| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Remember 2E, where both PCs and monsters gained only 1 or 2 HP per hit die after lvl 10? Anyone would feel like braving such an end game like that?
On the bad side, we'd all have less HP, yes, but on the good side, monsters would no longer have the absurd amounts of HP that make weapon damage obsolete, even the Evocation School would make sense once more.
Any takers?
Damage weapon isn't really obsolete at higher level. In my campaign gamage dealers are able to deal insane damages each round. It really depends on the number of encounters per day.
If you have many, then weapons are kings and magic users save their big spells.
If you have few, magic is king because the magic users won't save their spells.
But with your system there wouldn't be much difference between a 10th level character and a 15th level in "resistance".
* It goes against the epic feel you have in D&D.
* Magic becomes even more powerful (damage dealing spells at least) and you must rewrite the magic system. If you do that, you play low fantasy, and you better do it from level two on.
Read Game of Thrones d20 system, it looks somewhat like your proposal.
Damage weapon isn't really obsolete at higher level. In my campaign gamage dealers are able to deal insane damages each round. It really depends on the number of encounters per day.
If you have many, then weapons are kings and magic users save their big spells.
If you have few, magic is king because the magic users won't save their spells.But with your system there wouldn't be much difference between a 10th level character and a 15th level in "resistance".
* It goes against the epic feel you have in D&D.
* Magic becomes even more powerful (damage dealing spells at least) and you must rewrite the magic system. If you do that, you play low fantasy, and you better do it from level two on.Read Game of Thrones d20 system, it looks somewhat like your proposal.
Funny becuase the spells haven't changed much since second ed, and the HP are through the roof, as well as weapon damage.
|
I'm not sure about this. I don't consider it a complete sacred cow, having played through plenty of 1e/2e games where this was the norm. I think at this point we've experienced hit point expansion alongside damage expansion, and the end result might be a bit of wash.
So... having gotten to this point, I'm not sure if it solves any particular problem to go back to 1e/2e hit point levels. I'd be interested in some thought exercises or playtests that might show how it would work, though.
Won't work. Its a dramatic, massive change that alters the general precepts of 3.5. Also, monsters always got whatever hit dice they had . . . there was no point at which monsters quit having full hit dice. The only differences were that all monsters had d8 and none of them got Con bonuses.
Check out Troll Lord Games' Castles and Crusades products, which are strongly reminiscent of 1e/2e. I've not played them, but I very much enjoy reading them and the artwork in the Players Guide and Monsters and Treasure is quite excellent work by Peter Bradley. They are d20 books, but VERY much along the feel of the earlier editions. TONS of goodies to steal ... er, appropriate ... from them, yep yep!
Remember 2E, where both PCs and monsters gained only 1 or 2 HP per hit die after lvl 10? Anyone would feel like braving such an end game like that?
On the bad side, we'd all have less HP, yes, but on the good side, monsters would no longer have the absurd amounts of HP that make weapon damage obsolete, even the Evocation School would make sense once more.
Any takers?
I'd take.
Remember 2E, where both PCs and monsters gained only 1 or 2 HP per hit die after lvl 10? Anyone would feel like braving such an end game like that?
On the bad side, we'd all have less HP, yes, but on the good side, monsters would no longer have the absurd amounts of HP that make weapon damage obsolete, even the Evocation School would make sense once more.
Any takers?
Well, I DO like that. But it sounds good in idea and I never actually tested how it works out.
And also, I don't have any high level play experience, and no idea how fast you run out of hp against high level opponents. If you're actually going down faster with level 15 than you did with level 10, it's not fun. But I like the idea of hp not rising to infinity.Also, one would have to think about what to do with monster hp? Given, that most high level creatures have insane Con scores, reducing their base hp per level from 6 or 4 to 2 would not really have a noticeable impact.
Remember 2E, where both PCs and monsters gained only 1 or 2 HP per hit die after lvl 10? Anyone would feel like braving such an end game like that?
On the bad side, we'd all have less HP, yes, but on the good side, monsters would no longer have the absurd amounts of HP that make weapon damage obsolete, even the Evocation School would make sense once more.
Any takers?
Well, I DO like that. But it sounds good in idea and I never actually tested how it works out.
And also, I don't have any high level play experience, and no idea how fast you run out of hp against high level opponents. If you're actually going down faster with level 15 than you did with level 10, it's not fun. But I like the idea of hp not rising to infinity.Also, one would have to think about what to do with monster hp? Given, that most high level creatures have insane Con scores, reducing their base hp per level from 6 or 4 to 2 would not really have a noticeable impact.
Well, remember, "average" critters didn't get any CON bonus to hp per HD. Now, named critters could, depending on how one spun things - but then, one has to also remember, critters rarely had ability scores other than (some times) STR, INT and WIS, maybe CHA. 'Cept Gawds, who had alla scores, and tons of other stuff. Gawds often died due to inability to decide how to slay mouthy mortals...
Remember 2E, where both PCs and monsters gained only 1 or 2 HP per hit die after lvl 10? Anyone would feel like braving such an end game like that?
On the bad side, we'd all have less HP, yes, but on the good side, monsters would no longer have the absurd amounts of HP that make weapon damage obsolete, even the Evocation School would make sense once more.
Any takers?
Well, I DO like that. But it sounds good in idea and I never actually tested how it works out.
And also, I don't have any high level play experience, and no idea how fast you run out of hp against high level opponents. If you're actually going down faster with level 15 than you did with level 10, it's not fun. But I like the idea of hp not rising to infinity.Also, one would have to think about what to do with monster hp? Given, that most high level creatures have insane Con scores, reducing their base hp per level from 6 or 4 to 2 would not really have a noticeable impact.
You know if this did happen monsters wouldn't need an insane number of HD to make up for the HP bloat on the players part. By lowering their HD you would also lower their BAB, and Saves getting them slightly closer to the same realm the players are in, making the "Race to the Highest DC" less nessecary. This would in turn me everyone wouldn't feel it was so "Mandatory" to get the "BIG 6".
Seems like a win/win all around to me.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
S
e
o
n
i
I have always thought that Monster HP and player HP were a bit strange.
Some monster do need loads of HP, as dragons and other massive creatures.
monsters like them should not be killable on strait fight hit and miss game you can not tank a dragon in the same way you can in wow. one swipe should send a medium character flying across the room.
players hp should not be comparable to monster like that.
No way. There might be a problem here (though I don't see it), but it's not solved by more complicated rules.
And, of course, this wouldn't work for the revision PF is supposed to be.
Remember 2E, where both PCs and monsters gained only 1 or 2 HP per hit die after lvl 10? Anyone would feel like braving such an end game like that?
Just on a side note here, only PCs have ever had this problem. Monsters always got the full benefit of HD (mainly because they were only d8's).
I'm not sure about this. I don't consider it a complete sacred cow, having played through plenty of 1e/2e games where this was the norm.
Mooooo.
|
|
Remember 2E, where both PCs and monsters gained only 1 or 2 HP per hit die after lvl 10? Anyone would feel like braving such an end game like that?
On the bad side, we'd all have less HP, yes, but on the good side, monsters would no longer have the absurd amounts of HP that make weapon damage obsolete, even the Evocation School would make sense once more.
Any takers?
Well, I DO like that. But it sounds good in idea and I never actually tested how it works out.
And also, I don't have any high level play experience, and no idea how fast you run out of hp against high level opponents. If you're actually going down faster with level 15 than you did with level 10, it's not fun. But I like the idea of hp not rising to infinity.Also, one would have to think about what to do with monster hp? Given, that most high level creatures have insane Con scores, reducing their base hp per level from 6 or 4 to 2 would not really have a noticeable impact.
You know if this did happen monsters wouldn't need an insane number of HD to make up for the HP bloat on the players part. By lowering their HD you would also lower their BAB, and Saves getting them slightly closer to the same realm the players are in, making the "Race to the Highest DC" less nessecary. This would in turn me everyone wouldn't feel it was so "Mandatory" to get the "BIG 6".
Seems like a win/win all around to me.
Especially at higher levels, Pathfinder classes already easily roll over monsters of much higher CRs. So I would not care too much for something that could make a level 10 party easily beat a CR 20 Dragon. As it stands now a level 15 party has a good chance of taking out a CR 20 Dragon.
Now without seeing what the final Pathfinder Monsters will look like, I'd be real careful about making them too easy.
Well part (most) of the problem there is that the "big bad monster" has a lack of actions. Teams beat individuals hands down, we all know that, however in D&D with the BBEG it tends to be forgotten, and then people are disapointed when the BBEG is either too easy or much too hard to affect by anything other than repeated damage by a rotating team of attackers (getting healed when they rotate out).
Level 15 is when the challenge system really starts to break down. A challenge rating 8 over the Party level is supposed to be a life or death skin of your teeth encounter. equal CR to party level is a 1/5 resources walk through the park, with anything between eating more and more resources.
4 level 15 characters should be able to take a CR 20 dragon, possibly in its lair, but someone is probably going to be dead afterwards, and the others should be well spent... unless they've had time to prepare and attack from an advantagious area.
|
Remember 2E, where both PCs and monsters gained only 1 or 2 HP per hit die after lvl 10? Anyone would feel like braving such an end game like that?
On the bad side, we'd all have less HP, yes, but on the good side, monsters would no longer have the absurd amounts of HP that make weapon damage obsolete, even the Evocation School would make sense once more.
Any takers?
Where's the fun in this from both the players and GM's perspective? As the latter, for example, I'd hate to have to start adjusting all my 3.x monsters' hp stats.
I wouldn't be adverse to the OP's proposition provided that we also went to monster stats and reduced them to the damage capabilities that they used to have.
Remember- our HP have increased, but so has the damage (through strength) of the typical melee brute monster.
If you adjust one and not the other, all you've really done is ensure a really, really short campaign..
-S
I can see the old 2nd Ed style of post lvl 10 hp being adapted as an OPTION for GM's and players who want to go a little hardcore for more challenge at higher levels without resorting to cheesey tactics on the GM's part. As for replacing the current system? It's not very backwards compatable and I'd pass on that idea completely.
Personally I'd love this idea, it would stop the HP's going into silly areas (such as being able to fall from a 1000ft drop and living).
However, 3.0 onwards featured somthing that this didn't take into account, multiclassing. In 3.0 onwards, one of the advantages melee classes gain over spellcasters is their additional hit points, which become pointless under this system. Few would have incentive to remain in the martial classes and most characters would just multi-class into spellcasters.
Actually the amount of gain for a spellchucker was much less at higher levels than everyone else.
Wizards got 1 hp a level
Rogues/clerics/the like got 2 hp a level
Fighters got 3 hp a level
And back in AD&D at least, only fighters could gain the full benefit of a high CON score. Everyone else could only get 2 HP per level off of CON.
|
Actually the amount of gain for a spellchucker was much less at higher levels than everyone else.
Wizards got 1 hp a level
Rogues/clerics/the like got 2 hp a level
Fighters got 3 hp a levelAnd back in AD&D at least, only fighters could gain the full benefit of a high CON score. Everyone else could only get 2 HP per level off of CON.
Ah, ah, you pansies ... :)
In AGOT, you only gain full xp at level 1. After that, it's only 1 2 or 3 hps / level depending on how martial you are....
Personally I'd love this idea, it would stop the HP's going into silly areas (such as being able to fall from a 1000ft drop and living).
HP already get into silliness at about 5th level. Actually, HP increasing at all is more than a bit silly.
TS
Personally I'd love this idea, it would stop the HP's going into silly areas (such as being able to fall from a 1000ft drop and living).HP already get into silliness at about 5th level. Actually, HP increasing at all is more than a bit silly.
TS
O.o
Appropriate thread to post this in TS. ^_^
YMMV, but D&D is the wrong game system to model that kind of HP system ... GURPS, however, does it nicely.
Just sayin'...
my only run in with gurps was enough..ugh