Reincarnation/Dwarf age/Oh god I am 9 now.

[Starchild7309]

Ok so I want your opinions on this. I started as a half elf wild mage sorcerer in the campaign I am playing. I was killed by a dragon and reincarnated. I came back as a hill dwarf. It screwed my Cha, but I got a crap ton of HP. Apparently since dwarves "mature at the same rate as humans" my DM ruled that my new body was 18 years old. This last session I had a wild magic surge that reduced my age permanently by 9 years. Nothing was really said until today when he messaged me and said, oh bad news, your age is 9 now. (he hadn't let me know I was 18, my original character was in his late 20's.) Furthermore, I have to look into it, your mental stats stay the same, but your physical stats will all be dropping. Does that sound right? Am I getting screwed over?

Before you ask I am not sure what the physical stats are changing by, but I can only imagine a 9 year old dwarf is pretty sucky.

[hymer]

Am I getting screwed over?

When you decided to play a wild magic sorcerer, did you not expect something like this to be possible? If your character becomes unplayable, retire it. It did die, after all.

[Starchild7309]

I understand that's a possibility, I do, but I have 10 levels invested in this character with backstory and all that and retiring it is not something I really want to do. I was just asking opinions on the DMs ruling.

[Quintessence]

Mechanically aging down doesn't do anything, this isn't 3.5 where getting old gave mental stats and reduced physical. Age doesn't seem to do anything this edition.

[Herobizkit]

RAW, younger than "adventuring age" doesn't mechanically affect your stats.

D20 Modern had the only definitive "child" stats that I'm aware of:


Children (newborns to age 11) are handled differently from other characters. They do not have classes or levels. They begin with the same ability score package as ordinaries (15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8), but their ability scores are reduced as follows:

–3 Str, –1 Dex, –3 Con, –1 Int, –1 Wis, –1 Cha

If your "being 9" was only semi-permanent, I'd likely throw this in for effect... being 9 is punishment enough, though, in most cases.

[Starchild7309]

If your "being 9" was only semi-permanent, I'd likely throw this in for effect... being 9 is punishment enough, though, in most cases.

Unfortunately, while my DM hasn't given me his adjusted stats yet, he is definitely going for being too young to adventure has penalties. Should be interesting as I am the face of the party. "Yes take us seriously, our 9 yr old dwarf will tell you why."

[Giant2005]

It sounds to me like your DM is quite intentionally being a prick.
Did you roll the Wild Surge or did he, and did you see the die roll?
The fact that it was the worst roll possible (something that has a 0.2% chance of occurring) is dubious enough, but his decision to arbitrarily de-age you from your late 20s to 18 a moment before giving you this result is ample evidence of malice.
If that level of malice is a rare occurrence with him (I expect it is considering you seemingly made it to level 10 without complaint) then simply talk with him. Take the 9 years of de-aging from the Wild Surge, but reject the years that he de-aged you on a whim. He has no right to do that.
If that level of malice is a common occurrence, then don't bother trying to salvage the character. Just say goodbye to the character and join another game. It is better to say goodbye to him now than to say goodbye after he has been screwed over to the point of being unrecognizable.

[Quintessence]

Unfortunately, while my DM hasn't given me his adjusted stats yet, he is definitely going for being too young to adventure has penalties. Should be interesting as I am the face of the party. "Yes take us seriously, our 9 yr old dwarf will tell you why."

Well that is just DM non-sense and he is gimping you for no reason.

[Starchild7309]

Did you roll the Wild Surge or did he, and did you see the die roll?
The fact that it was the worst roll possible (something that has a 0.2% chance of occurring) is dubious enough, but his decision to arbitrarily de-age you from your late 20s to 18 a moment before giving you this result is ample evidence of malice.
If that level of malice is a rare occurrence with him (I expect it is considering you seemingly made it to level 10 without complaint) then simply talk with him. Take the 9 years of de-aging from the Wild Surge, but reject the years that he de-aged you on a whim. He has no right to do that.


I rolled the surge, I rolled the d10 that determined the age increase or loss.

He can be tough, but he is also fair. That's why this seemed very much out of character for him. I do see his point, he apologized for not telling me at the time of the reincarnation that the body I was in was that of an 18 yr old. If reincarnation gives you a "new adult body of that race" then I see it being 18. I get the surge and the loss of years, it just feels wrong on some level to me. Like if a fireball went off and killed the character I get it, but a wild surge gimps the character so badly he is unplayable sucks. Maybe I am just bitching for no reason?

On a side note I didn't want the reincarnation, but since we are strictly forbidden to "meta game" I knew if it was turned down the party wouldn't have taken me to town for a resurrection (as the 10 day window would have passed for raise dead). I complained about being backed into that decision, but kept at it for r/p reasons and my Dm was selling me on it like, wow look you have so many HP now, that loss of Charisma is nothing to bad. Now I am going to get Str, Dex and Con penalties. Bye-Bye HP, climbing anything, and anything dex based. The more I think about it the more I am annoyed now.

[hymer]

Maybe I am just bitching for no reason?

Not for no reason, certainly. Losing a character (or the better part of one) sucks. It should suck. Not to the point where you can't get past it, but it shows you've connected with the character, and thus the game. It's something of a rollercoaster with the twists and turns you've been thrown, which makes it, in a way, worse than a clean cut.
You trust your DM generally. I think you should trust him with it now. If he cannot have unpleasant consequences - like penalties and death and retirement - happen to PCs, his job becomes very hard indeed. I'd ask him if there was any hope of retrieving the character you've lost, and then choose what to do from there.

[Quintessence]

I rolled the surge, I rolled the d10 that determined the age increase or loss.

He can be tough, but he is also fair. That's why this seemed very much out of character for him. I do see his point, he apologized for not telling me at the time of the reincarnation that the body I was in was that of an 18 yr old. If reincarnation gives you a "new adult body of that race" then I see it being 18. I get the surge and the loss of years, it just feels wrong on some level to me. Like if a fireball went off and killed the character I get it, but a wild surge gimps the character so badly he is unplayable sucks. Maybe I am just bitching for no reason?

On a side note I didn't want the reincarnation, but since we are strictly forbidden to "meta game" I knew if it was turned down the party wouldn't have taken me to town for a resurrection (as the 10 day window would have passed for raise dead). I complained about being backed into that decision, but kept at it for r/p reasons and my Dm was selling me on it like, wow look you have so many HP now, that loss of Charisma is nothing to bad. Now I am going to get Str, Dex and Con penalties. Bye-Bye HP, climbing anything, and anything dex based. The more I think about it the more I am annoyed now.

No in this situation you have every right to bitch, aging doesn't change stats by RAW and the fact that he is giving you penalties would piss off any player.

[Giant2005]

Just take a few days off adventuring to cast a bunch of spells until you get a few years back.
Sure even worse things might happen to you, but I wouldn't even consider it a gamble. If your character is unplayable, he can't get more unplayable - he can only become playable once again (if you luck out).

[some guy]

Thinking outloud:
You were an half-elf, which age at the same rate as humans (and you were in your in your late twenties). You now are a dwarf, which age the same rate as humans, but are considered young until they reach 50 yrs.

Reincarnation creates a new adult body.

Calling a human adult at 18 yrs is a social construct, dwarves call their selves adult at 50, which is also a social construct. I would take that point up with your dm, seeing how an 18 year old dwarf is still considered young and not an adult (even though as capable as a 50 year old dwarf, only less experienced).


I think it would be reasonable to request to start as a 50 year old dwarf.

[the secret fire]

Sounds to me like your DM is being reasonably aboveboard about everything, and that this is a case where you simply need to retire the character. PCs die and/or get mangled beyond repair sometimes, even old ones. If negative consequences become meaningless, it kind of kills the fun of surviving and thriving, doesn't it?

edit: or you could just play her as a badass 9 year old. There's one of those in Game of Thrones right now.

[TheTeaMustFlow]

Given that Dwarves aren't considered adult at 18, I'd say you have a pretty good argument for being older than that. A human often isn't fully physically mature at 18 , and most human cultures in most d&d settings don't mark adulthood at 18 - the PHB just says 'late teens', and most of the ones where I can remember something being specified is 16. There's no reason for a magic marker at 18 merely because that's the one our culture has chosen as an essentially arbitrary marker. For that matter, there's a lot of places and cultures in the real world with a different age of majority - would a Jewish man be reincarnated at 13, or someone from Taiwan at 20, just because of cultural differences?

[pwykersotz]

In my opinion, you are both being fair about this. The DM is well within his rights to rule that becoming a child warrants a physical stat decrease, and setting you at age 18 was reasonable, if maybe a bit weird for the reasons pointed out above.

At the same time, you come to the table with the expectation of being able to play the game. You sound more worried about that than a particular screw of random chance.

I would ask the DM point blank if this is playable in his world. If he says yes, it might end up being something that you can resolve on a further quest or else is going go cause interesting developments.

On the other hand, if this really kills the character for you, ask for a form of temporary retirement. Ask if your Dwarven child can search a major city or somesuch for a cure, with plans to rendezvous with the party once that happens. It could be a solo game, or just some off-screen time, and you could roll a new character in the meantime.

[TheProfessor85]

Go on a quest to magically age yourself!

[Giant2005]

You could just reincarnate yourself again.

[SharkForce]

as noted, you can always just keep wild surging until you get an age increase.

[Rysto]

as noted, you can always just keep wild surging until you get an age increase.

That could take an incredibly long time. You have a 5% chance of actually getting a wild surge, and then you have a 2% chance of getting the "change your age" effect, and it's only a 50% chance of getting the "make yourself older effect" (and it's only a 30% of chance of aging by at least 6 years).

Overall that's a 0.03% chance of getting what the OP wants. Start rolling, I guess. He can re-join the game next year some time.

[Veldrenor]

You could just reincarnate yourself again.

This solution is pretty funny. It's like "nope, this body sucks. *hgurk-gurgle* *vwump* Nope, don't like this one either. AIEEEEEEeeeeee *thud* *vwump* Ok, this is fine. Let's roll!"

[Temperjoke]

Well, I can understand his position, he is going by "You are the physical age in a new body, that you were in your last body" which for a dwarf is considerably younger than it would be in a half-elf body. I don't think this is the correct approach in this instance though, as you were in a physically adult body, you should be reincarnated into a new body at the same physical development level in the new race, actual age aside. Based on his position, it makes sense that you'd be a little kid with an adult mind, physically you shouldn't have the same stats as an adult. I don't agree with his position, but he's the DM, and, apologetic or not, he's decided to screw you (and indirectly screw over your party) this time. Maybe he's got reasons for it that you aren't aware of, such as another member wanting to take the lead socially, or it ties in nicely with the campaign story?

[TheTeaMustFlow]

That could take an incredibly long time. You have a 5% chance of actually getting a wild surge, and then you have a 2% chance of getting the "change your age" effect, and it's only a 50% chance of getting the "make yourself older effect" (and it's only a 30% of chance of aging by at least 6 years).

Overall that's a 0.03% chance of getting what the OP wants. Start rolling, I guess. He can re-join the game next year some time.

Actually, it'll be a little quicker than that - I make on average 200ish days of full casting before the 0.03 chance comes off, but there's also the possibility of rolling the reincarnate result or getting lower rolls on the make yourself older effect multiple times. Though then again, there's also the possibility of de-aging yourself further (possibly into a virtual newborn) or suicide by fireball/confusion/angry modron/chucking yourself into the astral plane right next to a Githyanki with a Silver Sword.

[Waffle_Iron]

This solution is pretty funny. It's like "nope, this body sucks. *hgurk-gurgle* *vwump* Nope, don't like this one either. AIEEEEEEeeeeee *thud* *vwump* Ok, this is fine. Let's roll!"

I am laughing so hard right now.

[GorogIrongut]

I disagree with his approach for a couple of reasons:
1. You were a half elf in their 20's... if he was going for parity, and was playing the card that dwarves mature at the same rate as humans same as half elves... then you should have been the same age as your previous character.
2. Socially dwarves aren't allowed the freedom to wander around outside of their delvings at the age of 18, barring some bizarre explanation By definition... even if not biologically... this means you're much closer to 50 than 18 yrs old. I'm currently playing a hill dwarf character (also with ridiculous hp). I started his age off in his 50's. If your DM expected you to roleplay romantic moments in your campaign, then he set you up to play the part of what would socially be a 12 yr old human by making you an 18 yr old dwarf.
3. Lastly I disagree because he didn't tell you the age that he had arbitrarily assigned your character. Without giving you the information in advance, you were unable to weigh the pros and cons... the risks of a wild surge aging our de-aging your character. If you'd known, you might have been more careful with your wild magic... or you might have deliberately gone out and sought encounters that would have aged your character. Because you didn't have this information, the DM has basically nuked your character by fiat. Very not cool.

I personally would expect him to modify your age to that of the half elf when he died, before applying the -9 to your age.

Good luck.

[VariSami]

Funny how I think no one has brought up finding a ghost. That thing ages you with a touch and should not be a particularly rare or isolated occurrence. Being a dwarf, you should be able to handle a bit of an increase in age in case the ghost pings you fifty or so years into maturity. I had actually thought of using something to that end as a plot hook at some point: a child has been touched by a ghost, having been turned into a middle-aged person with notable trauma and seeming mental retardation.

Edit: Okay, it was Horrifying Visage that I had in mind rather than the touch but my point stands. Particularly since the aging effect ranges from 10 to 40 years.

[MaxWilson]

Before you ask I am not sure what the physical stats are changing by, but I can only imagine a 9 year old dwarf is pretty sucky.

Before you retire the character, spend a few days in-game trying to get another wild magic surge to age you back to normal.

[Starchild7309]

3. Lastly I disagree because he didn't tell you the age that he had arbitrarily assigned your character. Without giving you the information in advance, you were unable to weigh the pros and cons... the risks of a wild surge aging our de-aging your character. If you'd known, you might have been more careful with your wild magic... or you might have deliberately gone out and sought encounters that would have aged your character. Because you didn't have this information, the DM has basically nuked your character by fiat. Very not cool.


OK well it turns out its not as bad as I thought it was going to be. Mainly because I argued this point primarily, but also some of the others that you all shared with me. Thank you for that. So apparently, my str is taking a -3 hit, but that doesn't matter too much. He is keeping my Con the same and dex is still the same. I am also now considered small. It should be interesting as I had romantic in game relationships that were not central to the story, but were most definitely important.

On a side note, as a kind of spy...no one will have any idea who I am cause I can't stay in one form for more than 6 months of game time.

[Celcey]

First off, who among you was able to cast Reincarnate but not Gentle Repose or Raise Dead?

Secondly, if you're coming back as an adult dwarf, that means you're somewhere in your 50s, because that's when Dwarfs are adults. An 18-year-old dwarf is simply not an adult dwarf. Personally, I would say somewhere in your late 60s to early 70s makes more sense, to match your original age, but I suppose 50d is acceptable.

However to give you a mechanical penalty against you for one of your class features? I find that completely unacceptable, and even reprehensible. 5th edition is not about completely accurate simulation, and it doesn't sound like that's what you signed up. It's not in the least okay for your DM to force a mechanical penalty on you for what is, again, one of the (if not the) main features of your subclass.

TL,DR: You have every right to bitch about it. You should be in your low 40s at least, and the DM is severely punishing you for your choice of subclass.

[Slipperychicken]

I hate reincarnate. I'd honestly prefer to just let my PC die forever if that's the only option.

Also, seconding raise dead and revivify. The ideal situation is to have a cleric who can cast gentle repose and/or revivify on you (gentle repose mainly being there so you can revivify later if you don't have the components handy). Cheap, easy, quick, and doesn't permanently screw your character over.

[Tallis]

No in this situation you have every right to bitch, aging doesn't change stats by RAW and the fact that he is giving you penalties would piss off any player.

Lower physical stats for a 9 year old makes perfect sense. Just because there's no specific rules for it doesn't change that fact. This isn't a video game after all, it's supposed to simulate life. Do you expect babies to be born with 18 strength? Mental stats should be unaffected since all the character's life experiences are intact. My question is how he decided on the age of the new body. Was it arbitrary or did he have some reason for it to be 18 years old. He definitely should have told the OP about that when he was reincarnated not waited until this happened. It makes the situation seem shady even if it's not intentional on his part.

I'd talk to him about the change in age at reincarnation and see if you can talk him into making the new body the same age as the old.

[Starchild7309]

First off, who among you was able to cast Reincarnate but not Gentle Repose or Raise Dead?

No one among us was able to cast it, we just happened to have found a druid grove in the swamp prior to our encounter with the dragon. We had no cleric at the time and were more than 10 days from any place that could raise me.

As I found out what the penalties were going to be for being 9 now, it does suck a little, but I have in the past handicapped myself for the sake of interesting r/p and I will try this new, younger me, to see how it works out. If it doesn't and I have to retire him I have a few ideas of what to play. I rarely try to powerhouse my characters and I am usually more interested in the r/ping aspect than the hack and slash.

[Cespenar]

This is something that you tell stories of and laugh about in the future, probably with a beer in your hand.

"Remember the time when I turned into a dwarven child? And then I had to try and haggle with the lord about the quest reward, as a dwarven 9-year old, because he was reluctant and none of you had any social skills whatsoever!"

Perspective.

[Herobizkit]

This solution is pretty funny. It's like "nope, this body sucks. *hgurk-gurgle* *vwump* Nope, don't like this one either. AIEEEEEEeeeeee *thud* *vwump* Ok, this is fine. Let's roll!"That's pretty much verbatim what happened with Reincarnation in my childhood 1/2e games. :smallbiggrin:

[Celcey]

Lower physical stats for a 9 year old makes perfect sense. Just because there's no specific rules for it doesn't change that fact. This isn't a video game after all, it's supposed to simulate life.

That's the thing though, it isn't. Not unless that's the specific type of game you're playing, in which the laws of physics always apply and other such technical details are kept track of. If that's the way you want to play, that's totally fine, and enjoy yourself. But if you're playing a normal game of 5e, where Rule of Cool is king and fluff does not and should effect crunch, the game is not meant to simulate life. It's meant to be fun. And I don't know about you, but having my character gimped because of a class ability would be the exact opposite of fun.


As I found out what the penalties were going to be for being 9 now, it does suck a little, but I have in the past handicapped myself for the sake of interesting r/p.... I rarely try to powerhouse my characters and I am usually more interested in the r/ping aspect than the hack and slash.

Personally, I think it's something entirely different when the player doesn't optimize or even chooses a sub-par option, because that's something you chose because you wanted it. Your character becoming forcibly less good to be "accurate to life" is unfair, especially since you're playing a magical dwarf. Last I checked, science has no data on the strength of adolescent dwarves.

[Mr.Moron]

That's the thing though, it isn't. Not unless that's the specific type of game you're playing, in which the laws of physics always apply and other such technical details are kept track of. If that's the way you want to play, that's totally fine, and enjoy yourself. But if you're playing a normal game of 5e, where Rule of Cool is king and fluff does not and should effect crunch, the game is not meant to simulate life. It's meant to be fun. And I don't know about you, but having my character gimped because of a class ability would be the exact opposite of fun.


I think you've confused "The particular play style I enjoy" with "normal". I'm not aware of anything in the books that implies "rule of cool is king" or that fluff should never inform DM decisions or general game mechanics. In general the game leaves a lot of grey space and it expects any given table to fill that as they see fit "rule of cool" or otherwise and makes no judgement on which filling is correct.
If I'm mistaken about this, feel free to cite the rules.

In general I'd say that a child's body having lower strength than an adult's body is a reasonable. I'd also say that rolling a result on a printed RAW table and having it de-age you is reasonable. Since the rules don't cover children or children's stats what happens when you actually de-age is a grey area. So winding up with a body that is weaker than an adult body because a table result de-aged you is I think reasonable as well. It is also reasonable to not have it make you weaker. It might also be reasonable that you pick up the lucky trait - because hey it's a trope that plucky young adventurers have good luck.

Honestly if i got a wild magic result that turned me into a pre-teen and it had no mechanical affect on my character, I'd perhaps feel some minimal relief in the very first moment. However that would be vastly outweighed by the continued feeling that my actions don't really carry any chance of consequence. At the end of the day I play to engage the world and see what happens, sometimes that stuff is bad for my character. It sucks in the moment but more than pays off in how it enhances the moments that do go my way.

[Xetheral]

As I found out what the penalties were going to be for being 9 now, it does suck a little, but I have in the past handicapped myself for the sake of interesting r/p and I will try this new, younger me, to see how it works out. If it doesn't and I have to retire him I have a few ideas of what to play. I rarely try to powerhouse my characters and I am usually more interested in the r/ping aspect than the hack and slash.

If it doesn't work out, before retiring the character consider simply asking the DM to fix it. Some DMs may refuse (and if so you have no recourse other than making a new character or walking away), but many will happily entertain a player's request for a change, particularly if that player isn't having fun any more.

Personally, I think the DM made a mistake here. Either he misread you and thought you'd enjoy playing a child, or he didn't take your feelings into account when making the decision about how old your new dwarf body was. If your table's play style demands that the DM not consider the players' feelings when making decisions (as many tables require), so be it; but otherwise he screwed up: this is a perfect example of where a more nuanced approach would have led to everyone having more fun.

[Starchild7309]

Personally, I think the DM made a mistake here. Either he misread you and thought you'd enjoy playing a child, or he didn't take your feelings into account when making the decision about how old your new dwarf body was. If your table's play style demands that the DM not consider the players' feelings when making decisions (as many tables require), so be it; but otherwise he screwed up: this is a perfect example of where a more nuanced approach would have led to everyone having more fun.

While it annoyed me prior to finding out the penalties were not as severe as I thought they may be, I am ok with this now. Sure it handicaps me slightly, but it opens up the avenues for interesting r/p. Playing through RoT, there are not as many r/p encounters as i usually enjoy, but I should say that my DM is someone that I have been friends with for over 20 years. I trust his style and his judgement like 99.99% of the time. He follows rules strictly, but this is something we have all come to expect and follow along with over the 18+ years we have played with him. He has created multiple campaigns that have gone long years for our group, full of enjoyment, intrigue and some of the most memorable events in game. I think it was an oversight on his behalf that he did not tell me the new age of the body. I am ok with it starting at 18. In all honesty, I didn't even realize de-aging was a possibility(must have missed that on the chart when I looked it over), so it wasn't really an important fact to know prior to getting that surge. I was originally concerned about the loss of all the back story and r/p investment I put into a character with side quests to regain my elven blood and also the search for artifacts that would assist me. Since that is not lost, all I have to worry about is climbing now...and I am light enough for the paladin to carry me now.

[Kurt Kurageous]

Quote Originally Posted by Veldrenor View Post

This solution is pretty funny. It's like "nope, this body sucks. *hgurk-gurgle* *vwump* Nope, don't like this one either. AIEEEEEEeeeeee *thud* *vwump* Ok, this is fine. Let's roll!"

That's pretty much verbatim what happened with Reincarnation in my childhood 1/2e games. :smallbiggrin:

Yeah, only the character never made it to formation, just a lot of rerolling 3d6 before my DM (also very young) allowed 4d6 drop 1 low, rolled in order.

I lost a lot of 1st levels that never got a name, lost a lot before they made it to third level, too.

[Starchild7309]

This solution is pretty funny. It's like "nope, this body sucks. *hgurk-gurgle* *vwump* Nope, don't like this one either. AIEEEEEEeeeeee *thud* *vwump* Ok, this is fine. Let's roll!"

I will admit my group chat with the other players, this was the first suggestion and even though its been dismissed, it keeps coming back, over and over and over again.

[VariSami]

I will admit my group chat with the other players, this was the first suggestion and even though its been dismissed, it keeps coming back, over and over and over again.

I am glad you mentioned how you are accommodating this from a RP perspective in the message before the quoted one but since you are commenting on suggestions: Any particular reason you might not opt for the ghost route (i.e. finding a ghost and intentionally failing dramatically vs. Horrifying Visage which ages you 1d4x10 years)? It is somewhat meta-gamey, but like I said, ghosts should probably not be a completely unheard of phenomenon and their ability to age you would probably be quite well-known in the stories. Heck, if both you and the DM were to agree on that, it could make for a nice side-story.

[Tallis]

That's the thing though, it isn't. Not unless that's the specific type of game you're playing, in which the laws of physics always apply and other such technical details are kept track of.

You're confusing "simulate life" with 'simulate real life. I intentionally did not say that. If dwarves age differently in your game that's fine but in all the games I've ever played a dwarf is weaker as a child than he/she is as an adult.

if you're playing a normal game of 5e, where Rule of Cool is king and fluff does not and should effect crunch

How are you determining what's a normal game of D&D?


the game is not meant to simulate life.

I disagree. It's meant to simulate living as an adventurer in a fantasy world.


It's meant to be fun.

Of course. It's a game after all.


And I don't know about you, but having my character gimped because of a class ability would be the exact opposite of fun.

In that case you should definitely never play a wild magic sorcerer. The uncertainty is the point of the subclass. You may create a super awesome effect far beyond your normal power by accident or something really bad may happen. If the bad things are just waived away then what's the point of them? Without the risk where's the fun?




Personally, I think it's something entirely different when the player doesn't optimize or even chooses a sub-par option, because that's something you chose because you wanted it. Your character becoming forcibly less good to be "accurate to life" is unfair, especially since you're playing a magical dwarf. Last I checked, science has no data on the strength of adolescent dwarves.

But he did choose it. He chose to play a subclass whose main feature is it's unpredictable magic which can cause negative results.
You're correct: science has no data on dwarves but the DM has made an entirely reasonable decision that in his world they are not as strong as adults. I would be willing to bet that that is true in most campaign worlds (Though the idea that dwarves are born as fully grown adults is kind of interesting now that I think about it. I might use that.)
Not that it's proof in a 5e world but in earlier editions there were ability score bonuses and penalties based on age, so there is a precedent for the change.

[Vogonjeltz]

Ok so I want your opinions on this. I started as a half elf wild mage sorcerer in the campaign I am playing. I was killed by a dragon and reincarnated. I came back as a hill dwarf. It screwed my Cha, but I got a crap ton of HP. Apparently since dwarves "mature at the same rate as humans" my DM ruled that my new body was 18 years old. This last session I had a wild magic surge that reduced my age permanently by 9 years. Nothing was really said until today when he messaged me and said, oh bad news, your age is 9 now. (he hadn't let me know I was 18, my original character was in his late 20's.) Furthermore, I have to look into it, your mental stats stay the same, but your physical stats will all be dropping. Does that sound right? Am I getting screwed over?

Before you ask I am not sure what the physical stats are changing by, but I can only imagine a 9 year old dwarf is pretty sucky.

Three things (ok, maybe 4):

1) Reincarnate states that it's an adult body.

2) Dwarves are considered young until they are 50. So although they're mentally mature at 18, they wouldn't really be an adult until 50, so I'd put your age at the bare minimum, 50. Adding in the age difference this should put you at 41, which is young, but not immature.

3) There are no stat changes based on age within the default rule set, so if the DM imposes this they're just riffing, that leaves a ton of room for argument.

4) The rules don't even bother to give children stats, only adults, so technically your character if they really were 9 would probably be reduced to being an NPC. This is something to hash out with your DM, but the headaches involved suggest that the evidence from points 1 and 2 should be enough to recommend that your character is now in a 41 year old body.

[RickAllison]

Essentially what I am seeing is that the penalties he is inflicting on your character should NOT be the result of being shrunk to a 9-year-old, but on being reincarnated as an 18-year-old (or 20). You would still be a child by dwarven standards and, since we don't have growth records for D&D dwarves AFAIK that tell what ages mirror the physical maturity of humans, it is fairest to assume that you should have spawned with the decreased attributes. By relative benchmarks, being an 18-year-old dwarf could well be like a 7 and a half-year-old human.

[Telok]

Since there are no aging rules in 5e I'd just go gonzo. Push the wild surges and see if I could end up with a negative age. Try to grab some reroll abilities to help it along.

[Addaran]

I'm the only one that absolutely love reincarnate for dead characters? It creates some kind of "negative" effect to having died, it presents new RP opportunities with your character having to adapt physically and mentally to being something else, you try something slightly different and you stay involved with the story. Seems a lot better then just ressurecting every time.


As for the OP, glad to see pretty much everything seems in order. I'd have been worried too about him/her being unplayable or when he mentionned that there would be penalities. But just -3 str on a pure caster, not a huge problem. Our wild mage got de-aged to 14 and it was really funny to see him try to flirt with the women we meet. People found him weird when they talked to him, but that was also because of his now purple skin and hair made of ice. I'm sure you'll have fun being the 9-years old face. =D

If for some reason it doesn't work, i'm sure you can talk to the GM. Especialy if you played along and tried the child-character for a bit.