Why are hit points generated randomly?

[hong]

5 hit points is a very significant boost in C&C because monsters do less damage and there's less healing magic.

Whereas 5 hit points is meaningless in Robotech because of things doing MDC damage.

 

[Hussar]

Uh. . .

So, giving characters the better side of *average* HP at levels 2+ disadvantages which classes exactly, and how/why, over the long term?

I'm still not getting it.

There's an increase of 1 HP per level on average, from die type to die type, when rolling as per the standard rules. So, what's the diff?

In other words, the advantage of having d10 over having d8 is precisely 1 HP per level, on average (regardless of whether it's the standard rolling system, or the system I use). Hm. . .

I'm not saying I agree with the arguement, but, basically, it boils down to the high hp classes losing out on a lot more potential hp's than a low hp class. A 20th level wizard is 20 hp from max. A 20th level barbarian is 100 hp's from max.

 

[S'mon]

Whereas 5 hit points is meaningless in Robotech because of things doing MDC damage.

And this is relevant to rounding up vs rounding down... how?

 

[hong]

Mang, you ever rounded up MDC damage? That's like... ONE HUNDRED hit points!

 

[Felon]

ROTFLMAO at the irony of this statement.

Because a wizard is now getting 3 hit points per level, while the fighter is getting 6, despite having 2 and half times bigger hit die. The thief is getting 4 and the cleric is getting 5. The high hit die characters are losing out on far more hit points per level than the lower die characters. At 10th level, the fighter has 60 out of 100 hp's, down by 40. The cleric has 50, only ten less than the fighter, despite his max being twenty less. The poor barbarian is even farther in the hole.

In other words, when you round up, the high dice classes lose out on a lot more potential hit points than the low dice classes.

Right, the high HD classes miss out on potential hit points. That's great if the fighter has some way to maximize that potential (I can tell you blowing on the dice doesn't work nearly as well as distracting the DM with a "what in the world is THAT???""). Otherwise, the law of averages says the 10th-level fighter will have about 10 more HP than the 10th-level cleric. Of course, I've seen fighters roll above average, but then again I've seen my share of clerics with more HP than the fighter as well.

Random-rolling doesn't ensure the potential is realized. OTOH, using fixed HP does. All you have to do is fix the hit points above average (like 3/4 max).

 

[Ravellion]

On the high average / low average debate:

a d4 average is 2.5. Rounded up that is a 3, an increase of one-fifth over the 2.5.

a d12 average is a 6.5. Rounded up that is a 7, an increase of one-thirteenth over the 6.5.

So if you give high average, the wizards get a 20% hp boost, and barbarians a 7,7% hp boost. Other classes fall in between, obviously.

 

[Ravellion]

Random-rolling doesn't ensure the potential is realized. OTOH, using fixed HP does. All you have to do is fix the hit points above average (like 3/4 max).

3/4 max, eh? let's see...

Wizards get 3 out of 4. A 20% increase from their average 2.5.

Barbarians get 9 out of 12, a 19,25% increase from their average 6.5.

Quite balanced in which class gets the bonus... but:

Giving higher than average hit points diminishes the usefulness of expendable fixed die damage (such as fireball). This is turn means it is more useful for casters to go for "save or die" spells, a side effect I am loathe invoke. It also means non-expendable damage (such as melee attacks) are relatively more useful.

Take what you wish from this. I myself use low average, which tends to hurt casters more than others in the HP department, but also means damage spells are more useful than disabling spells.

 

[S'mon]

3/4 max, assuming you round down as per 3e standard:

d4 - Wizard - 3
d6 - Rogue - 4
d8 - Cleric - 6
d10 - Fighter - 7
d12 - Barbarian - 9

Seems to give a big boost to the already overpowered Cleric and Druid. Rounding up:

d4 - Wizard - 3
d6 - Rogue - 5
d8 - Cleric - 6
d10 - Fighter - 8
d12 - Barbarian - 9

Edit: Personally I like direct-damage spells so half max is good for me.

Not bad I guess.

 

[Aluvial]

I offer three methods to my players.

1) Straight Roll, reroll any 1 once. (if you roll 2 1's, you get a 1)
2) Fixed Score, 1d4=2, 1d6=3, 1d8=4, 1d10=5, 1d12=6
3) Median Roll, Roll three of your die type. Pick the middle result. If two numbers (or I suppose all three) tie, then that tie result is the result. (This method is freguently picked by my characters with d10 and d12.

Aluvial

 

[Quartz]

Please detail why this is so (i.e., how you reached this comclusion), if you wouldn't mind.

I'd like to know what I might be doing wrong.

If you're having fun, you're not doing anything wrong.

My reasoning is that under the rounding up system, a wizard with 1d4 HP automatically gets 3 HP or 75% of max whereas a fighter with 1d10 automatically gets 6 HP or 60%, and a barbarian with 1d12 gets 7 HP or 57%. That's an almost 20% drop. And spellcasters have spells to boost their HP or compensate for their lack, which combat classes don't.

Note though that I specify combat class, not fighter or barbarian or whatever. Thus a monk is a combat class, as is a cleric with appropriate domains (like War), as is an eldritch knight, as is a mystic theurge if he's got the appropriate domain (like war). But a plain wizard isn't, nor is a cleric focussed on healing, nor is a Divine Crusader who's focussed on divination.