PDA

View Full Version : Should a foreign character automatically be bilingual?



Talakeal
2013-03-03, 11:24 PM
In a recent game I had a situation where a player character came from an exotic region where the language was different than that spoken by the party.

The player didn't want to spend the skill points to learn the language of their characters homeland, and insisted I give it to her for free. I told her she could have either her native language or the language of her current home for free and would have to pay skill points for the other.

The player refused and decided to go with common, rationalizing that the character hadn't spoken her native tongue in so long she had forgotten.

Over the course of play said character encountered someone from their own native land who did not speak common, and therefore the two could not communicate.

The player was extremely mad at me for the situation, feeling that I had cheated her out of RP time.

What do you guys think? Should characters whose back-story includes an origin in foreign lands start the game with free bonus languages, or should they have to pay skill points to be bilingual like everyone else?

Joe the Rat
2013-03-03, 11:52 PM
My inclination would be to treat it like a racial tongue - if your ruleset gives elves and goblins and whatnot their own language and common, I'd be willing to fudge it in. But that would also depend on how likely the encounter you noted was - if it (almost) never comes up in play, it's a non-issue.

That said, it is a fudging. It's a fair call, but I'd state it that they get their native tongue free, and have to invest in speaking Common.

Sylian
2013-03-03, 11:54 PM
You could house rule that they get the language for free, and everyone else gets 2 points in a flavour skill, such as Perform or Profession or Craft, assuming it's nothing too strong.

shadow_archmagi
2013-03-03, 11:54 PM
In most games I've seen, languages are really cheap anyway. It seems surprising to me that your player was unwilling to invest. On the other hand, I wouldn't think much of giving out a free language *because* it's so cheap.

Slipperychicken
2013-03-03, 11:57 PM
In this case, I think you did the right thing. If she really wanted that language, she could have spent the skill point for it. Seriously, it's just one skill point.


As a general rule, don't allow PCs to gain benefits from their backstories or fluff (things like being a noble so you can score free cash from relatives). This will result in players optimizing their PC's backstories for desired boosts.

The only exception I can think of to "no boosts from backstory" is if the benefit is so totally worthless that it won't have any in-game effect. Like ranks in Profession (Moisture Farmer). Or if literally nobody the PCs encountered would ever speak the language, and speaking it in-character has exactly the same effect as spouting nonsense-words.

PersonMan
2013-03-04, 12:30 AM
In this case, I think you did the right thing. If she really wanted that language, she could have spent the skill point for it. Seriously, it's just one skill point.

If it's DnD.

And for most classes, it's 2. Only Bard (IIRC) has Speak Language as a class skill.


As a general rule, don't allow PCs to gain benefits from their backstories or fluff (things like being a noble so you can score free cash from relatives). This will result in players optimizing their PC's backstories for desired boosts.

I'd say it depends on the group. If you have people who would just try to game the system if you say "I will be giving some minor fluff based bonuses to people", then don't.

Otherwise, it encourages putting more effort into a good backstory - just say 'here are some guidelines, but I will work out the benefit for each of you. It can't be anything too good, just saying that now' or similar to avoid creating false expectation.


Or if literally nobody the PCs encountered would ever speak the language, and speaking it in-character has exactly the same effect as spouting nonsense-words.

Until the character teaches the rest of the party the language and they use it to communicate secretly.

If they want to, people can generally wring some kind of benefit out of almost anything. The question becomes less "how do I win this game?" and more "do I want to start this game?", combined with "is it actually that bad if they all speak Herblerdargian? I mean, really?".

(I may be biased, I've honestly never encountered a 'you can't speak to them because nobody speaks the right languages!' plot-thing that was both not solved by magic within 5 minutes and done well.)

shadow_archmagi
2013-03-04, 12:36 AM
Person-Man makes a good point. Language Barriers are fun the *first* time that you have to play charades, but really they just go downhill from there.

LibraryOgre
2013-03-04, 01:38 AM
I view it as "If you want this, you have to invest in it." You wrote your background so you're a stranger to this land? Fine, but you've got to put it in there. I am *FAR* more likely to let you fudge your mastery level a little in a language than I am to let you just have it for free.

I mean, really, Billingual is a 5 point trait. You can get at least Novice in a language for 1 BP at character creation. You're the one who robbed yourself of an RPing opportunity by deciding that whatever else you spent points on was more important than the language.

icefractal
2013-03-04, 02:55 AM
Depending on the system, the cost of knowing a second language may be way out of proportion to how often that language will actually come up in game, especially if it's just something from a character's background and not related to the premise of the campaign.

For example, there was one WoD game where I had a character that was from Mexico. It turned out that being fluent in Spanish was (IIRC) a three-point merit (which is pretty sizable in WoD). For something that was likely to come up in game rarely or never, because the campaign was set entirely in the Bay Area. Luckily, the GM decided to handwave that.

In other systems, it's a smaller investment, but even then it can be pretty hefty as a starting character, for something you may not get any benefit from (for example, in Pathfinder, that could be your entire starting skills, or at least a big chunk of them). My feeling is that things should have a cost in relation to how much they will actually be a factor in the campaign.

Jack of Spades
2013-03-04, 03:24 AM
If you want to play a foreigner, you get your native tongue for free, then invest in Common. That's how I rule it as a GM, and I never expect anything else as a player. If you don't want to spend the points, don't make a damn foreigner. And if you DO make a foreigner, and choose not to give them their native tongue, don't be an ass and get mad at the GM when he doesn't let you speak a language you don't know.

For example, there was one WoD game where I had a character that was from Mexico. It turned out that being fluent in Spanish was (IIRC) a three-point merit (which is pretty sizable in WoD). For something that was likely to come up in game rarely or never, because the campaign was set entirely in the Bay Area. Luckily, the GM decided to handwave that.
Errata made language a lot cheaper in WoD. Meaning that in just about every system, an additional language is cheap as hell.

Killer Angel
2013-03-04, 03:30 AM
What do you guys think? Should characters whose back-story includes an origin in foreign lands start the game with free bonus languages, or should they have to pay skill points to be bilingual like everyone else?

They have to pay (unless you're giving some free advantages, based on the details of the background, and each player get some).

hymer
2013-03-04, 03:56 AM
I don't think you did anything wrong. As far as I can tell, you followed the rules where the player expected you to break them because she wanted something (albeit a small something) for nothing. The DM made a call, which happens to follow the established rules.

That being said, hurt feelings are hurt feelings, and they don't alway respond well to arguments. Talking about this with the player and putting some effort into smoothing it over could well be a good idea.
And maybe point out that e.g. a Pearl of Speech is actually not that expensive.

Edit: I assumed 3.5 for some parts, obviously. If you went against the rules with your call, I can definitely see why the player would be annoyed.

Rhynn
2013-03-04, 04:19 AM
Depends on the system and how much it matters.

AD&D and earlier, yeah, you can have a free language. Even in 2E, that's the worst/most expensive use for NWP slots (to the point that I give demihumans bonus languages separate from their bonus NWP slots). 4E, same thing - have your language.

D&D 3E, GURPS, WoD, L5R, point-based games in general, RuneQuest... sorry, you gotta get your languages according to the rules.

Warhammer FRP set in the Empire, I'd let the player replace a skill or talent with Speak Language (Reikspiel) if the character's career didn't give it already.

I'd use a general exception, though: if there's no way the original language is going to be useful in play, ever, I'd let them have the "common" language for free. Dimensional travellers in Elric/Stormbringer, for instance.

Lorsa
2013-03-04, 04:21 AM
This all depends on what system you play, which campaign setting, why the player chose to be from a foreign land and if you intend for language to be a barrier. Generally I find language barriers to be annoying, which is why I believe D&D invented common and in the Forgotten Realms everyone speaks their home language and common. In nWoD as someone mentioned, language is very expensive and basically it forces every character that isn't brittish or american-without-other-culture to invest in it to be believable. That is just wrong.

Ashtagon
2013-03-04, 05:07 AM
Depends on the system and how much it matters.

...

Warhammer FRP set in the Empire, I'd let the player replace a skill or talent with Speak Language (Reikspiel) if the character's career didn't give it already.

...

The default wh 2e rule is that characters get Speak Language (reikspiel) as part of their racial package. Characters hailing from other lands get speak (character's homeland) as their racial package language ninstead. All characters have the option of replacing one skill from their initial carer skills package with speak language (wherever the campaign starts).

Anteros
2013-03-04, 05:20 AM
Well...since you're kinda the DM and in complete control...you basically not only shot down something the player wanted, but then went out of your way to create a situation where they were punished for it. Yeah, I can see why they might be upset. It kinda strikes me as punishing the player for good character development.

The point of the game is to have fun. If it really is such a light investment just let it go. It's not like they're trying to power game you.

Rhynn
2013-03-04, 07:05 AM
The default wh 2e rule is that characters get Speak Language (reikspiel) as part of their racial package. Characters hailing from other lands get speak (character's homeland) as their racial package language ninstead. All characters have the option of replacing one skill from their initial carer skills package with speak language (wherever the campaign starts).

I didn't remember it was an official rule. Makes sense, then. I remembered a lot of the foreign careers (Diestro, Bretonnian knights, Norscan Berserker, etc.) get Reikspiel as a career skill.

Ashtagon
2013-03-04, 07:10 AM
I didn't remember it was an official rule. Makes sense, then. I remembered a lot of the foreign careers (Diestro, Bretonnian knights, Norscan Berserker, etc.) get Reikspiel as a career skill.

The stupid bit is that it means every "foreign" character is fluent in his native tongue, which removes the "I'm Estalian but three generations removed from my culture" concept. Arguably, that can be done by generating the character as a Reiklander and then role-playing the Estalian bit. Someone that far removed from his Estalian roots probably shouldn't be able to access the diestro career anyway.

Dumber even that that though, is it means you can have PCs who don't have a language in common with the surrounding land, or possibly even with the rest of the party.

In effect, it boils down to either be bilingual, or make it an ancestral background decision too far removed from the present day to have a rules effect.

Baalthazaq
2013-03-04, 07:23 AM
Well...since you're kinda the DM and in complete control...you basically not only shot down something the player wanted, but then went out of your way to create a situation where they were punished for it. Yeah, I can see why they might be upset. It kinda strikes me as punishing the player for good character development.

It is not good character development.

If your backstory is you are an expert swordsman/duelist and your character has no proficiency with swords, nobody owes you that proficiency. That's bad character development, not good. Really really bad.

If later, someone challenges you to a swordsman's duel, that's not the DM "punishing the player".

DigoDragon
2013-03-04, 08:56 AM
My opinion is that if a player wants to be from an exotic locale, they should invest the points for the language there. At the same time I usually divvy out a few bonus points if I'm given a decent character background so there's the return for the investment.

Rhynn
2013-03-04, 09:04 AM
The stupid bit is that it means every "foreign" character is fluent in his native tongue, which removes the "I'm Estalian but three generations removed from my culture" concept. Arguably, that can be done by generating the character as a Reiklander and then role-playing the Estalian bit. Someone that far removed from his Estalian roots probably shouldn't be able to access the diestro career anyway.

Yeah, I imagine those careers generally assume you grew up there. Obviously, getting an exception from the GM is simple.


Dumber even that that though, is it means you can have PCs who don't have a language in common with the surrounding land, or possibly even with the rest of the party.

I don't think that's necessarily dumb. If your game/setting actually involves languages and no "Common", it's obviously an intended feature that PCs can be unable to speak with those around them.

Conan d20 actually had an interesting take, based on the source material: you learn a new language (or, I suppose, get a new "bonus point" to learn one with when appropriate) every other level. There is no "Common" language. Sometimes, you're not going to be able to speak to everyone in a country you're in, but that's just part of the story - if an adventure requires speaking to people, there's going to be someone you can speak to. (Unless the GM is just hell-bent on being difficult, which you can't ever rule out.)

Synovia
2013-03-04, 10:44 AM
If you want to play a foreigner, you get your native tongue for free, then invest in Common. That's how I rule it as a GM, and I never expect anything else as a player.
I'm not sure why this would be the default though... pretty much every playable race gets their racial language and common for free.

If the character was non-human, I'd allow them to swap out the racial language for the desired language of the background. If they were human, I'd just tell them to spend some of their extra skill points... thats kind of what the extra ones are there for.

1337 b4k4
2013-03-04, 03:23 PM
It depends on whether you have a language called (or referred to as) "Common". By definition, "common" will be the "common" language among all the people who regularly interact in your world and at the very least a heavily accented familiarity with the language should be assumed for all characters. By implication, this means that many or most characters will also have a "native" language, which may or may not be "common".

On the other hand, if there is no "common" communication language, then absolutely every language should have their associated costs paid.

Tengu_temp
2013-03-04, 03:30 PM
What do you guys think? Should characters whose back-story includes an origin in foreign lands start the game with free bonus languages, or should they have to pay skill points to be bilingual like everyone else?

A backstory should not give the character an unfair mechanical advantage over the rest of the party. Giving the character a free language is such an advantage. Similarily, you shouldn't give a character a powerful magic item for free just because they wrote in their backstory that they inherited it.

Beleriphon
2013-03-04, 03:48 PM
On the other hand, if there is no "common" communication language, then absolutely every language should have their associated costs paid.

At certain points in Europe this could be Greek, Latin or French for example. That said languages in D&D and most roleplaying games don't really model languages that well. For example modern Norwegian, Swedish and Danish are all similar enough that a speaker of one could make themselves understood to a speaker of another so long as spoke slowly and clearly. Most RPGs don't handle mutual intelligibility well. I suppose that why everybody speaks "common".

awa
2013-03-04, 04:23 PM
knowing a language that will likely never come up and having a powerful magical item are very different things.

It comes down to this is knowing a second language an advantage worth a skill point? then it should cost a skill point.

If knowing a second language is throwing away the skill point then the dm should just hand wave it. You should not punish a player for being a foreigner.

I suspect the hard feeling may be because they feel you stuck the other person in there path because they did not take the language and if they could speak to them they would never have had an opportunity to use it.

Kadzar
2013-03-04, 05:43 PM
I feel like when you made a character not be able to understand their own native language, you should have at some point done some reflection and realized how ridiculous that is. Now, I don't see what a big deal knowing one extra language is; it would only allow her to talk to the few people who happen to come from her hometown, and, sure, she could teach it to her fellow party members, but then they'd need to invest points to learn it, also, so they'd ultimately save one skill point in the whole party to learn the language. Whoop dee doo. Also, most races other than humans get them for free, and I think the only reason humans don't get extra languages is that they aren't expected to be from any sort of exotic cultures.

If you were so dead set on this player not getting a free language, you should have either forbade her from taking Common as a free language or allowed her to have Common free but given her penalties to social skills and having to roll for social interactions until she spent some points in learning the language.

Devils_Advocate
2013-03-04, 06:04 PM
It really depends on the game. Your references to "skill points" and "common" make me think that this was a d20 game, where getting Common in addition to your native language is standard for a reason. Giving humans regional languages is fine, but those should be in addition to Common, as is the case for non-humans. There shouldn't be a local Common and a foreign Common. The main point of Common is that the player characters all get it for free.

Basically, I'm wondering whether you took a game where all characters speak their native tongues plus Common for free (which works out to just Common if Common is your native tongue) and changed it so that that's not true for some characters. Because that seems somewhat inappropriate.

Conversely, in e.g. Exalted, there is no default "common tongue" by rules design, so speaking a foreign language as well as the local language naturally costs more. If you don't want to pay that cost, well, don't make your character a foreigner then.

Talakeal
2013-03-04, 07:45 PM
It really depends on the game. Your references to "skill points" and "common" make me think that this was a d20 game, where getting Common in addition to your native language is standard for a reason. Giving humans regional languages is fine, but those should be in addition to Common, as is the case for non-humans. There shouldn't be a local Common and a foreign Common. The main point of Common is that the player characters all get it for free.

Basically, I'm wondering whether you took a game where all characters speak their native tongues plus Common for free (which works out to just Common if Common is your native tongue) and changed it so that that's not true for some characters. Because that seems somewhat inappropriate.

Conversely, in e.g. Exalted, there is no default "common tongue" by rules design, so speaking a foreign language as well as the local language naturally costs more. If you don't want to pay that cost, well, don't make your character a foreigner then.

We are not playing Dungeons and Dragons.

The system we are using assumed that all player characters speak the language of the empire, which is the most common spoken language and universal trade tongue across the continent.

Characters are allowed to speak any number of extra languages by spending a single character building point for each, and if the character chooses not to speak the imperial tongue they can take a flaw for that and receive extra building points.

The player in question did not want to spend the character point to speak their native tongue because they felt it was not worth the cost and would hardly ever come up, which is not unreasonable from a min max perspective, just from a verisimilitude perspective.


Also, your post made me realize just how stupid the D&D language system is. Every non human is bilingual, and all intelligent people speak a handful of languages. Also, virtually every being in the world speaks common, which means that there is no purpose to ever speak another language except to intentionally sound "mysterious". I assume this is an artifact of Tolkien, but I wonder why this sacred cow has yet to be butchered?

Boci
2013-03-04, 07:55 PM
Also, your post made me realize just how stupid the D&D language system is. Every non human is bilingual, and all intelligent people speak a handful of languages. Also, virtually every being in the world speaks common, which means that there is no purpose to ever speak another language except to intentionally sound "mysterious". I assume this is an artifact of Tolkien, but I wonder why this sacred cow has yet to be butchered?

Because most gaming groups do not like roleplaying through a language barrier on a regular basis. I am yet to find a group who likes the idea. Still, you could aruge that languages should be set up as realistic by default, since adding a common tongue is easier than removing it.

As for the situatiuon in your OP, it seems like the player have been more annoyed with the findings natives who did not speak imperial, rather than nothaving both languages. They may have seen it as you gloating, which I'm sure you weren't.

Anteros
2013-03-04, 08:00 PM
It is not good character development.

If your backstory is you are an expert swordsman/duelist and your character has no proficiency with swords, nobody owes you that proficiency. That's bad character development, not good. Really really bad.

If later, someone challenges you to a swordsman's duel, that's not the DM "punishing the player".

Sure, but there's clearly a difference. Your example is one of a player trying to abuse his back story to get something major for free. Something like a language proficiency is so minor in the long run that there's no reason to quibble over it.

If I were DMing I'd just let it slide. If a player wanted a larger benefit I'd probably say no. Either that...or I'd let them have it, but also warn them that if they want mechanical benefits from their backstory, I may invoke some sort of mechanical disadvantage at some point from it as well. "You want to be part of a noble house and have more resources as a result? Fine. However, you should know that your house has a bad relationship with (insert faction name) so you should expect some difficulties from them later." Fair is fair after all.


A backstory should not give the character an unfair mechanical advantage over the rest of the party. Giving the character a free language is such an advantage. Similarily, you shouldn't give a character a powerful magic item for free just because they wrote in their backstory that they inherited it.

I fail to see how a language is a unfair mechanical advantage....unless you as the DM are planning on making that language an integral part of the campaign, it's almost completely mechanically irrelevant.


My opinion is that if a player wants to be from an exotic locale, they should invest the points for the language there. At the same time I usually divvy out a few bonus points if I'm given a decent character background so there's the return for the investment.

This seems like a fair compromise to me as well.

MickJay
2013-03-04, 08:32 PM
Also, your post made me realize just how stupid the D&D language system is. Every non human is bilingual, and all intelligent people speak a handful of languages. Also, virtually every being in the world speaks common, which means that there is no purpose to ever speak another language except to intentionally sound "mysterious". I assume this is an artifact of Tolkien, but I wonder why this sacred cow has yet to be butchered?

Just because someone knows a different language, and a bunch of other people know it as well, doesn't mean they'll want to always use it. For example, Common could have been forced on your people, and you actually detest using it; it isn't your first language, and you find speaking your own tongue easier; your first language defines part of your cultural identity, and it's something you hold dear; you not so much want to 'sound mysterious', but you'd rather discuss something without everyone else knowing what you're talking about; [insert all the other reasons because of which mankind isn't speaking a single language here]... 'Common' that everyone speaks was made for players' convenience, and doesn't reflect historical realities well. On average, people will prefer to speak their native tongue, and imposing another language won't change this. Alternatively, elites in a given country might embrace a language different from their native one, but most likely the lower classes won't be in a situation to learn it.

Talakeal
2013-03-04, 09:03 PM
Just because someone knows a different language, and a bunch of other people know it as well, doesn't mean they'll want to always use it. For example, Common could have been forced on your people, and you actually detest using it; it isn't your first language, and you find speaking your own tongue easier; your first language defines part of your cultural identity, and it's something you hold dear; you not so much want to 'sound mysterious', but you'd rather discuss something without everyone else knowing what you're talking about; [insert all the other reasons because of which mankind isn't speaking a single language here]... 'Common' that everyone speaks was made for players' convenience, and doesn't reflect historical realities well. On average, people will prefer to speak their native tongue, and imposing another language won't change this. Alternatively, elites in a given country might embrace a language different from their native one, but most likely the lower classes won't be in a situation to learn it.

I would say speaking a secret out loud in a foreign language because you don't think the listerner understands certainly falls under the heading of trying to sound mysterious.


I am not sure if I agree with your premise. If every single person on the planet spoke a single language (I have no idea how this would occur) I can't imagine it wouldn't displace all other languages in a rather short amount of time.

If you look around the world the majority of indiginous languages are dissapearing at an alarming rate. I believe in North America half of all the native tongues have no living speakers.

Zeful
2013-03-04, 09:18 PM
Also, your post made me realize just how stupid the D&D language system is. Every non human is bilingual, and all intelligent people speak a handful of languages. Also, virtually every being in the world speaks common, which means that there is no purpose to ever speak another language except to intentionally sound "mysterious". I assume this is an artifact of Tolkien, but I wonder why this sacred cow has yet to be butchered?

I think the same, it's why if I ever get back into DMing, I'm making Common a trading language. Great at numbers, has very granular language for quantities, but terrible at interpersonal communication to the point that talking about more than three or four people is impossible with the language.

MickJay
2013-03-05, 11:18 AM
I would say speaking a secret out loud in a foreign language because you don't think the listerner understands certainly falls under the heading of trying to sound mysterious.


I am not sure if I agree with your premise. If every single person on the planet spoke a single language (I have no idea how this would occur) I can't imagine it wouldn't displace all other languages in a rather short amount of time.

If you look around the world the majority of indiginous languages are dissapearing at an alarming rate. I believe in North America half of all the native tongues have no living speakers.

You might just want to communicate freely with someone else, without being understood by random bystanders, nothing mysterious about that.

Disappearance of indigenous languages tends to follow wiping out the cultures and identities (intentional or otherwise). If you have, for example, a Dwarven lad living in a human city and his parents 1. want to become assimilated 2. think their native culture might make it more difficult, they could simply not speak Dwarven at home, and the child would probably never learn it. If you have a Dwarven enclave surrounded by human neighbors, and the dwarves have previously been beaten into submission, or found themselves under strong influence of human culture, their language might become less attractive to learn (becomes associated with painful past, or seen as outdated and unnecessary).
On the other hand, if the dwarves feel pride in their heritage and cultivate it, or are in active defiance against the humans, they might well make considerable efforts to preserve and develop their culture (and language). Perhaps the language has some religious significance as well. Overall, languages that were spoken by a culture that could boast a considerable body of literature are slow to die out, as those who inherited both the language and the literature have tangible link to the past on which they can base their pride and from which they can draw strength for further perseverance (IF that society is under some form of cultural or political pressure).

Talakeal
2013-03-05, 12:48 PM
You might just want to communicate freely with someone else, without being understood by random bystanders, nothing mysterious about that.

Disappearance of indigenous languages tends to follow wiping out the cultures and identities (intentional or otherwise). If you have, for example, a Dwarven lad living in a human city and his parents 1. want to become assimilated 2. think their native culture might make it more difficult, they could simply not speak Dwarven at home, and the child would probably never learn it. If you have a Dwarven enclave surrounded by human neighbors, and the dwarves have previously been beaten into submission, or found themselves under strong influence of human culture, their language might become less attractive to learn (becomes associated with painful past, or seen as outdated and unnecessary).
On the other hand, if the dwarves feel pride in their heritage and cultivate it, or are in active defiance against the humans, they might well make considerable efforts to preserve and develop their culture (and language). Perhaps the language has some religious significance as well. Overall, languages that were spoken by a culture that could boast a considerable body of literature are slow to die out, as those who inherited both the language and the literature have tangible link to the past on which they can base their pride and from which they can draw strength for further perseverance (IF that society is under some form of cultural or political pressure).

I agree with everything you have said. My point is that D&D forces you to come up with a convoluted explanation for every person in the world. Literally every non human character (and human with a high intelligence) is bilingual, and one of their languages is common. While some societies might exist as you described, it is a bit of a stretch that EVERY society is in a similar situation.

MickJay
2013-03-05, 06:27 PM
Quite true. I'm not sure what compromise would be better, though: on the one hand, Common is the for players' convenience; on the other, all the other languages are there to make things more exotic/interesting/difficult/realistic. What solutions would you suggest? I can't think of anything that I'd think would have been an improvement...

Zeful
2013-03-05, 06:58 PM
Quite true. I'm not sure what compromise would be better, though: on the one hand, Common is the for players' convenience; on the other, all the other languages are there to make things more exotic/interesting/difficult/realistic. What solutions would you suggest? I can't think of anything that I'd think would have been an improvement...

Change the assumptions, and make interparty communication the player's job. If languages are significantly rare, and you only get your one racial/regional language and maybe a trade language like from my last post (just so you can have plots and quests where the players have a language barrier to worry about without having that extend to the "what do we/I get out of this" factor) players will tend to make sure they can speak to each other if you enforce it.

Rhynn
2013-03-05, 10:42 PM
Change the assumptions, and make interparty communication the player's job. If languages are significantly rare, and you only get your one racial/regional language and maybe a trade language like from my last post (just so you can have plots and quests where the players have a language barrier to worry about without having that extend to the "what do we/I get out of this" factor) players will tend to make sure they can speak to each other if you enforce it.

Or if they don't, you get awesome experiences you'll remember over a decade later.

We were playing RuneQuest and someone managed to bring in a PC who shared no language (even Tradetalk) with the others, and had to default to a related language (at a fraction of their skill). What ended up being communicated as a new PC tries to join the party was:

"Me... [garble]... enemy! Me... [garble]... death... [garble]... you!"

Things got a bit tense.

What he wanted to say was, more or less, "I am not your enemy. I worship the god of Death, like you!" (This god of death also having dominion over honor, warfare, and swords.)

I took pity and gave a lot of experience ticks (over time) in a language the other PCs actually understood...

icefractal
2013-03-06, 05:46 AM
Characters are allowed to speak any number of extra languages by spending a single character building point for eachOut of how many points total?

DigoDragon
2013-03-06, 07:24 AM
While some societies might exist as you described, it is a bit of a stretch that EVERY society is in a similar situation.

True, and it would miss out on the fun RP possibilities to try and converse with people who don't share a language. In a previous D&D campaign I ran, the party has run into a dozen different Orc tribes in their adventures. A handful of the tribes were actually friendly. Exactly ONE tribe had any members that spoke fluent Common (the merchant).

It was a lot of fun when a friendly Orc tribe was trying to get the PCs to listen to a job offer they had and couldn't speak in any language the party knew.
Things like that make language a bit more important to the game, thus players start investing more into them.

Talakeal
2013-03-06, 06:02 PM
Out of how many points total?

150 for starting characters.

Jerthanis
2013-03-06, 07:15 PM
In a game where communication happens only through auditory, language dependent means, I would never introduce deafness, muteness or a language barrier to any important detail or story element. I don't find it to be an interesting problem to solve that you can't receive or grant information to a source. The only time I'd consider even using language in any real sense would be as an easter egg style insider's tip like, "Does anyone speak Elvish? Yes? This guy's name means "Betrayer" in Elvish, you might not want to trust him" or a means to add some degree of flavor to some widget like: "Most people who learn Dwarvish do so partly by reading The Ancestors' Chronicle in the original dwarvish, which includes the legends of the Dwarven King Melitock dealing with the Sirens on his hundred years voyage, you know these facts about them because of that."

I would never, ever have a character come up to the party and say, "Boogah boog blargh babamda." and then when they look at me uncomprehendingly say, "Oh, no one took Giantish, so you can't communicate with this character and do this part of the game... oh it'd've been awesome."

Lack of ability to communicate with important story elements is just locking content away for no good reason.

Now, this isn't to say however that it's not worth utilizing the choice of a person never learning their ancestral language to emphasize the drama of that character perhaps lacking roots in their culture of origin, and how they feel about that. I WOULD consider it a good use of language to help that person tell that story. However, it seems also like this person couldn't manage to swing their character traits exactly how they wanted them, and had to cut abilities or skills here and there to get it under budget.

And as to the idea of common being a trade language, artificially created by merchants for simple quantity/quality purposes but incapable of complex or relational information, the trouble is twofold. First of all, the people sitting around the table are speaking English/French/German/Swahili/Real World Language, and limiting their concepts to what the fake language is supposed to be capable of is going to be a headache to police, since what they want to express is best expressed naturally through the language they're ACTUALLY speaking and stopping the action every five minutes to say, "You can't say that in Common, say something else" is going to get on everyone's nerves, yours most of all.

Second problem is that it's not how languages develop in relationship with trade. Generally speaking, the regional dialect in which the most powerful military, economy and culture is located will become the language of diplomacy and people will learn that. The reason is that while you can trust people directly involved in mercantilism to learn a proprietary language, you can't trust nobles, guards, customers, soldiers, customs officials, and so on to learn your Merchant's tongue, and those are also people you will need to speak to when travelling to a foreign land. So it makes more sense to learn the language of that place or hire an interpreter than to make up a language only some of the people you need to speak with will ever know.

Personally, I just hate language barriers in RPGs and would encourage whatever it takes to minimize their impact on your gameplay.

Zeful
2013-03-06, 07:45 PM
Jerthanis, I would spend the time to do a full write up explaining why your post is missing the point or containing some annoying strawman, but it would essentially boil down to this one arguement:

Every valid argument you've made in your post, is an argument of taste. That your style of play works well for you is great, but I would find myself bored out of my mind at the style of play you espouse; I even find your view on non-standard languages to be very limiting and against what I feel is the appeal of play. I find the entire point of using language barriers in role-playing games as one of those things that add depth to the world and force the players to more fully integrate themselves with it. Kind of hard to call it a role-playing game if the character's have no role in the world to play, isn't it?

awa
2013-03-06, 09:00 PM
One of the players not being able to talk with the rest of the party gets real old real fast. It might be an interesting role playing encounter for a session but after that it's either annoying and/or spotlight stealing as the character needs to spend a long time miming every thing to every one they meet or just not talking neither of which is good

dps
2013-03-06, 09:24 PM
Generally speaking, my view is that if you want a skill, you should have to invest in it. But deciding strictly this needs to be enforced should be based on a common sense look at the details of the system and campaign, and also on how the players like to play (I'd generally be stricter with people who want to min-max their characters for combat and then just hack-n-slash than with players who actually want to RP).

If having the extra language would have only cost 1 point out of 150, then it probably isn't unreasonable to expect the players to pay for it if they want it.

Rhynn
2013-03-07, 12:43 AM
I would never, ever have a character come up to the party and say, "Boogah boog blargh babamda." and then when they look at me uncomprehendingly say, "Oh, no one took Giantish, so you can't communicate with this character and do this part of the game... oh it'd've been awesome."

Yeah, neither would I. I'd have a character come up to the party and say, "Boogah boog blargh babamda." and then they'd find a way to communicate with them. In D&D, that's not even a challenge, that's trivial. In other games, it can be a challenge to overcome (which is sort of the point). Why even have languages in the game if knowing one is never an advantage?

Kaeso
2013-03-07, 06:19 AM
From a purely mechanical standpoint, I don't think foreign characters should automatically be bilingual. After all, non-Americans don't automatically learn English. However, from a pure gameplay perspective it's better to have all characters have a common language, common or otherwise. I still think foreign should be treated as a foreign/bonus language for foreign characters.

hymer
2013-03-07, 06:49 AM
After all, non-Americans don't automatically learn English.

Could you elaborate on that? Is language acquisition 'automatic' when you speak it with your family? Learn it in school? Or what?
It would seem there are a number of people in countries from Australia to Wales who pick up English as automatically as Americans.

TuggyNE
2013-03-07, 07:31 AM
Could you elaborate on that? Is language acquisition 'automatic' when you speak it with your family? Learn it in school? Or what?
It would seem there are a number of people in countries from Australia to Wales who pick up English as automatically as Americans.

I think the meaning was "not all non-Americans will know English, especially without putting specific effort into it".

As a side note, and as an American myself, I suppose I should be a little amused that "English" may equal "American" to many, and e.g. Scotland's use of it come to mind a bit later. Special case that subsumes the general, or something of that sort.

Kalirren
2013-03-11, 11:33 AM
Also, your post made me realize just how stupid the D&D language system is. Every non human is bilingual, and all intelligent people speak a handful of languages. Also, virtually every being in the world speaks common, which means that there is no purpose to ever speak another language except to intentionally sound "mysterious". I assume this is an artifact of Tolkien, but I wonder why this sacred cow has yet to be butchered?

I think the short answer to this is that this is indeed how most of the world works, and that the US of A is a real outlier in this respect. Americans just don't tend to realize how multilingual most of the rest of the world is. The US government basically succeeded in culturally genociding its natives, so we only have the colonizer's language (English), unlike in basically every other corner of the world that was colonized by Europe, where the colonized and the colonizing languages coexist to some nontrivial extent. And Europe itself is so cramped that you end up speaking 2 or 3 languages anyway.

In a world where most everyone speaks some intelligible Common, speaking a different language is an important form of identity assertion. Just look at how the Catholic Church uses Latin iRL. Religions would have ecclesiastical languages, ethnic and racial movements would use their own languages. There's plenty of reason to speak something that isn't Common. It just depends on how you want yourself to be understood.

Incidentally, as someone who has been frustrated at sharing no languages with their own grandmother, and having to rely on a cousin to interpret, I think your player is at fault for not recognizing an opportunity to introduce some form of identity-loss regret to their character as a result of not being able to communicate with someone of the ethnicity they thought they were a member of but clearly weren't.

Edit: Just wanted to mention - looking at how languages are used iRL, it seems like everyone collapses onto speaking at least one of a few trading languages, languages that are like English, Chinese, French, Arabic, in that they have wide penetration and people are likely to speak them whom you deal with. You don't really get a single Common (though the Internet is changing that too.) But in D&D, with the existence of what is essentially one immense and overbearing globally mobile magical class, (and especially a Tippyverse, where this magical class actually functions as a single population center) yeah, you probably only have one Common. I don't actually find this a stretch of the imagination at all. I imagine that in opposition to civilization, "monsters" are operationally defined as races that cannot speak or understand Common, as opposed to "savages", which are things that simply don't speak Common, but can be taught to understand it.

Rhynn
2013-03-11, 12:07 PM
Yeah, if you want to make real-world comparisons, in a huge part of the world, you can get along with English. In most of Europe, AFAIK, English is taught as a second or third language starting in grade school, at say age 9 (sometimes in preference over actual local second languages spoken by large and historic majorities in the country). That's your Common Tongue - the language that has come into contact with countless others and stolen words from them, and is now spoken by many, many people from almost all walks of life almost all over the world (English was a Germanic language that merged with Cymric and other British native languages, then with Latin-derived French from the Viking-turned-French-speaker Normans, and then countless words from countless languages over centuries). Turning "you can get along with it everywhere" into "everyone speaks it" is about the usual level of D&D over-simplification (compare the D&D feudal system, agriculture, etc. etc.).

Ashtagon
2013-03-11, 12:24 PM
Yeah, if you want to make real-world comparisons, in a huge part of the world, you can get along with English. ...

You obviously never tried ordering food in a Parisian restaurant in English :smallconfused:

supermonkeyjoe
2013-03-11, 12:32 PM
To be honest I think the biggest problem here is that the player demanded the bonus! Personally I award characters a small bonus for a good backstory, something along the lines of a bonus language or a restricted feat but for a player to say I have X in my backstory so you should give me Y is a bit cheeky. Either everyone gets a bonus related to their backstory or no-one should.

Additionally I have played in a game with a language barrier, one character didn't speak the common tongue so had to have all exchanges translated by my character, it was a lot of fun (especially when I "mistranslated") they did get to make sense motive checks to catch the general tone of the conversation though. At no point was it detrimental to the game and some great encounters came out of this.

Gwazi Magnum
2013-03-11, 01:05 PM
As a general rule, don't allow PCs to gain benefits from their backstories or fluff (things like being a noble so you can score free cash from relatives). This will result in players optimizing their PC's backstories for desired boosts.

The only exception I can think of to "no boosts from backstory" is if the benefit is so totally worthless that it won't have any in-game effect. Like ranks in Profession (Moisture Farmer). Or if literally nobody the PCs encountered would ever speak the language, and speaking it in-character has exactly the same effect as spouting nonsense-words.

Or make a reason for the benefit to not work until a level it works on.

Example: My 1st d&d character was noble born and had a number of magical items bought by her father to help her practice her magic powers (she was a sorcerer).

But there was noble bickering and one nobles men raided and killed her family, forcing her flee without any of her magical items or wealth, so no benefit.

However, they did eventually storm her house once at a higher level and get the goods, but in that sense it worked just like any other dungeon but mixed with my person back story. So say, instead of searching through an enchanted cave, it was re-skinned to match back story.

There, something like a noble history without them being able to get unfair benefits from it.


Well...since you're kinda the DM and in complete control...you basically not only shot down something the player wanted, but then went out of your way to create a situation where they were punished for it. Yeah, I can see why they might be upset. It kinda strikes me as punishing the player for good character development.

The point of the game is to have fun. If it really is such a light investment just let it go. It's not like they're trying to power game you.

It's 2 skill points, unless if you're a skill starved fighter it shouldn't be an issue.

Plus there's a rule where you can pick bonus languages at level 1 according to your intelligence modifier, so she could of gotten it for free if she had an intelligence of at least 12.


We are not playing Dungeons and Dragons.

The system we are using assumed that all player characters speak the language of the empire, which is the most common spoken language and universal trade tongue across the continent.

Characters are allowed to speak any number of extra languages by spending a single character building point for each, and if the character chooses not to speak the imperial tongue they can take a flaw for that and receive extra building points.

The player in question did not want to spend the character point to speak their native tongue because they felt it was not worth the cost and would hardly ever come up, which is not unreasonable from a min max perspective, just from a verisimilitude perspective.


Also, your post made me realize just how stupid the D&D language system is. Every non human is bilingual, and all intelligent people speak a handful of languages. Also, virtually every being in the world speaks common, which means that there is no purpose to ever speak another language except to intentionally sound "mysterious". I assume this is an artifact of Tolkien, but I wonder why this sacred cow has yet to be butchered?

When someone chooses to pick raw stats above reflecting their own character, they shouldn't get mad when their min-maxed ended up leaving out of something.

Being a min-maxer myself I feel the need to stress it's called min-max, for a reason.


150 for starting characters.

And languages start only 1?
+I assume they get more points as they level?

Even if not, 1 point out of 150 for a language?
That's even cheaper than it would be in D&D 3.5...

She really should of invested the minimal points if it was something so vital to her character development.

Kalmageddon
2013-03-11, 02:03 PM
I would say give her character her native tongue for free, just like elves have their racial language and common.

One thing I quickly found out is that languages are not an interesting aspect to roleplay unless you actually speak the language in real life, which is obviously not always possibile. If the players don't speak the language of an NPC they are simply deprived of a roleplay opportunity and the DM can't flash out the NPC adequately and basically is reduced to say "the NPC says something you don't understand".
It can work when the language barrier is used as a plot point or as an added difficulty in some situations, but as far as roleplay goes I find that it's better to get rid of it.

Big Mac
2013-03-11, 03:51 PM
In a recent game I had a situation where a player character came from an exotic region where the language was different than that spoken by the party.

The player didn't want to spend the skill points to learn the language of their characters homeland, and insisted I give it to her for free. I told her she could have either her native language or the language of her current home for free and would have to pay skill points for the other.

The player refused and decided to go with common, rationalizing that the character hadn't spoken her native tongue in so long she had forgotten.

So your player basically demanded something that other players were not getting for their characters and then decided to hobble their own character, by not taking their native language.


Over the course of play said character encountered someone from their own native land who did not speak common, and therefore the two could not communicate.

The player was extremely mad at me for the situation, feeling that I had cheated her out of RP time.

I think your player cheated their character.


What do you guys think? Should characters whose back-story includes an origin in foreign lands start the game with free bonus languages, or should they have to pay skill points to be bilingual like everyone else?

I think (with 20-20 hindsight) you should have told your player to give you an in-character reason why their character was going to be able to speak common, but not the language of their nation.

Maybe your player's character was the child of two foreigners that brought their child up to only speak common, or somesuch. That would make for a time when meeting someone from her old country and not being able to speak her own language would be a good roleplaying opportunity - i.e. fun.

It seems like your player just wanted to force you to give her the free thing you told her she wasn't entitled to.

A Tad Insane
2013-03-11, 04:19 PM
Skills(langugues included), are rarely things people just have. They have to spend time working on them. That hour you used to learn how to juggle is an hour you didn't use learning shoemaking. Learning a second langugue is very hard, and takes time and effort, so I would have giving the native langugue for free, and half a point in common. Does she want to be fluent in common? Well, that's time she spent with a text book as opposed to at thw market, learning to haggle.

Jerthanis
2013-03-11, 05:39 PM
Jerthanis, I would spend the time to do a full write up explaining why your post is missing the point or containing some annoying strawman, but it would essentially boil down to this one arguement:

Every valid argument you've made in your post, is an argument of taste. That your style of play works well for you is great, but I would find myself bored out of my mind at the style of play you espouse; I even find your view on non-standard languages to be very limiting and against what I feel is the appeal of play. I find the entire point of using language barriers in role-playing games as one of those things that add depth to the world and force the players to more fully integrate themselves with it. Kind of hard to call it a role-playing game if the character's have no role in the world to play, isn't it?

Did I ever say that it wasn't a matter of taste? Every phrasing I use is "I don't think" "I would consider" "I would never" "I would use". I went out of my way to proofread my post and added my final conclusion sentence at the end to make it clear it was personal preference.

You would be bored out of your mind to not encounter language barriers? That is an extremely odd and specific challenge to find extremely vital to your enjoyment of a game. I find your objection boggling because your insistence on the importance of barriers as a means of adding depth, and that if I don't incorporate language barriers I must advocate the character having no role to play when I pontificated at length about the ways I might use language to add depth to a setting or situation ASIDE from as a barrier. It seems you are the one using strawmen and slippery slopes.

My objection to the idea of a language devoted entirely to the practice of trade is that it doesn't make sense to me from a verisimilitude perspective because everything I understand about languages is that they arise organically out of existing languages, splitting and evolving as vernacular changes in common use. Everything I know about languages indicates that purposefully invented languages never catch on.

If you were to explain that the source of this language was that it was actually more just mathematics, like how most of our world uses arabic numerals, that could make sense. Perhaps what you mean is that in this language you can say, "1x+42 = 6y" and be understood to mean you'll give the person your X (that you point at to indicate what it is) plus 42 coins and they'll give you six of their Y (which they also have to point at) and they can respond, "1x + 49 = 6y" to represent haggling. They aren't speaking any kind of language, they're using basic mathematics supplemented by pointing and gesturing, and would never be indicated with, "I say in the trade tongue: ___" and thus avoid my complaint of it being difficult to manage what can and can't be said with it.

Or you could describe a worldwide Guild that enforces its power over all trade that happens everywhere, and they could mandate their merchant ambassadors learn and use their proprietary language in all official transactions as a means of enforcing their political power, somewhat similarly to how the historical church enforced Latin as an official language long after it was no longer being used naturally.

I'm not objecting to a world that contains these elements, I'm objecting to a world that has a proprietary trade language without these elements. I object to this trade language existing primarily as a means of encouraging language barriers for the sake of having language barriers. To my mind, without these qualifications, the invention of a robust, but limited language which can handle the concepts necessary for trade, yet not for real communication are implausible and actually make a setting less deep and consistent at the same time they make the game less fun to play. Thus, this idea presents a lose-lose proposition for both setting design and user friendliness design.


Yeah, neither would I. I'd have a character come up to the party and say, "Boogah boog blargh babamda." and then they'd find a way to communicate with them. In D&D, that's not even a challenge, that's trivial. In other games, it can be a challenge to overcome (which is sort of the point). Why even have languages in the game if knowing one is never an advantage?

I see you also didn't read the large section of my objection where I enumerate the ways I would convey knowledge of a language as an advantage that don't include it as a means of overcoming a language barrier. I would also point out that when a challenge is trivial, it isn't an interesting challenge and when there is no recourse for a character and the challenge cannot be reasonably attempted it is also uninteresting. I would argue that language barrier challenges nearly always fall into this category. An interpreter is available for hire trivially or is nearly impossible to find. A spell can be utilized to communicate or a person cannot cast such a spell at all. A language barrier is what I call a 'locked door problem', a term I use to describe anything which stops forward progression dead until a roll is made or a resource is used at which point progress continues as if the barrier had never existed in the first place.

Essentially, my point boils down to this: In a game using auditory, language dependent methods as the overwhelmingly primary means of conveying meaning, elements which impede auditory, language dependent methods of communication are going to impede your ability to convey meaning. Without sufficient reason to do so anyway, I believe this makes it a bad choice to introduce such impediments and a good choice to introduce means to limit how often these impediments become necessary to portray a world with verisimilitude.

Talakeal
2013-03-12, 01:40 AM
I agree, normally I do not use language as an obstacle to overcome. But it was appropriate for the situation, and the character in question is a sorcerer who knows the tongues spell, anyway, so I decided to run with it.

Yes, that's right, I didn't mention it earlier for fear of derailing the topic, but the character in question is a sorcerer with the tongues spell. This is probably why she didn't bother spending character points on language in the first place. Note that she did NOT choose to cast tongues in this particular instance, deciding that any information she might get out of the encounter was not worth burning a spell slot.

Ashtagon
2013-03-12, 02:52 AM
I agree, normally I do not use language as an obstacle to overcome. But it was appropriate for the situation, and the character in question is a sorcerer who knows the tongues spell, anyway, so I decided to run with it.

Yes, that's right, I didn't mention it earlier for fear of derailing the topic, but the character in question is a sorcerer with the tongues spell. This is probably why she didn't bother spending character points on language in the first place. Note that she did NOT choose to cast tongues in this particular instance, deciding that any information she might get out of the encounter was not worth burning a spell slot.

So she chose not to learn her character's native language AND she chose not to cast a spell she knew that would have solved the issue?

No sympathy for her at all then.

That's like saying a rogue character shouldn't need to bring lockpicks to pick a lock.

Jerthanis
2013-03-12, 03:00 AM
I agree, normally I do not use language as an obstacle to overcome. But it was appropriate for the situation, and the character in question is a sorcerer who knows the tongues spell, anyway, so I decided to run with it.

Yes, that's right, I didn't mention it earlier for fear of derailing the topic, but the character in question is a sorcerer with the tongues spell. This is probably why she didn't bother spending character points on language in the first place. Note that she did NOT choose to cast tongues in this particular instance, deciding that any information she might get out of the encounter was not worth burning a spell slot.

Wow... that's something alright.

I should be clear that as much as I'm railing against the idea of language barriers, I wasn't really trying to come down on you for bringing it up in game or supporting this player in her position. It is potentially an interesting character widget that they have lost their culture to a sufficient degree and the player had a chance to react as a character and seemed more to react as a jilted player. I was withholding judgement of this player, but this detail seems to be pretty damning.

To make an analogy, imagine you had given your players 149 character points, and the race she picked granted her racial language as a free bonus at no cost, but she took a defect called "Lose a language" that was a defect worth 1 point. To ask that this 1 point defect never come up is as unreasonable as asking for any other 1 point defect to never come up... if it never comes up it isn't worth the extra point you got from not having taken the language.

The only scenario I'd say might trend towards it being a little unreasonable of you is if she thought it was kind of important to speak the language, but she just could not get her character working the right way mechanically without that extra point and she imagined she would get the language at the first chance she could get with advancement points and it'd be quietly added to the character and imagined to always be there, and you made her lack of ability come up before she had a chance. I somewhat doubt this was the case, but it's the only reasonable justification for annoyance I can think of.

erikun
2013-03-12, 03:38 AM
We are not playing Dungeons and Dragons.

The system we are using assumed that all player characters speak the language of the empire, which is the most common spoken language and universal trade tongue across the continent.

Characters are allowed to speak any number of extra languages by spending a single character building point for each, and if the character chooses not to speak the imperial tongue they can take a flaw for that and receive extra building points.

The player in question did not want to spend the character point to speak their native tongue because they felt it was not worth the cost and would hardly ever come up, which is not unreasonable from a min max perspective, just from a verisimilitude perspective.
If this was D&D 3.5e, then I suppose I could see the player's point of view. That system considerably overvalues the Speak Language skill and undervalues skill points; a character could easily spend one quarter to one half of their starting 1st level skill points learning a single language, depending on class and stats.

1 point out of 150 to learn a language is about as minimal as you can get. Given the other choices you've mentioned the player made, I have little doubt this is simply the player trying to get something for free rather than any roleplay or problematic system mechanics.

Kalmageddon
2013-03-12, 03:42 AM
I agree, normally I do not use language as an obstacle to overcome. But it was appropriate for the situation, and the character in question is a sorcerer who knows the tongues spell, anyway, so I decided to run with it.

Yes, that's right, I didn't mention it earlier for fear of derailing the topic, but the character in question is a sorcerer with the tongues spell. This is probably why she didn't bother spending character points on language in the first place. Note that she did NOT choose to cast tongues in this particular instance, deciding that any information she might get out of the encounter was not worth burning a spell slot.

And was she right?
I mean it seems like a pretty big assumption to make, I'm guessing she had a reason to believe that? Or was it just out of frustration?

Ashtagon
2013-03-12, 06:06 AM
It sounds like you were playing gurps, right? If so, I'd have docked her 1 point (with explanation; it's pre-spent) the next time character points are awarded, and then given it to her

Themrys
2013-03-12, 06:54 AM
Skills(langugues included), are rarely things people just have. They have to spend time working on them. That hour you used to learn how to juggle is an hour you didn't use learning shoemaking. Learning a second langugue is very hard, and takes time and effort, so I would have giving the native langugue for free, and half a point in common. Does she want to be fluent in common? Well, that's time she spent with a text book as opposed to at thw market, learning to haggle.

Depends. Truly bilingual people usually learn both languages from their parents, which is a lot easier than learning a new language as an adult. Still causes them to learn both languages slower, but toddlers don't learn shoemaking anyway. :smallwink:



The easy solution to most roleplaying problems is to not consider each other enemies. In my experience, if a player can expect to get to use all skills at one point or the other in the game, they'll happily spend those skill points.
Of course, I don't play RPGs to win. I play them for roleplaying, and have, so far, only encountered groups who were focused on the roleplaying, too.

Frozen_Feet
2013-03-12, 09:29 AM
No. No character should know any arbitrary number of languages "just because"; it's a legitimate roleplaying choice or challenge to be unable to effectively communicate. Players should be informed when such problems are likely to occur, or if their choices are going to lead to them, though.

Your sorcerer players had no grounds to complain.

Jay R
2013-03-12, 09:56 AM
At the start, I would have said, "You get one language for free, and pay for any others. If you want the native language for free, then pay for Common. But everybody else has to pay for a second language; you do too."

I once had a player in Champions who wanted to use the same power several ways without paying for separate effects. I repeated, regularly, "No problem. Next time you get points, pay for that version. You can have any version of a power you pay for." It took three or four repetitions before he got it.

The answer to all requests for extra abilities should be "If you want to have it, fine. Pay the points for it."

Consider the following quotes together:


The player refused and decided to go with common, rationalizing that the character hadn't spoken her native tongue in so long she had forgotten.

Over the course of play said character encountered someone from their own native land who did not speak common, and therefore the two could not communicate.


Characters are allowed to speak any number of extra languages by spending a single character building point for each, and if the character chooses not to speak the imperial tongue they can take a flaw for that and receive extra building points.

The player in question did not want to spend the character point to speak their native tongue because they felt it was not worth the cost and would hardly ever come up, which is not unreasonable from a min max perspective, just from a verisimilitude perspective.


... the character in question is a sorcerer with the tongues spell. This is probably why she didn't bother spending character points on language in the first place. Note that she did NOT choose to cast tongues in this particular instance, deciding that any information she might get out of the encounter was not worth burning a spell slot.

This is not about wanting character fluff. This is a straightforward bid for free abilities.

You did NOT give her an unfair starting position.

You did NOT put her in a situation she couldn't handle.

She just decided not to pay for the ability - twice.

She needs to be told that no amount of character background replaces paying for the skills she wants.

If the character background is a pilot, she should pay for piloting skills.
If the character background is a performer, she should pay for performing skills.

And for the same reason, if the character background is bilingual, she should pay for a second language.

Pay for the skills you want. It's that simple.

dps
2013-03-12, 04:44 PM
Plus there's a rule where you can pick bonus languages at level 1 according to your intelligence modifier, so she could of gotten it for free if she had an intelligence of at least 12

There are also systems out there where your number of known languages at start is determined by your intelligence score (or whatever the equilvelant is called in those systems).

LordVonDerp
2013-03-12, 04:53 PM
A backstory should not give the character an unfair mechanical advantage over the rest of the party. Giving the character a free language is such an advantage. Similarily, you shouldn't give a character a powerful magic item for free just because they wrote in their backstory that they inherited it.

the ability to speak a language that will in all likelihood never come up is NOT a mechanical advantage, it's merely a flavor element.

Jay R
2013-03-12, 06:24 PM
the ability to speak a language that will in all likelihood never come up is NOT a mechanical advantage, it's merely a flavor element.

But that theoretical consideration does not apply. The situation we are discussing is one in which the use of the language did come up.

The player is specifically upset that she didn't get a useful skill. She even had a replacement ability - the spell tongues. But she didn't want to spend the day's spell either.

This is not a situation in which it doesn't come up, and is therefore not a mechanical advantage. The player is specifically upset that she did not get a mechanical advantage.

Qwertystop
2013-03-12, 06:59 PM
I remember once (I think it was my second game on these forums... died rather quickly, people just stopped showing), I played a homebrewed thing called a Ghostlight, which was basically a will'o'wisp modified to be a playable 0 LA character as opposed to a Fine flying ball of can't-do-much.

As a separate part of the character (not built into the race), I decided (asking the DM) that I would understand languages as normal for getting starting languages (I think I had Common and Sylvan), but could not vocalize anything but Sylvan (headcanon on how it sounded was like wind and chirping, which just seemed to fit better with a ball of light than being able to talk). Other communication was determined via colorcode:

Green: Yes/good
Yellow: No/bad
Red: Danger
Blue: 20 questions/get Calvin over here to translate
Brown: Confused

(Calvin being the one guy who understood Sylvan).

I was thinking it'd be fun/funny, between having a translator for getting important stuff across, a quick way of saying short things, and, of course, since the translator was a Binder, plenty of chances for amusing mistranslation (quickly fixed by flashing yellow or red, or just zapping him).

Unfortunately, the rest of the party didn't seem to see that, though admittedly there wasn't much time for stuff to have happened. Accurate if somewhat vague translations (I had hopes for those), and a plan on figuring ways of getting some sort of mindlink up to entirely circumvent the issue (admittedly started by me when I saw nobody else was finding it fun).

All in all, I guess all I can say from this is: anecdotal example of the fact that some people find it fun to have a language barrier, and some don't.

(Incidentally, if anybody else thinks that sounds like fun as far as the communication, I'm always up for a game)

Talakeal
2013-03-12, 07:32 PM
There are also systems out there where your number of known languages at start is determined by your intelligence score (or whatever the equilvelant is called in those systems).

That's kind of the conundrum. If it was a clear cut mechanical advantage then I could say "absolutely yes, spend the points." If it is just a vague RP advantage then I can say "Sure, take whatever your back storiy jusfities". But it is kind of somewhere in the middle.

dps
2013-03-12, 08:19 PM
That's kind of the conundrum. If it was a clear cut mechanical advantage then I could say "absolutely yes, spend the points." If it is just a vague RP advantage then I can say "Sure, take whatever your back storiy jusfities". But it is kind of somewhere in the middle.

Yeah, and it also depends on the setting. If you have bonus languages, however gained, and you never meet up with anyone else that speaks them, then it's just fluff. But if you have encounters with NPCs that speak them, then it can be a mechanical advantage. And even the DM might not know at the start if you'll ever meet any such NPCs.

Jay R
2013-03-12, 11:30 PM
Yeah, and it also depends on the setting. If you have bonus languages, however gained, and you never meet up with anyone else that speaks them, then it's just fluff. But if you have encounters with NPCs that speak them, then it can be a mechanical advantage. And even the DM might not know at the start if you'll ever meet any such NPCs.

So you default to the rules: PCs must pay for extra languages.

LibraryOgre
2013-03-13, 10:16 PM
You obviously never tried ordering food in a Parisian restaurant in English :smallconfused:

The French and French-Canadians are somewhat odd in this respect... they've actively resisted the incursion of the English language into their daily lives, and resist Anglicianisms in their language (q.v. e-mail v. the official "courrier électronique'"), at least on an official level.

However, I also process passports at our library, and we're in a pretty diverse area. I see a lot of birth certificates, and an amazing number of places dual-language all of their documents into English.... lots of Africa, chunks of Asia, and then into Pacifica.

Ashtagon
2013-03-14, 01:22 AM
However, I also process passports at our library, and we're in a pretty diverse area. I see a lot of birth certificates, and an amazing number of places dual-language all of their documents into English.... lots of Africa, chunks of Asia, and then into Pacifica.

I think that's a matter of international agreements to make it more convenient for people in jobs such as yours, rather than because those people tend to be fluent in English.

Let's face it, if passports weren't dual-language English, passport control officers would either have to learn dozens of languages, or most passports would be routinely rejected as the immigration control officer goes "what's this foreign jibber-jabber? I can't read it. Go away." It's there for the benefit of the traveller, it that it gets him want he wants (namely, through immigration control), but it's not really there for him to read - that's what the native-language version of the dual-language text is there for.

hymer
2013-03-14, 05:00 AM
I believe there was a funny case with a Polish passport, where a man was much sought after all over Ireland. His name was made out to be 'Passport' in Polish, and nobody seemed to know.
The reason being that whenever a Pole was asked to identify himself, he showed his passport, and the first thing it said wasn't the guy's name, but 'Passport' in Polish. So a guy named Passport was turning up all over the island, doing various things and getting an astounding number of traffic tickets, because 'he' was in fact every Pole in Ireland with a passport.

So I don't think those English translations are there for convenience of Mark & colleagues. They're likely there because English is one of several official languages in many places around the world.

Ashtagon
2013-03-14, 06:04 AM
I believe there was a funny case with a Polish passport, where a man was much sought after all over Ireland. His name was made out to be 'Passport' in Polish, and nobody seemed to know.
The reason being that whenever a Pole was asked to identify himself, he showed his passport, and the first thing it said wasn't the guy's name, but 'Passport' in Polish. So a guy named Passport was turning up all over the island, doing various things and getting an astounding number of traffic tickets, because 'he' was in fact every Pole in Ireland with a passport.

So I don't think those English translations are there for convenience of Mark & colleagues. They're likely there because English is one of several official languages in many places around the world.

My cousin has a Polish passport (dual citizenship). It contains English translations. This story is urban legend.

hymer
2013-03-14, 06:17 AM
I'll believe Stephen Fry and Q.I. over you any day. :smallsmile:
I didn't think it was last year, it was obviously before Poland entered the EU.

Edit: Come to think of it, it was a driver's license, not a passport. Relevance is dwindling ever faster. But it's still a good story. :smallbiggrin:

prufock
2013-03-14, 06:47 AM
Characters are allowed to speak any number of extra languages by spending a single character building point for each, and if the character chooses not to speak the imperial tongue they can take a flaw for that and receive extra building points.

The player in question did not want to spend the character point to speak their native tongue because they felt it was not worth the cost and would hardly ever come up, which is not unreasonable from a min max perspective, just from a verisimilitude perspective.
Your player is being a crankypants. The only advice I have to give is to tell your player to stop being a crankypants.

He or she tried to "game" the system by claiming "I should get stuff for free because BACK STORY." Calmly explain that the system does not work that way. You want something, you pay for it with character points. You didn't want to spend the ONE character point to have a second language, that's fine, you don't speak that language.

While it shouldn't come up very often (you said it's assumed most people speak the imperial language), I don't see any problem with language being an occasional barrier. People can still communicate basic points, and that is in itself a roleplaying opportunity.

Ashtagon
2013-03-14, 07:00 AM
I'll believe Stephen Fry and Q.I. over you any day. :smallsmile:
I didn't think it was last year, it was obviously before Poland entered the EU.


You do realise Stephen Fry is a comedian, right? He is famous for telling jokes, right? Jokes are generally not required to contain any truth, right? You know all this, right?

hymer
2013-03-14, 07:35 AM
Indeed. Yet here it is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCgrOpHcahg
He appears not to be joking, and some research has gone into mentioning this from the QI elves. They've shown a Polish driver's license too, which still have the 'PRAWO JAZDY' on them with the red EU licenses today.

Rhynn
2013-03-14, 08:17 AM
Indeed. Yet here it is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCgrOpHcahg
He appears not to be joking, and some research has gone into mentioning this from the QI elves. They've shown a polish driver's license too, which still have the 'PRAWO JAZDY' on them with the red EU licenses today.

QI has had plenty of urban legends touted as fact, and some plain incorrect facts. Sometimes they come up in later seasons (either a retraction by Fry, or a correction by one of the guests). The writers don't always do their homework thoroughly. (Don't worry, it's not Stephen Fry's fault, he doesn't write the questions or the answers or the trivia.)

However, in this case, BBC backs you up (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/7899171.stm).

You have to be fairly stupid not to get the name right, though, given that AFAIK all European driver's licenses have the numbered entry system (1. surname, 2. given names), and Polish, Irish, and UK ones all do.

hymer
2013-03-14, 08:22 AM
Thanks, Rhynn. If I couldn't trust Stephen Fry any more, all I'd have left to cling to is the Oxford Dictionary of English. :smalleek:

Feralgeist
2013-03-14, 09:04 AM
From a purely mechanical standpoint, I don't think foreign characters should automatically be bilingual. After all, non-Americans don't automatically learn English. However, from a pure gameplay perspective it's better to have all characters have a common language, common or otherwise. I still think foreign should be treated as a foreign/bonus language for foreign characters.

From a technical standpoint, most Americans do not learn English. they learn "Ah-mare-eeh-can!". The spelling and pronunciation of alot of words have been heavily bastardized due to laziness and forgetfulness over the years. Us Australians are non-american, but alot of us learn english as our first (often only) language. Of course, we throw in alot of slang, so i guess our language is "Strayan". Alot of English people no longer speak true english, as their language has devolved into many dialects. There isn't really a common language, because once there is it stops being cool, or people think of a fun or easier way to say things. It's a joke at first, but if enough people do it it changes the language little by little.


TL; DR
Strangers in a strange land will always be partly bilingual. If only enough so they can say "where is" "hello" "goodbye" "I'ma kill you foo!"

And as for the whole "should there be a language barrier?" issue. Is what the character has to say REALLY that vital? there's always the option of them being taciturn and you just say what they do
Someone offends: "I sneer at them, and level my sword at their throat."
Someone is bereaved. "Sir example places his hand on the grieving orphans shoulder"
Dragon appears "I soil myself. Alot. And scream unintelligibly before drawing my sword."
Little timmy is trapped down a well and the well is caved in so he has only so much air and when we open the well we have to watch out for bats and timmy may or may not be infected by lycanthropy so we should probably watch him for suspicious activities while we save him while also avoiding poisonous dire bats. "Sword out, i whistle to the party and beckon."

Jay R
2013-03-14, 12:02 PM
Pay for your skills. That's all. Pay for every skill you want to have.

Your backstory explains why you bought the skills you did, not why you didn't have to.

Scow2
2013-03-15, 01:44 PM
Do other characters in your system get "Free" languages (Such as members of other races, if there are any)?
In D&D, you get bonus languages AND racial languages - and D&D's built on the conceit that there are no actually "foreign" languages. All humans everywhere speak Common, and non-human races not only speak Common, but their native language for 'free'.

If your system gives other races 'free' languages, then I'd say this character deserves it as well, as he's technically a different 'race' (Just mechanically and biologically identical to the people of the main empire).

Talakeal
2013-03-15, 05:42 PM
Do other characters in your system get "Free" languages (Such as members of other races, if there are any)?
In D&D, you get bonus languages AND racial languages - and D&D's built on the conceit that there are no actually "foreign" languages. All humans everywhere speak Common, and non-human races not only speak Common, but their native language for 'free'.

If your system gives other races 'free' languages, then I'd say this character deserves it as well, as he's technically a different 'race' (Just mechanically and biologically identical to the people of the main empire).

There are no racial languages except in the case of creatures with mouths incapable of replicating human speech, so no. This is not to say that there aren't regional or cultural languages which are unique to certain races, but they are not "racial languages" as such. IF a player was a member of another race (and this isn't normally allowed) they would have to spend points to buy their additional languages normally. If they didn't also speak the Imperial tongue they would get extra character points from that (more than the cost of their own native language actually).


Also, I simplified the situation quite a bit in the initial post, and told some white lies to make it easier to communicate without exposition. If you want the full story see below, but feel free to skip it (it shouldn't actually change anything either way).

The character in question was a dryad who gave up her connection with nature for mortal love, only to watch her human family die of plague and leave her alone. When the party encountered a lake spirit (the one who was created zombies in my previous post) the lake spirit could only speak Sylvan, which is normally the language of all nature spirits including dryads.

TuggyNE
2013-03-15, 06:28 PM
The character in question was a dryad who gave up her connection with nature for mortal love, only to watch her human family die of plague and leave her alone. When the party encountered a lake spirit (the one who was created zombies in my previous post) the lake spirit could only speak Sylvan, which is normally the language of all nature spirits including dryads.

That actually makes the inability to communicate entirely sensible, in an RP sense, and rather tragic. Nothing wrong with that outcome.

NotScaryBats
2013-03-16, 04:10 AM
I guess I'm in the minority here, but I think most of you guys are being pretty harsh with the "no one gets a mechanical bonus for free!" and such.

I would have no problem with a Japanese dude being able to speak Japanese and English in a game that took place in Texas. If he had to pay "shoot well" points for the ability to speak the language, and everyone else had more "shoot well" than he did just because he wanted to play a Japanese dude (for whatever reason)...

For me and the majority of players I have encountered, that just probably wouldn't be a big deal. I play 3.5 D&D, 4e D&D, oWoD, and nWoD.

LibraryOgre
2013-03-16, 08:46 PM
I would have no problem with a Japanese dude being able to speak Japanese and English in a game that took place in Texas. If he had to pay "shoot well" points for the ability to speak the language, and everyone else had more "shoot well" than he did just because he wanted to play a Japanese dude (for whatever reason)...

Funny you should mention that, as I'm in a fairly immigrant heavy area... where you've got a lot of 3rd generation immigrants who do not speak the language of the "homeland" better than random people in their class.

However, to go back to earlier, I wasn't talking about the passports... we only process US passports. Rather, I was talking about birth certificates and other such documents, which are frequently dual-language.

Jay R
2013-03-16, 11:45 PM
I guess I'm in the minority here, but I think most of you guys are being pretty harsh with the "no one gets a mechanical bonus for free!" and such.

I would have no problem with a Japanese dude being able to speak Japanese and English in a game that took place in Texas. If he had to pay "shoot well" points for the ability to speak the language, and everyone else had more "shoot well" than he did just because he wanted to play a Japanese dude (for whatever reason)...

For me and the majority of players I have encountered, that just probably wouldn't be a big deal. I play 3.5 D&D, 4e D&D, oWoD, and nWoD.

The crucial thing is that the player got upset specifically because it was a useful skill she wanted for free. She even had a spell to compensate (tongues) that she chose not to use because she wasn't even willing to use a single spell slot for one day.

That's asking for a useful skill for free. Nope.

Fortuna
2013-03-17, 12:49 AM
Your backstory explains why you bought the skills you did, not why you didn't have to.

I was going to say something rambling that would probably have offended half a dozen people, but it basically boiled down to this kernel of wisdom quoted here. Most systems have a fluff/crunch divide - you use fluff to present the mechanics, and you use mechanics to represent the fluff.

NotScaryBats
2013-03-17, 02:26 AM
The crucial thing is that the player got upset specifically because it was a useful skill she wanted for free. She even had a spell to compensate (tongues) that she chose not to use because she wasn't even willing to use a single spell slot for one day.

That's asking for a useful skill for free. Nope.

Well, I don't know why she chose Tongues as a spell to have, but clearly the player feel that languages are something she should be worrying about and paying her 'kill stuff' points for.

Like, "my backstory has my character a chef"

"how much profession chef do you have"

"well, I'm a fighter, so my 2 skill points are in climb and swim, so no profession chef"

"okay well here's a cake battle where you have to bake the best cake to win"

"well, that's lame, because my character is kinda supposed to have been a cake chef before she started adventuring"

"haha, guess you should have bought some profession chef! Instead of just asked for it for free!"

Fortuna
2013-03-17, 03:45 AM
Well, I don't know why she chose Tongues as a spell to have, but clearly the player feel that languages are something she should be worrying about and paying her 'kill stuff' points for.

Like, "my backstory has my character a chef"

"how much profession chef do you have"

"well, I'm a fighter, so my 2 skill points are in climb and swim, so no profession chef"

"okay well here's a cake battle where you have to bake the best cake to win"

"well, that's lame, because my character is kinda supposed to have been a cake chef before she started adventuring"

"haha, guess you should have bought some profession chef! Instead of just asked for it for free!"

Well, yes. You should have. And if you couldn't manage that as a fighter, you should probably have chosen a class more amenable to taking a rank or two in Profession (baker).

NotScaryBats
2013-03-17, 05:29 AM
Nah that's cool - I guess we just play two different games.

Talakeal
2013-03-17, 01:57 PM
Well, I don't know why she chose Tongues as a spell to have, but clearly the player feel that languages are something she should be worrying about and paying her 'kill stuff' points for.

Like, "my back-story has my character a chef"

"how much profession chef do you have"

"well, I'm a fighter, so my 2 skill points are in climb and swim, so no profession chef"

"okay well here's a cake battle where you have to bake the best cake to win"

"well, that's lame, because my character is kind of supposed to have been a cake chef before she started adventuring"

"ha-ha, guess you should have bought some profession chef! Instead of just asked for it for free!"

You know it's funny, until I saw you added the "ha-ha" I thought you were taking the DM's side from this exchange. I couldn't imagine making a character whose skills didn't represent their background, and the inability to do so is one of the major reasons I dislike 4E.

How far would you take this? Would you apply it to useful skills, like a fighter who said he was an acrobat would be allowed to use tumble and bluff? Abilities? Would you allow him to be a genius scholar despite his 8 Int? Class features? Allowing him to cast cantrips because he went to wizard school? Races? Allow him to fly around and breathe fire because he is actually a red dragon instead of a human?

Obviously some of these examples are absurd and there should be a line drawn somewhere. But if you suggest giving characters backgrounds and professions for free I am wondering where.

Also, how would you resolve said cake battle if one of the other contestants was a PC who actually did max out their profession: baker skill, possibly even augmenting it with feats?

PersonMan
2013-03-17, 04:15 PM
How far would you take this? Would you apply it to useful skills, like a fighter who said he was an acrobat would be allowed to use tumble and bluff? Abilities? Would you allow him to be a genius scholar despite his 8 Int? Class features? Allowing him to cast cantrips because he went to wizard school? Races? Allow him to fly around and breathe fire because he is actually a red dragon instead of a human?

Obviously some of these examples are absurd and there should be a line drawn somewhere. But if you suggest giving characters backgrounds and professions for free I am wondering where.

Having been on both sides of the 'free stuff based on background' thing, it's almost always limited to a handful of skill points. Sometimes a feat, if it's a bad one.

Of course, as always, giving anyone leeway for anything ever like this requires a group you can trust to not try and abuse it (or a DM who enjoys that kind of thing, I guess).


Also, how would you resolve said cake battle if one of the other contestants was a PC who actually did max out their profession: baker skill, possibly even augmenting it with feats?

I'm pretty sure the issue was "fighter cannot take this skill but has the fluff, but then the DM forces them into a situation in which he needs the actual skill". If there were two cake bakers in the party, I'd imagine that they'd either sort it out beforehand on who was better or determine it between them with the DM adjucating.

Jay R
2013-03-18, 10:05 AM
I guess I'm in the minority here, but I think most of you guys are being pretty harsh with the "no one gets a mechanical bonus for free!" and such.

Why is having to obey the rules "harsh"? Everybody else is obeying the rules.

You get skills from buying skill points, not from complaining.


I would have no problem with a Japanese dude being able to speak Japanese and English in a game that took place in Texas. If he had to pay "shoot well" points for the ability to speak the language, and everyone else had more "shoot well" than he did just because he wanted to play a Japanese dude (for whatever reason)...

For me and the majority of players I have encountered, that just probably wouldn't be a big deal. I play 3.5 D&D, 4e D&D, oWoD, and nWoD.

First of all, he said it was one point out of 150. That's not cutting too deeply into the "shoot well" points.

Secondly, I'm far more likely to rule in the other direction. If somebody only takes "shoot well" points, I might look at the character sheet and say, "This is a war android -- a weapon, not a character. Start over, and this time create a person." Note that this will make sure that nobody gets more "shoot well" points than anybody else.

(And for the record, the last game of Champions I played was set in Texas. I took a character who could speak Mandarin and Vietnamese - and I paid for them both. Neither ever came into play, and it never once crossed my mind to ask for them for free.)

Bryan1108
2013-03-19, 12:21 PM
We played a D20 Modern game with a zombie infestation. The players were all 1st level but one guy insisted on being a Navy SEAL. We pointed out that at 1st level, he would have just barely gotten through basic training but he wasn't having it.

We found out in the second session that his "SEAL" had no ranks in swimming :)

I don't believe in slavish devotion to the rules but a player does have some responsibility to have their characters make sense.

PersonMan
2013-03-19, 12:21 PM
Why is having to obey the rules "harsh"? Everybody else is obeying the rules.

For some people, "if there's something that would benefit the fluff of your character but provide essentially no mechanical benefit or really come up in game, talk to the DM about it and you might get something for free" is the rule.

Jay R
2013-03-19, 04:41 PM
For some people, "if there's something that would benefit the fluff of your character but provide essentially no mechanical benefit or really come up in game, talk to the DM about it and you might get something for free" is the rule.

But that's not the issue here. The player is upset specifically because it would have been useful. All discussion of something with essentially no mechanical benefit is off-topic.