D&D 5E Why different HD types for classes? (Another HP thread...)

[DND_Reborn]

So, the real answer is that it was conceived as a game balance tool and nowadays is mostly a legacy mechanic. But if you want to know in terms of the fiction why some classes have larger hit dice, it’s a combination of physical toughness and conditioning that comes with physical combat, and skill at reducing the impact of a strike that comes from training and experience. While the wizard spent his time studying spells, the fighter spent her time practicing getting hit by things.

Yeah, legacy indeed.

So what of the rogue who grew up on the tough streets, getting in fights and such, surviving both on physical toughness and conditioning as well as luck and sixth-sense? What of the cleric who served as a soldier before adventuring and was crusader of sorts, getting in battles as well as having the favor of his god to protect him?

Why should these classes have d8 and a fighter or other such have d10 or better?

 

[Umbran]

While the wizard spent his time studying spells, the fighter spent her time practicing getting hit by things.

Correct - note that this isn't just "so the fighter has more meat". The figher has more of all the things you need to keep operating when folks are trying to hurt you.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Correct - note that this isn't just "so the fighter has more meat". The figher has more of all the things you need to keep operating when folks are trying to hurt you.

So, he has more skill, luck, favor, and all the other abstract features that comprise HP? I see no reason why that is true.

 

[Umbran]

Why should these classes have d8 and a fighter or other such have d10 or better?

Because, again, the narrative follows the mechanic. You cannot create an arbitrary backstory, and use that backstory to justify arbitrary mechanical adjustments, or the gameplay falls apart.

Pick your backstory, but remember that you can't have everything! Then choose the class that fits the backstory. You cant be as good as a fighter at fighting and as good as a rogue at skills and cast magic just like a wizard. You can write an arbitrary characer backstory that justifies all of them, but for game balance reasons you have to choose.

So, if they really fight as much as a fighter, they should be a fighter class, perhaps with a background that fits their street-upbringing. If they were really a rouge, who did a lot of fighting, you take a rogue, with maybe some melee-oriented subclass. But remember that the fighter still did more fighting than you did, and can take more punishment as a result.

 

[Leatherhead]

Yeah, legacy indeed.

So what of the rogue who grew up on the tough streets, getting in fights and such, surviving both on physical toughness and conditioning as well as luck and sixth-sense? What of the cleric who served as a soldier before adventuring and was crusader of sorts, getting in battles as well as having the favor of his god to protect him?

Why should these classes have d8 and a fighter or other such have d10 or better?

Why do people keep trying to take things from the poor, poor Fighter?
Isn't it enough that the Thief/Rogue stole being good at physical tasks from them, now they have to burgle the Fighters HP?

 

[DND_Reborn]

While the wizard spent his time studying spells, the fighter spent her time practicing getting hit by things.

And of course those caster-types practiced getting in fights with other casters so they would know better how to handle spells they might face. This includes damaging spells where saves are part of it maybe, of also aren't. I could easily imagine an apprentice wizard tossing a single magic missile at another to practice learning to shrug off damage.

 

[Umbran]

So, he has more skill, luck, favor, and all the other abstract features that comprise HP? I see no reason why that is true.

No, because that's not how abstracts work. Hit points represent a lot of possible things. The fighter's aggregate "can take physical punishment" is greater, whatever bits it is. If you want to say that is mostly meat and dodging skill, that's fine.

The point is, and I again repeat - do not use the narrative description as the basis for mechanical choice. Use it to make sensible fiction. When the fighter survives a fireball, you narrate it because of his dodging ability. For the rouge, you say it is luck. For the wizard, you say it is sixth-sense. But, overall, the fighter has greater ability to take the damage the world throws at them. The figher has more meat and dodging ability than the wizard has sixth sense.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Because, again, the narrative follows the mechanic. You cannot create an arbitrary backstory, and use that backstory to justify arbitrary mechanical adjustments.

Pick yoru backstory. Then choose the class that fits the backstory, knowing going in that you can't have everything. You cant be as good as a fighter at fighting and as good as a rogue at skills and cast magic just like a wizard. You can write an arbitrary characer backstory that justifies all of them, but for game balance reasons you have to choose.

So, if they really fight as much as a fighter, they should be a fighter class, perhaps with a background that fits their street-upbringing.

I get all that, but that doesn't balance out the issue of how abstract HP are gained. I'll give you an example of how luck/favor works out.

When I was in 7th grade I was hit, full on, by a car when I was skateboarding. Honestly, it easily could have killed me. I was lucky. I went face-first into the windshield, shattering it, rolled over the car, and flew about a dozen feet before landing on the road. Now, as an active youth in pretty good shape, I might have had a couple or even three HP for "meat" purposes, but I never go in fights or anything like that--so I certainly wasn't "tough", I was also a bookworm and D&D nerd. Any additional HP I would have had would have been maybe from the sixth-sense, luck, and divine favor? Who knows? My point is that a wizard could just as easily have 10 HP with a decent CON due to those other factors as a fighter with 10 HP (assuming d8) and a similar CON would have from other factors.

You can bring up the "game balance" argument, but there are other ways the game is balanced out, so I really can't buy that anymore.

 

[DND_Reborn]

No, because that's not how abstracts work. Hit points represent a lot of possible things. The fighter's aggregate "can take physical punishment" is greater, whatever bits it is. If you want to say that is mostly meat and dodging skill, that's fine.

The point is, and I again repeat - do not use the narrative description as the basis for mechanical choice. Use it to make sensible fiction. When the fighter survives a fireball, you narrate it because of his dodging ability. For the rouge, you say it is luck. For the wizard, you say it is sixth-sense. But, overall, the fighter has greater ability to take the damage the world throws at them. The figher has more meat and dodging ability than the wizard has sixth sense.

So, you do value meat and dodging over sixth-sense, favor, luck, or whatever else is involved that the wizard has? Why is that (other than game balance)?

 

[Oofta]

... You are thus putting the cart before the horse.

I would also say that the horse is dead and has been for quite a while.

HP are the worst possible option, but better than other alternatives for their goal.

We want a fighter to be a big tough that can take a beating and keep on ticking. That's it. It doesn't really matter how you justify it or if there's no justification at all. It's a simple rule that makes the game easy to play that does it's job well enough.