|
In Pathfinder, when I move the campaign to a new area, I have the locals talk in their language by default. When my party went to the Mwangi Expanse, a couple characters grabbed the local languages because no locals spoke common.
I'm guessing they had no way to access Comprehend Languages. Which any 1st level Cleric can prepare. They didn't want to multiclass, or wanted the ability to access it at all times. I suppose that's fair enough, but no one I know would spend points on it.
In post-apartheid South Africa, I worked with an old Sotho guy called William, who spoke nine African languages, and no English. We could only communicate in Afrikaans and a bit of Tswana. He had no highschooling, and was illiterate. UN translators must be fluent in six languages. I met a man in Thailand who spoke eight dialects of Chinese.
Twenty languages is hardly impossible, in a world of superheroes like Pathfinder.
This is no different than any 3.5 class with 'Speak Language' as a class skill, except for the fact that in 3.5 there was no limit to how many pts you could put in. So, you could have a Wizard or Rogue who knew 20 languages at level 1.
I don't know what game that was, but it was not 3.5 as...
1) Only Bards(well from core) had Speak Language as a class skill.
2) There was a limit on how many ranks you could have in a skill( was your level + three)
On another note I like some characters speaking multiple languages. In a Eberron game I played a changling(who got speak language as a class skill as a racial) and every leavy level I kept it at max...why because relying on a spell can be dangerous if you are trying to disguise yourself....anti-magic zomes....or anayalize dweamor can tell you are using what spells...all of which will bow your cover.
Though the funniest thing about speaking language is old White Wolf...where pretty much all UN translator had to be elder vampires.
But on the topic...laernbing language is not that tough for people...especialy if they are related is it is not too unrealistic. So it is really a non issue I think.
Oh, realism in D&D. What happens RAW when you cast a lightning bolt underwater ? Surely if we want to learn languages realistically, then water conductivity must be factored in as well ! And why RAW a character with 100 HP can just dead fall from 500m and likely the worst that will happen is a bruise ?
There, end of realism debate.
Um you do know people have actualy survived falls from greater heigts with only a bruise right? Admittly not common but it has happen.
As for the lighting bolt underweater...yeah that is quite silly which is why I still use the rule from 1st and/or 2ns in which it gets the area of a fireball centered on you.
Or shooting five arrows from a composite longbow in 6 sec.
ZING!
You mean ZING! ZING! ZING! ZING! ZING!
In my campaign it's two skill points per language: one for read/write the other one for speaking. Works well.
Ruyan.
Let's ignore, for a moment, the fact that this game has dragons and magic and lots of other things that are totally unrealistic. Let's stay within the context. We're talking about game usually taking place in a world where dragons and magic and all that are real. Or don't care they're not, since they're around, anyway, and reality can go screw itself.
Still, to complain about the number of languages one can acquire and not about a thousand other things that are less "believable" (or however you want to call this. Use "realistic", if you must) just doesn't check out.
So it's unbelievable that someone can learn 30 languages in his lifetime? Examples for people with more known languages in the actual, real world, have been given above. And since adventurers are basically super heroes (and high-level adventurers are a couple of steps above super hero), it's not really a stretch to think that the same guy who can give reality the finger since he can change reality almost literally with wishful thinking, the guy who knows almost everything there is to know about humans, all the other humanoid races, all the angels and devils and other outsiders, dragons, undead, fairies, constructs, dragons, animals, magical creatures, aberrations, and plant life also knows a score-and-a-half languages.
Or is it the fact that he can pick up 20 languages in about half a year? Considering that he went from wet-behind-the-ears newblood magic apprentice who can cast one, maybe two meaningful magic spells before he needs to go and have a lie-down to the Archwizard of All Reality, able to slug it out with archangels, huge-ass dragons that have lived hundreds of years, and what-not, this again utterly fails to impress me.
It's like seeing a guy stop his car on the middle of the road, go to his car's rear, open the trunk, take out an Alien Death Ray and reduce half the city around him to burning, molten rubble, and the guy in the car behind him complains that he spilt his coke when he had to step on the breaks because of this guy.
I don't know what game that was, but it was not 3.5 as...1) Only Bards(well from core) had Speak Language as a class skill.
2) There was a limit on how many ranks you could have in a skill( was your level + three)
I don't have time to go through and figure out exactly what they did, as I can't find the build. But one of my players did this with a rogue.
20 Int to start (+5 languages)
3.5 Splatbook feat that made Speak Languages a class skill and gave languages (don't remember how many)
Speak Languages was listed as a skill, but it specifically said 'you don't purchase ranks in it'. The limit on skills were 'how many ranks you had in it'. Since you don't purchase ranks, you can put a skill point into it, and how many ranks do you have? Zero ranks. Therefore you can never hit the limit of 4 ranks at first level, since you never have any ranks in it.
Speak Language
Action : Not applicable.
Try Again : Not applicable. There are no Speak Language checks to fail.
The Speak Language skill doesn’t work like other skills. Languages work as follows.
* You start at 1st level knowing one or two languages (based on your race), plus an additional number of languages equal to your starting Intelligence bonus.
* You can purchase Speak Language just like any other skill, but instead of buying a rank in it, you choose a new language that you can speak.
* You don’t make Speak Language checks. You either know a language or you don’t.
* A literate character (anyone but a barbarian who has not spent skill points to become literate) can read and write any language she speaks. Each language has an alphabet, though sometimes several spoken languages share a single alphabet.
So, they started with like 8 languages, and burned another 12 skill points to get more languages at 1st level (this was back when you got 4x8 + 4x5 = 52 skill points, so burning 12 skill points for languages wasn't that hard at 1st level).
|
In the real world learning languages is merely a matter of being exposed to the them at an early age.
This is actually a myth. Adults learn languages just as well as children provided they invest the same time, energy, and concentration in doing so. Children just usually have a lot more of all those things to spare to focus on learning a language. Particularly, children who know absolutely no languages have very little else to spend their time and energy on.
In fairness, this idea was considered true by the scientific community as well as everyone else until studes disproved it fairly recently. That cognitive psychology class I took was surprisingly informative.
I'm confused; what's not realistic about the Linguistics skill? There are people out there that are fluent in a dozen different languages, and I'm of the camp that no real world person is higher than maybe 6th level.
Don't be silly now...
Chuck Norris is like level -eleven-.
Chuck Norris is like level -eleven-.
Chuck Norris is the reason nobody is higher than level 6.
|
The current rules, with skills, feats, and traits, don't handle languages well. They super-simplify the complexity and difficulty to balance the huge number of languages in the game. As DM I require that the character actually study the language, either with a tutor or by a significant time spent in daily immersion. I wouldn't allow a character to just pull a language out of thin air just for spending a skill point.
If they don't know a language, then they have to rely on Diplomacy or Int checks to express things and Sense Motive or Wis checks to understand what's being expressed to them.
A more believable way would be to make language learning a skill similar to Craft, Perform, or Profession. Thus a character would take Language (Infernal) or Language (Orcish) separately, perhaps with an easy DC 5 to start for understanding/expressing basic phrases ("Me want buy orange") and higher ones for subtleties, accents, highly educated vocabulary, etc.
I think in most cases where a player even bothers thinking about adding another language, it is because his character has had to put up with a great deal of exposure to speakers of the language, and the frustration of not having been able to understand them, possibly over several sessions and in extreme conditions. In those cases, the GM might allow that the character has an ongoing exposure to the language, and being a pretty extraordinary specimen, as PCs are meant to be, has picked up enough of it to get along. (Think: The 13th Warrior.)
The next most frequent case would probably be spellcasters or other studious types, requiring a language for their research. The GM can easily say that the leveling-up period took a couple months this time - at least for that character - and that he studied during the down time.
Next would be players just wanting to add one overnight, which I think most of us agree stretches the boundaries of believability, even for an RPG.
One problem with the current language system is that it treats all languages equally.
Having studied many languages professionally and worked as a translator and interpreter in several, there is a definite hierarchy of language complexity (for want of a better term).
I imagine languages like Elven and Dwarven (perhaps I am being influenced by Tolkien here) being like the Finnish and Russian of the real world.
Whereas I see Orcish as more of a pigin, such as say PNG or Solomon Islands pigin. A wide variety of variations that combined into a common "trade-talk" type language.
A simple way, I think, of applying this in game would be to have two tiers of languages. One skill point in a basic language would provide functional fluency. One skill point in a difficult language would give you basic day-to-day knowledge. A second skill point would give you functional fluency.
Perhaps if you spent an extra point above those two tiers you could get bonuses to skill checks when interacting with speakers of that language. ie 3 points in Elvish means that not only are you fluent but your knowledge of the language means you also understand the intricacies of etiquette, regional variations etc to the point where elves respond better to you, a +5 to Diplomacy, Bluff etc.
For example, my Indonesian is "advanced professional" but I will never be mistaken for a native speaker (though I could if I was speaking over the phone). But my knowledge means I get what would be in DnD terms a circumstance bonus to my diplomacy and bluff checks when interacting with Indonesians. Think of it like a gnome who speaks excellent elvish - no elf will think he is a native speaker but they will respond well to his competence in the language.
My German is very good and I "look like" a German. When I speak I can sound like a Rhinelander but when it gets in to more complicated discussions I get stuck. But day-to-day in shops or the pub, my accent and slang would be effectively fluent for normal conversations.
Compare this to my "survival level" French. I look no different to a French person but as soon as I open my mouth they know I am an English speaker. In Paris this would give me a circumstance penalty to Diplomacy etc - until I say "Je suis Australien" and I then get a bonus ;-)
But there is no language that is demonstrably more difficult to acquire than any other.
And for a 2nd level druid, it's as hard to master a crossbow as a spiked chain. Really, you're nitpicking right now.
plus the fact that linguistics is easily trumped by other in game mechanics like comprehend language and tongues the spells and the witch's tongues hex.
Our witch has tongue hex, she also has some points invested in linguistics.
We also let her use linguistics to "read lips"
In the tv series Star Trek: Lt Uhura was a linguist that could pick up a new language by listening to it and studying it for a short time.
that is why she was the communications officer.
another character on the more recent star trek: enterprise (an oriental woman) had the same trait(and position) if you ever watched the show, she repeatedly 'picked up' new languages on the fly, The linguistic skill basically allows you to do this with "selecting" the new language, you can just speak a pigdin version of it for a time as long as you keep making DC checks.
As a character levels, and puts slots into the skill, keep the ranks in reserve, as the character uses the lingusitics skill in game to interpret a new language, if he/she gets good results against the DC, you can say, do you want to learn this language and use one of your slots?
If they do lousy at rolling and miss alot of DCs you tell them they cannot learn the language at this time, but they can keep trying to speak it the pigdin way (by making rolls) if they like.
plus the fact that linguistics is easily trumped by other in game mechanics like comprehend language and tongues the spells and the witch's tongues hex.
That's like saying overland movement speeds are wasted because teleportation makes walking obselete.
Not every party has access to those spells.
But there is no language that is demonstrably more difficult to acquire than any other.
You can pick some obscure Austronesian language, or some Salish/Bantu language with lots of agglutinative properties or clicks. In the end it doesn't matter, because kids are still able to learn these languages perfectly, without any help whatsoever.
That being said, there is varying differences between attempting to acquire a new L2 based on what your L1 is. Acquiring Polish or Ukrainian will be much easier if you speak Russian natively. Similarly, Spanish or Italian will be easier if you speak French natively. However, Norwegian speakers will have great difficulty with Finnish, and Romanian speakers will find Sanskrit easier than Hungarian.
Conversely, some languages will just always be difficult to acquire, unless you're a native. Basque and Korean are examples, due to them having no living relatives. But that's a property of the world, and not necessarily the language itself.
Suggesting a two-tier system of languages is to ignore the relativistic difficulty that occurs in L2 acquisition.
I'm not sure what languages you have studied, but your statement is one of the most ridiculous comments about learning languages I have ever heard (especially as you say no language is more difficult and then say Basque and Korean are). Learning a language as a child is different to "my character just levelled up and I have put a skill point into elvish so I am now effectively fluent in the language". Try learning Indonesian and Finnish and tell me that Indonesian is not easier than Finnish.
Finnish - 15 noun cases, 3 different plurals, five different infinitives, etc
Indonesian - one case, no nouns changes for plurals, one infinitive, no exceptions to grammatical rules, perfectly consistent pronunciation and spelling etc
Or take it one more step and try PNG Pigin - crack jokes after a day or two of intensive study.
English as a non-English speaker? How many ways can you pronounce "ough", spelling exceptions that make no sense - entire books have been written on the subject.
I am not suggesting any kind of system that makes a judgement on learning a new language being more or less difficult depending on how closely related it is to a language you already know (plus someone would have to group the DnD languages into language families - Aklo is that like Abyssal or Dwarvish or ??? Or is it a language isolate?). That's a given - I speak English and German, with the help of a dictionary I can read Dutch reasonably well. I know no Russian so a dictionary isn't really going to help me with Polish. So "relativistic difficulty" is not the issue here.
But a simple modification to the linguistics skills that, if you point an extra point into a language, gives you a bonus in interacting with speakers of that language is unrealistic?
plus the fact that linguistics is easily trumped by other in game mechanics like comprehend language and tongues the spells and the witch's tongues hex.
That's like saying overland movement speeds are wasted because teleportation makes walking obselete.
Not every party has access to those spells.
Parties having characters in them that can devote 20 skill points to linguistics don't have access to comprehend languages?? Come now, don't be silly.
You're also changing what it said.
The linguistics skill is not in any way over powered BECAUSE there are other easier and less character resource intensive ways to do the same thing quicker and better.
By the time someone can put 10 points into linguistics they have to be 10th level. Don't think they have access to low level spells like tongues? The could get a wand of it and 5 skill points in UMD would work it fine, as well as UMD will be useful for many other things besides just waving a tongues wand.
So mechanically point for point, it's not over powered.
It's a 20th level character, they could do alot more earth shattering things than speak 20 extra languages.
|
|
Not to mention the fact of strongmen capable of lifting far more than any real life human being makes D&D unrealistic from the start.Nah, I was watching a Strongmen of the World competition a while back, and I worked out that they mostly had about 22 strength.
Amiri has a 24 Str at 16th level. Also, the unrealistic part is that characters can lift such weights without breaking bones from the pressure.
Parties having characters in them that can devote 20 skill points to linguistics don't have access to comprehend languages?? Come now, don't be silly.
You're also changing what it said.
The linguistics skill is not in any way over powered BECAUSE there are other easier and less character resource intensive ways to do the same thing quicker and better.
By the time someone can put 10 points into linguistics they have to be 10th level. Don't think they have access to low level spells like tongues? The could get a wand of it and 5 skill points in UMD would work it fine, as well as UMD will be useful for many other things besides just waving a tongues wand.
So mechanically point for point, it's not over powered.
It's a 20th level character, they could do alot more earth shattering things than speak 20 extra languages.
I never said anything about level 20 or any other level for that matter. Also I have not said linguistics is overpowered, underpowered or otherwise - merely an alternative to the way skill points are allocated to it.
Given 20th level characters can do virtually anything using magic, using your argument you may as well not spend any skill points on anything because they will become redundant. But as you progress from level 1 onwards all sorts of things are necessary because you have no way of doing them other than with your own inherent skills and abilities. Skills and abilities at level 20 cannot be looked at in isolation of all the levels you take to get there.
The point I'm trying to make is if you're gonna chuck out so much "realism" out the window, you might as do it so that the skill remains fun and useful (i.e. as RAW). Your supposition that their should be two-tiers of languages is scientifically unfounded, since there is no objective measurement of difficulty of language acquisition, unless being compared to a base.
Given that the realism has already been "chucked out" with the one size fits all approach in RAW, making a minor change is not over the top.
As with pretty much everything in the game there are many arbitrary decisions made to make the game function. Dividing languages up in any fashion would be no different. And there would be no "science" to it as there is limited info about each language in the game. Perhaps some languages are tonal, pictographic scripts, others use the "common" script. Who knows, some may be bizarre clicks, whistles, whatever.
I agree that in the real world it can't be done without working off a base. But it can be done - and will require a certain degree of arbitrariness.
Even if all languages are treated the same, why shouldn't there be a bonus for putting more skills in it. Why are all other skills based around putting more points in them makes you better at them? Yet Linguistics means each point gives you a new language and doesn't make you any better at the languages you already know. RAW means a level 1 half-orc with low int can technically be as good at speaking elven as a level 20 elven expert with a brain the size of a planet. Sure it's RAW, but I think it is a bit over-simplified.
As for Indonesian and its grammar....it is as I described it. Regional variations are limited as almost all Indonesian speakers have another language as their mother tongue. So any variations are largely because they are mixing Indonesian with Javanese, Madurese etc. Standard Indonesian, however, is incredibly straightforward.
RAW means a level 1 half-orc with low int can technically be as good at speaking elven as a level 20 elven expert with a brain the size of a planet. Sure it's RAW, but I think it is a bit over-simplified.
A lot of things in the game are over-simlified. If I am going to pick on an area of the game to make more realistic I am going to pick weapons, armor, or how the 2 should interact. Picking on a skill that got no love in 3.5 in most groups, and does not get a whole lot of attention now is not the place to start, IMHO.
This is no different than any 3.5 class with 'Speak Language' as a class skill, except for the fact that in 3.5 there was no limit to how many pts you could put in. So, you could have a Wizard or Rogue who knew 20 languages at level 1.
That's actually not true. There is/was a limit on ranks per level in 3.5.
That said, I somewhat agree witht he original poster. For my campaign, Every time the players acquire a new language, they must choose if they can read/write or speak the language. Thus, It takes twice as many skill points to acquire languages as the RAW.
I don't like the idea of literate commoners in a pseudo-middle age era.
This is no different than any 3.5 class with 'Speak Language' as a class skill, except for the fact that in 3.5 there was no limit to how many pts you could put in. So, you could have a Wizard or Rogue who knew 20 languages at level 1.
That's actually not true. There is/was a limit on ranks per level in 3.5.
That said, I somewhat agree witht he original poster. For my campaign, Every time the players acquire a new language, they must choose if they can read/write or speak the language. Thus, It takes twice as many skill points to acquire languages as the RAW.
I don't like the idea of literate commoners in a pseudo-middle age era.
In D&D there is not assumption that the average person can not read and write. What does being a commoner have to do with limiting the adventurers?
In D&D there is not assumption that the average person can not read and write. What does being a commoner have to do with limiting the adventurers?This is no different than any 3.5 class with 'Speak Language' as a class skill, except for the fact that in 3.5 there was no limit to how many pts you could put in. So, you could have a Wizard or Rogue who knew 20 languages at level 1.
That's actually not true. There is/was a limit on ranks per level in 3.5.
That said, I somewhat agree witht he original poster. For my campaign, Every time the players acquire a new language, they must choose if they can read/write or speak the language. Thus, It takes twice as many skill points to acquire languages as the RAW.
I don't like the idea of literate commoners in a pseudo-middle age era.
It's part of the Lingiustics skill. There is no difference between a PC class and an NPC class when they select the skill. A rank, is a rank, is a rank. However, my restriction also applies to the bonus languages from a high INT. My world is just less literate than the standard Pathfinder world. Yet, even with this restriction, characters tend to know more languages than their real-world couterparts.
It's part of the Lingiustics skill. There is no difference between a PC class and an NPC class when they select the skill. A rank, is a rank, is a rank. However, my restriction also applies to the bonus languages from a high INT. My world is just less literate than the standard Pathfinder world. Yet, even with this restriction, characters tend to know more languages than their real-world couterparts.In D&D there is not assumption that the average person can not read and write. What does being a commoner have to do with limiting the adventurers?This is no different than any 3.5 class with 'Speak Language' as a class skill, except for the fact that in 3.5 there was no limit to how many pts you could put in. So, you could have a Wizard or Rogue who knew 20 languages at level 1.
That's actually not true. There is/was a limit on ranks per level in 3.5.
That said, I somewhat agree witht he original poster. For my campaign, Every time the players acquire a new language, they must choose if they can read/write or speak the language. Thus, It takes twice as many skill points to acquire languages as the RAW.
I don't like the idea of literate commoners in a pseudo-middle age era.
Ok. I was trying to understand the why's of the situation. :)
Also, the unrealistic part is that characters can lift such weights without breaking bones from the pressure.
:: !!! :D
''With a scream the gnome cleric is crushed by a giant stone slab!''
Oh no! I will rush to his aid!
''What are you going to do?''
I'll pick up the giant stone slab!
''Ok, make a str check.''
Pssh, Str 26 mother funsta! Aha a 19! That's a total score of 27!''
''Well done. You firmly grasp the giant stone slab and slowly raises it away from the gnome cleric mulch. Make a Fortitude save..''
Aweso.. what, wait? Fort check? Eh, why?
''...''
Ok, ok, fine, sheesh, rolling. Total check result comes to.. aw crap, 14.
''As you raise the stone slab above your head you hear a sickening cracking noise and then feel a shooting pain in your arms.."
...what? Seriously?
''YOUR ARMS BREAK YOU DROP THE SLAB ON YOUR HEAD YOU DIE!''
..christ.
''BO YEAH! EAT IT! HA!''
..I hate you.
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16
|
In my campaign, I use a house rule very similar to BenignFacist's. Mine is a four-rank structure:
1 rank:
"Tourist-level" proficiency in the language. You can ask how much things cost, where the bathroom is, tell them, "please no kill me," and so forth. Your grammar will be atrocious, but you can often get the general idea of what people are saying if they speak slowly and clearly.
2 ranks:
Intermediate level. You can generally get your point across, but you will make lots of mistakes. You can usually understand what people are saying, so long as they aren't speaking too fast. At this point, you can start to discuss abstract concepts.
3 ranks:
Fluent. You can converse freely with native speakers, and will usually only trip up when discussing highly complex subjects like philosophy or religion. You still have an accent, but it's weak enough that you can be understood by just about everyone.
4 ranks:
Native speaker. You have almost no accent, and can freely speak and understand the language as though you were a native speaker.
|
|
Interesting Tamago. Can characters take 1 rank in multiple languages instead of having to spend 4 ranks in one before taking their next?
I would maybe allow characters to progress a number of steps equal to their Int bonus per rank, minimum one. Thus an 18 Int wizard only needs to spend one rank to have native speaking rating, but a 12 Int fighter has to have 4 ranks to have the same proficiency.
EDIT: Also, if Indonesian is so unmarked for case/phi-features, then a speaker of let's say Polish, who marks everything, will have a difficult time figuring out how to interpret something to them which should be marked.
I'll have to check among my former Indonesian linguist colleagues to see if any of them speak one of the more complicated European languages. But I know when I switch from German to Indonesian I don't curse the lack of gender and cases. Though the use of the same word for he and she (dia) can be annoying!
A lot of things in the game are over-simlified. If I am going to pick on an area of the game to make more realistic I am going to pick weapons, armor, or how the 2 should interact. Picking on a skill that got no love in 3.5 in most groups, and does not get a whole lot of attention now is not the place to start, IMHO.
I agree that in the scheme of things it is not that important compared to other issues in the game (which I won't mention here to avoid derailing the thread). But the professional translator in me thinks the system is a just a tad too oversimplified.
Though it would be nice if the Pathfinder linguistics system worked in real life - the same effort to speak a simple language a complicated one. I really would be able to speak Scottish Gaelic, Zulu and all those other languages I have no time to learn properly ;-)
Parties having characters in them that can devote 20 skill points to linguistics don't have access to comprehend languages?? Come now, don't be silly.
You're also changing what it said.
The linguistics skill is not in any way over powered BECAUSE there are other easier and less character resource intensive ways to do the same thing quicker and better.
By the time someone can put 10 points into linguistics they have to be 10th level. Don't think they have access to low level spells like tongues? The could get a wand of it and 5 skill points in UMD would work it fine, as well as UMD will be useful for many other things besides just waving a tongues wand.
So mechanically point for point, it's not over powered.
It's a 20th level character, they could do alot more earth shattering things than speak 20 extra languages.
I never said anything about level 20 or any other level for that matter. Also I have not said linguistics is overpowered, underpowered or otherwise - merely an alternative to the way skill points are allocated to it.
Given 20th level characters can do virtually anything using magic, using your argument you may as well not spend any skill points on anything because they will become redundant. But as you progress from level 1 onwards all sorts of things are necessary because you have no way of doing them other than with your own inherent skills and abilities. Skills and abilities at level 20 cannot be looked at in isolation of all the levels you take to get there.
did you read the first few posts? The OP stated a 20th level character that can put 20 skill points into linguistics and speak 20 languages is over powered.
Read before you criticize and post.
did you read the first few posts? The OP stated a 20th level character that can put 20 skill points into linguistics and speak 20 languages is over powered.
Read before you criticize and post.
Pot, this is kettle, over.
Funnily enough, I did read the whole thread - and have noticed how it has covered a range of issues that diverge from the OP's original point. My recent point was about looking in isolation at what a level 20 character can do - not whether speaking 20 languages at level 20 is OP or not (and I think my views on the RAW mechanics of the Linguistis skill are pretty clear).
Sure characters at various levels get access to spells that can make speaking languages (ie putting points into linguistics) unnecessary, but not all characters will end up as level 20, just like not all parties will have members who can cast Comprehend Languages, Tongues etc. Even where a party will get access to those spells, what do they do before they get to that point?
I too have a problem with the way linguistics works. People can counter-complain that some people complain about 'realism' in the game, but I posit the question: "What about gravity? What about breathing and the consumption of food? What about any of the other rules in this game that simulate some level of reality?" If those things didn't exist, if there was no element of realism, then you wouldn't be able to connect, you would never feel an element of danger...
Some people have a stronger sense of realism, and there's nothing wrong with it. Low-magic campaigns rely more heavily on rules that enforce realism, and there is a big demand for low-magic rules.
I require players to give me a reason to have been learning a language, and I expect them to remind me on a regular basis that they are studying whenever they are able. There are times when PCs travel or rest without anything eventful, and these are the times when I expect them to do things such as study languages, that's why I put that restful period in there.
However, this thread has given me a pretty cool idea... Linguistics checks to learn languages, and each language has a DC. Start with your racial language, plus one if you have a positive Int modifier. Common would be like a DC 12, dwarven might be a 15, elven might be a 17 (arbitrary numbers). Extraplanar languages would be harder, up in the 20s.
Learning a language would take a set number of days or weeks, and you'd make Linguistics checks like Craft checks. After the correct number of successes, you learn the language. It doesn't give the gradient effect that some of the other suggestions give, but I think it fits current mechanics, allows the learning of multiple languages per level (for those people who level once a year or something), and promotes fluff.