D&D General Adjusting Constitution

[ezo]

What do you think? Would you play in a game with these rules? Are there any pitfalls you see?

Right now my game is more "RAW" than normal... @DND_Reborn misses all his tweaking... but this is something we embraced for a while and it works well if you want to keep hit points higher.

Since then, we've returned to a more managable amount of hit points, but what you are suggesting should work fine IME.

In case you're wondering: our current house-rule is:

1st level: max HD plus the total of ALL your ability modifiers (typically this is +6 or 7, but sometimes can be better if ability scores are rolled.
After 1st: average (round DOWN!) or roll.

But, like I said, when we tried the rule as you have it, the HP bloat just becomes ridiculous. It can work depending on your game style, of course, just didn't work well for us.

 

[Horwath]

Right now my game is more "RAW" than normal... @DND_Reborn misses all his tweaking... but this is something we embraced for a while and it works well if you want to keep hit points higher.

Since then, we've returned to a more managable amount of hit points, but what you are suggesting should work fine IME.

In case you're wondering: our current house-rule is:

1st level: max HD plus the total of ALL your ability modifiers (typically this is +6 or 7, but sometimes can be better if ability scores are rolled.
After 1st: average (round DOWN!) or roll.

But, like I said, when we tried the rule as you have it, the HP bloat just becomes ridiculous. It can work depending on your game style, of course, just didn't work well for us.

is the total modifier applied for HPs after 1st level?

this could be nice application for not min-maxing your point buy:

15+1,15+1,15+1, 8,8,8
modifiers: +3+3+3-1-1-1, total 6

13+1,13+1,13+1,12,12,12
modifiers: +2+2+2+1+1+1, total 9

 

[ezo]

is the total modifier applied for HPs after 1st level?

At first level. If the modifiers increase during play, you gain more hp. If they decrease, you lose hp.

this could be nice application for not min-maxing your point buy:

15+1,15+1,15+1, 8,8,8
modifiers: +3+3+3-1-1-1, total 6

13+1,13+1,13+1,12,12,12
modifiers: +2+2+2+1+1+1, total 9

Yep, few do min-max.

We also like it because of the abstract nature of HP, you benefit from ALL your ability modifiers.

 

[Hawk Diesel]

All right, so I have to admit this has gotten me to go down a rabbit hole of sorts. As I think about HP between classes, I can't help but feel odd about having 9th level casters put on the same tier (HP-wise) as rogues and monks. Additionally, if wizards and sorcerers are given a the lowest tier of d6 HD because of their spell lists, then what of the bard that can now access all wizard spells by 10th level?

I find myself going back and forth on how to resolve this issue. Do rogues and monks move up to the next tier? Do all full casters move down a tier? I also feel like maybe fighters should move up to the same tier as barbarians.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Careful, admitting that this came from 4e might not be wise. Lotta folks will turn up their nose just hearing the name. Though I appreciate that you did, in fact, mention it.

is the total modifier applied for HPs after 1st level?

this could be nice application for not min-maxing your point buy:

15+1,15+1,15+1, 8,8,8
modifiers: +3+3+3-1-1-1, total 6

13+1,13+1,13+1,12,12,12
modifiers: +2+2+2+1+1+1, total 9

At least with the way 4e did it, yes, increasing your Constitution score after first level did in fact increase your total HP.

All right, so I have to admit this has gotten me to go down a rabbit hole of sorts. As I think about HP between classes, I can't help but feel odd about having 9th level casters put on the same tier (HP-wise) as rogues and monks. Additionally, if wizards and sorcerers are given a the lowest tier of d6 HD because of their spell lists, then what of the bard that can now access all wizard spells by 10th level?

I find myself going back and forth on how to resolve this issue. Do rogues and monks move up to the next tier? Do all full casters move down a tier? I also feel like maybe fighters should move up to the same tier as barbarians.

In 4e, Wizards and other relatively squishy/"glass cannon" types (e.g. Invoker, Assassin, and Psion) got 4 HP per level after first, which means they had effectively d6 HP, average roll rounded up. The vast majority of classes, including Rangers, got 5 HP/level, equivalent to d8. Fighters, Paladins, and most other tanky-type classes got 6 HP/level, equivalent to d10; this is one of the (subtle) ways that shows that the Avenger, despite wearing cloth and being mostly a speedster, was in fact able to moonlight as a Defender because they had high HP and could get high AC via feats.

The only class that had more HP per level was Warden, which got 7 (equivalent to average d12, rounded up). Barbarians did not get bigger hit dice, and instead got various forms of self-healing, THP, or otherwise high self-sustain instead of having a bigger raw health pool per se. (Also, in general, Primal classes loved boosting CON, so they tended to have a lot of health regardless.)

Keep in mind that you DON'T add your constitution modifier to each level's HP, so the Wizard is gaining only 2/3 of the HP the Paladin or Fighter is, and only 80% of a Warlock or Ranger's gained HP. It may not seem like much, but they definitely still start out behind and, without intentional investment, they'll always be outstripped.

The absolute maximum HP a character can get (excluding taking feats or something) is being a Warden (17+Constitution at 1st level, +7 HP per level), starting with 20 Con and increasing it to 30 by the time you hit max level. For convenience, I'll treat it as "10+Constitution" base HP + 7xlevel gained XP, for a total of 40+210 = 250 HP. Toughness only adds an additional +15 HP, so realistically, the maximum total HP a level 30 Warden could have is 265. The minimum possible HP for a 4e character is a level 30 Wizard who started with 8 Constitution (which naturally increases by +1 at level 11 and 21, for a total of 10); they would have 18 (base HP) + 29x4 = 134 HP.

For comparison, a 20th level 5e Barbarian today, who maximizes Con and grabs Tough, has 12+7 (Con mod)+2 (Tough) = 21 HP from first level, and 7+7+2 = 16 additional HP per level thereafter, capping out at a whopping 325 HP. Meanwhile, the weakling 5e Wizard (-1 Con mod, so 5 HP at first level and 3 HP thereafter) caps out at a measly 62.

There's still plenty of space between the stoutest and flimsiest characters in 4e--it's just not the absolute ridiculousness (over 250 HP!) you find in 5e. Oh, and those 5e numbers scale dramatically faster, since we're looking at 30 levels of 4e vs only 20 levels of 5e. If you confine things to only the first 20 levels, the Warden up there won't even crack 200 HP. In other words: HP scale dramatically faster in 5e than they ever did in 4e. You start off incredibly flimsy, but as long as you didn't neglect your Con mod, you'll almost surely grow well past not just an equal-level 4e character, but a higher-level one.

 

[Xeviat]

All right, so I have to admit this has gotten me to go down a rabbit hole of sorts. As I think about HP between classes, I can't help but feel odd about having 9th level casters put on the same tier (HP-wise) as rogues and monks. Additionally, if wizards and sorcerers are given a the lowest tier of d6 HD because of their spell lists, then what of the bard that can now access all wizard spells by 10th level?

I find myself going back and forth on how to resolve this issue. Do rogues and monks move up to the next tier? Do all full casters move down a tier? I also feel like maybe fighters should move up to the same tier as barbarians.

With Max HD, it might be possible to bring back d4 HD if wizards need a little nerf.

 

[Xeviat]

Careful, admitting that this came from 4e might not be wise. Lotta folks will turn up their nose just hearing the name. Though I appreciate that you did, in fact, mention it.

I'm never afraid to admit that I'm a 4venger. It was my favorite edition to play and run. I like 5E more from a designer perspective; I make a lot more of my own house rules and material for 5E.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I don't like the constitution score at first level.
But just having max hit die per level + constitution modifier seems solid.

 

[aco175]

I could see adding your CON modifier to death saves. This would reward high CON to stabilize and make the saves. I might even allow you to gain 1hp if you roll over 20. Might make for some heroic stuff.

I would also be in favor of not gaining HP after some level except for CON, another thing from olden days. Maybe cap 10th level or 8th level. Now you want to add points to CON at some level.

 

[CreamCloud0]

this is only an idea that formed literally just as i was reading so it's not especially thought out but what if CON actually directly influenced the size of your Hit Die? 8 CON is the baseline you get your class's normal hit die size, but at 12, 16 and 20 you bump up the size of your HD up to a max of d12?

honestly i would bring back d4HD and reduce the size of most of the fullcasters die's to incentivise them to invest in CON more while reducing the MAD of martials, your CON saves and OP's wound points are then directly based off the size of your HD rather than CON itself (though you do get a bonus to both of those at 10, 14 and 18 CON so it's not entirely useless to martials)