D&D General Rolling HPs

[Horwath]

Odds are against a roll being better than taking the (rounded up) average so 90% of the time my players take the average. There have been rolls - one guy rolled low, but then stuck with it and rolled max at the next level.

I've seen some people posting here they would allow a reroll on HP rolls because they are low, or that they allow multiple rolls. Surely that completely defeats the object of rolling. If you don't want to chance it, take the average! It's that simple.

Maybe if the average was rounded DOWN, there would be more rolling going on...

we now play a 3.5 campaign.

we all use average fixed value.

as a rogue on 2nd level I get 3 Hp, 3rd level 4HP, 4th level 3HP, 5th level 4HP, etc...

 

[Tallifer]

I prefer point buy. I can see the thrill of good luck and the humour of bad luck, but for a long term character, whether one I am playing, or a bunch of characters in my own campaign, I prefer a level playing field.

(I got a certain perverse enjoyment out of rolling 18, 14, 14, 11, 16, 15 on 4d6 drop the lowest and in order for a game in which the DM and all the other players insisted that we roll. Of course, being an OSR game, my uber character can still die without warning from a failed poison saving throw. I have already rolled up my back-up.)

 

[Lanefan]

It’s a different style of play. Makes the game more like a roguelike, where you play in part to see how far the character will make it, and if they die, that’s no big loss, you just make another one and try again.

Finally! Someone gets it!

I think for a lot of people, that’s not what they want out of an RPG though. They don’t want their characters to be disposable, they want to create and detail a character to play through an epic story, for character death to be a significant and tragic moment in said story.

Which all sounds good until you look under the hood, where you'll see an underlying (and IMO very much unwarranted) expectation on the player's part that the character will survive until-unless the player permits the game/DM to kill it.

Call me a curmudgeon, but a player getting this precious about a character never ends well in my experience.

They want to tailor their stats to make the best version of the character they envision, rather than playing a randomly-generated character the best they can.

The difference lies in approach: do I come up with my character idea before arriving at char-gen night and then try to tailor the stats to suit, or do I roll first and come up with my character idea based on what the dice have given me to work with.

Me, I usually do a bit of both: I'll have two or three character ideas in mind* before rolling any dice, and then see which one fits best with what the dice give me.

* - or one idea in mind that's largely dice-proof e.g. if I go in thinking I'm going to play a Jack-Sparrow-like character it doesn't matter what I roll, I can still play the character just fine smply by mannerisms and characterization.

 

[The Green Hermit]

Do you roll/allow rolling HPs in your game? If so are you a 'hard line' "You decided to roll so your stuck with that 1" or do you have a way to mitigate bad rolls?
What options I've seen are:
Player and DM roll, DM rolls behind a screen, and player can decide to take either roll. Of course the player cant see the DMs roll before deciding.
Re roll 1's.
If you roll lower then half take half.

How do you go about it.

We roll, but if the amount is less than the average, we take the average.

 

[Undrave]

I just take the average every level. I don't trust dice not to screw me over on something so important.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Been a bit since I dropped by this thread. Lots of good reading.

I like the idea that average HP should be rounded down, not up. 90+% of everything is rounded down after all in 5E. It gives you at least some incentive to roll for it.

Consider rolling 4d6k3 for ability scores. You average 12.25 (roughly), compared to the average 12 with the standard array. Sure, you might roll worse, but it is a bit better so encourages players to roll.

Now, point-buy rewards players in a fashion, but denies the best starting scores. It is safe and you get better results (albeit marginally) than rolling 4d6k3, but you are kept from the highest scores since point-buy stops at 15 (before race and maybe a feat). With point-buy, max is 17 at level 1; with rolling, it is 20.

I think a cool way to do it is roll scores in order, but allow players to swap their results with each other. Maybe one rolls good scores for a rogue but was interested in a cleric or druid, and the other rolls a good cleric set, but had interest in a rogue or bard maybe. Easy-swap your sets. Odds are with 4-5 players, I would think people could get scores they can play and maybe even be happy with?

I'll check back in a bit later to see how the thread has progressed. Again, interesting reading people!

 

[Oofta]

If you really want to balance out average HP with rolling just round up on even levels and down on odd. Make a decision of rolling or average at character creation.

 

[Charlaquin]

Finally! Someone gets it!

Oh, I totally get it. I enjoy both styles.

Which all sounds good until you look under the hood, where you'll see an underlying (and IMO very much unwarranted) expectation on the player's part that the character will survive until-unless the player permits the game/DM to kill it.

Call me a curmudgeon, but a player getting this precious about a character never ends well in my experience.

I actually don’t have a problem with games where the characters can’t die without the player’s permission. Just use the penalties for resurrection to a character who would have died and narrate them as a debilitating injury. That said, I do prefer character death to be on the table and not require player permission, even in this style of play. The player(s) not feeling ready to let go of the character is precisely what makes the death impactful. Of course, if you’re going this route I recommend starting at 3rd level or going very easy on 1st and 2nd level characters, because that early, the rest of the group hasn’t had time to get invested in the character.

The difference lies in approach: do I come up with my character idea before arriving at char-gen night and then try to tailor the stats to suit, or do I roll first and come up with my character idea based on what the dice have given me to work with.

Me, I usually do a bit of both: I'll have two or three character ideas in mind* before rolling any dice, and then see which one fits best with what the dice give me.

* - or one idea in mind that's largely dice-proof e.g. if I go in thinking I'm going to play a Jack-Sparrow-like character it doesn't matter what I roll, I can still play the character just fine smply by mannerisms and characterization.

Agreed, but many players prefer to have their character fully thought out ahead of time, or to have several such characters on deck, and choose one from among them that fits the rest of the party.

 

[Lanefan]

I actually don’t have a problem with games where the characters can’t die without the player’s permission. Just use the penalties for resurrection to a character who would have died and narrate them as a debilitating injury. That said, I do prefer character death to be on the table and not require player permission, even in this style of play. The player(s) not feeling ready to let go of the character is precisely what makes the death impactful.

Sure.

The problem is that IME the player who isn't ready to let go of the character if-when it dies often quickly moves on to denying that anything bad* can happen to the character at all, and will raise a holy stink when it does; meaning I-as-DM have to specifically treat that character with kid gloves unless I want a headache. No thanks.

* - in my game this can include level loss, major wealth loss, long-term debilitation e.g. loss of mind, and so forth.

Agreed, but many players prefer to have their character fully thought out ahead of time, or to have several such characters on deck, and choose one from among them that fits the rest of the party.

I go the other direction and suggest players roll up their characters in (as far as possible) complete ignorance of what anyone else is rolling up. Play what you want (or what the dice will let you!) and if it turns out you're all magic-users I-as-DM can always lob in an NPC fighter or two to round you out.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Sure.

The problem is that IME the player who isn't ready to let go of the character if-when it dies often quickly moves on to denying that anything bad* can happen to the character at all, and will raise a holy stink when it does; meaning I-as-DM have to specifically treat that character with kid gloves unless I want a headache. No thanks.

* - in my game this can include level loss, major wealth loss, long-term debilitation e.g. loss of mind, and so forth.

I go the other direction and suggest players roll up their characters in (as far as possible) complete ignorance of what anyone else is rolling up. Play what you want (or what the dice will let you!) and if it turns out you're all magic-users I-as-DM can always lob in an NPC fighter or two to round you out.

For players who don't want a character to die when it does happen, maybe impose a different penalty instead of removing the character entirely? Suggestions would be losing a level and/or a -1 to all ability scores. If you already tell them "bad stuff" happens in your game, this would seem like a reasonable alternative to removing the character completely. shrug