Hi,
Given that spell casting can cause instant physical aging, what is the effect of instant aging on a spell caster going through puberty, pregnancy, or menopause?
Cheers
Heh, that's the first time I have seen this, and I thought I had seen "all the questions" on here, by now.
The consensus around here is that the body physically ages, but that the character does not experience the aging in a "sped-up-film" sense.
Thus, the stress of the spellcasting has aged the body and grown the hair and fingernails, but food in the stomach is still there and still digesting, etc (otherwise even a month's aging would instantly kill any character from lack of food, water and sleep.
So, to answer your questions specifically:
Puberty
Well, I guess the body goes through the changes it otherwise should for puberty (pubic hair grows, testies drop, etc) but things like pimples don't immediately leap out of the face.
Pregnancy
I say the baby doesn't age and suddenly come to term, but remains at whatever "stage" it already was (the mother ages but the baby doesn't). The effects on a developing foetus of the mothers body suddenly aging are up to the Seneschal and he's encouraged to be devious :-)
Menopause
See Puberty.
One day when we do Sorcery and the Fey, I must see to it that we put in a section clarifying aging etc.
Oh, and welcome to the forum!
Brian.
Quote from: Brian LeybourneThus, the stress of the spellcasting has aged the body and grown the hair and fingernails, but food in the stomach is still there and still digesting, etc (otherwise even a month's aging would instantly kill any character from lack of food, water and sleep.
What does aging do to weight? I would suspect that one would lose weight. If the spell casters hair and finger nail grow the mass (at least) must come from some where...(ok, so its not that much weight).
NT
Hi,
Quote from: Brian LeybourneThe consensus around here is that the body physically ages, but that the character does not experience the aging in a "sped-up-film" sense.
Thus, the stress of the spellcasting has aged the body and grown the hair and fingernails, but food in the stomach is still there and still digesting, etc (otherwise even a month's aging would instantly kill any character from lack of food, water and sleep.
I think that it's the hair/fingernail detail (which I like, BTW) that causes an issue. I can see the problem of saying "your character ages but there is no physical change, losing (X) months from your lifespan..." as it loses the immediacy. Many would voluntarily exchange their old age in order to gain a benefit in the present. However, by instantly transporting the character (X) months along their lifespan there are other issues. Hair and fingernails grow, indicating that the body is experiencing the aging. What then for menstruation? Wound healing? Memory? These things are unaffected? Why?
The mage casts a spell. She is unable to defend her body from the spell. The spell takes a measure of energy from her lifesource in order to power itself (as a kind of "path of least resistance", where the spell usually powers itself from another external source as the mage usually defends herself?). This ages her, Dorian Gray style. Is that the idea?
Cheers
Quote from: Brian Leybourne
Pregnancy
I say the baby doesn't age and suddenly come to term, but remains at whatever "stage" it already was (the mother ages but the baby doesn't). The effects on a developing foetus of the mothers body suddenly aging are up to the Seneschal and he's encouraged to be devious :-)
A post-menopausal woman can have a donor (or otherwise externally created) embryo implanted and go through pregnancy. Extrapolating from this, the only likely risks would be the risks typically associated with pregnancy at an older age - increased chances of gestational diabetes and pre-clampsia (high blood pressure related) for the mother, increased down's syndrome and other disorders for the child, the mother is at higher risk of complications during childbirth, etc. You can find plenty of info on age & pregnancy via Google.
I think of it more like a transmutation than high-speed aging. You don't experience the years, but rather magically transform to the state you would be in at the new age.
Hi,
Quote from: kenjibExtrapolating from this, the only likely risks would be the risks typically associated with pregnancy at an older age - increased chances of gestational diabetes and pre-clampsia (high blood pressure related) for the mother, increased down's syndrome and other disorders for the child, the mother is at higher risk of complications during childbirth, etc. You can find plenty of info on age & pregnancy via Google.
No disagreement on any of this.
OTOH, my original postulation concerned the effects of magical aging on a pregnant mage.
Cheers,
Hi,
Quote from: kenjibI think of it more like a transmutation than high-speed aging. You don't experience the years, but rather magically transform to the state you would be in at the new age.
How do you justify the hair/fingernail growth within your own campaign, given it is a transmutation?
Cheers,
Ian,
You're absolutely right, of course. Really, the hair and fingernail thing is there because it's cool more than any desire to have it be "logically right". That's my understanding anyway, you would have to ask Rick (who wrote the Sorcery chapter) to be 100% sure.
Really, it can all be written off as "it's magic", but for those of us who like a little more internal consistancy/logic/realism then yes, the hair and fgingernails don't really work.
Perhaps if we explain is thus:
The aging not prevented represents the portion of the magic that must be drawn from the sorcerers body directly (as apposed to from the phlogiston, the spirit world, or whatever other McGuffin you prefer; I use the spirit world myself) and this magic is drawn directly from the sorcerers life energy. The sorcerers body attempts to cope with this wracking invasion by pushing aspects of the body to age and thus provide the life energy that's being siphoned off. So, hair and fingernails grow, arteries and veins rupture, cells die off, skin wrinkles etc. The sum effect is that the character is physically a month (per success) older without having aged. This means that there's no danger of starvation etc, nor any danger to a foetus.
How's that?
Brian.
Quote from: Brian LeybourneThe aging not prevented represents the portion of the magic that must be drawn from the sorcerers body directly...
Personally, I'd leave it at that. The effect is part of the unexplained mystery of magic. It manifests itself through selective physical signs of aging.
As far as the pregnancy scenario is concerned, I'd argue that the mage doesn't have the capacity to draw energy from the unborn child either voluntarily or involuntarily.
OTOH, you might want to consider the implications for triggered magics and curses. For instance if a mage has cast a protective spell that lasts a particular duration then perhaps the instant aging, being magical, should cause the duration to expire. If a mage has been hit by a time-based curse then again perhaps the curse should trigger instantly upon application of the spell aging penalty.
You've got to admire a game where you can play with the implications to this extent. : ^ )
Cheers,
Quote from: Ian.PlumbOTOH, you might want to consider the implications for triggered magics and curses. For instance if a mage has cast a protective spell that lasts a particular duration then perhaps the instant aging, being magical, should cause the duration to expire.
Ah, but then you could almost never get off any duration-based spell, since they last hours/days/weeks and even one failure on the aging roll will age you a month... :-)
Brian.
Hi,
Quote from: Brian LeybourneAh, but then you could almost never get off any duration-based spell, since they last hours/days/weeks and even one failure on the aging roll will age you a month...
It depends.
If a mage casts a spell that affects themselves and lasts a duration (say, Nightvision or some such personal enhancement) then I think the duration should expire with any aging failure. That's part of the risk of casting the spell under those circumstances.
OTOH, if the wizard casts a spell that affects something external to themselves for a duration then whether the wizard ages or not shouldn't affect the duration of that spell.
Cheers,
Aging is the process of the body going through cellular cycling to the point where it ceases to be able to regenerate cells. It's intensely complicated, actually, and you could do a ton of research on it. The point, however, is that in order for the damage of aging to be done, you actually have to damage cells, and have them regenerate if they can. This normally occurs over time, and as the result of normal processes over time. What this means is that any description of the process that deals with it scientifically is doomed to fail unless you start picking and choosing which parts are aging, and which are not.
Fortunately this is magic. I think the solution lies with the fey.
The fey are only "immortal" in that they do not age normally. Hence, if the effect of a spell were to "age" a fey creature in terms of cellular cycling, they would experience no effect. BTW, there are some real world creatures that are sorta like this - some sharks and carp and other creatures don't experience the regeneration problems that humans (and most creatures) do over time. In any case, the point is that the process must have something to do with something other than aging as our science knows it.
The obvious answer is that it's in the soul. This seems to be where the magic comes from (and it's neat to think of SAs as a real in-game force), so why not make that assumption. Basically, humans have only so much soul, and it gets "weary" over time. This causes the body to experience age, outwardly. Fey do not get weary for whatever reason, normally. But when casting, they have the same chance of picking up this weariness of spirit as humans do. So they age the same amount as humans when something goes wrong with a spell.
This all goes along with my theory of Fey aging in an older thread. Fey basically actually age to, say, 18 years old, and then stays like that indefinitely. Humans age at the normal ratetheir whole lives. Either Fey or Humans who mess up with magic weary an amount instantly, which causes the aging.
In any case, the Aging, caused by the wearying process is not like normal aging. It's not a process of time passing, and causing the effects that time passing would cause. No, instead, what happens is that the body shows the results of the increased weariness, which is to be exactly the same as if the character had aged to the new total age, at the current point in actual time. Basically, it looks more like the character had been born earlier than they actually age any more. Basically the body is just a bit more run down that it was previously.
To me, I'd not do the hair and fingernails, because those would indicate that the character had, at some point, not cut their hair or fingernails, etc, which is contrary to fact. These would be part of everyday life, and not the wearying of the spirit.
Does this make any more sense from the metaphysical POV?
Mike
Quote from: Ian.PlumbHi,
Quote from: kenjibI think of it more like a transmutation than high-speed aging. You don't experience the years, but rather magically transform to the state you would be in at the new age.
How do you justify the hair/fingernail growth within your own campaign, given it is a transmutation?
Cheers,
I see two options:
1. Drop it as inconsistent with how it works otherwise ala Mike Holmes' great explanation.
2. Keep it in because you like the effect and just handwave it away as "magic" in a world that does not always obey the laws of rationality. It could be interesting to leave such a visible effect in if magic is taboo and wizards risk severe retribution if they are discovered.
Hi,
Quote from: Mike HolmesTo me, I'd not do the hair and fingernails, because those would indicate that the character had, at some point, not cut their hair or fingernails, etc, which is contrary to fact. These would be part of everyday life, and not the wearying of the spirit.
This is really the crux of the matter. I think that what you are proposing is a replacement for the current mechanic rather than an interpretation of it. It makes sense and is internally consistent -- but it feels like a free lunch for the mage to me.
If a mage ages a month in a moment there won't be any external sign that this is the case. It's not like you'd see wrinkles develop in a month or whatever. The hair and fingernail growth adds drama to the scene -- everyone knows what the mage has sacrificed to cast the spell under the circumstances as the signs are visible. It is a dramatic device, and a quite clever one I think.
If there is no or little outward sign, on the other hand, then at what point does the mage die when casting a spell due to the effect of cumulative spiritual aging? If the mage has syphillis that will kill them by the age of 42, does cumulative spiritual aging past 42 kill them through the ravages of the disease? If not, then the mage is getting a free lunch. If so, then the spiritual aging is quite physical and the lack of hair/fingernail growth starts to feel like the anomaly.
I think your suggestion is fine -- internally consistent and workable. A neat solution to a mild quandary. Personally, I'll keep the aging to the physical and ignore the whys for the moment.
Cheers,
No you misunderstand quite a bit. You would look older. Well, not if you only aged a little, but you get what I mean. Jake has agreed that the fingernails and hair are for effect in another post, IIRC. And as such, I don't think it's at all problematic if you want to keep it in. I'm just trying to adjust for consistency. But the real effect isn't cosmetic, and doesn't change from my version to the regular version. IThe real effect is that the character is nearer to death, and perhaps can't function as effectively.
That is, the "weariness" makes you old. Eventually, the character will lose stats before he normally would. Then he'll die prematurely. Not because some disease runs it's course sooner, but because, weakened by age, a disease he gets later will kill him more easily that it would otherwise have. Or, if he doesn't get a disease, then he'll die of old age at some point much sooner than he would have.
Basically, if you "age" a month, you have one month less to live, IMO. Which is strong incentive not to do it. OTOH, like smoking, you don't know how long you've got. So mages gamble with their lifespan, and hope they don't regret it later. But, unlike cigarettes, the mage can prevent the harm by being careful. So, if you were a smoker, and could do it without harmful helath effects would you do it? Well, to the extent that one would do so, a mage will be careful.
Mike
Remember also that past 40 the character makes aging rolls every year. And a year can keep coming by mighty fast for a sorcerer...
Brian.
Hi,
Quote from: Mike HolmesNo you misunderstand quite a bit. You would look older.
I wrote, "If a mage ages a month in a moment there won't be any external sign that this is the case." To me, this implies acceptance of the underlying principal that the mage has physically aged a month.
Quote from: Mike Holmes... the real effect isn't cosmetic, and doesn't change from my version to the regular version. The real effect is that the character is nearer to death, and perhaps can't function as effectively.
I don't think that you are suggesting that the aging is cosmetic. The idea that the mage is necessarily closer to death isn't correct though.
Quote from: Mike HolmesThat is, the "weariness" makes you old. Eventually, the character will lose stats before he normally would. Then he'll die prematurely.
IMO, this is the free lunch for the mage.
Let me explain. A mage has his horoscope cast at 18. It is determined that unless external influences alter events he will die at age 93. At 25, while carousing, our mage catches syphilis. It cannot be cured. Another horoscope is cast and it is determined that he will die in 17 years time of tertiary syphilis. A spectacularly unpleasant fate.
The mage knows that spiritual aging is perfect aging; joints do not deteriorate through wear and tear, diseases do not run their course, tumours do not grow, there is no onset of rheumatism, parasites are kept at bay. He also knows that he has 51 years or over 600 months of spiritual aging up his sleeve before he affects his real life expectancy. And unless he has an SA relating to a desperate desire to die from a venereal disease, he probably wants to die before reaching 42.
Quote from: Mike HolmesBasically, if you "age" a month, you have one month less to live, IMO. Which is strong incentive not to do it.
Perhaps. The incentive would be stronger if the mage was really aging though: he dies at age 42 rather than age 93 in the above example, personal spells with durations expire, hair grows, memories fade.
Again, there is nothing wrong with the spiritual aging that you suggest. It is internally consistent and works.
Cheers,
Personally, I have no desire to ever play in the sort of campaign that lasts long enough for aging rolls to make a difference. I enjoy this aspect of Pendragon because so much depends on building a dynasty and participating in the full Arthurian cycle. But not for TROS.
I don't want to start playing with a 22 year old character, and still be playing that character when he's 42. Just don't want it.
So for me, aging as a penalty has no bite to it. Oh sure, one could simply role play the character's understandable desire to not get old. After all, a GM has to do that for NPC sorcerers because generally he won't really care on their behalf how old they get. But there isn't a built in mechanical reason for why a player would care.
I mean for me in a game I'd be more likely to think..."oh, so my sorcerer aged 18 months. Big deal, I'll cast the spell again"
I mean when playing 1ed D&D did anyone REALLY care that Haste spells aged you? Did anyone even bother to keep track. Maybe. Certainly not my group at the time.
The Insight rules make obtaining a new character less painful than in other games, so aging your character right into the grave really doesn't have that much downside from my perspective.
Pendragon's system where the wizard actually has to sleep following a powerful spell, IMO has some teeth to it. It often is simply not convenient for the wizard to just take a 48 hour nap. Super powerful magic might require years of sleep if the difficulty isn't reduced by being sure to cast the spell at the right time, on the right day, in the right place, with the right preparations.
This to me has a lot more teeth to it (some would say "too much" to actually have a wizard as a PC in Pendragon. Which suits me just fine)
"penalty now" is more effective than "penalty later". I don't really care about "penalty later". I'm not planning to play this character "later" anyway.
I think the aging rules are built on some pretty hefty assumptions about the ideal of roleplaying being having a character survive over the course of a campaign that lasts years of real time. Because it would take years of real time (or an artificially flash forwarded clock) to reach the point where character age even begins to matter.
My solution. Don't play with Sorcerers at all. I never much cared for magic users anyway.
I agree with you there Ralph. I switched to using something like "paradox" from Mage: The Ascention as a penalty for my magic users. They don't even see it coming until it's too late.
Quote from: ValamirI don't want to start playing with a 22 year old character, and still be playing that character when he's 42. Just don't want it.
OTOH, the idea of starting a campaign with an inexperienced character -- such as a 22 year old -- may not appeal to most players. If your character starts the game in their late thirties, then rapid aging is more of a concern.
Quote from: Valamir"penalty now" is more effective than "penalty later". I don't really care about "penalty later". I'm not planning to play this character "later" anyway.
Treating the character as disposable may not be the style of play TRoS' authors had in mind when they designed the game. However, I agree that an immediate penalty is more of an incentive than a future penalty.
Quote from: ValamirI think the aging rules are built on some pretty hefty assumptions about the ideal of roleplaying being having a character survive over the course of a campaign that lasts years of real time. Because it would take years of real time (or an artificially flash forwarded clock) to reach the point where character age even begins to matter.
This assumes that everyone starts their game with new characters fresh out of their apprenticeships. I can't remember the last time I played a character like that. In addition, it's not like every day, week, or even month of gaming environment time is played out in-game. That is, it's not like your character simply rolls from scenario to scenario in a seamless sequential manner.
Cheers,
Well, TROS does have a "penalty now" component, which is that sorcerers are feared, reviled and killed on sight, and it's hard to hide the physical evidence of sudden hair, beard and fingernail growth. So it's a roleplaying thing as opposed to a hard-and-fast penalty.
Brian.
QuoteTreating the character as disposable may not be the style of play TRoS' authors had in mind when they designed the game. However, I agree that an immediate penalty is more of an incentive than a future penalty.
I'm not so sure here; the Insight mechanic strongly suggests, at least to me, a character with a fateful Destiny, the opportunity of playing a tragic character by choice, without losing too much on character progression as compared to other players.
QuoteThis assumes that everyone starts their game with new characters fresh out of their apprenticeships. I can't remember the last time I played a character like that. In addition, it's not like every day, week, or even month of gaming environment time is played out in-game. That is, it's not like your character simply rolls from scenario to scenario in a seamless sequential manner.
I very much agree with this point. Especially a kind of noble game could very easily contain months of pause between scenarios.
Quite true Brian.
Although in my experience there are only three real ways of playing out a "Pariah" disadvantage in actual play (such as a Zhodani character in Traveler, a rogue telepath from B5, etc).
1) in a campaign limited to a location where the character is not a pariah (the Zhodani homeworld say)
2) in a campaign where the entire campaign circles around the pariah character and his efforts not to get caught. Which is a fun and exciting way to play, but comes with its own set of restrictions.
3) in a campaign where lip service is paid to the Pariah status, but in practical day to day play its just breezed over.
In situation 1 and 3, the penalty essentially goes away. And in situation 2 the penalty has taken over the campaign which may or may not be desired by the other players.
The Paradox idea, or Sorcerer's Humanity limit I think is far more effective because both essentially feed into more story possibilities in a way that a mere spell point limit doesn't.
IMO, Aging is a really cool idea conceptually and would make a great foundation for a novel. But doesn't strike me as a particularly effective limiter for an RPG. A GREAT source of color for the RPG. But no really an effective limiter. I think the weakness in Sorcery in TRoS is trying to use the Aging as both a color provider and a limiter.
Let us not also remember the knockout roll, fellas. The effects of rapid aging can knock a sorcerer out, leaving them vulnerable to whatever circumstances may come their way.
Hi,
Quote from: Brian LeybourneWell, TROS does have a "penalty now" component, which is that sorcerers are feared, reviled and killed on sight, and it's hard to hide the physical evidence of sudden hair, beard and fingernail growth. So it's a roleplaying thing as opposed to a hard-and-fast penalty.
I think it's important to distinguish between the game mechanics and the gaming environment. Not everyone will use TRoS with the Weyrth gaming environment. Changing rule systems is relatively easy -- changing campaign settings is a pain.
As such, the first part is a gaming environment limitation rather than a TRoS limitation. The second part is a trigger for enacting the first part, and whether the second part should be used at all is under discussion.
Personally I think that if there is to be a limitation it needs to be a mechanic. This lets the referee know that the rule set was designed with this in mind. If the referee opts to abandon the rule as it doesn't fit with their chosen gaming environment then they need to address any balance issues that result.
Cheers,
I agree with most of what's been posted so far. There are two ways to look at it. Either the aging thing is a mechanical disincentive or it's a role-playing disincentive. Mechanically, a character basically has a pool of months to his life that he's burning through with the only penalization that he'll run out earlier if he spends them quickly. But that assumes that the player feels this pressure.
Given that I, too, do not expect to play the character until he has a chance to age that much, I too do not feel the mechanical incentive not to spend age. So it must be a role-playing thing.
Your mage character probably doesn't have any SAs that say that he wouldn't roll around in mud in front of a crowd. But if there was some advantage to be gained by it, would you automatically have the mage do it just because there was no mechanical incentive against it? Not all motives have to be wrapped up in mechanics. The point is that I would think it very implausible, personally, if you were to play a mage who didn't care about whether or not he aged. In fact, think of it as a narrativist statement mechanically. The ammount of life that a character is willing to burn through to cast a spell should indicate the importance with which the character holds that action.
So, unless you're playing a very Gamist version of TROS, I think that the aging rules provide a perfectly suitable thematic relevance to using magic.
Mike