D&D General Are Hit Points Meat? (Redux): D&D Co-Creator Saw Hit Points Very Differently

D&D co-creator Dave Arneson wasn't a fan of hit points increasing with level. According to the excellent Jon Peterson's Playing at the World he felt that hit points should be fixed at character creation, with characters becoming harder to hit at higher levels.

Of course, this is an early example of the oft-lengthily and vehemently discussed question best summarised as ‘Are hit points meat?’— a debate which has raged for over 40 years and isn’t likely to be resolved today! (but no they’re not)

Arneson's Hit Points for Characters

Game Wizards is very decidedly not a book about who invented which system in D&D. But early drafts of the book did track one design choic...

playingattheworld.blogspot.com

Arneson later created a hit point equation in his 1979 RPG Adventures in Fantasy which was a game in which he hoped to correct "the many errors in the original rules".

 

[Minigiant]

Probably a good Idea would be renaming levels.
Make level 3 level 1 and call level 0 to 1 apprentice levels. Problem solved.
Level 0: no class now app 1
Level 1: now app 1
Level 2: now app 2

Maybe restructure wizards to start with level 1 spells at former level 3, now level 1.
This would help martial characters keeping up.
Add levels 21 and 22 where you can have fun with abilities gained at level 20.

I think level 3 is too high.
I still believe that at level 1 you should get 2 HD.
1 from class
1 from race/lineage.

So at level 0, you only get your 1 race HD to play a raw rookie.

Class HD would be stamina and would regenerate overnight.
Race HD would be meat and take weeks of rest, medical checks, or magic to heal.

Optional rules would let you level up as a race instead of class and be more monstrous,

 

[Thomas Shey]

You aren't wrong. The problem (as has been noted frequently) is that what was written down wasn't the game Gygax played. Or rather it's the same rules but did a terrible job of communicating the metagame. Which meant there was a major difference between those who learned from someone who learned from Gygax and those who learned from the books.

Or, in the latter case, learned from someone who learned from the books or picked it up via osmosis in play. I really have to say that the style often presented as the "old school standard" was far from such even in 1975. Most of what's sometimes been presented as a change in expectations is more of the designers recognizing over time how many, probably most, and maybe even the vast majority of people had been playing for a long time.

 

[Minigiant]

Or, in the latter case, learned from someone who learned from the books or picked it up via osmosis in play. I really have to say that the style often presented as the "old school standard" was far from such even in 1975. Most of what's sometimes been presented as a change in expectations is more of the designers recognizing over time how many, probably most, and maybe even the vast majority of people had been playing for a long time.

Well the game never really told you "how to play how to play". I don't think any game described how to play within a playstyle. Just how to do your turn.

So there was likely at least a half dozen playstyles for players to approach adventures. One for each popular subgenre of fantasy.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Well the game never really told you "how to play how to play". I don't think any game described how to play within a playstyle. Just how to do your turn.

So there was likely at least a half dozen playstyles for players to approach adventures. One for each popular subgenre of fantasy.

Maybe so, but there was enough commonality both observed and described back in the day for me to say with comfort that style that was described as "the way things were played in the old days" was unlikely to be the commonality some have claimed.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Imagine if any other game expected a pedigree based on who you learned from.

 

[Minigiant]

Maybe so, but there was enough commonality both observed and described back in the day for me to say with comfort that style that was described as "the way things were played in the old days" was unlikely to be the commonality some have claimed.

I agree. It was common but nowhere as common as claimed.

And now there are at least 7-8 common ways to run a level 1 D&D adventure. From using henchmen to using cowardly tactics to modifying for high HP heroics to easy rests etc

 

[billd91]

Imagine if any other game expected a pedigree based on who you learned from.

There are plenty of RPGs that vary a great deal depending on how they’re run. D&D isn’t unique in that respect.

 

[Michael Linke]

Then what's the purpose of the lower 5 (or 6) levels. if they can't be played?

I would. Just like any other game the default is to start at the as-written start and go from there.

Starting at level 3 or level 5 or whatever is equivalent to starting Monopoly with each player already having a pile o' cash and hotels on several properties: playable, sure, but not what the game expects.

I've seen various explanations for "why".

Some games want to communicate that the character you're playing might have started out tougher or more experienced than the character you may have played in a previous installment.

In some games, your starting hero may be introduced at level 5, but supporting characters met early on might be weaker, and so start from a lower level. In Pokemon, you typically start the game with a level 5 monster, but are able to encounter monsters as low as level 1, and add them to your party.

The game may have levels imparting linear progression on your stats, such as in D&D prior to 3rd edition where you earn 1 HD per level, but you don't want the initial level up to double the character's power, such as going from 1d8 hp to 2d8 hp, so they may start you off at level 5 so your initial level up is just a 20% boost in power, rather than a 100% boost. 3rd edition smoothed the 1st to 2nd level boost by starting you off at maximum hp for your Hit Die, so your likely getting a 50% boost at level 2, rather than 100%, and 4th and 5th used some variation of that.

Edit: And don't forget the Dark Sun setting, which just told DMs to start their campaigns at Level 3.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Imagine if any other game expected a pedigree based on who you learned from.

Honestly, in practice a lot of them do, just not to this degree. There are very much play-style expectations that are largely an artifact of who you started playing with in an awful lot of games, and they can effect, for example, the value of various acquired traits in a way that isn't self-evident until you realize what's going on.