D&D 4E Should hit points continue to be generated randomly in 4e?

[Eloi]

I like options.

If I have a few new options for how to determine my character's hit points when we level up, I'll definitely be interested in seeing how useful they are. If I can, say, burn an AP "ahead of time" to turn a below-average HP roll into a maximum HP roll, that would make me extremely happy.

Perhaps there will be a new feat that would allow a character to "roll two dX for hit points, take the better result", or maybe even 3dX. Heck, there might even be a party-focused feat that lets party members who have trained together swap the "extra" results of their die rolls. (The Barbarian who rolls an 11 and a 6 doesn't really "need" that 6, but the Rogue would sure appreciate it..)

I like to roll dice, but I also like to have rules which grant a second chance at a solid foundation of hit points. That seems more fun to me than suffering from a poor die roll, for the life of the character.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

I like to roll dice, but I also like to have rules which grant a second chance at a solid foundation of hit points. That seems more fun to me than suffering from a poor die roll, for the life of the character.

That's the rub. Almost everyone is gung-ho for going with random rolls but then have to add in house rules so that the roll isn't TOO random. Nothing else involved in leveling up a character is random, so why have this one little thing hang on?

DS

 

[Lanefan]

That's the rub. Almost everyone is gung-ho for going with random rolls but then have to add in house rules so that the roll isn't TOO random. Nothing else involved in leveling up a character is random, so why have this one little thing hang on?

Better yet, randomize more of it. There should be a random element to skill point gain to reflect the competence of your trainer...or yours as a student. Spellcasters should have some sort of random element to slot gain...say, a roll each level and when your rolls add to a certain number you get an extra slot to assign to any level you have slots in; something like that. And so on.....

Lanefan

 

[Marnak]

I am thinking about using the following hit point rule in my next campaign.

Players roll as normal. If they roll lower than the average (rounded down), they get the average. If they roll above the average, they get the higher number BUT the DM gets the "extra" hit points as well, added them to a pool of "floating hit points" that the DM can assign to make his important NPCs (who normally get average hit point rolls) a bit tougher.

Marnak

 

[Victim]

Better yet, randomize more of it. There should be a random element to skill point gain to reflect the competence of your trainer...or yours as a student. Spellcasters should have some sort of random element to slot gain...say, a roll each level and when your rolls add to a certain number you get an extra slot to assign to any level you have slots in; something like that. And so on.....

Lanefan

And you should roll to see which stuff you get too - no more picking whatever you want.

 

[GhostTiger]

I guess this shows the different mindset of different types of gamers. Just about everyone I have ever played with comes to D&D with a blank slate when it comes to character creation. You roll the dice, see what stats you get, and then you decide on what sort of character you are going to play. That has been the case for 28 years. Only recently, and really only from what I have read here, do I find D&D players who come to the character creation process with a fully formed character idea/design.

An interesting thing about this thread is the different variations of houserules we use, and have used, for years. I've been playing since '79 and in contrast to the post above, I have never, ever, seen anyone roll stats first, then decide what they are going to play. Players either came to the table wanting to try something, "I wanna be a Elf Druid this time!" or would ask, "What does the party need? A Rogue? Ok." Rolling stats was the first thing you did after you chose what you were going to play. Naturally, players often changed their mind during the creation process, but stats had no effect on their choice.

I voted for rolling hps. Rolling hps is always fun. The disappointment of a bad roll is infrequent since every group I've ever gamed in had some form of re-roll houserule. Predominately, roll a second time if you don't like your first and you have to take the second roll, or roll two and take which one you want. Occasionally nothing would help and you'd be stuck with a bad number. And everyone was ok with that.

On a side note, in all my decades of gaming, with a number of different unrelated groups, not one group has ever used point buy either. Frankly, all of my friends are horrified that anyone would take the randomness out of stat determination. lol 'Course, in my games you roll multiple sets (usually three) and take the preferred.

I think that's the allure of what I would refer to as "random" stats or hps, we houserule the process to the point where better-than-average numbers are not necessarily assured, but very likely.

GhostTiger

 

[Pygon]

I see no problem with random hit points. It's the player's risk if they want to go random.

I houserule that d4's can re-roll 1's and anything larger can re-roll 1's and 2's (I might change that for d6ers). In any case, all that does is raise the averages, and I could do the same for monsters and NPCs to counterbalance.

PC's feel more personal when they are built off dice rolls, even though I prefer the point buy system for ability scores, which pretty much just leave hit points (and starting wealth, and maybe age, height and weight, but pff).

 

[Cadfan]

I think that's the allure of what I would refer to as "random" stats or hps, we houserule the process to the point where better-than-average numbers are not necessarily assured, but very likely.

How likely do you think it is that another significant part of the allure of "random" stats and hp is that the houserules you and everyone else add function to give you a very, very high chance of above average stats and hit points?

 

[Felon]

Personally, I see a big warning flag when a DM emphasizes a lot of randomness in his game. It's often a sign that the one-armed-bandit thrill of rolling dice is where the fun element of the game has been concentrated, rather than on the actual stuff going on in the game--the plot, character interactions, decision-making, etc. It's not 100% reliable as indicators go, but it's served me quite well.

Likewise, when I see a player wanting to roll bunches of dice all the time in my campaign, I examine what he's got going on. It can be a sign that he's not feeling drawn into events.

Fixed hit points all they way. Trading off a character's long-term viability for the short-term gambler's thrill is a poor deal.

 

[EATherrian]

I don't know, some of the most fun I had was with a character who was a fighter/cleric (this is second edition) with only a 7 Constitution who never rolled more than 1 for the hit points. I may not have lasted long in every fight, but dang it it was fun.