The Arcane Programmer Guide ( Official Rules Technique )

[Kemptock]

The problem here (I believe) is that any attempt to build a self-resetting mechanism that also does something useful is a violation of the first law of thermodynamics, since the energy of the initial and final states of the mechanism would be equal and work would have been done. Arcane Lock is only capable of storing potential energy and can't generate any by itself, so it won't be able to do so by itself. Essentially, we're trying to build a perpetual motion machine here, and I'm pretty sure it's not possible without the ability to generate energy from nothing. Magic can do that, but I'm not seeing a permanent way by strict RAW.

Should the DM allow Arcane Lock to close things that have been opened, then this is certainly possible because it now gains the ability to do work. Building Arcane Lock + Magic Mouth-based "batteries" is possible, but they won't be rechargeable without mechanical work. Finding a way around that pesky First Law is what we'd need to do this.

Actually even if the self-resetting mechanism does nothing useful, it's still valuable to a system as an observable, physical interaction, something the system currently lacks ( Except for the illusion of a mouth on an object, but that is pretty inaccurate ), since it could introduce more options when it comes to information delivery. We already violated the first law of thermodynamics though ( If one treats everything magic relayed to not qualify under actual physical definitions of energy ) by creating, destroying and creating energy using Arcane Lock.

When a boulder comes crashing down on a thin wooden bar gate, no force in the universe can prevent the incoming results without inserting useful work of it's own to stop it ( Such as the equivalent of installing iron reinforcements to said gate ), yet the casting of Arcane Lock does so. It then also temporarily "destroys" the energy it imbued within that wooden entryway when surpassed with a password, and creates it again a minute later. And it's got an infinite reservoir of such energy, unlike an actual physical mechanism which whenever disabled ( Such as unlatching or dismantling an iron chain ), would require further useful work to put back, and can't happen automatically unless powered by an energy source which in turn is powered by useful work from somewhere rather than creating energy magically.

But as I said, we know what the spell does, not how. We don't know if it made the wood's particles as dense as metal ( Although not being Transmutation, it is an unlikely speculation ), or if it did something like place a locking Forcefield equivalent to Wall of Force on it, so that it becomes impassable and much tougher to penetrate, since it is actually the magical force that needs to be broken or forced open ( Which as an abjuration spell, seems more fitting ).

We do know though that this automatic bolstering of a matter's resilience is a violation, in that it creates new energy. However, that statement only tells us that we could derive useful work by repeatedly casting "Arcane Locks" to bestow energy on objects. The real question that needs to be asked is - How to close back the entryway while the spell is surpassed, until the spell re-asserts, which then makes it a perpetual energy creator.

Hence my particular design. We already have self-closing door hinges. Not really sure what their actual name is, but I'm talking about these ( https://media-cdn.tripadvisor.com/me...se-bar-and.jpg ). But what we don't have and never can have is a way to place a magical enchantment which suddenly makes them locked, impassable as steel and can automatically turn such a feature on/off without any new energy being added to it or any energy taken from it. All that is left to do is how to exploit that little "Forcefield", which is what I attempt in that picture.

If we have a spring that sends a projectile bursting through some upper flimsy gateway, normally as it plummets back down, it won't be strong enough to stop that gravitational pull, just as it wasn't strong enough to keep it from being jettisoned through with momentum. The only way this condition changes is if someone puts in useful work to reinforce said gateway immediately. But Arcane Lock reinforces it instantly and automatically, so that ball is now suddenly encountering much more resistance from that entry than it did just a moment ago, and with no useful work. I'm pretty sure this does cheat energy, the only question is how much and how to use it.

That being said though, I always know of a design that produces industrial amounts of energy in the span of 10 minutes ( Or even an hour with more spell slots ) using Arcane Gate. If that ball is made of Lead, ( 20 feet in diamater, same as that of the Arcane Gate ), then we're looking at an object weighing about 6 tons moving at a speed of roughly 200km/h at best, which is quite the energy output.

[Mjolnirbear]

This is genius. And I would straight-up ban it.

RAW aside, this isn't the intended function of the spell. I'd let it utter a command word (activate a magic item) or allow your ideas for size come into play. But I'd put a full stop onto letting one magic mouth activate another.

That's not to say it's not creative and well-thought out. But I would not allow it to go as far as this logically takes you.

As a side note, you can simply use Morse Code with a binary setup rather than an alphabet setup.

Another side note is that I'm certain my eyes glazed over at the alphabet part, but I'm not certain it would work in less you spelled every word. English has many more sounds than letters: there are two 't' sounds, two 'p' sounds, two 'th' sounds that have nothing to do with the letters, an 'ng' sound you can't even pronounce as an English speaker on its own, and lets not even talk about nasal sounds, voiceless sounds, stressed sounds and the schwa.

Then you have accents. Régional variations. Rolled 'l' and 'r' or something else.

Perhaps you did Account for it. As I said, my eyes glazed over; my superficial knowledge of programming would fit in two bits and it was sorely tested today lol.

[Kemptock]

This is genius. And I would straight-up ban it.

RAW aside, this isn't the intended function of the spell. I'd let it utter a command word (activate a magic item) or allow your ideas for size come into play. But I'd put a full stop onto letting one magic mouth activate another.

That's not to say it's not creative and well-thought out. But I would not allow it to go as far as this logically takes you.

As a side note, you can simply use Morse Code with a binary setup rather than an alphabet setup.

Another side note is that I'm certain my eyes glazed over at the alphabet part, but I'm not certain it would work in less you spelled every word. English has many more sounds than letters: there are two 't' sounds, two 'p' sounds, two 'th' sounds that have nothing to do with the letters, an 'ng' sound you can't even pronounce as an English speaker on its own, and lets not even talk about nasal sounds, voiceless sounds, stressed sounds and the schwa.

Then you have accents. Régional variations. Rolled 'l' and 'r' or something else.

Perhaps you did Account for it. As I said, my eyes glazed over; my superficial knowledge of programming would fit in two bits and it was sorely tested today lol.

You could actually "disable" a town or even a city with the size enchantments alone really, but nevermind that, wouldn't want to stray from the topic too much.

A binary setup was listed, although it would be slower than the Alphabetical model. As for the sounds, you can always add an object or two, but I did not notice much that would prevent an intelligible conversation. You'll have to give me some word example about t and p ( I'm actually not even a native English speaker ), but "th" for example as in "Thistle" would just activate the "F" letter, while "th" as in "The" would activatte "De". Everything else was indeed not intended to be included, including things like regional variations and accents ( The messages are all always going to be in the voice of the casters who enchanted them anyway, although you might do something like use Alter Self to give someone whom you sold a gadget a message that plays in his own voice ). But yeah, the standard model is only for a conversation that can be generally understood, not finesse. Although you could pour more gold in and create a 100 more objects with different sounds to make it seem more natural if you wanted to.

[XmonkTad]

I'm 100% in love with this idea and the guide to go with it. If only there was some way to get around that pesky component cost. Ah well. It's not prohibitively expensive, especially not for things like 30 ft blindsight and telecommunication.

[Saeviomage]

If you can say it, the magic mouth can repeat it. Therefore if you can take the form of something that can create nano-second long ultrasonic pulses, you could vastly upgrade the speed of a network of these.

I guess if you are allowed an exhalation or inhalation as an utterance, then you have the fundamentals of a speaker. Chaining together magic mouths that react to small pressure changes with magic mouths that transmit nanosecond pings, then at the end magic mouths that exhale or inhale tiny amounts is basically creating a digital communication system. Anything you say at one end comes out the other.

"If input a and b are not emitting sound, emit sound" is a nand gate, which means you have the basic building blocks of binary logic. You can make any computer using such a construct.

[Mjolnirbear]

Okay, so in English, all voiceless stops (p, K, t) are either aspirated or unaspirated. The 't' in 'top' and the 't' in 'stop' are different. Put a lit match in front of your mouth and shout stop. The flame barely flickers. But whisper top, and it's likely to go out. We don't even know we do it, but other languages do. It's insignificant to use but it is very important.

A similar difference is with voicing, except we notice this one. The difference between b and p is that one is voiced (voice box is relaxed). When you whisper, you can't tell them apart, because you can't voice a whisper. S and z, t and d, K and g are further examples.

Nasalization. Let's head over to French for this one. Stationne, à verb Form of Parking, pronounces N like we do. But station, which is used like we do, does not pronounce the N. Instead, it nasales the vowel Ô. English does this automatically with all vowels before an N or M; because it's automatic, we don't notice, same with aspiration. But in French, it's a huge deal; failure to do this correctly just screams you're not a native French speaker.

I could give you rules like this forever; the phonetic alphabet comes close to duplicating this, but also has diacritics marks that you have to account for which change the sound (aspirated t looks like 't to the power of h', for instance). But the average English speaker has no idea how many sounds it makes that have nothing to to with spelling. Just trust me on this: an alphabet will not work. The phonetic alphabet might, plus letter variations for diacritics marks, if your World happens to have one.

To make an alphabet work you would have to spell every word. Might as well use morse code.

Of course, with magic, it's usually 'good enough'. A command word can be whispered, or shouted, with change more than simply volume, but they're accepted nonetheless. But that's as much intent of the user than precision. Your system is a fascinating logic argument, but it wouldn't actually work, linguistically speaking, by using an alphabet.

Edit to add: the International phonetic alphabet has 107 letters, 57 diacritic marks, and four additional notes indicating stress, intonation, and other things that don't affect individual sounds but affect syllables. Math that up and you have what I believe is scientifically called a crap ton of individual cables

Edit the second: the whole operation is simpler once someone invents a magic mouth spell variant; you can reprogram what it says with a command word or program it to repeat what it heard since the last time the command was spoken. But that's a terribly intrusive thing to do to your Super creative idea, as it eliminates the need for such extensive logic deductions which are, as I've said, simply amazing.

[Kemptock]

If you can say it, the magic mouth can repeat it. Therefore if you can take the form of something that can create nano-second long ultrasonic pulses, you could vastly upgrade the speed of a network of these.

I guess if you are allowed an exhalation or inhalation as an utterance, then you have the fundamentals of a speaker. Chaining together magic mouths that react to small pressure changes with magic mouths that transmit nanosecond pings, then at the end magic mouths that exhale or inhale tiny amounts is basically creating a digital communication system. Anything you say at one end comes out the other.

"If input a and b are not emitting sound, emit sound" is a nand gate, which means you have the basic building blocks of binary logic. You can make any computer using such a construct.

Yes, Using "Alter Self" to introduce a variety of frequencies has been listed, but I didn't originally want to push things too much. Polymorph however is out of the question per RAW, since it states that "The creature is limited in the actions it can perform by the nature of its new form, and it can't speak, cast spells, or take any other action that requires hands or speech.", unlike True Polymorph ( Which is also optional, yet I didn't add since it's such a high level and already broken enough in it's wording as it is ), so finding a bipedal form of your size to change into which can make these pulses might prove challenging, although "Alter Self's" direct wording is that you decide the sound of your voice, without any other limitations. Although some people might disapprove if one were to say "I change the sound of my voice to be loud as a Supernova", so again, this is why.

But, we don't actually have to vocalize such a short message ourselves in the first place. We could input any message into a magic mouth, even "Beep", and order another magic mouth to activate as soon as that other magic mouth becomes audible. So now the speed of relay is as high as physically possible and far beyond anything even biologically possible. It should also be noted that only the messages themselves have a set speed ( During which they are delivered, and upon finishing, trigger other relays ), but that once finished, they carry over their 30 feet instantaneously. Since other relays don't actually have to wait for a sound wave to travel to them. They just instantly recognize when one has occurred within a 30 feet cube.

Also, I'm not exactly certain so I'll ask you - would it require two, or a trillion magic mouth enchantments to be activated by exhalations and inhalations in the full range of human voice?

[Kemptock]

Okay, so in English, all voiceless stops (p, K, t) are either aspirated or unaspirated. The 't' in 'top' and the 't' in 'stop' are different. Put a lit match in front of your mouth and shout stop. The flame barely flickers. But whisper top, and it's likely to go out. We don't even know we do it, but other languages do. It's insignificant to use but it is very important.

A similar difference is with voicing, except we notice this one. The difference between b and p is that one is voiced (voice box is relaxed). When you whisper, you can't tell them apart, because you can't voice a whisper. S and z, t and d, K and g are further examples.

Nasalization. Let's head over to French for this one. Stationne, à verb Form of Parking, pronounces N like we do. But station, which is used like we do, does not pronounce the N. Instead, it nasales the vowel Ô. English does this automatically with all vowels before an N or M; because it's automatic, we don't notice, same with aspiration. But in French, it's a huge deal; failure to do this correctly just screams you're not a native French speaker.

I could give you rules like this forever; the phonetic alphabet comes close to duplicating this, but also has diacritics marks that you have to account for which change the sound (aspirated t looks like 't to the power of h', for instance). But the average English speaker has no idea how many sounds it makes that have nothing to to with spelling. Just trust me on this: an alphabet will not work. The phonetic alphabet might, plus letter variations for diacritics marks, if your World happens to have one.

To make an alphabet work you would have to spell every word. Might as well use morse code.

Of course, with magic, it's usually 'good enough'. A command word can be whispered, or shouted, with change more than simply volume, but they're accepted nonetheless. But that's as much intent of the user than precision. Your system is a fascinating logic argument, but it wouldn't actually work, linguistically speaking, by using an alphabet.

Edit to add: the International phonetic alphabet has 107 letters, 57 diacritic marks, and four additional notes indicating stress, intonation, and other things that don't affect individual sounds but affect syllables. Math that up and you have what I believe is scientifically called a crap ton of individual cables

I wouldn't be so sure about the lit match as a non-native speaker, unless I wanted to sound more native, I might just as often verbalize it as "Ssssss-TOP!" rather than some accented British "Stahp". Now I understand all that you're saying, I understand the model if made in English will make words sound like a broken first generation immigrant's or a mediocre text reader on the internet rather than native speech, but I'm not really seeing much that would prevent two people from perfectly understanding what's being said, still.

Is there any non extremely rare example of a message that one could send to someone else with only those letters and would make no sense whatsoever? I'm currently just seeing something like "Bring me a bowl of fruit" as just being sent as "Bring me Eh Baul of Froot" yet still completely understandable in sounds. Unless the issue is more about what the magic mouth enchantments will recognize, but their triggers are not set though voice ,rather by detailing a circumstance which can be "as general as you'd like", which as you say, works with magic.

Also, if we were creating a phonetic alphabetical system, I must add - those would be what is scientifically called a crap ton of incredibly thin cables, all bundled up into a single cable container no thicker than a rope! Heh. It would cost 1680gp per cable rather than 260gp, which isn't too much, since the good thing with cables is that they are a one-time investment. The enchantment costs the same, we just need to pay for length in cable material, which can made from cheap durable materials, and is also extremely thin so hardly takes much material even so.

[Mjolnirbear]

Yes. Just voicing and stress.

Desert. - dezERT. To leave the army without leave.
Desert - DEzert. A dry place.
Dessert - dezERT. A sugary treat.

Tied or tide becomes died when voiced. Bye becomes pie when not.

These are common, incredibly common, because we use voicing to tell words apart.


In addition, another snag.
We have an H sound. The French do not. Nor do they have a 'th' sound, neither voiced (the) or unvoiced (thick). You notice this when you hear a French speaker. They 'ze' instead of 'the' and 'taught' instead of 'thought' and otel instead of hotel. A native French speaker struggles with these because they're insignificant, unimportant, irrelevant to all the language rules he knows, but to us, it's extremely noticeable.

Spanish speakers can't start a word with 's' before a stop. When you hear them try to say skip, school, stop, they will actually say eschool, eskip, estop.

English speakers can't start a word with Sr. There is no English word that starts that way. When an English speaker tries to say Sri Lanka, they say 'shree'.

Mandarin can't tell 'R' and 'L' apart. Cue 'engrish'.

So when our Spanish speaking goblin uses your system to speak English to an English elf, they get nonsense words.

Linguistics is complicated. Most of these rules are only known subconsciously. Now add grammar rules. It's a Welsh goblin speaking to the English elf, and instead of subject-verb-object sentences, you get, say, object-subject-verb.

Imagine Yoga. "when you reach 1000 years you won't look good either" became "when 1000 years you reach look as good you will not" (true fact, the grammar is Yiddish). Add a Chinese accent and years, reach, look and will become garbled.

Linguistics is my button. Lol. None of this really matter except in an academic way. Completely derailing the thread and it's purpose. I know it wouldn't work, but the fact that it won't is both pointless, and probably handwavable "because magic" and "who cares".

[Kemptock]

Yes. Just voicing and stress.

Desert. - dezERT. To leave the army without leave.
Desert - DEzert. A dry place.
Dessert - dezERT. A sugary treat.

Tied or tide becomes died when voiced. Bye becomes pie when not.

These are common, incredibly common, because we use voicing to tell words apart.


In addition, another snag.
We have an H sound. The French do not. Nor do they have a 'th' sound, neither voiced (the) or unvoiced (thick). You notice this when you hear a French speaker. They 'ze' instead of 'the' and 'taught' instead of 'thought' and otel instead of hotel. A native French speaker struggles with these because they're insignificant, unimportant, irrelevant to all the language rules he knows, but to us, it's extremely noticeable.

Spanish speakers can't start a word with 's' before a stop. When you hear them try to say skip, school, stop, they will actually say eschool, eskip, estop.

English speakers can't start a word with Sr. There is no English word that starts that way. When an English speaker tries to say Sri Lanka, they say 'shree'.

Mandarin can't tell 'R' and 'L' apart. Cue 'engrish'.

So when our Spanish speaking goblin uses your system to speak English to an English elf, they get nonsense words.

Linguistics is complicated. Most of these rules are only known subconsciously. Now add grammar rules. It's a Welsh goblin speaking to the English elf, and instead of subject-verb-object sentences, you get, say, object-subject-verb.

Imagine Yoga. "when you reach 1000 years you won't look good either" became "when 1000 years you reach look as good you will not" (true fact, the grammar is Yiddish). Add a Chinese accent and years, reach, look and will become garbled.

Linguistics is my button. Lol. None of this really matter except in an academic way. Completely derailing the thread and it's purpose. I know it wouldn't work, but the fact that it won't is both pointless, and probably handwavable "because magic" and "who cares".

Even if someone heard "There's an oasis in the dezERT", isn't it still incredibly clear in context ( And likewise for any other word which is somewhat "off" in the sentence, Oh-ah-sees or whatever ) and on the spelling alone what the message is? As for "Dessert", at least as non-super-native-sensitive-British-speaker, the actual sound seems to be much more closer, exactly the same as "Dizert". As for the language differences, are you saying that this is only a problem between different language speakers ( Which exists without telecommunication too ), different racial speakers ( Which would also exist normally if they can't pronounce something )? I'm not really following, but also don't really want to waste you time.

It will matter to me if it doesn't work or if the system would require different linguistical rules to program properly. I'm pretty sure the triggers are not an issue, since they react to a general audible circumstance. Not just "because magic", rather because it is RAW magic, that they can comprehend general audible conditions, like a "human translator" or speech software or however you want to think of it.

So that leaves the output, the messages that we put for each letter and get transmitted over. As much as I try, I mean, record yourself with a phone saying "Aaaaa" and "Bbbb" and "Ayyyy" ( I in English, but will actually correspond to Y in the enchantment, so that we can enchant "I" with "bEE" like sound ), and "Rrrr". and "nnn" and "ggg" ( As in gold, while J sounds will be assigned to J ), I'm still getting words which are coherent to anyone who knows their rough spelling.

Now play those in sequence to get "Bring". Now instead go for "Bribe" ( Which will be B-R-Y-B ). Now add some "dd" somewhere and do "Bride", or do Bread ( B-R-E-D ). You aren't subconsciously vocalizing anything right now, you're just playing the recorded inputs. You have no control beyond "pressing the letters" which then convey a singular input, just like the Magic Mouths. Broken English? yes. But did you hear "Cleopatra" or "Kirin birin karkarkroki Xenu Dira" at any point? I don't think so. So could someone use your letter recordings by playing them to play something like "Bring bread" or "Bring Bribe, lots of cash" and have someone on the other side understand them? With only some times in which they have to say "Ddddddeeeeee zee ert, HOT, H-O-T, S-A-N ( SUN ), S-E-N-D ( Sand )" to clarify when there's some absent-mindedness?

Two people, of the same race, who speak the exact same form of English. Just how major the situation is? I mean, I know for a fact from doing pure letter recordings and playing in sequences in real life that it's not exactly like hearing Chinese. Regardless though, thanks for the feedback, it does make sense that for precision communication, someone might op for a more accurate phonetic system.

[Mjolnirbear]

Let's start with T. We pronounce it Tee. But you can't use Tee, because then Tara becomes tiara.

So you try to narrow it down. You want something more like Tuh, but very short, and you want the vowel as neutral as possible. It still doesn't work. You get a glottal stop. Tuh-ara,or T'ara. The speaker will say Tara, and the magic mouth is trying to get T'ara. So it fails to interpret it. But suppose it doesn't. The listener heads T'ara. Close enough, you think.

But a glottal stop is rare outside certain British accents. You typically get it when one word follows another with vowels, like 'a eagle'. Which anyone normally corrects to 'an eagle'. So the listener thinks you have two words: Tuh ara. Maybe they think you mean 'to Ara' and wonder if it's a place or person.

How do you say azure? It's a voiced soft J sound actually. But when you tried to reproduce the sound, you used Jay. Zhay just isn't in your 26 letters. Neither is Sh. Or Ch. Or The. Or That. No combination of letters produce these sounds. The? It's the most common word in our language. On the other hand, X is a combination of sounds, C and S, except when it's a Z. N and G together do not make NG. So your magic mouth would say buh ur i nuh guh i nuh guh, which is not at all like bringing. Note the I sound. That could be ih, ee, eye, or whatever depending on how you pronounced it when you coded it.

The IPA tries to capture every sound perfectly. They put tons of work into it. But IPA has a lot of overlap, and the notations are complicated, and it took decades to develop, and we still are incapable of saying à consonant without the vowel sound.

But assumed that it worked. You put in 107 cables times 58 cables times 4 cables to account for all known possible human sound.

Now do all of that again for someone with a lisp, or who stutters. Add the theoretical non-human unique sounds.

It's simply not how language works, your way. It's impossible to turn recordings of letter sounds into recognizable speech without voice-editing software cat can capture the waves of 't' without contamination by other letters.

Do me a favour. Say t. Then say stop. Takes pretty much the same time, right? But the latter contains three extra sounds. Saying them selerate and then adding them together would not sound like stop. Now try discriminatory.

It works as an alphabet if you spell each word. It works in binary the same way. It does not produce speech. You need actual recordings of each word, which is how it's done today. Google doesn't spell it out. It reads the word, then finds a recording of that word, and half the time Alexi or Siri still won't understand you.

[Kemptock]

Let's start with T. We pronounce it Tee. But you can't use Tee, because then Tara becomes tiara.

So you try to narrow it down. You want something more like Tuh, but very short, and you want the vowel as neutral as possible. It still doesn't work. You get a glottal stop. Tuh-ara,or T'ara. The speaker will say Tara, and the magic mouth is trying to get T'ara. So it fails to interpret it. But suppose it doesn't. The listener heads T'ara. Close enough, you think.

But a glottal stop is rare outside certain British accents. You typically get it when one word follows another with vowels, like 'a eagle'. Which anyone normally corrects to 'an eagle'. So the listener thinks you have two words: Tuh ara. Maybe they think you mean 'to Ara' and wonder if it's a place or person.

How do you say azure? It's a voiced soft J sound actually. But when you tried to reproduce the sound, you used Jay. Zhay just isn't in your 26 letters. Neither is Sh. Or Ch. Or The. Or That. No combination of letters produce these sounds. The? It's the most common word in our language. On the other hand, X is a combination of sounds, C and S, except when it's a Z. N and G together do not make NG. So your magic mouth would say buh ur i nuh guh i nuh guh, which is not at all like bringing. Note the I sound. That could be ih, ee, eye, or whatever depending on how you pronounced it when you coded it.

The IPA tries to capture every sound perfectly. They put tons of work into it. But IPA has a lot of overlap, and the notations are complicated, and it took decades to develop, and we still are incapable of saying à consonant without the vowel sound.

But assumed that it worked. You put in 107 cables times 58 cables times 4 cables to account for all known possible human sound.

Now do all of that again for someone with a lisp, or who stutters. Add the theoretical non-human unique sounds.

It's simply not how language works, your way. It's impossible to turn recordings of letter sounds into recognizable speech without voice-editing software cat can capture the waves of 't' without contamination by other letters.

Do me a favour. Say t. Then say stop. Takes pretty much the same time, right? But the latter contains three extra sounds. Saying them selerate and then adding them together would not sound like stop. Now try discriminatory.

It works as an alphabet if you spell each word. It works in binary the same way. It does not produce speech. You need actual recordings of each word, which is how it's done today. Google doesn't spell it out. It reads the word, then finds a recording of that word, and half the time Alexi or Siri still won't understand you.

If I were going for "Azure" I'd probably just opt for "A-zoor" since there's really only full word that resembles it. And "The" seems completely identical for me to "De". But again I'm not a native speaker, while it seems as if "X" would then simply be handled as "Eks" by the letters, and I couldn't follow the bribing example. "Buh" seems right to me, as extremely short as possible. "Ur" would be to me more o a guttural sound, like going "Brrrrrrrr" from cold, the vibrating "Brrrrrr". ( Without the B ). As for the I, as specified, the letter should actually be "Y" when you put the message of how English people say "I". In the "I" letter I'd put the "Ee" like "Bee"., while Nuh to me seem like it would be more recorded as the beginning of going "Nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnope!" rather than "nuh".

But yes, I can see things might not be ideal, I'll just defer to you on this. And when I said I tested recordings, I don't mean google translate or Siri. I'm not typing words into any speech software, I'm literally recording sounds into a recorder. As in saying what you call an extremely short "Buh" ( Which to me sounds like a perfect milisecond "B" ) and so forth, into a pure recorder like you have in a windows 98 computer, and then playing those sounds in sequence to form words with them, and getting things which seem mostly understandable. Maybe because I'm not a native English speaker, I'm not doing them with an accent/or some uncontrolled slips that you would expect some British guy to, and therefore I'm not entirely sync with you, on top of not being a linguist.

But again, it at least as I said, I can see that it is unclear in many times, and I'll defer to you on the subject. I guess it will have to be spelled out or invested with more gold for precision ( Which if it's actually 107 TIMES 58 and then times 4, is going to be 248,240, which I guess eliminates a precision system for most low-level characters and regular individuals. But being half the price of a palace or keep, probably actually still affordable as a one-time investment for kingdoms or a merchant guild or just a spellcaster with an infinite gold generator trick, or anyone who can take a trip to the Elemental Plane of Earth, while everyone else will settle for spelling or Swift Binary. Or making out the words ). However, I doubt that adapting the program for someone with a lisp would be a priority in the campaign heh, academia aside, and perhaps different races will need their own recordings. I mean, it's already abundantly clear that Aarakocra or Goblins might need a unique model in the first place.

[Kane0]

This is fantastic, I’m getting lessons in both engineering and linguistics all at once!

[Mortis_Elrod]

This is fantastic, I’m getting lessons in both engineering and linguistics all at once!

Isn’t it great? 10/10 would thread again.

[Azgeroth]

you totally could make a computer with this system.

there are 7 kinds of logic gate, all but 1 require 2 inputs, that last 1 takes 1 input and inverts it..

i think where things will get tricky is in replicating micro processors, as they are basically super miniaturised circuits in their own right, but if you are permitted to use hair and sand grains, your rolling.. just need someone with small enough hands to make the thing.. (tiny spider familiar anyone?)

as for actually making the things (schematics and plans) a quick google of basic early computer circuitry should do just fine..

i would though squarely put this in the realm of artificers.. though you could make the backbone (core systems) on 24/7 with magic mouth, aside from auditory outputs, if you want anything visual you either need a very clever arcane lock shenanigans to reveal continuous flames (if you can persuade your DM to have prestidigitate effects permanent, you could make a tv!) which sounds squarely like the artificers bag.. or maybe transmutation wizards??

the next problem... how in the hell did your character just re-create several hundred years of very advanced math to the point they could by themselves, create computer science??? solve that one and you are golden my friends...

if your DM says technology doesnt exist in DnD (Faerun) ask them about sigil...

[Saeviomage]

Yes, Using "Alter Self" to introduce a variety of frequencies has been listed, but I didn't originally want to push things too much. Polymorph however is out of the question per RAW, since it states that "The creature is limited in the actions it can perform by the nature of its new form, and it can't speak, cast spells, or take any other action that requires hands or speech.", unlike True Polymorph ( Which is also optional, yet I didn't add since it's such a high level and already broken enough in it's wording as it is ), so finding a bipedal form of your size to change into which can make these pulses might prove challenging, although "Alter Self's" direct wording is that you decide the sound of your voice, without any other limitations. Although some people might disapprove if one were to say "I change the sound of my voice to be loud as a Supernova", so again, this is why.

Well, you could combine glyph of warding with magic mouth to lift that restraint. It's just a shame you can't use the output of a magic mouth to sample another magic mouth...

But, we don't actually have to vocalize such a short message ourselves in the first place. We could input any message into a magic mouth, even "Beep", and order another magic mouth to activate as soon as that other magic mouth becomes audible. So now the speed of relay is as high as physically possible and far beyond anything even biologically possible. It should also be noted that only the messages themselves have a set speed ( During which they are delivered, and upon finishing, trigger other relays ), but that once finished, they carry over their 30 feet instantaneously. Since other relays don't actually have to wait for a sound wave to travel to them. They just instantly recognize when one has occurred within a 30 feet cube.

Speed of relay isn't what you want though. You want very short messages so you have bandwidth. If you want a processor, then you want it to magic mouths NOT making sound as half of your binary state. The shorter a sound your mouth is capable of, the higher the bandwidth of any component you make with it - the quicker it can switch between 'on' and 'off'

Also, I'm not exactly certain so I'll ask you - would it require two, or a trillion magic mouth enchantments to be activated by exhalations and inhalations in the full range of human voice?

Depends on how short an inhalation/exhalation you can get. If you can get short enough and rapid enough then one: you can synthesize any pressure change by chaining it extremely far above the maximum frequency you want to replicate.

Otherwise it depends on how good you want it to sound: but it's binary not linear. When someone talks about "8 bit sound", that is the count of mouths you would need to get that audio effect.

FWIW, you can still understand speech and get an indication of the speaker all the way down to 1 bit sound. It's horrible to listen to (it's staticy and scratchy), but it's doable.

i think where things will get tricky is in replicating micro processors, as they are basically super miniaturised circuits in their own right, but if you are permitted to use hair and sand grains, your rolling.. just need someone with small enough hands to make the thing.. (tiny spider familiar anyone?)

The main issue is that every logic gate requires another magic mouth... but since a given magic mouth can execute logic of arbitrary difficulty, you would't need to. You can potentially put the ENTIRE PROCESSOR in a single mouth, but you would need to be able to contain the whole processor's logic flow in your head, which might prove incredibly complex. However you can store some pretty complex logic there, stuff which would require hundreds of gates:

"If a creature says 'repeat message' and at the elapsed time after they have said that after the last time a creature said 'record message' the creature that said 'record message' was generating pressure from it's mouth, repeat your message"

I mean you could probably finesse the language, but that's basically a voice-activated message recording and playback system in a single mouth, expressed in english. Note that the spell doesn't require you to express the logic of your magic mouth in any way - it just behaves according to whatever trigger you choose.

as for actually making the things (schematics and plans) a quick google of basic early computer circuitry should do just fine..

i would though squarely put this in the realm of artificers.. though you could make the backbone (core systems) on 24/7 with magic mouth, aside from auditory outputs, if you want anything visual you either need a very clever arcane lock shenanigans to reveal continuous flames (if you can persuade your DM to have prestidigitate effects permanent, you could make a tv!) which sounds squarely like the artificers bag.. or maybe transmutation wizards??

the next problem... how in the hell did your character just re-create several hundred years of very advanced math to the point they could by themselves, create computer science??? solve that one and you are golden my friends...

There's not really a lot to solve. Science has never proceeded at a sedentary and steady pace. It was always a set of leaps and bounds. If anything, it's amazing that this hasn't already been done. Maybe it is? It would explain all the "DM-only tricks" that wizards always seem to get up to.

[jiriku]

With a more careful reading of arcane lock, I think we do have a challenge, although not the one I thought originally. However, it is a challenge that can be overcome.

Arcane Lock:You touch a closed door, window, gate, chest, or other entryway, and it becomes locked for the duration. You and the creatures you designate when you cast this spell can open the object normally. You can also set a password that, when spoken within 5 feet of the object, suppresses this spell for 1 minute.

A couple of elements here:

The spell must be cast on a container or entryway. It cannot be cast on a lock.

When the spell is cast, the item becomes locked. If it does not possess the capacity to be locked normally, presumably this is a magical locking force. If it does possess the capacity to be locked normally, I make the assumption (A) that its lock is magically actuated into its locked position and reinforced. Alternately, I can make the assumption (B) that the locking is always by magical force and not by use of a physical lock, even if one is present.

When a command word is spoken, the spell is SUPPRESSED. Note that the text does not say the item becomes unlocked, merely that the magic is suppressed and the object can be opened normally. But either (C) the lock is magically actuated into its open position so that the object can be "opened normally" or (D) no motion occurs.

We have four possible pairs of assumptions: A*C, A*D, B*C, B*D. I find A*C to be the most plausible interpretation, but B*D is also reasonable. A*D is a much narrower interpretation and I'll discard B*C as rather silly.

Under A*C, we have magically generated reciprocating motion. This is the most favorable interpretation and essentially jump-starts the industrial revolution.

Under A*D we have magically generated motion in only one direction. I can work with that by specifying that the lock is a vertically oriented power screw able to freely rotate, that locks the object in its UP position and unlocks it in its DOWN position. When arcane lock activates, the power screw makes an up-stroke. When arcane lock is suppressed, the power screw unscrews itself by the force of gravity. It is then in position to make another up-stroke when the spell reactivates. This is a little awkward to work with but we still have unidirectional motion and eventually the industrial revolution.

Under B*D we have to work much harder, but as you noted we have an object whose resistance to motion increases considerably. Let me think on that for a bit and see what I can come up with.

[Kemptock]

you totally could make a computer with this system.

there are 7 kinds of logic gate, all but 1 require 2 inputs, that last 1 takes 1 input and inverts it..

i think where things will get tricky is in replicating micro processors, as they are basically super miniaturised circuits in their own right, but if you are permitted to use hair and sand grains, your rolling.. just need someone with small enough hands to make the thing.. (tiny spider familiar anyone?)

as for actually making the things (schematics and plans) a quick google of basic early computer circuitry should do just fine..

i would though squarely put this in the realm of artificers.. though you could make the backbone (core systems) on 24/7 with magic mouth, aside from auditory outputs, if you want anything visual you either need a very clever arcane lock shenanigans to reveal continuous flames (if you can persuade your DM to have prestidigitate effects permanent, you could make a tv!) which sounds squarely like the artificers bag.. or maybe transmutation wizards??

the next problem... how in the hell did your character just re-create several hundred years of very advanced math to the point they could by themselves, create computer science??? solve that one and you are golden my friends...

if your DM says technology doesnt exist in DnD (Faerun) ask them about sigil...

You can make fully automatic, holographic displays with photorealistic quality as it stands, using thrice-fold programmed illusions. Just that due to the fact that much like a Magic Mouth message, they only play scripted performances once triggered, you'll need tens of thousands of castings to create even a basic screen, but again I did not include ideas such as that since I didn't want to include projects that were too outlandish, otherwise posters would focus on those and get angry that I'm posting unrealistic ( In most campaigns ) prospects for a player. Seeing as how even a 20th level pure caster could only make 6 programmed illusions a day, which gives him 2 permanent "pixels" of a single color, for a single stationary screen, not to mention all the Magic Mouth outputs it would take to create something that is basically a Windows display. Might take centuries.

In theory though, if already having infinite time or gold to try and make a "computer", then yeah you can make a full holographic display. You could create the basic "touch screen" by placing illusions that activate ( While all those who are deactivated are imperceptible until they are ) upon where your finger is on the hologram, you could create the computer mouse with illusions that respond to the visual circumstances of an actual mouse's movements, and so on, given unlimited time.

The most rudimentary form of 2D display with Programmed Illusions, with 100 "pixels" or so in black and white, ( Which you would need 200 for, and thrice-fold illusions for all of them ), would take 600 castings of Programmed Illusion, or 33 days. For a level 20 spellcaster. So if someone was already at endgame yet still playing and had that downtime, a possible endeavor, but gets more and more timely with even slightly more complexity to the display.

That is why I was trying to build a visual display with Arcane Lock. Which I did, it works, you don't need any continual flame or convincing or for an entryway to "move" for it to work. It works based on the principles explained, which is sloping "bowling lanes" for colored balls and Arcane Gates stopping them in the positions where they need to be to create a certain visual image. You just need to manually reset the small balls by picking it up what the device drops and dropping it back down the chute in every reset, but nothing that a familiar couldn't do.

And Arcane Lock on the other hand, can be cast 14,400 times in 8 hours by a 20th level Wizard with Spell Mastery.

With a more careful reading of arcane lock, I think we do have a challenge, although not the one I thought originally. However, it is a challenge that can be overcome.




A couple of elements here:

The spell must be cast on a container or entryway. It cannot be cast on a lock.

When the spell is cast, the item becomes locked. If it does not possess the capacity to be locked normally, presumably this is a magical locking force. If it does possess the capacity to be locked normally, I make the assumption (A) that its lock is magically actuated into its locked position and reinforced. Alternately, I can make the assumption (B) that the locking is always by magical force and not by use of a physical lock, even if one is present.

When a command word is spoken, the spell is SUPPRESSED. Note that the text does not say the item becomes unlocked, merely that the magic is suppressed and the object can be opened normally. But either (C) the lock is magically actuated into its open position so that the object can be "opened normally" or (D) no motion occurs.

We have four possible pairs of assumptions: A*C, A*D, B*C, B*D. I find A*C to be the most plausible interpretation, but B*D is also reasonable. A*D is a much narrower interpretation and I'll discard B*C as rather silly.

Under A*C, we have magically generated reciprocating motion. This is the most favorable interpretation and essentially jump-starts the industrial revolution.

Under A*D we have magically generated motion in only one direction. I can work with that by specifying that the lock is a vertically oriented power screw able to freely rotate, that locks the object in its UP position and unlocks it in its DOWN position. When arcane lock activates, the power screw makes an up-stroke. When arcane lock is suppressed, the power screw unscrews itself by the force of gravity. It is then in position to make another up-stroke when the spell reactivates. This is a little awkward to work with but we still have unidirectional motion and eventually the industrial revolution.

Under B*D we have to work much harder, but as you noted we have an object whose resistance to motion increases considerably. Let me think on that for a bit and see what I can come up with.

True, can't be cast on a lock as I've expressed in the post. I also thought long ago about lock mechanism movements, but if you post something on these forums which is based on a ruling rather than pure RAW, you get torn to shreds. Any method must be viable based on RAW alone and all DM rulings are automatically assumed to be antagonistic to the player. I will say though, B*D is actually the more likely scenario, if one were to speculate about things like that from the perspective of magic.

Check out the description of the School of Abjuration ( To which Arcane Lock belongs ) in the PHB and then take a look at every Abjuration spell available. Unlike Transmutation, which is the school dedicated to affecting matter directly, no Abjuration spell ever really alters the environment in a direct way. Whenever it does add something to the environment ( Glyph of Warding, Globe of Invulnerability, Imprisonment, Antimagic Field ), it always acts only through it's own magical energy. It doesn't shift the state of matter directly. Imprisonment's "Chaining" might be the only notable exception, in which the spell creates chains, firmly rooted in the ground, which hold the target in place. But we still have no idea how those magical chains made out of thin air interact with physics, since for example the spell says that "The target is restrained until the spell ends, and it can't move or be moved by any means until then.". Now, one might summarize, that if you were to cast the spell on say a creature standing on some dungeon floor, and then bring a powered drill and dislodge the areas of floor those chains are attached to, then he'd be able to move with the chains and the bit of floor attached to them dragging behind, but we know it isn't the case. It probably just remains frozen in place regardless of the chains.

So aside from that, based on almost all Abjuration spells, which are in fact magical force-fields ( Globe of Invulnerability, Prismatic Wall ), it would make sense for a DM to rule for B*D and not for moving matter as if it were Transmutation or another school, when no such movement was specified. And it is after all called "Arcane Lock" moreso than "Reinforce Lock" or the like. For a universally accepted method, B*D surely must be solved, it seems.

[Easy_Lee]

This is great. By the strictest of RAW and with no additional assumptions made, one can make a see / hear earring for 20 gold that says "see" if a creature other than you is seen moving, and "hear" if a creature other than you is heard. That not only tells you when something is nearby, but also lets you know if it's invisible (hear only) or silent (see only).

I wonder how much nobles will pay for intercom with a switch. Probably a lot more than 260 gold plus materials (trigger sounds upon hearing them uttered by something other than the magic mouth when the switch is up).

I don't think it's a stretch to say that the mouth can hear and see anything that can be heard or seen. But if a DM wanted to balance it, I'd set the opposed stealth DC equal to the caster's stat. However, that would be homebrew.

[8wGremlin]

This is great. By the strictest of RAW and with no additional assumptions made, one can make a see / hear earring for 20 gold that says "see" if a creature other than you is seen moving, and "hear" if a creature other than you is heard. That not only tells you when something is nearby, but also lets you know if it's invisible (hear only) or silent (see only).

I wonder how much nobles will pay for intercom with a switch. Probably a lot more than 260 gold plus materials (trigger sounds upon hearing them uttered by something other than the magic mouth when the switch is up).

I don't think it's a stretch to say that the mouth can hear and see anything that can be heard or seen. But if a DM wanted to balance it, I'd set the opposed stealth DC equal to the caster's stat. However, that would be homebrew.

You would probably want to have them round the other way, as having "see,hear" every turn would be a nightmare.
However if you had them set up inversely, they would only fire on the exceptions.
detecting "invisible" and "silent" when they respectively triggered.

[Easy_Lee]

You would probably want to have them round the other way, as having "see,hear" every turn would be a nightmare.
However if you had them set up inversely, they would only fire on the exceptions.
detecting "invisible" and "silent" when they respectively triggered.

Or, just take the earring off when you can see what you're looking for.

[Saeviomage]

Since the logic is arbitrary, you could make a magic mouth announce "detected" when it detects "the most recent thing I asked you to look for or listen for".

[Moosoculars]

Enemy detector

A thin wire which can be slipped under a door, through a key hole or a hole you drill. It counts the number of monsters it can "See"

If there is a creature within 30', not including "Party" count 1
If there are two creatures with '30, not including "Party" AND message 1 counted 1 say 2
etc

Can be improved by speaking the types of creature as well.

[Saeviomage]

Enemy detector

A thin wire which can be slipped under a door, through a key hole or a hole you drill. It counts the number of monsters it can "See"

If there is a creature within 30', not including "Party" count 1
If there are two creatures with '30, not including "Party" AND message 1 counted 1 say 2
etc

Can be improved by speaking the types of creature as well.

"If you have said beep less times than the number of creatures that were in line of sight at the red end of the piece of wire you are on when a creature holding the wire said 'detect', say beep"

If you want creature types or numbers read out, you need to make multiple mouths.

[Tetrasodium]

This is genius. And I would straight-up ban it.

RAW aside, this isn't the intended function of the spell. I'd let it utter a command word (activate a magic item) or allow your ideas for size come into play. But I'd put a full stop onto letting one magic mouth activate another.

That's not to say it's not creative and well-thought out. But I would not allow it to go as far as this logically takes you.

As a side note, you can simply use Morse Code with a binary setup rather than an alphabet setup.

Another side note is that I'm certain my eyes glazed over at the alphabet part, but I'm not certain it would work in less you spelled every word. English has many more sounds than letters: there are two 't' sounds, two 'p' sounds, two 'th' sounds that have nothing to do with the letters, an 'ng' sound you can't even pronounce as an English speaker on its own, and lets not even talk about nasal sounds, voiceless sounds, stressed sounds and the schwa.

Then you have accents. Régional variations. Rolled 'l' and 'r' or something else.

Perhaps you did Account for it. As I said, my eyes glazed over; my superficial knowledge of programming would fit in two bits and it was sorely tested today lol.

I know this is an older thread, but english has 44 of them It's hardly an impossibly large number. text to speech programs & modern voice recognition(siri/cortana/alexa/google's voice thing/dragon) all make use of those sounds rather than recording every possible word & including that gigantic file. Given the "quality" of audio from early audio recordings & communication devices, it would not need to be perfect & people would learn to speak like their device needs quickly enough. Back in the day, PDA's had their own written input language & it was popular enough that you can put it on modern devices. in the end though, the difference between "send help olc invasion" and "send help orc invasion is pretty minimal" Since you are already putting 44 of them on, including a couple extra to differentiate things like how L & R get munged by different dialects would just be a matter of deciding how important it is. The idea that people wouldn't learn how to speak to their cable is unreasonable as long as it was a useful oer important enough implementation to warrant it

[Project_Mayhem]

As much as I like programming in things that weren't intended for coding, I think the biggest RAW counter to this is the DC of the Programming Skill check to invent the entire discipline from scratch with no prior innovation and invention to iterate from. 50? 60 maybe? Assuming you can make it untrained

[Spyderson]

Could we make vending machines of a sort with this?

Say 8 small boxes with glass doors to display what's inside.
Each box with a unique arcane locked password.
A coinbox with a magic mouth inside it is affixed to the side of each box.
The trigger for the magic mouth is a gold/silver/ copper coin entering the box through the coin slot.
When the correct amount is entered the mouth whispers the password for the lockbox.
The corresponding box is unlocked.
Customer retrieves their desired item.

Could probably be optimized a lot. ie. Make the hinge for the box at the top so the door closes after the customer takes their item.

Edit1:reformatted to make clearer

Edit:2 i'm pretty sure with a trap door lid you could even make an arcane lock/magic mouth top feeding hopper with a 1 minute delay so the box refils automatically? I'm away from my books right now to read over the spells again and draw any plans so I'm not 100% on how it'd work.

[JoeJ]

The biggest glitch I see with this idea is that the alphabet won't work; you'd have to use phonemes to get understandable speech. A wizard who doesn't think of that is not going to be able to accomplish much.

A repeating Arcane Lock door is pretty easy. Just design the door so that the weight of whatever is behind it pushes it open, and then a spring pulls it closed again after whatever it was falls through. After a minute of being closed, the spell is effective again and you can put something else behind it, ready to drop next time. Build a series of doors and chutes with the proper delay triggers and you should be able to refill your traps (or whatever) from a central holding bin.

Combining this with my house rule that allows objects to go through a Teleportation Circle, I'm seeing a way to get vast quantities of grain into a city and sort it into different bins for distribution.

[Aaron Underhand]

In volume 2 of his book "Winning Ways" John Conway explains how to take the "game of life" (which he invented) and make a Turing machine, capable of being programmed and doing arbitrary computation

This is a very useful step-by-step guide into make a general purpose stored program computer from Magic mouth.

Historically one of the driving forces for such computational engines was the need for Navigation and Ballistic tables for the military. Remember the prize for solving the Longitude problem? Such a device would have many applications, even without anything other than auditory read out of results

While a "small number" (thousands) of transistors magic mouths can make a simple computer that will far exceed human calculation, do remember just how many transistors are in your smartphone and watch....

Spoiler: A 7 transistor radio!?

Show

Yes I'm old enough to remember when a 7 transistor radio was a marketing slogan (so much better than 5...)
However there is this thing called Moore's Law, and the number of transistors on a single integrated circuit has roughly doubled, every 18 months since the things were invented. My old BBC micro had a processor called a 6502 in it. They named it for the number of transistors in the Central Processing Unit chip. These days your phone probably has more than 64 Billion transistors in it, so 640 billion gold pieces to replicate in Magic Mouths... and people say there is nothing to spend your gold on in 5E

[Waterdeep Merch]

This is a really cool thought exercise. Even without going down this huge rabbit hole of advanced computing and holographic communication, I've gotten ideas for simple programming functions that are useful for everyday adventuring. I'd recommend any would-be wizard read through this if only to demonstrate what intelligent application of even modest spells can do.

For all the awesome advanced stuff, the only thing I'm having trouble figuring out is automated data storage and recovery (excuse me if I just missed it, there was a lot to take in). Arcane locks seem to be the best key, but those are, at best, binary states (locked or unlocked), meaning you'd need an absolutely massive array of them to store data of any sort. Several spring-loaded hinge traps containing water, hovering over a large observable "hard drive" that itself has hinge traps in every subsequent hole so that the data can be erased as desired, is my best thought. Can we do better?