Re: Message from Abysia
Well, I just had my first experience with an age-susceptible kingdom and I have to agree aging is overdone. I was playing Marignon, no growth/death, and those Witch hunters were dropping like flies. First, it really clashed with my concept of Marignon. I'd always assumed the initiate/hunter/Grand Master business was one of those youth-adult-old man contrasts and it certainly doesn't feel right for all competent witch hunters to be doddering old men with a life expectancy of four of five year preaching from the pulpit. Second, it made Witch Hunters almost useless - if I'm going to put up with aging, I'm normally going to do it only for relatively rare particular issues, like a critical combat or a site search team, or if I can manage some treatment, and I'll just go ahead and get a Grand Master then. Third, it's just too weird that Witch Hunters age and die as fast as High Inquisitors, who really *are* supposed to be doddering old men. Simarily, it was odd for my Tien Chi S&A Celestial Masters to die so fast if they could make it to 300. If it takes them that long to get old, it should take a little longer to actually die than for a normal human.
In real life aging is an exponential process and the chance of death doubles every x years, where x is relatively constant for a given species (it's 8 years for humans). I figure the base chance of dying should be about 100/(years to get old), or about 2%/year for a human. It should double every (years to get old)/6 years (8 for a human, assuming a start around 50) So a full formula would be 100/years to get old)*2^(age-(years to get old).
|
Threaded Mode