117 réponses à ce sujet

[DraCZeQQ]

So buying a slave and treat him nice is being evil and letting him be bought by some spoiled rich @#$%^ is being good?

[Haussier]

DraCZeQQ wrote...

So buying a slave and treat him nice is being evil and letting him be bought by some spoiled rich @#$%^ is being good?

if you freed said slave you would be good. If you kept said slave it would be evil. Whether you were kind or mean is unrelated to you owning him as a slave.

100 sov. sounds right if their healthy. People can be breed much like any other living being.

Also in all countries in DA besides Tevinter slavary is outlawed.

Modifié par Haussier, 23 février 2011 - 02:48 .

[AlexXIV]

Purgatious wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

Purgatious wrote...

I'm Irish, we we're enslaved for 400 years by Britian, THOS OFFENDS ME!!!!!!!!1111

herp.

Don't irish people solve their problems by going to the pub and drink until they fall over?

We're free aren't we?

I never said it doesn't work.

[Zkyire]

Haussier wrote...

DraCZeQQ wrote...

So buying a slave and treat him nice is being evil and letting him be bought by some spoiled rich @#$%^ is being good?

if you freed said slave you would be good. If you kept said slave it would be evil. Whether you were kind or mean is unrelated to you owning him as a slave.

100 sov. sounds right if their healthy. People can be breed much like any other living being.

Also in all countries in DA besides Tevinter slavary is outlawed.

It's not as simple as that. This is a time where the majority are poor. If you're rich enough to buy a slave, you can afford to give that person a good life. Buy them as a slave and then keep them on as a servant or whatever. As opposed to saying "I bought you, now you're free.. go live the with other Elves in the Alienage.. in abstract poverty and filth!"

[SnowHeart1]

Or you could "buy them", free them, and then pay them a living wage to work for you. Or find someone living in poverty and offer them the same. Just because people are poor does not give you license to abuse them, and yes, taking away their freedom is abuse. (God, I had thought moral relativism was dead.)

[Maconbar]

AlexXIV wrote...

DraCZeQQ wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

DraCZeQQ wrote...

Well LadyHawke has hers mansion. And Im pretty sure she wont be cleaning, sweeping taking care of it. So she NEEDS some servants. And its pretty much the same if she hire some elf or buy elf slave and treat him nice ... but still her armor must be polished, her clothes washed, floor swept and dinner ready! =)

So if you work for someone it is the same as being a slave?

Never said that ... I said that my mansion needs servant(s) ... and it doesnt matter whenever they are hired or bought ... I must say you guys are terrible at roleplay if this is whats bothering you

So being against slavery is bad roleplay?

I am not bothered, just wondering.

No. Slavery isn't acceptable in all parts of Thedas.

[Haussier]

IEatWhatIPoo wrote...

Haussier wrote...

DraCZeQQ wrote...

So buying a slave and treat him nice is being evil and letting him be bought by some spoiled rich @#$%^ is being good?

if you freed said slave you would be good. If you kept said slave it would be evil. Whether you were kind or mean is unrelated to you owning him as a slave.

100 sov. sounds right if their healthy. People can be breed much like any other living being.

Also in all countries in DA besides Tevinter slavary is outlawed.

It's not as simple as that. This is a time where the majority are poor. If you're rich enough to buy a slave, you can afford to give that person a good life. Buy them as a slave and then keep them on as a servant or whatever. As opposed to saying "I bought you, now you're free.. go live the with other Elves in the Alienage.. in abstract poverty and filth!"

And if they wanted to leave? What then? What if they wanted pay? Would you pay them as a servent? I think it is indeed as simple as this. That being said this is a game and if you wish to roleplay a guy who is pro slave or one who justifies it because he is not as cruel as other masters thats fine. I'm not offended by the talk I just have strong moral convictions about this topic.

[Zkyire]

Haussier wrote...

IEatWhatIPoo wrote...

Haussier wrote...

DraCZeQQ wrote...

So buying a slave and treat him nice is being evil and letting him be bought by some spoiled rich @#$%^ is being good?

if you freed said slave you would be good. If you kept said slave it would be evil. Whether you were kind or mean is unrelated to you owning him as a slave.

100 sov. sounds right if their healthy. People can be breed much like any other living being.

Also in all countries in DA besides Tevinter slavary is outlawed.

It's not as simple as that. This is a time where the majority are poor. If you're rich enough to buy a slave, you can afford to give that person a good life. Buy them as a slave and then keep them on as a servant or whatever. As opposed to saying "I bought you, now you're free.. go live the with other Elves in the Alienage.. in abstract poverty and filth!"

And if they wanted to leave? What then? What if they wanted pay? Would you pay them as a servent? I think it is indeed as simple as this. That being said this is a game and if you wish to roleplay a guy who is pro slave or one who justifies it because he is not as cruel as other masters thats fine. I'm not offended by the talk I just have strong moral convictions about this topic.

Yes if they wanted to leave then let them leave. But don't just say "I bought you, now you're free, because freedom is more important than living a long, healthy and safe life."

Would you rather be servant to a wealthy person, living in a clean and safe environment, having all the food you want, and actually having a wage (even if it's only a tiny bit). Or would you rather be masterless, living in a filthy environment, filled with thieves and thugs, with no money, no hot water, and little food?

If it was me, personally, I'd buy the slaves, then have them work off the money I spent on them (so I can use that to buy more, and so on). Then once they had worked it off, I'd give them a choice, continue working (I'd give them a wage at that point) so they can have their own money, their own home etc. Or just flat out leave.

The absolute worst thing to do is just buy them and immediately set them free. Then what? You're out of money (so you can't help more people) and they're right back where they started: penniless, on their own, with a good chance of ending up a slave again, only the next person who buys them wont be so nice.

Modifié par IEatWhatIPoo, 23 février 2011 - 03:08 .

[DraCZeQQ]

IEatWhatIPoo wrote...

Haussier wrote...

IEatWhatIPoo wrote...

Haussier wrote...

DraCZeQQ wrote...

So buying a slave and treat him nice is being evil and letting him be bought by some spoiled rich @#$%^ is being good?

if you freed said slave you would be good. If you kept said slave it would be evil. Whether you were kind or mean is unrelated to you owning him as a slave.

100 sov. sounds right if their healthy. People can be breed much like any other living being.

Also in all countries in DA besides Tevinter slavary is outlawed.

It's not as simple as that. This is a time where the majority are poor. If you're rich enough to buy a slave, you can afford to give that person a good life. Buy them as a slave and then keep them on as a servant or whatever. As opposed to saying "I bought you, now you're free.. go live the with other Elves in the Alienage.. in abstract poverty and filth!"

And if they wanted to leave? What then? What if they wanted pay? Would you pay them as a servent? I think it is indeed as simple as this. That being said this is a game and if you wish to roleplay a guy who is pro slave or one who justifies it because he is not as cruel as other masters thats fine. I'm not offended by the talk I just have strong moral convictions about this topic.

Yes if they wanted to leave then let them leave. But don't just say "I bought you, now you're free, because freedom is more important than living a long, healthy and safe life."

Would you rather be servant to a wealthy person, living in a clean and safe environment, having all the food you want, and actually having a wage (even if it's only a tiny bit). Or would you rather be masterless, living in a filthy environment, filled with thieves and thugs, with no money, no hot water, and little food?

If it was me, personally, I'd buy the slaves, then have them work off the money I spent on them (so I can use that to buy more, and so on). Then once they had worked it off, I'd give them a choice, continue working (I'd give them a wage at that point) so they can have their own money, their own home etc. Or just flat out leave.

The absolute worst thing to do is just buy them and immediately set them free. Then what? You're out of money (so you can't help more people) and they're right back where they started: penniless, on their own, with a good chance of ending up a slave again, only the next person who buys them wont be so nice.

Exactly my point ... I completly agree!

[SnowHeart1]

Actually, yes, to some people freedom is more important than a long life, particularly if it's a long life spent separated from your family and emptying some rich fool's chamber pot. "But hey, I got a full tummy, so it's all good!" Come on. You're totally trying to justify a corrupt and dehumanizing system simply by saying, "Well, I didn't whip my slaves." Let's clap you in irons, maybe have you raped a few times to break your will, put you up on a platform in rags, then sell you to some benighted person who "buys" you, takes you forever away from your family and tells you, "You should thank me for buying you and giving you food and shelter; I could have you flogged if I wanted to but I won't, that's just how nice a guy I am." Nevermind the fact that even by buying the slave in the first place you're helping to provide demand for a market in which other people will be horribly brutalized by others. This is exactly why some people got pissed off about this topic by one of the original responses; because for some people it's apparently not just about RPing but definitely comes across as trying to justify a certain kind of slavery. Jeebuz, some people...

Modifié par SnowHeart1, 23 février 2011 - 03:22 .

[Drowsy0106]

[quote]IEatWhatIPoo wrote...

[quote]Haussier wrote...

[quote]IEatWhatIPoo wrote...

[quote]Haussier wrote...

[quote]DraCZeQQ wrote...

So buying a slave and treat him nice is being evil and letting him be bought by some spoiled rich @#$%^ is being good?[/quote]

if you freed said slave you would be good. If you kept said slave it would be evil. Whether you were kind or mean is unrelated to you owning him as a slave.

100 sov. sounds right if their healthy. People can be breed much like any other living being.

Also in all countries in DA besides Tevinter slavary is outlawed.[/quote]

It's not as simple as that. This is a time where the majority are poor. If you're rich enough to buy a slave, you can afford to give that person a good life. Buy them as a slave and then keep them on as a servant or whatever. As opposed to saying "I bought you, now you're free.. go live the with other Elves in the Alienage.. in abstract poverty and filth!"

[/quote]

The absolute worst thing to do is just buy them and immediately set them free. 

[/quote]




Agreed, that would be a very bad investment. 

Modifié par Drowsy0106, 23 février 2011 - 03:15 .

[Haussier]

IEatWhatIPoo wrote...

Haussier wrote...

And if they wanted to leave? What then? What if they wanted pay? Would you pay them as a servent? I think it is indeed as simple as this. That being said this is a game and if you wish to roleplay a guy who is pro slave or one who justifies it because he is not as cruel as other masters thats fine. I'm not offended by the talk I just have strong moral convictions about this topic.

Yes if they wanted to leave then let them leave. But don't just say "I bought you, now you're free, because freedom is more important than living a long, healthy and safe life."

Would you rather be servant to a wealthy person, living in a clean and safe environment, having all the food you want, and actually having a wage (even if it's only a tiny bit). Or would you rather be masterless, living in a filthy environment, filled with thieves and thugs, with no money, no hot water, and little food?

If it was me, personally, I'd buy the slaves, then have them work off the money I spent on them (so I can use that to buy more, and so on). Then once they had worked it off, I'd give them a choice, continue working (I'd give them a wage at that point) so they can have their own money, their own home etc. Or just flat out leave.

The absolute worst thing to do is just buy them and immediately set them free. Then what? You're out of money (so you can't help more people) and they're right back where they started: penniless, on their own, with a good chance of ending up a slave again, only the next person who buys them wont be so nice.

if your going for the rich philanthropist I would suggest first freeing the man and then offering him a wage to stay on as a servent. This way you can build him back up to some resemblence of a man again.

Truthfully if you buy slaves you are simply perpetuating a brutal business that results in the torture and deaths of the innocent and powerless. Just my point of view.

[Zkyire]

SnowHeart1 wrote...

Actually, yes, to some people freedom is more important than a long life, particularly if it's a long life spent separated from your family and emptying some rich fool's chamber pot. "But hey, I got a full tummy, so it's all good!" Come on. You're totally trying to justify a corrupt and dehumanizing system simply by saying, "Well, I didn't whip my slaves." Let's clap you in irons, maybe have you raped a few times to break your will, put you up on a platform in rags, then sell you to some benighted person who "buys" you, takes you forever away from your family and tells you, "You should thank me for buying you and giving you food and shelter; I could have you flogged if I wanted to but I won't, that's just how nice a guy I am." Nevermind the fact that even by buying the slave in the first place you're helping to provide demand for a market in which other people will be horribly brutalized by others. This is exactly why some people got pissed off about this topic by one of the original responses; because for some people it's apparently not just about RPing but definitely comes across as trying to justify a certain kind of slavery. Jeebuz, some people...

Read what I said. I didn't say anything about mistreating them, or about flogging them, or about keeping them away from their families forever. You're putting words in my mouth.

If I, the benevolent buyer, didn't buy them, then chances are they would have been bought buy someone who would mistreat them. Who would flog them, who would keep them locked up forever. I'd only keep them until the debt was paid and they had some coin in their own pockets. Then give them the choice to stay or leave. THEIR CHOICE.

If you just buy them, then set them free, you're out of money. Meaning you are poorer for it, meaning you wont be able to buy more to help them.

If you buy them and then give them money and then set them free, you're out of even more money. Again, meaning you are poorer for it, meaning you wont be able to buy more to help them.

If you keep that up you'll only be able to help a handful.

But by keeping them on as indentured servants (still giving them a wage) they can pay off their debt, AND they can earn some coin for themselves, all the while living in a safe environment. Then when their debt is paid off, they can leave, on their own free will. That way, they're free, and they have some money to start a new life, and you have your money back so you can buy another slave and give that person the same chance. And again and again and again. In the long run allowing you to help a lot more people than if you just bought a handful and went "Now you're all free.. I don't care where you go or what happens to you, bye".

What's the alternative? You don't buy any slaves at all? Then they will end up in the hands of cruel, heartless bastards who will abuse them, for life. They'll never see their friends or families again, they'll never go home, they'll be miserable and suffer until the day they die.

You're saying my way is immoral? Is it not more immoral to set them back into the cold, alone, with no money, no food? Oh hey, it doesn't matter, you're free! Yeah free to wander alone, hungry and destitute. Hey, maybe you can even go back to an Alienage and live off scraps.

[DraCZeQQ]

Or we can actually murder the slavers and free the slaves and ask the cute ones if they wanna work for us ... damn ... since murder is better then slavery, why we havent though about this earlier! =)

[Zkyire]

Haussier wrote...

if your going for the rich philanthropist I would suggest first freeing the man and then offering him a wage to stay on as a servent. This way you can build him back up to some resemblence of a man again.

Truthfully if you buy slaves you are simply perpetuating a brutal business that results in the torture and deaths of the innocent and powerless. Just my point of view.

But you're not in total power. You're just one wealthy person. You not buying them wont stop the slave trade.

Modifié par IEatWhatIPoo, 23 février 2011 - 03:39 .

[SnowHeart1]

Poo, read what I and Haussier wrote, then reread what you wrote. We never suggested YOU were doing the flogging, nonetheless, yes, your proposal is immoral. Seriously. This was kind of the money quote (paraphrasing): "I'm out some money if I free them." Really? Thanks, that about sums it up. Nice to see benevolence in action. This thread is reaching a level of moral absurdity that I'm just checking out of it entirely. Have fun kids.

[Zkyire]

DraCZeQQ wrote...

Or we can actually murder the slavers and free the slaves and ask the cute ones if they wanna work for us ... damn ... since murder is better then slavery, why we havent though about this earlier! =)

That would be the best option, the problem being there's a lot of slavers, and they're well armed. It'd be bloody and cost many lives.

[Zkyire]

SnowHeart1 wrote...

Poo, read what I and Haussier wrote, then reread what you wrote. We never suggested YOU were doing the flogging, nonetheless, yes, your proposal is immoral. Seriously. This was kind of the money quote (paraphrasing): "I'm out some money if I free them." Really? Thanks, that about sums it up. Nice to see benevolence in action. This thread is reaching a level of moral absurdity that I'm just checking out of it entirely. Have fun kids.

THAT'S THE POINT.

If you have 100 sovereigns and buy 10 slaves at 10 sovereigns each. Then set them all free. Then what? you now have 0 sovereigns. You can't buy any more slaves to set them free. You've only helped 10 people.

But if you have 100 sovereigns and buy 10 slaves at 10 sovereigns each, then make them work off that debt. THEN set them free. You have helped free 10 people, and now have your 100 sovereigns back so you can buy 10 MORE people to FREE them too.

You are being short sighted for the sake of "absolute freedom". Money IS an issue. It allows you to help MORE people.

[koshindan]

SnowHeart1 wrote...

Poo, read what I and Haussier wrote, then reread what you wrote. We never suggested YOU were doing the flogging, nonetheless, yes, your proposal is immoral. Seriously. This was kind of the money quote (paraphrasing): "I'm out some money if I free them." Really? Thanks, that about sums it up. Nice to see benevolence in action. This thread is reaching a level of moral absurdity that I'm just checking out of it entirely. Have fun kids.

He's right about being "out some money." If you spend money on a slave and immediately free him, you lose the substantial investment into it. It does seem somewhat callous, but considering that having that one slave work off the debt (in better conditions than they probably lived in before), they would be able to buy and ultimately free another slave. There really isn't a way to free people from slavery without doing something that would soil your hands. 

-----------

One interesting thing about the seemingly large cost is that it is somewhat realistic. In the real world, a slave was an expensive thing that you had to provide for and shelter. One big thing discovered after slaves were freed in the US was that it ended up being cheaper to pay the barest of wages and have those people try to find their own places to live in and feed themselves, which leads to the Alienage reasoning.

[Hathur]

I think the writers completely overlooked the historic facts as to why the human race used / had slaves in the first place (other than the fact because we're a disgusting species full of hatred and cruelty...)... Slaves were preferred to paid-labor because it was immensely less expensive to force someone to do your work than to pay them a fair wage to do it.

Ancient Romans, Egyptians, the Americans, much of Europe, etc all used slaves because it was absurdly cheap to force people to work for you... that was the whole point of it.

People sold slaves in our species history (and still do in some parts of the world) and made a profit not by selling them for a huge amount per head, but because they sold them cheap and in bulk.... slaves were more often than not, expendable... you wanted slaves cheap because if one got sick or died, you could throw him/her away and buy a new one.

Now in DA2, we're hearing about 100 sovereigns for a SINGLE slave? In DAO 100 gold coins was a LOT of damn money... hell you could buy several suits of massive plate mail armor for that!

What the hell kind of slaves were they selling? Were their feces and urine made of pure gold that warranted they be so valuable? Did they have mind reading powers that could help a wealthy ruler scan the minds of all his enemies so he'd know where to attack them?

Seriously.. I think that Bioware simply forgot what slaves are or how the concept of slavery worked from an economics perspective. As it stands, their idea of slavery boggles the mind moreso than a world with elves & magic spells.

Modifié par Hathur, 23 février 2011 - 03:49 .

[Haussier]

IEatWhatIPoo wrote...

Haussier wrote...

if your going for the rich philanthropist I would suggest first freeing the man and then offering him a wage to stay on as a servent. This way you can build him back up to some resemblence of a man again.

Truthfully if you buy slaves you are simply perpetuating a brutal business that results in the torture and deaths of the innocent and powerless. Just my point of view.

But you're not in total power. You're just one wealthy person. You not buying them wont stop the slave trade.

Exactly. It is true that not buying them won't stop them from making and selling slaves, but neither will buying them and setting them free. Covering up the wound won't help if you don't stop the bleeding first. One must first attack the source of the problem before one can treat the symptoms.

[koshindan]

Hathur wrote...


Now in DA2, we're hearing about 100 sovereigns for a SINGLE slave? In DAO 100 gold coins was a LOT of damn money... hell you could buy several suits of massive plate mail armor for that!

I think the increased cost is probably artificial inflation from it being illegal almost everywhere. Plus the slave counts as a rechargeable mana battery, so their cost has to compete with lyrium, and that is even more restricted.

Modifié par koshindan, 23 février 2011 - 03:54 .

[CaptainZaysh]

IEatWhatIPoo wrote...

THAT'S THE POINT.

If you have 100 sovereigns and buy 10 slaves at 10 sovereigns each. Then set them all free. Then what? you now have 0 sovereigns. You can't buy any more slaves to set them free. You've only helped 10 people.

But if you have 100 sovereigns and buy 10 slaves at 10 sovereigns each, then make them work off that debt. THEN set them free. You have helped free 10 people, and now have your 100 sovereigns back so you can buy 10 MORE people to FREE them too.

You are being short sighted for the sake of "absolute freedom". Money IS an issue. It allows you to help MORE people.

Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

[CaptainZaysh]

A poster pointed out above that by turning 5 tricks a day your sex slave pays for herself in a year. After that it's all profit.

[Haussier]

Hathur wrote...

I think the writers completely overlooked the historic facts as to why the human race used / had slaves in the first place (other than the fact because we're a disgusting species full of hatred and cruelty...)... Slaves were preferred to paid-labor because it was immensely less expensive to force someone to do your work than to pay them a fair wage to do it.

Ancient Romans, Egyptians, the Americans, much of Europe, etc all used slaves because it was absurdly cheap to force people to work for you... that was the whole point of it.

People sold slaves in our species history (and still do in some parts of the world) and made a profit not by selling them for a huge amount per head, but because they sold them cheap and in bulk.... slaves were more often than not, expendable... you wanted slaves cheap because if one got sick or died, you could throw him/her away and buy a new one.

Now in DA2, we're hearing about 100 sovereigns for a SINGLE slave? In DAO 100 gold coins was a LOT of damn money... hell you could buy several suits of massive plate mail armor for that!

What the hell kind of slaves were they selling? Were their feces and urine made of pure gold that warranted they be so valuable? Did they have mind reading powers that could help a wealthy ruler scan the minds of all his enemies so he'd know where to attack them?

Seriously.. I think that Bioware simply forgot what slaves are or how the concept of slavery worked from an economics perspective. As it stands, their idea of slavery boggles the mind moreso than a world with elves & magic spells.

Theoretically you would only buy a few then breed them to create more then sell a few of the offspring to quickly make up the profit. Slaving was and still is a very profitable business even with the huge costs.

Just an fyi Slavery still exists in some form in every country in the world. For instance here in the US sex slaves are more common than you would think... Also you hear about some rich wacko bringing over an illegal foreigner and forcing them to work for free or they'll "turn" them into immigration (a note those who are victims of illegal human trafficking will not be deported and will be given asylum along with their famalies that are still abroad).