Aging and Undead

[Gnome]

This may be something that's not explicitly covered by the rules, but here goes. Two questions:

* If a creature has aging stat modifiers due to old age, do these remain after becoming undead (say, a vampire)? I could see why the mental ones would remain, but not the physical.

* If a creature becomes undead while still young, would they get the mental bonuses for age once they hit the appropriate age categories? I can't think of a reasonable explaination as to why not offhand.

 

[Jack Simth]

I'd be inclined to say "Yes" and "No" respectively (keep all bonuses and penalties due to age at moment of becoming undead, don't gain bonuses for becoming really old after having become undead), although mostly for percieved balance reasons:
If they lose the physical penalties due to age while keeping the mental benefits, or gain the mental benefits without the associated penalties, then there's no reason to ever encounter an old Lich that doesn't have an extra +3/+3/+3 to mental stats, over and above the +2/+2/+2 he gets for becoming a lich. Ditto for Vampires, Ghosts, and the like (although freshly created undead might not have such benefits). Now, when that's a class ability (as in the case of a high-level Monk or Druid) then it's fine - it's a class feature, and is meant to be used in such a manner; part of the balance - the rest of the time? Umm, no.

 

[Anubis]

I would have to say yes to both, if only due to precedence. Most places where the books dicuss aging, it's pretty uniform that when something "stops aging", they still get the bonuses to Int, Wis, and Cha (this represents the wisdom of aging or whatever) while they no longer get the penalties to Str, Dex, and Con (because those are aspects of actually physically aging.

Of course one might think that the undead no longer gain that wisdom of aging due to the fact that it seems as though only mortal humanoids get those bonuses, and that might be a reasonable counterpoint.

 

[jdrakeh]

Something to keep in mind is that the flow of time does not leave all undead un touched - just some of them. Obviously, vampires, ghosts, and the like don't age physically - but that same immunity to the passage of time is not specifically afforded to zombies, wights, skeletons, and the like. Conceivably, with the passage of time, these latter, lesser, undead could wither (or rot) away completely. So, the answer to your first question is:

If the rules specifically confer immunity from the passage of time upon an undead creature, then no, they don't suffer physical penalties for aging. That said, I'd award penalties for aging to any undead crature who is not specifically afforded that ummunity under the rules (in fact, I'd likely make the penalties more severe to represent phsyical decomposition).

As for the second question, undead (well, some of them) still possess the capacity to learn (which is what knowledge-based aging bonuses really represent), so yes - I'd still grant them them the bonuses for years that pass them by.

Really, the easy way to come to a logical conclusion here (for both questions) is to look at 'aging' as the passage of time, not necessarily the maturation of the physical body (if you think about it, the former is what thet aging rules actually reflect, rather than the latter).