>I wasn't aware of the RQ2 reference that any
>people used it for daily living. It may only be a play -toy of the Old
>Pavis nobles, or a portion of it might have survived in common usage in
>the Rubble, but reduced from it's greatness by the centuries of hardship.
I do not believe that Pavic natives have forgotten most of their EWF-era language and replaced it with foreign words. Furthermore I do think that the Pavic Natives were too poor to afford nobles for much of their history so the suggestion of it being a playtoy of the nobility is a bit farfetched.
Me>> I really don't think we need to bother about when semantic drift
>> spawns a new language. Just impose a penalty on reading old pavic
>> documents written during the Second Age rather than add a new
>> language for little gain.
> Semantic drift doesn't have to spawn a new language to hinder
>communication.
Yet suggesting that we create a _new_ language to distinguish the language written in the days of the EWF from that of modern Pavic natives today seems to me to be rules overkill on par with Monster Colloseium's Chariot Construction Rules.
Nobody today speaks EWF-era Old Pavic nor are there any circumstances in which one concievably encounters a living speaker of EWF Old Pavic. The only circumstance in which EWF Old Pavic would play an influence is if one encountered scrolls written in it.
Hence simply imposing a penalty when trying to understand Old Pavic as it was writ in the EWF days seems to me a much simpler solution than to add a new language to reflect the differences in speech between one language that is not spoken today and one that is.
>I am surprised that you would say not to add a new language for Old
>Pavic; the language difference already exists in the game (Old Pavic
>IS a listed language in the reference books)
Huh? I have nothing against Old Pavic. I simply pointed out that the references showed that it is spoken by the Pavic natives today. _You_ wanted to create a new language called Pavic to reflect the speech of the native Pavics today, a distinction which I feel is unnecessary.
>I have had characters want to add Waha Knot reading,
>Agimori Hunter Sign, and Spirit Speech just because they ran across them
>in various module references, and these can certainly be considered to
>provide little gain, but possibly enough to be justified in their
>character concept.
The difference between Waha Knot Reading and written Praxian is what? Agimori Hunter sign is hardly equivalent to American Sign Language to warrant it being treated it as a language in its own right as you suggest. Lastly learning Spiritspeech to add to 'character concept' is a contradiction in terms without a clear idea of what the language is actually used for - a module reference is hardly adequate for this purpose IMHO.
Powered by hypermail