when using a verbal component of a spell is the same in all languages?

[Kimras]

In a thought i was wondering if a person who spoke another language but had high knowledge arcane would be able to able to recognize the spell even though we speak completely different languages. If it is all the same does that means there is technically a language of spells.

[Zanos]

The skill in question would be spellcraft to identify spells, and it's independent from language.

I don't think it's ever mentioned if there's a "universal" language for magic, but the Wizard fluff mentions that many arcane tomes are written in Draconic, which is why Wizards have it as a bonus language.

[DeadMech]

Rather than knowledge arcane the correct skill would be spellcraft to recognize a spell being cast. And to do so you have to be able to observe the verbal and somatic components but doesn't mention anything about speaking the same languages. So there probably is a universal language of magic.

[georgie_leech]

Rather than knowledge arcane the correct skill would be spellcraft to recognize a spell being cast. And to do so you have to be able to observe the verbal and somatic components but doesn't mention anything about speaking the same languages. So there probably is a universal language of magic.

More likely that the verbal and somatic components begin forming the spell/gathering the energy before it's actually cast, and the Spellcraft is to see if you can interpret the pattern and figure out which spell it is. Given the extremely varied anatomies involved(anything from person to animal to bug to gibbering horror from beyond the veil), and the fact that you don't make one check and then know that "Xysquip" is the word for Magic Missile forever and always, I think that's more likely, at least.

[bekeleven]

Again, I don't think there's a RAW answer, but:

In my games, you learn how to cast a spell from a person, or from a book, or (if divine) through divine inspiration, or (if spontaneous) through experimentation. There can be multiple ways to cast the same spell, as the casting ritual is basically just a mnemonic device to get you into the state of mind to draw the prana from your body.

Generally you use the same words as your teacher/instructional book, and draconic tends to be a popular choice.

[Sir Garanok]

I don't know of the verbal components of a spell being affected by the caster's language.

Also if a spell has somatic components(and see it being cast),
you don't need verbal to identify.

[Jeff the Green]

More likely that the verbal and somatic components begin forming the spell/gathering the energy before it's actually cast, and the Spellcraft is to see if you can interpret the pattern and figure out which spell it is. Given the extremely varied anatomies involved(anything from person to animal to bug to gibbering horror from beyond the veil), and the fact that you don't make one check and then know that "Xysquip" is the word for Magic Missile forever and always, I think that's more likely, at least.

I tend to agree, except there's another option. It could be that the exact words and gestures don't matter, but the patterns do. So you can recognize the cadence, tone, and flow of the vocalizations.

[Ettina]

If they were in animal form using Natural Spell, would that make recognizing what spell they're casting more difficult?

[Duke of Urrel]

I agree that there is a universal Language of Magic, but the mechanics, requiring the use of Spellcraft even to identify a first-level spell, suggest that every spellcaster speaks this language in a highly unique or idiosyncratic way. I always use the following fluff: The Language of Magic can be used to cast spells only if it authentically expresses the unique personality of the creature that uses it. This is why your own spoken words are perfectly clear to you when you use the Language of Magic to cast a spell, but the words spoken by an enemy spellcaster who casts the same spell may not be clear to you at all.

This rule also applies to the Language of Magic as it is written. Everybody who writes in the Language of Magic shapes the magic runes in a unique way. This is how I account for the rule that when you encounter a spelltext or a magic scroll written by another spellcaster, you must use Spellcraft skill to decipher it, even if it describes a low-level spell.

(Since magic staffs and wands can be activated by anyone who has a particular spell on his or her class list, I assume that these items do not require their users to pronounce magic words idiosyncratically, as magic scrolls do. Magic items that require only command words to activate may not use the Language of Magic at all.)

I also agree that identifying a spell as another spellcaster casts it involves more than simply understanding the spoken incantation (i.e. its verbal component). Identifying gestures (i.e. somatic components) and even material components may also belong to this task - depending on the spell - and gestures may vary from one spellcaster to another as much as, or even more than, spoken words do. However, the variation in the way various creatures gesture or move while they cast spells cannot account for the need for Spellcraft skill to decipher written spelltexts and magic scrolls. This is why I assume that idiosyncratic variation from one individual spellcaster to another simply belongs to the nature of the Language of Magic itself, as it is both spoken and written.