Wait. Let me get this straight. You are all upset that elementals are being used (or exploited) to power Eberron vehicles? Yet, no one bats an eye when a soul is thrown into an engine to power a hell car in "Descent Into Avernus" like it was a piece of coal? At least the elemental gets to live in the engine. A persons soul, the last remanent of existence, is completely destroyed. For what? To power a car? Y'all need to get your priorities straight.
Our priorities are staying on topic and addressing the question raised by OP. I am sure there would be a different at discussion if we were talking about soul cars, but we are not.
The discussion was the exploitation of labor and/or resources to power a vehicle. How is the exploitation/destruction of a soul to power a vehicle not the same thing?
Whether or not they’re the same thing isn’t relevant, because that’s not the topic of discussion. Barging into a discussion about elemental binding in Eberron with a reference to an unrelated adventure that takes place in an unrelated setting is a bit silly, don’t you think? After all, you’re not batting an eye while the Galactic Empire are out here making Death Stars with Wookiee slave labor. You need to get your priorities straight.
Granted, I think Linklite missed the important word “unfairly” in their definition in reaching their conclusion that there was exploitation. If the elemental’s labour was being used fairly—defined by the potentially alien definition of “fairness” of a non-human creature—then there would definitionally not be exploitation.
Nah, I noted it, I'm just operating under the premise that it isn't fair, or there wouldn't be a discussion to be had. Although granted, I'm playing a little loose with definitions in order to avoid essay length posts trying to be precise.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Wait. Let me get this straight. You are all upset that elementals are being used (or exploited) to power Eberron vehicles? Yet, no one bats an eye when a soul is thrown into an engine to power a hell car in "Descent Into Avernus" like it was a piece of coal? At least the elemental gets to live in the engine. A persons soul, the last remanent of existence, is completely destroyed. For what? To power a car? Y'all need to get your priorities straight.
Our priorities are staying on topic and addressing the question raised by OP. I am sure there would be a different at discussion if we were talking about soul cars, but we are not.
The discussion was the exploitation of labor and/or resources to power a vehicle. How is the exploitation/destruction of a soul to power a vehicle not the same thing?
It is very similar, but that is not the discussion - the discussion is specifically about how to help OP address exploitation in a very specific setting. They are not playing Avernus, so saying “but Avernus is worse” is nongermane to the issue at hand - they are trying to figure out how their character might respond to a specific circumstance, so discussion of other circumstances is only relevant if you tie that in.
Now, could they tie that in - yes. Here is what your post could have said:
The D&D world has other vehicles powered by more unsavoury mechanisms, like the soul-powered vehicles of Avernus. Perhaps your character knows about those vehicles and, while they are not thrilled with the idea of using elementals, they see it as the lesser evil to using souls or the like. After all, sky ships are necessary for the economy and general society to function, so they have to be powered—your character could prefer they be powered by otherworldly entities rather than souls.
Granted, I think Linklite missed the important word “unfairly” in their definition in reaching their conclusion that there was exploitation. If the elemental’s labour was being used fairly—defined by the potentially alien definition of “fairness” of a non-human creature—then there would definitionally not be exploitation.
Nah, I noted it, I'm just operating under the premise that it isn't fair, or there wouldn't be a discussion to be had. Although granted, I'm playing a little loose with definitions in order to avoid essay length posts trying to be precise.
Whether or not it’s unfair is, in fact, the entire question in play. You can’t just beg the question like that 😛
Granted, I think Linklite missed the important word “unfairly” in their definition in reaching their conclusion that there was exploitation. If the elemental’s labour was being used fairly—defined by the potentially alien definition of “fairness” of a non-human creature—then there would definitionally not be exploitation.
Nah, I noted it, I'm just operating under the premise that it isn't fair, or there wouldn't be a discussion to be had. Although granted, I'm playing a little loose with definitions in order to avoid essay length posts trying to be precise.
Fair enough - though I think it is worth reiterating that saying the system is fair, and thus sidestepping the moral issues, is one of the solutions that OP could and should consider.
Wait. Let me get this straight. You are all upset that elementals are being used (or exploited) to power Eberron vehicles? Yet, no one bats an eye when a soul is thrown into an engine to power a hell car in "Descent Into Avernus" like it was a piece of coal? At least the elemental gets to live in the engine. A persons soul, the last remanent of existence, is completely destroyed. For what? To power a car? Y'all need to get your priorities straight.
Our priorities are staying on topic and addressing the question raised by OP. I am sure there would be a different at discussion if we were talking about soul cars, but we are not.
The discussion was the exploitation of labor and/or resources to power a vehicle. How is the exploitation/destruction of a soul to power a vehicle not the same thing?
It's not that it's not the same thing - or that it is. It's that we were discussing the morality of harnessing elementals to power cars in Eberron. Perhaps the soul cars in Avernus are immoral, but that isn't really pertinent to the discussion unless someone brings it up as a parallel - which no one did until you criticised us for not doing it. If you want to bring them into the discussion, that's fine, but it should be adding to the discussion rather than just criticising us. I mean, what about [insert your go-to historical atrocity here]? And you're here discussing imaginary soul cars that run on imaginary souls? What does that say about your priorities? In my opinion, the same as is talking about elementals instead of soul cars - not a lot, and it's unproductive to approach the conversation that way.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Granted, I think Linklite missed the important word “unfairly” in their definition in reaching their conclusion that there was exploitation. If the elemental’s labour was being used fairly—defined by the potentially alien definition of “fairness” of a non-human creature—then there would definitionally not be exploitation.
Nah, I noted it, I'm just operating under the premise that it isn't fair, or there wouldn't be a discussion to be had. Although granted, I'm playing a little loose with definitions in order to avoid essay length posts trying to be precise.
Whether or not it’s unfair is, in fact, the entire question in play. You can’t just beg the question like that 😛
Meh, as I said, I was playing a little loose, just not in the way that matters. That the OP isn't mentioning that they've come to an unforced and uncoerced agreement with the elementals on a fair trade suggests to me that the relationship is either coerced and therefore unfair, or they're not in possession of a soul/self aware/whatever term you want to use to say that they're not just a collection of atoms blindly obeying the laws of physics with no will of their own.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
When I did this in 4e, the elemental was a small salamander that was essentially a pet. Like a husky or other working dog breeds, it enjoyed its work. And when the ship didn't need to go, the party could just decouple the engine from its chamber so it could continue to burn to its heart's content. Over longer stops it would leave the ship and accompany the party.
Actually, the discussion here is: 'Is using an elemental to power a ship ethical?'
The OP has some additional background - but that is the question at hand: Ethical, yes or no. Personally, I don't have any real opinion, because it's a sort of hypothetical x hypothetical = hyperthetical. I was just trying to be funny, which seems to have caused great offense =)
In that light, I retract my earlier statement, and issue this instead: Elementals are tender and sensitive creatures with rich inner lives and emotional responses. Responsible summoners should secure detailed consent before calling any elemental into service, for any reason. Always remember the Three Laws of Summoning:
A summoner may not harm a summoned creature, or through inaction cause a summoned creature to come to harm
A summoner must respect the feelings and wishes of a summoned creature except where that would conflict with the First Law
A summoner must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
I can't really speak for others, but I wasn't offended. I did wonder if you were joking, but I've seen a lot of people with that attitude, so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ It was worth discussing, even if we spent more time critiquing word choice than on topic.
Nice inversion of the 3 laws.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Nah, that too was a joke. I have a slight ironic tint to everything I say or write - and in text, I'm often misunderstood =)
Really, I should try to learn from that, but it's just ... it happens naturally.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
"Piloting an elemental vessel requires effective communication between the pilot and the bound elemental. The elemental controls the vehicle’s movement, and everything from basic propulsion to delicate maneuvering is dependent on the ability of the pilot to control the elemental. If the elemental is uncontrolled and not suppressed, the vehicle moves according to the elemental’s whim until a pilot asserts control again."
Same goes for summoning spells, as you're not asking for consent. It basically amounts to temporary, magically-induced kidnapping.
This game is chock full of problematic tropes.
but see...as described in many posts here....how do we know its against its will? their giving it exactly what it wants, and it doesnt have the same morals or values we do, in fact, we are entirely alien , and could think its using us
thats why this is in a super gray area, because the ones being enslaved are entirely alien
but as others have said, and i will repeat : most folks just wont care and will ride the boat happily
Couldn't it just be an employee instead of a slave? It is free to go, and paid as a member of the crew. It's not stuck doing this job, but it kind of likes being a non-combat member of an adventuring party. It's better than other labor it could get like powering a forge in the city or something.
Same goes for summoning spells, as you're not asking for consent. It basically amounts to temporary, magically-induced kidnapping.
This game is chock full of problematic tropes.
but see...as described in many posts here....how do we know its against its will? their giving it exactly what it wants, and it doesnt have the same morals or values we do, in fact, we are entirely alien , and could think its using us
thats why this is in a super gray area, because the ones being enslaved are entirely alien
but as others have said, and i will repeat : most folks just wont care and will ride the boat happily
Slavery is always bad, no matter how you parse it. Being able to ignore the fact that a summoned elemental had no say in the matter is to ignore the real-world history of the Transatlantic slave trade.
My people and I don't have the privilege of doing that, especially in a game where BINDING spells exist.
It's not slavery if it isn't a sophont, which is why owning a pet isn't slavery.
In the vast majority of fantasy settings, elementals lack free will and hence aren't sapient.
Same goes for summoning spells, as you're not asking for consent. It basically amounts to temporary, magically-induced kidnapping.
This game is chock full of problematic tropes.
but see...as described in many posts here....how do we know its against its will? their giving it exactly what it wants, and it doesnt have the same morals or values we do, in fact, we are entirely alien , and could think its using us
thats why this is in a super gray area, because the ones being enslaved are entirely alien
but as others have said, and i will repeat : most folks just wont care and will ride the boat happily
Slavery is always bad, no matter how you parse it. Being able to ignore the fact that a summoned elemental had no say in the matter is to ignore the real-world history of the Transatlantic slave trade.
My people and I don't have the privilege of doing that, especially in a game where BINDING spells exist.
It's not slavery if it isn't a sophont, which is why owning a pet isn't slavery.
In the vast majority of fantasy settings, elementals lack free will and hence aren't sapient.
It's why I argue that this whole debate is somewhat absurd; the elemental's mentality is so completely removed from conventional sentience that It can't really be described as slavery.
Well ... it's debatable whether humans have free will. It's like half of philosophy, and last I checked, the majority vote was against. Of course, I'm in the 'yes, humans have free will' camp, and I'm also in the camp of 'yea, you could propably wrangle some sort of deal with an elemental - but maybe you don't even really have to camp. But I would warn against a human-centric view of free will, just because elementals are made of fire (well, some of them are) and all they do and ever can do is burn stuff.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
Well ... it's debatable whether humans have free will. It's like half of philosophy, and last I checked, the majority vote was against. Of course, I'm in the 'yes, humans have free will' camp, and I'm also in the camp of 'yea, you could propably wrangle some sort of deal with an elemental - but maybe you don't even really have to camp. But I would warn against a human-centric view of free will, just because elementals are made of fire (well, some of them are) and all they do and ever can do is burn stuff.
sigh Ok, sure. Then change the term "free will" to "fribdorch" and define "fribdorch" as "the quality indistinguishable from free will people exhibit".
But that's as far as I'll go in terms of entertaining your post, because I never claimed elementals didn't have free will, I said we shouldn't assume they do. It's up to your DM.
In the vast majority of fantasy settings, due to fribdorch, if you take 2 people (not humans - e.g. this will apply to elves) and put them in identical circumstances, they will behave differently. If you do the same thing with 2 elementals of the same kind (e.g. 2 earth elementals), they will behave identically, due to lacking fribdorch.
Just to poke my head back into this conversation and apolgies but I'm not completely sure where, if anywhere, this will go....
I won't quote the monster manual completely but it does state in the Elemental listing that they are described as "formless life forces on their home planes" and "have no desire except to course through the element of their home plane" and "like beasts of the material plane have no sense of society or culture and little sense of being" but "instinctively resent being pulled from their home plane and bound into service".
So you can infer from that that they are a magical version of a beast of burden or wild animal and much like a cowboy might try to "break" a bull or horse, a spell caster may try to "break" an elemental into some form of service.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
* Need a character idea? Search for "Rob76's Unused" in the Story and Lore section.
Just to poke my head back into this conversation and apolgies but I'm not completely sure where, if anywhere, this will go....
I won't quote the monster manual completely but it does state in the Elemental listing that they are described as "formless life forces on their home planes" and "have no desire except to course through the element of their home plane" and "like beasts of the material plane have no sense of society or culture and little sense of being" but "instinctively resent being pulled from their home plane and bound into service".
So you can infer from that that they are a magical version of a beast of burden or wild animal and much like a cowboy might try to "break" a bull or horse, a spell caster may try to "break" an elemental into some form of service.
True. I have to say rereading through this, I still personally feel like I like keith bakers take on this
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Whether or not they’re the same thing isn’t relevant, because that’s not the topic of discussion. Barging into a discussion about elemental binding in Eberron with a reference to an unrelated adventure that takes place in an unrelated setting is a bit silly, don’t you think? After all, you’re not batting an eye while the Galactic Empire are out here making Death Stars with Wookiee slave labor. You need to get your priorities straight.
Nah, I noted it, I'm just operating under the premise that it isn't fair, or there wouldn't be a discussion to be had. Although granted, I'm playing a little loose with definitions in order to avoid essay length posts trying to be precise.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
It is very similar, but that is not the discussion - the discussion is specifically about how to help OP address exploitation in a very specific setting. They are not playing Avernus, so saying “but Avernus is worse” is nongermane to the issue at hand - they are trying to figure out how their character might respond to a specific circumstance, so discussion of other circumstances is only relevant if you tie that in.
Now, could they tie that in - yes. Here is what your post could have said:
The D&D world has other vehicles powered by more unsavoury mechanisms, like the soul-powered vehicles of Avernus. Perhaps your character knows about those vehicles and, while they are not thrilled with the idea of using elementals, they see it as the lesser evil to using souls or the like. After all, sky ships are necessary for the economy and general society to function, so they have to be powered—your character could prefer they be powered by otherworldly entities rather than souls.
Whether or not it’s unfair is, in fact, the entire question in play. You can’t just beg the question like that 😛
Fair enough - though I think it is worth reiterating that saying the system is fair, and thus sidestepping the moral issues, is one of the solutions that OP could and should consider.
It's not that it's not the same thing - or that it is. It's that we were discussing the morality of harnessing elementals to power cars in Eberron. Perhaps the soul cars in Avernus are immoral, but that isn't really pertinent to the discussion unless someone brings it up as a parallel - which no one did until you criticised us for not doing it. If you want to bring them into the discussion, that's fine, but it should be adding to the discussion rather than just criticising us. I mean, what about [insert your go-to historical atrocity here]? And you're here discussing imaginary soul cars that run on imaginary souls? What does that say about your priorities? In my opinion, the same as is talking about elementals instead of soul cars - not a lot, and it's unproductive to approach the conversation that way.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Meh, as I said, I was playing a little loose, just not in the way that matters. That the OP isn't mentioning that they've come to an unforced and uncoerced agreement with the elementals on a fair trade suggests to me that the relationship is either coerced and therefore unfair, or they're not in possession of a soul/self aware/whatever term you want to use to say that they're not just a collection of atoms blindly obeying the laws of physics with no will of their own.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
When I did this in 4e, the elemental was a small salamander that was essentially a pet. Like a husky or other working dog breeds, it enjoyed its work. And when the ship didn't need to go, the party could just decouple the engine from its chamber so it could continue to burn to its heart's content. Over longer stops it would leave the ship and accompany the party.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
Actually, the discussion here is: 'Is using an elemental to power a ship ethical?'
The OP has some additional background - but that is the question at hand: Ethical, yes or no. Personally, I don't have any real opinion, because it's a sort of hypothetical x hypothetical = hyperthetical. I was just trying to be funny, which seems to have caused great offense =)
In that light, I retract my earlier statement, and issue this instead: Elementals are tender and sensitive creatures with rich inner lives and emotional responses. Responsible summoners should secure detailed consent before calling any elemental into service, for any reason. Always remember the Three Laws of Summoning:
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
I can't really speak for others, but I wasn't offended. I did wonder if you were joking, but I've seen a lot of people with that attitude, so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ It was worth discussing, even if we spent more time critiquing word choice than on topic.
Nice inversion of the 3 laws.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Nah, that too was a joke. I have a slight ironic tint to everything I say or write - and in text, I'm often misunderstood =)
Really, I should try to learn from that, but it's just ... it happens naturally.
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
Building Eberron Adventures - The Last War - Eberron: Rising from the Last War - Sources - D&D Beyond (dndbeyond.com)
"Piloting an elemental vessel requires effective communication between the pilot and the bound elemental. The elemental controls the vehicle’s movement, and everything from basic propulsion to delicate maneuvering is dependent on the ability of the pilot to control the elemental. If the elemental is uncontrolled and not suppressed, the vehicle moves according to the elemental’s whim until a pilot asserts control again."
but see...as described in many posts here....how do we know its against its will? their giving it exactly what it wants, and it doesnt have the same morals or values we do, in fact, we are entirely alien , and could think its using us
thats why this is in a super gray area, because the ones being enslaved are entirely alien
but as others have said, and i will repeat : most folks just wont care and will ride the boat happily
Couldn't it just be an employee instead of a slave? It is free to go, and paid as a member of the crew. It's not stuck doing this job, but it kind of likes being a non-combat member of an adventuring party. It's better than other labor it could get like powering a forge in the city or something.
It's not slavery if it isn't a sophont, which is why owning a pet isn't slavery.
In the vast majority of fantasy settings, elementals lack free will and hence aren't sapient.
It's why I argue that this whole debate is somewhat absurd; the elemental's mentality is so completely removed from conventional sentience that It can't really be described as slavery.
Well ... it's debatable whether humans have free will. It's like half of philosophy, and last I checked, the majority vote was against. Of course, I'm in the 'yes, humans have free will' camp, and I'm also in the camp of 'yea, you could propably wrangle some sort of deal with an elemental - but maybe you don't even really have to camp. But I would warn against a human-centric view of free will, just because elementals are made of fire (well, some of them are) and all they do and ever can do is burn stuff.
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
sigh Ok, sure. Then change the term "free will" to "fribdorch" and define "fribdorch" as "the quality indistinguishable from free will people exhibit".
But that's as far as I'll go in terms of entertaining your post, because I never claimed elementals didn't have free will, I said we shouldn't assume they do. It's up to your DM.
In the vast majority of fantasy settings, due to fribdorch, if you take 2 people (not humans - e.g. this will apply to elves) and put them in identical circumstances, they will behave differently. If you do the same thing with 2 elementals of the same kind (e.g. 2 earth elementals), they will behave identically, due to lacking fribdorch.
Just to poke my head back into this conversation and apolgies but I'm not completely sure where, if anywhere, this will go....
I won't quote the monster manual completely but it does state in the Elemental listing that they are described as "formless life forces on their home planes" and "have no desire except to course through the element of their home plane" and "like beasts of the material plane have no sense of society or culture and little sense of being" but "instinctively resent being pulled from their home plane and bound into service".
So you can infer from that that they are a magical version of a beast of burden or wild animal and much like a cowboy might try to "break" a bull or horse, a spell caster may try to "break" an elemental into some form of service.
True. I have to say rereading through this, I still personally feel like I like keith bakers take on this