Age Check

[-Daniel-]

I was thinking as I listened to a news program about the aging populations and how age expectancy is going up and so if the age we start to loose our health. So if I wanted to model that kind of effect I could just move the age at which a character must check for on the aging table.

So I am curious, what would the negatives be if I pushed the ageing check out until, say, 42? Two more terms? Other then encouraging more terms and thus more skills and cash and benefits? Is there a real down side to doing this?

Daniel

 

[AKAramis]

I was thinking as I listened to a news program about the aging populations and how age expectancy is going up and so if the age we start to loose our health. So if I wanted to model that kind of effect I could just move the age at which a character must check for on the aging table.

So I am curious, what would the negatives be if I pushed the ageing check out until, say, 42? Two more terms? Other then encouraging more terms and thus more skills and cash and benefits? Is there a real down side to doing this?

Daniel

Aside from older starting PC's, pushing it back isn't much matter.

Changing the numbers, however...

Let's talk turkey: In MegaT, the Vilani got aging save modifiers, and got to ignore the 7 term limit. One player, with a +3 line purity (which translates to a DM+3 on all aging saves).

That means at age 32, he needed 5+/4+/5+... from 41%/58%/41% to 83%/91%/83%

So at 36, same rate. 17% of generic humans haven't lost strenght, and some 36% have lost two! 69% of Vilani +3's have lost , and about 2% have lost 2...

So if you just want to slow aging a bit, just extend the start or increase the interval to 5 years...

Once you get to Vilani, they age REAL slow. AS in 120 year old +3's are not unheard of as viable PC's. At +5, well, let's just say that Vland still has nobles who knew the last 3 emperors....

(Solomani of TL9+, BTW, have a different aging saves table... ISTR it's a point different at a few points... AM Solomani, or Solomani & Aslan... too lazy to check at the moment.

 

[CosmicGamer]

So I am curious, what would the negatives be if I pushed the ageing check out until, say, 42? Two more terms? Other then encouraging more terms and thus more skills and cash and benefits? Is there a real down side to doing this?

The system was not meant for people to retire at age 65 and then go adventuring in my opinion, and thats why your "encouraged" to leave your careers early and go adventuring. I personally try to live within the rules but if you want to push the start of aging back in your TU I would suggest imposing a term limit for your players so they don't keep accumulating skills.

age we start to loose our health

I would like to point out that this is an hard statement to quantify. I would also like to point out that its an aging roll - you do not automatically start feeling the effects of aging at 34 years old. Most of the 6 term characters I've created so far have only failed 1 in 3 aging rolls. The first roll only fails on a 4 or less. Id like to point out that there are not very many professional athletes in their 40s because they are starting to feel the effects of aging.

I just wanted to give some observations that may help you live with the rules as written.

To answer your question; I see two additional downsides
1) very old adventurers which doesn't seam realistic
2) the aging tables may need to be changed because there should be more mental deterioration as you get older as well as physical

 

[CosmicGamer]

Aside from older starting PC's, pushing it back isn't much matter.

Changing the numbers, however...

Let's talk turkey: In MegaT, the Vilani got aging save modifiers, and got to ignore the 7 term limit. One player, with a +3 line purity (which translates to a DM+3 on all aging saves).

That means at age 32, he needed 5+/4+/5+... from 41%/58%/41% to 83%/91%/83%

So at 36, same rate. 17% of generic humans haven't lost strenght, and some 36% have lost two! 69% of Vilani +3's have lost , and about 2% have lost 2...

So if you just want to slow aging a bit, just extend the start or increase the interval to 5 years...

Once you get to Vilani, they age REAL slow. AS in 120 year old +3's are not unheard of as viable PC's. At +5, well, let's just say that Vland still has nobles who knew the last 3 emperors....

(Solomani of TL9+, BTW, have a different aging saves table... ISTR it's a point different at a few points... AM Solomani, or Solomani & Aslan... too lazy to check at the moment.

I'm sorry but I don't understand half (or maybe more) of what your saying. I tried to bold some of them. I have not read the entire book yet but I would think that if it has to do with aging it wouldn't be in the last half of the book with space combat, psionics, Trade and World creation. Could you explain?

 

[zozotroll]

dafrca

The negative is more powerful starting PCs. If that is not a big deal, and I certainly dont see one more term as game breaking, then it should be OK. Or you can consider anagathics to be those new drugs.

The other question is, do you have games that last so long that the PCs need to make ageing rolls after chargen? I have seen few games where anybody made an age check after game start. You either died, or got so rich you retired, or the game fell apart.

 

[AKAramis]

Aside from older starting PC's, pushing it back isn't much matter.

Changing the numbers, however...

Let's talk turkey: In MegaT, the Vilani got aging save modifiers, and got to ignore the 7 term limit. One player, with a +3 line purity (which translates to a DM+3 on all aging saves).

That means at age 32, he needed 5+/4+/5+... from 41%/58%/41% to 83%/91%/83%

So at 36, same rate. 17% of generic humans haven't lost strenght, and some 36% have lost two! 69% of Vilani +3's have lost , and about 2% have lost 2...

So if you just want to slow aging a bit, just extend the start or increase the interval to 5 years...

Once you get to Vilani, they age REAL slow. AS in 120 year old +3's are not unheard of as viable PC's. At +5, well, let's just say that Vland still has nobles who knew the last 3 emperors....

(Solomani of TL9+, BTW, have a different aging saves table... ISTR it's a point different at a few points... AM Solomani, or Solomani & Aslan... too lazy to check at the moment.

I'm sorry but I don't understand half (or maybe more) of what your saying. I tried to bold some of them. I have not read the entire book yet but I would think that if it has to do with aging it wouldn't be in the last half of the book with space combat, psionics, Trade and World creation. Could you explain?

MegaT = MegaTraveller, the 1987 edition of Traveller.
Solomani: men of Sol. Us.
Vilani: Men of Vland. Them. They look like us, but don't act like most of us. They also live far longer in the OTU setting. 150 years is not uncommon.
generic: as in, not specific. In this context, any human who is neither Solomani nor Vilani.
Vland: homeworld of the Vilani. Capital of the First Imperium. Fell to the Terran confederation around 2300AD... or around -2200 Imperial. Or about 3000 years prior to the setting as portrayed by MJD in the Spinward Marches book for MGT.

AM: shorthand for Alien Module.
AM: Solomani is the Solomani Alien Module for Classic Traveller.
Solomani & Aslan was DGP's revision of AM Solomani and AM Aslan to MegaTraveller standards.

MT, MegaT: generally, in traveller fandom, MT is used, MegaT is used when clarity is more needed.
MGT, MoTrav, RTT: Mongoose's Traveller.



The Vilani Line Purity modifier is a modifier to aging saves; the higher the modifier, the more pureblooded the Vilani is. (and also, the longer they live.)

Now, I'd forgotten that Mongoose changed the aging save mechanic...

So we have 2d-4 for 1+, that's an aging save of 5+, or 30/36=5/6 chance of no loss.

So, doing the math
1 in 12 loses one point in term 4
1 in 18 loses two points in term 4
1 in 36 loses three points in term 4
5/6 lose nothing.

term 5:
0= 65/108 =60%
1= 5/54 =9%
2= 181/972 =19%
3= 127/486 =26%
4= 73/144 =51%
5= 1/162 =1%
6= 1/432 =0%

Term 6 has about 20% having no aging taken...

Lordy, they made the math ugly.


Now, looking at it, a +1 aging save mod is the exact same effect as pushing aging back a term with this mode.

Older editions have had different modes.
CT and MT:
Each term, roll a save for each of STR/DEX/END/INT
T4-7: 8+/7+/8+/auto
T8-11: 9+/8+/9+/auto
T12+: 9+*/9+*/9+*/9+
* lose two points, not one.

TNE: roll 1d16 for more than attribute to save for each listed attribute
T4-5: Dex
T6-7: Str & Dex
T8-11: Str, Dex End
T9+: Str, Dex, Con, Int
(The actual tables used Agl instead of Dex, and Con instead of End...)

T4 was save vs Age/10 or more on 2d6, starting at (IIRC) 35, and rolling every 5 years. ISTR star rolls at 35 for physicals, and 65 for Int... but I'm not checking.

So there are plenty of options for you to play with if you want to