Baldur's Gate : The Sword Coast Chronicles : NWN2 Persistent World

There was an elemental spirit thingy named Orglash in MotB that seemed to speak common. I dunno if that's the same thing???????????????? And I never beat that campaign either.

Hawke wrote:I think we are overthinking the ears part on elementals. Like Golems, they are just magical, and can hear.

Exactly. Now...can we extrapolate this to speak?!?

Consider Morse Code.

It requires no body parts. It is simply a sequence with significant meaning. We use them to stand-in for words but it's just so that we can apply logic to it rather than if... Morse Code was a language with innate meanings of it's own. (omg computers are talking to eachother!) ((wait that actually happens..))

Now also consider that perhaps the crackle of a fire elemental has an innate meaning of its own so that these sentient beings without talky-wordy bodyparts can communicate with. Does that mean they can speak? Yes. Does that mean they do talky-wordy bits of Common? All lore sources says no.

Can they if taught? Eh. I still haven't seen a source answer that. A IRL dog couldn't speak English if taught it. I've tried! All they do is bark!

So is there more of a depth to this thing that isn't so much reliant on what a form is capable of physically but more concerned with what the language medium is comprised of and actually means?

I'd be shocked if drow-sign could be translated from wolf wildshape. Same concept... the form is "capable" of it... but the medium doesn't carry any meaning for it.

Steve wrote:

Hawke wrote:I think we are overthinking the ears part on elementals. Like Golems, they are just magical, and can hear.

Exactly. Now...can we extrapolate this to speak?!?

that's what i was trying to convey as well

Boddynock wrote:

DM Echo wrote:Your entire argument is still you can't prove me wrong therefore I am right.. A lack of evidence for something also isn't evidence that it is true. By your own logic, insects should be able to speak with high enough int scores because nothing in the monster's manual says they can't.

Not exactly, my argument has the precedent that the monster manual and other souls include specific cases where a creature cannot speak a language it knows. You are making the assumption that the lack of this for elementals is an over sight, I am making no assumptions when I say that the lacks of that restriction means it isn't there.

So in truth, my argument isn't "you can't prove me wrong therefore I am right," it is actually "I am right to begin with, and you have to justify a change in the rules that makes me wrong." If this ruling had not happened, I could make no case at all and my position would have been correct, so since you are the one calling for change, you re the one that has to provide proof to support it, the status quo doesn't have to be proven, it just is.

That is probably why most of my argument has been cutting holes in yours, because I have nothing to prove.

(And to be clear Echo, I don't mean you in particular when I say all this, I just mean your position. I am not trying to be personal or attack you here, but critical thinking is critical, and therefore often comes off that way. I am critical of the position, not of you or anyone that holds it.)

I haven't seen the status quo you mention, and I was going to mention the exact opposite as in my time as a DM watching players and as my time as a player playing with people I have yet to see a druid in elemental shape speak common. It has been generally accepted among those I have interacted with and observed that elementals are incapable of speaking common and I myself took it as a general rule of thumb. I never mentioned this because it is anecdotal evidence and has no weight in the argument.

I am also not saying it is an "oversight". An oversight would assume that they didn't say explicitly that they can't speak common by mistake, I think the monster's manual is only 319 pages long and they didn't want to make it another 1,000 pages long by listing all the things every creature is not capable of in the book.. Which is why they don't mention the languages each creature is incapable of speaking.. As well as a number of other possible abilities you could just give creatures simply because the monster's manual doesn't say they can't do it.

Selande wrote:Consider Morse Code.

It requires no body parts. It is simply a sequence with significant meaning. We use them to stand-in for words but it's just so that we can apply logic to it rather than if... Morse Code was a language with innate meanings of it's own. (omg computers are talking to eachother!) ((wait that actually happens..))

Now that's a interesting theory, I'll give that. But the language itself isn't explained as a repetitive noise, so to assume it's morse code like, while interesting and certainly feasible, seems like something they'd explain.

Selande wrote:Now also consider that perhaps the crackle of a fire elemental has an innate meaning of its own so that these sentient beings without talky-wordy bodyparts can communicate with. Does that mean they can speak? Yes. Does that mean they do talky-wordy bits of Common? All lore sources says no.

Can they if taught? Eh. I still haven't seen a source answer that. A IRL dog couldn't speak English if taught it. I've tried! All they do is bark!

So is there more of a depth to this thing that isn't so much reliant on what a form is capable of physically but more concerned with what the language medium is comprised of and actually means?

I'd be shocked if drow-sign could be translated from wolf wildshape. Same concept... the form is "capable" of it... but the medium doesn't carry any meaning for it.

Your dog isn't a extra-dimensional being that has no organs, yet is a living creature, nor lacks a brain and yet understands what's happening around it as a sentient creature. However, if a wandering druid were to cast 'awaken' on it, suddenly your dog very much could talk.

However, all lore sources requires a citation. Nothing explicitly states that they can't speak. Infact, to the contrary, if we don't assume that you're correct in your fashion of how the language is used then the point falls apart.

Edit: Butchered my quotes.

Selande wrote:Consider Morse Code...

...Does that mean they do talky-wordy bits of Common? All lore sources says no...

Morse code is an alphabet, not an entire language. And could you actually cite any of these source that say no, it seems to me no lore sources cover the issue specifically for elementals, and the closest thing in the lore that addresses it is below:

Savage Species is a sourcebook that deals wholly with PCs playing as monstrous characters, which would include playing as an elemental, and is therefore the closest thing I can think of regarding this. Keep in mind this sourcebook applies to ALL monstrous characters equally, making no exceptions in addition to the ones listed in a monster's monster manual entry.

Savage Species, Page 8, Section 9, reads:

9. Review Description:

Use the base creature entry in the monster manual and Chapter 6: Description in the Player's Handbook to complete the alignment, deity, age, height, weight, eyes, hair, and gender blanks of the character sheet. If you do not want to use the base creature's alignment, see Alignment in Chapter 8: Campaigns.

Your monster kind may list starting languages. If so, record those and any additional languages gained because of high intelligence of skills. If your monster kind has no starting languages, assume your character speaks common.

So, if I were to make a fire elemental character, and had an INT of 12, I could choose common and speak it with absolutely no restriction according to the rules. This is the closest analog to a druid elemental speaking a language other than the elemental language that you are likely to find in the rules, and it offers no limitations on what language a creature can speak at all in addition to what is listed in their entry. In fact, it assumes common is so ambiguous, that even creature that might not otherwise be able to speak can in fact speak common.

So, that is another rather firm example in the sourcebooks support an elemental being able to speak any language it knows, and I have yet to see one provided (despite claims that it exists) that supports them being unable to speak anything other than their native language due to physiological reasons.

Boddynock wrote:

Syracuse wrote: A intellect devourer understands undercommon, but explicitly can't talk. But, it has telepathy.

This is the heart of the issue right here, intellect devourers explicitly cannot speak. Why is the absence of this explicit limitation in the elemental's entry taken as open to interpretation? Is it open to interpretation that an orc can fly because their entry doesn't say they cannot? Is it open to interpretation that a horse can climb nearly vertical objects simply because the entry doesn't say they cannot? (I mean, they can in Skyrim, so why not D&D?)

The intellect devourer is one of the very rare exceptions where the book actually states that they can not speak.. Again.. by that logic a giant ant should be able to speak because the monster's manual doesn't say they can't... And giant ant is just one of many on the list of creatures which the MM doesn't say is incapable of speak biologically but we can assume through common sense that they are incapable of speech, regardless of int.

DM Echo wrote: The intellect devourer is one of the very rare exceptions where the book actually states that they can not speak.. Again.. by that logic a giant ant should be able to speak because the monster's manual doesn't say they can't... And giant ant is just one of many on the list of creatures which the MM doesn't say is incapable of speak biologically but we can assume through common sense that they are incapable of speech, regardless of int.

But we do have the thri-kreen to support that it can't, thanks to lacking anything at all in accordance with 'vocal chords'. Just clicks and clakcs of mandibles, and twitchy attenae.

But common sense doesn't have anything to do with a elemental, a elemental isn't a creature of reason. It's some magical thing from another dimension that has no heart, yet lives, has no brain, yet thinks. A ant commands these things, and we know the limitations of your typical ant.






As a side note, giant ants shouldn't even exist, really. The way they breathe says that they'd suffocate if they ever grew out of such proportions. Their legs can't support them if they grew 'giant sized', and their circulatory systems would cause them to suffocate due to how they breathe.

Not... really part of the conversation, but just a interesting side note.

DM Echo wrote: The intellect devourer is one of the very rare exceptions where the book actually states that they can not speak.. Again.. by that logic a giant ant should be able to speak because the monster's manual doesn't say they can't... And giant ant is just one of many on the list of creatures which the MM doesn't say is incapable of speak biologically but we can assume through common sense that they are incapable of speech, regardless of int.

Actually the rules cover why a giant ant cannot speak, it has no languages and doesn't not have the intelligence to gain languages. So that is not an exception, it is just way the rules work, and the way they are written. You will notice that the text for the spell "Awaken" specifically grants the target knowledge of a language, not simply the ability to speak.

Syracuse wrote:
But we do have the thri-kreen to support that it can't, thanks to lacking anything at all in accordance with 'vocal chords'. Just clicks and clakcs of mandibles, and twitchy attenae.

Actually, according to this entry Tri-kreen are capable of speaking common...

http://eberronunlimited.wikidot.com/thri-kreen

And this one:

http://gaming.corellonshand.com/char/Thri-kreen.html

And this one:

http://alcyius.com/dndtools/classes/thr ... index.html

And can speak common according to page 222 of Savage Species (left side, near the bottom)

http://new.vk.com/doc-85466568_364027124

Boddynock wrote:Actually, according to this entry Tri-kreen are capable of speaking common...

http://eberronunlimited.wikidot.com/thri-kreen

And this one:

http://gaming.corellonshand.com/char/Thri-kreen.html

And this one:

http://alcyius.com/dndtools/classes/thr ... index.html

And can speak common according to page 222 of Savage Species (left side, near the bottom)

http://new.vk.com/doc-85466568_364027124

Huh. Neat find. I redact my statement.

Boddynock wrote:

Selande wrote:Consider Morse Code...
...Does that mean they do talky-wordy bits of Common? All lore sources says no...

Morse code is an alphabet, not an entire language.

FCC ARRL Extra license holder here, was just about to say exactly this. While today computers perform the translation, on normal field days we're met with people across the globe who while are familiarized with MC, may affix the letters to a different language altogether (French, German, Italian, etc). Just because you recognize the pattern of a single letter from simple sound and silence doesn't exempt you from the different language it constructs.

It's even worse when you run into someone who can't spell.

The same goes for computers speaking to one another. Yes their root capacity is either electric or photon being fired or not, but the protocols involved across a wide berth of technologies is vast.

Syracuse wrote:

Boddynock wrote:Actually, according to this entry Tri-kreen are capable of speaking common...

http://eberronunlimited.wikidot.com/thri-kreen

And this one:

http://gaming.corellonshand.com/char/Thri-kreen.html

And this one:

http://alcyius.com/dndtools/classes/thr ... index.html

And can speak common according to page 222 of Savage Species (left side, near the bottom)

http://new.vk.com/doc-85466568_364027124

Huh. Neat find. I redact my statement.

Dark Sun is one of, if not my most, favorite setting, and Thri-Kreen one of my favorite races... Freaking Praying Mantis Psionic Warrior!!! RAWR!