Why I Think Rolling For Hit Points is a Bad Thing

[B.T.]

Roll all HD at each level to calculate HP. Is the HP that you rolled larger than your maximum? Good, you keep it. Is it smaller than your maximum? Keep the old value as a consolation prize.

 

[imurphy943]

This thread is making me wonder how many people would like to roll randomly for other character creation features, though.

Like, you go to take the Commoner background and it gives you 3 skills on average, but you can roll 3d6 and divide by 3 for # of skills (rounding down as usual).

Or instead of giving a damage bonus at set levels, fighters roll a d20 every level and get +1 damage whenever they roll an 11 or higher.

As a player, I'd take that option. As a DM, I'd let my players take that option if they did all the extra rolling themselves.

(and everyone will).

 

[Wulfgar76]

We always roll for stats and HPs.

What happens when the fighter rolls a 1 for his hit points?

Just curious.

In my 25 years of D&D I have never not seen a DM house-rule this to one degree or another.

 

[kitsune9]

I would only agree with the OP if the game is built on the assumption that requires X hp per level; however, I think the designers are definitely going with mean assumptions thus they expect a fighter who gets a d12 hit die to survive on 6.5 hp per level as opposed that the fighter should have 7.5, 8.5, or any other number of hp.

However, I understand the point of having static hp gain. It's a great rule for tournament play as it tries to keep pretty much all characters on a even field.

On a more personal level, I like the challenge of surviving a level should I only roll a 1 for my next hit die.

 

[Janaxstrus]

What happens when the fighter rolls a 1 for his hit points?

Just curious.

In my 25 years of D&D I have never not seen a DM house-rule this to one degree or another.

Back in the old days? He got 1 for HPs.
More recently? HP "Advantage", aka, player rolls once, DM rolls once. Take whichever roll you want. If both roll a 1, you get a 1.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

What happens when the fighter rolls a 1 for his hit points?

Just curious.

In my 25 years of D&D I have never not seen a DM house-rule this to one degree or another.

In my game, he gets a one. Why bother rolling if you're not going to accept the roll?

 

[renau1g]

We always rolled for hp in the 3.5e, some lucky rolls for me and some really unlucky ones for a friend and my tiefling rogue had almost as many hp's as his half-orc barbarian for a bit. It was fun. Then I rolled a 1 next level and he rolled a 12. By level 12, we looked at the average and my rogue rolled a 4 on average, his was a 6. He was slightly below average, I was slightly above. Even though at level 4-ish we were about the same (we rolled all levels, including level 1).

I like that it's back. It's super-simple to house-rule too. Just use average hp. Odd-levels get rounded down, even levels get rounded up hp, or just round up every time.

 

[Wulfgar76]

Back in the old days? He got 1 for HPs.
More recently? HP "Advantage", aka, player rolls once, DM rolls once. Take whichever roll you want. If both roll a 1, you get a 1.

This is what my DM did when I first began playing in the 2e days and I adopted it going into 3rd edition.

Eventually players began pleading for mercy when both of us rolled low for hit points. Ultimately we began using average HD (rounded up) and rolling for hit points became a relic.

I hope to see both options available and the DM can choose which method he wants to go with.

 

[Steely_Dan]

I hope to see both options available and the DM can choose which method he wants to go with.

I think the group should decide on that (not to take away DM influence, which seems to be quite popular amongst certain D&D mindsets these days).

 

[BobTheNob]

Yes, character A sucks more than character B.

If people care about differentiating their characters, they'll do so with different creative conceptions, different races, different armor, different weapons, they'll play their characters differently.

If two people choose the same race, class, theme, background, armor, weapons, and play the same way, then 10 hp or 8 hp is not going to make them seriously different. They're still going to both be dwarven fighters in heavy armor with a long sword and shield.

I spend alot of time disagreeing with Shidaku...but this time I will totally agree!!!! (and would have xp'd if it was switched on)

If people think that random HP is required to create differentiation in characters, I wonder if they are looking hard enough. My group have been using set HP since 3e (Se what...12 years) and through 4e and I can honestly say that not once has a character appeared "same" as another as a result.

Now with 5e, characters have 4 way character definition (race, class, theme background) which is more refined than ever!!...and still people are arguing "without random hp, characters will be same same".

Sometimes I understand an argument and can see how people came to that conclusion (even when I disagree), but this time, I just dont see how the conclusion that static HP = same/same (/homoginised) characters could possibly have been reached.