That was kind of the joke. They are not really that different. I don't have a problem. They fit the dictionary definition of confederacy to a "t." That seems like a good place to stick the sea faring goblins. When I get around to redrawing my world map I think I'm going to redraw the continents more rugged. I can give East Colassia some penisulas and fjiords to extend the coastline and open up more maritime adventures. Intiially I was torn on the goblin slavery part. I like shades of grey but I figured as victims of slavery, the members of the Coalssian Confederacy wouldn't want to be hypcrites. Then I remembered that I'm planning to create at least six different tiny kingdoms to make up the Confederacy. They should not all agree on the ethics of slavery, and they should not all agree on what constitutes appropriate treatment of goblins. I still haven't figure out which human nations should have slavery, serfs, peasants, or yeomen and in what quantities. Before I tied it to the predominant religions and the predominant ethical outlook of the various nations. At two extremes Phidas friendly governments tend to have slavery or serfs while Zarthus friendly governments tend to have yeomen. Hallisan and Khemra governments tend to fall in between. But a lot of the issues of slavery (or serfdom which is very similar to slavery) has to do with economics. In the United States, there were lots of people who opposed slavery on moral grounds but the main reason that the north abolished slavery and the antebellum south did not was because of economics. Assuming a moral vaccuum: If a land's agriculture is based off of massive plantations, slavery is efficient. If the agriculture is based off of lots of small farms that are spread out slavery is not efficient. I imagine goblins would need a lot of supervision. To make goblin slavery viable you need to have work that requires lots of bodies in one palce. If the goblins are spread out, a lot of them will will sneak away (and they might come back and shiv the masters while they sleep). The D&D city builder as an optional city for goblin ghetto. Where goblins are tolerated for cheap labor but they are technically free and they are paid, barely. I don't see Scarterran goblins being okay with menial labor for pittance money. They would probably have to be a stick that blurs the line peasant and slave. "Hey work here and accept this as pay or we kill you." Poor people can still be mistreated even they are technically free. Game of Thrones brings that up quite a bit. I figure in a place like Uskala where the king is utterly ruthless and Lawful Evil and the Lawful Evil god has the dominant priesthood BUT the economy is not particularly well suited for slavery, that slave ownership would be a luxury for the rich rather than a backbone for the entire the economy. In places where slavery is legal but rare, they would be the consequences of capital crime. If a man is executed for high crimes like treason, his family would be sold into slavery for all time. Lawful Evil all the way. I'm not sure how a government with Lawful Good power centers would justify slavery if their economy woudl be well-suited to it. Apseldia, the only nation I have with a Chaotic Good leaning government has a lot of large plantations with paid workers. Just because a place has a cash crop economy doesn't mean they will have slavery. Apseldia does have institutionalized racism, they are a republic but only half-elves and gnomes can vote. Apseldia is also overcrowded so the laws of supply and demand mean that laborers will work for cheap.