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.

Brian Leybourne wrote: 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.

Hi,

Brian Leybourne wrote: 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.

Brian Leybourne wrote:
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 :-)

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,

kenjib wrote: 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.

Hi,

kenjib wrote: 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.

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.

Brian Leybourne wrote: The aging not prevented represents the portion of the magic that must be drawn from the sorcerers body directly...

Ian.Plumb wrote: 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.

Hi,

Brian Leybourne wrote: 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...

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

Ian.Plumb wrote: Hi,

kenjib wrote: 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.

How do you justify the hair/fingernail growth within your own campaign, given it is a transmutation?

Cheers,

Hi,

Mike Holmes wrote: 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.

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,

Mike Holmes wrote: No you misunderstand quite a bit. You would look older.

Mike Holmes wrote: ... 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.

Mike Holmes wrote: That is, the "weariness" makes you old. Eventually, the character will lose stats before he normally would. Then he'll die prematurely.

Mike Holmes wrote: Basically, if you "age" a month, you have one month less to live, IMO. Which is strong incentive not to do it.

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.

Valamir wrote: 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.

Valamir wrote: "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.

Valamir wrote: 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.

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.

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.

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.

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,

Brian Leybourne wrote: 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.

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