If an animal is allowed to use a headband of vast intelligence or mental superiority, is there any reason not to allow it regular use of languages?
I don't think there is any clear rules in regards to this, Awaken does provide knowledge of a language but I'm not sure headband is equivalent to the awaken spell.
I guess if you play a more fantastical world like say Narnia, having talking animals would be no big deal, but a less fantastic world most animals would still lack the physical qualities needed to vocalize languages.
I think it would be able to fully understand x number of languages though.
|
(Post-monster ate my post)
In my old group we ruled that an animal that gains an int score of 3 or higher through any permanent means (headband questionable, level bonus or inherent definitely) could understand but not speak languages.
We also created a "Pearl of Vocalization" that basically acted as magical vocal chords, allowing you to speak any language you knew regardless of form. I think we put it at around 2-4k.
Animals (or anyone else for that matter) who gain intelligence increases do NOT gain new languages unless some ability specifically says they do (such as is the case in Awaken Animal if I'm not mistaken). If their intelligence increases high enough that they gain new sill ranks, I highly recommend having it take ranks in Linguistics. Even then, there is no guarantee that they will have the physical capability to speak (check with your GM on that one).
When making a headband of vast intelligence, you choose what skill you want the bonus ranks to go into. If making it for an animal, you could choose linguistics and 16 of your favorite languages. That would cover your animal companion until you're 20th level. :)
Except you would have to get their intelligence to 10, 12, or higher with said headband for that to work. Otherwise, you aren't gaining any new ranks at all. (Every level animals get 2 ranks minus their intelligence modifier, minimum 1)
Except you would have to get their intelligence to 10, 12, or higher with said headband for that to work. Otherwise, you aren't gaining any new ranks at all. (Every level animals get 2 ranks minus their intelligence modifier, minimum 1)
According to RAW the headband grants skill ranks, no matter what your starting or ending INT.
A headband of vast intelligence has one skill associated with it per +2 bonus it grants. After being worn for 24 hours, the headband grants a number of skill ranks in those skills equal to the wearer's total Hit Dice.
Except you would have to get their intelligence to 10, 12, or higher with said headband for that to work. Otherwise, you aren't gaining any new ranks at all. (Every level animals get 2 ranks minus their intelligence modifier, minimum 1)According to RAW the headband grants skill ranks, no matter what your starting or ending INT.
A headband of vast intelligence has one skill associated with it per +2 bonus it grants. After being worn for 24 hours, the headband grants a number of skill ranks in those skills equal to the wearer's total Hit Dice.
Well it's certainly not the intent. The game designers have been quite clear on how the headbands worked in the past.
You'd have to consider their vocalization abilities.
A parrot would speak better than a snake.
Then, I guess a trained dog that knows "sit, stay, sic balls, etc..." might have an edge on a grizzly bear that never was around humans saying anything more than "AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!! RUN!!! A BEAR!!!"
I'm kinda weird tho.
In my game, the drunk dwarf has a dog named Tenser.
He's been learning more and more stuff, and since he looks like Scooby Doo, we eventually gave him speech.
It's not a familiar though; it's more a "comic relief" character.
I think it's an unwritten rule that he inexplicably never either affects or is affected by combat in any way shape or form.
I'm dungeonmaster, so nothing bad ever happens to dogs.
Honestly, your average bear in D&D/Pathfinder is smarter than your average bear in reality. He has to be, otherwise Speak with Animals is a lemon of a spell.
I'd say if you wanted an item, such as, say, a Fez of Smarter than Average to put on your flying monkey, it should be given a price break as it only works on dumb animals, the same way that Horseshoes of the Zephyr are cheaper than Boots of Flying because there's a difference between use by PCs and use by their companions.
He didn't say it was intent. He said it was RAW.
I would have assumed someone as concerned with RAW as yourself would understand this.
Um...I never refuted that he said it was RAW. said it was intent.
Why the harsh tone?
Well it's certainly not the intent. The game designers have been quite clear on how the headbands worked in the past.Except you would have to get their intelligence to 10, 12, or higher with said headband for that to work. Otherwise, you aren't gaining any new ranks at all. (Every level animals get 2 ranks minus their intelligence modifier, minimum 1)According to RAW the headband grants skill ranks, no matter what your starting or ending INT.
A headband of vast intelligence has one skill associated with it per +2 bonus it grants. After being worn for 24 hours, the headband grants a number of skill ranks in those skills equal to the wearer's total Hit Dice.
Could you quote something for me? I don't mind using RAI over RAW when it's better for the game, but I've never heard or read anything to make me think that you can't use a Headband of Vast Intelligence to make your horse better at swimming.
Could you quote something for me? I don't mind using RAI over RAW when it's better for the game, but I've never heard or read anything to make me think that you can't use a Headband of Vast Intelligence to make your horse better at swimming.Well it's certainly not the intent. The game designers have been quite clear on how the headbands worked in the past.Except you would have to get their intelligence to 10, 12, or higher with said headband for that to work. Otherwise, you aren't gaining any new ranks at all. (Every level animals get 2 ranks minus their intelligence modifier, minimum 1)According to RAW the headband grants skill ranks, no matter what your starting or ending INT.
A headband of vast intelligence has one skill associated with it per +2 bonus it grants. After being worn for 24 hours, the headband grants a number of skill ranks in those skills equal to the wearer's total Hit Dice.
I'll see if I can track down a developer statement. In the meantime, here are some pertinent rules:
After 24 hours, the bonus the headband grants becomes a permanent bonus.
This is what the headband text is referring to. Only there is a provision that makes the gained skills from the intelligence increase static to the headband. This was done to prevent abuse such as removing a headband and putting it on again to reassign skill ranks willynilly. To assume that the headband gives you free skills regardless is to assume that the intelligence increase gives you free ranks as well--which does nothing except re-open the avenue for abuse and allow one to get double duty out of an intelligence headband.
If you have an extraordinarily low intelligence and don't gain many ranks per level, such as when you are an animal, the headband cannot grant you extra skills as you are still below average.
EDIT: No luck on finding a developer statement (yet), but here are some pertinent threads, some of which contain posters that seem to follow the same interpretation I do.
INTELLIGENCE INCREASES
HOW RETROACTIVE FRIENDLY IS PATHFINDER?
WHEN DO ANIMAL COMPANIONS GET MORE THAN ONE SKILL POINT?
HEADBAND OF VAST INTELLIGENCE AND SKILL RANKS
INCREASING INTELLIGENCE AND SKILL POINTS
PERMANENT INCREASES TO INTELLIGENCE, DOES THAT GRANT RETROACTIVE SKILL POINTS?
SKILL RANKS AND LEVEL STAT INCREASES
EDIT 2: Ah, here it is.
For those too lazy to click, the relevant bits:
It's easy to see why in 3.5 the Intelligence boosting items didn't mess with your skill points, ain't it? :-)
The headband of vast intelligence grants you an Intelligence bonus. We wanted it to also grant skill points, since that's what increased intelligence scores do. What we DIDN'T want was a situation where you get an item that grants an INT bonus and put it on your head and get to pick where those extra skill ranks go there and then... because then what's keeping you from putting those ranks in to, say, Appraise, but then when you get to a locked door you can just take the item off and then put it back on your head and say, "Now those skill ranks are adding to my Disable Device!" Makes the item WAY too versatile.
So the solution was to "hard code" the skill ranks into each item. That way, when you find an INT boosting head band, you not only know what the skill ranks it grants are, but when you take it off and put it back on or pass it around to your friends, it stays the same. It removes the whole "What do I want to be good at today?" problem. And that DOES mean that sometimes you'll find an INT boosting item that overlaps with skill ranks you already have, but that's fine with me since you're still enjoying all the other benefits of the increased INT score just like you did in 3.5 (which, remember, doesn't grant ANY skill ranks for INT boosters).
You certainly don't get the bonus ranks hard coded into the item AND another batch of skill ranks to spend as you wish.
I'll make sure Jason knows that this'll be something we should add to the FAQ. It's not really errata, since it's not really a correction. It's just something that needs more explanation.
EDIT: I'm not sure if excluding bonus languages from the things the headband grants was an oversight or intentional. I think it might have been intentional, but I'm not sure.
I hope that helps! :D
If an animal is allowed to use a headband of vast intelligence or mental superiority, is there any reason not to allow it regular use of languages?I don't think there is any clear rules in regards to this, Awaken does provide knowledge of a language but I'm not sure headband is equivalent to the awaken spell.
I guess if you play a more fantastical world like say Narnia, having talking animals would be no big deal, but a less fantastic world most animals would still lack the physical qualities needed to vocalize languages.
I think it would be able to fully understand x number of languages though.
That's a good point. Certain apes can learn sign language well, but they don't have the morphological specialization(s) requisite to speech production.
If an animal is allowed to use a headband of vast intelligence or mental superiority, is there any reason not to allow it regular use of languages?
This leads to two question:
1) Would i allow a animal with a higher Int score to understand languages, if the Int score gave it bonus languages. = YES.2) Would i let it speak the bonus languages. = NO. (parrot being an exception).
.......
Why, because animals do not have a vocal cords like a human. They would not be able to make the sounds. The benefit that humans get from having vocal cords is that we can speak languages, but the downside is we can not breath while choking on food.
Most animal while choking on food (example, your cat with a hairball), can still breath even while coughing stuff up.
......
(For every rule there is an exception, for ever exception you crate a rule)
Magic = Awaken Animal spell, lets creatures speak languages, So would say YES to both, if it was an Awaken Animal or Plant.
......
So you want to throw a headband of +int on a normal creature..... just do not forget to give it a Collar of Tongues so it can speak back and forth.
A whole bunch of stuff.
None of the items you quoted support your argument in any way.
You said, "To assume that the headband gives you free skills regardless is to assume that the intelligence increase gives you free ranks as well--which does nothing except re-open the avenue for abuse and allow one to get double duty out of an intelligence headband."
This statement is patently false, and also a bit ridiculous. The headband doesn't grant you skill ranks based on having a higher INT bonus, it simply grants you max ranks in one skill, as a separate power from giving you a higher INT score - in order to prevent abuse, just like the dev said.
- RAW says you gain max ranks in one skill.
- No published material, FAQ, errata, or developer statement contradicts.
- It's not unbalancing to the game.
Speaking is hard. If you don't have the lips toung and vocal cords for it you're out of luck. you might have an animal companion wolf with a +6 headband that can understand common, infernal, abyssal, celestial, elvan and sylvan, but with a fixed muzzle his chances of speaking it are nill. (he might have a shot at infernal though if you picture it as pretty growly)
I suppose you could always get a trained parrot, have it put its natural skill rank into linguistics and then give it a headband, and then it could ask "poly want devils food cake!" in infernal.
Speaking is hard. If you don't have the lips toung and vocal cords for it you're out of luck. you might have an animal companion wolf with a +6 headband that can understand common, infernal, abyssal, celestial, elvan and sylvan, but with a fixed muzzle his chances of speaking it are nill. (he might have a shot at infernal though if you picture it as pretty growly)
I suppose you could always get a trained parrot, have it put its natural skill rank into linguistics and then give it a headband, and then it could ask "poly want devils food cake!" in infernal.
It would have to. If it tried the usual phrase, it would likely come out as "Polly wishes to devour the crisped remains of a Cheliaxian soul."
Everyone keeps going on about how the devils have no word in their language for "kindness" or "mercy," so I'm betting with such a seriously limited vocabulary, they wouldn't have a word for "cracker" either. "Soul cracklin's" is probably the closest you get.
As per the vocal chord structure arguments.
Parrots and songbirds can talk. There are a few songbirds IRL smart enough to be taught how to speak, crows and the like. Sparrows, bluebirds, they're not smart enough to learn the complexities.
Owls, raptors, reptiles, toads, no. Dogs, cats, well, you can always cite specialized research or come up with the Saturday-Night-variety-show examples but let's call it a no for simplicity purposes.
Now remember, this is D&D, not real life. Let's look at races that can speak but that shouldn't be able to according to vocal chord structure.
Gnolls. Dragons. Lizard folk. Boggards. The list goes on. But each one has a racial language that they speak and are either made of magic (ex: dragons) or have a terrible accent that makes them hilarious to try and understand (ex: gnolls). So I'd rule that if the player can find precedent in what their character has seen in the campaign world then they can put together something that can talk. If this means I deal with a tiger animal companion that sounds like a growly Scooby-Doo then so be it.
Summary: If the player wants to do all the work for me and they can convince me then I'll consider it. But then of course you get this:
PC: Say it.
Tiger: ?
PC: Say it...
Tiger: murrrrr
PC: Saaaaay it?
Tiger: They'rrrre grrrrrrreat!
PC: He said it! squee
Tiger: murrrr ::sulks off::
So YMMV. It depends on what flavor you like.
If your animal, through whatever means you use, now has an intellegence of 3 or more and common as a language (i did this with an ape, a HD based stat up, and a rank in linguistics so i could teach it to use a greatsword :D) it can't talk but it can understand what you say to it so do you need handle animal to get it to do stuff or can you just ask it?
A whole bunch of stuff.None of the items you quoted support your argument in any way.
You said, "To assume that the headband gives you free skills regardless is to assume that the intelligence increase gives you free ranks as well--which does nothing except re-open the avenue for abuse and allow one to get double duty out of an intelligence headband."
This statement is patently false, and also a bit ridiculous. The headband doesn't grant you skill ranks based on having a higher INT bonus, it simply grants you max ranks in one skill, as a separate power from giving you a higher INT score - in order to prevent abuse, just like the dev said.
- RAW says you gain max ranks in one skill.
- No published material, FAQ, errata, or developer statement contradicts.
- It's not unbalancing to the game.
Play it how you like. I'm certainly not going to stop you from believing what you want to believe.
** spoiler omitted **
It's intelligent now so Handle Animal wouldn't apply anymore. You would have to tell or ask it to do things and it would decide whether or not it felt like it.
It's intelligent now so Handle Animal wouldn't apply anymore. You would have to tell or ask it to do things and it would decide whether or not it felt like it.** spoiler omitted **
Assuming, of course, that it understood anything you were saying.
As per the vocal chord structure arguments.
Parrots and songbirds can talk. There are a few songbirds IRL smart enough to be taught how to speak, crows and the like. Sparrows, bluebirds, they're not smart enough to learn the complexities.
And even when they learn how to vocalize words, they aren't really communicating the same way humans do. Animal communication, even those apes supposedly talking via sign language, only communicate in stimulus-response (diatic) patterns. Human speech is qualitatively different than animal communication.
But I digress.
It's a fantasy game. Animals can talk with appropriate magic. :)
Animal communication, even those apes supposedly talking via sign language, only communicate in stimulus-response (diatic) patterns. Human speech is qualitatively different than animal communication.
Lamens terms please. I couldn't even find diatic in the dictionary.
Lamens terms please. I couldn't even find diatic in the dictionary.
Put simply, animal communication only relates to stimulus and response. There is no element of actual choice, relationship, or understanding of the nature of symbols. Also animal communication is not language in the human sense that includes rules of syntax. Despite the behaviorist hoopla about how, for example, apes could be taught to communicate via sign language with humans and/or with each other in the same way humans communicate with each other, nothing of the sort ever took place. Instead, behaviorists just ended up with really well-trained apes who could ape the behaviors that behaviorists wanted to them to demonstrate in order to "prove" the behaviorist thesis correct.
Talking animals in a fantasy world. I can't believe anyone would think of such a thing, much less suggest it. It would main your campaign seem childish and infantile, not realistic at all. It would be a little kiddy game instead of a grown up game. Good thing pathfinder has built in rules so that animal can't speak even if they can understand the language. That is a relief.
Pathfinder has rules that animals absolutely cannot have an intelligence above 2. Most cats, foxes, and dolphins are therefor magical beasts. Some cats can speak a little but it seems to hurt. The pearl of languages would be created with speak with animals, possibly a modified version. The grey elf magic of awakening, possibly a ninth level druid spell gave trees the ability to move and talk like humans. That's a Treant.
|
Put simply, animal communication only relates to stimulus and response. There is no element of actual choice, relationship, or understanding of the nature of symbols. Also animal communication is not language in the human sense that includes rules of syntax.
There's about 30 years of pretty decent peer reviewed research that strongly suggests you're wrong. Much of this research isn't widely accepted solely because of the difficulty of reproducing the results of these experiments: most scientists don't have the luxury of spending decades working intensely with singular animals that demonstrate the high-end of their species' intelligence. MOST animals can't grasp these concepts, but most humans can't fully grasp concepts at OUR far end of the bell curve of knowledge. I would think an animal companion would qualify as the same sort of special, super-genius animals as Kanzi the Bonobo and Alex the Parrot.
Syntax: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091212144710.htm
Semantics: http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=419#more-419
Symbols: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/10022981.html
Relationships: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_%28parrot%29
Forgive my linking to "popular" websites, but unless we were both using university systems to read and write these posts, most of my scientific journal links would be forbidden.
|
|
Most cats, foxes, and dolphins are therefor magical beasts.
Seriously? You're gonna suggest cats and foxes as candidates for personhood (what this debate is really about) when there's a half dozen candidates that a rational, sane scientist would at least consider the arguments for?
Some cats can speak a little but it seems to hurt.
I can only think of three reasons you might say this:
1) You're talking in character as some sort of Golarion scholar
2) You're insane
3) You're trying to undermine the pro-animal intelligence argument with ludicrous claims.
I hope it's reason 1 or 3.
Pathfinder has rules that animals absolutely cannot have an intelligence above 2. Most cats, foxes, and dolphins are therefor magical beasts. Some cats can speak a little but it seems to hurt. The pearl of languages would be created with speak with animals, possibly a modified version. The grey elf magic of awakening, possibly a ninth level druid spell gave trees the ability to move and talk like humans. That's a Treant.
Please Double check the Pathfinder Bestiary. All those animal listed above start with Int 2.
Magic items that Increase permanent Int, and grant bonus language. The animal can now understand the language. How well it understands, would still be based on how much Int it now has.
The animal would not be able to speak language (except parrot's). You would need the addition magic item, with the spells: Tongues.
As this spell grants the ability to speak languages.
Animal with Greater than 2 Int, would now need Diplomacy checks to get them to do things. The same as any other NPC.
Seriously? You're gonna suggest cats and foxes as candidates for personhood (what this debate is really about) when there's a half dozen candidates that a rational, sane scientist would at least consider the arguments for?
I believe what he's saying is that since most animals have an int of 2, and cats foxes etc are smarter than most animals, they should have a higher int.
I agree insofar as the stat system doesn't differentiate at the lower levels... because its meant for humans, not for critters. There's a huge difference in intelligence between individual dogs, even without training.
Most cats, foxes, and dolphins are therefor magical beasts.Seriously? You're gonna suggest cats and foxes as candidates for personhood (what this debate is really about) when there's a half dozen candidates that a rational, sane scientist would at least consider the arguments for?
Some cats can speak a little but it seems to hurt.I can only think of three reasons you might say this:
1) You're talking in character as some sort of Golarion scholar
2) You're insane
3) You're trying to undermine the pro-animal intelligence argument with ludicrous claims.I hope it's reason 1 or 3.
4) What I actually saw and heard.
The cats in question often made a few noises first before they actually got the words out. This was every time. It was like they were trying to climb a cliff face, or something else that never gets much easier for most people.I will admit that since I started taking medication I am less sensitive to how cats feel, but you are still hurtful. You are lucky that you are not sensitive to spirits and emotions. Stop expressing your luck through cruelty.
Familiars are magical creatures.
Beastiary page 307 says "Intelligence score of 1 or 2(no creature with an Intelligence score of 3 or higher can be an animal)."
A creature can be a familiar or animal, it cannot be both at once.
It can start as an animal, become a familiar, then become an animal again when something happens to it's wizard.
Arguing by logic I´d say no since:
Real world humans need years to grasp the principle of languages and this is when they are kids with rapidly growing brains. If you find an adult human who never learned a language (and who didn´t die of apathy for some reason like the children in that mad king´s experiment) you will never be able to teach him language even if he´s a clone of Einstein
It´s hard enough for the speaker of a indogerman language like english to learn a non-indogerman language like chinese.
(on the other hand, it´s fantasy, so do whatever suits you ^^)
Arguing by logic I´d say no since:
Real world humans need years to grasp the principle of languages and this is when they are kids with rapidly growing brains. If you find an adult human who never learned a language (and who didn´t die of apathy for some reason like the children in that mad king´s experiment) you will never be able to teach him language even if he´s a clone of Einstein
It´s hard enough for the speaker of a indogerman language like english to learn a non-indogerman language like chinese.
(on the other hand, it´s fantasy, so do whatever suits you ^^)
And yet humans can learn other language latter on in life, due to intelligence. It might be harder to learn language latter on in life but people still do it.
Animal still have there own native language as well. Most cat are consider to be able to speak Feline, most snake can under stand other snakes, and dogs understand other dogs. True, most humans, can no learn to speak the language of animal, because we lack the ability to understand smells, or give off the correct smell.
Now add in magic: Speak with animal, speak with plants, Speak with STONEs. And you have a world were even inanimate object have some self awareness :D lol.
.......
So i see no problem with animal gaining INT and become more than animals with a magic item that raise INT.
I would just also require another item to let them speak the language they have learned (like tongues spell).
Awaken Animal is high enough level spell, permanent, and cost 1,500 gold, so would let the animal gain both INT and the ability to speak (as listed in the spell description).
.......
Also, when a druid turns into a cat, he can not speak human, but he can speak feline. So the president, for this way of think is in line with the rest of the game.
|
|
Seriously? You're gonna suggest cats and foxes as candidates for personhood (what this debate is really about) when there's a half dozen candidates that a rational, sane scientist would at least consider the arguments for?I believe what he's saying is that since most animals have an int of 2, and cats foxes etc are smarter than most animals, they should have a higher int.
I agree insofar as the stat system doesn't differentiate at the lower levels... because its meant for humans, not for critters. There's a huge difference in intelligence between individual dogs, even without training.
Maybe the fox has intelligence 2/50 and the cat has 2/00. :)
And yet humans can learn other language latter on in life, due to intelligence. It might be harder to learn language latter on in life but people still do it.
Yeah, since they know the basics of elevated communication, the concepts of "I You HeSheIt We You They" and even the concept of numbers (people who know only a One Two Many-System will never get basic math)
Animal still have there own native language as well. Most cat are consider to be able to speak Feline, most snake can under stand other snakes, and dogs understand other dogs. True, most humans, can no learn to speak the language of animal, because we lack the ability to understand smells, or give off the correct smell.
Such languages are merely expressions of feelings and simple signals - they don´t form sentences and stuff, it is not possible to express anything complex in this languages.
It´s like a human who can say "Am hungry" "Am sad" "Am angry at you" "Watch out" in some different tonesBut as I said, if it´s cool for you, go with it. I´m not the guy who says every time he watches a SF movie that every effective drive for interstellar ships should be able to render a planet uninhabitable. There´s logic and there´s cool.
Do not forget the "I want to be let out of the house", which my cat give me.
Or the "I want to be let in the house", and the "Let me into the house NOW, or i will scrach your window frame to bits", ... oh and the MEWO MEWO i do NOT want to be put outside, scrach bite i am told when it is snowing outside.
....
By RAW animal have an INT of 2
Reality is that some cats and dogs are smarter than some humans !!
I could just house rule it that it should be apparent intelligence.
A Harpy has an apparent Charisma of 1 or 2. Possibly 0.
Pathfinder does not deal with apparent ability ratings because they may have wanted to keep things simple.
Note that foxs should have pass without trace as well as stealth as if they had a greater intelligence.
Dolphins have pack tactics on some of the nature shows I have seen.
Cats already ahve stealth +14. That, at least, sounds right.
|
For what it's worth I would give animals with headbands a known language but not the ability to speak that language unless they are known to have demonstrated speech in nature. I would also allow them a crude speach with friends they deal with frequently. During combat it would be fairly simple concepts but when there isn't a time constraint they could likely communicate some fairly complex topics.
I don't see a dog communicating much at all with random strangers in a hurry though.
Maybe the fox has intelligence 2/50 and the cat has 2/00. :)
Seriously? You're gonna suggest cats and foxes as candidates for personhood (what this debate is really about) when there's a half dozen candidates that a rational, sane scientist would at least consider the arguments for?I believe what he's saying is that since most animals have an int of 2, and cats foxes etc are smarter than most animals, they should have a higher int.
I agree insofar as the stat system doesn't differentiate at the lower levels... because its meant for humans, not for critters. There's a huge difference in intelligence between individual dogs, even without training.
Hahaha. +1 for AD&D reference. :D
For what it's worth I would give animals with headbands a known language but not the ability to speak that language unless they are known to have demonstrated speech in nature. I would also allow them a crude speach with friends they deal with frequently. During combat it would be fairly simple concepts but when there isn't a time constraint they could likely communicate some fairly complex topics.
I don't see a dog communicating much at all with random strangers in a hurry though.
The GM can have a lot of fun talking like Scooby Doo.
"Ratch rout ror ra Rake Ronsrer!"But seriously, a magic collar that allows animals to use a specific language would be cool.
Cost to create=3*5*2000*1.5 because it's based on tongues.
If the intelligence is high enough, then the spell "Share Language" from the APG should work on the animal.
My mage uses it on his monkey familiar every day (24 hour duration). All kinds of fun.
My copy of the APG says it doesn't give them any extra vocal ability.
Give your monkey a chalk board.