Print

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

[Lyn Farel]

Most of the RPers that play slavers I know are perfectly conscious of this. Characters that often do think like "slavery = bad/evil" are foreigners for the most part, in my experience.

[Nicoletta Mithra]

Well, what you say would be how a holder is expected to care for his slaves. There are, though, good and bad holders. Thing is people outside like to rather think of Amarr and the practice of slavery as morally abhorrent none the less.

What makes playing an Amarrian slaveholder unattractive isn't so much that there is no one thinking of it like you suggest, but rather the consequence that regardless of whether you're a benevolent holder or no, everyone outside the Amarrian RP community will shun you socially in one way or another. And then there are the Amarrian abolishonists, too.

Also, I agree with what Lyn said in response to Esna. The news article even states: "In related news, the former Annaro police commander Garr Diymir was sentenced to two months of house arrest and fined 1,000 ISK for illegally diverting police resources to allow the Ducia Foundry slaves to enter Caldari space and perform the rescue. Unofficial surveys indicate the majority of Caldari citizens support his decision." to me, it seems to indicate that there weren't ethical or moral concerns at work, but rather the attachment to laws.

As to Seri: I don't agree with the idea that Capsuleer society is Gallentean. Many corps organize themselves in a communictic fashion and virtually all corps are depending on one or a dew charismatic personalities as de-facto 'dictators' or on an 'oligarchy' of active people. Well, maybe the Gallente do as well, though. ;P

[Graelyn]

Yes, and not so much

It just takes more work.

Graelyn is a benevolent Holder, and over time, even the staunchest enemy still treats him cordially, and he's not excluded from places and groups of people.

On the other hand, no one who isn't Amarrian wants to do any real RP (outside of 'hi, how are you') with an Amarrian. It's just too jarring, I guess.

However, you might be surprised to find it's not slavery that has anything at all to do with any of this.

It's 100% religion. No one wants to go out partying with a boring Fundie, and most detractors of Amarr are not basing anything off of plot or storyline, but out of sheer hatred (OOC or otherwise) for theocratic thought.

All of this is understandable (I abhor almost any organized religion IRL), but true nonetheless, and it is that, not the slavery issue everyone argues about, that causes the Amarr/Everyone else divide.

[Vieve]

On the other hand, no one who isn't Amarrian wants to do any real RP (outside of 'hi, how are you') with an Amarrian. It's just too jarring, I guess.

Jarring?

Wow. There must be something wrong with my brain.  Actually, there is, but never mind that.   In my assortment of characters, I've generally found it easier to RP with Amarr folks than I have Matari or even some Federation types.

[Makkal]

On the other hand, no one who isn't Amarrian wants to do any real RP (outside of 'hi, how are you') with an Amarrian. It's just too jarring, I guess.

Jarring?

Wow. There must be something wrong with my brain.  Actually, there is, but never mind that.   In my assortment of characters, I've generally found it easier to RP with Amarr folks than I have Matari or even some Federation types.

What do you mean?

[Casiella]

Graelyn, then how do you explain the (recent?) trend toward Matari mysticism?

(That's not a poke, to be clear, but a curious, friendly question. )

EDIT: And anyone who doesn't already know that something's wrong with Vieve's brain hasn't interacted with her yet.  

[Vieve]

On the other hand, no one who isn't Amarrian wants to do any real RP (outside of 'hi, how are you') with an Amarrian. It's just too jarring, I guess.

Jarring?

Wow. There must be something wrong with my brain.  Actually, there is, but never mind that.   In my assortment of characters, I've generally found it easier to RP with Amarr folks than I have Matari or even some Federation types.

What do you mean?

What do I mean?  I mean that it has generally been easier for me to find a way for my characters to bait RP hooks for Amarr (or Caldari or some Federation types) than it has been for Matari or other Federation types.   


Or were you wondering what I meant by saying that?  If that's the case, well, it doesn't take as much effort for me to find things my characters and theirs care about.  How's that for an explanation?


If you were wondering what Graelyn meant, well, can't help with that.  He'll have to speak for himself. 

[Nicoletta Mithra]

Graelyn is a benevolent Holder, and over time, even the staunchest enemy still treats him cordially, and he's not excluded from places and groups of people.

On the other hand, no one who isn't Amarrian wants to do any real RP (outside of 'hi, how are you') with an Amarrian. It's just too jarring, I guess.

I would say that people not wanting to do 'any real RP' is a kind of exclusion. Most people Nico knows treat her cordially and politely and don't exclude her explicitly. Still, oftentimes there is some kind of exclusion happenening, be it people not wanting to do 'real RP' with her or otherwise.

On the other hand there are some people I have lots of very profoundly deep, quite real RP with and that includes religious topics.

However, you might be surprised to find it's not slavery that has anything at all to do with any of this.

It's 100% religion. No one wants to go out partying with a boring Fundie, and most detractors of Amarr are not basing anything off of plot or storyline, but out of sheer hatred (OOC or otherwise) for theocratic thought.

All of this is understandable (I abhor almost any organized religion IRL), but true nonetheless, and it is that, not the slavery issue everyone argues about, that causes the Amarr/Everyone else divide.

This might be the case, as slavery goes hand in hand with religion and theocratic thought, if one is Amarr and not some criminal, at least - I think. So, the dichotomy there between slavery and religion is one that I don't see fitting for Amarr. it's quite possible though that as I play Nico, her conviction that slavery can be justified is the most prominent expression of theocratic thought one gets from her. Though I'd doubt that, it's certainly one of the stronger points she makes in that regard.

On the other hand, I have been RPing with people who really had no problem with the religious side to Nico and all was fine, until the topic of slavery arose. I think that's because one can play someone who is authentically religious and faithful without being a fanatic fundie and a boring one at that.

So, maybe it's the combination of slavery for (supposedly) religious reasons? Might very well be, as I met people in eve who have little problems with slavery á la Angel cartel, who had much more problems with Holders who apparently feigned religious motivation, but who had even more problems with Holders who were apparently honest about their religious conviction, especially if those were also believably benevolent.

Though I don't quite understand the why of this pattern, it seems to be what is observable. If so, I ask myself why? Maybe because people not only loathe theocracy, but even more so the (perceived) implication that in some cases theocracy might be justified?

Also: It might have to do with the fact that Amarrian religion is, as a monotheism, quite close to the abrahamic religions? Maybe people have a problem with monotheism nowadays, but not so much with polytheistic/animistic paganism? It meight explain why Matari shamanism (I don't think mysticism fits there, that much) is en vogue.

And yah, I didn't interact with her much, yet. Nico is Amarr, btw. so, maybe we should change this lack of RP, somewhen.

[Graelyn]

Graelyn, then how do you explain the (recent?) trend toward Matari mysticism?

(That's not a poke, to be clear, but a curious, friendly question. )

EDIT: And anyone who doesn't already know that something's wrong with Vieve's brain hasn't interacted with her yet.  

There is a biiig difference in people's minds towards spirituality (especially New Age sort of angles on it), and the monolithic super-dogmatic entities, responsible for centuries of suppression of progress etc, that are waning in the world today.

[Casiella]

Ah, I see what you're getting at. New Age hippie "spirituality" vs traditional monotheistic "religion".

And FWIW, Nico, while not all mystics are shamanistic, all shamanists are mystics. I won't do the Wikipedia thing here, but essentially shamans are supposed to be people who can bridge between the spirit world and "our" world, acting as go-betweens for everybody else. That's pretty mystical, and something that frustrates me about Minmatar RP. Which also sort of explains why Minmatar haven't gotten all "my Lord, my Lord, why have you forsaken us?" when they go through the Day of Darkness.

[Nicoletta Mithra]

I'd beg to differ. True, Shamanism has this thing with the spirit world and the shaman as a go-in-between it and the worldly realm through altered states of consciousness, and this is similar to certain aspects if mysticism. But certainly Shamanism is not the same as mysticism, which has at it's heart the pursuit to attain communion, identity or conscious awareness of an ultimate reality, divinity, spiritual truth, or God through direct experience, intuition, instinct or insight. So, while techniques might be similar, aims are quite different:  Shamanic travels to the spirit lands have a practical purpose (e.g. healing) and not the enlightenment of the shaman and his communion with the ultimate reality of the divine.

Also, mysticism is, typically, closely associated with a well developed, institutionalized religion that has a well developed theology in a society with a huge amount of labor division and/or technical know-how, which frees time, time that's necessary to pursue mystical rather than practical aims. (Examples are ample: Sufism and Islam, Rhineland mysticism or Hesychasm and Christianity, Zen and Buddhism, Kabbalah and Judaism...) That's usually conditions Shamanism doesn't fullfill.

So, I'd venture the claim that most mystics are practitioners of a non-shamanic religion and shamans are only rarely mystics, though one doesn't preclude the other.

[Leopold Caine]

On the other hand, no one who isn't Amarrian wants to do any real RP (outside of 'hi, how are you') with an Amarrian. It's just too jarring, I guess.

Jarring?

Wow. There must be something wrong with my brain.  Actually, there is, but never mind that.   In my assortment of characters, I've generally found it easier to RP with Amarr folks than I have Matari or even some Federation types.

What do you mean?

Would like to know as well. As a rule of thumb and from my experience, it's easier to communicate with more-mainstream (in relation to IRL) Caldari and Gallente characters than the culturally alien and in that venue more complex Amarr and Matari ones, with concepts of slaveholding feudal systems and neotribalism ones.
I roleplay a slave holder, and not the most benevolent one, and I have  feeling that's sometimes a certain taboo, which is alright from an IC perspective of a federal bureaucrat, for example, but sometimes I feel the issue blends through into OOC as well; what I'm saying is, sometimes I feel a character's IC perception of slavery is twisted by the sociological context of our IRL civilization/culture.

Also, suggest topic split on Shamanism/mysticism and applications to Matari culture?

[Serendipitous Echo]

Just to end the debate:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mysticism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shamanism

On slavery: it isn't limited to the Amarr. It's not limited to Sansha's Nation. Criminal organizations across New Eden most likely use "slaves" for various purposes, most far more horrifying than manual labor on a plantation. The Kingdom, Blood Raiders and the Empire are only part of the problem, yet the focus is on the Amarr. Why? It is the religious argument used to defend slavery, and perceived hypocrisy of the faith. Which is perfectly understandable.

Now, here's a question for all the "Slavers" out there; what is the doctrine behind slavery? What is the canonical source of the practice? What are the legitimate IC reasoning that an Amarrian would use? Where are the scriptures an Amarrian would point to in order to support their view of slavery?

That's probably the biggest problem of RP'ing a Slaver; having IC knowledge enough to build a unique and informed member of a society that promotes slavery. What ends up happening is using tired tropes that, honestly, get boring after a while. You either get "I'm an evil slaver, all your Minmatar belong to me", or "Slavery isn't all bad, I give my slaves ice cream and sundaes once a week!"

Here's the big question: Our characters are Capsuleers, right? Some are a representatives of a particular faith. They are a representative of a faith that has slaves. Do your characters themselves have slaves, or are they separate from that due to being a Capsuleer? How much is the mechanics of EVE reflected in what players can or cannot do IC? I'm not saying there's a wrong answer here; on the contrary, I'm trying to point out that there is a deep, deep chasm of knowledge of very basic aspects of Capsuleer existence, and existence in the Empires. With that chasm, it's hard to both create a believable character and insure that such a character doesn't fall into stereotypes that just don't mesh with an active community.

Maybe, just maybe, if those answers were in place, playing a Slaver (or having proper justifications for not being one) would be easier. I wouldn't go so far as to say it would be more palatable to more people; it's slavery. No matter where you come from, it has negative connotations. In fact, I usually just ignore most "Amarrian Slaver" characters due to the perception--whether it is correct or not--that they'll be portraying individuals my characters wouldn't interact with in the first place. I've found it's the easiest way to keep from causing undue stress to myself and others.

Anyways, lots of room for unique RP, but the Amarr themselves are handicapped with the "evil religious slaver" moniker. It's not something that can be fixed overnight, and there are serious questions that need to be addressed during character creation that just aren't.

Or, to put it another way:

what I'm saying is, sometimes I feel a character's IC perception of slavery is twisted by the sociological context of our IRL civilization/culture.

This.

I am unapologetic about this. Slavery is abhorrent to me. For the same reason that in Mass Effect games I just can't bring myself to go Renegade, I can't play an Amarrian slaver or someone who actively supports any form of slavery.

Now, as I've played a Sansha's Nation supporting character, I would point out that most of my efforts have been directed at pointing out the benefits of specific aspects of Sansha's ideals while chastising those who support the active enslavement of unwilling individuals. I also took a "conscientious observer" role in the Incursion events leading up to the Incursion expansion. I couldn't support the attacks, while I understood the necessity of them. I also understood the moral reasoning, though the ethical reasoning royally irks me.

Hopefully that made some sort of sense. >.<

/rant

[Nicoletta Mithra]

A good suggestion, Leopold. I opened a thread here. I don't see how giving wikipedia links ends a debate: I read both of them and neither of the articles states explicitly how one relates to the other. I think the articles support my view - others might disagree. Also, wikipedia isn't the holy grail of knowledge.

As to the slavery: Really, there are Amarr out there who don't simply use those tiring tropes. Especially back in the days there were some, though they got fewer with time passing, as - in my experience - it is quite tiring to react to "Slavery is the evil!" with and elaborate justification just to, again, get a "Doesn't matter for it is the evil!".

My problem isn't so much with how easy it is to play a slaver: It's quite easy if you use those mustache-twirling evilness tropes or the religious fundy evilness tropes. What is my problem is that those people that try to put thought into it and impersonate a believable slaver are in my experience the ones that are most severly shunned for it and least appreciated in responses - at least in relation to the effort they put in.

It's certainly a problem that there are Amarr running around with the "evil religious slaver" moniker. This has, imho, also to do with TonyG's terrifying writing skillz. But those now have a higher percentage within Amarrian RP than they had back some time and I think that has to do with the thing that you will be excluded from some RP activities for OOC reasons, that is OOC morality/ethics. Thus it's just natural that one has an increase of 'troll slavers' who aim at the above mentioned moniker, as they expect this from the start.

Also, it's less time consuming to do this rather than putting effort in reading the few bits of scripture we have and trying to make sense of them and the other relating PF to come up with an elaborate argument that justifies slavery or to play some well thought out other type of slaver just to get rewarded with the feeling that OOC issues lead to some kind of exclusion if you do so.

[Serendipitous Echo]

I don't see how giving wikipedia links ends a debate: I read both of them and neither of the articles states explicitly how one relates to the other. I think the articles support my view - others might disagree. Also, wikipedia isn't the holy grail of knowledge.

They are two distinct paths, albeit with some overlap.

On to your other points!

Here's the thing. There will always be those who won't play with a particular style of RP or character type. It's the problem with choosing a path in a social game. Someone will always dislike your choice for some reason. OOC conflicts occur as well. Dealing with these is the challenge, and dealing with them well is it's own reward.

Instead of looking at it as a case of exclusion, why not figure out a way to include those who decide on the "path less traveled" in other ways? When the world puts up a  "No Slavers Allowed" sign, why not put up your own "Only Slavers Allowed" to counter it?

There's always alternatives.