Preferred method for PC HP progression

[Xervous]

Of all the existing rules, house rules and interpretations for dealing with those extra points you pad your Not Dead Yet pool with each level - what's the method you like the best and why? Do you like different methods for different power level games?

The recent games I've played in have been using half HD or half rounded up to keep with the average of rolled hp, a consistent approach a la point buy mentality. I'm curious what others' experiences are, how different methods have shifted the dynamics of class and ability point allocation for players.

[Necroticplague]

I just go with max HP. Helps increase the gap between having a big HD, and having a small one, so it's more significant (and thus, somewhat compensating for the blatant overvalueing of that trait WOTC appears to use).

[stanprollyright]

Currently the method is "roll HD. If you roll less than half, take half"

My preferred method is something like this: d10=8hp, d12=9, d8=6, d6=4, d4=3.

[GreatDane]

Currently the method is "roll HD. If you roll less than half, take half"
Yup, this is the one my group uses. So if the barbarian rolls a 3, she still gets 6 hit points.

I like it because it keeps the element of randomness while providing a safety net, especially for classes with large HD.

[Kelb_Panthera]

I prefer average for most games. I don't like random rolls for anything as fundamental as HP or ability scores for the most part.

That said, I'll occasionally see my way through for rolling on special occasions; say an old-school dungeon-crawl where I expect the guy to be dead in a couple sessions anway or a natural characters one-off (3d6, in order, after you've chosen your class.)

I honestly don't see the point of rolling if you're just going to throw away anything under half.

[Ieagleroar]

Max HP for my group. Make a barbarian slightly more even with a wizard.

[Troacctid]

I like to use average, or average rounded up, and use the variant rules for death and dying (http://web.archive.org/web/20110111170127/http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Article.aspx?x=dnd/drdd/20080201a).

[stanprollyright]

I don't like random rolls for anything as fundamental as HP or ability scores for the most part.

That said, I'll occasionally see my way through for rolling on special occasions; say an old-school dungeon-crawl where I expect the guy to be dead in a couple sessions anway or a natural characters one-off (3d6, in order, after you've chosen your class.)

Agreed on both accounts.


I honestly don't see the point of rolling if you're just going to throw away anything under half.

Think of it like this: nobody wants to risk rolling a 1 on their hp and have it affect the rest of their (probably shorter) career. Everyone wants a chance to roll high, especially classes with bigger HD. Average hp for a d10 class comes out to 6.5/level, for a d8 it's 5.25. So everyone's hp is slightly higher than average, with a much higher floor, and the same ceiling.

It's similar to when you roll your stats and get a good spread except for a single 4, which you could put into a dump stat, but your DM lets you jiggle around one of your other scores to bump it up to a respectable 7 so you still have a dump stat but your barbarian isn't severely brain damaged and your wizard doesn't have to run around naked because his robes are a medium load.

[Fizban]

Straight average, no random screws, no free lunch.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Think of it like this: nobody wants to risk rolling a 1 on their hp and have it affect the rest of their (probably shorter) career. Everyone wants a chance to roll high, especially classes with bigger HD. Average hp for a d10 class comes out to 6.5/level, for a d8 it's 5.25. So everyone's hp is slightly higher than average, with a much higher floor, and the same ceiling.

I get how the numbers work out. I just don't see much point in gambling when there's no risk and minimal reward.


It's similar to when you roll your stats and get a good spread except for a single 4, which you could put into a dump stat, but your DM lets you jiggle around one of your other scores to bump it up to a respectable 7 so you still have a dump stat but your barbarian isn't severely brain damaged and your wizard doesn't have to run around naked because his robes are a medium load.

:smallannoyed: That's a red flag in my eyes. That looks suspiciously like kid gloves to me. I have -very- little tolerance for kid gloves. I rolled, I got what I got. If that 4 really bothered me I'd scrap the whole set and try again, DM permitting, or just live with it and mitigate it somehow (probably WBL).

[KillianHawkeye]

We used to do max hp in my group, but to be honest it made balancing the enemy encounters a bit harder (unless we also gave monsters max hp, but we didn't want to do that). Just the high hp characters having so much more hp than the low hp characters was somewhat problematic as well. We don't do a ton of optimization tricks or even use competent battle strategies, so it isn't like the wizards and rogues could always avoid taking damage, either.

Now, we get max hp only for the first 3 levels and average (rounding to even on even levels and odd on odd levels) after that. We get a little bit of a cushion starting out, but the slower overall hp growth works better for the way we play and puts less of a burden on the DM to tailor the monsters to our characters specific strengths/weaknesses. Kinda like the best of both worlds.

[stanprollyright]

I get how the numbers work out. I just don't see much point in gambling when there's no risk and minimal reward.

It's not my favorite; just how my current group plays.


:smallannoyed: That's a red flag in my eyes. That looks suspiciously like kid gloves to me. I have -very- little tolerance for kid gloves. I rolled, I got what I got. If that 4 really bothered me I'd scrap the whole set and try again, DM permitting, or just live with it and mitigate it somehow (probably WBL).

It's less about the character and more about immersion. From a pure game perspective, fixing it is not even necessarily to the character's advantage, since they have to sacrifice an equivalent point buy from another score to get it up to a DM-mandated minimum in an ability they intend to use as little as possible. Within the game world, it starts to stretch reality that someone that deficient in any area could not only function in society, but also be a successful adventurer. A 4 in anything means you have problem with basic tasks involving that score. You also have to consider natural selection, since D&D is mostly based on medieval europe, which had an infant mortality rate upwards of 50% and life expectancy of ripe old 40, and that's before you consider magical monsters and undead hordes and whatnot that seem to routinely kill thousands of people, yet they repopulate quickly because commoners breed like rabbits...The point being, the odds are you wouldn't make it out of childhood.

Now, if you have a 4 post-racial and size modifiers, that's one thing. You are an especially [adjective] member of an especially [adjective] race. That's fine. Your race obviously has other evolutionary advantages and/or a society where everyone has the same racial penalty.

The other thing is the two most commonly dumped scores are charisma and intelligence, and maybe strength for mages. Too often have I seen a low Cha used as a reason for a player to not roleplay at all; and low Int to avoid participating out of combat, and/or to play a ridiculous, comical, and often offensive stereotype.


Now, we get max hp only for the first 3 levels and average (rounding to even on even levels and odd on odd levels) after that. We get a little bit of a cushion starting out, but the slower overall hp growth works better for the way we play and puts less of a burden on the DM to tailor the monsters to our characters specific strengths/weaknesses. Kinda like the best of both worlds.

I've played sorta like that. Max hp for the first 3 levels, roll normally after that. It worked pretty well.

[Crake]

~words~

I gotta agree with Stan here, in terms of character optimization, forcing a dump stat up at the expense of another stat makes things harder, not easier. If it was just a free state bump, then I could understand your apprehension, but as it is, that's a fair rule, and stops the three stooges syndrome from manifesting.

Regarding the topic at hand, I personally use point buy (and 35 points at that) as well as average rounded up for HP.

[RoboEmperor]

Average, unless the group is weak. Then max hp. No rolling.

[Kelb_Panthera]

It's less about the character and more about immersion. From a pure game perspective, fixing it is not even necessarily to the character's advantage, since they have to sacrifice an equivalent point buy from another score to get it up to a DM-mandated minimum in an ability they intend to use as little as possible. Within the game world, it starts to stretch reality that someone that deficient in any area could not only function in society, but also be a successful adventurer. A 4 in anything means you have problem with basic tasks involving that score. You also have to consider natural selection, since D&D is mostly based on medieval europe, which had an infant mortality rate upwards of 50% and life expectancy of ripe old 40, and that's before you consider magical monsters and undead hordes and whatnot that seem to routinely kill thousands of people, yet they repopulate quickly because commoners breed like rabbits...The point being, the odds are you wouldn't make it out of childhood.

Adventuring isn't a normal profession. It's a high-risk, high-reward occcupation most commonly filled by societal rejects and mercenaries. A guy with a 4 would be just such a societal misfit. Depending on which ability it's in, it isn't hard to come up with a quick characterization.

Str: prove that my brains are more than enough to overcome not only my own lack of brawn but the might of others.

Con: "proving" that I'm not so weak as everyone believes and can be just as tough as anybody (yes, it's denial).

Dex: shooting things is for cowards and dodging is for sissies. Big axe, big armor, cut 'em down like wheat.

ANY PHYSICAL: Screw it, the magic'll make it up. (accurate often enough)

Int: don't need no book learnin' or fancy talkin'. Hit it hard enough with something big and pointy, most problems stop bein' problems. Alternate: <god X> provides what I need. Didn't need no cleverness, far as he's concerned. Alt B: magic's good 'nuff for dragons. 's good enough for me.

Wis: I'm a tad scattered but I get things done and there's a lot to learn/ fight/ enjoy out there.

Cha: Just go with the flow, man.

There ya go.

Now, on to the next;

No human would survive to adulthood if not for our unparalleled degree of cooperative behavior. A weakness in a given child doesn't really make nearly as much difference as it would in most other species.

The average life-expectency of 40 is that low in no small part because of the very high infant mortality rate you mentioned. If you made it to 5, you had a damn good chance of making it to 65. Disease, except the odd epidemic, wasn't as bad as you may have been led to believe and in a D&D world clerics have a vested interest in wiping it out (save for those of a deity of pestilence).

The rampant monsters and marauders largely take the place of the nigh-nullified disease threat but; generally speaking; as CR goes up, commonality goes down. It's the same as predators IRL. There are a lot more rabbits than wolves and a lot more wolves than lions. Something like dragons probably only number a couple hundred, world wide, at any one time.


Now, if you have a 4 post-racial and size modifiers, that's one thing. You are an especially [adjective] member of an especially [adjective] race. That's fine. Your race obviously has other evolutionary advantages and/or a society where everyone has the same racial penalty.

Evolution probably plays a fairly minimal role in a world where gods create races. Magic is a great equalizer for races of low RHD and LA compared to more slow-learning creatures; especially in light of the generally more cooperative nature of civilized races compared to more tribal or merely social creatures.


The other thing is the two most commonly dumped scores are charisma and intelligence, and maybe strength for mages. Too often have I seen a low Cha used as a reason for a player to not roleplay at all; and low Int to avoid participating out of combat, and/or to play a ridiculous, comical, and often offensive stereotype.

OOC problems should be handled OOC. As long as those players aren't being disruptive and are having a good time, what do you care if they're a wall-flower out of combat or perhaps a tad boorish.

As for "offensive" stereotypes; stow it. Unless they're deliberately trying to be offensive or actively mocking some personal flaw you struggle with, just let it go and enjoy the friggin' game.

[Pugwampy]

This is as sacred as AB points . I give players a choice to roll for it or take fixed HP which is half hp depending on level .

To be honest most players like to roll for both AB and Hp .

[Zancloufer]

I tried max HP for a while, but also balanced it by giving max HP/HD for monsters/NPCs as well.

Recently I tried a "top 75%" roll. Essentially the top 2-3 numbers of the HD is what you always get (d4=3/4, d6=5/6, d8=6-8, d10=8-10, d12=10-12). Still gives some random rolls and means that "better HD = more HP" always, while still giving a degree of randomness. Just give the monsters/NPCs Max HP-1 per HD and it averages pretty close to PC numbers as well.

[Xervous]

The selling point of maximized HD being more favorable to non casters is one of the things that drew my curiosity here. As with any balance tweak of good intentions there's usually some unforeseen side effects that ride in with the good. In this case I gather it's a mote of difficulty to encounter design and the thought process behind what qualifies a proper threat for the team. Skewing HP to give certain characters a larger buffer may increase the burden of optimal play demanded of wizards and other pajama clad spellslingers or ninjas, but that's only if you're deeming bigger numbers as the means to challenge a barbarian's new health total.

If this maximized hp rule is applied to team monster (and is it in your games where the PCs get to enjoy it?) has it skewed encounter lengths against the meatier opponents or encouraged the GM to prune the meatbags to offer a shorter meal?

[Arbane]

One idea I heard about from an Old School Revival game was that PCs reroll ALL their hit-dice every time they level up. If the new roll would be lower than the old total, they just gain one HP over the old total instead. Seems like that would eventually even out the bad rolls, if the PC somehow survived long enough.

My current GM allows Hero Points to be used on HP rolls - either to reroll or to boost the result. Nice when I had an extra one at level-up that would've been lost anyway.

(Personally, I'd rather take an average roll, as dice hate me.)

[Calthropstu]

Am I the only one that likes playing the elven wizard with 35 hp at 15th level?

[Celestia]

I know this isn't entirely what people are talking about, but one thing I liked from when I played Hackmaster was the HP bonus at level one. You started with 20 plus your hit die. It ensured you never have to deal with the 1 HP problem and die from a paper cut. It also deemphasized the importance of level two as now your hit points no longer double. I really liked that system.

As for the actual rolling, I'd say just do whatever the players want. Balance and challenge are all well and good but not at the expense at enjoyment. This is, first and foremost, a game. Whether or not people have fun is far more important than any sort of misguided sense of "fairness" or "integrity" or anything else. If the players have the most fun rolling, great. If they have the most fun with max HP, that's fine, too.

This is especially important for the DM/GM to realize. Yes, you're a player, too, but when there's a conflict, you have to be the first one to compromise and try working out a solution that works for everyone. You have the most power which means you need to use it the most responsibly. The others trusted you enough to put you in charge, and you have to honor that trust. I know whenever I've been in that situation, I would try my hardest to make things a reasonable challenge, but I would be constantly fudging things here and there, even if only slightly, to make sure everyone else kept having fun. If ignoring a roll will keep a player from having a cheap and unexpected death, I'll do it.

[PaucaTerrorem]

An old DM I had used a method I liked. At each level it was your choice; either roll and hope you get a high one or just take half your HD.

[rrwoods]

In my groups we've done something I haven't seen mentioned before, probably because my first DM made it up (or got it from his, etc).

The player rolls, then they may reroll once. (Rerolls must be kept.)

[Elkad]

I've used max or average at various times.
I've also used "you must roll, and you are stuck with that 1".
Currently it's "roll twice, take the better"

I've always (since 1e anyway) given people their choice of either adding one (up to the die maximum) to a prior roll, or reroll it completely (no guarantee of improvement), with a Wish. Yes, that means tracking all your rolls as you level up.
If I had wish-loops, that would obviously turn into maxhp, but I haven't had to deal with that from any of my players.

[KillianHawkeye]

In my groups we've done something I haven't seen mentioned before, probably because my first DM made it up (or got it from his, etc).

The player rolls, then they may reroll once. (Rerolls must be kept.)

This actually reminds me of what my old group from 15 years ago used to do when we first started playing 3E.

The player and the DM would each roll the new Hit Die. The player then had the choice to take the one he rolled or the one the DM rolled, except the DM's roll was kept secret until the choice was made. That way, it was really an interesting choice of weighing the odds of how likely the DM's roll was higher than your roll.

We typically would take the DM's roll when our own roll was bad because the odds were in our favor. It didn't always work out, but it was a fun little mini-game during the leveling up process. :smallsmile:

[the_archduke]

I have never gotten to use it, but this would actually give melee nice things.

1. Never, ever roll for HP. It isn't fair to have the possibility that a wizard get more HP in a level than the barbarian.
2. Multiply your HD size by your BaB progression. (i.e. Barb gets 12, Fighter gets 10, Cleric gets 6 (3/4 x8), Wizard gets 3 (1/2 x6) (yes I play Pathfinder))
3. Minimum HP is 1 per HD (so commoners don't have 0 hp per level. Also helps prevent the extreme OP cheese that is playing a commoner)

This helps reduce MAD for melees as they can afford less CON and it reduces SAD as casters would need more CON or else be really squishy.

[Berenger]

1d12 = 1d6+6
1d10 = 1d5+5
1d8 = 1d4+4
1d6 = 1d3+3
1d4 = 1d2+2

[SirNibbles]

1d12 = 1d6+6
1d10 = 1d5+5
1d8 = 1d4+4
1d6 = 1d3+3
1d4 = 1d2+2

I like this.
___

I also like giving age-based racial hit dice (without affecting ECL or any abilities that are based on HD) for all PCs and NPCs similar to the way dragons get theirs. It's nice knowing that you can be a level 1 Wizard with your 1d4 but you have 3d8 extra HP for being an adult humanoid. It also means you can more accurately represent the differences between a toddler and an adult, even if they're both completely untrained in combat.

[SangoProduction]

Not to be nitpicky, but average lifespan includes infant mortality. So high infant mortality = lower average lifespan, even if people live much longer, if they get past the infant years.

[Keltest]

I generally allow my players an option. They can roll their hit die and take what they get, or they can use a modified version. So you can go with:

1d4 OR 1d4, max at level 1
1d4+2 OR 1d6
1d6+2 OR 1d8
1d6+4 OR 1d8+2 OR 1d10
1d8+4 OR 1d10+2 OR 1d12

The exact combinations depending on the nature of the campaign I'm running. If I'm giving non-d4 classes the Dx+ dice, then ill generally let the d4 classes take max HP at level 1 so they don't die if they trip on a root. But not always, because sometimes that's really funny.

[Ninjaxenomorph]

I honestly like rolling (though I don't fault average), though Pathfinder actually has a retraining option to improve your HP if you rolled low. Or if you want to make it rain gold coins and you have not rolled max.

[Rebel7284]

I have always done average or average rounded up and been happy with that.

[Siosilvar]

I prefer to minimize randomness in character generation. There's plenty of dice to roll during the game, and it makes it easier to check the math when people level up outside of play time. So I prefer half or 3/4 rounded up.


Am I the only one that likes playing the elven wizard with 35 hp at 15th level?

With an 8 Con and either of my preferred methods, you have 31 hit points at 15th level. Even on a d6 like Pathfinder or 5e, you can get 32 if you take a 6 Con instead. Go wild. :smallwink:

[legomaster00156]

I give my players a choice at every level: they can take 1/2 HP rounded down (4 on a d8, 6 on a d12, etc.) or they can take a risk by rolling.

[Minimuggs]

Personally I like the randomness of rolling. Whilst it is annoying to have poor rolls on your HD the dice often balance themselves out somewhere else on the character sheet. If they don't then then maybe that character was destined to die as he was just a little unlucky.

I have never used max HP per level but personally I wouldn't want to. Our games are always played with a high chance of character death and emphasise the fact that the universe doesn't revolve around the players. Making them that much healthier than anyone else in the game of equivalent level gives them an unjustified boost imo. It also devalues placing a high score into CON as CON is only then really relevant for Fortitude saves.

Having said the above, the most experienced player in our group prefers averaging the roll.

[ChaosStar]

My dad, who I've mentioned plays second edition, uses MAX HP at each level. Not sure about myself, but definitely MAX HP at first level. I also prefer rolling for Ability Points rather than point buys or arrays. My favorite method though is the organic character rolling method.

[rrwoods]

This actually reminds me of what my old group from 15 years ago used to do when we first started playing 3E.

The player and the DM would each roll the new Hit Die. The player then had the choice to take the one he rolled or the one the DM rolled, except the DM's roll was kept secret until the choice was made. That way, it was really an interesting choice of weighing the odds of how likely the DM's roll was higher than your roll.

We typically would take the DM's roll when our own roll was bad because the odds were in our favor. It didn't always work out, but it was a fun little mini-game during the leveling up process. :smallsmile:

This is actually the way we do it too, it's mathematically equivalent but I do agree it has a different feel.

[javcs]

Usually max HP/HD or I swipe the progression from Iron Heroes:
d4=1d4
d6=1d4+2
d8=1d4+4
d10=1d4+6
d12=1d4+8
Any effects that alter HD size add or subtract 2 per die step.
Sentient undead utilize Charisma to HP/HD as though it were Constitution.

Oh, and I run a modified Massive Damage threshold:
MDT is RHD size + number of RHD (if any, racial paragon levels count as RHD)+ HP/HD modifier + MDT size modifier + DR (or applicable energy resistance if an energy attack); if multiple types of DR, use the highest that applied to the attack. Suffer a -1 penalty to MDT for each successful Massive Damage Save made in this combat/encounter or since last rest period or since regaining HP or healing.
Massive Damage save is Fort DC 15+ amount of damage past MDT. Failure by 5 or less drops you to -1 and dying, failure by 5-10 drops you to -5 and dying, failure by more than 10 means you just died.
Massive Damage applies to everything, including that which is immune to critical hits/sneak attacks.



And sometimes I go for the Vitality/Wounds variant.

[J-H]

Everything in my games has maxed HD. It's saved my players a few times, and keeps enemies from crumpling in just a couple of hits.

[nyjastul69]

I'm pretty strict on rolling for HP's. If the group get's whiny about it I'll make a change. I haven't met a whiny group yet.

[Ualaa]

Our group uses similar to what someone has called 'Iron Heroes', a few posts before this one.

We're playing Pathfinder, so hit points range from d6s to d12s.
There are no d4 classes.

So we have:
d6 = d4+2
d8 = d4+4
d10 = d4+6
d12 = d4+8

Basically, you're guaranteed one of the upper four possible results.
So hit points is improved, compared to straight rolling.
But there is still an element of randomness involved, because it is fun to actually roll the dice.

[digiman619]

I'm personally in the max HP for 1st level, roll (minimum half) for the rest category; a Barbarian that rolls a 3 on their d12 will get a 6 HP (+Con bonus/penalty, obviously). I also allow retraining (as described by Ultimate Campaign) if they're still unsatisfied.

[Professor Chimp]

I offer my players a choice whenever they start a new character: roll it, or take average. I don't run high OP, high risk campaigns, so having high HP is not essential and I'm pretty lenient/generous with healing anyway.

Whichever they choose, they'll have to stick with it though. No changing their minds and switching to the other option if things don't work out, such as the rollers getting 1s or 2s in a row.

[Ashtagon]

Just to recap, so far in this thread there's:


RAW: Roll dice as given.
Roll 1d4 + (enough to bring the maximum to whatever the class could normally get)
Roll (die size corresponding to half maximum result) + (half maximum result)
Fixed at maximum.
Fixed at half maximum, round off (i.e., up in this specific case).
Fixed at 75% maximum, round off.
Fixed at maximum × BAB fraction.



Reroll options: (nb. specify which of the items in the first list is the re-roll method)

No re-rolls allowed.
Choose one of two generation methods before rolling.
Take original result or $generation_method; must accept second roll.
Take original result or $generation_method; choose best of the two results.
n/a - generation system uses fixed scores not die rolls.


Level one options:

Roll as normal.
Maximise the first level's hit points.
n/a - generation system uses fixed scores not die rolls.


OSR option:

Roll as normal.
Re-roll every die from every level when you level up. Take the best of your previous score plus one or this new die roll total.
n/a - generation system uses fixed scores not die rolls.


Of these, I think I have most often played 1-1-2-1. I think I would most enjoy 7-5-3-3 or 1-1-2-2.

[RedMage125]

Low hit points due to a poor roll are a sure-fire way to have less fun at a game table.

Since low levels are so fragile, I allow max hp for level 1 AND level 2.


Currently the method is "roll HD. If you roll less than half, take half"


After level 2, I use a similar method. Players can roll or take "half plus 1" on the die. This means wizards and sorcerers are really only checking to see if they get a 4, otherwise they get a 3, but that's still poor hp.

Better than a level 5 fighter or barbarian having less than 30 hp because of poor rolls.

[exelsisxax]

Con score + level * (half-max of HD + Con mod)

Nobody in my groups like to play anything that's a good healer, so it flattens things out while preventing 1-shots at level 1. Probably a more niche method.

[Deox]

My groups enjoy the randomness, so we've devised the following which works out very well for us:

Depending on your HD:
1d4, re-roll 1s
1d6, 1d8, 1d10s re-roll 1s & 2s
1d12, re-roll 1s, 2s, & 3s

[Elkad]

Con score + level * (half-max of HD + Con mod)

Nobody in my groups like to play anything that's a good healer, so it flattens things out while preventing 1-shots at level 1. Probably a more niche method.

Wait, what?

That's high-average, plus a one-time bonus of your entire con score, right?
3rd level wizard with a 14 con would have 14+(3+2)+(3+2)+(3+2)=29?
Or are you halving the con mod each level, so it would be 14+(3+1)+(3+1)+(3+1)=26?


I fix lowbie one-shots by setting death to -con, which helps nearly everyone.
Oh, and not using greataxe-waving orcs. Stick to javelins and shortswords until the players are at least 3rd level.

[exelsisxax]

Wait, what?

That's high-average, plus a one-time bonus of your entire con score, right?
3rd level wizard with a 14 con would have 14+(3+2)+(3+2)+(3+2)=29?
Or are you halving the con mod each level, so it would be 14+(3+1)+(3+1)+(3+1)=26?


I fix lowbie one-shots by setting death to -con, which helps nearly everyone.
Oh, and not using greataxe-waving orcs. Stick to javelins and shortswords until the players are at least 3rd level.

*pathfinder.

So death is already -con rather than -10, and yes that wizard would have that much health, because half of d6 is 3. Half max isn't average. It's half of max.

[lylsyly]

The group I play in uses MAX for 1st 3 levels, then roll for every other level but nothing less than half rounded up.

Of course, we also use 10+1d8 for ability scores, arranged to suit (before racial adjustments) and we don't run into 10 drunk orcs around a campfire , we run into war bands of 40-50 out hunting (usually us):smallbiggrin:

[Xervous]

Quite the spectrum we've got here. A general tendency to agree that the average is nice - with more often being merrier.

How then does team monster get its HP set up? Roll em, average, player's method (in the case where it isn't a simple average)?

[Kelb_Panthera]

Quite the spectrum we've got here. A general tendency to agree that the average is nice - with more often being merrier.

How then does team monster get its HP set up? Roll em, average, player's method (in the case where it isn't a simple average)?

Average, barring special cases. It's printed right there in the block and I've got enough to do without having to roll HP when setting up an encounter.

[gr8artist]

~ snip ~
2. Multiply your HD size by your BaB progression. (i.e. Barb gets 12, Fighter gets 10, Cleric gets 6 (3/4 x8), Wizard gets 3 (1/2 x6) (yes I play Pathfinder))
~ snip~
Umm... Pathfinder's HD are correlated to BAB, if I remember correctly. Any class with full BAB gets a d10 (except the special snowflake Barbarian), any class with 3/4 BAB gets a d8, and any class with a 1/2 BAB gets a d6. Just thought I should point out that you're essentially doubling down on the same variable.

Personally, I like using "Max minus 2" for HP. A buff to the mundanes, while keeping the casters in line with expected averages. Since my group tends to favor DPS builds, I often use the same rule for NPC's (but not always for creatures, as the recalculations can get annoying).

I also like using 2d6+5 for stat generation, giving results of 7 to 17, with an average of 12. I let players choose point-buy (PF 20) or randomized (2d6+5, roll 6 and assign) and MAY let players with bad luck switch to point-buy if everyone else rolls well. I've also used a "stat bonus at every even level" rule, which goes nicely with PF's "feat at every odd level" rule, but I'm not sure I want to use that regularly.