Rolling Hit Points for characters


Homebrew and House Rules

Dark Archive

In your opinion, which of these 3 options would you prefer to use for your character? Pros and cons of each.

1) After 1st level, hit points are rolled twice, taking the larger amount.

2) After 1st level, hit points are rolled normally, minimum half.

3) After 1st level, hit points are rolled as d6 = d3+3, d8 = d4+4, d10 = d5+5, and d12 = d6 + 6.

Currently using method #1 in my current campaing but finding ALL the characters are near max hit points after 6 levels. I don't want the randomness of rolling as per RAW, nor use the houserule to give set amount hp per level.


It depends on what you're seeking. The way you worded it, your "but finding ALL the characters are near max hit points after 6 levels" sounds to me like that's something you don't want?

#2 guarantees that characters will have at least 50% the potential full hit points. #3 guarantees they will have more than 50% of the potential. Which is more desirable to you?


2 and 3 are virtually the same, aren't they? I guess 3 allows for one extra hit point on average.

All of these systems result in characters that are tougher than average for their class.

My preferred system is to just take the average result at each level, but you seem to not like that...

so I'd say number 2. It retains the most potential to run low.

More Hit Points does not a better game make. Not for monsters, and not for PCs.


Lately, in both groups I am playing in, the tendency is for everything to have maximum hit points. It seems to work for us.


We have been using 1 for years.

Dark Archive

Otherwhere wrote:
It depends on what you're seeking. The way you worded it, your "but finding ALL the characters are near max hit points after 6 levels" sounds to me like that's something you don't want?

This is correct. I don't want the characters at or near max hit points for the same reason why I don't like running monsters at max hit points (unless they're considered bosses). Monsters with max hit points causes all combats to last longer, which use more party resources for each encounter, forcing the party to feel the need to rest more often. Characters with max hit points are virtually indestructible unless I increase the CR of the encounter, which IMO only adds to the complexity of the situation.


ckdragons wrote:
Otherwhere wrote:
It depends on what you're seeking. The way you worded it, your "but finding ALL the characters are near max hit points after 6 levels" sounds to me like that's something you don't want?
This is correct. I don't want the characters at or near max hit points for the same reason why I don't like running monsters at max hit points (unless they're considered bosses). Monsters with max hit points causes all combats to last longer, which use more party resources for each encounter, forcing the party to feel the need to rest more often. Characters with max hit points are virtually indestructible unless I increase the CR of the encounter, which IMO only adds to the complexity of the situation.

Then if what you're seeking is lower hit points, #2 would better serve than #3, but #1, which is what you're using, allows for lower hit points, even if that's not what you're seeing. (I could roll two 1's, or anything lower than a 6 on a d10 - though rolling 2 d10's averages 5.5 hit points/level I believe.)

Grand Lodge

I have found since the retraining rules where added for HP even normal works well as if they feel they got a bad roll for some cash and some time they can bring it back up to where they think it should be.

For 3 day and 30*level you can retrain to add +1 to your max hp as long as it is not more then what you could have had as if you rolled max for each level.

(http://www.d20pfsrd.com/basics-ability-scores/more-character-options/retra ining)

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I like giving maximum hitpoints for several reasons.

1) It makes the characters more durable. My players put a considerable amount of investment in the narrative of their characters. I tailor the campaign to their characters' stories. Nobody wants a player to make a new character all the time. While I don't want my campaign to be without death, I want to make sure a character's death is a decisive consequence.

2) It gives me wiggle room to be brutal or imperfect in my encounter design. It allows me to let enemies focus fire or use clever tactics, because I know the PCs are more durable than the average character.

3) My players still feel like death is possible. If the players feel too indestructible, I can throw them a tough encounter to keep their hubris in check. That's my power as a GM. Really, GMs should be doing this anyway -- alternating between easy and tough encounters to give the players highs and lows.

4) It's so much easier to calculate hitpoints. My players aren't the most savvy with Pathfinder, so sometimes they calculate their stats wrong (more often NOT in their favor). With max hitpoints, it's always Level * (Hit Die + Con modifier). If they use favored class bonuses for hitpoints, they can figure out if they done so just by checking the disparity.

5) Solves all the problems with random hitpoint generation.

Also remember that players feel much more weight with hit point loss than the GM. Losing 25% of a PC's hit points doesn't feel that big of a deal to a GM, who knows the scope of the adventure and encounter. To that player, it's a much bigger deal.

Dark Archive

Cyrad wrote:
I like giving maximum hitpoints for several reasons.

Do you also max hp all of the monsters, too?

I like some of your points you provided. However, my players are quite experienced playing Pathfinder since it was released, in addition to D&D for many many years prior.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

ckdragons wrote:
Cyrad wrote:
I like giving maximum hitpoints for several reasons.

Do you also max hp all of the monsters, too?

I like some of your points you provided. However, my players are quite experienced playing Pathfinder since it was released, in addition to D&D for many many years prior.

For a period, I tried having every monster be at maximum, but it made combats last too long, just as you said earlier in this thread. Now, I usually keep the hit points as shown in the stat block, but if I want the encounter to use up more resources, I'll raise them to max.

Verdant Wheel

i think setting a mean is a good idea, with the possibility to "roll hot" and end up with more HP, and eliminating the "cold rolling" that would put you under the mean. because having lower-than-average HP is not what many modern gamers want to deal with, lest they be masochistic grognards.

I assume that such a system helps martials, as I assume they take more HP damage on the whole. I would be interested to see if someone else has a different experience.

My system, similar to your three in essence, is to determine a total-mean for that level, offer a chance to roll that new fresh hit die, and give them the higher of either that mean or their previous total plus the new roll. What is novel about my system is how I handle the Favored Class bonus: I allow it a certain liquidity, essentially factoring it out of the equation above, and allowing the whole of it to be retrained at each level, so long as any skill points it was pulled out of are immediately replenished with new skill points.

(example: 5th level fighter 14 CON = 10+5+5+5+5+CONx5 = 40. If my fighter rolls his new hit die, 1d10+2, and his new result isn't 40 or higher, before adding in FC bonus HP, then he is promoted to 40 HP, and can reassign FC points from there so long as he doesn't lower total skill ranks without replenishing them from his new 5th-level skill points)

mathematically, it offers the chance to get a lead with a good die roll at every level, but systematizes the re-normalization structurally by imposing the mean from the total sum, rather than per-die (to dampen repeated run-away luck somewhat by keeping the mean at a proportionate distance), while enabling maximum flexibility in the assignment of favored class bonuses. that said, my group has not bothered with FC bonuses that weren't HP or skill points so I'll cross that road when we get there.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

rainzax wrote:

i think setting a mean is a good idea, with the possibility to "roll hot" and end up with more HP, and eliminating the "cold rolling" that would put you under the mean. because having lower-than-average HP is not what many modern gamers want to deal with, lest they be masochistic grognards.

...

(example: 5th level fighter 14 CON = 10+5+5+5+5+CONx5 = 40.

The expected value of a fair d10 is 5.5. You made this big argument for giving characters at least half the average, and you're suggesting giving every character less than the expected value of their hit die? Your proposition seems so complicated that even after reading your post three times, I still don't get it. What little I understand doesn't strike me as mathematically sound, either.

Verdant Wheel

you cannot roll a result of 5.5 on a d10 Cyrad, it's impossible!

...I guess unless the die is balanced on it's edge between 5 and 6...


My houserule where characters get to roll an extra die per point of constitution modifier, taking the best result, has been working really well over the last several times my groups have leveled up. It directly rewards focusing on constitution more than just an extra static number per hit die. Just getting CON to 12 (a small price, even in point buy) is extremely helpful, and getting extra dice for the future can be as easy as buying a belt. For my front-liners, getting +2 or +3 CON gives them a great chance of having the HP to be survivable, while the sorceress who stays far away from anything pointy eventually got herself to +1 just to have that extra die of insurance. Unlike other house rules for HP I've seen, this one gives the players a lot of agency into how effective they want it to be for their individual play style.


rainzax wrote:

you cannot roll a result of 5.5 on a d10 Cyrad, it's impossible!

So? 5.5 is still the average result of multiple d10 rolls. If you want to operationalize for hit points, round up to 6 or alternate between 5 and 6. Otherwise, you will get a character with hit points under the expected mean.


ckdragons wrote:

In your opinion, which of these 3 options would you prefer to use for your character? Pros and cons of each.

1) After 1st level, hit points are rolled twice, taking the larger amount.

2) After 1st level, hit points are rolled normally, minimum half.

3) After 1st level, hit points are rolled as d6 = d3+3, d8 = d4+4, d10 = d5+5, and d12 = d6 + 6.

Currently using method #1 in my current campaing but finding ALL the characters are near max hit points after 6 levels. I don't want the randomness of rolling as per RAW, nor use the houserule to give set amount hp per level.

We've been using option 1 for the last couple of PF campaigns we've been playing and option 2 for the new D&D 5 campaign.


I have used: "Re-roll once if less than half" which is not quite as high-rolling as your #1.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

rainzax wrote:
you cannot roll a result of 5.5 on a d10 Cyrad, it's impossible!

That's what they said about dividing by zero!

Cyrad divides a pugwampi by zero and unleashes an infinite amount of pugwampis upon the world!


Try this:

Give them max HP at lvl 1 as per normal, then on subsequent levels they roll and whatever the difference between the roll and a max roll, give them extra skill points. So, for example, if they have d10 HD, their first level they get an automatic 10. Then on lvl 2, lets say they roll an 8, they get 2 bonus skill points. Then, on lvl 3, lets say they roll a 1, they get 9 bonus skill points. So, basically, the HP and SP they get each level will always add up to 10 with a d10 HD.

Verdant Wheel

on a serious note, thank you for correcting my math, posting as i was as a form of procrastination to projects in full sway IRL, (which is why we are all here, no?), the 14-CON 5th level fighter's mean HP would be 10+5.5+5.5+5.5+5.5+5xCON = 42 (before FC).

the simple way to describe my method (what my house rules doc says) is:

Spoiler:

Rolling Hit Points
Every level after 1st, we shall conduct a group Rolling Event:
Determine your mean HP parameter (max at 1st + half HD per level + Constitution x HD).
Roll your new Hit Dice for your new level - take this or your mean as your new HP.

I like to make it a bit of a drama, waiting until we are all collected and rolling together. Interestingly, when a d6 character rolls an 'ace' (max result, in this case "6"), even if another character rolling a higher hit die still manages to roll higher (say, a 7 on a d10), the difference in satisfaction is strangely vast. Add that to martial/caster disparity, eh?

Oh yeah, I don't explicitly say they get flexibility with their FC bonus, which maybe I should?, we just kind of do it. I suppose I could add the line "Finally, you may add or retrain your FC bonus as a last touch, so long as skill points are replaced equally." to summarize the gist of it? Consider it amended!

cheers.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Maximum hp until level 5, average hp after that. Gives martials a clear advantage, increases low level survivability, helps prevent 15 minute adventuring day.


Our group has been using option 3 for over ten years as it greatly helps the martial characters and makes characters more resilient.

It can be pretty depressing for the Barbarian to roll 1 on a D12 when the Wizard rolls 6 on a D6. Anything that encourages players to run Martial characters is good by us!

We also make low-level characters a lot less "squishy" by giving everything additional hit points. Generally everything (monsters included) gets extra hit points equal to the average of their Strength and Constitution abilities (with bonuses for larger creatures).

So in our group a typical 1st level character has at least 20 hit points regardless of class.


Do groups use the Retraining rules for HP?


Here's a crazy notion how about you roll hit points and take what you get !

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Half maximum plus one. Keeps things nice and consistent. Forget about this rolling garbage.


I like to use the HP rules from the PF Society. They seem to be the most "fair and balanced".


Pathfinder Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

And LazarX gave the HP rules for PFS beyond 1st level in his post. I like those rules as well even though I tend not to use most other PFS rules in my home games.


But what for you do about rolling monster hit points ?


The Saltmarsh 6 wrote:
Here's a crazy notion how about you roll hit points and take what you get !

Yeah, because we totally need more ways to screw over martials!

That's the key problem with the normal HD rolling - a caster with low hp may have to prepare more Flight, Invisibility etc. and maybe get the con-belt a bit earlier. No big changes in playstyle, no different feets needed.
But a martial with low HP is screwed. You can't stand in the front line after rolling a bunch of 1's on your HD. Better say good bye to the cool build you envisioned and take defensive feats instead (and there aren't that many after Paizo needlessly nerved the only really good one to death).

In addition, free rolling your HD hurts the already MAD classes the most. I can roll nothing but 1's on a Scarred Witch Doctor and probably still have more HP then most of the party. The monk with 12 Con can start making his next character when he ends up with 17hp on level 5.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Rolling hit points makes about as much sense to me as rolling to see if your reflex save or Base Attack Bonus improves when you level up. 4th and PFS dropped the concept entirely, while I believe 5th uses average HP but offers rolling as an optional rule. Rolling for HP is in PF for historical reasons, and I fully expect it to disappear if Pathfinder ever releases a second edition.

I would strongly prefer a set amount of HP each level to just about any kind of rolling model.


I let players have max hit points to prevent thge absurdities of a mage being able to out hp a fighter (rare but possible) I also let the monsters have max hitpoints as my group is fairly optimized and adds some threat back. Sure maxes those low cr/high hit dice animals a fair bit scarier


And so another nail is driven into the coffin of gaming
You can not and should not be able to control some aspects of gaming just like in life


Maximum for levels 1 and 2, then roll normally afterwards.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
The Saltmarsh 6 wrote:

And so another nail is driven into the coffin of gaming

You can not and should not be able to control some aspects of gaming just like in life

If some people on the internet not playing your way is enough to be considered a nail through the coffin of gaming, I don't know what to say.

This argument of "there are things you can't control in life, so you should just deal with it" is patently ridiculous, but I keep hearing it. I don't care if I can't control stuff in life. I'm playing a game (and not the Game of Life :P). I don't want my Barbarian to be permanently crippled in what I expected him to be able to do because of one or two or three bad rolls.

Stuff happening to kill my Barbarian in the course of the game? Fine. Being useless as a frontliner because I happened to roll a 1 on just a couple die rolls? Not fine.

I'm not saying you have to take the average or whatever. Keep rolling hit points if that's what you find fun. :)

But don't pretend I'm somehow a lesser gamer because I think this particular mechanic is bad.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Homebrew and House Rules / Rolling Hit Points for characters All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Homebrew and House Rules