I have been toying with the idea of doing some house rules for hit points.
Namely, if you roll a hit die and get less than half hit points, you take half, otherwise you take the roll.
This was done in response to myself having a level 6 fighter with 32 hit points, due to some of the worst rolls in my history of playing the game.
12 Level 1
3 Level 2
3 Level 3
5 Level 4
6 Level 5
3 Level 6
I later threw away every D10 I ever used for this character.
Are there any opinions on this particular house rule?
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
If you're frustrated with the variance of rolled hit points, why not just use the system that PFS organized play uses? Max at level 1, and average-rounded-up at all other levels. So for a fighter or other d10 class, you get 10+CONmod at 1st, then 6+CONmod thereafter. Works well enough in PFS.
One of the dms in my group uses the rule, if you role 1/3 the max value or less re-roll, so a d6 or d8 re-rolls 1,2, a d10 rerolls 1,2 or a 3, and a d12 rerolls 1,2,3or4.
My group's general house rule is you roll half your hit die and add half. So a Fighter with a 1d10 rolls 1d5+5 (on a computer dice roller obviously) or 1d8 become 1d4+4 etc. Does the same thing without all the extra rolling.
At our table the HP roll ruling goes like this:
When I run I game, I do max HD at 1st level, HD/2 + 1 thereafter.
Our current game is max HD at 1st level, (HD + 1)/2 thereafter [average HD], dropping 0.5 until the next level.
When I started my PF campaign Iwent for the following method:
1. All player characters and important NPCs/major monsters get their Constitution score (or Charisma score for Undeads) as a base hp.
2. On each level (including the first) they increase it by the average result of their HD, rounded up, plus their Constitution (or Charisma for Undeads) bonus.
Thus 5th level Fighter with Constitution score 17 has a total of 62 hit points: 17 for Constitution score plus 5 x (6 for fighter HD +3 for Con bonus) hit points.
3rd level Witch with Constitution score 10 has a total of 22 hit points: 10 for Constitution plus 3 x 4.
Currently I am happy with this method as it increased party survivability at the start and allowed me to use somewhat larger groups of enemies at 1st an 2nd level.
|
In my next game I was thinking of going with 1d6 + (1 per die size above d6) for each hit die. So a Wizard rolls 1d6 + Con, a Cleric rolls 1d6 + 1 + Con, a Fighter rollers 1d6 + 2 + Con and a Barbarian rolls 1d6 + 3 + Con. (They still get the same HP at first level, so 12 + con for barbarian for example.) This means that you get the same average HP, but everyone has the same variance from their average.
|
|
I'm obscenely generous in my games. I give maximum hit points for the first three levels and then the half-die plus half rule. Don't worry, I still kill a fair share of PC's. If I had to be honest, I'd say I am this generous because it allows be to put the party against tougher monsters and speed up advancement.
|
|
In my next game I was thinking of going with 1d6 + (1 per die size above d6) for each hit die. So a Wizard rolls 1d6 + Con, a Cleric rolls 1d6 + 1 + Con, a Fighter rollers 1d6 + 2 + Con and a Barbarian rolls 1d6 + 3 + Con. (They still get the same HP at first level, so 12 + con for barbarian for example.) This means that you get the same average HP, but everyone has the same variance from their average.So you are never going to get 10, 11 or 12 as a barbarian? ever? not 9 or 10 as a fighter? so a wizard can get 100% of thier possible hit points? and a Cleric fan get 85% of thier hp but a Fighter can only get 80% and a barbarian can only get 75%. This seems like you are hosing melee classes, don't they get hosed enough?
A melee person also gets a minimum of 30% of their possible hit points, where a wizard can min out at 16%. A barbarian's minimum result is 4, and average is 6.5, where a wizard's average is 3.5 and max is 4. The method I outlined does not change the average result (or the result you should expect), it ONLY changes how you get there.
This is to prevent the 240 + (20*con) HP barbarian just as much as the 31 + 20*con HP barbarian. I have actually seen someone roll 1s for their first 3 HP rolls (levels 2-4) and end up with less HP than anyone else in the party, including wizard, despite having a 14 con as a fighter. It sucks. It sucks only a little less than having everyone roll normal HP but one guy keeps maxing, so you end up with one fighter with 55 pre-con HP at level 10, and another with 100 pre-con.
Instead of the 31->240 range for a 20-level barbarian, the method I proposed would be a 88->192 range. (Despite the fact that the high+low have different averages, I assure you that this is an artifact of the difference between the probability of rolling a 1 on a d12 and the probability of rolling a 1 on a d6).
Either way, the barbarian range of 88->192 is still much much better than that of the wizard of 25->120.
ds: old (new)
d6: 25->120 (20->120)
d8: 27->152 (46->139)
d10: 29->190 (67->162)
d12: 31->240 (88->192)
I'm obscenely generous in my games. I give maximum hit points for the first three levels and then the half-die plus half rule. Don't worry, I still kill a fair share of PC's. If I had to be honest, I'd say I am this generous because it allows be to put the party against tougher monsters and speed up advancement.
Max HP every level then I really get to challenge you.
As a DM I Housed ruled back in the Racial HP at 1st
so it was Max HD + Con Bonus + Racial (from Beta)
Then the Player could Choose 1/2 or roll at every level gain after 1st + Con
In most cases they chose the 1/2 but if they rolled it had to be with me watching and they could choose their dice or mine for the roll.
Roll twice, take the best.
Averages.
d12 = 8.486
d10 = 7.15
d8 = 5.8125
d6 = 4.472
As you can see it pulls the average up to 70% of the face value of the die at the high numbers and 73% of the face value of the lower dice. That's from 54% big dice and 60% lower dice with the usual roll once method. So not very much average change, really, but what it does do is pull the average higher, making low rolls less likely.
|
|
Sorry, I typo'd for the wizard's max. I also typo'd under "new" for d6, which should be the same as "old."
Players are not in direct competition with one-another, but they are in indirect competition. If the melee character of the party gets unlucky and ends up with barely any more HP than the wizard who got lucky, how does that leave the melee character feeling? Not too good I imagine. It's great if it works the other way since the wizard didn't care much about their HP.
HP right now is the only thing that a character can want in a build, and end up not getting through sheer bad luck. A 20th level barbarian with 18 con can, while raging, end up as low as 191 HP. Or a 10-con barbarian can, without raging, end up as high as 240.
HP disparity is not *usually* a big deal, and is something I've handled in the past by simply giving people who consistently roll 1s and 2s the occasional mulligan.
My point with the maximum HP of barbarian wasn't the MAXIMUM, but how ridiculous that maximum looking next to the equally-likely MINIMUM. My "fix" is only an attempt to make that gap smaller. However, when making the gap smaller, I want to keep the AVERAGE the same so that I don't have to do any math on the HP of monsters from the bestiary. 1d6 + 3 has the same average as 1d12.
As a final note: I said this was something I was considering, not something I was definitely doing. I might even allow a player to pick which one they do for any given level.
PS: I find your fascination with "chance of barbarian beating wizard" entertaining when you already state that you don't believe players should be competing.
We use the following rules for hit points.
1 - 1st level is always max.
2 - After that everyone rolls a 1d4 and adds a static modifier to that roll.
So wizards roll 1d4+2
Fighters roll 1d4+6
Clerics roll 1d4+4
Barbarians roll 1d4+8
It gives higher then normal hit points to allow players to survive a little better and still have everyone rolling. A few levels of bad rolling will not make a character too weak... and a few levels of good rolling will not put a character well in front of others characters of his general type.
Our group finds it a nice mix of the random rush of rolling a die while letting a DM have a stable group without too much swing.
I allow my players to have max hp. It may mean that encounters need to be a little more difficult but it takes away the sting of bad luck handcuffing your character.
Not much sours a player on their character than a couple succesive bad hp rolls upon levelling up. Especially when compared against the good luck of a mage or rogue making the fighters total look rather pathetic.
It costs me very little and it only helps a players satisfaction with their character. You don't have to bother with people fudging rolls competing with the chronically honest.
I have adopted this rule:
Step 1: Roll the hit dice for your class when you level up.
Step 2:
If you like the result:
- Keep it.
If you DONT like the result:
- Roll again, keep that roll.
- Settle for the Average Hit points.
Step 3:
Add the CON modifier
I have created this rule because I feel that it is more fun to roll HP than just take the average. The more dice players roll, the better they feel.