Comments on: Flawed House Rule: Double-Rolling Hit Dice

By: Rory

Rory — Mon, 29 Nov 2010 14:59:54 +0000

I am currently running a Greyhawk Campaign using the Pathfinder set of rules.

I like my player’s characters tough than the average Joe soap.

Maximum hit points for the first 3 levels, then from level 4 onwards we use the sysytem below.

d4 = 2 + 1d4/2
d6 = 3 + 1d6/2
d8 = 4 + 1d8/2
d10 = 5 + 1d10/2
d12 = 6 + 1d12/2

I also tend to keep the gloves on for the first 3 levels so that the players can find themselves and at least let the character develope a bit. BUT level 4 the gloves come off!!

By: Zach

Zach — Sun, 11 Apr 2010 11:12:40 +0000

I think the whole argument about how having higher hit points makes the character more relaxed in combat is kinda loaded in one direction. Some times a player just flat out rolls high for his hit points. Is that bad for gameplay then when random good luck happens? We had Elmo join us for the original Temple of Elemental Evil and for the first 4 new levels he gained, the DM rolled 8s for HP (We always roll HP in front of the group) and my paladin often rolled 7-10 the majority of the time. That was good for us…

Meanwhile my sister in law Amanda’s melee ranger was on the opposite spectrum. She had a +1 Con and rolled 1-3 the majority of the time. By the time we reached the pyramid with the earth elementals she was a 6th level (I think) ranger with 32 HP (on 7d8+7? ick!) She got hit by a critical and went from full health to -10 in one blow. She was careful and safe but her bad rolling completely screwed what was supposed to be a melee fighter.

PCs are supposed to be a cut above the rest so I don’t see why extra HP should be condemned… no one wants to think their big bad melee character is as durable as an adobe house in a rain storm. Besides… if you are that concerned with the die going from a 5.5 to a 7.15… just take average life for a monster and bump it up the same increment or maybe a bit under.

By: Dan

Dan — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 03:22:28 +0000

We tend to have high-powered characters anyway, taking on encounters with an ECL at least 1 or 2 levels higher than our party average level. As a result, we tend to overpower our characters – for example, rerolling 1s in ability score generation, or taking the average die roll on a hit die if you roll under half (or if you roll a 1). It doesn’t tend to unbalance things too much as long as the DM uses the same rules for his NPCs and monsters, or always throws average party level + 3 or so ECLs at us.

By: zox

zox — Sun, 30 Aug 2009 11:43:12 +0000

We play it like this: you can reroll if you want but you *have* to take the second roll even if it’s worse that the first one.

By: Quicksilver

Quicksilver — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 06:13:44 +0000

I have to agree with Matt. There’s no one answer to every situation. But i also have to point out that GM’s RARELY ever roll for the HP of their monsters, which means the monsters get average every fight, while the pc’s get their butts kicked or they over-survive every fight. If you make a rule for your pc’s, then make it apply to your monsters. If the pc’s are known to roll low, then the monsters should be known to do the same, except for special occasions. Keep it fair, most of all keep it fun.

By: Matt

Matt — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 02:05:13 +0000

I disagree. You seem to be implying that the game is perfectly balanced as written for every gaming style. That is impossible.
For some styles of gaming double rolling, average hit points, and other hit point tweaks are perfectly reasonable.
Of course it affects overall game balance and that must be taken into account. However, it does not outright break the game. It is just a matter of style of play.

By: John

John — Sun, 16 Nov 2008 00:36:41 +0000

silver bullet of a rule mod as everything is connected. What’s more important is to seek balance.

Clarification – each level after 3 the players choose Option 1 or 2; they get to make this decision each time.

By: John

John — Sat, 15 Nov 2008 23:54:49 +0000

It’s interesting to note that 4e assigns maximum hit points at every level. Our approach in 3.5 has been to max the hit points for the first three levels. After that, players have a choice:

Option 1 – Average Result
They can choose the average number of hit points (even level equals half the die so D6 is 3 for levels 4, 6, 8 …; odd level equals half the die plus 1 so D6 is 4 for levels 5, 7, 9 …

Option 2 – Straight Roll

But the most important consideration is that all of this takes place within the larger framework of the complete game system translated into the campaign. We often have cleric-lite parties. Thus the need for various magic, summoning spells for hit point sponges, or allies (in the crawl or during rest). Encounters also get adjusted based on the nature of the party. So there is no

By: Matt

Matt — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 01:44:40 +0000

Having played both sides of the spectrum, I’d prefer to have my characters roll for HP, and I’d prefer to give them every opportunity to roll well…

I’ve taken averages, but that’s not fair to the players. A barbarian who has a d12 loses 5-6 hp per level. At the higher end of the spectrum, that’s an extra 100 potential hp, and at the lower end, that’s an extra hit from a longsword…

Overpowered PCs can be compensated with by more and higher powered monsters. If the fear is that they’ll fail saving throws vs more powerful NPCs, but throw more bruisers at them.

In the end, I’ve found it better for the party tanks to have the HP to suck up a lot of damage.

By: Tom Barta

Tom Barta — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 04:02:40 +0000

I’m DMing a campaign currently at level 3. So far, I’ve offered to let the players choose any number of dice to roll, and then they must average the results (rounding up to the nearest integer, so it’s slightly in their favor). They get to choose the level of risk they’re taking. At levels 1 and 2, they picked 2-4 dice to protect themselves from bad rolls, but by level 5 or so they’ll be back to standard HP rolls, to re-capture the fun of the risk.