My players roll and, if they don't like the result, I'll reroll it for them...but they have to take my roll even if it's worse. As you might expect, they don't usually have me reroll unless they get less than average. I generally roll well, however, so sometimes they take a chance...
M
Max hp for first level, and then roll two die and keep the better result.
I offer a choice:
1. Roll 2 dice, take the higher of the two
2. Take the average +1
3. Game of Asmodeus: Roll that HD, until it comes up maximum or "1".
roll twice taking the better roll, re-roll doubles (min or max)
this thread has me curious though...
Has anybody gotten rid of any other random rolls?
If you don't like the wizard having more hit points then the fighter, what about a wizard hitting a target the fighter missed?
not trying to knock on anybody, just curious
Max on first level (note: this does not apply to your pet!).
From level 2 on (or whenever rolling for your pet), choose: (and tell me before tosing the die)
- roll, but you will get at least half the die max (i.e. a d8 will wield 4,4,4,4,5,6,7 or 8)
- roll, with an option of re-rolling. If you re-roll, the second result stands.
|
1) Roll
2) If you don't like the result roll again and subtract 1 from the new result
3) If you don't like the new roll, roll again and subtract two from the result
4) Carry on rolling and subtracting an additional one from the result until you either get a result you like or a 1 is the only possible result.
In my group its roll or take average, but then its based off your class.
Always re-roll one's, 1d4's only re-roll one's 1d6 one and two's 1d8 one, two and three's 1d10 one, two, three, four. I find this keeps the average hp higher than just going for average and also still gives you the excitement from rolling your hp and getting max without just rolling two as a fighter and having less health than say a wizard.
In my group its roll or take average, but then its based off your class.
Always re-roll one's, 1d4's only re-roll one's 1d6 one and two's 1d8 one, two and three's 1d10 one, two, three, four. I find this keeps the average hp higher than just going for average and also still gives you the excitement from rolling your hp and getting max without just rolling two as a fighter and having less health than say a wizard.
My group use exactly the same method for same reasons.
Seems that there are more people house-rule HP dice than not.
Max for first 2 levels then roll or take average +1
roll twice taking the better roll, re-roll doubles (min or max)
this thread has me curious though...
Has anybody gotten rid of any other random rolls?
If you don't like the wizard having more hit points then the fighter, what about a wizard hitting a target the fighter missed?not trying to knock on anybody, just curious
The DM for our 3.5 game allows us to roll twice-take better for curing wounds as well as for rolling hit points. But that's only when healing out of combat - in combat, it's the raw roll.
Otherwise, I can't think of any other situations in which we have taken out or substantially modified a set of rolls after initial character generation (in which we roll 4d6-drop low, roll 2 sets of 6 and pick the preferred set).
Usually some fixed number. I used to do averages, or let the players roll, but more and more, I find doing a point based system just ends up being fairer for everyone involved. It's the same reason I do point buy for attributes instead of dice rolling.
For example in the current game I'm running the hp and skill points per level, before modifiers are;
class hp skill points
Alchemist 6 6
Barbarian 12 4
Bard 7 7
Cavalier 10 4
Cleric 7 3
Druid 6 6
Fighter 9 3
Inquisitor 8 6
Magus 7 3
Monk 7 5
Oracle 5 7
Paladin 8 4
Ranger 7 9
Rogue 6 10
Sorcerer 6 2
Summoner 4 6
Witch 5 3
Wizard 5 3
Usually a "high" average with max at 1st level. With all other random elements removed from character creation I saw no reason to keep hp random. In the groups I've played with, the more keen they are on optimizing the more likely they are to ditch any random elements. If they don't care about optimization at all, the more likely everything is going to be rolled randomly (stats, hp, money, etc.) Also, the older (age-wise) the group is, the more likely to use random; the younger, fixed. That's just my experience though. YMMV.
Max HP at first level, you are supposed to be the top of your creed after all.
Then each level, you get to roll. But, should you roll a 1, you can re-roll it once. If you get another 1, the gods have decreed that 1 is all you get.
A friend of mine taught me a cool trick I have adopted. You roll your hit die, if you don't like it, you roll the next lower hit die, and so on. Let's take a Barbarian, they roll a d12 and get a 2, player can take the 2 or roll a d10. They roll a d10 and get a 1, the d12 is now off the table, they take the 1 or roll a d8 on down to a d2.
I'm curious how that plays out, aside from lengthening combat. Do you find it difficult to get healed up to full hit points? Do you take more risks? Does combat get boring after a certain point?My DM gives max hit points at all levels. But he gives NPCs and monsters max HP as well.
When I DM, I normally just declare no rolling, everyone take their average (fractional, rounded down but recalculated each level) HP.
In my experience it doesn't affect in combat healing much because damage that needs to be healed is still coming in at the same rate. You are taking damage over a longer period of time, but really it's no more a strain on healing then having 2 combats with average HP opponents. What it does give you is more time to react with heals if huge damage spikes are happening so there's less chance of someone suddenly dropping and things escalating into a TPK.
Maxing HP for everyone essentially turns a 3 round combat into a 5 round combat, assuming you are using the first round for buffing, battlefield set-up and maneuvering into position. I don't think a 5 round fight is so long it becomes boring, and the extra rounds of engagement tends to make players that like to get into the thick of things more willing to perform non-direct damage actions. For example, a sorcerer that likes to blow stuff up may be more willing to throw out a haste on round one if he knows he get's to do what he likes most (blow stuff up) for 4 more rounds rather than 2 and so enjoys the game more.
From a DM perspective your effectively cutting the number of encounters you have to prep in half, since each combat will last nearly twice as long (game and real time) and eat roughly twice the party resources. This let's you focus your creative time and juices on a smaller number of encounters if you want so you can either save yourself a lot of prep time if you have a busy life, or spend more time making each encounter interesting. Or you could run with the same number of encounters with a smaller number of opponents per fight, since the enemy damage dealers won't drop as fast. I think this helps add variety to the game too, since not every fight has to be against 4-5 opponents to be a challenge. The downside is that with less encounters or less enemies your going to be slowing down XP. Even if you don't adjust encounters/adventure or opponents/combat, your still gonna level slower simply because each fight will take longer to resolve so you get less progress through an adventure on any given night.
I'd be interested to see how much correlation there is between the responses in this thread and the responses in the thread on 3 round combats.
this thread has me curious though...
Has anybody gotten rid of any other random rolls?
If you don't like the wizard having more hit points then the fighter, what about a wizard hitting a target the fighter missed?not trying to knock on anybody, just curious
Just removed random HP for me, nothing else. the reason being that a lucky/unlucky streak in combat is a temporary thing, but bad rolls on Hit Dice stick with your character forever.
Plus aberrant dice streaks in combat or skill checks can make for funny stories, but if someone wants to play a tough barbarian or fighter or whatever, a bad HP roll or two is messing with your whole character concept which is no fun.
|
1st - 5th level = Hit die max
6th - 10th level = Roll hit die twice and take the better roll
10th and up = Roll the hit die and take what you get
We feel this creates a similarity to aging. Younger (lower level) characters are generally healthier and heal faster but as they age they heal slower and gain less and less health.
k
My groups always roll with half being the minimum roll result possible.
Now a -CON mod still can reduce the result.
|
My games always roll for hit points, throw out any 1's, and then they have the option to buy the hit points they didn't get at a price of 1% of the suggest character wealth for that level.
Say level 4 PCs gain enough experience to level to 5. The barbarian rolls a d12 and it comes up an 8. He has the option to purchase any or all the remaining hit points up to 12 at a price of 105g per hit point (Suggested character wealth of 105000 x .01 = 105). So for 420g he could get max hit points.
roll twice taking the better roll, re-roll doubles (min or max)
this thread has me curious though...
Has anybody gotten rid of any other random rolls?
In my experience, getting rid of all random rolls during the character creation and "leveling up" phase is quite common.
|
I give the option to roll or take the average. I also allow Hero points to be used for re-rolls and plot twist cards for creative solutions. In a recent home game I had two players level up and roll rather than take the average and both rolled 1s and 2s; between the two of them they were able to get averages by burning hero points and a plot twist card.
I've been using a greedy system for forever.
Max HP at 1st,
Every level after works as follows:
Roll your hit die.
If you want to keep the roll, you're done, modify your hit points.
If not, roll again.
You may continue to reroll the die IF it is greater than the last roll made. Should the die come up with an equal or lesser number, those are your hit points for the level.
I prefer to not use HP at all. I usually run with the wounds and vitality rules. What I do is say everyone has con score wounds and vitality equal to their hit dice+con modifier at first level and every level thereafter. In this case monsters simply receive max hp for their level.
If the party would rather just use HP, then they just get max hit dice+con modifier every level to PCs, and leave monsters at the same HP.
Our game has been just rolling and taking what we get, but if we end up with a low enough number over time that it starts to really hurt (i.e. you've got a level 5 Barbarian with 30 HP somehow) our GM will retroactively bump it up to max at first, average for every level after with the Con mod.
In my current campaign all players *and* monsters have maximum hitpoints.
So far: Works surprisingly well, except non-corporeal creatures. They become too powerful for their CR.
We let the dice fly :) for a new (1st level) character I let players re-roll once if it comes in under half.
Currently, roll twice, take the average and round up. Keeps the outliers down but allows a bit of variation.
We let the dice fly :) for a new (1st level) character I let players re-roll once if it comes in under half.
You make them roll HP @ Level 1!?
I give the option of one or the other (but whatever you pick, you stick with it).
I think both of my GMs prefer us to roll but allow us to reroll 1s (something I often do too if everyone is rolling HP).
I prefer the average myself but that's because my die roll luck sucks. Most of my fellow players prefer rolling.
In my experience it doesn't affect in combat healing much because damage that needs to be healed is still coming in at the same rate. You are taking damage over a longer period of time, but really it's no more a strain on healing then having 2 combats with average HP opponents. What it does give you is more time to react with heals if huge damage spikes are happening so there's less chance of someone suddenly dropping and things escalating into a TPK.
Maxing HP for everyone essentially turns a 3 round combat into a 5 round combat, assuming you are using the first round for buffing, battlefield set-up and maneuvering into position. I don't think a 5 round fight is so long it becomes boring, and the extra rounds of engagement tends to make players that like to get into the thick of things more willing to perform non-direct damage actions. For example, a sorcerer that likes to blow stuff up may be more willing to throw out a haste on round one if he knows he get's to do what he likes most (blow stuff up) for 4 more rounds rather than 2 and so enjoys the game more.
From a DM perspective your effectively cutting the number of encounters you have to prep in half, since each combat will last nearly twice as long (game and real time) and eat roughly twice the party resources. This let's you focus your creative time and juices on a smaller number of encounters if you want so you can either save yourself a lot of prep time if you have a busy life, or spend more time making each encounter interesting. Or you could run with the same...
My experience is similar. Since my players use a modified point buy system that's fairly generous and most of them are optimizers, damage output is higher so it mostly evens out in the end; I'd say that the extra hit points makes combat last one, maybe two rounds longer than normal.
I have my players roll every level, but at first level they can choose to take the average for their hd if they roll low.
Aren't PC's supposed to receive full HP from their first HD?
Max HP at 1st.
For the rest of the levels used to roll twice or take average if both rolls are lower.
Now using the option to take average or roll twice and take the highest.
Aren't PC's supposed to receive full HP from their first HD?
They are, but this is a thread about house rules, so...
Prior to 3.0 we rolled at every level and took what we got; even if it was a one and even at first level. I remember a scene from the first Gamers movie whre the massive fighter has a 95% chance to rip open the gate but ends up throwing his back out when he tries. The weak archer who only has a 35% chance rips it off easily and tosses it aside. To me, that's just part of a game being a game. I understand why people may not care forit but I don't think randomness is "The Great Evil" that some make it out to be.
Aren't PC's supposed to receive full HP from their first HD?They are, but this is a thread about house rules, so...
I understand that it's just I can see a wizard with 1 hp and a 2 CON Mod getting his butt handed to him by a Kobold with a dagger...
When I DM the players roll with my adapted from somewhere re-roll rules. d6 hit dice re-roll 1's, d8 and d10 hit dice re-roll 1's and 2's, and d12 hit dice re-roll 1's, 2's, and 3's. I find it gives PCs the chance of high or low rolls while not completely screwing up high hit dice classes who have bad luck.
Aren't PC's supposed to receive full HP from their first HD?
At 1st level. What happens when you level is up to the players/GM.
I understand that it's just I can see a wizard with 1 hp and a 2 CON Mod getting his butt handed to him by a Kobold with a dagger...Aren't PC's supposed to receive full HP from their first HD?They are, but this is a thread about house rules, so...
Why wouldn't a inhumanly frail (since humans have at least a 3 Con, it has to be an elf or something) person not be highly vulnerable? For that matter, even if I used the standard rules that wizard would still only have 2 hp.
What do you mean inhumanly frail? A Human wizard can have a 2 CON Mod.
Let's see 3 HP Max dies at -14...
that what 17-18... Hmm my CR 1 Kobold Rogue that I commonly use early on can deal 20 damage with his dagger in a single round.