract, without being able to treat the servant as a worthless slave ( 'Content = Teen' rule covers what cannot be done)

That it was edited out whilst the general server rules and rules of sshamath were left unaltered also caused me a little confusion.

I guess the problem is as JCVD1 said, stupid players are always going to cause problems, case in point I refer to my first paragraph.

BigJ

[JCVD1]

.And considering how quickly servers such as Tales of Amn, Tales of Amn 2, Port of Shadows and Realm of Shadows go down, I think we can assume that too much freedom about what you can do to others might not be the best of options.

I played on Tales of Amn. I was a Red wizard.We had 2 player slaves(female ones even!). And they played their roles without complaints or whinning. And in a server where everything went, 18+, no limits. (No raping of slaves! YES oh yes! ITS POSSIBLE.)

That did not turn off the server. Idiots did. The "freedom" you mentioned had nothing to do with a server failing.IT did because the Admins are breaking their own rules about cheating and harrassing people, making an uninteresting update or attempt a custom Leveling system that hardcore PnP players did not like one bit.

There are no aspect of the goodie spectrum RPwise that is restricted, while Evil gets limitations on Enslavement/slavery amongst other things...Assassinations?

[DM Hera]

There are aspects of goodie rp not allowed on this server. Such as we require paladins to give RP outs in pvp, when in truth they are divinely inspired to kill you because of sense evil. =P Its stretching but its a truth. Could you imagine we just let Paladins walking around sense evil all the time?


Anyways.

I do not think we need player slaves to make roleplay believable or make it stronger. I believe slave players are a negative on the server and am pleased not to see them. Note everything i am saying is Player.

[JCVD1]

There are aspects of goodie rp not allowed on this server. Such as we require paladins to give RP outs in pvp, when in truth they are divinely inspired to kill you because of sense evil. =P Its stretching but its a truth. Could you imagine we just let Paladins walking around sense evil all the time?


Anyways.

I do not think we need player slaves to make roleplay believable or make it stronger. I believe slave players are a negative on the server and am pleased not to see them. Note everything i am saying is Player.

You mean the same RP outs evil murderers give to innocent people even if they are inspired to spread blood and evil? The RP out is a universal rule all alignments have to follow.

Negative? I don'T see how. A matter of preference maybe, but that does not mean because you don'T like it, it has to be the case for everyone. Again, no one is forced to play a Slave. It's a choice we should be allowed to take whatever the "Rp preferences' of others. Pretty much the same as I don't like to play elf rogues. No one's forcing me and I don't!

[Empoweredfan]

Well, there is the answer right there. You both sort of made it clear. There will always be idiots.

And I am not attacing any server for playing with slavery. If people wants to play slaves or not, on other servers, they are free to do so to their hearts content. But we have all seen exploitation of trust in an online setting before, haven't we? I can think of a few cases right at the top of my head, which is why I've become so riggid about rules that I think protects players from others and themselves. Peer-pressure is a very powerful thing at times, with the application of a silver tongue.

Until everything goes sour, and there is a lot of OOC drama (and seething anger that lasts for years to come).

As for S'shamath. Yes, slaves can be brought into the city, but they cannot be owned by citizen, or those that live there. Only visitors. It also limmits the sale value of them in the city, as the market is so small. And again. What servants that are available in S'shamath, golems, magical summons, undead servants, ect, ect, mundane slaves would not be the most impressive addition to ones wealth.

And Thayans. . . why not PM the DM team and see if you can arrange a secret slave hunting event for the Thayan faction, and try to smuggle them away? Evil doesn't need to be done against other players all the time. There is a world of NPC's out there.

[BigJ]

Heh, I am getting drawn in again, I hate it when I do this. Just to confirm, the ruling was edited after I had first read it, ages ago. Indentured Servants were allowed, the rules was at some point edited, however no mention of this in server rules (which is really where it should be) and the Rules of Sshamath still state indentured servants are allowed. Hence some confusion. This OOC will help as it wont be some UD discussion that gets lost over time amongst all the surface stuff in another forum, but still the rules need updating.

DM Hera seems a wise soul who is actively DM'ing in the UD, so I will probably just always roll with what he says, on anything. You surfacers can start your own thread if you feel the need

Peer-pressure is a very powerful thing at times, with the application of a silver tongue.

This trumps all on a PG-13 server. As someone who works with kids in RL I have to watch for this and it can be subtle, if kids play here then safeguards need to be in place regardless of lore and logic. I still say Indentured Servant (a contract) is different from slavery, but its not worth the risk if kids are around.

This next bit, I can't help myself, stop reading if you like, but regards lore and logic -

Well, there is the answer right there. You both sort of made it clear. There will always be idiots.

Logic - That's right, an idiot left left a bunch of arrows on the ground naming Eilistraeens. Ergo by your logic, to deal with that idiot lets ban all players from leaving arrows on the ground. Sry, couldn't help it, its just an obvious counter to your statement.

Lore - There is a Drow House in Sshamath that's sole business is to buy and sell slaves.
Lore - 6% of slaves in Sshamath are Human (about 800 or so)
Lore - Slavery is widespread in Sshamath, but residents may hold slaves only from races that the drow consider too primitive to practise wizardry (Ie. Orc, half-orc, tanurukk)
Lore - The College of Enchantment is in charge of the slave market'S' and overseers (as in plural), so it sponsors guard detachments who scour Sshamath inside an out for signs of slave unrest or escapes.

Heh, I'll stop, it not relevant anyway as on a PG-13 you have to set aside lore and logic sometimes. It has been a very useful discussion though, very worthwhile and here to stay for reference in our new OOC discussion forum.

BigJ

[DM Hera]

There are aspects of goodie rp not allowed on this server. Such as we require paladins to give RP outs in pvp, when in truth they are divinely inspired to kill you because of sense evil. =P Its stretching but its a truth. Could you imagine we just let Paladins walking around sense evil all the time?


Anyways.

I do not think we need player slaves to make roleplay believable or make it stronger. I believe slave players are a negative on the server and am pleased not to see them. Note everything i am saying is Player.

You mean the same RP outs evil murderers give to innocent people even if they are inspired to spread blood and evil? The RP out is a universal rule all alignments have to follow.

Negative? I don'T see how. A matter of preference maybe, but that does not mean because you don'T like it, it has to be the case for everyone. Again, no one is forced to play a Slave. It's a choice we should be allowed to take whatever the "Rp preferences' of others. Pretty much the same as I don't like to play elf rogues. No one's forcing me and I don't!

But I can not unsee your rp. I have to see your player to player slavery, and that is the difference in all these topics. Your rp does not exist in a personal bubble. While you dont have to play an Elf Rogue, seeing one is not crossing the line.

However I am hopeful if this is one of the few issues affecting Evil RP we are in good shape!

[Empoweredfan]

Lore - 6% of slaves in Sshamath are Human (about 800 or so)

This I am unaware of. Are you sure that it isn't regarding the citizen of Darkwoods?

Lore - There is a Drow House in Sshamath that's sole business is to buy and sell slaves

Also unaware of. And where would they be buying and selling slaves?

Lore - Slavery is widespread in Sshamath, but residents may hold slaves only from races that the drow consider too primitive to practise wizardry (Ie. Orc, half-orc, tanurukk)
Lore - The College of Enchantment is in charge of the slave market'S' and overseers (as in plural), so it sponsors guard detachments who scour Sshamath inside an out for signs of slave unrest or escapes.

This sort of contradict what lore I've been reading about S'shamath and slavery. Where there is just one tent, and there is only one mention of magic being used (which would be transmutation to shrink them down.)

http://forgottenrealms.wikia.com/wiki/Sshamath

As to my statement, that was just a general example of idiocy that can occure with OOC frustration on a server, where I've come to understand 'don't be a d**k is the prevailing rule of conduct. There is very little that can be done to fix or counter such behaviour, especially after the fact. Also, frustration is not a case of logic. It is a case of directed anger and outlets.

However, my point is this. Slavery roleplay, is in it's nature servitude roleplay. Which is a huge responsibility on both parties to make it work. Now, you might say truthfully, that you know how to do that. How it can be fun for everyone involved. That you have done so successfully before. This might all be true. But can you claim confidence in others to do the same? To respect and protect the fun for other people roleplaying a slave or slaver? A lot will say yes to all of this, but how many would be able to do so truthfully, until one have tried both situations? Slave and Slave master?

And secondly. How would this work at all, if parties didn't want to play that way in the first place?