The starting age table for Tieflings on the prd seems to indicate that Tieflings have a base adventurer starting age of 20 years, and between 4d6 and 8d6 added on top of that, depending on the class you choose.
But if you look at the aging effects table, Tieflings age at the same rate that humans do, so on an average roll, a Tiefling Wizard enters play at 44 years old, well past middle age and nearly "old". Meanwhile, a Human Wizard enters play at an average age of 21, well within the prime of their life. Is this a typo?
Tieflings were originally released with longer lifespans. They did an errata to change the aging to follow humans but didn't errata the starting ages. You should use the human starting ages for them.
The outsider races are supposed to age at the same rate as the mortal parent (generally assumed to be human unless given a special exception). The ages were printed incorrectly in the ARG and it's been a bit of a mess since then.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The "age as human" thing doesn't really make sense to me.
Elves live hundreds of years, humans let than a hundred. Half-elves fall in the middle, longer than humans, shorter than elves.
I know the immortal outsider heritage of tieflings/aasimar is more distant than a parent, but if its strong enough to give you horns/wings/claws/spell like abilities and make you an Outsider certainly it seems strong enough to let you live longer than a normal human.
I have never actually played a tiefling or aasimar as a human, played an elf aasimar or a halfling tiefling, always used the parent race aging categories, never realizing that was the correct way or that there was an issue with the printed way.
If your tiefling has a halfling heritage it should age like a halfling. The numbers in the book assume human heritage.