Slave caravans - slaver to slave ratio?

A

Azgulor

Banded Mongoose
In setting up the next series of adventures for my campaign, the PCs will have the opportunity to attempt to free some comrades from slavers. Any suggestions on what would be a believable ratio of slavers to slaves?

I'm thinking 40 slaves being transported in reinforced wagons. (Essentially cells on wheels.)

Would the number of slavers been determined based on guarding against the slaves or protecting the caravan from attack? I realize the correct answer is both, but which point is the primary concern?

Thanks,

Azgulor
 
You are smart with your slaves. :twisted:
If you remember in the movie (as well as in a pastiche by Andrew Offutt - Conan the mercenary) most slaves travel on foot with chains at their foot and arms.
They are so tired that they won't (and can't) try to escape. Moreover this make sure that only the fittest will survive.
In that way, you'll only need 4 slavers on horses and 2 others on a chariot.

Of course if the region is unsecure, you will have more slavers to defend the caravans but also more slaves to reduce the overall costs, say 20-30 slavers for up to 200 slaves.
 
It would be nice to see more info on slavery and other subjects too. I know its covered a little in shadizar, but I think it can be fleshed out a little more.
For example: How does slavery work in Brythunia? Slavers prize Brythunian maids, but, do the Brythunians just hand them over? Is it more like a black market, where the powers that be turn a blind eye for a bribe?
And when you consider all they countries, there can be all kinds of possiblities.
 
urdinaran said:
It would be nice to see more info on slavery and other subjects too. I know its covered a little in shadizar, but I think it can be fleshed out a little more.
For example: How does slavery work in Brythunia? Slavers prize Brythunian maids, but, do the Brythunians just hand them over? Is it more like a black market, where the powers that be turn a blind eye for a bribe?
And when you consider all they countries, there can be all kinds of possiblities.
Click to expand...
Noone would give voluntarily their own as slaves. As in the first Conan movie, slavers usually attack isolated villages.
 
The King said:
No one would give voluntarily their own as slaves. As in the first Conan movie, slavers usually attack isolated villages.
Click to expand...

Really? I think you underestimate civilised greed, vanity and sense of vengeance. So, to say "no one" as an absolute is wrong. If I may quote Robert E. Howard:

"'I am the daughter of the king of Ophir,' she said. 'My father sold me to a Shemite chief, because I would not marry a prince of Koth.'

Her lips twisted in a bitter smile. 'Aye, civilised men sell their children as slaves to savages, sometimes. They call your race barbaric, Conan of Cimmeria.'

'We do not sell our children,' he growled, his chin jutting truculently.

'Well - I was sold.'"

Robert E. Howard, Iron Shadows in the Moon, AKA Shadows in the Moonlight
 
civilised men sell their children as slaves to savages, sometimes.
Click to expand...
sometimes has all its meaning there.
most slaves come from razzia and raids on villages because it is far easier to catch peasants who can't defend themselves.
Turan or Hyperborea could never sustain a slave trade merely waiting for people selling their children.
And this point of view is admirably represented is the movie where the village of Conan is attacked and destroyed.

Slaves can also be victim of war (soldiers) or people from a specific community suffering retaliation (resistance to invaders or worshippers from another religion).
 
You aren't necessarily wrong there, but you originally said "no one." That was the part I disagreed with and showed to be incorrect. "Someone" quite apparently did give up their own - and it was a fairly common occurance in ancient times.
 
The King said:
Noone would give voluntarily their own as slaves. As in the first Conan movie, slavers usually attack isolated villages.
Click to expand...
History proves you wrong. Slavery, even if it doesn't go by the name of slavery, has been one of the favorite ways of unloading "extra mouthes" in many cultures ... even today much of the ilicit sex trade is fuled by such slavery. And thats to say nothing of the folk who are simply greedy sumbitches preying on their neighbors.

Another historical mode of slavery was the concept that someone might forefit their freedom as compensation for a debt or as a penalty for a crime.

But, in the case of Byrthunia, I believe that they are the subject of slave raiders due to their lack of a strong national military.


As for the slave caravan: the slaves will be unarmed, bound with heavy chains, tired, underfed and, if the slavers are doing their job right, very very intimidated. 1 guard could probably control at least 10-20 slaves. I'd say the number of guards should probably be based more on defense from raiders than controling slaves.

Later.
 
Yeah, don't use Conan in the movie as a m odel here, folks. He was a badass from birth, just about, and when Thulsa's goons were marching him in chains to...whereever it was...he was a big, big guy and probably pretty dangerous.

40 slaves in wagons...I'd run it as all 40 being in like...just 2 10' x 10' wagons. Packed in there. Maybe 4-6 guards and a caravan master who's the "total deal".
 
VincentDarlage said:
You aren't necessarily wrong there, but you originally said "no one." That was the part I disagreed with and showed to be incorrect. "Someone" quite apparently did give up their own - and it was a fairly common occurance in ancient times.
Click to expand...
I admit my choice of word "noone" wasn't excellent.
I had in mind the concept of a full slave economy like Turan and perhaps Shem.

As Argo tells in the following posts, there are also some countries which use slaves to work in the galleys and these are mostly criminals or ennemy soldiers.

When I talk of slave culture, I mean people who are taken in slavery as child and grow up and die as slaves with no chance to free themselves. Sometimes they even had children who where born as slaves.
The African people and some Chinese folks suffered this. The former were "used" in masses in Middle-East and after in Europe and America (from South to the North).
The Chinese were razzied from villages by warlords and used for all tasks.

It shall be noted that Vikings also used slaves (thralls) who could be later granted freedom.


This scene from the Conan movie is good because it refered to historic realism where in ancient age deportation (or eradication) from whole population was a common fact all over the world.
 
I played a session few weeks ago: one of the players was captured by slavers and the others decided to free him. Finally, some of the liberated slaves were convinced by the players to join them and form a bandit gang (in the next session they will start in the middle of a fight against a lot of soldiers... and only the players will survive if they can :mrgreen: )

In my session the slaves were into small and crowded wagons, chained one to each other. There are few guards, but veteran, mounted and well armed. They are level 3 or 4, a mix of nomad, soldier and borderer. Their only mission is to protect the caravan to its destiny. There's also a tough guard's leader.

There should be slave traders in charge of the whole caravan, selling the slaves, feeding them, hitting them when do something wrong, and so on.

The slave caravan should be formed by merciless slavers from Turan, Shem, Zingara, Stygia, and maybe Zamora, Argos and Aquilonia. And remember that they are cruel, but they don't want to "break" their "goods".

I see slavery as a consequence of:

-Kidnapping
-Slaver raids
-Laws (as a punishment)
-Poverty
-Prisoners of war

I think that the olny cases when the slaves travel on foot are after a battle or when the slavers have more success than the expected in their raids, so all the captured men can't travel in wagons (a good choice if you want your players to suffer :mrgreen: ).
 
Sadly, People living in many parts of the world today will sell one of their children into slavery to help feed the rest of the family. Desperation is a big factor.
 
The King said:
It shall be noted that Vikings also used slaves (thralls) who could be later granted freedom.
Click to expand...

Norese slaves and thralls are two different things. Thralls were those subjugated through conquest, and slaves (slaves - sound familier) were taken in vikings (the word is a verb refering to raids, but it has become synonymous with the coulture, which is erroneous). Norse also practiced fostering regularly, which was aq familial endenturement where family members were traded for land/prestige/favors/other peole. I promise you my second son, you give me the land from my furthest farm to the river - tat sort of thing.

Speaking of "Things", that was the name of the Norse political body, a meeting of the elders for the most important issues, but a Thing could be held at a community level too where anyone had a voice, including slaves, thralls or fosters.

Just as an aside, all Norse had an equal vote in the Thing, including women. Even slaves...eventually....after they'd been around a while.

I could easily see Nordheimer slaving operating this way. They're essentially Norsemen.
 
Sutek said:
The King said:
It shall be noted that Vikings also used slaves (thralls) who could be later granted freedom.
Click to expand...

Norese slaves and thralls are two different things. Thralls were those subjugated through conquest, and slaves (slaves - sound familier) were taken in vikings (the word is a verb refering to raids, but it has become synonymous with the coulture, which is erroneous).
Click to expand...
Is there any difference between conquest and raid?

Another thing concerning slavery: if the slaves are valuable (beautiful girls, potential fighters for the arena), then they won't travel on foot.
 
Excellent discussion! My group has run afowl of slavers twice now. Each time I had the slaves in wagons. I figured going by foot would be way to slow to cover the huge distnaces they were travelling.

I would very much like to see a good sourcebook for Conan on slavers and caravans in general. They are both common phenomenon in my Hyborian campaign.
 
For those interested the old AD&D DragonLance adventure (DL2) features a slave convoy under attack where the slaves are locked in wagons.
 
Bushido said:
Personnaly, I would say 15 slavers, most being good fighters.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the feedback! This is in the neighborhood of what I was thinking. If the guard:slave ratio is too high, it seems to me it would be a cost-prohibitive venture; too low and it's too easy for the slaves to overpower their masters.

Azgulor
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top