PDA

View Full Version : Morality of Elemental Binding [ECS]



goken04
2009-09-05, 10:52 AM
I'm new to the Eberron Campaign Setting (still not actually having played it) and am trying to crib the airship idea for a non-Eberron game I'm running and I can't figure out the answer to these questions, despite scouring the ECS and online wikis:

What do the Elementals think of being bound? Are they willing participants? If so, why do these powerful extraplanar creatures serve humanoids like they are nothing more than horses? Are elementals bound against their wills? Wouldn't this draw the ire of not only the elemental bound, but all elementals who encounter the ships and note their kin enslaved to inferior humanoids?

Also, how big of an elemental is needed for binding to airships? Someone help a DM out!

kamikasei
2009-09-05, 10:55 AM
As far as I know, the elemental doesn't have to be intelligent.

Also, bear in mind that these same questions apply to golems (and further indicate that no, the elemental spirit doesn't have to be intelligent).

Project_Mayhem
2009-09-05, 11:01 AM
According to Magic of Eberron, theres a bunch of rogue Gnome academics who ask the same questions, and try to make friendly contact with elementals.

goken04
2009-09-05, 11:03 AM
As far as I know, the elemental doesn't have to be intelligent.

Also, bear in mind that these same questions apply to golems (and further indicate that no, the elemental spirit doesn't have to be intelligent).

OH! When it says that they bind Fire or Air Elementals, I just assumed they meant the statistical Fire Elemental (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/elemental.htm#fireElemental) or Air Elemental (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/elemental.htm#airElemental), both of which have Int scores. Are there non-Intelligent, living Elementals that can be used for binding? I'm really confused.

goken04
2009-09-05, 11:07 AM
According to Magic of Eberron, theres a bunch of rogue Gnome academics who ask the same questions, and try to make friendly contact with elementals.

See, here's my problem: The society (of humanoids) that makes use of these airships in my campaign world live in the City of Brass on the Elemental Plane of Fire. I'm trying to make sense of how this society could regularly use Elementals (if it is against their wills) while maintaining a positive relationship with the many fire elementals they interact with daily.

kamikasei
2009-09-05, 11:09 AM
I honestly don't know, I don't think it's ever stated one way or the other. I'm basing the idea that they don't have to be intelligent on golems:


The animating force for a golem is a spirit from the Elemental Plane of Earth. The process of creating the golem binds the unwilling spirit to the artificial body and subjects it to the will of the golem’s creator.

Since golems are mindless despite having these spirits bound, I'm assuming the spirits are themselves mindless. This may not be correct. However, since neither golem-making nor elemental binding are [Evil], I imagine the game creators didn't intend for either act to be tantamount to slavery and mind control.


I'm trying to make sense of how this society could regularly use Elementals (if it is against their wills) while maintaining a positive relationship with the many fire elementals they interact with daily.

My inclination would be to say "the same way you can have domesticated animals while maintaining good relations with their intelligent cousins". That is, treat "elemental" as a form of life to the same extent "natural, organic creature" is.

LibraryOgre
2009-09-05, 11:22 AM
You're assuming elementals have a society. While some elemental beings do (Genies of various varieties), elementals themselves may not. Heck, they may not even identify each other as being separate entities.

Starscream
2009-09-05, 11:24 AM
Technically, an "Elemental" is any being from the elemental planes who is composed of the element that makes up that plane.

So I always assumed that the typical elementals from the MM were that plane's "people", i.e. the sentient dominant species.

Maybe any sort of elemental "spirit" will do, and for all we know they are using the mindless equivalent of vermin or even oozes to power these things.

But that's just a guess, I haven't read all the Eberron books, they might have some other explanation.

goken04
2009-09-05, 11:25 AM
You're assuming elementals have a society. While some elemental beings do (Genies of various varieties), elementals themselves may not. Heck, they may not even identify each other as being separate entities.

No, right. But the City of Brass IS an Efreeti society. It'd be like finding out the guests in your home power their cars with ground up chimpanzee. You may not be a chimpanzee, but it's close enough to make you a little nervous, don't you think?

PlzBreakMyCmpAn
2009-09-05, 11:26 AM
Having looked at this recently for BG's maximum cheap item crafting thread, I'd say its atleast a non-good action.

It says that if you fail the binding then the elemental will get mad at you and attack you. Also they are trapped in a magical matrix. Atleast a rat in a maze can get some cheeze...

kamikasei
2009-09-05, 11:28 AM
It'd be like finding out the guests in your home power their cars with ground up chimpanzee. You may not be a chimpanzee, but it's close enough to make you a little nervous, don't you think?

Or perhaps it's like finding the guests in your house drive their vehicles by harnessing them to horses. That seems to be far enough away not to bother most people, and "Elementals" -> "elemental spirits" may well be a similar gap.


It says that if you fail the binding then the elemental will get mad at you and attack you. Also they are trapped in a magical matrix. Atleast a rat in a maze can get some cheeze...

A rat in a maze needs cheese - elementals require no sustenance. And it's possible for the elemental to be acting mindlessly.

Salt_Crow
2009-09-05, 11:33 AM
I remember Explorer's Handbook detailing that a 'freed elemental' (from any elemental vessel) would be 'rightfully pissed off'. That seems to indicate a rather raw deal for the elementals.

goken04
2009-09-05, 11:34 AM
Let us say that "spirit of Elementals" are not actually living creatures, but small shards of the essence of the respective planes. A non-living, magical, planar resource used to power the ships. Does this seem believable/practical for my purposes?

quick_comment
2009-09-05, 11:38 AM
I would just say that binding non-sentient elementals is no different than using a horse or an ox to pull a car.

Gralamin
2009-09-05, 11:42 AM
I've always followed the idea they are unwilling intelligent creatures, and thats why its so hard to control them, and if you, say, crash your airship the Fire elemental tries to kill all of its enslavers.

The Neoclassic
2009-09-05, 11:43 AM
Let us say that "spirit of Elementals" are not actually living creatures, but small shards of the essence of the respective planes. A non-living, magical, planar resource used to power the ships. Does this seem believable/practical for my purposes?

Absolutely. Perhaps it has the essences of movement/strength/whatever in it to provide not just power but the ability to use it, but no hint of consciousness/self-awareness/cognizance. So, they themselves are sort of like automaton, albeit naturally occuring rather than created ones.

I think it neatly avoids the "What sort of elementals are these, and is it wrong/creepy to bind them?" debate which is arising, while providing a sensible, consistent answer.

EDIT: As far as them turning upon being released, I'd explain it as the "Elemental spirits" as being naturally inclined to use/exercise their power, as that's all they can do- so if they are somehow released, they'll keep doing so, but in a destructive rather than productive way. Of course, this means that describing them as "angry/pissed" is simply personification in the same way in which we personify our computer which has crashed as being ornery.

ZeroNumerous
2009-09-05, 11:46 AM
I've always followed the idea they are unwilling intelligent creatures, and thats why its so hard to control them, and if you, say, crash your airship the Fire elemental tries to kill all of its enslavers.

I agree.

Why?

Because Eberron isn't nice.

quick_comment
2009-09-05, 11:49 AM
You can also make it evil to bind the elementals, and have society as a whole vaguely aware of it, but uncaring. Maybe there is a group called PETE (People for the ethical treatment of elementals) who try to make people care.

Kylarra
2009-09-05, 11:50 AM
I've always followed the idea they are unwilling intelligent creatures, and thats why its so hard to control them, and if you, say, crash your airship the Fire elemental tries to kill all of its enslavers.They don't actually need to be intelligent for that, there's a reason why we compare people's stubbornness to a mule.


EDIT: As far as them turning upon being released, I'd explain it as the "Elemental spirits" as being naturally inclined to use/exercise their power, as that's all they can do- so if they are somehow released, they'll keep doing so, but in a destructive rather than productive way. Of course, this means that describing them as "angry/pissed" is simply personification in the same way in which we personify our computer which has crashed as being ornery.Like a wildfire that [b]rages out of control. A ferocious wind. etc. We already use that sort of imagery anyway.

kamikasei
2009-09-05, 11:51 AM
EDIT: As far as them turning upon being released, I'd explain it as the "Elemental spirits" as being naturally inclined to use/exercise their power, as that's all they can do- so if they are somehow released, they'll keep doing so, but in a destructive rather than productive way. Of course, this means that describing them as "angry/pissed" is simply personification in the same way in which we personify our computer which has crashed as being ornery.

That'd be my approach. Treat it like a clay golem's berserk ability.


Because Eberron isn't nice.

No, but it does contain plenty of good-aligned people who you'd expect to speak out against an evil practice of enslaving intelligent elementals. The warforged were able to get their rights, after all.

goken04
2009-09-05, 12:03 PM
Absolutely. Perhaps it has the essences of movement/strength/whatever in it to provide not just power but the ability to use it, but no hint of consciousness/self-awareness/cognizance. So, they themselves are sort of like automaton, albeit naturally occuring rather than created ones.

I think it neatly avoids the "What sort of elementals are these, and is it wrong/creepy to bind them?" debate which is arising, while providing a sensible, consistent answer.

EDIT: As far as them turning upon being released, I'd explain it as the "Elemental spirits" as being naturally inclined to use/exercise their power, as that's all they can do- so if they are somehow released, they'll keep doing so, but in a destructive rather than productive way. Of course, this means that describing them as "angry/pissed" is simply personification in the same way in which we personify our computer which has crashed as being ornery.

THIS. Yes! Thanks everybody for helping me figure out a suitable explanation for my world!!

Gralamin
2009-09-05, 12:06 PM
No, but it does contain plenty of good-aligned people who you'd expect to speak out against an evil practice of enslaving intelligent elementals. The warforged were able to get their rights, after all.

Assuming they knew they were intelligent, and knew they could speak. Warforged have both of these traits obviously, and were running around nearly free far more abundantly then elementals are. Magic of Eberron, as Project Mayhem mentions, even suggests the Gnomes aren't even sure if they are intelligent.

All people really know is: If you don't have the right device / mark, driving an elemental vehicle requires to bend the elemental to your will with your strength of personality alone.

Jack_Simth
2009-09-05, 12:23 PM
See, here's my problem: The society (of humanoids) that makes use of these airships in my campaign world live in the City of Brass on the Elemental Plane of Fire. I'm trying to make sense of how this society could regularly use Elementals (if it is against their wills) while maintaining a positive relationship with the many fire elementals they interact with daily.By picking Water, Air, or Earth elementals only. Or binding specific fire elementals that have either broken local laws, or have been sold into slavery to pay their debts. The City of Brass is mostly run by Lawful-Evil Efreeti, no?

Sintanan
2009-09-05, 12:29 PM
I honestly think in Eberron most people really don't think about or care about the questionably moral ethics behind binding intelligent "creatures" from outside their universe.

It doesn't help that these "creatures" speak gibberish (how many commoners will know Ignan?) and go on a complete and udder rampage killing everything they can find when they are released from being under control.

I mean, we use radioactive elements that can cause serious injury and death when released from control, but we don't question their use because we just use it.

Second case in point: If there was evidence that there were microscopic organisms that could only survive in unrefined petroleum, would the whole world stop using gasoline? Sure, a few would question and debate the ethics behind it, but the majority would just keep rolling on forward.


All in all, though... I would have to go with goken04's suggestion. I like it. :smallsmile:

awa
2009-09-05, 12:50 PM
Golems and elemental bindings are one of those things that wasn't though out very well. Binding against its will imply its at the very least as intelligent as an animal.
Its being bound unable to move or act forced to power a an artificial body against their will for as long as the golem exists which could be thousands of years.

stick a monkey in an isolation chamber unable to move and see if any one calls you evil.

yet the spell is not evil

To your question the city of brass is lawful evil they own slaves and lots of them this probably wouldn't bother them particularly if you don't use effrete in the casting alternatively it's your campaign change how elemental bindings work.

LurkerInPlayground
2009-09-05, 11:50 PM
OH! When it says that they bind Fire or Air Elementals, I just assumed they meant the statistical Fire Elemental (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/elemental.htm#fireElemental) or Air Elemental (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/elemental.htm#airElemental), both of which have Int scores. Are there non-Intelligent, living Elementals that can be used for binding? I'm really confused.
Uhh . . . Elementals have Int from 4 to 6 in those entries. The Elder Air ones are average Int, but aren't the type of thing the you'd use in that capacity anyway.

They're probably on the level of chimps, if not dumber. And most of that intelligence would probably be more alien than a chimp's anyway.

The typical portrayal of fire elementals is that they're more interested in burning the crap out of everything than they are about getting along with their fellow sentients.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-09-05, 11:56 PM
Uhh . . . Elementals have Int from 4 to 6 in those entries. The Elder ones are average Int, but aren't the type of thing the you'd use in that capacity anyway.

They're probably on the level of chimps, if not dumber. And most of that intelligence would probably be more alien than a chimp's anyway.Int 4-6 is more the level of a child, or someone who is challenged. Chimps are Int 2(like most animals). Though FWIW, I've always thought they didn't give enough variation to the animals, there's no reason a Bat and an Ape should be the same Int.

PId6
2009-09-05, 11:56 PM
Uhh . . . Elementals have Int from 4 to 6 in those entries. The Elder Air ones are average Int, but aren't the type of thing the you'd use in that capacity anyway.

They're probably on the level of chimps, if not dumber. And most of that intelligence would probably be more alien than a chimp's anyway.
Animals have Ints from 1 to 2. Anything 3 and up is considered sentient.

Edit: Darn you ninja!

arguskos
2009-09-05, 11:59 PM
And besides, even if elementals were *only* as smart as chimps, it's still not right, morally speaking, to enslave them for massive periods of time to do our will. When it says "unwilling", it implies that the creature is capable of disagreeing with it's task and not wanting to be bound, meaning the damn thing is smart enough to say "no" and make it stick.

It seems that Eberron is partially based on the enslavement of free willed creatures. Huh. Wonder if Mr. Baker thought that one out?

PId6
2009-09-06, 12:00 AM
It seems that Eberron is partially based on the enslavement of free willed creatures. Huh. Wonder if Mr. Baker thought that one out?
It's probably intended. Eberron is supposed to be more morally gray after all.

arguskos
2009-09-06, 12:04 AM
It's probably intended. Eberron is supposed to be more morally gray after all.
Eh... it's not really implied though, because he even says in Magic of Eberron that no one knows if elementals are intelligent. I personally look at this and conclude that it was looked at after the fact when a fan pointed out that elementals are intelligent, and Baker went, "Oh. Yeah. About that...."

Granted, that's his call to make, and I won't begrudge him it, but it does seem like something that was pretty iconic of the setting was kinda forgotten about.

LurkerInPlayground
2009-09-06, 12:07 AM
Int 4-6 is more the level of a child, or someone who is challenged. Chimps are Int 2(like most animals). Though FWIW, I've always thought they didn't give enough variation to the animals, there's no reason a Bat and an Ape should be the same Int.
Which is probably where D&D is wrong. Chimps probably are as smart as some children without language and they're capable of complex social behaviors.

But that's irrelevant.


And besides, even if elementals were *only* as smart as chimps, it's still not right, morally speaking, to enslave them for massive periods of time to do our will. When it says "unwilling", it implies that the creature is capable of disagreeing with it's task and not wanting to be bound, meaning the damn thing is smart enough to say "no" and make it stick.

It seems that Eberron is partially based on the enslavement of free willed creatures. Huh. Wonder if Mr. Baker thought that one out?
Uhhh. So what?

You know why I hate morality threads? Because they drag on for pages and pages while everybody tries to be the philosopher.

"Moral" just means you have motivations and restraints on your behavior.

Which is to say that I can value enslaving an alien creature to power an airship. If a fire elemental is hell-bent on burning everything in the world, what should I care about its opinion?

I may or may not treat it ethically afterwards, depending on need or inclination; considering that many young chimps get retirement homes after acting or scientific research. However, I'm betting that a fire elemental is probably never going to be friendly, as they're usually portrayed as hostile and alien and interested mostly in burning you.

Intelligence just means that they possess some problem-solving skills that gets put into the service of trying to burn you alive.

And besides, Mr. Baker was setting out to make a noir setting. So it's actually keeping in theme if society turned out to be a little bit two-faced, treacherous and profiteering.

PId6
2009-09-06, 12:11 AM
Which is to say that I can value enslaving an alien creature to power an airship. If a fire elemental is hell-bent on burning everything in the world, what should I care about its opinion?
Eh, where are you getting that? :smallconfused: Elementals are True Neutral. You're probably plucking them from their plane while they're just minding their own business. Maybe you're thinking of fiends?

arguskos
2009-09-06, 12:11 AM
So. Ok, let me get this straight. You are advocating the complete, utter, total enslavement of a creature that is AT LEAST as smart as a child, if not more so, and you seriously expect that some folk might not balk at that one? Right then. Your prerogative I guess.

Also, the veiled insult there was unneeded. :smallwink:

LurkerInPlayground
2009-09-06, 12:13 AM
Eh, where are you getting that? :smallconfused: Elementals are True Neutral. You're probably plucking them from their plane while they're just minding their own business. Maybe you're thinking of fiends?
Elementals are portrayed as forces of nature. Just because a tornado wrecks your home and kills all your loved ones doesn't mean that it did anything other than follow its nature.

Besides, I don't give a damn about what the tornado values. I give a damn about what *I* value.

LurkerInPlayground
2009-09-06, 12:14 AM
So. Ok, let me get this straight. You are advocating the complete, utter, total enslavement of a creature that is AT LEAST as smart as a child, if not more so, and you seriously expect that some folk might not balk at that one? Right then. Your prerogative I guess.

Also, the veiled insult there was unneeded. :smallwink:
Morality doesn't mean "good."

Morality just means you have motivations and restraints on your behavior. It means I can delay gratification and create reasons for why a chosen course of action is beneficial or desirable (i.e. good).

Don't make me repeat myself.

arguskos
2009-09-06, 12:16 AM
Don't make me repeat myself.
Didn't ask you to. Just wanted to be sure I was clear about your opinion on the matter, which, since you did nothing to refute what I gleaned, I can assume I was. Cool then. We'll just differ on this one I think. :smallwink:

Gralamin
2009-09-06, 12:18 AM
Morality doesn't mean "good."

Morality just means you have motivations and restraints on your behavior. It means I can delay gratification and create reasons for why a chosen course of action is beneficial or desirable (i.e. good).

Don't make me repeat myself.

There are three main meanings to Morality.

1) a code of conduct or belief which is held to be authoritative in matters of right and wrong
2) an ideal code of belief and conduct, one which would be espoused in preference to other alternatives by the sane "moral" person, under specified conditions

In its third usage, 'morality' is synonymous with ethics.

You seem to be focusing on the 1st meaning, and Bringing in a lot of your beliefs on what makes something right, wrong, or good.

LurkerInPlayground
2009-09-06, 12:20 AM
Didn't ask you to. Just wanted to be sure I was clear about your opinion on the matter, which, since you did nothing to refute what I gleaned, I can assume I was. Cool then. We'll just differ on this one I think. :smallwink:
I don't think you are clear on my opinion.

You're still stuck in the position of assuming your righteousness. Whereas, I am pointing out, very matter of factly, that your opinions on your own rightness don't really actually matter at all.

Because humans are capable of making that scenario moral. That's the power of our imagination. I can argue that the benefit of an airship far outweighs the opinion of some alien creature.

We do this with chimps all the time. We use them while they're young. We acculture them to human society. They go through trauma. Then we shove them in retirement homes when they get to be too hideously strong.

A less ethical society might simply dispose of theirs rather than stick them in a prison with gilded prison bars.

If we're going to a "code of conduct that is authoritative in matters of right and wrong" than *your* beliefs aren't really important compared to society's beliefs in Eberron.

Believe it or not, slavery was once argued to be moral. And in this case, we're not even sure that elementals qualify as human.

Being that this is a noir setting, it's so doesn't hurt it at all that some aspects of society aren't exactly progressive.

PId6
2009-09-06, 12:20 AM
Elementals are portrayed as forces of nature. Just because a tornado wrecks your home and kills all your loved ones doesn't mean that it did anything other than follow its nature.

Besides, I don't give a damn about what the tornado values. I give a damn about what *I* value.
Yet elementals don't attack anyone unless summoned to do so, which is hardly their fault. You're basically advocating the enslavement of distant sentient races who are perfectly content ignoring you entirely until you pluck them from their homes to work for you. If they go into a destructive rage only because of the fact that you've enslaved them, can you really blame them?

arguskos
2009-09-06, 12:23 AM
All I want is to ensure I am not misunderstanding your point. Thanks for clarifying it further. Is it more correct to say that you are advocating disregarding the creatures in question, since the matter of their intelligence is irrelevant to what the society that uses them cares about?

Considering that I haven't mentioned my own position on the issue, I think you claiming that I'm "stuck on my own righteousness" is a bit unkind to my character. I'm not insulting you, please refrain from insulting me, if you would.

LurkerInPlayground
2009-09-06, 12:26 AM
Yet elementals don't attack anyone unless summoned to do so, which is hardly their fault. You're basically advocating the enslavement of distant sentient races who are perfectly content ignoring you entirely until you pluck them from their homes to work for you. If they go into a destructive rage only because of the fact that you've enslaved them, can you really blame them?
You're thinking in terms of a modern human. Not in literary terms of how elementals tend to be portrayed. Which is that they don't give a toss if they burn down your home.

As to whether they're content to ignore you . . . meh. Merely because they lack the power to journey over to me to burn me doesn't mean they won't, given the opportunity.

LurkerInPlayground
2009-09-06, 12:30 AM
All I want is to ensure I am not misunderstanding your point. Thanks for clarifying it further. Is it more correct to say that you are advocating disregarding the creatures in question, since the matter of their intelligence is irrelevant to what the society that uses them cares about?

Considering that I haven't mentioned my own position on the issue, I think you claiming that I'm "stuck on my own righteousness" is a bit unkind to my character. I'm not insulting you, please refrain from insulting me, if you would.
More or less.

Humans have used children in coal mines before and have kept human slaves as well.

In our fiction, maybe there is a debate. But maybe nobody really cares enough to crusade in the name of Civil Rights for Outsiders.

It's not like the people in your fiction are necessarily as ethical as you are. Or maybe they are.

Or maybe they've given this problem *a lot of thought* and still decided that this wasn't such a bad thing. (Again, we experiment on chimps all the time and will "retire" or "dispose" of them depending on inclination or the law.)

In either case, it's entirely up to you to decide how alien or human those elementals are because you can change their stats on a whim. Although I favor the "alien" approach mostly because this is a noirish setting.

The notion of a human rights movement in a noir setting doesn't seem to fit well within the theme.

PId6
2009-09-06, 12:31 AM
You're thinking in terms of a modern human. Not in literary terms of how elementals tend to be portrayed. Which is that they don't give a toss if they burn down your home.

As to whether they're content to ignore you . . . meh. Merely because they lack the power to journey over to me to burn me doesn't mean they won't, given the opportunity.
So you're justifying slavery by saying you're punishing them for not feeling bad about some crime that they might or might not want to commit and would never have the means to commit unless you punish them thus?

arguskos
2009-09-06, 12:31 AM
Fair enough then. Thanks for indulging my curiosity and answering my questions. :smallsmile:

PId6
2009-09-06, 12:33 AM
More or less.

Humans have used children in coal mines before and have kept human slaves as well.

In our fiction, maybe there is a debate. But maybe nobody really cares enough to crusade in the name of Civil Rights for Outsiders.

It's not like the people in your fiction are necessarily as ethical as you are. Or maybe they are.

Or maybe they've given this problem *a lot of thought* and still decided that this wasn't such a bad thing. (Again, we experiment on chimps all the time and will "retire" or "dispose" of them depending on inclination or the law.)
Saying that it's wrong and saying that it's appropriate for the setting are completely different things. I think it's a perfectly applicable detail of Eberron, and I realize that the convenience of enslaving elementals outweigh the moral implications for most residents of the setting. But that still doesn't mean that the slavery is morally justifiable by our own (and even D&D's) standards.

LurkerInPlayground
2009-09-06, 12:35 AM
So you're justifying slavery by saying you're punishing them for not feeling bad about some crime that they might or might not want to commit and would never have the means to commit unless you punish them thus?
See above.

PId6
2009-09-06, 12:38 AM
See above.
See above.

arguskos
2009-09-06, 12:39 AM
See above.
See above.

....sorry, I just wanted in on the action. :smallbiggrin:

LurkerInPlayground
2009-09-06, 12:40 AM
There are three main meanings to Morality.

1) a code of conduct or belief which is held to be authoritative in matters of right and wrong
2) an ideal code of belief and conduct, one which would be espoused in preference to other alternatives by the sane "moral" person, under specified conditions

In its third usage, 'morality' is synonymous with ethics.

You seem to be focusing on the 1st meaning, and Bringing in a lot of your beliefs on what makes something right, wrong, or good.
In a manner of speaking, that's exactly what I'm saying. And I'd argue that I'm using both definitions in the fullest sense. This definition, doesn't for one moment, mention altruism or empathy. Those things may be very common as part of a moral code, but they aren't universal 100% of the time.

But I'm not talking about *my* beliefs per se. I'm pointing out that the ethical reasoning presented so far in this thread is self-centered and conditioned.

People here are more interested in giving the "right" response, not that the response that makes sense given any number of variables (e.g. whether elementals are "human.")

Again, we use chimps almost in this exact fashion all the time. And poachers all over the world butcher intelligent animals, such as elephants, all the time, simply because there is a strong economic incentive to do so.

In other words, people spend too much time putting on the superficial appearance that they don't condone slavery, regardless of whether enslaving a human or an animal are actually equivalent ethical situations.

This is exactly why I hate morality threads. Because people waste time speaking about their opinions and reaffirming their righteousness rather than actually *saying* anything.

You can be both a moral creature and an utter bastard.

PId6
2009-09-06, 12:40 AM
See above.

....sorry, I just wanted in on the action. :smallbiggrin:
Should have quoted him as well then, like this:




See above.
See above.
See above.
:smalltongue:

awa
2009-09-06, 12:42 AM
to be fair its not an eberon setting its just coping the airship concept so any thing about eberon morality is irrelevant no offense intended. Because the setting is on the elemental plane of fire their should be no question as to whether elemental are intelligent just ask them if you speak ingean.

As a side note many species of fire elemental (note not the elemental elementals) are depicted as dangerous becuase they (being made of fire and living in a world made of fire until forcible removed from that world) don't realize that fire hurt others it just dosent occur to them

PId6
2009-09-06, 12:45 AM
But I'm not talking about *my* beliefs per se. I'm point out that the ethical reasoning presented so far in this thread is self-centered and conditioned. People here are more interested in giving the "right" response, not that the response that makes sense given any number of variables (e.g. whether elementals are "human.")
Actually, the most relevant moral perspective here is the one that the game itself espouses.


"Good" implies altruism, respect for life, and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings. Good characters make personal sacrifices to help others.

"Evil" implies hurting, oppressing, and killing others. Some evil creatures simply have no compassion for others and kill without qualms if doing so is convenient. Others actively pursue evil, killing for sport or out of duty to some evil deity or master.
Elementals are definitely considered "sentient beings" by the game's definition, and enslaving them certainly counts as "oppressing". Thus, enslaving elementals is evil. And being "human" is certainly no qualifier at all in this setting, unless you're willing to ignore every other sentient creature such as elves, gnomes, dragons, outsiders, etc for completely arbitrary reasons.

Gralamin
2009-09-06, 12:48 AM
In a manner of speaking, that's exactly what I'm saying. And I'd argue that I'm using both definitions in the fullest sense. This definition, doesn't for one moment, mention altruism or empathy. Those things may be very common as part of a moral code, but they aren't universal 100% of the time.

But I'm not talking about *my* beliefs per se. I'm pointing out that the ethical reasoning presented so far in this thread is self-centered and conditioned.

People here are more interested in giving the "right" response, not that the response that makes sense given any number of variables (e.g. whether elementals are "human.")

Again, we use chimps almost in this exact fashion all the time. And poachers all over the world butcher intelligent animals, such as elephants, all the time, simply because there is a strong economic incentive to do so.

In other words, people spend too much time putting on the superficial appearance that they don't condone slavery, regardless of whether enslaving a human or an animal are actually equivalent ethical situations.

This is exactly why I hate morality threads. Because people waste time speaking about their opinions and reaffirming their righteousness rather than actually *saying* anything.

The Your beliefs part was referring to the bit on
It means I can delay gratification and create reasons for why a chosen course of action is beneficial or desirable (i.e. good).
I'm sure we can agree that whether that is an acceptable definition will vary from person to person, and thus is your belief?

I'd agree, from an in-setting perspective, there is nothing morally wrong. From an out of setting perspective, its a bit unsettling to some people. The thing to keep in mind about morals is they are just sets of beliefs.

LurkerInPlayground
2009-09-06, 12:48 AM
Elementals are definitely considered "sentient beings" by the game's definition, and enslaving them certainly counts as "oppressing". Thus, enslaving elementals is evil. And being "human" is certainly no qualifier at all in this setting, unless you're willing to ignore every other sentient creature such as elves, gnomes, dragons, outsiders, etc for completely arbitrary reasons.
Except that D&D doesn't quite mention what "sentience" means. And that you can spend quite a bit of time slaughtering sentient creatures depending on play style.

In short, D&D morality/ethics is silly.

jseah
2009-09-06, 12:54 AM
And being "human" is certainly no qualifier at all in this setting, unless you're willing to ignore every other sentient creature such as elves, gnomes, dragons, outsiders, etc for completely arbitrary reasons.
This happens a lot actually.

I'm sure there was a reason for all those wars going on, and the fact that most Houses in Eberron are at least partially race-restricted.

LurkerInPlayground
2009-09-06, 12:54 AM
The Your beliefs part was referring to the bit on
I'm sure we can agree that whether that is an acceptable definition will vary from person to person, and thus is your belief?

I'd agree, from an in-setting perspective, there is nothing morally wrong. From an out of setting perspective, its a bit unsettling to some people. The thing to keep in mind about morals is they are just sets of beliefs.
Yes. I do agree that they're "just a set of beliefs." That's entirely the point I'm trying to arrive at with my overly verbose cogitations.

And even from an out-of-setting perspective, I'd have to know more specifics before I cared to give my personal opinion on whether it's right or wrong.

That it's unsettling to a person really shouldn't be the point if you're trying to write a narrative. A good story ought to contain people who you would never agree with as characters. People who can't stare unflinchingly at human nature probably aren't cut out to being top-shelf writers anyway.

And the simple and blunt fact of the matter is that when people use the word "moral" to mean "altruism and empathy" it's just a common shorthand colloquial use.

But it's a very limited way of using the word that ignores the concept's other relationships. Which is to say that you can be a moral person and still be an utter bastard.

PId6
2009-09-06, 12:55 AM
Except that D&D doesn't quite mention what "sentience" means. And that you can spend quite a bit of time slaughtering sentient creatures depending on play style.

In short, D&D morality/ethics is silly.
From this (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/theBasics.htm#intelligenceInt) page:


An animal has an Intelligence score of 1 or 2. A creature of humanlike intelligence has a score of at least 3.
I think "humanlike" is equivalent to "sentient" here.

And I agree that D&D morality is silly, but it's still relevant here. And slavery is even more untenable under real world morality.

LurkerInPlayground
2009-09-06, 12:57 AM
Elementals are definitely considered "sentient beings" by the game's definition, and enslaving them certainly counts as "oppressing". Thus, enslaving elementals is evil. And being "human" is certainly no qualifier at all in this setting, unless you're willing to ignore every other sentient creature such as elves, gnomes, dragons, outsiders, etc for completely arbitrary reasons.
I mean "human" as in whether or not a creature is of such a status as to deserve equal status as a person.

Which is just a fancy and self-serving way of saying that they're enough like us that we'd feel bad about slaughtering them.

Chickens typically don't get treated that well.

PId6
2009-09-06, 12:59 AM
I mean "human" as in whether or not a creature is of such a status as to deserve equal status as a person.

Which is just a fancy and self-serving way of saying that they're enough like us that we'd feel bad about slaughtering them.

Chickens typically don't get treated that well.
See above. Elementals are quite "humanlike", far more so than chickens.

LurkerInPlayground
2009-09-06, 01:02 AM
And I agree that D&D morality is silly, but it's still relevant here. And slavery is even more untenable under real world morality.
Why is it untenable under real world morality?

Yes, it's true that black people are humans in the every meaningful lawful and scientific sense that we understand the word. So what? It just means our ancestors are mistaken.

You can still be a person who finds slavery justifiable. And it'd still be a moral. And these people do exist. And I'm not just talking about neo-Nazis or white supremacists either. I'm talking about people who think slavery is justifiable, given the permission of a sufficient authority; divine or secular.

Is it ethically tenable under the morality that we all agree with? Probably not.

And in any case, if your definition of "sentience" is a "human-like" creature, by which, I'll assume you mean an animal with advanced abilities to empathize with motives of other members of their species and other such complex social behaviors . . .

Then so what? You haven't set the parameters of whether elementals actually are like that. And even then, we find it moral to sometimes kill members of our own species; and it wouldn't even legally count as murder.

Typical literary portrayals of elementals tend state that they're little more than natural forces with the barest sketch of personality -- in short, inhuman and alien. Hence their name: elementals.

Of course, you could make them pretty much the same as elves or dwarves. But that's boring.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-09-06, 01:05 AM
Chickens typically don't get treated that well.Chickens have Int 1. Elementals have Int 4 at the lowest.

And yes, I'm saying that the smarter you are, the more you matter. This is supported in the D&D-verse by the inclusion of the Wizard class.

LurkerInPlayground
2009-09-06, 01:07 AM
Chickens have Int 1. Elementals have Int 4 at the lowest.

And yes, I'm saying that the smarter you are, the more you matter. This is supported in the D&D-verse by the inclusion of the Wizard class.
What?

So wizards get better treatment in a society and before the law? How egalitarian of you.

There are people who eat chimp brains and kill elephants to feed their starving family.

Your reasoning is flawed at best.

Lysander
2009-09-06, 01:11 AM
Elemental can speak. That's pretty darn sentient, even if they rarely use that ability.

In terms of intelligence I always sort of image them like the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man in Ghostbusters. He doesn't speak, seems pretty plodding and single-minded, goes on a rampage, but still understands what's going on.

LurkerInPlayground
2009-09-06, 01:15 AM
Elemental can speak. That's pretty darn sentient, even if they rarely use that ability.

In terms of intelligence I always sort of image them like the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man in Ghostbusters. He doesn't speak, seems pretty plodding and single-minded, goes on a rampage, but still understands what's going on.
Yeah, somehow, I'm not sure I really want to give Marshmallow Man any civil rights instead of just proton blasting him.

PId6
2009-09-06, 01:19 AM
Why is it untenable under real world morality?

Yes, it's true that black people are humans in the every meaningful lawful and scientific sense that we understand the word. So what? It just means our ancestors are mistaken.

You can still be a person who finds slavery justifiable. And it'd still be a moral. And these people do exist. And I'm not just talking about neo-Nazis or white supremacists either. I'm talking about people who think slavery is justifiable, given the permission of a sufficient authority.

Is it ethically tenable under the morality that we all agree with? Probably not.

And in any case, if your definition of "sentience" is a "human-like" creature, by which, I'll assume you mean an animal with advanced abilities to empathize with motives of other members of their species and other such complex social behaviors . . .

Then so what? You haven't set the parameters of whether elementals actually are like that.

Typical literary portrayals of elementals tend state that they're little more than natural forces with the barest sketch of personality -- in short, inhuman and alien. Hence their name: elementals.

Of course, you could make them pretty much the same as elves or dwarves. But that's boring.
*sigh* If you want to get into moral relativism or specific systems of morality, fine, name your system. But the vast majority of modern moral systems would say that harming other humans (or sentient beings, in this setting), and especially enslaving other humans, is wrong, unless you have a very good reason for doing so (such as self-defense), which slavery rarely has. And the most relevant system, the alignment system of D&D, places such an act as evil as well.

And literary portrayals of elementals are not the issue here; it's only the D&D one (specifically the Eberron one) that matters. It doesn't matter whether having elementals be the same as humans is "boring" by your opinion. And for the record, being sentient and being the same as humans is not the same thing at all; a dragon is undoubtedly sentient, but acts and thinks very differently from humans. Same for many outsiders.

And D&D clearly shows that elementals are sentient. Elementals have Intelligeces ranging from 4 to 10, which is indicative of sentience, since as I've said, anything with Int 3+ has "humanlike" intelligence as defined by the PHB. So you are unambiguously enslaving a sentient creature when you bind an elemental, an evil, and wrong, act.

LurkerInPlayground
2009-09-06, 01:22 AM
*sigh* If you want to get into moral relativism or specific systems of morality, fine, name your system. But the vast majority of modern moral systems would say that harming other humans (or sentient beings, in this setting), and especially enslaving other humans, is wrong, unless you have a very good reason for doing so (such as self-defense), which slavery rarely has. And the most relevant system, the alignment system of D&D, places such an act as evil as well.
And this changes nothing about what I said. Morality just means you have restraints, motivations and can delay gratification. That some moral codes are more universal than others, or otherwise share common elements, doesn't change that basic fact.

Yes, altruism and empathy are common in moral codes. But they aren't the be-all end-all. And they're not even expressed in the same way by the same kinds of ethics.

Even now, you stuck a qualifier in there. You need a "very good reason." You yourself, just admitted that there can be a way where slavery would be acceptable under a given code.

And this is a delicious irony any time the word "morality" gets bandied about. So-called "moralists" are some of the biggest intellectual cowards out there.

Review your words and be enlightened.

PId6
2009-09-06, 01:25 AM
Even now, you stuck a qualifier in there. You need a "very good reason." You yourself, just admitted that there can be a way where slavery would be acceptable under a given code.

Review your words and be enlightened.
A very good reason which most people who utilize elemental binding in Eberron do not have.

You are speaking in very vague generalities here; please be more specific and name a few "good reasons" that would be applicable.

LurkerInPlayground
2009-09-06, 01:29 AM
A very good reason which most people who utilize elemental binding in Eberron do not have.

You are speaking in very vague generalities here; please be more specific and name a few "good reasons" that would be applicable.
I already have.

Marshmellow Man from Ghostbusters. I'd proton blast him. He can solve problems. Woop-dee-doo. He's also an elemental menace to mankind. (Evil doesn't necessarily need malicious intent to occur anyway.)

We experiment on chimps and shove them into retirement homes after they get too big to be manageable to us. And these guys are half-human to the point that they can never be as they were. They pay the price for knowing human culture. And those are the lucky ones that aren't eaten or flat-out killed.

If fire elementals can solve problems but aren't social animals in the sense that we care about, why wouldn't I want to use them as a power source? Especially if all they care about is destruction for destruction's sake. Then it's a massive benefit to humanity if they are properly harnessed.

My house cat has a nearly identical social status. It lounges around the home and gets fed. The only difference is that it doesn't power my engines or try to burn me alive.

In short, I gave examples. You just weren't listening.

PId6
2009-09-06, 01:42 AM
I already have.

Marshmellow Man from Ghostbusters. I'd proton blast him. He can solve problems. Woop-dee-doo. He's also an elemental menace to mankind. (Evil doesn't necessarily need malicious intent to occur anyway.)

We experiment on chimps and shove them into retirement homes after they get too big to be manageable to us. And these guys are half-human to the point that they can never be as they were. They pay the price for knowing human culture. And those are the lucky ones that aren't eaten or flat-out killed.

If fire elementals can solve problems but aren't social animals in the sense that we care about, why wouldn't I want to use them as a power source? Especially if all they care about is destruction for destruction's sake. Then it's a massive benefit to humanity if they are properly harnessed.

My house cat has a nearly identical social status. It lounges around the home and gets fed. The only difference is that it doesn't power my engines or try to burn me alive.

In short, I gave examples. You just weren't listening.
Examples relevant to the situation at hand. I fail to see how a house cat or a chimp have anything to do with elementals, since elementals are sentient while animals are not (and I've no idea about "Marshmellow Man").

And again, as I've said before (which apparently you ignored), elementals do not care at all about destruction. They have no means to do it, nor do they have the will, unless you enslave them in the first place. True. Neutral.

LurkerInPlayground
2009-09-06, 01:45 AM
Examples relevant to the situation at hand. I fail to see how a house cat or a chimp have anything to do with elementals, since elementals are sentient while animals are not (and I've no idea about "Marshmellow Man").
And you've yet to provide a working defintion of "sentience." But don't bother doing it here. I have one. The problem is that you aren't incorporating one for your use.

And yes, chimps are pretty damn sentient. As are elephants.

Elephants have been known to use tools. They've been known to protect humans. They visit the graves of their dead and grieve them in funerary ceremonies and will make efforts to bury them.

Chimps are known to enjoy television. Whereas cats won't even recognize their reflection in the mirror.

So yeah. You need to really think this one thorugh.


And again, as I've said before (which apparently you ignored), elementals do not care at all about destruction. They have no means to do it, nor do they have the will, unless you enslave them in the first place. True. Neutral.
And you are just making up properties of fictitious creatures.

But yeah, usually, fire elementals are about destruction. That's their thing. Sort of like dragons that sleep on piles of gold. And trolls that live under bridges.

Logically, the fact that they lack the power to destroy you says nothing about their inclination for doing so, when given the choice.

Kylarra
2009-09-06, 01:55 AM
And again, as I've said before (which apparently you ignored), elementals do not care at all about destruction. They have no means to do it, nor do they have the will, unless you enslave them in the first place. True. Neutral.



A fire elemental is a fierce opponent that attacks its enemies directly and savagely. It takes joy in burning the creatures and objects of the Material Plane to ashes.


Just saying.

Godskook
2009-09-06, 02:07 AM
As far as making elemental binding sensible around elementals

1.Make it a 'job' for the elementals. Make all the 'work' of binding an elemental to a system be setting up the 'outlet' that the elemental 'hooks up' to. That way, elementals obviously accept this, since it is a line of work they're uniquely suited for. You can even incorporate it into the story at times, for example, by killing off all of the PC's ship's off-duty 'engine crew' elementals, forcing them to land at regular intervals while traveling long distances.

2.Make more 'permenant bindings' a form of punishments for various crimes.

3.Before the 'slave-trade', Africa already had a more 'normal'(read: not profit-based or rather not industrialized) version of slavery. That's why it was so easy for the slave market to start up; black people were the ones doing the 'enslaving' part of it. If you want a more morally-grey elemental binding, draw a lot of analogies to that system.

Omegonthesane
2009-09-06, 02:12 AM
Just saying.

Insert flimsy, perfunctory argument that this is just them being friendly and showing you how great it is back in their home here.


3.Before the 'slave-trade', Africa already had a more 'normal'(read: not profit-based or rather not industrialized) version of slavery. That's why it was so easy for the slave market to start up; black people were the ones doing the 'enslaving' part of it. If you want a more morally-grey elemental binding, draw a lot of analogies to that system.

Are you going to go into detail, or do we lazy mortals have to do our own research?

PId6
2009-09-06, 02:13 AM
Fact 1: Eberron is a D&D setting.
Fact 2: D&D settings use D&D rules.
Fact 3: In D&D, sentience is defined as Int 3+.
Fact 4: Elementals have Int 3+.
Conclusion 1: Elementals are sentient in Eberron.
Fact 5: Animals (including chimps and elephants) have Int 1-2 in D&D.
Conclusion 2: Animals are non-sentient in Eberron.*
Fact 6: In D&D, elementals reside on elemental planes.
Fact 7: Elementals on elemental planes have no natural means to travel to the Prime Material Plane and "seldom leave their home plane except when summoned elsewhere by a spell" according to the MM.
Fact 8: An elemental cannot harm denizens on the Prime Material from its home plane.
Conclusion 3: Elementals are not threats against those on the Prime Material unless summoned by them.
Fact 9: Other types of elementals besides fire (water, air, earth) are bound.
Conclusion 4: Even if fire elementals are "about destruction" as you put it, and even if that justifies enslavement, air, water, and earth elementals still necessitate some justification.
Fact 10: Good in D&D requires "concern for the dignity of sentient beings."
Fact 11: Evil in D&D "debase or destroy innocent life, whether for fun or profit."
Fact 12: Elemental binding in Eberron is slavery of elementals for the sake of profit, which is debasing their lives.
Conclusion 5: According to Conclusion 3, those elementals cannot and have not harmed those on the Prime Material, and thus are innocent.
Conclusion 6: Binding innocent elements who are no threat to anyone, even if they are "about destruction", is debasing sentient lives and is thus evil.

Please address these conclusions if you still argue that elemental binding is not evil in Eberron.

* Note: I do believe that animals should be protected by the same laws as humans, but that's not relevant to the discussion since in D&D, the line between sentience and non-sentience is clearly marked.

PId6
2009-09-06, 02:14 AM
Just saying.
Just saw that, though it only applies to fire elementals and still doesn't justify slavery of them, as I've concluded above.

Kol Korran
2009-09-06, 03:38 AM
i haven't gotten to read the entire thread, as my time is short, but i'll try to contribute as i can:

- the Eberron bound elementals are bound unwillingly, and they keep trying to break off, and then kill those who enslaved them (or just whomever is in the vicinity). they are unwilling slaves.
- do other elementals recognize or respond to the bound elementals? who knows- yes, they ARE intelligent (it could be argued for golems as well- the bound earth spirit powers the golem, but it's not making it's decision. like workers on automated sheeps). Elemental minds are Alien, and thus work differently- do they even care for each other? who knows? that's for the DM to decide.
- Efreets however "feel" much more humanoid in their outlook. but would they consider pure elementals close enough to comfort? i read your comment on the chimpanzees. up until to the trial of the apes nearly no one thought of them as remotely close to humans, much less given similar rights. efreets are known to be cruel and "superior", i suggest you play them that way, considering most other races as simple cattle.
- two other options for your ship, if it's build in the elemental plane of fire: give the bound elementals a special status- they could either be simple slaves (maybe other elementals can notice a special thermal signature on them that identifies them as so? put on by the efreet over lords?) or they could be criminals "doing time"... simpl,e but adds flavour i think.

hope this helped, and sorry if i repeated anything that was said,
Kol.

Bayar
2009-09-06, 03:59 AM
Fact 10: Good in D&D requires "concern for the dignity of sentient beings."
Fact 11: Evil in D&D "debase or destroy innocent life, whether for fun or profit."

Eberron Fact: Good and Evil are not absolute in this setting. It is more of a "Shades of gray". The cardinal of the Silver Flame, who is the order of holier than thou paladins is evil. Heck, most people presented in Eberron are evil but no one does anything to judge them because evil is not really bad. Nor is good actually good.

Take the paladins: they crusaded against lycantrophes. Now look at the Azure city paladins. See any corelation ?



Also, I really should treat my petrol in my car more civilised. It comes from the organic beings that were living a very long time ago and it is not morally right to use them to power my car. Would you use the corpses of your ancestors to power your steam train ? Thought so.

LurkerInPlayground
2009-09-06, 04:08 AM
Eberron Fact: Good and Evil are not absolute in this setting. It is more of a "Shades of gray". The cardinal of the Silver Flame, who is the order of holier than thou paladins is evil. Heck, most people presented in Eberron are evil but no one does anything to judge them because evil is not really bad. Nor is good actually good.

Take the paladins: they crusaded against lycantrophes. Now look at the Azure city paladins. See any corelation ?



Also, I really should treat my petrol in my car more civilised. It comes from the organic beings that were living a very long time ago and it is not morally right to use them to power my car. Would you use the corpses of your ancestors to power your steam train ? Thought so.
Or in short, the setting is noir.

Noir is defined by such archetypes as the femme fatale and the hard-bitten and cynical private eye (who is disillusioned by the corruption/impotence of conventional law enforcement). It's a setting that's supposed to be inherently characterized by a more cynical world view.

Godskook
2009-09-06, 04:18 AM
Are you going to go into detail, or do we lazy mortals have to do our own research?

Mortals? Did I come off cocky or something?

Also, yes, you'll have to do your own research to a degree. While I suppose I could come up with a little more about the subject, my understandings of pre-colonial Africa's slavery systems don't go too much farther than what I've touched upon in my various history classes.

Omegonthesane
2009-09-06, 04:40 AM
Mortals? Did I come off cocky or something?
Nah, I just can't resist the opportunity to snark. Don't worry.


Also, yes, you'll have to do your own research to a degree. While I suppose I could come up with a little more about the subject, my understandings of pre-colonial Africa's slavery systems don't go too much farther than what I've touched upon in my various history classes.
Hm, this doesn't really strengthen your case...

kpenguin
2009-09-06, 04:52 AM
Or in short, the setting is noir.

Noir is defined by such archetypes as the femme fatale and the hard-bitten and cynical private eye (who is disillusioned by the corruption/impotence of conventional law enforcement). It's a setting that's supposed to be inherently characterized by a more cynical world view.

I thought the setting was pulp.

Project_Mayhem
2009-09-06, 07:58 AM
Impassioned philosophical/ethical debate aside, I should point out that, within Eberron, only people who know a lot about elemental binding would even be aware there was a debate. It's kind of implied that the gnomes guard their secrets heavily, so the group of morally accountable indivduals is basically just the gnome binders.

As mentioned waayy earlier, it's also implied that opinion is split as to whether the elementals are sentient. Now, possesing the rulebooks, we are aware that elementals possess 3+ Int, but thats not true for the characters in the setting. Bear in mind the problems that occur in real life when people try to argue that animals are/aren't sentient and that we should/shouldn't eat them - It's not an arguement where one side can be proven to be right.

So, my point is, that only the binders who think the elementals are sentient and still enslave them are definately morally reprehensible. The rest are probably morally on par with most meat eaters*, and everybody else doesn't even know whats going on.

I hope that made sense

*That wasn't a dig - I eat meat

Weezer
2009-09-06, 08:53 AM
Also, I really should treat my petrol in my car more civilised. It comes from the organic beings that were living a very long time ago and it is not morally right to use them to power my car. Would you use the corpses of your ancestors to power your steam train ? Thought so.

Funnily enough for a short while during the industrial revolution in Egypt mummies were burned to power steam trains.

So yes people would use corpses of their ancestors to power a train.

Kylarra
2009-09-06, 09:47 AM
Out of boredom and because it was too hot to sleep last night...

Hypothesize if you will, that the sentient elementals of various types have a society of sorts. Now hypothesize that within such a society, you'll find deviants, criminals as it were. Now, jailing these criminals would take up a lot of time and effort. What if you could outsource these criminals into some sort of work-release program? Where they're confined so they cannot hurt/taint people (other elementals) and their talents are turned to marginally productive ends? What if people (not elementals) would pay you for the "privilege" of using your outcasts in this manner and would even "keep" them for you? I think the leaders of this society would go for it.

To an extent, it solves your morality crisis as the elementals bound are now "evil", insofar as their society construes evil, and you are acting as jailers who oversee their incarceration for the duration of an agreed upon time. (This hypothesizes that you release them after a stated time, assuming that you are dealing with a "less serious" offender, but could also be extended to you only taking "life imprisonment" offenders, depending on your taste).

Leliel
2009-09-06, 10:10 AM
Ach.

I feel the need to explain here that "sentient" does not equal "sapient".

"Sentience" is the ability to feel emotions recognizable by humans.

A dog is sentient. A fish is sentient. It's quite possible that an ant is sentient.

"Sapience" is the ability to reason and think on a level comparable to humans.

An elemental is sentient, not sapient-they feel emotions, but that's about it. They can't reason beyond instinct, they can't think beyond the present.

The "chimp" tautology is inaccurate, as chimpanzees are very close to being, if not truly, sapient. It's why we can't domesticate them.

On a side note, the "sentient not sapient" is an analogy used by archons in my 4E games to justify transforming elementals into more archons-they're giving them the ability to think by changing their natures.

It's not one that's easily knocked over.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-09-06, 10:42 AM
An elemental is sentient, not sapient-they feel emotions, but that's about it. They can't reason beyond instinct, they can't think beyond the present.What makes you think this? Elementals are Int 4 at the lowest, that's still higher than Chimps.

NEO|Phyte
2009-09-06, 10:55 AM
What makes you think this? Elementals are Int 4 at the lowest, that's still higher than Chimps.

Only because all Animals are shoehorned into Int 1-2.

kpenguin
2009-09-06, 11:02 AM
We should also observe that humans can have intelligence scores that are the same as that of an elemental, if they roll low enough. Do these retain their sapiency?

Lysander
2009-09-06, 12:45 PM
Ach.

I feel the need to explain here that "sentient" does not equal "sapient".

"Sentience" is the ability to feel emotions recognizable by humans.

A dog is sentient. A fish is sentient. It's quite possible that an ant is sentient.

"Sapience" is the ability to reason and think on a level comparable to humans.

An elemental is sentient, not sapient-they feel emotions, but that's about it. They can't reason beyond instinct, they can't think beyond the present.

The "chimp" tautology is inaccurate, as chimpanzees are very close to being, if not truly, sapient. It's why we can't domesticate them.

On a side note, the "sentient not sapient" is an analogy used by archons in my 4E games to justify transforming elementals into more archons-they're giving them the ability to think by changing their natures.

It's not one that's easily knocked over.

In D&D terms sentience would be represented by Charisma and sapience by Intelligence. A golem has CHA 1, the absolute minimum to be more than a thing. Elementals on the other hand can have human levels of charisma and intelligence.

Leliel
2009-09-06, 02:59 PM
"Intelligence score" and "sapient" are not the same thing.

If you look at the behavior of elementals, it's easy to tell that they don't plan, although most are "on the ball" as it were.

Forgive me for using a New World of Darkness reference, but it's the first game I learned so:

Take a lesser spirit from that game. Talk to it for a little while. You'll find out that it's quite intelligent and has the ability to plan in the short term. And yet, it isn't sapient, although it's self-aware and very much sentient.

Why? Beacuse a spirit cannot be anything other than what is represents. A fire spirit exists to burn things. A revenge spirit lives to enact brutal justice.

The same holds true for elementals-they cannot be anything except what their nature dictates them to be.

A truly sapient creature as we humans can understand it has the ability to ask "why" this is so-and disobey it, if they so choose.

Binding an elemental is not any more morally wrong then hitching a very smart horse up to a carrige.

You should treat it well, let it rest and stuff. But the actual binding is not in any way a morally gray process.

EDIT: Oh, you said Charisma. The point still stands, but sorry.

awa
2009-09-06, 03:31 PM
pepole need to read the first post this isnt about eberron so whether pepole in eberon know that a elemental has intelligence is irrelevant its set near the city of brass a city i might mention controlled by effrite who can speak to elemental's if they chose becuase they start with ignan. Even the stupidest fire elemental who ever lived is smarter then the smartest chimp/ elephant/ dolphin that ever lived (not including magical altered individuals/ hybrids or other exceptions)

dnd has a black and white morality system if your culture allows slavery then that just means your entire society is evil not that slavery is okay

enslaving violent/ dangerous creatures who have never done you wrong still isnt a good or neutral act just becuase they could theoretically hurt them if you gave them the opportunity to.

they have a wisdom score, an intelligence score and a charisma score that means they are thinking free willed individuals it doesn't matter what elemental in literature or world of darkness do the only elemental that matter are the dnd ones.

All this back and forth straw man arguments is driving me crazy

sorry about the rant just a little exasperated

LurkerInPlayground
2009-09-06, 06:40 PM
dnd has a black and white morality system if your culture allows slavery then that just means your entire society is evil not that slavery is okay

enslaving violent/ dangerous creatures who have never done you wrong still isnt a good or neutral act just becuase they could theoretically hurt them if you gave them the opportunity to.
No. You say that's canon and therefore are deciding that it's black and white, even though D&D has been very traditionally *GREY.* Early versions of D&D were closer to Westerns than they were to Lord of the Rings.

The fact that it's canon doesn't have any bearing on reasoning out the kind of setting you're shooting for.

And the blunt fact of the matter is that we do use sapient AND/OR sentient creatures for our own purposes in the modern world. If we're not eating them, then we're using their body parts or experimenting on them. If it's not outright slavery, it's still simply our way to dominate creatures that we simply deem lesser than ourselves.

Additionally, I take a dim view of others who need to invent wrongs inflicted in the course of a civil discussion. Because I've yet to see a "straw man," but have seen plenty of plain misunderstanding.

Lysander
2009-09-06, 09:19 PM
All this back and forth straw man arguments is driving me crazy

sorry about the rant just a little exasperated

If it makes you feel better, I imagine that this same debate would occur in any world with elemental binding.

awa
2009-09-06, 11:36 PM
i'm not arguing that in real life pepole don't enslave each other and argue that what their doing isn't evil, your arguments that some pepole hurt thinking creatures in real life therefore its okay to bind elemental makes no sense.

In dungeons and dragons where you have alignment and any paladin can just squint at you real hard and determine if you are in fact a bad person morality is a lot more black and white. if you look at races who commonly practice slavery you may notice most of them are evil. They may think that what their doing isn't wrong and that might makes right but all it takes is detect evil/good to see who's wrong or right.

WeeFreeMen
2009-09-07, 01:44 AM
If I were to take a stab at it. I would say "Enlist" the elementals for whatever cause they deem needed.

Maybe lower powered elementals would need the Money or whatever elementals need. (More fire?)

goken04
2009-09-08, 06:23 PM
I don't want to say too much, because I know a member of my campaign occasionally reads the boards, but suffice it to say that this discussion continues to give me good ideas I will definitely be using. Thanks guys!