Print

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

[Sirus]

The trailer made me LOL, and was surprisingly well-made. Almost looked real.

Also, a game with mechanics like the one ^^^above^^^ would be totally awesome, and I would play it (assuming that those weren't the ONLY tactics available, just the really bastardy ones).

[Jasper]

http://www.gamekings.tv/videos/interview-slavery-the-game/

As many suspected the trailer has been confirmed fake. (to generate publicity for a tv series about the dutch slave trade)

[ThtblovesDF]

Even just in DF, imagine some slave mechanics, kobolds can be taken to a slave fella (much like animal trainer) and after a not-in-detail-explained-training, you can assign slaves to Nobles who have that specific desire, as well as guards.

The slaves have a moral system not unlike dwarfs as well as a rebellion meter... being near dwarfs for example keeps it low, being on there own or left alone with other slaves, starving, a dwarf-master who enjoys pain, would raise it.

Dwarfs at a certain level try to get weapons... a chair, a dagger, a dwarf child... and eventually if really pushed, trys to make a run for it. Slaves that are close to him/her (bonus for same race) will try to join if there moral is close to breaking.

Maybe have a mechanic where a unit will build fear the more it damages/kills other slaves... say there is a dragon that gets feed slaves... as long as he is around, his "fear" will keep most other slaves in control. Or the slave master, whatever.

[Fniff]

I don't think dwarves endorse slavery.

[Frumple]

... do you not remember/know of the mermaid bone discussion?

I don't think dwarves do in the raws, though. Not like it wouldn't take three seconds to fix that.

[Virex]

Play as a Spartiate and fight wars with your helots, then have your perioiki write poems about how you totally did all that yourself!

I hope you do realize the Spartans regarded the people they conquered as little better than livestock?

[a1s]

Slavery, as potential game mechanic, is rather massive. Imagine your favorite rts or even rpg, now add the ability to capture and morally break the enemy, forcing his troops and men to work for you.

Oh, you mean like Pokemon?

[ThtblovesDF]

Nice a1s, nice...

[Servant Corps]

http://www.gamekings.tv/videos/interview-slavery-the-game/

As many suspected the trailer has been confirmed fake. (to generate publicity for a tv series about the dutch slave trade)

I actually wonder if Dutch Slave Traders did end up using the club that was showcased in that fake trailer.

[nenjin]

That was the first question that popped into my head too

[Viken]

What really gets me is that after the US abolished slavery, most of the world followed suit.  No one wanted another civil war in their hands, atleast in the Western countries.  And yet, the vast majority of African countries enslaved their own people, first starting with the slave trade, and then in other areas of their economy; like the Blood Diamond debacle that went on in the '90s.

I see it as something bloody amusing, cause you can't bring up the topic to an African American in this country without them pointing out that the whites enslaved them; and yet if you point out the fact that their own countrymen put them into that position, and where still doing it, they'd denie it up and down or try to change the subject. 

[Cthulhu]

Yes, I've heard that argument before.  It still boils down to whites exploiting and fucking up a primitive society.  They'd created the demand for slaves, and unscrupulous africans were more than willing to make rivals disappear for a quick buck.  The same thing would happen if you created a blood trade for white people.

They were ignorant and silly, and we had a responsibility to enlighten them or at least leave them alone.  As can be seen from pretty much every primitive society discovered by modern man, we couldn't handle it.

[Servant Corps]

And yet, the vast majority of African countries enslaved their own people

Slavery in Africa (and possibly in the rest of the world, pre-Transatlantic Slave Trade) was much more about 'fictive kinship' than the Slavery we know of today. There were obligations a slave must give to his master, but also obligations a master must give to his slave. The only real difference is that a slave will likely be treated only as a child in this kinship relationship at best, and can't grow out of this status as a "junior" member of the family to become a "senior member". In fact, because slaves can be trusted to swear loyalty only to their masters, some Kings would give slaves political power, trusting them to not form an independent power base that could go against the interests of the Kings.

Probably is still a horribly brutal system of oppression, but you are comparing two unlike systems. In the Transatlantic Slave Trade, slaves were "chattel", merely property and a form of capital, and there was no obligation a master must give to his slave.

[Sappho]

They were ignorant and silly, and we had a responsibility to enlighten them or at least leave them alone.  As can be seen from pretty much every primitive society discovered by modern man, we couldn't handle it.

Ah, the ol' White Man's Burden. This society does not contain all of the things that I define as "civilized," therefore I have a responsibility to these savages to change it. Nevermind that it's a complex, intricate, sustainable society that they're perfectly happy with. If we don't bring them Christianity and refrigerators, they're no better than animals! Golly, it sure is tough being the only race in the world to have figured out the right way to live...

"Primitive" is a term invented by Europeans to describe everything non-European (obviously this has changed now to be something more like "non-monotheistic"). It's the same as the Romans calling everyone not Roman "barbarian." African languages are generally far more complex than Indo-European ones, society is generally more complex as well, and also generally more egalitarian. In fact, the last egalitarian society on the planet that we know of exists (or existed, they've mostly been integrated with CIVILIZATION now) in Africa - the !Kung. There were no leaders because none were needed. They lived in a society of equals and an environment of plenty. They spent all their time gathering nuts, occasionally hunting, and playing games. Good thing the White Man went on in there and taught them about Jesus and Coca-Cola and developed that land into something "useful." Now that there's not enough nuts for everyone they've all been forced to move to the cities and get jobs and tin-roofed hovels in the slums.

Sorry for the rant, but this is a super raw nerve for me.

[Frumple]

On the flip side, internet and antibodies have a lot going for 'em. It's kinda' neat that we could theoretically feed the entire world with a pop per mi^2 much larger than a lower-tech sustainable population could with the produce of a single country, even if we don't. Consumerism and industrialism has less to offer (and is in the process of killing our species and our planet's biosphere, yaaay _not), but there was a lot that so called civilization could have offered without screwing so much up. They didn't and here we are, but yeah.

In any case, it's not the white man's burden, but the human's burden to humanity, which humans have been failing at horrifically for ever and ever and ever. Hope for the future! _{because the past's already screwed up}

The british empire was pretty much a dick, though. Can't argue with that. Quick Edit: Not that I'm actually arguing with Sappho's points, which were pretty spot on. Just pointing out the bright side to social organization beyond subsistence farming/hunter-gatherer stuff.