House Rule: Re-Rolling 1's on HD

[Mandos]

My group has had a longstanding house rule of re-rolling 1's on hit dice. It just seemed crushing to a player to get all pumped to level, and then roll a 1. It meant slightly higher average HD, but I did the same thing back to NPCs/monsters, so that they had a slightly higher HP total. We've done this for almost 20 years, and seems to work ok.

Recently one of the players in my campaign made a barbarian character, and was very frustrated when, two times in a row, he got a 2: first a re-roll of a one, and then a straight up roll of a 2. He was very frustrated, and argued that we should change the rule so that high hit-point classes (i.e. Barbarians) should get 1/2 their HD or re-roll.

I objected to this because the marginal benefit increases with the range of variability. A mage has a 25% chance of getting a reroll, whereas the barbarian PC has a 50% chance of getting a re-roll. I really objected to a house rule that was class unbalancing in that it had a very disproportionate effect on one class.

He had a pretty good come-back: our house-rule disproportionately helped lower HD classes. A mage rerolling will gain on average by 75% of their potential variability, but a barbarian only gains a 58% average benefit.


My inclination is to keep the house-rule of re-rolling 1's, but to make the range comparable. The mage re-rolls 1's, the barbarian 1-3, etc. I am worried about unintended consequences however--this might skew the relationship between the altered stat (HP) and unaltered stats like saves, BAB, etc.

Any thoughts on this?

[Kol Korran]

i'm fairly crap at math, so i can't quite comment on your rules, but inour group we played by rerolling any roll of half the HD or less.

yes, it meant in each level you got the high half part of the die for HP, but it worked well for us. it made the characters a bit more survivable, while key opponents got treated the same (about 75-80% of full HP).

it makes damage output have a bit less impact, and battles slightly longer when resorting to damage only.

BUUUT... the players aren't bummed by a rotten roll (and we have two players who roll abysimally) which is the important thing.

meh, it worked for us at least, but we tend to play high heroic fantasy kind of games, so a bit of extra hp helps... :smallconfused:

[Aegis013]

My group (and most groups I join) end up taking one of the variants/homebrews I've used in the past.

First: Full HP from HD at the first 3 levels (this is to get out of the "anybody takes a crit is probably going to instantly die" range) half of maximum HP every level thereafter. This removes the uncertainty and frustration of bad rolls and makes sure that the Wizard isn't ever going to have more HP than the Fighter from HD alone.

Second: Full HP first level, 2nd level and beyond, roll until you get a number that is higher than half (3 or 4 on a d4, 7-12 on a d12) and take that number. This leaves the random element, and ensures that the Wizard isn't ever going to have HP than the Fighter from HD alone.

Rerolling 1's seems like a good idea, but I've always taken it farther in my groups.

[missmvicious]

We use the AHP variant in our Campaigns.

It's not a house-rule... it's a variant, so it cuts down on the bickering.

PCs are given a choice: they may roll up their HP or they may take the average HP. They chose this at character creation and stick with their choice until their character dies. I tend to get good rolls, so I stick with the dice. My hubby tends to roll 1s and 2s a lot, so he uses AHP when he builds and levels. Everyone is happy.

[JohnDaBarr]

Re-rolling 1's is fine by me but anything higher... well no!

it will mess up a lot of thing's and it could end ugly.

Simply tell the barbarian if he has a problem he can always play a wizard and swing that greataxe with his re-roll HD chances.

[Psyren]

i'm fairly crap at math, so i can't quite comment on your rules, but inour group we played by rerolling any roll of half the HD or less.

This is what we do, and it works quite well. Nobody wants to be the Barbarian gaining the same health as the Wizard after all.



it will mess up a lot of thing's and it could end ugly.


You're overreacting quite a bit here.

[Ravens_cry]

In the group I am part of, you can reroll any hit dice roll, once.
However, you must take that result, whether it is better or worse.
Sometimes it has paid off, sometimes it has not.
Also, all HP rolls must be witnessed.
So if you make a character at home, you got to roll hit points at the table.

[Zaq]

Wait, people still roll for HP?

[Seerow]

Rerolling less than half is the most fair way to do it. Your player is 100% right that reroll on 1st is more in favor of the Wizard than a Barbarian, which is bad given it's the Barbarians and other high HD classes that could use the help most.

[Ravens_cry]

Wait, people still roll for HP?
Yes, as should be apparent from the responses in this thread.:smallconfused:

[JohnDaBarr]

You're overreacting quite a bit here.

heh, maybe I am a bit.

There is a reason why there is a dice on the table and the more you interfere with that.... well let's just say fun comes first but our characters need to have flaws in order to insure a better game.

[Waker]

The rule my players all follow is max HP at first level. Every level afterwards they have two choices. Either they can take half the HD+1 or they can roll the die and take whatever they get (no rerolls). If you feel like playing it safe as the Barbarian with your D12 HD you can get the automatic 7 or take a chance with rolling.

[Fax Celestis]

Most groups I play in use the "roll, and if it's less than the average on the HD, use the average" houserule. It makes HP slightly higher, but honestly not enough to be a big issue.

[molten_dragon]

I offer my players a choice. Either roll your hit points in front of me and reroll 1's, or take half your hit dice +1 (so 3 on a D4, 4 on a D6, etc). The average for these two methods is the same, it's just a matter of whether you like to gamble or not. Most choose not to.

[Jopustopin]

We normally go with the one reroll but you must keep the second roll.

[navar100]

My group uses roll two dice and take the higher one. Reroll if get double ones. It's still possible to get double twos, obviously, but it's worked out so far.

Another option:
d4 -> 2 + 1d2
d6 -> 3 + 1d3
d8 -> 4 + 1d4
d10 -> 6 + 1d4
d12 -> 6 + 1d6

[Scarlet-Devil]

Someone had posted an idea I found interesting a while back... but I can't quite remember what it was. I think it was something like:

d4=d4
d6=d4+2
d8=d4+4
d10=d4+6
d12=d4+8

So every class rolled a d4 with an automatic bonus based on what die you would normally be rolling. I'm not sure if those numbers are right; getting a free +8 is pretty outrageous, unless you're really going for a high-powered game (but don't want to just maximize the rolls). You get the idea though- this kind of system takes away from the randomness a little and ensures that classes that are supposed to be tougher are tougher.

Edit: Ninja'd, sort've.

[Godskook]

I use an odd houserule. I make players roll their HD at all levels, but charge xp to maximize it. Long standing characters tend to get really bulky, especially warblades and barbarians, while new characters dont have the xp yet to afford to max all their HD.

[Zaq]

Someone had posted an idea I found interesting a while back... but I can't quite remember what it was. I think it was something like:

d4=d4
d6=d4+2
d8=d4+4
d10=d4+6
d12=d4+8

So every class rolled a d4 with an automatic bonus based on what die you would normally be rolling. I'm not sure if those numbers are right; getting a free +8 is pretty outrageous, unless you're really going for a high-powered game (but don't want to just maximize the rolls). You get the idea though- this kind of system takes away from the randomness a little and ensures that classes that are supposed to be tougher are tougher.

Edit: Ninja'd, sort've.

If memory serves, that's how Iron Heroes does it. I might be misremembering, though . . . been a LONG time since I've looked at IH.

[Darth_Versity]

My group have always have a similar rule. You may reroll ANY HD roll, but at a -1 penalty (to a minimum of a 1) and you must accept the reroll. This leads to players with lower HD only rerolling on a 1 but the higher HD characters taking a chance on bigger numbers.

[gkathellar]

If memory serves, that's how Iron Heroes does it. I might be misremembering, though . . . been a LONG time since I've looked at IH.

This is indeed how IH works. It functions quite nicely, if I do say so.


There is a reason why there is a dice on the table and the more you interfere with that.... well let's just say fun comes first but our characters need to have flaws in order to insure a better game.

There are dice in the game to ensure an element of statistical chance when determining success or failure, or when determining degree of success. Having lower-than-average hit points because of sheer chance doesn't constitute a "character flaw," it constitutes a statistical penalty that you receive through no fault of your own.

[CTrees]

The rule my players all follow is max HP at first level. Every level afterwards they have two choices. Either they can take half the HD+1 or they can roll the die and take whatever they get (no rerolls). If you feel like playing it safe as the Barbarian with your D12 HD you can get the automatic 7 or take a chance with rolling.

This is exactly what I do. Well, half the HD, rounded up. Let's those that want to gamble, gamble, and those that don't are safe. We do the same thing with starting wealth if starting at level one-you can take average, or you can roll and accept the results. No one gets screwed over unless they did it to themselves.

[Emmerask]

Someone had posted an idea I found interesting a while back... but I can't quite remember what it was. I think it was something like:

d4=d4
d6=d4+2
d8=d4+4
d10=d4+6
d12=d4+8


This is actually quite nice, I like it.

As for the take Half your hd +1 , that actually greatly favors casters too who get a minimum of 75% of their potential hp while a barbarian would only get a minimum of 58% of his potential hp, for it to be fair everyone should get the same % amount of minimum hp ie:

d4 = 3
d6 = 4 every even 5 every odd level
d8 = 6
d10 = 7 every even 8 every odd level
d12 = 9

[Quietus]

I tend to have everyone roll, and simply use a "floor" value - that is, "You can't get less than 1/2 the die's maximum". Rolling a d4, a 1 or 2 is treated as a 2. On a d12, a 6 or lower counts as six. Though I like the "roll d4+bonus" method. I think I'll use that next time I run a higher powered game.

[Curmudgeon]

Any system involving rolling is going to penalize some characters and reward others; that's inherent in randomness. The only fair system is to not roll for any part of character development. I always use average + ½ on each HD after first level:
3 HP for each d4 http://home.comcast.net/~ftm3/ASMoNM/d4.gif
4 HP for each d6 http://home.comcast.net/~ftm3/ASMoNM/d6.gif
5 HP for each d8 http://home.comcast.net/~ftm3/ASMoNM/d8.gif
6 HP for each d10 http://home.comcast.net/~ftm3/ASMoNM/d10.gif
7 HP for each d12 http://home.comcast.net/~ftm3/ASMoNM/d12.gif

[Xiander]

I personally tend to favor just giving max HP at every level (I seldom GM so my experience with it is limited).

The reasoning is this: No one wants to roll low, so generally rolling just risks penalizing players who roll poorly. Giving max HP also serves to make PCs tougher so any miscalculation of challenge rating on my part is less likely to outright kill off every PC, and it allows me to throw some tough stuff at my players.
Finally, the once who benefit the most from this are the high HD classes, who could frankly use the boost.

[Con_Brio1993]

heh, maybe I am a bit.

There is a reason why there is a dice on the table and the more you interfere with that.... well let's just say fun comes first but our characters need to have flaws in order to insure a better game.

Why are you assuming that every group is like your group? I personally find "Barbarian with worse HP than the wizard" to be a flaw that doesn't facilitate good roleplaying or fun.

[Novawurmson]

Most groups I play in use the "roll, and if it's less than the average on the HD, use the average" houserule. It makes HP slightly higher, but honestly not enough to be a big issue.

This is what I use as well. Works out fine.

[Coidzor]

Any foe with credible damage output is not going to care whether you've got 20 more HP at 20th level. Mostly because by that point HP damage isn't really so much credible as an afterthought of any real threat.

And at low levels the difference is even more negligible.

The game is still going to be really rockettaggy even if you give everyone max HP per HD for every HD.

[Piggy Knowles]

As for the take Half your hd +1 , that actually greatly favors casters too who get a minimum of 75% of their potential hp while a barbarian would only get a minimum of 58% of his potential hp, for it to be fair everyone should get the same % amount of minimum hp...

Sure, the caster is getting 75%... of a much lower number. The barbarian who takes this is still getting more than twice as much in HP.

The same would be true in rolling. The caster would have a 25% chance of rolling max HP, and the barbarian would only have an 8.3% chance of doing the same. And yet I don't see most barbarians complaining that how unfair it is they're SO MUCH LESS LIKELY to get a max HP roll than their wizard counterparts.

[Godskook]

Any system involving rolling is going to penalize some characters and reward others; that's inherent in randomness. The only fair system is to not roll for any part of character development.

Random != unfair, but I do agree that unbridled dice rolls tend to not lead to players feeling that the game is fair. The system I use(which also extends to stat generation) utilizes the XP-river to even out dice rolls over time. The only player who ever thought the system was unfair rolled balanced stats that had a point-buy too high to improve for a long time, while playing a character who wanted to be more SAD.

[DoctorGlock]

When I DM lower optimization I always used "reroll anything less than half" which led to everyone being happy with HP

When I DM higher op groups we use either average HP or max HP on the basis that if you get hit chances are you ain't going to make it so focus on either your defenses or truly obscene modifiers.

When I DM joke games we do roll and keep as is for the lulz, but that's more to make fun of grognardism than anything else.

Frankly, in both serious cases we found having the minimums eliminated has no change on the game but to remove random death at lower levels and as a slight buffer at higher levels. Overall it improves the health of the game. Crud, I made a pun by accident.

[Xiander]

Any foe with credible damage output is not going to care whether you've got 20 more HP at 20th level. Mostly because by that point HP damage isn't really so much credible as an afterthought of any real threat.

And at low levels the difference is even more negligible.

The game is still going to be really rockettaggy even if you give everyone max HP per HD for every HD.

Perhaps, but it is not going to make the odds of oneshot kills higher.

[Jack_Simth]

Any thoughts on this?
If you re-roll 1's on HP until you get something that's not a 1...

A d4 (average 2.5) becomes a d3+1 (three possible results: 2, 3, 4 - average 3, an improvement of 0.5, on average)
A d6 (average 3.5) becomes a d5+1 (five possible results: 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, average 4, an improvement of 0.5, on average)
A d8 (average 4.5) becomes a d7+1 (seven possible results: 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, average 5, an improvement of 0.5, on average)
A d10 (average 5.5) becomes a d9+1 (nine possible results: 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, average 6, an improvement of 0.5, on average)
A d12 (average 6.5) becomes a d11+1 (eleven possible results: 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, average 7, an improvement of 0.5, on average)

It's a very flat benefit, really it is. It's no more unfair to different base hit die sizes than is the bonus HP from having a Con score of 12.

Really, though, it's a game of dice. Them's the breaks. It's supposed to be random an arbitrary on certain things...

[Slipperychicken]

Any foe with credible damage output is not going to care whether you've got 20 more HP at 20th level. Mostly because by that point HP damage isn't really so much credible as an afterthought of any real threat.


This. My groups have maxed 1st level HD, then either rolled or used average. Doesn't matter much for me; all my dice except d20s like giving very-close-to-average results, especially for HD. My current character rolled average-0.5, my last had average+1.

[Coidzor]

Perhaps, but it is not going to make the odds of oneshot kills higher.

And if you enjoy games where characters routinely die from being one-shotted, then you're perfectly welcome to play like that, but I find that you'll be in the minority on this board and generally run into intra-group conflict over that philosophy.

[Xiander]

And if you enjoy games where characters routinely die from being one-shotted, then you're perfectly welcome to play like that, but I find that you'll be in the minority on this board and generally run into intra-group conflict over that philosophy.

I think you misunderstand me. Maxing HP seems like a good idea to me, since it lowers the chances of a oneshot (even if only by a little, and only from enemies who rely on damage dealing, it's still something). So basically I prefer games where oneshots are unlikely.
Also I am aware that this does not solve all the problems which may or may not exist in the game, and that it certainly dose not make fighters come much closer to the power level of wizards, but it does give the classes which are supposed to be tough a tendency to actually be tougher than their frailer counter parts.

[Stone Heart]

I just want to throw my hat in for the half or higher idea. Though we don't make it a 1-5 come to a 6, for the d12, but rather reroll on any of them. It works pretty well for us, I would not say it hurts the games too much, our dm rolls his NPC's the same, and challenges are given appropriately.

[navar100]

If you re-roll 1's on HP until you get something that's not a 1...

A d4 (average 2.5) becomes a d3+1 (three possible results: 2, 3, 4 - average 3, an improvement of 0.5, on average)
A d6 (average 3.5) becomes a d5+1 (five possible results: 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, average 4, an improvement of 0.5, on average)
A d8 (average 4.5) becomes a d7+1 (seven possible results: 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, average 5, an improvement of 0.5, on average)
A d10 (average 5.5) becomes a d9+1 (nine possible results: 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, average 6, an improvement of 0.5, on average)
A d12 (average 6.5) becomes a d11+1 (eleven possible results: 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, average 7, an improvement of 0.5, on average)

It's a very flat benefit, really it is. It's no more unfair to different base hit die sizes than is the bonus HP from having a Con score of 12.

Really, though, it's a game of dice. Them's the breaks. It's supposed to be random an arbitrary on certain things...

Over the course of 20 levels a one time roll of 1 is not going to matter because you're likely to get a 10 (fighter) or 12 (barbarian) in there as well. However, the majority of your play time is less than 20th level than it is 20th level and for that one level you are playing where you rolled 1, you will be that level for quite some real world time. Only having a 1 is a very large influence for that play time.

[Jack_Simth]

Over the course of 20 levels a one time roll of 1 is not going to matter because you're likely to get a 10 (fighter) or 12 (barbarian) in there as well. However, the majority of your play time is less than 20th level than it is 20th level and for that one level you are playing where you rolled 1, you will be that level for quite some real world time. Only having a 1 is a very large influence for that play time.So would rolling a 12.

[killem2]

We reroll on 1's, and at every 5th level, you take the maximum HP possible + con bonus. Like you do at level 1.

[Inferno]

I like the number you re-roll on to scale depending on the HD type:

d4 - re-rolls on a 1
d6 - re-rolls on a 2
d8 - re-rolls on a 3
d10 - re-rolls on a 4
d12 - re-rolls on a 5

Barbarian and Fighter always get more Hp than wizard, Ranger's minimum is equal to Wizards maximum. Means you can still roll pretty low, but makes die size make a bit more difference than using the full die range.

[Knaight]

A d4 (average 2.5) becomes a d3+1 (three possible results: 2, 3, 4 - average 3, an improvement of 0.5, on average)
A d6 (average 3.5) becomes a d5+1 (five possible results: 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, average 4, an improvement of 0.5, on average)
A d8 (average 4.5) becomes a d7+1 (seven possible results: 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, average 5, an improvement of 0.5, on average)
A d10 (average 5.5) becomes a d9+1 (nine possible results: 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, average 6, an improvement of 0.5, on average)
A d12 (average 6.5) becomes a d11+1 (eleven possible results: 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, average 7, an improvement of 0.5, on average)

It's a very flat benefit, really it is. It's no more unfair to different base hit die sizes than is the bonus HP from having a Con score of 12.
Treating this as accurate:

A d4 goes from 2.5 to 3, which is a 1/5 (20%) increase.
A d6 goes from 3.5 to 4, which is a 1/7 (13%) increase.
A d8 goes from 4.5 to 5, which is a 1/9 (11%) increase.
A d10 goes from 5.5 to 6, which is a 1/11 (9%) increase.
A d12 goes from 6.5 to 7, which is a 1/13 (7%) increase.

In short, this favors low HD classes. To the point where rerolling a 1-2 for d10 or d12 is still less advantageous than rerolling 1s for a d4.

[W3bDragon]

Like some others here, we use full HD for first three levels, then roll and get minimum half.

We used to do rerolls on 1s, but eventually felt that it was unfair for PC1 to roll a 7 on a d10, while PC2 rolls a 1 on a d10 then rerolls and get a 10. So we changed it to roll, minimum half HD.

In campaigns that we expect to be very combat heavy, we extend full HD to the first 5 to 10 levels depending on the DM.

As for how much difference it makes, it usually matters more at the early to mid levels, where a few hitpoints can be the difference between retreating this round or sticking around for another round of full attack, let alone the difference between life or death. At higher levels, the difference is negligible as things tend to average out and hitpoint damage becomes less of a concern.

[Yahzi]

There are a lot of rolls your character needs to make to thrive in his/her adventuring career. Rolling well leads to exciting victories (remember that time I dropped the BBEG with one crit?); Rolling badly leads to exciting defeats (remember when we all failed our save against the Trog's stench and had to flee for our lives?).

But there is only one roll that can permanently cripple your character. If you miss, just swing again; if you fail a save, get a cure; if you die, get raised. But nothing can fix a bad HP roll.

It is absurd to me to stake quite so much on a random roll. Even rolling for stats isn't so bad; at least you know at the start what you have. But rolling up a fighter and then finding he has 3 hit points at 3rd level is just... absurd.

Making the players roll for hps is cruel. And unfair, since no DM I know rolls hit-dice for all those dozens and dozens and dozens of monsters.

I can't imagine anything less than full hps for melee characters at every level. Spell casters are different; nobody cares how many hps a 17th level mage has.

[Knaight]

But there is only one roll that can permanently cripple your character. If you miss, just swing again; if you fail a save, get a cure; if you die, get raised. But nothing can fix a bad HP roll.

It is absurd to me to stake quite so much on a random roll. Even rolling for stats isn't so bad; at least you know at the start what you have. But rolling up a fighter and then finding he has 3 hit points at 3rd level is just... absurd.

HP rolls tend to balance themselves out. Stat rolls are far, far more permanent, sure, you know what they are from the start, but that doesn't mean they don't have a huge effect. As for the Fighter example, you get full HP at first level regardless. 12 is a minimum, odds are you have 14 Con, so that sets it up at 18. Using averages, you instead have 25 or 26 depending on methodology, using maximums, 36. I favor averages, as that puts the HP at the level the designers were going for, and while the designers weren't exactly good at balance, maximums as a house rule doesn't help that. In short, rolling for HP is unfortunate, rolling for stats far, far more obnoxious.

[Yahzi]

In short, rolling for HP is unfortunate, rolling for stats far, far more obnoxious.
To be fair, I prefer giving the monsters max HP too. :smallbiggrin:

I agree, I don't like rolling for stats either. In 1E it's fine, because stats aren't even that important; in 3E it just seems like player punishment. I run a mean sandbox world, and if the dice say you die, you die, and I roll all the dice in the open; but even I couldn't make a Barbarian take a 1 on his HP roll.

[Gandariel]

i actually have players choose average or roll, and if they choose to roll it's their fault if they don't get good rolls :P

[dogfish44]

In my group, we've always rolled. Wizard can never re-roll, anyone else can re-reroll 1's till they get 2+. The rogue has a habit of a 1 at every level. We haven't had any deaths now we're at level 11, so I think this way works.

[Crocodactyl]

When I DM AD&D 1e, my players roll and keep what they get. The Cleric has probably twice the health of the thief. But we just play AD&D for the departure from order and balance and an occasional laugh when we find a weird rule in those disorderly old books. In 3.5 we take averages, no rolling at all.

[Heliomance]

Someone had posted an idea I found interesting a while back... but I can't quite remember what it was. I think it was something like:

d4=d4
d6=d4+2
d8=d4+4
d10=d4+6
d12=d4+8

So every class rolled a d4 with an automatic bonus based on what die you would normally be rolling. I'm not sure if those numbers are right; getting a free +8 is pretty outrageous, unless you're really going for a high-powered game (but don't want to just maximize the rolls). You get the idea though- this kind of system takes away from the randomness a little and ensures that classes that are supposed to be tougher are tougher.

Edit: Ninja'd, sort've.

One of my friends uses a very similar system that I've now adopted, using d6 as the base size. So d4=d4, d6=d6, d8=d6+2, d10=d6+4, d12=d6+6. Seems to work well enough.

[Knaight]

One of my friends uses a very similar system that I've now adopted, using d6 as the base size. So d4=d4, d6=d6, d8=d6+2, d10=d6+4, d12=d6+6. Seems to work well enough.

I'd probably want to introduce curvature.
d4= 2+d3-d3
d6= 3+d4-d4
d8= 4+d5-d5
d10= 5+d6-d6
d12=6+d7-d7

Note that d5 is d10/2 if using physical dice, and d7 is d20 reroll 15+ all divided by two.

[candycorn]

Personally, I favor rerolls of this sort. This is a case where a single bad roll can have consequences that follow the character for their entire span.

In addition, if the rule benefits martial types over magic types? Great! That's not going to upset the balance of the game one bit.

I typically use: Roll your HD. If that is less than 50% of the maximum roll possible, increase it to half the HD, rounded down.

This means that each die has possibilities of:

d4: 2, 2, 3, 4 (average: 2.75, +0.25 over standard roll)
d6: 3,3,3,4,5,6 (average: 4.00, +0.5 over standard roll)
d8: 4,4,4,4,5,6,7,8 (average 5.25, +0.75 over standard roll)
d10: 5,5,5,5,5,6,7,8,9,10 (average 6.50, +1.00 over standard roll)
d12: 6,6,6,6,6,6,7,8,9,10,11,12 (average 7.75, +1.25 over standard roll)

This has the advantage of increasing the odds of getting average rolls, rather that using the reroll under half option, which spreads the low roll odds over all numbers.

[Jack_Simth]

Treating this as accurate:

If you keep re-rolling 1's until you get something other than a 1, it is. I can walk you through the math if you like.


A d4 goes from 2.5 to 3, which is a 1/5 (20%) increase.
A d6 goes from 3.5 to 4, which is a 1/7 (13%) increase.
A d8 goes from 4.5 to 5, which is a 1/9 (11%) increase.
A d10 goes from 5.5 to 6, which is a 1/11 (9%) increase.
A d12 goes from 6.5 to 7, which is a 1/13 (7%) increase.

In short, this favors low HD classes. To the point where rerolling a 1-2 for d10 or d12 is still less advantageous than rerolling 1s for a d4.
Treating this as accurate...

No more so than does a Con bonus of +1.

With a Con bonus of +1:
A d4 goes from 2.5 to 3.5, which is a 2/5 (40%) increase.
A d6 goes from 3.5 to 4.5, which is a 2/5 (26%) increase.
A d8 goes from 4.5 to 5.5, which is a 2/5 (22%) increase.
A d10 goes from 5.5 to 6.5, which is a 2/5 (18%) increase.
A d12 goes from 6.5 to 7.5, which is a 2/5 (14%) increase.

In short, this favors low HD classes. To the point where having a con bonus of +1 for d10 or d12 is still less advantageous than having a con bonus of +1 for a d4.

[Palthera]

My house rule was that HP were rolled as d4 + ? So a wizard would just roll a D4, but a barbarian would roll 6+D4. It meant that (without taking constitution into account) you would always have HP in line with the class. A fighter would always average more HP than a wizard. But you didn't reroll 1s because that would just make the whole thing ridiculous.

[Heliomance]

I'd probably want to introduce curvature.
d4= 2+d3-d3
d6= 3+d4-d4
d8= 4+d5-d5
d10= 5+d6-d6
d12=6+d7-d7

Note that d5 is d10/2 if using physical dice, and d7 is d20 reroll 15+ all divided by two.

Uh... you do realise that all of those have a chance to produce zero hit points, right? And it's just needlessly complicated.

[panaikhan]

In one campaign I was a player in, the DM came up with the following house rule:
Upon rolling your HP for gaining your level, you took the roll OR your Con bonus, whichever was higher.
This meant, the minium HP gained per level, was twice your Con bonus.

In the same campaign, all monsters had maximum HP, so it did seem to balance out.

-edit- though, this campaign did seem to have alot of high-Con mages in it...

[Jeopardizer]

I'd probably want to introduce curvature.
d4= 2+d3-d3
d6= 3+d4-d4
d8= 4+d5-d5
d10= 5+d6-d6
d12=6+d7-d7

Note that d5 is d10/2 if using physical dice, and d7 is d20 reroll 15+ all divided by two.

You realize that you can roll 0 with these?

[Tr011]

I am worried about unintended consequences however--this might skew the relationship between the altered stat (HP) and unaltered stats like saves, BAB, etc.

Any thoughts on this?

I house ruled for a long time to roll every HD for PCs three times, taking the best roll. This does make HD more important than Con, that's pretty nice because without the house rule in my opinion HD are not important enough and players should be rewarded with an amount of HP that they can feel when they take a class with higher HD. Also, it buffs the (in DnD very weak) Tank chars (needed with my players because everyone wants to play mostly glass cannons).

I think you should make sure to buff Barbarian's HP equal or more than mage's, so rerolling the lowest quarter of HD (1-3 for Barbarian, 1 for mages) would be ok, but what about Warlocks/Rogues? They get HD6. You should neither get them the same amount of rerolling chances like wizards (on a 1 only) because Warlocks do need more HP nor giving them the same chance as Rangers and Psychic Warriors (1-2 for HD8). So maybe you can think of something else.

[Knaight]

Uh... you do realise that all of those have a chance to produce zero hit points, right? And it's just needlessly complicated.

That much is actually intentional. As for needlessly complicated, no more so than stat generation. Randomized elements that important should be prioritized, and a detailed curve does that.


If you keep re-rolling 1's until you get something other than a 1, it is. I can walk you through the math if you like.
That's the key bit. The double one alters it a bit, and whether or not to include that was somewhat ambiguous. I just assumed that this interpretation was the correct one, if only to simplify the math.


With a Con bonus of +1:
A d4 goes from 2.5 to 3.5, which is a 2/5 (40%) increase.
A d6 goes from 3.5 to 4.5, which is a 2/5 (26%) increase.
A d8 goes from 4.5 to 5.5, which is a 2/5 (22%) increase.
A d10 goes from 5.5 to 6.5, which is a 2/5 (18%) increase.
A d12 goes from 6.5 to 7.5, which is a 2/5 (14%) increase.

In short, this favors low HD classes. To the point where having a con bonus of +1 for d10 or d12 is still less advantageous than having a con bonus of +1 for a d4.

However, the con bonus is likely to increase with hit die, given that characters with high hit dice tend to have high con. Also, the 2/5ths noted should be a 2/5, 2/7, 2/9, etc - the percentages are correct.

[Sgt. Cookie]

How about this as a house rule: Your con mod determines the minimum you can get on a die roll. A +1 AND +2 counts as not rolling less than 2.

For example:

You get a Barbarian with a con mod of +4, that means the minimum Hp the Barbarian could get is 8, while the max is 16. If the Barbarian rolled 3 or lower, then it's counted as 4.

Likewise, if the Barbarian had a con mod of +13, then it would count as constantly rolling a 12, and then adding 13. So the max the Barbarian could get would be 25.

If a con mod is negative, then it does not affect rolls. This means that if a Wizard had a con mod of -1, then it would only be penalised once.

Granted, this does mean that characters with a +12 con mod will get a double bonus, but this rule doesn't mean that characters with a negative con get a double penalty.

[Curmudgeon]

How about this as a house rule: Your con mod determines the minimum you can get on a die roll. A +1 AND +2 counts as not rolling less than 2.
This doubles the impact of the CON stat in determining hit points. For a SAD character it will move CON up in importance and still make the character viable. For a MAD character you've just screwed over classes where CON isn't a priority by disadvantaging them with respect to other classes.

I really, really, dislike this idea.

[Sgt. Cookie]

This doubles the impact of the CON stat in determining hit points. For a SAD character it will move CON up in importance and still make the character viable. For a MAD character you've just screwed over classes where CON isn't a priority by disadvantaging them with respect to other classes.

I really, really, dislike this idea.

While it is correct that this benefits some characters over others, you are forgetting that physical stat based characters rely on high Hp to get them through the 'crawl.

But characters that don't rely on high Hp have other tricks at their disposal. Such as magic.

Don't forget about the single penalty clause, d4 with a -1 Con mod is still a d4 with a -1 con mod. Not a d3 with a -1 Con mod

[Curmudgeon]

But characters that don't rely on high Hp have other tricks at their disposal. Such as magic.
Sometimes. How is this going to help a non-spellcaster? For instance, the Rogue needs:

INT for skill points, and important skills like Search, Disable Device
DEX for Reflex saves, AC bonus, and many class skills
CHA for skills like Bluff, Gather Information, Use Magic Device
WIS for Will saves, and the perception skills: Spot, Listen, Sense Motive
STR for attacks, damage, and carrying capacity to stay within a light load
:confused:

[Essence_of_War]

My group either uses max hp at every level, or

d4 = d2 + 2
d6 = d3 + 3
d8 = d4 + 4
d10 = d5 + 5
d12 = d6 + 6

I personally prefer the former, but the rest of the group really likes the small amount of variance from the latter. It lets them roll (and they really like rolling) while still making sure that everyone walks away with a reasonable number of hp.

OP,
I like your take on the expanding radius of re-rolls. May have d4/d6 re-roll 1s, d8/d10 re-roll 1s and 2s, d12 re-rolls 1-3. I think fixed bottom re-rolls seem to favor the smaller hit die folk noticeably.

[Fax Celestis]

Note that d5 is d10/2 if using physical dice, and d7 is d20 reroll 15+ all divided by two.

I disagree!

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Z7bZv6wyTzs/TjLvurL39TI/AAAAAAAAAQ4/g_J9WtdVnbQ/s1600/5-sided.jpg

http://www.gmdice.com/media/catalog/product/cache/1/image/9df78eab33525d08d6e5fb8d27136e95/D/7/D7_BLACK_550.jpg

[eepop]

We let people reroll as much as they want, but each time, they use a die one step smaller.

1d12->1d10->1d8->1d6->1d4

So if a barbarian rolls a d12 and gets a 2, he can roll a d10. If he doesn't like the result of that, he can roll a d8, etc.

We've all been very happy with it. It makes low results a lot less likely, but it doesn't rule them out entirely.

If you wanted to add your "reroll 1's" onto the end once you reach d4, that would probably work fine.

[gkathellar]

I disagree!

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Z7bZv6wyTzs/TjLvurL39TI/AAAAAAAAAQ4/g_J9WtdVnbQ/s1600/5-sided.jpg

http://www.gmdice.com/media/catalog/product/cache/1/image/9df78eab33525d08d6e5fb8d27136e95/D/7/D7_BLACK_550.jpg

I have an overwhelming suspicion that the odds on those dice are wrong.

[charcoalninja]

I personally tend to favor just giving max HP at every level (I seldom GM so my experience with it is limited).

The reasoning is this: No one wants to roll low, so generally rolling just risks penalizing players who roll poorly. Giving max HP also serves to make PCs tougher so any miscalculation of challenge rating on my part is less likely to outright kill off every PC, and it allows me to throw some tough stuff at my players.
Finally, the once who benefit the most from this are the high HD classes, who could frankly use the boost.

Sniff... I thought I was the only one.

[Fax Celestis]

I have an overwhelming suspicion that the odds on those dice are wrong.

Nope, they are statistically accurate.

[Trenelus]

Couple of first games we rolled after 1st lv, no rerolls.
Heh, one time when after the session party level up I had been having worst luck during the evening, so I told DM that I would roll the Hp next time when we would play. Well, a mont later we level up again, and then DM notesis that nobody remembered that I had not roll'ed for last levels Hp. Ops.
I even managed to get to play in 1st edition game last, and there my wizard had the most HP in whole party...
After that I have seen couple of different methdos in use, ½HD with +1 on even levels, 1 max and then 3/4 after that, or first 3 levels max and then ½.
With new game going we are trying a rule: 1st 3 levels are maxed, then you get ½ + 1 on even levels, but only to lv 10. At 11th and past it you gain smaller, fixed amount based on your class.
Most of groups I'm in don't want to roll our HP anymore. To much bad luck in the past.

[navar100]

So would rolling a 12.

Rolling a 1 for hit points hurts more than rolling a 12 helps. Rolling a 12 means you can take one more hit and not go down to do something. Rolling a 1 means you can't take one more hit than you could last level but the bad guys still got one level stronger.

[Coidzor]

That much is actually intentional.

You can't just say that and then not explain why you think such a controversial thing is a good idea. :smallconfused:

[gkathellar]

Nope, they are statistically accurate.

Oh. Very cool, then.

[ericgrau]

My inclination is to keep the house-rule of re-rolling 1's, but to make the range comparable. The mage re-rolls 1's, the barbarian 1-3, etc. I am worried about unintended consequences however--this might skew the relationship between the altered stat (HP) and unaltered stats like saves, BAB, etc.

Any thoughts on this?
Well you have to include con as well. I'd say an average con would be 14+4=18 or with a high point buy 16+4=20. Then a mage re-rolling 1's gains about 1/2 out of 7 HP: 1/14th. d6 => 8 HP, d8 => 9 HP, d10 => 10 HP, d12 => 11 HP. So a barbarian should reroll 1's and 2's, maybe fighters too, and everyone else should only reroll 1s. If you do a lot of low level play where you don't usually go beyond a +2 con item, then you might extend the rerolling 2's to d8 HD classes but even then I wouldn't allow barbarians a reroll on 3's if d4 HD only get it on 1's.

[MukkTB]

Can someone link or quote the UA average HP rules?

[Greyfeld85]

Most groups I play in use the "roll, and if it's less than the average on the HD, use the average" houserule. It makes HP slightly higher, but honestly not enough to be a big issue.

This is the way that I'm most used to.

[Greyfeld85]

Well you have to include con as well. I'd say an average con would be 14+4=18 or with a high point buy 16+4=20. Then a mage re-rolling 1's gains about 1/2 out of 7 HP: 1/14th. d6 => 8 HP, d8 => 9 HP, d10 => 10 HP, d12 => 11 HP. So a barbarian should reroll 1's and 2's, maybe fighters too, and everyone else should only reroll 1s. If you do a lot of low level play where you don't usually go beyond a +2 con item, then you might extend the rerolling 2's to d8 HD classes but even then I wouldn't allow barbarians a reroll on 3's if d4 HD only get it on 1's.

Adjusting rerolls based on Constitution score is completely unfair. If you end up getting lower HP on average per level due to a handicap taken because of your Con score, then there's just no reason to put one of your high scores into Con in the first place.

And really, the front line fighters are the ones that need the higher HP per level anyway, so there's absolutely no reason to purposely gimp them.

[Kerrin]

I personally tend to favor just giving max HP at every level (I seldom GM so my experience with it is limited).

The reasoning is this: No one wants to roll low, so generally rolling just risks penalizing players who roll poorly. Giving max HP also serves to make PCs tougher so any miscalculation of challenge rating on my part is less likely to outright kill off every PC, and it allows me to throw some tough stuff at my players.
Finally, the once who benefit the most from this are the high HD classes, who could frankly use the boost.
We usually use maximum hit points for levels 1 and 2, then for levels 3+ we roll with a floor of half the die's maximum.

But, giving out maximum hit points every level is interesting and something I never really considered. I'll have to give it some thought and propose it for consideration for our group. Thanks for the idea!

[ericgrau]

Adjusting rerolls based on Constitution score is completely unfair. If you end up getting lower HP on average per level due to a handicap taken because of your Con score, then there's just no reason to put one of your high scores into Con in the first place.

And really, the front line fighters are the ones that need the higher HP per level anyway, so there's absolutely no reason to purposely gimp them.

It's based on average total HP. This way the wizard gets about 7% more HP and the barbarian gets about 7% more HP, on average. I assumed a typical con. And I had to round up a bit. Even with a con of 14 instead of 20 after magical boosts (12+2, for example), it's still at most re-roll on 2 for the barbarian. Anyone who doesn't get at least on ok con in D&D is committing suicide with or without such a rule; it isn't anything special or rewardable to put points in con. A low con is a rare exception, not the rule.

Max HP does work ok but it favors the higher HD classes again because your HD effectively doubles but your con bonus doesn't. I'm actually playing in such a game and since the monsters are tougher to match it's that much more scary to be low HD. One surprise and you spend half the combat fleeing and getting healed, whereas the rest of the fights you don't get attacked like any other game. Kinda polarizing (100% safe like usual sometimes, other times can't play half the fight), which is not a good thing IMO. But it's manageable. Bit of mirror image, false life or so on and problem solved; do warn your squishies if you do it so that they don't lose a couple gaming sessions to learning it the hard way when they do finally get ambushed. Melee rogues OTOH get shafted pretty hard with not much available to save them and they're always up front even without an ambush.