Greetings!

Long ago, I got rid of the ubiquitous "Common" tongue found in D&D. I found that having the "Common" tongue essentially made other languages irrelevant. Of course, having access to the spell, *Comprehend Languages* or the spell, *Tongues* also accomplishes that, too. However, by getting rid of the "Common" tongue, that also puts a premium even more so on such spells and magical items and effects which allow the comprehension of different foreign languages, whether of various ethnic and cultural languages, or entirely different racial languages. Now, having a Wizard along that is fortunate to possess such a spell in their spellbook is a particular boon to not just the Wizard, but the whole adventuring party.

Beyond that, getting rid of the "Common" tongue has now revitalized various different lands and kingdoms, placing an enhanced importance on especially valuable regional languages--which then provides a very nice incentive for the Player Characters to seek out language specialists so as to learn new regional languages, or other obscure languages from diverse cultures, as well as the many strange languages of different barbarian tribes, or the languages of some fantastic culture or race of humanoids. In the meantime, having no such "Common" language to provide the ability for everyone to communicate freely with anyone and everyone else has restored a more historical feel to the campaign compared to the campaigns I ran long ago where such a "Common" language was de riguer. This kind of ancient world feel and enhanced verisimilitude has also brought into another dimension--the historical and cultural significance of having companions that are skilled in language "X"--as well as the frequent necessity of hiring interpreters and special cultural guides, that are fluent in particular languages, as well as being well-versed in the lore of different tribes and cultures, and the impact such has not only on the language specifically, but a range of different dynamics and nuances in all kinds of social interactions.

In addition, having a campaign dynamic where no "Common" language exists, and giving rise to enhanced cultural education and diverse skills in languages has brought a particular interest in acquiring various texts, books, and scrolls, as well as when the party encounters ancient inscriptions within dungeon ruins, ancient temples, or within foreign palaces and fortresses. Such campaign dynamics have also placed a significant prominence and value upon skilled translators and other specialized academic professions.

I think getting rid of the "Common" tongue has created a huge dimension of depth and enhanced everyone's enjoyment in many different ways. Admittedly, having no such "Common" tongue known by everyone has on occasion created communication obstacles and also presented some "Story flow" challenges--but with some extra thought and care in preparation on my part, as well as preparation, flexibility, and open-mindedness on the Player's part, such challenges are easily overcome and dealt with successfully. I think having a campaign that is free from having the "Common" tongue has been a very worthwhile and meaningful dynamic to embrace for the campaign as a whole.

What are your thoughts on such languages and the "Common" tongue dynamic? Have you done something similar in your own campaigns? How have your players responded to such dynamics in the game world?

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Common works in limited doses. Eberron, for example, uses Common to represent the tongue of Galifar, the now-fallen kingdom (really an empire) that broke up and led to a century of war that set the current political boundaries of the focal continent for most games in that world. However, Common was not the "common tongue" of this continent in the distant past (that was Goblin), nor of the other continents on the world, nor of other planes in that setting. In essence, Common = Galifarian Common in Eberron.  IIRC, didn't Greyhawk have its Common based upon the tongue of the Great Kingdom?

I haven't delved too deeply into such changes, mostly out of expediency and laziness, but the default assumption in my games over the years has become that the "common" tongue (in the universalist sense typically used in D&D) does not exist, only regional languages that might be more common than others (so technically there might be multiple "common" tongues that vary by region). So communicating with people from other regions is not a simple task and always requires either a translator or learning a new language. PCs from distant regions must select the dominant language spoken in whatever region the campaign will be set as one of their starting languages.

One of challenges of emphasizing such details, however, is the limited allotment of skill points or proficiency slots available, depending on edition, at least when playing D&D. Which can place too much strain on players when deciding between background skills required for their concept or learning a new language. One advantage of 5e is that it includes optional rules for PCs learning new languages in their down time by dedicating a significant amount of time and money with a tutor. That provides a significant amount of flexibility when dealing with campaigns where numerous languages exist and are an important feature of the word.

One thing I've been considering for a while is to change the old "language" skill or proficiency (particularly in systems where language is treated as a skill) into a universal "Linguistics" skill used when attempting to communicate with people speaking unfamiliar languages. Difficulty could be set based on how unfamiliar individual characters are with any given language, as well as the complexity of the concepts exchanged. And rolls could also be made when attempting to learn a new language as well, making their learning speed dependent on a skill roll.

I got this idea from the old West Games Star Wars RPG, where language works that way, under the assumption that the number of languages is so vast throughout the galaxy, it wouldn't be practical to learn each language individually. My take would be that the Linguistics skill wouldn't allow you to speak a language you don't know outright, but rather that it allows you to understand each other through crude gestures and fragments of words and expressions you manage to pick up throughout your exchange. Making at least some degree of communication with new cultures possible, at least for dedicated language scholars skilled in Linguistics.

It's something I've explored occasionally.

I big part of making it work is having a game / setting that allows for more mundane challenges. If all the quests revolve around fighting huge dragons then having to find an interpreter to help you buy food can feel like it's getting in the way of the 'real' fun.

If the game is more gritty and down to earth then these details add to the overall challenge. Just travelling to the next city state is an adventure in itself.

I rename Common for each campaign, but everybody speaks English on Star Trek because while a myriad of languages does add complexity and verisimilitude, it's also a pain in the ass in actual play.

I've done the "everybody in the party must have one language in common" many times, but its just easier to default to "Trade Tongue" or "Main Kingdom Language" which is just another version of Common.

Classic Traveller dodges the language issue because that's just crazy sauce. 40k uses their Imperial language as their version of Common, but with so many planets getting isolated for a dozen generations, even that's a major dodge.

I enjoy grunting as much as the next GM, but if my Orcs & Dragons don't speak Common, how else are they to taunt and insult the PCs before they whack them?

Of course, if everyone speaks Star Trek English, it negates the value of language skills which isn't bueno.

I like the idea of having lots of languages, in theory.  It adds depth and verisimilitude, and it makes travel a lot more interesting.  On the other hand, it makes everything a lot more work for the GM, players, and even the characters.  My campaigns usually have various languages, but I mostly just use that to inform name creation.  During the game, characters speak enough languages to get by, everyone speaks English in practice, and the rest gets swept under the rug.

Quote from: Spinachcat on October 04, 2020, 07:37:10 PMI enjoy grunting as much as the next GM, but if my Orcs & Dragons don't speak Common, how else are they to taunt and insult the PCs before they whack them?

Easily.  It's not hard at all to sneer, jeer in a sarcastic tone (while speaking incomprehensible syllables), gesture at a PC's crotch, and then laugh sardonically.  Pisses the players off just as well!

I've always used just-plain-languages myself, and have only run two parties (and neither for as much as a year) outside the littoral containing the world's two most common lingua francas.

Happily, in GURPS, there isn't any artificial restriction on how many languages you can learn any more than upon any other skill.  Just a matter of on what you feel like spending points.

I've had some trouble figuring out how to make abandoning common work with D&D and quasi-historical settings; in one of the places I was trying to emulate, every third city along the trade route introduces a new distinct language, and there are at least three writing systems in use.

The Forgotten Realms even has guidance about local languages if you dig in a bit, but then you need players willing to spend their few language picks on nearby human tongues instead of all the beast / elemental / divine things they expect, even before you start bringing in dead languages.
Or translators become an important part of play, or translation magic.

*I'd* enjoy that, but I need to meet my players at least half-way.
I'm starting up a campaign tomorrow (!) with a nonstandard language list - we'll see how that goes - but it's still got Common at the root.

More and more, I compromise on languages.  That is, I want a little more nod to realism than "common" and racial languages implies, but not even to the extent that one could call the result verisimilitude.  I'm still hard on the playable side of the equation, but with one toe dipped across the line.

Usually, I'm getting there by having a few "common" replacements while making a distinction between such trade languages and full languages.  In a trade language, you can buy things, plead for mercy, ask directions, hurl insults, etc, but you can't express complex ideas or impress the locals or the like.  In a full language, you can do everything, but to a narrower group of people.  I've also played around with a variant where language proficiency comes in "partial" and "full" levels, with the "partial" operating like the trade languages.  Any trade languages in that scheme don't have a "full" proficiency to get.  Then I'm handing out twice the language proficiencies to compensate.  Not sure yet if partial/full buys me enough for the hassle, though.  That's certainly as far as I'll push it in most games. 

For example, in one campaign I've got trade languages including "Imperial, Moon Fey, Slice, and Low Draconic".  Slice is the "trade" tongue of goblins, orcs, etc.  You can talk to them using it, but you can't disguise yourself and fool them for long with that speech.  You will not always understand what you overhear, either.  Goblins talking among themselves use "Boss", with lots of nuance for pecking order, which is important to them. To learn that language is to gain some insight into how goblins think.  A person knowing slice could follow a little of Boss, maybe.  (In D&D 5E for example, it would be disadvantage on Insight or Perception to get the gist of the conversation.)  Slice/Boss are more distinct than dialects but not completely separate either.  Imperial/High Imperial and the Low/High Draconic work more like German/High German.  Moon Fey will let you communicate with a lot of creatures that would require 5 or 6 other languages otherwise, but it is hardly "common".

In that campaign, it adds up to about 40 languages that a starting character could learn, but less than 10 of those are trade languages.  About half are of interest only to natives, merchants, scholars, or the like.  A few are dead/planar languages that casters might want to know.

The main effect on play is to put different characters front and center at times.  Bob has to talk to the king because even though his charisma isn't tops, he knows the language of the court.  Other characters are following along well enough, but they don't necessarily get all the nuance. 

Most groups its too hard and leads to boredom for some people as they have to pretend not to hear what's going on and check out.  We did this a lot with 7th Sea back in the day and I didn't find it actually added much to the gameplay.

I never use Common.  There might be some Trade Tongues that are used by traveling or guilded merchants but your average local merchant probably wouldn't know it.

In any given area, there's probably one or two dominant languages that people can use.  For example if you're in one of the countries neighbouring Aquilonia, or in major cities with trade routes, you can probably get by with Aquilonian in foreign lands, but if you're way out in the backwoods of Bossonia, which lies inside Aquilonia, you might have to deal with people that don't speak that tongue.

I find players usually like a good language system, but it's good to make sure during chargen all PCs can communicate with each other.

I endorse this view. I never have a "common" tongue. Some languages may be more widespread than others, but no "common." Also no single "magic"  language. An ancient inscription or text (including a magic text) will be written in an ancient language and if you didn't learn it, then you can't read it. Especially if you are a MU you definitely want to pay attention to picking up languages, both ancient and modern.

Yes it adds complications, but so does learning specific weapons, or building alliances and social networks. It's something you have to do to proceed and progress. it's part of the game.

Quote from: CRKrueger on October 05, 2020, 02:09:44 PM

I find players usually like a good language system, but it's good to make sure during chargen all PCs can communicate with each other.

Agreed. Conversely, if you're looking for a campaign rather than a on-off, it's good to encourage the party to have a mix of second or third languages, so they have options to travel knowing that at least one of them can talk to the locals.

I agree. However the one thing I allow is that there is a Merchant's tongue that is a pidgin of most languages. However Merchant's tongue can't be used for more than Trading and simple words and phrases. So in effect if you want to communicate outside the Foreigner's Quarter of a city you need to know the language of that land.

Quote from: Zirunel on October 05, 2020, 08:28:43 PMConversely, if you're looking for a campaign rather than a on-off, it's good to encourage the party to have a mix of second or third languages, so they have options to travel knowing that at least one of them can talk to the locals.

I don't need to encourage them; the players are almost always smart enough to figure it out on their own.