Removing Hit Points from the Game

[DND_Reborn]

I wish I knew, but I almost never track combat rounds.

I was curious. We've had larger battles take 2-3 hours in real-time and maybe 15-20 rounds in game time. The other end is also true, 2-3 rounds in about 15-30 minutes. I know what you mean about the lengthy process of reducing overblown PC hit points, though. However, by Tier 3 there are a lot of decent damage monsters where 4-5 hits will take a PC out.

 

[S'mon]

I was curious. We've had larger battles take 2-3 hours in real-time and maybe 15-20 rounds in game time. The other end is also true, 2-3 rounds in about 15-30 minutes. I know what you mean about the lengthy process of reducing overblown PC hit points, though. However, by Tier 3 there are a lot of decent damage monsters where 4-5 hits will take a PC out.

I find the problem is with large numbers of medium-threat monsters, the "Steading of the Hill Giant Chief" problem. Recently in online text chat game the 5 PCs vs 10 giants & a dire tiger took us 3 hours.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I can see that. I'm hoping the "using averages" idea with roll-once initiative will speed things up considerably (it has so far). I just ordered TFtYP since I loved the older Against the Giants modules! If the DM runs it, I'll keep this in mind.

 

[CubicsRube]

[MENTION=467]Reynard[/MENTION] although hitpoint inflation doesn't bother me as ive never played past 11th level in 5e, i have run some numbers on where my sweet spot would be.

Ultimately I decided on this: at level 0 use you CON score for hitpoints. At level 1 and every level thereafter, use the average hit points gained per level WITHOUT the CON modifier.

This front loads some of the HP and most classes with a COn bonus will break even around 3rd to 5th level.

It props up those with a low con slightly and brings down those with a high con score slightly, lessening the hp gap between classes.

Note i would still use the con mod for hit dice recovery and for con saves of course, so it is still a useful stat.

That may or may not work for you.

 

[Immortal Sun]

The only alternate HP system I've used is Deadlands body chart (and frankly I love it). I'm not sure how well it would translate into D&D. For the unfamiliar, everyone gets a fixed amount of HP (30) unless you are "hefty" or "slim" (35 and 25 if I recall). There are 8 default body parts (head, chest, gut, groin, left leg, left arm, right leg, right arm), each are assigned a range on a d20 based on how difficult they are to hit (20 was head, 19 was groin, etc...). But your HP in any area never changes. (Apologies if I'm not remembering the system perfectly, it's been almost a decade since I played.)

Each body part also had "damage thresholds" that resulted in impairment (or death) the higher the damage in that area got.

I've considering using such a system in D&D. I do think HP should "grow" over the levels, but with such a system it would have to be much less. I'm still tooling it over in my head how to implement it, how to adapt for the various classes(maybe max 1st level HD+Con Score), how to handle called shots, how to handle healing (does it heal one area? divided over the whole body? called healing?) and so on.

 

[TaranTheWanderer]

The systems I enjoy the most are the ones where your HPs are fixed

Dangerous Journeys had Hit points fixed based on your physical stats. A very, very tough person could take 120 damage while most people were around 60-80. Armour provided damage reduction and every attack could be parried.
You never got tougher.

FATE has a Stress track(based on your Endurance(Constitution) which lets you soak up damage. Lets say you have a stress track of 4 (0000)

if you took 5 damage, you can soak up 1 to 4 damage and the rest is overflow. if you choose to soak 3, for instance, (00X0), and the other 2 would be overflow and then you couldn't use that 3rd box to soak damage anymore, but can still use the 1,2 or 4. getting hit for another 3 damage forces you to take a 4 box. So, as your stress track gets worn down, you keep being forced to accumulate more overflow.

I suppose you could lower hit points and have a stress track based on your Con score. Your stress track clears after a short rest and Hit points are recovered using Hit dice. (or vice versa) No full recovery.

I'm just brainstorming. I'm sure there's a way to do a wound system in 5e (I think I saw a good one suggested), but most would require a huge revamp of the system.

Personally, I like the idea of lower hit point but letting armour absorb damage. I think that would have a better feel than straight AC.

 

[5ekyu]

I think starting at 3rd, the archetype level, is a good place to begin. I think it wouldn't be a hard sell with award ideas such as Satyrn suggests once in a while.



One idea is to look at what gaining a level would give the PC. Instead of getting it all at once, maybe every few weeks or a month, award 1-2 HP, eventually a prof bonus increase, maybe a new skill or feat, etc.

Actually, now that I think about it--I might look more carefully into this idea myself.

At this point you are really into a point buy no level system - say HETO or GURPS or any of many others.

Likely best to start with them rather than try to turn DnD into them.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Well, it is an option the OP can follow if he wants to try it. Like I said, I might explore it since I already have material for D&D but nothing for the other games you mention. I barely remember seeing GURPS back in the 80's... barely, I think once--maybe twice.

It would take some time, and the OP might not think it is worth it. Either way, play on!

 

[UngeheuerLich]

[MENTION=467]Reynard[/MENTION] although hitpoint inflation doesn't bother me as ive never played past 11th level in 5e, i have run some numbers on where my sweet spot would be.

Ultimately I decided on this: at level 0 use you CON score for hitpoints. At level 1 and every level thereafter, use the average hit points gained per level WITHOUT the CON modifier.

This front loads some of the HP and most classes with a COn bonus will break even around 3rd to 5th level.

It props up those with a low con slightly and brings down those with a high con score slightly, lessening the hp gap between classes.

Note i would still use the con mod for hit dice recovery and for con saves of course, so it is still a useful stat.

That may or may not work for you.

Most interestingly that was about the solution in the first 5e playtest. I think it was Con score hp. Then class based hp rolled per level. Con score was the minimum you would get however. Hit dice were already in place as rolled die+con.
My experience and probably that of most other people was that 1st level was not dangerous enough. It somehow felt off that a first level wizard was so tough... one should mention however that monsters were quite weak then. Maybe too weak. Today's MM goblins would fare better.

I am a bit sorry that the way it was done in the MM. Every monster seems to start with 1 hit die and then a second for level 1 was not done in the PHB. Pathfinder 2 seems to implement it.
So maybe 1d8 for medium. 1d6 for small people at level 0. Even if you don't maximze them and assign average + con, you will increase everyone's 1st level hp except for the small barbarian with 10 con.

So a small wizard at level 1 would have 4+4+2xCon hp instead of 6+con.
The medium barbarian would have 5+7+2xCon

So everyone starts witha a bit more and 2HD at level 1.

Small PCs would be a little bit disadvantaged but not too much. You could make it easier and just start anyone with d6 hp maximized. Would also work well enough.

 

[Argyle King]

If I'm understanding the OP correctly, it sounds as though he wants a system which has (for a lack of better words) a more horizontal style of PC advancement, as opposed to the somewhat vertical nature of stacking more numbers on top of each other.

If I'm understanding that correctly, I have similar issues with D&D sometimes. (I wouldn't say "problems" because the game is intentionally designed that way; so, it's functioning as intended.) On the player side of things, there are a few common story tropes and scenarios (such as a hostage situation) which don't quite play out the way I imagine in D&D. On the monster side of things, there are some later-tier battles in which fights start to drag because of buckets of HP being the way in which monsters are made tougher. It's not quite as noticeable as 4th, but it still happens and can eat up a lot of play time. From the DM side of things, I occasionally have some cognitive dissonance with how the various parts of the game world compare to each other, but, as said, it's part of the intended design, so it's working as it's supposed to.

I think there are some possible solutions -such as a 5e version of what 3rd Edition players called E6 games. I did see a comment earlier which sounded similar to that by stopping at 10.

If you're looking to heavily modify how HP, damage, and etc work in general and also additionally work toward a more "horizontal" game, it may be easier to try a different system rather than try to work against the core design of D&D.