Arelith

Written by Peppermint and Yma

1: Allow a timer on Slave Collars. Every [insert period of time here, somewhere between one irl week to one irl month I suggest] the slave ‘owner’ has to use their paperwork, (or another widget) on the slave to re-secure the Collar. If they do not do this, then after a set month, the slave is given the option to be released to the Slave Master once more. This is to encourage Slave Owners to be around more, and to allow Slaves to go to other masters, if they are not.

2: Allow a slave owner to sell a slave at cost price (1000 gold per level) back to the city at any time. Whether the slave is online or not. This is to prevent absent slaves cluttering up the lists of slave owners. Also it ties into the following point.

3: Put a small tax on slaves, cumulative with each slave purchased. This is to encourage more diverse owning of slaves, rather than one or two characters owning –all- of them(*).
An example would be – A single slave is worth 100 gp per level, per month. So at level 30, if you just own one slave, they cost you 3000 per month. If you own two slaves, this doubles. So it’s 200 per level, per month. If you own three, it doubles again. So 400 per level, per month, ect.


(*) This is by no means any disrespect to those players who do own multiple slaves. They are very awesome, and I have a lot of respect for them. But it can be a bit frustrating to others to see all slaves being snatched up by a small group, no matte how awesome the players are)

First two are wholeheartedly agreed. However, the taxation is as much a preventative measure of all of them being snatched by the -MASTER SLAVERS- as it is a demotivation for newer players to jump into the game

Sure, you can be a lowlevel slaver under the proposal, but you'd better farm. A -lot-... or have them do it, and impose the "give me all of your coin" rule. I'd loathe that. I like them having a bit so they can buy stuff and my nonlawfully aligned character doesn't have to.

I don't belive that 500-3000 permonth is raelly that much. And remember, the 3k only comes in if your slave is level 30. A level 30 slave can, surely, manage to grind that much per IG month! And I'd fin dit a little odd also, having a master who's low enough a level that 3000 is a -lot- but with a slave who is... well, level 30.

I don't know, we're still settlng into the new gold system. But there has also been a suggestion of a minium level that -slavers- can own slaves ,as well as slaves to be slaves (if this makes sense?) Meaning that this would also serve to encourage that.

Furthermore- the big thing - I like the idea of some sort of encouragement for slavers to -USE- slaves rather than just have them hanging around. If you do somehow have a level 30 slave, and they are not able to bring in at least 3k per IG month then... well I'd say something a little odd is happening.

(1) could be abused - what's stopping the slave from just logging off onto an alt for a month/however long and then getting themselves released if they felt like it,or finding another way to avoid the slaver (like logging off when they get Called, watching the player portal, etc)? (Not saying this is something that most slave players would do, but there are always rotten apples in the barrel)

(2) - Yes. So much yes, given personal experience. And that way if you find out you don't really flow very well on a timezone side of things with a certain slave you can let them go - give the slave PC a floaty white message on login like "Your Master has returned your paperwork to the Slavemaster." - without any hard feelings or forced RP.

(3) - Won't take that personally, since I try (I have learned from when I started!) to give those Azu buys the option to refuse - using rings, that can be 'lost' by the character if the player decides against it - and check if they're okay with it (And I checked multiple times with open choice in that situation recently) - but this won't stop groups buying slaves.
If anything, this might impede starter/lower-level slavers from getting into the business based on a purely mechanical side of things. If a group is determined to own a lot of slaves, they are likely a group that goes adventuring/does trade/other avenues to earn a lot of gold between them.

It seems a little harsh to me on individual slavers/lower level slavers to base it on that. If a new slaver decides to pick up a slave - and that slave turns out to be level 30 - that's just a kick in the teeth over the expensive initial cost. Martin is a great example of a high-level slave that still rolls with the roleplay of -being- a slave, high-level mechanically or not.
If the 'new-old' gold system was in use, this would have been a fantastic gold-sink suggestion!

I agree that a minimum level for a slaver to be able to buy slaves (To display some significant investment into the character) would probably be a good idea - something like the Slavemaster saying:

The Slavemaster wrote:"What, you want to buy a slave? Sod off, you're greener than grass. Who's to know if you'll be here next cycle, let alone next year, or if you'll just disappear and abandon your property in the city? Prove yourself to be a Slaver that will stick around, then we can talk."

or

The Slavemaster wrote:"What, you want to buy a slave? ... Alright, I've heard about you. Don't look likely to be shirking your responsibility as a Slavemaster. We can talk."

(1) could be abused - what's stopping the slave from just logging off onto an alt for a month/however long and then getting themselves released if they felt like it,or finding another way to avoid the slaver (like logging off when they get Called, watching the player portal, etc)? (Not saying this is something that most slave players would do, but there are always rotten apples in the barrel)

At the point where a character -does not log in for over a month- to avoid someone, and is willing to pay the exorbant fee it takes to be 'freed' then I'd question whether you 'want' them to be a slave. After all, someone can do this now and basically avoid all the same reprocussions.

And if they are doing things like logging off when summoned, then that is a very clear abuse.

Right now, if Joe the slave is purchased by Bob the Slave Owner, and Bob logs off aftera week... then without the help of a DM... welp. So much for Joe's rp.

I firmly believe we need -some- autimated way for slaves to be released to the city if their owners go absent. This will not only be good for slave players, but also means that other characters who are active get a crack at owning slaves, and encourages owners to be about more to tend to their property. It's also good for DMs, as it a) is less work and b) Means that there's less chance of argumemnts.

To put it another way - let's pretend a slave is a Quarter. Right now, someone can own a quarter, -for ever- and not have to log in once to refresh it. Yes, a Dm can take the quarter off the player. But how long before one of these players goes 'But I -was- rping with him once a week! Is that not enough! DM Favoritsm wahhhh' or a slave character goes, 'Yeah uh.. he uh... didn't... log on at all. So uh, can you release me now?' <.< >.>.


The third point I will concede is not perfect. Also, I really hoped my small note suggesed, as this is VERY important

THIS IS NOT AN ATTACK ON ANYONE!

Indeed the taxation suggestion came from Peppermint, who is the other big 'slave owner' on the Underdark.

I happen to believe Azuliah both an amazing character, you are an amazing player, and I literally consider you one of my favorite players/characters on the underdark. THAT SAID! Right now it's difficult to come up with a reason not to -keep- owning slaves so long as they're of any quality (rp quality I mean). Slave ownership is a point of pride, the owner says. So what reason, icly, -is- there to sell on any slaves you have? Or manage them in any way? Not that much.
The idea behind the third suggestion (which Igrant may at least need tweaks) is to encourage more diverse ownership. Also, hand in hand with option 2, it is to encourage slave ownres to 'clear' their lists, to stop lists being 'trophies.' To make characters who want to buy slaves think twice. Because it should be sometihng you stop to think about.

To put it another way, right now there is absolutly no reason not to grab almost every single slave going. The gold cost for buying slaves to start up with is not tiny, but it's not overwhelming and, with the slave, you can probably make it back.

~With a taxation option, you force players, and characters to go: 'I could buy this slave ,it'll be my third. But that is expensive. Do I really want that? Can I afford that? Is this slave useful enough to me that it's worth my time? '

As I said, the third option is the one I am most hazy about myself and I'm certainly open to a rejigging of numbers. But, I am not convinced that the idea itself is a bad one.

I like the ideas, but as Tashalar said, number one can be abused by the slave player - so not sure on that method.

I do not like the idea of slaves being judged, in any way, due to their level. So many players have mentioned to me in tells things such as "Yeah but when you're in your 20 levels, or hit 30, you'll just kill us all and break free." This makes absolutely no sense to me. Being mechanically stronger than another character has nothing, what so ever, with being a slave.

Your last point - limiting slaves per owner via a tax ... not sure I like that method - the tax method, but limiting slaves per owner - this I like and I do encourage as some people seem to be collectors and it limits how much they can RP with the slaves they have if they have a high number. I suggest a mechanical limit. I'd suggest no more than four slaves per owner. Even that is a high number if you want real solid RP with each of them.

I also like the idea - this is my idea (slave player's decision) to have slaves that are connected with certain areas - such as the Outpost - say you have a slave character who doesn't really want to be owned by anyone at the moment or all owners are at their limit ... a slave character can be part of the Outpost, or some area and work for the city/Outpost district, what have you - this is also a good idea, I feel, for those who want to check out the system of slavery without actually having to commit to an individual owner. And perhaps this could be limited to certain levels of slaves, such as up to level 8 or something.