Your Take on PC Hit Points

[Persimmon]

So for a long time I (and pretty much everyone I played with) just calculated hit points RAW. Sure, it was lethal, especially at the low levels, but we scoffed at those who claimed they rolled max (or close to it) every time and had huge HP totals. But when I discovered Hackmaster 4e, which gives all PCs (and monsters) a 20 HP "Kicker" at 1st level level and uses the concept of exploding dice, I changed and adopted that for awhile. For B/X we just had a 10 HP kicker and no crits. Then I changed and started using different additional rolls for HP at first level depending on whether the class is martial, semi-martial, or non-martial. I liked the randomness but you could still end up with just 2 HP. But we always followed the old school method of having HP rolls stop around 10th level and just adding the flat number in the rulebook.

But recently I switched to each character getting a HP bonus at character creation equal to their total constitution score, added to the roll & Con modifier, if applicable. And for our upcoming Undermountain campaign I think I'm going to go a step further and adopt the (yikes) 5e practice of having characters just keep rolling as normal every level with the Con bonus, in addition to the aforementioned kicker.

I like the bonus at 1st level because it cuts down a bit on random deaths from minor injuries but over time if the rolls are legit, the PCs aren't necessarily much more powerful. Plus, we do have a pretty brutal house-ruled crit system. And any single attack causing over 50 points of damage requires a Con check or you die from trauma. So does every resurrection and you lose 1 point of Con permanently every time you die. Haven't decided if I'll bring back exploding dice yet, though we did use those for healing too.

Just out of curiosity, any particular tweaks you have for rolling character hit points?

[serleran]

I have used this method on and off for several games:

a) Characters begin play with their Constitution score + maximum for class, but do not gain Constitution modifier
b) at level 2, characters gain their Constitution modifier, only, unless it is negative at which point they gain 1 HP
c) at level 3, they roll and gain HP normally

This is very similar to what you have proposed/done.

Another option I have used is modified from Gamma World:

a) characters gain a number of HD equal to their Constitution score at level
b) each HD is based on their class
c) Constitution modifier is applied only to the sum, not to each die
d) characters do not gain additional HP from level advancement but there may be effects that do bestow them

And one more slight variant:

a) characters gain their maximum HD roll for a number of levels equal to their Constitution adjustment, minimum of 1

Oh, and because it just occurred to me, based on a possible misreading of OD&D, with my own change:

a) each level, when a new HD is gained, all level-based HD are rolled and the new total (with attendant Constitution adjustment) is compared to the previous
1) if the new total exceeds the old, it is retained
2) if the new total is lower than the old, the old is used but the character gains their level in HP to compensate

[Go0gleplex]

Max HP + CON bonus at 1st then BtB each level after. For Crits I use max weapon damage + 2x character level. Death and res, yup, -1 CON when back. Nothing really special actually.

[JShan101]

d6+CON bonus "0-level" hp, then proceed as normal.
Folks had to have hit points to live before they became daring adventurers, right?

Crtis, yes, to give the players something to live for...and sometimes die from. I tried using max damage + a roll, but my easily confused group somehow couldn't follow that. So now it's just automatic max.

[Persimmon]

I've shared our crit system before, but since it's come up here, I'll post it again.

Nat 20 is a crit; fighters & barbarians have more generous chances, again derived from DCC.
So for them, it's Levels 1-4: 19-20; Levels 5-9: 18-20; Levels 10-15: 17-20; Levels 16+: 16-20

Roll another d20:
1-15: x2 damage
16-17: x3 damage
18-19: x4 damage
20: x5 damage

Roll your hit location die and describe your crit! . Note that it's not max damage initially, but all modifiers are added before multiplying so it could be pretty low or really high.

For damage causing spells, if the target rolls a 1, they take a crit with same rules as above.

XP awarded for surviving crits.

Simple, lethal, and my players love it.

[serleran]

Forgot to mention: I do not use critical hits. A few weapons have a "threat range" like weapons of sharpness, vorpal, feather-edged, crushing, or disruption (vs. undead) but players face more attacks than they deliver and therefore are subject to receiving critical injuries more often. Also, I do not like a flat X%, regardless of ability, of 'the ultimate hit' so, if I do use them, level matters but I haven't figured a way I like, yet, mostly because I don't want to use them.

Other groups I have played in used natural 20 is automatic hit/critical and deals maximum weapon damage +1d4. They stopped doing that after my druid's trained-for-war bear rolled three 20s on claw, claw, bite. The hug damage was ruled to be naturally critically because it was delivered, automatically, from two other critical hits. The big bad of the entire campaign was laid low in one round of attacks.

[Persimmon]

Forgot to mention: I do not use critical hits. A few weapons have a "threat range" like weapons of sharpness, vorpal, feather-edged, crushing, or disruption (vs. undead) but players face more attacks than they deliver and therefore are subject to receiving critical injuries more often. Also, I do not like a flat X%, regardless of ability, of 'the ultimate hit' so, if I do use them, level matters but I haven't figured a way I like, yet, mostly because I don't want to use them.

Other groups I have played in used natural 20 is automatic hit/critical and deals maximum weapon damage +1d4. They stopped doing that after my druid's trained-for-war bear rolled three 20s on claw, claw, bite. The hug damage was ruled to be naturally critically because it was delivered, automatically, from two other critical hits. The big bad of the entire campaign was laid low in one round of attacks.

Fair enough, but that's exactly why we love criticals. It took one arrow to kill Smaug and two hits to kill the Witch King. So if the big bad dies, so be it. As for the players facing more attacks, that's why I give them extra XP for surviving crits and why I like giving martial classes more attacks and abilities like cleave. Once I started using crits in D&D no one has ever complained. When we first started playing C&C someone had this pretty cool Half-orc barbarian character but he got annihilated in their second adventure by an evil monk who did 45 points of damage in one attack sequence due to crits. The PC had 25 or so HP, but it was game over. The player shrugged and moved on. Since we generally run multiple PCs it didn't knock the player out of the game.

But the main thing is finding what your group likes and just keep doing that.

[JediOre]

For me, at first level the PC needs at least half the hit points for their hit dice (so five hit points for a fighter, two for a wizard, and so forth). So any roll below the half-way point goes to the half-way point and then add any constitution bonus. After that, take what the die rolls and add the constitution bonus, if any.

We use the same "natural-20 does double damage" approach I've been using since around 1981. Roll damage twice adding all bonuses each time, combine them and that is the damage done.

[maximus]

I like hit points, the more the better. Max HP at first level. After that roll btb.

On a more serious note, I use crits as well. A natural 20 causes max damage + an additional d6 roll. A natural 1 is a fumble, trip, bow string breaking, lose your next attack, etc.

[Grandpa]

I just do max die at 1st level.

Once an adventure I declare the crit hit table in play: % die rolled. Below the results (From Hargrave)

Brain penetrated, immediate death.
Voice box ruined, total voice loss.
Hand severed, die in d8 minutes.
Impalement, weapon is stuck there.
1 – 5 ribs broken.
Artery cut, die in d10 minutes.
As above, but die in d12 minutes.
Achilles’ tendon cut, fall immediately.
Fingers 1 – 5 severed. (Roll side)
Toes As above.
Eye ruined or torn out.
Gashed, blood in eyes, can’t see.
Genitals/breasts torn off, shock.
Ear taken off, hearing loss.
Buttock torn off, fall, shock
Stunned for d10 melee turns. No fighting.
Stunned for d6 minutes. No fighting.
Minor concussion, d10 minutes as above.
Moderate concussion, unconscious.
Major skull fracture, unconscious.
Throat cut, die in d3 melee turns.
Arm Torn off (roll % loss,) die in d3 melee turns.
Leg As above, fall, die in d3 melee turns.
Heart pierced, die immediately.
Spine ruined, variable results.
Face As for eyes above, but both eyes destroyed.
Nose ruined, -6 Charisma, stunned.
Head, Nothing apparent. Later problems.
20% chance of tangling feet, die in d10 painful minutes.
Skull caved in, major brain damage.
Lung punctured, internal damage.
Head torn off, immediate death.
Body split in twain, immediate death.
Entire head pulped. Irrevocable death results.

[Go0gleplex]

Back in the 80's we had crit and fumble tables for Blunt, Slashing, and Piercing weapon types as well as unarmed...and also used the 'Swanson Tables' which had special quirks a character could have such as; Flesh tastes horrible. Most monsters only bite once; or Keen Sighted, +1 to Search/Spot checks; and so forth. Not all were good like the body odor thing or extra hairy. lol The Fumble tables had stuff like 'fall on friendly weapon left for double damage' and 'smell enemy's bad breath, stumble backward dazed, -2 to AC'. Good times.

[serleran]

I think it was 2nd edition AD&D and the Combat & Tactics book that had the first system for critical hit injury that I actually thought was mostly decent, it later becoming the foundation used in d20 with the threat range (though not the verification roll as I recall). Anyway, I could see a similar idea of that, but coupled with the weapon mastery idea from Classic's Rules Cyclopedia/Mentzer's Master (I love that book), to make not only level matter, but the enemy type struck, and by what. But, I tend to like the old Avalon Hill-style tabulations and chart lookups... as long as it is not Critmaster, I mean, Rolemaster.

[JShan101]

Trying to remember what system it was--Chivalry & Sorcery, maybe?--that had a crit chart that was not only vicious, but downright hysterical to read.

[Grandpa]

Trying to remember what system it was--Chivalry & Sorcery, maybe?--that had a crit chart that was not only vicious, but downright hysterical to read.

Arduin was one such game. There were others but don't come to mind at the moment.

[Fizz]

I think it was 2nd edition AD&D and the Combat & Tactics book that had the first system for critical hit injury that I actually thought was mostly decent, it later becoming the foundation used in d20 with the threat range (though not the verification roll as I recall).

Even before C&T in 2nd Ed, i had used my own similar critical hit rules. But the threat range was based on class, not weapon. 20 for wizards, 19-20 for priests and rogues, and 18-20 for warriors. Fighters with specialization had 17-20. If the verification check was made, then you had made double damage, but if the verification check was also in the threat range, you had double damage and could verify for triple damage, and so on. It made for some very exciting moments. I think the highest we ever had was quintuple damage.

-Fizz

[Fizz]

I have played with different variations on hit points, but the most common has been raw. The variation i've liked most is improving hit points at 1/2 or 1/3 the standard rate (standard hit points at 1st level), but this is in conjunction with armor-as-damage-reduction rules. I like that variant because it leads to different styles of combat between different characters.

-Fizz

[serleran]

Has anyone ever used an instant kill rule, a la d20 and the triple 20s?

I did once. Didn't like it, mostly because it happened one time, and special rules that are that edge case are just not interesting to me. As a full-time game tweaker.

[bulletmeat]

If I can ever get a game going again, I will try going back to the MERP crit tables again.
IIRC, it was 20 to crit, % for effect adjusted by the prevailing attribute score.

[Go0gleplex]

I'll have to dig out my d30 tables and look at those after a long long while. lol

[Captain_K]

Max hp (+CON adjust) at first level, roll after that and nothing under half at all levels.

std dice for damage and hit, but 1 is fumble and 20 is crit. a) 2x dice roll, b) 2 dice roll, or c) "the red book" which has the old arms law crit and fumble tables I let the PC decide when they roll a 20 or have them rolled against them.

exploding requires d20 to roll multiple 20s?

[paladinn]

In 4e, a character got a number of HP based on class Plus the entire Con score at L1, then a set number of HP plus Con bonus at each level.

I've wondered about adapting that for C&C.. likely the only thing from 4e. Is that excessive?

[JediOre]

I prefer PCs that are not all buff with hit points. It gives pause to most players to solve everything with brute force. They get cagey if their 5th level fighter has between 25 and 30 hit points instead of 40+. That randomizing of hit points, as long as you don't let it cripple a PC, gives play to the gang coming up with alternative ways to overcome things as well as pausing to assess if they should pull back sooner rather than later. That's my thoughts on it.

[Persimmon]

In 4e, a character got a number of HP based on class Plus the entire Con score at L1, then a set number of HP plus Con bonus at each level.

I've wondered about adapting that for C&C.. likely the only thing from 4e. Is that excessive?

What was the set number? That method is similar to what I do at 1st level, but I always have random rolls in there because I like that variability. I hate how later editions of D&D often just average the monster HP for every encounter.

As for excessive, that would depend on your game. Do you have lots of combat? Do you use criticals and/or exploding dice mechanics? Those can ratchet up the lethality quite a bit.

[paladinn]

In 4e, clerics started with 12+Con score. Each level got 7+Con bonus. Fighters got 15+Con score at L1 and 9+Con bonus.

I'm thinking just starting with one's Con score at L1. Even a 10 Con (mediocre) to start is as good as a great d10 roll. An 18 Con score would give more hp than a max d10 plus Con bonus. But I'm open to other options.

[maximus]

I prefer PCs that are not all buff with hit points. It gives pause to most players to solve everything with brute force. They get cagey if their 5th level fighter has between 25 and 30 hit points instead of 40+. That randomizing of hit points, as long as you don't let it cripple a PC, gives play to the gang coming up with alternative ways to overcome things as well as pausing to assess if they should pull back sooner rather than later. That's my thoughts on it.

My thoughts as well

[paladinn]

So while we're still pondering.. How about at L1, every character gets the max hp from one HD (i.e. 10 for fighters, 8 for clerics) plus his/her entire Con score. That allows a little variation at L1. For each level after, roll one HD, 1/2 minimum, plus one's Con bonus. And as btb, max HP at L10.

Trying to help out slightly with survivability at lowest levels.

Does any/everyone allow adding Con bonus for levels after L10?

[Fizz]

So while we're still pondering.. How about at L1, every character gets the max hp from one HD (i.e. 10 for fighters, 8 for clerics) plus his/her entire Con score. That allows a little variation at L1. For each level after, roll one HD, 1/2 minimum, plus one's Con bonus. And as btb, max HP at L10.

Trying to help out slightly with survivability at lowest levels.

Does any/everyone allow adding Con bonus for levels after L10?

No, that's way too much for "helping out slightly at lowest levels".

Per core rules, a 1st level fighter has an average of 5.5 hit points per level. That's 55 at 10th level.

Your method would give a Con 10 fighter 10+10=20 hit points at 1st level, nearly quadruple the core rules. And then a minimum of one-half of that (1d10 with all results of <5 treated as a 5) is an average of 6.5 more per level. So by 10th level, an average of 78.5. That's 43% more than core rules.

If you consider a high Con score, then by the book an 18 Con fighter has 8.5 hp per level (on average), that's 85 at 10th level. And your method results in 18+10=28 hit points at 1st. That's 3.5x core. At 10th they'd have 113 hit points, 33% more than core rules.

I can see an argument for a boost at 1st level only (rolling a 1 sucks, i get it), but beyond that it becomes a power-gaming mechanism that is ultimately self-defeating. If the characters have excessive hit points, then for an equivalent challenge the monsters need more hit points or more deadly weapons, so it evens out. So what's the point? Why not just keep standard hit points and scale the challenges?

If you want to grant some help at low levels, then just keep it simple. The simplest is to grant max hit points at 1st level, and nothing more. My preferred method would be to have the player roll hit points twice, choosing the better result.


-Fizz

[Grandpa]

If you want to grant some help at low levels, then just keep it simple. The simplest is to grant max hit points at 1st level, and nothing more.


-Fizz

That's what I've done almost forever. It kinda gets them off of the runway and into the air so to speak without warping the power curve overall.

[Persimmon]

So while I do add the total Con score at 1st level, that's to whatever the regular roll (plus/minus Con adjustment) is. Then it's straight rolls after that. So what I've found is that by the time characters reach 10th level or so, their HP may or may not be on the high side of what they could have with straight rolls throughout. So it's not excessive. I have always followed RAW for the higher levels (no Con bonus) but we're contemplating just having characters roll as normal right through the end, which is what they do in 5e, right? Nobody in the current campaign is that high yet.

We do this primarily because of our fairly lethal crit system, which even things out quite a bit. In a recent game a 2 HD ungern did over 40 points of damage to a 6th level PC due to good critical rolls. And, as many have noted, monsters often have multiple attacks, increasing their chances to get that crit. Higher level monsters often do more damage, so theoretically a single hit from a giant might do over 100 points of damage with a crit, killing even a high level PC, which makes sense when you think about it. And since I started this method the players have universally liked it, so we keep the criticals because it adds some drama and tension. It has not resulted in OP characters that can't be slain for sure. In fact, the deaths have been more meaningful and memorable. And I prefer combat-heavy games so this also meshes with that.

So the question to ask is "What do you want out of whatever changes you're making?" Is it just to increase survivability at low levels? Then do something simple at first level only like MAX hp or adding the total Con score. If you're thinking more long-term because of a specific style of play, that's something else. 5e adjusted monster hit dice (giants get d20, for example) as a way to balance greater PC hit points (I presume), due to their obsession with balance.

[Fizz]

I think a lot of the desire for more hit points stems from the desire to "win" the game; they must defeat every monster in heroic fashion. But it is meant to be a role-playing game. How do you portray such a character?

Consider, suppose you created a fighter, with good strength and con scores. You go to roll hit points... 1. So with their good Con they have 4 total hit points. Most people would say "ugh". But instead of being disappointed, use it to define your character. In this case, maybe the fighter is strong and skilled, but has an underlying health condition, such as brittle bones or low lung capacity. Think of the portrayal of Ivar the Boneless from the series Vikings.

Low scores / hit points, etc are not detriments, they are roleplaying opportunities.


-Fizz