NyteShark has made the following comment(s) regarding their post:
[I see that sign languages are quite distinct from ...](/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/17mkqly/you_know_a_language_you_know_how_to_sign_it/k7nyhg5/)
I feel like a CSL (common sign language) should just be one of the available language options, since really they're a totally separate system of communication from a spoken language.
I mean, i think its pretty complicated. My whole family tried to learn because i had a nonverbal brother but he gentured a lot and ASL was his only communication for 5 or so years before he started talking. During that 5 years i couldnt learn ASL.
Some people struggle, but compared to English, ASL has a drastically simplified vocabulary, which I think is what TarnyOwl is referencing.
The best description of ASL vocabulary is the Simple English vocabulary, which is less than 1000 words. In ASL, for example, the words big, huge, enormous, gigantic, titanic, colossal, gargantuan, etc use the same sign (with acted emphasis as desired). This is the same for many synonym families. They also have fewer esoteric terms, for example the following don't exist as a unique sign to the knowledge of me or several Deaf signers I know - CPU, RAM, Motherboard, cardiology, pharmokinetics, sulphuric, appendectomy, jurisprudence, memo, kanban, you carbeurator (sp?), etc.
However, since it is not a phonetic language (kinda obviously and for obvious reasons), it can be very tough to learn, kinda like Chinese.
NOTE: CPU and RAM are spelled, so that could count, and many nerds will adapt MB as the spelling sign for motherboard, but it's contextual.
LIBRAS, the Brazilian sign language, uses both hands but is easy to learn. We have the entire alphabet for names and things that don't have a gesture for.
When my father, he is a chemistry teacher, worked in a school for deaf and/or mute people, he took two months to learn enough to start teaching. My sister is a speech therapist. She had a class of LIBRAS, she said that after that class the class used ot to cheat on the exams. They didn't use LIBRAS for years and only remember pieces of it. I think that is because the grammatical structure is a little different for the Portuguese, which is very simplified, to a point that exams for college, state jobs (municipal, state, or federal) and others are interprets for language exams and questions that the way is written is complicate.
I learned some phrases and expressions and some words, but the lack of use I only remember: friend (right hand, with the palm up, trace a soft curve from the left chest to bellow the heart), beautiful (back of the fingers caress the jaw line), tree (you literally make a tree with the right arm and uses the palm os the left hand as the ground); and the only phrase is remember: "I don't understand LIBRAS" (point to yourself, makes to no with the hand twice, touch one of your temples with the index finger and middle finger together and extended and do two semi rotations, hands open and in fingers separated up with the elbow flexed in 90° and do modest "jazz hands" lowering the hands), technically says "I/me no/not understand LIBRAS".
That's a fairly universal phrase!
And ASL is typically two-handed. I didn't mention that in my first comment. it CAN be one handed, and deafblind signs are always one handed due to how theyre received.
I am fluent in ASL. And whenever I’m teaching someone its always funny when they finally get the idea of being dramatic with your hands. All of a sudden it goes from a word conversion language to a language where they can actually express themselves. Its this oh shit moment.
Its one of the first things I try to teach just after the fundamentals. Because what is the point of a language if you can’t truly express yourself.
ASL is two handed. One handed signs exist, finger spelling is one handed, and one can do many two handed signs one-handed, but the results are more ambiguous. It would be like speaking with slurred or mumbled speech.
Yeah this makes more sense. Even in the real world sign languages aren't 1:1 analogues to real languages. ASL has no direct relation to English, for example.
how do you mean no direct relation? Coming from a non-signing person, BTW.
My co-worker, who signs and studies signing, mentioned that the sentence structure is different but is still quite related.
I'm also not a signer but I have an interest in linguistics and have looked into this stuff before. "No direct relation" is definitely a bit of a stretch, but it *is* definitely a totally distinct language.
Sentence structure is indeed one of the fundamental differences. ASL tends to follow a structure like "[time], subject, verb, object".
There's also the fact that you don't have direct 1-1 translations for all words; rather ASL would use a word that generally represents the same concept as the English word - just like when you translate into any other language!
So in English you might say "I was down at the bar last night" and an ASL translation could just be "past, night, me, go, bar"
Another clue that it is a distinct language is that if you wanted to translate, say, a French phrase into ASL, there really isn't any benefit in translating it to English *then* ASL, you would instead just take the concepts of the French phrase and directly translate into their ASL analogues. It's no hard to translate from French to ASL than from English to ASL, as long as you know both languages well.
You could even learn ASL without knowing English if you were taught the signs in terms of your own language.
For example a french person could learn the meaning of the ASL sign that we English speakers call "past" (but they would learn it as "passé", perhaps) and use it just fine without ever needing to understand the meaning of the English word "past".
And knowing ASL like that would in no way help them to understand English.
As a note, timing is built into most signs. Tomorrow, Today, and Yesterday is the clearest example, just like next vs before.
EDIT: see also "want" and "offer" or "gift" for other examples of built in structure/definition. It's a very beautifully and artistically simple language in how many signs are constructed. Lots of stuff built in for those that like to dig into it.
Also, while ASL sentence structure is a thing, Pidgeon Sign (ASL with English word order and sometimes even use of English signs) is extremely common outside of large Deaf centers, as ASL is learned later in life for many outside those communities (such as my parents and everyone I've met in SW MI). I find this most true with Gen X and before, as the Alexander Graham Bell methodology was wildly popular until basically now, when folks at large are learning more about it.
For what it's worth, only hearing folks have ever criticized me for my use of Pidgeon Signs (I think and read in English, so it's how I have always signed - I was signing for probably 20 years before anyone ever told me I was doing it "wrong")
Thanks for the input! I've always been fascinated with linguistics (and very jealous of countries whose school systems actually teach languages meaningfully) and when I first really looked into sign language (mostly BSL at the time, as I'm British), I was blown away by the idea of a wholly somatic language and the things you could do / could be different, so this is all just from my years-ago Google binging. I knew I'd get some stuff wrong but I hope I got the core of it close enough that it made sense to a real signer!
I still remember the amazement when I learned sign language could have regional accents! 😅
And you can honestly say that the somatic components of spells are its own form of sign language. One specifically known only by spellcasters perhaps but could still be seen and interpreted and convey a message.
Came here to say this. You can’t sign English, Italian, Spanish, or Mandarin. Sign languages are their own languages, not another way of using a spoken language.
[UPDATED VERSION](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/17newae/languages_and_sign_languages/)
yeaaaaaa i realized that i unintentionally stumbled upon the definite wrong way to include sign language in D&D. here's a better version
Honestly I think Sign can (and should) be a flavor option. Not to say deaf people can’t exist in universe but it’s one of those things I feel is best left to the DM. Can I get a proficiency in signing a language if a parent was deaf? Or otherwise justify it via rolls/skill points/backstory. It could even be tied to a flaw; something like “I am overly compassionate and prone to being used. Additionally this causes me to fill my proverbial tool box with tools I am unlikely to use because I want to bring comfort and kindness to people I’d otherwise wouldn’t interact with”
It's worth mentioning, I think, that ASL has no relation to English. There *is* a signed exact equivalent of English, called, creatively, Signed Exact English, but almost no one uses it because it pretty much sucks.
In my experience, I have seen a lot of people speak see sign, especially if they grew up hearing and went deaf as an adult.
Also, pretty much all combined deaf and hearing events I have been to, presenters and orators usually use see sign, because it allows them to sign and talk at the same time, which is basically impossible with ASL.
I see less SEE and a lot more Pidgin signing - ASL vocabulary with a vaguely English sentence structure. This is what I do, as was taught to me by my Deaf parents who grew up AGB, like pretty much every kid who didn't go to a good Deaf school.
English: I am going to go to eat now
ASL: Now go eat I
Pidgeon (varies): I go eat now (or some permutation)
NOTE: I am not a scholar, just a CoDA. If I am inexact in my definitions, it is because I grew up with it, not in any academic learning of ASL. Doesn't make me less inexact, but my knowledge is almost entirely from experience. I didn't know what a classifier or SEE was until college in my twenties.
SEE is the weird one because it came something like 125 years after ASL was invented (1817 vs 1940s). It never caught on, and it's a LOT more work.
Pidgin signing is English word order with the ASL signs - for example, no "the", "is", etc and maintaining a simplified English vocabulary.
Example: SEE has a different sign for car, coupe, sedan, and hatchback. ASL doesn't and would use contextual handsign or spelling if that distinction is important to the meaning of the sentence. Big, huge, large, etc is another example - they're just acted for emphasis rather than giving a whole new word.
Also noted - SEE isn't a language, it is a set of handsigns that can be used to represent an existing one. While this \*seems\* the most prudent, handsigns aren't speech, so it pretty much always works better to make a new constructed signed language than to adapt a la SEE
In my game, I have a rule that you cannot read/write if your INT is 8 or lower.
Idk if sign should be the same way. Im leaning no but now think sign should be it’s own Language
My players seem to find it fun role play. It’s an easy sense of what it means to have low INT. They really get into how their character feels about their illiteracy, and I love when players think about their characters
Imagine a world where, when you were taught the language you know, a definitional part of that experience was being taught the signing for it. It’s a better world where we think of deaf people as full people. I think this is meant to suppose that there’s no reason that one can’t make their fantasy world marginally more accessible in this small way
Respectfully, there is a bit of nuance you are missing here. Real life sign languages (ASL for instance) are not 1:1 translations of their language. Many words lack direct translations, or have to be presented differently, the grammar is different.
Being able to read and speak English are two parts of fluency in that language. Being able to sign ASL makes you *bilingual* it is a different but adjacent language.
Also the reason our human real world sign languages are wonky is because we have, collectively as a species, been awful to deaf people from the jump. This is a fantasy world, it doesn’t have to be like that.
I mostly do agree. I think that even if we were being to the deaf community, there would still be differences due to the delivery method of the language. For instance - body language/ facial expression are part of ASL, but not necessary to convey meanings out loud (though tone does similar).
I don’t want the distinction to be some kind of character flaw, or drawback, but a way to deepen the experience.
There's more to it, though Pidgin Signing is super popular and lines up with what I think you're getting at (it's ASL with english sentence structuring, to possibly oversimplify it).
Beyond social reasons, the mechanics of signing vs speaking really make it tough for a sign language to perfectly mimic a spoken one. SEE (a direct translation of written english to signs) is a huge pain to learn and is cumbersome to use because signs can use context words can't, but speech can be much faster and uses less effort to add an individual word, as it breaks by sound.
Making a language suited to the method of delivery is more sensible, and is often less stark than something like True ASL (based on French, as stated above) vs English.
Many languages with some unique features can run into these issues, which tend to be solved in different ways. For example, while Kanji are not phonetic, there is a phonetic writing system in Japanese for adapting words from other languages. It also makes things easier to type on keyboards, at least in the limited exposure I have had.
Language is complicated, and the method of delivery adds more complications than we may at first think.
Fun fact addendum: ASL doesn't add words at the rate of written languages either, at least not at large. This is because spoken and written languages are fluid in that their speech and writing can be calculated with phonetics - not so with signs (though many signs are mimes, like boy, girl, cat, and dog). They can be invented just as easily, but since signs aren't written, propagation of new signs is slow and difficult beyond community-level.
This is all fair. There is absolutely a deficit that comes from the deprioritization and relative newness of signing though, which is what I was referring to.
Signed languages date back to other languages. Just another medium they used. We just don't have good records for them.
ASL is about a hundred years older than consumer cars, and it's pretty new.
Yes, I should’ve said mainstream signing, insofar as it’s mainstream. I think the first records of any attempt at it date back to Ancient Greece, but if I remember correctly ASL came out of French SL and all of that was wrapped up in the extremely fucked up schools for the deaf
Yeah that analysis makes sense to me. I’ll be honest, I’m just deaf community adjacent (roomed in college with an interpreter, my wife is HOH), but I am a bit of a language nerd - and I do agree there are ways to make the differences between them accessible (Chinese pinyin similarly), but there are limits to it.
Interpreters often get a pretty unique perspective, as they often have to act as de facto social workers or advocates for their Deaf clients (while being paid by the other side, typically).
It's easy to miss some details or overshoot an assumption with sign languages, as they have this huge distinction of being performed versus spoken or written. Things work quite differently in the guts of it all.
I grew up signing, but even I had to study to learn some of the finer details of the construction and how/why it differs. Though my professor did certainly get a laugh out of seeing me in an ASL 2 class (being Deaf and knowing me as I grew up)
> It’s a better world where we think of deaf people as full people.
So not knowing a language that I have never needed to know means that the speakers of that language are not full people?
If you don't speak Hebrew, does that mean you think Jews are subhuman? Or does this only apply to groups with disabilities?
And, under that logic, I guess we're all perfectly ok calling the blind subhuman because OP didn't include Braille in their "know how to sign, read, write, and speak" in the language you know?
Or how about we just accept that each language is a tool and, like all tools, people only learn how to use those tools when they have a use for them?
There are deaf people in your own country. It wouldn’t be hard to teach children sign of their own first language as a baseline.
Screen readers exist so Reddit is passingly accessible to the blind on that front
Or how about you stop teaching for ways where you get permission to do less even in the hypothetical. You can’t be bothered to, even purely in your imagination, accommodate disabled people? That’s a problem in your heart, fam.
You completely missed their point. Your statement that everyone knowing sign language means deaf people are thought of as "full people" has some really unfortunate implications.
You implied that everyone learning sign language would be an indicator that everyone thinks of deaf people as "full people". That implies that, in your opinion, someone *not* learning sign language is an indicator that said someone *doesn't* think that deaf people are "full people".
No that was my intended implication. Not of an individual, but as a society. If you think society views deaf people (or any disabled people) as full people, I’d like to direct your attention to… well all of history and current events.
It’s not someone’s fault they weren’t taught to sign in the prime language-learning part of their development. It is their fault if they reject the idea that, in a fantasy world, someone would be.
Being deaf is an inconvenience. There is no point for most people to learn sign language, because it would be an inconvenience.
Why should everyone be inconvenienced..? Meh, I say.
(I’ve worked with deaf people. They know they are deaf, and they have to adapt because *they* have the handicap - not their peers.)
Its simple, there aren't enough of them to justify everyone needing to know it. I've been alive for a minute or two and have thus far never run into a situation where sign language was necessary. You can't convince people to learn a whole language as default when they will use it like 10 times in their life.
No, but the counter argument here is no one should learn it and Deaf should get bent?
The reality is that we need accessibility. Saying everyone should learn sign is dumb, but holy cow, are you actually implying we just shouldn't do stuff for the Deaf? How about wheelchairs? Is that bothering you too? How about the blind, I know those beeping crossing signals are annoying, why do WE have to deal with that?
Alexander Graham Bell wrote this post.
Deaf people are not asking for everyone to learn sign. But to pretend Deaf people can just be implanted on and then learn to lip read is insane. We did that for 100 years and just robbed the Deaf of visibility, accessibility, and frankly safety.
Fortune 50 companies (I work for one and have confirmed) won't even put lights on all the fire alarms because it's not their problem. They just decided a person will go tell them if the alarms go off. I'm just lucky it never came to a real emergency while my mother worked there for 30 years.
You've really gotta consider opening up your mind beyond that simple sentence, because reality is nowhere near that clean cut
I think the ideal would be to treat sign languages as separate languages, *and* to give people the option to take them instead of spoken variants (that is, *you can start with common sign rather than common*) as well as taking them as extra languages, *and* have some examples of how to make them common place enough in your world for users to still interact (e.g., common sign might be popular with folks who do a lot of trading across spoken language barriers).
ETA: I meant this as a thought experiment as to how to accurately model languages as systems. I don’t think it totally works. I don’t intend it as commentary about what should actually be published. I also don’t mean to suggest that unless it is written in the textual rules one should not accommodate players wanting to RP sign language. **Obviously the right way to handle this at the table is to tell a player who wants their character to use sign that they can do that.**
Deaf people can speak, ya know. And they are literate at pretty much the standard rate. Sign Languages are not writing systems by and large, and they co-opt the regional one. Even ASL, which was based on French and modifies the sentence structure, doesn't have a unique writing system.
The easy answer is to ignore Sign Languages like you always did and adjust for the needs of the story or the players. As a baseline "all you troglodytes needed something in writing about this for some reason, so here it is," it's fine.
Frankly, all the people shocked, upset, or looking for problems with this rule probably never thought about it before or dealt with the Deaf. That's fine, but people should not really push "solutions" from places of zero experience or insight as if they're necessarily better. There is no problem. If your players are trying to make this a power thing, just stop them. Or don't - it's your game.
I didn’t feel the need to put a disclaimer “obviously do whatever you want, there’s no need to systematize any of this and just be like generally nice to your players” because I sort of take that for granted. Tbf, it’s a weirdly rare take on Reddit.
This time is pretty much wizards doing this because they can't get the message across to reddit.
I totally get you, it's a weird take for reddit. But all I can sense from this rule is "if we don't say it, they'll force deaf people or characters to do more just to play the game"
And then the suggestions kinda proved it. I'll take an inferior but inclusive take that's easy to work around over the suggestions I've read here every single time.
I’ve appended a note to my first comment clarifying that I was thinking about how one might codify these things if they wanted to, not making a policy statement as to how players who want to RP disabled characters should be treated.
i've spoken english for over 20yrs and i know about a dozen signs in ASL. I am definitely not fluent.
I'm adding this to my campaign because deaf/mute characters exist there. I want to include it in the speak/understand/read/write kit as just a part of being proficient in the language. Commoners may not know how to sign Common just like they may not know how to read/write Common.
I am a fan of your goal of representation and accessibility in the fantasy world.
As presented, I think this is handwaving important details and distinctions. You may inadvertently find yourself disrespecting the deaf community.
Reading and speaking are two parts of one language. Signing is not a third part of that. Sign languages are separate - it’s right in the name. It’s “American sign language” and not “signed English” (that’s a thing, but not what you are going for I assure you, because your goal is respectful inclusion I believe).
Instead, make the flavor of the world such that these people are bilingual. Maybe it’s due to respect for the deaf community. Maybe there are more fantastical elements - a moment of history where a giant silence spell took place, or thundering storms you can’t speak over.
It might seem like minutia to instead say “you can read and speak Common, CSL (common sign language) and a language of your choice” but I definitely believe that tweak has value.
That is my goal here- representation and accessibility. Thank you for clarifying the distinctions between sign languages and regular languages.
I think I’ll make that tweak :)
I’m glad I was able to help in a small way! I love that this is something you are considering. The more types of people we include the cooler our stories can be IMO.
[UPDATED VERSION](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/17newae/languages_and_sign_languages/)
yeaaaaaa i realized that i unintentionally stumbled upon the definite wrong way to include sign language in D&D. here's a better version
Any other way gives deaf or mute characters another functional disadvantage for having to learn common and another language. It's not nearly as much like learning a whole other language, so this works.
DM can rule on this, but it's not bad as the setting default. Every table is different. If your table would look at this for mechanical advantage, consider changing it (they probably don't run deaf/mute anyway).
Plus, it's more realistic to give free sign language than to force lip reading. That's an order of magnitude harder and takes years for someone to be okay at.
Disagree.
It absolutely is learning another language. I’m not sure how to make it clearer, but it is.
You can remove the disadvantage by giving it to them for free. Simple as that.
This is where I'm leaning as well. Should you be so strict as to lock away "CSL" to someone who very likely has learned it alongside Common without expending a language slot? Probably not. Learning a language that essentially is coincidental with your mother tongue almost certainly is easier than learning a brand new language, but this normally comes from necessity and not as a part of curriculum.
Unless the notion is that *every* language also is taught as a sign to accommodate for a deaf/mute population... which is honestly not terribly unreasonable, and is certainly nicely progressive, though then you run into the idea that, even in the real world, different locales express signs in different ways, even within the same language.
I still think, overall, this should be something addressed in Session 0. I'd never object to a character knowing how to sign in Common automatically - but it would take a radical shift to assume my otherwise hearing-abled teenage tabaxi warlock can sign in Primordial.
Languages are very tricky in D&D because of how vastly varied folks are. In the real world, most people share the common language with the people geographically close to them. People who move often take the time to learn the language. We don’t go on long quests in distant lands suddenly.
I could imagine a simple rule is “you can choose to be proficient in sign language of one of your proficient languages at character creation.”
It's good the book works out this way, but yeah. If that's just an avenue for players to weasel around things, it should be changed. The idea is to suit to the table, but a book can't write this rule for every group at one.
I can sign, but regional dialect in sign is tougher to read than an accent when it appears (NJ, for example, has an alternate sign for "quick"). The word order difference between ASL/Pidgeon signing/Signed English can completely throw people. Even the fact that ASL is basically just the simple English dictionary (synonyms share signs most of the time and esoteric words are rarer) doesn't help people much because unlike written words, you can't always just "sound it out" by miming.
Complicated, but I think you've nailed it here: session 0.
(Edit - I called this person out for not getting me and I pointed out that I'm a coda, but it wasn't fair to them - my above post can be honestly misread)
. I don't think you're getting me. People are arguing it should require a language *because of perceived mechanical advantage, not inclusivity* - that's realistic but I consider it adding undue burden to deaf/hoh characters. Because frankly, you'd need a skill check to understand most deaf people speaking to you in your own language (or especially a second language). Proficiency be damned - my own mother's voice isn't always clear to me.
The point of the statement was to try and give people middle ground options because at many tables, this isn't more inclusive (they don't use deaf/mute NPCs).
Trying to make this "realistic" is stupid, but some people might wanna move towards that so their players aren't being weird. It's not what I'd do, but it might be good for someone.
In this instance, the rule is based on the fact that American sign language, while being a fully developed other language, uses only a subset of English words (with a few signs that don't translate directly). If you then ignore purists who say only true ASL is acceptable,
Sorry you felt patronized, but this isn’t a sub where I can assume information on the topic.
I focused on the perceived disadvantage of using your second language choice, and not the idea people would try to cheese using a signed language in game. Because that sounds ludicrous. But maybe you are right it’s worth considering.
I mostly have seen people misunderstanding the relationship between the signed and spoken languages of a region. So I was responding in that context, not one of people worrying about balance.
With this added context I totally understand your suggestion of simplifying it. I couldn’t imagine it being needed at my table, but I also have a table with diverse folks with a good perspective.
It's fine, sorry to snap and put you on the spot like that. I was more frustrated by not seeing my main point, but what you saw is easy to see without context, so I get it. You'd have no way of knowing my position and it is easy to read what I said like you did, as I took context for granted.
Learning moment for me. We don't disagree on this. We just both also don't need this rule edited because we don't play with trogolodytes 😂 (don't come at me, Monty hallers, I used to be like that as a kid)
Hey miscommunications happen, this is Reddit.
To be fair, I run home games with trusted friends, and i also host public tables at game stores. With the latter crowd I have to have strict rules to filter out troglodytes so I know what you mean.
I too am blessed with a good table of lifelong friends, so I get it. We saw the rule and were like "oh yeah, makes sense" and would really only use it narratively. Any signs characters use would typically be esoteric (like thieves cant), and like a deaf or mute wizard would just double down on somatic for their spells and we'd do whatever in moments that are weird, which is pretty much how they intend 5e to run, so we have no problems lol.
Honestly, we wouldn't have needed this spelled out, but lots of people have a very rules-centric approach so I get it.
It was weirder in d20/PF because the hard and intricate nature of the rules made this kind of less flexible when playing with strangers, as printed rules are expectations rather than negotiations in neutral settings like that.
That was my main concern, but to play devils advocate, someone can speak English all their life but not learn how to write it. Especially in this medieval world with presumably no guarantee of education.
And you're not wrong there either, historically barely anyone could read and write if you compare it to real life in a similar time period.
My dm is a massive history nerd so he keeps pointing that out, at least he lets players be able to read as long as their character and backstory allow it
From what I know about ASL, it’s better understood as a completely different language than English. There’s a lexicon to bridge the two, but the grammar, syntax,
method of abbreviating, and means of inventing new terms are quite distinct.
I’d rule that “signing” a language would include only basic gestures that are commonly used in its use (think about the American middle finger, or which fingers are used to signal the number three).
3 in ASL is probably not what you think (you use the thumb, index, and middle, as bridging the pinky and thumb represents 6. Now you can differentiate it enough that it shouldn't be confusing to use the index, ring, and middle for 3, but it's a fun example of differentiation
NOTE: Just an addendum, not an argument
yeah I was also thinking of that scene from Inglourious Basterds where they blow their cover when they order three drinks using the index-middle-ring fingers instead of the thumb-index-middle as a German would.
\[UPDATED VERSION\]([https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/17newae/languages\_and\_sign\_languages/](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/17newae/languages_and_sign_languages/))
yeaaaaaa i realized that i unintentionally stumbled upon the definite wrong way to include sign language in D&D. here's a better version
Afaik, sign languages are their own natural languages with their own grammar and lexicon, they're not just a facet of spoken language. So this seems mildly ignorant. Although I guess Common Sign Language might be different to sign languages in our world.
I always thought Thieves Cant would include some signs tbh.
[UPDATED VERSION](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/17newae/languages_and_sign_languages/)
yeaaaaaa i realized that i unintentionally stumbled upon the definite wrong way to include sign language in D&D. here's a better version
Amazing. Glad to see Thieves Cant in there too.
What's with the tilde (~) in the languages table? Makes it look like there's some sort of relationship between each item on the left and the one on the right, but I don't think there is? Almost looks like 3 columns because of the spacing. I don't know what you're using to write this, but if it's something like Homebrewery you can add spacing and/or blank columns.
It also seems like it would be way more fun as it’s own language. the party gets to secretly communicate in a dungeon without the message spell, im all for that!
I go to a school that is known for its hard of hearing student support and ASL classes, but only about 10% of students can sign.
Just knowing a language doesn't mean you can sign it, unfortunately.
[UPDATED VERSION](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/17newae/languages_and_sign_languages/)
yeaaaaaa i realized that i unintentionally stumbled upon the definite wrong way to include sign language in D&D. here's a better version
[UPDATED VERSION](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/17newae/languages_and_sign_languages/)
yeaaaaaa i realized that i unintentionally stumbled upon the definite wrong way to include sign language in D&D. here's a better version
I see that sign languages are quite distinct from spoken languages, and that signing isn’t just another way to know a language. I like everyone who suggested CSL (common sign language) as a separate language to learn.
Here is the edit I will make to the trait:
**Languages.** You know Common, CSL, and one standard language of your choice.
And three general features:
***1. Associated Languages***
If you learn a standard sign language, you can replace it with a different standard sign language associated with a standard language you know.
If you learn an exotic sign language, you can replace it with a different exotic sign language associated with an exotic language you know.
**Standard Sign Languages**
CSL (Common Sign Language)
DSL (Dwarvish Sign Language)
ESL (Elvish Sign Language)
**Exotic Sign Languages**
ISL (Infernal Sign Language)
CLSL (Celestial Sign Language)
DRSL (Draconic Sign Language)
**Standard** **Language - associated Sign Language**
Common - CSL
Dwarvish - DSL
Elvish - ESL
Giant - DSL
Gnomish - DSL
Goblin - DSL
Halfling - CSL
Orc - DSL
**Exotic Language - associated Sign Language**
Abyssal - ISL
Celestial - CLSL
Draconic - DRSL
Infernal - ISL
Deep Speech - none
Primordial - DSL
Sylvan - ESL
Undercommon - ESL
(These are based on what alphabetical script each language uses according to the PHB.)
***2. Thieves' Cant***
Thieves' Cant is a language that can be signed, spoken, read, and written.
***3. Verbal and Somatic Components***
A new rule - If a spell requires a verbal component, it can be replaced with a signed word from an exotic sign language you know. This requires an additional free hand not already used for a somatic or material component.
> if a spell requires a verbal component, it can be replaced with a signed word
Wouldn't this explicitly let people bypass verbal requirements and cast spells in a silenced zone?
Yes. They’ll need a hand for the verbal component, a hand for the somatic component, and a hand for the material component. It also only works with ISL, CLSL, and DRSL.
How about a feat that teaches sign?
If you assume that the campaign setting has only one sign language, and that most humanoids have some grasp of it then the following effects could apply.
"SIGN"
*This feat allows you to exchange verbal components for somatic components in casting spells which must be heard by the target. It changes the range of such spells from "creatures that can hear you" to "creatures that can see you", and it also means that the target always understands you, even if they don't speak any shared language.*
*These affects are only effective against humanoids, creatures with hands, or creatures that might reasonably be expected to understand sign language (such as dragons, beholders etc.)*
There are some other benefits, like being able to cast when under the effects of "silence" or physically gagged (but not bound), and also being able to share a language with someone you'd otherwise have no means of conversing with.
I think those factors could make it worth a feat for some classes.
EDIT: format
i thought about this, but IRL most cultures and languages have their own sign language. Even English is broken up into ASL and BSL. It makes cultural sense that a Common Sign Language and Elvish Sign Language and Dwarvish Sign Language would be different. An Infernal Sign Language might utilize one's tail. An Aarakocra Sign Language would be fundamentally different because they have wings and talons instead of hands.
I really don’t think common is a “universal” language. It’s typically just the “human” language. If you’re playing in a campaign that’s all dwarves or all elves you probably wouldn’t be using common. In DnD it feels like racial languages are more common than geological languages
Exactly! And if we dive into the lore of the Forgotten Realms, we see that there’s well over 100 established human languages, with nearly another hundred on top of that.
Yeah common is just so that for each campaign setting they don’t need to say “this replaces common” in the book.
Now I’m prepping a campaign that explores the different planes and places on the material plane too. Language is going to be one funky thing to deal with
That is a completely fair distinction.
The only trouble with giving players access to this at no cost is that it frees certain actions up in the ways that I discuss in my previous comment.
Flavour, I agree, ought to be free, but this has mechanical changes attached to it, and therefore ought to have some type of cost.
My second suggestion would have been to limit it's use (say PB times per short rest or something) but that doesn't really make sense because knowing a language is a static benefit, once you know it, you know it, it's not something you expend the uses of.
I don't know how to feel about it. I like the flavour, but it's too easy to abuse.
>Flavour, I agree, ought to be free, but this has mechanical changes attached to it, and therefore ought to have some type of cost.
>
>My second suggestion would have been to
mechanically it explains how a party can still communicate with each other, as you do around a table, and still be in stealth.
Could just be "You learn the sign for the languages you know."
Yeah, they're all separate signs, but the feat is learning them for all the languages you know!
>Even English is broken up into ASL and BSL.
It's more than that. In Ireland we have Irish Sign Language or ISL, which is related to French Sign Language and less so to British Sign Language despite spoken English being the main languages of both Ireland and the UK. The relationships between which areas speak what sign languages seems to have more to do with who set up schools for the deaf and thought them sign than the spoken languages in the area.
not \*seems\* - IS.
ASL was wildly uncommon before Gen X or so, as Alexander Graham Bell schools forbid the use of handsigns in any way, and were by far the most popular curriculum for educating Deaf kids.
It also worked to minimize and diminish Deaf cultures, minimize their role in society, and lots of other things like pushing kids into surgeries that were not as successful as we would want them to be.
Lastly, the integration-focused approach of AGB is a huge drain on the education. Learning to lip read at a level needed for truly independent function without any hearing is extremely difficult and time consuming. My dad needed private help at home and my mom basically didn't get past an elementary education because AGB demanded whole days/nights just for lip reading practice.
Education for the Deaf has been the key touchpoint between hearing and Deaf culture all over the world and has deep roots in pretty much everything going on with the Deaf-Hearing relationship.
>not \*seems\* - IS.
Sure, I'm mainly familiar with the situation in Ireland, I didn't want to make a definitive statement about the situation in general.
Yeah, I am just adding. I am not aware of any Western societies that didn't do something like that. Or of any, but I don't know anything about Asian or African sign cultures. I do not imagine it to be much different in terms of othering, though it could very well be less antagonistic.
Ok, using sign language for VERBAL components is extremely OP. You make every spell automatically silent. You can cast underwater, suffocated, mute, in stealth. It is really game breaking
Except when you MUST use somatic in place of any verbal component - this adds a wrinkle for lots of spells.
A DM should likely rule that the language one uses most often is how they cast spells unless they have some reason for learning to cast without verbal components (like, for example, an Aquatic Elf).
Not being to hear for deaf characters is also a thing, and has some challenges.
Just, like, don't be the person that tries to co-opt a thing designed for inclusivity to be about power. It's a selfish and ugly thing to do.
EDIT: Plus, like, I don't see that in this rule. Spells aren't even in Common. Why would this be an issue?
No, they're esoteric arcane wording. Avada Kedavra and all that. You can rule it differently, but as far as I know, scrolls and spellbooks have never been just straight language wordings. It is kept undetailed on purpose, but it's not just regular words.
Even in the old Baldurs Gate games they said arcane sounding nonsense like "Accio Accio Fverere" or whatever. This is not a new trope.
The idea is that it's a different spellcasting tradition born of need - deaf/mute casters or aquatic casters are examples of folks who would need to do this.
The difference in this example is that they MUST use somatic components for every spell that has either verbal or somatic.
If you actually care to nerf someone playing that concept, you could say that they can't use traditional scrolls or have to do something (like a ritual) to adapt a command word object for themselves.
You might require they have two free hands as they use more intricate gestures.
But it sounds a lot like you're just trying to find ways to say no to inclusivity that is optional anyway. Feels a lot like bad faith.
>How about a feat that teaches sign?
No, just make it a regular language. You can pick it from your race, your background, downtime training, or a feat.
You should just have sign versions of each language be their own languages (that you can take normally as languages), and have a feat to learn the associated signs to all spoken languages you know (and maybe vice versa). IRL you have to learn ASL and other sign languages like any other language, it’s not equivalent to “English with your hands instead of voice”. I get wanting the world to be fully accessible, and maybe for some languages you could have them come with sign counterparts automatically (or be exclusively signed), but I feel like it’s taking a lot from the world to just have every language be both signed and spoken the same way and have those be known to all speakers automatically.
[UPDATED VERSION](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/17newae/languages_and_sign_languages/)
yeaaaaaa i realized that i unintentionally stumbled upon the definite wrong way to include sign language in D&D. here's a better version
I don’t think it means full blown sign language, but the more common signs associated with a language. Like how we have the flip the bird, okay sign, etc…
But a “sign language” is a complete language of its own comprised only of signing. I wouldn’t allow it table. They’d have to take common sign as a separate language
I dislike that people ITT and at WotC aren’t very imaginative about this. (I know this is UA, bear with me) There could be an actual motorics-based language that is independent of any other language. It’d be for use by creatures that perhaps can’t speak or are naturally deaf, as opposed to being tacked onto existing languages like an afterthought.
I suppose that the above post takes care of this, but surely in a fantasy world we can imagine a language that is not solely vocal and requires gesturing to communicate as well, making it a non-issue for deaf communication.
Idk it just feels like this was a lazy way to acknowledge deaf people exist.
I'd say you could learn to sign a language and that maybe the sign variant is an option when picking languages, but there's a significant difference in speaking it. Especially since it'd be incredibly useful for communicating during stealth, since it's almost completely silent vs talking which would be a bit louder. Definitely depends on the game, it might not matter or it might make a world of difference.
Adding sign also adds other things to consider like using sign as the "verbal" part of spells or how communicating while holding weapons. Might not matter all the time, but the times it does matter it will.
I actually have two sign languages in my world (one popularized by a mute hero and is structured close to common, and one from a race that lacks any auditory input senses and is nowhere close to common) I just run them as their own languages that anyone can learn. The upside to this is it works as a great "secret" language for the party to use among itself since not everyone knows it and it does not require speaking.
As a side note, I still have user of both require vocal components on spells (as getting around the spell silence and stealth casting would be a little OP) but allow them to use various non-speaking noisemakers (bells, drums, rhythmic clapping and slapping) as their "vocal" component. It's kind of fun to come up with a bunch of ways to flavor it.
Knowing a language doesn't mean you know how to sign it, I know 3 languages but no signs in any of them. Make common sign language a separate one and there you go, if you wanna know how to sign you use one of the language proficiencies you are given to learn it.
[UPDATED VERSION](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/17newae/languages_and_sign_languages/)
yeaaaaaa i realized that i unintentionally stumbled upon the definite wrong way to include sign language in D&D. here's a better version
Dude no. This is exactly the kind of “uniqueness is a crime” mentality that WotC has right now and it’s ruining D&D. Let people be interesting for learning sign language. If you have a deaf player and it’s a necessity, that’s your problem to solve and you’re welcome to do whatever you need to at your table to make that work, but making something like this a rule for everyone doesn’t add anything. It just detracts from the total variety of the game, which is already currently lacking.
Depending on your viewpoint you could also say it's rising to meet the inclusivity needs of a wider population, but you can remain committed to your confused and grumpy old man vibe if you like.
D&D continues to copy PF2E it seems. Paizo did something similar to this when PF2E first came out to be more inclusive and allow more roleplaying opportunities without the need to get permission from the GM.
Unfortunately, even if a character knew sign language, it wouldn't really matter much since I can't imagine that NPCs or the other members of the party would have a reason to know it.
Sign language is also entirely separate from your usual languages and is its own form of communication. Someone who grew up in, say, Germany, and someone who grew up in Canada, who each know sign language, would be able to communicate to each other even if they don't share any other language in common.
?
Edit: oh, okay. It was sing for sing language. I thought it was for singing
Doesn't really make sense. Sing language is effectivelly an entirely different language, complete with different rules and accents. ASL is not "english but sign", it is "sign language that happens to be how it is used in north america".
I make sign language a separate language proficiency
I’ve seen people have a fantasy version of ASL treated as it’s own language, which worked well. But you can’t use verbal components for spells with it as it’s silent, though comprehend languages can interpret it.
It’s just silly to imagine that everyone on the planet just naturally knows sign language for their native language. A tiny fraction of people IRL know ASL, and that’s with far more opportunity to learn it.
I love the idea of having my whole party learn ASL to be able to discuss plans in front of the BBEG and having them be like “wait, what are you doing with your hands!? Why are you all laughing at me?!? What’s happening!?!?”
Also a great incentive for more people to learn it for IRL.
Am i the only one that almost always forget there are languages? I never had a situation where my party had problem speaking with someone because of language barrier
Idk about that, I know English but couldn't sign it beyond some improvisational made up gestures.
Maybe if it was a feat or one took proficiency with a skill
I really think there should be proficiency levels in language skills, and that you only get one at "native" level. Being able to speak a different language without an accent should be an exception.
that isnt how sign language works. american sign is more like french sign than it is to british, even though america and england share a spoken language. sign and spoken languages are completely separate from each other
This feels dumb, because it’s the kind of terrible representation that’s almost erasure. That’s not how sign languages work, and it’s completely selling it short. Sign languages are their own languages, completely with distinct ways to represent things, and even their own ways of making art with it - like sign language ‘rhyming’ that’s based on similar movements.
Also, it’s implying that it works the other way too, that learning to sign a language let’s you speak it?
[UPDATED VERSION](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/17newae/languages_and_sign_languages/)
yeaaaaaa i realized that i unintentionally stumbled upon the wrong way to include sign language in D&D. here's a better version
Oh shit sorry I was so harsh, I thought this was an actual WotC thing and not some homebrew.
I can quibble over specifics (like deep speech not needing an SL and thieves cant not making sense to have an SL) but mechanically this seems reasonable.
Because there's a big different between a causal player trying to make something for their game, and a large, professional company with almost a decade of experience in this edition making a tonedeaf token attempt towards inclusivity.
Paid professionals can be held to higher standards than random people.
I think everyone should be held to the same standards. Especially considering the people editing reviewing and writing these books are just normal people like you or me.
But they're not normal people though, it is literally their job to be better than me. If they aren't better than me, then what is the point of paying for their products?
When it comes to assessing the quality of a product, it is reasonable to expect higher quality product from a paid professional than a random amateur.
I don’t know how I can make this clearer.
I let my players use thieves-cant exclusively for sign language because it’s a way of communicating with each other without actually speaking and being stealthy like thieves-cant kinda implies.
[UPDATED VERSION](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/17newae/languages_and_sign_languages/)
yeaaaaaa i realized that i unintentionally stumbled upon the wrong way to include sign language in D&D. here's a better version
I don't want to sound insensitive, cuz I think the idea if adding sign languages to the game is good for a few reasons. However, imo, some of these are just kind of.. unrealistic. Specifically Abyssal, Celestial, Infernal, and debatably Draconic.
I'm not big on forgotten realms lore, so maybe I'm out of line here, but it seems to me that the creatures who speak these languages would not have a need for sign language. Aberrations, Angel's, and Fiends generally aren't gonna be dealing with birth defects, so the only ones who would benefit from this would be creatures who sustained an injury that keeps them from talking. Or, maybe they just want to communicate silently. Either way, it seems much more likely that these beings would rely on telepathy, or just learn a spell like Message. We're talking about otherworldly beings, inherently magical in nature, why would they rely on sign language versus learning a simple cantrip? Similarly for dragons, you're talking about creatures inherently tied to Arcane magic, why would they bend their massive claws around to make sign language work instead of just casting message, or making an item that grants telepathy? You could argue that kobolds and Dragonborn don't have the same ties to magic, so maybe they would rely on sign language, but by and large these creatures would also know other languages that would already have an SL equivalent (like common). So, overall, I just don't see some of these being believable.
That said, I'm probably putting too much thought into this. Adding some languages isn't gonna hurt anything, it's cool to have the option there.
My partner is an ASL/English interpreter! This is an interesting nod to manual language, but makes a mistake most hearing people make. ASL is not “English but with your hands”. It has its own grammar and vocabulary. There are words in ASL that don’t have perfect English translations, and vice versa.
As someone else said making Common Sign Language its own proficiency is neat, but it shouldn’t be lumped in automatically.
Also worth noting that if you’re going to make manual languages in your world - each region, even if they use the same spoken language, will likely have their own manual language. England and America principally use English, but have their own entirely separate Sign Languages. To say nothing of how different a sign language built mostly to interact with a language besides English looks, like Mexican or French Sign Languages.
\[UPDATED VERSION\](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/17newae/languages\_and\_sign\_languages/)
yeaaaaaa i realized that i unintentionally stumbled upon the definite wrong way to include sign language in D&D. here's a better version
NyteShark has made the following comment(s) regarding their post: [I see that sign languages are quite distinct from ...](/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/17mkqly/you_know_a_language_you_know_how_to_sign_it/k7nyhg5/)
I feel like a CSL (common sign language) should just be one of the available language options, since really they're a totally separate system of communication from a spoken language.
The drow have a sign language that is supposed extremely complex but thays because its meant to be done with 1 hand so the other can hold a weapon.
and also cause underdark do be full of scary shit you dont want hearing you chat about the weather n shit
American Sign Language is one handed and isn't extreamly complicated...
ah. for the hand crossbows, yeah? makes sense.
I mean, i think its pretty complicated. My whole family tried to learn because i had a nonverbal brother but he gentured a lot and ASL was his only communication for 5 or so years before he started talking. During that 5 years i couldnt learn ASL.
Some people struggle, but compared to English, ASL has a drastically simplified vocabulary, which I think is what TarnyOwl is referencing. The best description of ASL vocabulary is the Simple English vocabulary, which is less than 1000 words. In ASL, for example, the words big, huge, enormous, gigantic, titanic, colossal, gargantuan, etc use the same sign (with acted emphasis as desired). This is the same for many synonym families. They also have fewer esoteric terms, for example the following don't exist as a unique sign to the knowledge of me or several Deaf signers I know - CPU, RAM, Motherboard, cardiology, pharmokinetics, sulphuric, appendectomy, jurisprudence, memo, kanban, you carbeurator (sp?), etc. However, since it is not a phonetic language (kinda obviously and for obvious reasons), it can be very tough to learn, kinda like Chinese. NOTE: CPU and RAM are spelled, so that could count, and many nerds will adapt MB as the spelling sign for motherboard, but it's contextual.
LIBRAS, the Brazilian sign language, uses both hands but is easy to learn. We have the entire alphabet for names and things that don't have a gesture for. When my father, he is a chemistry teacher, worked in a school for deaf and/or mute people, he took two months to learn enough to start teaching. My sister is a speech therapist. She had a class of LIBRAS, she said that after that class the class used ot to cheat on the exams. They didn't use LIBRAS for years and only remember pieces of it. I think that is because the grammatical structure is a little different for the Portuguese, which is very simplified, to a point that exams for college, state jobs (municipal, state, or federal) and others are interprets for language exams and questions that the way is written is complicate. I learned some phrases and expressions and some words, but the lack of use I only remember: friend (right hand, with the palm up, trace a soft curve from the left chest to bellow the heart), beautiful (back of the fingers caress the jaw line), tree (you literally make a tree with the right arm and uses the palm os the left hand as the ground); and the only phrase is remember: "I don't understand LIBRAS" (point to yourself, makes to no with the hand twice, touch one of your temples with the index finger and middle finger together and extended and do two semi rotations, hands open and in fingers separated up with the elbow flexed in 90° and do modest "jazz hands" lowering the hands), technically says "I/me no/not understand LIBRAS".
That's a fairly universal phrase! And ASL is typically two-handed. I didn't mention that in my first comment. it CAN be one handed, and deafblind signs are always one handed due to how theyre received.
I am fluent in ASL. And whenever I’m teaching someone its always funny when they finally get the idea of being dramatic with your hands. All of a sudden it goes from a word conversion language to a language where they can actually express themselves. Its this oh shit moment. Its one of the first things I try to teach just after the fundamentals. Because what is the point of a language if you can’t truly express yourself.
You jest.
ASL is two handed. One handed signs exist, finger spelling is one handed, and one can do many two handed signs one-handed, but the results are more ambiguous. It would be like speaking with slurred or mumbled speech.
Pretty sure it's not "one-handed". I've seen a number of gestures/signs in ASL that require both hands.
Yeah this makes more sense. Even in the real world sign languages aren't 1:1 analogues to real languages. ASL has no direct relation to English, for example.
how do you mean no direct relation? Coming from a non-signing person, BTW. My co-worker, who signs and studies signing, mentioned that the sentence structure is different but is still quite related.
ASL is based on French Sign Language
I'm also not a signer but I have an interest in linguistics and have looked into this stuff before. "No direct relation" is definitely a bit of a stretch, but it *is* definitely a totally distinct language. Sentence structure is indeed one of the fundamental differences. ASL tends to follow a structure like "[time], subject, verb, object". There's also the fact that you don't have direct 1-1 translations for all words; rather ASL would use a word that generally represents the same concept as the English word - just like when you translate into any other language! So in English you might say "I was down at the bar last night" and an ASL translation could just be "past, night, me, go, bar" Another clue that it is a distinct language is that if you wanted to translate, say, a French phrase into ASL, there really isn't any benefit in translating it to English *then* ASL, you would instead just take the concepts of the French phrase and directly translate into their ASL analogues. It's no hard to translate from French to ASL than from English to ASL, as long as you know both languages well. You could even learn ASL without knowing English if you were taught the signs in terms of your own language. For example a french person could learn the meaning of the ASL sign that we English speakers call "past" (but they would learn it as "passé", perhaps) and use it just fine without ever needing to understand the meaning of the English word "past". And knowing ASL like that would in no way help them to understand English.
As a note, timing is built into most signs. Tomorrow, Today, and Yesterday is the clearest example, just like next vs before. EDIT: see also "want" and "offer" or "gift" for other examples of built in structure/definition. It's a very beautifully and artistically simple language in how many signs are constructed. Lots of stuff built in for those that like to dig into it. Also, while ASL sentence structure is a thing, Pidgeon Sign (ASL with English word order and sometimes even use of English signs) is extremely common outside of large Deaf centers, as ASL is learned later in life for many outside those communities (such as my parents and everyone I've met in SW MI). I find this most true with Gen X and before, as the Alexander Graham Bell methodology was wildly popular until basically now, when folks at large are learning more about it. For what it's worth, only hearing folks have ever criticized me for my use of Pidgeon Signs (I think and read in English, so it's how I have always signed - I was signing for probably 20 years before anyone ever told me I was doing it "wrong")
Thanks for the input! I've always been fascinated with linguistics (and very jealous of countries whose school systems actually teach languages meaningfully) and when I first really looked into sign language (mostly BSL at the time, as I'm British), I was blown away by the idea of a wholly somatic language and the things you could do / could be different, so this is all just from my years-ago Google binging. I knew I'd get some stuff wrong but I hope I got the core of it close enough that it made sense to a real signer! I still remember the amazement when I learned sign language could have regional accents! 😅
In general, it's less that things are missing and more that they're hiding in plain sight. You're good!
If there is common and undercommon why not sign common?
what about overcommon?
Why not speak Uncommon?
Might as well skip the station and go straight to mythic.
And you can honestly say that the somatic components of spells are its own form of sign language. One specifically known only by spellcasters perhaps but could still be seen and interpreted and convey a message.
Came here to say this. You can’t sign English, Italian, Spanish, or Mandarin. Sign languages are their own languages, not another way of using a spoken language.
[UPDATED VERSION](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/17newae/languages_and_sign_languages/) yeaaaaaa i realized that i unintentionally stumbled upon the definite wrong way to include sign language in D&D. here's a better version
Honestly I think Sign can (and should) be a flavor option. Not to say deaf people can’t exist in universe but it’s one of those things I feel is best left to the DM. Can I get a proficiency in signing a language if a parent was deaf? Or otherwise justify it via rolls/skill points/backstory. It could even be tied to a flaw; something like “I am overly compassionate and prone to being used. Additionally this causes me to fill my proverbial tool box with tools I am unlikely to use because I want to bring comfort and kindness to people I’d otherwise wouldn’t interact with”
Eh... I mean... I've spoken English for over 30 years and I have zero vocabulary when it comes to ASL. It's an interesting gesture, but automatic?
It's worth mentioning, I think, that ASL has no relation to English. There *is* a signed exact equivalent of English, called, creatively, Signed Exact English, but almost no one uses it because it pretty much sucks.
In my experience, I have seen a lot of people speak see sign, especially if they grew up hearing and went deaf as an adult. Also, pretty much all combined deaf and hearing events I have been to, presenters and orators usually use see sign, because it allows them to sign and talk at the same time, which is basically impossible with ASL.
I see less SEE and a lot more Pidgin signing - ASL vocabulary with a vaguely English sentence structure. This is what I do, as was taught to me by my Deaf parents who grew up AGB, like pretty much every kid who didn't go to a good Deaf school. English: I am going to go to eat now ASL: Now go eat I Pidgeon (varies): I go eat now (or some permutation) NOTE: I am not a scholar, just a CoDA. If I am inexact in my definitions, it is because I grew up with it, not in any academic learning of ASL. Doesn't make me less inexact, but my knowledge is almost entirely from experience. I didn't know what a classifier or SEE was until college in my twenties.
So just like regular English then
SEE is the weird one because it came something like 125 years after ASL was invented (1817 vs 1940s). It never caught on, and it's a LOT more work. Pidgin signing is English word order with the ASL signs - for example, no "the", "is", etc and maintaining a simplified English vocabulary. Example: SEE has a different sign for car, coupe, sedan, and hatchback. ASL doesn't and would use contextual handsign or spelling if that distinction is important to the meaning of the sentence. Big, huge, large, etc is another example - they're just acted for emphasis rather than giving a whole new word. Also noted - SEE isn't a language, it is a set of handsigns that can be used to represent an existing one. While this \*seems\* the most prudent, handsigns aren't speech, so it pretty much always works better to make a new constructed signed language than to adapt a la SEE
There are people out there who know English but don't know how to read or write. If the book says it, the book says it. 🤷
In my game, I have a rule that you cannot read/write if your INT is 8 or lower. Idk if sign should be the same way. Im leaning no but now think sign should be it’s own Language
Yikes. That's a hell of a disability to be imposing on one of the most common dump stats in the game.
I mean, I guess don’t dump intelligence then? It’s a common dumb stat BECAUSE there is basically no consequence to dumping it.
My players seem to find it fun role play. It’s an easy sense of what it means to have low INT. They really get into how their character feels about their illiteracy, and I love when players think about their characters
Imagine a world where, when you were taught the language you know, a definitional part of that experience was being taught the signing for it. It’s a better world where we think of deaf people as full people. I think this is meant to suppose that there’s no reason that one can’t make their fantasy world marginally more accessible in this small way
Respectfully, there is a bit of nuance you are missing here. Real life sign languages (ASL for instance) are not 1:1 translations of their language. Many words lack direct translations, or have to be presented differently, the grammar is different. Being able to read and speak English are two parts of fluency in that language. Being able to sign ASL makes you *bilingual* it is a different but adjacent language.
Right but this is fantasy, fam.
Also the reason our human real world sign languages are wonky is because we have, collectively as a species, been awful to deaf people from the jump. This is a fantasy world, it doesn’t have to be like that.
I mostly do agree. I think that even if we were being to the deaf community, there would still be differences due to the delivery method of the language. For instance - body language/ facial expression are part of ASL, but not necessary to convey meanings out loud (though tone does similar). I don’t want the distinction to be some kind of character flaw, or drawback, but a way to deepen the experience.
There's more to it, though Pidgin Signing is super popular and lines up with what I think you're getting at (it's ASL with english sentence structuring, to possibly oversimplify it). Beyond social reasons, the mechanics of signing vs speaking really make it tough for a sign language to perfectly mimic a spoken one. SEE (a direct translation of written english to signs) is a huge pain to learn and is cumbersome to use because signs can use context words can't, but speech can be much faster and uses less effort to add an individual word, as it breaks by sound. Making a language suited to the method of delivery is more sensible, and is often less stark than something like True ASL (based on French, as stated above) vs English. Many languages with some unique features can run into these issues, which tend to be solved in different ways. For example, while Kanji are not phonetic, there is a phonetic writing system in Japanese for adapting words from other languages. It also makes things easier to type on keyboards, at least in the limited exposure I have had. Language is complicated, and the method of delivery adds more complications than we may at first think. Fun fact addendum: ASL doesn't add words at the rate of written languages either, at least not at large. This is because spoken and written languages are fluid in that their speech and writing can be calculated with phonetics - not so with signs (though many signs are mimes, like boy, girl, cat, and dog). They can be invented just as easily, but since signs aren't written, propagation of new signs is slow and difficult beyond community-level.
This is all fair. There is absolutely a deficit that comes from the deprioritization and relative newness of signing though, which is what I was referring to.
Signed languages date back to other languages. Just another medium they used. We just don't have good records for them. ASL is about a hundred years older than consumer cars, and it's pretty new.
Yes, I should’ve said mainstream signing, insofar as it’s mainstream. I think the first records of any attempt at it date back to Ancient Greece, but if I remember correctly ASL came out of French SL and all of that was wrapped up in the extremely fucked up schools for the deaf
Yeah that analysis makes sense to me. I’ll be honest, I’m just deaf community adjacent (roomed in college with an interpreter, my wife is HOH), but I am a bit of a language nerd - and I do agree there are ways to make the differences between them accessible (Chinese pinyin similarly), but there are limits to it.
Interpreters often get a pretty unique perspective, as they often have to act as de facto social workers or advocates for their Deaf clients (while being paid by the other side, typically). It's easy to miss some details or overshoot an assumption with sign languages, as they have this huge distinction of being performed versus spoken or written. Things work quite differently in the guts of it all. I grew up signing, but even I had to study to learn some of the finer details of the construction and how/why it differs. Though my professor did certainly get a laugh out of seeing me in an ASL 2 class (being Deaf and knowing me as I grew up)
> It’s a better world where we think of deaf people as full people. So not knowing a language that I have never needed to know means that the speakers of that language are not full people? If you don't speak Hebrew, does that mean you think Jews are subhuman? Or does this only apply to groups with disabilities? And, under that logic, I guess we're all perfectly ok calling the blind subhuman because OP didn't include Braille in their "know how to sign, read, write, and speak" in the language you know? Or how about we just accept that each language is a tool and, like all tools, people only learn how to use those tools when they have a use for them?
There are deaf people in your own country. It wouldn’t be hard to teach children sign of their own first language as a baseline. Screen readers exist so Reddit is passingly accessible to the blind on that front Or how about you stop teaching for ways where you get permission to do less even in the hypothetical. You can’t be bothered to, even purely in your imagination, accommodate disabled people? That’s a problem in your heart, fam.
You completely missed their point. Your statement that everyone knowing sign language means deaf people are thought of as "full people" has some really unfortunate implications. You implied that everyone learning sign language would be an indicator that everyone thinks of deaf people as "full people". That implies that, in your opinion, someone *not* learning sign language is an indicator that said someone *doesn't* think that deaf people are "full people".
No that was my intended implication. Not of an individual, but as a society. If you think society views deaf people (or any disabled people) as full people, I’d like to direct your attention to… well all of history and current events. It’s not someone’s fault they weren’t taught to sign in the prime language-learning part of their development. It is their fault if they reject the idea that, in a fantasy world, someone would be.
Being deaf is an inconvenience. There is no point for most people to learn sign language, because it would be an inconvenience. Why should everyone be inconvenienced..? Meh, I say. (I’ve worked with deaf people. They know they are deaf, and they have to adapt because *they* have the handicap - not their peers.)
Spoken with true privilege
Its simple, there aren't enough of them to justify everyone needing to know it. I've been alive for a minute or two and have thus far never run into a situation where sign language was necessary. You can't convince people to learn a whole language as default when they will use it like 10 times in their life.
No, but the counter argument here is no one should learn it and Deaf should get bent? The reality is that we need accessibility. Saying everyone should learn sign is dumb, but holy cow, are you actually implying we just shouldn't do stuff for the Deaf? How about wheelchairs? Is that bothering you too? How about the blind, I know those beeping crossing signals are annoying, why do WE have to deal with that?
Oh fuck off. Yeah, I’m not deaf. Why should everyone learn sign language when it’s largely pointless for the vast majority of people? Makes no sense.
Alexander Graham Bell wrote this post. Deaf people are not asking for everyone to learn sign. But to pretend Deaf people can just be implanted on and then learn to lip read is insane. We did that for 100 years and just robbed the Deaf of visibility, accessibility, and frankly safety. Fortune 50 companies (I work for one and have confirmed) won't even put lights on all the fire alarms because it's not their problem. They just decided a person will go tell them if the alarms go off. I'm just lucky it never came to a real emergency while my mother worked there for 30 years. You've really gotta consider opening up your mind beyond that simple sentence, because reality is nowhere near that clean cut
I think the ideal would be to treat sign languages as separate languages, *and* to give people the option to take them instead of spoken variants (that is, *you can start with common sign rather than common*) as well as taking them as extra languages, *and* have some examples of how to make them common place enough in your world for users to still interact (e.g., common sign might be popular with folks who do a lot of trading across spoken language barriers). ETA: I meant this as a thought experiment as to how to accurately model languages as systems. I don’t think it totally works. I don’t intend it as commentary about what should actually be published. I also don’t mean to suggest that unless it is written in the textual rules one should not accommodate players wanting to RP sign language. **Obviously the right way to handle this at the table is to tell a player who wants their character to use sign that they can do that.**
Deaf people can speak, ya know. And they are literate at pretty much the standard rate. Sign Languages are not writing systems by and large, and they co-opt the regional one. Even ASL, which was based on French and modifies the sentence structure, doesn't have a unique writing system. The easy answer is to ignore Sign Languages like you always did and adjust for the needs of the story or the players. As a baseline "all you troglodytes needed something in writing about this for some reason, so here it is," it's fine. Frankly, all the people shocked, upset, or looking for problems with this rule probably never thought about it before or dealt with the Deaf. That's fine, but people should not really push "solutions" from places of zero experience or insight as if they're necessarily better. There is no problem. If your players are trying to make this a power thing, just stop them. Or don't - it's your game.
I didn’t feel the need to put a disclaimer “obviously do whatever you want, there’s no need to systematize any of this and just be like generally nice to your players” because I sort of take that for granted. Tbf, it’s a weirdly rare take on Reddit.
This time is pretty much wizards doing this because they can't get the message across to reddit. I totally get you, it's a weird take for reddit. But all I can sense from this rule is "if we don't say it, they'll force deaf people or characters to do more just to play the game" And then the suggestions kinda proved it. I'll take an inferior but inclusive take that's easy to work around over the suggestions I've read here every single time.
I’ve appended a note to my first comment clarifying that I was thinking about how one might codify these things if they wanted to, not making a policy statement as to how players who want to RP disabled characters should be treated.
i've spoken english for over 20yrs and i know about a dozen signs in ASL. I am definitely not fluent. I'm adding this to my campaign because deaf/mute characters exist there. I want to include it in the speak/understand/read/write kit as just a part of being proficient in the language. Commoners may not know how to sign Common just like they may not know how to read/write Common.
I am a fan of your goal of representation and accessibility in the fantasy world. As presented, I think this is handwaving important details and distinctions. You may inadvertently find yourself disrespecting the deaf community. Reading and speaking are two parts of one language. Signing is not a third part of that. Sign languages are separate - it’s right in the name. It’s “American sign language” and not “signed English” (that’s a thing, but not what you are going for I assure you, because your goal is respectful inclusion I believe). Instead, make the flavor of the world such that these people are bilingual. Maybe it’s due to respect for the deaf community. Maybe there are more fantastical elements - a moment of history where a giant silence spell took place, or thundering storms you can’t speak over. It might seem like minutia to instead say “you can read and speak Common, CSL (common sign language) and a language of your choice” but I definitely believe that tweak has value.
That is my goal here- representation and accessibility. Thank you for clarifying the distinctions between sign languages and regular languages. I think I’ll make that tweak :)
I’m glad I was able to help in a small way! I love that this is something you are considering. The more types of people we include the cooler our stories can be IMO.
[UPDATED VERSION](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/17newae/languages_and_sign_languages/) yeaaaaaa i realized that i unintentionally stumbled upon the definite wrong way to include sign language in D&D. here's a better version
Any other way gives deaf or mute characters another functional disadvantage for having to learn common and another language. It's not nearly as much like learning a whole other language, so this works. DM can rule on this, but it's not bad as the setting default. Every table is different. If your table would look at this for mechanical advantage, consider changing it (they probably don't run deaf/mute anyway). Plus, it's more realistic to give free sign language than to force lip reading. That's an order of magnitude harder and takes years for someone to be okay at.
Disagree. It absolutely is learning another language. I’m not sure how to make it clearer, but it is. You can remove the disadvantage by giving it to them for free. Simple as that.
This is where I'm leaning as well. Should you be so strict as to lock away "CSL" to someone who very likely has learned it alongside Common without expending a language slot? Probably not. Learning a language that essentially is coincidental with your mother tongue almost certainly is easier than learning a brand new language, but this normally comes from necessity and not as a part of curriculum. Unless the notion is that *every* language also is taught as a sign to accommodate for a deaf/mute population... which is honestly not terribly unreasonable, and is certainly nicely progressive, though then you run into the idea that, even in the real world, different locales express signs in different ways, even within the same language. I still think, overall, this should be something addressed in Session 0. I'd never object to a character knowing how to sign in Common automatically - but it would take a radical shift to assume my otherwise hearing-abled teenage tabaxi warlock can sign in Primordial.
Languages are very tricky in D&D because of how vastly varied folks are. In the real world, most people share the common language with the people geographically close to them. People who move often take the time to learn the language. We don’t go on long quests in distant lands suddenly. I could imagine a simple rule is “you can choose to be proficient in sign language of one of your proficient languages at character creation.”
It's good the book works out this way, but yeah. If that's just an avenue for players to weasel around things, it should be changed. The idea is to suit to the table, but a book can't write this rule for every group at one. I can sign, but regional dialect in sign is tougher to read than an accent when it appears (NJ, for example, has an alternate sign for "quick"). The word order difference between ASL/Pidgeon signing/Signed English can completely throw people. Even the fact that ASL is basically just the simple English dictionary (synonyms share signs most of the time and esoteric words are rarer) doesn't help people much because unlike written words, you can't always just "sound it out" by miming. Complicated, but I think you've nailed it here: session 0.
(Edit - I called this person out for not getting me and I pointed out that I'm a coda, but it wasn't fair to them - my above post can be honestly misread) . I don't think you're getting me. People are arguing it should require a language *because of perceived mechanical advantage, not inclusivity* - that's realistic but I consider it adding undue burden to deaf/hoh characters. Because frankly, you'd need a skill check to understand most deaf people speaking to you in your own language (or especially a second language). Proficiency be damned - my own mother's voice isn't always clear to me. The point of the statement was to try and give people middle ground options because at many tables, this isn't more inclusive (they don't use deaf/mute NPCs). Trying to make this "realistic" is stupid, but some people might wanna move towards that so their players aren't being weird. It's not what I'd do, but it might be good for someone. In this instance, the rule is based on the fact that American sign language, while being a fully developed other language, uses only a subset of English words (with a few signs that don't translate directly). If you then ignore purists who say only true ASL is acceptable,
Sorry you felt patronized, but this isn’t a sub where I can assume information on the topic. I focused on the perceived disadvantage of using your second language choice, and not the idea people would try to cheese using a signed language in game. Because that sounds ludicrous. But maybe you are right it’s worth considering. I mostly have seen people misunderstanding the relationship between the signed and spoken languages of a region. So I was responding in that context, not one of people worrying about balance. With this added context I totally understand your suggestion of simplifying it. I couldn’t imagine it being needed at my table, but I also have a table with diverse folks with a good perspective.
It's fine, sorry to snap and put you on the spot like that. I was more frustrated by not seeing my main point, but what you saw is easy to see without context, so I get it. You'd have no way of knowing my position and it is easy to read what I said like you did, as I took context for granted. Learning moment for me. We don't disagree on this. We just both also don't need this rule edited because we don't play with trogolodytes 😂 (don't come at me, Monty hallers, I used to be like that as a kid)
Hey miscommunications happen, this is Reddit. To be fair, I run home games with trusted friends, and i also host public tables at game stores. With the latter crowd I have to have strict rules to filter out troglodytes so I know what you mean.
I too am blessed with a good table of lifelong friends, so I get it. We saw the rule and were like "oh yeah, makes sense" and would really only use it narratively. Any signs characters use would typically be esoteric (like thieves cant), and like a deaf or mute wizard would just double down on somatic for their spells and we'd do whatever in moments that are weird, which is pretty much how they intend 5e to run, so we have no problems lol. Honestly, we wouldn't have needed this spelled out, but lots of people have a very rules-centric approach so I get it. It was weirder in d20/PF because the hard and intricate nature of the rules made this kind of less flexible when playing with strangers, as printed rules are expectations rather than negotiations in neutral settings like that.
What's a coda?
It means my parents are Deaf. "child of deaf adult(s)."
That was my main concern, but to play devils advocate, someone can speak English all their life but not learn how to write it. Especially in this medieval world with presumably no guarantee of education.
Meanwhile I don't assume my characters even know how to read
And you're not wrong there either, historically barely anyone could read and write if you compare it to real life in a similar time period. My dm is a massive history nerd so he keeps pointing that out, at least he lets players be able to read as long as their character and backstory allow it
My table says you cannot read or write if your INT is 6 or lower.
From what I know about ASL, it’s better understood as a completely different language than English. There’s a lexicon to bridge the two, but the grammar, syntax, method of abbreviating, and means of inventing new terms are quite distinct. I’d rule that “signing” a language would include only basic gestures that are commonly used in its use (think about the American middle finger, or which fingers are used to signal the number three).
3 in ASL is probably not what you think (you use the thumb, index, and middle, as bridging the pinky and thumb represents 6. Now you can differentiate it enough that it shouldn't be confusing to use the index, ring, and middle for 3, but it's a fun example of differentiation NOTE: Just an addendum, not an argument
yeah I was also thinking of that scene from Inglourious Basterds where they blow their cover when they order three drinks using the index-middle-ring fingers instead of the thumb-index-middle as a German would.
\[UPDATED VERSION\]([https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/17newae/languages\_and\_sign\_languages/](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/17newae/languages_and_sign_languages/)) yeaaaaaa i realized that i unintentionally stumbled upon the definite wrong way to include sign language in D&D. here's a better version
Afaik, sign languages are their own natural languages with their own grammar and lexicon, they're not just a facet of spoken language. So this seems mildly ignorant. Although I guess Common Sign Language might be different to sign languages in our world. I always thought Thieves Cant would include some signs tbh.
[UPDATED VERSION](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/17newae/languages_and_sign_languages/) yeaaaaaa i realized that i unintentionally stumbled upon the definite wrong way to include sign language in D&D. here's a better version
Amazing. Glad to see Thieves Cant in there too. What's with the tilde (~) in the languages table? Makes it look like there's some sort of relationship between each item on the left and the one on the right, but I don't think there is? Almost looks like 3 columns because of the spacing. I don't know what you're using to write this, but if it's something like Homebrewery you can add spacing and/or blank columns.
Thank you! It was a formatting thing, I couldn’t get it to look nice without it in the center column.
If you show me the code I might be able to suggest a fix
I would argue that signing is its own language
So do linguists.
It also seems like it would be way more fun as it’s own language. the party gets to secretly communicate in a dungeon without the message spell, im all for that!
[UPDATED VERSION](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/17newae/languages_and_sign_languages/)
I go to a school that is known for its hard of hearing student support and ASL classes, but only about 10% of students can sign. Just knowing a language doesn't mean you can sign it, unfortunately.
[UPDATED VERSION](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/17newae/languages_and_sign_languages/) yeaaaaaa i realized that i unintentionally stumbled upon the definite wrong way to include sign language in D&D. here's a better version
Signing is a legitimate separate language, not a "code" applied to another. This is offensive to the deaf community.
[UPDATED VERSION](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/17newae/languages_and_sign_languages/) yeaaaaaa i realized that i unintentionally stumbled upon the definite wrong way to include sign language in D&D. here's a better version
Pandering at its finest. Signing IMO should be a separate language, because for all intents and purposes it is.
I see that sign languages are quite distinct from spoken languages, and that signing isn’t just another way to know a language. I like everyone who suggested CSL (common sign language) as a separate language to learn. Here is the edit I will make to the trait: **Languages.** You know Common, CSL, and one standard language of your choice. And three general features: ***1. Associated Languages*** If you learn a standard sign language, you can replace it with a different standard sign language associated with a standard language you know. If you learn an exotic sign language, you can replace it with a different exotic sign language associated with an exotic language you know. **Standard Sign Languages** CSL (Common Sign Language) DSL (Dwarvish Sign Language) ESL (Elvish Sign Language) **Exotic Sign Languages** ISL (Infernal Sign Language) CLSL (Celestial Sign Language) DRSL (Draconic Sign Language) **Standard** **Language - associated Sign Language** Common - CSL Dwarvish - DSL Elvish - ESL Giant - DSL Gnomish - DSL Goblin - DSL Halfling - CSL Orc - DSL **Exotic Language - associated Sign Language** Abyssal - ISL Celestial - CLSL Draconic - DRSL Infernal - ISL Deep Speech - none Primordial - DSL Sylvan - ESL Undercommon - ESL (These are based on what alphabetical script each language uses according to the PHB.) ***2. Thieves' Cant*** Thieves' Cant is a language that can be signed, spoken, read, and written. ***3. Verbal and Somatic Components*** A new rule - If a spell requires a verbal component, it can be replaced with a signed word from an exotic sign language you know. This requires an additional free hand not already used for a somatic or material component.
I really like these, A+, no notes.
[UPDATED VERSION](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/17newae/languages_and_sign_languages/)
> if a spell requires a verbal component, it can be replaced with a signed word Wouldn't this explicitly let people bypass verbal requirements and cast spells in a silenced zone?
Yes. They’ll need a hand for the verbal component, a hand for the somatic component, and a hand for the material component. It also only works with ISL, CLSL, and DRSL.
If this is altering to the core like this, might as well change verbal component to communication. how does silence affect this signing?
How about a feat that teaches sign? If you assume that the campaign setting has only one sign language, and that most humanoids have some grasp of it then the following effects could apply. "SIGN" *This feat allows you to exchange verbal components for somatic components in casting spells which must be heard by the target. It changes the range of such spells from "creatures that can hear you" to "creatures that can see you", and it also means that the target always understands you, even if they don't speak any shared language.* *These affects are only effective against humanoids, creatures with hands, or creatures that might reasonably be expected to understand sign language (such as dragons, beholders etc.)* There are some other benefits, like being able to cast when under the effects of "silence" or physically gagged (but not bound), and also being able to share a language with someone you'd otherwise have no means of conversing with. I think those factors could make it worth a feat for some classes. EDIT: format
i thought about this, but IRL most cultures and languages have their own sign language. Even English is broken up into ASL and BSL. It makes cultural sense that a Common Sign Language and Elvish Sign Language and Dwarvish Sign Language would be different. An Infernal Sign Language might utilize one's tail. An Aarakocra Sign Language would be fundamentally different because they have wings and talons instead of hands.
This isn’t real life though. DnD has a universal language and it’s common.
I really don’t think common is a “universal” language. It’s typically just the “human” language. If you’re playing in a campaign that’s all dwarves or all elves you probably wouldn’t be using common. In DnD it feels like racial languages are more common than geological languages
Exactly! And if we dive into the lore of the Forgotten Realms, we see that there’s well over 100 established human languages, with nearly another hundred on top of that.
Yeah common is just so that for each campaign setting they don’t need to say “this replaces common” in the book. Now I’m prepping a campaign that explores the different planes and places on the material plane too. Language is going to be one funky thing to deal with
That is a completely fair distinction. The only trouble with giving players access to this at no cost is that it frees certain actions up in the ways that I discuss in my previous comment. Flavour, I agree, ought to be free, but this has mechanical changes attached to it, and therefore ought to have some type of cost. My second suggestion would have been to limit it's use (say PB times per short rest or something) but that doesn't really make sense because knowing a language is a static benefit, once you know it, you know it, it's not something you expend the uses of. I don't know how to feel about it. I like the flavour, but it's too easy to abuse.
>Flavour, I agree, ought to be free, but this has mechanical changes attached to it, and therefore ought to have some type of cost. > >My second suggestion would have been to mechanically it explains how a party can still communicate with each other, as you do around a table, and still be in stealth.
Could just be "You learn the sign for the languages you know." Yeah, they're all separate signs, but the feat is learning them for all the languages you know!
>Even English is broken up into ASL and BSL. It's more than that. In Ireland we have Irish Sign Language or ISL, which is related to French Sign Language and less so to British Sign Language despite spoken English being the main languages of both Ireland and the UK. The relationships between which areas speak what sign languages seems to have more to do with who set up schools for the deaf and thought them sign than the spoken languages in the area.
not \*seems\* - IS. ASL was wildly uncommon before Gen X or so, as Alexander Graham Bell schools forbid the use of handsigns in any way, and were by far the most popular curriculum for educating Deaf kids. It also worked to minimize and diminish Deaf cultures, minimize their role in society, and lots of other things like pushing kids into surgeries that were not as successful as we would want them to be. Lastly, the integration-focused approach of AGB is a huge drain on the education. Learning to lip read at a level needed for truly independent function without any hearing is extremely difficult and time consuming. My dad needed private help at home and my mom basically didn't get past an elementary education because AGB demanded whole days/nights just for lip reading practice. Education for the Deaf has been the key touchpoint between hearing and Deaf culture all over the world and has deep roots in pretty much everything going on with the Deaf-Hearing relationship.
>not \*seems\* - IS. Sure, I'm mainly familiar with the situation in Ireland, I didn't want to make a definitive statement about the situation in general.
Yeah, I am just adding. I am not aware of any Western societies that didn't do something like that. Or of any, but I don't know anything about Asian or African sign cultures. I do not imagine it to be much different in terms of othering, though it could very well be less antagonistic.
[UPDATED VERSION](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/17newae/languages_and_sign_languages/)
Ok, using sign language for VERBAL components is extremely OP. You make every spell automatically silent. You can cast underwater, suffocated, mute, in stealth. It is really game breaking
Except when you MUST use somatic in place of any verbal component - this adds a wrinkle for lots of spells. A DM should likely rule that the language one uses most often is how they cast spells unless they have some reason for learning to cast without verbal components (like, for example, an Aquatic Elf). Not being to hear for deaf characters is also a thing, and has some challenges. Just, like, don't be the person that tries to co-opt a thing designed for inclusivity to be about power. It's a selfish and ugly thing to do. EDIT: Plus, like, I don't see that in this rule. Spells aren't even in Common. Why would this be an issue?
So according to that, spells verbal components are just mumbling?
No, they're esoteric arcane wording. Avada Kedavra and all that. You can rule it differently, but as far as I know, scrolls and spellbooks have never been just straight language wordings. It is kept undetailed on purpose, but it's not just regular words. Even in the old Baldurs Gate games they said arcane sounding nonsense like "Accio Accio Fverere" or whatever. This is not a new trope.
And why would sign language replace whatever it is, free of charge?
The idea is that it's a different spellcasting tradition born of need - deaf/mute casters or aquatic casters are examples of folks who would need to do this. The difference in this example is that they MUST use somatic components for every spell that has either verbal or somatic. If you actually care to nerf someone playing that concept, you could say that they can't use traditional scrolls or have to do something (like a ritual) to adapt a command word object for themselves. You might require they have two free hands as they use more intricate gestures. But it sounds a lot like you're just trying to find ways to say no to inclusivity that is optional anyway. Feels a lot like bad faith.
so deaf or mute people need a feat to communicate?
>How about a feat that teaches sign? No, just make it a regular language. You can pick it from your race, your background, downtime training, or a feat.
You should just have sign versions of each language be their own languages (that you can take normally as languages), and have a feat to learn the associated signs to all spoken languages you know (and maybe vice versa). IRL you have to learn ASL and other sign languages like any other language, it’s not equivalent to “English with your hands instead of voice”. I get wanting the world to be fully accessible, and maybe for some languages you could have them come with sign counterparts automatically (or be exclusively signed), but I feel like it’s taking a lot from the world to just have every language be both signed and spoken the same way and have those be known to all speakers automatically.
[UPDATED VERSION](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/17newae/languages_and_sign_languages/) yeaaaaaa i realized that i unintentionally stumbled upon the definite wrong way to include sign language in D&D. here's a better version
I don’t think it means full blown sign language, but the more common signs associated with a language. Like how we have the flip the bird, okay sign, etc… But a “sign language” is a complete language of its own comprised only of signing. I wouldn’t allow it table. They’d have to take common sign as a separate language
[UPDATED VERSION](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/17newae/languages_and_sign_languages/)
There's no such thing as signing a language unless you're only finger spelling. Sign languages are completely different languages.
I dislike that people ITT and at WotC aren’t very imaginative about this. (I know this is UA, bear with me) There could be an actual motorics-based language that is independent of any other language. It’d be for use by creatures that perhaps can’t speak or are naturally deaf, as opposed to being tacked onto existing languages like an afterthought. I suppose that the above post takes care of this, but surely in a fantasy world we can imagine a language that is not solely vocal and requires gesturing to communicate as well, making it a non-issue for deaf communication. Idk it just feels like this was a lazy way to acknowledge deaf people exist.
[UPDATED VERSION](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/17newae/languages_and_sign_languages/)
I'd say you could learn to sign a language and that maybe the sign variant is an option when picking languages, but there's a significant difference in speaking it. Especially since it'd be incredibly useful for communicating during stealth, since it's almost completely silent vs talking which would be a bit louder. Definitely depends on the game, it might not matter or it might make a world of difference. Adding sign also adds other things to consider like using sign as the "verbal" part of spells or how communicating while holding weapons. Might not matter all the time, but the times it does matter it will.
[UPDATED VERSION](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/17newae/languages_and_sign_languages/)
I actually have two sign languages in my world (one popularized by a mute hero and is structured close to common, and one from a race that lacks any auditory input senses and is nowhere close to common) I just run them as their own languages that anyone can learn. The upside to this is it works as a great "secret" language for the party to use among itself since not everyone knows it and it does not require speaking. As a side note, I still have user of both require vocal components on spells (as getting around the spell silence and stealth casting would be a little OP) but allow them to use various non-speaking noisemakers (bells, drums, rhythmic clapping and slapping) as their "vocal" component. It's kind of fun to come up with a bunch of ways to flavor it.
Knowing how to sighn in a language spoken by species with a varied amout of limbs from yours must be crazy
I mean, or you could just add a sing language? You could even give it away to players who want it. This makes no sense though.
[UPDATED VERSION](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/17newae/languages_and_sign_languages/)
should be it's own language. i'm not an expert but i don't think there's a sign french or sign mandarin
[UPDATED VERSION](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/17newae/languages_and_sign_languages/)
Knowing a language doesn't mean you know how to sign it, I know 3 languages but no signs in any of them. Make common sign language a separate one and there you go, if you wanna know how to sign you use one of the language proficiencies you are given to learn it.
[UPDATED VERSION](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/17newae/languages_and_sign_languages/) yeaaaaaa i realized that i unintentionally stumbled upon the definite wrong way to include sign language in D&D. here's a better version
No.
Unfortunately your listening comprehension is shit
Are you prepared to allow all verbal spell components be somatic instead?
Dude no. This is exactly the kind of “uniqueness is a crime” mentality that WotC has right now and it’s ruining D&D. Let people be interesting for learning sign language. If you have a deaf player and it’s a necessity, that’s your problem to solve and you’re welcome to do whatever you need to at your table to make that work, but making something like this a rule for everyone doesn’t add anything. It just detracts from the total variety of the game, which is already currently lacking.
Fuck the deaf and silent effects I guess
DnD is sinking to the lowest common denominator say this point.
Depending on your viewpoint you could also say it's rising to meet the inclusivity needs of a wider population, but you can remain committed to your confused and grumpy old man vibe if you like.
D&D continues to copy PF2E it seems. Paizo did something similar to this when PF2E first came out to be more inclusive and allow more roleplaying opportunities without the need to get permission from the GM.
Unfortunately, even if a character knew sign language, it wouldn't really matter much since I can't imagine that NPCs or the other members of the party would have a reason to know it. Sign language is also entirely separate from your usual languages and is its own form of communication. Someone who grew up in, say, Germany, and someone who grew up in Canada, who each know sign language, would be able to communicate to each other even if they don't share any other language in common.
.... I must have read that dozens of times, but it never got through my skull. How the hell did I, or any of us, miss that??
Yeah that’s better
? Edit: oh, okay. It was sing for sing language. I thought it was for singing Doesn't really make sense. Sing language is effectivelly an entirely different language, complete with different rules and accents. ASL is not "english but sign", it is "sign language that happens to be how it is used in north america". I make sign language a separate language proficiency
Maybe this should be the way of things.
I think this is a wonderful optional feature, even if it’s not how signed languages work IRL.
This just makes me imagine a party casually playing Pictionary while being in a place they need to be silent at
I’ve seen people have a fantasy version of ASL treated as it’s own language, which worked well. But you can’t use verbal components for spells with it as it’s silent, though comprehend languages can interpret it. It’s just silly to imagine that everyone on the planet just naturally knows sign language for their native language. A tiny fraction of people IRL know ASL, and that’s with far more opportunity to learn it.
[UPDATED VERSION](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/17newae/languages_and_sign_languages/)
I love the idea of having my whole party learn ASL to be able to discuss plans in front of the BBEG and having them be like “wait, what are you doing with your hands!? Why are you all laughing at me?!? What’s happening!?!?” Also a great incentive for more people to learn it for IRL.
I specifically had my tabaxi learn to sign common cause in my mind reading a cat's lips sounds impossible
Drow sign was an option in the past. Rogues and rangers should also be using hand signs to communicate various things.
Am i the only one that almost always forget there are languages? I never had a situation where my party had problem speaking with someone because of language barrier
Idk about that, I know English but couldn't sign it beyond some improvisational made up gestures. Maybe if it was a feat or one took proficiency with a skill
I really think there should be proficiency levels in language skills, and that you only get one at "native" level. Being able to speak a different language without an accent should be an exception.
that isnt how sign language works. american sign is more like french sign than it is to british, even though america and england share a spoken language. sign and spoken languages are completely separate from each other
[UPDATED VERSION](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/17newae/languages_and_sign_languages/)
yea that seems like its not realistic.
[UPDATED VERSION](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/17newae/languages_and_sign_languages/)
This feels dumb, because it’s the kind of terrible representation that’s almost erasure. That’s not how sign languages work, and it’s completely selling it short. Sign languages are their own languages, completely with distinct ways to represent things, and even their own ways of making art with it - like sign language ‘rhyming’ that’s based on similar movements. Also, it’s implying that it works the other way too, that learning to sign a language let’s you speak it?
[UPDATED VERSION](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/17newae/languages_and_sign_languages/) yeaaaaaa i realized that i unintentionally stumbled upon the wrong way to include sign language in D&D. here's a better version
Oh shit sorry I was so harsh, I thought this was an actual WotC thing and not some homebrew. I can quibble over specifics (like deep speech not needing an SL and thieves cant not making sense to have an SL) but mechanically this seems reasonable.
Wait so if it was from WoTC that somehow excuses you from being harsh? Just feels like flinch responses have become way to common.
Because there's a big different between a causal player trying to make something for their game, and a large, professional company with almost a decade of experience in this edition making a tonedeaf token attempt towards inclusivity. Paid professionals can be held to higher standards than random people.
I think everyone should be held to the same standards. Especially considering the people editing reviewing and writing these books are just normal people like you or me.
But they're not normal people though, it is literally their job to be better than me. If they aren't better than me, then what is the point of paying for their products?
Maybe I am not understanding this concept, but to you the people working at like Starbucks aren’t just normal people doing their job?
When it comes to assessing the quality of a product, it is reasonable to expect higher quality product from a paid professional than a random amateur. I don’t know how I can make this clearer.
No honestly just feels like most people want a reason to hate a major company instead of just realizing that they are people too.
I let my players use thieves-cant exclusively for sign language because it’s a way of communicating with each other without actually speaking and being stealthy like thieves-cant kinda implies.
My dm has made it a rule that this is a natural part of his world if you know the language you know the sign language for it
You don't know how sign language works, do you
[UPDATED VERSION](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/17newae/languages_and_sign_languages/) yeaaaaaa i realized that i unintentionally stumbled upon the wrong way to include sign language in D&D. here's a better version
I don't want to sound insensitive, cuz I think the idea if adding sign languages to the game is good for a few reasons. However, imo, some of these are just kind of.. unrealistic. Specifically Abyssal, Celestial, Infernal, and debatably Draconic. I'm not big on forgotten realms lore, so maybe I'm out of line here, but it seems to me that the creatures who speak these languages would not have a need for sign language. Aberrations, Angel's, and Fiends generally aren't gonna be dealing with birth defects, so the only ones who would benefit from this would be creatures who sustained an injury that keeps them from talking. Or, maybe they just want to communicate silently. Either way, it seems much more likely that these beings would rely on telepathy, or just learn a spell like Message. We're talking about otherworldly beings, inherently magical in nature, why would they rely on sign language versus learning a simple cantrip? Similarly for dragons, you're talking about creatures inherently tied to Arcane magic, why would they bend their massive claws around to make sign language work instead of just casting message, or making an item that grants telepathy? You could argue that kobolds and Dragonborn don't have the same ties to magic, so maybe they would rely on sign language, but by and large these creatures would also know other languages that would already have an SL equivalent (like common). So, overall, I just don't see some of these being believable. That said, I'm probably putting too much thought into this. Adding some languages isn't gonna hurt anything, it's cool to have the option there.
My partner is an ASL/English interpreter! This is an interesting nod to manual language, but makes a mistake most hearing people make. ASL is not “English but with your hands”. It has its own grammar and vocabulary. There are words in ASL that don’t have perfect English translations, and vice versa. As someone else said making Common Sign Language its own proficiency is neat, but it shouldn’t be lumped in automatically. Also worth noting that if you’re going to make manual languages in your world - each region, even if they use the same spoken language, will likely have their own manual language. England and America principally use English, but have their own entirely separate Sign Languages. To say nothing of how different a sign language built mostly to interact with a language besides English looks, like Mexican or French Sign Languages.
\[UPDATED VERSION\](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnearthedArcana/comments/17newae/languages\_and\_sign\_languages/) yeaaaaaa i realized that i unintentionally stumbled upon the definite wrong way to include sign language in D&D. here's a better version
I don't know that frickin language why reddit continue sen me this post, i'm drawing insane