Aasimar / Tiefling Age Categories

[stardust]

What are the age categories for Aasimar and Tiefling?

[seekerofshadowlight]

I'd say same as human. You could use half elf, but I myself would go with human.

[Fred Ohm]

http://www.ekkaia.org/rpg/dnd/ps/racial.html

[Dain GM]

Regrettably - those answers are not only unsatisfactory - but unrealistic.

How can you have a creature who has a parent that is - for all intents - an immortal being - and not have long life?

We're not talking about human with an Infernal Bloodline (via sorcerer) - we're talking about a meta-human who has a parent who does not die.

The book pegs an elf at Venerable at 350 - and humans are Venerable at 70 - and half-elves are Venerable at - you guessed it - 125 years.

So how can a being who has a parent that is - for all intents and purposes - immortality (as in - Devils, Demons rarely age that I know of) - have anything other then long life?

Nothing else in this makes much sense...

I'd at least find the average age of Devils - and go from there at half... But then, that's just me.

[Jeremias]

@Dain GM
Yeah, not their parents are Gods/Devils, they have celestial or fiendish ancestors. For an Half-Celestial, look here: http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/monsters/halfCelestial.html.

So, for Aasimar and such things, I very much like the abovelinked table and will use it for my next character.

[The NPC]

For Tiefling at least according Pathfinder Player Companion: Blood of Fiends tieflings on average age at the same rate as humans no matter what they're mortal stock is. They are some instances of tieflings living longer but those are not common.

[Irnk, Dead-Eye's Prodigal]

Neither Aasimar nor Teifling have parents that were immortal. That would be Half-Celestial/Half-Fiend. Aasimar/Tieflings have the appropriate ancestors & usually far enough back that nobody knows who/when. This to me implies a strong case for human age patterns. Or the age patterns of whatever non-outsider race they came from.

[Shuriken Nekogami]

Aasimaar/Tiefling Depends on both stocks involved. i would say they live quite a long time.

[Mighty Squash]

While the Golarian specific books have made it clear that Teiflings atleast age basically as human, the fact that they are inhuman enough to be outsiders rather than humanoid should really count for something. (Personally, I don't think that they should be outsiders, but that is a whole other argument.)

[The Drunken Dragon]

Dain GM wrote:

Regrettably - those answers are not only unsatisfactory - but unrealistic.

How can you have a creature who has a parent that is - for all intents - an immortal being - and not have long life?

We're not talking about human with an Infernal Bloodline (via sorcerer) - we're talking about a meta-human who has a parent who does not die.

The book pegs an elf at Venerable at 350 - and humans are Venerable at 70 - and half-elves are Venerable at - you guessed it - 125 years.

So how can a being who has a parent that is - for all intents and purposes - immortality (as in - Devils, Demons rarely age that I know of) - have anything other then long life?

Nothing else in this makes much sense...

I'd at least find the average age of Devils - and go from there at half... But then, that's just me.

Well, the Blood of Fiends book states that the infernal nature of a Tiefling's blood actually causes physical discord with its mortal body, thus causing it to age "faster" than most half-breed races (i.e. Half-Elves). i have no idea what Aasimar are like, but i know that Tieflings live for human life-spans because their fiendish blood is slowly destroying their body from within (ironically mimicking the effects of aging despite the fact that their powers ought to keep them immortal).

[Wolf_Shay]

I personally go Half-elf lifespan at best...neither Tieflings or Aasimars are particularly strong in the planetouched traits to warrant anything better. I mean, their existence is roughly described as being the freak chance that a dormant strain of fiendish or celestial heritage manifests itself far down the bloodline. Just enough to set them apart, not enough to make them too dissimilar

[David knott 242]

Will we have an answer in a little over 3 weeks, when that Advanced Race Guide comes out?

[Dain GM]

Well - again, it's all pretty much how person wants to play it, I suppose. But these are the facts, as I see them clearly.

1. There is a type of creature that has "fiendish" or "infernal" ancestors - they're sorcerers - and unlike regular humans, they are granted power because those traits manifest themselves in ways that normal humans don't have.

2. Tieflings are far more potent then either half-elves, or any half-breeds out there - as half-orcs, or half-elves have Human Racial modifiers (i.e. +2 to one stat - with a few extra kicks). Tieflings clearly don't - they are so far removed from "human stock" - that they have bonuses and penalties to various stats - as if they were an elf, a dwarf, or any race other then human, or even a human mixture.

3. Tieflings are clearly different then humans in look - but of course - this fact is even more pronounced when a player decides to indulge in the "Fiendish Heritage" feat - which further bonds the blood of an outsider even deeper.

4. If you're willing to concede that Tieflings are "beings slowly destroyed inside" - via the "Darkside" tendencies (an interesting RP dynamic, to be sure) - well and good. However - there is no differential for them - they have no specific aging modifier that indicates that they would age uniquely - with penalties to their bodies from the "Tieflings curse" - or some such element.

5. Everyone knows that demi-humans mixed between two parents enjoy only part of each parental strength/weakness - half-elves most notably gain some advantages that humans have, and some penalties that humans have - and their age alone is evidence of this. Yet somehow Teiflings - a being so far removed from human stock that they essentially age the same, and function the same (clearly that is false - as detailed by the rules - because they don't have the same modifiers by a long shot as part human, or even some modifiers - like a half-elf). Tieflings don't - they are a mix of two parents, not some ancient power awakened. Despite what insinuations the book may have - that is clearly what a sorcerer is.

A Tiefling is closest to a Changeling - if you think about - and even a Changeling has very specific rules for aging and what occurs through their adolescence.

The fact of the matter is that everyone on this thread is using what source or idea they happen to stumble on to justify their preconceptions of what the character is like. Naturally - no one can really know - only make basic guesses on what makes sense.

The reason we're out of luck in this case is because Paizo - like most companies - did a lot of great work, but in this case they got sloppy, and they made an error due to laziness or incompetence.

Don't get me wrong - I love Pathfinder - but they screwed up. They gave us variations on variations on a race that is not properly defined - and when we ask questions - we get a thread like this to figure out what went wrong - by players, not by the rules.

Bottom line - it was sloppy work. And any GM who looks over the details is responsible for what they choose to use, and how they choose to use it, especially when dealing with a race that is not properly codified.

As for the Advanced Players race? Well - let's just say this - I hope you're right - but we'll know it when we see it.

[8 Red Wizards]

I have always just assumed Assimars and Tieflings live as long as half-elves. This might of been answered and I missed it, but how long do Half Fiends and Half Celestial live. I saw the link, but it was dead, and I've seen suggestions that they are immortal, but that just doesn't sound right.

[Fredrik]

Dain GM wrote:

Bottom line - it was sloppy work. And any GM who looks over the details is responsible for what they choose to use, and how they choose to use it, especially when dealing with a race that is not properly codified.

Rather than "sloppy", I choose to see it as allowing for a variation in play styles -- especially since this is a Player Companion, and the DM decides the rules. Here's the relevant paragraph from Blood of Fiends, with "weasel words" bolded by me. (I expect a similar paragraph in Blood of Angels.)

Blood of Fiends wrote:

One of the curses (or blessings, depending on one’s viewpoint) of tiefling physiology is that even nature itself seems to recognize the wrongness of their creation. The strange and anomalous ways in which a tiefling’s taint influences his growth puts massive stress on his growing body, and even those tieflings spawned from dwarves and elves often have only human-length lifespans, with most meeting violent ends long before their allotted time is up.

So, one DM can keep it simple and go with the suggestion: all tieflings have human lifespans, and their humanoid background is just fluff. At the same time, another DM can allow tiefling PCs (and NPCs) to have the same lifespans as their siblings, without going against any explicit rule.

A third DM could even use a "native outsider" subtype to make things yet more complicated. For example, a humanoid (elf, native outsider) tiefling would be treated like a humanoid type, an elf subtype, and a native outsider subtype, but not an outsider type. No using a hat of disguise to look like a hound archon, but you could look like a dwarf instead.

All get to do whatever they think would be more fun, and no one can say that they're doing it wrong.

[LazarX]

Dain GM wrote:

Bottom line - it was sloppy work. And any GM who looks over the details is responsible for what they choose to use, and how they choose to use it, especially when dealing with a race that is not properly codified.

Just because a designer's aesthetic descisions differ from yours; And your objections have no premisial basis other than your personal preferences on how things would work out, does not mean "they do sloppy work".

There's no scientific baisis for the half races of Pathfinder/D20, there's even less for inserting the ancestry of alien beings into mortal families. So it pretty much all comes down to arbitrary aesthetic preferences.

Even in the real world, mixing genetics is pretty much a throw of the dice. Sometimes a birthing combination is not much more than the worse of both worlds.

I keep both of them to human scale lifetimes. (I've even considered reducing them) Because the core races are loaded quite enough with races with longer than human scale lifespans.

[Dain GM]

LazarX wrote:

Dain GM wrote:

Bottom line - it was sloppy work. And any GM who looks over the details is responsible for what they choose to use, and how they choose to use it, especially when dealing with a race that is not properly codified.

Just because a designer's aesthetic descisions differ from yours; And your objections have no premisial basis other than your personal preferences on how things would work out, does not mean "they do sloppy work".

There's no scientific baisis for the half races of Pathfinder/D20, there's even less for inserting the ancestry of alien beings into mortal families. So it pretty much all comes down to arbitrary aesthetic preferences.

Even in the real world, mixing genetics is pretty much a throw of the dice. Sometimes a birthing combination is not much more than the worse of both worlds.

I keep both of them to human scale lifetimes. (I've even considered reducing them) Because the core races are loaded quite enough with races with longer than human scale lifespans.

While your opinion on how to age them is your own - sloppy work is still sloppy work.

When a writer makes up a fantasy world - they are responsible for making up a set of fictional rules to explain things. If a writer says "Meh - I'll just do it this way because it looks cool" - or if the writer fails to address the issue because they didn't care to - then that was either lazy, or sloppy.

I refuse to believe that with the massive amount of work that Paizo has done that for them to take an integral part of the game mechanics and not have it formally addressed was for a purpose.

If you are suggesting that Paizo had a codified system of aging in place that they wrote down and stuck to, even if it is illogical or foolish - that could make sense.

But by no means does it make sense for a writer (in this case, Paizo - or Pathfinder) - or anything like that to say "We're creating a fictional realm - a realm where the realities of the world are defined - by us - and as silly or illogical as those realities are - we defined them, they're out values - and we go from there - except in the case when we created a race of beings, and when people asked basic questions, we ascribe answers that we basically pull out of our butt."

And while I agree that birthing can bring out the worst of both races - the book doesn't apply the policies of genetics to the creatures. They have a series of bonuses in place - the bonuses are there - as for the rules on aging?

There are also codified rules on aging for purposes of "Venerable" and so on - if the Tieflings are aging faster, or becoming more worn out via bad aging - then it is very likely that they should have rotting flesh - and far more severe penalties to their aging.

Also - this desire to put them on humans? Again - if the Teifling is a combination of Devil and Human - perhaps you'd have something - but if you mixed a Devil and an Elf, or a Devil and a Dwarf - what then? Why should an Elf/Teifling have radically reduced age (as a human) - while a Human/Teifling would be exactly the same age? That doesn't make sense - I don't think they gave it much care - because they never assumed this would be such an issue.

It is - it came up - and now that people have asked questions, the writers have to suddenly scramble to answer it. They wouldn't have to scramble if they had made the rules clear up front. They didn't.

That was either lazy of them, or they figured it wouldn't matter and didn't bother, not because they were unable, but they didn't care. If they didn't care, that was sloppy.

Which was my point.

[Fredrik]

@ Dain GM: I perceive that you may have Asperger's. (Your insistence that a storytelling aid must be logically complete was pretty telling, though far from the only sign.) Suffice it to say that I do not share your perspective, and I insist that mine is just as valid as yours to the universe. (It doesn't care at all whether a particular storytelling aid is more focused on fluff or crunch.) Also, my perspective is infinitely more valid to me than yours, so merely reiterating your point of view will add nothing of value to anyone.

[Brox RedGloves]

Dain GM wrote:

LazarX wrote:

Dain GM wrote:

Bottom line - it was sloppy work. And any GM who looks over the details is responsible for what they choose to use, and how they choose to use it, especially when dealing with a race that is not properly codified.

Just because a designer's aesthetic descisions differ from yours; And your objections have no premisial basis other than your personal preferences on how things would work out, does not mean "they do sloppy work".

There's no scientific baisis for the half races of Pathfinder/D20, there's even less for inserting the ancestry of alien beings into mortal families. So it pretty much all comes down to arbitrary aesthetic preferences.

Even in the real world, mixing genetics is pretty much a throw of the dice. Sometimes a birthing combination is not much more than the worse of both worlds.

I keep both of them to human scale lifetimes. (I've even considered reducing them) Because the core races are loaded quite enough with races with longer than human scale lifespans.

While your opinion on how to age them is your own - sloppy work is still sloppy work.

When a writer makes up a fantasy world - they are responsible for making up a set of fictional rules to explain things. If a writer says "Meh - I'll just do it this way because it looks cool" - or if the writer fails to address the issue because they didn't care to - then that was either lazy, or sloppy.

I refuse to believe that with the massive amount of work that Paizo has done that for them to take an integral part of the game mechanics and not have it formally addressed was for a purpose.

If you are suggesting that Paizo had a codified system of aging in place that they wrote down and stuck to, even if it is illogical or foolish - that could make sense.

But by no means does it make sense for a writer (in this case, Paizo - or Pathfinder) - or anything like that to say "We're creating a fictional realm - a realm where the realities of the world are defined - by us - and as...

I'm getting the distinct impression that the only reason you're calling the work "sloppy" is because it doesn't fit with your personal opinion.

If you don't like it (and you've made it abundantly clear that you don't), then play it your way in your house and stop giving us these absolute proclamations and insinuating that any GM who doesn't play it your way is having BADWRONGFUN. (i.e.: "...While your opinion on how to age them is your own - sloppy work is still sloppy work...")

[James Jacobs]

Age categories for each and every 0 HD race in the game appear in the Advanced Race Guide.

Up until that point, we (and for the most part, Wizards of the Coast and TSR before us) have only ever really listed age categories for PC races—by which I mean races presented as "core player races" for any one campaign. Other races, like goblins and tieflings and what not, are assumed for the most part to be by and large NPC characters. Will they work as PCs? Absolutely. Are they "core races?" Not for Golarion.

Now... with the Advanced Race Guide's publication, we are for the first time presenting these races in a format where they ARE intended to be used as player characters. As a result, we're including things like age ranges, height and weight, and similar information for all of them.

To get back to the original poster's question:

Tieflings (and aasimars) reach adulthood at 60 years. They both have maximum ages of 250+6d100 years.

[LazarX]

The designers apparantly made the choice that they wanted asimars and tieflings to arise from other than just human/human parents.

At the same time however that given that they were all ready making variations based on which devil or demon had provided the infernal part of a tiefling's heritage that they weren't going multiply those variations by all of the possible mortal parent races as well and chose this option to normalise the mortal side of the equation. While it was not the option I would have chosen, (I'd have just restricted them to human parents and have done with it) it's just as valid as a choice that I or anyone else would have made. Difference is... I'm not the publisher who's fronting the initiative, so I don't get to make that choice for what goes on print.

You want all those variations.... Have fun with the ARG.

[8 Red Wizards]

Here's my view on the ages of Half Celestials and Half Fiends, they are both templates you put on the base creature that enhances the base creature. The template does not enhance the base creatures life-span so if the base creature is a human it has the life-span of a human, and if the base creature is an elf it has the life-span of an elf.

[LazarX]

James Jacobs wrote:

Tieflings (and aasimars) reach adulthood at 60 years. They both have maximum ages of 250+6d100 years.

Any particular reason they got such a lifespan boost? With that kind of longevity that kind of takes them out of human scale generations.

[James Jacobs]

LazarX wrote:

James Jacobs wrote:

Tieflings (and aasimars) reach adulthood at 60 years. They both have maximum ages of 250+6d100 years.

Any particular reason they got such a lifespan boost? With that kind of longevity that kind of takes them out of human scale generations.

All of the native outsider races got that boost. And as for a "Boost," since they've never had an official lifespan in Pathfinder... it's not really a boost at all. I wasn't actually part of that book's design and development, but I suspect they chose that range because of the fact that they've got the blood of immortal creatures running through their veins. AKA: The DNA of an immortal outsider helps you live longer.

[LazarX]

James Jacobs wrote:

LazarX wrote:

James Jacobs wrote:

Tieflings (and aasimars) reach adulthood at 60 years. They both have maximum ages of 250+6d100 years.

Any particular reason they got such a lifespan boost? With that kind of longevity that kind of takes them out of human scale generations.

All of the native outsider races got that boost. And as for a "Boost," since they've never had an official lifespan in Pathfinder... it's not really a boost at all. I wasn't actually part of that book's design and development, but I suspect they chose that range because of the fact that they've got the blood of immortal creatures running through their veins. AKA: The DNA of an immortal outsider helps you live longer.

Maybe after I get my copy of ARG I'll take my swing at making the equivalent of Val and Dark-kin. For the uninitiated these were Human subraces of Arcanis with celestial and infernal influences in thier bloodline. Created in the days when asimars and Tieflings were both +1 ECL races they were designed to be 0 ECL variants. Dark-kin were the occasional infernal mutants that would pop up every now and then in a Human family because of past relations, where as the Val families were direct creation of the Valinor (something between a celestial and incarnation of a God's Aspect) to provide leadership for Men. Among other things both were limited to human lifespans.

[Mort the Cleverly Named]

James Jacobs wrote:

And as for a "Boost," since they've never had an official lifespan in Pathfinder... it's not really a boost at all. I wasn't actually part of that book's design and development, but I suspect they chose that range because of the fact that they've got the blood of immortal creatures running through their veins. AKA: The DNA of an immortal outsider helps you live longer.

While it is true that you guys haven't published an official age range, you have published about Tieflings before. The very recent "Blood of Fiends" explicitly states that their lifespans are the same as humans (even if they were spawned from dwarves or elves), and that their outsider blood actually burns their lives away more quickly (rather than extending them). It also refers to Tiefling traits often appearing during their "teen years" and "adolescence," implying they are the same. The new lifespans also contradict the published Tieflings I could find (there may well be more, but these were the ones I knew without searching).

Council of Thieves:

Ecarrdian was born after Chammady, but he is not young nor is she middle-aged. Using this scheme, he could only be about half way to maturity for his sister to not be middle-aged.

Crosael is a middle-aged woman who has "long served the Arvanxi family," yet has managed to keep her Tiefling heritage secret from Aberian. Wouldn't he have noticed that she wasn't aging?

Jade Regent:

Soto Takahiro is 26, yet is an adult.

I mean, it is obviously a really minor thing, but it is most certainly a "boost" over what they were previously assumed to have (and explicitly stated to have in Blood of Fiends). Of course, since this is just the setting neutral ARG and those other sources are Golarion specific, you could always say "Golarion Tieflings age differently" and magically put my little heart to rest...

[James Jacobs]

Turns out the rulebooks and Golarion don't always match. It frustrates me when that happens. But it happens. (Personally, I prefer tieflings to have closer to human lifespans... maybe a LITTLE longer... but not that much longer. Ah well.)

[therealthom]

Dain GM wrote:

Regrettably - those answers are not only unsatisfactory - but unrealistic.

How can you have a creature who has a parent that is - for all intents - an immortal being - and not have long life?

We're not talking about human with an Infernal Bloodline (via sorcerer) - we're talking about a meta-human who has a parent who does not die.

The book pegs an elf at Venerable at 350 - and humans are Venerable at 70 - and half-elves are Venerable at - you guessed it - 125 years.

So how can a being who has a parent that is - for all intents and purposes - immortality (as in - Devils, Demons rarely age that I know of) - have anything other then long life?

Nothing else in this makes much sense...

I'd at least find the average age of Devils - and go from there at half... But then, that's just me.

Because all traits don't breed true?

You might as well ask "How can a child who has a parent who has blue eyes, not have blue eyes?"

[The NPC]

So, general adulthood 60. Golarion age as human. Got it.

[James Jacobs]

Actually...

I'm going to try to get the ARG errataed so that aasimars and tieflings reach adulthood and have starting ages equal to humans. Because beyond the two contradictions Mort pointed out above...

Spoiler:

The main bad gal from Burnt Offerings is an aasimar. Her history is VERY closely tied to the town of Sandpoint, and if she doesn't reach adulthood until 60, that means she was born before Sandpoint was founded, which makes all sorts of nonsense.

A quick glance at the other race ages listed in the ARG and all those look fine—either they're like drow or svirfneblin and have always had established ages, or they're new races who haven't had significant NPC appearances that rely heavily upon their childhood history being on a time scale equal to that of a human.

Now... I suppose I COULD say "Tieflings and aasimars age differently in Golarion," but that's super obnoxious. The rulebooks don't have a built-in campaign setting, but Golarion DOES assume you're using the rulebooks, and as such, what's in the rulebooks SHOULD match what happens in Golarion as much as possible.

Grr.

[Mort the Cleverly Named]

James Jacobs wrote:

I'm going to try to get the ARG errataed so that aasimars and tieflings reach adulthood and have starting ages equal to humans.

If you could get that done, it would be really awesome. I love me some plane-touched (wait, is that Wizards IP? Plane-poked) races, but the really long childhoods add an entire extra level of backstory weirdness. It works fine for Elves, with the idea of the Forlorn and everything, but Tieflings and Aasimars already have so much going on it would be great for the "official" maturation to be human-like.

[The NPC]

So now its start at he human rate but can go to 250+6d100?

[James Jacobs]

The NPC wrote:

So now its start at he human rate but can go to 250+6d100?

That's my current thinking, yeah... although that might get adjusted as well so that the entire aasimar/tiefling age range more closely matches humanity.

Obviously... in your games, go with whatever variation you prefer.

[Zaister]

I guess it would suck for a human parent to never be able to see their aasimar kid grow up before their own death :)

And the story of N. would get really weird.

So, yes, that's a good change!

[LazarX]

James Jacobs wrote:

Actually...

I'm going to try to get the ARG errataed so that aasimars and tieflings reach adulthood and have starting ages equal to humans. Because beyond the two contradictions Mort pointed out above...

** spoiler omitted **

A quick glance at the other race ages listed in the ARG and all those look fine—either they're like drow or svirfneblin and have always had established ages, or they're new races who haven't had significant NPC appearances that rely heavily upon their childhood history being on a time scale equal to that of a human.

Now... I suppose I COULD say "Tieflings and aasimars age differently in Golarion," but that's super obnoxious. The rulebooks don't have a built-in campaign setting, but Golarion DOES assume you're using the rulebooks, and as such, what's in the rulebooks SHOULD match what happens in Golarion as much as possible.

Grr.

That settles it. When I get my copy I'm going to post my own conversions of Val and Dark-kin. or as some might put it. "Asimar and Tiefling Lite". :)

[Midnight_Angel]

James Jacobs wrote:

Actually...

I'm going to try to get the ARG errataed so that aasimars and tieflings reach adulthood and have starting ages equal to humans.

Glad to read that.

Umm... while we're at it... may I suggest the same change for the other 'native outsider' races? I see zero reason for such high a starting age for the elementally touched when Aasimar and Tieflings start at human age.

(Plus, it'd make my 17-year-old Sylph Cleric really happy... *ducks for cover*)

[Maggiethecat]

So, for Pathfinder Society purposes, am I good with having an Aasimar character who is in her mid-20s? I had a backstory made up for her regarding her and her sister (who is human), but the Aasimar character is supposed to be the younger sister, and having her be 60 when she joins the Pathfinders while her sister is supposedly older...just doesn't quite fit.

[Ninjaxenomorph]

Maggiethecat wrote:

So, for Pathfinder Society purposes, am I good with having an Aasimar character who is in her mid-20s? I had a backstory made up for her regarding her and her sister (who is human), but the Aasimar character is supposed to be the younger sister, and having her be 60 when she joins the Pathfinders while her sister is supposedly older...just doesn't quite fit.

You have to conform to the age rules. I'm not too happy about my tieflings aging 40-50 years, either. Throws the 'happy ulfen family' idea for my witch right out the window.

[Maggiethecat]

Ninjaxenomorph wrote:

You have to conform to the age rules. I'm not too happy about my tieflings aging 40-50 years, either. Throws the 'happy ulfen family' idea for my witch right out the window.

Did you read the rest of the thread?

James Jacobs wrote:

Quote:

So now its start at he human rate but can go to 250+6d100?

That's my current thinking, yeah... although that might get adjusted as well so that the entire aasimar/tiefling age range more closely matches humanity.

Obviously... in your games, go with whatever variation you prefer.

[LazarX]

Ninjaxenomorph wrote:

Maggiethecat wrote:

So, for Pathfinder Society purposes, am I good with having an Aasimar character who is in her mid-20s? I had a backstory made up for her regarding her and her sister (who is human), but the Aasimar character is supposed to be the younger sister, and having her be 60 when she joins the Pathfinders while her sister is supposedly older...just doesn't quite fit.

You have to conform to the age rules. I'm not too happy about my tieflings aging 40-50 years, either. Throws the 'happy ulfen family' idea for my witch right out the window.

Well with a bit of flavor you could always go the Melody Pond route.

"You've named your daughter....after your daughter."

[Ninjaxenomorph]

Maggiethecat wrote:

Ninjaxenomorph wrote:

You have to conform to the age rules. I'm not too happy about my tieflings aging 40-50 years, either. Throws the 'happy ulfen family' idea for my witch right out the window.

Did you read the rest of the thread?

James Jacobs wrote:

Quote:

So now its start at he human rate but can go to 250+6d100?

That's my current thinking, yeah... although that might get adjusted as well so that the entire aasimar/tiefling age range more closely matches humanity.

Obviously... in your games, go with whatever variation you prefer.

But in the ARG it says the minimum age for Tieflings/Aasimar is 60...

[Maggiethecat]

James Jacobs wrote:

Actually...

I'm going to try to get the ARG errataed so that aasimars and tieflings reach adulthood and have starting ages equal to humans.

[doc the grey]

how will this affect the country of Tainjing, which is a nation full of aasimar?

All in all though I agree with James' critique where they hit maturity like humans but live longer as it makes all the prior works fit and the long life can be explained away by the relative rarity of either race coupled with the hard lives and high mortality rates that come with them.

[Ninjaxenomorph]

Maggiethecat wrote:

James Jacobs wrote:

Actually...

I'm going to try to get the ARG errataed so that aasimars and tieflings reach adulthood and have starting ages equal to humans.

Ah, ok, thanks, did not see that.

[Animation]

NO! No errata! I like the longer ages!

At least leave the other ages other than maturity high. I want a race that lives a long time, isnt a small or slow race, and isnt an elf.

Why do people always want to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory?! Darn errata! :)

[James Jacobs]

Animation wrote:

NO! No errata! I like the longer ages!

At least leave the other ages other than maturity high. I want a race that lives a long time, isnt a small or slow race, and isnt an elf.

Why do people always want to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory?! Darn errata! :)

If you like the longer ages... then by all means, keep them.

The reason I want to errata their ages down is that we've got 5 years of products that assume a more human aging pattern. There exists a discrepancy between the Advanced Race Guide and several adventures and Adventure Paths, and it's a LOT easier to resolve that discrepancy by making a few changes to a couple of numbers in a single book than it is re-writing entire campaigns.

[Animation]

Can you compromise, and just change the age of maturity? And maybe make the official high end age be 50+8d100?

That way, older products match, and some tieflings die at age 150 but some still live to 850? That way, both camps can be satisfied? Those who want their characters to officially die more like humans can have that, but if I want my 600 year old to still look 30, I can be official too?

[Samnell]

James Jacobs wrote:

Animation wrote:

NO! No errata! I like the longer ages!

At least leave the other ages other than maturity high. I want a race that lives a long time, isnt a small or slow race, and isnt an elf.

Why do people always want to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory?! Darn errata! :)

If you like the longer ages... then by all means, keep them.

The reason I want to errata their ages down is that we've got 5 years of products that assume a more human aging pattern. There exists a discrepancy between the Advanced Race Guide and several adventures and Adventure Paths, and it's a LOT easier to resolve that discrepancy by making a few changes to a couple of numbers in a single book than it is re-writing entire campaigns.

However it comes out, I really appreciate the fact that you guys do think about these things and try for consistency.

[James Jacobs]

Animation wrote:

Can you compromise, and just change the age of maturity? And maybe make the official high end age be 50+8d100?

That way, older products match, and some tieflings die at age 150 but some still live to 850? That way, both camps can be satisfied? Those who want their characters to officially die more like humans can have that, but if I want my 600 year old to still look 30, I can be official too?

I could... but honestly I'd rather not, since we've already assumed human-like aging spans in those products, and that includes saying things like "aasimars age similarly to humans" or something to that effect in Blood of Angels, and includes assumptions of how long generations last in aasimar nations.

The fun part of RPGs is that you CAN make changes like that... but if you want to cleave as close to "official" as you can, there will be times when your preferences and Paizo's preferences simply don't match up.

[Ninjaxenomorph]

Also, Radovan would seem a lot different if he was around 70.