D&D 5E More HP - was it a good idea?

[manduck]

I don't know that we necessarily lost something with HP increases in later additions. The game can still be plenty dangerous for the PCs. Actually, 5E seems to have a little more dangerous feel to it again. Even with HP that would be higher in 5E than what they would on my character in say 2E, I still get chewed to bits sometimes. The big departure, as far as PC toughness goes, seems to be 4E. In higher levels, my 4E fighter was nearly invincible. With various healing mechanics and lots of HP along with good AC and damage, my 4E fighter was rarely in any real danger. In 5E, I've had plenty of close calls and taken some big hits. That danger is exciting and fun.

Ultimately though, as both DM and player, I like the idea of having a bit more HP and survivability. Mainly because I'd much rather spend my game sessions actually playing the game rather than sitting around while people make up replacement characters. Or having to make one my self. I don't mind if my character dies or if some combats get a bit swingy with crits and big damage. I just have a personal preference not to have to take up session time with making characters. Some of us have backup characters, just in case. Though not everyone has time to do that or perhaps even the inclination.

 

[Ashkelon]

HP aren't up though. They are down from the previous edition, sometimes by A LOT. And adult red dragon has 750 HP in 4e, and 256 in 5e. An ogre in 4e has twice as many HP than the 5e version. Classes got more HP as well, along with a lot more healing surges.

But at level 20 a 5e fighter with 18 Con has 204 max HP while a 18 Con 4e fighter would only have 147 max HP.

 

[Sacrosanct]

I'll also note that while low HP made things more lethal in AD&D (a red dragon could wipe out an entire 11th level party except maybe the fighter with one breath weapon), what really made AD&D more lethal were the save or die and level draining mechanics. Bring those two things back into 5e, and I'm sure it would feel much more dangerous And your players would hate you.

 

[Sacrosanct]

But at level 20 a 5e fighter with 18 Con has 204 max HP while a 18 Con 4e fighter would only have 147 max HP.

The 4e fighter started with more HP (15+CON), and had a bunch of healing surges (much more healing than 5e HD mechanic). So across a typical adventuring day, the number of effective HP is much higher.

 

[Ancalagon]

HP aren't up though. They are down from the previous edition, sometimes by A LOT. And adult red dragon has 750 HP in 4e, and 256 in 5e. An ogre in 4e has twice as many HP than the 5e version. Classes got more HP as well, along with a lot more healing surges.

My starting point wasn't 4e....

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using EN World mobile app

 

[Schmoe]

As someone who has rolled many 1 HP wonders, I'm inclined to say yes.

 

[Sacrosanct]

My starting point wasn't 4e....

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using EN World mobile app

Never said it was. Just that in the progression of D&D, with the steady increase of HP, 5e is actually down. Not up. It's only up if you ignore 3e and 4e. So it seems from WoTC's perspective, MOAR HP was definitely not the answer for 5e

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

There’s nothing like the “thrill” of playing a 2HP wizard with an AC of 9.


I am totally down with the higher HP. It means that even at low levels, the PCs can take on some exciting foes, instead of just streams of giant rats and measly goblins (not that those can’t be exciting, when done right).

As someone who has rolled many 1 HP wonders, I'm inclined to say yes.

 

[Wiseblood]

I've been toying with the idea of play testing Hit point dice increases from proficiency bonus. So level one characters would start with 3 hit dice (maxed of course, because PCs are heroes), and then 7 total Hit dice at level 17. This solves first level fragileness, and hit point bloat. This keeps the high levels edgy and encourages a few other rule changes that I like as well.

1) Proficiency bonus to armor class: because something you are proficient in should give you a proficiency bonus. I know the argument... bounded accuracy!!!, but its WAY too easy for high level characters to hit monsters and each other. Adding this in doesn't break anything, and solves a lot when character hit point bloat is also fixed.

2) Proficiency bonus for the number of saves characters are proficient in. Obviously first level characters start with 2 proficient saves, but they get to have an additional proficiency each time their proficiency bonus goes up. Which conveniently maxes out at +6, so at level 17+ all characters are proficient in all saves.

3) Cantrip scaling can be eliminated. I really don't like cantrip scaling, for some reason it just feels wrong to me. I think that its partly because at-will cantrips quickly outscale low-level damage spells, and partly because very little else in the game follows this mechanic so it feels out of place.

4) Some additional rule changes need to be made to tone down damage scaling. I haven't got all these worked out, but some choices may include:
eliminating or reducing multi-attack from all or most classes, eliminating the divine smite option from paladins, eliminating damage from hex and hunter's mark, fixing polymorph, eliminating extra damage fluff that was added to the game to compensate for hit point bloat.

As I write this, the game seems so much more exiting to me. It feels dangerous and compressed into the sweet spot of D&D (levels 3-10, IMO).

I would like to see higher lows and lower highs and this looks elegant to me.

 

[Ashkelon]

The 4e fighter started with more HP (15+CON), and had a bunch of healing surges (much more healing than 5e HD mechanic). So across a typical adventuring day, the number of effective HP is much higher.

Eh not really though. In 5e the healing burden has just shifted to healer classes like the cleric. Instead of a fighter who is self sufficient and can fully recover twice per day, in 5e you have a fighter who can recover about half of his HP per day and needs a healbot to cover the rest.

What 4e did allow for is for every encounter to be dangerous. In 4e because Hp totals for Pcs were lower (after around level 3 or 4), it meant each encounter was more likely to drop a PC leading to tender and more dangerous fights. In 5e the HP bloat means that the first few encounters will rarely bring a PC to even 50% of their max HP. It's only when you get to 3+ encounters without resting that combat even begins to feel challenging in 5e.

I would personally rather have more HP per day if it meant each individual encounter could feel challenging in 5e.