D&D 5E HP bonus lowest of Strength/Con

[Don Durito]

I'm thinking of implementing this rule.

Instead of Con bonus adding to hp, the bonus to hp will be based on the lowest of Strength or Con.

Reasons to do this:
1) Makes Strength more attractive and less of an obvious dump stat for other many classes
2) Makes Dex a little less Strong in comparison, as a high Dex means giving up either a high Strength or Con
3) Gives a bit of a (relative) HP boost to tradtionally high hit point classes - this gap seems to have closed a bit too much with the increased hit dice in 5e plus the fact that so many spellcasters have so many reasons to take a good Con.
4) Nice and simple to implement

What do we think?

 

[DND_Reborn]

There have been a lot of thread on these sorts of ideas, so I'll address each of your points.

1. It doesn't make STR more attractive, it makes it more "required" as a lot of players view CON already. Most PCs IME have CON as the third (sometimes second even) highest score. What keeps players from dumping INT and putting the slightly better score in STR? I don't see this as addressing a problem as more a shift of one (potential) problem to another.

2. High DEX is still attractive because it means high AC, better Initiative, and better DEX saves (more common that STR saves). If I have a better AC, I am not as worried about HP because I won't get hit as often (not a perfect solution, but it helps certainly). Even DEX saves are more common when it comes to damaging spells or effects, so being more likely to make the DEX save also helps reduce the need for HP that way.

3. Most traditionally high HP classes (the warrior-types) already have decent or great CON scores IME because their first priority is often STR or DEX and CON is second or third. Also, since you are using the lower of STR/CON, you are demanding both scores be good to have better HP. How is that helpful for "boosting" the HP of these classes? If anything, it makes it harder I would think.

4. It is nice and simple to implement, but I don't think it will help accomplish much of what you seem to be looking for as it doesn't support your reasons as I see it.

If your goal is to make STR more attractive or to reduce the dump stat issue:

1. implement the variant encumbrance rules (STR x5 for unencumbered, not STR x15!!!). Most PCs with STR 8-10 are easily considered encumbered and have -10 speed if you use the variant rule. We see a lot more STR 10-12 than 8-9, even for casters!
2. have finesse weapons only use DEX for attack rolls, keep damage tied to STR. This encourages ranged weapon users and rogues to have a decent STR or sacrifice damage potential. This rule also diminishes the overall appeal of DEX, so that helps IMO.

Otherwise, would you mind clarifying precisely what your design intent is with this rule and what problem, if any, you are trying to address? Thanks!

 

[Don Durito]

Most traditionally high HP classes (the warrior-types) already have decent or great CON scores IME because their first priority is often STR or DEX and CON is second or third. Also, since you are using the lower of STR/CON, you are demanding both scores be good to have better HP. How is that helpful for "boosting" the HP of these classes? If anything, it makes it harder I would think.

As I said it makes it "relatively" better. These classes don't get more HP, but other classes will likely have less. This reinforces the traditional role of the frontline character a little.

As it is now I find that often the difference between a Sorcerer and a Fighter is one HP per level and I think that flattens things out a bit too much.

It makes Dex primary for Melee characters slightly less attractive, which is enough, I think (because while you can have a good Str, and Con, you can't have a good Dex, Dex and Con.

It reduces the likelihood of just about every character having a Con of 14. If it's harder to get those extra HP, then it may lead to a rethinking of priorities.

2. have finesse weapons only use DEX for attack rolls, keep damage tied to STR. This encourages ranged weapon users and rogues to have a decent STR or sacrifice damage potential. This rule also diminishes the overall appeal of DEX, so that helps IMO.

I have considered this in the past, but I'd prefer not to. It feels overly punitive and Individual attacks already feel like they do too little damage relative to opponent's HP.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Gotcha, so you are really more finding the caster classes have too many HP because they are dumping STR (in some cases anyway I would imagine) in order to have decent DEX and CON, gaining some AC and good HP?

I'm not sure how Sorcerer (d6) and Fighter (d10) should only be 1 HP per level unless most of your sorcerers go with Draconic Bloodline? It is popular, so I could see that. But IME if a caster is likely to have a CON 14, a fighter will likely have CON 16. Obviously YMMV.

Again, as far as DEX goes, a better DEX already gives you a better AC so HP aren't quite as important. I think this will more cause all characters to have slightly less HP (not a bad thing IMO!) because now both STR and CON are required for good HP, not CON alone. Because now instead of just a CON 14, you need a STR 14 as well--which IMO also won't fit many character concepts.

But, it is a very simple concept to implement. So, give it a try and see if it works out.

I know my table would never adopt it, but we don't see anyone dumping anything most of the time because we made certain every ability score is important to most classes. You might see an 8 or 9 once in a while, but in the six PC's I've played over the last two years or so I had one PC (female elf wizard MC) with a STR 9. All the other PCs had at least 10's everywhere.

What about INT? Do you see a lot of PCs dumping INT since only Wizards really need it?

 

[DND_Reborn]

Just a thought: maybe use CON mod to HP to increase your HD roll to the maximum for the HD? This way, sorcerers and wizards are capped at 6, and fighters and such would be at 10. It also makes it so it is worth more to have a higher CON if you have a higher HD.

Here is a table showing some calculations if you want to consider the idea:

If the STR dump thing is more an issue, there are other ways to tackle that.

Anyway, just a thought. Otherwise, if you go with your original concept, please post your results after trying it for a while.

 

[commandercrud]

The last thing anything in 5e needs in a HP boost.

 

[DND_Reborn]

The last thing anything in 5e needs in a HP boost.

Nothing in the OP is doing that.

Item #3 seems to be implying that, but the point the OP was making is it actually reduces HP for casters especially, which relatively gives STR-based warriors a "bump" in HP.

If you think about it, making HP dependent on two scores (STR and CON) instead of one automatically makes it give less of a bonus to HP. For that reason alone, I like the idea on the surface.

But, I agree the last thing 5E needs is more HP!

 

[Helldritch]

What you might consider is to apply penalties at all times. Here is how we do it. A St penalty to damage will apply even to ranged attack and finesse weapons. So dumping strenght will lower your damage potential. The logic behind this is that though you can hit the weak spot of an armored opponent, you lack the strength to fully punch through. Also, we use the alternate carrying capacity just as @dnd4vr proposed you.

This makes strenght a desirable stat for just about anyone. Also, use more tactical options such as push, shove and knock down. Strength is vital to avoid these effects. Even a one point penalty to strength can spell doom as these actions do not target AC. The worst of the lot for players is the knock down. Not only do you fall prone and you are now attacked with advantage, but you lose half your movement just to get up thus limiting your ability to get away from melee if you are a caster or ranged attacker.

 

[DND_Reborn]

This makes strenght a desirable stat for just about anyone. Also, use more tactical options such as push, shove and knock down. Strength is vital to avoid these effects. Even a one point penalty to strength can spell doom as these actions do not target AC. The worst of the lot for players is the knock down. Not only do you fall prone and you are now attacked with advantage, but you lose half your movement just to get up thus limiting your ability to get away from melee if you are a caster or ranged attacker.

Yep, this is why my elven rogue/wizard/cleric with STR 9 took expertise in Athletics. Not having proficiency in STR saves was still problematic at times, though.