PC Slaves

[LoD]

Bond Slaves

Grant slaves some degree of freedom by placing more control into the hands of the slaver.  Not physical control, but psionic control through a shift in the master-slave relationship.  These slaves, most likely the only kind a PC would be allowed, would become known as "bond slaves".

Develop a bond between the master and slave, granting limited abilities that would allow the master some control over the slave from any distance.  Let the master exact both some amount of punshiment and, perhaps, even death to the slave should they betray or overstep their boundaries.  This relationships would have be integrated into the game as an "acceptable" use of the Way so as not to alarm people into thinking they are mindbenders.

This new control would do a few things.  One would be to allow the slave more freedom to travel and pursue the master's interests beyond the normal scope they do now.  If the master-slave bond was of a nature that disallowed the slave a will disobey, then you suddenly have more opportunities for them.  They could take jobs as scouts, hunters, ambassadors, spies and other interesting roles without raising the questions, "Why would this person continue to be a slave if they were allowed outside the city?"

If you remove the need for the physical whip, then you have a lot more room to work with, both for the master and the slave.  There would need to be a way for the bond to be broken down and/or removed.  And that might be an interesting role for a mindbender.

The second thing this "bond slave" idea might achieve is creating a whole layer of how slaves are perceived.   No longer are they simple property, but potentially the most loyal of servants and something that a city-state would understand to be both nearly incapable of betrayal and tied to its master in a way that cannot be won over with material possessions or physical torture.

Since slaves are normally a special application, I don't think this would be too difficult to integrate into the system.  And it might actually bring some interesting RP for slaves that are forced into the role -- both in the RP of being conditioned for the mater-slave relationship as well as after the conditiong is over.  With the idea of a "bond slave",  there becomes a coded measure of control in place to reinforce their new position.

-LoD

[EvilRoeSlade]

Having played a (fairly short-lived) Byn mul, I would say that the successes are largely related to the superior structure of the clan itself.  As long as the infrastructure is there, the clan can be active, and can do so without a good deal of immortal support.

The main strength of the T'zai Byn's infrastructure is that the clan has a goal, that everyone can understand and everyone can fairly well work towards.  This infrastructure can be undermined when the leaders of the clan are ineffectual, but is always there, enduring through good leadership and bad.

I think that every clan could stand to have a clear goal in which everyone understands what's needed to be done to work towards.

[My 2 sids]

Two:  

A)   Maybe people interested in slaves would do better in the clans outside the two main cities... were play isn't so politically based.  A hunting slave or crafting slave where the entire group is depending on them may have more to do.

B)   I'd say perhaps a slave program.  Like someone mentioned enslaving someone is one punishment the templarate could inflict.  If you had the two city's houses have a "school" and work the slaves (like for a year or defined amount of time) maybe people would be more open to the idea.

[Aldiel]

Slavery is an extremely, extremely, extremely restricted role. PCs should never be forced into it, and I think the idea of "either take this extremely restricted role or DIE" isn't much of a choice at all.

It takes a certain kind of player to enjoy being a slave, and there's a reason we see so few of them in game.

Suck it up dude, this is armageddon.  :twisted:   A good RPer should have fun playing any role, and should be excited when his plans for his character are suddenly changed by IC events.

[Aldiel]

Does anyone have additional ideas that might help but haven't been mentioned yet?

You know what would be fun?  To make those players who get karma revoked for bad RP, so that they have negative karma, be forced to play slaves.   :twisted:   Mwhahaha.  (Of course, I'm just kidding here.  Slavery is a very hard thing to play)

[spawnloser]

Suck it up dude, this is armageddon.  :twisted:   A good RPer should have fun playing any role, and should be excited when his plans for his character are suddenly changed by IC events.

So, if you think so, Aldiel, lemme know who you're playing so that I can take away all of his/her freedoms besides those I permit and see how much you like continuing the character.  A good RPer could still not enjoy certain parts of certain roles, but can play them well regardless.  That's the diffeence here.

[Aldiel]

Ibusoe, your post was so big, I only got through like half of it, and although what I read seemed good and true, these are -not- misconceptions for veteran players, and especially not for staff!  I don't know where you got this idea that slavery is incredibly rare or, that if you have some experience playing, that you can't play a slave.  I have interacted with lots of slaves over the years.  Now, I would like to see just a few more people playing slaves, but the problem is most noobs are turned off by slavery.  I personally think it's awesome and whole-heartedly embrace it.  :twisted:  One thing I got to in your theses that I did not agree with was this bit about commoners having slaves.  Do you have any idea how much it costs to take care of a slave?  Successful merchants, bards, and officers might have slaves, but I could hardly imagine some fresh hunter running around with a slave unless you're planning on feeding your NPC every time you are hungry.

[Aldiel]

Suck it up dude, this is armageddon.  :twisted:   A good RPer should have fun playing any role, and should be excited when his plans for his character are suddenly changed by IC events.

So, if you think so, Aldiel, lemme know who you're playing so that I can take away all of his/her freedoms besides those I permit and see how much you like continuing the character.  A good RPer could still not enjoy certain parts of certain roles, but can play them well regardless.  That's the diffeence here.

Lol, spawny, I wasn't being entirely serious.

[spawnloser]

Lol, spawny, I wasn't being entirely serious.

Ah, my bad.

Oh, and on a side note:  my mother called me 'spawn' once...once.

[EvilRoeSlade]

Do you have any idea how much it costs to take care of a slave?

Probably less than it would cost to take care of a child.

You have to give it food and water, just like you would have to do with your kid.

You have to give it clothes, but you can give it crappy clothes that no free man would ever willingly wear, and you can let its clothes fall into disrepair and nobody is really going to complain.

If you're already paying for lodgings, your slave can stay there at no extra charge.

It seems to me that an independant merchant could own a slave (or even several) with relative ease.

[HunterKiller]

A good RPer should have fun playing any role

No.  By that rationale a "good worker" is someone who would have fun no matter what job they did.  Sounds idealistic but isn't very realistic.  Jobs (like playing roles) are best matched to people's strengths and weaknesses and some have even found good professions matching people with those jobs (hence the words job placement).  Regarding the game, a role should match a person's personality and time constraints (how often they can play).  Some roles are most certainly not for "good rpers".  The buck up attitude is a little strange one to take with a game, one should find enjoyment in the game itself and not get into the position of having to 'deal with it.'  That would be a sad waste of a great game.

- HK

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

I did not play a Byn mul, but rather a Kuraci slave. In my experience, within the proper inviroment, a PC slave has more than enough to do.

If I get the chance and time, I will app to play another Kuraci slave, or perhaps a Byn slave. I feel like a slave role actually increases your ability to role-play, both solo and in terms of fleshing out your character.

I understand the world much better now than I did perhaps a year or two ago, before playing the role. I would not want to take PC slavery out of the game.

I would suggest, if I might, that House Borsail, which trafficks in slaves, be revamped, however. I spent a short time with them before being sold a few years back, and I must say that then, the level of interaction was absolutely pitiful.

[Anonymous]

When I first started playing, muls were just a "better race" to be a fighter.  There wasn't any real distinction between muls and any other PC race.  The rule was that PC muls were "the exception".  There were so many "free muls" or "mercenary muls" that the concept that muls were slaves was completely lost on the general playerbase.

My chagrin that there were no slave hunters, no grand escapades to hunt human-intelligent quarry across the face of Zalanthas, no rebellion between master and servant, no carefully crafted assassinations by "letting" a highly-trained gladiator slave "escape" during an inconvenient moment... this chagrin gradually became a spite for the "exceptional PC free-mul".

Well, this grew into vogue with The Powers That Be (both player and immortal), and the concept of a "free" mul was eliminated.  

But the main problem was that no real infrastructure for slaves rose to compensate.  Things have <i>vastly</i> changed since I have last played, but I have also played a slave, a templar (borsail, no less), and a slave owner.  

My life as a slave consisted of being very loyal and incredibly bored.  My life consisted of being largely restricted to the house compound, and crafting bandages over... and over... and over... and over again.  I was then allowed to leave the tavern... so I spent the time wandering around and waiting for someone from my house to give me an order... because none of the "free" people where I was stationed would speak to me because I was a slave.

My life as a slave owner was a <b>constant</b> fight with the PCs.  There were the PCs who had no real reason to stick around as slaves.  i.e. you catch a thief, and give them the choice death in the arena or be my slave, and they say "I'll be your slave" then proceed to leave the city, blow you a rasberry and then give you the finger from just outside the gate.  No one would go catch them, bounties were ignored, and there was no way to force the issue psionically or otherwise.  Then there were the PCs who were so bored to tears being a slave, because there was really no good direction to give a PC slave in the existent Arm environment.   Go spy for me turned into giving me bad or simply made-up information.  Go fetch me this turned into a boring festival of endless mundanity.  Fight for me became a dull drudge because of lack of attendance at actual arena events.  

There was no real way to distinguish between being a slave and being a non-slave while retaining the freedom of play that made it interesting to play for both the owner and the slave.  There wasn't enough infrastructure inside the pits to be an isolated clan in and of itself.  There was no way to interact between slave owners and slaves in an isolated environment that separates (but bridges) the enslaved and the free.

In my mind, the appealing (for gameplay) distinction between free man and enslaved is one of two items: societal restriction or willingness to be enslaved.

If you knew that you would inevitably be returned if you ran away, there's the challenge of escape, the challenge of retrieval, and the challenge of control.  If you knew that the slaves are the more physically powerful of a group of people, there's the tension of maintaining "ownership" and using that power - whether it is voluntarily, subtly manipulated, or by force of psionic control.

But no structure or resources existed for that.  Otherwise, we, as players, would have to come up with some societal structure (like the HBO show Rome, that someone pointed out) that made the difference clear but appealing.

Maybe things have changed.