The following article appeared in L’avant garde #63 (May 1984).

Languages reveal culture. Their use in an RPG campaign adds verisimilitude. Riffing off Phenster’s examples, we can introduce languages to a simple D&D campaign without much effort. Or we can use the examples as a starting point and, with some effort, develop the ideas further.

Like hirelings and henchmen, the use of languages in the campaign is more a model or template than a strict rule, so I categorize the following rules, derived from “MYSTERIORUM LIBRI,” in [C] Campaign.

Learning Extra Languages [C]

A character can learn languages in addition to languages known at character creation (see “Ability Score Modifiers in the Great Halls of Pandemonium”). A teacher must be found, and the fee negotiated. The suggested minimum is 100 g.p. per month.

The time required to learn a language is 6 + d6 months. Complex languages take 6 + 3d6 months. Reduce the number of months by one month per language already known, not counting Common and the alignment language. Dialects of known languages require half the number of months.

Learning may be interrupted for up to one month without consequence. An interruption of more than a month adds an additional month to the learning time, i.e. after a month or more without learning, one month of previous study is lost.

Reducing Monster Languages

“All other creatures and monsters which can speak have their own language” (Men & Magic, 12).

In OD&D, the monster list doubles for the language list. Holmes reproduces the text (9), adding that all languages are selected at character creation. Moldvay suggests human dialects and 19 languages spoken by monsters from the Basic (1981) rulebook. Cook and Marsh give no further guidance concerning which Expert monsters might speak their own language. The AD&D Dungeon Master’s Guide (1979) lists more than 50 languages (102), including one for each color and metal of dragon plus six giant types.

If language selection is to be meaningful, the player should have a certain assurance to encounter speakers or script written in the language. Choosing the language of bronze dragons would be a rare gamble. Of course, when a player selects the language, the clever DM finds a way to include the speech of a bronze dragon in the game. Clever DMs aside, a language not chosen by players is of little use in the campaign.

Instead of a language for every monster, Hazard groups monsters by themes, loosely cultural. For example, gnomes and kobolds speak dialects of dwarvish.¹ All fairy creatures speak the same language, as do goblinoids and wargs.

Hazard also groups mythical creatures, who speak one of an undefined number of unnamed ancient human, or “Mythic,” languages. As a good many monsters from contemporary sources (OD&D, Holmes, AD&D Monster Manual, B/X) are drawn from mythology, this greatly reduces the language list. Furthermore, because the Mythics are from ancient (presumably human) cultures, they are doubly useful.

Monster Languages by Culture [C]

These are monster languages according to Hazard’s system. The DM is free to modify and invent. Alternative names are in parentheses. See Phenster’s description of each monster language.

Surrogate Languages

“[Hazard] uses other real languages (usually old ones) for other old languages in the Heptarchy.”

—from “MYSTERIORUM LIBRI”

The first I encountered the idea was in Ray Winninger’s Dungeoncraft, where the author applies foreign languages to character names (Dragon #259, 18-20). Hazard goes further. He uses real-world languages as stand-ins for any representation of imaginary languages in the campaign. In “MYSTERIORUM LIBRI,” Phenster notes Hazard’s choice of surrogate language for each human language in parentheses at the end of the description.

Human Language Categories [C]

Like the “Common” language, used throughout D&D editions and ubiquitous in D&D campaigns for going on five decades, Hazard’s “Old Common” is not otherwise named. Phenster’s DM doesn’t go out of his way to name the language used throughout the dominant culture of the ancient world, either, calling it “O.E.,” which must stand for Old Empire.

Though perhaps obvious, I outline these categories and subcategories as a simple way for the DM to consider languages in the campaign setting.

The Common Languages

In addition to the Common language currently in use throughout the campaign setting, a number of other languages once served a similar purpose. These, if not still spoken, have extant written samples. Phenster’s examples are old and ancient common and numerous mythic languages.

Old: This was the common language hundreds of years before the contemporary Common, which may or may not be an offshoot of the older. If English is our real-world Common, Old English or French are examples of Old Common.

Ancient: At least one step removed from Common, this language was in widespread use a thousand years or more before the present. In the real-world example, the Romans spread Latin throughout the known world.

Mythic: The many and diverse mythic languages were first used in times long past and places near and far. Greek, Old Norse, Egyptian, Ugarit, and Mayan are a few examples from our world.

Uncommon Languages

Phenster mentions Caerlon, an indigenous language. I add the local and foreign categories.

Indigenous: Spoken by people native to the area, indigenous languages are spoken and may be written, depending on the culture’s technological level.

Local: In some areas, usually outside the setting’s cultural center, the Common language may be foreign. The locals speak Common as a second language. Player characters from the region would speak the local language as well as Common.

Foreign: Merchants, immigrants, and invaders bring their languages to the campaign area.

The Rare Languages

The example is Runic, which is lost, magical, and secret. The Forty-Eight Keys are another possible example, but Phenster doesn’t make it clear whether the language is lost or magical or both. Though I break down the constituent categories, combining at least two of these makes the player’s choice less rare. In any case, player characters usually cannot learn a rare language at the beginning of their careers.

Lost: A lost language is unknown or heard of only in legends at campaign start. A lost language usually falls into another category or categories, e.g., a lost mythic language.

Magic: Assuming the usual D&D campaign setting where magic-users must cast a spell to read magic, any additional magical language should be, at least, difficult to use or limited, perhaps by rarity. It may also allow the use of a different kind of magic.

Secret: A secret language is used by a small group, widely dispersed. A missive may be intercepted, but its contents are indecipherable to outsiders without the proper magic.

Alignment Languages

A system of only two opposing alignment languages places a greater emphasis on the opposition between them. It suits a campaign that, like Hazard’s Great Halls of Pandemonium, embraces Law and Chaos as opposing sides, wherein scenarios focus on the ongoing battle between them. Alignment Languages: Law and Chaos [C] can be used whether using three, five, or nine alignments. These house rules assume five.

Alignment Languages: Law and Chaos [C]

Whether good or evil, lawful and chaotic characters know their respective alignment language, either Law or Chaos. Neutral characters know neither.

Written Alignment Languages [C]

Alignment languages are usually spoken. Individual words or short phrases (up to three words suggested) may be inscribed on a durable medium, e.g. stone, precious metals.

¹ In Holmes, “Gnomes are similar to dwarves,” and kobolds are “dwarf-like,” though they “behave much like goblins” (28, 29).

This is the 28th in a continuing series of articles, which reedits house rules for Holmes Basic D&D from 40-year-old game club newsletters. Mentions of house rules are in bold text and followed by a [bracketed category designator].

For rules category descriptions and more about the newsletters, see “About the Reedition of Phenster’s.” For an index of articles, see Coming Up in “Pandemonium Society House Rules.”

Phenster’s Pandemonium Society House Rules is a work of fiction. Names, characters, businesses, events, incidents, and newsletters are either products of the author’s imagination or are used in a fictitious manner. Any resemblance to actual persons, living or dead, or actual events is pure coincidence.

“On behalf of all Association members, I thank Steve Ruskin for his dedicated service to this publication over the last three years. During his tenure, Steve collected our articles into a record 25 high-quality issues with a friendly and professional attitude that encouraged many of our readers to become contributors, including yours truly” (“Letter from the Editor,” L’avant garde #58).

In November 1983, a new editor took the post at the East Middleton Wargamers Association’s newsletter. He keeps his first Letter from the Editor brief, thanking his predecessor, referring readers to the table of contents, and signing “Dave” with a flourish over the typed initials “C. D. R.”

That would be the last generically titled “Letter from the Editor” in L’avant garde. In the next issue, January 1984, the heading is “Dispatch from the Campaign Desk.” The subheading is “The Year of L’avant garde.” Therein, Dave writes:

“For as long as I can remember, we have talked about putting out an issue every month as if it were a chimera or the Holy Grail. The two usual problems are (1) the editor’s lack of time and (2) having enough articles to put into an issue while keeping to the 20-page minimum (that makes it worth the overhead). For the first problem, I am determined to put in the time required. For the second one, over the last month I have talked to almost all the more-or-less regular contributors and asked a few more of you for articles in 1984. The response has been very enthusiastic. With a little work, I believe we will have enough articles to make this a 12-issue year” (L’avant garde #59).

With a penchant for parenthetical asides, Dave goes on to preview articles in the January issue and alludes to upcoming contributions. Among them is our favorite contributor:

“We all (except the most grognard among us) enjoy hearing what the young D&Ders in the Pandemonium Society are up to, and Phenster promises more this year. He starts this month with a good argument for reconsidering ability score adjustments (for those of you who remember when we used to do that). Later, we’ll see an article about languages (which I already have), an enigmatic piece Phenster calls ‘Dweomercraeft’ (which I am anxious to get), and more fun things the Neighborhood D&D Players are up to.”

Dave battled the chimera and won the Grail: one issue per month, all above the 20-page minimum. The September issue, at 56 pages, is the largest issue of L’avant garde in the Postlethwaite Collection.

By the end of the year, Phenster contributes articles to nine issues. Two of these we’ve seen already. Those I link in the following list of articles by number and month. I also add links to subsequent articles as they are published here. Where the title is ambiguous, I include a descriptive phrase in brackets.

Phenster’s 1984 Contributions to L’avant garde:

• #59 January “Another Way to Adjust Ability Scores for XP”
• #60 February “The Panaggelon, Castle and Dungeon” [building castles and dungeons]
• #61 March “Dweomercraeft”
• #62 April “Monsters in the Deep Dungeons”
• #63 May “Movement and Encumbrance”
• #65 July “Regular Entourage” [hirelings and henchmen]
• #67 September “MYSTERIORUM LIBRI” [languages]
• #69 November “Wherefore Deep Dark Dangerous Dungeon Delves” [adventure hooks and treasure]
• #70 December “Magic Items in the Great Halls”

This series covers topics in the order as they appear in the Holmes Basic D&D rulebook (TSR 1977). In addition to these, I foresee only a few more topics to complete Phenster’s Pandemonium Society House Rules.

Grail obtained, a 12-issue year was not again attempted. Dave would go on to edit six issues the next year and only two the year after. In the March 1986 “Dispatch from the Campaign Desk” (#77) Dave informs readers that he has been accepted to the University of Pennsylvania and calls for a successor, as he will step down in the coming summer. In his last “Dispatch,” Dave repeats the call. Issue #78 is the final number of L’avant garde in the Postlethwaite Collection. Steve Ruskin’s 25-issue record remains.

This is the 26th in a continuing series of articles, which reedits house rules for Holmes Basic D&D from 40-year-old game club newsletters. Mentions of house rules are in bold text and followed by a [bracketed category designator].

For rules category descriptions and more about the newsletters, see “About the Reedition of Phenster’s.” For an index of articles, see Coming Up in “Pandemonium Society House Rules.”

Phenster’s Pandemonium Society House Rules is a work of fiction. Names, characters, businesses, events, incidents, and newsletters are either products of the author’s imagination or are used in a fictitious manner. Any resemblance to actual persons, living or dead, or actual events is pure coincidence.

The player party visits their local Sword & Board to recruit NPCs for the next adventure. How many potential hirelings are present? What class? What level?

DM’s Summary

In this article, I get into lots of details and tables. Here’s the short version.

Number of Hirelings: First decide the frequency of each character class. Fighters might be common, dwarves and elves rare, and all others uncommon. Roll a d12. Divide the result by 2 for common types, 4 for uncommon, and 11 for rare. Drop the fraction.

Level of Hirelings: Roll a dice in size (number of sides) equal to or greater than the PC’s level and a d3. Divide the result of the first dice by the result of the d3, rounding up. In case of a result higher than the PC’s level, re-roll the first dice.

For explanations, examples, and variations, see below.

Number of Hirelings

“Then Hazard tells us how many [hirelings] there are and how much they cost according to his system…”—Phenster, “Regular Entourage: Hirelings and Henchmen”

Phenster doesn’t make much of it, but limiting the number of potential hirelings represents a cost of failure in Hazard’s system. In an inn full of unlimited potential hires, a candidate’s refusal has no significant consequences, and hirelings are a boring commodity.

We could use a two-step method, first determining if any hires of a particular class are available, then how many. I prefer to put the steps together in one dice roll, and I have the idea that greater numbers should be less frequent.

Playing with dice, I hit on this method to determine the number of hirelings available of a given class. The basic mechanic is to divide a dice result by a number and drop the fraction. The higher the divisor, the fewer potential hires.

This method is similar to using a larger dice as a smaller dice. To generate a number from 1 to 3, for example, we roll a d6, divide the result by 2, and round up. The only difference is, here, we drop the fraction instead of rounding. The practical effect, evident in the table below, is that we split the chance for the highest number, giving the remainder to zero. The chance for any other result is still the divisor over the dice size.

• Dividing by 2 and dropping the fraction, there’s still a one-third chance for a 1 or 2, but the chance for a 3 is reduced to one-sixth, and there’s a one-sixth chance for a zero.
• Dividing by 3, we split the chance for the highest result, a 2, into three parts, sharing between the 2 (one part or one-sixth) and the zero (two parts).

We’ll see below, the effect is the same with larger dice and greater divisors, but we share the chance between the highest result and zero in more parts. A d12 divided by 6, gives us a ¹⁄₁₂ chance for a 2 and ⁵⁄₁₂ for a zero.

Simple Example

The DM decides that fighters for hire are common at the Green Dragon Inn. Thieves, magic-users, and all halflings are uncommon, and clerics are rare, as are dwarves and elves of any class. To determine the number available, she throws a d6 and divides the result by 2 for common types, 3 for uncommon, and 6 for rare. A table of results looks like this:

The table shows that some number of common types are available five in six times. One or two are present one-third of the time, and three only one-sixth. One candidate from the uncommon types is available half the time, and two of them one in six times. While rare types appear only one-sixth of the time, then only a single candidate.

One-sixth, or 16⅔%, may not be considered so rare; we use the term relative to common. For finer granularity, we can use a larger dice. A d12’s 8⅓% gradation makes the rare types sufficiently infrequent while still keeping them in the game. If rare types appear only 1% of the time, for example, it’s hardly worth rolling for it.

A d20, with its 5% gradation, yields a few more potential hires of the common type, while keeping the numbers of uncommon and rare types low.

Still, I like the d12 for the purpose. The granularity is enough fine for game purposes, and, depending on the divisor, we get up to six common types. With only a 28% refusal chance on the negotiation table, more than six candidates available might as well be a hundred; no need to roll on the negotiation table. Plus, we get some use out of the dodecahedron.

In the table above, I place arbitrary categories on the divisors based on their maximum results. One might consider a divisor of 6 as rare, allowing 2 of the rare types 8⅓% of the time. The DM can select a divisor for each category as seems fit, even changing the divisor to suit current conditions (as in wartime or when a demon horde is on the rampage). For example, I like a divisor of 2 for common types, 4 for uncommon, and 11 rare. We might say men-at-arms (0-level) are twice as numerous as fighters and roll twice on the common column.

Hireling Level Determination

Phenster suggests, by the method to determine hireling cost based on experience required for their level, that those of 2nd and higher levels might be seeking work at the Nine of Pentacles. He does not, however, provide a method for determining the level.

The simplest method to determine hireling level is, of course, to roll a dice the size of the highest possible level (the hiring PC’s level). This gives us an even chance for each level. But, like greater numbers of candidates, I have the idea that higher-level NPCs seeking employment are less frequent.

To skew the results toward lower levels, roll the level using an equal distribution as in the previous paragraph, then divide the result by the results of a second dice, rounding up. Taking the d8 (8th-level PCs) as an example, we see in the table below that dividing by a d2 splits the first dice in half, giving equal distributions in the low and high results. Dividing by a d3 or a d4 yields some variation in the lower middle results (3 and 4 on the d8) but the same equal distribution for the lowest results and the upper half.

The small percentage equally distributed for higher-level hirelings feels appropriate. I do want some variation in the lower levels, which leaves the d2 aside. The larger the divisor (second) dice, the greater the percentage for lower-level hirelings and lesser for higher levels. I like the d3 for the greater (though small) chance for higher-level results, but it requires (unless one is armed with a d6 numbered 1 to 3 twice) an additional mental step to derive the d3 results from a d6 roll. For this reason, while its higher results are less likely, the d4 is attractive. I give tables of results for both. Let the DM decide.

Pandemonium Society characters reached levels around 13th. I include 20th level because we have a dice for it.

At levels for which no dice matches (7, 11, 13, 14, 17, 19), use the next higher dice. On any result above the PC’s level, re-roll the first dice—not the divisor dice (d3 or d4). A d16 is achieved by rolling any dice plus a d8. An even result on the first dice adds 8 to the d8 results. Ignore the first dice’s odd results. In the same way, we can make a d9 (with a pair of d3s), d15 (d5, d3), and a d18 (d6, d3).

The following article is from L’avant garde: Newsletter of the East Middleton Wargamers Association #65, July 1984.

1 Phenster mentions the Nine of Pentacles elsewhere (see “Dirty Fighting”), referring to it as the group’s “local Sword & Board,” which, we assume, is an inn.

2 See Ability Score Bonuses and Penalties [E], “Ability Score Modifiers in the Great Halls of Pandemonium.”

3 See Morale [E], “Advanced Combat.”