D&D 5E You can't necessarily go back

[slobo777]

If my 4e numbers are out to lunch feel free to fix 'em; but I think my point still stands - the increase in damage dealt has not kept up with the increase in damage absorption.

Lan-"inflation doesn't just apply to economics, it seems"-efan

The point does still stand, but there's a reason for it, and it's one of the things that divides some 3E vs 4E fans (not this one, I like both for what they do).

The reason, as far as I understand it, is this:

4E monster stats are designed to be the game-playing foil to 4E PC stats. A monster hit point is often not the same thing (in terms of what the numbers represent) as a PC hit point. Monster damage is likewise not quite the same thing, point-for-point, as PC damage.
​

One consequence of this is that 4E's damage and hit points scaling plays awkwardly if you try to play the game PC vs PC or Monster vs Monster. The designers evidently felt that these were edge cases, and didn't need to be supported for their norms of play in the 4E world.

4E monster damage did get a boost, along with HP reduction, so monster hp/damage moved a little towards PC ones, after a couple of years experience with some of the larger fights turning into grind-fests.

 

[Tony Vargas]

One consequence of this is that 4E's damage and hit points scaling plays awkwardly if you try to play the game PC vs PC or Monster vs Monster. The designers evidently felt that these were edge cases, and didn't need to be supported for their norms of play in the 4E world.

Roles also contribute to the PvP dueling 'edge case' working poorly in 4e. Leaders and Defenders have abilities that only function to the benefit of or in the presence of allies. A leader or defender participating in a duel is, in effect, not a whole character. OTOH, controllers can optimize their control vs a single target, and Strikers are naturally set for dueling.

Similarly, monster roles can fail to work quite right when pulled into a Monster vs Monster scenario...

PvP can happen, though, and a few minor optional rules might have helped deal with some of those issues. Giving a meaningful advantage to marking an enemy in a duel, letting PCs count as their own allies when alone, that sort of thing...

 

[Shadeydm]

Actually yes they do, in an odd way - 3e characters die at -10 h.p. while by RAW 1e characters die at 0. This can make a *huge* difference to survivability because in 3e someone at -6 can still be patched up. Long ago we changed 1e to a -10 death point, which may somewhat explain why I've seen the survivability be so similar as noted above.

Now to bring 4e into the equation, while I'll leave it up to someone else to give accurate numbers (without including heal surges, please) it certainly seems to be the case that starting 1st-level h.p. average much higher than any previous edition. I suspect this is done with the intent of avoiding the one-shot kill from a fall or trap or whatever (in most cases weapons needed two good non-crit. hits to take down any Fighter in any edition pre-4e).

Lanefan

I believe 4E characters can go down to their negative bloodied value which might be more than 10 and still get to make death saves or get bandaged or otherwise healed.

 

[Shadeydm]

Now, Shadeydm, if all you want to say is that the raw number of hp has increased from edition to edition, fair enough. To which, I respond, so what? Taken in isolation, that increase is meaningless. Without actually placing it in context, it doesn't mean anything. It's the removal of context that I'm questioning here. I mean, a 3e dragon has a LOT more hp than a 1e dragon. Does that mean that it takes a lot longer to kill a 3e dragon? Well, not really since 3e characters also have had their offensive capabilities greatly increased from a baseline 1e character.

Without context, your point doesn't really mean anything. Ok, so different editions give out different starting HP. So what?

Again I didn't start it I just replied to it. I was only refuting the notion that another poster put out there that there has a been a little HP inflation with each edition. All I did was say that it was more than a little. Once the various crus4ders decided the honor of thier favorite edition had been violated is when all this other stuff got injected into it. Prior to honor defending it was simply a question of a little inflation or significant inflation nothing more or less. But please do return to your regularly scheduled edition war I wouldn't want to get in the way of conditioning people to the one true wayism of D&D.

Mod Note: Please see my post below. ~Umbran

 

[Neonchameleon]

Dragons perhaps aren't the best example, as they and Giants are rather notorious as glass cannons in 1e played by RAW. That said, most monster h.p. numbers in 1e are generally pretty low; I found 3e made more sense in this regard though at times got a bit carried away.

Some of the massively high monster hit point numbers I've seen in 4e modules I can't relate to at all; I can only assume 4e adventurers can really bring the pain in big numbers in a hurry.

One thing that has really changed over the editions is the damage a monster can give out vs. the damage it can take. A 1e Hill Giant using a club does 2d8 (I think) damage and has maybe 40 h.p., so a best-case ratio of about 1:2 or 1:3 (16:40). A 3e Hill Giant using a club might do 2d8+8 and have about 100 h.p., giving a best-case ratio of about 1:4 (24:100). A 4e non-minion Hill Giant using a club - well, I don't know what damage it would give out but I'll guess at 2d10+12 - but it'll probably have 200-300 h.p. for a best-case ratio of about 1:8 (32:250)

Don't know the numbers for the hill giant, but I can work it out.

Say the average Hill Giant is a level 12 standard monster (feels about right given ordinary Ogres are level 7-8) and a brute (which is obvious).

Hit points are around level*10+25 = 145

Average Damage for a brute in melee = (12+8) * 1.25 = 25. 2d12 + 12 is about right. Best case ration is just over 1:4, but he probably also has a limited use power for a really hard hit, and some sort of flattening sweep.

We're looking at 1:4

Now the big hit points belong to elites and solos. An obvious elite would be an ettin in the middle of some ogres. Elites have the hit points of two normal monsters of their level, and solos four.

You've been looking at the hit points of Solos I think - so let's take a real one. The Level 14 Purple Worm. A Solo is not a normal monster - you're expected to generally fight hill giants as a family, but it's the entire party against one dragon. Dragons are the archetypal Solos.

The Purple Worm has 560 hit points. Which seems absurd. Until you realise one Purple Worm is meant to be more of a challenge to the PCs than five of the hill giants.

Its main attack is "Devour Whole" (it normally uses the Bite for Opportunity Attacks). Devour Whole does 3d10+7 damage (average 22) but if the poor sucker devoured can't escape by the end of the turn it does a further 30 (!) Acid damage.

It then has a minor action attack per round We'll take Fling for 3d10+8 more damage.

(When bloodied it gets a second minor action attack. Probably the poison sting for a further 2d8 and ongoing 15 damage).

And finally 1/round when you hit the purple worm it Thrashes. Which can do 3d12+5 damage to two separate targets.

So in total, it can do in one round
3d10+7 + 30
plus 3d10 + 8
plus 3d12 + 5 to two separate targets.

It can't, of course thrash at someone it has swallowed at the time. And they won't be taking the 30 damage if they escape.

But using your full damage metric,

The guy it swallowed takes 67 damage
The guy it flung and then thrashed at when he charged back in takes 79 damage
The guy who was just standing too close takes 41 damage.

Both these last two have possibly also been flung into the holes made by the Purple Worm.

Total of 187 damage dished out in the round. That 560 isn't looking so good right now...

And then it has two action points to use in the fight (each meaning it can try to swallow an extra person for the 3d10 +7 (possibly +30) damage) and when it's bloodied it gets an extra action for another 3d10+8 damage.

Yes, 4e monsters with a lot of hit points can generally bring the pain. (At least post Monster Manual 3 - the MM1 Purple Worm is a disgrace).

 

[Manbearcat]

@Neonchameleon

I put the numbers as an XP response to Lanefan for his earnest effort.

Standard Hill Giant MBA is 3d10 + 11 and 159 HPs. Same ratio as 3e - 1:4 (for max damages as he was using) - but with an encounter power to attack twice, push 2 and knock prone. 1e ratio is about 1:2.5 but the "to-hit" versus "of level fighter" in 1e is lower.

 

[Umbran]

Again I didn't start it I just replied to it.

Actually, in terms of getting personal and insulting, it looks like you did start it.

Folks, name-calling (like, "crus4der") and dismissing others as fighting over honor, rather than out of honest and rational disagreement, is at the core of edition warring. If we start labeling every disagreement as "HE is edition warring, I'm just defending myself," things will degrade quickly.

So, folks, avoid attributing motives to others, and don't call names. Very simple.

Question? Please take them to e-mail or PM. Thank you.

 

[Obryn]

I believe 4E characters can go down to their negative bloodied value which might be more than 10 and still get to make death saves or get bandaged or otherwise healed.

You're confusing two things here.

There's two main ways to die.

First is: Hit your negative bloodied value, and die.

This is remarkably easy to hit at low level (especially 1st), but rather hard to hit at paragon tier and above. Even if enemies aren't specifically attacking downed combatants (which they might do if they are, for example, flesh-eating ghouls), the frequency of area effects and ongoing damage can cause all sorts of damage after unconsciousness.

The second is via death saves. If you're at 0 HP or below, when it's your turn, you roll a 4e-style save. (That is, success on a 10+.) Succeeding on one doesn't stop your dying; it just holds it off that round. Three failures over the course of an encounter and you're dead. (So if you fail two death saves, get healed back to consciousness, and then go unconscious again and fail another death save, you're dead.) If you get a 20+ on your death save, after fairly uncommon modifiers, you get to immediately spend a healing surge. I've seen this happen maybe once a year, so it doesn't come up often, but it's awesome when it does.

These two systems operate in parallel; you can die at -1 HP if you fail 3 saves, or go to -Bloodied without ever making a death save. The game gets pretty tense when you have a few PCs rolling them.

I'd say deaths in my game at low levels were about evenly split between the two, with maybe negative bloodied edging out death saves. It tends to be fun and exciting in play - though like most things in 4e, it's not particularly swingy.

-O

 

[Manbearcat]

The above is consistent with my own experience. PCs at low levels are exceedingly fragile compared to higher level counterparts. This is primarily due to resource proliferation while leveling, specifically resources such as (i) enemy action denial (or negative status effects eg - 2 to hit), (ii) reactive damage mitigation (immediate actions) and proactive buffs (temporary HPs and damage mitigation)...and of course (iii) the increasing PC ability to inflict the greatest negative status effect of all on NPCS/monsters.

1st level PCs don't even possess a 2nd level utility power. Their capacity to control combat and mitigate damage is quite limited...especially in proportion to monster/NPC capabilities at that level. I've actually found 4th edition has the propensity to be extremely harsh on 1st level PCs...especially those lacking caution.

 

[Obryn]

The above is consistent with my own experience. PCs at low levels are exceedingly fragile compared to higher level counterparts.

Agreed on all points, here. The HP inflation isn't really the main difference between low & high-level 4e play. It's the characters' increased breadth and capability to handle more situations.

I also find that, at mid-Paragon, I generally need to stick to L+1 or L+2 encounters to make a reasonable challenge. Again, largely because of the PCs' breadth and their ability to deal out condition-driven pain.

-O