Level Up (A5E) Deadlier combat

[rules.mechanic]

We do HP as per the Core Rules, then half it and add Constitution. Should be similar numbers to what you are using and we find it works well - feels like a better scaling and leads to a rough doubling of HP at each tier of play. We did it that way to make conversion easier (esp for monsters) but, in the end, we tended to leave the mid- and high-level monsters as they were to make them tougher.

 

[Kozos]

There is this hack I have worked on. I despise the hp bloat and decided that very low hp should be increased a bit and we need a generous cut at high level hp. Thus I reached this formula that works both for monsters and pc.

hp = conScore*sizeMod + hd*(hpPerHD+conMod/3)

Size Mod
Tiny = 1/2
Small = 2/3
Medium = 1
Large = 1.5
Huge = 2
Gargantuan = 4

Hp per HD
d6 = 1
d8 = 1.5
d10 = 2
d12 = 2.5
d20 = 5

Larger creatures can take more damage. That's the main idea behind it.
Please find attached document on how this would affect monster hp.


Lets see a couple examples at level 1, 5 and 20
Some level 1 chars. There are two hp values , the first for medium creatures, the second for small ones
Wizard 12 constitution: 13/9
Barbarian 16 constitution: 19.5(19)/14.1(14)
Cleric 14 constitution: 15.5(15)/10.8(10)
Same chars at level 5.
Wizard 12 constitution: 17/13
Barbarian 16 constitution: 33.5(33)/28.1(28)
Cleric 14 constitution: 21.5(21)/16.8(16)
Same chars at level 20 with +2 con.
Wizard 14 constitution: 34/29
Barbarian 22 constitution: 92/84.6(84)
Cleric 16 constitution: 66/60.6(60)

 

[Eubani]

Simple modifiers to Death Saves that increase deadliness without turning it into a massacre:

+2 to Death Save DC if CR of creature that dealt damage is higher than character level.
+4 to Death Save DC if CR of creature that dealt damage is twice or greater than character level.
+2 to Death Save DC if damage dealt was a critical.

 

[Lanefan]

One thing that each DM probably wants to decide, on vague terms at least, is a rough idea of expected lethality in your game both short-term and long-term.

Short-term: out of a starting party of x, where x is the usual number of characters (PC and NPC both) in the party, (1) how many do you expect will die in the first adventure? (or the first ten sessions if you're running either non-episodic or the campaign is a single great big adventure) This gives you an idea of how much character turnover to expect, particularly in the early days.

Long-term: out of a starting party of x, as above, (2) how many do you expect to finish the campaign and of those, (3) how many will have died and been revived at least once?

Once you've determined this, it's not a huge amount of work to dial things up or down to suit.

For me the answers are about (1) - 25-50%; (2) maybe one; (3) all.

 

[Guest 6801328]

Level of Exhaustion each time you hit zero.

When healed above 0 you are still unconscious. At the end of each of your turns make a Con save to wake up. Or somebody can spend an action waking you up.

 

[Kinematics]

I don't think these ideas will work, broadly speaking, because they fall under the same trap that hinders other "gritty" suggestion: They are solely and exclusively negatives for the players.

If the question is, "Would you like to stand here and do what we've always done, or would you like me to hit you in the head with a rock?", people generally don't favor the rock. But if you give them a wooden stick and a ball to swing at, with the warning that the ball might hit them, and they need to be careful not to hit themselves with the stick, they'll be quite happy.

What you need is a new beneficial mechanic that has, as a side effect, increase risks within combat. EG:

• You get a new super move if you're down to 'bloodied'! But if you miss, you open yourself to an automatic counterattack from the enemy.
• You get greater freedom of movement in combat, but so do the monsters, which means they have an easier time attacking downed players.
• Ranged cures are always AOE. That means you can heal your allies that are standing next to each other, but it also means that if you heal someone who just got taken down, you also healed the monster that took him down.
• Increased combat flexibility for players (something very much desired) means increased combat flexibility for monsters. How about a cleave attack for your fighter? That makes it much easier to hit downed players while still fighting effectively. A 'cover' mechanic can also be used to separate you from your downed ally. The ground slam your barbarian wants isn't locked behind the magic-user paywall, so AOE damage ahoy!

One critical factor is turn order. If no enemy can act between the time the party member falls and the person who can heal him can act, then it's kinda pointless. Legendary actions are great for pounding on death saves. Is there a way to make combat move more like that even without a legendary monster enemy?

And what about death saves without needing to drop to 0 HP? (A poison that can be applied to a bloodied character?) Or at least, unconsciousness, which is nearly as good.

I had an idea for a sap weapon that does 'virtual' damage. That is, the physical damage is still the standard 1d4 of a club, but it would do 2x-3x that damage to determine whether it knocked a person unconscious.

For example, Str 14 thug hits your level 1 fighter (12 HP) on the back of the head with a sap. He rolls a 3, for 5 total damage. You take 5 real damage, but 15 'knockout' damage. Since 15 damage is enough to drop you to 0 HP, you're out, even though you're then lying unconscious with 7 HP left.

Now what happens when your cleric comes along and heals you? Well, you're still unconscious, until someone slaps you awake. The healing doesn't make you "not dead", and thus able to resume fighting.

Now take that analogy to a full fight. The dragon has a bodyslam attack that's designed to knock you out. So now you're unconscious (incapacitated), but aren't at 0 HP. The cleric can heal you, but you're still unconscious. No ranged yo-yos. You're not dying, sure, but you're absorbing more of the party's actions in order to get you back into the fight than a simple Healing Word. And that imbalance can swing things sharply against the party, especially for an AOE type of attack. (Though you'll probably be woken up by the next wing buffet.)

0 HP is sometimes described as unconscious, sometimes dead, sometimes just down and unable to fight. I'm not trying to figure out what 0 HP actually means; I just want to make it possible to explicitly go to the unconscious state without going to 0 HP.

This of course is a beneficial mechanic for parties that don't want to go murderhobo on everything. So, again, something that is useful to everyone that can also be used to make things much deadlier in the right circumstances.


Addendum: I'd like to have actions other than "Attack" be strongly useful in combat. Part of the problem, I think, is that combat is already so short that big bad monsters don't get to shine. In order to counter this, people are turning towards ideas to make things "deadlier" for the players, which is difficult to do in such a short time span, and comes across as petty.

I'd prefer an approach where combat is "more difficult", and that a boss fight (or even non-boss fight) feels like a boss fight. I don't think that's feasible when combat is so one-dimensional and short. Short, deadly fights seem to require a certain amount of cheese, and players cheese right back. We need more room in combat to do more.

 

[Giauz]

@Kinematics : Well, part of my proposal gives each combatant a dynamic target range (roll the target number, same as initiative rolled at beginning of combat, or below to do "scratch damage", roll 100 or above to do 1 HP of damage and give the target a chronic or permanent penalty). Rolling anything else can hit thin air, scenery, or even another PC/enemy. Combined with some simple rules for using almost anything as a weapon, and we could have a pretty deadly but also option rich system.

 

[Imaculata]

I don't think these ideas will work, broadly speaking, because they fall under the same trap that hinders other "gritty" suggestion: They are solely and exclusively negatives for the players.

I think this is a good point. I think we should look for something that makes combat more risky, while also increasing the excitement and fun. So not a rule that leaves you unconscious on the ground for the rest of the fight, but rather something that allows you to take risks, with high reward.

• You get a new super move if you're down to 'bloodied'! But if you miss, you open yourself to an automatic counterattack from the enemy.

I'm not fond of adding new moves just to make combat more deadly. Its cool, but more of a new feature rather than a solution to make combat more deadly. Preferably, I want a rule that makes as little changes to the existing rules as possible.

• You get greater freedom of movement in combat, but so do the monsters, which means they have an easier time attacking downed players.

I'm not exactly sure how this would work.

• Ranged cures are always AOE. That means you can heal your allies that are standing next to each other, but it also means that if you heal someone who just got taken down, you also healed the monster that took him down.

This seems like an odd exception, when most spells are targeted. It is also annoying, and more busy work for the DM. It can create a ping pong effect, where monster health is constantly bouncing up and down as they get caught in the healing-crossfire. It is also an amendment of existing spells, which means some spells will now have alternate rules. I am not fond of that.

• Increased combat flexibility for players (something very much desired) means increased combat flexibility for monsters. How about a cleave attack for your fighter? That makes it much easier to hit downed players while still fighting effectively. A 'cover' mechanic can also be used to separate you from your downed ally. The ground slam your barbarian wants isn't locked behind the magic-user paywall, so AOE damage ahoy!

I think this idea would be better fitted in a topic for better 5E combat. They are good suggestions though, but don't directly address the issue of combat deadlyness.

One critical factor is turn order. If no enemy can act between the time the party member falls and the person who can heal him can act, then it's kinda pointless. Legendary actions are great for pounding on death saves. Is there a way to make combat move more like that even without a legendary monster enemy?

The turn order is part of the problem. But you could also just limit the number of death saves per combat.

And what about death saves without needing to drop to 0 HP? (A poison that can be applied to a bloodied character?) Or at least, unconsciousness, which is nearly as good.

I think this is a good idea for deadlier monsters. A Demilich for example should simply force a death save. I think such additional rules could be added to existing monsters to make them more formidable. It wouldn't directly address the healing issue, but it does help on the whole in making some monsters scary again.

Addendum: I'd like to have actions other than "Attack" be strongly useful in combat. Part of the problem, I think, is that combat is already so short that big bad monsters don't get to shine. In order to counter this, people are turning towards ideas to make things "deadlier" for the players, which is difficult to do in such a short time span, and comes across as petty.

I think making combat more varied, and making combat more deadly, are two separate issues. Both are worth looking at.

 

[clearstream]

Makes dying a bit more complex and a bigger drain on party resources. Would you die after reaching a certain negative score (-10 in 3E, - constitution score in Pathfinder)?

It might not be necessary, because while you are negative you are also making death saving throws. You die when those run out, as usual. Were you (or should you become) negative equal your HP max, you die per the normal rules anyway. So that's a hard floor.

Healer might need to spend multiple spells slots and multiple actions to bring someone back, stopping that player doing something more fun.

I've never fully followed the - it's only fun if I can hit things - line of thought. When I play a character with healing, I find it fun to keep my party alive.

 

[ThatGuySteve]

I've never fully followed the - it's only fun if I can hit things - line of thought. When I play a character with healing, I find it fun to keep my party alive.

I've played healers in 3e, 4e and 5e.

I enjoyed 4e most because when I healed I knew they were not going to instantly drop again, 25% HP from a surge + a little extra kept them on their feet generally. It only cost my minor action, so I could still use any of my other powers that round.

I enjoyed 5e the least because even if you use Healing Word so it's only a bonus action, that stops you casting a levelled spell with your action. OK for a melee cleric, but stuck with cantrips for a caster. And even upcasting Healing Word, the hit points regained are very low, one hit could easily knock them down again.