I understand you're looking for ideas on how to give bonus hit points to PCs, especially at 1st level, to keep them alive at lower levels. Here's what I do.
First, maximum hit points + Con modifier at every level.
At 1st level, all PCs get +30 hit points. To keep things balanced, all enemies ALSO get +30 hit points, regardless of CR, HD, ECL, or anything else.
At 5th level (when the party is APL 5), the PCs lose 10 of those points. Enemies now only get +20 hit points.
At 10th level (APL 10), you lose 10 more hit points. Enemies now get +10 hit points.
At 15th level (APL 15), you lose the final 10 hit points. Enemies no longer gain any bonus hit points.
So you get extra hit points at first level, but the monsters do as well to keep things balanced (and it's very easy to add the extra hit points to enemies). The higher level you are, the more hit points you have from class levels and the less important those extra hit points become, so they slowly fade away at an equal rate for everyone.
30 hit points is what I go with. It could be 15 to start and drop by 5 every five levels instead, or a different number of hit points that drop by a different division of levels. The basic premise is that what you do to the PCs you have to also do to the monsters to keep things balanced.
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
I strongly don't like the concept of giving monsters more HP along with PCs. I think this drastically weakens the whole point of beefing up PC hp, since fights will be longer, PCs will be hit more often, and there goes the extra PC hp without adding to the adventuring day.
Also, 30 hp bonus is excessive in my opinion, since it completely pushes 1st level characters out of the danger zone, instead of nudging them just a little further from it.
I'd rather see something along the lines of 5-10 hp bonus at 1st level, and don't want to see it tied to the constitution score, since that will cause Con to become a bit too good compared to other stats. My personal preference would be to use the option of double max hp based on class at 1st level, with the con bonus added once.
|
I might not be in the majority here, but I don't believe that characters *need* more hit points at starting levels. That's why levelling up is so exciting for 2nd and 3rd level.
We are already offering more hit points to characters with bonus hit points for favored class, an improved toughness feat, and extra healing options with turn undead. Any more, and you are detracting from the excitement of the game.
That being said, you could offer an optional rule in a sidebar offering bonus hit points for race, as suggested in the Alpha document.
|
I like the idea of giving more HP at first level, though giving too many would be overcorrecting the problem. We use max HP + CON modifier at first level, and I'm leaning toward adding the racial HP bonuses listed in the Pathfinder alpha. I like the idea of a character's race having an effect on their hardiness.
I might not be in the majority here, but I don't believe that characters *need* more hit points at starting levels. That's why levelling up is so exciting for 2nd and 3rd level.
I second the idea, surviving the first level is a kind of rite of passage in D&D. Fewer hit points also favor cooperation and team work, the essence of D&D.
im all for having a side bar if ya want but nothing too wild as default .
|
I do think starting characters need a bit more, because it's an annoyance and game-stopper to have to roll up new characters and kludge them in to the story so much more frequently when you're just trying to get the story started! I don't think of myself as a killer DM, but I see it happening more frequently at early levels. No access to raising, very little healing magic... "rite of passage" isn't worth the frustration of deaths to me. For that, I'd play Paranoia.
Personally I like the idea (similar to that in Monte Cook's Book of Experimental Might) of starting hp = max HD + Con score. This makes Constitution *matter* a lot more, particularly for the early levels. Someone hardier is... hardier. Leaving casters justifiably nervous and hiding behind the fighters.
(I also like that Cook makes the actual Con score tied to death and dying besides, but that's a different thread).
I like the idea of Extra HP not to many but some, I like the idea based on characters race
A member of our play group keeps saying if the players get the bonus hp so should the monsters (we dont agree but im our groups mouth piece here at Paizo so I will post it)
|
An extra 10 HP would not be such a bad thing to add to PC's at first level. A wizard would have 16+con while a fighter would have a 20+con using the Paizo alternate dice ruling. That would give the players enough HP to do some interesting things at first level and it will be meaningless in a few levels anyways. Rolling your HP can give some funky results.
If we must have extra starting hp, I like the idea of extra hp based on race. However - this would have to be balanced by some other bonus to those choosing be gnomes or halfling.
I am not sure though, that we need it at all. In the old (really old) days, people started with 1d4 + con bonus hp (as a wizard). Now you get max hp on your first level. Do we really need more "help" than that?
Giving out 30 or more hp is just too much. It takes away the sense of being a young inexperienced character on its way to fame, if you are already build like a tank!
As another commented, you could just leave these as options! Instead of making it standard.
|
|
Yesterday we played with the flat bonus 6 extra hit points at 1st level option and combined with the favored class bonus hit point and the increased hit die for 2 of the classes, our group was very survivable. You really don't need that many extra hit points for a 1st level character to become survivable. If you really want more hit points then take Toughness. Just my opinion based on my experiences.
|
|
At the moment I am leaning towards keeping the basic system, but then have a side bar with a discussion about optional 1st level starting HPs, and then list out several options. I think most folks are already giving out max HP's/HD, so we can assume that is the standard.
I like the idea of racial HP bonus and I like adding in the total constituion score. But I think if you add them both together it is a bit high.
"My personal preference would be to use the option of double max hp based on class at 1st level, with the con bonus added once."
If you double max hp at 1st level, the wizard only gets 12 compared to the barbarian with 24. The wizard can take maybe two extra hits, three at the outside, before he's down, and while it's slightly better it doesn't do enough. Besides that, tying it to class hit points will cause cherry-picking; everyone will want to make their first level barbarian for the massive bonus hit points at 1st level.
"We are already offering more hit points to characters with bonus hit points for favored class, an improved toughness feat, and extra healing options with turn undead."
Favored class gives +1 hp. While that might add up at higher levels, at 1st level it's just +1 hp. As for improved toughness, I like that it's improved a bit, but you should never be forced to take a feat just to survive. As for the extra healing options with turn undead, you're still toast if you happen to take two or three hits before the cleric gets their chance to act; I really like the new turning rules but it doesn't help you if you can't survive long enough for the cleric to do it.
"I like the idea of a character's race having an effect on their hardiness."
That's why the races have Con modifiers. Don't get me wrong, I don't mind the idea of races getting bonus hit points, but I think it will cause too many problems in the long run. For example, do monsters get the same bonuses? How do you decide what bonus they get? Does it change if they're played as PCs?
I think it should be a flat bonus to every PC regardless of race, class, or Con. Otherwise you're forcing players to choose certain aspects of their character just to survive instead of allowing them to play the PC that they actually want to play.
|
|
Options;
1
Have every character start with hit points equal to their Constitution + their base die (instead of Con Mod).
1st level Wizard (d6 HD version) with a 10 Con? 16 hp.
1st level Barbarian with a 14 Con? 26 hp.
After 1st level, it drops to the standard dX + Con Mod. The dice rolling could also be an option. We usually use half the die rounded up. (Great deal for Wizards and Sorcerers, who can choose 3 instead of rolling a d4, less exciting for Barbarians, who can choose 7 if they aren't feeling lucky, but will miss out on the chance to get an 8-12.)
2
Add hit points to the negative side of thing. Getting knocked out as a 1st level Wizard might be just as easy, but getting *killed* might be a little harder.
The current hot idea here is to have the Disabled condition last until you reach negative hit points equal to your Con mod, and then you don't actually die until you reach negatives equal to your Con score (with 10 being the minimum, even if your Con is lower).
So a Gnome Bard with 14 Con and 8 hit points would drop to Disabled between 0 and -2 hit points, and then Dying from -3 to -13, and then Dead at -14.
Additionally, the Stabilization roll could be switched from 10% to a Fortitude Save. With a DC 10, even a Con 10 character has a 50% chance of Stabilizing each round, and becomes much less likely to bleed to death.
The Dying condition could be extended by some other technique as well, with the Dying character losing only 1 hit point per *minute* instead of per round, greatly increasing the chance that help will arrive in time for the Dying character.
3
Monte's Book of Experimental Might has some useful thoughts on the matter.
4
Unearthed Arcana has some ideas, Wound pts vs. Vitality pts. and so forth.
5
4E has some ideas as well.
There's no shortage of ways to address this, the $64,000 question is finding the most intuitive and least intrusive option that appeals to the largest number of fans.
|
|
Has anyone else here played under the module than came with the Gazetteer of the Known Realms from Goodman games?
The basic idea is this: Every pc choose an NPC class to play as. You all have -1000 experience points and are "level one" when you reach "0"
You also choose a feat that is a non-combat feat. This feat is a BONUS, but you do not get any other feats until you hit 1st level.
So by the time you make 1st you have some extra hps, some extra spells (if you chose adept) or maybe even an extra +1 to base attack.
Not only that but you get the chance to give a little more background on the character. We tried it and it's pretty cool!
Here are some alternate rules, then.
Rule #1: Death occurs at end of encounter
Max hp + Con per HD; no extra hit points except feats.
Your negative hit points are infinite. However, you have one minute after the end of the encounter to get back to positive hit points. It sounds crazy until you read this:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18368186/print/1/displaymode/1098/
Rule #2: Efficient healing
All healings spells can be cast for maximum effect if the casting time is increased to 1 minute and the caster succeeds at a concentration check DC 15 + spell level.
|
|
If was allowed to make ONE big change to the game, I would make monster HD and Classes be build exactly the same. In short make 1 monster HD=1 Class level. Then from there I would build monsters with the idea that there would potentially be used as PCs and thus NEVER give them a power that the PCs a should never have.
Oh, but this would make Summoning / Planar Binding / Gate viable and non-broken, and PC Monsters and Monster Cohorts and non-standard Familiars and Companions, and Wild Shape / Polymorph / Shapechange as well, as no Monster would have a ridiculously-game-breaking-in-PC-hands ability like 'grant 3 wishes per day' or 'give any reptilian creature any super power you can dream of' or '3 HD Slyph casts spells as a 7th level Sorcerer and can summon 8 HD Air Elementals...'
This will never be allowed as it would fix so many broken things in one fell swoop that there'd be no reason to make new editions!
There would be a great wailing heard from the CharOp forums as well. For about 30 seconds. Then we'd find something else to play with. :)
|
|
I like the racial version. My thinking goes that a normal elf with no class levels may have 4 hp. Your character has a class level that you add to that because if I remember correctly HP are supposed to represent a character ability to handle damage and subvert damage or something like that.
There are already racial modifiers that can affect Constitution so why not HP's. If you are taking a specific race because you want more hit points you probably would not take the elf class anyway.
|
|
Also wanted to mention my house rules regarding hit points. I used to say you roll when you level up but you always get at least half. So if you roll 1d10 and you roll a 2 you would still get a least 5 hp.
In my current RotR campaign I have gone as far as to say max hit points at each level.
I just do not like the random roll for hit points. It means that a fighter and a wizard could end up with the same amount of hit points just from bad rolling on the fighters part. Just does not make much sense to me.
Not sure if there is a prettier solution to the random roll.
I also use max hp at every level.
It is simple and provides a real sense of distinction between the classes. There is still very much a sense of danger, and I have certainly killed PCs. Mostly, though, it makes things easier for me to DM, as I am less worried about fudging things and can pull out the stops. The party also adventures for a longer time before resting, as well.
O
|
|
I also use max hp at every level.
Whether it's max hp, half hp or half hp rounded up, I've noticed a trend over the years to move away from random generation.
I cheered at the concept of point-buy, and I cheered at the 3.0 MM with all of it's monsters having averaged hit points, and I've loved playing Xendrik Expeditions, where everyone has average (round up) hit points as well. I not a huge fan of randomness *in character generation.* Once the game is playing, let the dice fall where they may (with an occasional Action point or act of GM Fiat as necessary to keep it dramatic and fun), but I hate being straightjacketed by dice rolls from playing the character I want to play.
(It was awful in 1st Edition, where a character had to have a 9 in some stat to qualify for even the schmoe classes, and I would occasionally roll up some hapless prat who qualified for *nothing.*)
|
|
In our second playtest session, we've come to the conclussion that, with the new extra hit points almost every character gets as RAW (+1 per favored class and the die upgrades of Wizards and Rogues), adding extra hps at 1st level seems almost redundant.
The weakling mage (let's say Con 10) will have 7 hps to start with (6 per the maxed die and +1 per favored class if Elf, Half-Elf or Human). That's more than enough for a physically weak character. A Fighter (let's assume Con 14 for this one) will have 13 hp (10 +2 (Con) +1 (Fav)). With that, you could survive a maxed hit from a greataxe.
So, after having played with extra hps (we used just maxed class die x2), I think we're going to revert to maxed class die.
|
|
I think that you are forgetting that someone using a greataxe is going to have a decent strength score. It's going to wipe out that PC with one swing or nearly take him out. The point of the HP boost is not to make PC's more survivable, but to give them a buffer so that they can attempt some things that they wouldn't normally try until 3rd level and up. I know that, unless they have the Improved Bull Rush feat, a fighter will not try that maneuver because of the AoO involved. With this buffer, he could do this maneuver and still have a chance of success. It also buffers the critical hits a little. Lucky Kobolds will no longer wipe out a party in one round.
|
|
I know why are those extra hps there, and we welcomed them in our playtest game. The end result, however, was that characters, and especially "weak" characters, were already getting a hp boost in the form of die upgrade and +1 bonus per favored class.
That's the thing. We liked it on paper, not so much in use. Die upgrading, +1 hp per favored class and the changes in the Thoughness feat are more than enough.
Well Paizo has already increased the hit point total by altering some of the classes. Couple this with the new Toughness feat (which is even better than Improved Toughness) and you can have a wizard with 10 hit points or more straight up. For some people this is more than enough.
If you want more hit points both the Con score option or the double starting hit point option work fine. I'm personally against racial bonus hit points (which some races already get in a way with their Con bonus).
Perhaps Paizo should try out something like reserve points (in the SRD rules)? It doesn't give PCs more hit points, but functions a bit like healing for all classes, allowing them to go for longer in fights.
|
|
I use Max Hit points at 1st + Con Bonus. After That its pure rolls, you take what you get.
A trend I see In D&D I hate is that to many people are trying to move D&D into a system where PCs are automatically in win situations. Players should not automatically have a tacticle advantage over monsters, NPC because we are afraid they might lose a battle. Players should learn to cover come situations through various methods, the most important TEAMWORK.
Doing away with randomization does away with alot of the indiviualism of each character.
Another trend is that certain skills, feats, spells have become automatic. As it is every fighter will turn out the same, Every Class will be the same.
I might not be in the majority here, but I don't believe that characters *need* more hit points at starting levels.
I strongly agree. In my games, we do use the maximum HP at first level variant, but I think that's just the type of thing best left to homeruling. Adding extra HD goes too far, first level characters should be somewhat fragile, and the beefed up HD of wizards and rogues already fixes things for the classes on the lower end of the spectrum.
After all, starting a campaign at 2nd, 3rd, or even 4th level is a perfectly viable solution for those that don't like to play through this period of your character first getting his dungeon feet wet, so to speak.
im all for having a side bar if ya want but nothing too wild as default .
I was thinking that this might be prime territory for an optional rule sidebar. I've knocked tons of 1st level characters into negatives, and in a way, it reinforces that they are inexperienced, and how far they can push their limits. Often times, even when the have more hit points later, the tactics they learn from having to conserve hit points at low levels carries on to making them more tactical later on in their career.
The biggest problem I have isn't even so much giving extra hit points at first level, but that that bonus at first level carried into second, third, etc. While eventually in their mid levels the extra hit points may not mean much, it does throw 2nd, 3rd, etc. out of whack for a while as well.
Here's what I like:
max hd plus con at first level(plus feats if chosen)
I notice some bad rolls have really hurt char in the game I'm in right now. So I'm going to try something new next time I'm DM:
Roll twice at each level, and take the better roll. I like the random factor, and this should prevent successive bad rolls.
As for first level, add a minor 1-6 points for race
AND instead of the -10 to death, have it be -CON till death. This is only bookeeping for players, monsters could still have a set amount. I have no doubt players will keep careful track of this. With the cleric's new turning healing, char death should be rare but possible. I don't like my players feeling completely indestructable.
|
|
As I mentioned above, characters are still fragile. This extra HP is more of a buffer than a way to prevent dying. With this buffer, it makes the game fun again from level 1 all the way up to 12. Characters at 1st level can now actually attempt something and fail without the reprocution of instant death. Critcal hits no longer wipe out parties. I think the extra HP is needed to help stimulate game play and allow players to try new things. Just because they have more HP doesn't meant that they will be any more stupid or that they will survive more. It just gives them one more chance to do something without death.
What about using all Ability bonuses to enhance the HP total at first level instead of just Con mod? The entirity of your character is used to make up the Hit Points, so using the generic 15,14,13,12,10,8 would give you an additional 5 Hit Points at first level. All races seem to come up with an additional point from whatever their Ability racial changes are so that would be a +6 using generic Abilities; who knows what that could change to using different Character creation methods? This doesn't seem to overpowering, will be fairly uniform for whatever methods the DM uses.
I would also like to see the possibility of Charisma being looked at to be used in the HP progression somehow, because force of personality is a huge component in the 'will to live' aspect. Thoughts?
|
|
It looks to me like Max plus Con is too much and max plus Con modifier is too little -- from the article and the discussion.
What about simply Max plus 1/2 Con. So if you have a 14 Con, you get +7 hp. If you have a 9 Con, you still get +4 hp. Feels like it makes sense -- you get a bonus based on your Con -- but not so much that it feels game balancing.
|
|
I like the idea of racial HP bonus and I like adding in the total constituion score. But I think if you add them both together it is a bit high.
I do too. If it helps, remember that several races have Con modifiers, so by taking Con into account for HP, there is already some influence of race in there.
But I think I'd vote for the Racial option. Every race gets some HP just for their race. Makes sense. Then their Con mod reflects their personal toughness. Then they get some more HP based on their class. After that, it's all based on class and Con.
|
|
Depending on what your goals for your game are, any of your suggestions may be the best tool for the job.
I'd prefer that it default to roll it straight + Con with an extensive discussion in a sidebar or DM chapter on suggestions, options & variants that can be used to customize this facet of the game as needed. There are an awful lot of 'same rules for everybody' folks that are going to be here just because 4e isn't going that way. Cutting them out should not happen.
As a complete opposite to that, here's a suggestion that worked well back in the AD&D days and still works well in C&C. For first level hit points take your highest ability score and add your con bonus and then roll your first level hit die straight. For each additional levels roll it straight + con bonus.
Pros: Everybody has high HP starting out.
Cons: Forces a DM to view HP as completely abstract and everbody has high HP starting out ;).
Sam