Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Rhialto 07-10-07, 02:57 AM	Essentially, full native speaker fluency is assumed once you have 5 ranks in a skill (count any bonuses from any relevant feats; I don't think there are any, but you never know). If you have 4 or fewer ranks, then any attempt to communicate in that language with a fluent speaker of that language is treated as a Bluff skill attempt at delivering a secret message. If neither speaker nor listener are fluent (have 5+ ranks), there is an additional -5 penalty on this check. There is no particular benefit in having more than 5 ranks in a specific language if both people are fluent. If if one person is not fluent, any ranks over 5 (that the fluent person has) in the language are treated as a bonus on the communication check. Literate characters are initially assumed to be literate only in the languages they start with. Adding a simple script (eg Latin, Greek, Cyrillic, Runes) costs 1 skill point. Adding a complex script (eg Hebrew, Arabic, devanagari) costs 2 skill points. Adding a very complex script (eg. hieroglyphics, hanzi) costs 4 skill points. Knowing a script doesn't give any particular ability to understand the language, although in the case of simple scripts, the character can read a text out aloud even if he doesn't understand the language. In the case of complex scripts, a character can read it aloud, but will make many errors. Reading aloud is not possible with a very complex script unless the character also knows the language. This system is supposed to reflect the difficulties of of language barriers in more realistic terms. In a campaign that uses this system, the number of monster languages should be simplified a lot, and interpreters would become the valuable hirelings they are in real life. Thoughts?
Bobson 07-10-07, 03:53 AM	This system is supposed to reflect the difficulties of of language barriers in more realistic terms. In a campaign that uses this system, the number of monster languages should be simplified a lot, and interpreters would become the valuable hirelings they are in real life. Thoughts? It's an interesting system, and provided you grant bonus skill points at chargen specifically for languages (probably based on int), it could work... But why choose 5? That means a 1st level *anything* isn't fluent in their native tongue. And if each rank of it costs one skill point, most people will never bother investing points in more languages (2 points for the standard character to learn a new language, if it's useful, is usually acceptable. 5 is more than most characters can afford). I went a very different route in revising language for my current campaign. I divided every language up into one of five families, based on their alphabets (Common/Imperial, Draconic, Divine, Elvish, and Dwarvish), mostly based on what runes it uses in the core books (Divine is a combination of Infernal, Abyssal, and Celestial). Each character starts with verbal proficiency in their native language, and gets one extra skill point to spend on speak language per point of int mod (speak language is a class skill for everyone). Wizards get read/write Draconic for free, and Clerics get read/write Divine for free. Barbarians can't spend any points on read/write at chargen. To learn a new language it costs: 1 point to learn to speak a new language in the same family you already can speak a language of. 1 point to read/write a language in the same family you can already read a language of. 1 point to read/write a language you can speak. 1 point to speak a language you can read/write. 2 points to speak a language from a different family. 2 points to read/write a language from a different family. Using this method, the average commoner (10 int) can speak fluent common (or whatever his racial language is), but can't read it. A smart one might be able to, or might be bilingual. An 18 int character could speak five languages (native and 4 others, if there are 4 others in the family), but be unable to read or write any of them... or could speak and read/write two of them fluently, and have one or the other in a third. I feel doing it this way is pretty realistic compared to standard D&D (though still rather abstracted from reality, since there's no "I know a bit of the language). Bilingual characters aren't uncommon, and literate characters are common, but no one is the language-monkey that a standard D&D character can become (a 1st level elven wizard can easily speak, read, and write 6 languages, which is just absurd - gray elves get 7).
Rhialto 07-10-07, 04:19 AM	Sorry, I meant to add that characters are automatically considered fully fluent (5 ranks) and literate (except for barbarians) in those languages that they would normally be given at the start. This system is meant to curtail the use of the Speak Language skill to more realistic levels. Specifically, a character starts with: - 5 ranks (plus literacy for non-barbarians) in the character's "automatic languages (eg common and dwarven for dwarf characters). - A number of skill points to spend on additional languages equal to his Intelligence bonus. These skill points can only be spend on those languages listed as bonus (or automatic) languages for that character. They may be spent on acquiring literacy in those languages, if the language has a new writing system. Note that if Speak Language is a cross-class skill for you, the effective value of these points is halved, just like regular skill points. The initial pool of general skill points may of course be spent on acquiring ranks in the Speak Language skill, or spent on other skills. I just find it ridiculous that a character can start with, say, common (automatic language), plus 4 additional language (18 Int) at full fluency. Even 14 Int (3 languages, 4 if demi-human) isn't all that unsual in a game, but that level of fluency is vanishingly rare *without special training*. You do find people with a smatttering of several languages, but native level fluency in more than 2 languages is in real world terms, a one-in-a-million thing.
IronMouse 07-10-07, 06:41 AM	In core, Speak Language is a class skill only for bard. So, when I want to learn orcish as a non-bard I have to dump ten skill points? TEN! Not to mention that almost no one can master a second language before level 7. "Whoa, finally, I know now how to speak goblin!" Wizard: "Who cares. I learned Tongues two levels ago. Not to mention that I understand every spoken and written language in existence since level 1 anyway. So, would you PLEASE stop wasting all your skillpoints?"
Rhialto 07-10-07, 07:03 AM	By that logic, you may as well tell the rogue to stop learning Hide and Move Silently, since the wizard has the invisibility spell, or anyone from learning Heal, since the cleric has cure light wounds, or anyone learning Diplomacy, since wizard has suggestion, or Disable Device, since there's the knock spell, or...
IronMouse 07-10-07, 07:40 AM	Low level spells making skills superfluous is a problem in 3.5, that is true. However, your approach isn't helping, it just makes an existing flaw much worse. Spending one or two points on a language is one thing - someone can afford that, once or twice. But having to waste five or ten is another. I mean, seriously, five skill points are the equivalent of one *feat*. And ten skill points is what an average fighter/cleric/paladin/commoner/... gets in *five levels*. I'm sure it didn't took me five levels or two feats to learn english, really.
Rhialto 07-10-07, 08:02 AM	let's see... Seems reasonable to suppose the average modern human who has actually learned a foreign language to perfect fluency levels could be considered a smart/dedicated/charismatic hero (d20 commoner class represents a medieval peasant rather than a modern person). All of those have languages as a class skill. So, by 2nd level they can have fluency in a foreign language. Additionally, a reasonable case could be made for citizens of some modern countries that they should get certain foreign languages as an automatic language, bypassing this system altogether. otoh, the present system for languages is broken, and blatantly so. A 10 Intelligence 1st level fighter could be fluent in 6 languages (2 for racial automatic languages, plus 4 from skill points). And that is supposed to be the grunt in the party. At the abusive end, a 5th level bard with 14 Int could have perfect fluency in 64 languages! You can't tell me that languages aren't broken when it is that trivial to learn a language.
058 07-10-07, 10:41 AM	Language is one of the things I've been thinking about for my next campaign. I agree that the current official system isn't remotely realistic. I'll also say that learning a new language is akin to spending ten skill-points, too - three years of French (and an A for most of it) and I still wouldn't consider myself fluent.
Rustmonster 07-10-07, 02:24 PM	otoh, the present system for languages is broken, and blatantly so. A 10 Intelligence 1st level fighter could be fluent in 6 languages (2 for racial automatic languages, plus 4 from skill points). And that is supposed to be the grunt in the party. At the abusive end, a 5th level bard with 14 Int could have perfect fluency in 64 languages! You can't tell me that languages aren't broken when it is that trivial to learn a language. It's really funny how you say something is "broken" and "unrealistic", when the way you are trying to "prove" that is so comicly stupid. "A 10 Intelligence 1st level fighter could be fluent in 6 languages." Yes, he could. But that would take ALL of his skill points. Yes, yes, I know fighters never had the best skills in the first place, but stuff like ride and intimidate can be quite handy, while languages are only useful in very specific situations. "Wow, I can speak Common, Dwarven, Elven, Halfling Gnome, and Orc! But, umm... anyone who speaks those will probably also speak Common, which I had anyway..." Oh, and if you are a human, you get one less than that. You could also say something like this. "Wow, I'm a human fighter who can speak Common, Undercommon, Giant, Infernal, and Abyssal! Now, if I ever meet drow, giant or evil outsiders, I can have a conversation with them, even though most of those can probably already speak Common, and since I have no ranks in diplomacy or intimidate, there's almost no point." "At the abusive end, a 5th level bard with 14 Int could have perfect fluency in 64 languages!" To be fair, he could be fluent in 68 languages maximum. Now, yet again, this will mean he has no skill ranks in ANYTHING else. What's the point of being able to talk in 68 diffrent languages when 1)mostly everyone that you'd actually want/have/be able to talk to speaks common, and 2)There arn't likely that many languages in ANY D&D setting. I mean, hell in the PHB, they only have 20 listed languages. Now, if you throw in the handfull of monsters that speak their own languages, it's still likely less than 68. "Oh boy! I can speak Sahuagin! Now if I can just get underwater and find somehow to breath, I can talk to Sahuagin in their own language! Although... probably when I get close they will rend my flesh from my bones before I can speak, and even if they let me try to explain my intrusion, I can't make a diplomacy or bluff check to save my life. Which is exactly what I need them for right now. And Sahuagin speak common anyway, as they have an Int over 10. But... I can speak it at least!" Really, when you think about it, any creature you'll likely want/have/are able to speak to either have common as well, or at least have 12 Int to take common, as when something is blantly stated as the universal language, why WOULDN'T you learn it? Yes, you CAN have a character with what seems like too many languages, but then again, this requires a huge amount of skill points, and I'd much rather have 2 skill points than be able to speak Terran. Yeah, you can speak their language, but it doesn't matter as you are as sociable as a breakfast. If you use all of your skill points to speak languages, then that means that your character is obsesive, makeing him useless in everything else, or that he just has some kind of gift for language, but he is useless at everything else. The maximum languages a 10 Int fighter can learn are 25 (Common, any racial language, 23 from skill points). But he can't ride a stationary log, and he's as intimidating as your grandmother. It might seem "broken" or "unrealistic", but then again, so is the notion that you'd spend all your life training in nothing but languages.
058 07-10-07, 02:45 PM	That's exactly it, no one has to spend all of their life doing this, he's talking about a first level fighter. It's a stretch to imagine a first-level wizard fluent in six languages. It is entirely unrealistic for someone to be able to learn a language as easily as the current rules make allowances for. How long does it take to get from level one to two, a week? Have you [i]ever[i] tried learning a language in that amount of time? The least I've ever heard of is a summer course, and the only purpose of that is to meet prerequesites for a degree, because it sure doesn't stick in your mind after that.
Rhialto 07-10-07, 03:20 PM	Yes, that 10 Intelligence 1st level fighter coudl start with 6 languages. And that is plainly broken and is equally plainly pushing teh numbers. But in academic terms, a 10 Int fighter is your stereotypical jock. He shouldn't be able to learn even a second language fluently, never mind being able to learn 6. The bard is an equally ludicrous example, simply because you'd have a job locating that many languages. but can't you see that, for teh amount of effort the character spends learning a language, it doesn't have any basis in reality at all? Now, the notion that you'd spend all your life studying languages is silly. Of the d20 core classes, only the bard is a decent language student. If we consider that 5 languages at native fluency is the mark of a talented linguist (in RW terms, that is very remarkable), that's 25 skill points, add a couple points for the literacy if they use odd scripts. Our 14 Int Bard 5th level bard would have 64 skill points, plus another 4 skill points for use only with languages. He could afford to sink 27 skill points into languages by that if he wanted to be known as a linguist. By 10th level, that many skill points would be a trivial expense for him. Yes, the party may find themselves short on language skills in this system. That's true in teh real world too. It's why there is a thriving industry in teh real world for interpreters and translators. Perhaps this system would encourage the party to get one as a hireling. Or perhaps they'll just hack and slay, secure in the knowledge that they can't understand those pleas for mercy.
Rustmonster 07-10-07, 03:34 PM	That's exactly it, no one has to spend all of their life doing this, he's talking about a first level fighter. It's a stretch to imagine a first-level wizard fluent in six languages. Well, alright then. Is it reasonable to assume that a Level one fighter spent all of his free time where he wasn't training for combat learning languages? And no, it is not a stretch to imagine a first level wizard fluent in six languages. They are men and woman of books. If we assume that a wizard has an INT of 16, and is a race that gets two starting languages, he will start off with 5. An elf wizard will have about 5 languages, which makes sense, as he spent his training learning from books. An elf wizard is concidered level one at, on average, 145 years old. If we say they have trained since adulthood, then they have been studying magic for 35 years. Are you saying that a highly intellegent person, who spends all of their time reading books, would not learn some languages from them? Let's say this wizard has the languages (Common, Elven, Draconic, Gnome, and Sylvan). Common and Elven are known by all elves. Draconic is learned in their arcane training, as it is a magic language. There is a Gnome settlment near his town, so he learned Gnome to communicate better. He learned Sylvan from a tome about the creatures of the forest, and it was easy to learn as it uses the same albhabet as Elven. If he choses to take another language, that represents how he chose to forgo training into, say, how to identify spells that had been cast (Spellcraft) in exchange for learning another language, maybe Dwarven, as he want to learn more languages that use the Dwarven alphabet. Remember, it costs 2 skill points for most classes to learn languages, so taking Dwarven instead of putting ranks in Spellcraft represents signifigantly more work. I made learning all of those languages seem reasonable, with just a little bit of fluff. If you want to, maybe concider just removing the bonus languages you get for high INT. That way, my Elven wizard with 20 skill points would have to spend 8 skill points to learn all of the languages I mentioned. Thatleaves him 12 skill points, so using speak language shows more of a destinct hit to his skills. Now he can take 4 ranks in knowledge(arcana), 4ranks in Spellcraft, and 4 ranks in Concentration. Otherwise, he could have taken 4 ranks in bluff as well and used 4 points to get 2 ranks in a crossclass skill. One problem with your system is that to learn to speak and write Draconic (the language of magic) fluently (assuming it is a complex script) cost 14 skill points (7 for bard). That leaves sample wizard with 6 skill points, enough for 2 ranks in Concentrate, Spellcraft, and knowledge (arcana). Most wizards are supposed to know Draconic, but now it is a huge hinderance to learn it! What you don't understand is how valuable 1 skill point is, nevermind 2. It represents hard, long training. Are you saying learning a simple script language (12 points for all but bard) is the same as training to effortlessly jump 3 feet in the air with a running start? Or to never fail a 10 foot long jump with a running start, or a 5 foot long jump from a standing start? To fight on a warhorse with no trouble? Identify glyphs of warding instantly? Survive in the wild with no trouble? Effortlessly hook a grappling hook at up to 10 feet? PS, why did you chose to give script types based on real world languages? What kind of script is Dwarven? Elven? Draconic? Common?
IronMouse 07-10-07, 03:37 PM	I wouldn't consider the current language system broken. Unrealistic maybe (just like the whole rest of the skill system...), but not "broken". It's not like languages are that important, at least in most games. My uncle knows five languages (german, english, french, latin and ancient greek) and while he's somewhat gifted in that area he's far from being superhuman. If you have trouble with characters burning all their skill points to languages, just rule that you can't learn more languages from skill points like you could get ranks in a skill. This limits the skill-languages for a fighter to two at level one and even a bard can't learn more than one additional per level. This seems still awesome - but that's what D&D characters do all the time. Awesome things (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=12393614&postcount=239). Another reasonable houserule would be, that you need two skill points to gain literacy in an alphabet (like dwarven or draconic), after you've done that you can read all the languages associated with that one, provided you speak them. This adds a bit of realism but I would not go further than that. Remember that high level PCs can do all kinds of "unrealistic" stuff, and I'm not even talking about magic here. That's the way it is, you're not going to solve anything by making languages insanely difficult to learn (compared to all the other "unrealistic stuff). The only thing you do is to punish players who actually want to play characters who speak more than one or two languages.
Rhialto 07-10-07, 03:52 PM	ok, I'll accept by 9th level, as that cited post notes, characters can do awesome things. But 1st level wizard (potentially) speaks 10 languages fluently? At 1st level, that kind of superhuman talent shouldn't be going on.
058 07-10-07, 05:06 PM	Elves and dwarves are the only races that I can see knowing anywhere near that many languages at first level. How old is your average 1st-level human, or halfing, maybe twenty? These are people who generally come from a background of being a common person. The common person *today* is on par, intellectually, with some of the most advanced thinkers of the time period D&D is based on. Don't believe? Try mathematics. Nowdays, we learn some of the most incredibly advanced math in the world before we reach twenty. Languages? Most people take one or two in school. Do we remember them? No, not generally - most people take the languages to graduate and promptly forget them. Your basic 1st level D&D characater isn't likely to have had any sort of formal schooling, nor is he likely to have lived for very long outside whatever little hamlet he's from. It's absurd to propose that the average (ten intelligence) adventurer should speak more than one or maybe two languages starting out; six is insane. Learning a new language is a big deal, unless it's being learned at a very young age (think birth to six), because dealing with different gramatic structures and even remembering enough words to get by speaking is difficult for a brain that's already set into its method of communication.
JoAT 07-10-07, 07:09 PM	The language system is as realistic as it needs to be, given the existance of magic. Realism is impoirtant, but making something a viable choice is much more so, and if takes this long for characters to learn langauges, it's much more likely that they'll get a magic item that does the job for them. Besides of which, learning new languages is already something of a big deal. Unless they get them at 1st level, as a supernatural ability later on, or as a prerequisite for a PrC, not too many people have the spare skill points for a new language when they could spend time making skills that they actually use better, when they could, again, drop some gold for a magic item. Now, if you're talking about a low to no-magic world, or a no-magic-for-you world, it might be a viable choice, but only if you want to force a party member into the roll of head translator, spread the resposability out among the group (preventing them from being able to do other things), or force them to hire native guides any time they go to a place that uses a different language. You may also want to check out the Midnight system for the Speak Language skill - it's similar to what you have here, but more forgiving (it makes learning languages as 1st level characters slightly harder than the PHB, and learning them after 1st much harder). Just score down to the Speak Language section under skills on their SRD: http://darknessfalls.leaderdesslok.com/character_skills.htm
058 07-10-07, 07:49 PM	Regardless of whether unnatural forces such as magic exist, learning a language isn't easy. There's nothing in the air that makes it easier simply because people can conjure fire with their minds. What you're suggesting is that learning to speak a language has to be easy because otherwise, someone would simply cast a spell. To me, that seems a poor answer. Perhaps it's accurate to the mechanics of everything, but it still seems to me that "let's ask the wizard to do it" is a player response and not a character response.
JoAT 07-10-07, 08:14 PM	A poor choice is still a poor choice. If something can be done cheaply and easily using existing technology (*cough*Magic*cough*), then that's how it's going to be done. This is a game, after all, and if there's a long and complex series of rules that makes it hard to do something naturally, but it's as easy as ever to use magic to do, then guess which method they'll pick, in game or out. In many ways it's like a calculator. Someone may learn to do complex equations in their head. It may take years to understand how the math works so as to do so without error. Or they can use a calculator, which many people do, allowing their math skills to become rusty. Years of time and effort vs $1.29. Now, in D&D, that's more like 10 skill points (times however many languages exist in the world) vs. 5,200 gold for a Helm of Comprehend Languages and Read Magic (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/wondrousItems.htm#helmofComprehendLangua gesandReadMagic). Still, not much of a choice - spend the 10 skill points (and if you're a fighter that's out of what, 2 a level? 4 at the most likely?), or spend a small amount of money for a magic hat (and you'll note that the helmet does more than languages - it also covers a skill bonus and read magic at will. Just the languages is probably worth about 4,000 market price, at best). Making anything a bad choice means that it won't be used. If you want to highlight things like languages and communication barriers, etc, the Speak Language skill is the last place you do it in. First you start by eliminating spells like tongues and comprehend langugues, and class abilities like the Tongue of Sun and Moon, which grant the ability to speak it all, then look at skills. If you want to make it very hard to communicate, alter them as well.
Rustmonster 07-10-07, 09:16 PM	ok, I'll accept by 9th level, as that cited post notes, characters can do awesome things. But 1st level wizard (potentially) speaks 10 languages fluently? At 1st level, that kind of superhuman talent shouldn't be going on. Okey, what?!?!?! Oh ya, he shouldn't be able to have that superhero talent at level one. I mean, it's not like wizards are MAGICAL or something. Come on, you're trying to put your brand of "realism" into a game where at level one a wizard can shoot missles of force out of his hand to kill stuff, and where he can put an entire nuclear family to sleep for 1 minute. Twice every day. And then, he still has enough in him to throw 3 blobs of acid at you. Alternatly, he can summon a horse from nowhere, summon a celestial creature, shoot a cone of fire at you, shoot streams of colour at your face, animate a rope, make people double in size, shock or chill you with a touch, create illusions, disguise his appearence, drain the strength from a foe, or make them run in fear. I see this all the time on the news. "Mad Wizard Terrorizes City. More on that at 11. But now, a story of a man who knows 10 languages, but has no other talents. Super man, or super obsesion? We'll tell you, after these messages." Seriously. If you want to make it so no one will take speak language, just say they can't take it. NO ON WILL USE 12 OR MORE SKILL POINTS TO BUY A DAMN LANGUAGE! You want realism? Make learning languages cost no skill points. Make it that characters can buy manuals that help them learn a language. They can spend time reading it on off time, when they arn't sleeping. If they clock X number of hours reading the book, they learn the language. People in real life don't just *Poof* gain skills anyway. Why arn't you complaining about that? And PS again, why did you use real world languages for the scripts examples? Are you sure you are playing d20 Past or something? There is no Greek or Latin in D&D.
058 07-10-07, 10:41 PM	Knowing a language and being able to shoot magic out of your fingers are two completely different and unrelated things. A wizard, by D&D definition, spends almost all of his time studying magic, meaning that he would have very little time to devote to something like learning languages, regardless of how smart he is. Learning a language isn't a matter of intelligence, it's a matter of patience. I'd say the reason he used real-world languages is because there's not a whole lot of information on the alphabet of Infernal or Ignan, and he was specifically talking about the complexity of the alphabet. I'll admit that there's a level where adding realism is bad and slowing to the game, but that's almost always when it relates somehow to physics. Anything about the mental stats can pretty much be one hundred per-cent realistic, as far as I'm concerned, because rarely does it include rolling the dice.
JolanthusTrel 07-10-07, 11:58 PM	Umm... 1st level human fighter with 10 int can get 6 languages? Umm no. Common, No bonus languges due to intelligence. then spending 4 points to get the cross class skill to his max of 2 would make 3. Dwarves use a Runic Alphabet, similiar to the Viking Style. Elves use a flowing script, nit sure of the similarity to a RL script. Dunno what Dragons use though. I make my players learn languages, cause not everyone I have them run up against speaks common, but I could just be nasty that way.
Neutronium_Dragon 07-11-07, 12:49 AM	> A wizard, by D&D definition, spends almost all of his time studying magic, > meaning that he would have very little time to devote to something like > learning languages, regardless of how smart he is. And guess what - a lot of those books he's studying from are written in other languages. He learns them because they're a basic tool of his trade. ----- I can't help but feel that this push for "realism" (however you define that) is overlooking something: Languages in 3E are handled the way they are so that gameplay flows smoothly. Having to pantomime, or make Bluff checks, or talk baby talk as part of a roleplaying encounter may be fine when it happens once or twice. But when it's happening all the time, the novelty quickly wears off and it ends up being obnoxious instead.
Vaelan 07-11-07, 01:36 AM	I just find it ridiculous that a character can start with, say, common (automatic language), plus 4 additional language (18 Int) at full fluency. So say that you don't have fluency in any non-automatic languages. You just know enough and know what you do know well enough that the language isn't an issue worth making any gameplay distinction over.
Rhialto 07-11-07, 04:46 AM	wow, lot's of replies. Apologies is I get teh quotes wrong. What you're suggesting is that learning to speak a language has to be easy because otherwise, someone would simply cast a spell. To me, that seems a poor answer. Perhaps it's accurate to the mechanics of everything, but it still seems to me that "let's ask the wizard to do it" is a player response and not a character response. In essense, what I'm saying is that people (in a high magic cast spelsl) *because* learning languages is hard. I have nothing much against characters using the magic where it is available. But where magic isn't available, it shouldn't be possible for a low-level character to perform superhuman feats. Oh ya, he shouldn't be able to have that superhero talent at level one. I mean, it's not like wizards are MAGICAL or something. I have nothing against that wizard speaking 500 languages, provided he is using magic to do so. But the sklls system is meant to be using non-magical talent to do these things. Have you even heard of, never mind met, anyone who can speak 10 languages fluently, straight out of college? Because taht is what that wizard is equivalent to. And PS again, why did you use real world languages for the scripts examples? Are you sure you are playing d20 Past or something? There is no Greek or Latin in D&D. I used real-world examples for the scripts, because frankly, there is not one example of a fantasy script that would rate as complex or very complex, with the sole exception (depending on which specific variant) of Tolkein's quenya. I haven't met a single example of a very complex script that has been illustrated in fantasy literature anywhere. Feel free to assume all scripts are simple in the default d20 ruleset. Umm... 1st level human fighter with 10 int can get 6 languages? Umm no. Common, No bonus languges due to intelligence. then spending 4 points to get the cross class skill to his max of 2 would make 3. ok, when I wrote that 6 languages, I was basing the number on teh assumption that each language is a different skill. A reasonable assumption, since my knowledge of Japanese is no help whatsoever in speaking Hebrew; each language in real life really is a different skill. But let's say "speak languages" is all one skill. let's make it more ridiculous. An 8 Int fighter can still learn 3 languages well in the basic ruleset. And we are talking sub-normal intelligence levels now, in a class that is classically meant to be akick-the-door type. It's just silly. Besides of which, learning new languages is already something of a big deal. Unless they get them at 1st level, as a supernatural ability later on, or as a prerequisite for a PrC, not too many people have the spare skill points for a new language when they could spend time making skills that they actually use better, when they could, again, drop some gold for a magic item. if you have Speak Languages as a class skill (bards only in core), and a modest Int bonus, scooping up languages is something you could do simply because you have spare skill points. I guess the choice between being 5% better at an action skill, or learning a language perfectly depends a lot on the focus of your campaign. If you're trying to have any kind of campaign where talking it out is a significant part of the game, the rules make it a no-brainer to scoop up languages. If all your party is ever really doing is kicking the door down, murdering orcs, and stealing their family heirlooms before fencing them off rinse and repeat, then yeah, the present system is fine.
JoAT 07-11-07, 07:12 AM	In essense, what I'm saying is that people (in a high magic cast spelsl) *because* learning languages is hard. I have nothing much against characters using the magic where it is available. But where magic isn't available, it shouldn't be possible for a low-level character to perform superhuman feats. Well, in that case, no problem I can see. People will use the magic, and occasionally run out and have to hire people for them. As long as you know this is the result, and it's what you want, no problem here. I have nothing against that wizard speaking 500 languages, provided he is using magic to do so. But the sklls system is meant to be using non-magical talent to do these things. *cough*Epicskilluses*cough* ok, when I wrote that 6 languages, I was basing the number on teh assumption that each language is a different skill. A reasonable assumption, since my knowledge of Japanese is no help whatsoever in speaking Hebrew; each language in real life really is a different skill. But let's say "speak languages" is all one skill. Ah, but your knowledge of Japanese will help some amount when you encounter, say Korean or Chinese. Your knowledge of Chinese (whether it be Mandarin or Cantonese) will certainly help when you go to read a Japanese newspaper. Languages travel in packs, and tend to be interrelated. I'd recommend giving related languages (like Dwarf, Terran and Gnome, Giant, Goblin and Orc, or Common and everything) a synergy bonus, giving greater comprehension if you know both, or even a very, very basic level in the other, if you only know one. let's make it more ridiculous. An 8 Int fighter can still learn 3 languages well in the basic ruleset. And we are talking sub-normal intelligence levels now, in a class that is classically meant to be akick-the-door type. It's just silly. Some (well, most, really - multi-lingual speakers and nations out-number us monoliguals) countries out there do have more than 1 offical language, and in some of those countries, more than one language will be used co-currently when speaking, meaning that even Int 8 equivalents know these languages, or else can't function in society. Actually, languages are much more interesting and complex than most would think. I'd recommend looking over some wikipedia articles on multilingualism if you're interested in representing language in a realistic light (or just for fun. They really are fascinating.): Multilingualism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multilingual) Multilingual Nations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multilingual_nation) Polygots (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_noted_polyglots) Language Families (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_group) You may also want to consider dumping Common, since one single language, which is, for all intents and purposes the (one and only) "human language" is insanely unrealistic. For that matter, so is Elven and Dwarven. At the very least, the various subraces should have different dialects, either contributing or stealing words from nearby human communities. if you have Speak Languages as a class skill (bards only in core), and a modest Int bonus, scooping up languages is something you could do simply because you have spare skill points. I guess the choice between being 5% better at an action skill, or learning a language perfectly depends a lot on the focus of your campaign. If you're trying to have any kind of campaign where talking it out is a significant part of the game, the rules make it a no-brainer to scoop up languages. If all your party is ever really doing is kicking the door down, murdering orcs, and stealing their family heirlooms before fencing them off rinse and repeat, then yeah, the present system is fine. Actually, in our last Kick in the Door game, the diplomacer picked up Speak Language quite often, since all she needed was a good diplomacy skill to mess with some encounters, and she didn't want to spend the extra gold that could be better spent on buffing items on any Amulet of Infinate Languages. Conversely, the artificer in our more roleplaying oriented game has maxed most of her non-craft oriented skill points on Diplomacy, Bluff, Sense Motive, Gather Information, Knowledge (just about everything) and Intimidate, to better pull off the noble facade - she couldn't pick up a language skill if she wanted to. Luckily, magic comes to the rescue. (That is to say, how useful it is in a given game or game style is very much a YMMV type of thing). ;)
Rhialto 07-11-07, 09:05 AM	Regarding the language families. You are half-right. There are relationships between many languages, but the specific example you chose was way off base. The grammar involved in Japanese, Chinese, and korean is different for each language. Korean has a unique writing system, not used anywhere else. The Chinese characters are used in common between Japanese and Chinese, but because the grammar is so different, you won't realy get much mileage out of it. You migt understand that a given report is talking about "cars", possibly even a specific brand, but you won't know whether they are saying those cars are good or bad, not without knowing the target language anyway. There really isn't any meaningful synergy bonus between these. The 3 languages are from entirely unrelated families. A better example of a language synergy bonus might be between English and French, or between Russian and Polish (although that one would require learning a new writing system too). Regarding teh idea of dumping "common". I always understood common to mean teh human language that is common to the village/town/province where the party begins adventuring, and that common sense implies there would be other human languages. Some (well, most, really - multi-lingual speakers and nations out-number us monoliguals) countries out there do have more than 1 offical language, and in some of those countries, more than one language will be used co-currently when speaking, meaning that even Int 8 equivalents know these languages, or else can't function in society. Those societies that are functionally bilingual are better treated as granting its members the extra languages as automatic languages, rather than feeding into any skill system. The mental processes involved in learning a language in early childhood (as it would be with those societies) is very different from learning them later in life as a skill. The 8 Int 1st level fighter coming from a multilingual community has an explanation for multiple languages (in my rationale they'd get tacked on as extra automatic languages). That same fighter from a monolingual community doesn't. ---- I notice a lot of people are criticising this because it takes 10 skill points to learn a language. Criticising it for taking 5 is perhaps a fair comment. But you should be criticising it on the basis of those characters who are meant to be able to do this stuff, not those who aren't. You say it's nigh impossible for an idiot warrior to learn languages so it's broken. I say it's nigh impossible for an idiot warrior to learn languages, and that is entirely realistic. My system still makes it practical for character builds to have superhuman levels of linguistic ability, assuming you take a class that is meant to be able to learn languages. That darkness_falls page you pointed me to has an interesting system for language study. Reducing a language to 3 skill points and a restriction on the number of points spent per character level seems to work just as well for me, although I'm not sure about those synergy bonuses. Consider that English theoretically would have a synergy bonus for French, Dutch, and German; how much of an article written in those languages (assume you never studied either) could you read?
058 07-11-07, 10:15 AM	Not much, perhaps, but if'n you know French and are reading a Spanish article, you might get more out of it. Both of those are Latin-based (while English is Germanic and simply happens to share some words with French), meaning that they have a similar grammar structure and most of their words are related closely enough that someone well-versed in one could make out the gist of a paragraph or two of the other. It's becoming apparent to me that if the Language skill is to be reworked, the languages, too, must be modified. This is something that might be difficult, partially depending upon the campaign setting. For example, I'm working on a campaign right now where I've scrapped all of the original languages to be replaced by several I've denoted, and I've made a rule that if a character can speak a related language, he can roll an Intelligence (or Speak Languages) check to say or understand a single thing spoken in that language. Of course, for my own campaign setting, I'm not including Celestial, Abyssal, or pretty much any language that isn't common on the Material Plane, because there aren't other planes. I understand that most campaign settings aren't like this, so a lot more work would have to be put in to linking languages as related and all that jazz.
JolanthusTrel 07-11-07, 10:32 AM	I think to learn a new language a prerequisite is you have to find someone to teach it to you. Halflings are rather secretive about there language so you aren't likely to pick it up listening to it walking down a street for example. Another other thing is... lets take footballers or (soccer players for americans) cause to me if anyone is going to take the place of the 8 Int fighter it is going to be them. They get transfered around the world they have to pick up at least the basics if they are going to communicate the fact they want a drink, they have picked up an injury, they want to abuse another player (cause if your going to swear at someone they might as well understand.) You get exposed to a language long enough you will pick it up.
Rhialto 07-11-07, 10:37 AM	@ JolanthusTrel: Those soccer fans may well have 1 or 2 ranks in the language - enough to use the Speak Language skill to Bluff (mechanics as for the sending a secret message) the meaning across. It's one thing to order a beer in French or say voulez vous coucher avec mois. It's quite another to be discussing proust in it.
JoAT 07-11-07, 11:14 AM	Regarding the language families. You are half-right. There are relationships between many languages, but the specific example you chose was way off base. The grammar involved in Japanese, Chinese, and korean is different for each language. Korean has a unique writing system, not used anywhere else. The Chinese characters are used in common between Japanese and Chinese, but because the grammar is so different, you won't realy get much mileage out of it. You migt understand that a given report is talking about "cars", possibly even a specific brand, but you won't know whether they are saying those cars are good or bad, not without knowing the target language anyway. There really isn't any meaningful synergy bonus between these. The 3 languages are from entirely unrelated families. I'll be the first to admit that while I know stuff, I don't know lots. I picked the langauges primarily because I remembered reading that portions of the Japanese and Korean languages (specifically the written portions) were related to a Chinese dialect, though the languages had been evolving seperatly for somewhere in the 2000 year mark (I'm actually to tired right now to go and figure out where this is from - passing the 20 hour mark, and caffeine is needed). Regarding teh idea of dumping "common". I always understood common to mean teh human language that is common to the village/town/province where the party begins adventuring, and that common sense implies there would be other human languages. Not always. Or, in fact, rarely. Most games I've had the pleasure of participating in had Common for the humans, and... that's it. Even human cultures from far off places would all speak the same language with no real change. Though I suppose that translating magics could, to some degree, explain this, either by rendering everything some form of species neutral "common" - a universal tongue brought into existence via magic, and adopted by the most acquisitive of all races as their own, or by enforcing a sort of double speak, meaning that all within range hear both the original and translated version, and have, in time, blended the languages together to form a single tongue. Those societies that are functionally bilingual are better treated as granting its members the extra languages as automatic languages, rather than feeding into any skill system. The mental processes involved in learning a language in early childhood (as it would be with those societies) is very different from learning them later in life as a skill. The 8 Int 1st level fighter coming from a multilingual community has an explanation for multiple languages (in my rationale they'd get tacked on as extra automatic languages). That same fighter from a monolingual community doesn't. I'd tend to think, though, that unless most of the communities are the rare isolated communities, they would be bilingual or multilingual on some level. D&D communities tend towards diversity, so that even an isolated community is about only 95% human or some other dominant race. Mixed and Integrated (the later being what I've seen as most common in PC background areas - again, this is most defiantly a YMMV area) are at something like 80% and 40%, respectively, and with such a substantial minority of other races, the character who grew up learning multiple tongues would be the rule, not the exception. I notice a lot of people are criticising this because it takes 10 skill points to learn a language. Criticising it for taking 5 is perhaps a fair comment. But you should be criticising it on the basis of those characters who are meant to be able to do this stuff, not those who aren't. You say it's nigh impossible for an idiot warrior to learn languages so it's broken. I say it's nigh impossible for an idiot warrior to learn languages, and that is entirely realistic. My system still makes it practical for character builds to have superhuman levels of linguistic ability, assuming you take a class that is meant to be able to learn languages. One of the problems is that there are so very few classes that have Speak Language as a class skill. Bard, Factotum, maybe Truespeaker, and anyone who's a member of the changeling race. This means that while the idiot warrior can't learn anything, it's cripplingly difficult for the bright, young missionary and the wise mage to do so as well. The cost may as well be 10 skill points, total, with the few classes that have the skill having a class ability that reduces the cost, because the difference is that major. That darkness_falls page you pointed me to has an interesting system for language study. Reducing a language to 3 skill points and a restriction on the number of points spent per character level seems to work just as well for me, although I'm not sure about those synergy bonuses. Consider that English theoretically would have a synergy bonus for French, Dutch, and German; how much of an article written in those languages (assume you never studied either) could you read? An article... not much. I can however understand spoken conversation to a limited degree, due the amount of words borrowed from them in English, and minor, incidental learning (and borrowing learned words for my own use) on the side. EDIT: It's also important to note that a) Midnight is a low magic world, though the Heroic Paths and Pseudo-Artifact thingies (my book has been missing since January, and they're not available on the SRD linked, so I don't recall their actual name) go a long way towards fixing this. In general, though, PCs don't have magic to rely on for translations. 2) Midnight also grants more skill points to characters, to paying for new languages is not a huge burden.
Rhialto 07-11-07, 11:42 AM	One of the problems is that there are so very few classes that have Speak Language as a class skill. Now that you mention it, a very strong case could be made for granting wizards Speak Languages as a class skill, given their academic leanings. Arguably so for the vanilla warrior-style cleric, but certainly so for the cloistered cleric types, Speak Languages should also be a class skill. Whoever heard of a medieval priest who couldn't speak Latin after all? I can only assume it was an accidental omission that those classes never got that noted as a class skill. Those two are getting Speak Languages as a class skill in my house rules.
Rustmonster 07-11-07, 01:54 PM	It's great that you're going for "realism" yet your doing it with a completly unrealistic system: Skill points. In real life, do you just *Poof* gain skills for no reason? No, you gain them through training. My suggestion: You want realism? Make learning languages cost no skill points. Make it that characters can buy manuals that help them learn a language. They can spend time reading it on off time, when they arn't sleeping. If they clock X number of hours reading the book, they learn the language. Is MUCH more "realistic" than yours, as this is how people actually gain languages. Also, it would probably count for one hour of "book learning" for every, say, 5 hours you are at least a little exposed to a language. Hey, ya know what? How bout we combine our systems? Let's say that the X hours you have to study is a multiple of five. Every (X/5) hours you clock, you become a little more proficient in the language, and can over time speak it better. Now THAT sounds like realism. And then people may actually WANT to speak different languages, because it won't cost a billion skill points. If you want dumb people having a harder time learning it, make it that you gain slighty more hours if you have a high Int, and slightly less if you have a low Int. I don't know how I'd implement that, but it seems to fit your "OMG only people with 10,000 INT can speak a language!" idea.
058 07-11-07, 02:02 PM	Gaining skillpoints represents training in a particular skill. Putting points into Tumble doesn't magically allow you to roll better; practicing rolling, which is represented by spending skill points, allows you to roll better. The same goes for language; spending skillpoints on learning a language is akin to spending some time learning.
JoAT 07-11-07, 02:31 PM	Now that you mention it, a very strong case could be made for granting wizards Speak Languages as a class skill, given their academic leanings. Arguably so for the vanilla warrior-style cleric, but certainly so for the cloistered cleric types, Speak Languages should also be a class skill. Whoever heard of a medieval priest who couldn't speak Latin after all? I can only assume it was an accidental omission that those classes never got that noted as a class skill. Those two are getting Speak Languages as a class skill in my house rules. A very good idea. Might I also suggest adding specific language skills to various classes as class skills? Rangers, for instance, would likely be knowledgeable in wood-glyphs, and a small set of terrain-based languages (for forest rangers, Sylvan and Elven comes to mind), while Rogues might take the opportunity to bring back Thieves' Cant. Hey, ya know what? How bout we combine our systems? Let's say that the X hours you have to study is a multiple of five. Every (X/5) hours you clock, you become a little more proficient in the language, and can over time speak it better. Despite the semi-viscous sardonic tone you seem to be conveying (text not being the ultimate in getting tone across), I'd just like to note that I've actually worked on a skill-based system like this (not just for Languages, but all skills), and it wasn't actually looking that bad. This whole d20 thing came along though, and I haven't really looked at it since.
Rhialto 07-11-07, 03:19 PM	A very good idea. Might I also suggest adding specific language skills to various classes as class skills? Rangers, for instance, would likely be knowledgeable in wood-glyphs, and a small set of terrain-based languages (for forest rangers, Sylvan and Elven comes to mind), while Rogues might take the opportunity to bring back Thieves' Cant. I can't help thinking that the send secret message aspect of the Bluff skill was originally designed as a substitute for the Thieves' Cant language from 2E. I don't think there's a good case for granting Speak Languages as a class skill for rogues and rangers, since Speak Languages is supposed to represent a general knack for learning any language, not just their environment-specific ones. But granting thieves' cant (for rogues and bards), woodland lore (for both rangers and druids), etc etc as class-specific bonus languages would work for me.
WizO_Autumn 07-12-07, 01:08 AM	Ahem. Please keep it civil folks.
Salla 07-12-07, 01:36 AM	Language is one of the things I've been thinking about for my next campaign. I agree that the current official system isn't remotely realistic. It's not supposed to be realistic, it's supposed to be playable.
Rhialto 07-12-07, 03:22 AM	And what is one of the key points of a camapign is meant to be the foibles of language barriers? Then it isn't remotely playable as it is. There's an old story, probably apocryphal , about Japan's first emissary to China hundreds of years ago. Allegedly, some mistake in communication thanks to the language issues set the tone for contact between those two nations ever since. You just can't do that in d20 as it is.
Lethanic 07-13-07, 11:03 PM	If you want to make languages more important, make comprehend languages a higher level spell.
BobbyMac 07-15-07, 10:37 PM	Ars Lingua (http://www.rpgnow.com/product_info.php?products_id=20356&src=TG) I do not own shares of Tangent Games and have no investment banking ties with the company nor do I own any of said shares through my company's 401(k) plan.