I haven't had good experiences with the randomization of the HP system in the past, so I've come up with a house rule that I believe helps fix that.
Essentially, you roll your hit die as normal at level up, but you can choose to take your con modifier in place of your roll (Netting 2x con mod gained per level minimum). This is limited to no more than the maximum you could possibly roll on the die and (I hope) promotes and rewards characters that invest in Con.
My question is, is there anything I'm overlooking with this system?
It should give my players just a bit more staying power if they build for it, but given I give them a 13 point buy to work with they might need it haha.
Anyway, just something I came up with and wanted to share!
If there are any other GMs out there that have modified this part of the system in the past, post your own house rules about HP here!
|
I do 1/2 HD + 1 (round up on even levels, round down on odd levels) for HP. It's just a lot less bookwork for me.
d6 = 3.5 + 1 (5 on even levels, 4 on odd levels)
d8 = 4.5 + 1 (6 on even levels, 5 on odd levels)
d10 = 5.5 + 1 (7 on even levels, 6 on odd levels)
d12 = 6.5 + 1 (8 on even levels, 7 on odd levels)
That method takes away the main selling point of barbarians, and potentially allows for sorcerers and wizards to end up with more HP per level than would normally be allowed. Plus it gets weird with con boosting equipment.
The house rule I'm going with at the moment is: Take what you rolled, or half of the best possible roll. Break down the probabilities and it's much less of a gimme than it looks like on the surface.
Normal minimum/average/maximum results:
d6: 1/3.5/6
d8: 1/4.5/8
d10: 1/5.5/10
d12: 1/6.5/12
This method:
d6: 3/4/6
d8: 4/5.25/8
d10: 5/6.5/10
d12: 6/7.75/12
Average HP/level for any given class goes up by about 1, but worst-case-scenario, you end up just half a point below average.
That method takes away the main selling point of barbarians, and potentially allows for sorcerers and wizards to end up with more HP per level than would normally be allowed. Plus it gets weird with con boosting equipment.
Not sure if you're referring to my house rule, if so, how does it subtract from playing a barbarian? Yes they get a d12...but they benefit as much from this rule as anyone and as a general rule have higher Con?
And sorcerers and wizards are limited to a max of 4+Con mod, assuming they have 18 or higher Con, which is the same as if they had been really lucky with rolls and heavily invested in Con, no higher.As for con-boosting equipment.. I'll have to think that one over, but I'd probably end up with a rule that it uses your unmodified Constitution (just your starting score + any level bonuses into it + inherent bonus), and then con-boosters give you extra hp as they usually do.
Xan Ning; that's a good one that I haven't heard of before, rather interesting... if my original idea doesn't work out, I'll probably steal that.
I use 1/2+1 so a d10 equals 6 HP every level.
Or basically what PFS does.
That method takes away the main selling point of barbarians, and potentially allows for sorcerers and wizards to end up with more HP per level than would normally be allowed. Plus it gets weird with con boosting equipment.Not sure if you're referring to my house rule, if so, how does it subtract from playing a barbarian? Yes they get a d12...but they benefit as much from this rule as anyone and as a general rule have higher Con?
And sorcerers and wizards are limited to a max of 4+Con mod, assuming they have 18 or higher Con, which is the same as if they had been really lucky with rolls and heavily invested in Con, no higher.
OK, what you have is a system where those classes with low hit dice have a very good chance of always getting above average rolls if they invest in their Con (and many do). Classes with high hit dice are less likely to roll less than their Con bonus, so they have average hit points.
For example, a wizard with 18 Con will ALWAYS be getting above average hit points. A Barbarian with 20 Con will have average hit points most of the time, only the lower end of the curve being tilted upwards by this system. Hence the cumulative average hit point difference between the 'wimpy' wizard and the 'mighty' barbarian is narrowed by improving the wizard's hit points. So what? Well, wizards are arguably a lot more powerful than barbarians as they gain in levels already, and low hit points are meant to be one of their weaknesses. One of the barbarian's attractive features is better hit points than anyone else. This system reduces that attractive feature.
Your system is skewed in giving greater advantage to those with low hit dice and high constitution scores.
Hmm.. let's see;
Wizard rolls;
Average would be 3.5
With 14 Con;
Average moves up to 3.66
With 16 Con;
Average moves up to 4.00
With 18 Con;
Average moves up to 4.5
Barbarian rolls;
Average would be 6.5
With 14 Con;
Average moves up to 6.583
With 16 Con;
Average moves up to 6.75
With 18 Con;
Average moves up to 7
So the difference between scores is 2.5 points at 18 con, versus 3 if they were rolling, on average. Alright, I'll admit that it does give the lower HD classes an advantage, but the point of the system is to prevent the feeling of, oh, I've got 18 Con and a d12, but i rolled a 1 so i'm getting 5 hit points this level. At the minimum now it'd be 8 points.
After doing out the little math, it does make me reconsider though. The barbarian is a little less attractive as a whole..worth a rethink. I'll get back to you on this if I can work out a system that still works to benefit those who invest in Con, just more evenly across the board.
Perhaps something tied into BAB?
1/2 BAB classes don't get the benefit of this system,
3/4 BAB classes get 1/2 benefit from this system,
Full BAB classes get the full benefit?
I haven't scratched the math, but it might work. If only odd numbers weren't so damned awkward to use at 1/2 benefit. Ugh.
... but the point of the system is to prevent the feeling of, oh, I've got 18 Con and a d12, but i rolled a 1 so i'm getting 5 hit points this level. At the minimum now it'd be 8 points.
That is why a lot of groups adopt something like a Roll and if you get less than 1/2+1 you instead gain 1/2+1 base HP before CON.
That is why a lot of groups adopt something like a Roll and if you get less than 1/2+1 you instead gain 1/2+1 base HP before CON.... but the point of the system is to prevent the feeling of, oh, I've got 18 Con and a d12, but i rolled a 1 so i'm getting 5 hit points this level. At the minimum now it'd be 8 points.
The problem I have with that system is that it doesn't reward you for actually investing into constitution, it's even all around, which actually means it's worse than the system I proposed because it achieves the result of increasing low end health but not the intent behind it. Clearly mine isn't the perfect solution I had thought it was due to the wonky probability of different size die, but I'd prefer to go with something that rewards investment than something that buffs everyone indiscriminately.
Brainstorming here, maybe if I limited the roll's minimum to 1/2 the HD, so bigger HD classes can take advantage of larger Con scores, while rewarding all-around? This way, wizards effectively cap at 16, while barb's don't cap until 22 con, fighters at 20. Might be roughly appropriate, but I'll have to do out the math.
How does someone not benefit from investing in CON in the system a lot of people use?
Your system results in less HP than the system I suggested.
Where are you getting this whole HP Cap idea?
How does someone not benefit from investing in CON in the system a lot of people use?
Your system results in less HP than my system.
The point is not that they don't benefit, it's that the relative value of having higher Con is less noticeable. If I have 16 Con and d10 HD in your system, at worst I'm getting 9 HP, but the agile fighter with 10 Con is getting 6, only 3 points less. That's a usual difference of exact Con mod, but I would rather a system that makes that difference more pronounced, to reward investment.
Under my system, the player with 10 Con's average hp per level is 5.5, while the player with 16 Con's average hp per level is 8.8, it's a slight difference when you compare the averages of the two methods, but when you look at minimums it's a whole different story, the minimum for the 10 Con is 1 measly point, while the 16 is 6 points, a difference of 5 health per level! It means that the beefier characters have much less of a chance of getting less than the casters, without skewing the average health per level too much. The point is not to have my players running around with X% more health than average, it's to reward characters that are built to be damage sponges, with the ability to accomplish that, even if they have the worst rolling luck in the world!
The HP cap thing is to mitigate my system not working too well at low levels with small hit die. It makes the wizards con increases worth more with average rolls than bigger hit die classes due to probability, but if you cap it a certain point, the eventual increasing returns for bigger HD classes pays it off. It's not unreasonable to get 18 Con at level 1, but as a wizard, your minimum roll is still only 3 rather than 4, you need a bigger HD to benefit fully from your con, but you do still benefit from that investment.
|
My preferred fixed HP system is max -2. It keeps the bigger hit dice a bit more enticing while not needing to adjust the enemy HP really. I have done everyone (that means the baddies as well) get max HP as well...but the players had hell of a time at level 1 and didn't quite like the 500 HP dragons at level 15. Mostly we roll tho...because most of my players seem to like it...even the ones who keep rolling 2s and 3s for HP on their d8.
I have a Fighter that his rolls were: one 3, five 2s, and thirteen 1s.
For a total of 13+10+3+100=126 at level 20. He was the Main Front Liner in the entire group. And was the most successful and funnest character I played.
3 HP per level can be a major difference in this game. Well 60 HP after 20 levels.
I have a Fighter that his rolls were: one 3, five 2s, and thirteen 1s.
For a total of 13+10+3+100=126 at level 20. He was the Main Front Liner in the entire group. And was the most successful and funnest character I played.
3 HP per level can be a major difference in this game. Well 60 HP after 20 levels.
That's fine and all, but you probably weren't just relying on your measly 126 health to get by, or if you were you were lucky as all heck haha, it's of course possible to get by with incredibly low rolls, but when the rules are based on numbers it can be frustrating. Doubly so when you invested with the expectation of getting above average health, I'm sure you would have had an easier time with an extra 40-60 health under your belt, and it likely wouldn't have detracted from the fun you had at all unless you were really into the concept of a frail fighter and it was important to your role-playing.
Anyway, it's not anyone's place to decide what way of having fun is the best, if you had fun with a abysmally unlucky but ultimately successful fighter, that's awesome, but I know I'd be disappointed if I was in your shoes at the time and so would my players. Role-playing is primary to my Pathfinder games, but often RP is driven by the numbers you've got to work with, and bad luck with rolls isn't a character motivation I find compelling to play.
Anyway, I don't just want to give my players a handout with 1/2HD+1 or any other arbitrary minimum, so that's why I'm trying to concoct an essentially fair system that keeps power near the same levels as the original game, but removes the bad feelings associated (in my group at least) with low rolls, if they choose to act on it. And if you really like the low rolls, taking your Con mod is a choice in the system I presented, you can stick with that 1 if that's what you want to do.
The Half+1 HD system is based on the Average result rounded up. If someone invests in CON they end up with Above Average. Remember in this game a 10 in a Stat represents Average Baseline.
So a 10 CON Warrior NPC would get 6HP every level while the 18 CON Fighter PC gets 6+4=10 HP.
The system I proposed where you roll but can choose to take a Half+1 Minimum means a d10 HD PC/NPC gets anywhere from 6 to 10 HP. It provides the Randomness of rolling HP with a Safety Net. It Also wouldn't require a Major redoing of every monster you throw out as NPCs and Monsters use the (Half+1)+CON HP method. That is IIRC.
To be perfectly honest, I don't care about the NPCs, I either hand-wave or give them maximum health plus a bit anyway, & my system does not empower the PCs to the point that I need to adjust monsters in any way, the PCs will simply be a bit more resilient than the base rolling system, but still weaker than your system.
Breaking out the math;
Since the maximum health in each system is the same, I will do the work for averages and minimums. This math assumes, for my system only as it's irrelevant otherwise, that the PCs never increase their Con as they level and start with the relevant score value, for 22 Con at level 1, it would be difficult to achieve. Nonetheless, the math tracks upward in all cases, with an average slightly higher than the core and a minimum at a much more reasonable HP for a playable character, so it does not skew the conclusion that can be drawn from the data.
Math on Averages;
Usual PC health; (at level 20)
10 Con/14 Con/18 Con/22 Con
Fighter=110/150/190/230
Barbarian=130/170/210/250
Wizard=70/110/150/190
Half HD+1 health;
10 Con/14 Con/18 Con/22 Con
Fighter=140/180/220/260
Barbarian=165/205/245/285
Wizard=90/130/170/210
My system;
10 Con/14 Con/18 Con/22 Con
Fighter=110/152/202/242
Barbarian=130/171.66/230/275
Wizard=70/113.33/160/200
Math on Minimums;
Usual PC health; (at level 20)
10 Con/14 Con/18 Con/22 Con
All classes follow the same route;
20/60/100/140
^Conclusion; mostly too low to be playable, except in extraneous circumstances.
Half HD+1 health;
10 Con/14 Con/18 Con/22 Con
Fighter=120/160/200/240
Barbarian=140/180/220/260
Wizard=80/120/160/200
^Conclusion; higher than the average for rolling. Better than what is considered the norm for playable, all around.
My system;
10 Con/14 Con/18 Con/22 Con
Fighter=20/80/160/200
Barbarian=20/80/160/240
Wizard=20/80/140/180
^Conclusion; low Con-scores still can lead to nigh-unplayable characters, AS INTENDED, but high Con scores result in characters that approach rolling averagely and are still playable despite what has been horrendous rolling luck.
In conclusion, my system works an intended. The average is within the bounds of rolling averagely and 1/2HD+1, but the minimum proves that maxing out Con is rewarded. Low Con scores lead to worst-case scenario with rolling builds, but high scores make the PCs playable, effectively disregarding their poor dice luck, just as I set out to do. And all accomplished without needing to rework any NPCs or Monsters.
Phew, that was a lot of math hoping to prove it worked XD.
Your system just makes MAD classes more MAD...
It Nerfs Fighters & Wizards while buffing Barbarians. What are you using as Usual PC Health considering the Half+1 is based on the average rolls.
So the Half and Half+1 are pretty much Identical.
Also you have all HD EXCEPT for d8 HD.
Also how would you handle it if they did increase their CON later on? Would they be screwed out of the HP increase or what?
Your system just makes MAD classes more MAD...
It Nerfs Fighters & Wizards while buffing Barbarians. What are you using as Usual PC Health considering the Half+1 is based on the average rolls.
So the Half and Half+1 are pretty much Identical.
Also you have all HD EXCEPT for d8 HD.
Also how would you handle it if they did increase their CON later on? Would they be screwed out of the HP increase or what?
The usual PC health is based on the average of rolling a die. (half the number of sides + 0.5) It is near identical to your system of Half+1, but it's the baseline and is slightly lower as it doesn't round up the half point, so I included it for numerical comparison.
This system does NOT make classes any more MAD than before, because when averaged out, the outcome is nigh-identical to the system base. The numerical proof is above (Compare Usual PC health to My system under the Average rolls math). The only purpose of this system is to increase the MINIMUM, as I have stated now /numerous/ times.
If characters increase their Con later on in leveling, they gain retroactive bonuses to HP per HD as is usual, but their rolls are just that, their rolls, and are not retroactively changed. It works in exactly the same method as base system.
For example;
A level 10 fighter in normal pathfinder play without any house rules, and with a starting Con of 18, gets a +6 belt of Con.
If his health before was perfectly average 5.5 points per level, his current total without the belt is 95 points. (55 points from rolling, 40 from Con bonus)
If he puts on the belt and wears it for 24 hours so the bonus to Con acts as though permanent, his health increases to 125 points (Still 55 points from rolling, but his Con bonus has increased to 70)
A level 10 fighter using my system, with a starting Con of 18, gets a +6 belt of Con.
If his health has been the average under my system it is 101 points. A slight increase from the base, due to investing in Con early on. (61 points from rolling, 40 from Con bonus)
If he puts on the belt and wears it for 24 hours so the bonus to Con acts as though permanent, his health increases to 131 points (Still 61 points from rolling, but his Con bonus has increased to 70)
And yes, I skipped d8 HD, you can still see the exponential progression. It's irrelevant to do d8, as it would not change the conclusion at all. I could have just done d6 and d12 as I gave 4 sample points for each, and the pattern is easy to deduce.
I like giving everyone and everything max hit points.
Not a popular trick to be sure, but I reeeeely enjoy it.
I make my players choose on character creation if they want to roll or take the average every level. Almost everytime they pick roll. Occasionally you get the barbarian who rolls 1s and 2s (feelsbadman) but other than that, players are usually eager for the randomization in my experience.
The same could be said of ability scores as well. No one chooses array when I offer it at character creation xD
A method I used because I wanted to make a 3-player party a bit beefier was splitting hit dice, giving max for one side and rolling for the other half, then adding Con. Makes the party beefier but still randomizes exactly how much exp.
1D6 = 1D3 + 3 + Con
1D8 = 1D4 + 4 + Con
1D10 = 1D5 + 5 + Con
1D12 = 1D6 + 6 + Con
Regarding the proposed system, with that low point buy, I don't believe it's any different than rolling normally. It only comes into effect if a player has 14 Con, and For any build, I see that being unlikely with that point buy, because other stats are going to be more important. For it to be truly worthwhile, a player needs to make a huge investment in Con, and with that low point buy they're basically making themselves useless. Who wants to be the barbarian with 18 Con but 10 Str?
If you want Con to play a more prominent role in HP generation, maybe do something like this (Though I'll admit this punishes low Con):
1D6: 1D3+ 2*Con
1D8: 1D4+2*Con
1D10: 1D6+2*Con
1D12: 1D8+2*Con
Mind, that's off the top of my head, just looking at it it's not the best, but some tweak to the formula could work to make HP more Con dependent in a more noticeable way.
Your Usual HP is still to low for your calculations then.
As every 2 levels a Fighter would gain 11 HP so at third level they would have 21+(3*CON)
At 20th level they would have 114 HP base.
Not a major increase but still enough to make a difference.
And you still haven't shown the Math for a d8 class.
I really like to roll hit points, but in my campaign (the two-character campaign my sweetheart is running for me) I'm glad that I have the safety net of getting at least half my HD in HP every level up (that is, at least 3 + Con for my sorcerer, and 4 + Con for my rogue). However, I voluntarily restricted my sorcerer's Summon Monster II spell to elementals only (character concept) in exchange for the choice of taking average HP out of the Bestiary or rolling HP every time I summon. And yes, I've ended up with a small elemental with only 2 HP, which still punched the bad boy in the face for major damage (and survived the fight thanks to good AC and not getting hit, IIRC).
For the first time now, we've tried out a Point Buy system for a module, and to be honest, I really like rolling my ability scores a lot better. I might feel different if we actually used a different, more dangerous rolling method. Something about seeing numbers and having to find my character concept rather than creating my own numbers according to a concept appeals more to me.
For the module, I rolled HP without safety net and (thanks to a 15 Point Buy and SAD builds) Con at 10 or even 8 (racial penalty). Which now means that my melee rogue with only 25 HP at level 5 has to make sure his AC is high enough to avoid getting hit.... Oh well, I'll see how well that party plays out in the end. Honestly, I don't expect my low HP to be of a major importance anyway--either high AC or ranged attacker, darkvision across the party and access to Darkness spells, Stealth high, ....
Best,
your crazy gnome from next door
I have suggested to my players many of the options above. Every time they chose the random roll over the average bet.
Everone thinks if they rolled a 1 on last level then the die owes them a max roll this time.
People just like to roll dice hoping to go big.
I like giving everyone and everything max hit points.
Not a popular trick to be sure, but I reeeeely enjoy it.
My groups tend to do this actually. I personally think it's not bad. Makes rocket tag perhaps a little less rockety.
We roll twice, take the best of the two; since that resulted in a surprising number of snake eyes (so to speak), we implemented an option to re-roll 1's once.
So a roll on d6 of a 1 and a 3 would allow the character a single re-roll hoping to better the 1. A roll of 1 and 1 would give them two opportunities to improve.
And yes, we have still had characters only getting a single hit point for their trouble, but far less often. (All of the above is before the standard addition of Con mod, of course).
Personally, I think they are being rewarded for their investment in Con under standard rules.
I haven't had good experiences with the randomization of the HP system in the past, so I've come up with a house rule that I believe helps fix that.
Essentially, you roll your hit die as normal at level up, but you can choose to take your con modifier in place of your roll (Netting 2x con mod gained per level minimum). This is limited to no more than the maximum you could possibly roll on the die and (I hope) promotes and rewards characters that invest in Con.My question is, is there anything I'm overlooking with this system?
It should give my players just a bit more staying power if they build for it, but given I give them a 13 point buy to work with they might need it haha.Anyway, just something I came up with and wanted to share!
If there are any other GMs out there that have modified this part of the system in the past, post your own house rules about HP here!
Mmmmm i has the same issue with the system some years before... i like the randomization, but some players are so unluky that you just can´t unleash a great battle for the party without kill the whimpy... sad, but give them the option of full hd at level or half sounds like 4th. maybe you can check that system for reference and see what you can take from it.
In AD&D2ndE, at 9th+level, all the classes start gainning HP (but they loose the rol hd), maybe you´ll can see the PHBAD&D2E for reference too.
In the Iron Heroes System, the classes hd work a mixed version of what you suggest:
HD......HP/lvl
d4......XXXXX
d6......1d4+2
d8......1d4+4
d10.....1d4+6
d12.....1d4+8
or just give to your players some kind of bonuses:
at every level 1hp+lvl bonus, all of them begins with toughness, full hd every lvl-.