If I had 500 slaves...

[azato]

how many guards would I need? They will be doing some heavy mining and I will not only need people to watch them 24/7 but also to hunt them down if they escape. Of course this is theoretical as i don't actually have 500 slaves.

 

And for soldiers in general. What is a good ratio for the military like...for every 10 privates there is 1 sergeant, for every 5 sergeant their is a lieutenant?

[Rapier]

Re: If I had 500 slaves...

 

It depends a lot on the condition of the slaves and how they are held and what level of rebellion they have, in general. There have been periods in history where a handful of guards/overseers have kept control of 50 or even 100 slaves.

 

Are the slaves restrained? Are they branded/marked? Are they in good health? Can they blend in to the normal populace? I would guess that 1 guard / 10 slaves at the top of the scale.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_unit#Units.2C_Formations_.26_Commands

 

Hierarchy of modern armies.

[Ragnarok]

Re: If I had 500 slaves...

 

For the slaves, I would guess, 50-75 guards depending on what weapons the guards have and the general morale of the slaves.

 

Not sure about the ranks, but I'm sure other folks will have some good stuff.

[dmjalund]

Re: If I had 500 slaves...

 

Also consider how extensive the mine is - the bigger it is, the more guards you may need

[Markdoc]

Re: If I had 500 slaves...

 

Historically, you could control 500 slaves with only a few overseers - maybe as few as 5 or 6, more typically about 10 - 15. In the old south, typically an overseer was responsible for about 50-60 slaves.

 

Sound crazy? Usually slaves are deliberately kept in gangs, so you are not looking at 500 rampaging slaves, but groups of 10 or 20. If you have 3 armed overseers walking 20 slaves - who are unarmed and chained - to their station in the mine, then locking them in, before going to get the next lot, suddenly things don't look so rosy for a revolt. You also don't typically employ your own guards to hunt escaped slaves - though if you had to, you just lock some of the slaves down and send their overseers - you simply employ slave hunters, as you need them. If slavery is legal, you can even call on the militia or the police to help you. You keep food and water strictly guarded and carefully rationed - any runaway slave is going to be starving and dehydrated inside a day or two unless he can get food from somewhere - which risks giving away his location.

 

Think of it like a prison - which it is. The inmates may outnumber the guards by a significant ratio, but they should never be a position where it is "all of them" vs "all the guards" - you use gates, locks, cells and chains as "strength multipilers" for control. The more docile the slaves, the less you need this.

 

In gaming terms let's take a bunch of "dangerous" slaves like PCs. You chain 'em together, so that they can only move at the speed of the slowest person. If they have shackles, they can only move at half speed. You attach the chains with rivets hammered into place, so it can't be picked (there's no lock). The chains act as a grab, so they chained-up people are at half OCV and half DCV. They might have tools as weapons, but these will likely be improvised - like say a mining pick - not at all the same implement as a war pick and therefore giving another -3 OCV. In a straight fight, even if the PCs are clearly superior to the guards (normally) the disadvantages will be substantial. If the overseer is smart, there will be a good archer on overwatch who can easily plug any troublesome slave long before they can shuffle up to him. Etc.

 

And the last thing to remember is that even slaves typically were not willing to throw their lives away. Sure 20 slaves might be able to take down one overseer - but the first one or two to make a move probably dies. In addition, unless they have cunning plan for long term escape, slaves are usually marked in some way so escape from the slavers is only the first step - if you flee, and then are caught again, life is likely to be short and very, very unpleasant. Soooo .... who's gonna be first?

 

cheers, Mark

[Rapier]

Re: If I had 500 slaves...

 

Ohhh that reminds me. There was one game we had where all the slaves were in a mine in the middle of the desert. A heavily armed guard caravan would show up every week with a week's supply of food and water. No ore, no water.

 

So they had no guards!

 

The more guards you need, the less cost-effective each slave will be. People were actually rather ingenious when it came to how to effectively manage large groups of slaves with just a few guards.

[Steve]

Re: If I had 500 slaves...

 

Actually, with magic involved, you can get by with very few guards, maybe 1 or 2 for every 100. If the slaves are mentally compelled to obey, you only need guards to give guidance and keep any slaves from wandering off into the wilderness.

[BobGreenwade]

Re: If I had 500 slaves...

 

Another factor to consider is how well-treated the slaves are. Working mines may be hard and grueling work, but if the owner provides good food, good housing, good health care, protection from harm, and other benefits -- particularly including an emotional sense of personal worth and appreciation -- few guards will be necessary. If the slaves are sparsely fed, beaten into submission, held to onerous quotas, and so forth, then you'll need more.

[AlHazred]

Re: If I had 500 slaves...

 

Just kill them and raise them as zombies. No chance for them to rebel, and it's not highly-skilled labor anyway. Then you need no guards at all!

[Lawnmower Boy]

Re: If I had 500 slaves...

 

...Which implies that a necromancer could charge just less for his services than all those guards. There's probably some sort of freaonomics paper in there, somewhere. Or one crazy discussion of the labour theory of value in a fantasy world. I wish that I could hear Marx debate Schumpeter on this one.

And with a necromancer in the house, you could. Although it would be expensive, apparently.

[McCoy]

Re: If I had 500 slaves...

 

Historically' date=' you could control 500 slaves with only a few overseers - maybe as few as 5 or 6, more typically about 10 - 15. In the old south, typically an overseer was responsible for about 50-60 slaves.[/quote']

Yep. Slaves, prisoners, lowest ranking soldiers, historically the ratio has been 50:1. But the men in charge may have help from within the group. In the Antebellum South the Overseer may have had Drivers, slaves put in supervisory positions over other slaves. The Prison Guard has Trustees, the Sergent appoints Squad Leaders.

[assault]

Re: If I had 500 slaves...

 

And for soldiers in general. What is a good ratio for the military like...for every 10 privates there is 1 sergeant' date=' for every 5 sergeant their is a lieutenant?[/quote']

 

"It depends".

 

Most historical armies had no formal hierarchies like this. Even the Romans only seemed to have a handful of "NCOs" in each unit, and that's including standard bearers and people with essentially administrative duties (who might, admittedly, take a command role in a pinch). The cavalry, did, on the other hand, have decuriones, commanding units of ten men (on paper), but these were the equivalent of centuriones in the infantry - more like company commanders than anything else.

 

So, basically, each unit has a commander and a few assistants, and you're pretty much good.

 

Under no circumstances should you take modern military organisations as a guide, unless you are modelling a modern military organisation.

[Drhoz]

Re: If I had 500 slaves...

 

Also depends on what kind of mining they're doing. Open pit mining, like the early stages of diamond mining in South Africa, and emerald mining in South America today? Or underground mining, in which case you only need a fraction of the guards and barriers across the entrance, and the occasional patrol around the mountain to ensure they aren't digging their way out elsewhere.

[azato]

Re: If I had 500 slaves...

 

Thanks guys....it will be underground mines with harsh conditions.

 

 

Here is a quick narrative I made up about the spot (it was written in one swoop with no checking):

 

Hokar is a more "recent" addition to the hold of the Sea Princes. This region was originally populated by gnomes who had a few modest sized "villages". While the region and a good deal of mineral wealth, and they did a fair amount of mining, they did not heavily mine the area. They did not trade much and while they used the mineral wealth for decoration that was about the limit. When those of the Sea Princes first made contact, they quickly realized the amount of wealth these gnomes had. They set up trade, but the gnomes were not very eager to purchase items since they had little use (or desire) to have goods that were not gathered regionally. The humans built a small settlement. It seemed innocent enough at first. The humans did provide more protection against the humanoids in the area and some of the goods they offered were welcome. Over a period of a few years, the gnomes trusted the humans almost as much as other gnomes. They saw several times where the humans turned back some serious attacks. The gnomes even started a festival celebrating one of the most heroic nights. Thee would gather for a common celebration with the humans. The humans provided protection and the gnomes willingly helped fund the building of fortifications and such.

 

The happy bond changed when one night, during the celebration, the humans captured a number of leaders and children and, holding them hostage, forced them to aggressively mine. Heretofore the gnomes had mined the easiest veins. The humans wanted the wealth drawn from the ground as quickly as possible. The harsh conditions, the cruelty they suffered, the despair they felt, the gnomes started dying off. Realizing the need for more laborers, the city of Hokar started needing more slaves. Much of them supplied by natives of the Amedio Jungle. The most sought after slaves are Dwarfs.

 

Based on comments above I am thinking about making the few surviving gnomes as DRIVERS. Very, very very bitter and cruel. They cannot strike back at their masters BUT they can at least strike back at humans in this position.

[mattingly]

Re: If I had 500 slaves...

 

If I had five hundred slaves

And if I had five hundred more

I'd be the man who owned

a thousands slaves

that bow down to their lord

 

Dun-da-lun-da (Dun-da-lun-da)

Dun-da-lun-da (Dun-da-lun-da)

Dun-da-lun-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da

[Michael Hopcroft]

Re: If I had 500 slaves...

 

Thanks guys....it will be underground mines with harsh conditions.

Based on comments above I am thinking about making the few surviving gnomes as DRIVERS. Very, very very bitter and cruel. They cannot strike back at their masters BUT they can at least strike back at humans in this position.

 

Sounds like you have a heavy turnover of labor as slaves starve, get sick, or get into accidents. You've stated that the owners view slaves as disposable -- and might indeed choose to "dispose" of the survivors once the mine is played out (which might be sooner rather than later if they mine that aggressively). Being put into their clutches is a slow, lingering death sentence.

[Susano]

Re: If I had 500 slaves...

 

Hey, when you're done with your 500 slaves, can I borrow them? I've some pyramids that need building.

[Michael Hopcroft]

Re: If I had 500 slaves...

 

Hey' date=' when you're done with your 500 slaves, can I borrow them? I've some pyramids that need building.[/quote']

 

IIRC, the Pyramids were built by relatively-well-compensated freemen rather than slaves. They were more motivated to do the work properly (good pay, good living conditions and the religious significance of the task at hand) and were skilled craftsmen and stonemasons. Of course, feeding and caring for them all was still a monumental task, but freemen were a lot easier to work with on that scale than slaves.

[Susano]

Re: If I had 500 slaves...

 

IIRC' date=' the Pyramids were built by relatively-well-compensated freemen rather than slaves. They were more motivated to do the work properly (good pay, good living conditions and the religious significance of the task at hand) and were skilled craftsmen and stonemasons. Of course, feeding and caring for them all was still a monumental task, but freemen were a lot easier to work with on that scale than slaves.[/quote']

 

I didn't say they were *big* pyramids.

[Drhoz]

Re: If I had 500 slaves...

 

IIRC' date=' the Pyramids were built by relatively-well-compensated freemen rather than slaves. They were more motivated to do the work properly (good pay, good living conditions and the religious significance of the task at hand) and were skilled craftsmen and stonemasons. Of course, feeding and caring for them all was still a monumental task, but freemen were a lot easier to work with on that scale than slaves.[/quote']

 

Indeed. Funnily enough, all the graffiti on the blocks along the lines of "this block was placed by the Never-tiring Gang" never gets mentioned by the pyramidiots who say it was all done by Atlanteans or cow-molesting tourists from Zeta Reticuli

[Steve]

Re: If I had 500 slaves...

 

Indeed. Funnily enough' date=' all the graffiti on the blocks along the lines of "this block was placed by the Never-tiring Gang" never gets mentioned by the pyramidiots who say it was all done by Atlanteans or cow-molesting tourists from Zeta Reticuli[/quote']

 

Sorry to ask an off-topic question, but I'd never heard before that there was such graffiti. Are there any websites that discuss this?

[Ranxerox]

Re: If I had 500 slaves...

 

In gaming terms let's take a bunch of "dangerous" slaves like PCs. You chain 'em together, so that they can only move at the speed of the slowest person. If they have shackles, they can only move at half speed. You attach the chains with rivets hammered into place, so it can't be picked (there's no lock). The chains act as a grab, so they chained-up people are at half OCV and half DCV. They might have tools as weapons, but these will likely be improvised - like say a mining pick - not at all the same implement as a war pick and therefore giving another -3 OCV. In a straight fight, even if the PCs are clearly superior to the guards (normally) the disadvantages will be substantial. If the overseer is smart, there will be a good archer on overwatch who can easily plug any troublesome slave long before they can shuffle up to him. Etc.

 

cheers, Mark

 

I think you are being a little harsh here. Shackles are not the same as a grab. When you grab someone you are trying to prevent them from moving all together, whereas when you shackle a slave you still them to be able to move and work. By deliberately giving them more freedom so that they can do your bidding, IMO you are sacrificing some of the OCV and DCV penalty of a full grab. Also, I would probably allow the players to move faster than half speed if they made a DEX roll with how much the made the roll by determining their speed.

 

Of course if the PCs remained slaves long enough, they would become eligible to buy skills such a Environmental Movement:Shackles and WF:Mining Axe.

[Doc]

Re: If I had 500 slaves...

 

...Which implies that a necromancer could charge just less for his services than all those guards. There's probably some sort of freaonomics paper in there, somewhere. Or one crazy discussion of the labour theory of value in a fantasy world. I wish that I could hear Marx debate Schumpeter on this one.

And with a necromancer in the house, you could. Although it would be expensive, apparently.

 

Hey hey... I like this one! Isn't a necromancer and his zombies similar to an engineer and his manufacturing robots? Apparently, in order to maximise profits, both fantasy and realworld masters wish to minimize the salary mass of their explotation... So, in some way, Marx has already written about that!

 

There's a difference, though, as unlike manufacturing robots, zombies are creating by killing people, wich reduces the labour supply at the same time it reduces the labour demand, maintaining labour prices while reducing the rioting capabilities of the working class). So, in a world like this, there would be a continual zombification of the economy until everybody, except necromancers and masters, are zombies!

 

Sorry... I'm too much in political economy by now.

[Alibear]

Re: If I had 500 slaves...

 

If I had five hundred slaves

And if I had five hundred more

I'd be the man who owned

a thousands slaves

that bow down to their lord

 

Dun-da-lun-da (Dun-da-lun-da)

Dun-da-lun-da (Dun-da-lun-da)

Dun-da-lun-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da

 

I Proclaim you are a very bad man.

[Lawnmower Boy]

Re: If I had 500 slaves...

 

Hey hey... I like this one! Isn't a necromancer and his zombies similar to an engineer and his manufacturing robots? Apparently, in order to maximise profits, both fantasy and realworld masters wish to minimize the salary mass of their explotation... So, in some way, Marx has already written about that!

 

There's a difference, though, as unlike manufacturing robots, zombies are creating by killing people, wich reduces the labour supply at the same time it reduces the labour demand, maintaining labour prices while reducing the rioting capabilities of the working class). So, in a world like this, there would be a continual zombification of the economy until everybody, except necromancers and masters, are zombies!

 

Sorry... I'm too much in political economy by now.

 

Yes, but it throws a Schumpterian wrench into the machinery by putting the Necromancer's magic into the mix. Are spells an exogenous economic input that escapes the iron law of wages?

(More likely, they can be seen as capital. Which, according to Marx, is surplus value. Hmm. Are lichs doing spell research the equivalent of zombies? Or of the ultimately alienated proletariat, no longer possessing their labour, or even the need for it?)