How much should HP scale?

[Hassassin]

I did some back of the envelope calculations and arrived at 3x. 14 for a 1st level fighter and 42 for a 10th level one.

 

[Fanaelialae]

I voted x5, because that feels like a good number, but I was tempted to vote that this poll is rubbish.

If hp start low then damage should start low, and if damage starts high then hp start high. That's the first element of your ratio, which is essentially what you're asking about.

The second part should be dependent on damage scaling. HP should obviously be much higher in a system where you gain 2 damage per level than one where you gain 1 damage every 2 levels.

You could have a system where hp start low and scale quickly, or one where they start high and scale slowly, or one which starts high and scales quickly, and they'll all be balanced provided you balance the other side of the equation (damage) correctly. As such, asking about the ratio isn't necessarily asking the right question.

 

[Ahnehnois]

I went all the way down to x2. Being twice as tough as someone else is a big deal!

1st level characters aren't tough enough, so I think they should have vitality/wound or some large resevoir of health, making it easier to advance slowly. I'd rather see level-based defense and parrying/blocking than more hp.

I think the rates should be different between classes, but not radically different.

 

[Kingreaper]

You could have a system where hp start low and scale quickly, or one where they start high and scale slowly, or one which starts high and scales quickly, and they'll all be balanced provided you balance the other side of the equation (damage) correctly. As such, asking about the ratio isn't necessarily asking the right question.

The poll is asking about how fast it should scale (ie. the ratio).

Which may not be THE right question, but it's certainly A right question.

If you have a question you think is more important, then ask that as well. This thread doesn't prevent you starting others.

 

[Mercurius]

Here's one approach.

Starting HP: CON + Max Hit Die (d4 for wizards, d6 for rogues/bards, d8 for clerics, d10 for fighters, d12 for barbarians).

I like the idea that the starting range for ability scores is 3-18, with most racial modifiers being +1 (with the occasional +2 for extremes, like half-giant strength), so almost no starting character would have higher than a 19 CON to start. So given 3-19 starting CON, the starting range would be:

d12 classes: 15-31
d10 classes: 13-29
d8 classes: 11-27
d6 classes: 9-25
d4 classes: 7-23

Realistically no one is going to want to start with a really low Con, so you can add 3-6 HP to the lower ranges to get the numbers for 99% of PCs.

I like re-introducing hit die, but with the minimum being CON bonus. So if a fighter has 18/+4 CON, their range is 4-10. That means that at 10th level the max HP would be:

d12 classes: 139 HP
d10 classes: 119 HP
d8 classes: 99 HP
d6 classes: 79 HP
d4 classes: 59 HP

So that's a range of about x3 to over x4. I'll say x4.

 

[Fanaelialae]

The poll is asking about how fast it should scale (ie. the ratio).

Which may not be THE right question, but it's certainly A right question.

If you have a question you think is more important, then ask that as well. This thread doesn't prevent you starting others.

Okay, I realize all of that.

My point was that hp don't exist in a vacuum. They exist to balance an equation.

Assume the oversimplified form of:

(h)p = (d)amage

Any discussion that considers how h will change should therefore also consider the implications thereof upon d.

Keep in mind that the above is, again, oversimplified. There are numerous factors to consider. Just for starters, the number of hits a character should be able to take (I believe the prevailing number from that poll is 3). Thus, our equation becomes:

h = 3d

I mean, it's all well and good to say that you'd like to see hp double, or triple, or whatnot, but I think it's very important to consider whether that leaves the designers with enough room to include meaningful changes in damage as levels increase. Personally, I'd like to see monsters gain +1 damage per level, because it creates a smooth basis for clear improvement.

Based on the equation above, that would indicate that the fighter needs at least 3 hp per level (after 1st), or [1st level hp] + 27 at level 10. That would be a doubling if the fighter starts with 27 hp, an (approximate) tripling if he starts with 13 hp, or a quadrupling if he starts with 9 hp.

However, 1st level hp shouldn't be ignored here. In the first case, the average damage at first level should be 9 (~1d8+5), the average for the second example should be 5 (~1d6+2), and for the third example it should be 3 (~1d4+1).

Of course, the above is very rough. It ignores a number of important factors, such as healing. I offer it simply to illustrate my point. The reality is that you're not just discussing hp ratios, but also the typical damage output of a level 1 monster as well as a number of other significant factors.

To me, it's like discussing the number of cylinders a car should have without first discussing whether that car should be an SUV or a supermini.

In my opinion, it's important to keep these things in mind during such a discussion.

 

[Kingreaper]

In my opinion, it's important to keep these things in mind during such a discussion.

Indeed, it is. But if you say "we shouldn't decide anything until we've decided the other related things": you never decide anything.

You need to pick things to focus on first, as ones to build out from. You need to keep the others in mind, but you can't wait until you've decided them.


Your equation: h=3d, is a reasonable one, but it's missing a key factor:
hL=3dL where L is your level.

What this poll is asking is: h1/h10=?. Equivalent to: d1/d10=?.

You've clearly already got damage numbers in mind. So you can answer it based on those. For people who don't yet have damage numbers this may help them decide on them.

 

[Hassassin]

What this poll is asking is: h1/h10=?. Equivalent to: d1/d10=?.

I hope those two aren't equivalent. Assuming that d stands for damage per hit and not average damage per attack or round, d/h should change based on class and level.

 

[Kingreaper]

I hope those two aren't equivalent. Assuming that d stands for damage per hit and not average damage per attack or round, d/h should change based on class and level.

I think average damage per round is the most relevant value to use for d, personally.

But distinguishing between those three values is a good point.

 

[Fanaelialae]

I hope those two aren't equivalent. Assuming that d stands for damage per hit and not average damage per attack or round, d/h should change based on class and level.

It's simple enough to do, so I think it's definitely a possibility.

Let's say you want a fighter to be able to take 3 hits at 1st and an additional hit every 5 levels (5 hits at 10th). The equation simply becomes:

hL = (3 + L/5)dL

You can set different ratios for different classes once you figure out what dL should be based on the fighter (since average damage per hit can be assumed to be fairly constant, assuming that balance is considered important).

If you want a wizard to be able to take 2 hits at 1st level, and an additional hit every 10 levels, just change the equation to:

hL = (2 + L/10)dL

Since dL has been determined from analysis of the fighter, hL for the wizard is easy. Though you may have some issues with fractional hp. You can always add those in as a "class feature" though.

Indeed, it is. But if you say "we shouldn't decide anything until we've decided the other related things": you never decide anything.

You need to pick things to focus on first, as ones to build out from. You need to keep the others in mind, but you can't wait until you've decided them.


Your equation: h=3d, is a reasonable one, but it's missing a key factor:
hL=3dL where L is your level.

What this poll is asking is: h1/h10=?. Equivalent to: d1/d10=?.

You've clearly already got damage numbers in mind. So you can answer it based on those. For people who don't yet have damage numbers this may help them decide on them.

Yeah, I couldn't remember how to resize the letters to do a subscript; thanks!

I still don't think that this makes a great starting point.

Let's face it, hp ratios are purely a matter of aesthetics. I don't think anyone will say, "A tenth level fighter has more than double the hp of a first level fighter. That's a deal breaker!" D&D has never had small ratios. The classical ratio has be 1:10 (since hp increased linearly, assuming average rolls). 3e made that slightly lower with maximum starting hp, but it was still pretty close. 4e made those ratios much smaller by giving PCs lots of starting hp, and then linear progression thereafter.

I think before you can arrive at ratios, you need to answer a few other questions first. Should survivability outpace (Hassassin's preference) or merely keep pace with damage? How does each class fit into this? Once you have that, you can put together the equations and run the numbers to see how it works on paper. You can see whether crits, for example, are reasonable when compared to a wizard's starting hp.

I honestly think that this ratio should grow out of the other factors, rather than the other way around, and I hope that is the approach the designer's take as well.