since i haven't seen this up yet i like and use option one max hp +con mod
and would like to see that one used myself but if not why not just keep that side bar and let each DM use which ever option they would like .
|
I like and use option one max HP + Con Mod
Half a year ago I started a campaign with option "Max HP + Constitution Score"
BUT
Currently we're playing with a Vitality/Wounds system, which means that the option above isn't necessary anymore.
Vitality/Wound points let 1st level characters adventure without the traditional death risk (since they at least double hit points), but they have to be enough cautious in order to keep the low-level game dangerous.
I don't recommend using this system as presented in the Unearthed Arcana, but I really think it's the best system for cinematic adventures in 3.x (You know: best from 4e in 3e!)
For backwards compatibility's sake, I'd suggest the "Standard" method to be used...too many hit points on 1st level really shifts the power of the characters, and will force DMs to modify monster power in older 3E adventures otherwise.
But I'm all in favour for a sidebat in the DM's Section of the book offering the shown varieties. I like the "Max HP + Con + racial bonus" method, for example. Gives a one-time boost that makes racial choice more interesting, and doesn't overpower the characters too much, IMO.
Since it is specifically asked for, I would suggest either the FLAT way of adding HPs or just throwing in with the (Max+Con score) crowd. It IS a good way to beef up characters at 1st level.
I have used the MAx hit points at first level and the fixed hit points from then onward for some years now.
It works for me, but I do use heavily modified death and dying rules, which effectively give the characters an extra 10 Hit points before risk of death. I will post them on here under a different thread as a rule option for people to look at.
So if you are going to use the standard -1 and dying rules, then you may want to have the characters have a few more hit points to start.
I don't like the hit points by race, as I can see that what with people wanting to play odd races, that there would have to be an extra bit categorising them in terms of additional hit points. I'm veering towards either "everyone gets an extra 6 hp" or "HP+Con mod+Con Score"
For backwards compatibility's sake, I'd suggest the "Standard" method to be used...too many hit points on 1st level really shifts the power of the characters, and will force DMs to modify monster power in older 3E adventures otherwise.
It's not that big a deal -- you could just make "give all NPCs and monsters from outside sources +10 hit points" part of the conversion guidelines.
-The Gneech
Like Aritz, I'm a fan of the VP/WP system. Not only does it feel more realistic to me, but it does provide a bigger boost to the lower levels where it's really needed while still providing a level of threat to upper level characters.
I'll likely continue using this system (or something quite like it) in spite of whatever rules are decided for Pathfinder.
For the racial HP entry, i'm surprised that Gnomes ended up in the less-hardy bin due to their small size. I would think that a race with a racial bonus to CON would at least qualify as having medium hardiness.
I believe that max HP at first level + con mod is enough. I run games tough. I don't think there's a need to change it. The reward for stupidity should be death.
Perhaps this question is an opportunity in disguise. There are some adventures out there for "0 level" characters, but they have to include rules for such play. Perhaps that could be intrinsic to the Pathfinder RPG. A small step before 1st level class choices that covers the character's early background. It gives a few more hit points to start out with and can provide even a single-classed character with a bit of uniqueness all their own. Like so...
A “0 Level” character is one who is simply at an apprentice level of training. 0 level represents knowledge learned before the character committed to training in a true class, thus 0 level characters all have the same abilities and choices since they do not actually have a class yet. 0 level does provide options based on the character’s training, but these options are not required to be linked to their first class level. A warrior may have had arcane training before taking up the fighting profession, and a cleric may have had a roguish upbringing before finding religion.
A character has maximum hit points for 0 level, and since they have no “class,” their one Skill Choice is considered a Class Skill for them, no matter what is chosen.
Alignment: Any.
Hit Die: d6.
BAB: 0
Saves: The character may choose one Save (Fortitude, Reflex, or Will) and gains a +1 bonus to it.
Skill Choices: 1.
Weapon and Armor Proficiency: Proficient with one simple weapon of choice or a light shield.
Proto-Training: The character has some additional training but not the measure of a full class yet; choose one option from the list below:
Arcane: Can prepare 1 Cantrip per day to cast. This adds to the number of Cantrips prepared per day if gained through a class later.
Combat: Proficient with one additional weapon (Simple or Martial). Gains a +1 to hit with it if gains proficiency through a class later.
Religious: Can prepare 1 Orison per day to cast. This adds to the number of Orisons prepared per day if gained through a class later.
Skilled: Gains 1 additional Skill as a Class Skill.
Toughness: Gain +4 Hit Points.
Typically 0 level would just be a precursor to taking your 1st level abilities, but rules could be included for actually playing 0 level characters until they get to take their 1st level. Perhaps a negative experience total that has to be "bought off" to reach 1st level.
Experience Point Total
Slow: -900
Medium: -600
Fast: -400
And in a way, it could also work like the 0 to -9 hit point buffer for level-draining abilities.
|
We're doing double hitpoints at first level for Rise of the Runelords.
It's worked out nicely so far. Hit points are not that hard to remove so it's not a big deal. One good arrow shot at 1st level and those extra hit points are gone.
Now at fourth level I have about exactly what I should have. I multiclassed into wizard. A move I may not have considered if I didn't have the hp to spare. The extra hp served me well at low level, but they're not vital anymore.
I hate the WP/VP thing. It's added paperwork and it's tired. Why not just call it what it is, S.D.C. and hit points? Do we really need to copy Palladium?
Max hit points + Con bonus at 1st level is fine, particularly since you've bumped the Hit Die type of many of the classes up a notch. That's probably already change enough to make backward compatibility at the low end a little wonky. Granting too many more hit points at 1st level will only exacerbate the situation.
That said, I think you might be wise to include some alternate approaches as a sidebar, much in the way you've done with XP advancement. That would go a long way toward making Pathfinder modular and flexible enough to accommodate multiple playstyles, which I think is a good thing.
But the default option should remain max hit points + Con bonus for new characters.
|
|
I don't see what the fuss is.
With maximum hit points at 1st level + Con modifier, +1 hit point if you are pursuing your favored class, + 3 more hit points that scale if you take Toughness, you have some pretty effective characters!
A 1st level human with 14 Con as a fighter can start with 16 hit points, if he takes toughness. That's plenty.
A 1st level wizard with 12 Con now starts with 6 + 1 + 1 hit points, so he gets 8. Again, pretty good.
If you give away too many hit points at 1st level, you cheapen Toughness, and make your first level gain to 2nd level mean less. I would keep hit points as written.
|
For backwards compatibility's sake, I'd suggest the "Standard" method to be used...too many hit points on 1st level really shifts the power of the characters, and will force DMs to modify monster power in older 3E adventures otherwise.
But I'm all in favour for a sidebat in the DM's Section of the book offering the shown varieties.
Agreed
|
|
Please keep the Max HP + Con Bonus at first level as the standard. That helps a lot with backwards compatibility, and I agree that upping the hit dice of several of the classes helps solve some of the lack of hit point problems at first level.
Still, keep the other options as options in a side bar. They are run and will probably be used.
|
|
As a GM, I find Hitpoints easy to remove regardless of the level. Extra hitpoints at first level give the pc's a small comfort zone that means less and less the higher level you are.
At first level, a PC should feel good about fighting a pack of Goblins, and not spend the entire level acting scared of a fight because of single digit hit points.
A bad Dice night at first level can kill an entire party.
We currently play with the typical "max HP +con modifier" rule in place.
My impression right now of low level 4th ed is that you are a heroic level character even at first level, making it impossible to start out as "Just a Farmboy from the sticks." Starting out as a nobody and taking a character to high level "Hero of the Land" status is what makes the game fun for me. That being said, we will be trying out the different options, but right now I say give a few extra hitpoints because of race and background and keep the "max hp + con modifier" rule as the sidebar option.
|
|
I'm also in the max HP + Con mod camp. I like first level to be dangerous. PC's get powerful soon enough, it's nice to have a point when they're almost regular people. It gives a sense of accomplishment when you can remember back to when a goblin with a spear could have dropped you with one good hit. Also the 0 to -10 buffer zone helps with PC's not dying in droves.
But I think the other options are good ones, and think they should stick around as optional rules. I may not use them in my campaigns, but I'm sure a lot of other people would.
P.S.- I love the new class HD! Rogues should be a little tougher as they're front line combatants, and wizards aren't completely feeble now.
|
Someone should ask Monte Cook if they can use his Health/Grace rules for HP in the Book of Experimental Might. It rather like that set up for letting parties keep pressing on after battles.
Basic gist is, Health is the points derived from Con bonus, Grace (I prefer to call it Stamina) is the HD points. Grace represents your ability to avoid taking damage, Health is when you start bleeding. Health restores at normal rate, Grace at the rate of non-lethal.
It helps for describing the condition of combatants, and with the ability to rest a bit and regain your Grace points, you don't have to rest to gain everything back before continuing.
I also like the idea of surprise attacks going straight to Health, so if you get the drop on someone good enough, you can take them out without a fight.
I like the racial bonus idea. It adds new bonuses to weigh when choosing race, but its a small choice in the grand scheme of things. I also like the possibilities this opens for unorthodox combinations: 14 HP half-orc wizards taking hits for 12 HP elf rangers.
Not to threadjack, but I also like the idea of standardizing HD. My one suggestion is that I think it would be easy to bring Barbarians down to d10s if they got toughness as a bonus feat at 1st level.
Someone should ask Monte Cook if they can use his Health/Grace rules for HP in the Book of Experimental Might. It rather like that set up for letting parties keep pressing on after battles.
I like Monte Cookes stuff but that gets away from the base 3.5 part of this game
for the same reason i hate the wound vitality rules
I don't see what the fuss is.
With maximum hit points at 1st level + Con modifier, +1 hit point if you are pursuing your favored class, + 3 more hit points that scale if you take Toughness, you have some pretty effective characters!
A 1st level human with 14 Con as a fighter can start with 16 hit points, if he takes toughness. That's plenty.
A 1st level wizard with 12 Con now starts with 6 + 1 + 1 hit points, so he gets 8. Again, pretty good.
If you give away too many hit points at 1st level, you cheapen Toughness, and make your first level gain to 2nd level mean less. I would keep hit points as written.
This is the way I'll cast my "vote", too. With scaled up hit die plus rewarding the PC for taking favored classes and the improved Toughness feat (nyuknyuk!)now being an option, the "standard" starting hit point system is the best option.
Standard for compatibility, Toughness and Favored Class bonuses are good enough.
I'm personally with the "Keep it the same" crowd.
However, if I were to make a larger change, I'd go with ROLL + Con Score, not Max. I played two games of 1st edition this weekend and the random rolled 1st level hit points were a great deal of fun.
There is one sweet little bit about using +score - Con score boosts would actually *do* something at the odd numbers!