D&D 5E Would you change a monster's hit points mid-fight?

[FormerlyHemlock]

The DM had a golden opportunity to allow something awesome to happen in the game you know one of those moments players talk about later. And a chance to reward a player for being patient and not complaining about the bow.

As a DM I think that allowing what is cinematic moment to stand in spite of what you have written is more important than being a slave to the rules or you written encounter.

To me that looks more like an opportunity to cheapen every other awesome moment ever by inflating them with near-misses. It's not awesome unless it genuinely works.

 

[neobolts]

As the title asks: it's the middle of an encounter, would you change a monster's hit points?

This might be during a boss fight where the PCs roll well and it looks like the big bad is going to die before taking a turn. Or maybe during a long fight that looks like it might drag. Or perhaps a tense fight where the party is toeing on a TPK.

Would you?

Absolutely. But very rarely. And that could go either way: more HP or less HP. There's so many reasons to fudge/change ANY ASPECT of an encounter on the fly, depending on circumstances. Too easy? Make it harder. Too dull? Spice it up with a new ability. Adapting on the fly is part of the game.

Heck, the 5e DMG (p235) points out that you can fudge rolls as a DM (in moderation):

Rolling behind a screen lets you fudge the results if you want to. If two critical hits in a row would kill a character, you could change the second critical hit into a normal hit, or even a miss. Don't distort die rolls too often, though, and don't let on that you're doing it.

Oh wait, if I take that last sentence as RAW, then...

Never mind, I NEVER fudge rolls and stats.

 

[GSHamster]

If the enemy has largely used up their resources, and has no more tricks to pull out of their hat, but still has many hit points, so that the remaining fight is going to be an uninteresting slog, the party may find the bad guy drops on the next hit, yes.

In these cases, why not have the bad guy surrender or try to flee? Obviously the outcome of the fight is not in doubt, so why not use actions available to the DM instead of fudging the numbers?

 

[travathian]

I can and do change monster HP all the time. I'm really surprised to hear that so many others object to doing so. I'm coming from such a different perspective that I have a hard time even seeing the common ground in the far distance on this one.

This. I am truly baffled at the people who make it sound like cheating or that it is against the 'rules' in a sandbox world.

Tabletop RPGs aren't videogames or movies or books. Unexpected things happen. Being the DM gives you both the power and responsibility to adapt to those things in order to maximize the challenge and fun of the game. If you aren't willing to fudge dice rolls or adjust HPs, then why even run a game? Might as well be playing a chose your own adventure and join the players.

 

[Eirikrautha]

I hardly ever modify up, but will occasionally modify down. I usually don't like to up the hit points or powers of a monster mid-stream, because it can feel like you are pulling the rug out from under your players. If a monster is too puny, I will make a mental note and add some twist to the encounter after the monster is dead (reinforcements, a "real" villain behind the villain, etc.) to make up for it.

I seldom lower hit points for pacing reasons, but instead because I may make a power error. If the players are going into a situation where they can reasonably suspect they are outgunned, then nope, no change. You brought the TPK on yourselves. But if I didn't give them a way to know, or if the encounter is not meant to be, then I might weaken the monster a little.

It's all about table expectations. Any talk of DM "neutrality" is a pure fiction. A DM isn't impartial or neutral, because he sets the challenges (and the difficulty, setting, and hints thereof). So a slavish dedication to "what is written" really doesn't sway me. If my table is aware that they are risking their lives, then I'll let the dice fall where they may. If they aren't expecting that kind of risk in a particular encounter, I might shave hit points. It depends on what will be fun.

 

[Chocolategravy]

If they're rolling well or poorly no, that is the player's responsibility to deal with that situation. They know what the dice are doing and they can withdraw or celebrate a lucky fight. If I misjudged the encounter difficulty however, then yes.

 

[SirAntoine]

As the title asks: it's the middle of an encounter, would you change a monster's hit points?

This might be during a boss fight where the PCs roll well and it looks like the big bad is going to die before taking a turn. Or maybe during a long fight that looks like it might drag. Or perhaps a tense fight where the party is toeing on a TPK.

Would you?

If you do this, don't let your players know you do ever.

 

[The Human Target]

Do adult players not know most DMs fudge?

I mean you shouldn't highlight it, but let's be real.

 

[Paraxis]

I don't like modifying h.p mid fight, I put it in the same camp as fudging dice rolls and I don't do that either. That being said I alter h.p when encounter building all the time, most of my players are optimizers so I go with slightly higher h.p values for almost all my monsters going into the fight. Occasionally I will "remove" some of these extra hit points mid fight for story reasons, but rarely. For example if a character that hardly ever shines in combat hits a creature and the damage would leave it with just a few h.p I give that character the kill so he can shine for a moment. I think of it as taking away the cushion I prepared so its justifiable in my mind.

I would never ever add extra h.p to a monster mid fight, ever. That would be like saying a monster made a saving throw when it didn't, or saying it missed with an attack that would kill a pc, I just don't do those things.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Might go with a more technically solid system in that case - 3.x/Pathfinder, 4e, etc, heck even GURPS or something like that - or create a definitive house rules document for 5e, tightening up all the wiggle room, and sticking to it.

...But, OTOH, what they don't know won't hurt them - well, won't hurt their enjoyment of the game.

I don't find it necessary - as long as I'm clear about the scope of my DM Intervention up front, then I define areas that are subject to mechanisms beyond my control, and I can stick to those. Sometimes that scope includes monster HP, sometimes it doesn't.