D&D 5E (2014) Restoring Name Level to 5e

[Pauln6]

Given the bounded nature of 5e, would it be possible to bring back name level for player characters?

Essentially, this limited the hit points, narrowed the gap between high and low Con characters and limited hit point bloat once the PCs had a decent chunk of hp in the bank. At Name level (9-11 for most classes) the players ceased to roll for hit points and we're given a flat rate with no con bonus. This was typically 4hp for fighters and barbarians, 3hp for fighter subclasses like Ranger and Paladin, 2hp for everyone else, except 1hp for wizards (and sorcerers in 5e).

Given that save or die is now hp damage, I was wondering what changes might need to be made to mid and high level monsters to try and facilitate this change. Is there a simple formula that could be applied across the board to damage, such as reducing the size of dice rolled?

 

[DwarfHammer]

I would do 3 for the warriors classes and 2 for everyone else. It would probaly work pretty good with the lack of high level spell slots. As magic is pretty weak in this edition. I like it.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I don't see any real changes that would be needed to monsters, other than if you are nerfing PC hp you might want to nerf monsters as well if you want to maintain the balance. If you want it to be harder, no change is needed IMO.

I think the 4,3,2,1 would work as well, but might create too much separation so @DwarfHammer's suggestion might be better. You'll have to try it out.

Also, how often do you find your game reaching levels past 9-11th?

 

[Pauln6]

I don't see any real changes that would be needed to monsters, other than if you are nerfing PC hp you might want to nerf monsters as well if you want to maintain the balance. If you want it to be harder, no change is needed IMO.

I think the 4,3,2,1 would work as well, but might create too much separation so @DwarfHammer's suggestion might be better. You'll have to try it out.

Also, how often do you find your game reaching levels past 9-11th?

Our group is 10-15.

Monster hp are fine I think. My current concern is that some PCs can be reduced to less than half hp in round one, while tanks can get through several fights with barely a scratch. If hp are closer together, then I might be able to scale back their higher level damage to put the rogues and wizards at slightly less risk.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Our group is 10-15.

Monster hp are fine I think. My current concern is that some PCs can be reduced to less than half hp in round one, while tanks can get through several fights with barely a scratch. If hp are closer together, then I might be able to scale back their higher level damage to put the rogues and wizards at slightly less risk.

A couple other options from the game I am running next:

You HP mod is not your CON. It is your best ability score (so it could be your CON, but likely won't be). This allows each character to benefit from their best ability to their HP, so Rogues will benefit from avoiding blows (DEX), clerics rely on their faith (WIS), and wizards anticipate their foe's attack (INT), etc. All six ability scores can be justified to boosting HP, not just CON.

You only apply your HP mod at level 1. Afterwards it is always just gaining HD, which you must roll.

Without the HP mod applied to every level, HP is lower over course and might suite your goal.

 

[Charlaquin]

Given the bounded nature of 5e, would it be possible to bring back name level for player characters?

Essentially, this limited the hit points, narrowed the gap between high and low Con characters and limited hit point bloat once the PCs had a decent chunk of hp in the bank. At Name level (9-11 for most classes) the players ceased to roll for hit points and we're given a flat rate with no con bonus. This was typically 4hp for fighters and barbarians, 3hp for fighter subclasses like Ranger and Paladin, 2hp for everyone else, except 1hp for wizards (and sorcerers in 5e).

Given that save or die is now hp damage, I was wondering what changes might need to be made to mid and high level monsters to try and facilitate this change. Is there a simple formula that could be applied across the board to damage, such as reducing the size of dice rolled?

5e does give you the option when you level up to either roll your class hit die for how many HP you gain or take a fixed value based on your class. You could always rule that players must roll until 10th level, after which they must take the fixed value. I’ve considered experimenting with this myself.

 

[Li Shenron]

Our group is 10-15.

Monster hp are fine I think. My current concern is that some PCs can be reduced to less than half hp in round one, while tanks can get through several fights with barely a scratch. If hp are closer together, then I might be able to scale back their higher level damage to put the rogues and wizards at slightly less risk.

So in order to help Wizards and Rogues, you are going to penalize others, so that you can then scale back damage and possibly find that you need to change other monsters stats?

If you have a problem with one thing, change that one thing. Give more HP to Wizards and Rogues, problem solved.

 

[Fanaelialae]

My current concern is that some PCs can be reduced to less than half hp in round one, while tanks can get through several fights with barely a scratch.

I've run a fair amount of high level 5e and I haven't had this issue with tanks. They're certainly more resilient than the other party members, but that is by design. Not anywhere near as tough as you're describing though.

Are you handing out armor and shields with bonuses? That is something that I've always been very careful about in my 5e campaigns, so it's possible that's what's making the difference.

Personally, I would be careful about making such a change. Without modifying monster damage, you need to be aware that you are going to make the game harder (and that difficulty curve is going to grow steeper as they approach level 20). If you do modify monster damage, I think you'll throw CR 8 and lower monster damage out of whack with CR 9 plus monster damage (because there's no reason to nerf monsters before the HP soft cap, but then creatures after the cap are weaker due to the damage penalty).

5e is fairly robust and may be able to handle the changes you're proposing. These are just a few things to consider should you choose to go this route.

 

[Ashrym]

Our group is 10-15.

Monster hp are fine I think. My current concern is that some PCs can be reduced to less than half hp in round one, while tanks can get through several fights with barely a scratch. If hp are closer together, then I might be able to scale back their higher level damage to put the rogues and wizards at slightly less risk.

That's one of the traded off points for the added versatility some classes have. It doesn't make sense to me to work on marginalizing the hit point drawback in having taken theses classes. That drawback is there because the higher hit points in other classes are meant to be a significant advantage.

 

[Helldritch]

Our group is 10-15.

Monster hp are fine I think. My current concern is that some PCs can be reduced to less than half hp in round one, while tanks can get through several fights with barely a scratch. If hp are closer together, then I might be able to scale back their higher level damage to put the rogues and wizards at slightly less risk.

Is it every fights? If not which event types are leading to this situation? Could it be a problem related to the play style of players vs your own?

This thing rarely happens in my games. I rarely get to attack the lower hp characters as they are in the back. Of course it might be that I have 6 players in my two groups so the two (or three in one group) front liners (without counting the clerics in heavy armor) are able to shield the less armored characters... Could you tell us about a few of the situations that led you to think as you do?