human languages

[tomfoolery]

it takes all sorts, people. there's gotta be a bajillion different languages on earth, and everyone in dnd speaks COMMON? ok, to start us off, i suggest East and West Common, and reduce learnable languages. talk to me.

[Gralamin]

I'm not sure we speak the same language.

(as in, elaborate and use proper grammar)

[Fax Celestis]

The reason those languages developed in the modern world was due to social isolation, which was largely caused by geographic influence. However, geography is less of an issue when one can teleport or fly or plane shift. Having one language (Common) actually makes a good deal of sense: language developed as a whole instead of as a variety of colloquial spin-offs that eventually developed into entirely separate languages.

[LoopyZebra]

Well, from a game standpoint, it helps the party alot. One campaign I read, there was no common, so for character A to talk to Character C character B had to translate. An easy fix would be to rule that it 'just happens' that the party all has a single language or common, and then have the NPCs have what you prefer.

Slightly harder would be to make a history that helped with the reasoning. As Fax pointed out, there wouldn't be as much geographic separation as the real world in any given campaign. Secondly, the languages could either a. be spread by a single imperial or trading nation, ala English, or b. all languages are derivates of a single languages, ala romance languages to Latin. Thirdly, because of magical influence, the world might use a language prescribed by a higher power. If a god spoke common to all races, then all races would learn common. Also, most civilized nations use a common tongue for parlay (again, English, perhaps...) and have translators on hand in the real world, so therefore DnD worlds would probably have them as well.

Personally, in my game world, Common/Lurian was spread by the Lurians, a massive trading empire, and the language remained in use for trade and diplomacy after the empire's fall. Other languages have been spread by ancient empires, so continental languages are more common than small regional dialects, so in total, about 90% of the world speaks one of five languages (and three to five languages are easy to get with a high Int).

There would be no mechanical benefit to the Party for spliting up common as opposed to making a new language for the natives to speak. You could easily rule that common is only spoken by traders/diplomats/the educated, and that the masses speak whatever. A history to explain the spread of common would be easy too.

[tomfoolery]

true, but then why Elven and Gnomish and Dwarvish? even if you were able to teleport, the majority of people, even in a pseudo-modern, magic-based world can't. and also, people are extremely reluctant to give up their culture--just because the internet exists doesn't mean that everyone speaks English or Chinese. Also, since the dnd world (in fact, any world ruled by humans) revolves around war, sheer mutual hatred would prevent cultural assimilation. in fact, even in countries not at war, but in relatively close proximity and semiconstant communication (example: Italy and France, hundreds of Native American tribes and nations, Texas and Mexico) don't necessarily adopt the same language--especially if there are borders.

[tomfoolery]

and what's wrong with complications? also, that's why i suggested reduced language- learning

[Fax Celestis]

true, but then why Elven and Gnomish and Dwarvish? even if you were able to teleport, the majority of people, even in a pseudo-modern, magic-based world can't. and also, people are extremely reluctant to give up their culture--just because the internet exists doesn't mean that everyone speaks English or Chinese. Also, since the dnd world (in fact, any world ruled by humans) revolves around war, sheer mutual hatred would prevent cultural assimilation. in fact, even in countries not at war, but in relatively close proximity and semiconstant communication (example: Italy and France, hundreds of Native American tribes and nations, Texas and Mexico) don't necessarily adopt the same language--especially if there are borders.
Granted, but you also have to take into account the racial issues. In a D&D world, racial "differences" would probably overtake and replace national ones. Therefore, racial languages would remain because that'd be "patriotic".

Think of it another way: social Darwinism. With more than one sentient race crawling around the earth, there's a lot for humans to contend with. Language would probably become standard so that there would be racial unity.

Race plays a bigger part of the D&D political landscape than most people realize.

Furthermore: even if everyone can't teleport, the important/powerful/trend-setting people probably can, and the masses will follow.

[Lord Iames Osari]

In my game, there are two kinds of Common (called Mercaani), both of which are based off of an ancient trading language: Emorian, or Western Mercaani, and Mehrunian, or Eastern Mercaani. The two regions have been isolated from each other for millennia, ever since a huge magical catclysm. While there has always been some contact between powerful figures on both sides, the common people, separated by a vast desert surrounded by harsh mountains, have developed regional dialects. Speakers of the two variants can understand each other with an Int check against DC 10 + other speaker's Int mod (reflecting the fact that a smarter person will know and use more words, more local jargon, etc.) 20 can be taken.

There is also a third language, Northern Common, which is spoken by the peoples who live on the steppes above the dwarven plateau and in the frostfell further to the north. Northern Common, sometimes called Northron, is unrelated to Mercaani.

[Fax Celestis]

In my game, there are two kinds of Common (called Mercaani), both of which are based off of an ancient trading language: Emorian, or Western Mercaani, and Mehrunian, or Eastern Mercaani. The two regions have been isolated from each other for millennia, ever since a huge magical catclysm. While there has always been some contact between powerful figures on both sides, the common people, separated by a vast desert surrounded by harsh mountains, have developed regional dialects. Speakers of the two variants can understand each other with an Int check against DC 10 + other speaker's Int mod (reflecting the fact that a smarter person will know and use more words, more local jargon, etc.) 20 can be taken.

There is also a third language, Northern Common, which is spoken by the peoples who live on the steppes above the dwarven plateau and in the frostfell further to the north. Northern Common, sometimes called Northron, is unrelated to Mercaani.
Another example, though, of geographic divisions, which are (in most circumstances; the one detailed here is an exception) usually mitigated in D&D.

[Macrovore]

foolery, it really depends on the setting. Some need the language barrier, and some don't. Many DM's want simple settings, and a language barrier often just adds unneeded complications.

[tomfoolery]

yes i know. i'm just saying that if, for example, the game is the size of England, I suppose one language is reasonable but in eberron (sorry if i misspelled) the range is an entire world, with continents separated by oceans and seas in the continents and all kinds of crazy stuff, and from what i've seen everyone speaks common. explain how oceans are not geological barrier enough to explain at least 3 common languages for humans which make up 75% of the population, if not more.

in response to the patriotic thing, humans, in addition to having to contend with elves and dwarves and orcs and drow and giant sentient termites, would probably also struggle amongst themselves. which is not to say that cultural unity would not exist, explaining the lack of a large variety of commons.

[tomfoolery]

and i know that it's up to the DM but it just opens so many doors for campaign plot ideas, and so many uses for otherwise small-time rogues (listen at a crack in the wall, "what are they saying?" "it sounds like east common, what does 'shknlaab zkood poun wassubba' mean?" translate spell, if they can remember the words right, and it means "all the pieces are in place we will assassinate Lord Poln tomorrow night"). and i'm not a roguey type of person. i'm just surprised that so many people don't use extra languages.

[tomfoolery]

even with kick-in-the-doors. think crusaders-vs-arabs.
oh hi Mac. i didn't mean for this to become an argument about whether there should be more than one common, just a topic for those who like the idea.

[Eighth_Seraph]

Triple post, preceded by a double post; trying to bring up your post count, huh? Anyway, you have a good point in your argument, foolery. In my home-brewed default setting, Pseudelity (a work in progress), I based the major continent on a general European shape and size, then quadrupled the size of the Ural Mountains, took Africa away, and BAM! Ultimate social isolation. Of course, when the mountains are crossed and I borrow Oriental Adventures, there will be a whole new set of languages to learn there, including Eastern Common (to be renamed later) and several racial and/or tribal languages. But otherwise, throughout all of the pseudo-European continent there's a common language.

Also, think about it this way: all of Europe (along with a good section on the North African coast and all around the mediterranean) was taken over by the Roman empire, so more than half of it was speaking a Romance language. Spanish is my first language, and I've never had any problem understanding Italian, and could understand the average Parisian after taking French 1 freshman year. So a general common language isn't really all that much of a stretch.

[Elrosth]

Also, where does common span continents in Eberron? I believe the natural inhabitants of Xendrik don't speak common. (I could be wrong, but I assumed this was true) If you were gonna talk to the drow, you'd have to learn their language, or the language of the Giants, or hope that somebody (perhaps an Extreme Explorer NPC) had been through there before. Granted, you probably don't wanna talk to the drow on Xendrik anyway. Then there is Argonessen. Mostly dragons, except for the barbarians that live on the shore. I don't believe they speak common either. They might speak a variant though, once again I don't remember.

Dwarves would have had plenty of time to learn Dwarven in Frostfell, Elves would've picked up Elven in Aerenal. I'd say Xendrik but they probably mostly just knew Giant there. Halflings would have learned their tribal Halfling tongue on the Talenta Plains long before explorers disturbed them.

If anything, common either started as a) the human racial language in Sarlona, before humans came to Khorvaire, or b) as a trade language for all the races to learn, so they could communicate and, well, trade. In fact, that is what I understood common to be: a trade language. It isn't as complex as the other languages, and can be easily learned by outsiders enough to get by their day-to-day.
Perhaps it borrows, as the human race is prone to do in d&d, from other races for it's base. English does this quite commonly, most of our language is derived from other languages.

Anyway, the example of Eberron, at least, has a pretty good background to work with for evolving languages. I don't know about other campaigns, but they could work similarly or even (gasp) just not work. D&D is a game. If not having to deal with "does my character understand your particular dialect" makes it easier, then so be it. It's really a preference for the group. But if you do want complexity, it is already there waiting for you.

[Matthew]

The argument for 'Common' being a logical linguistical development in a D&D world is pretty thin. The reason D&D has Common is for the same reason that the people of virtually every world (not all, though) visited by SG-1 speak perfect English and the 'Universal Translator' exists in Star Trek (But Vulcans and Klingons, etc.. can apparently bypass it whenever they need to for dramatic purposes).
Basic, Common, or whatever you want to call it, exists for ease of storytelling and that's it. If you want to complicate things you're free to do so (I know I do; the nature of my own campaign world would make a 'common' language laughable). As long as you can suspend your disbelief you can rationalise the outcome any way you want.

[tomfoolery]

to begin with, i was discussing why there aren't more human languages. i don't really think xendrick counts as a "common" language.

and the klingons and the other shee-hat in Trek (and in Wars, but not so much) all are bipedal, 4-limbed, 5-digits-per-limb, and funny-foreheaded. i'm not saying it should be outlawed, i'm just wondering why people are so lazy that they're not even willing to complicate their plot in a remarkably easy way. just use subtitles, you don't have to speak Russian or whatever.

[Matthew]

There aren't more human languages for the sake of simplicity. Generic D&D has no need of them; however, detailed and complex campaign worlds usually make some attempt at including multiple languages.

It is worth noting that it is not just humans that ought to have diverse languages. All 'races' ought conceivably to have various languages. The Dwarves of the Blue Mountains need not have any linguistical relationship with the Dwarves of the Grey Mountains. Nor need their script be anywhere near similar.

Indeed racially distinct languages can be considered misleading themselves. In Middle Earth the Elves were the first to speak and their language and script is either the basis or main influence for many others. On the other hand, Tolkien himself uses Westron as a 'Common' language to facilitate his story telling (I'm simplifying quite a bit here, I know).

Basically, though, the answer you are looking for is at the heart of the 3.x system, the simplicity mantra.

[tomfoolery]

ah, pulling the tolkien card. yes, true, true, yes. but--there are so many more humes than elves or dwarves or...you know what? nevermind. topic is dead.

[Matthew]

Hey, looks like Wizards now have an article addressing this issue:

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/sg/20060908a

[Fax Celestis]

They're reading our fora!