Preferred hp level up method

[Mike Miller]

What do people prefer when leveling up for HP? Take average, max, roll for it, something else?

I like to roll, but I'm curious what a larger consensus might be.

[Geddy2112]

I always take average round up, but that is because my rolls are always garbage. I let my players take average or roll.

[mistermysterio]

my group typically rolls and, if the roll is less than half, can EITHER reroll (and take the second result regardless) or take average/half.

[Anxe]

I like rolling, but my players often take average if they're bringing in a new PC at a higher level.

This has led to the occasional odd hiccup. For example, the monk I'm playing in an E6 campaign right now has max HP. Doesn't lead to anything horrifying as he's just a monk, but there you go.

[TheIronGolem]

I do max HP, or average when I want to run a slightly more deadly game. Randomness has no place in character advancement.

[BearonVonMu]

I tend to dislike having characters of varying strengths, so I typically go with "First HD is maxed, all others are high average".
I do this for the same reason I prefer point buy for stats: most of the time it will be fine, but sometimes you'll get great disparities in power.

[martixy]

d4 + rest

As in wizards roll d4 and are done. Barbarians roll d4+8.

That's my favourite when not using just max HP and dispensing with the rolls entirely.

[AnimeTheCat]

DM rolls one, player rolls one. The Player picks which roll to take only knowing their roll.

[ZamielVanWeber]

Roll as normal but rolls are floored at average -.5. So a d4 would be 2,2,3,4 and a d8 would be 4,4,4,4,5,6,7,8.

[Zanos]

Average round up or max. Not a fan of rolling.

I don't think max is overpowered or anything either. At level 20 a 20 con(with items) wizard gets 18% more health, where a 20 con(with items) barbarian gets about 45% more health.

[Zordran]

Max on the first, and then average on the rest, so a d8 class gets 8,5,4,5,4...

My DMs have never liked that I don't roll, and this was a fair compromise in line with intent.

[flappeercraft]

I usually do average. So add 2.5 for d4, 3.5 for d6 and so on. The .5's are rounded down but when it would become even from adding another die then it is added in then.

[Crake]

Max on the first, and then average on the rest, so a d8 class gets 8,5,4,5,4...

My DMs have never liked that I don't roll, and this was a fair compromise in line with intent.

If you're doing proper average, like it's suggested in the DMG, the first "rolled" dice is supposed to be rounded down, so it should be 8, 4, 5, 4, 5... instead.

Personally our table pretty much exclusively uses average rounded up, so d4 is 3, d6 is 4, d8 is 5, d10 is 6 and d12 is 7

[Luccan]

Max, usually. If I want it to be a little more deadly, half or half+1. While I like it for stats sometimes, rolling is especially bad for HP because it only makes the game deadlier for some players and if you want it deadly for all, that's not a good way to do it. If I were to do rolling, I might allow a character who rolled less than half to pick up some other (minor) benefit.

[Celestia]

Rolling HP is an antiquated practice. It may have been fine in the early editions (I don't know), but 3.5 focuses extremely heavily on character building and combat. Making people roll their hit points is pointlessly punitive. Even doing straight half hit dice does nothing but limit one of the few benefits the mundanes get. A wizard going from max to average loses one hit point. A barbarian loses five. Why do so many people make rules that unfairly hurt the mundanes? In 3.5, the best method is absolutely to do max hit points for every level. If you want things to be deadly, then increase the damage of the monsters. Maybe then the wizards might actually be squishy like they're supposed to be.

[ZamielVanWeber]

We retain the rolls because they can be exciting. It is fun to nail that max roll. The floor is to make sure you get a decent chunk of HP regardless. Just because you are not excited by the rolling for HP and prefer to max the hit die does not make it "needlessly punitive" or "hurt mundanes." They get by plenty fine in my group where this houserule pervades.

[Celestia]

We retain the rolls because they can be exciting. It is fun to nail that max roll. The floor is to make sure you get a decent chunk of HP regardless. Just because you are not excited by the rolling for HP and prefer to max the hit die does not make it "needlessly punitive" or "hurt mundanes." They get by plenty fine in my group where this houserule pervades.
The game already has plenty of rolling when virtually every single action calls for a d20. Is that not enough? Rolling that nat 20 and getting a critical is certainly exciting, I'd say. Leave the randomness for when you're actually playing the game. No need to permanently weaken a character just because of one bad roll.

[Remuko]

Rolling HP is an antiquated practice. It may have been fine in the early editions (I don't know), but 3.5 focuses extremely heavily on character building and combat. Making people roll their hit points is pointlessly punitive. Even doing straight half hit dice does nothing but limit one of the few benefits the mundanes get. A wizard going from max to average loses one hit point. A barbarian loses five. Why do so many people make rules that unfairly hurt the mundanes? In 3.5, the best method is absolutely to do max hit points for every level. If you want things to be deadly, then increase the damage of the monsters. Maybe then the wizards might actually be squishy like they're supposed to be.

i mostly agree with this.

[rel]

I feel like a poll or graph or something would help this thread.

I use the following:
Max at 1st level then average. Fractions are not counted but carry over and add up.

So a wizard gets 4hp at level 1, then 2 (average roll is 2.5 but the .5 is not counted) at level 2, then 3 (average roll is 2.5 + the .5 from before) at level 3 and so on.

[Hurnn]

I use average rounded up.

[Ellrin]

Man, I've never done anything but roll normally. Maybe I should talk with my DMs.

[Crake]

Rolling HP is an antiquated practice. It may have been fine in the early editions (I don't know), but 3.5 focuses extremely heavily on character building and combat. Making people roll their hit points is pointlessly punitive. Even doing straight half hit dice does nothing but limit one of the few benefits the mundanes get. A wizard going from max to average loses one hit point. A barbarian loses five. Why do so many people make rules that unfairly hurt the mundanes? In 3.5, the best method is absolutely to do max hit points for every level. If you want things to be deadly, then increase the damage of the monsters. Maybe then the wizards might actually be squishy like they're supposed to be.

This seems like a needless overreaction. I honestly disagree that maxing hp makes that much of a big difference. Rolling I still disagree with, because low hp makes a big difference, but getting a few more hp per level, there's a point of diminishing returns. The power difference between average and max is certainly not a big jump, and there are plenty of mundanes anyway that don't have particularly large hit dice, while clerics and druids get d8s, so I don't even know why you're bringing the whole mundane vs magic thing into it at all. The wizard's simply not getting hit in the first place.

[Gruftzwerg]

Most DMs I played with roll(s) after the first lvl until they got a result over 50%.

I myself prefer max HP, because imho HP already have a really bad scaling. There are tons of ways to increase dmg in 3.5, but when it comes to HP its a really bad joke.

And because of PC dmg optimization, I always give NPCs/Monsters max HP. Sometimes even more to make the fights somewhat enjoyable:
homebrew npc/monster HP template for bigger groups:
< +50 extra HP = +0 CR
51 - 100 extra HP = +1 CR
101 - 150 extra HP = +2 CR
...
I did make this for a group of 6 players with 3-4 of em aiming most of the time for dmg builds. Cause you can't have always more enemies to fit the size of the group. You can't have 1.5 boss NPCs. So you have to adjust somehow imho. Note that the values where optimized for the group I played with, so the fitting values for your group may vary.

[Topaz]

In my Pathfinder game I'm using 2/3 die size, rounded nearest; which is same as average rounded up for dice up to d8 but a little more generous above that, because I figured that flat bonuses are more proportionately generous to the smaller dice. It seems to be working out pretty well.

[Crake]

Most DMs I played with roll(s) after the first lvl until they got a result over 50%.

I myself prefer max HP, because imho HP already have a really bad scaling. There are tons of ways to increase dmg in 3.5, but when it comes to HP its a really bad joke.

And because of PC dmg optimization, I always give NPCs/Monsters max HP. Sometimes even more to make the fights somewhat enjoyable:
homebrew npc/monster HP template for bigger groups:
< +50 extra HP = +0 CR
51 - 100 extra HP = +1 CR
101 - 150 extra HP = +2 CR
...
I did make this for a group of 6 players with 3-4 of em aiming most of the time for dmg builds. Cause you can't have always more enemies to fit the size of the group. You can't have 1.5 boss NPCs. So you have to adjust somehow imho. Note that the values where optimized for the group I played with, so the fitting values for your group may vary.

Sure you can!

Say your boss is CRX
2x CRX-2 = CRX
This means CRX-2 = 0.5 CRX, so to have 1.5 boss NPCs, you have a CRX boss, and a CRX-2 boss, or you can have 3 CRX-2 bosses if you want them to be all the same.

[Mars Ultor]

Two points, plus the next lowest die. A fighter is 1d8 +2, a cleric is 1d6 +2, etc.

[Gruftzwerg]

Sure you can!

Say your boss is CRX
2x CRX-2 = CRX
This means CRX-2 = 0.5 CRX, so to have 1.5 boss NPCs, you have a CRX boss, and a CRX-2 boss, or you can have 3 CRX-2 bosses if you want them to be all the same.

sure, but that doesn't always get the wanted results (longer fights). Cause if they don't have enough HP to survive even a single round of AoE (not to talk about single target) dmg the PCs dish out in a single turn, it doesn't help at all. They'll still die like flies in the end, unless they have more HP. And as said, regular HP scaling (per lvl/CR) is meh and doesn't contribute in a noticeable way to solve the situation imho.

[Eldariel]

For minor balance/logic improvements, I'm partial to full HD for everyone every level and 2xCon modifier for Warrior-type classes. Maximizes frontliner advantage.

[Mordaedil]

We play on roll20 and I've always been really bummed by bad luck in my rolls, so I made a deal with the DM that for important permanent rolls like HP and others, I roll 3 times, but only take the last one.

This doesn't really change anything besides making the dice roller work a little more, but I got pretty good results from it except last time when I only got 2HP. Considering my other levels were max, I'm not that bummed.

[Jay R]

Max first die. Then I ensure that the total be at least average, but not each new die.

So the average for a 4th level Fighter is 10 + 5.5 + 5.5 + 5.5 = 26.5, so the minimum I allow is 27*. If he had 21 at third level and rolls a 3, he will be bumped up to 27. But if he had 28 and rolled a 1, he just goes to 29.

*CON bonus is separate, and not affected.

[Necroticplague]

Maximized. Makes having a larger HD actually feel like something that matters.

[Jormengand]

I use average, rounded down holistically rather than individually (4,2,3,2,3... for a d4). I dislike any form of "Roll to see how badly you shoot yourself in the foot at chargen".

[SangoProduction]

d4 + rest

As in wizards roll d4 and are done. Barbarians roll d4+8.

That's my favourite when not using just max HP and dispensing with the rolls entirely.

Oh I like that.

[Elkad]

Roll. Record each roll permanently. (so you can reference them in later levels).
I've been known to give out Hit Die rerolls as awards (plus it's a listed "standard" use of a Wish in my games), so you need to be able to look at your sheet and say "hey, way back when I leveled up to 3, I rolled a 2 on my d12, I'll reroll that one"

[NerdHut]

Most of the games I've participated in used either a straight roll, or we rolled but re-rolled 1s. The game I'm currently running, we're trying out flat hp based on HD: d4-3, d6-5, d8-6, d10-8, d12-10 (But first HD is still max). It's got its own pros and cons. You can't get that huge hp boost as a barbarian, but everyone seems to like it alright since it's always above an average roll.

[Jay R]

When modifying hit point rules, be careful to consider what unintended effects you might have.

I had a DM once who maxed out hit points, and to be "fair", he also maxed out the damage from fireballs, lightning bolts, and other magic attacks. Since that basically doubles magical damage, and doubles hit points, the only real effect was that it reduced the effective damage done by weapons in half. It also reduced the relative value of high CON. In his desire to help the players, he had in fact reduced the power of the paladin, the fighter, and the ranger.

I never pointed that out, since my wife and I were playing the only wizards.

[heavyfuel]

Rolling HP is an antiquated practice. It may have been fine in the early editions (I don't know), but 3.5 focuses extremely heavily on character building and combat. Making people roll their hit points is pointlessly punitive. Even doing straight half hit dice does nothing but limit one of the few benefits the mundanes get. A wizard going from max to average loses one hit point. A barbarian loses five. Why do so many people make rules that unfairly hurt the mundanes? In 3.5, the best method is absolutely to do max hit points for every level. If you want things to be deadly, then increase the damage of the monsters. Maybe then the wizards might actually be squishy like they're supposed to be.

You could go the other for deadlyness. Everyone gets max hp-3. This punishes Wizards and Sorcerers (though not the freaking Druids). A Barbarian only loses 25%, but the Wizard loses 75%

[Celestia]

You could go the other for deadlyness. Everyone gets max hp-3. This punishes Wizards and Sorcerers (though not the freaking Druids). A Barbarian only loses 25%, but the Wizard loses 75%
Yeah, that could certainly work. I'd probably go max -2, though. Otherwise, the wizard/sorcerer will be so weak that even at level 20, a stiff breeze could kill them. I mean, unless that's what you're going for, of course. :smalltongue:

[Elkad]

Yeah, that could certainly work. I'd probably go max -2, though. Otherwise, the wizard/sorcerer will be so weak that even at level 20, a stiff breeze could kill them. I mean, unless that's what you're going for, of course. :smalltongue:

Kinda seems normal to me. 20th Level Magic-Users struggled to hit the old 60hp cutoff for Power Word: Kill (11d4+31 with a 16 Con, and more con didn't help), and a couple Magic Missiles would always put them under it.
It's far easier for a Wizard to hit the new 100pt limit for Power Word: Kill now.

[heavyfuel]

Kinda seems normal to me. 20th Level Magic-Users struggled to hit the old 60hp cutoff for Power Word: Kill (11d4+31 with a 16 Con, and more con didn't help), and a couple Magic Missiles would always put them under it.
It's far easier for a Wizard to hit the new 100pt limit for Power Word: Kill now.

PW:Kill is irrelevant. How are you a lv 20 Wizard/Sorcerer that's still vulnerable mind-affecting AND death effects? :smallconfused:

[Elkad]

PW:Kill is irrelevant. How are you a lv 20 Wizard/Sorcerer that's still vulnerable mind-affecting AND death effects? :smallconfused:

That's a new change as well. PW:K was a Conjuration effect.

And still, there seems to be an expectation here that people don't spam various Dispels like mad.

[heavyfuel]

That's a new change as well. PW:K was a Conjuration effect.

And still, there seems to be an expectation here that people don't spam various Dispels like mad.

If you have Mind Blank up, sure, Dispel Magic will eat that right up, but if you have a piece of equipment, then only target dispels work, and they have to target that specific piece of equipment, which is nearly impossible since Magic Aura is lv 1 spell that lasts 1day/lv

Also, there are ways to stop Dispel Magic, a Ring of Counterspelling being the most famous one, though it's flimsy

[rs2excelsior]

I've become a fan of roll past first and reroll 1s, which is something I don't think I've seen in this thread--although most of y'all seem to be more generous than that anyway.

I might try giving everyone/every monster max hp... something to consider.

[Nifft]

My most successful long-term game used half-HD rounded down or what you roll, decided after you roll.

This had minimal benefit to low HD (+0.25 expected value on a d4; the only number affected on a d4 was the 1)

It also had maximal benefit for high HD (+1.25 expected value on a d12).

== == ==

Then I saw the 4e HP mechanics and I'm kind of in love with their method of HP calculation now. High initially, low bonus each level, and no +Con every level so there's no multiplicative scaling.

Using that would require re-working all spells & maneuvers & how combat works, but at least it'd be clean and non-contentious.

[heavyfuel]

A slight beef I have with max HP is that D&D combat is already a slug fest.

Even simple combats go for around 30 minutes of real life time, and more challenging ones can take up litteral hours (I think our table's record is just over 5 hours for a single encounter)

Adding even more HP to characters exacerbates this problem.

[Zanos]

I don't give monsters max HD unless they're special characters. A lot of creatures tend to have hilariously inflated HD, and maximizing them does inflate their HP by a lot. Especially undead. 27 HP CR 1/2 Zombie? Yeah, right.

[Gruftzwerg]

A slight beef I have with max HP is that D&D combat is already a slug fest.

Even simple combats go for around 30 minutes of real life time, and more challenging ones can take up litteral hours (I think our table's record is just over 5 hours for a single encounter)

Adding even more HP to characters exacerbates this problem.

Sorry, but this is imho a problem of non optimization and mismanagement from the player side. Be it impatience, bad action economy, no one optimizing in dmg in any way, no coordination, or whatever else causes your players to take that long.
If your group would play Rocket Tag (the other extreme compared to low/non optimization), fights wouldn't last more than 15min, most of the time even lesser than 5 min., where most of the time the DM is setting the battlemap up.

[Elkad]

If you have Mind Blank up, sure, Dispel Magic will eat that right up, but if you have a piece of equipment, then only target dispels work, and they have to target that specific piece of equipment, which is nearly impossible since Magic Aura is lv 1 spell that lasts 1day/lv

Also, there are ways to stop Dispel Magic, a Ring of Counterspelling being the most famous one, though it's flimsy
Chain Spell:Greater Dispel (Targetted) at you, your head slot item, face slot item, both rings, and 15+ other equipment slots. Yes, I have to shoot blind. I'm going to break a lot of your gear for d4 rounds. Much of it will be at a low CL and fail very easily.
Even better if I can Maximize it, but that takes (more) metamagic reduction.

And of course you can defend against it. Wear 20 rings (18 of which are non-magical). Put gloves on. Pay extra to craft items for non-standard slots (Mind Blank Socks that take your feet slot, under regular boots). Etc.

And that's a good opener vs just about anyone, it's not just for sticking PW:K

[Allanimal]

If your group would play Rocket Tag (the other extreme compared to low/non optimization), fights wouldn't last more than 15min, most of the time even lesser than 5 min., where most of the time the DM is setting the battlemap up.

Just an opinion, but that doesn't sound fun at all.
On one side, if the enemies are always dead before they get a chance to do anything, where is the sense that the PCs are in danger? On the flip side, the PCs are all dead in 5 min, and had no chance to really do anything about it? I'd probably be out of the DM seat if it happened often.

A somewhat longer combat where the PCs are challenged and it seems like it could go either way, and they need to have tactics and coordination, now that's fun.

To get back on topic, HP inflation can just lead to the slugfest, where it is obvious who will win, it just takes time to hack away at that pile of HP with no thought. Yeah, a lucky crit may swing the outcome a bit for one side, but the sense of danger ends quick and the sense of tedium sets in.

It's a fine line to walk...

[StreamOfTheSky]

Aside from max first HD (of course), I always have done the rest as 3/4 max (6 on a d8, 7.5 on a d10, etc...). Ensures that a high HD is actually beneficial. I've been in games w/ rolled hp where the sorcerer had more hp than the barbarian, and it was ridiculous.
I don't do max for every HD because I figure it devalues direct damage spells even more if everyone has that much hp, but I've played in games with it and it's ok overall, too.
I also require summons and pets to use the average HD result like in the MM entries, to give the martial classes a bit more of a leg up compared to them. And use high point buys for PCs and NPCs while summons and pets use the MM values, for the exact same reason.
Every little bit helps lessen that disparity...

[Eldariel]

Yeah, that could certainly work. I'd probably go max -2, though. Otherwise, the wizard/sorcerer will be so weak that even at level 20, a stiff breeze could kill them. I mean, unless that's what you're going for, of course. :smalltongue:

Most of a level 20 character HP is Con-bonus anyways. 14 Con, +6 item (baseline minimum) is +100 HP, though Wish-boosts for +40 more are reasonable (not to mention temporary HP - even just Empowered False Life is +23 average, and different sources stack). Even base HP of 0 wouldn't be much of a problem.

This is why I double Warrior level Con to HP; otherwise the relative difference in HP gets buried under shared flat bonuses. This at least gives people dedicated to training their body something to show for it.


And yeah, dispelling is strong but dispelling any particular buff is 50/50 without much work on the Dispel check (meanwhile normal CL boosters like Orange Prism Ioun Stone, Archmage and Beads of Karma on allday buffs counteract it) so for a level 20 caster, nothing short of Disjunction is reliable; I wouldn't expect Mindblank to go down easily, particularly with the characters' offensive power making fights quite short limiting the action opportunity for repeated GDMs.

Now Permanencied buffs and magic items (Chained GDM) are a different story...

[Gruftzwerg]

Just an opinion, but that doesn't sound fun at all.
On one side, if the enemies are always dead before they get a chance to do anything, where is the sense that the PCs are in danger? On the flip side, the PCs are all dead in 5 min, and had no chance to really do anything about it? I'd probably be out of the DM seat if it happened often.

A somewhat longer combat where the PCs are challenged and it seems like it could go either way, and they need to have tactics and coordination, now that's fun.

To get back on topic, HP inflation can just lead to the slugfest, where it is obvious who will win, it just takes time to hack away at that pile of HP with no thought. Yeah, a lucky crit may swing the outcome a bit for one side, but the sense of danger ends quick and the sense of tedium sets in.

It's a fine line to walk...

I just intended to show the other extreme. I wanted to suggest to find a sweet spot somewhere in the middle.
Your PC need to be more optimized when it comes to combat. That doesn't always mean high PO dmg builds. Just the fluent coordination and ability usage within the group can save much time. If everyone know his options he can do, before it is his turn this saves a lot of time. DM & PCs should be aware of the most common spells & ability rules and don't need to look em up every time (note: most common, not all ;). Another common mistake is action mismanagement like incombat-healing, to many buffs cast over several rounds when the combat has started or other suboptimal choices that can be made.



I don't do max for every HD because I figure it devalues direct damage spells even more if everyone has that much hp, but I've played in games with it and it's ok overall, too.

Why would that be a bad thing to devalue direct damage spells? I mean, even a non optimized caster can dish out more AoE dmg per turn, than most mundane can dream off. I mean where is the point when the entire encounter can be solved within 2-3 standard actions??
Imho this change even helps the martial classes, cause they can easier obtain high single target dmg and thus have still the chance to drop 1 enemy / turn. the casters can still contribute with AoE/single target dmg and other spells.

Imho full casters already shine in every part of the game, they don't need to be on pair with the sole thing martial classes can do well: killing stuff via HP dmg.

[Eldariel]

Why would that be a bad thing to devalue direct damage spells? I mean, even a non optimized caster can dish out more AoE dmg per turn, than most mundane can dream off. I mean where is the point when the entire encounter can be solved within 2-3 standard actions??
Imho this change even helps the martial classes, cause they can easier obtain high single target dmg and thus have still the chance to drop 1 enemy / turn. the casters can still contribute with AoE/single target dmg and other spells.

Imho full casters already shine in every part of the game, they don't need to be on pair with the sole thing martial classes can do well: killing stuff via HP dmg.

Anything that devalues spellcaster damage also devalues melee damage with the cave-at that melee does little else while spellcaster can do anything else as well. Thus any kind of HP inflation is inherently more a problem for martials than spellcasters. That said, I prefer the option of increasing HP and buffing martials (and obviously using ToB - pounce charge being the only way to do damage is dumb) while keeping damage spells around near as is (perhaps minor buffs). Again this makes martials a bit closer to having a niche of their own.

[molten_dragon]

I always do average rounded up. Rolling in the past has always led to trying to minimize the randomness (reroll ones, roll twice and take the better result, etc.) so I just get rid of it altogether now.

[Gruftzwerg]

Anything that devalues spellcaster damage also devalues melee damage with the cave-at that melee does little else while spellcaster can do anything else as well. Thus any kind of HP inflation is inherently more a problem for martials than spellcasters. That said, I prefer the option of increasing HP and buffing martials (and obviously using ToB - pounce charge being the only way to do damage is dumb) while keeping damage spells around near as is (perhaps minor buffs). Again this makes martials a bit closer to having a niche of their own.

Imho melee have still an easy time optimizing their dmg. And no, you don't always need to rely on charge for that. And while optimizing for dmg as melee is good, cause you get better at your main duty, the same can't be said for casters.

If a caster optimized for blaster, he sacrifices utility spells, either prepared or spells known. He gets less flexible and ain't T1 anymore.

Further casters can't reach the dmg potential of martials as easily as mundanes, when it comes to optimization. While martials just pick that up what they need or think fit best, the caster needs to be aware of casterlvl loss (due to non 10/10 prc) and loss in flexibility. So optimizing as blaster is even less worth with HP inflation.

If you consider the mentioned points, imho HP inflation helps the mundane martial classes and weakens direct damage spells from casters.

[Eldariel]

Imho melee have still an easy time optimizing their dmg. And no, you don't always need to rely on charge for that. And while optimizing for dmg as melee is good, cause you get better at your main duty, the same can't be said for casters.

If a caster optimized for blaster, he sacrifices utility spells, either prepared or spells known. He gets less flexible and ain't T1 anymore.

Eh, just you using some metamagic reducers and prepare some damage spells does in no ways reduce your tier rating; you still have plenty of slots leftover, let alone with slot refreshing builds or the like. You don't actually need any build resources such as feats or items to be T1; thus you're free to focus everything on getting your Energy Admixtured Twin Split Ray Empowered Quickened (Chained) Orbs or Hails of Stone or Jovoc comboes or whatever online.


Further casters can't reach the dmg potential of martials as easily as mundanes, when it comes to optimization. While martials just pick that up what they need or think fit best, the caster needs to be aware of casterlvl loss (due to non 10/10 prc) and loss in flexibility. So optimizing as blaster is even less worth with HP inflation.

If you consider the mentioned points, imho HP inflation helps the mundane martial classes and weakens direct damage spells from casters.

Eh, caster doesn't need to use PRCs or lose caster levels to build damage. You can either use spells and thus use 10/10 PRCs, or just cast/persist Divine Power and be a frontliner. I built a level 11 Cleric Charger (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?314454-3-5-Cleric-Charger) that's still a Cleric while also one-shotting Hecatoncheires. And that's without many of the higher end ridiculous self-affecting spells like Consumptive Field, Energy Transformation Field or such.

Now this is true if casters restrict themselves, do not use metamagic reduction or persistent spells, don't loop anything (obviously), and don't bind stuff that can do this for them. In such cases, mundane damage multiplication is much easier. However, regardless of HP casters' ease of attacking through Save-or-Die/Loses does not change, which means the more HP the enemies have, the comparatively larger the caster advantage in bypassing HP entirely is.

[heavyfuel]

Sorry, but this is imho a problem of non optimization and mismanagement from the player side. Be it impatience, bad action economy, no one optimizing in dmg in any way, no coordination, or whatever else causes your players to take that long.
If your group would play Rocket Tag (the other extreme compared to low/non optimization), fights wouldn't last more than 15min, most of the time even lesser than 5 min., where most of the time the DM is setting the battlemap up.

Optimization goes both ways. A character that deals around 90 dmg per round is pretty optimized for E6, wouldn't you say? Yet this character was participating in the 5 hour combat.

If you make the ubercharger not able to charge, or the SoD wizard unable to cast (counterspell), their rocket tag strategy tends to go down the drain.

Optimization goes both ways.


Chain Spell:Greater Dispel (Targetted) at you, your head slot item, face slot item, both rings, and 15+ other equipment slots. Yes, I have to shoot blind. I'm going to break a lot of your gear for d4 rounds. Much of it will be at a low CL and fail very easily.
Even better if I can Maximize it, but that takes (more) metamagic reduction.

And of course you can defend against it. Wear 20 rings (18 of which are non-magical). Put gloves on. Pay extra to craft items for non-standard slots (Mind Blank Socks that take your feet slot, under regular boots). Etc.

And that's a good opener vs just about anyone, it's not just for sticking PW:K

Like you said, opening with Chain Dispel has its counters, and it's also subject to be stopped by a ring of counterspells

Plus, you can't maximize Dispel Magic

From the srd: "Spells that might actually be useful once maximized are not affected"

[Pleh]

I roll, but I like to max the first HD. The first level is rough enough without a low roll to really throw a wrench in it.

When making/advancing NPCs, I like using AnyDice to average the rolls.

[Nupo]

Max first and then roll with the option of a re-roll. If you re-roll you are stuck with the second roll. Makes the decision to re-roll or not fun. If you rolled a 1 it's an easy decision, but if you say roll a 4 on a d8 the decision is a little harder.

[weckar]

Max 1st, then roll. We also roll ability scores. It's a hit die for a frickin' reason.

[Eldariel]

Optimization goes both ways. A character that deals around 90 dmg per round is pretty optimized for E6, wouldn't you say? Yet this character was participating in the 5 hour combat.

If you make the ubercharger not able to charge, or the SoD wizard unable to cast (counterspell), their rocket tag strategy tends to go down the drain.

Optimization goes both ways.

No such thing as SoD Wizard. Any Wizard can cast the spell and they take no investment in build resources. Not to mention, counterspelling is an immensely action-negative, unreliable combat option generally (Battlemagic Perception is a different matter of course). It's practically impossible to reliably shut down casting, certainly on a different plane of complexity than shutting down charging (though Bounding Assault maneuver helps the charger a LOT).

[weckar]

No such thing as SoD Wizard. Any Wizard can cast the spell and they take no investment in build resources. Not to mention, counterspelling is an immensely action-negative, unreliable combat option generally (Battlemagic Perception is a different matter of course). It's practically impossible to reliably shut down casting, certainly on a different plane of complexity than shutting down charging (though Bounding Assault maneuver helps the charger a LOT).

Actually, scribing the spell in the first place may take some character build GP.

[Eldariel]

Actually, scribing the spell in the first place may take some character build GP.

Fair, it might if you did not find a book with it and did not get it as a level-up. That feels extremely minor though, but technically you're correct. Few hundred GP is in the same category as mundane armor and such though - on higher levels, they rarely amount to that many per cent of your wealth.

[heavyfuel]

No such thing as SoD Wizard. Any Wizard can cast the spell and they take no investment in build resources. Not to mention, counterspelling is an immensely action-negative, unreliable combat option generally (Battlemagic Perception is a different matter of course). It's practically impossible to reliably shut down casting, certainly on a different plane of complexity than shutting down charging (though Bounding Assault maneuver helps the charger a LOT).

Or, you know, feats and spells per day. Feats are a pretty big investment, even in e6 (unless the DM's given you 30+ feats) and spells per day are an even bigger problem at low levels.

Also, Divine Defiance doesn't waste a spells slot (you just need the spell prepared, and you can even use Dispel Magic), requires no readied action, and can be done 3+cha times per day as an immediate action

[Eldariel]

Or, you know, feats and spells per day. Feats are a pretty big investment, even in e6 (unless the DM's given you 30+ feats) and spells per day are an even bigger problem at low levels.

Also, Divine Defiance doesn't waste a spells slot (you just need the spell prepared, and you can even use Dispel Magic), requires no readied action, and can be done 3+cha times per day as an immediate action

Sure, feats are but you don't need feats for SoD spells. Spells per day, sure, but it's just a small pebble in a massive bag.

And yeah, DD and other counterspell setups are a different matter altogether but hardly commonplace.

[heavyfuel]

hardly commonplace.

Optimization goes both ways :smallbiggrin:

[Eldariel]

Optimization goes both ways :smallbiggrin:

Of course, realistically everyone should habe anti-spell options since spells are so good but I'd still find every encounter having a dedicated counterspeller hard to believe in all but the most caster centric settings. And SoD Wizard is just as inconvenienced as Fireball Wizard (though of course, you can just CL pump to make dispelling an unlikely prospect or use LoS/E blocks or False Theurgy or whatever).

[Elkad]

Plus, you can't maximize Dispel Magic

From the srd: "Spells that might actually be useful once maximized are not affected"

You forget your blue text?
Suppressing the magic properties of an item for 1d4 rounds sound exactly like a "variable, numeric effect"

[heavyfuel]

You forget your blue text?
Suppressing the magic properties of an item for 1d4 rounds sound exactly like a "variable, numeric effect"

Oh , my mistake. Thought you were referring to the caster level check (though there's the argument that since Dispel Magic is unmaximizeable due to the clause I mentioned)

Still, the ring would counterspell it before any effect, so you'd need at least two dispels before you can cast your other spells

[Elkad]

Oh , my mistake. Thought you were referring to the caster level check (though there's the argument that since Dispel Magic is unmaximizeable due to the clause I mentioned)

Still, the ring would counterspell it before any effect, so you'd need at least two dispels before you can cast your other spells

That raises the question of what is the interaction between Chain Spell (or a Chain Lightning even) and a Ring of Counterspells.
If I target you first, does it prevent the chained effects?
How about if I target you last, after (CL-1) of your items?

[Hackulator]

Roll, if they get below half then bump it up to half.

[Gruftzwerg]

Optimization goes both ways. A character that deals around 90 dmg per round is pretty optimized for E6, wouldn't you say? Yet this character was participating in the 5 hour combat.

If you make the ubercharger not able to charge, or the SoD wizard unable to cast (counterspell), their rocket tag strategy tends to go down the drain.

Optimization goes both ways.


ehm.. how should I put it without sounding rude..
90 dmg per round is nice for E6 yes, sound like some dmg optimization. But what's with the other stuff a decent optimized ubercharger build needs? mostly..
Mobility to have more reliable charge usage, even after round 1. If you don't build by class/prc for that ( e.g. Bounding Assault-maneuver, Drunken Master's Stagger ability, there is also a skilltrick and a few spells that can cover that up), you can still invest at least into 1-2 Anklet of Translocation for that. They are cheap and mandatory for early ubercharger builds. If the players are struggling with this kind of "problems", they aren't optimized at all. Just pimping dmg without reliability to bring it to the target is a common build mistake in ubercharger build (which makes em auto-fail from an optimization point imho).

As said, when i talk about optimization I don't sole mean theoretical raw dmg output. I mean optimizing the build, to make it feel "complete", covering some of the problems a build might have (e.g. the needed mobility for ubercharger; or Iron Hearth Surge to deal with Rage/Frenzy aftereffects of Barb/Frenzied Berserker...). There are many aspects of a build that can be optimized ;)


Now this is true if casters restrict themselves, do not use metamagic reduction or persistent spells, don't loop anything (obviously), and don't bind stuff that can do this for them. In such cases, mundane damage multiplication is much easier. However, regardless of HP casters' ease of attacking through Save-or-Die/Loses does not change, which means the more HP the enemies have, the comparatively larger the caster advantage in bypassing HP entirely is.

At first I was expecting that in a group with mundanes, noone is going to play a T1 with extreme cheese (metamagic reduction loops or anything that gets near this optimization lvl). Sure, you can always overshadow your other non T1 teammates is your really desire.
But without all the cheese, T1 classes will pay in flexibility and overall powerlvl when they optimize for HP dmg.
Even if it may sound silly to you, but imho a caster bypassing the HP entirely and killing stuff is still better than a caster that overshadows the mundanes with the sole thing they wanna be good at: HP dmg.
Especially if you consider the big AoE range + reach that blast spell can have to deal HP dmg. (edit: from a party balance point of view)

[heavyfuel]

That raises the question of what is the interaction between Chain Spell (or a Chain Lightning even) and a Ring of Counterspells.
If I target you first, does it prevent the chained effects?
How about if I target you last, after (CL-1) of your items?

You don't target one person then another. The spell targets everyone at the same time, even if the secondary targets are affected only after the primary target. And if one of targets has a ring, the ring counters the entire spell, so it doesn't have any effect.


ehm.. how should I put it without sounding rude..
90 dmg per round is nice for E6 yes, sound like some dmg optimization. But what's with the other stuff a decent optimized ubercharger build needs? mostly..
Mobility to have more reliable charge usage, even after round 1. If you don't build by class/prc for that ( e.g. Bounding Assault-maneuver, Drunken Master's Stagger ability, there is also a skilltrick and a few spells that can cover that up), you can still invest at least into 1-2 Anklet of Translocation for that. They are cheap and mandatory for early ubercharger builds. If the players are struggling with this kind of "problems", they aren't optimized at all. Just pimping dmg without reliability to bring it to the target is a common build mistake in ubercharger build (which makes em auto-fail from an optimization point imho).

As said, when i talk about optimization I don't sole mean theoretical raw dmg output. I mean optimizing the build, to make it feel "complete", covering some of the problems a build might have (e.g. the needed mobility for ubercharger; or Iron Hearth Surge to deal with Rage/Frenzy aftereffects of Barb/Frenzied Berserker...). There are many aspects of a build that can be optimized ;)


Sure, and I perfectly agree with your point. But I never said he wasn't a mobile character. Even with a lot of mobility, there are ways to make an ubercharger not deal damage (incorporeal foes, miss chance, abrupt jaunt, reach weapons + standstill, countercharge, to name a few). It's impossible to optimize against everything

[Gruftzwerg]

You don't target one person then another. The spell targets everyone at the same time, even if the secondary targets are affected only after the primary target. And if one of targets has a ring, the ring counters the entire spell, so it doesn't have any effect.



Sure, and I perfectly agree with your point. But I never said he wasn't a mobile character. Even with a lot of mobility, there are ways to make an ubercharger not deal damage (incorporeal foes, miss chance, abrupt jaunt, reach weapons + standstill, countercharge, to name a few). It's impossible to optimize against everything

really?
There are ways via magic items and spells to deal with misschances.
A simple Anklet of Translocation deals with Abrupt Jaunt, reach weapons + standstill and even Countercharge or weapons set up against a charge.
Sure, you won't have everything immediately at hand if you start at low lvl. But over the lvls (when you can start to call yourself a ubercharger) you should have at least a few of the cheap Anklets to deal with "most" stuff that tries to stop you from charging. It only costs 1,400g and thus is available for 3rd lvl character wbl. 2 charges are enough for most encounters and you can switch em after each combat. Since they are cheap and small, there is no problem of having enough of em to deal with the regular amount of encounter per day.

edit: btw, even tumble can deal with a few of the things (reach weapons w/ or w/o stand still).

[heavyfuel]

really?
There are ways via magic items and spells to deal with misschances.
A simple Anklet of Translocation deals with Abrupt Jaunt, reach weapons + standstill and even Countercharge or weapons set up against a charge.
Sure, you won't have everything immediately at hand if you start at low lvl. But over the lvls (when you can start to call yourself a ubercharger) you should have at least a few of the cheap Anklets to deal with "most" stuff that tries to stop you from charging. It only costs 1,400g and thus is available for 3rd lvl character wbl. 2 charges are enough for most encounters and you can switch em after each combat. Since they are cheap and small, there is no problem of having enough of em to deal with the regular amount of encounter per day.

edit: btw, even tumble can deal with a few of the things (reach weapons w/ or w/o stand still).

You can't use a Teleport effect mid charge


You must have a clear path toward the opponent, and nothing can hinder your movement (such as difficult terrain or obstacles). Here’s what it means to have a clear path. First, you must move to the closest space from which you can attack the opponent. (If this space is occupied or otherwise blocked, you can’t charge.) Second, if any line from your starting space to the ending space passes through a square that blocks movement, slows movement, or contains a creature (even an ally), you can’t charge. (Helpless creatures don’t stop a charge.)

As it's been discussed many times before, teleportation isn't movement (and can't be used to activate Skirmish, the usual reason for such questions (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?528686-3-5-Does-teleportation-effects-count-as-movement)). So you can't teleport mid charge

Edit: You also can't Tumble mid charge


Action
Not applicable. Tumbling is part of movement, so a Tumble check is part of a move action.


Charge is a full round action, not a move action

[Gruftzwerg]

You can't use a Teleport effect mid charge



As it's been discussed many times before, teleportation isn't movement (and can't be used to activate Skirmish, the usual reason for such questions (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?528686-3-5-Does-teleportation-effects-count-as-movement)). So you can't teleport mid charge

Edit: You also can't Tumble mid charge



Charge is a full round action, not a move action

Anklet of Translocation is a swift action an thus can be used mid-charge. Yeah it doesn't count as movement. But we ain't talking about Skirmish. Either you use the teleport to bring you to a good spot to charge or to follow the dirty lil caster after his immediate teleport. I don't get where you see the problem? You can use swift actions in the middle of other actions, you don't need to chain em one after the other action like with movement & standard actions.
And why I shouldn't be able to tumble while charging? After all charging involves movement and tumble is part of movement. You don't need to always use a "move action" to be able to tumble. The movements of charge counts too. Cause it's a "general (tumble) rule" that it is part of your regular movement, which is typically a movement action. But it gets trumped by the specific text of the charge's full-round action which involves movement too.

[Mike Miller]

Edit: You also can't Tumble mid charge

Charge is a full round action, not a move action

Yes, you can, it has been discussed at length before (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?532279-Can-you-tumble-and-charge-at-the-same-time).

[StreamOfTheSky]

Why would that be a bad thing to devalue direct damage spells? I mean, even a non optimized caster can dish out more AoE dmg per turn, than most mundane can dream off. I mean where is the point when the entire encounter can be solved within 2-3 standard actions??
Imho this change even helps the martial classes, cause they can easier obtain high single target dmg and thus have still the chance to drop 1 enemy / turn. the casters can still contribute with AoE/single target dmg and other spells.

Imho full casters already shine in every part of the game, they don't need to be on pair with the sole thing martial classes can do well: killing stuff via HP dmg.


Anything that devalues spellcaster damage also devalues melee damage with the cave-at that melee does little else while spellcaster can do anything else as well. Thus any kind of HP inflation is inherently more a problem for martials than spellcasters. That said, I prefer the option of increasing HP and buffing martials (and obviously using ToB - pounce charge being the only way to do damage is dumb) while keeping damage spells around near as is (perhaps minor buffs). Again this makes martials a bit closer to having a niche of their own.

It's not a question of direct damage spells' value vs. martials. It's the value of those spells vs. save or lose/die/cry/etc..., summoning, buffing, and so on. Direct damage is already weak. if hp is so inflated that it takes significantly more fireballs to wipe out a bunch of enemies, you have even less reason to use it than in a "typical" game with average hp. Higher hp does also mean martials take longer to kill foes. But it benefits them defensively more than any other party members and they have no daily limits on their attacks, so it's less of a concern.
Anyway, in order to not make attacks that reduce hp too undesirable compared to other options to win a fight which tend to already be better, I don't outright do max hp. That's my rationale, whether you agree with it or not.

[Gruftzwerg]

Anyway, in order to not make attacks that reduce hp too undesirable compared to other options to win a fight which tend to already be better, I don't outright do max hp. That's my rationale, whether you agree with it or not.

Sure I agree with you ;)
Cause you know the situation at your table at best, what fits your tables desires and how optimized the PC at your table are.
As said, the homebrew hp templates I talked about is just a tool to compensate high dmg setups of the PCs (+ bigger group). It's just one option to handle such things.

[TheBeggarDwarf]

Depends on the edition, to be honest. In 5th edition, I have my players maximize the first HD, then roll for the rest, with the option to take the average listed in the book if they roll low. 5th Edition feels less deadly, and I use it as trainer for younger players (and for one-shots and quickies). Any other edition, maximize 1st, then roll for the rest (re-rolling 1's, unless my players are feeling particularly high-risk). Works for us, especially since my players like high-risk, anything-can-go-tragically-wrong games.

Side-note: does anyone else roll for random hp for monsters? I like the feel of each creature having its own level of health. Yeah, it leads to goblin warriors with 2 hp, but it also leads to some fun surprises, and my players can't just assume a creature's hp.