D&D 5E Player Hit Points

[James Gasik]

Rolling compared to what?


And you could just as likely roll a 6 on the d6 and a 12 on the d12 as rolling 1 on either die. The size of the HD doesn't matter.

Ultimately, if you're talking about rolling compared to RAW average (rounded-up), rolling costs you 1/2 a hp every level on average, so you should take the average rounded-up instead of rolling.

Frankly, I always thought that was a mistake by WotC. They should have made it average rounded-down. That way if you played it safe and didn't roll, the penalty was you'd end up with slightly fewer hit points on average compared to rolling.

It is a bit generous. Maybe what should happen is you track the half hit points so every even level you get +1 hit point over the odd ones.

 

[ezo]

It is a bit generous. Maybe what should happen is you track the half hit points so every even level you get +1 hit point over the odd ones.

I wouldn't say it is that it is generous, simply that you are (on average in the long run) rewarded for playing it safe. Sort of goes against the grain for me.

Another method I always liked and I know others have mentioned it is rolling HP with advantage.

You get better HP obviously, but there is still that off chance for a bad roll. Compared to the flat average RAW option, it is more HP, but there is still the risk. Regardless of HD size, you have a 75% chance of rolling the rounded-up average or better if you roll with advantage, but that 25% lingers to scare some people.

FWIW, d6 sees a bump of 0.47 hp, d8 is 0.81 hp, d10 is 1.15 hp, and d12 is 1.49 hp at each level.

 

[Micah Sweet]

One thing about rolling for ability scores: there's a very big difference between rolling in order and roll-and-arrange. The latter is the default for 5e and really does just randomize starting character power. I've not seen that be a problem, but it certainly can be and the only up side to the method is pcs are generally a bit stronger out the gate (which can be achieved with higher point buy or better arrays)

It's worth noting that in my experience with this, direct comparison of character power is unusual (because pc end up with different roles) and system mastery is a much bigger factor than how well you rolled.

Roll-in-order could push players to play something unexpected, or at least would if more different arrays were viable. As i stands everyone who's best ability is intelligence is going to play a wizard or an artificer, and the rest of their choices don't really care about ability scores.

My preference most of the time is roll in order. There are ideas that would never have occurred to me otherwise.

 

[jmartkdr2]

My preference most of the time is roll in order. There are ideas that would never have occurred to me otherwise.

I get there eventually - or at least to a point where some randomness to prompt me in unexpected directions is appreciated, but that's after playing for a while.

It's also worth noting that the specific edition you're using has a big effect on how well this works - for example, I would expect Level Up to play out very differently than 2014 5e.

 

[Ondath]

Who would complain about a casino where the odds were even on winning or losing, and then if you lost money at the end of the night they'd give you almost all of it back?

Well, modern players don't see hit points rolls as a casino. They see it as a fundamental aspect of surviving the game's expected difficulty (and I can't blame them given that the game is designed around players having average hit points and dealing average damage and monster having relative power to that since 3E). So when you try to make it a casino for them, they hate it when they level up and only get +1 HP when their friend got +10. Every time they go unconscious easily, they remember that this was due to something they had no control over and hate it even more. And in an OSR game, that can be fine, people aren't attached to their characters that much, you admit that luck will always play a role. But when you're supposed to be competent heroes and your characters falls over due to wind blowing? That sucks. So that's why rolling for HP is not a casino in my games.

 

[Distracted DM]

Well, modern players don't see hit points rolls as a casino. They see it as a fundamental aspect of surviving the game's expected difficulty (and I can't blame them given that the game is designed around players having average hit points and dealing average damage and monster having relative power to that since 3E). So when you try to make it a casino for them, they hate it when they level up and only get +1 HP when their friend got +10. Every time they go unconscious easily, they remember that this was due to something they had no control over and hate it even more. And in an OSR game, that can be fine, people aren't attached to their characters that much, you admit that luck will always play a role. But when you're supposed to be competent heroes and your characters falls over due to wind blowing? That sucks. So that's why rolling for HP is not a casino in my games.

I ... I think that my players are modern players? They certainly play now. Some of them are relatively new
Some of them take the average because they want to have consistent, predictable hitpoints.
Others roll hit points because they want the chance to roll high- just like stat rolls.
Players like to roll because they think they might roll high. They don't really like it when they roll low.

So... might as well just take the average- or if players really want to roll, adopt something like WWN's system that'll help the gamblers among them to not wallow in the low end of the pool.

Or.. you do you. The casino analogy was just that: to show the situation in a different context. No need to make judgements about what makes a "modern player."

 

[ezo]

No need to make judgements about what makes a "modern player."

Oh... oh, YES THERE IS!!!! (j/k)

 

[Stoutstien]

HP used to be viewed more akin to a savings throw than the default form of mitigation so it's understandable that players don't like playing with dice nowadays.

 

[LordEntrails]

Average, because that's what FG defaults to. But as DM if a player wants to roll, that is fine with me.
But given the option as a player, I take average because it's rounded up and actually more than average so yea me!

 

[Ondath]

I ... I think that my players are modern players? They certainly play now. Some of them are relatively new
Some of them take the average because they want to have consistent, predictable hitpoints.
Others roll hit points because they want the chance to roll high- just like stat rolls.
Players like to roll because they think they might roll high. They don't really like it when they roll low.

So... might as well just take the average- or if players really want to roll, adopt something like WWN's system that'll help the gamblers among them to not wallow in the low end of the pool.

Or.. you do you. The casino analogy was just that: to show the situation in a different context. No need to make judgements about what makes a "modern player."

I certainly don't mean to argue that the way my players play is the only true, modern way. However, I have experienced this with different groups rather consistently. Someone rolls a 1 or a 2 with their Hit Die and they immediately regret rolling for Hit Points. Initially what I did was "Either take the PHB average or roll, but once you make your choice you can't change it for that level". What happened was that a player would roll low for one level and never stray from the PHB average ever again. And that's boring, I don't want want that. Which is what led me to my current rendition of the HP roll rules. They mean everyone rolls for HP, but nobody complains.

And I wasn't trying to make a judgement! While there are bound to be players who started recently and like the "casino" style, that's not the current mainstream style of playing D&D. The current mainstream style is the character-oriented long-form storytelling that wants to emulate Critical Role. Getting random hit points does not work with that style (I know CR themselves roll for HP, but I think it works even to their own detriment there). I also run a concurrent Old School Essentials table, and people who like that style (who can be old and new, but what I mean by old-school and modern is that the gritty deadly playstyle was more prominent back in the day and is a niche now), and there I think getting random HP would be much more appreciated. It's not a value judgement on my part, I actually really like both playstyles. But I try to cater to my players depending on which style they prefer.