Removing Hit Points from the Game

Satyrn · May 31, 2019

ART! said:
What if you just gave PCs all the benefits of leveling up except for the hit points (assuming they start with some decent chunk of HP)?

That'd totally work for me.

I actually was recently fiddling with a hack that would work much like that. A character would start with his Con score in hit points and then gain from 1 ( wizard) to 4 (barbarian) hit points for each Keven ( including the first). It improves a character's hit points for tier 1, and then stays pretty static for tier 2.

It had the neat effect of working well ( in theory at least) with the Encounter building guidelines, CR and such, when it comes to the damage a PC can take. The numbers line up will enough that I'd just treat the characters as equivalent to half their level. So, level 5 characters would be facing CR 2 or 3 creatures as the standard.

On top of this, the players would still have fireball and their Extra Attack, which effectively means the monster's hit points have been reduced, too.

Immortal Sun · May 31, 2019

Just gonna present a counter opinion:

No, I don't reduce HP gain because low-level threats remaining dangerous at high levels isn't a play goal for me.

I just find new and exciting ways to hurt the pla...I mean characters.

dave2008 · Jun 1, 2019

Reynard said:
Have you eliminated hit point inflation from your 5E game? How did you do it? Did it work?

Eliminated no, modified yes. Be using HP (per standard) and BHP (bloodied HP = meat points) we have something that feels good to our group. That coupled with slow leveling (it took us 4 years to reach level 10) and we don't have the issue you want to combat (or at least how I understand it).

EDIT: To clarify, BHP don't really change, you basically have what you started with (leveling does not change BHP). Once those got to 0 - your dead.

dave2008 · Jun 1, 2019

Saelorn said:
One issue with this comes in the form of healing potions. It's hard enough to ask someone to hand you a healing potion, under the existing model of abstract damage. It would be even harder to ask someone for a morale potion, when everyone involved is perfectly aware that nobody has been injured at all.

Likewise, complaining to the cleric that you feel distressed, and having them cast cheer up on you, does not seem very heroic.

Think of it as fatigue,minor injuries, and luck, that is what we do and it works just fine (for us & coupled with actual meat points). It doesn't seem odd to ask the cleric to cast heal on you because your exhausted and can't take much more before I suffer a lethal injury. And everyone is aware you are fatigued, scratched, bruised and can't take much more.

The Crimson Binome · Jun 1, 2019

dave2008 said:
Think of it as fatigue,minor injuries, and luck, that is what we do and it works just fine (for us & coupled with actual meat points). It doesn't seem odd to ask the cleric to cast heal on you because your exhausted and can't take much more before I suffer a lethal injury. And everyone is aware you are fatigued, scratched, bruised and can't take much more.

The best part about bruises is that they're highly visible, in exactly the same way that morale and luck are not.

dave2008 · Jun 1, 2019

Saelorn said:
The best part about bruises is that they're highly visible, in exactly the same way that morale and luck are not.

Yes, fatigue is fairly visible as well. I am not sure what you are suggesting. Both fatigue and bruises can have little to no impact on actual performance (I know from years of experience here

HP, IMO, works very well as an abstraction of three things: fatigue, minor injuries (scratches, bruises, etc.), and luck. Now, I like an actual hit to have more consequences then just death saves, so we added meat points (BHP) instead, which kick-in when you take a serious blow (you have 0 HP or on critical hits).

By escalating HP (as characters increase in level) we mimic the increased ability of the characters, and by keeping BHP constant we mimic how, no matter who you are, when you really get hit - its serious. This works well for us, but I admit it doesn't do a good job of simulating the last stand of Boromir and similar events. But in general it works for us.

Fenris-77 · Jun 1, 2019

I think people might be underestimating the amount of rework involved in removing hit points. The game scales around hit points. Damage output, PC and monster HP totals, spell damage etc. It might not be perfectly balanced, but thats the system. If you change HP the cascade of other changes to balance and gameplay is pretty huge. Unless you rescale damage to match the replacement system but then you do, as mentioned above, just have the same system with smaller numbers. Im not saying don't do it, but just be honest about the sheer amount of qork required to do it right.

It would be easier, and simpler, to change the healing mechanics. You'd get similar results for a lot less work. You could still layer on some rules to model increasing injury too, if that's your thing.

DND_Reborn · Jun 1, 2019

Fenris-77 said:
I think people might be underestimating the amount of rework involved in removing hit points. The game scales around hit points. Damage output, PC and monster HP totals, spell damage etc. It might not be perfectly balanced, but thats the system. If you change HP the cascade of other changes to balance and gameplay is pretty huge. Unless you rescale damage to match the replacement system but then you do, as mentioned above, just have the same system with smaller numbers. Im not saying don't do it, but just be honest about the sheer amount of qork required to do it right.

It would be easier, and simpler, to change the healing mechanics. You'd get similar results for a lot less work. You could still layer on some rules to model increasing injury too, if that's your thing.

Fenris-77 brings up an interesting point about removing systems or house-ruling them. If you can change one thing instead of another to achieve the same desired effect, go with the easiest option. For example, our table has been debating changing the AC mechanic to Armor give damage reduction, etc., but it worked out pretty balanced but resulted in nearly the same effect for combat as keeping AC as it is! Sure, you go hit more with our ideas, but your Armor absorbed some of the damage. The net balance worked out even, but it raised the point: why bother then? If our system achieves the same result in duration of combat and so out as the status quo, why bother changing it? So, we dropped it and continue with AC as is.

In working with HP, we found changing the healing systems (spells, rest, etc.) works more easily than trying to revamp the HP system.

Riley37 · Jun 1, 2019

I have been pondering, but have not hammered out nor play-tested, a system which combines D&D HP with the Mutants and Masterminds idea of rolling to see how well you survived damage. Track how many HP damage you have received. Every time this increases, make a CON saving throw against that DC. Assuming most PCs have CON 16, that means they're safe when they've taken 4 HP damage, since even if they roll 1, they'll pass that DC 4 saving throw. If they take 23 HP damage, then they need to roll 20 to make a DC 23 CON saving throw. How badly they fail the saving throw determines how badly they're injured. This plan has several downsides. One of those is changing the balance of power; a wizard and a rogue are now equally at risk, rather than one getting d6 and the other getting d10. Proficiency with CON saving throws becomes even more desirable, via class or the Resilient feat.

DND_Reborn · Jun 1, 2019

Riley37 said:
I have been pondering, but have not hammered out nor play-tested, a system which combines D&D HP with the Mutants and Masterminds idea of rolling to see how well you survived damage. Track how many HP damage you have received. Every time this increases, make a CON saving throw against that DC. Assuming most PCs have CON 16, that means they're safe when they've taken 4 HP damage, since even if they roll 1, they'll pass that DC 4 saving throw. If they take 23 HP damage, then they need to roll 20 to make a DC 23 CON saving throw. How badly they fail the saving throw determines how badly they're injured. This plan has several downsides. One of those is changing the balance of power; a wizard and a rogue are now equally at risk, rather than one getting d6 and the other getting d10. Proficiency with CON saving throws becomes even more desirable, via class or the Resilient feat.

So what happens if they fail the check? I am not familiar with Mutants and Masterminds.

As for the discrepancy between classes and HD type, you could add a bonus to the check. Also, if you make it a CON ability check instead of a save, it removes the advantage to classes with CON saves or desire for the Resilient (CON) feat.