True. That certainly puts this thread in the running for the irony awards.
Irony: The universal language.
Does the Tongues Spell Allow You to Read?
- Thread starter tylermalan
- Start date
Irony: The universal language.
tylermalan
First Post
Ha, that's funny! My location is correct but I'm from the US, so no problem here. And actually, I'm originally from St. Louis, enrious.
As for the original question, I had a game last night where I posed this question to my group (as I just acquired a new Inquisitor spell and wanted to take Tongues), and we decided to play it as you guys would - it does not allow you to read.
However, from a purely RAW perspective, I have to mention that I'm not totally convinced. I agree that the examples and analysis going on in this thread allude to a particular ruling, but I don't think that this ruling is specified by the wording of the spell.
As an example, lets say that someone hands you a piece of paper with some writing on it. They ask you, "Do you understand this?" This is a legitimate question, as your understanding of the language determines your answer. So, if you had a spell active on your person that allows you to understand any language... see what I mean?
Though, interestingly, prior to starting this thread I had not made a connection concerning the spell itself and the spell's title... which, I agree, implies a certain usage.
As for the original question, I had a game last night where I posed this question to my group (as I just acquired a new Inquisitor spell and wanted to take Tongues), and we decided to play it as you guys would - it does not allow you to read.
However, from a purely RAW perspective, I have to mention that I'm not totally convinced. I agree that the examples and analysis going on in this thread allude to a particular ruling, but I don't think that this ruling is specified by the wording of the spell.
As an example, lets say that someone hands you a piece of paper with some writing on it. They ask you, "Do you understand this?" This is a legitimate question, as your understanding of the language determines your answer. So, if you had a spell active on your person that allows you to understand any language... see what I mean?
Though, interestingly, prior to starting this thread I had not made a connection concerning the spell itself and the spell's title... which, I agree, implies a certain usage.
For the record, my groups have always played it the way tylermalan suggested it should be in the original post- our logic was that since it's a higher-level effect, it should be able to incorporate the lower-level "reading" effect too. It is true, though, that the RAW alone does not necessarily support that view.
Also, as an interesting aside, some stories I've heard/read about the "speaking in tongues" effect suggest that a person doing it could speak to several people, and have each individual interpret the words as being from a different language- that is, listener A might think it was Latin, while listener B thinks it's Etruscan, listener C thinks it's Greek, and so forth. Would this sort of thing be achievable with one casting of the Tongues spell, do you think? Or should it be an even higher-level spell, perhaps called "Glossolalia" or something? (Yes, I know that's the technical/scientific name for the "speaking in tongues" effect- that was an intentional choice.)
Also, as an interesting aside, some stories I've heard/read about the "speaking in tongues" effect suggest that a person doing it could speak to several people, and have each individual interpret the words as being from a different language- that is, listener A might think it was Latin, while listener B thinks it's Etruscan, listener C thinks it's Greek, and so forth. Would this sort of thing be achievable with one casting of the Tongues spell, do you think? Or should it be an even higher-level spell, perhaps called "Glossolalia" or something? (Yes, I know that's the technical/scientific name for the "speaking in tongues" effect- that was an intentional choice.)
jonesy
A Wicked Kendragon
Even if you allow for a religious explanation, or even an in-game 'we know there's magic because the rulebook says so' perspective, gibberish is still the more likely explanation. Likely implying a certain percentage of cases.
I would be careful going with just a RAW approach - we make a lot of assumptions about things in the rules because they are not specifically stated or are worded poorly.
The problem is that there are many meanings to the word "understand" - do you comprehend what the words mean, do you comprehend the significance of the words, etc.
For example, consider:
"The domestic canine quadruped progressed at a superior velocity in a position anterior to the vehicle motivated by dual equine traction." (one of my favorite sentences)
Now, you may "understand" what every single word in that sentence means, but do you "understand" the import of the sentence, what it actually is saying? (rhetorical)
But even beyond that, your example is one of literacy, not understanding or comprehension - and again note the difference in wording of the two spells.
And were that the ruling at the table, I'd have no objection because I think a case could be made for it (I think a stronger case could be made the other way but neither can be "proven" wrong) that supports that interpretation.
One thing I'd caution though - equating spell levels to power. For example, maybe the reason that they increased the spell level was because unlike Comprehend Languages, Tongues can be cast on a target other than the caster or whatnot.
Also, I missed the import of the second paragraph of Comprehend Languages:
PRD said:
Here you have rules for reading with Comprehend Languages - yet there is no such information with the Tongues spell. Two logical conclusions spring to mind (if anyone can think of others, please contribute):
1) The information is not present for Tongues because Tongues cannot be used that way.
2) There is no limit to the amount of information per minute that can be read while under the influence of Tongues, it also allows for magical writing to be read, it cannot be foiled by certain warding magic, and it allows for the deciphering of codes or revealing messages concealed in otherwise normal text.
Tongues, Communal
I think that spell could and it'd make a great role-playing opportunity, IMO. But then, in my campaign world, there's over 60 languages present on one continent alone.
Even if you allow for a religious explanation, or even an in-game 'we know there's magic because the rulebook says so' perspective, gibberish is still the more likely explanation. Likely implying a certain percentage of cases.
Again, not discussing the rightness or wrongness of your assertion, for me it's too close to a religious discussion (for example, someone who believes they have spoken in or witness someone who did could come by and offer up a spirited rebuttal) and to my understanding, ENWorld would prefer that such matters not be addressed here.
You misunderstood what I was saying, I think. Let me try it a different way.
Character under the effect of Tongues is called "Speaker."
Speaker says something to a group of four people, call them "Listener A, Listener B, Listener C," and "Listener D."
Listener A is from Rome, and is a native speaker of Latin.
Listener B is from southern Italy, and is a native speaker of Etruscan.
Listener C is from Athens, and is a native speaker of Greek.
Listener D is from Ashurbanipal, and is a native speaker of Persian.
Speaker says something in the unique "language" allowed him by the Tongues spell. He just speaks once, and thinks of the words in whatever language he likes (most likely his native one).
Listener A hears Latin, as if Speaker were using Latin to talk (even though he's not). Listener B hears Etruscan, as if Speaker were using Etruscan (even though he's not). Listener C hears Greek, as if Speaker were using Greek (even though he's not). Listener D hears Persian, as if Speaker were using Persian (even though he's not).
It's a really weird and subtle effect, not directly implied by the wording of the existing Tongues spell.
On another note, I have a world with lots of languages too.
Each continent has its own Common tongue, and the Underdark has Undercommon; there are some 70-odd different languages to learn (some of which are dead languages used by civilizations that were snuffed out for one reason or another centuries ago). I also wrote in rules for special things like language families (for example, several varieties of Dwarven, but learning one gives you a bonus on Linguistics with others in the family even if you don't technically speak them) and "espionage" languages (two different languages use the same symbols for writing, allowing you to hide secret messages in one language within a "surface message" written in the other). They might rarely or never come up in play, but I like having the option of using them for a cooler campaign.I got you and while I don't know of any spell that allows that without "activating" listeners, I pointed out the group version of Tongues and how with a little campaign flavor could do just that. (Everyone hears their own language)
On another note, I have a world with lots of languages too.
On one continent, a French analogue serves as the lower common while a Latin analogue serves as the upper common. In addition to national languages, there are tribal languages and so on - but I don't have anything really analogous to Common or Undercommon - there are racial languages, but orcs seperated by say 500 miles are unlikely to speak the same language.
As we're currently doing a Thieves campaign in Ptolus, I reintroduced something woefully removed - Underworld Cant. I wonder how many people read of Cant in 1e and thought it was all made up?
Bloodspoor
First Post
Just buy a babble fish and stick it in your ear once. End of discussion and no magic was needed. http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Babble_Fish_(3.5e_Creature)
