The 'sidebar' for the different hitpoint options (Racial, etc) is buried on the page AFTER the Barbarian's class progression chart... Who would EVER find this, if they haven't already read the complete book cover-to-cover, and are just trying to roll up a new non-Barbarian character?
(*I* had a hard time finding the section, when I knew exactly what I was looking for.
I had to use the Search feature in the PDF, which isn't available in a book, obviously.)
This info should be listed next to the generic "Creating a Character" information, which applies to all characters/classes, not in the middle of the Barbarian class.
I also noted that the sidebar about CMB (p. 133) is located A BUNCH of pages ahead of where CMB is otherwise explained... If there is a reason for being located where it is, it should also give the page number for where CMB is explained at length.
Why would Joe Blow turn to the 2nd or 3rd page of the Barbarian class to find this info?
It belongs in a generic description of "how to create your character".
(i.e. Choose your Race, Class, & Stats, and then derive your HP, Saves, BAB, Skills & Feats,
from your choices. Hit Point options would fit there.)
I myself could truly not find this without the Search function
(and I *HAD* read it before, browsing the Beta when it was released.)
Simple layout fix.
Yeah. There are a LOT of layout issues.
Paizo needs to do some serious ground-up information architecture to make the beta (alpha+SRD) what it should be, that is, to be worth my dollars for the hardcover. These seem to be common enough complaints.
But anyway, that said, I thought I'd threadjack and say that I'm using the Flat 6 option for my Runelords campaign, and I think Flat 6 is "the bomb" so to speak. I think it's become the new standard for my group, and if that "Starting HP Options" sidebar becomes less option and more rule, my vote is for Flat 6.
|
ITs ok for the sidebar to exist listing variant rules
butr as quandary mentioned its not placed in the right place... it shoukld be either in generating character back in 2nd chapter or at the beginning of chater 3 before the barbarian.
i don't remember which is which. buti and my dms usually give tops hp for the class... from there on its the player's work to survive.
From what I understand eventually Jason is going to pick one of these methods to put in the hardcover. Until this is set in stone it's a sidebar. Many of the existing sidebars are going the way of the dodo when the hardcover comes out.
Regardless, if the sidebar remains in the final I agree that it's poorly places. As has been mentioned there are a good number of layout issues in the beta.
My group is trying out the max HD + con mod + racial + bonus (if any). I'll let you know whether they survive or not. It looks promising though.
|
|
Both of the Pathfinder groups I'm playtesting with use the Max Base + CON + Race + Favored Class Bonus method for determing hit points, and the Die Average + CON + Favored Class Bonus method for leveling up.
So far the results have been exciting, and my preference would be for Max Base + CON + Race + Favored Class Bonus to be the default assumption for starting characters, with Die Roll/Average + CON + Favored Class Bonus for leveling.
I agree that the sidebar is not intuitively place in the Beta. I expect that the final will look much more polished than the Beta, as Jason won't be pounding it out alone while burning the midnight oil in a desperate attempt to be ready for GenCon. They wouldn't do that to him twice. Right?
|
|
Both of the Pathfinder groups I'm playtesting with use the Max Base + CON + Race + Favored Class Bonus method for determing hit points, and the Die Average + CON + Favored Class Bonus method for leveling up.
So far the results have been exciting, and my preference would be for Max Base + CON + Race + Favored Class Bonus to be the default assumption for starting characters, with Die Roll/Average + CON + Favored Class Bonus for leveling.
I agree that the sidebar is not intuitively place in the Beta. I expect that the final will look much more polished than the Beta, as Jason won't be pounding it out alone while burning the midnight oil in a desperate attempt to be ready for GenCon. They wouldn't do that to him twice. Right?
I second everything said here, except to point out that the favored class bonus wouldn't apply if the PC used it for a skill point instead (an option which is awesome, by the way).
Director of Games
|
Hi there all,
We are still debating bonus hit points at first level and I would love to see more opinions on the matter.
As for the sidebar placement, we are aware that there are a number of bits in the wrong spot. Fortunately, we have many, many months before the final goes to print to fix some of these issues.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
I second the vote for Flat 6.
A PC is a hero, they're not just commoners, they're better. A commoner often has about 6hp. So they get the 6hp every commoner has, PLUS their PC hit die, plus CON bonus. That's 1st level. After that, I'm having them roll for HP and add CON bonus.
Flat 6. I like it a lot.
We're using Con Score + Max HP + other HP bonuses for first level characters, and it's worked very well. It's our favorite out of the hit point options thus far.
I prefer either racial or flat starting hit point bonus. On the other hand, though, I dislike the maximum class HD hit points at level 1, since it leads to arbitrary unfairness in terms of multiclassing (Barbarian/Wizard is a better combination than Wizard/Barbarian).
Flat/racial starting hit point boni also mesh well with my virtual levels system (for those interested: http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/pathfinder/pathfinderR PG/design/ability/racialSkillsHitPointsAndOtherBonusesSolutionToSkillsAndLA ).
|
My group has been playtesting the rules with my Falcon's Hollow campaign, and we've become very fond of the racial hit point option. I gives a nice bump to starting hit points while reinforcing the racial traits in the game. If this option is finalized, the extra hit points could be folded into the race descriptions to save space.
I'm still not sure we need the extra HPs, although most people seem to think otherwise.
I've looked at options a few times. While I understand the nature of racial HP, and it does seem to add flavor, I'm not sure if it the right flavor. So, I'm a bit more in tune with a flat number.
|
|
I don't think the extra hit points are necessary.
Looking back at my long running game, I've killed off a lot of PCs. I mean, a lot. I have a Drawer of Shame where the character sheets go to rot (and be NPCs in a pinch later). It's filled with characters. But I digress ...
Most of the PC deaths in my game have been around the 3rd-6th level mark, not 1st. I don't think adding an extra amount of hit points is necessary to make characters more durable.
That being said, I think the new Favored Class option of an extra hit point per level, the +2 to an ability that Humans and Half-Elves can put into Constitution, as well as the revised Toughness feat, is certainly enough, should a player feel their character absolutely needs more hit points. That's an extra 6 hit points available to a character there.
We use Class Max + full CON Score and the group LOVES it.
More HP = longer battles, more encounters, and more interesting enemies. It's one of the few things I really liked in 4Ed: it makes the heroes feel heroic, right off the bat.
I'm using this method for my savage tide campaign. It works really well and gives the pcs a lot more opertunity to shine.
I've been using the Flat 6 option for many games and it offers the least amount of power creep for the necessary amount of "life insurance" for low-level PCs--and it has the benefit of becoming insignificant as levels grow.
The CON score bonus changes the game way too much, IMO, and is not backwards compatible. The damage dealt by 3.5 weapons and the amount of damage healed by spells is not scaled to consider the CON score increase.
|
Make the "standard" option (max hp at 1st level) standard, to keep it backwards compatible with 3.5.
But PLEASE keep the sidebar of variant options. I had never seen some of these options before, and though I usually use standard, I can think of many occasions to use one of the variants (if I'm using a gritty Low Fantasy point-buy, I'd perhaps go with Flat hp bonus for survivability; if I chose High Fantasy, I could easily see the Constitution method; and I have a secret love for the Racial option).
And please move the sidebar to a more easily-referenced spot with character generation, as well as Table 4-1: Character Advancement. Both get lost in the Barbarian write-up, and would fit better with Table 2-2: Ability Modifiers, IMO.
In my new RotRL campaign, they are still building characters but so far it looks like, 1 dwarf, 2 halflings, 1 human and 3 unknown (probably human or elf).
This is using Max HD, + con modifier, + racial
The guy playing the dwarf fighter jaw hit the table when he figured that he had 24 hit points at 1st level. (d10 +1 con, +8 racial, +1 (favored), +4 (new toughness feat)).
So my vote goes for racial, and keep the new toughness feat the way it is currently written.
-- david
Papa.DRB
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Bucking the trend here, Jason.
Of course players are going to love it when their 14-CON human sorcerer starts play with 15 hp instead of 6. They would also like +1 BAB and familiars with frickin' lasers on their heads.
I suppose I just disagree with the sentiment that PC's are that much better than normal people. I see a 1st-Level character as being fresh off the farm, newly graduated from the magical academy / monastery, and taking their first steps on their road to adventure. They have a little bit of training, but are getting by on moxie, not experience.
A sorcerer with 15 HP, who doesn't die until he's at -14 hp, just isn't afraid of a giant rat. And that's a shame.
By all means, include a sidebar explaining that there are ways to ladle advantages onto 1st-Level characters. But you should also note in that sidebar that these improvements essentially make the character capable of handling challenges that previous modules considered appropriate for 2nd-Level characters.
Or, seriously, drop all the fancy extra hit points, skill points, power-creep attribute pushing ... and simply suggest that some DM's might start their campaigns at 2nd Level.
|
Bucking the trend here, Jason.
Of course players are going to love it when their 14-CON human sorcerer starts play with 15 hp instead of 6. They would also like +1 BAB and familiars with frickin' lasers on their heads.
I suppose I just disagree with the sentiment that PC's are that much better than normal people. I see a 1st-Level character as being fresh off the farm, newly graduated from the magical academy / monastery, and taking their first steps on their road to adventure. They have a little bit of training, but are getting by on moxie, not experience.
A sorcerer with 15 HP, who doesn't die until he's at -14 hp, just isn't afraid of a giant rat. And that's a shame.
By all means, include a sidebar explaining that there are ways to ladle advantages onto 1st-Level characters. But you should also note in that sidebar that these improvements essentially make the character capable of handling challenges that previous modules considered appropriate for 2nd-Level characters.
Or, seriously, drop all the fancy extra hit points, skill points, power-creep attribute pushing ... and simply suggest that some DM's might start their campaigns at 2nd Level.
Bravo, Chris. You've summed up my opinions on the matter as well. Once the game increases in power, there is no going back. It's much harder to deny players something than it is to grant them something. Heck, I have a hard time telling my playtesters we aren't using any of the optional hp from the sidebar!
I can understand the design intent to balance the core races as choices with other material, but there are two problems with this:
1. PRPG is to be the replacement for the core books. That means eventually people who buy PRPG will not have access to the old 3.5 splatbooks and therefore won't have "overpowered splat races".
2. Nothing is stopping other third party publishers from making overpowered races for PRPG, and we end up in the same cycle as now.
Perhaps the best way to handle this would be to provide a short chapter in the DMG section on how to balance races - what is worth what, and how to reduce new races to LA +0. For example: If a new race has more or less than a total ability score modifier of +0, you should reduce one or more abilities until it achieves this balance.
Of course, I do think half-orcs should just have +2 Str, -2 Int (or -2 Cha).
I don't like the extra hit points at first level option either, at least not as a standard. As has already been expressed, PCs are exceptional, but for the most part, they are exceptional like professional athletes are exceptional, i.e. they have natural talent, but they have to have the drive to get better to get better.
When you start having PCs getting too much extra stuff at first level, including hit points, you start getting into the "Chosen of the Gods, these guys are THE heroes of the century" kind of feel, and I don't like that, at least not as the default campaign supposition.
To back this up a little, in my playtest for the Rise of the Runelords (Spoilers, just in case):
With extra hit points, either +6, or racial, or whatever, neither one of them would have fallen down at all, and the fight would have, for all intents and purposes, have been a cakewalk for them. As it was, it wasn't deadly, but there was a threat of danger to it.
It would have likely been more deadly without the extra Pathfinder add ins, i.e. orc ferocity allowing the half orc to take down the nearest foe before he collapsed, the half-elf actually being able to attack at range with Hand of the Apprentice over and over again, and the bard standing in for a cleric because he had first level spells, i.e. cure light wounds, at first level.
This added power level, plus extra hit points, makes it feel, to me, like 1st level is becoming a formality rather than the formative period for starting adventurers.
|
|
I've been using the Max HD + Con score in my RotRL playtest campaign, which is wrapping up Burnt Offerings. It's worked extremely well for our play-style, but I can see how it wouldn't be for everyone.
What I like about this option is that it gives the party considerably more staying power, without increasing their overall power level -- they can't dish out anymore than normal, but can run through several more encounters before needing to rest. It's also allowed some of the lower-hit die character classes to take a more active role -- the wizard actually spends time on the outskirts of the combat area, rather than hiding around the corner after tossing his single magic missile.
Absent any specific rules about applying the bonus to monsters and NPCs, I decided to grant the Con score bonus HPs only to "named" opponents, which also works very well. Monsters generally have enough hp as is, and a hefty addition could leave them (and any nasty special attacks) in the fight too long. But for classed NPCs it works perfectly, keeping them around a few extra rounds. It made a huge difference (in a good way) to fights with glass-jawed NPCs such as Tsuto, Lyrie and Gogmurt.
With all that said, I'd be fine if the CON score remains a variant option. I'm not a big fan of the racial bonus variant, but the flat bonus of +6 or so would be ok -- I'll just keep using Con score in my own games.
|
|
Currently, in my Falcon's Hollow playtest campaign, I have the following characters:
Half-orc monk 5 (formally a werewolf until the group made a deal with the fey queen Syntira)
Halfling wizard (transmuter) 5 (who owes the queen three favors)
Gnome scout 3/fighter 2 (in all his gnomish glory)
Half-elf ranger 5 (player's former character was an elf knight but felt the character was too rigid for the mood of the campaign)
At first level, I granted the players max hit die + Con modifier + racial bonus. Despite some thinking this may be too much, both myself and the players have found this to be a great starting point. Throughout the adventures, the players lasted longer in combat situations, but I didn't feel like it lessened the threat level. The half-orc monk as been dropped to negatives several times in combat, with the drama heightened by the fact that he had a high number of points to start with. If anything, right from the start, I knew I didn't have to pull any punches, which was a concern of mine as the party didn't have a ready source of healing available. I also provide this bonus to NPCs and monsters with character levels, which helps relieve the "glass jaw" villain problem that arises.
Also, by starting with this boost, the characters have a solid foundation of hit points to build on, as we roll for hit points at all future levels. Rolling a 1 on hit points at a level later on still isn't optimal, but the characters aren't nearly as weak because of it.
However, I find that the flat +6 seems too arbitrary and lacks justification. The racial hit point variant grants an equivalent bonus while reinforcing the different racial qualities which are, already, an integral part of the game.
But, here's the question . . . does this need to be standard, or can it stay a "sidebar"?
I don't begrude anyone trying it out, or liking how it works for them, but once you bump the power level up, the temptation will be for new adventures and APs to take this into account, and nudge things, ever so slightly, upwards, making it more difficult for someone like me that wants to run things without the bonus hit points.
It may go this way, and if most of the people like it, that's great, I'm just not really thrilled with this becoming the default.
** spoiler omitted **
KEjr, I would say that your spoiler makes the case for some extra starting HPs. The events you recounted should be a cakewalk and a series of feelgood battles for the PCs, IMO.
I do think leaving the hitpoints variant sidebar intact for the final product is a perfectly acceptable way to go.
On some of the other options mentioned: I strongly dislike the racial variant---it has no game balance as the small races get penalized with no benefit. I also don't feel the need for story justification of any of the extra hps options.
KEjr, I would say that your spoiler makes the case for some extra starting HPs. The events you recounted should be a cakewalk and a series of feelgood battles for the PCs, IMO.I do think leaving the hitpoints variant sidebar intact for the final product is a perfectly acceptable way to go.
On some of the other options mentioned: I strongly dislike the racial variant---it has no game balance as the small races get penalized with no benefit. I also don't feel the need for story justification of any of the extra hps options.
But:
I vote for max HP + Con modifier/level + Con score. Then allow the heal skill to heal 1/2 the check in hp rounded down up to your hit points before the encounter started.
Gives you more hit points, a reason to take the heal skill, and limits the need for a cleric to keep healing you.
|
Director of Games
|
Hey there Everybody,
For the sake of compatibility and a number of power balance arguments, I think these bonus hit point rules are going to remain an optional component. I like that a number of them have become quite popular, but with favored class bonuses, HD increases, and a number of other factors, I am strongly thinking that these should remain a tool for those who need them, but not a mandatory, assumed component.
Thoughts?
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Jason,
I think tribof1 pinned down the point I think you're trying to make. Some styles of play have more fun when 1st-Level characters can be sooped up. For other (perhaps grittier) styles of play, I'd like to see races --and 1st-Level characters in general-- kept at their 3.5 power levels.
Of course, the DM needs to make this determination before the first session begins, which is the trickiest time to discern play style...
Hey there Everybody,
For the sake of compatibility and a number of power balance arguments, I think these bonus hit point rules are going to remain an optional component. I like that a number of them have become quite popular, but with favored class bonuses, HD increases, and a number of other factors, I am strongly thinking that these should remain a tool for those who need them, but not a mandatory, assumed component.
Thoughts?
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
A reasonable approach that's hard to argue with. You've got my vote!
Hey there Everybody,
For the sake of compatibility and a number of power balance arguments, I think these bonus hit point rules are going to remain an optional component. I like that a number of them have become quite popular, but with favored class bonuses, HD increases, and a number of other factors, I am strongly thinking that these should remain a tool for those who need them, but not a mandatory, assumed component.
Thoughts?
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
I think that's a great solution. Most of the time I'm probably going to run without the extra hp, but once in a while, I might like to throw the PCs into the fire or portray them as being less "exceptional" and more "elite," so it would be nice to have the default as it is, but with the option clearly outlined.
Hey there Everybody,
For the sake of compatibility and a number of power balance arguments, I think these bonus hit point rules are going to remain an optional component. I like that a number of them have become quite popular, but with favored class bonuses, HD increases, and a number of other factors, I am strongly thinking that these should remain a tool for those who need them, but not a mandatory, assumed component.
Thoughts?
Excellent! I think having these rules (all that you mentioned) as optional rules in side bars is a great idea. Personally I see people picking and choosing these options based on their play group. I imagine almost all of them will get plenty of play but many of us like the power level where it is.
Hey there Everybody,
For the sake of compatibility and a number of power balance arguments, I think these bonus hit point rules are going to remain an optional component. I like that a number of them have become quite popular, but with favored class bonuses, HD increases, and a number of other factors, I am strongly thinking that these should remain a tool for those who need them, but not a mandatory, assumed component.
Thoughts?
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
This is probably a good idea, though I think bonus starting hit points are better suited and better targetted to solving the problem of low-level survivability than higher hit dice or favored class bonuses, etcetera. They are not essential for that, however, as DMs worried by this can simply start at a higher level.
We're trying:
Hitdie-max + Con score + all the other usual bonuses at 1st. All other levels as usual.
But, we went a step further for death & dying. Death is at negative 1/2 your normal hitpoints (semi-permanent effects like magic Con altering items only, rage doesn't alter "normal"). Anything below 0 hp is dying. On your round, 10% chance to stabilize. Failure to stabilize forces you to roll your largest hitdie (in the even of multiclass PCs). You bleed out that many hp.
So if you're fighter has 50hp normally, you die at -25. If you get hit to -1, you fall unconscious. On your turn, you roll stabilization. If you fail, you roll a d10, and bleed out that much. If you're above -25, you're still dying.
This seems to give roughly the same bleed-out time (in rounds) but makes it unpredictable so your healer needs to think about stabilization. It also widens the range of lower level characters to not outright die from a single luckly greataxe crit.
We started CotCT with flat bonus of 6 hit points. It's working great as it keeps my players in a fight a bit longer. Another good thing is the new rule that character dies when his negative hit points reaches his constitution score, not just -10. Works great with diehard-feat! I'm still voting for keeping the starting hit points "standard". It's very easy to use optional rules when needed...
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8
|
We played a PbP with the racial hit point bonus. We were using a 3.5 module. I really enjoyed the extended adventuring day and not having to go away and come back to the dungeon with all the re-rigging that might entail (monsters taking over other dwellings, etc.). It did get a bit awkward though as the characters had earned enough XP to level up but the day wasn't even done yet. They were getting deeper into the dungeon and facing tougher monsters without the spells and feats that might have helped them.
Flat 6! :D
|
|
Hey there Everybody,
For the sake of compatibility and a number of power balance arguments, I think these bonus hit point rules are going to remain an optional component. I like that a number of them have become quite popular, but with favored class bonuses, HD increases, and a number of other factors, I am strongly thinking that these should remain a tool for those who need them, but not a mandatory, assumed component.
Thoughts?
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
I think keeping the optional rule sidebar is an excellent idea. While I wouldn't want the hit point booster in my game that I run, there's no reason to say it's not a good option for others ...
Yes, let's go for standard (improved) HD and other bonuses and keep the flat increases as an option in a sidebar. Please move the sidebar out of the barbarian rules section!
Hey there Everybody,
For the sake of compatibility and a number of power balance arguments, I think these bonus hit point rules are going to remain an optional component. I like that a number of them have become quite popular, but with favored class bonuses, HD increases, and a number of other factors, I am strongly thinking that these should remain a tool for those who need them, but not a mandatory, assumed component.
Thoughts?
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
I agree whole-heartedly !