In v3.5 and PfRPG, a 1st level human bard with a 10 int can speak common.
In v3.5 he puts 4 skill ranks in Speak Language, and can now speak Dwarven, Elven, Halfling, and Gnome (and common).
In PfRPG he can only put 1 skill rank in Linguistics and can only speak Dwarven (and common).
I see this as a problem for Bards especially as they should be the "great communicators".
-- david
Papa.DRB
To me, that makes sense. Languages which are picked up through experience in a class (the bard's good communication skills) should go up as levels are gained. If the bard's intelligence is just average (10), he is not better than the average person at picking up languages. His "before adventuring" years have not given him better language ken than an average member of his species.
Here lies the difference between a 1st level bard with good Int and one with just an average one.
|
I am with the OP on this one. In the real world, there are many nations were speaking two or three languages is common. I don't think the number of languages you speak should be directly tied to INT but instead raise skill points and let characters select their languages they want. Force dwarves to only speak dwarven etc. and then force them to spend a skill point or two to pick up human (common). As long as they are getting more skill points it should be fine. D&D should be a polyglot world and it should be very easy to get languages.
In v3.5 and PfRPG, a 1st level human bard with a 10 int can speak common.
In v3.5 he puts 4 skill ranks in Speak Language, and can now speak Dwarven, Elven, Halfling, and Gnome (and common).
In PfRPG he can only put 1 skill rank in Linguistics and can only speak Dwarven (and common)...
... and decipher writing in codes or unfamiliar languages (25%), and forge a copy of a document well enough to get past your average guard familiar with it (50%).
It has become easier for everyone to pick up languages, but yes, Bards have lost out on starting with up to 4.
Here lies the difference between a 1st level bard with good Int and one with just an average one.
That was just numbers to demonstate the problem that I mentioned.
Lets say a Bard with a 16 Int, he knows common, dwarven, elven, gnome.
PfRPG +1 skill point, he picks up halfling
v3.5 +4 skill points, he picks up halfling, varisian, and two other regional languages since he started in Absalam (sp?) where many nations are represented.
Same problem. He has lost 3 language slots at the start and never can catch up.
-- david
Papa.DRB
ps. I *like* the way skills are handled now. Droppng the x4 at 1st level is a *good* idea. I just think that in the Linguistics area it is a problem
pps. I don't know what a good 'fix' for this problem would be or if it should be fixed. I am just looking for opinions and bringing it up.
|
Here lies the difference between a 1st level bard with good Int and one with just an average one.That was just numbers to demonstate the problem that I mentioned.
Lets say a Bard with a 16 Int, he knows common, dwarven, elven, gnome.
PfRPG +1 skill point, he picks up halfling
v3.5 +4 skill points, he picks up halfling, varisian, and two other regional languages since he started in Absalam (sp?) where many nations are represented.
Same problem. He has lost 3 language slots at the start and never can catch up.
-- david
Papa.DRBps. I *like* the way skills are handled now. Droppng the x4 at 1st level is a *good* idea. I just think that in the Linguistics area it is a problem
pps. I don't know what a good 'fix' for this problem would be or if it should be fixed. I am just looking for opinions and bringing it up.
Although it fits thematically, I think I'm leaning in favour of speak language being a skill on it's own, costing one point and being able to be taken as many times as you like.
|
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
Since most campaigns do have a polygot type setup, with lots of languages being spoken in the area (racial, regional, and various planar languages), maybe the solution is to simply give all characters 2 extra langauges at 1st level. It doesn't change the number bards have in relation to other characters, but does help the situation of not having enough language slots for your standard character.
A refinement on the idea could be to have certain classes get bonus languages, for instance, wizards get 1 bonus one from the planar languages or draconic, clerics get one regional language or celestial or infernal, and bards get 2 regional or racial, and other classes get none.
|
|
Since most campaigns do have a polygot type setup, with lots of languages being spoken in the area (racial, regional, and various planar languages), maybe the solution is to simply give all characters 2 extra langauges at 1st level. It doesn't change the number bards have in relation to other characters, but does help the situation of not having enough language slots for your standard character.
A refinement on the idea could be to have certain classes get bonus languages, for instance, wizards get 1 bonus one from the planar languages or draconic, clerics get one regional language or celestial or infernal, and bards get 2 regional or racial, and other classes get none.
That sounds like an interesting idea.
|
|
Since most campaigns do have a polygot type setup, with lots of languages being spoken in the area (racial, regional, and various planar languages), maybe the solution is to simply give all characters 2 extra langauges at 1st level. It doesn't change the number bards have in relation to other characters, but does help the situation of not having enough language slots for your standard character.
A refinement on the idea could be to have certain classes get bonus languages, for instance, wizards get 1 bonus one from the planar languages or draconic, clerics get one regional language or celestial or infernal, and bards get 2 regional or racial, and other classes get none.
Nice, I like this too. Simple and too the point.
A refinement on the idea could be to have certain classes get bonus languages, for instance, wizards get 1 bonus one from the planar languages or draconic, clerics get one regional language or celestial or infernal, and bards get 2 regional or racial, and other classes get none.
I like this. Tweaking just a bit more.
Linguistics is a class skill for Bards, Clerics, Rogues and Wizards.
If the PC takes 1 skill point, only at first level, in Linguistics the PC gets:
Bard - 3 additional languages (choice of any)
Cleric - 1 additional language (regional or celestial or infernal(depending on alignment))
Rogue - 2 additional languages (regional or racial)
Wizard - 1 additional language (planar or draconic)
-- david
Papa.DRB
|
|
I'll agree that giving a character extra skills for a high Int and allowing them to be purchased as skills is giving 'double credit' for a high Int. Being one of many highly intelligent people capable of conversing in only one language, I appreciate the amount of effort required to truly master another language (for example, I know a little Japanese, a fair amount of Spanish, and a tiny bit of French). I couldn't really make it in any of those countries. This is not that I'm bad at learning languages (or not smart) but I haven't been 'immersed' enough that I 'mastered' the language. This really seems like it should be a 'skill issue'.
I like the idea of languages being purchased as a skill, but that should be all the skill purchases. You don't buy ranks, just languages. So, in that sense it is a little like a skill trick (spend skill points and get x) or a little like a craft - there is only one craft skill, but thousands of 'specialties'.
If that were the case, no class would get more than their Racial language 'free', but a few skill points spent to learn languages is probably a good idea. But whether a group speaks common among themselves or they all choose to learn sylvan - as long as they can communicate, the game should run fine.
In the 2nd Darkness "Traits", there's an "Adopted"/Foreign Culture Trait, that basically lets you pick up the cultural traits of another Race (including Language), which would help if you want your character to also know Varisian, Elven, etc, and even seems a cool way to differentiate Humans/other Races in bizarre settings (slaves of Drow, Planar Cities, etc...)
BTW, I don't really buy the "picking up languages because you lived in a metropolis" thing. There's a 100 languages spoken in NYC, but those are mostly spoken by immigrants or descendants of those immigrants. Sure, something like Spanish is the "most useful" secondary language, but people still have to put an effort into learning it FLUENTLY. Sure, it's likely to know some 'basics' and slang (see Familiarity, below) but that's totally different. Speaking 4 or more languages FLUENTLY IS extremely rare (especially if they're not related/similar/have different scripts/etc).
I'd also note that with Pathfinder's new system, that the 1 point at first level comes with a +3 bonus (on top of INT bonus), so that Bard will have something like a +4 to +8 bonus at first level. This means that ANY langauge they aren't "fluent" in, they have a decent bonus to their roll each time they want to speak/understand it. It would make sense to give a "familiarity" bonus to that, so those from "polyglot" Absalom would have a broad familiarity, those from Cheliax might be "familiar" with Abyssal, generally matching the common cultures/races present in your home background...?
|
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
BTW, I don't really buy the "picking up languages because you lived in a metropolis" thing. There's a 100 languages spoken in NYC, but those are mostly spoken by immigrants or descendants of those immigrants. Sure, something like Spanish is the "most useful" secondary language, but people still have to put an effort into learning it FLUENTLY. Speaking 4 or more languages fluently IS very rare.
I'd also note that with Pathfinder's new system, that 1 point at first level comes with a +3 bonus (on top of INT bonus), so that Bard will have something like a +4 to +8 bonus at first level. This means that ANY langauge they aren't "fluent" in, they have a decent bonus to their roll each time they want to speak/understand it. It would make sense to give a "familiarity" bonus to that, so those from "polyglot" Absalom would have alot of familiarity, those from Cheliax might be "familiar" with Abyssal, generally matching the common cultures/races present in your home background...?
The concept that living ina city/region where multiple languages are spoken and therefore the citizens of that place knowing more languages is more based on areas such as Europe, where in countries like, say Belgium, French, Dutch, and German are all common (and official) langagues, and many of the citizens speak 2 of them. In most American cities, even those like NYC, Chicago and LA, that have dozens of languages spoken by some, this is not as much the case.
Also, the linguistics skill doesn't give you a check to speak languages you don't know, or understand oral versions of them. It only lets you comprehend writen versions, so it is not a viable substitute to speaking many languages.
Sure. But the Flemish Nationalists (for example) are partly pissed because most of French "Community" DON'T speak fluent Dutch (more often just having decent 'familiarity'), although Flemish DO generally speak good French, because they make the effort (and they'res probably more media in French, given France is next door, and it was formerly the 'Elite' language). In any case, speaking *2* languages fluently is reasonable, but 3, 4, 5+ just picked up passively from where you grew up? That's NOT remotely realistic.
If Linguistics isn't used to understand spoken language, it should be. And if Pathfinde is truly "rolling the skills together", they defintely should give a use to making Linguistics rolls for the spoken side, otherwise they're not actually being rolled together, it's just giving you a free Language Fluency every time you boost your Linguistics score.
It'd also give a much better representation of things like "familiarity" than the all-or-nothing fluency does: and also allow non-fluent, but "familar"/Linguist characters to communicate in VERY rough terms like "Go", "No", "Friend", etc...
|
|
You are skilled at working with language, both in its spoken and written forms. You can speak multiple languages and can decipher nearly any tongue given the time.Now in the spirit of that, WHY wouldn't it make sense to make skill checks for spoken Languages you're not fluent in? That's pretty much what I do if people are speaking French or Italian, I try to piece together what it means from what I know of Spanish. Sure, currently it doesn't mention rules for communicating orally, but it sure seems a ripe target if the skills are being re-vamped...
Oh I like that. Languages you know are determined your initial Int bonus and increased by Int gains, plus maybe feats and special class bonuses to the number of languages you speak (as described above). You are fluent in any language you speak and never need to make checks for it. Linguistics is used to try to understand languages you DON'T speak fluently. Wow. I really like that.
Linguistics becomes about your facility with languages in general, not that 1 point per language bologna that lets people learn 20 languages. You speak fewer languages well but can gist/decipher more of them. It has both a modicum of verisimilitude and a lot of in-game applications. Now anybody would have at least a small chance to figure out an unknown language. Get the number of languages you speak out of Linguistics and make Linguistics about your skill with languages.
Well, characters putting 20 ranks into Linguistics is quite the rarity,
so I think those "background" or Class feature "familiarity" bonuses are going to be providing the most significance for this.
("border areas" would know "the basics" of Orcish, whatever...)
I don't know what the number should be: 4, 2, but if you put in several ranks it would make sense to learn a new language "fluently" (1 rank as currently the case is VERY cheap, if you've ever studied foreign languages). Languages that are more similiar (such as sharing a script, like Skald(Viking) & Dwarven in Golarion) should be "easier" to learn (taking less Linguistics ranks to become Fluent). Sufficiently "alien" or "difficult" languages (whether Planar or Tian Xia) should give a "un-familiarity" penalty - the penalty for non-Fluent use could easily be made to correlate to how many ranks are needed to BECOME Fluent, if that makes sense. I've always thought it strange that a Human can so easily become fluent in a language whose native speakers take centuries to mature (Elves).
I'd prefer to apply this to starting bonus languages as well, so you could know lots of similar languages if you have a high INT, but exotic ones (ancient Thassilonian, Elven, Tian Xia) would cost 2 or 3 or 4 ranks. Skill Focus bonuses should of course allow new Fluent languages... Actually, I've heard that learning one language makes another easier to learn, and this is also modeled by the increasing overall Linguistics score.
Note: this seems to reduce the languages spoken by characters. But it's also making it so characters have a way to communicate ROUGH IDEAS in languages they AREN'T fluent in, which is great fodder for role-playing scenarios. Anyway, food for thought...
Anyone sighted a Jason Buhlman around these parts recently? :-)
I know this really doesn't count for anything, but one of my players actually is a linguistics major, and he loves the linguistics skill more or less as it is (he isn't overly thrilled with the forgery aspect of it).
However, his point is this . . . nothing in the OGL skill system is going to do a great job of being an accurate representation of how people actually learn languages, and very few characters are going to spend 20 skill points over their entire career to pick up +20 ranks in this skill and 20 languages, and if they do, they have done so at the expense of some other over the top, heroic level skill applications.
We have used the linguistics skills in a few ways that aren't spelled out in the skill description, such as picking up what kind of accent someone has, which seems to make sense.
There is already a provision for picking up on an archaic or rare form of a known language. I'd say that, at the DM's discretion, anything the DM thinks is related he might allow a check for (for example, someone that knows Skald trying to pick up what some dwarves are saying in their native tongue).
Anything that gets too complicated, or tries to be too realistic, is putting too much effort into a relatively broad skill system as it currently stands.
I've always thought it strange that a Human can so easily become fluent in a language whose native speakers take centuries to mature (Elves).
I would assume that someone that has invested a skill point in a given language can make themselves easily understood in that language, but they probably still have a fairly obvious accent and trip over a few more obscure phrases.
At best, instead of investing more ranks to be fluent, I'd say that maybe there should just be a DC for speaking a known language fluently enough to sound like a native.
Or you could assume that someone that has an "affinity" as defined by the Pathfinder Campaign Setting (lived in a region for a year, invested 2 ranks in Knowledge Local during that time) could be assumed to be fluent.
|
|
I don't know what the number should be: 4, 2, but if you put in several ranks it would make sense to learn a new language "fluently" (1 rank as currently the case is VERY cheap, if you've ever studied foreign languages). Languages that are more similiar (such as sharing a script, like Skald(Viking) & Dwarven in Golarion) should be "easier" to learn (taking less Linguistics ranks to become Fluent). Sufficiently "alien" or "difficult" languages ...
See, this quickly leads to a really complicated system that is more trouble than it's worth. A "realistic" system would involve each language as it's own skill with synergy between similar languages, but 99% of players and GMs don't care that much. Part of me falls into the 1% that would love to see that, but I accept that most people would hate it/ignore it so I want to see Pathfinder come up with a simple, easy-to-use system that allows players and GMs to make languages an interesting part of their games.
Actually, I've heard that learning one language makes another easier to learn...
Depends on how closely they are related. I learned Spanish as an adult and am pretty close to native-fluency (I lived in Mexico for several years and work in an almost entirely Latino community). That fluency helped me very little when I tried to learn Tagalog (I lived in the Philippines for a couple of years too). Because of shared history there are actually some Spanish loan words in Tagalog but the grammar and root vocabulary is so COMPLETELY different* that I was often frustrated because I had learned a second language and now couldn't learn a third.
*Example: Tagalog and other related languages (Ilocano, Visayan, etc.) conjugate verbs mid-word, which totally changes the way the syllables fall and the way the words re pronounced. Crazy! I 'get' how it works, but can't for the life of me do it.
Exactly. I don't think it should be that complicated. The part about some languages being more difficult to become fluent could be ditched. Characters might have several Language "Familiarities" based on their background, and there would be some general "Similarity" or "Exotic" bonuses/penalties in a small 4-6 line table. But enough to give people the idea they can improvise on it, like you and alot of others do already, outside the rules.
Total bilingualism is quite rare in RW, situations of diglossia (uneven proficiency) in multi-lingual countries are more common. That said, it is understandable that the PF system uses a simplification. I remember the RQ language system and it was quite awkward (it even jeopardized in-party comprehension).
My problem with bonus points for languages at 1st level is that it will make characters multi-lingual by default, when several countries and communities are clearly mono-lingual, and may be a bit isolated actually.
Having the PF Campaign Setting before me, I think that an interesting option (which covers for the smaller but steadier rate of language slots with languages absorbed into the Linguistics skill) would be to create inter-language affinities, as opposed to skill or character language affinities:
E.G. The druid in Quandary's example must speak Druidic, as it is a class language. It seems (in Golarion) that Druidic is connected to Sylvan and Elvish IIRC in quite a few vocabulary elements. You can give the character the option of using Druidic to understand or even produce a smattering of Sylvan with Int rolls or Linguistics rolls. Those rolls would have a bonus proportional to the affinity between the languages. If in your campaign Dwarven is a simplified version of Terran with some Undercommon elements, give speakers of those languages a chance to understand the others with variable bonuses, say, speakers of Dwarven get a +5 bonus to get Terran or Undercommon; speakers of Terran a +10 to get Dwarven. The DC would be assigned according to the difficulty of the message to pass or understand, like 10 for basic concepts, 15 for a standard conversation, 20 for technical issues, 25 for really abstract and obscure topics, and 30+ for dialects, archaic forms and stuff.
On having languages bumped into Linguistics, which has other uses desirable for intellectual characters like wizards and bards, it makes more sense for character advancement. Consecrating slots to languages was a drag if you wanted to create a scholar/language freak PC in 3.5, as it was a clear drain on skill allotment (not a big deal for bards or rogues, but a hard choice for the others). The new rule kinda reflects how knowing more languages makes it easier to learn others and to gain communication proficiency faster.
To cover other situations (low Int PCs really immersed in a multilingual setting) it would be possible to create a feat, similar to the 4e Linguist feat: take it once, you get immediate proficiency in 3 languages.
Andreas: I agree about the "default" multi-lingual thing with high INT characters. Back when I played 2nd Edition, we allowed the bonus proficiencies to go either towards Languages, Skills, or Weapon Proficiencies. Perhaps worth bringing into Pathfinder.
And I think I mentioned it briefly, in the 2nd Darkness, the "Traits" ("1/2 Feats") include an Adopted/Foreign Culture background trait that would let a low INT character gain another language for "free". Also a nice approach.
In v3.5 and PfRPG, a 1st level human bard with a 10 int can speak common.
In v3.5 he puts 4 skill ranks in Speak Language, and can now speak Dwarven, Elven, Halfling, and Gnome (and common).
In PfRPG he can only put 1 skill rank in Linguistics and can only speak Dwarven (and common).
I see this as a problem for Bards especially as they should be the "great communicators".
-- david Papa.DRB
Its no longer x4 skill pts at 1st level!
Sorry after what i typed first I read the rest of this thread and realised I have made a serious error, can someone explain to me why they changed this?
Its just that this is a truly major change and a shock which serves me right to think this was a closer variation of 3.5 and not pay closer attention...
That was one of the first changes in Alpha 1, and it's reasoning was explained in the sidebars about changes from 3.5. Now you are no longer punished/gifted based on which class you chose at 1st level... And for the most part, there is a net skill gain, if you take at least one rank in all class skills.
Out of curiosity what if that bard selected skill focus in linguistics?
Would they gain that +3 in extra langauges and I might be really blind here but if you put a skill rank in a class trained skill to get that +3 bonus would that bonus also grant you 3 extra languages since it is a class skill?
Probably not but I did need to ask just to make things clearer.
Take care and all the best!
Out of curiosity what if that bard selected skill focus in linguistics?
Would they gain that +3 in extra langauges and I might be really blind here but if you put a skill rank in a class trained skill to get that +3 bonus would that bonus also grant you 3 extra languages since it is a class skill?
Probably not but I did need to ask just to make things clearer.
Take care and all the best!
As it reads, no, they shouldn't because they get one language per rank invested in a skill, not based on your total bonus. The +3 from skill focus is no different from your ability bonus from a high ability score, in that regard.
Linguistics problems...
For my own history, I've taken classes in three different languages (French, Spanish and German if anyone cares. And you shouldn't, cos I really don't. :-p ), and as a result know how to carry on basic minimal conversations in one or maybe two, and how to offend people in all three. :-p I don't necessarily see the bard as the ace diplomat who can speak a dozen languages with ease, but instead more as the storyteller and entertainer who may have picked up a few stories in a few varied languages over the years, but who may not know much more. Therefore, I'm fine with the max ranks = level rule. It makes life much easier, and it seems to be more balanced in many ways.
My BIGGEST problem with linguistics is that it includes the 'Forgery' skill. Really, I don't think my pidgin progress in French helped me become better at mimicking handwriting, or falsifying papers, or any of that. If anything, I think Forgery should fall under the Bluff skill. The DM makes a roll against your Bluff to see how good your forgery is, and then maybe you make another Bluff skill roll when you present the papers to see if you match up against what the guard/busybody/whatever expects, and the success of your papers can be an additional modifier like on the current list to see how well you pull it off. Or whatever.
In the end, Forgery seems to be a lot more about making someone believe that something that isn't true, is true. By definition, that seems to fall a lot more under Bluff than Linguistics.
I am with the OP on this one. In the real world, there are many nations were speaking two or three languages is common.
But not everyone there will speak all those languages. Only the smart ones (i.e. those with bonus languages from high int) will.
Beyond that, I usually grant everyone common, their racial language (if any), and their national language (if any). So if you're an elf living in Osirion, you'll automatically know Common, Elven and Osiriani.
In the 2nd Darkness "Traits", there's an "Adopted"/Foreign Culture Trait, that basically lets you pick up the cultural traits of another Race (including Language)
I think this refers to Traits as in character traits, not those you find in the racial description. So a human adopted by elves could choose Arcane Dabbler (from Pathfinder Companion: Elves) as a trait with adopted, but not the +2 to spell penetration race trais.