L&L 5/21 - Hit Points, Our Old Friend

Crazy Jerome · May 21, 2012

nnms said:
I just don't want to see the illusion of leveling. Like in 4E where you gain 10% more HP, but monster damage mysteriously goes up by the exact same amount. Where you gain +1 to your skills every second level, but DCs mysteriously go up the exact same amount.

...

But I do still see the positives of having a "Design ultra balanced monsters and encounters like 4E" rules module for those who want it.

Actually, once they made the decision to make the numbers generally flatter across the board, all kinds of possibilities open up here. "Bulk" can matter without elephants being "elephant demons" to 3rd level guards, because bulk adds to hit points but hit points are relatively flat. In the same way, this makes it possible to have balanced monsters without even needing much of a module. It's not foolproof, but there is definitely more room to maneuver.

Dausuul · May 21, 2012

Szatany said:
To me, its a weak argument. Weak, because everything that is being accomplished by having characters at negative hp unconscious can albo be achieved by having them conscious. How? Simple: characters at negative hp are down, can do very little (maybe crawl? certainly not attack or cast spells). Worst case scenario, they can always pretend that they are unconscious to avoid enemy attention.

From my DMing experience, they can, but they hardly ever will. If a PC has been dropped into the negatives, the situation is usually tense to say the least. That means everyone feels a strong pressure to do whatever they can to contribute. Faking unconsciousness is not going to happen. If all that a PC can do is crawl, she will crawl at a monster and try to headbutt it over a cliff.

While this is exciting, it also means that the fictional logic of unconsciousness protecting you ceases to work. An enemy who is crawling is an enemy who could still be a threat. So it's logical that the monster would deliver that one final blow to put the PC down for good. Instead of a saving grace that gives you a chance to survive being "killed," negative hit points become a death spiral mechanic.

Incenjucar · May 21, 2012

The reason that big monsters don't get more HP in 4E is because buckets of HP are boring. This is also why 4E solo monsters got their HP reduced later on because even when they're the whole encounter buckets of HP are still boring.

nnms · May 21, 2012

UngeheuerLich said:
I really like the idea, that something has that AC, because of its hide, and this HP, because of its mass. And this way, dragon screams: solo monster. Without an arbitrary classification.

I like the idea of roles (both PC and monster) being emergent properties rather than defined in advance.

Crazy Jerome said:
Actually, once they made the decision to make the numbers generally flatter across the boards, all kinds of possibilities open up here. "Bulk" can matter without elephants being "elephant demons" to 3rd level guards, because bulk adds to hit points but hit points are relatively flat. In the same way, this makes it possible to have balanced monsters without even needing much of a module. It's not foolproof, but there is definitely more room to maneuver.

That's a good point. Perhaps there doesn't need to be a monster building system where their hit points equals four times the average damage of PCs of the same level, where defenses aren't designed to produce the same hit rate regardless of level, etc.,.

I'd like to give you guys both XP, but it says I need to spread it around some more. Great posts.

Szatany · May 21, 2012

Dausuul said:
From my DMing experience, they can, but they hardly ever will. If a PC has been dropped into the negatives, the situation is usually tense to say the least. That means everyone feels a strong pressure to do whatever they can to contribute. Faking unconsciousness is not going to happen. If all that a PC can do is crawl, she will crawl at a monster and try to headbutt it over a cliff.

While this is exciting, it also means that the fictional logic of unconsciousness protecting you ceases to work. An enemy who is crawling is an enemy who could still be a threat. So it's logical that the monster would deliver that one final blow to put the PC down for good. Instead of a saving grace that gives you a chance to survive being "killed," negative hit points become a death spiral mechanic.

Well, in this case the player made a choice and should live with the consequences. No one forced him to crawl at enemy (it makes no sense anyway if he can't make attacks or cast spells). At least the system is giving players a choice right? They wanna be stupid about it, it's fine by me.

Ridley's Cohort · May 21, 2012

Bedrockgames said:
I understand, and people who made the shift to 4e generally seem to be in that camp. My point is lots of people who didn't make the shift never saw any of this stuff as a problem in need of fixing. I think there is really gulf between the two camps over how to approach designing an edition of D&D, one is "what is wrong with D&D and how can we fix it." the other is "what is right about D&D and how can we make it even better". In my opinion the reason 4e seemed like such a break for many fans it it took the first approach. I am not saying the first approach is wrong, but taking it will naturally lead you to satisfy fans of the game who always had issues with some of its core elements, while possibly alienating those who liked it and just wanted some basic improvements.

It is not 4e players versus non-4e players issue. There is a fundamental design problem in 1e/2e/3e that a party without a cleric plays so differently from a party with a cleric. It is quite possible to trudge through dungeons without a Wizard, but the staying power of the party without a Cleric was too problematic.

You may not have had a problem but I can promise you this is a common complaint, one that makes life harder on the DM because otherwise good adventures could just come apart at the seams.

Most old time playing groups just conceded that they needed an NPC cleric along, when no one wanted to play the cleric. Well, that kinda of works. But it also kinda sucks.

Removing the necessity for a cleric means that players get to play the PCs they want play, rather than someone playing a class they do not enjoy a player or DM running a tagalong NPC when they have plenty on their plate already. Is that not a worthwhile design goal?

Dausuul · May 21, 2012

Szatany said:
Well, in this case the player made a choice and should live with the consequences. No one forced him to crawl at enemy (it makes no sense anyway if he can't make attacks or cast spells). At least the system is giving players a choice right? They wanna be stupid about it, it's fine by me.

Then we should just go back to death at zero, and put the responsibility on players to fall over and play dead when they're almost out of hit points. They wanna be stupid and keep on fighting, so be it.

Szatany · May 21, 2012

Dausuul said:
Then we should just go back to death at zero, and put the responsibility on players to fall over and play dead when they're almost out of hit points. They wanna be stupid and keep on fighting, so be it.

No, the negative hp cusion is useful. It just doesn't need the unconciousness component.

UngeheuerLich · May 21, 2012

Dausuul said:
From my DMing experience, they can, but they hardly ever will. If a PC has been dropped into the negatives, the situation is usually tense to say the least. That means everyone feels a strong pressure to do whatever they can to contribute. Faking unconsciousness is not going to happen. If all that a PC can do is crawl, she will crawl at a monster and try to headbutt it over a cliff.

While this is exciting, it also means that the fictional logic of unconsciousness protecting you ceases to work. An enemy who is crawling is an enemy who could still be a threat. So it's logical that the monster would deliver that one final blow to put the PC down for good. Instead of a saving grace that gives you a chance to survive being "killed," negative hit points become a death spiral mechanic.

There were times, when players actually though about feigning death, or running away... long long time ago...

Phaezen · May 21, 2012

UngeheuerLich said:
There were times, when players actually though about feigning death, or running away... long long time ago...

Not so long ago, my group made an inglorious retreat on Friday evening. We had those Kobolds at our mercy, till it turned out their dragon master was real, in the area, not so pleased about us thinning the ranks of his worshipers.