Removing Hit Points from the Game

[The Crimson Binome]

You could, except the games that implement static single digit hit points tend to have highly aggressive 'wound tracks' where each loss of hit points carries with it a commiserate debuff, which tends to change the problem from "every attack is save or die" to "every attack is save or suck". And while leaves you with some opportunity to respond, typically you have relatively few options to do so. They also tend to have mechanics that allow for more than a single point of damage to occur at once.

A wound track is a reasonable HP alternative. I mean, there's a huge difference between an HP system and no system, but the difference between an HP system and a wound track is not necessarily that significant.

Even if the first wound gives the equivalent of Disadvantage on every check, that can present an interesting choice in terms of action economy, whether you hide from the fight (and thus deprive your team of a meaningful action each round), or risk serious injury in order to keep contributing. If you compare it to the HP system from 1E, where you didn't have Disadvantage but you died instantly when you ran out of HP, then it presents much the same choice. It's not quite a true Hunter's Dilemma, since there are a bunch of dice involved, but if every individual fled when they were first bloodied then the enemy would have a much greater chance of prevailing.

 

[Celebrim]

A wound track is a reasonable HP alternative. I mean, there's a huge difference between an HP system and no system, but the difference between an HP system and a wound track is not necessarily that significant.

True, and they can blur at the edges.

For example, you can implement both hit points and a wound track by having statuses that come into effect when you have various fractions of your max hit points.

One of the biggest problems I have with 5e though makes this tough to adapt to 5e, and that is that in an effort to get rid of the fiddliness of prior editions they introduced a very elegant advantage/disadvantage mechanic. And it's really elegant but what it lacks is any concept of 'extra advantaged' or 'extra disadvantaged'. So if you are already advantaged, there is no value in trying to do anything that would increase your advantage and if your already disadvantaged there is no value in avoiding doing things that increase your disadvantage. Things are already as bad as they can get. You are never forced to throw 3 or 4 die and choose the best/worse. If you do something like, "If you have less than 50% hit points, you are 'wounded' and have disadvantage on all rolls.", you might mitigate some of the hit point inflation by punishing you tactically for choices that get you wounded, but you interact negatively with the rest of the system. So while getting rid of fiddliness was worthwhile, it really feels like a big tradeoff.

My homebrew system has a quasi-wound track where if you are reduced to 10% or less of your hit points, you are 'staggered' and limited to partial actions, and reduced to less than 0 hit points you are dying. So in a sense, you have 3 hit points - healthy, staggered, dying (and then dead). But there is space between those situations that you don't have in a true wound track. And of course, if I wanted even more complexity (which 5e could probably withstand) I could have more boxes on the quasi-wound track.

 

[Mercule]

Personally, I don't think you can remove HP from the game and have it still function -- at least not without reworking enough other mechanics such that it is no longer recognizable as D&D. I really think you have two options:

1) Put whatever fluff you need to around HP so that it no longer causes pain. My preference is that hit point is an abstraction that incorporates some elements of skill and luck that could be handled by some other mechanic (say, defensive bonus on AC), but aren't for... reasons. Narrate it, if you want. Or, just ignore it. Yes, it's awkward if you're looking at it directly, but I just mentally stick it in the back bedroom and don't open that door -- while I refer to it as my "craft room" during public conversations. To an extent, this is exactly what you're doing in any number of video games that only show you a health bar, but still have a number, if you look at your character details.

2) Switch to another system that is built to not use HP. Savage Worlds, Fate, or Fantasy Hero all come to mind well enough. IIRC, Genesys uses a wounds system, and it's roughly the same level of complexity as 5E.

Whether you choose option #1 or #2 depends on your priorities. You decide what they are and live with them. Personally, I loathe the class/level mechanics and pseudo-Vancian spell slots (5E magic is tolerably improved), but I like having a Monster Manual and some other niceties, so I stick with D&D. YMMV.

 

[scoolio]

As a player of "other than D&D" systems for the last 20 years I struggle with the Hit Points problem as well. I've been debating doing a limit on HP and giving full Hit Points for Levels 1-3 to boost survivability and then just allow 1HP + Con bonus for every level after that. Unfortunately this means that I have to also adjust things like a Fireball cast as a 9th level spell issues as they occur in game.

 

[Charlaquin]

As a player of "other than D&D" systems for the last 20 years I struggle with the Hit Points problem as well. I've been debating doing a limit on HP and giving full Hit Points for Levels 1-3 to boost survivability and then just allow 1HP + Con bonus for every level after that. Unfortunately this means that I have to also adjust things like a Fireball cast as a 9th level spell issues as they occur in game.

Yeah, if HP doesn’t increase significantly throughout a character’s career but damage remains the same, survivability is going to dramatically decrease as characters gain levels, which is very counter-intuitive. For a change like this, you’d pretty much have to re-write half the game to adjust damage scaling to suit your new HP scaling.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Yeah, if HP doesn’t increase significantly throughout a character’s career but damage remains the same, survivability is going to dramatically decrease as characters gain levels, which is very counter-intuitive. For a change like this, you’d pretty much have to re-write half the game to adjust damage scaling to suit your new HP scaling.

I agree that it's counter-intuitive, and it's not to my taste, but I would expect that lower survivability at higher levels is the goal of such an effort.

If you reduce HP but then scale damage to match, all you're left with is the same game with slightly smaller numbers. That doesn't seem like it would be worth the effort.

On the other hand, if you reduce HP but don't scale the damage to match, you end up with a game that plays very differently. High level characters would have a lot more damage output than low levels, but wouldn't have grown much in terms of survivability. As such, they'd be powerful but cautious. I don't think it would be my cup of tea, but there are probably some out there who would enjoy it.

 

[HJFudge]

One thing I have wanted to try but have not yet got around to, is simply changing what I call Hit Points to Morale Points, and then narrating successful attacks and such in a different way than 'He hits you with his sword, cutting you deeply!'.

Mechanically? Nothing would change, so if your issue is with slow combat or what not this won't help at all. However, if you want to have a different 'narrative feel' to the game, simply having successful attacks against a PC not do damage but instead 'scare them, shake them, make them want to give up hope, etc' I would think this might assist. Perhaps at certain percentage points you can narrate an actual wound.

This simulates the battle being an expert affair, where each hit can be devastating...and that the enemies don't wear down on the characters meat but rather their state of mind. The fighter keeps getting almost overwhelmed by the goblins strikes...parrying or blocking each one but maybe a few of them have gotten too close for comfort, and are tiring him out...making him doubt himself, etc.

 

[ART!]

I'd probably buy in if I could get some "sub levelling" in. Like, even if it took 6 months to get to 5th level, if I gained an extra ASI or a feat halfway through, that would satisfy me.

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)?

 

[The Crimson Binome]

One thing I have wanted to try but have not yet got around to, is simply changing what I call Hit Points to Morale Points, and then narrating successful attacks and such in a different way than 'He hits you with his sword, cutting you deeply!'.

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.

 

[HJFudge]

But morale potions exist in real life! Its called booze Liquid Courage and all that.

Also, there have been plenty situations I have been in where no one has been injured, but someone remarks 'Ugh, I need a drink' and no one thinks this odd...as we are mostly feeling the same way. This usually occurs during holiday season with the extended family, or after a brutal work day