Standard list of languages

[pyrokov]

I have been taking another look through BFRPG as a candidate of system for my next table, and have noticed that there is a disappointing lack of a language table.
The book gives a few languages in the character generation section: Common, Elvish, Dwarf and Halfling languages.
Scattered through all the monster entries, you additionally could find some extra languages: Dragon, Gnomish, Troll, Giant, Dragon, Goblin, Hobgoblin, Orcish, Ogre, Treant and the four elemental languages.
I think it might be warranted to add some curiously missing languages here such as Gnoll and Lizardman, and to compile all such standard languages into a single list somewhere in the book.

[Boggo]

the OSR way is less rules it better

add whatever languages you want for your game, thats the way it's intended to be

[Solomoriah]

Indeed, we don't standardize things that don't need to be standardized; the GM should make these decisions about his or her world.

[Dimirag]

Standardizing languages into the core rules means that those languages will be taken as always available to the characters, but the way BFRPG does it, lets each GM to set their own language lists, maybe monsters languages are too alien to be understood or due to the monster's aggressiveness no person has been able to learn it.

[pyrokov]

While I understand the sentiment, there is already some amount of standardising done where the core book has your standard monsters, and some of these monster entries already mention that there is a particular language that they speak. It is easy enough for me, as someone who has played other TSR games, to simply take a list from those systems and adapt it to my own use. Language lists are one of the easiest aspects of the game to house rule if you already have a good grasp on the game world, but this is not always going to be the case for people picking up BFRPG.

I really have two points to this -
1. it's not a good experience for anyone to have to trawl through all the text to find what languages exist in the implied setting of BFRPG (imagine doing this without ctrl+f with a physical rulebook)
2. fledgeling Game Masters would likely benefit from having an entry in their chapter of the rulebook briefly discussing the languages that *might* be in their fantasy game world

[SmootRK]

For me, Language is a setting or campaign specific aspect. Additionally, it need not be any more complex than a GM wants.

While I have played in groups that compartmentalize languages into distinct sets including multiple languages for each race (based upon region/nations), I have even played in a group that simply said everyone speaks the same base language, where each race or group simply has their own dialect or variant, much like the differences between English by Americans (which we all know have several dialects), Australians, or British Isle variations.... ie Orcs would sound a certain way, giants another way, etc but all basically understandable.

Literally every group I have played with have used (written or unwritten) house rules, some more complex and others less so, but Every Group had them. This falls into that realm.

[Solomoriah]

The exact list of languages is the same as the exact list of monsters; it's a setting issue, not a rules issue. And we mostly don't do setting.

[Dimirag]

1. what languages exist in the implied setting of BFRPG

It may seem, but there is no implied setting, it may be some written relationship between some monsters but that is.

2. fledgeling Game Masters would likely benefit from having an entry in their chapter of the rulebook briefly discussing the languages that *might* be in their fantasy game world

It may also be detrimental as such list may be taken as "official/obligatory" meaning the GM would have to use all related monsters or remove as needed, and BFRPG has a big "it's easier to add than to remove" mentality.

[pyrokov]

I would say you could scarcely make an rpg rulebook without some kind of implied setting, even if the goal is just standard fantasy.

An alternative solution then - put it in the description of The Western Lands in the Morgansfort book?

[Solomoriah]

Pyrokov, I get that you want this, but no one else has ever mentioned it. No, it's not possible to fully avoid an implied setting, but as a policy I nail down nothing that doesn't need nailing.

[Dimirag]

An alternative solution

An even better one, make a supplement and share it
Boggo has share some language learning rules so you may check that for inspiration if wanting to do more than just a list

[Rosisha]

doesn't the core rules say everyone speaks common as a default and more languages might be available? Isn't that sufficient?

I love adding language rules to my settings - but if Solomoriah made language rules part of the core book, I'd have to deal with people saying "But this is what's in the book!" I have to vote for less rules here. I think the line about "Common" is completely fine and sufficient, and from there I can make it more complex if I choose.

That being said, I'd also love to vote for a language supplement and would happily help write such a document if anyone would like my support. One thing I would do, for example, is include a "Language Families" structure - i.e. similar to how you have Germanic languages and Latin languages. Learning a language with a family is easier than not, and then finally I'd have penalties for learning languages with no common root - i.e. going from a Proto-Indo European language to a Proto-Uralic would be difficult. This even allows for a fun layer of world building, where you could have a similar situation to our own history where adventurers who have a lot invested into their language knowing your world's Latin, figure out that your world's Sanskrit has a lot in common. Then figuring out that the ruins in both regions are connected leading to them figuring out a clue that leads to a powerful lost artifact that survived as a legend in both cultures!

That would be an exciting revelation!