Levistus's_Leviathan
5e Freelancer
As someone that is interested in linguistics, especially etymology and how different languages are related to each other, I think that realistically simulating how languages work would be mostly detrimental to the experience of playing a game. Imagine if every every few days the characters are on the road the local dialect became more and more difficult to understand, until you run into a language that isn't mutually intelligible with their language and they have a much harder time interacting with the NPCs. Trying to model regional dialects would make the game worse. There are ways you could alleviate this issue, like having there be a lingua franca that merchants and other travelers use, but most of my adventures involve the PCs talking with many NPCs in an area to learn information. Realistically modeling languages would heavily interfere with how I play the game. In D&D, the Common language is a handwave, similar to babelfish from Hitchhiker's Guide or the translator implants from Guardians of the Galaxy. I think the game would be less fun if it correctly modeled how languages work in the real world.
Baldur's Gate is almost 600 miles from Waterdeep. In a medieval-adjacent setting, that would almost definitely mean that a native Baldurian citizen would not be able to understand a Waterdhavian. Imagine if when you play Gale in Baldur's Gate 3, you couldn't understand any of the characters from Baldur's Gate unless you cast a language spell.
I do think there are settings that have interesting approaches to language, mainly Eberron. In Eberron, the main continent Khorvaire was colonized by humans from Sarlona. The 5 Nations speak Common because it was the official language of Galifar. Riedran is related to Common, they're both descended from "Old Common," but they're not mutually intelligible. Goblin was the language of the Dhakaani Empire, so goblinoids and most other native races to Khorvaire know how to speak it. Elvish, uniquely, is something elves are born with an innate understanding of. In my own games, I do enjoy experimenting with the language system and including stuff like creoles, but I do not have any urge to fundamentally change the language system.
I do not think regional languages would work in a game like D&D, where there is no assumed setting. D&D has to have "Goblin," because the language cannot be called "Dhakaani," or "Maglubiyetan," or "Urshani," as that name would not work in most D&D worlds. I think racial languages kind of have to be the default in D&D. Undercommon and the planar languages work because enough settings have an Underdark and outer planes for them to be in the core rules.
D&D is not a simulation. I do think every setting could use a more Eberronian approach to language, but trying to accurately model how languages work would make the game worse.
Baldur's Gate is almost 600 miles from Waterdeep. In a medieval-adjacent setting, that would almost definitely mean that a native Baldurian citizen would not be able to understand a Waterdhavian. Imagine if when you play Gale in Baldur's Gate 3, you couldn't understand any of the characters from Baldur's Gate unless you cast a language spell.
I do think there are settings that have interesting approaches to language, mainly Eberron. In Eberron, the main continent Khorvaire was colonized by humans from Sarlona. The 5 Nations speak Common because it was the official language of Galifar. Riedran is related to Common, they're both descended from "Old Common," but they're not mutually intelligible. Goblin was the language of the Dhakaani Empire, so goblinoids and most other native races to Khorvaire know how to speak it. Elvish, uniquely, is something elves are born with an innate understanding of. In my own games, I do enjoy experimenting with the language system and including stuff like creoles, but I do not have any urge to fundamentally change the language system.
I do not think regional languages would work in a game like D&D, where there is no assumed setting. D&D has to have "Goblin," because the language cannot be called "Dhakaani," or "Maglubiyetan," or "Urshani," as that name would not work in most D&D worlds. I think racial languages kind of have to be the default in D&D. Undercommon and the planar languages work because enough settings have an Underdark and outer planes for them to be in the core rules.
D&D is not a simulation. I do think every setting could use a more Eberronian approach to language, but trying to accurately model how languages work would make the game worse.
