Hit Points: Summary or 'Old School' style?

[DocEldritch]

Something I'm curious about, after recently reading some actual play threads of folks running either original set or retroclone 'old school' games (as in White Box old school), is if folks running C&C do the more modern version of hit points, where each level you roll a die and simply add it to your current total, or the older version where each level you reroll the total of all the dice and if the new total exceeds the old, it becomes your new hit points, and if it does not, they don't change?

Been debating something like that for my games, simply out of a desire to avoid HP glut. Debating a bit between that, and between using that system for the dice rolls, but each level you get your CON bonus added in (so your total will always increase slightly, if your CON is high enough).

[Omote]

Never done it the old school way.

~O

[ThrorII]

Even when I played ye Ole Skoole, back in 1980, we never rolled hit points old school style...

Now, getting max hp at 1st level, thats NEW school.

[serleran]

Lacking comprehension of intent implies a lack of schooling. Purposeful misreading of the intent is another matter.

That said, I make only elf characters do it. And, they have to take the roll, regardless of whether it is better or not. Nyah.

[Go0gleplex]

Re-rolling all of your dice seems silly. I always go with the cumulative total.

[Tadhg]

Hmmm, only vaguely familiar - perhaps I read about this method on a forum. I don't recall it from OB/D&D. But if it was in the rules, it's probably the first one I threw out. Not sayin' it's a bad way, but we rolled for the next level and added the HP.

[zarathustra]

i do the 'old style', it somewhat reduces the likelihood of a fighter getting a few crappy rolls and only having 8 hp at 3rd/4th level.

[Lord Dynel]

I'm not from the really old school, Doc. Not the really, really Old School. I'm Old School enough, though.

Anyway, I'm not even sure I even heard of that method. It doesn't sound too bad - if you roll bad on one level, you have a chance of getting better next level. It could make things interesting, at the very least. I, personally, would be willing to try it at least once.

So, I say knock yourself out - if you want to give it a try, gor for it.

[Rikitiki]

Me, I just do the roll-going-up-a-level to get cumulative HP.
But, on crappy roles, I let them have minimum-half-the-hit-die
instead. That way, nobody (as mentioned earlier) ends up with a
wimp due to bad rolling and, because of this, I get to throw baddies
at 'em rather than pull any punches.

[Lord Dynel]

Me, I just do the roll-going-up-a-level to get cumulative HP.
But, on crappy roles, I let them have minimum-half-the-hit-die
instead. That way, nobody (as mentioned earlier) ends up with a
wimp due to bad rolling and, because of this, I get to throw baddies
at 'em rather than pull any punches.

That's pretty funny. I suggested this once, early in the 3.0 D&D era, and some of my players actually got mad at me. They said that it trivialized those who were fortunate enough to roll high, giving the low rollers what amounted to free hit points. Since then, I haven't played with player's hit point at all. Max at 1st level (I do this for C&C, too) and roll every level after that.

[Just Jeff]

Huh. I've never heard of the reroll method, and I played old school when it was new.

[kreider204]

Huh. I've never heard of the reroll method, and I played old school when it was new.

Ya, I started with Holmes and then moved to 1st ed. AD&D, and I've never heard of it either. Is it in the PHB or DMG? Or is the OP referring to OD&D when he says "old school"?

[finarvyn]

the older version where each level you reroll the total of all the dice and if the new total exceeds the old, it becomes your new hit points, and if it does not, they don't change?

You have to understand that this is a "gray area" as far as rules interpretation goes, as to which of the two methods you describe were actually intended. No one that I knew personally going back to the 1970's regularly played it with the re-roll every level.

Some folks read the original Men & Magic rules and swear that it's supposed to be done that way. I've mostly played the "roll the new die only" method for 30+ years. The problem is that in Men & Magic they combined hit dice with plusses, a system abandoned when you move to the HD tables in the Greyhawk supplement. For example, a first level fighter rolls 1+1 HD and a second level fighter rolls 2 HD. Suppose I rolled a 3 for the HD at first level, so I have 3+1 or 4 HP. Now, what do I roll at 2nd level? If I roll another full HD (maybe I get a 5) I would need to subtract that +1 back off to get 3+5, or 8 HP. Simply adding the new HD to the old number (4+5) would, in effect, give me 2+1 HD at 2nd level instead of the 2 HD in the chart. This is where folks interpret that the intent was to re-roll each time and take the highest number, so that you don't have to subtract those pesky +1 bunus values that appear and later vanish.

It does diminish the effect of a bad roll, but it also means that following a lucky roll a character might not advance in HP for a level or two. Since I was reminded of that method a couple of years back, I've adopted it in several campaigns and I think I actually like it better.

[finarvyn]

Huh. I've never heard of the reroll method, and I played old school when it was new.

Ya, I started with Holmes and then moved to 1st ed. AD&D, and I've never heard of it either. Is it in the PHB or DMG? Or is the OP referring to OD&D when he says "old school"?

As I noted in my post above, it's an issue for OD&D and a conflict in the Men & Magic character tables. A player who went through Holmes and into AD&D likely wouldn't have encountered this issue since the Greyhawk supplement cleaned things up.

[koralas]

Something I'm curious about, after recently reading some actual play threads of folks running either original set or retroclone 'old school' games (as in White Box old school), is if folks running C&C do the more modern version of hit points, where each level you roll a die and simply add it to your current total, or the older version where each level you reroll the total of all the dice and if the new total exceeds the old, it becomes your new hit points, and if it does not, they don't change?

Others have talked about the varying beliefs of what was meant for HP, and rather than go into a diatribe on who is right and who is wrong, lets look at the rules themselves, and I will give some commentary on oD&D on how we ran it, which really was in two distinct but related ways.

For the most part the issue lies with how your interpret the "Dice for Accumulative Hits" description from OD&D Men & Magic:

Code: Select all

Dice for Accumulative Hits (Hit Dice): This indicates the number of dice which
are rolled in order to determine how many hit points a character can take. Plusses
are merely the number of pips to add to the total of all dice rolled not to each
die. Thus a Super Hero gets 8 dice + 2; they are rolled and score 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 5,
6/totals 26 + 2 = 28, 28 being the number of points of damage the character
could sustain before death. Whether sustaining accumulative hits will otherwise
affect a character is left to the discretion of the referee.

The term "Accumulative" means to grow progressively. So thus the add additional die each level... However, the chart does not allow for you to do that easily since there are the additional "+" on certain levels on the charts. Compound this with the OD&D rules using a d6 for each character for HD. (The d6 was the basic die for just about everything, later supplements added varying HD for the character classes, weapons, monster HD, etc., but I digress...) The example points out rolling for a Super Hero, but it doesn't state whether this is a character being developed at such level on the spot, or a character progressing to that level and therein lies the debate. The groups I played with thought of it meaning to add the additional hit die, so we did without re-rolling the level before, and we would drop the bonus HP. This was explained by the DM in situations where you might not gain additional HP (or were at a lower HP) by using the last sentence of the paragraph, that the character had just been worn down over time by all of the accumulating hits taken. Thus he doesn't react as fast, as he had previously due to scar tissue that has to complete healing or some other malady or condition. Eventually this morphed into allowing anyone that had a +2 or +3 to retain those HP if the die came up a lower value, thereby ignoring the die roll.

Now with the Greyhawk supplement the issue of the pluses is removed...

Code: Select all

Alternate Hit Dice and Hit Point Accumulation: (Addition/Amendment)
This system is expressly aimed at raising fighters and lowering magic-users with
regard to hit points which can be sustained. This system functions as follows: For each
level attained the character gets one die for hit points until the top normal level is
reached; thereafter a certain number of hit points will be added for each level above normal
that is attained.

This is followed by a chart with the various HD types are associated with the classes in the BECMI versions of the game. Now the "Accumulation" makes more sense, that you just add one additional roll per level, but it is still not specifically defined that way or if you roll all the dice over. At this point, we simply used the cumulative methodology.

For the life of me I can't find my "Blue Book"/Holmes right now so lets skip ahead to Moldvay basic...

Code: Select all

ROLLING HIT POINTS:  Each time a character earns enough experience points to gain a new level, the character gets to roll for more hit points.  When starting out, each character rolls one hit die, using the type of die given for the character class.  Upon reaching second level, the character rolls the same type of die a second time and adds the result to the first roll.  The process is repeated for each new level.  The result of each new hit die roll is [i]always[/i] added to the total of the other hit die rolls.

(First level characters may easily be killed in battle.  As an option, the DM may allow a player character to roll again if the player has rolled a 1 or 2 for the number of hit points at first level only.)

Here it is specifically spelled out, you roll an additional die each time the character rises in level, this is added to the previous total, so the HP truly accumulate. Note that the expert set later sets a cap on the number of hit dice gained, and provides for bonus HP each level there after.

Mentzer has another description, but it is also stating a cumulative total of 1 die at first level, and adding an additional die of the appropriate type at each level.

AD&D 1st Edition states...

Code: Select all

Class of Character is self-explanatory. Multi-classes have been omitted,
but certain facts pertaining to them are given hereafter.

Hit Dice Type shows the type of die to be rolled by a character of the
appropriate class at each level of experience (q.v.) he or she has gained
so as to determine how many hit points (q.v.) the character has. Multi-classed
characters determine their hit points as follows:
- Roll the hit die (or dice) appropriate to each class the character is
  professing.
- Total the sum of all dice so rolled, and adjust for constitution (q.v.).
- Divide the total by the character's classes (two or three), dropping
  fractions under %, rounding fractions of % or greater upwards to the
  next whole number.
- The number derived (quotient) is the number of hit points the
  multi-classed character gains with the rise in that experience level.

Here it also shows that you are accumulating dice, not re-rolling the dice at each level. While the paragraph can leave a bit of a question, the bullet points drive home that the HP is a net gain to HP, not a re-roll of the HD.

The C&C PHB states...

Code: Select all

HIT DICE (HD): This is the die type rolled, at each level, for the
character’s hit points. The constitution modifier is added to, or subtracted
from, the result whenever hit points are rolled. The results are cumulative,
so a 5th level barbarian has 5d12 hit points.

So the paragraph is eerily similar to oD&D; however, it states they result are cumulative, and if you look at the character class progressions charts, it simply shows a die type, not a number of dice, at each level. So you can deduce it means, roll a new die of this type at each level.

[quote="DocEldritch"Been debating something like that for my games, simply out of a desire to avoid HP glut. Debating a bit between that, and between using that system for the dice rolls, but each level you get your CON bonus added in (so your total will always increase slightly, if your CON is high enough).[/quote]

I'm not quite sure what you mean here since in all versions of D&D you got a bonus to your HP for each HD for a high Constitution. In oD&D it was +1 if your Con was 15+. The Greyhawk supplement expanded that to +2 at 17 and +3 at 18. So whether or not you would roll all of the HD over or not, you still had a Con bonus.

I would be careful about limiting character HP, unless you do the same for the monsters otherwise you run the risk of changing the balance of the game. I come from an old-school mentality that not every encounter is "balanced", that is they can be overcome with force based on the ability of the characters at that time. However, in general most encounters that are combat oriented in a given "adventure" should be able to be overcome by smart players, some are simple, others tough, some very deadly, and the occasional, oh crap lets not fight, lets skirt them, dodge them, negotiate with them, bribe them, or just plain run away. This though comes from the balance struck in the game... A first level party will fight a group of orcs, but would run from even a single stone giant. A 6th level party should be able to take on a couple of stone giants buy may run from a single storm giant... Now this doesn't speak to wanting certain monsters to be tougher than expected (or weaker for that matter), but rather an overall balance. Weakening PC's to make a grittier game is fine, but watch the scale at which you do so.

Do what makes sense for you and your players, that is what is most important.

[DocEldritch]

Good points all, and I'm thinking that a misreading of the intent of the rule is where that idea got stuck in my head. Not that I have ever used it, but have seen instances of it being used in 0e games.

I've got too many other ideas I want to write up for a game to really think about shafting my PCs with lower hit points, so reading some of the replies was helpful. Most likely going to stick with my old 2e rule of "Each level you get to choose, either half the die value, or roll as normal. Choice made before rolling." Gave folks a choice of risking getting fewer HP or simply taking a nice average for that HD.

On another note, got myself a copy of the CKG for a birthday present to myself. Love it. Except I do wish I'd gotten the hardcover and not the digest! My eyes can not handle that small print! I've gotten tons of ideas from it though, and am really pleased I ordered it.