Maximum Hit Points

[scholz]

Has anyone tried this? I mean, giving Fighters 10 HP/Level, Wizards 4, Clerics 8, etc..
I was thinking it might make the distinction between the fighters and other classes more distinct. I am not sure what other consequences or side effects it might have.

 

[jthilo]

I'm trying it right now, although it's only been two sessions. At least once, a character has been down to low single digits, so it's not like it's made the party unstoppable. It doesn't help at all against huge amounts of Strength damage, for example.

 

[Laman Stahros]

I haven't tried max hps per level but, I am using a 3/4 hp per level model and it works great. Keeps the players from rolling up a 5th level cleric with less hp than the 5th level wizard (yes, it happened. Can you say dead cleric?).

 

[StGabe]

We use max-1 because I hate random stats (we use 28 point stat buy as well). It works pretty well. We're also a very low magic campaign though so the PC's need all the help they can get.

 

[Li Shenron]

Has anyone tried this? I mean, giving Fighters 10 HP/Level, Wizards 4, Clerics 8, etc..
I was thinking it might make the distinction between the fighters and other classes more distinct. I am not sure what other consequences or side effects it might have.

Are you giving this (a) only to the PC or (b) also to NPC and monsters?

Possible things to keep under the radar:

- in case (a) characters are stronger than monsters, you may want to either increase the amount of encounters in a day or the monsters' number or CR
- in case (b) you simply get longer combats

- healing stuff (potions, spells, overnight rest) is slightly less valuable, because they proportionally heal less than before

- save-or-die or incapacitating effects become more valuable compared with damaging effects (not only spells, but including e.g. sneak attack)

- Constitution is slightly less useful than before

These changes can be either good or bad, depending on your preferences! For example to my own taste more/longer combats is good, less need for high-Con is good, but I didn't like the reduced usefulness of healing and the increased focus on save-or-die spells (although I like the characters using things which aren't straight damage either).

 

[scholz]

Are you giving this (a) only to the PC or (b) also to NPC and monsters?

I am wavering. I am inclined to make it just the PCs and select monster and NPCS. I don't use the normal XP system (I award a level when I feel like it, basically) so I am not too worried about that.

- in case (a) characters are stronger than monsters, you may want to either increase the amount of encounters in a day or the monsters' number or CR
- in case (b) you simply get longer combats

I am okay with either of these consequences. I guess, I've never had a problem challenging the PCs, that isn't a problem. And honestly, it isn't to give the players a boost that I am thinking about this change. It really is to prevent the dice from overly hurting a character in general.

Ex. I play a front line fighter in a game, and fear going up levels sometimes, because I could roll a 1 on HPS and then I am stuck. Our GM gives the option of choosing the low average, but 4 or 5, while fine, isn't really all that impressive, especially since my guy has only a +1 Con Bonus.​

Imagine if the BAB system were similar, every level you roll a die and if you rolled low your BAB didn't improve, if your rolled high it it. I think people who have nothing but combat abilities (fighters) would be pretty irked.

- healing stuff (potions, spells, overnight rest) is slightly less valuable, because they proportionally heal less than before

I am of two minds on this. Either (a) make healing cheaper and more accessible, or (b) make healing a less common thing.
(a) I actually had a system in 1E that changed the cure spells to proportional healing 10%, 20% etc.. It worked pretty good, especially at mid-levels. I would be fine with returning to something like that.
(b) If healing is TOO useful, clerics become little more than healers, and that sucks. If they don't feel compelled to blow all their spells on healing, we might see them become more interesting spell casters (or I might get rid of them all together).

- save-or-die or incapacitating effects become more valuable compared with damaging effects (not only spells, but including e.g. sneak attack)

True, but there are fewer of these than before. And honestly I wouldn't mind seeing these spells take a more important role. It is way more interesting story wise to Baleful Polymorph something into a toad than it is to Blast it with a Fireball IMHO.

- Constitution is slightly less useful than before
These changes can be either good or bad, depending on your preferences! For example to my own taste more/longer combats is good, less need for high-Con is good, but I didn't like the reduced usefulness of healing and the increased focus on save-or-die spells (although I like the characters using things which aren't straight damage either).

Good point. But on the other hand, if you wanted to design a wizard who used melee touch spells, or a cleric who waded into combat, CON would still be useful, and more importantly COULD be useful. In RAW you might have a Wizard with a 14 Con and roll poorly on your hitpoints, so despite being robust, you would have to avoid melees.

Thanks for all the good points. I definitely think the option is on the table.

 

[Li Shenron]

(b) If healing is TOO useful, clerics become little more than healers, and that sucks. If they don't feel compelled to blow all their spells on healing, we might see them become more interesting spell casters (or I might get rid of them all together).

I was thinking the opposite here.

I have noticed that if you give the PC more hp, the players tend to "make the day last longer", meaning that if normally they can do 3 encounters before giving up for the day, when they all have lots of HP left, they tend to go on and face a couple of encounters more (if the adventure has them, of course).

This is ok... until they realize later that the normal amount of healing available (spells, potions, rest) is not enough to get them back to full health.

What can happen at this point is that they may request Clerics and Druids exactly to devote more spellcasting to healing than they normally would.

 

[Voadam]

I've played in a game that did this. The hp discrepancy between my barbarian and the party wizard was tremendous.

 

[Celebrim]

I've played in a game that did this. The hp discrepancy between my barbarian and the party wizard was tremendous.

QFT.

Other than the fact that it seems like an unnecessary power creep to me, that seems to be the biggest problem. As a change, it doesn't seem to do anything particularly useful, since inevitably you are going to end up maxing the hit points of the enemies as well or otherwise increasing the difficulty of challenges to keep up. This is power creep, but its also destablizing for exactly the reason Voadam mentioned.

The average hit point spread between a barbarian and a wizard climbs from 4 hp/level up to 8 hp/level. The average effect of attacks goes down too, which makes evocation just that much more obvious of a choice for a Wizard's banned school. Why bother fireballing creatures with maximized hitpoints?

It seems to me that the only thing you are trying to avoid is characters with below average hit points. Personally, as a DM characters with below average hit points annoy me too, because they can't handle the challenge I expect them to. So I rule that if you are currently hit point deprived (below average hitpoints for a character of your class and constitution) the gods smile on your plight, and the next time you gain a level you can take your die roll or high average hit points (3 for a wizard, 4 for a thief, 5 for a cleric, etc.) which ever is worse. This keep things on the even keel in the long run without effecting game balance too much.

 

[Li Shenron]

I've played in a game that did this. The hp discrepancy between my barbarian and the party wizard was tremendous.

How did this spoil the game for you? Was it too easy to remain alive?