D&D 5E Effects of Aging

[CapnZapp]

For human, I would make cut off years 40,60,80,100.

at age 40 you get -2 penalty on one of the physical scores(str,dex,con) of your choice.

at age 60 you get -2 penalty on other 2 scores that you didn't reduce at age 40.

at age 80 you get additional -2 penalty on all physical scores and -2 penalty on one mental score.

at age of 100(you should be dead already) you get additional -2 penalty on all ability scores.

I would not.

The only penalty I feel appropriate for 5th edition is Disadvantage.

Anything more d20:ish is clutter.

 

[Horwath]

I would not.

The only penalty I feel appropriate for 5th edition is Disadvantage.

Anything more d20:ish is clutter.

while I love the advantage/disadvantage mechanict, it cannot be only penalty/award.

especially for aging as it is gradual process.

You cannot just at certain year cutoff someones ability by 50% or more.

Aging is gradual, it works slowly.

 

[Hand of Evil]

Don't think I would change any stats but would add notes on activity.

Falling damage is now double (he can't get up!)
No longer can jump
Movement is halved
Observation checks have a greater difficulty
Has to take a piss if rolls a one on any dice
Meds - carry and take 2 to 12 (2d6) meds for general pains and issues a day

 

[CapnZapp]

while I love the advantage/disadvantage mechanict, it cannot be only penalty/award.

especially for aging as it is gradual process.

You cannot just at certain year cutoff someones ability by 50% or more.

Aging is gradual, it works slowly.

I realize that, but in the spirit of 5th edition I encourage you to remove small modifiers like that.

Cheers

 

[bedir than]

I would not.

The only penalty I feel appropriate for 5th edition is Disadvantage.

Anything more d20:ish is clutter.

Except that Disadvantage doesn't stack. So you are saying that said player could never have Advantage. No matter their circumstances just because they are old they will never get to roll 2d20 on a check. Inspiration die? Now useless. Sneak Attack is literally impossible with your change.

 

[Lidgar]

Having thought about it, I prefer to keep the effects of aging all role play, with the inspiration mechanic being used as a reward when it is played well.

And while at first I was confused why they still had the ghost ability to age when there is no longer a penalty for aging RAW, there is the cumulative effect of just outright dying if you are aged too much.

I do see a situation where a DM and player disagreeing on the age a PC dies.

PC: "But he works out by hiking to remote dungeons every day! He should live to be 100!"

DM: "Nah, remember all those taverns he hung out in? His liver is toast!"

 

[CapnZapp]

Except that Disadvantage doesn't stack. So you are saying that said player could never have Advantage. No matter their circumstances just because they are old they will never get to roll 2d20 on a check. Inspiration die? Now useless. Sneak Attack is literally impossible with your change.

Change? You must have replied to the wrong post.

The rules as written say nothing on ageing. I merely replied to a poster suggesting a clutter of little penalties, reminding him that sort of detail is more 3rd edition era design than 5th edition era design.

I have said nothing about Sneak Attack. I certainly haven't said "now you have disadvantage on everything".

By the way, you are familiar with the option to replace disadvantage and advantage with -5 and +5, no?

 

[bedir than]

Change? You must have replied to the wrong post.

The rules as written say nothing on ageing. I merely replied to a poster suggesting a clutter of little penalties, reminding him that sort of detail is more 3rd edition era design than 5th edition era design.

I have said nothing about Sneak Attack. I certainly haven't said "now you have disadvantage on everything".

By the way, you are familiar with the option to replace disadvantage and advantage with -5 and +5, no?

Your suggestion of applying Disadvantage removes all opportunity for Advantage. That takes away many opportunities for Sneak Attack. So though you didn't mention it, your suggestion for change does effect it.

Giving someone permanent Disadvantage on physical abilities is much more dramatic than a minor debuff.

 

[CapnZapp]

And while at first I was confused why they still had the ghost ability to age when there is no longer a penalty for aging RAW, there is the cumulative effect of just outright dying if you are aged too much.

That confusion, I fear, is if you remain in the mindset of previous editions, where you assume every effect must have a clear impact on the character's game stats.

In a more free-form game telling your player "you age 20 years" is perfectly alright, even if that has zero game impact on your ability to attack foes, climb walls or run away from bears. 5th edition is that game.

 

[CapnZapp]

Your suggestion of applying Disadvantage removes all opportunity for Advantage. That takes away many opportunities for Sneak Attack. So though you didn't mention it, your suggestion for change does effect it.

Giving someone permanent Disadvantage on physical abilities is much more dramatic than a minor debuff.

No. Stop being preposterous. And stop assuming I mean "permanent disadvantage" on everything just because I follow the game's paradigm on -1 modifiers (i.e. not having them).

This is my final reply to you on this issue. Have a nice day.