at what age are Gnolls considered adults?

@Shalvenay Gonna need a setting for that question.

@BESW Forgotten Realms

Edition?

@BESW 3.x would be ideal, but sources from other editions would work as well

3.5 is probably the most likely to have that info, actually.

This wikia cites Keith Baker's article "Playing Gnolls" in Dragon 367 when it makes these claims:

> Gnolls have very short lifespans when compared with other sapient humanoids, living only 30 or so years on average and maturing to adulthood at a remarkable speed. Gnolls do not, however, age particularly dramatically except at the end of their lifespans, at which point the decline is sharp and deadly, quickly ending in death.

[digs for article]

Here we go, original text:

> Gnolls mature with remarkable speed for intelligent humanoids; some cite this as proof of their demonic heritage and suggest that it is unnatural for a creature to be ready for battle so soon after birth. They have short life spans—in fact, they rarely live longer than thirty years, but they typically remain remarkably strong and vigorous right up to the end of their days. When their strength leaves them, it is a sudden and catastrophic decline.

(source)

there we go. doesn't give a number though -- I suppose that somewhere in the 8-9 range would be workable?

I suspect that's about as detailed as you'll get, but we can work it out from other cases.

@BESW alrighty, sounds like a plan to me

If you take the ratio of starting age to venerable age for each of the seven PHB humanoids and average them out, you'll get a typical maturity-to-longevity ratio.

Plug "30" into the longevity slot and you'll get the age at which gnolls would be expected to reach maturity.

But they mature "with remarkable speed," so I'd take about 3/4 of that starting age.

(alternately, just take the highest ratio of the starting races rather than averaging it, and use that for the formula)

let me look

Depending on whether I take the average or the lowest, I'm getting a starting age of 4.8 to 6.3. Taking 3/4 of that gives... or 3.6 or 4.7.

But my math is in question, because it's mine.

the highest ratio of PHB races is dwarves with 10

so that means that a gnoll is fully grown at 3 years old

250/40 = 10?

400 not 250 according to my PHB

Ah, I'm looking at the SRD.

Ah, got it.

You're looking at the race descriptions and I'm looking at the age tables.

yeah

but 3 to 4 is sensible I think

Also, the gnome and the halfling have ratios of 12.5.

So, I'm getting ranges between 2.4 and 3.4 for gnoll maturity, before adjusting for "with remarkable speed."

ah. table numbers again?

and eyes go wide

I'm using tables for maturity, and text for death.

ah.

The average M/D ratio is 8.82, and the highest ratio is 12.5 (gnomes at 40:500 and halflings at 20:250).

@BESW got it.

Now, if I leave out half-orcs as statistically insignificant when determining the society's perception of "normal" ageing, the average shifts down to 8.05, giving us a range of 2.4 to 3.73.

looks like I'll be playing a gnoll kit that's spent oh, three months or so on the surface of Faerun? xD

Alternately:

Instead of a mean average, we might go for a mode average.

Humans are far and away the most visible population according to the DMG's citybuilding stats, to the point that everyone else is practically just a statistical anomaly. So if we use the human's M/D ratio of 6, we get a gnoll maturity of 5 years before adjustment for "remarkable speed."

@Shalvenay You're playing with 2 RHD and +1 LA? That's...brave...

@Miniman (actually, this might get plopped on the NWN server I play on -- depends on what happens for a while though)

My ballpark for "remarkable speed" is about 3/4, which would put gnoll maturity around 3.75.

We can also consider that anything less than about a dozen years is going to seem amazingly fast to other humanoids regardless of the ratios.

@Miniman I probably wouldn't do a gnoll on a straight 3.5e table for that reason (if I was to put it on a table, it'd be in 5e most likely)

So adjusting for "remarkable speed" may be unnecessary, as the unmodified ratios already provide maturity ages which seem quite remarkable.

good point

Alright, @BESW: first influence map...

so, that gets me to a 1 year old gnoll kit

In summary: the maths say a gnoll reaches maturity somewhere between 2 and a half and 5 years of age, and you can argue anything within a year up or down from that range without too much trouble.

maybe a bit less

@nitsua60 Yaaaaaak!

hey there @nitsua60

@BESW he's so cute with those stubby little legs, dark-colored shaggy hair, and large nostrils. All of which, I'm told by Nepal's Forestry Institute, are morphological adaptations to high altitude and cold.

@Shalvenay hiya

@nitsua60 what's up?

Should have been grading a test during the last half-hour, instead built influence map.

heheh

@BESW Personally I'm a fan of the little cacti with their perfectly-purple flowers.

Did the influence map help you think about things differently?

I found that they helped me cohese the aesthetic and ethos I was going for, made it all come together.

@BESW I don't know if it made me think of much differently, but I hope it's a good reference to throw out to the players now, two weeks before we start the campaign.

But it may be that I'm not far enough along in prep that things need to congeal/should be congealing yet.

@Miniman I'd aggressively downvote you--as a friend, of course, hoping to help you keep that nice, round number--but fear I'd get identified as a bot. Or an ex-. Or an ex-bot....

@nitsua60 :)

@nitsua60 A better strategy for all concerned would be to focus on posting answers deserving of bounties :P

I think the only bounty I've earned is in a system I've never played. [Hmm... rummaging through WoD, WH40K, CoC, 13thAge, ... questions.]

@nitsua60 rpg.stackexchange.com/users/23970/…

Yup, that's the one. I do like it. Perhaps I can answer a question about a game I've never played in a language I don't speak. I'm looking at you, anima-beyond-fantasy!

@Miniman I do like the one downvote. It's like the anecdote about that servant who whispered in Caesar's ear during the triumphs.

(Each of the top four answers sits at +X/-1. We are all mortal!)

....I have 3 downvotes across my top ten best-voted answers. I need to say more controversial things.

lol I don't think that is what that means

I need to attract more trolls?

you need to flip more tables over, or BURNINATE more things

either of those will probably work

:P

@nitsua60 haha, well I managed to answer a question in that tag. :P

Hey, chat. I'm searching for art and having a hard time figuring out what terms to Google. Looking for illustrations of an industrial fantasy city. Like, New York if it were run by pixies.

"Skyscrapers and fairy lights" would probably be the best description of what I'm after.

I can think of a couple things with fairy lights, but not any like, modern city type things with those

and obviously fairy lights by themselves are not too hard to look for

What is the purpose of the chat?

You mean in the big picture of the Stack Exchange structure?

I imagine it is partly an outlet for people to talk so that people aren't having conversations in comments and cluttering question answer space

Exactly what that does/should look like is discussed here.

@Christopher [wave]

And hi, @Ahriman! I don't usually see you coming in, you're just there.

...

Has my secret been found out

I must flee!

[runs for the hills]

also: [waves]@BESW

What's new?

Prepping for a move to Sweden

Ooh.

the "with the entire family" is the stressy part

I can see how that'd be stressful, yes.

@NielsK Hi!

@Bowsska [wave]

Argh, apparently I still don't know persistently how to build links in chat.

@Anaphory [like this](http://example.com/)

Normally, I try one way, realise it's not the right one, and correct to this.

But this time I was busy reading old chat messages, so editing timed out.

[you can use \ to un-code-ify markdown elements](http://example.com "Do you want mouseover text? Because this is how you get mouseover text.")

@BESW Modern cities, and not just Dungeon Noir/Magicpunk like in Eberron, Arcanum, etc?

@Anaphory Yes, though those might qualify.

What do you want to show? Because eg. Artemis Fowl graphical novels might show centaurs working on computer consoles, but due to setting won't show outdoors shots. Shadowrun will have a lot of chrome on people, but you might find something with dragons on skyscrapers.

"Dragons on skycrapers" sounds fun. I'd like some street-level stuff too, like what rush hour would look like.

Establishing shots, basically.

like: google.be/…

Eeh.

More like... remember in Pacific Rim when they showed an establishing shot of a city, and it had a kaiju skeleton that'd been built up and over and inside?

I didn't, but it's easy to find.

@Anaphory A lot of the Shadowrun images I'm getting have the Seattle Space Needle, which is reminding me that in Mort "the many, many undead in the city have been enthralled by a powerful necromancer who’s set up a vantage point atop the Space Needle. [...T]hey oversee a city full of zombies who get out of bed, walk to workplaces, buy products from one another, and otherwise play-act a parody of urban life. All day, every day, with no signs of stopping."

Any D&D 5e people in here? I wanted to see what you guys thought about an idea that I wanted to try out for my next campaign

@Tophandour Yo.

So, here's my idea... I was toying with the idea of changing up how magic items are made. Instead of some enchanter sitting in an enchanting shop and making them, I want to magic items to exist because their owner is simply powerful enough to make the object magical. For example, after some time a fighter's sword becomes +1 because it's his sword and by level 20 it would become a legendary-level item simply because it's his

So here's how I'm going to attempt to implement that:

At various points in the story or when the players power up to a certain extent, I give them "enchantment points" and they spend those to create a magic item that is thematic for their character. For example, at level 3 I might give everyone one "uncommon point" which will allow them to enchant one item in their possession with an "uncommon" equivalent effect like adding +1 to a sword (actual level decisions pendign)

Then later they'll get a "rare point" and they can place a rare equivalent enchantment on an item. If they place it on the item that the uncommon point was on, they can shift the uncommon point to a different item. This way, the fighter could have a +2 sword now and also have a cloak of protection or something like that

I'm reminded of 4e's Dark Sun advancement progressions.

The point of this is that I want to make magic items much harder to find and not possible to buy and I also like the idea of the player's equipment growing with them

so that rusty rapier that the rogue dug up to start his adventure with will one day be imbued with his power and be a potent death-dealer

It's a cool idea

I think it might solve some issues that I have with my current campaign. I came into this 5e campaign straight from having run a 3.5 campaign and I was worried about the possibility of the party having too few cool magical items (started playing with the playtest) so I made magic items possible to buy

and now they have a sizable collection that they haul around with them all the time.

Implementing balance may be tricky, but yes. Cool idea.

I've learned a lot since the playtest, hehe

What are you going to do about consumables?

Consumables will be possible to find in loot or sometimes in shops

possibly including non-recharging wands

I once ran a 3.5 game which made a strong social distinction between consumable and permanent items.

So the enchantment points should just go towards permanent items

(An influential cult taught that magic was a limited resource, and if magic items weren't keeping it all locked up for the rich to use, everyone would be able to cast spontaneous spells. Consumable items returned their magic to the world when used, so they were acceptable.)

I'm planning on making it clear that your enchantment points should not go toward powergaming your character. No underwater breathing helmets just because you know the party is headed to the ocean soon if it's not thematic for your character.

If your character is a cleric of an ocean god, then sure

if your character has lived in a landlocked country their whole life, probably not

the items will ideally tell a story and will be a legacy for the character

If my character lived in a landlocked country his whole life, he'd definitely buy a water-breathing item if we were spending any time near the ocean.

a) He'd be afraid of drowning, and b) He'd want to go check it out!

Well they could buy some water-breathing potions but I probably wouldn't let their power that has been building up over a series of adventures manifest itself on their helmet as water-breathing just because they learned yesterday that their next destination is the ocean

or they could buy a wand of water breathing or find some sort of rare plant that grants the power, etc

[shrug] If that's what they want their legacy item to be, why not? It's unusual and interesting and will create opportunities for inventive applications.

I've had an image of a player character's tomb with their enchanted items placed in it and someone rediscovers it years later and can tell who that person was by what their items did

and I want to discourage getting just a bunch of eclectic effects that don't follow a central theme just because it would round out your character really well unless your character is a McGyver or Batman type character that likes to have something for every circumstance

Idk, I'd probably be fine with it if the PC's thing is having a utility belt

I'd encourage you to let each player's legacy grow organically, rather than guiding them to have the kind of legacy you're imagining for them.

Explain your idea to them, of course. But let them decide what that'll mean for their character.

In all likelihood, knowing my players, they'll like the idea of building on the theme they have for their character and I'll pretty much accept whatever items they might want, but I just have to put the idea out there that the items that they choose should make some amount of sense

And that I reserve veto power in case one of them goes mad with power (or more likely, we get a new player that is trying to hard to minmax)

too* ugh

As a player, I like to play utility-belt using characters so I totally get wanting to get a bunch of random things just-in-case, but that would still fit my character's central theme. Also to be clear, the central theme of the character would be player-defined

Can't wait to get to that next campaign, though. My current party is level 15 and synergizes pretty well so it will be fun to be back to low levels and have some of those low level challenges again

I'd be inclined to not want to define my character's central theme, but to play to discover it.

Ok, that's fair I suppose. My group tends to define it at the start but that's a different playstyle. If you were one of my players I'd take that into account

The person who an archaeologist infers from my belongings would be defined by my life of adventure as much as by my origin.

If my adventures didn't change me, I'd find that to be a very boring story indeed.

That's a good poitn

My warlock right now has a save DC of 21. He's got the +3 rod of the pact keeper

it wasn't easy for him to get, but he has a tendency to Hypnotic Pattern an entire encounter, banish a couple of the key enemies, or hold the things standing next to the fighter

so it will be fun to get back to the days when most enemies had a good chance of making a save :p

Heh.

I'm enjoying systems without linear power level progressions.

Like what?

Fate is our go-to system right now. It's got a very minor power creep (that we're actually ignoring), but mostly character change is horizontal rather than vertical.

Characters change as they experience things during their adventures, but their mechanical power and complexity remain largely the same over time.

I've played the Dresden Files game before for a few sessions before scheduling conflicts killed it

Really loved it, I played a Tony Stark character who befriended a local warden (another player) who spent most of his time making my house an impervious fortress with tons of wards on it

Sounds fun!

We're using atomic-robo for the base of our game system, with modifications from other fate-core materials as we feel the need.

Watching the player create his magic glove that helped him do earth magic was part of what made me want to homebrew some sort of enchantment system for 5e

What's atomic-robo about?

I imagine atomic things and robo things

Atomic Robo is a comic book series about the Action Science adventures of a robot made by Nikola Tesla.

Oh, I've seen that!

I think someone linked to it in this chat once during a conversation about giant bugs, maybe?

Aye.

Our game is set in 2013 Earth, except that about six months ago all the electric infrastructure went fzzt and Weird magic and mad science showed up to help or take advantage of it. Our party is the crack field team for an agency dedicated to "Using Weird stuff so Weird stuff doesn't use you."

We've got an alchemist and her golem, a retired FBI agent with psychic powers, an inhuman chance-manipulating assassin, a bionic survivalist, a catman prince from an abandoned Atlantean colony, and a Korean blood-bending vampire.

In our current adventure, we're trying to stop William Shatner from using Hollywood's mystical power source to create a real version of Enterprise.

Why would you want to prevent that? Let him create it, I say, but be there to kill him and take it from him at just the last possible moment :p

...because Hollywood needs its power source or the containment units will open.

(Hollywood is currently powered by a studio sound stage made up like the engine room of the Enterprise. So long as all the actors stay in character, it actually generates power.)

what do the containment units contain?

That's classified. (We haven't decided yet.)

ok. Just things that would be very bad to let out

Probably at least one of our recurring villains.

But it could be anything. Even the Warner brothers (and the Warner sister).

That reminds me, in the Dresden Files campaign that I was in for a little while, we had Time Warner be an organization run by the type of vampires that feed off of intense emotion

Nice.

so the local cable offices where people have to take a number and wait for several hours just to get their cable box was actually a feeding ground

and the bad service was completely intentional

Lovely.

I could buy it... I definitely feel drained after I leave those places :p

In our world, amazon.com has a secret nuclear fusion program.

Huh. Did Jack Lesnie delete his account?

I'm seeing stuff all over the site that references answers he gave, but the answers aren't there anymore.

Not even as deleted answers.

@DuckTapeAl Google suggests that his account is now rpg.stackexchange.com/users/10075/user2754

Huh. Weird.

I'm just looking through the Atomic Robo SRD – What's the difference between paying refresh for stunts, and

> • Make refresh inversely proportional to the number of stunt slots the PC has, from one to five. For example, if the PCs have five stunt slots, their effective refresh is 1. If they have two stunt slots, their effective refresh is 4.

?

@Anaphory I'm not sure; the actual ARRPG book uses the first bullet point.

I also did not find anything related to those bullet points in the ARRPG book.

I'll ask it on mainsite if you don't.

I'll do.

Done, probably with plenty of room for improvement.

And now I should go to bed, and see in the morning what my question has become.

ttfn