Inb4 "hur hur slavery is evil, muh freedoms" have you included "alternative" slavery in your campaigns?
Besides slavery in the Americas what was slavery like in different eras and how was it viewed? how have you incorporated it into your world?
Playing in a One Piece game currently, slavery is uncommon but still very much alive.
The degenerate mutants of California are largely enslaved by the Neomormon church rebuilding salt lake city.
>how have you incorporated it into your world?
Really depends on the culture, here are a few:
>Goblinoids
All slaves are owned by the state and either work in the military or on public works, once they've served for a sufficient amount of time they are allowed their freedom. Slaves are acquired through military conquest. Most populations are generally kept in place to continue farming/infrastructure maintenance while the occupying force takes over their finances with an installed occupying general that reports to the capital.
>Orcs
Have "community slaves" where they are not owned by a single person but instead used by the tribe as a whole. They are generally pretty badly abused, and "broken" with hard labor after a few years. Skilled fighters are prized for gladiatorial combat, and tribes compete among themselves by having their gladiators beat the shit out of each other.
>Humans
Much closer to the slave trade as it existed in the middle east. Slaves were generally sold by foreigners coming in from the south, a lot of the time the sellers are themselves orcs selling either other orcs or humans.
Also I say broad strokes for races, but I am merely mentioning different country's racial majorities.
Also the most prized of slaves are hill giants, they take to the yolk easy with their generally docile nature (as long as they are placated with food) and are great for heavy labor.
>>44278316
I'm glad you mentioned this OP as most of the time modern fiction just takes the 'man as cattle' approach of slavery which wasn't the default until the alleged Age of Enlightenment.
Well still brutal slavery in the ancient Roman or Greece slaves were (in general) often closer to what you would to be consider endented service today.
>>44278382
Ok thanks for the oc anon
I remember reading that roman slaves were kepted almost as close as a family memeber or friend. teachers, accountants, and physicians were often slaves.
Besides that roman timbit any other info on slavery in other locations like Europe, middle east and Asia more so on the social relationships and less on the manual labor part?
Bumping with more jean
>>44278421
I see, any documentary to recommend?
Jon meme isn't so bad but anything else?
>>44278447
Roman slavery depends, you had urban slaves who looked after the house and then you had those doing the shit jobs, mining being a particularly bad one, or farming also being fairly unpleasant
Not to mention in the later empire gladiators losing a lot of value, especially on rome itself and becoming just meat for the grinder
>>44278316
Depends on the country.
In a lot of places (like Rome for instance) it was a lot more like indentured servitude sometimes; you could buy your way out of slavery by working off debt and stuff like that, and selling yourself into slavery to get OUT of debt wasn't uncommon in many cultures that had loaning systems.
Frequently slaves were treated fairly well compared to what we think of here in the US too; they weren't something everyone had in huge numbers for most of history simply because society wasn't rich enough to support so many individuals keeping so mang slaves; it's basically adding a full grown human being on the list of your financial dependents, one who was literally unable to legally support himself.
Arguably some slaves in certain cultures in history were fairly well-treated, such as gladiators (who were actually better fed then some Roman army legionnaires and got laid a LOT).
But when the Spanish and English got into slaving they did it in incredibly large numbers compared to ancient world cultures because they could afford to support so many people and because the brutal labor they used them for (sugar and cotton and silver mining) caused so many deaths that they basically considered them disposable.
Even the African tribes who SOLD the Spanish their slaves weren't as incredibly callous as the Spaniards and American settlers were; since their slaves oftentimes outnumbered them they dehumanized them to an insane degree.
>>44278316
Quite a bit, really. Slaves are the main workforce and servants. Magical slavery is different, in that people with sorcerous potential are set aside for sacrifices. Like, if you need a big ritual, it's going to burn up a lot of souls - So you want plenty of slaves with potential sorcery in their blood, so they die first.
>>44278447
Slavery in rome was a lot less like slavery than you typically think of it, it was more of a social caste system than an economic one.
>>44278316
I find it really interesting that a lot of slavery's history is forgotten, I just remembered Janissary, who were Christian children from conquered states , who were converted to Islam and enveloped into the Devshirme system ("Collection of Children"). They were also called "slave soldiers", because of how they were captured. The strong were to become Janissaries, while the intelligent would become scientists.
>>44278421
>most of the time modern fiction just takes the 'man as cattle' approach of slavery which wasn't the default until the alleged Age of Enlightenment.
Here's another point; Europeans aren't the only ones that have engaged in slavery - everyone has, and europeans aren't even the worst offenders.
My point being that your point is very euro-centric, in that the 'man as cattle'-approach to slavery was very much the default outside of Europe.
Semitic slavery of europeans is the reason "slav" is etymologically related to "slave", and the arabs practiced castration of their slaves (which was honestly probably for the best, if you for some fucking reason feel that you really need slavery).
>>44278447
A lot of roman slavery was "voluntary", in that extremely poor people sometimes sold themselves into slavery because it was way cozier than being poor. Slaves did have (limited) rights, you weren't allowed to abuse them (too much), and many slaves reached respectable positions within households and families.
And later in America, this might get some shit flung my way, but the vast majority of slaves were actually treated relatively well. I'm not saying it's right (it was wrong on many different levels), just that it was far away from Hollywoodesque constant abuse, at least as the norm.
>>44278537
>But when the Spanish and English got into slaving
Casual reminder that the slave trade was primarily managed by jews, not the Spanish or English.
>>44278643
Well wrong from the slaves point of view. Morals are fluid and change with the times. I don't think you can say people who come of age in a slave holding society can possibly be expected to consider slavery wrong
>>44278537
Yea I'd much rather be a slave in ancient rome, 1800's america, a barbary slave...basically anything but a Caribbean agriculture slave.
Besides the Americas,Roman and Ottoman styles do you people know of others worth looking into?
>>44278447
>>44278537
>>44278643
These are hilariously misleading about what slavery was like in Rome. Yes, an (already) educated/skilled/handsome slave was treated as an asset. The tens of thousands who died in salt mines did not live any kind of life worth living, however. Nor could they be said to have rights.
Also, the indebted usually didn't choose to enter slavery. It was chosen for them.
>>44278700
Well, Athens was famous for having slaves twist rope. One of their exports.
This was done by hand.
What was left of a slave's hands after a few years is best left to history.
>>44278714
This may surprise you anon, but roman history is thousands of years long. Making a general statement isn't a thing you can do unless you want to say "we call em all romans, even when they aren't"
>>44278668
Probably the only reason Western civilisations consider slavery to be morally wrong now is because we can afford to, since we have prime movers and motive power on far grander scales than the ancients could've dreamed. The Greeks certainly knew about steam power (Heron's steam ball, for instance) but they never made the connection to turning it into practical machinery because they didn't have a pressing need for it.
>>44278750
Wage slaves are better for the post industrial economy anyway.
>>44278749
Fair enough. The fact that no one else in this thread specified a time frame is no excuse for my having done so. How about the Republic/Imperial period, during which, to my (admittedly limited) knowledge, slavery didn't change much. At least in terms of what slaves were used for.
>>44278789
Short version; the Roman Empire at any period was fucking big, and how slaves were treated depended on a lot of factors, including who the slave was, who the master was, where they were, what job the slave had, what skills he was expected to know, how wealthy the owner was, what ethnicity the slave was, where the slave was taken, and how he became a slave.
So basically the exact same number of factors determining everything in a person's life ALREADY, plus a few more.
The situation was far less universally incredibly horrible like it was for Spanish Empire slaves working in their South American colonies.
>>44278447
Slavery in muslim societies were a bit like roman slavery . People were kodnapped during raid on enemy territorry and brought from fuck knows where to the slave markets where they were bought by rich families. Then after that they were generally taken good care off and treated as part of the household.
>>44278316
Is she aware that by adapting that pose, she is actually giving a better view of her vagina to an admittedly smaller group of viewers?
>>44278916
A lot of why we consider slavery so horrible in a modern contest is our association with it to Spanish Empire slavery (which was incredibly horrible), but in America it's also about the lack of freedom and ability to vote as well as an inability to better oneself.
Since in the ancient world being free and being able to better oneself were NOT given things for most individuals (even freedom to travel wasn't really anything anyone wanted since most people's livelihoods were related to agriculture), and nobody could vote at ALL in most cases, really it only boiled down to how badly the slave was treated, which was all over the place depending on where and when.
Many places actually had laws against abusing slaves too harshly, as contradictory as it seems to treat someone as property and yet still give them rights.
>>44278916
>and how slaves were treated depended on a lot of factors, including who the slave was, who the master was, where they were, what job the slave had, what skills he was expected to know, how wealthy the owner was, what ethnicity the slave was, where the slave was taken, and how he became a slave.
Not that this is wrong... but, I pointed out in my post that high-value slaves were treated as assets. I was just pointing out that the treatment of said high-value slaves was nothing to judge the system on as they were more the exception then they were the rule.
>>44278962
>Is she aware that by adapting that pose, she is actually giving a better view of her vagina to an admittedly smaller group of viewers?
It's called "being cold".
>>44278316
>how have you incorporated it into your world?
The setting distinguishes between "humans" (the race) and "people" (the state of being).
You become a human from the point of conception, but a person from the point of birth. Humans get the same rights as pets, while person rights are roughly early enlightenment-era, i.e owning of property and freedom of religion are things the sovereigns are fairly cool with.
Slavery, then, is a punishment for "crimes against person-hood", which get punished by stripping someone's "person" status reducing them to simply the status of "human".
The following crimes are punished this way:
+Aggravated assault resulting in permanent loss of limb
+Rape
+Breaking of certain extremely important oaths
+Enslaving free people
Slaves are usually treated as attendants to the person or next of kin they transgressed against (you REALLY don't want that) or become property of the fiefdom the judgement was declared in, usually to be used for the performance of certain tasks.
>>44279040
She looks pretty hot to me.
>>44279040
>You become a human from the point of conception, but a person from the point of birth.
Does that mean abortion is legal or are you a /pol/tard?
>>44278768
Hah, I wasn't going to go there but you may have a point.
Oh right, played in one game where a person could willingly participate in slavery to the state. Basically you went through an evaluation as to what you were good for, and then the state figured out what it needed, and you basically sold yourself into slavery of the state to determine what to do for you for the period of time you pre-determined. It had a certain level of pay which was quite good, and when you completed your time you got paid, the longer you lived as a slave the more you got paid. There were sectors in which you could choose to be assigned based on your evaluation, otherwise just let the state decide and depending on the sector, every certain number of years you could request to be released from your contract or to be transferred or something. If you did request to to be released though you got a severely reduced amount of pay, and if you tried to just leave or run away the punishment was severe, since you are actually a slave.
Slave roles ranged anywhere from street cleaners to construction workers, servants to teachers, etc... the only thing that was not allowed was roles with an expected death rate, so nothing like selling yourself to slavery and ending up a soldier. One of the characters sold herself into an extended contract as a breeder slave, pretty weird but she got a lot of money.
>>44278316
Slavery is featured in a few different forms in the setting I'm currently using.
The Kalessian Empire has a strongly regulated system of slavery. While treatment varies from master to master, slaves are generally treated fairly decently. The best are treated as well as (or in some cases better than) the master's family members, and are professional educators, healers, and artisans. It is not too uncommon for wealthier men to take various slave mistresses, though many of the more religious members of society generally frown upon this. Most commonly, however, slaves live together in plain cells and do manual labor for the upper classes. If a slave owner is found to be especially abusive, however, he is required by law to relinquish permanently his slaves to the State and is not allowed to own slaves again. No Kalessian-born person can be a slave, so all slaves are either imported from other kingdoms' slave markets or from conquered territories. If the child of a slave is born in the Kalessian heartlands (the kingdom of Kalessus proper), that child is not considered a slave, and is entitled special rights as a child, and is considered a free person as an adult. This sometimes leads more unscrupulous slaveowners to temporarily deport their pregnant slaves to the provinces until the child is born, allowing the owner to claim the baby as one of his slaves.
There are no officially labeled slaves in the kingdoms that make up the lands of Corian. However, various kingdoms have a peasant class in place, who, depending on which kingdom or estate you are in, may be treated no better than slaves, or as equals to freemen. The Southlands are similar to Corian in this regard.
con't.
>>44279084
The Middle Kingdom has a tradition of indentured servitude, in which free men or women may pledge themselves completely for a specified amount of time to other free men or women (or nobles) for any number of reasons. Unfortunately this system is not always very heavily regulated and is abused quite regularly by organized crime groups and wealthy moguls. Also complicating things is the fact that parents own their children's rights regarding servitude, and are sometimes compelled to sell their children into slavery either for many years or indefinitely.
Huar Laou and the tribes of the Wild Jungles practice slavery as well. A tribe generally takes slaves from an enemy tribe, either by conquering or straight up stealing them. All slaves initially belong to the tribe's leader, but he may give them as gifts or even sell them to whomever he sees fit. The kingdom of Huar Laou essentially functions as just a much more organized, bigger tribe than the rest in the Jungles, so they, too, participate in this form of slavery. Generally when slaves are captured, they are brought before a council of the king's representatives and appraised. The best ones are given to the Crown and put to work for the government in whatever position best suits them. Often they are military grunts, construction workers, prostitutes in state-run brothels, and so on. The rest of the slaves are sent to State-run slave auctions and sold to the highest bidders.
>>44278316
You should think about the rights of slaves in the given nation, and what purpose slavery is for.
As every one mentioned already, America and Britain treated slaves as property and had them do the most unwanted jobs. But even that isn't the whole picture.
For example, slaves in America could still own property and have money of their own. There were even whole marketplaces that were meant to sell to slaves. Some of the stuff was being bought on behalf of an owner, but not all by far.
Also, try reading the Bible. It's surprising to many that the Bible prescribes exactly how slavery should be conducted. Slaves can only be whipped a set number of times (I believe 41 was the max? having trouble finding that verse), it says that if a slave dies as a result of a beating the slaves master should be punished. There are set terms on slavery, like they can only be held for 6 years and then were automatically emancipated. Slavery isn't hereditary. Slaves could even own other slaves.
Again, think about the purpose of slavery. In some instances, it can be very merciful. For example, slavery as an alternative to the death penalty. There's also debt slavery, (peonage) where people are slaves only long enough to pay off their debts (different than indentured servitude, because an indentured servant has more rights than a slave).
Another example is the Pirate Queen Ching Shih. "Ching Shih's code had special rules for female captives. Standard practice was to release women, but J.L. Turner witnessed differently. Usually the pirates made their most beautiful captives their concubines or wives. If a pirate took a wife he had to be faithful to her. The ones deemed unattractive were released and any remaining were ransomed. Pirates that raped female captives were put to death, but if pirates had consensual sex with captives, the pirate was beheaded and the woman he was with had cannonballs attached to her legs and was chucked off the side of the boat"
>>44279090
Slavery exists in other forms and other kingdoms, but either I haven't fully explored/developed those ideas yet or they are just the same as some of the other places I've listed.
Also, the setting is high/heroic fantasy. If I had to equate the kingdoms/locations to real-world civilizations, I would say that the Kalessian Empire/Kalessus is kind of like a pseudo-Roman empire if the Western Empire had existed into the high middle ages and zealously flew a banner of the god of justice and order.
The kingdoms of Corian are kind of like the British Isles/Scandinavia/Western Europe with extra servings of Celtic paganism and witchcraft. The Southlands are rather similar to central and Northeastern Europe, but also with elements of Scottish culture (e.g. clans, highlanders/lowlanders, and some other things).
The Middle Kingdom is much like early Ming China (surprise surprise), only – among a few other differences – instead of an emperor, they are ruled by an oligarchical council.
Huar Laou is sort of like a hodgepodge of Siam, West Africa, and Aztec Mexico.
And, for reference, Corian is slightly Northeast of the other continent, which is significantly larger than it. As well, ignore the scales on the maps, as they are not accurate.
Slaves are extremely common in my world, because turns out people in a pre-industrial world have a heavy need for labor and being able to justify it based on racial or magical lines is perfect.
The most common race held to slavery are goblins, but nobody really cares because goblins are literally inferior. (normal people roll 3d6 as stats, goblins roll 2d6; the very best of goblin kind is only as good as a slightly talented human) This is because goblins come from the earth itself; formed by the ejaculate of wasted sperm. Sperm is very magical in this setting, though its not magical realm at all, this is just a consequence of that.
Trolls are also commonly slavers. This is because they aren't as stupid and more organized then in most settings, but they cannot handle hot or barren environments due to size and cannot outbreed humans, so they stay back on their own lands most of the time, though many mingle. Most of the big nations are fairly cosmopolitan.
Wizards also created a race of beings that are suited to being their slaves; kobolds. About half the kobolds out there are conjured, and half are born naturally from existing kobolds. Kobolds come in various sizes and shapes, these genetic castes giving them specific uses, but because Wizards are not super common the enslavement of kobolds and kobolds in general are not overly common.
Orcs are another honorable mention. The orcs that integrate with society can either be slaves prized for strength or slavers themselves; but the 'savage' orcs that people have to fight all the time on the wilderness are all religious fanatics, and their religion outlaws slavery (and therefore, lets them hate everyone else. Also interspecies breeding, which also lets them hate everyone else.)
>>44279052
>Does that mean abortion is legal or are you a /pol/tard?
Is it really that hard to believe someone might just make a setting in a way that they believe makes internal sense, rather than trying to push something as arbitrary as pro life/pro choice?
REALLY?It's legally treated as self-harm due to the fact the baby is part and property of the woman and her body. You can do it, but you need a 'witness' to vouch for your sanity as the setting's far from egalitarian.
>>44279051
Oh you.
>>44279052
That was more or less the common believe across the world up until the late 1800's. The church's position was that a man did not receive his soul until his first breath.
"Riding your self flat", ie. the most common form of abortion of the era, was frowned upon, but the church provided neither indulgences for it, nor excommunicated anyone over it, for it wasn't a sin, much less "murder".
>>44279091
>Pirate Queen Ching Shih
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ching_Shih
Horry sheet, why is there no movie about this bitch?
Just reading that makes it sound like some crap Hollywood made up.
>>44279189
>he church's position was that a man did not receive his soul until his first breath.
That is incorrect. Church scholars differed on the matter throughout history. Aquinas even wondered in his writings when human life began and concluded: "I don't know."
Many scholars determined the quickening (the first noticeable movement of the child in the womb) as the beginning of a person's life, but even then there is room for interpretation and argument.
I like how slavery is portrayed in Exalted,
>>44279214
To add to that, the "official" position of the Catholic Church, as long as it has stated an official position on the matter, has always been opposition to abortion.
>>44279214
While some theologians may have debated the subject, it was the most commonly held belief of the time, which is why it comes up in Shakespeare and many other writings. "The unborn child is not condemned for the soul has not been yet breathed into him.", and the like.
The Romans and many of the ancient asiatic cultures held similar views on the subject. Even as far back as Plato's contemporaries, you read of the soul entering the baby through the ephemerial air he first breaths.
Science, revealing the various activities and wonders of the development of unborn children, is really what opened the door to making abortion a real controversy, oddly enough. Before that, you didn't have evidence the child was even alive, until it started kicking.
>>44279260
Catholic canon law, in the Decretum Gratiani, stated that "he is not a murderer who brings about abortion before the soul is in the body." stood until 1875, which is why the church never provided indulgences for it.
Thomas Aquinas, who accepted the Aristotelian theory that a human soul was infused only after 40 days for a male fetus, 90 days for a female, saw abortion of an unsouled fetus as always unethical, but the church didn't hold the act officially a sin until then, and even then, at the time, didn't consider the child to be ensouled at "the moment of conception" as do modern anti-abortion folks.
>>44279308
>>44279266
>>44279260
All of this is a little bit true, a little bit false.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_abortion#Belief_in_delayed_animation
AFAIK in many islamic states the slavery wasnt such a big thig - you could still become a powerfull political player (eg. caliphs advisor, leader of the mameluks etc) as slave and every muslim considered himself to be the slave of god
also - Slavic and Baltic people sold themselves into slavery to pay depts and becoming someones indetured servant was a popular punishment in medieval law
>>44279380
Many "high-ranking" slaves in Islamic cultures were forced to be eunuchs, though, right? So perhaps from an external perspective it wasn't a big deal, but I am sure it was something they often remembered on a personal level. Correct me if I'm wrong. I don't actually know for sure if that was the case.
>>44278316
I've played a short 40k game where we were all serfs/slaves on a chaos ship and had to survive.
It's close the the most gruesome ideas of slavery, where part of the game also consisted in avoiding the berserk space marines who hunted down slaves for sports. We had protection from one of the SM, but that didn't mean the khornate one did care much.
>>44278965
>A lot of why we consider slavery so horrible in a modern contest is our association with it to Spanish Empire slavery (which was incredibly horrible), but in America it's also about the lack of freedom and ability to vote as well as an inability to better oneself.
>Since in the ancient world being free and being able to better oneself were NOT given things for most individuals (even freedom to travel wasn't really anything anyone wanted since most people's livelihoods were related to agriculture), and nobody could vote at ALL in most cases, really it only boiled down to how badly the slave was treated, which was all over the place depending on where and when.
>Many places actually had laws against abusing slaves too harshly, as contradictory as it seems to treat someone as property and yet still give them rights.
you mean like we do with pets? not that contradictory
>>44278421
>Well still brutal slavery in the ancient Roman or Greece slaves were (in general) often closer to what you would to be consider endented service today.
Nope, Rome and Greece, like most of antiquity definitely had chattel slavery apart from a few more civilized exceptions, like Spartan helots, who were more like serfs.
Republican Rome was particularly harsh. Masters had the right to kill and torture their slaves for any reason whether they worked in the mines or were teachers in the city, and a slave's testimony in a court wasn't seen to be reliable UNLESS they had been tortured for the confession. This slowly started to change to a more humane system in the Imperial period, almost a millenium after the founding of Rome. Just because a few slaves were lucky enough to be educated and live cosily in the city, doesn't mean this was the case for the majority of them. Indentured servitude was rare, and the vast majority of slaves were war booty or children born into slavery. Also, the romantic notion of a slave saving money and bying his freedom depended entirely on the good will of the master, slaves had no legally protected right to have any possessions or family.
>>44278643
actually it was very much the hollywood esque abuse. the thing was though, that mostly happened in specific areas where you had a trade good that was perishable if you didn't harvest it, and there wasn't enough easily available labor.
Sugar for instance is one such a crop, expensive and high in demand, but at the time a difficult margin of harvest and manufacture. Slavery of the american kind became profitable only because these trade goods and the need for labor because of the increased demand for them. take away the people buying them and nobody would have filled their vessels with breathing eating and shitting africans.
>>44279260
>>official position
that may be their official position
but its factually wrong.
Catholicism embraced early birth control before contemporary knowledge made a coke crazy pope 180 on the concept.
>>44279380
It's shocking the Muslim countries still had literal slavery in living memory, and only abolished it out of pressure from the civilised world.
Slavery exists in my campaign, in fact, it was one of the reasons a massive war got started.
Contrary to expectation, a Lawful Evil demon/primal god actually denounces slavery, and he's one of the main players as a result, calling in a favor and the promise of loot to call an army to the rebel cause.
Because his philosophy runs off of a (brutal) meritocracy, he hates those who take slaves as lazy bastards and slaves who don't rebel as cowards.
On the other hand, the rebellion didn't begin because the slaves were entitled, in fact, a lot of the miners were mercilessly worked to death. The head of the rebellion, a barbarian, is a former miner.
>>44279630
>even freedom to travel wasn't really anything anyone wanted since
..travel was insanely unsafe. Primarly. Even during the roman period, public security was barely above Afghanistan's during the US occupation.
>>44279967
>had
Mauretania. Most of the United Emirates as well. Bonded labour's still widely practiced in S-E Asia. It's a permanent issue in India, to name a specific country.
>>44279090
>The Middle Kingdom has a tradition of indentured servitude, in which free men or women may pledge themselves completely for a specified amount of time to other free men or women (or nobles) for any number of reasons. Unfortunately this system is not always very heavily regulated and is abused quite regularly by organized crime groups and wealthy moguls. Also complicating things is the fact that parents own their children's rights regarding servitude, and are sometimes compelled to sell their children into slavery either for many years or indefinitely.
Like something from a /d/ slavery thread. I like.
>>44278316
>you will never purchase slave qts with big booties
Why even live?
WE WUZ SLAVS AN SHEEIT
>>44278643
>A lot of roman slavery was "voluntary"
That was made illegal during the Republic, no?
>>44278382
I really like the idea of a physically more powerful race using human slaves in somthing similar to dog fights.
This is oddly on-topic for me.
So, for a good while, I've been working around the idea of a world that is quite literally driven by slavery. Inspired by an old, near-forgotten Miyazaki's work, I've established my world as nearly completely lacking agriculture. "Instead", there exists a strange race of outlandish creatures that buy human slaves in exchange for huge quantities of wheat.
This basically means that any larger, more significant nation/realm/kingdom is almost completely predicated on huge slave trade, since slave-trade is basically the only reliable way to achieve surplus of food necessary for establishing things like infrastructure, dedicated craftsmen or warrior social circles, or to even feed a city of any kind.
Now recently I've started realizing that this whole thing might come across as rather... morally iffy. We are considering creating a simple but potentially commercial game set in this settings, and I've suddenly started wandering if anyone would be even WILLING to play a game where slavery is... just a necessity, really.
>>44280297
I would, but I would also so my moral fiber is rather different to most.
>>44280329
The point of the settings is not to revel in it. I have no intention of actually glorifying the situation. But I don't really intend (at least within the extent of the first smaller work) offer much of an alternative either.
Strictly mechanically, it makes for an interesting economy model (hardly a plausible one, but still... might be fun), which is yet another reason why I don't want to give up on it. But considering just how PC the western cultures are lately, I really wonder if it does not make the project a economical suicide.
>>44280297
i think it would fail because of the reason you gave. it doesn't make any fucking sense at all.
loli sex slaves
>>44279663
Well thing is Roman slavery was a very very complex concept.
Now I'm not saying that all the slaves were treated well, the majority definitely wasn't. I'm just pointing out that their humanity was very universally accepted.
See the notion that Roman slaves were seen as object comes from the fact that Romans categorized the instrument of agriculture as 'speaking instruments' (instrumenta vocalia) that is slaves, 'almost talking instruments' (instrumenta semivocalia), that is cattle, and simple or 'mute tools' (instrumenta muta). The concept of owning slaves wasn't even described as the legal term used for ownership (dominium) it was referred to as dominica potestas similar to the pater familias' patria potestas over the family.
Their graves like the graves of any free man was a sacred site (locus religiosus) as well.
Also slaves could and most definitely had legally protected rights of possession. It was called a Peculium and they were free to manage it however they wanted it. They could even own slaves themselves too called servi vicarii. Also they could even enter into contracts with their master (only as a naturalis obligatio tho).
>>44280381
Slaves in Rome even had more rights than the 'free' women.
>>44280365
Actually, within the context of the lore it does. It sure as fuck does not make less sense than any other fantasy world economy I've seen.
Sure, if we really want to get down to the gritty numbers, the infrastructure necessary for such model to work would be a bit crazy and probably consume all the overheads produced, but then again: in context of the genre, it's not such a grave offender.
The rather stretched plausibility aside, which I REALLY doubt would anyone fucking care about, the real problem is whenever people will be willing to identify and care about cultures whose existence is predicated on slavery or not.
>>44280368
I played in a game with those once.
>>44280359
I wouldn't try to revel in it. I just wouldn't care. Besides, you could run it as a campaign of rebels who will try and overthrow the outlandish beings and bring fertility to the land. That could be a fun campaign for your group. Besides, while living they might have to barter money(which is backed by slaves) for goods to defeat them, which could make for some interesting roleplay moments.
Lots of misconceptions regarding Roman slavery in this thread, like how widely spread the practice of voluntarily entering indentured service was, how often it was legal, and how often it was genuinely voluntary (it wasn't. It was generally coerced).
The idea that slaves were treated better in Rome is silly too. It's all situational. Slaves with useful bureaucratic skills tended to not be punished in a manner that would lessen their value, but the same can't be said for your average slave procured by conquest. A slave put to work in the agricultural, mining, or entertainment sectors could find themselves in a special kind of living hell. Some of the things inflicted on slaves during the height of gladiatorial fashion, purely for entertainment, are horrific and frankly bizarre.
So yeah, there is no magical Roman method to slavery by which people suddenly stop abusing the benefits of having absolute power over other people. The Roman system had little oversight and wasn't particularly concerned with maintaining the good health of its slaves in the first place.
>>44280384
In many cases pretty much yes. Funny thing is the act of setting a slave free was called manumisso (leting out of hand) and it partly comes from the same concept of manus that meant both the husbands power over his wife and the masters power over his slave.
>>44280423
Funny thing is once slaves were not so readily available their treatment was pretty well regulated. I don't mean they lived a cosy life they were simply pretty valuable assets. I think the actual edict was issued by Constantin I that banned wanton abuse or killing of slaves and even had magistrates force owners to sell the slaves they kept abusing.
>>44280386
no, what doesn't make sense is that humans need to sell slaves for grain because they cant make their own food. thats retarded. someone is making the food. the food should be able to be made by the humans. you are basically handing us the idiot ball
>>44280483
What if the humans live on shitty land that isn't arable or productive, Anon?
And the other race of beings is too powerful to simply conquer? But they don't want to conquer the humans because they live on shitty, worthless land, so they just trade them paltry things like food in exchange for cute concubines by the truckload?
>>44280415
The problem is not really in the RPG side of it, where it's up to the GM to do what ever he wants, and the theme of trying to somehow "fix" the rather fucked up world is obviously free for GM's to explore.
The problem is rather with the specific project we are working with, which is a simple strategy game. You don't control a particular group of heroes, you lead a small nation and while you should have the option to actually refuse to participate on the slave market, it will pretty much mean that you will set yourself into an almost unwinnable disadvantage.
>>44280483
>thats retarded
While I won't say that I have complete confidence in the merrits of the lore I've created for my world, I find it rather perplexing that you without hesitation call something retarded without actually knowing a SINGLE THING about it. Since you don't even know the reasoning behind this odd situation, I have no idea how the fuck you can go and immediately dismiss it like this.
>someone is making the food.
Yeah, the outlandish creatures are.
>the food should be able to be made by the humans.
Why? Humans have not been able to produce food in mass quantities (enough to ensure abundance necessary for forming state-like organizations) across many historical periods and locations, for all kind of reasons. Often while there were other cultures capable of doing that.
What drives you to the automatic assumption that people MUST be able to mass produce food just from the fact that somebody entirely different (a LITERALLY DIFFERENT RACE) can?
>>44278316
Slavery, in the very earliest/most primitive instances is what happens when you don't want to kill someone you have every right to kill in your cultural context, or buy someone for some material benefits you have no obligation to provide for free. It's a sensible and humanitarian arrangement on that level, though you are not obliged to see it that way and certainly a slave is not obliged to see it as something to be grateful for - it is a misfortune but whether it is better or worse than death, or poverty, is a matter for debate.
This sort of primitive slavery often involves treating the slaves as inferior but nonetheless integral members of the family/tribe/household. In Soviet textbooks this was called "patriarchal slavery". It's one thing.
The large-scale slavery practiced later on is very different and I'm not sure the American one was even the worst kind. The early Caliphate and its immediate successors had some extreme excesses in this regard too. Like sending a huge amount of black slaves to dig canals in the swamps, Stalin-style, with comparable mortality and massive slave rebellions that had to be put down with extreme bloodshed.
>>44278316
I think I recall something about small southeast Asian tribal societies where the slaves, probably from defeated tribes, outnumbered the free, but the free were hardass highlander warriors so they can usually terrify them into behaving.
>>44280533
>What drives you to the automatic assumption that people MUST be able to mass produce food just from the fact that somebody entirely different (a LITERALLY DIFFERENT RACE) can?
I'll bite. Why can they do that? Does it have something to do with their physiology (are they, in fact, the Wheat themselves, exchanging slaves for their own corpses?!?!?!)? Or do they have some superadvanced technology that humans can't use, or simply won't be allowed to access by any means available?
>>44278484
No but I you can't go wrong with BBC.
>>44280423
The Important thing is just not to copy 12 years a slave.
>>44280528
They could just conquer us and take the people instead of the land
>>44278668
Well, many of them did. I agree that it is unfair to expect someone to do so on average.
I'd like to add that while some things are almost universally considered amoral (killing innocents), others really are much more circumstantial and it is natural for THAT to change with time and unnatural to expect people to act as if they grew up and lived in a completely different world.
>>44280586
>don't realize what post commenter is replying to
>read "you can't go wrong with big black cock"
>realize it's the BBC, the television channel
>will never be able to look at the BBC in the same way
>>44280585
What if (not in your setting I know, but in some other one) the alien species was actually magically potent undead humans (i.e. liches) and the slaves are taken as apprentices and those later become liches too?
>>44280596
Humans run away from you when you try to conquer them, but run towards you when you offer them bread. Dominate smarter, not harder.
>>44280565
Literally Sparta
>>44279403
It really depended om which type of slave you became if you were sent to the harem then yeah but for example in the ottoman empire the government was practically run by slaves and some even married into the royal family and they ofcourse would need their tools
>>44280596
They probably did conquer the humans. Now they "trade" them food in exchange for slaves. It's basically just the Overlords feeding the free range human herd and taking some for personal uses.
>>44280476
That legislation was passed to prevent abuse and arbitary killing of slaves should be an indicator that things were not fine and dandy.
For something a little bit different consider the Anglo-Saxon version of slavery, the lot of the Theow.
A/S slaves were predominantly used in agriculture. They have extremely high labour obligations to thier master,even compared to other forms of bound workers. They would also often have a (very) small amount of land allotted for subsitence farming but most of their time they are working on their masters fields.
As in other cultures, some people did sell themselves into slavery. This was usually during periods of famine or other hardship when the protection and security of service to a master was preferable to starvation.
Slaves could own prperty and buy their freedom but this was of course expensive and rare. Theows were not considered "Oath-Worthy" which meant that thier word carried no legal weight which is a pretty big deal in a society that was obsessed with oaths and contracts. Needless to say this excludes them from a huge swathe of public life.
Their weregild was also a pittance.Thier master would recieve 40 shillings and their family only 40 pence. The weregild of freemen starts at 200 shillings for comparison.
One interesting thing to note is that William II banned slavery in 1102, which is amusing to note when talking to people about the "Norman Yoke".
This ban would also become important about 700 years later as it was the basis of the notion that slavery was confined to the colonies and slaves brought to Britain became freemen automatically.
>>44278316
Owning another human being as property is always wrong. Only Evil aligned characters do it (both in game and IRL), and I suggest you get your head checked if you think "ethical slavery" exists
Slavery wasn't even bad though desu
>>44280690
Only those over 18 can go on 4chan, anon.
>>44280690
What about people who want to be owned?
>>44280719
>>44280704
Only those retarded enough to think you can have slaves AND be a good person seem to post on here it seems... maybe you're the containment board and the rest of the world is the sane ones, not the other way around?
>>44280719
What about people who want to die? Should killing them not count as murder? Are you seriously this mentally stunted?
>>44280647
Yeah, pretty similar. I mean helots were not EXACTLY slaves - they had more personal freedom and could even try to kill Spartans if they dared, they were just collectively in thrall to the Spartan collective because Greeks are funny like that - but the core dynamic is similar.
>>44280727
I've seen people, seditionists no doubt, talk about how owning slaves does not make you evil all over the Internet and even in the real world. The quarantine has failed.
>>44280727
What is "good"?
>>44280727
>What about people who want to die? Should killing them not count as murder? Are you seriously this mentally stunted?
Are you talking about Euthanasia? Does the fact that it's got a whole different name not tip you off? Assisted Suicide?
And you failed to address my question.
What about people who want to be owned?
>>44280773
Those who desire slavery should be killed.
Those who desire death should be enslaved.
>>44280782
Interesting ethos. Validate your beliefs.
>expansive militaristic empire led by a God-King (based on Benin/Timbuktu with a bit of Rome and Egypt mixed into it) keeps slaves en masse to sustain its armies
>even conquered the Anglo-Europe equivalent of the setting because they were running out of people to enslave and the soldiers grew restless
they're not exactly evil or anything, but being forced into agricultural labor for the rest of your life (with the possibility of being sacrificed to the God-King because Sun needs souls badly) isn't pleasant. also, someone might make a good luck out of your head once you're dead.
>>44280790
*good luck charm, obviously -.-
>>44280787
Not that guy, but this way no one gets what they want. Dissatisfaction is the vehicle of progress. Game.
>>44280727
>you must be retarded to thing you can have slaves AND be a good person
Oh so now each and every roman, greek, ameritard and well, most of humanity is bad.
Yup, thanks anon. That view is totally nuanced and refined.
>>44280585
>Does it have something to do with their physiology (are they, in fact, the Wheat themselves, exchanging slaves for their own corpses?!?!?!)?
That is actually a kinda neat idea, but it's more of the latter.
The reality is thatWheat and several other main cultural plants when extinct on the mainland as a result of a biological weapon intended to starve the opponent going really wrong. The "Celestials", who themselves live off the mainland and who were quite literally created to safeguard the worlds largest ecological experiment that could hypothetically feed an entire continent, have access to various modified resistant strains of wheat and grow it en-mass. Unsurprisingly, they are jealously protective of it, and the grain they sell is carefully sterilized beforehead.
As I've said, I can't say I'm exactly confident that it's a brilliant writing, but part of the whole deal is that most of this info is not actually accessible to the players: the nature of the Celestials, the sources of their food, the reasons why they need human slaves - all of these things should be left unresolved for the actual players.
One of the main themes of the world, aside from it's age and the feeling of a very "worn-out, depleted world" is the frustration of an unequal position in which human kind finds themselves.
The whole world is tailored to further expand on those themes. The landscapes are largely derived from central Asia: Kavkaz, regions surrounding the Aral lake, central Iran, as well as eastern Tibet and south Mongolia are the prime sources of inspirations - extensive steppes, high altitude deserts, great, imposing mountain ranges and occasional grasslands or coastal marches are the prime landscapes: Armenian, Turkmenic, Iranian and Tibetian societies are the prime cultural inspirations.
>>44280806
>Not that guy, but this way no one gets what they want. Dissatisfaction is the vehicle of progress. Game.
Is progress better than satisfaction?
>>44280787
Those who desire slavery will make bad slaves; they only seek to escape responsibility. Make them face death, for they are weak and will hinder you.
Those who desire death are broken men. Those who are broken can be molded easily and will do anything, as long as it will give them a new purpose.
>>44280814You don't need to defend dead pedophiles on the internet though, M. Tullius Cicero won't come back from the grave and suck your dick for it.
>tfw you will never be the fuck slave of a hot 30 years old widow
>>44280818
Out of curiosity, are you Russian or are you just saying Kavkaz because it's quicker and easier to remember?
Anyway, that's pretty neat and makes sense, I suppose. So what do they need the humans for?
And what are the humans themselves like - predominantly/completely nomads of various types and development levels?
>>44280818
>As I've said, I can't say I'm exactly confident that it's a brilliant writing
You're right, it's goddamn awful
>>44280839
There's a small population of those who profit from the mass dissatisfaction of those around them, who have attempted to justify the grind of daily toil in service to a master nobody wants or needs as a so-called noble thing. They would say yes.
People with souls and spines, on the other hand, would say that sacrificing a couple modern wonders in favor of watching those on top fall the farthest would be hella worth it.
>>44280684
Roman law had a pretty similar concept of slavery too calledd 'colonatus'. A colonus tho appeared to be free in most aspects, was considered a 'slave to the land' (servis glebae) he was born upon.
>>44280847
You can still defend dead pedophiles on general principle though. It's vital in fact, to making sure your own ethics make sense. Defend whatever you can defend and reject the indefensible.
>>44280875
Well yeah, that is called a serf, a very common condition in too many places to name.
>>44278316
I added slavery in a summer campaign and it actually worked out pretty well.
Just told the group they could get slaves of ANY race, with larger races been more expensive.
no magical realm ensued, instead everyone used their slaves as either mounts or as spies when they entered new settlements.
One of the Minotaur slaves was later the basis for the main tank's Minotaur Fighter
>>44280855
>Out of curiosity, are you Russian or are you just saying Kavkaz because it's quicker and easier to remember?
Not Russian, but slavic and sometimes I completely forget myself.
>So what do they need the humans for?
I'm gonna keep that part of the mystery undisclosed for now.
>And what are the humans themselves like - predominantly/completely nomads of various types and development levels?
Yeah. It's not like agriculture does not exist AT ALL, some smaller societies cultivate things like lentils, vegetables, grow fruit trees, but it's usually just enough for bare survival: absolute majority of societies were nomadic or semi-nomadic. Back before the Celestials appeared, hunters and gatherers were common, but nomadic or semi-nomadic animal herding was probably the most common and efficient subsistence.
Settled and urbanized cultures largely re-appear only after the trade with the Celestials is established. And as you can imagine, they aren't exactly stable.
>>44280856
>You're right, it's goddamn awful
OK.
>>44280847
>>44280847
>Those who desire slavery will make bad slaves; they only seek to escape responsibility. Make them face death, for they are weak and will hinder you.
Assumptive. They could be BETTER slaves because they are enthusiastic and determined.
>Those who desire death are broken men. Those who are broken can be molded easily and will do anything, as long as it will give them a new purpose.
Or they could be driven and determined. Suicide can be viewed as an act of ultimate willpower and, arguably, the only real choice anyone can make.
>>44280872
So the greatest good for the largest people is in firm effect in theory, but in practice the largest good for the greatest people is the reality?
>>44280872
>People with souls and spines, on the other hand, would say that sacrificing a couple modern wonders in favor of watching those on top fall the farthest would be hella worth it.
You are describing what is known as the Russian (or Soviet) mentality, and in the process implying that those cattle have souls and spines, while the great liberal reformers have neither.
>>44280872
Modern wonders like...what? Order? Peace? Medicine and internet?
>>44280924
Yeah.
>>44280924
>peace, order, and medicine are modern wonders
I repeat, you have to be over 18 to use this website.
>>44280924
Peace has never and will never be acheived
>>44280921
>Assumptive. They could be BETTER slaves because they are enthusiastic and determined.
Here's the thing, it really depends on what sort of slaves you're looking for. The eager type would make good eunuchs and other such soft, intellectual servants. Broken men are to be preferred for menial work though.
>>44280921
>Or they could be driven and determined. Suicide can be viewed as an act of ultimate willpower and, arguably, the only real choice anyone can make.
Dostoyevsky detected.
>>44278316
Slavery, like empire, asserts humans have inherent economic value, and responsibility to it.
Both systems also acknowledge that humans exhibit different levels of agency: freemen control their own fate, aristocrats influence others' lives, and slaves are incapable of ruling themselves and need to be cared for.
Capitalism is the opposite of this - especially in transhumanist settings. When everyone is free, no-one has value. When no-one can contribute value, no-one is useful to the market and they'll soon be brushed into the dustbin of history by the AIs and smart contracts running the market.
>>44280954
>When no-one can contribute value, no-one is useful to the market and they'll soon be brushed into the dustbin of history by the AIs and smart contracts running the market.
Then what good is the market?
>>44280964
It is of benefit to the AIs.
>>44280954
>muh transhumanism
tumblr pls leave
>>44280946
>Broken men are to be preferred for menial work though.
But you're still assuming a broken work force is better at menial labour over an enthusiastic one.
>Dostoyevsky detected
Never read it, but I've had a friend who has suicided and another who turned away at the last moment. My relationships with them and the discussions we had have coloured my perception.
That and the fact I feel I could never kill myself because I couldn't commit to something that monumental.
>>44280790
>enslaves people out of boredom
>sacrifices said slaves
>not evil
k.
>>44280971
Fuck them, I'm causing more solar flares.
You guys are alright. Stay out of the inner solar system in 2018.
>>44280921
>Or they could be driven and determined. Suicide can be viewed as an act of ultimate willpower and, arguably, the only real choice anyone can make.
Suicide is a funny thing. It requires a certain level of willpower to override the base instinct to survive, yet implies a lack of it by the person's inability to simply endure hardship. Perhaps it's a kind of madness, like an actual defect in the functioning of your brain.
>>44280787
>Validate your beliefs
HAAAA! HAHAHAHA!
HA!
>>44280690
Well, that was a nice thread for as long as it lasted.
>>44280964
It's of benefit to itself. It's an emergent principle of reality.
Imagine the xenomorphs from Alien/Aliens. Their shapes and species vary over time - egg, facehugger, incubator-snake-thing, drone, etc - but the essential principle is the same.
So too for capitalism. It manifests in different forms, and while the principle endures in any environment composed of resource-desiring agents, it gradually iterates towards smarter, faster, and more powerful agents. Baseline humans are the egg and will be cast off as transhumans win, and then AI in turn.
That doesn't mean humans get exterminated immediately, just that they lose agency as a species. Ofc by the time a local dyson sphere enters construction, they'll be worth as much as any other random heap of atoms on the market.
>>44280897
Yup pretty similar, kind of like proto-serfdom, what sets it apart is that it was contractual. People agreed to became bound to the land (their land) that they handed over for protection. I find it kinda interesting.
>>44280982
I think you're looking at this in a reductive way: if His soldiers have nothing to do, who's to say they won't revolt? wouldn't you rather your 100K soldiers have something to do that profits you rather than have them plotting to overthrow you?it's not like the Empire is the Big Good of the setting anyway.also wouldn't you want your head to bring good look to a duke's mansion? that's very egotistical of you.
>>44280913
How many butt concubines did they purchase?
>>44281004
I don't know what you're trying to say, but I like your style.
>>44281003
>Perhaps it's a kind of madness, like an actual defect in the functioning of your brain.
I'm inclined to agree. They've worked out that sadness can cause actual, physical damage to the heart. No reason to assume depression couldn't do the same to the mind.
>>44281003
Or more logically, the survival of individual is not always necessarily beneficial to survival of the species - sometimes not even to the survival of the majority of his own genes. Suicide, just like altruism, is perfectly compatible with post-Hamilton genetics and there really should be nothing surprising about it. The only people who find suicidal tendencies among human kind weird are those who still carry remnants of Christianic mentality, or those who grossly misunderstand biology and cognitive sciences.
>>44281029
Enslaving an entire country because you are afraid of the massive army youI assumeare responsible for assembling in the first place seems pretty morally black to me. It doesn't really matter though. Could you tell me more about your setting? It sounds interesting.
>>44281033
none.
The paladin had a shitload, but they mostly chilled on his mount while he smashed someone's face in.
pic related.
>>44281113
in a bit, I will
I don't want any slavery in unless you deal with inevitable sex slavery.
>>44280977
As someone who's been suicidal I can say it's a bizarre place to be. You've reached a point where the idea of continuing your life as it is seems unbearable and you see no way of escaping that fate beyond death. But death terrifies you too, for reasons you can't quite pinpoint. So you're stuck in this limbo between bad and worse, and you're not sure which is which. Death scares you because it's death, but living scares you because it's suffering. You can't really say which choice is braver or "right" because depression has wrecked your brain and made everything seem terrible. Whatever you pick is indicative of a lack of willpower; in the end you are just running from whatever scares you more. I would agree that the suicidal have simply entered a state of madness.
>>44281289
I can sort of imagine sex slavery being illegal because the power dynamic is to unbalanced for meaningful consent.
>>44278316
>Inb4 "hur hur slavery is evil, muh freedoms
Are...ARe you implying you support Slavery?
>>44281122
Dude, Mordekaiser has loads of butt concubines that he plows on the nightly.
Try again.
>>44281303
Why would that matter in a society that accepts any other form of slavery? The entire idea behind it is the removal of choice.
>>44281304
It's annoying moral posturing, especially when feudalism and ethnic cleansing are not blinked at twice.
>>44281333
We tend to frown on ethnic cleansings too, it's just we sometimes have problems identifying it when it happens
>>44281324
I think most societies a clear distinction is made between sexual things and other types of matters.
I mean plenty of capitalist countries don't allow prostitution.
>>44281304
>>44281359
Now I see where you're getting confused.
It's about how /tg/ reacts to mention of it in a fictional setting.
Always with a picture of a girl at auction, and slavery as the topic I jump straight to sex slavery.
>>44281301
As a fellow victim of suicidal tendencies, I agree wholeheartedly.
>>44281412
The best kind!
>>44281412
It's a powerful image
>>44281479
>>44281475
Was ancient sex slavery even that common in reality?
>>44281412
I know.
Unfortunately I have had to ask the GM post-session to steer away from those things because I roleplay like a turd when I have a huge boner.
>>44281412
Because we know what's going to happen.
You might buy a housekeeper, a cook, or whatever else. But you're a pervert with trouble finding a woman, or an old man who's tired of his wizened wife, or a dominant prick who sees someone he in fact owns.
If she's lucky, you're nice and gentle about it. But you're probably not, those types tend to have luck outside of this scenario.
And this is why pro-slavery types always get looked at funny. Because nobody sees "I'm going to get this person and have them tend to my home in exchange for food and a bed and being treated like a teenaged child who never grows up". They see "I'mma rape it".
>>44281500
People owned their slaves so they banged them occasionally. Just like people banged their servants even if they weren't slaves (I should know my great granddad came to happen this way).
I think a slave whose sole and only purpose was to be banged was pretty rare. It means you've got to have the resources to feed something that's just a cocksleeve.
>>44281113
Basically, there's 5 major factions, spread out around a great ocean in the southern hemisphere of its planet (like the Mediterranean, but way bigger):
>The Empire of the Ahigbeni
>Central/Western Africa themed
>started out as a relatively small kingdom up north, but conquered their way southwards to the ocean over the course of the last 300 years
>unites a number of former kingdoms and about 20ish cultures, but made them conform to the Imperial way of living and thinking (like the Romans did)
>theocracy ruled by a God-King (not an actual god)
>runs on a slave economy + exporting bronze wares en masse
>discovered gunpowder 200 years ago and proceeded to wreak havoc with it
to the Northwest of them:
>The League of Lokhóna's Ten Thousand Kingdoms (everyone calls it "The League" because time is money)
>Mughal India/Ottoman themed with a bit Sikh flavoring
>worship the One Divine and Her prophets, the Sword Saints
>a union of a number of small kingdoms and duchies for mercantile purposes
>well-equipped merchant navy, but still depends on the Empire for powder and cannons; in turn, the League supplies the Empire with about 20% of its slaves
>have serfs, but no actual slaves themselves (Her Blessed Scripture forbids it)
in the middle of the ocean, located on a lush archipelago:
>The Ombrian Union
>Byzantine/Coptic/Ethiopian themed
>12 clans scattered across 5 main islands constantly scheming against each other over seats in the Concilium or land claims
>formally ruled by a king, the Basileus, who has little to no power
>used to be a great power but lost nearly all of their colonies and dependencies during the last century
>keep themselves afloat by doublecrossing nearly every major power once or twice a year and piggy-backing off of more successful states
(1/?, will continue if you want)
>>44278316
You should read Debt the First 5000 Years. The author discusses debt slavery in ancient times. It was mostly parents having to sell their children into slavery to cover expenses, and the practice of rulers declaring all debt forgiven (thus freeing all debt slaves) as a way to rally public support when they first ascend to power.
Was interesting.
Also if you want to instantly grey-up the morality of slavery just make children of slaves be born free, and it's illegal to separate families.
>>44280059
Dont forget the ISIS where literal slavery is a thing....
>>44281671
...as opposed to the non-literal slavery of capitalism where you're born indentured but allegedly free, I take it?
>>44281671
>you will never be a brave peshmerga hero who bathes in the blood of Daesh swine and rescues a qt Yezidi gril who becomes your bride in gratitude
Why
Even
Live
?
>>44281704
stop calling IS by its tumblr name
>>44281712
No.
>>44281523
Once you get to that level of wealth you'd have to be pretty freaking disgusting not to have someone eager to share the bed with you on any given moment.
I do remember a passage in Xenophon where one of the commanders is known for sparing good looking boys, so sex as the main reason for a slave to be taken in is not unrealistic.
>>44281712
Do they deserve better?
>>44278957
Except instead of fighting in the arena, they were used as elite soldiers
>>44281782
And ended up actually running the whole country. Either as Mamluks or as Janissaries.
>>44281712
Daesh sympathizer detected.
>>44281753
I bet the human is a trap
>>44281828
He's not crossdressing.
This is what all slaves are dressed like in demon society.
>>44281712
But you gotta distinguish between Arab tribal fuckheads and noble, upstanding Shi'ite and Non-Arab heroes.
>>44281846
While Shi'ite is objectively BestpopularIslam, ultimately the differences between ISIS and any surrounding peoples is based on irreligious (and pretty unracially related) factors. Politics plays a much greater role.
>>44281892
>implying the Gulf states aren't also awful
>implying they aren't also tribal Arab fuckheads
Face it, tiger. Sunni arab spearchuckers are the worst, whether they're in murderous thug mode or oil sheikh money mode.Twelve is the superior quantity of Imams
>>44281933
That was kind of my point, actually. The problem is not religious, or racial, but politicaland economical.
>>44281953
Fair enough.
Free Kurdistan when??
>>44281683
>...as opposed to the non-literal slavery of capitalism where you're born indentured but allegedly free, I take it?
Says the person who uses the internet. Okay.
>>44281683
Go vote for Corbyn, commie.
>>44281980
The replacement of one state with another to keep the Kurds is not a perfect end. It is better, though.
>>44281999
Pic related.
>>44281999
here's your (You)
>>44281016
>Legal persons ejecting natural persons from society
US American problems, everybody.
>>44282083
ikr
>>44279091
>consensual sex punished by death
>>44281025
Actually that is how serfdom proper got started in France too. And probably in other places also but France is the example we learned it on since it is "classic" (and extremely well-documented).
>>44281054
I think it's just the latter, which is of course the majority of people. There have been plenty of avowed Christians who didn't see anything strange about suicide. The aforementioned Dostoyevsky, who called it the only true act of free will, was unorthodox, but certainly Christian and Christ-obsessed.
>>44281303
That requires a society that accepts slavery but hates rape in the modern sense of the word. Some sort of feminist hierarchical dystopia or... whatever. Could be interestingly weird I guess.
>>44281397
I think this clear distinction is more specific to those capitalist countries in question. It certainly is not so clear in archaic societies.
>>44279091
>debt slavery not immoral
The only version that is not immoral is the Biblical version, where usury was banned.
>>44281757
No, but you're not saying this to them. We do.
>>44281999
That's a pretty lousy counterpoint to present to an admittedly shitty argument. Consider capitalism as a form of not-literal-slavery which comes with various comfortable goodies, as did real slavery for many of the more well-off slaves (slave soldiers, eunuchs, etc.).
(It's still stupid because capitalism isn't slavery though, pretty much by definition.)
>>44282517
All my que.
>>44281515
This.
One thing to remember is that slavery is not actually economically that great an idea. Every culture that has pushed itself toward exceptional economic prowess has discarded the concept of owning human beings as property. Economies have been dependent on slaves, like Rome's, but this is because they were set up that way, not because it is a particularly good idea - and we've seen the end results of this dependency recur many times throughout history.
Ultimately, people choose slavery at an expense. Slaves are a luxury. The thrill and power of owning a human being is the reason slavery persists.
>>44281500
During the height of the most powerful Norse and Muslim nations, thousands of women were abducted specifically for that purpose. Yeah, slaves were often in clerical positions in Muslim nations, but none of them needed thousands of exclusively female bureaucratic clerks. Bed slaves were commonly taken by the Greeks and Romans, too. It's not remotely rare. It's rare that something else isn't ALSO done with these slaves, but, generally, when a man bought or captured a beautiful woman, they did so for one reason above all else.
>>44282550
>(It's still stupid because capitalism isn't slavery though, pretty much by definition.)
There's nothing in the definition of capitalism that says you can't own slaves. Slave trade is, after all, capitalistic. And of course, the desire to get the most labor for the least investment, while providing no social safety net, leads to slave like conditions.
Granted, neither is there any such exclusion from slavery in Marxism. The collective can designate or even acquire slaves, they are just the property of the individual commune (classical) or the state (lenin/mao).
Granted, this is just typical of the "feels" we build up around these terms in the west. Same as how we seem to feel Democracy and Communism are mutually exclusive, or that Capitalism requires Democracy. Neither is the case.
You guys inspired me to add a story to my setting. Kind of a Cinderella sort of thing.
>Local noble family is ruined, their only daughter taken into slavery against their will.
>Young girl falls in love with the noble boy she serves, but since she has nothing to offer him but her body and no position of her own, she believes he'll see her as nothing but a whore.
>She makes a tribute to the goddess of romance with what little she can tribute, and passes on her fears through prayer.
>Soon an old crone offers to teach the noble boy the arts of magic, this is deemed acceptable by the father of said boy, the girl secretly learns magic as well.
>The boy has a cruel brother who, failing at the magic, considers the crone a witch and works to get her fired.
>The servant girl stops the crone from being expelled on multiple occasions and humiliates the evil brother.
>Finally, the evil brother outs the slave as a spell caster and declares that she conspired with the crone.
>A cleric of the goddess of love shows up to verify whether the crone is a Witch or not.
>Turns our the 'crone' is secretly the goddess of love and explains the situation.
>Evil brother punished, noble house restored, general happy ending.
>>44282689
>One thing to remember is that slavery is not actually economically that great an idea. Every culture that has pushed itself toward exceptional economic prowess has discarded the concept of owning human beings as property.
That's moronic, never has slavery been abolished as a means for greater economic health.
Most civilizations have lost slavery due to outside pressure.
>>44282567
>Mexican too dumb to know what usury is
>>44282726
Slavery fell out of practice in most places because it is simply less economically viable than having a large spending population. Industrially, too, it's more effective.
There's a reason the Confederate war machine was totally lagging behind that of its foes.
>>44282567
The one time Jesus finds something so reprehensible he resorts to physical violence, and somehow the Church manages to sweep it under the rug like it never happened.
As did the Hindus, who had similar prohibitions. Only the Jews and Muslims stick to that, and the Jews, only among themselves (and even then, only among the Orthodox).
All the rest of us seem to have forgotten even *why* it's a sin, and ultimately dooms societies that practice it - not so much by God's wrath, as by simple mathematics.
>>44282726
Not intentionally.
Notice that the sloughing of slavery, however, has mostly coincided with the birth of a large lower class with a non-negligible spending capability. This is because it is preferable on an economic scale to have a large population shuffling money through the system while working for minor pay than to have a HUGE population of slaves that have no impetus to work their hardest, no love for the system they're part of, and no ability to put money back into the economy.
>>44282783
The Church used to ban it, but allowed Jews to practice it.
>>44282782
>Slavery fell out of practice in most places because it is simply less economically viable than having a large spending population.
>Not because of Enlightenment philosophy
>>44282509
Or one which considers sex outside marriage illegal, requires some kind of vow as part of legal marriage, and forbids slaves from making oaths or agreeing to contracts.
>>44282783
>The one time Jesus finds something so reprehensible he resorts to physical violence
Except that one time he struck a kid dead for bumping into him.
>>44282888
And as everyone knows, the boll weevil expels a pheromone preventing people from accepting enlightenment ideals, which is why slavery remained acceptable only in those places where its favored food, the cotton plant, could readily grow.
>>44282888
Enlightenment philosophy was part of it, but people were able to entertain these notions because it was becoming quickly apparent that there was a better alternative.
>>44282881
Specifically to make money for the church, as the Jews wouldn't practice it on one another... Which didn't help the Jews already shoddy reputation, and kinda locked them into bankerville for eternity.
>>44282888
Enlightenment philosophy didn't come out of nowhere, mang.
>>44278714
An interesting little legal tidbit is that the testimony of slaves was only valid if it was taken after they'd been flogged, IIRC.
>>44282910
>that one time he struck a kid dead for bumping into him.
>Completely accurate verses cherrypicked for your convenience by r/atheism
>>44282937
Dude, it's a joke.
He actually struck the guy dead for bumping into him after some other stuff, and it all worked out okay in the end anyway. It's still a funny image, though.
>>44282910
Hey now, the Gospel of Infancy Thomas ain't cannon... Unlike Jar-Jar.
>>44280476
>manumisso
I vaguely remember that being a term for marriage instead.
Also, you forgot to mention a father had 'manus' over his daughters.
>>44282888
Trade in slaves and serfdom was condemned by the church in Council of London 1102.
Granted, it didn't stay condemned, but there's a few dozen incidents of various societies abolishing slavery from 6th century to the 15th, all well before The Enlightenment.
...and there's nothing to say that it won't come back after The Enlightenment either. It's still practiced in some corners of the globe - plus, a good deal of the western world readily approves of and is made up of societies built on a "work or die" model, that some of the more "progressive" societies view as slavery.
>>44281500
If I know my Roman law correctly, you couldn't rape slaves. You were looked down on, sure, but it wasn't illegal as such. Same for prostitutes. Wasn't even considered adultery.
Speaking of, adulterers were banned from the military.
For another interesting little tidbit, rape of men was as much a crime as rape of women. Raping a man, a female virgin, killing a family member or desacrating a temple were the worst crimes one could commit.
>>44282782
>There's a reason the Confederate war machine was totally lagging behind that of its foes.
Yeah, because the north was heavily industrialized.
>>44283192
I want to add a bunch of other stuff to that, but the thread would go full /pol/tard, and we're having a hard enough time avoiding that as it is.
I like how in PF slavery is not morally wrong at all. The Iconic Paladin for example has a ton of slaves. One of the players in my current campaign used his starting cash to start off with half a dozen of them to do various busy work for him, with one being trained in Handle Animal in order to drive the party carriage.
>>44283276
IIRC, Pathfinder slaves are priced by how hazardous their duties are though. Not read up enough on it to see how that works culturally - or if they thought about it that much, but it kinda suggests that either it isn't entirely involuntary slavery, or there's some other benefactor watching over them.
>>44282782
I always find this hard to believe because of how freaking long human history is.
The benefits of slavery-less existence would have been discovered a long time ago. It doesn't require a whole lot of knowledge to invent such a society.
>>44282700
You can use slavery with capitalism but the system of capitalism itself is based on free exchange between free individuals or groups - so it is the opposite of slavery.
>>44282888
>Enlightenment philosophy
>Not Anglo-Saxon Christian fundamentalists ruining everything halfway fun as always.
Who was at the head of all those anti-slavery campaigns that ended it in the British Empire? Or the abolitionist movement in the USA when it was getting started for that matter?
>>44283422
I'd say there is an important line between having slaves per se and having slaves as a crucial element of your economy, i.e. a classical plantation system. The latter is indeed not very tenable in the long run; slaves become a hazard, among many others, but what's more it also tends to destroy the small landholders that are so crucial to any premodern society's health. There is a reason Romans eventually ended up converting their slaves into serfs.
>>44283438
There's nothing to say you can't trade with one another, and not still be slaves, and nothing in capitalism that says all citizens must be able to participate in it.
In the slave owning days, in America, there were neighborhoods, and even whole towns, entirely dedicated to slaves selling and buying things, not only for their masters, but for themselves. Slaves were allowed to have money, and even make additional money for themselves in this way, but they were still slaves, and much has been the case in many other slave owning societies.
There are many things the free market fixes - slavery isn't one of them.
>>44278447
A decent amount of Greek slaves lived decent lives in houses, but most slaves were from the frontier and were uneducated, sent to farms, and if they tried to escape they were sent to the mines. The slaves would never see the sun again, and most died in a year from accidents. They kept drunk to prevent revolt and keep them working, which made the work even more dangerous.
>>44283276
Whatwhatwhat? I'm curious. Can you tell me more?
>>44278316
Am i evil person for finding that painting hot?
>>44283497
I have never said it fixes it. I did say that capitalism is not slavery by its very nature. There can be capitalism inside of slavery and slavery inside of capitalism, but the one is manifestly not the other.
Those are two different relationships between people. Slavery - one person is owned by the other and is coerced to provide goods and services. Capitalism - two mutually independent individuals exchanges goods and services with each other on a free if not equitable basis. That is what I meant and while I am sure I have not been clear enough I do not know quite how you managed to misinterpret it this badly.
>>44283463
Well, not the fundamentalist Christians who were pointing to the Bible to justify slavery, surely. (In addition to negroids being the Curse of Ham or some shit.)
Given that the Bible has very specific rules and procedures regarding slaves, it'd be much easier to use religion to defend slavery, than to start an abolitionist movement.
Granted, one could say the same of polygamy, and well...
>>44282922
In the US, it was mostly about wanting the drive towards the westcoast to be as white as possible. The people of the US frankly didn't mind slavery, their thing was that they generally though the presence of nonwhites in their nation to be extremely undesirable and hopefully something that would eventually pass. Allowing them to spread by legalizing slavery in the new states ran contrary to that.
And it's frankly not like that idea disappeared anytime after the war - it persisted and informed, or rather blocked attempts to gain oversea colonies, because those tended to be choke full of nonwhites.
>>44283540
I don't care what does and doesn't fit your own idea of what a fundamentalist Christian is supposed to be like. Look up the leaders of the abolitionist movement. They were religious fanatics almost to a man, regardless of implausible you consider them to be.
>>44283540
>it'd be much easier to use religion to defend slavery
>Granted, one could say the same of polygamy, and well...
>What is Church Tradition
>What are the Synods
Why are atheists pretending to know things when they don't know shit?
>>44283540
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Wilberforce I mean just look at this guy. And he's just one among many.
>>44283551
IIRC wasn't Liberia originally formed by/from former slaves?
>>44283538
You seemed to be suggesting that capitalism precludes slavery - but the exact opposite is true - slavery often is capitalistic, or even the result of capitalism run rampant.
Same with democracy and communism. There's nothing stopping slavery from being part of nearly any economic model or government system.
Daily reminder that we all are wage slaves.
>>44283581
That is not the exact opposite. Slavery and capitalism are two systems of economic relations between people. Otherwise I suppose I don't disagree.
Communism and democracy though... Bah. You'd need to define communism. And democracy. A stateless classless society wouldn't need to be ruled by the people or anyone I would think. It'd just be an idyllic anarchy.
>>44283593
>slaves to the Memes
FTFY
>>44278643
As someone who literally just had a final in college over this, lemme try to add two cents.
In the early, eaaarly days of American slavery, like 16-1700s, most of those slaves that went there went to sugar crops in the Caribbean, where it was honestly cheaper to work them to death. Later, as the trans-atlantic slave trade broke down, slaves began to get very expensive. Depending on where in the US you were, one of two truths was applied to you: gang labor or task labor. Gang labor was the stereotypical white dude with a whip hitting people who didn't harvet the cotton fast enough, and worked them all day in hot summer heat with no breaks. Some died and many more permanent injuries from overzealous overseers. The task system was mostly in Carolina rice plantations, where they had a set list of chores, and once it was done they had the rest of the day. Slaves overall became too valuable to work to death after a while
>>44283578
Yes, and the point of Liberia wasn't to integrate more Africans into America. It was so black people could go back to Africa
>>44283540
Who was John Brown?
>>44283554
>>44283576
Neglecting there were hundreds of thousands of fundamentalist Christians proselytizing the exact opposite using the same book.
Not that such things aren't typical, especially with a book that thick, but again, the Bible has an awful lot to say about slavery, in terms of proscribed treatment, management, and punishment - so not exactly a good source for abolitionism, it was kinda on the Southern Baptist's side, though they were the "not one word of the law shall pass away" sort, unlike the more liberal Christians in the North.
>>44283593
I'm unemployed. Suck it, nerd.
>>44283652
So they did. It does not negate my point that the abolitionist movement ran on the fumes of religious extremism rather than those of secular philosophy. The other side was not so stupid as to discard the same weapon, and indeed that would have gone against the nature of contemporary society. But they were much less successful at wielding it, in the end.
I recall complaints that the South had the stronger legal case. But the North had the stronger religious case in the broader sense - in the sense of being able to build up a righteous fervour behind their agenda.
>>44283686
Are you really suggesting the North was more religious than the South in the 1800's? (...or... Ever?)
>>44283492
>but what's more it also tends to destroy the small landholders that are so crucial to any premodern society's health.
I remember that the Romans tried and failed to keep small landholdership alive, because they found that they weren't economically capable of competing with slave-tended plantations.
Likewise, the productivity gains torture produces are crazy and completely unattainable without heavy mechanization and the use of combustion engines and fetilizers.
In case of the Romans, the problem turned out to be that having lots of slaves and keeping them under absolutely horrifying working conditions (they, for example, used them in the industrial fabrication of pottery) leads to lots and lots of slave revolts, so turning a significant part of them into semi-free dependants should mainly be seen as a peackeeping measure they found affordable economically and legally.
The paladins in my setting are often former slaves or orphans adopted into the church. It really helps you have a large amount of faith in your god when their church literally delivered you.
I haven't delved too deeply into many of the southern cultures the party hasn't reached yet, but many of the city-states have slavery, in the sense that they have captives from battles with other city states act as their slaves. They usually get freed in the next war, since people aren't allowed to directly harm or arm slaves, so it's a surprisingly well-greased system.
The dwarves used to enslave halflings to grow food for them while they mined, since they were too busy to do that themselves, but even after the halflings were freed, the situation more or less stayed as it was, only the halflings were free to travel the world and had a more equal relationship with the dwarves that later bloomed into friendship. Just about every halfling village has a dwarven community underneath it.
>>44278316
In the society my character comes from, people from weak or shamed bloodlines are often enslaved, as are those captured in battles with rival tribes. The punishment for rebellion is most often far worse than death, and those who do resist are marked with sigils that allow the slavemasters to inflict them with unimaginable agony with but a thought.. Those who do die as a result of overworking or ritual sacrifice are fused together into flesh golems so that they can continue working, or serve in other roles like guarding strategic locations or people.
I kinda like the Elder Scrolls setup, where nearly every other race enslaved nearly every other at one point or another, and they go through a lot of cycles of being freed and turning into allies, then reversing the trend or starting over again in the opposite roles.
Seems nearly every group in that lore gets to be an an asshole or a hero at one point or another.
>>44283632
Though that glosses over the fact that slaves were raised in the north and sold or transported to the south in large numbers, because the southwards expansion could create vast fortunes fast as long as one had the unfree labour at hand.
>>44283708
That is not what I was suggesting, way to read past what I wrote again. But sure, why not? I don't have any statistics to back it up but I am pretty sure they were about equally religious at the time, just in somewhat different ways. I am willing to see any proof to counterwise though.
What I WAS suggesting is that the abolitionist movement was largely built on religious and moral sentiment, the two being inextricably linked at the time as far as most people were concerned, and that the South lost the religious propaganda war, which was part of why it was put in the no-win situation of secession. They could not convince the Northern and Western Protestants that, whatever may be said in the Bible, slavery was a morally acceptable thing in a Christian society. But northern abolitionist preachers could convince a large enough amount of the same that it was utterly intolerable from a religious point of view.
>>44282689
So it was a shitty time period to be a woman of any social status?
>>44284024
More like it was a shitty time period to be on the losing side. Not like that's ever changed.
>>44279250
Expound.
>>44283708
I'm pretty sure Plymouth, Massachusetts is north of Jamestown, Virginia.
