Undead Labor: why not?

[BarretWallace]

Re: Undead Labor: why not?

 

Terry Pratchett's Feet of Clay' date=' [i']Going Postal[/i], and Making Money explore using golems for cheap labor. They are used mostly in places where they aren't seen. Working underground pumps, spinning mills when there is no wind. At least one worked in a butcher shop. They are cheap. They don't tire. They can be repaired. They also made an excellent fire fighting force. In Going Postal, the post office is set on fire and the golems (being impervious to fire) simply walk in and remove things that are flammable, break down walls that are on fire, and take them elsewhere. "Gladys" also becomes a custodian and is eventually seen as "just one of the girls" at the post office.

 

One of them, Mr. Pump, functions as a parole officer. As "Mr. Pump does not tire. Mr. Pump does not eat. Mr. Pump does not sleep." his catching a violator is seen as "inevitable." If the violator goes overseas, Mr. Pump will simply walk under the water to get there.

 

They also made fantastic postmen.

 

This is one of the coolest treatments of "undead" labor I've ever read, and I enjoyed it thoroughly. Repped!

[Manic Typist]

Re: Undead Labor: why not?

 

Don't forget about middle management and societal effects related to this labor face. Having this kind of labor would serve to shift the entire basis of the economy and therefore the society; so you have some questions:

 

Who can create new workers?

Who can control workers, and how many?

Can control be regulated to those who don't naturally have the ability via artificial methods (i.e. magic control stones or somesuch)?

 

If only a select portion of the population is capable of controlling the undead, then they will become prized as middle management figures if the necromancers are busy....being necromancers, or ruling the kingdom, or whatever. If you can create items to enable pretty much anyone to do command the dead once they are walking, then the people who create those items have a guaranteed market AND the government has an incentive to regulate the production and distribution of those items.

 

Just some thoughts.

[Cancer]

Re: Undead Labor: why not?

 

Take the undead labor concept to its logical conclusion and it's rather bleak.

 

Bluntly, if the ruling class can get everything they want via undead labor, then the only point of having real live (and disobedient, willful, restive, disrespectful, ...) humans is that you need them to make your undead labor. Your civil administration policy becomes one of having breeding camps, ensuring that new humans are bred with adequate numbers, then at a harvestable age, the humans get executed in some way that leaves the corpse useable (poison seems likely). That way you don't have to budget any more than the bare maximum for the peasants' subsistence, you don't have to worry about revolts, or anything. The economic forces seem very clear and operate strictly in that direction.

[Ragitsu]

Re: Undead Labor: why not?

 

It's like a fantasy Industrial Revolution.

[Lawnmower Boy]

Re: Undead Labor: why not?

 

Actually, the Industrial Revolution entailed relatively few breeding/death camps.

[Cancer]

Re: Undead Labor: why not?

 

No, but there was a substantial relocation of population out of the rural areas and into the new industrial centers with their high labor demands.

[Outsider]

Re: Undead Labor: why not?

 

And the people were able to do that moving because of increased efficiency in agriculture. Undead would be dandy replacements for work animals and some laborers on any farm.

 

 

PS : The undead empire in my old campaign world effectively kept breeding populations just as you observed. The necromancers in charge used religion to control the live population, in addition to just intimidation and fear.

[assault]

Re: Undead Labor: why not?

 

That moving was largely forced as a result of enclosure of land by landlords. They worked out that they could make more money by driving away most of their previous tenants.

 

The Scottish highlands in the late 18th century was one of the more dramatic examples, but it happened to various degrees throughout Europe over several hundred years.

 

The resulting surplus population was one of the key factors enabling the industrial revolution to take place. There would have been few takers for jobs in the "dark Satanic mills" if it hadn't been for the appalling poverty of the vagabond class. That, and a considerable extent of repression against those who refused to work.

 

In medieval times, charity was a virtue. By the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries it was all about workhouses and the stocks.

 

Massively oversimplifying and overgeneralising, of course.

 

A more dignified undead related economy could be created by a society that venerates its ancestors. A peasant's ancestors could continue to farm, a warrior's ancestors could continue to fight, and a priest's ancestors could continue to pray.

[Lawnmower Boy]

Re: Undead Labor: why not?

 

Australians are a little weird about the social costs of the Industrial Revolution. Wow. You ship one nation to a desert wilderness on the other side of the world to encourage the others, and blah blah blah, you hear about it forever.

 

Actually, the mix of incentives and disincentives that pushed people into the factories during the Industrial Revolution were complex. And they were also politicised. If you put the argument that agriculture was getting more efficient to a Whig (ancestor of the modern Liberals), he would scream at you about "rents." (Meant in the same sense as that libertarian bore you know.) But the reason he would take this dubious line was that he was pushing for the repeal of the Corn Laws, which was unquestionably a good idea. And note the neat convergence between lower food costs in Britain pushing up the standard of living while freeing up labour, and the need for a (modern, industrial) Royal Navy to protect food imports.

 

Then there is the falling death rate, leading inevitably to a more skilled and more investment conscious work force (because the higher age cohorts are more numerous) in the cities and rural slums (if you can bear the political preaching, check out Little Lord Fauntleroy for a great description of one such), where the death rate fell most. That made more labour available precisely for a number of what we would now call industrial activities, and also promoted coal production and thus the railways. How did it happen that death rates fell most where people were most crowded into unsanitary conditions? Issues of construction methods, drainage and so on have to go into this, but the single most important reason for it has got to be the plummeting cost of bleach. And why was bleach getting cheaper? Better production methods --a great example of a virtuous circle of innovation.

 

"Cleanliness is next to Godliness." The people who said that tended (oops, digression here: you've got to know about the "English sandwich," according to which the poor and the rich tend to be good Anglican church goers, while the 'middle class' belonged to various so-called Nonconformist sects such as the Methodists) to be Methodists. Why is that important? Because the most important fungible source of patronage in the English countryside was still religious. That is, you got people to support you in, say, an election, by getting the local vicarage for one of "their" people. So politics was still very largely about religion in the institutional sense.

 

And the Tories were the party of the Anglican order. Because both political parties were patron-client group of aristocrats, and so led by necessarily-good Anglicans (if your family wasn't Anglican, how could you slide your younger brother into a bishopric that would get him into the House of Lords and get all those patronage goodies?), but the Whigs had made a tactical alliance with the Nonconformists! Well, what the heck does that mean, you ask. It means that when the Whigs went looking for new voters/religious converts, they had to look to the lower classes! Cleanliness, and Godliness (i.e., the 'evangelical" religiosity of the Nonconformist middle) went together with a set of other good and not-so-good things in a package of coercion. Get the poor into new, clean, rental housing; send their children to a (private, Nonconformist-run) primary school; close their pubs; impose expectations about personal hygiene; all of this would lead them out of the Godless Anglican church and benighted Tory-supporting and into the bright, sunny uplands of bleached linen, teetotaling, and Sabbath-observing.

 

Well, how do you accomplish that, you ask? By taking control of their living? Most of these people are part-time agricultural labourers, trying to survive on their gardens when times were tough, and taking Outdoor Relief (pre-modern UI) when they couldn't. Once they work in a factory, above all once Outdoor Relief is replaced by a more extensive workhouse system, they are under the control of their kindly, paternal, and, of course Nonconformist factory owner. He can line them up for a sanitary inspection. He can make sure that the women and children are in the factory by sunrise instead of off being corrupted. He can make sure that those who go to his church are promoted to be foremen and such.

 

Incidentally, this will all require breaking down traditional systems of organising skilled labour. For example, the Whigs "invented" a history of the Industrial Revolution in which the entrepeneurs were all virtuously inventive Nonconformists, instead of monopoly-seeking upper class patronage brokers. That's why you'll see bogus statistics implying that all the great engineers and inventors of the era were "self-made men." If you mentioned the ones that went to a public (Anglican) school, it would be giving Satan credit! And, far more importantly, it meant breaking up the unions. Which is why uppity labour activists sometimes went to Australia, and why, in the end, the Liberal party lost out to Labour.

[Cancer]

Re: Undead Labor: why not?

 

Yes, the status of undead labor in your fantasy world would be strongly affected by the religions ... how "real" they are, whether they have any power against the undead, or provide immunity to the zombification process, etc. My assertion that death zombie farms would become the rule assumes that there isn't a cheap effective countermeasure to the undead.

 

Though if there isn't initially (so that zombie death farms are the norm), and some new revelation pops up that can turn undead into ashes with a blessing, a gesture, and a few drops of holy water, then ... I expect the devotees of that revelation would persecuted with an intensity beyond even the worst witch hunts in Earth's history. That might be the basis of a potentially interesting campaign world, actually.

[Badger]

Re: Undead Labor: why not?

 

Well' date=' they stink. I dont want zombies handling my food, man.[/quote']

 

On the other hand, when I think about it. It would be more intelligent than your average McDonald's staff. (And possibly my sanitary-concious:doi:)

[Badger]

Re: Undead Labor: why not?

 

Is it just me or would Kim Jong Il have made a perfect evil necromancer?

 

 

Actually North Korea isnt far from walking dead, sadly.

[Outsider]

Re: Undead Labor: why not?

 

Yes, the status of undead labor in your fantasy world would be strongly affected by the religions ... how "real" they are, whether they have any power against the undead, or provide immunity to the zombification process, etc. My assertion that death zombie farms would become the rule assumes that there isn't a cheap effective countermeasure to the undead.

 

Though if there isn't initially (so that zombie death farms are the norm), and some new revelation pops up that can turn undead into ashes with a blessing, a gesture, and a few drops of holy water, then ... I expect the devotees of that revelation would persecuted with an intensity beyond even the worst witch hunts in Earth's history. That might be the basis of a potentially interesting campaign world, actually.

 

 

What is to say that the people running the zombie death farms havent come up with their a religion that is pro-zombie? Perhaps their religion says that existence is a struggle for spiritual perfection and eventual unification with the divine. That a series of births, deaths, and rebirths are experienced to allow a soul to accumule positive karma, and that the higher a soul's karma the higher a place in this Cycle of Life its next rebirth will be. That when a soul has high enough karma it will be reborn a person. That when a person is transformed into a zombie or skeleton, the soul can continue to (slowly) accumulate positive karma by doing all the drudge work, thus allowing the living to fully devote themselves to prayer, meditation, and other (quicker) karma improving activities. That the act of destroying the undead is an unholy and evil one, as it both stops the soul of the undead from accumulating positive karma, and pushes the burden of drudgery onto the living, thus interfering with the improvement of their souls as well...

[Ninja-Bear]

Re: Undead Labor: why not?

 

Iirc in one of the Death Gate Cycles, the world had a large undead workforce. Unfortunatley, the hero discovered that the balance of life and death got tilted towards death, and that is why his world was dead. Did anyone considered that angle? That I think would be a good reason why to ban the undead.

[BobGreenwade]

Re: Undead Labor: why not?

 

Is it just me or would Kim Jong Il have made a perfect evil necromancer?

 

 

Actually North Korea isnt far from walking dead, sadly.

Given that much of the discussion has been using zombies as food-handlers, this would probably be more like "wokking" dead.

[Badger]

Re: Undead Labor: why not?

 

What is to say that the people running the zombie death farms havent come up with their a religion that is pro-zombie? Perhaps their religion says that existence is a struggle for spiritual perfection and eventual unification with the divine. That a series of births' date=' deaths, and rebirths are experienced to allow a soul to accumule positive karma, and that the higher a soul's karma the higher a place in this Cycle of Life its next rebirth will be. That when a soul has high enough karma it will be reborn a person. That when a person is transformed into a zombie or skeleton, the soul can continue to (slowly) accumulate positive karma by doing all the drudge work, thus allowing the living to fully devote themselves to prayer, meditation, and other (quicker) karma improving activities. That the act of destroying the undead is an unholy and evil one, as it both stops the soul of the undead from accumulating positive karma, and pushes the burden of drudgery onto the living, thus interfering with the improvement of their souls as well...[/quote']

 

It would be interesting. I see still see a majority of their neighbors seeing it as nothing more than forcing their ancestors into slavery at best. A war with such a people would probably be all the more fierce. I and others might have a hard time playing in such a campaign if done seriously (unless I play someone trying to work behind the scenes to bring such an "abominable" culture down, of course)

 

It's an interesting thought exercise. But, I dont see even a culture obsessed with death (like ancient Egypt) going full out pro-zombie. I just see most foreigners seeing the continuation of obtaining good karma as more seeing things as preventing the dead from moving on to their eternal reward/punishment. Enslaving them for eternity, as it were. Their neighbors would see them as a threat (and probably burn their dead in battles against this nation as much as possible to prevent that fate from befalling them)

[Outsider]

Re: Undead Labor: why not?

 

It would be interesting. I see still see a majority of their neighbors seeing it as nothing more than forcing their ancestors into slavery at best. A war with such a people would probably be all the more fierce. I and others might have a hard time playing in such a campaign if done seriously (unless I play someone trying to work behind the scenes to bring such an "abominable" culture down, of course)

 

It's an interesting thought exercise. But, I dont see even a culture obsessed with death (like ancient Egypt) going full out pro-zombie. I just see most foreigners seeing the continuation of obtaining good karma as more seeing things as preventing the dead from moving on to their eternal reward/punishment. Enslaving them for eternity, as it were. Their neighbors would see them as a threat (and probably burn their dead in battles against this nation as much as possible to prevent that fate from befalling them)

 

 

Just to clarify : The people who used and so justify necromancy were the Big Bads in my old campaign world. They were supposed to be an abominable culture, and the expectation on my part was that the player characters would universally oppose them. The religion was basically a construct made up by the high necromancers (mostly undead themselves at that point) as a means of keeping their living chattels in line. It was yet another morsel of horribleness to get the PCs (and the players) to really loathe the bad guys. I would have had a hard time enjoying running (and therefore running at all) the game if one or more of my players wanted to be pro-necromancer.

 

And yeah, the neighboring cultures adapted just as you said, and moreso. Funerary rites dictated the destruction of all bodies, not just battle dead. The military developed a fanatical 'no man left behind' attitude, and a death before capture one as well. (A live prisoner was more valuable to the necromancers than a dead body... a live person you could drain of essence THEN make them into a zombie)

[dmjalund]

Re: Undead Labor: why not?

 

a more palatable variation might be a golem based economy.

[Badger]

Re: Undead Labor: why not?

 

Just to clarify : The people who used and so justify necromancy were the Big Bads in my old campaign world. They were supposed to be an abominable culture, and the expectation on my part was that the player characters would universally oppose them. The religion was basically a construct made up by the high necromancers (mostly undead themselves at that point) as a means of keeping their living chattels in line. It was yet another morsel of horribleness to get the PCs (and the players) to really loathe the bad guys. I would have had a hard time enjoying running (and therefore running at all) the game if one or more of my players wanted to be pro-necromancer.

 

And yeah, the neighboring cultures adapted just as you said, and moreso. Funerary rites dictated the destruction of all bodies, not just battle dead. The military developed a fanatical 'no man left behind' attitude, and a death before capture one as well. (A live prisoner was more valuable to the necromancers than a dead body... a live person you could drain of essence THEN make them into a zombie)

 

 

Thanks for more info. Though, I wasnt really making a big deal of anything. Just putting my 2 cents in on my interpretation (I do that like it or not sometimes:doi:).

 

I didnt think much about the capture part of it. i kind of figured the necros would be happy either way. Didnt think much of non-battle dead either because of their graves being in their territory (though I can see some fear of a future successful invasion messing with everything)

 

Though, on one side note, I seem to remember the Inca had a strange reverence for their dead ancestors. As in bringing out their mummified ancestors for special celebrations. Though, in fantasy terms it'd probably be a society lead by intelligent undead leaders* rather than using a workforce

 

*It probably beats our current system of unintelligent live leaders.

[Ragitsu]

Re: Undead Labor: why not?

 

Undead Labor Unions, fought by valiant PC Life Walker.

[Mathew]

Re: Undead Labor: why not?

 

Assuming that undead are merely low-end animal-like in intelligence, you could still use them like people would use animals... to pull carts, or as simple means of motive force. Why not put a skeleton at the bottom of a well next to a pump, with the instructions to keep pumping the water?

[Tasha]

Re: Undead Labor: why not?

 

a more palatable variation might be a golem based economy.

 

Actually something like that is part of the Eberron setting. Where one of the kingdoms made a force of Sentient Golems to fight their wars. IIRC it only made the war worse and eventually once the war ended, there were thousands of former Soldier Golems out of work with no experience beyond what one gets as a soldier.

[Starcloud]

Re: Undead Labor: why not?

 

There was a second edition D&D product; set in an island archipelago, there were two main cultures. One was the savage, "barbaric" and relatively "primitive" culture, and the other was the refined, somewhat decadent, remains of an older empire, mostly run by necromancers. The second culture saw nothing wrong with honoring their ancestors by raising their bodies and using them for most sorts of labor. In D&D terms at the time, though, both cultures were evil; just one was chaotic and the other was lawful.

 

Incidentally, the player characters were supposed to come from one culture or the other, and there were suggestions that the game master should run two groups of PCs in the setting and pit them against each other. Yeah, that'll work well with most groups.

 

As for the Eberron example.. actually, one of the Dragonmarked Houses created the Warforged, and they sold Warforged to everyone who could afford 'em.

[Tasha]

Re: Undead Labor: why not?

 

As for the Eberron example.. actually, one of the Dragonmarked Houses created the Warforged, and they sold Warforged to everyone who could afford 'em.

 

The point is that they were used in a huge war. The War ended and now tons of Soldier Trained Warforged are suddenly out of work and having to live their lives as free beings for a change.

[Badger]

Re: Undead Labor: why not?

 

Assuming that undead are merely low-end animal-like in intelligence' date=' you could still use them like people would use animals... to pull carts, or as simple means of motive force. Why not put a skeleton at the bottom of a well next to a pump, with the instructions to keep pumping the water?[/quote']

 

Well, I dont think I want any undead pumping drinking water. Now say the sewage, maybe.