Eyes of the Rune Keeper allow warlocks to 'read any writing', and it came up in a game where I questioned if that included Thieves' Cant. Technically it is a language with a written component, so I asked for my DM's opinion on whether my character could read it. It was decided that while Thieves' Cant is a language that my character could read, it was still in code and thus the written words were gibberish. I'm wondering what others' opinions on this matter are. The book says that spoken Thieves' Cant is a code hidden in ordinary language, but written Cant is just secret signs and symbols. If a warlock is able to read a foreign language without any idea of how to speak it, surely the idea is the same?
If I was the DM, I'd probably allow it. But that's also the problem. It's DM's choice. There's nothing wrong with conversing with the DM about it though, I would say that since it's an actual language, that it could be read. Maybe even ask your DM to translate it into the mixed up words (If he wants to do that) and it would provide yourself with a fun word scramble to attempt to decode.
I would say no. Thieves' cant is not a language, it is a secret code. It can be written in Common for example, and still whoever is reading it wouldn't understand the secret meaning.
Eyes of the runekeeper merely makes the text readable, it doesn't impart intention or context behind the words. So the writer wrote "dog" but without knowing the context, it has a much different meaning.
If I tell my friends "if you see something written in Abyssal, then up means down and left means right," then write "the exit is to the left" in Abyssal, that's technically code. The Warlock will be able to read what is written even if Abyssal is not a language he knows, but he won't know the special meaning behind those words. It's the same thing with scribbling a mark that I've told my friends means "loot".
Whichever the case you go for, however, it is important you let the player know of the nuances of the spell beforehand. Blindside the character, not the player, if you want to use something similar to my example above.
So the general consensus is along with what my DM did: Yes you can read it, but if you don't know the language it still doesn't make sense. Good to know! In the context of the moment it was still helpful to recognize the existence of words, as the fact something was written was still significant. We were using the description of "a set of secret signs and symbols" for written Cant, so being able to recognize certain designs as words was still meaningful to the situation.
Thieve's cant isn't a language. It's a code hidden within language. So yes, you can read the language it is written in, but you cannot decipher the intent behind the codewords.
True, Thieves Cant is not a language, its definitely a code. So technically Eyes of the Rune Keeper could read it but not understand it.
I would permit the Warlock to comprehend it in a High Magic or High Scifi game (Eyes of the Runekeeper enables the warlock/seer to see something, read it, access the Cosmic Weave, Universal Mind but only after making an Intelligence/Wisdom roll (as the vast majority of minds would see a sentence but not comprehend the true meaning)
In a low magic game, then Eyes of the Runekeeper definitely won't be able to understand thieves cant.
The language of Eyes of the Rune Keeper doesn't say "you can't read all languages" it says "you can read all writing". To me that implies that any written form of communication can be read, even if the message isn't necessarily understood. Thieves Cant as described in the players' handbook is coded messages when spoken, sure, but written down it's a set of secret symbols used to mark locations. A symbol drawn on a wall is still writing, to me at least. Unless the sign or symbol is some physical arrangement of objects, or some other code that doesn't involve writing, but that isn't specified exactly.
I look at Eyes of the Rune Keeper as if Comprehend Languages is always active for reading,
For the duration, you understand the literal meaning of any spoken language that you hear. You also understand any written language that you see, but you must be touching the surface on which the words are written. It takes about 1 minute to read one page of text.
Thieves Cant would be a message in common, that was cryptic or completely off topic to those untrained. You would know the literal words used, but not the meaning behind them. The same if you were to read a riddle, or even some otherwise coded message.
The language of Eyes of the Rune Keeper doesn't say "you can't read all languages" it says "you can read all writing". To me that implies that any written form of communication can be read, even if the message isn't necessarily understood. Thieves Cant as described in the players' handbook is coded messages when spoken, sure, but written down it's a set of secret symbols used to mark locations. A symbol drawn on a wall is still writing, to me at least. Unless the sign or symbol is some physical arrangement of objects, or some other code that doesn't involve writing, but that isn't specified exactly.
read =/= interpret, you could also consider that the symbols, unless they form an alphabet and are used linguistically, are drawings or markings rather than writings. If I say "The Rooster Crows at Midnight" in english the meaning of the words is that the animal known as a chicken is crowing at a time midnight, that is a valid reading of the writing- but if someone else knows an alternate interpretation that he and I determined he might read that as "The king is initiating the round-up-all-elves plan" but that use of the words isn't the meaning of the writing, it's just symbolism that we've settled on to convey a message secretly, like a riddle.
Amusing, side thing: It says "you can read all writing" so what happens if you say to the DM "I use eyes of the runekeeper to read all writing" obviously they roll their eyes and point out that it's not that sense of all, but it's funny to think about the warlock just processing every extant piece of writing all at once.
The language of Eyes of the Rune Keeper doesn't say "you can't read all languages" it says "you can read all writing". To me that implies that any written form of communication can be read, even if the message isn't necessarily understood. Thieves Cant as described in the players' handbook is coded messages when spoken, sure, but written down it's a set of secret symbols used to mark locations. A symbol drawn on a wall is still writing, to me at least. Unless the sign or symbol is some physical arrangement of objects, or some other code that doesn't involve writing, but that isn't specified exactly.
read =/= interpret, you could also consider that the symbols, unless they form an alphabet and are used linguistically, are drawings or markings rather than writings. If I say "The Rooster Crows at Midnight" in english the meaning of the words is that the animal known as a chicken is crowing at a time midnight, that is a valid reading of the writing- but if someone else knows an alternate interpretation that he and I determined he might read that as "The king is initiating the round-up-all-elves plan" but that use of the words isn't the meaning of the writing, it's just symbolism that we've settled on to convey a message secretly, like a riddle.
This is absolutely right. But to break it down to a real life example:
How many times have you seen a post on a social media site or a comment section where the poster used sarcasm and it was followed up with someone attacking that person for what they misconstrued as their actual beliefs and not sarcasm? Hell, look at large number of people who STILL take articles from The Onion seriously. Now, imagine this same Onion article is in Spanish, and these same readers are able to read Spanish. They'd still read the article, and likely STILL misinterpret it literally.
In these cases, these people understood the words (no matter what the language was) and took them at their face/literal value. That's how Eyes of the Runekeeper would work with Thieve's Cant. You'd understand the words (assuming it's actually a written language and not just scribbles), but you wouldn't necessarily understand the meaning behind them. Given enough time and experience with/exposure to the Cant, you might be able to decipher meaning (in the same way that a cryptographer can figure out codes), but that has nothing to do with the Eyes of the Runekeeper (unless the cant is ALSO in another language).
“It is a better world. A place where we are responsible for our actions, where we can be kind to one another because we want to and because it is the right thing to do instead of being frightened into behaving by the threat of divine punishment.” ― Oramis, Eldest by Christopher Paolini.
Right, the message itself might not be understood, but the symbols themselves could be recognized as words as opposed to just a random design. Assuming that Cant's written language is actually a set of symbols.
I'd argue that Eyes of the Rune Keeper cannot automatically bypass encryption or code phrases, etc., but that that's not what written Thieve's Cant is. Written Thieve's Cant is symbols that represent ideas on their lonesome - if you understand the symbol, you understand what it's trying to say. Written Thieve's Cant is essentially the Thieve's marks from Skyrim, as far as I understand it.
Eyes of the Rune Keeper is specifically about being able to interpret markings like that, up to and including much more complex sets of markings that Thieve's Cant can't support (because written Thieve's Cant isn't a full language, and Eyes of the Rune Keeper allows you to read those just fine).
So yes, Eyes of the Rune Keeper should allow you to understand the meaning of the symbols that make up Thieve's Cant, just like it can allow you to understand someone's personal method of writing shorthand or someone writing in a long-lost dead language, but it wouldn't be able to decode something written in plain English as 'Today I ate a slab of bread' to actually be a code-phrase meaning 'strike at the sound of drums'.
EDIT: Note that someone who knows Thieve's Cant could reasonably write out something in common using Thieve's Cant (rather than the secret signs/symbols ala the thieve's symbols in Skyrim) and, since it's in code, Eyes of the Rune Keeper would not work.
It depends on how the written Thieve's Cant is written whether or not Eyes of the Rune Keeper would work, in other words. If it's a shorthand symbol for the word 'Danger', Eyes of the Rune Keeper will work just fine on it - but if it's the actual written word 'Orangutan' and that means 'Danger' in this context, then Eyes of the Rune Keeper would not work.
I'd argue that Eyes of the Rune Keeper cannot automatically bypass encryption or code phrases, etc., but that that's not what written Thieve's Cant is. Written Thieve's Cant is symbols that represent ideas on their lonesome - if you understand the symbol, you understand what it's trying to say. Written Thieve's Cant is essentially the Thieve's marks from Skyrim, as far as I understand it.
Eyes of the Rune Keeper is specifically about being able to interpret markings like that, up to and including much more complex sets of markings that Thieve's Cant can't support (because written Thieve's Cant isn't a full language, and Eyes of the Rune Keeper allows you to read those just fine).
So yes, Eyes of the Rune Keeper should allow you to understand the meaning of the symbols that make up Thieve's Cant, just like it can allow you to understand someone's personal method of writing shorthand or someone writing in a long-lost dead language, but it wouldn't be able to decode something written in plain English as 'Today I ate a slab of bread' to actually be a code-phrase meaning 'strike at the sound of drums'.
EDIT: Note that someone who knows Thieve's Cant could reasonably write out something in common using Thieve's Cant (rather than the secret signs/symbols ala the thieve's symbols in Skyrim) and, since it's in code, Eyes of the Rune Keeper would not work.
It depends on how the written Thieve's Cant is written whether or not Eyes of the Rune Keeper would work, in other words. If it's a shorthand symbol for the word 'Danger', Eyes of the Rune Keeper will work just fine on it - but if it's the actual written word 'Orangutan' and that means 'Danger' in this context, then Eyes of the Rune Keeper would not work.
Totally disagreed. Here an example:
In an a letter you find this: L' acqua è calda (which is the italian for "The water is hot").
With Eyes of the Rune Keeper you can see the translation: The water is hot. But only a guy with Thieves' can understand the real meanig of that message, which may be: It is the right moment to act.
Only other characters which know Thieves' Cant can get the real meaning of that message.
I'd argue that Eyes of the Rune Keeper cannot automatically bypass encryption or code phrases, etc., but that that's not what written Thieve's Cant is. Written Thieve's Cant is symbols that represent ideas on their lonesome - if you understand the symbol, you understand what it's trying to say. Written Thieve's Cant is essentially the Thieve's marks from Skyrim, as far as I understand it.
Eyes of the Rune Keeper is specifically about being able to interpret markings like that, up to and including much more complex sets of markings that Thieve's Cant can't support (because written Thieve's Cant isn't a full language, and Eyes of the Rune Keeper allows you to read those just fine).
So yes, Eyes of the Rune Keeper should allow you to understand the meaning of the symbols that make up Thieve's Cant, just like it can allow you to understand someone's personal method of writing shorthand or someone writing in a long-lost dead language, but it wouldn't be able to decode something written in plain English as 'Today I ate a slab of bread' to actually be a code-phrase meaning 'strike at the sound of drums'.
EDIT: Note that someone who knows Thieve's Cant could reasonably write out something in common using Thieve's Cant (rather than the secret signs/symbols ala the thieve's symbols in Skyrim) and, since it's in code, Eyes of the Rune Keeper would not work.
It depends on how the written Thieve's Cant is written whether or not Eyes of the Rune Keeper would work, in other words. If it's a shorthand symbol for the word 'Danger', Eyes of the Rune Keeper will work just fine on it - but if it's the actual written word 'Orangutan' and that means 'Danger' in this context, then Eyes of the Rune Keeper would not work.
Totally disagreed. Here an example:
In an a letter you find this: L' acqua è calda (which is the italian for "The water is hot").
With Eyes of the Rune Keeper you can see the translation: The water is hot. But only a guy with Thieves' can understand the real meanig of that message, which may be: It is the right moment to act.
Only other characters which know Thieves' Cant can get the real meaning of that message.
The question isn't whether a person can understand the code can be understood with Eyes of the Rune Keeper. That's not what LangyMD is saying. They're arguing that if written Thieves' Cant is represented as a symbolic language - such as symbols that each have a specific meaning, a symbol for 'this house is safe' for instance - then Eyes can decode it. If the message is written in common but in a code, then yes the code would still be obfuscated.
That's also what the comprehend languages tweets you linked reference. A language that is all allusion would not be understood by the Eyes. But if it's just symbols that have meaning and not a message hidden in a sentence, the argument changes. The difference is between a written phrase that means something different than literally stated and a runic language with characters that only thieves know.
I'd argue that Eyes of the Rune Keeper cannot automatically bypass encryption or code phrases, etc., but that that's not what written Thieve's Cant is. Written Thieve's Cant is symbols that represent ideas on their lonesome - if you understand the symbol, you understand what it's trying to say. Written Thieve's Cant is essentially the Thieve's marks from Skyrim, as far as I understand it.
Eyes of the Rune Keeper is specifically about being able to interpret markings like that, up to and including much more complex sets of markings that Thieve's Cant can't support (because written Thieve's Cant isn't a full language, and Eyes of the Rune Keeper allows you to read those just fine).
So yes, Eyes of the Rune Keeper should allow you to understand the meaning of the symbols that make up Thieve's Cant, just like it can allow you to understand someone's personal method of writing shorthand or someone writing in a long-lost dead language, but it wouldn't be able to decode something written in plain English as 'Today I ate a slab of bread' to actually be a code-phrase meaning 'strike at the sound of drums'.
EDIT: Note that someone who knows Thieve's Cant could reasonably write out something in common using Thieve's Cant (rather than the secret signs/symbols ala the thieve's symbols in Skyrim) and, since it's in code, Eyes of the Rune Keeper would not work.
It depends on how the written Thieve's Cant is written whether or not Eyes of the Rune Keeper would work, in other words. If it's a shorthand symbol for the word 'Danger', Eyes of the Rune Keeper will work just fine on it - but if it's the actual written word 'Orangutan' and that means 'Danger' in this context, then Eyes of the Rune Keeper would not work.
Totally disagreed. Here an example:
In an a letter you find this: L' acqua è calda (which is the italian for "The water is hot").
With Eyes of the Rune Keeper you can see the translation: The water is hot. But only a guy with Thieves' can understand the real meanig of that message, which may be: It is the right moment to act.
Only other characters which know Thieves' Cant can get the real meaning of that message.
The question isn't whether a person can understand the code can be understood with Eyes of the Rune Keeper. That's not what LangyMD is saying. They're arguing that if written Thieves' Cant is represented as a symbolic language - such as symbols that each have a specific meaning, a symbol for 'this house is safe' for instance - then Eyes can decode it. If the message is written in common but in a code, then yes the code would still be obfuscated.
That's also what the comprehend languages tweets you linked reference. A language that is all allusion would not be understood by the Eyes. But if it's just symbols that have meaning and not a message hidden in a sentence, the argument changes. The difference is between a written phrase that means something different than literally stated and a runic language with characters that only thieves know.
Right. But Thieves's Cant RAI is a code that can be spoken in any language. It does not have its own "runes" or letters. Literally in the official description it says that it concerns only conversation:
Thieves’ Cant
During your rogue training you learned thieves’ cant, a secret mix of dialect, jargon, and code that allows you to hide messages in seemingly normal conversation. Only another creature that knows thieves’ cant understands such messages. It takes four times longer to convey such a message than it does to speak the same idea plainly.
In addition, you understand a set of secret signs and symbols used to convey short, simple messages, such as whether an area is dangerous or the territory of a thieves’ guild, whether loot is nearby, or whether the people in an area are easy marks or will provide a safe house for thieves on the run.
Eyes of the Rune Keeper allow warlocks to 'read any writing', and it came up in a game where I questioned if that included Thieves' Cant. Technically it is a language with a written component, so I asked for my DM's opinion on whether my character could read it. It was decided that while Thieves' Cant is a language that my character could read, it was still in code and thus the written words were gibberish. I'm wondering what others' opinions on this matter are. The book says that spoken Thieves' Cant is a code hidden in ordinary language, but written Cant is just secret signs and symbols. If a warlock is able to read a foreign language without any idea of how to speak it, surely the idea is the same?
If I was the DM, I'd probably allow it. But that's also the problem. It's DM's choice. There's nothing wrong with conversing with the DM about it though, I would say that since it's an actual language, that it could be read. Maybe even ask your DM to translate it into the mixed up words (If he wants to do that) and it would provide yourself with a fun word scramble to attempt to decode.
Can I roll for that?
I'd probably say yes, unless you rule that Thieves Cant has some sort of magical component that encrypts it somehow.
I would say no. Thieves' cant is not a language, it is a secret code. It can be written in Common for example, and still whoever is reading it wouldn't understand the secret meaning.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thieves'_cant
Eyes of the runekeeper merely makes the text readable, it doesn't impart intention or context behind the words. So the writer wrote "dog" but without knowing the context, it has a much different meaning.
I'm also leaning towards no.
If I tell my friends "if you see something written in Abyssal, then up means down and left means right," then write "the exit is to the left" in Abyssal, that's technically code. The Warlock will be able to read what is written even if Abyssal is not a language he knows, but he won't know the special meaning behind those words. It's the same thing with scribbling a mark that I've told my friends means "loot".
Whichever the case you go for, however, it is important you let the player know of the nuances of the spell beforehand. Blindside the character, not the player, if you want to use something similar to my example above.
So the general consensus is along with what my DM did: Yes you can read it, but if you don't know the language it still doesn't make sense. Good to know! In the context of the moment it was still helpful to recognize the existence of words, as the fact something was written was still significant. We were using the description of "a set of secret signs and symbols" for written Cant, so being able to recognize certain designs as words was still meaningful to the situation.
Thieve's cant isn't a language. It's a code hidden within language. So yes, you can read the language it is written in, but you cannot decipher the intent behind the codewords.
True, Thieves Cant is not a language, its definitely a code. So technically Eyes of the Rune Keeper could read it but not understand it.
I would permit the Warlock to comprehend it in a High Magic or High Scifi game (Eyes of the Runekeeper enables the warlock/seer to see something, read it, access the Cosmic Weave, Universal Mind but only after making an Intelligence/Wisdom roll (as the vast majority of minds would see a sentence but not comprehend the true meaning)
In a low magic game, then Eyes of the Runekeeper definitely won't be able to understand thieves cant.
The language of Eyes of the Rune Keeper doesn't say "you can't read all languages" it says "you can read all writing". To me that implies that any written form of communication can be read, even if the message isn't necessarily understood. Thieves Cant as described in the players' handbook is coded messages when spoken, sure, but written down it's a set of secret symbols used to mark locations. A symbol drawn on a wall is still writing, to me at least. Unless the sign or symbol is some physical arrangement of objects, or some other code that doesn't involve writing, but that isn't specified exactly.
I look at Eyes of the Rune Keeper as if Comprehend Languages is always active for reading,
For the duration, you understand the literal meaning of any spoken language that you hear. You also understand any written language that you see, but you must be touching the surface on which the words are written. It takes about 1 minute to read one page of text.
Thieves Cant would be a message in common, that was cryptic or completely off topic to those untrained. You would know the literal words used, but not the meaning behind them. The same if you were to read a riddle, or even some otherwise coded message.
How many times have you seen a post on a social media site or a comment section where the poster used sarcasm and it was followed up with someone attacking that person for what they misconstrued as their actual beliefs and not sarcasm? Hell, look at large number of people who STILL take articles from The Onion seriously. Now, imagine this same Onion article is in Spanish, and these same readers are able to read Spanish. They'd still read the article, and likely STILL misinterpret it literally.
In these cases, these people understood the words (no matter what the language was) and took them at their face/literal value. That's how Eyes of the Runekeeper would work with Thieve's Cant. You'd understand the words (assuming it's actually a written language and not just scribbles), but you wouldn't necessarily understand the meaning behind them. Given enough time and experience with/exposure to the Cant, you might be able to decipher meaning (in the same way that a cryptographer can figure out codes), but that has nothing to do with the Eyes of the Runekeeper (unless the cant is ALSO in another language).
Click Here to Download my Lancer Class w/ Dragoon and Legionnaire Archetypes via DM's Guild - Pay What You Want
Click Here to Download the Mind Flayer: Thoon Hulk converted from 4e via DM's Guild
“It is a better world. A place where we are responsible for our actions, where we can be kind to one another because we want to and because it is the right thing to do instead of being frightened into behaving by the threat of divine punishment.” ― Oramis, Eldest by Christopher Paolini.
Right, the message itself might not be understood, but the symbols themselves could be recognized as words as opposed to just a random design. Assuming that Cant's written language is actually a set of symbols.
It's not.
I'd argue that Eyes of the Rune Keeper cannot automatically bypass encryption or code phrases, etc., but that that's not what written Thieve's Cant is. Written Thieve's Cant is symbols that represent ideas on their lonesome - if you understand the symbol, you understand what it's trying to say. Written Thieve's Cant is essentially the Thieve's marks from Skyrim, as far as I understand it.
Eyes of the Rune Keeper is specifically about being able to interpret markings like that, up to and including much more complex sets of markings that Thieve's Cant can't support (because written Thieve's Cant isn't a full language, and Eyes of the Rune Keeper allows you to read those just fine).
So yes, Eyes of the Rune Keeper should allow you to understand the meaning of the symbols that make up Thieve's Cant, just like it can allow you to understand someone's personal method of writing shorthand or someone writing in a long-lost dead language, but it wouldn't be able to decode something written in plain English as 'Today I ate a slab of bread' to actually be a code-phrase meaning 'strike at the sound of drums'.
EDIT: Note that someone who knows Thieve's Cant could reasonably write out something in common using Thieve's Cant (rather than the secret signs/symbols ala the thieve's symbols in Skyrim) and, since it's in code, Eyes of the Rune Keeper would not work.
It depends on how the written Thieve's Cant is written whether or not Eyes of the Rune Keeper would work, in other words. If it's a shorthand symbol for the word 'Danger', Eyes of the Rune Keeper will work just fine on it - but if it's the actual written word 'Orangutan' and that means 'Danger' in this context, then Eyes of the Rune Keeper would not work.
This can help:
http://www.sageadvice.eu/2016/10/13/can-comprehend-languages-understand-thieves-cant/
The question isn't whether a person can understand the code can be understood with Eyes of the Rune Keeper. That's not what LangyMD is saying. They're arguing that if written Thieves' Cant is represented as a symbolic language - such as symbols that each have a specific meaning, a symbol for 'this house is safe' for instance - then Eyes can decode it. If the message is written in common but in a code, then yes the code would still be obfuscated.
That's also what the comprehend languages tweets you linked reference. A language that is all allusion would not be understood by the Eyes. But if it's just symbols that have meaning and not a message hidden in a sentence, the argument changes. The difference is between a written phrase that means something different than literally stated and a runic language with characters that only thieves know.
Thieves’ Cant
During your rogue training you learned thieves’ cant, a secret mix of dialect, jargon, and code that allows you to hide messages in seemingly normal conversation. Only another creature that knows thieves’ cant understands such messages. It takes four times longer to convey such a message than it does to speak the same idea plainly.
In addition, you understand a set of secret signs and symbols used to convey short, simple messages, such as whether an area is dangerous or the territory of a thieves’ guild, whether loot is nearby, or whether the people in an area are easy marks or will provide a safe house for thieves on the run.