D&D 5E D&D Next Blog - A Close Call with Negative Hit Points

[Vyvyan Basterd]

We playtested some of the ideas in this thread using Con as the basis when we played 3.5E. One issue that was raised by my players was that the houserules made most classes MAD. They felt the rule "forced" them to prioritize Con even moreso than the score's normal effect on their hps did.

 

[Dausuul]

You get one round while below 0 HP. No death saves, no negative hit points. There's only two ways to keep you from dying.

1) Magical healing. This is the only way you can get up off the floor.

2) An ally needs to administer a heal check to stabilize you. When you're stabilized, you're unconscious and stay that way until magical healing is applied or the fight ends. While in this state, if you are hit, you die.

Fail to get stabilized or receive magical healing when you're below 0 HP, and you die.

Wow. That's brutal. But... I kinda like it.

For a slightly less punishing alternative, take the suggestion that damage past zero hit points goes to your Con, and combine it with the 3E-style "lose a hit point every round." If you're down, your Con is dropping every round as you bleed out--and it won't come back just because someone drops a healing spell on you.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

Is this a commentary on mathematics? Negative numbers are annoying?

In this case, indirectly, yes. Negative numbers are unnecessary here, and overly fiddly for what they give you. The sneaking suspicion creeps into your mind that if zero isn't dead, then perhaps you should just give everyone some extra hit points and shift the scale up a notch. (This doesn't actually work as well as you first think, but that's why it is a suspicion and not a theory. )

This kind of design issue is like a bit of food stuck between your teeth, with no tooth pick in sight. Not really that important in the scheme of things, but still annoying. Picture yourself in a tuxedo at a formal dinner with a piece of green bean hung between your two front teeth. This is the very picture of "not elegant". When you hear people talk about elegant game design, they mean not doing this kind of stuff.

 

[Rampaging Lawn Gnome]

A house rule I like is: Once you hit 0 hp, you start taking damage to your Con. This damage doesn't effect your bonus or penalty, but if you hit 0, you're dead.

If you are healed, you heal from 0, because your hp never drops below 0, but you don't get your Con back, except by resting (or Spell X).

I'm liking this idea, plus Kid Snide's observation that it separates out two types of healing, which if a Cleric is able to heal HP and Con damage, they may not be as forced to be a healbot when someone's HP is low.

Just throwing out ideas:
When first bloodied - 1d6 Con damage
When first at 0 HP - 1d6 Con damage
Crit - 1d6 Con damage
At 0 - Unconscious and dying - 1d6 Con damage per round until stabilized
0 Con = dead

When falling to 0 HP, some Con damage would have occurred, and consequently, the number of rounds before death would be variable. Plus the DM could secretly roll the Con damage at bloodied and at 0 to keep the # of rounds until death unknown to the PCs. Rolling 1d6 Con damage per round when dying may help simulate 4e's three saves mechanic. Plus, the DM can now say: "You're gonna die. Roll a d6. Roll a d6".

I do recognize the pitfalls of ability score damage affecting the rest of the character sheet, and the added incentive of players to pump their Con scores.

Anyway, just some thoughts.

 

[Nebulous]

I think there should be SOME kind of default Death & Dying rules in the PHB, but the DMG needs to give the DM ample examples to tweak the game to the level of lethality he and the players agree on.

 

[Minigiant]

I don't like negative HP. It don't match the fluff that HP is the various ways to not die and a person at 0 HP is unable to defend themselves. This is how I'd do it.

Characters can’t be reduced to negative hit points. 0HP is the minimum. There is no automatic hit point total at which a character dies. Instead, any character who takes damage that reduces his hit points to 0 must make a Constitution save to avoid being disabled or dying. Whether or not the character makes the saves, they are also Bloodied

If the character makes the Con save, they are disabled. Failure means they are dying. A natural 1 is automatic death.

Disabled
A disabled character is conscious and bloodied. Their actions are limited. Any damage or additional damage forces another Con save. A disabled character who makes the save is now dying. Failure is death.

Dying
A dying character is unconscious and near death. Each round on his turn, a dying character must make a Con save to become stable. Failure is death

If the character succeeds on the save by less than 5, he does not die but does not get better. He is still dying and must continue to make Con saves every round.

Healing
Another character can make a Heal/Wisdom check to stabilize a disabled or dying character. Stabilization returns a dying or disabled character to 1 HP. Success of 5 or greater also makes the once dying character conscious again.

Healing that raises a dying or disabled character above 0 hit points makes her conscious and fully functional again, just as if she had never been reduced to 0. Healing does not remove the Bloodied condition.

Bloodied
Whenever a character reaches 0HP, they are bloodied. Healing HP does not remove the bloodied condition. Only certain rituals, certain spells, or a night's rest does.

Normal: Bloodied does nothing on its own. Some special abilities are more effective against bloodied characters.
Wound Module: Bloodied character get a -2 penalty to all checks.
Gritty Module: Bloodied characters who drop to 0 Ups are dying and must instantly make a Con check to not be dead.

 

[Kynn]

I don't like some of the death spiral rules you guys are proposing. I think there are good reasons to avoid layering on penalties to characters who have been knocked down once or twice (or even more).

It can cause an overall loss of enjoyment to know that not only have you had the crap beat out of you, but also now you're going to be ineffective for the rest of the game, making it easier for the crap to get beat out of you, and so on, spiral spiral spiral.

There are good reasons that no version of D&D has ever slapped big penalties on characters for dropping below zero hp.

 

[jodyjohnson]

The dying mechanics scream options, toggles, and dials to me.

I assume PHB will have a default but give 12 toggles in the DMG plus the do-it-yourself 13th toggle and we can all "play by the book".

I don't care what the default is. Death mechanics is one of the most time-honored house rules.

 

[kitsune9]

Interesting post. There's a whole range of arguments for negative hp and it's first-cousin, PC death. I like Pathfinder's treatment of negative hp (but don't like their treatment of Death in which I think it should be more harsher).

Anyways, I can see a point made for just about any treatment of negative hp and am pretty flexible about whatever system ends up being used.

 

[Minigiant]

I don't like some of the death spiral rules you guys are proposing. I think there are good reasons to avoid layering on penalties to characters who have been knocked down once or twice (or even more).

It can cause an overall loss of enjoyment to know that not only have you had the crap beat out of you, but also now you're going to be ineffective for the rest of the game, making it easier for the crap to get beat out of you, and so on, spiral spiral spiral.

There are good reasons that no version of D&D has ever slapped big penalties on characters for dropping below zero hp.

But 4E had one for going under 50% HP that was massively underused.

Bloodied was awesome. I hope they bring that death spiral back.