Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Cajoes]

I thought all dwarves already were Slaves to Armok.

[Sunken]

I remember some quote about piercing a slave's ear with an awl to put in a ring.

Exodus 21:5?

[Tormy]

If there are slaves, I would like to suggest having various types of slaves.

Not to mention "creature slavery"...IE. various not so intelligent creatures should be forced to do the hard work if it's needed. Think about the trolls in the LotR movies for example..

[Servant Corps]

The reason I mentioned about this type of slavery, where slaves are granted much power (altough heavily watched so as to ensure the slaves don't grow too powerful) is to present a different type of slavery other than the ones where slaves are weak. In this system, royal slaves are under the control of somebody, but the slave himself still have more power than, say, the average peon.

[Silverionmox]

The reason I mentioned about this type of slavery, where slaves are granted much power (altough heavily watched so as to ensure the slaves don't grow too powerful) is to present a different type of slavery other than the ones where slaves are weak. In this system, royal slaves are under the control of somebody, but the slave himself still have more power than, say, the average peon.

It's not rare to find a slave caste that grows powerful in history. The Egyptian Mameluks, the Chinese eunuchs, Babylonian overseers,...

[SirHoneyBadger]

The Romans, as well.

Here's a classic example of a highly placed slave:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiberius_Claudius_Narcissus

[Jude]

Sounds like how eunuchs were often in positions of considerable power.

[cowofdoom78963]

Dwarves ethics tword slavery is captial punishment. This means, of course they wouldent have slaves!

[SirHoneyBadger]

Yeah, eunuchs had many political advantages. You couldn't seduce them, for one thing (Although they could seduce you--which happened to Alexander the Great.), nor could they be distracted from their duties by sexual stimulation. You didn't have to worry about leaving your wife or daughter alone in their company. They couldn't have children, so they couldn't form ruling dynasties--which killed a lot of their motivation for overthrowing your government.

[Servant Corps]

I'm bumping this thread in the hope of gaining more...er...support...for this idea. I really like Silver's plan:

We need to make it completely flexible. That makes it simpler at the same time. All we need is a bunch of titles (serf, baron, duke, eunuch, marshall, general, vizier, sultan, caliph, etc.), a set of rights (supreme ruler, can own property, can own slaves, is allowed to vote in the king's election, is allowed to pass on his title to his children, etc.) and couple them together in the raws to have a sensible starting point.

There are several ways of interaction (election, duel, rebellion, buying titles, granting a fief,..). Those have to be hardcoded, though there should still be significant flexibility to edit them in the raws (number of electors, etc.). Those variables also can change in the game.

When those two are in place, everything will change naturally to resolve conflicts.
- changing the title of an individual
A rebellious noble could have his title taken away and become a captain, for example, which almost forces him to serve in the army, where he could redeem himself, etc.
- changing the rights of a title
Traders buy the right to bear arms in exchange for a tax. Citizens of the Ravels of Smithing, a fortress, lose the right to travel without paying toll on the king's roads. etc.

[Servu]

I'm bumping this thread in the hope of gaining more...er...support...for this idea. I really like Silver's plan:

Seconded. I'd love to see my nobles' area turn to a huge fighting pit when some slimy tax keeper sets a low value to some socks the baroness likes ever so much.

[Granite26]

Be careful of the dwarf-centric fallacy.

I think it'd be cool to support.

[Grendus]

Slavery will have to be implemented as both humans and goblins permit it (I forget about elves, I think the only thing they approve of is eating and making trophies out of other humanoids). However, as dwarves don't approve of it, it probably won't be a large part of dwarven life.

As SirHoneyBadger put it,

Dwarfs don't like slaves because slaves do the work that dwarfs could be doing instead. Dwarfs aren't real big on unemployment.

Dwarves are too damn efficient to have slaves. What do you need slaves for when you have haulers?

[Granite26]

MORE haulers?

[Grendus]

MORE haulers?

We call them "Potash Makers"

Edit: In retrospect, I kind of agree with some of this in that slavery is implemented differently by different cultures (everything from indentured servitude to a form of bankruptcy to lifetime status as property). This might be something to add to world gen, different races and even different civs may treat slavery in different ways.