To MAX HP or not to MAX HP

[Sunseeker]

Makes combats longer. More resources get used. That's about it.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

D&D has DICE! for a reason.

Rolling dice is one of the most fun aspects of playing an RPG. Why would anybody want to reduce the need to roll all of those magnificent polyhedral dice? This shift towards average HP, and standard arrays instead of rolling abilities, is a trend in D&D that doesn't sit well with my inner grognard.

I do understand the disappointment and frustration of rolling low, but without risking the bad there can't be any chance for the good. I do agree that the dice can be TOO swingy, so my groups have adopted methods to mitigate the extremes of randomness to a degree.

We roll 3d6 replacing one die with a 4 for abilities. This generates results between 6-16 for our ability scores.

We use max HP at 1st level, but then we roll 2 dice and average the results at every level after 1st. The bigger the hit dice the less swingy they tend to be this way. Fighters are more consistently average with some variation, while Wizards are more likely to have very low, or even possibly exceptionally high HP.

If this trend towards mediocrity continues in D&D then maybe they can skip dice all together in 6e, and everybody can use average to hit rolls and average damage to just count down how many rounds until their "no-lose" combat ends. If you should hit 50% of the time for 10 damage, then you just do 5 damage per round. If the Orc has 10 HP then you know you can kill 1 Orc every two attacks. There are 5 Orcs, so it takes 10 attacks. During that time they do X damage to you. If X is less than your HP you win. Combat could be done in 60 seconds or less with a calculators. Then we can get back to role-playing how cool and edgy our tragic lone-wolf anti-heroes are as they brood and ignore the DM's desperate attempts to interest them in plot hooks.

This message has been brought to you by the The International Brotherhood of Dice Collectors, Local 691.

The difference between random hit points (and ability scores) and random combat roles is the difference between permanent character creation and temporary combat rolls.

Stats (ability and or hp) are permanent character traits and don't makes sense being random unless you are going for a random character. And they have always been onconsistent. How come I choose some parts and take others randomly? Why don't I get random improvements to my attack rolls, or thief skills, or saving throws? Why do I get to choose my class? Who says I had the opportunity for the training I wanted? I didn't get to choose which stats I was born with (nature), why do I choose my opportunities (nurture?) Sounds backwards.

Most people today already have a character concept in mind. If that character concept involves being a super tough dwarf, it is an insult to get low Con and bad random hit point roles. You literally cannot reliably support pre-chosen character concepts with random stats and hit points.

I'm not saying they can't be fun, but they have to only be used when players don't have a strong choice of who they want to play already. They represent playing a game where you are given certain random parameters and you win the game by making some limited choices and leveraging them for best effect. But very few people play the game like that anymore.

Random numbers for task resolution aren't the same thing. You roll thousands of these and they balance out over the course of the campaign.

 

[TheSword]

I give Max HD and Con SCORE instead of bonus at first level. I then keep to the normal rules. Keeps 1st and 2nd level fun - particularly for new players/campaigns and it self corrects as by level 7 or 8 it’s a drop in th ocean. Played that way ever since 3rd and its the best houserule our groups use.

 

[Slit518]

Maybe give them max HP a level, but keep monsters around average or less. That way the players feel really powerful, can take on more, and really enjoy the game on a different level.

 

[FrogReaver]

If you want to give your players really awesome magic items then max monster hp probably works fine. I would probably steer clear of max player hp though.

 

[CAFRedblade]

I give players the option to either use the half value default for hp, or risk rolling. As for Monsters, I usually use the default HP, but I roll for everything else(att/dmg/saves). Maybe if you are using the max values, you can use the max damage...(or maybe 2/3 or 3/4 max) or just the default values to speed things up?

 

[AmerginLiath]

For some reason, my group has historically had Max HP as one of the things one could Wish for without the Lawyer Gods trying to finagle your wording. So we’d always use normal rolls but a lucky few would find themselves jumped up to high numbers due to a run-in with a genie or artifact.

 

[Ath-kethin]

In my group PCs get Max HP every level but monsters get the values listed in the MM. I do this because I don't allow full casters (so no healing magic) and we use very little in the way of magic items (no standard healing potions). Plus, I like small groups of 2-3 PCs.

It works for my group(s). If what you are doing works for yours, awesome.

 

[Rya.Reisender]

If you ask me, MaxHP is a bad idea. Makes combat rather boring.

I let my players roll for MaxHP increase. I honestly don't think it makes much of a difference that it's random. Your healing potential from hit dice is always the same regardless of what your MaxHP is and it's very unlikely that a PC is very far from the average after a few levels. If one of my players would keep rolling 1s on MaxHP increases, I might allow him to reroll eventually, though.

 

[Quartz]

I've always let my players have max HP, but in turn give my monsters MAX hp. Does this wreck the system?

I've used Max (HD) -N with some success, where N is usually 2 or 3. So in 5E, if N were 3 a wizard would get 3 HP per level, a fighter would get 7 HP per level, and a barbarian 9 HP per level. If N were 2, the figures would be 4, 8, and 10 respectively. I also have max HP for the first couple of levels, not just the first one.