D&D 5E Why different HD types for classes? (Another HP thread...)

[DND_Reborn]

Well, I made a joke because IMO (and in all honesty) this is a very stupid discussion.

If hit points are meat, then it also doesn't really matter what the hit dice are set for, because you could have a big ol' wizard. With tons o' meat.

It's only when you agree that, to some extent, hit points are an abstraction for various game concepts that you then understand that you can set them at (somewhat) arbitrary amounts; specifically, you are balancing between melee/martial characters and pew pew pew characters.

You can always quibble about the amounts (d4 or d6 for casters, d10 or d12 for martials, etc.), but it is (and always has been) a balancing aspect related to the abstract concept of hit points, not a "meat" aspect.

In short, the differnce has nothing to do with the "meat" v. "abstract," and, worse, this will likely just become another "meat" v "abstract" discussion.

Fine. It is pretty simple. If you don't like a discussion, don't participate. There is no reason to make a joke (even a stupid one) when someone wants to actually have a discussion on the topic.

As I stipulated in the OP, this isn't a "meat" HP issue. It is a carryover from prior editions and something I think warrants discussion and consideration. Other aspects of the game balance things out to make battlers tougher. Also, half the classes already use a d8 anyway. At 10 levels, even, you're typically talking about a difference of about a dozen HP?

 

[ccs]

It's an abstraction of the classes focus on physical prowess & fighting ability.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[DND_Reborn]

It is a curious fact that people are never so trivial as when they take themselves seriously; as such, I endeavor, at all times, to avoid that terrible fate.

It isn't a fact. Avoid whatever you want, Oscar... like maybe this thread?

 

[Leatherhead]

The warrior types have more HP because they need more HP in order to go into melee combat.

The only classes that have below Commoner (d8) hp are the Wizard and the Sorcerer. You could argue that's strange, but it's also sort of reflected in the fluff of Warlocks, who canonically "cheat" to get their arcane prowess by having an intermediary like Clerics and Druids do. Which leaves Bards as the only class that doesn't really fit the mold, though you could argue that they are all cheats too.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Also, since front-liners tend to have better Constitution scores anyway because they want more HP

I don't think that is true. Because concentration.

I find that constitution tends to be the second or third highest stat for the vast majority of PCs, irrespective of class.

 

[DND_Reborn]

The warrior types have more HP because they need more HP in order to go into melee combat.

The only classes that have below Commoner (d8) hp are the Wizard and the Sorcerer. You could argue that's strange, but it's also sort of reflected in the fluff of Warlocks, who canonically "cheat" to get their arcane prowess by having an intermediary like Clerics and Druids do. Which leaves Bards as the only class that doesn't really fit the mold, though you could argue that they are all cheats too.

I understand that of course, but they also tend to have better ACs, which reflects that need in combat IMO.

And bards cheat at everything.

I don't think that is true. Because concetration.

I find that constitution tends to be the second or third highest stat for the vast majority of PCs, irrespective of class.

I completely agree CON tends to be no worse than 3rd IME for most characters, but even so I think you'll find warrior-types still normally have better CONs on average. I won't say it is much higher, but probably a +1 bonus on average. Of course, player preference and tables vary so this might not be you experience.

 

[Charlaquin]

So, the real answer is that it was conceived as a game balance tool and nowadays is mostly a legacy mechanic. But if you want to know in terms of the fiction why some classes have larger hit dice, it’s a combination of physical toughness and conditioning that comes with physical combat, and skill at reducing the impact of a strike that comes from training and experience. While the wizard spent his time studying spells, the fighter spent her time practicing getting hit by things.

 

[Leatherhead]

I understand that of course, but they also tend to have better ACs, which reflects that need in combat IMO.

That's kind of debatable honestly. I see a lot of warrior types picking up a two-handed weapon (or possibly even two weapons) of some kind, which would put them at a disadvantage in the AC department against anyone using a shield.

AC also doesn't cover damage which comes from saving throws, like a Dragon's breath weapon, which the Warrior types are expected to bear the brunt of.

 

[Charlaquin]

I completely agree CON tends to be no worse than 3rd IME for most characters, but even so I think you'll find warrior-types still normally have better CONs on average. I won't say it is much higher, but probably a +1 bonus on average. Of course, player preference and tables vary so this might not be you experience.

In my experience it’s everyone’s second or third highest stat, depending on how MAD or SAD the class is.