More concerns over hit points

[trs31]

Sorry if this has all been said already but I did read through the other hit-point thread and it seems to be more about rests.

While I like how 1st level hit-points are calculated, I don’t like the way hit-points are added after level 1. Assuming that you can expect to get average hit-points over the course of you characters career it only makes sense to have a high constitution if your modifier is higher than the average for your hit dice. Counter intuitively this means wizards will benefit more from a high Con than fighters.

e.g.
Fighter Con 18, Level 1 HP = 24, level 2 HP=30, Level 3 HP=36
Fighter Con 8, Level 1 HP=14, Level 2 HP=20, level 3 HP=26 (Difference at level 3 = 10, Difference at level 10 =10)
Wizard Con 18 Level 1 HP=20, Level 2 HP=24, level 3 HP=28
Wiz Con 8 Level 1 HP=10, Level 2 HP=12, Level 3 HP=14 (Difference at level 3 = 14, difference at level 10 = 28)

Would it not be possible to keep HD + Con mod at subsequent levels as with old editions?

Secondly I have some issues with the way hit-points work. I accept they are an abstract concept. As a simulationist I would prefer that they represented just a characters health (and maybe stamina) and there be a separate system to account for a character’s ability to “roll with a blow” (perhaps linked to AC) however, I think that is a separate argument. If hit points are an amalgamation of health, ability to avoid damage, stamina and luck surly under the current system it would be just as reasonable to say, use your hit dice, or your Con modifier, or you Dex modifier, whichever is highest to determine your hit points per level.

It also makes me wonder why we have a “to hit roll” if success or failure here doesn’t actually determine if you hit. Followed by a weapon damage roll that doesn’t actually represent the amount of damage you have done. The current system seems to be stuck between an abstract and a simulationist system but doesn’t really work for either. In a system where Hit-points represent several different defensive elements doesn’t it make more sense for each character to just dish out an amount of damage-points each attack (with some random variation included for luck) that represent a combination of how much damage a character has done plus, how much they have forced their opponent to duck, doge and expend energy due to the skill of their attack. Armour could be damage reduction and we could do away with “to hit” rolls and AC altogether. (Not my choice…Just saying)

 

[eamon]

Counter intuitively this means wizards will benefit more from a high Con than fighters.

This is pretty traditional. It was very apparent in 3e, and less so (but still there) in 4e.

I'm not sure it really matters.

Fighter Con 18, Level 1 HP = 24, level 2 HP=30, Level 3 HP=36
Fighter Con 8, Level 1 HP=14, Level 2 HP=20, level 3 HP=26 (Difference at level 3 = 10, Difference at level 10 =10)
Wizard Con 18 Level 1 HP=20, Level 2 HP=24, level 3 HP=28
Wiz Con 8 Level 1 HP=10, Level 2 HP=12, Level 3 HP=14 (Difference at level 3 = 14, difference at level 10 = 28)

Though your qualitatively right, your math is off; you don't always roll the average hit die; there's a probability distribution here. The net effect is a little smaller. Additionally, which isn't quite captured by averages, this mechanic means that the peak isn't changed (the maximum hit points rolled don't change); the Con mod just ensures you can't roll particularly poorly.

I don't think it really matters in any case. The distinction is purely a balancing issue, and then it kind of depends what sorts of hit point numbers you want to reach. Here, lower numbers are probably easier to work with at the table, so I prefer this proposed approach to the hit-die+con mod approach. Again, not that it really matters much.

 

[BobTheNob]

For my part I wasnt trilled about the HP rules

Random,really? I dont mind random stats (with some compensation to avoid gimped charactsr) but random HP make me bletch. Its a preference thing I know.

Level 1 : Fine, great. I hate having single digit HP at level 1. The game should be fatal, but only to a degree. You need SOME leeway.

...then the bit about constitution replacing it if its higher? Just not a fan.

OP's Observation : It serves Low HP character better than high HP (moreso than 3e did). I understand you and agree.

What happens it I have a constitution of 12? No advantage whatso-ever. Then if Im playing a fighter with a con of 14 I have a 1 in 12 chance of it changing my woeful HP roll to a woeful+1. It just looks really un-rewarding.

Im not going to burn this idea right down, but I wasnt at all impressed by these decisions. I wonder what optional rules will do with it?

 

[trs31]

This is pretty traditional. It was very apparent in 3e, and less so (but still there) in 4e.

I'm not sure it really matters.



Though your qualitatively right, your math is off; you don't always roll the average hit die; there's a probability distribution here. The net effect is a little smaller. Additionally, which isn't quite captured by averages, this mechanic means that the peak isn't changed (the maximum hit points rolled don't change); the Con mod just ensures you can't roll particularly poorly.

I don't think it really matters in any case. The distinction is purely a balancing issue, and then it kind of depends what sorts of hit point numbers you want to reach. Here, lower numbers are probably easier to work with at the table, so I prefer this proposed approach to the hit-die+con mod approach. Again, not that it really matters much.

Eamon, I think I see what you mean. A fighter with a constitution of 10 has a 1 in 12 chance of rolling any number between 1-12 (average of 6.5) while a fighter with a constitution of 18 has a 4 in 12 chance of getting 4 hit-points and a 1 in 8 chance of rolling any number between 5 - 12 (average of 7)

I admit I hadn't thought of that but (assuming my maths isn't wrong this time-which it may be) that isn't much of an incentive to have a high constitution as a fighter. Of course I also accept we don't know how useful Con will be for other things.

 

[Stalker0]

Of course I also accept we don't know how useful Con will be for other things.

Con directly adds to nonmagical healing as well.

That said, I'm also not a fan of rolled hitpoints. But if the game provided a quick guide for static per level hp, that would be just fine with me.

 

[BobTheNob]

...But if the game provided a quick guide for static per level hp, that would be just fine with me.

I for one would houserule it in if the rule did not exist. I know Im not alone in disliking rolled HP at level up and I have faith the WOTC will recognize that we are out there and will provide optional rules for people who just prefer it that way.

 

[Janaxstrus]

I'm loving the rolled hit points.

I would rather see Rolled HD + Con than Rolled HD OR Con, whichever is higher

 

[eamon]

I think the current mechanic's OK, and I don't see why hit-die + con mod would be better; it just causes hit-point inflation which is not good.

However, I could see a few tweaks:

As trs31 rightly points out, the current rule makes Con mod increases more effective in absolute sense for wizards than for fighters. While I don't intrinsically think that's a problem, you could fix it by rerolling hit-die rolls that come out too low rather than just raising them to the minimum. I.e. if you have 14 Con and roll a 1, then reroll instead of raising it to 2. This way, higher hit dice benefit a little more; indeed every point of con mod would increase hp/level on average by 0.5 for all classes (assuming con mod is greater than 1 and no more than the hit die maximum).

Also, the current implementation raises the hit points rolled upto the Con mod if your roll is lower. This means constitution scores of 10-13 are essentially no better than Con 10 since you always roll a 1. Even Con 14-15 helps only to a very small extent - e.g. a fighter with Con 15 over the span of 12 levels on average gains only 1 hit point more than a fighter with Con 10, though he does start with 4 more hit points. Over the same span of levels even a wizard would gain just 3 hit points. All in all, this strikes me as a bit of a trap rule; if you choose a high Con (assuming you can choose somehow) you might think you're getting more hit points, but that really only works if your Con is very high and preferably a wizard. So I'd vote to reroll not if you roll lower than your Con mod, but reroll when you roll lower or equal to your Con mod. That way, even a Con of 12 helps a bit.

Finally (a little more optionally) if you wanted to smooth the progression so that odd constitution scores have some use, you could allow PCs with odd constitution scores above 10 to flip a coin when they roll an odd result on a hit die: on heads, gain a +1 bonus to hit points.

With these modifications, the maximal hit point scores remain unaltered; and the average hit point score assuming Con 10 remains unaltered, but every point of constitution raises average hit points per level by 0.25 (i.e. Con 10->11 is just as large a change as Con 15->16). Note that since the wizard cannot roll higher than a 4 on his hit die, a Con of greater than 16 would have no effect.

Finally, if they don't tweak the rule (about raising low rolls when levelling) somehow, I'd vote to abolish it. It's just too much of a trap as it is.

 

[Trance-Zg]

Rolling HP is bad, very bad. it can turn your Barbarian into a wuss with few bad rolles.

and HP is still to high

HP should be constitution score plus:
1 HP per level for wizard or similar class
2 HP per level for rogue or similar class
3 HP per level for cleric or similar class
4 HP per level for fighter or similar class

thoughness feat/background/theme/trait would give you 1 HP per level.

 

[Skyscraper]

Rolling HP is bad, very bad. it can turn your Barbarian into a wuss with few bad rolles.

and HP is still to high

HP should be constitution score plus:
1 HP per level for wizard or similar class
2 HP per level for rogue or similar class
3 HP per level for cleric or similar class
4 HP per level for fighter or similar class

thoughness feat/background/theme/trait would give you 1 HP per level.

Your barbarian will be like any other barbarian mechanically. Nothing to remember him by. Isn't that a shame? Wouldn't you rather have a barbarian who is one heck of a badass because he has so much more HPs than any other? Or, even if he has few HPs, wouldn't you even prefer to be that barbarian that shined even through his weakness, showing what courage really means when he dives headfirst into melee? Or what intelligence is, when he decides that diving headfirst is not the best solution? I hope my barbarian is remembered, when all is said and done.