Arelith

Emotes and things like that may come in the future as the architecture between character limits & emotes are in their own files.

In the mean time I am sure everyone will be able to endure with the very simple work arounds of language switching. I have sympathy for what some people are thinking here - but a lot of emotion is being ill spent in overindulgent negativity. Be more positive and life is more fun that way.

Like I said - the original idea was that this language would be removed. This is limitation is meant to make it more sensible to what conversations between "animals" and "those who can speak to them" in a way that is seen more appropriate now that animal has been disjointed from other languages which have almost nothing to do with animals.

I also understand change can be frustrating for some people - but the concept of animal language had to be redefined as it was no longer "doing the work" that it used to fulfill. It still does what it does, still gives people the ability to "question" animal npcs, and still allows people (& non people) to communicate in a unique though limited way (which is what people should adapt to).

So just remain calm and be patient.

Does "animal language" even exist in D&D? I may be wrong but I think it might be a NWN persistent world invention.

It probably shouldn't be called a "language" to begin with, as it just isn't. It's animal communication, yeah, but there's a difference.

Gouge Away wrote: Mon Oct 19, 2020 6:48 pm Does "animal language" even exist in D&D? I may be wrong but I think it might be a NWN persistent world invention.

It probably shouldn't be called a "language" to begin with, as it just isn't. It's animal communication, yeah, but there's a difference.

As I wrote in my initial response various classes and even some of our races have the ability to "communicate" with animals. Animal language fulfills that qualifer that represents class based empathy, magic, or magical quirks of other races. It's not a "language" but how it works on Arelith will probably always be a "language".

I like the change.

Every change can have its positives and negatives.
Consider whether your posting is contributing to a commentary about active changes rather than just trolling.
Troll posts will be removed as they serve no purpose in feedback. Thank you.

Red Ropes wrote: Mon Oct 19, 2020 6:47 pm Emotes and things like that may come in the future as the architecture between character limits & emotes are in their own files.

In the mean time I am sure everyone will be able to endure with the very simple work arounds of language switching. I have sympathy for what some people are thinking here - but a lot of emotion is being ill spent in overindulgent negativity. Be more positive and life is more fun that way.

Like I said - the original idea was that this language would be removed. This is limitation is meant to make it more sensible to what conversations between "animals" and "those who can speak to them" in a way that is seen more appropriate now that animal has been disjointed from other languages which have almost nothing to do with animals.

I also understand change can be frustrating for some people - but the concept of animal language had to be redefined as it was no longer "doing the work" that it used to fulfill. It still does what it does, still gives people the ability to "question" animal npcs, and still allows people (& non people) to communicate in a unique though limited way (which is what people should adapt to).

So just remain calm and be patient.

Belittling other's opinions by telling them to be more positive isn't exactly conductive to a discussion, nor does it address the feedback given. Of course remaining optimistic is easier for you, as it was your concept.

My feedback remains as is, and I feel that the change should perhaps be reverted until the emoting and text portions can be differed between emotes and the communicative "talking" portion. The spirit of this change is good, I feel the execution is lack luster and possibly needs a relook until that future architecture is out instead of rushing it now and telling players to be patient for it to be better (which, depending, can be a very long time).

Perhaps another bit of feedback, and to build off of what Baron Saturday suggested, is having a "default" message play. Maybe not have it be a rotating set but something more akin to the Drow Sign Language where it makes it clear that the animal is communicating something, thus removing the need for awkward '''' 's everywhere. What that message would be, I do not know. Anything from [The creature communicates] to [Animalistic communication], or something. Something that would make it clear that there is some form of communication going on but not detailing what type exactly to more easily fit all types of animals.

Red Ropes wrote: Mon Oct 19, 2020 6:50 pm As I wrote in my initial response various classes and even some of our races have the ability to "communicate" with animals. Animal language fulfills that qualifer that represents class based empathy, magic, or magical quirks of other races. It's not a "language" but how it works on Arelith will probably always be a "language".

Right, I do understand that:) But I question whether the word "language" itself is misleading and if the name of this tongue should be "animal communication" or something that doesn't imply there's going to be syntax and grammar and ways to express complex thought between various animal species. I say that realizing it's very late in the game to change the culture, of course, and that people will do what they will do regardless.

@Miaou

Your statements of me doing that as a means of belittlement are incorrect and I would appreciate it if you did not make such accusations.

The feedback in the thread is useful and your input is valid. But I do not think I am being off kilter when people are being overly passionate on topics. It happens - feedback is good, making it so everyone is suddenly either opposition or conformist is not.

I wanted to preserve animal from the chopping block and this is the first step towards that. It can certainly be approved but people should also realize not everything will go as their own hearts desire (nor mine)!

Red Ropes wrote: Mon Oct 19, 2020 6:47 pm Emotes and things like that may come in the future as the architecture between character limits & emotes are in their own files.

In the mean time I am sure everyone will be able to endure with the very simple work arounds of language switching. I have sympathy for what some people are thinking here - but a lot of emotion is being ill spent in overindulgent negativity. Be more positive and life is more fun that way.

Like I said - the original idea was that this language would be removed. This is limitation is meant to make it more sensible to what conversations between "animals" and "those who can speak to them" in a way that is seen more appropriate now that animal has been disjointed from other languages which have almost nothing to do with animals.

I also understand change can be frustrating for some people - but the concept of animal language had to be redefined as it was no longer "doing the work" that it used to fulfill. It still does what it does, still gives people the ability to "question" animal npcs, and still allows people (& non people) to communicate in a unique though limited way (which is what people should adapt to).

So just remain calm and be patient.

Please do not disrespect people's opinions and feelings. People are remaining calm and being patient, and your patronizing does not help anyone remain calm or patient.

The change did not 'have' to be redefined, it has not been an issue. I've played with dozens of druids and rangers and I've personally been able to understand animal language on all but two characters over the last 8 years, including an Grove Archdruid. I have only twice in all that time seen the nonsense that supposedly made this change a 'had to be redefined' territory. Instead now this change has created a gross amount of frustration for people and doesn't even make sense. Animals, like people, communicate in more than just emotional terms. This has been said and ignored. English is not complex enough to convey the meaning of animals, we don't have the words for the concepts conveyed in animal communication. If you've ever heard bird calls in the morning you'll know that they're quite chatty! Not to mention dolphins and apes and other intelligent species.


An animal can feel sorry for disturbing your rest, they do all the time. Animals are able to develop a sense of self. An animal is able to lay it's head down, and yawn and nod. So all this change did was make it a pain to communicate, not make the communication 'better'.

Please do not limit people's RP and fun just because of a few bad eggs are not 'rping right', that's what RPR is for. Lots of people don't RP languages right, but we don't punish people for using accents across languages, or not having flowery enough elven, etc.

-an "Disturbed. Sorry."

I think the change is valid, and I think the change is generous. Animal language doesn't exist, and a 25 character limitation communicates its implied brevity. Animal language is not meant for verbal communication, but has been used as a substitute for druidic. We now have druidic, we dont need -an. I think the change didn't go far enough.

Like Ork said there,
Its not about full sentances, its getting the point across in emotes and body langauge.

Tsukiko does this with sign langauge:
Hello. You. Good?

Me. Fine. Happy.

but these are augmented with *She beams a smile, hands moving in a spell like manner, motioning to herself*

Be creative =^.^=

When I played Pix, a totem wolf, I only used language in simplistic manners such as: "Danger, Thing close that way" or "Hungry, food?"
I like the change in the fact it will mean people will use the communication of animal in a more RP indusive way.
But I understand for those who already do, that it hinders the amount a slight bit.

I think some of you are making threats without realizing you're just harming your own argument. Re-read what Ropes said:

I wanted to preserve animal from the chopping block and this is the first step towards that.

Like I said - the original idea was that this language would be removed.

So all of you threatening to do this:

NPC Logger Number 2 wrote: Mon Oct 19, 2020 3:22 pm

TooManyPotatoes wrote: Mon Oct 19, 2020 3:15 pm

Dreams wrote: Mon Oct 19, 2020 3:01 pm -an Are you coming to the pie party later? There’s going to be lots of pies but I’m worried that one of those dastardly necromancers is going to show up and put a finger in it. And I don’t just mean dip his own finger into the pie, he’s going to dip someone else’s!

Fortunately this will now become:

[Animal language] Are you coming to the pie
[Animal language] party later? There's goin
[Animal language] g to be lots of pies but
[Animal language] I'm worried that one of th
[Animal language] at one of those dastardly
[Animal language] necromancers is going to
[Animal language] show up and put a finger
[Animal language] in it. And I don't just m
[Animal language] ean dip his own finger in
[Animal language] to the pie, he's going to
[Animal language] dip someone else's!

if the above screenshot is anything to go by.

This is EXACTLY what you can all expect to see if this is not reverted. Either that or animals just speaking sylvan or elven instead.

Are just going to get the animal language entirely deleted.


If switching from -an to -- seems like too much work, consider the alternative is that you'd not have to because there'd be no more -an.

Red Ropes wrote: Mon Oct 19, 2020 6:47 pm ...
In the mean time I am sure everyone will be able to endure with the very simple work arounds of language switching. I have sympathy for what some people are thinking here - but a lot of emotion is being ill spent in overindulgent negativity. Be more positive and life is more fun that way.

Like I said - the original idea was that this language would be removed. This is limitation is meant to make it more sensible to what conversations between "animals" and "those who can speak to them" in a way that is seen more appropriate now that animal has been disjointed from other languages which have almost nothing to do with animals.

I also understand change can be frustrating for some people - but the concept of animal language had to be redefined as it was no longer "doing the work" that it used to fulfill. It still does what it does, still gives people the ability to "question" animal npcs, and still allows people (& non people) to communicate in a unique though limited way (which is what people should adapt to).

So just remain calm and be patient.

I think the emotion comes from removing what has been a useful RP tool because some people have been using it wrong. And while it may not have been meant as condescending or patronizing (and as respectfully as I can be), I'm sorry but it certainly reads that way.

I have certainly never been involved heavily in any druid/ranger/nature rp, but I've seen fantastic animal emotes over the years and with this change, that's gone. I really think it's the emoting that is the key, here. As an example:
*her ears lay back and she growled, a low rumbling sound, as she shifted her weight looking ready to pounce*
That would cut off after '...and she...' with this new system. How can people not see how limiting that is?

I may be biased but I prefer emotes/descriptions that make the world feel more like a story and this change takes a good portion of that away. If emotes were limited to a 25 characters (or item descriptions, or character descriptions) it would take the same amount of tools to role play effectively off the board as well. Some may say it's easy to switch back and forth from Common, but having spent considerable time doing the same thing with elven at times, it's not. It just is not. And I'm a better than average typer. The amount of errors that creep in after even one or two lines of trying to remember [ ] or what language I'm in when in a coversation inevitably creep in and lead to small, jarring mistakes. How much more immersion breaking when a badger all of a sudden starts speaking in fluent Common?

I am much more offended by the recent use of the double bracket, OOC, out loud speech like:

((AFK 5 mins)), ((LOL)), ((where i go to sell stuff)), ((u wanna run [x dungeon]))"

that has become prevalent than a niche role-playing tool used by a small number of players and that an even smaller number are (apparently) abusing. (For clarity, I'm not against these when arranging RL times in written messages, just seeing people talk like that while in a party/group setting and not in -tells.)

Ork wrote: Mon Oct 19, 2020 10:42 pm -an "Disturbed. Sorry."

I think the change is valid, and I think the change is generous. Animal language doesn't exist, and a 25 character limitation communicates its implied brevity. Animal language is not meant for verbal communication, but has been used as a substitute for druidic. We now have druidic, we dont need -an. I think the change didn't go far enough.

Telling people how to role-play their characters and emotes is pretty poor form. This short version may work for you, but not everyone likes such truncated speech. As I stated above, I'm in the camp that the more the game feels like a story, the better.

As for the Druidic vs. Animal, I'm not sure we're to assume that if everyone just switches over to -du to do their long-winded discussions (which seems both to be your suggestion and wouldn't solve that problem which, again, seems to be a very small one from a very few players) that that will make anything better. Eventually druidic and/or sylvan, too, will just be hit with a 25 character limit. And in the meantime we'll have to wonder why, all of a sudden, every animal on Arelith can now speak druidic fluently.

TL;DR Animal lets people emote in that form or through companions in delightful ways. This change strips that away. Talk to the ones that are abusing the mechanic instead of taking it from the majority that use it well.

It's not making threats, it is stating the obvious. What you are doing is victim blaming and it is not cool.

NPC Logger Number 2 wrote: Mon Oct 19, 2020 11:42 pm It's not making threats, it is stating the obvious. What you are doing is victim blaming and it is not cool.

Please don't personally attack me. That is very rude to say I'm "victim blaming."

If it's "stating the obvious," then the animal language is just going to get deleted. And that's really disappointing.

I'm of the persuasion that people should be told what they're doing wrong, and animal language wasn't intended to hold discussions.

It is also rude to say me and others are "making threats" for stating the obvious. And blaming us because someone else came along and decided to take away or ruin a major RP tool from us is victim blaming. This 25 character limit is definitely going to make the quality of all animal RP on the server worse. I don't see why any reasonable person would think this is a good idea unless they had some kind of personal vendetta against a specific druid player.

Just like person A might be bothered by an elf/drow (or Torm Paladin/banite cleric) happy tea party, some of us are equally as bothered by animals having long form conversations in chirps and growls.

Xerah wrote: Tue Oct 20, 2020 12:15 am Just like person A might be bothered by an elf/drow (or Torm Paladin/banite cleric) happy tea party, some of us are equally as bothered by animals having long form conversations in chirps and growls.

25 character limit on Banites and Paladins to stop them from having tea parties.

I think we need to take a step back and refocus what we're looking at.

When one player in Animal form talks to another who may or may not be in a similar form using Animal Language, is it terrible that they're having a long conversation? Just because they're shapeshifted doesn't mean their capacity to think, reason, and convey such into words is diminished, just their vocabulary might be limited and they might have to use three words in place of one.

If a player is having their animal companion have a conversation, then I see a problem.

The situation appears to be devolving so we're just going to stop it here for now.