Jump to content



Photo

Starting Talents


  • Please log in to reply
48 replies to this topic

#21 Tenebrae

Tenebrae

    Member

  • Members
  • 931 posts

Posted 25 January 2014 - 08:44 AM

Latin isn't an older form of English. It's more like Anglo-Saxon/English.

Er... no.
IIRC, modern english is so heavily influenced by other languages, in particular Danish and Normannic French (itself influenced by the scandinavian languages), that it is not really that closely related to Anglo-Saxon as one might think.

#22 Elior

Elior

    Member

  • Members
  • 501 posts

Posted 25 January 2014 - 10:04 AM

There is something called Old English though. It was used during Shakespeare's time in which The Canterbury Tales was written in. However, Old English sounds far different than modern English and uses different pronunciation.



#23 Lok Hambrock

Lok Hambrock

    Member

  • Members
  • 23 posts

Posted 25 January 2014 - 10:40 AM

 

 

Literacy could either be linked to a Scholastic Lore specialty (e.g. Academic Knowledge) or be a specialty Talent with aptitudes Intelligence and Knowledge, to be taken each time one learns to read and write in specific characters (not languages), because if I can read English I can mostly also read German and Italian but that doesn't mean I can understand it (I'd need to learn the language too).

 

That's actually less true that you think. For example, while Dutch uses the same alphabet (Roman) as English the pronunciation is completely different (technical term, the phonetics do not share the same relationship to the graphemes).

That's of course correct.

What I meant was really to make the understanding and pronounciation of a language a language talent, while tying literacy to a skill.

I can of course read Dutch. I might even be able to recognize a few words (Munich/German here ;)) but I will not be able to pronounce it or understand it completely, that's what I'd need the language talent for.

 

In your example, to be able to read and speak both English and Dutch, with my idea you'd need the skill Scholastic Lore (Academic Knowledge) as a known skill to be able to recognize the Latin letters both languages use. To be able to speak both languages I'd need the talents Language (Dutch) and Language (English).

Now if I'd like to learn Ancient Egyptian I'd have to raise my Scholastic Lore (Academic Knowledge) to learn the hieroglyphs and I need the talent Language (Ancient Egyptian) to be able to both understand what the hieroglyphs mean and to speak the language.

 

I always imagined the relationship of High Gothic and Low Gothic to be of a nature similar to Latin and maybe Spanish, a language derived from Latin but with its own grammar and words. So while many words might seem familiar you wouldn't be able to understand anyone talking it.


Edited by Lok Hambrock, 25 January 2014 - 10:44 AM.


#24 Lok Hambrock

Lok Hambrock

    Member

  • Members
  • 23 posts

Posted 25 January 2014 - 10:42 AM

There is something called Old English though. It was used during Shakespeare's time in which The Canterbury Tales was written in. However, Old English sounds far different than modern English and uses different pronunciation.

Actually it's divided up in Old English (Beowulf), Middle English (Canterbury Tales) and Early New English (Shakespeare), plus modern English.

Old English was closer to the Germanic languages, then the Latin influences came.

 

Sorry for being a wiseass but I studied English linguistics :)


  • yggZ, Cail and Elior like this

#25 Cymbel

Cymbel

    Member

  • Members
  • 734 posts

Posted 25 January 2014 - 11:17 AM

I think we can all agree that:

 

  • All characters should be able to use knives, clubs and other simple melee weapons
  • That all characters should not know how to use primitive ranged weapons unless from Feral World or such
  • Every PC should be able to speak Low Gothic with no issue.
  • Their literacy depends on career/upbringing. A noble would be literate from the start (especially if they became an adept), while a Hive Born Arbites could read, just not as well and a Feral Worlder probably has no skill at all.

  • Cail and Lok Hambrock like this

#26 bogi_khaosa

bogi_khaosa

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,064 posts

Posted 25 January 2014 - 11:38 AM

 

Latin isn't an older form of English. It's more like Anglo-Saxon/English.

Er... no.
IIRC, modern english is so heavily influenced by other languages, in particular Danish and Normannic French (itself influenced by the scandinavian languages), that it is not really that closely related to Anglo-Saxon as one might think.

 

 

Yes I am aware that English has been influenced by other languages, :)

 

It is not, however, a descendent of Latin, which is a whole other branch of Indo-European.

 

It does have a lot of Latin  vocabulary, mainly via French (which IS a descendent of Latin), but it is definitely not a form of Latin. What it is is Anglo-Saxon + some Norse influence on the grammar + lots of French words + general linguistic evolution.

 

Whereas Low Gothic is supposed to be "modern" High Gothic. So the relationship between Italian and Latin.


Edited by bogi_khaosa, 25 January 2014 - 11:39 AM.

  • Cail likes this

#27 Lok Hambrock

Lok Hambrock

    Member

  • Members
  • 23 posts

Posted 25 January 2014 - 12:34 PM

Pretty good sum-up, Cymbel.

I think we strayed a little from the topic with the language discussion. Although I did find it interesting.



#28 Cymbel

Cymbel

    Member

  • Members
  • 734 posts

Posted 25 January 2014 - 12:37 PM

Oh definitely, Dutch and German are particular are fun languages to compare. I have the feeling that I can ALMOST read dutch because I know german, but it still remains out of reach (especially spoken).

 

My view for including stuff in a game is always think of the simplest way to interpret the rules/what would a jerk or by the book GM say. Like an Arbites gets lhos, but no lighter. Most folks don't get clothing by RAW, etc.



#29 Cail

Cail

    Member

  • Members
  • 371 posts

Posted 26 January 2014 - 03:23 AM

I don't see any reason why all characters, or most, should be literate. Why would they be? It's an obscure specialist skill in a medieval setting.

 

The Latin/English thing doesn't really work because High Gothic is supposed to be an older form of Low Gothic, right? Latin isn't an older form of English. It's more like Anglo-Saxon/English.

 

"or in some cases simplified English (US English)." ooh burn! :)

 

I actually didn't mean this in an offensive way, but a factual one. One of the key differences between the Webster dictionary (US) and the Oxford Dictionary (UK) is that UK English tends to keep the phonetic spelling patterns of derived words to show their history and which language they came from. US English tried to move away from this with Webster (which is why we have the difference in spelling between 'Colour' and 'Color') and removed words that it didn't see as necessary (which is why words like 'Learnt' don't appear in US English).
 

It wasn't intended as an insult, US is a more simplified version of the language if you compare them, but it was made so intentionally.

However, have you tried to read Anglo-Saxon? I studied it at university and its far closer to reading a language like Dutch than modern day English. Take this sentence for example "Hwæt! Wé Gárdena in géardagum, þéodcyninga þrym gefrúnon". It doesn't even use the same alphabet. (That translates roughly to "Quiet! we the spear-danes in the days of yore, heard of the clan's king's glories"). So yeah. Its still not something you can just 'take a guess at' because you know a language decendant.

 

 

 

 

 

There is something called Old English though. It was used during Shakespeare's time in which The Canterbury Tales was written in. However, Old English sounds far different than modern English and uses different pronunciation.

Actually it's divided up in Old English (Beowulf), Middle English (Canterbury Tales) and Early New English (Shakespeare), plus modern English.

Old English was closer to the Germanic languages, then the Latin influences came.

 

Sorry for being a wiseass but I studied English linguistics :)"

 

 

You beat me to this one :D For the record Anglo-Saxon and Old English are the same thing, and technically English is still defined as a Germanic language.
 


Edited by Cail, 26 January 2014 - 08:29 AM.

  • Lok Hambrock likes this
  • Intellect is the Understanding of Knowledge.
  • Sentience is the Basest Form of Intellect.
  • Understanding is the True Path to Comprehension.
  • Comprehension is the Key to all Things

 


#30 bogi_khaosa

bogi_khaosa

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,064 posts

Posted 26 January 2014 - 09:37 AM

 

I don't see any reason why all characters, or most, should be literate. Why would they be? It's an obscure specialist skill in a medieval setting.

 

The Latin/English thing doesn't really work because High Gothic is supposed to be an older form of Low Gothic, right? Latin isn't an older form of English. It's more like Anglo-Saxon/English.

 

"or in some cases simplified English (US English)." ooh burn! :)

 

I actually didn't mean this in an offensive way, but a factual one. One of the key differences between the Webster dictionary (US) and the Oxford Dictionary (UK) is that UK English tends to keep the phonetic spelling patterns of derived words to show their history and which language they came from. US English tried to move away from this with Webster (which is why we have the difference in spelling between 'Colour' and 'Color') and removed words that it didn't see as necessary (which is why words like 'Learnt' don't appear in US English).
 

It wasn't intended as an insult, US is a more simplified version of the language if you compare them, but it was made so intentionally.

However, have you tried to read Anglo-Saxon? I studied it at university and its far closer to reading a language like Dutch than modern day English. Take this sentence for example "Hwæt! Wé Gárdena in géardagum, þéodcyninga þrym gefrúnon". It doesn't even use the same alphabet. (That translates roughly to "Quiet! we the spear-danes in the days of yore, heard of the clan's king's glories"). So yeah. Its still not something you can just 'take a guess at' because you know a language decendant.

 

 

 

I know. I'm a professional translator--albeit not of Anglo-Saxon ;) , but I do have greater or lesser comprehension of English (duh), Russian, Latin, French, Greek, and German, and studied a wee bit of Icelandic ages ago. What little I can make out of Anglo-Saxon is through my knowledge of German. Modern English is much more divergent from its ancestor than say modern Latin (aka Italian :)) is from Classical Latin, or Russian from Old Slavonic (modern Greek is creepily close to ancient in comparison).

 

But anyway the point is that Low Gothic is supposed to be a "modern" form of High Gothic (if that makes any sense after 10 thousand years), so the parallels are Latin--Italian/Spanish/French/etc., Old Slavonic--Russian/Ukrainian/etc., or Old German--High German/Dutch, not Latin--English.

 

This is heavily derailing the thread, but really there is no one "British English" -- there are lots of dialects (which come to think of it is even more the case for Italian and German)..


Edited by bogi_khaosa, 26 January 2014 - 09:40 AM.

  • Cail likes this

#31 Cail

Cail

    Member

  • Members
  • 371 posts

Posted 26 January 2014 - 09:43 AM

Yeah sorry, some of that rant was mixed in with the confusions people were making with Middle English/Anglo-Saxon/E.N English. It all kind of got a bit jumbled as it came out my brain. I just wanted to make a point about the lack of mutual intelligibility.

I actually didn't know it was meant to be an evolution (I don't remember reading anything to that effect). I always drew the comparison with Latin partly because of the way its always shown to be written, but also because I assumed it shared the relationship with Latin/Middle English. One being an everyday language for the commoners to speak, and the other being a language of scripture that only nobles and clergymen could read.


Edited by Cail, 26 January 2014 - 09:46 AM.

  • Intellect is the Understanding of Knowledge.
  • Sentience is the Basest Form of Intellect.
  • Understanding is the True Path to Comprehension.
  • Comprehension is the Key to all Things

 


#32 bogi_khaosa

bogi_khaosa

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,064 posts

Posted 26 January 2014 - 10:06 AM

Yeah sorry, some of that rant was mixed in with the confusions people were making with Middle English/Anglo-Saxon/E.N English. It all kind of got a bit jumbled as it came out my brain. I just wanted to make a point about the lack of mutual intelligibility.

I actually didn't know it was meant to be an evolution (I don't remember reading anything to that effect). I always drew the comparison with Latin partly because of the way its always shown to be written, but also because I assumed it shared the relationship with Latin/Middle English. One being an everyday language for the commoners to speak, and the other being a language of scripture that only nobles and clergymen could read.

 

You know, I'm pretty sure that LG is supposed to be a form of HG, but I'm not 100% positive.



#33 LuciusT

LuciusT

    Member

  • Members
  • 902 posts

Posted 26 January 2014 - 11:19 AM

Back on point... should characters start with Linguistics (Low Gothic)? IMO, yes, most of them should and those case where they shouldn't can easily be accommodated in the way Only War handled it by Homeworld or, for DH2, be the level at which the character is or is not give the skill. To make all characters spend exp to buy it is simply another idiotic drain on exp making it more difficult to create functional, interesting characters in the game. It is bad game design.



#34 Cail

Cail

    Member

  • Members
  • 371 posts

Posted 26 January 2014 - 04:25 PM

Back on point... should characters start with Linguistics (Low Gothic)? IMO, yes, most of them should and those case where they shouldn't can easily be accommodated in the way Only War handled it by Homeworld or, for DH2, be the level at which the character is or is not give the skill. To make all characters spend exp to buy it is simply another idiotic drain on exp making it more difficult to create functional, interesting characters in the game. It is bad game design.

 

It depends what you want from the game though, which is why what we are discussing IS on topic. If you want a game world that accurately represents a quasi medieval feudal society and continues to draw mechanical parallels to its source material, then keeping Low Gothic as a bought skill (or re-introducing Literacy) as a talent is very GOOD game design.

I've had loads of plot driven through this. It works especially well if you use handouts that the players actually have to read themselves rather than telling them the information. Don't have literacy? You don't get to see the hand out as a player! No one has literacy? Well, you had better think of a way to work around this problem (you'd be surprised how many creative answers I've had to this).


  • bogi_khaosa, Tenebrae and Cymbel like this
  • Intellect is the Understanding of Knowledge.
  • Sentience is the Basest Form of Intellect.
  • Understanding is the True Path to Comprehension.
  • Comprehension is the Key to all Things

 


#35 Cymbel

Cymbel

    Member

  • Members
  • 734 posts

Posted 26 January 2014 - 04:45 PM

One of my favorite RPGs, Das Schwarze Auge, separates literacy from speaking each skill and while it makes sense in the XP market it has, it wouldn't work in the DH2e one (especially with the cost increases). I do think the distinction is an important one and lumping them together feels like a shame. And while I appreciate the move to roll together similar skills to reduce some of the more idiotic distinctions, some of the casualties like this are steps backwards.


  • Lok Hambrock likes this

#36 LuciusT

LuciusT

    Member

  • Members
  • 902 posts

Posted 26 January 2014 - 06:33 PM

 

Back on point... should characters start with Linguistics (Low Gothic)? IMO, yes, most of them should and those case where they shouldn't can easily be accommodated in the way Only War handled it by Homeworld or, for DH2, be the level at which the character is or is not give the skill. To make all characters spend exp to buy it is simply another idiotic drain on exp making it more difficult to create functional, interesting characters in the game. It is bad game design.

 

It depends what you want from the game though, which is why what we are discussing IS on topic. If you want a game world that accurately represents a quasi medieval feudal society and continues to draw mechanical parallels to its source material, then keeping Low Gothic as a bought skill (or re-introducing Literacy) as a talent is very GOOD game design.
 

 

That depends entirely in a view of the society which is not supported by the other game lines. For example, most homeworlds in Only War get Linguistics to start... are we to believe that Inquisition draws from a less learned segment of those worlds than the Imperial Guard?



#37 Cymbel

Cymbel

    Member

  • Members
  • 734 posts

Posted 26 January 2014 - 06:49 PM

The kicker is literacy, everyone could speak the common tongue, but the learned language and literacy are what has to be explicitly stated.



#38 bogi_khaosa

bogi_khaosa

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,064 posts

Posted 26 January 2014 - 07:30 PM

It's a view of society not supported by the Only War game line, but that's poor design for Only War.

 

It is a feudal society in which ignorance is a virtue -- which by the way makes it more dark ages than the actual dark ages. There is no reason for 95% of the population in such a society to learn how to read, at all. Including for run-of-the-mill Inquisitorial Acolytes. What for? Outside of the Adepta, the written word isn't used. It's useless. It would be like me learning Esperanto.

 

What I always did in Dark Heresy was assume that characters all had minimal skills in the sense that a functionally illiterate person does -- they can recognize common words, but they can't put them together.


Edited by bogi_khaosa, 26 January 2014 - 07:31 PM.

  • Tenebrae and Cail like this

#39 Tenebrae

Tenebrae

    Member

  • Members
  • 931 posts

Posted 27 January 2014 - 02:14 AM

One of my favorite RPGs, Das Schwarze Auge, separates literacy from speaking each skill and while it makes sense in the XP market it has, it wouldn't work in the DH2e one (especially with the cost increases). I do think the distinction is an important one and lumping them together feels like a shame. And while I appreciate the move to roll together similar skills to reduce some of the more idiotic distinctions, some of the casualties like this are steps backwards.

A lot of RPGs do this, including just about every one I can think of in a non-modern setting. With the possible exception of the newer members of the D&D family, dunno about those.



#40 Elior

Elior

    Member

  • Members
  • 501 posts

Posted 27 January 2014 - 11:40 AM

It's a view of society not supported by the Only War game line, but that's poor design for Only War.

 

It is a feudal society in which ignorance is a virtue -- which by the way makes it more dark ages than the actual dark ages. There is no reason for 95% of the population in such a society to learn how to read, at all. Including for run-of-the-mill Inquisitorial Acolytes. What for? Outside of the Adepta, the written word isn't used. It's useless. It would be like me learning Esperanto.

 

What I always did in Dark Heresy was assume that characters all had minimal skills in the sense that a functionally illiterate person does -- they can recognize common words, but they can't put them together.

 

Depends on the job function of the acolyte. An acolyte with a background in the Imperial Guard might not know how to read but an ex-arbite that served as an investigator should really know how to read. Linguistics could therefore be role based.






© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS