Reduced Monster Hit Points Results

[pdoconnell]

I think the important thing I've seen (only done it in three sessions, so four combats give or take) is that the damage range can be somewhat unpredictable. A player who takes a couple bad hits can be extremely knocked around, and can find themselves in very precarious positions if they're less than 10hp before that hit. It becomes EXTREMELY dangerous in any combat with a creature that can give ongoing damage. Speaking of which, don't adjust ongoing damage. Even ongoing 5 is scary, ongoing 10 is scary but still reasonable, but ongoing 15 is devastating. Maybe it isn't at epic, but I don't know if there's enough hp still to make it ok.

Party is 13th level with a Warlord, Cleric, Sorcerer, Paladin, and Warlock. If a striker gets picked on by a brute or more than one other monster, they get messed up quick. Last encounter the Warlock was hovering around 5hp every round after the first, survived but still very scary for her and that was with at least one leader focusing healing on her every round. Any action-removing power where a character can't move (stunned, dazed, immobilized) is potentially lethal. In this particular combat, they were fighting 4 Ash Remnants and immobilization keeping them locked down, and they would be in fear of being mobbed. I have a feeling ghouls would kill one of them.

Combat threat does depend on the monsters. I'm playing at level 13 right now, and based on looking at hp scaling, if a creature is going up on average 4-5hp or so every level, every 5 levels it'll add a round of combat which pretty dangerous at first glance. Creatures 3+ levels above a party are dangerous originally, in this version they are exceedingly difficult. I haven't done the actual math on these things, since I really don't have the time, but just looking at it.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Combat threat does depend on the monsters. I'm playing at level 13 right now, and based on looking at hp scaling, if a creature is going up on average 4-5hp or so every level, every 5 levels it'll add a round of combat which pretty dangerous at first glance. Creatures 3+ levels above a party are dangerous originally, in this version they are exceedingly difficult. I haven't done the actual math on these things, since I really don't have the time, but just looking at it.

Well, yeah, you've pointed out two potential issues. One is swinginess. When you crank monster damage you've got the potential to just kill PCs outright in a single round, which generally isn't possible (or likely) with standard damage outputs.

I agree about higher level monsters too. It isn't really about their hit points so much. Sure they'll be LESS of a threat at 50% hit points, but with their higher defenses they may well simply not GET damaged if the party has even a bit of poor luck on a couple rolls. The higher level damage is then really significantly lethal.

The other issue that I haven't seen addressed though is skew. When you have low hit point opponents fights become shorter in rounds and anything that doesn't simply do quantities of damage becomes considerably devalued. Why bother with wizard AoE control effect spells when even a moderate amount of focus fire will just wipe the monster out? You lose some of the tactical positioning aspects of combat as well since any plan that requires a couple rounds to pay off is just not worth it. You'll also significantly narrow the character's viable actions due to action economy as well. In a 4 round fight it is unlikely to be worth using a standard action for anything except a direct attack.

 

[pdoconnell]

Well, yeah, you've pointed out two potential issues. One is swinginess. When you crank monster damage you've got the potential to just kill PCs outright in a single round, which generally isn't possible (or likely) with standard damage outputs.

I agree about higher level monsters too. It isn't really about their hit points so much. Sure they'll be LESS of a threat at 50% hit points, but with their higher defenses they may well simply not GET damaged if the party has even a bit of poor luck on a couple rolls. The higher level damage is then really significantly lethal.

The other issue that I haven't seen addressed though is skew. When you have low hit point opponents fights become shorter in rounds and anything that doesn't simply do quantities of damage becomes considerably devalued. Why bother with wizard AoE control effect spells when even a moderate amount of focus fire will just wipe the monster out? You lose some of the tactical positioning aspects of combat as well since any plan that requires a couple rounds to pay off is just not worth it. You'll also significantly narrow the character's viable actions due to action economy as well. In a 4 round fight it is unlikely to be worth using a standard action for anything except a direct attack.

I actually think the concept of less time of battle has done one good thing for me and that's it makes terrain far more important. If an enemy can take a couple swings and not even be bloodied, it is far more willing to sit in the open and not run behind rocks or walls. If any hit can be over 50% of a creature's hitpoints, they tend to be smarter (or at least I am lol). Players move around a lot more too, because as monsters drop, they have to go after the next one. Increasing terrain damage is something I've also done, except for falling damage. I haven't had an opportunity to ponder falling damage much, may be worthwhile to increase but I"m not sure.

Another thing, it becomes somewhat more interesting to have more lower-level enemies. They may not hit much, but they're still threatening when they hit. Minions are the same, throw in a lot more lower-level minions and its no longer "oh, they hit me for 7-10 damage" but instead "damn! thats another 10-15 damage! we need to deal with these!"

As to whether to increase damage from +50% to +100%, I'd say the big question is how many higher level threats are there? Keeping the enemy range from +/- 1 level of the party, it may not be too bad. If you get above +2 of the party though, I'm not sure if that would go well.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I actually think the concept of less time of battle has done one good thing for me and that's it makes terrain far more important. If an enemy can take a couple swings and not even be bloodied, it is far more willing to sit in the open and not run behind rocks or walls. If any hit can be over 50% of a creature's hitpoints, they tend to be smarter (or at least I am lol). Players move around a lot more too, because as monsters drop, they have to go after the next one. Increasing terrain damage is something I've also done, except for falling damage. I haven't had an opportunity to ponder falling damage much, may be worthwhile to increase but I"m not sure.

Another thing, it becomes somewhat more interesting to have more lower-level enemies. They may not hit much, but they're still threatening when they hit. Minions are the same, throw in a lot more lower-level minions and its no longer "oh, they hit me for 7-10 damage" but instead "damn! thats another 10-15 damage! we need to deal with these!"

As to whether to increase damage from +50% to +100%, I'd say the big question is how many higher level threats are there? Keeping the enemy range from +/- 1 level of the party, it may not be too bad. If you get above +2 of the party though, I'm not sure if that would go well.

Well, overall my points are based more on analysis than experience with trying it, so I don't think they should be given TOO high a weight either. Once or twice I have run into games where they were trying to do this and were having some odd things happen, but it can be pretty hard to sort out one specific house rule as being the reason for something too. So its not a bad experiment to try and I'm interested in hearing more about how it actually went for people.

I'm still not that unimpressed with regular old minions though. I think there are definitely certain characters that can really clean them out, but even with a pretty good control wizard in the party I'm DMing they still regularly manage to get the party's attention. Had a level 7 battle the other day where I had 4 level 7 minions. They didn't have a HUGE impact, but they closed with the party and got hits. One got cleaved, another the STR cleric finally had to bash with healing strike, 2 others fell to the warlock's rod of reaving but it was round 4 before the last one went down, so they got an average of 2-3 swings, probably 10 attacks in all, 5 hits, so 25 damage. I suppose doubling it might have made them scarier, but I probably should have upped it to like 7 per hit anyway at that level.

 

[the Jester]

I've run a fair amount of 50% hps, 200% damage monsters in my campaign, and it has worked just fine. However, my party is large and has multiple leaders, so I wonder if I am undervaluing that damage increase somewhat.

Lemme just add that this GREATLY increases the swinginess of encounters, though.

 

[nicholasgeorg]

I've been using the 50% HP / 200% damage tweak for the past few sessions.

I think it's great, but it does have major problems.

Fast combat is awesome. In a four hour session, we might have 3 or 4 combats, lots of exploration and roleplaying and storytelling. Last night we had a bunch of exposition, a couple of quick combats (one didn't even need a tactical map) and a BBEG fight with 15 minions, 6 soldiers (2 leaders), an artillery, and the BBEG himself. The whole combat lasted 6 rounds, about 2 hours of game time, and the swordmage and warlord were both 2 hp away from negative bloodied.

However, tactics can be messed up. The fighter is at a bigger disadvantage, because a come-and-get-it can kill him fast. Basically, no one can stand toe to toe with anyone and trade more than 3 solid hits without going down. I've stopped doing coup de gras, but it's really scary.

I don't double damage for minions, ongoing, or traps. I am also doubling XP, because I want the campaign to move as quickly as possible.

 

[Tuft]

I've been using the 50% HP / 200% damage tweak for the past few sessions.

I think it's great, but it does have major problems.

Fast combat is awesome. In a four hour session, we might have 3 or 4 combats, lots of exploration and roleplaying and storytelling. Last night we had a bunch of exposition, a couple of quick combats (one didn't even need a tactical map) and a BBEG fight with 15 minions, 6 soldiers (2 leaders), an artillery, and the BBEG himself. The whole combat lasted 6 rounds, about 2 hours of game time, and the swordmage and warlord were both 2 hp away from negative bloodied.

However, tactics can be messed up. The fighter is at a bigger disadvantage, because a come-and-get-it can kill him fast. Basically, no one can stand toe to toe with anyone and trade more than 3 solid hits without going down. I've stopped doing coup de gras, but it's really scary.

I don't double damage for minions, ongoing, or traps. I am also doubling XP, because I want the campaign to move as quickly as possible.

One thing we noted immediately is the effect of powers that make the monsters attack themselves, such as Fool's Opportunity, Bloody Path, all domination effects, etc...

 

[Starfox]

How long does your fights last? Mine lasts as I mentioned about 5 rounds, so yours should last maybe 3? That isn't even enough to blow through all your encounter powers at higher levels, much less any dailies?

Using double damage/half hp monsters, my two fights yesterday lasted about 5 rounds each. These were tough fights, at level +3 or +4.

 

[the Jester]

One thing we noted immediately is the effect of powers that make the monsters attack themselves, such as Fool's Opportunity, Bloody Path, all domination effects, etc...

Yoinks.

I've been using the half hps, double damage for some monsters- sometimes mixing an encounter up with some "faster damage and die" monsters and some standard ones.

Oh yeah, and when I do it, I double damage dice only- so if the default monster does 1d10+3 damage, the "faster damage and die" version does 2d10+3. (This also means no increase in ongoing damage.)

 

[keterys]

To be fair, powers that make monsters attack themselves tend to actually not be terribly effective compared to actual PC attacks. So them becoming more effective is probably not too scary.