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

[Coroc]

To all of you guys bemoaning Hit dice, hit points etc. Look at weapon damage dice for a change:

What does 1d10 mean in this context?

What is a grazing hit (1) for
a fighter with 100 HP
a fighter with 100 HP but only 1 HP left
a Wizard with 4 or 6 HP

What is on the opposite a full hit (10) for
a fighter with 100 HP
a fighter with 100 HP but only 1 HP left
a Wizard with 4 or 6 HP

Do you see what I am getting at?

Do you now realize that HP is, and has to stay, a totally abstract mechanic?

 

[Oofta]

To all of you guys bemoaning Hit dice, hit points etc. Look at weapon damage dice for a change:

What does 1d10 mean in this context?

What is a grazing hit (1) for
a fighter with 100 HP
a fighter with 100 HP but only 1 HP left
a Wizard with 4 or 6 HP

What is on the opposite a full hit (10) for
a fighter with 100 HP
a fighter with 100 HP but only 1 HP left
a Wizard with 4 or 6 HP

Do you see what I am getting at?

Do you now realize that HP is, and has to stay, a totally abstract mechanic?

This argument has been going on since the 70s. Some people will never accept that HP, as terrible a construct as it is, works reasonably well and is probably the best option given the nature of the game.

 

[Garthanos]

This argument has been going on since the 70s.

I was on the wrong side in the 70s...

 

[Ashrym]

I could see it - as any nice thing one may try to give the fighter - spreading out like Extra Attack to some cleric domains, that way.

Then why does it scale with level?
And, why would that be an impediment to a class feature?

So wizards can't be proficient in weapons, at all, unless they choose a race that gives them a weapon proficiency?
So not just like, at all.

Now, admittedly, as soon as your EK starts casting spells, you have a rather serious comparison between him and the wizard... who might be a Bladesinger with Extra Attack.

Proficiency scales with level as a representation of experience, not superior knowledge in weapon use. That's why learning to use a weapon at 16 level still gives a +5 bonus instead of a +2 bonus having just learned it.

I would play a game house-ruled that wizards have no weapon proficiencies at all. That just means I would add the proficiency by race, or feat, or just rely on cantrips for damage. The class proficiencies aren't actually meaningful enough to matter.

My point with the fighter was the bonuses for the 1st level fighter who picks up cantrips or spells regardless of source are the same bonuses as the wizard. That's that exact same argument being used about weapons and proficiency. The argument that fighters cast spells as well as wizards is just as valid as the argument that wizards fight just as well as fighters because both arguments are using the exact same criteria. Both arguments are wrong, and I was illustrating the point.

5e proficiency is a lot more like the old non-weapon proficiencies from before the 3e skill system and all WotC did was add weapons to the mechanic. It's literally nothing more than learning how to use the weapon, or armor, or tool, or skill techniques.

 

[Tony Vargas]

The argument that fighters cast spells as well as wizards is just as valid as the argument that wizards fight just as well as fighters because both arguments are using the exact same criteria.

The comparison was at first level, and fighters do not cast spells at first level, all wizards do have some weapons they can use at first level.
If you want to 'complain' that some races cast spells as well as a same-INT wizard at 1st level, I suppose you could...

 

[Ashrym]

The comparison was at first level, and fighters do not cast spells at first level, all wizards do have some weapons they can use at first level.
If you want to 'complain' that some races cast spells as well as a same-INT wizard at 1st level, I suppose you could...

The race was necessary to give the wizard high enough DEX in the original comparison too. Not all races give the DEX bonus. It's a required condition to meet the argument in both cases.

All 1st level fighters can add spells so it's still just as valid a comparison. The shoe is just on the other foot.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

To all of you guys bemoaning Hit dice, hit points etc. Look at weapon damage dice for a change:

What does 1d10 mean in this context?

What is a grazing hit (1) for
a fighter with 100 HP
a fighter with 100 HP but only 1 HP left
a Wizard with 4 or 6 HP

What is on the opposite a full hit (10) for
a fighter with 100 HP
a fighter with 100 HP but only 1 HP left
a Wizard with 4 or 6 HP

Do you see what I am getting at?

Do you now realize that HP is, and has to stay, a totally abstract mechanic?

The most consistent perspective is that damage numbers represent a consistent amount of force being applied, while HP totals reflect force-dissipation factors.

The damage of an arrow, whether that's 1 or 10, is intrinsic to that arrow. The damage value represents things like mass and speed. While the arrow is in flight, it carries the same amount of kinetic energy, regardless of what it later hits. It's the exact same arrow, regardless of whether it hits a wizard or a fighter, and regardless of whether or not the victim has been previously injured.

The maximum HP of a creature reflect how much force it can withstand while remaining active. If a standard arrow imparts 5 units of force, then a fighter with 100hp can withstand twenty such events before falling. A wizard with 6hp can only withstand one such impact. A fighter with 100hp, who only has 1hp left, cannot withstand any additional arrows.

There are definitely some abstractions involved here. The damage value of an arrow involves mass, speed, and shape; but we don't bother defining how much of each, because it's not important. Likewise, the ability to withstand injury without falling depends on experience (somehow) and toughness; but we don't bother defining how much of each, because it's not important. It's somewhat abstract, yes, but it isn't nearly as abstract as some people claim it to be.

 

[Tony Vargas]

The race was necessary to give the wizard high enough DEX in the original comparison too.

You can leave race out of it, entirely.

Besides, second-best stat in DEX is hardly implausible for a wizard, second-best stat in INT for a fighter is prettymuch laughable, so we are talking fairly theoretical/arbitrary examples, just to illustrate the sameness of proficiency.

 

[Ashrym]

You can leave race out of it, entirely.

Besides, second-best stat in DEX is hardly implausible for a wizard, second-best stat in INT for a fighter is prettymuch laughable, so we are talking fairly theoretical/arbitrary examples, just to illustrate the sameness of proficiency.

You cannot leave race out of it entirely and still get that 16 DEX and INT required for the example. If race applies to one example it applies to all examples.

The fighter or rogue investing in INT isn't laughable because it's important to eldritch knights and arcane tricksters, or planning on using investigation.

I can make an elven fighter planning on going EK (possibly adding ritual casting) and it's worth my time to invest in INT. I would also have a cantrip at first level keyed off INT and matching the wizard DC's or attack role. It's an argument that works both ways, and being dismissive of that fact doesn't change it.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

The fighter or rogue investing in INT isn't laughable because it's important to eldritch knights and arcane tricksters, or planning on using investigation.

I can make an elven fighter planning on going EK (possibly adding ritual casting) and it's worth my time to invest in INT. I would also have a cantrip at first level keyed off INT and matching the wizard DC's or attack role. It's an argument that works both ways, and being dismissive of that fact doesn't change it.

Dex is a very effective secondary stat for a wizard of any type because it boosts their AC, initiative, ability to avoid being shoved or grappled, reflex saves and stealth.
Outside of a single subclass, Int is not a good secondary stat for a fighter because it is competing with Dex (or Str) and Con, and generally grants less to the class as a whole than those two stats do.