What's wrong with making them bust some rocks like in the Gulag? It's expensive to house and feed prisoners, they should earn their keep by being forced to do labor and work for the betterment of society.

Same applies to Fallout wasteland environment. You can't afford to feed prisoners with limited resources, you should put captured baddies to work, either that or a bullet in the brain.

Nothing evil with enslaving baddies and make them contribute to the good of the settlement; especially when the alternative is execution.

Not "wrong" at all.

"Like in the Gulag" kind of answers your question. The reason we fought the Cold War was because we were opposed to the Soviets, who threw people in the Gulag. (I also have a degree in history.)

How does busting rocks lead to the betterment of society? It's merely punishment for the sake of punishment. It doesn't help "earn their keep" unless, for some bizarre reason, the state owns a gravel company and can sell the gravel they make. And then it would be undercutting free enterprise gravel companies, so they couldn't even use those rock-busting skills once out of prison.

Have you seen Cool Hand Luke a lot, or something?

I have my thoughts about real world issue, but this is a game forum so stick with the game issues. Wasteland settlements aren't exactly capitalism; more like communism. Strap on a bomb collar and make those "former" raiders dig trenches, farm, repair stuff, whatever slaves from Paradise Falls do to keep the community running. Maybe even draft them on the front lines to fight for the settlement. They're bad guys so how is that evil in any sense?

In game terms, or in real world terms, it's the same answer for me. Strapping bomb collars on people or otherwise compelling their unpaid labor is, plain and simple, slavery. Forcing them to fight for your settlement means you're using them as human (or, I guess, super-mutant) shields. If your character were to do that, then others in the wasteland would be perfectly justified in seeing you as Evil (with the capital "E"). In fact, an heroic character might see it as their duty to overthrow you.

"But I only enslave bad people!" is a weak defense, since keeping slaves and using people as human shields is one of the things that makes the Bad Guys bad guys to begin with. That's how you can tell. It's like arguing that you only murder murderers. That makes you a murderer.

Better still- look at it this way. Your character is captured in their sleep by a group who says you've been harassing them, killing their members, and overall giving them a hard time. Rather than kill you, though, they're just going to strap a bomb collar on you and make you farm- for the rest of your life. You are their slave. (Hmmm. Hey, Bethesda- can I get props if this becomes a mission in an upcoming DLC?)

So- are they the good guys, or the bad guys?

It's a REALLY good rule of thumb that, if you wouldn't want it done to you, it's probably a bad thing to do it to someone else. I think that's the Golden Rule in reverse.

As for economy, it strikes me that Wasteland settlements are run like family farms. Of course you're not paying the settlers, they're forming an extended family unit, with you as father/mother figure. They eat food you provide and live in houses you build, wear clothes you pay for. Do children in a family get paid (other than a token amount) to do chores? It's not communism, it's a family. Communism was a reaction to capitalism; settlements are pre-capitalist, even a subsistence economy.

It is not wrong to enslave bad people in Fallout games. It is just more fun to enslave good ones.

It is always wrong to enslave people.

It's what makes you bad people.

What I get from this forum is that the average person is willing to joyfully accept slavery, genocide and extortion as long as you repackage it and give them a flimsy excuse to justify it.

Welcome to the human species.

what I was thinking. My entire greened in river is set up for the arena I plan to buy

- raiders don't work ,

- making them fight for their life so u can gain money is Capitalism

Even though it will always be "wrong", that doesn't mean it isn't necessary -- especially in a survival situation. Like killing. Killing is always "wrong"...but characters kill all the time in the game. If you don't, you die. At least if you take slaves, there's a chance they might actually reform.

From an ethical standpoint, it would be an interesting mechanic (re-introducing the Karma system) to "pop-quiz" the player from time to time to see if they remember what they're doing is wrong. Making sure your character doesn't lie to themself about their actions is important in staying focused on good. Failing to remember the humanity of the situation means you're beginning the slow, insidious turn to the dark side.

Thank you Mr Wikipedia, I of course deeply research every comment I make on a throwaway topic in a gaming forum
Our modern outlook on slavery is framed by the historical abuses. At the core of slavery though is the removal of individual freedoms such as the right to free movement and the right to ownership. The typical serf was tied to the land they were born on, while not the direct property of the lord where not exactly regaled with personal freedoms we take for granted.

Yes, I am kidding, it's a game and the settlers are running stock AI routines.
But at the same time as Lord (owner of the settlements) I get to send the settlers where I decree, assign them to the tasks I need doing, and most fun dress and equip them how I want.

It would have been nice to see some deeper interactions with the settlement management akin to some of the old style Civ/ Sim City games, where the recruitment is affected by the quality of your settlement and reputation. I have fond memories of 'Sid Mier's Alpha Centauri' with the ability of some leaders to nerve staple the population.

The sort of leadership a settlement has is also a major factor behind 'The Walking Dead', okay it's zombie survival rather than post-apocalyptic, but the scenarios of groups of survivors coming together are similar. Can a benevolent leader with a utopic outlook really survive the hardships?
Why aren't successful settlements besieged by hopefuls trying to find safety?

I get that the settlement system is a bolt on with very few mechanics of importance, it's a shame, a few tweaks and it could really add strong gameplay choices.

Ah subjective moral question. Those are always fun. No there's nothing wrong with enslaving bad people. In video games or reality. If they valued their freedom they shouldn't have use it for evil purposes. Enslaving the wicked is perfectly morally justifiable. (Again subjective)

If we're talking about real life, then yes, I think slavery of any kind is wrong. In the Fallout world though...perhaps not. I loved doing evil play throughs in FO3 and NV and getting involved in the slave trade. I never play a character like that for my initial play through (and usually not even for my next couple), but I always like to do an evil play through whenever possible. It's not really possible in FO4 currently unfortunately.

Mr. Wikipedia huh? I tend to take some ownership in my posts, regardless of where I post, gaming forum, throwaway topic, or something else.

Secondly, due to the nature of the feudal system and the differences in the social structure of society in those times, there wasn't much vertical mobility, simply because there weren't as many professions as there are today. What could a serf become if he desired to be something greater? A lord? A lord was of the warrior class, the vanguard, and someone called to go to war with his soldiers when called upon. In those times, Kings also went to war. I would have rather been a serf or a freeman. They were of course sometimes called to go to war -- and some were able to move up the ladder that way.

Personal freedom isn't the same as "civil freedom", and that is what we take for granted today. In any society, so long as you weren't a slave, you were free to do as you wish, move as you wish, choose your vocation, join the military, provide for your family, and live your life, only they lacked civil liberties due to the nature of feudalism and then absolute monarchy following that.

On topic:

It is wrong to enslave anyone, even if they are "bad", because in the end it justifies slavery, and that is morally wrong.

I agree, but there will always be exceptions. Those two FO3 characters I mentioned before are prime examples of this, and both have rather interesting backstories with a sense of charm and sadness. This would be a wonderful opportunity for the future of the series.

I have this vision of a chained slave sitting and having a discussion about life and purpose with Strong, then much later in the game becoming a captain of the town guard. Little moments like that make for amazing evolution. If they're emergent, one-off situations due to the Radiant engine, all the cooler.

"Let the punishment fit the crime."

Slavery is wrong. Now, sentences in labor camps/farms that don't last forever, that's... different?

Talking about Raiders, I like that they're more fleshed out in FO4 than they were in FO3, but I wish they'd be fleshed out even more and have it show in the game world. For example, some Raider-groups seem to tax caravans and other passersby with tolls or protection money, but they're always hostile to you. Maybe there could be some Raiders that weren't immediately hostile to you? After all, you could somehow justify that toll by arguing that they're keeping the area clear of ferals/creatures/other (crazier) Raiders.

I didn't find anything by googling "The Forsaken Skyrim". Did you mean Forsworn or ForsomethingIdon'tremember?

Actually, this is blurring an interesting line here. People in the modern world tend to over-simplify the governments of the past. Serfdom was, for all intents and purposes, a job. They were only "tied to the land" because...that's where the farm was. Any serf could go to the lord of that manor and "apply" for a transfer. If they didn't get it -- what are you gonna do? Starve? No. You continue to work because that's the only job you have.

When a serf didn't do their job, they were NOT strung up in the town square and disemboweled. They were usually kicked off the land and made freemen. A pretty terrible proposition for life in the Middle Ages. Serfdom was not a form of slavery. It was a contract for life.

Raise your hand if you would be willing to sign a contract that guaranteed you a job, income, and housing for the rest of your life.

I voted yes. I want all raiders to do my bidding!

No. It's wrong to kill them, it's wrong to make good innocent people support them, put them in labor camps and let them be.

The people upset about slavery in games should get off their duff and do something about real world problems.

From Wikipedia: "Estimates of the number of slaves today range from around 21 million to 29 million. Modern slavery is a multibillion-dollar industry with estimates of up to $35 billion generated annually. The United Nations estimates that roughly 27 to 30 million individuals are currently caught in the slave trade industry".

both answers are correct depending on what character you create.

Let's not forget 1.3 million children are involved in growing cocoa, 200,000 which live in Cote d'Ivoire probably from child trafficking or slavery. Cote d'Ivoire provide 30% of the world's cocoa with Nestle as a major buyer. So every time you buy a bar of chocolate, remember that.