Troll Lord Games

The title says it tall. I want high-level characters to have less hp in order to reduce the "I'm a high-level superhero who can jump off cliffs" vibe. However, the loss of hp is slightly compensated by the fact that I'm using 3rd edition ability modifier numbers (16-17 = +3, 18-19 = +4, etc). The shift was done for ease of play, both myself and my players are used to 3rd edition in this regards, and I wanted a character's natural ability to count more in checks and rolls. A 10th level fighter with a 18 strength who tries to force open a door gains a +10 bonus from level and only a +3 bonus from his actual Strength score? Doesn't seem reasonable to me. Even though primary attributes are important, I just wanted to make the natural score a bit more important. Anyhow, what do you think about these two house-rules:

* Remove Constitution modifier to hp at levels 10+

* Use 3rd edition ability modifier numbers

serleran wrote:
Whenever a class gets a set amount, such as +3 or +5, they are no longer rolling. Therefore, the Con bonus is no longer added. That's an official rule, and not a houserule; it would be a change to allow Con bonus to continue.

I initially believed that as well (probably early editions of D&D coloring my opinion). BUt there is an apparent contradiction in the C&C PHB.

Pg. 9 under HD decription states that the CON modifier applies whenever rolling for HP's. So initially, I assumed it was the same as early editions of D&D since at 10th level you are no longer rolling for HP.

However, on page 120 of the PHB under the HP heading, it specifically states that starting at level 10, each class has a set amount of HP's raised AND that the CON modifier is applied. This is reaffirmed by the fact that it specifically states that characters gain at least 1 HP each time a level is advanced (this would not be a necessary statement if CON modifiers weren't considered).

Even so, my players haven't reached 10th level yet so I don't think much about it so far. But, in all probability, I probably won't have them use their con mod for HP starting at 10th.

Sounds like that's a little bit of errata. Since Castles & Crusades emulates older versions of a particular game, it would be consistent to go with the way that game does its bonuses.

In short, at least the way I see it, CON bonuses stop once you no longer roll for hit points.
_________________
NOTE TO ALL: If you don't like something I've said, PM me and tell me to my face, then give me a chance to set things right before you call a moderator.
My small homage to E.G.G.

I would think that "officially" the rules as stated on pg. 120 would be the true method. The reasoning is because that is an entire section on the subject of hit points.

The contradictory part on page 9 which states that the CON bonus applies when HP are rolled is found only in a section explaining terminology.

So, the section actually devoted to HP would logically supercede page 9.

That being said, I'm actually more in favor of not adding the bonus beginning at 10th level.

I could go either way... a couple of extra hp after 10th level wouldn't concern me too much but I would think that since the game is very much in the style of AD&D... it would stop.

If we do look at AD&D for this as well, I notice that, using the Fighter as an example, they only got +3 and this was beyond 9th level. C&C seems to be a bit more generous at +4 and applying this beyond 10th.

On the other hand, I'm sure that if a pure wizard who had a CON bonus would *really* appreciate all the help he can get in the hitpoint department.

Fortunately this is not something I have to worry about for a while but would I would like to see an official errata regaring this issue.

Moriarty the Red.
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"

Partner to Brave Halfling Publishing
http://www.arcanacreations.com

Actually,now that I think about it, it doesn't require an errata at all. There is no contradiction.

The page 9 terminology is only defining what a hit die is. Of course it will say whenever you roll your hit die you add your CON bonus.

The page 120 Hit Point section officially and without a doubt states that you continue to add bonus past level 9.

I think our history with AD&D simply has us reading more into the hit die definition than is there. Had the terminology being explained on page 9 been hit points and not hit die then perhaps it would be ambiguous. As it is explaining what a hit die is, then no, it's not a contradiction.

Man we can overthink things.

LOL -- It's the after effects of 3.5 I tell ya!

Thanks for clearing that up DangerDwarf.

Moriarty the Red
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"

Partner to Brave Halfling Publishing
http://www.arcanacreations.com

DangerDwarf wrote:
I would think that "officially" the rules as stated on pg. 120 would be the true method. The reasoning is because that is an entire section on the subject of hit points.

The contradictory part on page 9 which states that the CON bonus applies when HP are rolled is found only in a section explaining terminology.

So, the section actually devoted to HP would logically supersede page 9.

That being said, I'm actually more in favor of not adding the bonus beginning at 10th level.

I understand what you are saying, but I am convinced it is something that everyone missed in the proofreading stage, as the 1st Printing has the same inconsistency in both sections. The box set doesn't have the second paragraph (space limitations) and the playtest document doesn't mention constitution bonuses at all. Given that the sentences are identical, except for the last word (roll was removed in the second iteration of the sentence), it's my belief that this sentence was a mistake. Of course, I'd love to hear from Steve, Davis, or Mac in regards to the intent, but they're at Gen Con.

Of course, if you happen to LIKE playing with the added hit points, go for it. I don't find the added hit points to be that big of a deal, since the average scores are likely to be no more than about 15, at least according to the standard die roll systems that have been seen here (3d6, 4d6 drop low, 2d6+6, 1d6+12, etc.) 15 only gives a +1.
_________________
NOTE TO ALL: If you don't like something I've said, PM me and tell me to my face, then give me a chance to set things right before you call a moderator.
My small homage to E.G.G.

moriarty777 wrote:
LOL -- It's the after effects of 3.5 I tell ya!

Actually, I'm blaming my overthinking on RIFTS. One of my groups has been playing it alot lately and I'm getting accustomed to having to look in 3-4 different sections to simply get all the information regarding a single rule.