Alternate Aging Rules

[Ferrix]

So this thought that different races might age got me to thinking of writing up a short bit about it. Here's what I've got so far... now they might not all be linearly balanced, but they're all balanced within themselves I think, half-elves are the only odd ones out but half-elves don't have too too much going for them anyways. Total plus/minus will be listed in (-/+) beside race name.

Human (-18/+9) - humans age as per the standard rules.
Middle Age: -1 Str, Dex and Con; +1 Int, Wis and Cha
Old Age: -2 Str, Dex and Con; +1 Int, Wis and Cha
Venerable: -3 Str, Dex and Con; +1 Int, Wis and Cha

Dwarf (-18/+9) - dwarves, while aging similarly to human just seem to get harder to kill as they grow old although they often become a lot less quick witted.
Middle Age: -1 Str, Dex and Int; +1 Con, Wis and Cha
Old Age: -2 Str, Dex and Int; +1 Con, Wis and Cha
Venerable: -3 Str, Dex and Int; +1 Con, Wis and Cha

Half-Elf (-12/+9) - half-elves get the best of both worlds, they age incredibly well while never really becoming too disabled.
Middle Age: -1 Str, Dex and Con; +1 Int, Wis and Cha
Old Age: -1 Str, Dex and Con; +1 Int, Wis and Cha
Venerable: -2 Str, Dex and Con; +1 Int, Wis and Cha

Elf (-18/+9) - elves age relatively slowly through their old age, but as they near the end of their years they often take a quick turn for the worst.
Middle Age: -1 Str, Dex and Con; +1 Int, Wis and Cha
Old Age: -1 Str, Dex and Con; +1 Int, Wis and Cha
Venerable: -4 Str, Dex and Con; +1 Int, Wis and Cha

Halfling (-12/+6) - halflings retain their nimbleness till the very end of their years, however they don?t always pick up on the benefits of age as quickly as other folk.
Middle Age: -1 Str and Con; +1 Wis or Cha
Old Age: -2 Str and Con; +1 Wis and Cha
Venerable: -3 Str and Con; +1 Int, Wis and Cha

Half-Orc (-12/+6) - half-orcs maintain a good deal of their strength even in their middle and older years, although it takes a while for them to gain the presence of mind and person that other races achieve.
Middle Age: -1 Dex; +1 Wis
Old Age: -1 Str and Con, -2 Dex; +1 Wis and Cha
Venerable: -2 Str and Con, -3 Dex; +1 Int, Wis and Cha

Gnome (-19/+10) - gnomes maintain their health throughout their years, although they do become less adept quicker than other races, however they are bastions of wisdom in their exceedingly older years.
Middle Age: -2 Str and Dex; +1 Wis
Old Age: -3 Str and Dex; +1 Int and Cha, +2 Wis
Venerable: -1 Con, -4 Str and Dex; +1 Int and Cha, +3 Wis

 

[Terraism]

I like these, quite a bit. They add a little more flavor, adding some rules-justification for all sorts of neat racial stereotypes. The only thing I'd object to is the dwarves' massive -6 to Intelligence. Assuming average starting intelligence, your venerable dwarves would barely be able to speak - not too much more intelligent than a large animal. I'd suggest that they get "more and mour dour" in their old age, instead of "less sharp." I'd swap the Int penalties with Charisma bonuses, or even just go with:

Dwarf (-15/+6) - Dwarves, while aging similarly to humans, get harder to kill as they grow older - though some speculate that it's their grumpiness that gives them this extra hold on life.
Middle Age: -1 Str, Dex and Cha; +1 Con and Wis
Old Age: -2 Str, Dex, and -1 Cha; +1 Con and Wis
Venerable: -3 Str, Dex, and -1 Cha; +1 Con and Wis

If you feel this is unbalanced (though I don't think it's any worse than other aging progressions,) maybe add in a +1 bonus to Int somewhere?

 

[Tuzenbach]

Call me crazy, but I believe that the shorter a lifespan a race has, the quicker that race should be allowed to progess in levels. Thus, the half-orc, human, and halfling would all get to the uber-levels much sooner than the elf, half-elf, dwarf, or gnome. Of course, the latter races would eventually get to the uber-levels when their counterparts are on their respective death beds.

 

[Ferrix]

I like these, quite a bit. They add a little more flavor, adding some rules-justification for all sorts of neat racial stereotypes. The only thing I'd object to is the dwarves' massive -6 to Intelligence. Assuming average starting intelligence, your venerable dwarves would barely be able to speak - not too much more intelligent than a large animal. I'd suggest that they get "more and mour dour" in their old age, instead of "less sharp." I'd swap the Int penalties with Charisma bonuses, or even just go with:

Yeah, it was a toss up between the two... thanks for the response

Call me crazy, but I believe that the shorter a lifespan a race has, the quicker that race should be allowed to progess in levels. Thus, the half-orc, human, and halfling would all get to the uber-levels much sooner than the elf, half-elf, dwarf, or gnome. Of course, the latter races would eventually get to the uber-levels when their counterparts are on their respective death beds.

Also, this is a bit off topic for what I had in mind for the changes to aging.

This to me is about as silly as level-limits from second edition, sorry, I just don't see it. Particularly if both characters adventure just as much. You should also note that the half-elf has only a few years on a halfling, by your reasoning they should be part of the quick advance races. I'd see no reason to slow experience gain for long-lived races, just as I'd see no reason to speed up experience gain for short-lived races.

If you ran a game like this, everyone would play humans or whatever the shortest lived race was because they'd advance at the swiftest rate. Talk about hurting choices.

Just because you live a shorter time does not mean you learn more in that time than others do. If that proved true, people who knew they'd probably die by the time they are thirty would be vastly superior to those who on average live twice as long.

 

[Tuzenbach]

Yeah, it was a toss up between the two... thanks for the response



Also, this is a bit off topic for what I had in mind for the changes to aging.

This to me is about as silly as level-limits from second edition, sorry, I just don't see it. Particularly if both characters adventure just as much. You should also note that the half-elf has only a few years on a halfling, by your reasoning they should be part of the quick advance races. I'd see no reason to slow experience gain for long-lived races, just as I'd see no reason to speed up experience gain for short-lived races.

If you ran a game like this, everyone would play humans or whatever the shortest lived race was because they'd advance at the swiftest rate. Talk about hurting choices.

Just because you live a shorter time does not mean you learn more in that time than others do. If that proved true, people who knew they'd probably die by the time they are thirty would be vastly superior to those who on average live twice as long.

Yeah, I miscalculated a bit with the half-elf, sue me I guess. It may sound silly, but I think it's even sillier to do away with magical aging altogether. I know a lot of persons were screaming "not fair!" about the issue pertaining to elves being able to haste themselves far more often than humans and being more effective when battling the ghost and the dreaded 10-year aging attack. I guess I should have been more clear: Bring back magical aging, but for the races with the least lifespan, at least let them advance quicker than the races who'll out live them. Mind you, it doesn't have to be an exact ratio. Just because the average elf's lifspan is 10X that of a human, they shouldn't take 10X as long to progress, but perhaps twice. In any event: BRING BACK MAGICAL AGING!!!

And no, I don't think my suggestion would inspire massives amounts of people to all of a sudden play a half-orc! LoL! I've never played one and never will. Too stupid, ugly, and aggressive.

 

[Haradim]

Of course, the latter races would eventually get to the uber-levels when their counterparts are on their respective death beds.

A point that many (possibly most; I've only heard of this happening in campaigns with considerable real-life longevity) games never reach; indeed, never seem to get anywhere near.

You can do an awful lot well within the lifespan of a human or half-orc. And if playing meant being left behind in levels (perhaps permanently), people wouldn't necessarily rush to the half-orc, but one might have a hard time convincing many people to play elves. DMs might also have a problem with such rules, as most I've encountered seem to dislike mixed-level parties.

This would essentially penalize people for choosing the longer-lived races, as it assumes that their extended lifespans is actually a balancing advantage (they will not only catch up, but will be better than any new characters introduced, for a while at least), where in many games, it's a total non-issue, as the campaign will end before they get to partake of the same challenges and experiences as their higher level companions. Unless one implemented magical aging, but even then, the DM can't force the PCs to use spells that will age them, and unless they are constantly using said spells (or the DM is being antagonistic with offensive aging spells, which would likely not go over well), many of the shorter-lived PCs would likely still keep ticking well beyond the scope of the campaign.

 

[Ferrix]

damn double post

 

[Ferrix]

In any event, if I was playing in a group and I had to gain twice as much XP for playing an elf as the person playing a human, would I bother? By the time I hit level two they are halfway to level three, by the time I get to level three they get to level four and it only gets worse. By the time they hit level 20, I'll be at level 14 and I'll get stomped if I lasted that long with that group in the first place. If you bother to do something like this, give races that live longer level scaling benefits, otherwise anyone who plays a long-lived race is going to have to hide in the back to survive particularly at higher levels.

Plus you can add magical aging to your game, but currently the haste spell is far from worth losing a year over. If it basically gave you two rounds for every one round, maybe it'd be worth it, but it'd be the rarest moments that it would see use, and any sorceror who picks it up is gonna kill people really quick. You also have to consider the potential it has for aging people to death (which happened in a 2e game once). If you are going to add magical aging to the game, you better make sure it's either one hell of an offensive spell, or for only the most draining of powerful magics. Knocking a year off of your life better be worth a hell of a lot.

And, what Haradim said.