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".

 

[Maxperson]

I'm a web developer. I see this behavior all the time, and smart people do it just as much as dumb people. Put them in an unfamiliar context and they will overlook stuff that's right in front of their nose, because they are busy trying to assimilate all the other stuff.

It's got nothing to do with intelligence.

Skip/overlook, sure. Fail to understand something incredibly simple that they read, probably not. If they see and read that box, they're not going to be confused.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I think you are underestimating the intelligence of people. Nobody is going to be confused by a sidebar(box) explaining that you can start at level three to give the players more survivability, such that a cat is unable to kill them like it could potentially kill a level 1 PC. They're going to understand what it's saying and can make an informed choice based on it.

There would be posts over all this forum about how WotC is disrespecting their play choice, gatekeeping against people who either use or don't use those levels, insisting that they've played seven hundred billion and three D&D games and they never used/ didn't use that option so they're right about... something, and always, always about which one is 'real D&D by people who have zero claim to that IP.

 

[Mordhau]

The problem with HP is that spells are named wrong.
Cure wounds should be called: refresh
Healing word should be called: rousing word.
Maybe they should only be able to heal you as long as you are above 0 hp.
For someone at 0, you need an actual "cure wound" spell.

Part of the issue is unconsciousness. Just redefine 0 hit points as shocked, knocked to the ground and struggling to find the will to stop the world spinning and keep fighting and you have less of a problem.

 

[MichaelSomething]

Why not just import the Dungeon Crawl Classics funnel?

 

[Neonchameleon]

Why not just import the Dungeon Crawl Classics funnel?

Because that works for a very specific tone. I've imported it for my WFRP retroclone, but it's not something I'd expect in modern D&D.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Part of the issue is unconsciousness. Just redefine 0 hit points as shocked, knocked to the ground and struggling to find the will to stop the world spinning and keep fighting and you have less of a problem.

That is right.
In know from warhammer that it is done that way. Until 0 hp you fight normally. If you are at 0 or below, you start getting crits that may permanently disable you. But it does not mean you go unconscious.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Skip/overlook, sure. Fail to understand something incredibly simple that they read, probably not. If they see and read that box, they're not going to be confused.

I have worked in a similar field, and I can tell you, it doesn't matter how prominent you make the warning. It could be a full-page spread with inch-tall holographic red-and-yellow letters saying

"DO NOT PLAY AT 1ST LEVEL IF YOU ARE A NEW PLAYER."

LOTS of people would still overlook it, despite being highly intelligent etc.

I worked at a company where a verification phone call was required for all first-time customers. This was prominently displayed at the top of every single page of our website, in yellow text on a black background. It was displayed in the text box of every single item available for purchase on the website, again in separate, bold, brightly-colored text. It was displayed on every shopping cart page, on the "are you sure you wish to make this purchase" page, on the "your purchase has been confirmed, please expect a phone call if this is your first order" page, and in the "your order has been received" email sent to every customer.

Easily three-quarters of all first-time customers were shocked and angry that I would call them for verification (or, just as often, cancel their orders because no phone number was provided, so no phone call could be made).

It legit does not matter how prominent you make the warning, nor the intelligence of the audience. LOTS of highly intelligent, thoughtful, careful people will miss it.

More importantly than that, though? It's not players you need to drill this into. It's DMs, and I've seen how pig-headed they are about this. The vast majority of DMs I've spoken to are absolutely certain that, unless there's a really really good personal reason (e.g. "I have a specific campaign idea that simply won't work at 1st level"), literally 100% of campaigns should start at 1st level. I know this because I've tried to persuade numerous DMs to consider starting at a higher level in 5e, specifically to help brand-new players get into the swing of things. I have been turned down literally 100% of the time, not a single DM has considered running the game at a higher level unless their campaign premise required it in the first place.

There's no defeating that level of ingrained "knowledge." The practical choice is to accept that that's what DMs think, and provide a solution which accepts that belief, rather than insisting that if you can just teach them the correct way, then everything will be fine.

 

[Maxperson]

I have worked in a similar field, and I can tell you, it doesn't matter how prominent you make the warning. It could be a full-page spread with inch-tall holographic red-and-yellow letters saying

"DO NOT PLAY AT 1ST LEVEL IF YOU ARE A NEW PLAYER."

LOTS of people would still overlook it, despite being highly intelligent etc.

I worked at a company where a verification phone call was required for all first-time customers. This was prominently displayed at the top of every single page of our website, in yellow text on a black background. It was displayed in the text box of every single item available for purchase on the website, again in separate, bold, brightly-colored text. It was displayed on every shopping cart page, on the "are you sure you wish to make this purchase" page, on the "your purchase has been confirmed, please expect a phone call if this is your first order" page, and in the "your order has been received" email sent to every customer.

Easily three-quarters of all first-time customers were shocked and angry that I would call them for verification (or, just as often, cancel their orders because no phone number was provided, so no phone call could be made).

It legit does not matter how prominent you make the warning, nor the intelligence of the audience. LOTS of highly intelligent, thoughtful, careful people will miss it.

More importantly than that, though? It's not players you need to drill this into. It's DMs, and I've seen how pig-headed they are about this. The vast majority of DMs I've spoken to are absolutely certain that, unless there's a really really good personal reason (e.g. "I have a specific campaign idea that simply won't work at 1st level"), literally 100% of campaigns should start at 1st level. I know this because I've tried to persuade numerous DMs to consider starting at a higher level in 5e, specifically to help brand-new players get into the swing of things. I have been turned down literally 100% of the time, not a single DM has considered running the game at a higher level unless their campaign premise required it in the first place.

There's no defeating that level of ingrained "knowledge." The practical choice is to accept that that's what DMs think, and provide a solution which accepts that belief, rather than insisting that if you can just teach them the correct way, then everything will be fine.

Okay. Let's say a lot of people do miss it. Does it really matter? A lot of people won't miss it, and if you do what's the worst that will happen? You'll start at level one until someone notices and then you'll mentally smack yourself in the head and maybe make the choice to start at 3rd.

What it won't do is cause lots and lots of confusion. I don't see any reason not to add this to the game. And perhaps if it were there, more DMs would be willing to start higher than 1st. Also, take a look at this poll. That's not an insignificant number of DMs that are starting at 3rd level or higher.

D&D 5E - What level do you like to start at?

Well the latest season of Critical Role just started started today and they started at And though I know this question gets asked on the regular, with the impending "5.5e", I feel it's a good time to ask again: What level you you like to start at? Or perhaps more accurately, which level do...

www.enworld.org

 

[MichaelSomething]

Speaking of level zero characters, Arcadia has 9 has the solution to your lack of them!

Get more from MCDM Productions on Patreon

Creating tabletop gaming products and videos!

www.patreon.com

From the tweet:
"Filthy Peasants!" presents fun and easy rules for level-0 character creation. Good thing they're fast. You'll need more than one character to play through our deadly funnel adventure in a troll's lair. Those who survive level-up and form the party in your campaign.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Why not just import the Dungeon Crawl Classics funnel?

While I consider the DCC funnel to be an excellent piece of design, one quite worthy of praise, I have to agree with Neonchameleon. It makes perfect sense for an old-school-focused game where characters are largely throwaway until they've "earned" their place. It doesn't really make sense for most modern D&D editions...hence why it exists in an OSR game and not a WOTC game.

Okay. Let's say a lot of people do miss it. Does it really matter? A lot of people won't miss it, and if you do what's the worst that will happen? You'll start at level one until someone notices and then you'll mentally smack yourself in the head and maybe make the choice to start at 3rd.

Again: I have seen numerous DMs do this. I have seen them repeatedly chalk up early-campaign problems to luck/freak dice, bad planning, a group that didn't mesh well together, etc. Essentially anything except considering a higher level.

What it won't do is cause lots and lots of confusion. I don't see any reason not to add this to the game. And perhaps if it were there, more DMs would be willing to start higher than 1st.

Why should it be confusing? It's a separate system. Include it in the back matter, separate from the normal progression, but still in a player-facing location. There's TONS of optional stuff that people opt into that aren't front-and-center, and those things have never caused confusion to the best of my knowledge. E.g., the game includes feats, but they're not at all forced or required, and I have yet to see a single player be utterly flummoxed by why there's these weird "feat" things when everyone actually just gets ASIs.

It seems to me you're massively inflating whatever confusion might result from this.

Also, take a look at this poll. That's not an insignificant number of DMs that are starting at 3rd level or higher.

D&D 5E - What level do you like to start at?

Well the latest season of Critical Role just started started today and they started at And though I know this question gets asked on the regular, with the impending "5.5e", I feel it's a good time to ask again: What level you you like to start at? Or perhaps more accurately, which level do...

www.enworld.org

The fact that 55.5% of the votes in that go for 1st level, when 5e so strongly encourages starting at 3rd, looks way more like evidence for my position than yours. Even in a game that you really, REALLY should start at 3rd, people start at 1st level.