Ravenloft is easily my favorite of the official D&D settings. However, there are some bits in the setting that I just don't use, for one reason or another. Today I want to talk about the languages introduced in the third-edition Ravenloft Campaign Setting book and why I see them as a misstep.
Languages
Prior to the release of the third-edition Ravenloft Campaign Setting book, little attention was paid to the role of language in the setting. In the second-edition version of the setting, it was assumed that, as in most D&D settings, the majority of the land's residents spoke a common tongue. The Common language, I feel, is one of D&D greatest innovations in terms of playability. It makes the linguistic aspect of communication simple so that everyone at the table can speak as though their characters expects to be understood in the vast majority of situations.
It's unrealistic, of course, that everyone speaks a language in common, particularly given how far apart different nations and territories can be in fantasy settings, but it also means that the players get to receive and relay a maximal amount of information when they interact with NPCs. There generally isn't a language barrier to get in the way of roleplaying, and if a language barrier does rear its ugly head it's actually noteworthy and special because it runs against the norm established by the presence of the Common language.
The third-edition of the Ravenloft setting retconned Common from the setting. In its place, a number of number of languages that covered specific domains were introduced: "The Dread Domains are home to widely differing and often isolated cultures. Thus, no Common language has arisen."
This was a disastrous idea, in my opinion. It is entirely possible, should the players create characters with no languages in common, that they will not be able to communicate with each other. And the potential slowdown in every roleplaying encounter where you have to check to see who speaks what is the wrong kind of nightmarish for a Gothic setting.
