Have These Basic Questions been answered yet?

[Nikosandros]

We shall see.

Are you implying that stats for PCs will start at 10 or that the modifiers will be different?

 

[Dragonblade]

I had a 9th level fighter where I rolled 1s for HP in five different levels. The fifth time, the DM let me roll over and I rolled a 1 again. He let me roll again and I rolled a 2. He made me keep the 2.

That's lame.

It might be time to find a new DM. I'm pretty good with accepting DM authority, but there are sometimes when you need to draw a line against bad DMing. If a DM tried to pull that in my group there would be a player revolt.

Seriously, when I hear stuff like that, it just reinforces why I think a certain amount of "DM proofing" the game is a VERY good idea.

 

[JVisgaitis]

Since the game is so dependent on math this time around at all levels, I'd wager that rolling for hit points is either removed or is something like 6+1d4 for Fighters every level.

 

[A'koss]

Since the game is so dependent on math this time around at all levels, I'd wager that rolling for hit points is either removed or is something like 6+1d4 for Fighters every level.

I wouldn't be at all surprised to see static or very near static hit points in 4e. If the new DDM cards are any indication you probably won't even see Con bonus to HP after 1st level.

 

[Lanefan]

Heck, I still roll for Hit Points. It allows some randomness into a character's development. Also I still enjoy the 4d6 drop the lowest, no re-rolls for my character generation.

We roll hit points and always will; we use 5d6 drop lowest 2, rearrange to suit, for stat generation.

One happy thought comes out of reading here, however: if hit points for both PCs *and* monsters are always maxed out, it'll then become trivially easy to scale it back by any amount you want to suit your own campaign and-or tastes...if you want your campaign "average" rather than "maxed", for example, just knock 40% off everything's hit points. Or, conversely, if you want to uber your campaign, scale up all the hit points by an extra 25%; whatever.

Lane-"but I still prefer random"-fan

 

[JVisgaitis]

...you probably won't even see Con bonus to HP after 1st level.

The would be the greatest thing ever, but what the hell would Con do then?

 

[A'koss]

The would be the greatest thing ever, but what the hell would Con do then?

Con still provides you with your Fort Def bonus, Con-based skills and very likely bonuses to various class special abilities. It seems to be shaping up that every ability score will have some power that it backs up...

 

[Klaus]

1. How are ability scores generated?

2. How are hit points determined?

3. What classes will be in the PHB?

4. What races will be in the PHB?

1. From what is know at the time, it will be point-buy by default, with the option of rolling them up as usual.

2. No straight-up answers, but odds are that it will be like SWSaga (i.e., you get your class' HD maximized x3 at 1st level).

3. For sure? So far Cleric, Fighter, Warlord, Wizard, Warlock, Ranger, Rogue, Paladin.

4. For sure? So far Human, Elf, Eladrin, Tiefling, Dragonborn, Halfling, Dwarf. The jury is still out on Half-Elves.

 

[Stogoe]

Since the Pit Fiend's Ability Bonuses are (3e values + 13(half level)) and there's really no other way to square that with the Spined Devil's Ability Bonuses, I'd say that 3e+1/2 level for Ability Checks is pretty darn confirmed.

 

[Dausuul]

I had a 9th level fighter where I rolled 1s for HP in five different levels. The fifth time, the DM let me roll over and I rolled a 1 again. He let me roll again and I rolled a 2. He made me keep the 2.

That's lame.

It might be time to find a new DM. I'm pretty good with accepting DM authority, but there are sometimes when you need to draw a line against bad DMing. If a DM tried to pull that in my group there would be a player revolt.

Seriously, when I hear stuff like that, it just reinforces why I think a certain amount of "DM proofing" the game is a VERY good idea.

Wait a minute. The player was horribly screwed over by the rules. The DM did not prevent this. And your solution is to "DM-proof" the game? It was more DM intervention that was needed here, not less.

I agree that the DM should have done something about this, but the ultimate fault lay with the idiotic rule that requires PCs to roll for hit points. If you want to fix the system to prevent this, DM-proofing is not the answer. Removing the "roll for hit points" rule is.