More 3.5 Alignment Issues

[Kaelaroth]

OK. In 3.5's slightly messed up alignment system, slavery of people is obviously a bad thing. Hence why good people free the poor little slavey-waveys from the bad gobbos and scary dwemons! ()

Yet, what happens when there is a good-aligned town/city/area which still practices slavery. However, rather than utilising normal neutral/good aligned humans, they enslave beings such as Drow and Kuo-Toa, subjecting thme to immense cruelty, and forcing them into humiliation and pain - but claiming that's all right, since they are evil beings. What alignment's that?

[NecroRebel]

Evil.

The Drow, Kua-Toa, Goblinoids, or whatever other evil race you have (even such things as fiends) are pretty clearly sentient beings. Thus, oppressing and hurting them and showing no regard for their dignity or life fits the description of Evil perfectly, and directly contradicts all of the attributes of Good.

In other words, it is Evil, with leanings toward EVIL.

[Dullyanna]

I'd say that's evil, especially with the "immense cruelty and humiliation" bit. And claiming it's alright because they're evil doesn't make it alright. I could cite a very good RL example here, but that'd be a no-no. IMO, there's a distinction between doing battle against eeevil races, and harvesting their bodies/souls. I'd say the culture is Neutral at the very best.

[Mr. Friendly]

*BUZZ*

Slavery is not a Good/Evil issue. It is a Law/Chaos issue.

Slavery is either legal or illegal. Slavery, in general, has rules. In general, slavery is Lawful.

How the slaves are treated modifies that.

A Lawful Good society can have slaves as long as it treats them well. What do you think Conscripted Soldiers and Debtors Prisons are?

A Lawful Neutral society uses slaves as it sees fit within its own rules. (typically not going out of their way to make life better or worse for the slaves)

A Lawful Evil society abuses and treats them cruelly.

Neutral/Good/Evil would be highly variable and Chaotic societies would as well.

[Nerd-o-rama]

Evil. Full stop.

[Morty]

Cruel slavery is Evil, and the fact that the slaves are evil is cheap excuse that doesn't change anything, unless those drow or kuo-toa have done something to deserve such punishment. So those people are plainly and simply Evil.

[Dullyanna]

@Mr. Friendly-there's a difference between a debtor's jail and lifelong servitude, even if the slaves are treated "well".

Edit: Conscription really depends on context, IMO. If your country is being razed by Baron von ****head, who wants control of the mythical fountain of youth that's in your land, then I'd say it's not too bad (As long as you're picking up battle-worthy individuals, instead of kiddies). The poor bastards being drafted into the Baron's army to serve his own selfish interests are victims of an act of eeevil!

[bugsysservant]

Evil, or if your DM is VERY lenient, neutral. Your alignment is generally in relation to yourself. Thus, while you can kill an evil person if doing so would save lives (arguably) and not have it be an evil act, you can't torture people to death just because they are evil. Likewise, you are enslaving evil people not because they are evil, but for slavery, which is an evil act.

Of course you could make the case that a non-evil strongly law aligned community could enslave people based upon past transgressions in a forced work system, but that would be on the basis of broken laws, not pure alignment.

Edit: GAH! So many ninjas

[Kaelaroth]

What if the beings that were enslaved were demons/devils? Sentient, yes, but truly malign, who would easily wish to destroy the peoples of the town?

[bugsysservant]

What if the beings that were enslaved were demons/devils? Sentient, yes, but truly malign, who would easily wish to destroy the peoples of the town?

Probably not, though it wouldn't be good. IIRC, there is a non-evil PrC that deals with essentially tricking demons into slavery (malconvoker?). These are beings of purer hate and malice, so killing them isn't evil, but willful association isn't good, and won't end well, kind of like the Numeroeans dragging Sauron before their king.

[Kaelaroth]

Probably not, though it wouldn't be good. IIRC, there is a non-evil PrC that deals with essentially tricking demons into slavery (malconvoker?). These are beings of purer hate and malice, so killing them isn't evil, but willful association isn't good, and won't end well, kind of like the Numeroeans dragging Sauron before their king.

*blinks*

*blinks again*

*goes to find LotR illustrated dictionary, grumbling*

[SurlySeraph]

What if the beings that were enslaved were demons/devils? Sentient, yes, but truly malign, who would easily wish to destroy the peoples of the town?

Still evil, though less so. With demons/devils, it would make sense for them to be enslaved magically through binding rituals or some such. Magically obligating them to help the town is less evil than the whole chains-and-whips thing.

Remember, the evil slave-keeping races tend to keep members of OTHER evil races as slaves. Hurting evil people is not necessarily good (though it often is).

[kamikasei]

*blinks*

*blinks again*

*goes to find LotR illustrated dictionary, grumbling*

The Numenoreans, Aragorn's ancestors, were so powerful that they actually defeated Mordor in the Second Age. Unfortunately they took Sauron back to their island as a prisoner, where his fast talking pretty soon had him as the power behind the throne leading the High Men in a war on the gods.

So, you know, don't try to get demons to do your dirty work.

[Azerian Kelimon]

LESS evil? Humilliation, pain, and cruelty, are ALWAYS really evil, even when inflicted upon a monster from the Lower Planes. Thinking "He/she/It's a devil/demon/daemon/yugoloth/something else, the kid gloves come off!" is the way to go for becoming a more evil version of

[Zenos]

Well, if they torture and humiliate them that is probably evil. The forcing them to work for them to repent for their evilness could be a neutral act.

[Citizen Joe]

DIE ALIGNMENT THREAD! DIE!
*stab stab*
DIE!

[Mr. Friendly]

@Mr. Friendly-there's a difference between a debtor's jail and lifelong servitude, even if the slaves are treated "well".

Edit: Conscription really depends on context, IMO. If your country is being razed by Baron von ****head, who wants control of the mythical fountain of youth that's in your land, then I'd say it's not too bad (As long as you're picking up battle-worthy individuals, instead of kiddies). The poor bastards being drafted into the Baron's army to serve his own selfish interests are victims of an act of eeevil!

Ah but Slavery does not mean lifelong servitude. Roman slaves had the opportunity to become freemen themselves.

I could see a Lawful Good society which, after winning a war against, say, orcs, enslaved them, but as the orcs became educated and more civilized, they were freed. If the LG society treats them well and without cruelty, they are essentially just POWs in work camps, the difference is that rather than having a warden they have an owner.

Obviously slavery is a fairly slippery slope in D&D, however I do not believe that slavery is, in and of itself, evil. It is not "good", but it isn't (necessarily) "evil" either. It isn't necessarily even Lawful or Chaotic. It simply "is".

In practice though, slavery, as practiced by civilizations, is typically Lawful. Papers have to be kept, records of sale, ownership and the like. Laws have to exist concerning the rights of slaves, etc.

As for the OPs question, the society in question is without a doubt evil. Treating evil cruelly is not good. It is just evil. To be a good society, enslaving them, they would need to treat them with kindness and have laws concerning the welfare of the slaves and conditions under which the slave could go free.

[Tallis]

Not dead yet! :)

Enslaving evil creatures captured in battle could be neatral as long as they are well treated.
Torture, cruelty and humiliation are evil no matter who the target is.

[bugsysservant]

DIE ALIGNMENT THREAD! DIE!
*stab stab*
DIE!

*Parry* *Block*

[Azerian Kelimon]

*Uses Setting Sun Counters, the proceeds to use Dual Boost to Activate Raging Mongoose and Girallon Windmill flesh rip, then uses Time Stands Still. As the opponent takes action, casts Celerity, and Time Stops.* Oh, no, we're having too much fun to quit now.

[Lemur]

DIE ALIGNMENT THREAD! DIE!
*stab stab*
DIE!

Trying to kill an alingment thread just because it's an alignment thread is technically an evil act, you know.

[Citizen Joe]

You can't debate this because none of the terms have been defined...

Where do you draw the line of what you consider slavery rather than simple imprisonment?

How do you define evil?

Depending on where you fall on those definitions, slavery could be anything.

"Arguing on the internet is like running in the Special Olympics. Even if you win, you're still retarded." - Inspirational poster

[SurlySeraph]

Both are somewhat subjective but will be clarified and made more precise as the thread goes on. For example, it looks like we're not going to be considering debtor's prison or conscription forms of slavery.

"How do you define evil?" We don't. That's so subjective that it cannot be agreed on; we can just discuss whether certain things are evil.

As for the last quote... arguing that arguments are stupid is in and of itself an argument! You're arguing too! You're special, just like us! Yaaaaaaay! *claps uncoordinatedly*

[bugsysservant]

"Arguing on the internet is like running in the Special Olympics. Even if you win, you're still retarded." - Inspirational poster

That's officially hilarious! Horible, yet very funny. What's really funny is that my kindergarten teacher (who later went on to become teacher of the year) said that I was retarded.

[Citizen Joe]

OK then we won't argue... I'll just restructure this discussion into a manner that is less alignment thready...

Cite and describe examples of slavery and rate on a moral scale of:
1: People are taken, blinded, deafened and tortured endlessly and forced to do menial work despite the presence of magic or technology that would do it more efficiently.
10: Slaves are revered for their selfless devotion to a cause despite not being paid for the important jobs they do.

[Kaelaroth]

"Arguing on the internet is like running in the Special Olympics. Even if you win, you're still retarded." - Inspirational poster

Shouldn't really be on my thread (), but that's frickin' hilarious. And mean. Very, very mean.

Meanwhile, I have another alignment question. If a bunch of lawful good aligned adventurers are fighting their way through a dungeon full of demons, cultists and mysterious fiends, and while there, they happen to find a bunch of young half-fiends and tieflings asleep in their beds, and one PC kills them, claiming that they would have both alerted their parents to the PC's presence, and have grown up to be cruel and evil, what alignment should he go to/remain?

[Admiral Squish]

Shouldn't really be on my thread (), but that's frickin' hilarious. And mean. Very, very mean.

Meanwhile, I have another alignment question. If a bunch of lawful good aligned adventurers are fighting their way through a dungeon full of demons, cultists and mysterious fiends, and while there, they happen to find a bunch of young half-fiends and tieflings asleep in their beds, and one PC kills them, claiming that they would have both alerted their parents to the PC's presence, and have grown up to be cruel and evil, what alignment should he go to/remain?

I'd say definitely evil. Killing of children, especially in their sleep, is not a good thing. If they were adults, it might be neutral. But, as alternative to their murder, maybe you could transport them out of the dungeon, somehow, and get them adopted by good people? That would be some serious points for good in your favor.

[Nightgaunt]

hmm... let's see

Being Ahead of your Time
..."Even if slavery, torture, or discrimination are condoned by society, they remain evil"...

Naturally you can always feel free to ignore any WotC books, but that's about that.

[Nightgaunt]

If a bunch of lawful good aligned adventurers are fighting their way through a dungeon full of demons, cultists and mysterious fiends, and while there, they happen to find a bunch of young half-fiends and tieflings asleep in their beds, and one PC kills them, claiming that they would have both alerted their parents to the PC's presence, and have grown up to be cruel and evil, what alignment should he go to/remain?

This feels like a troll, but I'll answer anyway:

Violence
... In fact, even launching a war upon a nearby tribe of evil orcs is not necessarily good if the attack comes without provocation - the mere existence of evil orcs is not a just cause for war against them, if the orcs have been causing no harm.

The answer is really DM fiat though, your players need to have a clear understading of what is Good and what is Evil in your campaign. The descriptors given in the PHB are reasonable, but not specific enough to account for all variances. If the player wants to do that say, "Not in my campaign world, here it is evil". But make sure the player is aware of that prior to the act. Don't penalize a character for using his values of Good and Evil in your campaign world and then declare him evil later. He grew up in your world and should have some understanding of it's values. Especially in a world of D&D, where alignments are cut and dry with spells and gods to enforce them.

[Citizen Joe]

Meanwhile, I have another alignment question. If a bunch of lawful good aligned adventurers are fighting their way through a dungeon full of demons, cultists and mysterious fiends, and while there, they happen to find a bunch of young half-fiends and tieflings asleep in their beds, and one PC kills them, claiming that they would have both alerted their parents to the PC's presence, and have grown up to be cruel and evil, what alignment should he go to/remain?

Let me rephrase your question. A bunch of vigilantees break into a crack den, killing a bunch of dope heads and drug dealers when they come across a couple kids asleep but with obvious needle tracks and that sickly druggy palour. One of the vigilantees kills them because they might alert the rest of the drug dealers and they would have grown up to be addicts and dealers themselves.

The key point here is that they are being vigilantees... so I'm not sure where lawful good falls into play if they are acting that way.

To answer your question, you shouldn't ask US you should ask your player what he thinks should happen to the alignment.