ARG errata has killed most aasimars and tieflings! And all dhampirs. Please fix?

[LazarX]

thejeff wrote:

LazarX wrote:

thejeff wrote:

LazarX wrote:

David knott 242 wrote:

You guys also overlooked that they changed the base age from 60 to 20 -- so it is still possible to create a character of any class of any of these three races who is below middle-aged.

The screwy thing with this errata is that the random rolls added to the base age are unchanged, so (for example) anyone playing a dhampir wizard and randomly rolling a starting age would roll 10d6 and add it to 20, which gives a result of anywhere from 30 to 70 with an average result of 55.

Presumably what they forgot to include is that you're supposed to us the human random formulas as well.

Great. The errata needs errata.

Then someone will drop a comma, and the errata to the erratta, will need errata.

Presumably those responsible have been sacked.

Those responsible for sacking the people who have just been sacked have been sacked.

Those responsible for sacking the people who were responsible for sacking the responsible people have themselves been sacked.

[GM Lamplighter]

Jeff Merola wrote:

Uh, this can happen, and there are a couple places where it could easily happen, especially since I know some people who run around with venerable characters.

Well, those characters aren't legal, so you shouldn't be surprised when illegal characters have trouble playing by the rules.

Guide to Organzied Play wrote:

A character can not be younger than the minimum age listed on Table 7–1 of the Core Rulebook, or listed on Table 5–1 of the Advanced Race Guide, and must be younger than venerable, as listed on Table 7–2 of the Core Rulebook and Table 5–4 of the Advanced Race Guide.

[Jeff Merola]

Even Old characters could be easily killed by these effects (more easily by one of them, actually. One of them ages you by 1d20 years at a time, the other ages you by half of your current age at a time). My point stands.

[GM Lamplighter]

Sorry, didn't post the entire relevant section. Here is the rest:

Guide 7 wrote:

A character that ages past venerable, for whatever reason, dies of old age and is removed from the campaign.

I guess the point is, worrying about gaining 1 year of age every X scenarios is not worth the effort to track. Yes, if you choose to make an old PC, and then encounter the one situation you mention, you could be in trouble. Worrying about tracking PC age due to the regular passage of time is not worth doing, though, because it will never be significant.

[Jeff Merola]

Your original post said don't bother to track it at all, because it'll never become relevant and challenged anyone to die of it. I said it could be relevant, and easy to die to in a couple of situations, and now you're going "Well, yeah, it could."

[Warwick Cailean]

If you read the ultra fine print, you don't technically die. You become the next Drandle Dreng, which is clearly a condition that cannot be removed, no matter how much prestige you spend.

[Voren Kcalberif]

"What just happened? Why do I suddenly feel as though I only have two years to live?"

[Kobold Catgirl]

Pipe down, gramps.

[FLite]

Jeff Merola wrote:

GM Lamplighter wrote:

I challenge you to take enough age damage in PFS to push you into another age category!

Uh, this can happen, and there are a couple places where it could easily happen, especially since I know some people who run around with venerable characters.

Venerable characters are like scissors. You should not run with them. You should walk carefully.