Bashing bags of hitpoints

[The Crimson Binome]

If the players don't know how many h.p. the monster has (and they shouldn't!) and the DM is doing a half-decent job of narration, the end result should look exactly the same: each hit is clobbering the monster for between 1/3 and 1/4 of its total hit points and thus should be narrated the same.

The PCs really shouldn't be able to tell whether they're putting 5 points into an 18 h.p. foe or 15 into a 58 h.p. foe.

As the 5E rules are nice enough to point out, this sort of thing is going to vary by DM. Personally, I would narrate those two situations in vastly different ways.

Confirmation rolls for crits don't negate a success; they merely represent a chance for an additional success.

A '20' is already a success in that you've (almost certainly) hit; now the crit roll gives you a chance to succeed further and really clobber the thing. Failing on the crit roll by no means negates the success already achieved, that of hitting the monster for damage.

Of that much, we are in agreement.

 

[Lanefan]

I came up with a solution for this problem, but I haven't tested it yet: give everything minimum HP. This includes PCs.

The math is really simple, because 1 HD = 1 HP. If a creature has 8 HD, then it has 8 base HP, plus whatever it gets from Constitution. A level 5 PC, for instance, has 5 HP + Con. A Gibbering Mouther has 36 HP (down from 67). A Fire Elemental has 48 (down from 102).

That would instantly make Con the uber-stat that everyone would max out on - probably not what's intended.

 

[Prakriti]

That would instantly make Con the uber-stat that everyone would max out on - probably not what's intended.

Are you sure it wouldn't be Dex (Initiative)?

 

[delericho]

Confirmation rolls for crits don't negate a success; they merely represent a chance for an additional success.

Mathematically, you're correct. And yet confirmation rolls are one of the most hated rules in the entirety of 3e. Because game design isn't just about maths - how they feel in play matters as well, and a failed confirmation felt (for too many people) like they were having their critical hit snatched away.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Mathematically, you're correct. And yet confirmation rolls are one of the most hated rules in the entirety of 3e. Because game design isn't just about maths - how they feel in play matters as well, and a failed confirmation felt (for too many people) like they were having their critical hit snatched away.

Something that can be very hard for game designers to come to terms with is that some potential players aren't very good at math, and they also get a say in how a game mechanic is received.

 

[TwoSix]

Something that can be very hard for game designers to come to terms with is that some potential players aren't very good at math, and they also get a say in how a game mechanic is received.

You might be overly generous by giving the impression most designers are good at math.

 

[Lanefan]

Are you sure it wouldn't be Dex (Initiative)?

No. Hit points are too useful too much of the rest of the time relative to initiative which is only useful in combat.

Choose Con. Roll race and class.

 

[5ekyu]

You might be overly generous by giving the impression most designers are good at math.

Cough **WoD** cough

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Difficult. I thunk some monsters have just a bit too much hp. The table in the DMG is even worse.
Luckily there are quite a few minsters that deviate from high hp low AC.

 

[Bacon Bits]

Cough **WoD** cough

I thought they were bad at lore revisions. Well, and having a bad model where you publish zero adventures and all your books are campaign settings and lore expansions.

...

Turns out White Wolf really only had that amazing lore and setting going for them, huh? I guess that explains all the LARPers.