Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Jens" data-source="post: 102098" data-attributes="member: 605">I couldn't agree more. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> Poor rolls can really cripple a character. (Think of a 4th level fighter with +1 from Con and only 20 HPs... not even that unlikely.) The best I can think of would be to give max HPs at 1st level and after that give average HPs, rounded down at even level and up at odd levels.I think rolling for HPs makes about as much sense as it would to, at character creation, roll a d20 and use that roll instead of the usual '10' for the character's base AC. Think about it - if it should be random how hardy someone is, shouldn't it also be random how difficult he is to hit? Yes, AC varies between characters due to Dex (and various protections, but that's irrelevant here) but HPs vary just as much due to Con. And both values are compared to random rolls (damage rolls and attack rolls, respectively) so it's not like everything would be pre-determined.Something else: IMX just about everyone re-rolls poor results, so why roll in the first place? I mean, if you roll for HPs, and reroll (say) 1s and 2s on a d10 when rolling HPs, why not just roll d8+2 in the first place? The same goes for anyone with stat-rolling systems with a rule like &quot;reroll 1s and 2s&quot;... why not just use d4+2 instead of d6? The usual &quot;4d6, reroll 1s and 2s, drop lowest&quot; can be simplified to &quot;4d4, drop lowest, add 6&quot;. But then some might still want to reroll 1s?That is good, yes. The more you get to customize, the more efficiently can you make use of the stats. Usually, having a good stat that you use a lot and a poor stat that you rarely use (say, Str and Cha for a fighter) is 'better' than having average stats. The increasing incremental costs of the DMG's point buy method reflect this reasonably well, I think.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Jens, post: 102098, member: 605"] I couldn't agree more. :) Poor rolls can really cripple a character. (Think of a 4th level fighter with +1 from Con and only 20 HPs... not even that unlikely.) The best I can think of would be to give max HPs at 1st level and after that give average HPs, rounded down at even level and up at odd levels. I think rolling for HPs makes about as much sense as it would to, at character creation, roll a d20 and use that roll instead of the usual '10' for the character's base AC. Think about it - if it should be random how hardy someone is, shouldn't it also be random how difficult he is to hit? Yes, AC varies between characters due to Dex (and various protections, but that's irrelevant here) but HPs vary just as much due to Con. And both values are compared to random rolls (damage rolls and attack rolls, respectively) so it's not like everything would be pre-determined. Something else: IMX just about everyone re-rolls poor results, so why roll in the first place? I mean, if you roll for HPs, and reroll (say) 1s and 2s on a d10 when rolling HPs, why not just roll d8+2 in the first place? The same goes for anyone with stat-rolling systems with a rule like "reroll 1s and 2s"... why not just use d4+2 instead of d6? The usual "4d6, reroll 1s and 2s, drop lowest" can be simplified to "4d4, drop lowest, add 6". But then some might still want to reroll 1s?That is good, yes. The more you get to customize, the more efficiently can you make use of the stats. Usually, having a good stat that you use a lot and a poor stat that you rarely use (say, Str and Cha for a fighter) is 'better' than having average stats. The increasing incremental costs of the DMG's point buy method reflect this reasonably well, I think. [/QUOTE]

Verification