Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
monster hit points...average?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="JustinAlexander" data-source="post: 6038965" data-attributes="member: 6700092"><p>Sure. But it's not like such adjustments are mutually exclusive with variable hit points.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>In general, hit points aren't the kind of thing that the character can easily "see" at the beginning of combat. Hit points work by affecting the type of wounds that a creature suffers: A 10 hp wound on an orc with 50 hp looks different than a 10 hp wound on an orc with 100 hp. So, insofar as description is concerned, it's emergent and doesn't exercise any skill set that you wouldn't already use with "all monsters of type X have the same hit points" (except that you're varying within the group instead of just between groups).</p><p></p><p>The primary benefit I see at the table from varying hit points, however, is not directly descriptive. By breaking up recognizable mechanical patterns, players end up focusing more on the game world instead of the mechanics modeling the game world.</p><p></p><p>In other words, if you roll for hit points you stop getting discussions like, "He dropped at 45 hp! So that means the other three trolls will also drop at 45 hp!" (It's not impossible to pull patterns out of the data, obviously. But generally the sample size is small enough that there's no discernible advantage to it.) IME, this isn't really a conscious choice by the players. It's, again, emergent behavior: If they can trivially recognize mechanical patterns, the brain will automatically yank 'em out and look at them. (It's what our brains are designed to do.) Obfuscate 'em just a little bit and people stop looking at them.</p><p></p><p>I talk about a non-mechanical example of this in <a href="http://thealexandrian.net/wordpress/13103/roleplaying-games/jaquaying-the-dungeon-part-2-the-jaquays-techniques" target="_blank">Jaquaying the Dungeon</a> (see "Minor Elevation Shifts").</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I think it's a question of whether your goal is to hyper-normalize the mechanical balance of any given encounter, or if you're looking for a naturalistic and emergent mechanical balance over the course of multiple encounters.</p><p></p><p>In other words, it comes back to the increasingly severe division between tactics-only players and strategy-and-tactics players in the hobby today.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="JustinAlexander, post: 6038965, member: 6700092"] Sure. But it's not like such adjustments are mutually exclusive with variable hit points. In general, hit points aren't the kind of thing that the character can easily "see" at the beginning of combat. Hit points work by affecting the type of wounds that a creature suffers: A 10 hp wound on an orc with 50 hp looks different than a 10 hp wound on an orc with 100 hp. So, insofar as description is concerned, it's emergent and doesn't exercise any skill set that you wouldn't already use with "all monsters of type X have the same hit points" (except that you're varying within the group instead of just between groups). The primary benefit I see at the table from varying hit points, however, is not directly descriptive. By breaking up recognizable mechanical patterns, players end up focusing more on the game world instead of the mechanics modeling the game world. In other words, if you roll for hit points you stop getting discussions like, "He dropped at 45 hp! So that means the other three trolls will also drop at 45 hp!" (It's not impossible to pull patterns out of the data, obviously. But generally the sample size is small enough that there's no discernible advantage to it.) IME, this isn't really a conscious choice by the players. It's, again, emergent behavior: If they can trivially recognize mechanical patterns, the brain will automatically yank 'em out and look at them. (It's what our brains are designed to do.) Obfuscate 'em just a little bit and people stop looking at them. I talk about a non-mechanical example of this in [url=http://thealexandrian.net/wordpress/13103/roleplaying-games/jaquaying-the-dungeon-part-2-the-jaquays-techniques]Jaquaying the Dungeon[/url] (see "Minor Elevation Shifts"). I think it's a question of whether your goal is to hyper-normalize the mechanical balance of any given encounter, or if you're looking for a naturalistic and emergent mechanical balance over the course of multiple encounters. In other words, it comes back to the increasingly severe division between tactics-only players and strategy-and-tactics players in the hobby today. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
monster hit points...average?
Top