|
Post by badger2305 on Jul 5, 2021 17:11:43 GMT -6
I had considered they may be more fully fleshed out, functional languages like Druidic, but then I imagine a Pegasus or a Unicorn trying to communicate, and the best I could imagine would be them pawing symbols into the dirt with their hoofs, or clomping in a particular pattern, like morse code. Yeah well, they talk you know…just like freaking Blink Dogs. They say…”Niiieee Heee Heeey Hoow Aaare Yooouuuu?” "Matthews! We're getting another one of those strange 'aw blah ess pan yol' sounds!" ![](https://i.pinimg.com/originals/c6/d9/56/c6d956c3368121327f0c5be653f1ac80.jpg)
|
|
|
Post by thegreyelf on Jul 6, 2021 7:10:08 GMT -6
I had considered they may be more fully fleshed out, functional languages like Druidic, but then I imagine a Pegasus or a Unicorn trying to communicate, and the best I could imagine would be them pawing symbols into the dirt with their hoofs, or clomping in a particular pattern, like morse code. Well in this case it could be a factor of comprehansion vs. SPEAKING. A dog can build a vocabulary equivalent to a 5-year old child, for example, but they cannot speak it, only understand it. Chimps and Gorillas can build human vocabularies that they cannot verbalize. Same with dolphins.
|
|
|
Post by dicebro on Nov 21, 2021 9:29:21 GMT -6
So I’m going out on a limb here. My argument is that the original use of “alignment” in gaming was for organizing opposing “Orders of Battle” in fantasy settings. See Chainmail’s Fantasy Supplement where Gygax creates a table for how these creatures “line up” against each other for a large scale battle with miniatures. So, at first, there were no ties to individual morality. Alignment was strictly intended for military formation and battle lines. It was a tool to help wargamers create armies.
The wargame “line up” was continued in OD&D on Pg 9 of Booklet 1. Why? It helped sell the game. With the alignment table, the new “Rules for Fantastic Wargames Campaigns” would be recognizable to an identifiable market. The wargamers who enjoyed Chainmail would open the OD&D booklet and almost immediately say “Hey I recognize this!!, I guess I need to buy this game too.”
Later on “Alignment” would be warped and twisted into an unworkable morality mess that would just cause problems and NO FUN.
So for alignment languages. Alignment languages are the answer to a rational question probably asked by a Chainmail play tester: “How are my goblin units going to to communicate with my wraith units on the battlefield?”
That’s pretty much it. “Alignment languages” solved a technical problem, and then went on to help solve a marketing problem. Thus I have felt free, as a referee, to justify eliminating alignments and corresponding languages almost altogether from my OD&D games unless I have a scenario involving mass combat.
Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by blackwyvern on Nov 21, 2021 16:01:25 GMT -6
I frequently do the same. Alignment serves a purpose in a Law vs. Chaos game, but if you want a more organic game alignment can just go away. I never use alignment as a morality compass. It either dictates a sides in a conflict or serves no purpose and is left on the editing floor. Detect evil works perfectly well with no alignment, actually works better without the assumption that evil = chaotic alignment.
|
|
|
Post by dicebro on Nov 21, 2021 18:45:26 GMT -6
I frequently do the same. Alignment serves a purpose in a Law vs. Chaos game, but if you want a more organic game alignment can just go away. I never use alignment as a morality compass. It either dictates a sides in a conflict or serves no purpose and is left on the editing floor. Detect evil works perfectly well with no alignment, actually works better without the assumption that evil = chaotic alignment. I use this definition of evil: causing harm to another for no reasonable purpose.
|
|
|
Post by delta on Nov 21, 2021 19:51:42 GMT -6
... So for alignment languages. Alignment languages are the answer to a rational question probably asked by a Chainmail play tester: “How are my goblin units going to to communicate with my wraith units on the battlefield?”... That's a pretty interesting take. I might not do exactly the same thing, but I'm thinking about fantasy mass combat all the time, so it might be useful for me to consider how those things interrelate. That might argue not for every single creature of an alignment to know the language, but the special captains, lieutenants, heroes, etc. to do so. Granted that's not how EGG seemed to play it, as MM has claimed that players all picked Neutral alignment and then picked up Lawful & Chaotic as added languages so they could talk to anything at that point. ![8-|](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/nerd.png)
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Nov 23, 2021 10:00:29 GMT -6
Just FWIW: I don't have alignment languages per se. I have eight languages. And when I roll them randomly they go like this: Everyone has common. Then roll a d6: 1. Ancient (human) 2. Barbarian (human beings that don't speak common) 3. Elven 4. Dwarven 5. Fell ("giant-types") 6. Cosmic If "cosmic" is rolled: roll on subtable, d3: 1. Celestial (intelligent lawful monsters) 2. Elemental (intelligent neutral monsters) 3. Chthonic (intelligent chaotic monsters) If a Magic User rolls up Cosmic, then the dialect known is always the one associated with his/her alignment. So, the "cosmic" language are, indeed, something like "alignment" languages. But human beings who choose an alignment do not automatically know the languages of the monsters who define those sides. And, with much study, human beings can learn any of the alignment languages -- they are not magically associated with their given alignments. So, I suppose I am close to Porphyre's view.
|
|
|
Post by Starbeard on Nov 27, 2021 0:31:15 GMT -6
Here's something I was just pondering yesterday. It's an attempt to allow the universal, unexplained, seemingly mystical alignment languages as they are seen in the rulebooks, while mechanically curbing their potential as a free know alignment/speak with magical animals while parleying:
- Alignment languages are a bit like “sending” in ElfQuest, a bit like the pseudo-telepathy of the “mentalics” in the Foundation series, a bit like the light and dark tongues of Tolkien. All things with an alignment have some inherent comprehension of their own alignment speech, and intelligent beings may communicate through them as a language.
- “Speaking” is a telepathic projection of sound, “heard” by all within earshot of normal sound (and only within earshot—so they are affected by silence spells, for example). The rule of thumb is that the communication is telepathically projected, but is otherwise treated and affected entirely as normal, non-magical sound, with the exception that there is no ability to whisper: ALL creatures within earshot will ALWAYS hear. Creatures of different alignment will react with hostility to the utterance: unaligned beings will drop at least one level of reaction, and oppositely aligned beings will react with violent and/or hateful intent. Hirelings will lose at least one point to their loyalty scores.
- Comprehension is usually automatic, but ability to communicate a function of level. Characters have a 10% probability of successfully communicating per level or HD. Magic-users and clerics have a 15% chance per level. Once a character has failed to communicate, neither comprehension nor use of the alignment language will be successful for the rest of the day. Generic, normal humanoids may have a 0% or 5% (1/2 HD) or a 10% (1HD) chance to communicate, per the whims of the referee and his world.
- The utterance of an alignment tongue is a very taxing business. Each time alignment speech is initiated, the speaker loses 100-600 XP times his current level. The responder may always respond without loss of XP. Since monsters do not have XP, it is up to the referee to decide which of them are therefore barred from initiating alignment communication, and which of them may initiate freely.
- It should probably be the case that communication should be both easier and less costly as characters move closer to their alignment planes of existence. On a Lawful Plane, lawful characters should just be able to speak freely.
|
|
aramis
Level 4 Theurgist
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star.png)
Posts: 172
|
Post by aramis on Nov 28, 2021 12:36:18 GMT -6
I've not used alignment languages since the early 1980's.
I find them breaking verisimilitude for me.
|
|
|
Post by qomannon on Jan 4, 2022 21:08:06 GMT -6
I treat "alignment language" similar to how Latin was used by the church during the dark ages... although it was a "dead language" not spoken by the populous, the clergy used it amongst themselves and during liturgies and mass.
Also, other "alignment languages" in my campaigns are languages, mostly dead, that are co-opted by secret societies amongst themselves. It would be like some secret occult sect "resurrecting" ancient Babylonian or Sumerian for their rituals and written archives, while the language was mostly lost to the general population otherwise.
I treat "common" as a regional language, similar to how Koine Greek was the mercantile language (used for commerce and daily transactions in Jerusalem during Biblical New Testament times, even though most locals spoke Hebrew and/or Aramaic otherwise).
|
|
|
Post by retrorob on Feb 13, 2022 16:28:12 GMT -6
Take note though, that common tongue in OD&D is known by the "most humans". Most, so not all of them. BTPBD has a rule for that (if it comes from the GD&D draft, I cannot say). On the other hand, every creature and intelligent monster has its own language + can speak a divisional tongue, just like men. I'd say that Alignment languages are more important than we think nowadays and perhaps they enhance the idea of the party composed of the same division members. As I understand it, the divisional tongues are clearly connected to the Anderson-Moorcock cosmic conflict (Law vs Chaos) They are not "secret" or "dead" like Latin in the Middle Ages. Some simple peasant without access to education for sure can be under INT 9 and can speak only Law.
|
|
|
Post by Starbeard on Feb 13, 2022 18:54:18 GMT -6
Take note though, that common tongue in OD&D is known by the "most humans". Most, so not all of them. BTPBD has a rule for that (if it comes from the GD&D draft, I cannot say). On the other hand, every creature and intelligent monster has its own language + can speak a divisional tongue, just like men. I'd say that Alignment languages are more important than we think nowadays and perhaps they enhance the idea of the party composed of the same division members. As I understand it, the divisional tongues are clearly connected to the Anderson-Moorcock cosmic conflict (Law vs Chaos) They are not "secret" or "dead" like Latin in the Middle Ages. Some simple peasant without access to education for sure can be under INT 9 and can speak only Law. Now that's a hot take, I hadn't thought from that angle before. All the humans and nearhumans scattered across the galaxy in Stargate can communicate with the Earthlings not because everyone speaks English, but because everyone speaks Law. If a character has a low enough INT to have only one language, it will be the cosmic alignment language, not "Common." I'd enjoy a game like that.
|
|
|
Post by dicebro on Feb 21, 2022 18:35:49 GMT -6
Mine is a minimalist approach: There are no alignment languages in Chainmail other than implied battlefield signals. Thus orcs and ogres from different lands, who “align” themselves with the armies of chaos, can understand when to charge, when to rally, etc. The same goes for OD&D. Gygax had an interesting idea but it just isn’t fun to deal with.
“Alignment” started out as a mechanic for fantasy mass combat, and that’s where it stays for me.
|
|
|
Post by Starbeard on Feb 21, 2022 20:03:47 GMT -6
I can understand that. It's worth saying that—even in OD&D—an idea can be accepted as an interesting concept and narrative device, but rejected as too cumbersome a game device to deal with.
|
|
|
Post by dicebro on Feb 22, 2022 7:16:11 GMT -6
I can understand that. It's worth saying that—even in OD&D—an idea can be accepted as an interesting concept and narrative device, but rejected as too cumbersome a game device to deal with. It’s interesting how folks just seem to love Alignment and that’s okay with me too. ❤️
|
|
|
Post by coffeezombie on Feb 24, 2022 7:26:16 GMT -6
I treat alignment language as a shared understanding of phrases, symbols, and tales. Two Lawfully aligned folks who meet up will easily share some values, and will use hand symbols, phrases, and know specific references that while not a language serve as some common points of understanding and basic communication.
For example, just had a cleric encounter a wandering elf and in their conversation they both began to understand each other as lawful. They didn't walk up and say "Bah Weep Grah Nah Weep Nini Bong" or something; in their dialogue, both saw their allegiance shining through their words, and both were trying to communicate to the other that they were lawfully aligned. The half-orc with them did not understand or perceive what they were doing. She could be told about it, but it was so far from what she understood or cared for as part of life that it sounded irrelevant to her.
In-setting, I explain the alignment tongues as unconscious emanations of the grander cosmic forces the characters are aligned with. Again, I think this only works with the original 3 alignment system. To explain it, I just point out how talking to a fellow Star Wars or Star Trek fan can suddenly include references and gestures that a laymen would find baffling - and that alignment tongues are like this, but more instinctual and tied into underlying cosmic forces in the world.
|
|
|
Post by dicebro on Feb 28, 2022 9:59:45 GMT -6
It is interesting how “Alignment” changed from an external struggle, one that creatures “aligned” themselves with on the battlefield, to something completely different: a separate game within a game created by Gary Gygax.
I wonder if Gary Gygax ever commented on his change of Alignment to a DM mini-game of charting individual character behaviors along with the corresponding rewards & punishments. Did he change his mind and abandon the Alignment Charting Mini-Game? Did he follow through on it? Did he even use it at all?
I have tried to grasp the Gygaxian Alignment chart and use his instructions. But they have proven to be just an unworkable and unsatisfying system of policing character behavior.
Thing is that Alignment as a personal moral outlook has stuck. Players will justify their character’s actions, and inactions, with a quick reference to their “alignment”. They become puzzled when I tell them that their lawful character can torture a goblin all night long and I won’t hold it against them. Players with Characters aligned with Chaos will use this as an excuse to screw around with The party as if they are expected to do so. It’s funny how the original concept of Alignment morphed into a weird mess of individual personality “rules”. I would like to explore the original concept in my campaign world. But it is hard for players to set aside what they honestly believe is fundamental to D&D, just because Gary wrote it down in a later version.
|
|
|
Post by howandwhy99 on Mar 3, 2022 0:29:35 GMT -6
I would like to explore the original concept in my campaign world. But it is hard for players to set aside what they honestly believe is fundamental to D&D, just because Gary wrote it down in a later version. I find players are okay with Alignment tracking once they realize it is some fantasy-based cosmic label of their behavior rather than an acting assignment. I track ALN behind the screen. They declare a starting ALN at campaign start. Then it is a matter of magic to learn their ALN. I give Clerics and Paladins a Detect ALN ability / spell (as opposed to detect good/evil). This way those classes which care about their ALN more have a means of monitoring it. I use colors, hues, brightness. It's not specific so much so the players learn detailed behavior changes. It is a rough showing of the current measure. For me, ALN Language is a rough reading by NPCs of others demeanor and behavior which reveals behavioral tendencies overall. Aka ALN. It's also central to the "Cleric Game" I run, where the players have to game these assessments. Unlike the NPCs who know automatically according to Wisdom, ALN, Level, and such. ALN may begin to matter once NPCs start treating a PC differently too, so it does matter to every player more or less. For example. You want to be taken as a scoundrel and a thief among your compatriots. They might take some different actions than expected if they think you've gone soft.
|
|
|
Post by dicebro on Mar 3, 2022 7:35:32 GMT -6
I would like to explore the original concept in my campaign world. But it is hard for players to set aside what they honestly believe is fundamental to D&D, just because Gary wrote it down in a later version. I find players are okay with Alignment tracking once they realize it is some fantasy-based cosmic label of their behavior rather than an acting assignment. I track ALN behind the screen. They declare a starting ALN at campaign start. Then it is a matter of magic to learn their ALN. I give Clerics and Paladins a Detect ALN ability / spell (as opposed to detect good/evil). This way those classes which care about their ALN more have a means of monitoring it. I use colors, hues, brightness. It's not specific so much so the players learn detailed behavior changes. It is a rough showing of the current measure. For me, ALN Language is a rough reading by NPCs of others demeanor and behavior which reveals behavioral tendencies overall. Aka ALN. It's also central to the "Cleric Game" I run, where the players have to game these assessments. Unlike the NPCs who know automatically according to Wisdom, ALN, Level, and such. ALN may begin to matter once NPCs start treating a PC differently too, so it does matter to every player more or less. For example. You want to be taken as a scoundrel and a thief among your compatriots. They might take some different actions than expected if they think you've gone soft. Wow that’s gotta be pretty complicated. Are your decisions on behavior pretty much case by case and recorded at the end of each adventure? I ref a game world without the supplemental volumes. In my world the Cleric must declare being aligned with Chaos or Law by the time they reach level 7 or so. But that’s only so they can cast the reverse of certain spells…for example “inflict wounds” and “poison food & water”. Fighters of Law who pick up a magic sword of Chaos will get zapped. That’s pretty much it until it’s time for a mass combat where certain creatures will refuse to fight alongside others.
|
|
|
Post by Starbeard on Mar 3, 2022 16:27:34 GMT -6
I do like the idea of a fully tracked alignment mini-game, even though I know I would be terrible at running it, unless maybe it was just one or two PCs and no NPCs ever had to be tracked. The idea of a player not getting to know their own alignment without deduction and magic is a nice touch I hadn't considered.
|
|
|
Post by howandwhy99 on Mar 4, 2022 0:19:02 GMT -6
Wow that’s gotta be pretty complicated. Are your decisions on behavior pretty much case by case and recorded at the end of each adventure? As I see it, the base game is basically a survival / civilization game. But the 3 Classes each have a game they are scored in: Combat, Magic, and ALN - for Clerics. I feel the style of the game design is of a hidden system which is relatively simple for the DM but "a hard read" for players who aren't allowed to know it but through operation. Like THAC0 or opponent ACs, trade values, item utility, NPC behavior, magic or spell usage (breadth and underlying design), as well as ALN. I find tracking stuff to be much of what I do when not describing what's happening. But ALN is easier than combat I find. I feel there needs to be pretty strong acts to justify marking a slight change down. But some count more than others. Rangers secretly assassinating another lawful ranger would be a call for a Save then and there. (Which they can elect to fail). I can't say what I track, but think like a game designer. Discrete actions defined in the game already, but not so specific they can't cover a broad span of behavior - I mean, declarations by those who don't know the rules and just see the myriad results.
|
|
|
Post by dicebro on Mar 8, 2022 7:42:27 GMT -6
Wow that’s gotta be pretty complicated. Are your decisions on behavior pretty much case by case and recorded at the end of each adventure? I feel the style of the game design is of a hidden system which is relatively simple for the DM but "a hard read" for players who aren't allowed to know it but through operation. Esoteric bro!
|
|
|
Post by blackbarn on Apr 4, 2022 0:35:54 GMT -6
I have sometimes thought of alignment languages to not be spoken per se, but kind of a simple communication or understanding between like-minded creatures. For example, if an evil sorcerer were to encounter some evil monster that didn’t speak the same native language, they might still be able to use alignment language to communicate the concept of teaming up long enough to fight a common enemy such as an approaching party of good guys.
|
|
skars
Level 6 Magician
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star.png)
Posts: 407
|
Post by skars on Apr 4, 2022 11:35:33 GMT -6
For alignment languages, I think that the chainmail reference of command and control for units on the battlefield can be interpreted as party members working together in OD&D and/or with the caller in practice. We have used it previously in this fashion and with henchmen/hirelings that join the expedition.
|
|
|
Post by dicebro on Apr 7, 2022 14:03:02 GMT -6
For alignment languages, I think that the chainmail reference of command and control for units on the battlefield can be interpreted as party members working together in OD&D and/or with the caller in practice. We have used it previously in this fashion and with henchmen/hirelings that join the expedition. Throw a helmet of alignment change into the dungeon as a treasure and watch the players freak out when their hero joins the enemy!
|
|
|
Post by Mordorandor on Nov 4, 2022 9:09:07 GMT -6
I thought I'd give two samples of Poul Anderson's use of "alignment languages" from Three Hearts & Three Lions.
The examples contain elements of what shows up in the the alignment language rules, like (a) they are actual languages, and (b) those of other alignments know when an alignment language is being used.
What the game didn't adopt was the effect alignment languages have on those of other alignments; for example, when Holger uses the language of Law to frighten the Faerie (first instance below) of Chaos.
One might argue that was a spell of sorts and not the utterance of the alignment tongue.
-----------
Chapter Nine
They stopped as swiftly as he had done, milling aside. But through the twilight, Holger saw warriors who ran toward him on foot, carrying bows. That wasn't so good. They could stand afar and fill him with arrows. Recklessly, he plunged toward them with some idea of breaking up the formation.
'Rah, rah, rah!' he shouted. 'Ti-i-iger!'-
The knights scattered before his charge. The bowmen stood their ground. He heard a shaft buzz nastily by his ear.
'Jesu Kriste Fili Mariae-'
The Pharisees shrieked! They spurred their horses, threw away their weapons, ran and galloped from him like an explosion. So it was also true they couldn't stand to hear a holy name, thought Holger exultantly. He should have remembered that. Only . . . why had his unthinking appeal been in Latin?
He was tempted to throw the whole hierarchy after them, but decided not to abuse his privilege. An honest prayer was one thing; taking the Great Names in vain for mere advantage was something else again, and could bring no luck. (How did he know that? Well, he did.) He settled for steering Papillon back westward and shouting, 'Hi-yo, Silver!' After all, the story was that the Faerie folk didn't like silver either.
....
Night stole over them. Holger, who would take the third watch, lay his length on the soft needles of the forest floor.
The fire burned warm and red. One by one his nerves eased.
To be sure, he couldn't fall asleep. Not under these circumstances. Too bad. He needed his sleep. ..
He woke with a jerk. Alianora was shaking him. In the restless light he saw her eyes grown enormous. Her voice was a dry whisper. 'List! There's summat out there!'
He got up, sword in hand, and peered into the gloom. Yes, he could hear them too, the pad-pad-pad of many feet, and he saw the light gleam off slanted eyes.
A wolf howled, almost in his ear. He leaped and slashed with his sword. Laughter answered, shrill and nasty. 'In nomine Patris' he called, and was mocked by the noises.
Either those things were immune to holy names, or they weren't close enough to be hurt. Probably the former. As his eyes adapted, he saw the shadows. They glided around and around the charmed circle. They were monstrous.
|
|
|
Post by dicebro on Nov 4, 2022 12:31:26 GMT -6
I thought I'd give two samples of Poul Anderson's use of "alignment languages" from Three Hearts & Three Lions. The examples contain elements of what shows up in the the alignment language rules, like (a) they are actual languages, and (b) those of other alignments know when an alignment language is being used. What the game didn't adopt was the effect alignment languages have on those of other alignments; for example, when Holger uses the language of Law to frighten the Faerie (first instance below) of Chaos. One might argue that was a spell of sorts and not the utterance of the alignment tongue. ----------- Chapter NineThey stopped as swiftly as he had done, milling aside. But through the twilight, Holger saw warriors who ran toward him on foot, carrying bows. That wasn't so good. They could stand afar and fill him with arrows. Recklessly, he plunged toward them with some idea of breaking up the formation. 'Rah, rah, rah!' he shouted. 'Ti-i-iger!'- The knights scattered before his charge. The bowmen stood their ground. He heard a shaft buzz nastily by his ear. ' Jesu Kriste Fili Mariae-' The Pharisees shrieked! They spurred their horses, threw away their weapons, ran and galloped from him like an explosion. So it was also true they couldn't stand to hear a holy name, thought Holger exultantly. He should have remembered that. Only . . . why had his unthinking appeal been in Latin? He was tempted to throw the whole hierarchy after them, but decided not to abuse his privilege. An honest prayer was one thing; taking the Great Names in vain for mere advantage was something else again, and could bring no luck. (How did he know that? Well, he did.) He settled for steering Papillon back westward and shouting, 'Hi-yo, Silver!' After all, the story was that the Faerie folk didn't like silver either. .... Night stole over them. Holger, who would take the third watch, lay his length on the soft needles of the forest floor. The fire burned warm and red. One by one his nerves eased. To be sure, he couldn't fall asleep. Not under these circumstances. Too bad. He needed his sleep. .. He woke with a jerk. Alianora was shaking him. In the restless light he saw her eyes grown enormous. Her voice was a dry whisper. 'List! There's summat out there!' He got up, sword in hand, and peered into the gloom. Yes, he could hear them too, the pad-pad-pad of many feet, and he saw the light gleam off slanted eyes. A wolf howled, almost in his ear. He leaped and slashed with his sword. Laughter answered, shrill and nasty. ' In nomine Patris' he called, and was mocked by the noises. Either those things were immune to holy names, or they weren't close enough to be hurt. Probably the former. As his eyes adapted, he saw the shadows. They glided around and around the charmed circle. They were monstrous. Maybe Gygax modeled the Paladin class after the character?
|
|
|
Post by Mordorandor on Nov 4, 2022 13:54:51 GMT -6
I might be mistaken, but I believe it was said Gary did indeed base the paladin on the character of Holger.
I'll defer to more astute archeologists.
|
|