What the heck is a thrall anyway? From the extremely limited encyclopedia entry it appears to just be a word for anyone forced to serve the Illithid. Like Githyanki once did. So why the heck do Githyanki seem to hate them almost as much as they do Githzerai? Is it just that Githyanki are assholes? 
Thrall?
Wed, 2008-05-28 06:41
#1
Thrall?
Wed, 2008-05-28 10:00
#3
Thrall?
The "Giths", before they split into Githyanki and Githzerai, were a slave race of the Illithids.
An Illithid's "thrall" on the other hand is actually being mentally controlled. While it doesn't explain how an Illithid accomplishes this in the Monster Manual or Lords of Madness I suspect it's similar to the Dominate Monster spell (though they seem to lack this ability).
From what I've read an Illithid can have a number of thralls and Illithids must "renew" the telepathic control periodically. While the Giths may have once been thralls they eventually developed their own psionic abilities and learned to block the Illithids control.
-420
Wed, 2008-05-28 10:19
#4
Thrall?
What the heck is a thrall anyway? From the extremely limited encyclopedia entry it appears to just be a word for anyone forced to serve the Illithid. Like Githyanki once did. So why the heck do Githyanki seem to hate them almost as much as they do Githzerai? Is it just that Githyanki are assholes?
The reason the gith races are no longer completely dominated by tyhe illithid has to do with Gith's rebellion and her "Live Free or Die" idiology. Therefore, culturaly, githyanki (and githzerai too) abhor slavery to such a degree as to hate the slave almost as much as the slaver. Githyanki in particular take the "live free or die" phylosophy to an extreme. Any slave that lacks the strenth of will to rise up, even in a futile uprising whre they are sure to be killed, is the exact opposite of everything a githyanki's been been taught in their culture. Therefore, if you are a slave, having been unable or unwilling to rise up against your masters at some time in the past, you are their idiological opposite, and must either die on the spot, or, if strong enough (and therefore worthy of some small respect, but nothing less will do) rise up gainst your masters at once and ally with The People.
Of course 99.9% of anyone dominated by illithids can't simply rise up against them, epecially true of thralls that have been bred and raised in the slave pens. The 'yanki don't care, though. Results matter. A thrall is part of the problem, or at a minimum is in the way. Kill 'em. An ally is part of the solution: killing illithids and thralls. You can do that, they'll let you, but the moment you are not working toward that goal, the 'yanki will re-examine what they're getting out of your alliance.
I don't see them as a******s, neccisarily, though their culture can perpetuate that personality type. They are not an evil race because they are particularly sadistic, just very brutal and matter-of-fact. Realpolitik rather than Schatenfreund.
Wed, 2008-05-28 10:20
#5
Thrall?
The "Giths", before they split into Githyanki and Githzerai, were a slave race of the Illithids.
An Illithid's "thrall" on the other hand is actually being mentally controlled. While it doesn't explain how an Illithid accomplishes this in the Monster Manual or Lords of Madness I suspect it's similar to the Dominate Monster spell (though they seem to lack this ability).
From what I've read an Illithid can have a number of thralls and Illithids must "renew" the telepathic control periodically. While the Giths may have once been thralls they eventually developed their own psionic abilities and learned to block the Illithids control.
-420
Examples:
Mind Probe to discover a humanoid's fears and psychological weaknesses, then use false sensory input (or real physical torture, or whatever) to break him psychologically.
Forced Mindlink combined with telepathically sending whatever mental images, emotions, etc., the humanoid would find terribly disturbing (look at what happened to the sharpener)
One could also use mindwipe to completely remove the humanoid's existing memories and begin reshaping his mind with new experiences (i.e., the victim has no idea he was ever anything but a thrall)
Various direct mental domination powers (the most powerful of which is literally called thrall, but it's so high-level that it's a very rare illithid that would have it)
Ah, yes, how could I forget -- Inflict Pain.
That's only looking at telepathic powers; individual illithid may also have access to psionic powers in other disciplines, devices, magic, etc.
I shouldn't give Azure ideas, tho'.
Wed, 2008-05-28 10:37
#6
Thrall?
After two or three generations the slaves are so used to being subjects to illithid rule that they don't imagine it any other way. Then the mind flayers probably don't need psionics and magic anymore to keep them in line., and are 'safe to turn their eyes outwards once more.'...
Wed, 2008-05-28 10:55
#7
Thrall?
What the heck is a thrall anyway? From the extremely limited encyclopedia entry it appears to just be a word for anyone forced to serve the Illithid. Like Githyanki once did. So why the heck do Githyanki seem to hate them almost as much as they do Githzerai? Is it just that Githyanki are assholes?
The reason the gith races are no longer completely dominated by tyhe illithid has to do with Gith's rebellion and her "Live Free or Die" idiology. Therefore, culturaly, githyanki (and githzerai too) abhor slavery to such a degree as to hate the slave almost as much as the slaver. Githyanki in particular take the "live free or die" phylosophy to an extreme. Any slave that lacks the strenth of will to rise up, even in a futile uprising whre they are sure to be killed, is the exact opposite of everything a githyanki's been been taught in their culture. Therefore, if you are a slave, having been unable or unwilling to rise up against your masters at some time in the past, you are their idiological opposite, and must either die on the spot, or, if strong enough (and therefore worthy of some small respect, but nothing less will do) rise up gainst your masters at once and ally with The People.
Of course 99.9% of anyone dominated by illithids can't simply rise up against them, epecially true of thralls that have been bred and raised in the slave pens. The 'yanki don't care, though. Results matter. A thrall is part of the problem, or at a minimum is in the way. Kill 'em. An ally is part of the solution: killing illithids and thralls. You can do that, they'll let you, but the moment you are not working toward that goal, the 'yanki will re-examine what they're getting out of your alliance.
I don't see them as a******s, neccisarily, though their culture can perpetuate that personality type. They are not an evil race because they are particularly sadistic, just very brutal and matter-of-fact. Realpolitik rather than Schatenfreund.
So... basically they're sadistic backstabbing cowardly ignorant bigots... but they're not evil... :|
I'd love to be a 20th level fighter talking philosophy with a tenth level githyanki...
I'd walk up and sit down and say. "Tell me about your people." And then he'd say, "The Githzerai people." And then I'd go, "Oh... um... I meant you faction... yeah..." And then once I'd finally gotten out of that I'd find a real Githyanki and ask them to tell me about their people and then pick apart their stupid little prejudices and because they're such psychos they wouldn't just get up and leave and if they attacked me I'd beat them down without even having to kill them because I'm twice their level and tell them to keep talking... and... yeah.
Wed, 2008-05-28 11:00
#8
Thrall?
So why the heck do Githyanki seem to hate them almost as much as they do Githzerai? Is it just that Githyanki are assholes?
I don't understand this question at all. Are you asking why githyanki hate thralls? They don't. They don't treat non-githyanki with any sympathy, but they don't feel any particular animosity towards slaves of the illithids.
They hate illithids far more than they hate the githzerai. The experience of their forerunners, enslaved, experimented on, and devoured by the illithids for countless centuries, defines both the githyanki and githzerai, making them what they are today. Their hatred for illithids, and desire to see them all exterminated, is all-consuming, and they will call a temporary truce with the githzerai to see them dead. Some 'yanki and 'zerai can see a future in which their peoples are reunited, but neither will suffer a mind flayer to live.
If an illithid thrall gets in the way of killing illithids, neither race will hesitate to kill the thrall, but if the mind flayers are all dead there's usually not any point in punishing the thralls any more than the mind flayers did. They may even feel a bit of solidarity with them, though as both gith races are xenophobic that's not going to go very far.
The most common thralls are grimlocks, who are also descended from the gith forerunners according to Dawn of the Overmind, though they didn't win their freedom when the children of Gith did. The gith races don't have any particular feelings about grimlocks today. They are not children of Gith the Liberator. They have been altered by illithids beyond recognition. They are not enemies unless they ally themselves with the hated illithids, but neither will they ever be friends.
Duergar were once enthralled by the mind flayers as well, at least in the Forgotten Realms, but the gith races don't have any particular feelings about them either, in spite of their common hatred of their former masters.
Wed, 2008-05-28 11:04
#9
Thrall?
I know they're enslaved by their hatred. Did you read Azure's post though?
Wed, 2008-05-28 11:08
#10
Thrall?
I know they're enslaved by their hatred. Did you read Azure's post though?
No, I hadn't yet. He's somewhat wrong; githyanki do not abhor slavery, and in fact they keep slaves themselves (who they obviously don't kill on the spot). Both githyanki and githzerai would feel contempt for someone who willingly allowed themselves to be enslaved, but they certainly don't hate slaves almost as much as they hate the illithids.
I stand by my previous post. Both races will kill slaves who get in the way of their genocidal quest, but otherwise they'll ignore them (or, in the case of the githyanki, possibly make them slaves of their own).
I think Azure is spot on with his "live free or die" emphasis when it comes to how the gith races view being enslaved themselves, but I don't agree that they would feel murderous hatred toward other slaves. After all, their ancestors were in the same position for a long time, and they understand perfectly well that freedom doesn't come in a single day. What if someone had slain Gith's ancestor, or Zerthimon's ancestor, merely for being slaves? The liberators would never have been born. Sometimes patience is necessary.
Wed, 2008-05-28 11:15
#11
Thrall?
So... basically they're sadistic backstabbing cowardly ignorant bigots... but they're not evil... :|
.
Umm, I don't think that was what I was describing at all. Not even a little, and in fact, specificly not "cowardly", "backstabbing", "sadistic", and "not evil". "Ignorant"? Maybe, but I don't think so. "Bigots"? Yes, most surely, and canon all the way.
Did you read Azure's post though?
I thought I read my own post, both while writing it and afterwards, but perhaps my ability to expess myself through writing isn't what I thought is was.
Ok, that was a bit sarcastic, and therefore unfair and confrontational on my part, Dire, but I do think you missed my points entirely.
I know they're enslaved by their hatred.
Yes, a most delicious irony.
Wed, 2008-05-28 11:28
#12
Thrall?
So... basically they're sadistic backstabbing cowardly ignorant bigots... but they're not evil... :|
.
Umm, I don't think that was what I was describing at all. Not even a little, and in fact, specificly not "cowardly", "backstabbing", "sadistic", and "not evil". "Ignorant"? Maybe, but I don't think so. "Bigots"? Yes, most surely, and canon all the way.
Did you read Azure's post though?
I thought I read my own post, both while writing it and afterwards, but perhaps my ability to expess myself through writing isn't what I thought is was.
Ok, that was a bit sarcastic, and therefore unfair and confrontational on my part, Dire, but I do think you missed my points entirely.
I know they're enslaved by their hatred.
Yes, a most delicious irony.
I say they're sadistic because they like inflicting pain on those who are already suffering enough as it is and also, you said it yourself. I say they're backstabbers because you said that they'd "re-examine what they're getting out of your alliance" the moment you stop working towards their goal. I said they're cowardly because they enjoy killing those that are weaker than them. I say that they're ignorant because their whole philosophy is completely inconsistent and idiotic and they don't realize it, and I say they're bigots because they believe themselves inherently superior to all other life forms.
I wasn't asking you if you read your post, I was asking ripvanwormer, because he seemed to not realize that he was disagreeing with it.
Wed, 2008-05-28 11:31
#13
Thrall?
He's somewhat wrong; githyanki do not abhor slavery, and in fact they keep slaves themselves (who they obviously don't kill on the spot). Both githyanki and githzerai would feel contempt for someone who willingly allowed themselves to be enslaved, but they certainly don't hate slaves almost as much as they hate the illithids.
I stand by my previous post. Both races will kill slaves who get in the way of their genocidal quest, but otherwise they'll ignore them (or, in the case of the githyanki, possibly make them slaves of their own).
.
Ugh I know. I'm not going to try to argue canon with you, Rip, it would be futile anyway. But, I always hated the "githyanki take slaves line"
To be fair, I'll disclose now that I'm talking from the perspective of my take onm githyanki culture, which may differ from canon, perhaps significantly, and is an attempt on a more in-depth cultural analysis, with some (brave mayhap foolosh) attempts at cohesion and to include other fan content.
That said, in my githyanki campaign, githyanki don't take slaves, they take captives. The distiction is accademic from an outside perspective, but to a githyanki the difference is important. A slave is kept for life, and is property. A captive works for you because you didn't kill him, and are refraining from doing so (for now). A slave will never be free. A captive was free, and if he was strong enough would still be.
Wed, 2008-05-28 11:36
#14
Thrall?
...So he's a slave you took in battle... Great, they're also hypocrites. Anything else you can say to make me hate Githyanki more? 
Wed, 2008-05-28 11:43
#15
Thrall?
I always figured githyanki to be arrogant, mercyless, and evil, but at the same time having a sense of honor that guides their actions (they have to be 'lawful' for some reason, after all) and prevents them from acting like savages. Of course I don't know if it's officialy stated that the githyanki keep slaves or any kind of forced labor, but that's clearly not the way I've seen them.
Wed, 2008-05-28 11:49
#16
Thrall?
One of the reasons I like the Githyanki so much is because their society is such a mix of the dreadful and the utopian. The dreadful has already been addressed in earlier posts.
The utopian:
Githyanki generally have a very strong sense of fraternity and brotherhood, much more so than humans -- and totally unlike almost every other evil-aligned race in D&D. I suspect this is an innate tendency, but also reinforced by cultural practices, which try to keep the level of internal violence at a minimum.
Equality of opportunity. Every single githyanki hatchling has the same (or at least, very similar) opportunities growing up, and the child of a supreme leader and a mlar are treated the same. Compare to Earth, where one child might grow up in extreme poverty or very abusive parents, while others may have access to riches and an easy life. "Well, I think I could make a good doctor, but the family just doesn't have the money for it" doesn't happen in githyanki society.
Lack of materialism: While githyanki do indeed enjoy possessions, glory, honor, and individual skill are far more important to them. The highest-status githyanki isn't one with a lot of money, but one who has slain many illithid, is skilled at his trade, and conducts himself with (the githyanki version of) honor.
On the subject of githyanki taking slaves/captives, there is inconsistency in the canonical sources themselves in any case. I lean toward (and I think Azure does also) the Guide to the Astral Plane version: "For themselves, they make slaves of their enemies only for short periods of intense humiliation. Slaves're always ritually sacrificed to the queen, eventually."
I imagine that the githyanki mindset views enthrallment as the ultimate degradation, so in that sense some could be psychologically capable of making a slave of a hated foe. (I wouldn't be too surprised, though, if this was an area of githyanki psychology that the giths themselves often find disturbing.)
Wed, 2008-05-28 11:56
#17
Thrall?
I say they're sadistic because they like inflicting pain on those who are already suffering enough as it is and also, you said it yourself. I say they're backstabbers because you said that they'd "re-examine what they're getting out of your alliance" the moment you stop working towards their goal. I said they're cowardly because they enjoy killing those that are weaker than them. I say that they're ignorant because their whole philosophy is completely inconsistent and idiotic and they don't realize it, and I say they're bigots because they believe themselves inherently superior to all other life forms.
I wasn't asking you if you read your post, I was asking ripvanwormer, because he seemed to not realize that he was disagreeing with it.
Last part first: I was being sarcastic. I already appologized for being sarcastic. I hereby appologize again.
OK, now to conter-point your arguements.
I say they're sadistic because they like inflicting pain on those who are already suffering enough as it is and also, you said it yourself.
Sadism is getting pleasure out of causing pain, and while I won't argue that githyanki (or humans for that matter) can't be sadistic, I don't see this as their major rationale. Postulate: Slavery, especially to illithids, is a living hell and torture to the mind, body, and spirit. Postulate: most illithid thalls couldn't or wouldn't rebel. Solution: Kill thralls. Swiftly. Efficiently.
I don't consider euthenasia sadistic. Is killing in battle sadistic? Never having killed somebody I can't say for sure, but idiologicly it doesn't have to be.
On second thought, yea, they're kind of sadistic, but no more than the adventurer cleaving goblin skulls for fun and profit.
I say they're backstabbers because you said that they'd "re-examine what they're getting out of your alliance" the moment you stop working towards their goal.
Such it has been with almost every treaty or alliance in history. Self interest, no more, no less. Githyanki are, if anything, a little more honest beacause they make no pretext that there is any other motive for their alliance that their primary goal of exterminating illithid. More to the point, relations with other githyanki are are of another caliber altogether, so I refute the "backstabber" label. At least in preferance for "front-stabber".
I said they're cowardly because they enjoy killing those that are weaker than them.
The art of warfare is all about avoiding the "fair fight", or especially one you'll loose. I'd go on, but I don't have my copies of The Art of War and The 37 Strategems on me right now. Suffice to say that fighting a fight where you'll loose and die, without gaining any strategic advantage by it, is not bravery, it is foolishness. Beating a weaker foe is not cowardice, it is victory.
I say that they're ignorant because their whole philosophy is completely inconsistent and idiotic and they don't realize it,
I'm specificly trying to avoid inconsistant, though you seem to think I'm messing that up. Idiotic is your opinion on the matter. As I'm not a subscriber to the "might makes right" type of phylosophy in my own life, I'll assume you are critiquing the phylosophy, not calling me an idiot for playing devil's advocate or using it to explain a coherant githyanki culture.
I say they're bigots because they believe themselves inherently superior to all other life forms.
I agree. Racism sucks (though I guess this is more speciesism). Does being a racist make someone an a*****e? Does it make tham evil? I ask because the answers are not so clear-cut.
...So he's a slave you took in battle... Great, they're also hypocrites.
I agree.
Anything else you can say to make me hate Githyanki more?
Probably 
Wed, 2008-05-28 12:07
#18
Thrall?
...So he's a slave you took in battle... Great, they're also hypocrites. Anything else you can say to make me hate Githyanki more?
Sure. They believe they're the freest race in the universe, while actually being (at least, in campaigns where the Revered Queen is on Her throne) in essence a repressive theocracy. They're as bad as, or maybe even worse than, the drow in terms of religious intolerance.
Wed, 2008-05-28 12:28
#19
Thrall?
Their xenophobia is a huge hiderance to their goals. If they made more alliances with other races, they'd be more successful in defeating the illithids, but they can't bring themselves to trust other races. Nowhere is this more ironic than their clash with the githzerai, their closest kin and the illithids' other most dire foes. At least they lay off githzerai on rrakkma, but still ...
Thralls are those who have been psionically dominated by the illithid. (Usually the process of becoming a proper illithid thrall involves more than being hit with a charm person manifestation; they add a lot of gruesome physical and psychological conditioning, topped by higher-level telepathic powers, to make someone a complete slave.)
It's worth noting that most thralls eventually get eaten, as illithids need a brain a month just to survive, and a healthy diet is more like one sentient brain a week. The gith races were once thralls themselves.
BoGr Guide to Missile Combat:
1) Equip a bow or crossbow.
2) Roll a natural 1 on d20.
3) ?????
4) Profit!