D&D 5E Double Monster Damage - Half Monster HP

[GMMichael]

It basically sounds like increasing the difficulty level on a VRPG. So, not a bad idea considering that many VRPGs find it important to include such a feature.

Combats will tend to last a lot fewer rounds, and this is in a system where 2-3 rounds is not atypical. You might well not get through even one full initiative cycle before the combat was resolved - which sucks for the player who rolled low initiative.

Which is why I like Double Monster Damage, without the Half Hit Points, because it means:
1) Fighting "monsters" becomes significantly different than fighting people
2) Players are forced to choose: use tactics or flee
3) The DM has to work a little harder to make the combat interesting, so it doesn't boil down to "ha, my numbers are bigger than your numbers."

 

[FrogReaver]

Swinginess favors the monsters, because no matter if they are beat there are more, but there's a limited number of PCs.

So I think there would be more PC deaths over the course of time. One bad crit might one shot even front-liners.

I think that characters would tend towards novas and initiative. Novas work fantastically because where before X would of damage would kill off and prevent Y retalitory damage, now it's X damage prevents 4Y. (Since X will kill twice as many, and those twice as many did twice the damage each) Plus you don't need sustained damage to kill many off.

Dex becomes more of a god-stat since initiative becomes more important.

Those capable of putting out a lot of damage (like casters) gain additional ascendancy over those who have resources for the long haul (like fighters) since there is no more long haul, or if there is it's a losing proposition.

Combats are quicker.

To sum up: Faster combats at the cost of more PC deaths over time, DEX becoming more important and casters get a further lead over weapon wielders.

I'll pass, thanks.

I think you are mistaken about X Damage prevents 4Y Monster Damage.

To start consider a big solo monster. It has 200 hp normally. It does 30 damage a turn. If it normally lasts 4 turns then it will do 120 damage total. Consider if we halved its hp and doubled its damage. It would last 2 turns and do 60 a turn. That's 120 damage total.

If it lasts 4 turns (2 with half hp) turns that means we are doing 50 damage a turn to it.

Now consider the same monster split into 2 different monsters. Each has 100 hp and does 15 damage a turn.
It will take you 2 rounds to kill each monster. Round 1 you take 30 damage. Round 2 you take 30 damage. Round 3 You take 15 damage. Round 4 you take 15 damage. Total damage 90.

Now consider halving their hp and doubling their damage. Round 1 you take 60 damage. Round 2 you take 30 damage. That's 90 damage take.

So, I'm not seeing the same amount of damage causing 4 times the damage reduction by halving monster hp and doubling monster damage.

 

[Satyrn]

Honestly I wish there was an easy rule to increase monster damage and lower monster hp that wasn't quite double and halving. Maybe something that would give close to 2/3 hp and 50% more damage. I'm not sure if there's a simple formula that can accomplish that.

This doesn't work out to exactly 50%, but you could add an extra damage die to each attack. If the static modifier (Str bonus, etc) is close enough to the damage die's average, just toss in anothr die of the same size. If the static is modifier is lower, use a small sized die, and if the static modifier is higher, increase the die size.


Like, adding another 1d8 to a longsword attack works out to roughly 50% if there's a +4 Str bonus. Or, if the Str bonus is lower, add in a 1d6 instead.

 

[FrogReaver]

It basically sounds like increasing the difficulty level on a VRPG. So, not a bad idea considering that many VRPGs find it important to include such a feature.



Which is why I like Double Monster Damage, without the Half Hit Points, because it means:
1) Fighting "monsters" becomes significantly different than fighting people
2) Players are forced to choose: use tactics or flee
3) The DM has to work a little harder to make the combat interesting, so it doesn't boil down to "ha, my numbers are bigger than your numbers."

No idea what you mean by 1. All your enemies would have double damage and half hp. There would be no difference at all in fighting a monster or fighting a person.

On 2. As has been noted here, any system where there exists high damage tends to push players to use tactics or flee. That was one of the first thoughts posted by multiple people about my proposal.

On 3. Not sure why the DM working harder is a good thing? You can have interesting combats without "my numbers are bigger than your numbers".

 

[FrogReaver]

This doesn't work out to exactly 50%, but you could add an extra damage die to each attack. If the static modifier (Str bonus, etc) is close enough to the damage die's average, just toss in anothr die of the same size. If the static is modifier is lower, use a small sized die, and if the static modifier is higher, increase the die size.


Like, adding another 1d8 to a longsword attack works out to roughly 50% if there's a +4 Str bonus. Or, if the Str bonus is lower, add in a 1d6 instead.

k. Then what do you propose to do with monster hp?

 

[Satyrn]

k. Then what do you propose to do with monster hp?

I don't know.

Multiplying by 2/3 is easy enough. Or subtract 2 (or 3 or 4) hp per hit die maybe.

 

[Lanefan]

Which is why I like Double Monster Damage, without the Half Hit Points, because it means:
1) Fighting "monsters" becomes significantly different than fighting people

Would it? Perhaps a clarification from [MENTION=6795602]FrogReaver[/MENTION] might help: by "monsters" do you mean any opponent the PCs are fighting (even including other PCs if it comes to that) or are you thinking only of monsters as in non-human-ish creatures?

EDIT: And there it is a few posts above, posted while I typed this.

2) Players are forced to choose: use tactics or flee
3) The DM has to work a little harder to make the combat interesting, so it doesn't boil down to "ha, my numbers are bigger than your numbers."

Anything that encourages these developments is always good.

 

[Lanefan]

k. Then what do you propose to do with monster hp?

If anyone out there still actually rolls the dice to generate monster h.p., just use a smaller die size. d6 instead of d8 should be enough.

 

[Satyrn]

If anyone out there still actually rolls the dice to generate monster h.p., just use a smaller die size. d6 instead of d8 should be enough.

Brofist!

That's what my suggestion works out to, although the -2 hp/hd I suggested works out closer to dropping from a d8 to d4. Shrug, playtesting will reveal needed tweaks regardless.

 

[FrogReaver]

Brofist!

That's what my suggestion works out to, although the -2 hp/hd I suggested works out closer to dropping from a d8 to d4. Shrug, playtesting will reveal needed tweaks regardless.

What do you think of this. -2 hp per hit dice. Increase damage dice in size by 2.