Aasimar / Tiefling Aging?

[Kristal Moonhand]

My copy of the ARG says that Aasimar and Tieflings age at the same rate as the geniekin races, but the official Paizo site says they age at the same rate as humans. Which one is right? Were aging rates errata'd at some point and I just missed it?

[KingOfAnything]

You can check out errata for specific products on on the product page.

Errata wrote:

Page 248—In Table 5–2: Featured Race Random Starting

Ages, change the Adulthood ages for the Aasimar,
Dhampir, and Tief ling entries to “20 years”.

[Nefreet]

My PFS Aasimar and Tiefling were both older than venerable humans. When they suddenly died of natural causes, my Sylph, Ifrit, Oread and Undine characters went to the funeral (and made lunch plans for 60 years in the future).

[The Wyrm Ouroboros]

Amusing / annoying that while that specific entry for Aasmimar, Dhampir, Tiefling adulthood is 20 years (Human being 15), and their aging effects for Middle, Old, and Venerable are identical to humans (35, 53, and 70 years old, with maximum age being 70 + 2d20 for each), the amount of time for training to be added onto that 20-year-old adult remains the old amount -- 4d6, 6d6, and 8d6 (though for dhampir, the last is 10d6).

Which means that a starting Aasimar or Tiefling character with an average training time roll of the trained classes (alchemist, cleric, druid, inquisitor, magi, monks, and wizards) are going to be 20 + (8 x 3.5) = 20 + 28 = 48 years old. Middle-aged, and working on old. Those who roll poorly will be 20 + (8 * 6) = 20 + 48 = 68 -- almost venerable, and needing to discover when they're going to die. Even with a minimum roll they're going to be 20 + (8 * 1) = 28, only 7 years away from middle age, as compared to the human-standard 15 + 2d6 = 17 minimum, 27 maximum.

With Dhampir it's even worse -- on average they'll be 55 (Old), maximum they'll be 80 (Venerable + 10, so might die any day now), minimum they'll be 30 (5 years away from middle age).

... really should have sat down, figured out how they wanted them to be reflected, and then used:

• Straight-out human age information (15 + 2d6) as they seem to have vaguely if erroneously meant by saying 'human';
• half-elf (20 + 3d6), half-elf IMO being the more likely original intent when they went with '20' and with the idea of a half-race;
• or just went ahead and kept the original planetouched (60 + 8d6).

IMO, half-elf would be most appropriate -- almost human, but not quite, not quite part of any world, always on the outside looking in.