Isn't there more to be done with Hit Dice?

[JellyPooga]

It has long irked me that for a game that has, since its inception, largely measured strength or power by the Level, or more accurately, the number of Hit Dice a creature or character has, that those same Hit Dice are used for so little. The list of what they do is short:

1) Determine Max HP
2) Restore HP during Short Rests

That's it. What if they also, for example:

- Could be spent to enhance (additively) ability checks, attack rolls and/or saving throws?

- Could be spent to mitigate attacks, damage or negative status conditions (e.g. "spend one HD to ignore the Poisoned condition for 1 round")?

- Were used to fuel Class or Racial abilities instead of arbitrary independent limits (e.g. instead of a Druid being able to use Wild Shape twice per short rest, it cost them 1HD to do so)?

- Could be used to empower "heroic actions" (e.g. swinging on the chandelier to avoid OA's or jumping down from elevation for extra damage)?

- Could be spent to grant a player narrative agency (e.g. "I spend a HD to include a table in this room" or "I spend a HD to have the Goblin Scout have a peg leg").

[Kane0]

Yeah ive often thought of adding extra uses for hit dice, but then I remember that if i did that would remove the only way everyone is guaranteed some kind of healing, which in turn makes a healer in the party more necessary than convenient. And considering most of my table loves playing martials and not so much support characters, i suspect the devs thought the same way.

If i were going to implement something i would stick very closely to things that mitigate damage taken or otherwise increase inmediate survivability, such as using a reaction to spend one hit die and add the roll (not con) to a saving throw or a number of dice up to prof bonus (plus con) to reduce damage taken from an attack.

[Hytheter]

Yeah ive often thought of adding extra uses for hit dice, but then I remember that if i did that would remove the only way everyone is guaranteed some kind of healing, which in turn makes a healer in the party more necessary than convenient. And considering most of my table loves playing martials and not so much support characters, i suspect the devs thought the same way.

If i were going to implement something i would stick very closely to things that mitigate damage taken or otherwise increase inmediate survivability, such as using a reaction to spend one hit die and add the roll (not con) to a saving throw or a number of dice up to prof bonus (plus con) to reduce damage taken from an attack.

I think you have the right of it. Hit Dice are for HP and that's it; whether that's good or not is up for debate but it's definitely an intentional design choice. Using it for things like you mention that directly increase survivability is a neat idea though.

[Townopolis]

I too have thought of this. Specifically:

Letting everyone add up to 1 HD to a saving throw when they roll it.
Letting martials (noncasters & half-casters, but not rogues) add up to 1 HD to any given attack roll.
Letting rogues (only) add up to 1 HD to any given ability check.


As Kane0 mentions, this does put a strain on healing resources. However, most of these options can prevent more damage than the HD would heal. Ultimately, it gives about half the classes more agency, but it also complicates resource management. Whether that's a net gain or loss depends a lot on the group. The group I'm currently running would probably benefit from it, but they decided against D&D for the next campaign, so we'll see when we see.

[Tawmis]

It has long irked me that for a game that has, since its inception, largely measured strength or power by the Level, or more accurately, the number of Hit Dice a creature or character has, that those same Hit Dice are used for so little. The list of what they do is short:


Eh - other abilities come into play to measure something's strength.

For example, the Vargouille.

Their challenge rating is a 1.

They're resistant to cold, fire, lightning. That will impact a significant number of spells thrown at them.
They're completely immune to poison and the poison condition.
They can fly 40'.
Their bite is at +4, and does 1d6+2.
So that's not bad.
Oh wait. There's more?
If bitten, they do 3d6 damage poison damage on top of that?

Hold on.

So one bite can do 4d6 damage.

And it's a challenge of 1?

What?

There's MORE?

Their kiss is a DC 12 CHR save, or the target loses 1 HP of CHR every hour, and if it reaches 0 the head of the victim rips itself off and becomes one?

So there's got to be an easy fix right?

Oh. Remove Curse. Greater Restoration or similar spell.

Well, none of those spells are available to low level party members.

Man, that's danger - WHAT? There's more?

They also have a stunning shriek that every humanoid within 30' must DC 12 WIS throw or be frightened?

So.

No, HP isn't what makes someone - monster or PC - powerful.

It's what they can do.

And if the DM plans a good fight - the melee folks should be cut and bleeding badly, casters - including healers - should pretty much be bone dry on spells - after successfully surviving a close battle.

And so using HP to get some health, because the cleric's low, and the party has used up their healing potions - seems pretty solid to me. :)

[Oramac]

It has long irked me that for a game that has, since its inception, largely measured strength or power by the Level, or more accurately, the number of Hit Dice a creature or character has, that those same Hit Dice are used for so little.

snip

Interesting you mention this. I completely agree. So much so that when I wrote my Necromancer Class (https://www.gmbinder.com/share/-MfV5fWkoPv8gy1g6i3p) (be gentle; it's still in development), I chose to use hit dice as their primary resource. This is only one way to apply this. You've mentioned plenty of other great options as well.

[Slider Eclipse]

One thing I've debated in my head is perhaps just giving everyone a modified version of the Fighter's Second Wind feature. "Once Per Short Rest you can use a Bonus Action to roll 1HD+Con+Prof, regain that many Hit Points." On one hand this would help ensure players almost always have some source of immediate healing in a pinch and give Hit Dice a use outside of Resting and determining Max HP, but on the other hand it does risk making Short Rests less desirable in some situations which is already a problem for Short Rest based classes.

[Kane0]

One thing I've debated in my head is perhaps just giving everyone a modified version of the Fighter's Second Wind feature. "Once Per Short Rest you can use a Bonus Action to roll 1HD+Con+Prof, regain that many Hit Points." On one hand this would help ensure players almost always have some source of immediate healing in a pinch and give Hit Dice a use outside of Resting and determining Max HP, but on the other hand it does risk making Short Rests less desirable in some situations which is already a problem for Short Rest based classes.

Eerily similar to 4e's Healing Surge, which was also repackaged as an alternate rule in the 5e DMG.

Edit: Some ideas
1) Healing Surge. Once per short or long rest, you can use your action to spend a number of Hit Dice up to your Proficiency Bonus and heal that amount
2) Grit. When you are forced to make a saving throw you can use your reaction to spend a Hit Die and add the result (without your Con modifier) to your roll after you see your roll but before the DM announces the results
3) Bolster. At the end of a short or long rest you can choose to spend a number of Hit Dice up to your Proficiency Bonus and gain the result in Temporary HP, which last until your next short or long rest

[Slider Eclipse]

Eerily similar to 4e's Healing Surge, which was also repackaged as an alternate rule in the 5e DMG.

Ironicly I actually never played 4e or even read it's rules due to all the bad press it got. (that and I started off with Pathfinder 1e so I never saw much reason to try another system at the time) so it's honestly surprising I came up with something so similar. makes me think that Second Wind is legitimately just a toned down version of the mechanic considering just how little I actually changed.

[Kane0]

Ironicly I actually never played 4e or even read it's rules due to all the bad press it got. (that and I started off with Pathfinder 1e so I never saw much reason to try another system at the time) so it's honestly surprising I came up with something so similar. makes me think that Second Wind is legitimately just a toned down version of the mechanic considering just how little I actually changed.

There's actually quite a lot of 4e's DNA sprinkled into 5e. Just don't go around saying that too loud...

[Sorinth]

Yeah ive often thought of adding extra uses for hit dice, but then I remember that if i did that would remove the only way everyone is guaranteed some kind of healing, which in turn makes a healer in the party more necessary than convenient. And considering most of my table loves playing martials and not so much support characters, i suspect the devs thought the same way.

If i were going to implement something i would stick very closely to things that mitigate damage taken or otherwise increase inmediate survivability, such as using a reaction to spend one hit die and add the roll (not con) to a saving throw or a number of dice up to prof bonus (plus con) to reduce damage taken from an attack.

I agree we don't want to get into a situation where parties need dedicated healers. So perhaps you can only use HD in a special way if you at least half your max available. That way you always have HD for healing, but when "fresh" you have these extra uses.

[Unoriginal]

It has long irked me that for a game that has, since its inception, largely measured strength or power by the Level, or more accurately, the number of Hit Dice a creature or character has

No longer the case in 5e. For NPCs, at least.

Hit dice in 5e are very much a post-facto justification once the desired standard HPs have been decided for the creature.

Which is likely why there are few things you can do with HDs.


For PCs, the level is also more important than HDs for measuring strength or power, in term of game math.

[kingcheesepants]

- Could be spent to enhance (additively) ability checks, attack rolls and/or saving throws?


Paladins would go from rarely missing their saves to never missing their saves. It would also make the barbarian decently more powerful while adding relatively little to wizards and sorcerers (which is maybe something you want but to be honest in actual play especially under level 9 I don't feel like casters are really so much better than martials)



- Could be spent to mitigate attacks, damage or negative status conditions (e.g. "spend one HD to ignore the Poisoned condition for 1 round")?


Some conditions would basically always be worth it if you could fix them (even temporarily) with a HD (charmed, dead, petrified, unconscious, paralyzed, stunned) while the rest would be more situational. But honestly it would make lots of monsters so much easier that it seems bad for game balance.



- Were used to fuel Class or Racial abilities instead of arbitrary independent limits (e.g. instead of a Druid being able to use Wild Shape twice per short rest, it cost them 1HD to do so)?


I kind of like the idea of being able to use short rest abilities extra times by spending HD but definitely not saying you always need to spend the HD to use them. I feel like later on when there are HD to spare that being able to use action surge or wild shape or other various short rest recharge stuff would be really powerful.



- Could be used to empower "heroic actions" (e.g. swinging on the chandelier to avoid OA's or jumping down from elevation for extra damage)?

- Could be spent to grant a player narrative agency (e.g. "I spend a HD to include a table in this room" or "I spend a HD to have the Goblin Scout have a peg leg").

This is essentially the stress mechanic from Blades in the Dark (pushing yourself and flashbacks respectively). I love that game and while I think that D&D could use certain narrative elements from that system, this particular instantiation doesn't really work that well. D&D is just a bit too mechanics based and putting in stuff like that kinda throws things way off.

Overall I kind of like the idea of being able to use HD to do more stuff but in terms of balance I just can't see any way to make it actually work. I don't see myself using any of the proposed ideas at my table but I'd be open to considering it if it seemed a bit more balanced and not too overpowered or heavily favoring one class or another.

[Osuniev]

I completely agree HD are a subsystem terribly underused, although I'm uncertain HOW to make them more relevant. I've toyed with some ideas here : https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?636310-Spending-Hit-Dice-to-increase-a-d20-roll

and here : https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?613301-more-uses-for-Hit-Dice&p=24543042#post24543042

Main ideas :

My reasoning is : Hit Dice represents the "tiredness" of your character, in a more granular fashion than exhaustion. Yet they don't matter that much (even though I play with the Gritty Realism Variant, it's not often my players feel like "I should be careful, I'm running low on Hit Dice").

1. "Restore spells using Hit Dice" (playtested)

In my new campaign, Spellcasters are obsessed with finding a way to get back their Spell Slots, because we play GR and we didn't in the previous campaign. Overall, I'm really happy with the mechanical effects (the fighter can shine again, diplomatic skills matter much more now that Detect Thoughts, Charm Person or Circle of Truth have a meaningful cost, to a lesser degree it's also true of other utility spells : they are still very useful, but because they have a real cost, they don't take priority over smart use of objects and skills).

I had them find "mana potions" which convert hit dice to spell slots over a short rest. (1 HD for a lvl 1 slot, 2 for a lvl 2, etc...) and it created cool moments where they had to choose how to spread them. It also provides a nice gold sink for players who don't care about having a castle and don't need armor since they lay spellcasters.

2. Hit Dice to fight exhaustion. (not playtested)
I love exhaustion as a mechanic, but it is really punishing on players. I am considering allowing the use of a Hit Die on Exhaustion Checks (because of sleep or water deprivation, ), either to add to the d20 or a a substitute (allowing for several Hit Dice being spent).

3. Hit Dice used on Death Saves (not playtested)
Instead of rolling a d20 for your death saves, you'd roll as many as you'd like of your HD. Meaning a character that has no HD left would auto fail.

4. Hit Dice to survive excess damage (not playtested)
When you go below 0 HP, you'll need to spend hit dice until their total equals or exceed the leftover damage. This rule can replace the rule for negative max Hp elegantly : on average, all your HD equals your HP, so if you haven't used any it's equivalent, and it makes excess damage have a cost : the more you take, the more HD you lose, and if you don't have enough... you die.

5. Hit Dice to get back up. (not playtested)
Whenever you receive magical healing whilst at 0 HP, you'd use Hit Dice (not d8s for Cure Wounds or d4 for Healing Word) to calculate how much HP you get back. Alternatively, you can go in negative HP, and so you need those hit dice to have a chance to go over 0.

6. Hit Dice for extra effort (not playtested)
On a Strength or Constitution Check, you could spend Hit Dice to increase your roll, basically putting all your energy to be more efficient, but at the cost of some of your long term recuperation.

7. Lose Hit Dice whilst unconscious (playtested)
Every time you go to 0 HP, you lose one HD. Every time you fail a Death Save, too.

8. Poison costs Hit Dice
When your character takes poison damage, s.he also loses 1 HD. When you're character is poisoned, s.he cannot use Hit DIce during Short Rests.

[Man_Over_Game]

Wanted to give a full response, but I got a bit busy, and most of what I wanted to say on the topic is below (a response in another thread).

Basically, why not BM maneuvers? It covers skills, defenses, maneuverability, almost anything you can think of. Combining that change with Slow Natural Healing would make each HD spent an important choice that has lasting consequences, and the classes that would use them the least (casters) already have to pay attention to lasting consequences.


I've always liked the idea of using Hit Dice.

Barbarians won't want to use a lot (since they're melee combatants that would want some for HP), but they get a 1d12. On a Maneuver, that's huge. You could, for example, add 1d12 to your Initiative check to guarantee a turn 1 engagement + Rage.

Rogues don't have much use for Hit Dice, as they are masters of avoidance and damage mitigation, so they will be able to spam maneuvers consistently without much risk. The catch is that they only get a 1d8, which isn't great compared to the rest of the martials.

Monks, with their rapid-fire attacks and high mobility, are one of the best classes to leverage maneuvers with their abilities. The catch is that they're incredibly squishy, and burning through your Hit Dice would only amplify that. So while they are one of the strongest classes to combine with Maneuvers, they also pay the highest price.

Since Attack Maneuvers only work with weapon attacks, it'd be a neat way of buffing Bladelocks who are otherwise constantly trying to catch up to their Eldritch Blast equivalents, since Warlocks can otherwise play similarly to Rogues (avoiding damage when needed).

This is even a buff to Fighters, who can leverage Action Surge around the number of maneuvers they can burst out in a single turn. Imagine a Samurai that just straight up melts a target in seconds by burning through his energy reserves.

Sure, this might put more emphasis on healing, but I still don't think that healing's a requirement. Killing something is just as effective as a form of mitigation as healing the damage that target would deal. As-is, healing is something that isn't very necessary in 5e, and putting more value on long-term healing from things like Healing Spirit or Song of Rest will be better for the game and party cohesion.

Combine it with something like Slow Natural Healing, and now you don't have to worry as much about it unbalancing your game, since the players would only be able to spam the abilities so long as the fights are easy and inconsistent, so it becomes a great way to perfectly gauge how difficult you need to make your future sessions. You can easily throttle around how much you think your players would enjoy spending time in town, instead of them doing it for the sake of it. Now they're adventurers taking a break from adventuring​, which is kinda the imagery you want when you'd see adventurers in a town, which helps reinforce that adventuring is difficult and adventurers are a rare breed.

[Kane0]

Oh, I completely forgot one that I already do!

Cure Wounds I felt was a bit underused compared to Healing Word, so when cast I allow the recipient to also roll one of their Hit Die if they want to get some extra healing out of it, upcasting allowing additional Hit Dice as well as the standard more healing. It adds to the bulk healing it can perform with one action but doesn't do so freely as the HD are still expended.

Another concept I was toying with was basically the same sort of thing but the caster can 'donate' hit dice to someone else, probably with Spare the Dying or similar.

[Segev]

Allowing alchemical healing potions that aren't technically magical - and thus are pretty cheap - that let you roll one or more HD as if during a short rest, but as an action or bonus action, would probably go over really well, wouldn't place more strain on healers, and would make the hit dice useful more often.

[Phhase]

Honestly, there are plenty of sources of healing. It's true that there's value in always having something in reserve, but at the same time, I've never been in a party the doesn't have at least one or two cure wounds or healing words. Throw in a few potions, various class features, and other items, and hit dice often don't get touched for sessions at a time. Granted, my groups usually run 1-2 notable fights per adventuring day, so that likely factors into it a fair amount.

[loki_ragnarock]

I house ruled that Berserker barbarians burn a number of hit die equal to the number of times they've frenzied today +1.

Because exhaustion sucks, but this still maintains a cost.

[Kane0]

I house ruled that Berserker barbarians burn a number of hit die equal to the number of times they've frenzied today +1.

Because exhaustion sucks, but this still maintains a cost.

This would probably be the more reasonable non-healing use I could see for HD, substituting for Exhaustion. Though for Frenzy specifically i'd make the first use free then 1 HD each time after that.

[Dork_Forge]

There's also the Dwarven racial feat that let's the mburn a single HD to heal when they Dodge.

Personally I wouldn't add more uses generally, when you eat into used HD then you very quickly start to compromise the healing the game assumes everyone has.

For example, one party wanted to make matching cloak magic items, so I made it that when within 30ft, they can spend a reaction to roll HD+Con and reduce the damage another cloak wearer took by that amount. They use them pretty frequently.

I chose to make that HD to make it have a real choice, if they use it heavily in a day they can just run out of HD and then find themselves burning other resources, or just not being at full hp after a rest.

[JellyPooga]

Eh - other abilities come into play to measure something's strength.
[snip]
No, HP isn't what makes someone - monster or PC - powerful.

It's what they can do.

HD aren't what make a creature/character powerful, it's just a metric (like an NPCs Challenge rating) by which they are judged (often leading to all sorts of mistakes). What I'm proposing is expanding HD from a mere number to an actual ability that does make having higher HD make a character more powerful and not just their abilities.

That CR:1 Vargouille you used as example might not be so intimidating against someone with 10HD and a slew of uses for them. The poison, magical disease and fear effects aren't as effective if you have HD that can be spent on resisting them.


No longer the case in 5e. For NPCs, at least.

Hit dice in 5e are very much a post-facto justification once the desired standard HPs have been decided for the creature.

Which is likely why there are few things you can do with HDs.


For PCs, the level is also more important than HDs for measuring strength or power, in term of game math.

Level (in this context) is synonymous with HD. There's actually a solid argument to remove the term "Level" from Classes to avoid confusion between Class Level and Spell Level. Describing Classes in terms of HD is in no way inaccurate (e.g. a 5HD Barbarian is always Level 5, assuming they're a PC and haven't multiclassed). Yes, as you say, in 5ed NPC design assigning HD is a post-facto justification of HP, but that doesn't have to be the case. If HD can be used for things other than HP, an NPC's HD actually matters. For example; if HD can be spent in some of the ways I describe, the King having 10HD lends justification to why he's the King; he has more juice in the tank to fuel and resist abilities; he's more than just a sack of HP and is powerful without necessarily having to have a bunch of additional abilities tacked on.


Personally I wouldn't add more uses generally, when you eat into used HD then you very quickly start to compromise the healing the game assumes everyone has.

I don't think the "more uses for HD negatively impacts healing" argument holds too much water. Yes, HD can be spent to heal on short rests, but there are several factors to consider;
1) A lot of parties forgo short rests as a matter of course. Go read some threads about how weak Monks and Warlocks are for proof enough of this.
2) HD healing is typically pretty low. I wouldn't want to rely on it in a pinch.
3) Short Rest Healing is slow. It takes an hour and requires a place to rest. Not convenient a lot of the time; the main reason anyone needs healing is because they're expecting imminent combat.
4) A Long Rest heals to max.
5) Not everyone needs a lot of, if any, healing.
Between all five factors, I'd be willing to bet that most characters end their day with some HD left in the tank. Not because they want to have them ready for the next day (given that a Long Rest only replenishes half your HD), but because they simply didn't have a need or the opportunity to use them. I'm looking for possible uses to make that resource valuable rather than forgettable.

Here's the interesting thing about making HD a resource for more than just healing; martial/caster parity.

- Casters typically have lower HD values than martials; Fighter d10, Wizard d6, etc.
- Casters are also typically the ones in least need of healing (lower HP means they tend to avoid situations where they're likely to lose HP).
- Therefore, the characters that get the greatest benefit from using HD proactively (i.e. martials) are also the ones that are most likely to want to save them for healing. Conversely, those that are most likely to be willing to spend them (i.e. casters) get the least value.

There's a satisfying kind of balance going on there.

[JNAProductions]

I don't think a king being 10 HD adds anything to the game-not as a universal.

Some kings should be powerhouses of physical or magical might, having oodles of HP and being match for an adventurer. Others should be more like a standard noble-they might have amazing gear, especially ancestral magical items, but are still just ordinary folk underneath all that.

I like how in 5E, HD are disconnected from CR, or at least not directly connected. In 3rd, if you wanted a monster with oodles of HP but crappy saves and attacks, you'd have to intentionally give them a special rule that lowered their saves and BAB, since those directly correlated with HD. In 5E, you could give a monster 1 HD or 1,000,000 HD-and it doesn't have a lick to do with their saves or attacks.

[PhoenixPhyre]

I don't think a king being 10 HD adds anything to the game-not as a universal.

Some kings should be powerhouses of physical or magical might, having oodles of HP and being match for an adventurer. Others should be more like a standard noble-they might have amazing gear, especially ancestral magical items, but are still just ordinary folk underneath all that.

I like how in 5E, HD are disconnected from CR, or at least not directly connected. In 3rd, if you wanted a monster with oodles of HP but crappy saves and attacks, you'd have to intentionally give them a special rule that lowered their saves and BAB, since those directly correlated with HD. In 5E, you could give a monster 1 HD or 1,000,000 HD-and it doesn't have a lick to do with their saves or attacks.

I agree with this. I want full flexibility to set HD separately from fictional standing in other ways. The idea of a 20-HD commoner (just because you want them to be great at skill X) is obnoxious.

[JellyPooga]

I don't think a king being 10 HD adds anything to the game-not as a universal.

The obvious retort here is "don't give your king 10HD then". Nothing about giving HD more utility prevents you from giving NPCs whatever features and abilities you like, any more than giving them Class levels does (which is itself, largely speaking, an unecessary mistake in most cases)

If your King does have 10HD, though, which can be used for multiple things beyond healing, then you don't have to graft on as many special or unique abilities in order to make them powerful. Don't forget, abilities an NPC has only exist in-game if the GM actually uses them. So if a King has the ability to add HD to attack rolls, that's only going to be relevent if he ever makes an attack roll and the GM decides to use that function. Otherwise, he still has all the utility that HD could bring (adding to saves or other ability checks, for example) without the need to make up or borrow rules elsewhere.

[JNAProductions]

The obvious retort here is "don't give your king 10HD then". Nothing about giving HD more utility prevents you from giving NPCs whatever features and abilities you like, any more than giving them Class levels does (which is itself, largely speaking, an unecessary mistake in most cases)

If your King does have 10HD, though, which can be used for multiple things beyond healing, then you don't have to graft on as many special or unique abilities in order to make them powerful. Don't forget, abilities an NPC has only exist in-game if the GM actually uses them. So if a King has the ability to add HD to attack rolls, that's only going to be relevent if he ever makes an attack roll and the GM decides to use that function. Otherwise, he still has all the utility that HD could bring (adding to saves or other ability checks, for example) without the need to make up or borrow rules elsewhere.

It also stacks a ton of HP onto him.

Why should saves or skills be related directly to HP for NPCs?

[PhoenixPhyre]

It also stacks a ton of HP onto him.

Why should saves or skills be related directly to HP for NPCs?

Right. And it means that if you do want to have a pixie (d4 HD) with a bunch of health, you also have to give them a bunch of saves, skills, etc. Or if you want to have a skilled Huge creature, they also have to have lots of HP.

Tying HD to anything else like that was a bad idea in 3e and a worse one in 5e.

[JellyPooga]

It also stacks a ton of HP onto him.

Why should saves or skills be related directly to HP for NPCs?

It's not. When it comes to NPCs in 5e, everything is fluid. You want a 1HD critter to have +12 Stealth? Sure. Go ahead. You want a 10HD King to be a bumbling, dim-witted fool? Done. Give him low Charisma and Wisdom and forgo using his HD to boost Saves and Ability Checks in Social encounters. Nothing says an NPC must use an ability they have. Claiming they do (not that I'm saying anyone is) is as absurd as saying that all NPCs must, at least once in any given encounter, roll Athletics to Shove because there's rules for it.


Right. And it means that if you do want to have a pixie (d4 HD) with a bunch of health, you also have to give them a bunch of saves, skills, etc. Or if you want to have a skilled Huge creature, they also have to have lots of HP.

Tying HD to anything else like that was a bad idea in 3e and a worse one in 5e.

The question then is "why have HD at all?" HP can be set independently of HD easily enough, so why have them in the 1st place? Yes, yes, sacred cows and all that, but if we're going to hold on to that notion and use HD at all, then we may as well lean in to it. From a design point of view, giving HD more practical use alleviates the need to make independent rules.

Do not mistake my wanting to give HD more uses for merely tying skills and saves to them. That's not the intention. The intention is to give more weight to actually having more HD and to the distinction between their values. Given additional, non-HP, use a large number of low value HD provides a distinctly different flavour of character to having a low number of high value HD, even if they have the same HP value. For example;

Dixie the Pixie has 11hp, represented by 3d6HD, while Tony the Oni has the same 11hp, but represented by a single d12 with a +4 Con bonus (using all "average" results, rounded up). The textural difference to how they're going or are able to use those HD is clear if they're able to use them the way I suggest, but the difference is entirely irrelevant under current rules.

[KorvinStarmast]

It has long irked me that for a game that has, since its inception, largely measured strength or power by the Level, or more accurately, the number of Hit Dice a creature or character has, that those same Hit Dice are used for so little.
That was in DO&D and AD&D. It's CR or Level in 5e.

The list of what they do is short:


1) Determine Max HP
2) Restore HP during Short Rests

That's for PCs. For Monsters it's "how many more points do we pile onto the monsters HP pool if they have a CON bonus."

That's it.
And that's fine. I don't think it needs more, but you have a few interesting ideas.
- Could be spent to enhance (additively) ability checks, attack rolls and/or saving throws? Bards offer inspiration. This is a team game. Artificers offer Flash of Genius. Druids and Clerics have Guidance cantrip (as does anyone with Magic Initiate Feat).
OK, let's roll with this anyway.
Restrict it to Fighter/Barbarian/Monk? Sure. Now we are getting somewhere. Limit it to one HD per attempt? Sure. Limit it to saving throws? Yes. (Maybe as a sub for something like Indomitable?)
For attack rolls, I suspect that it would throw bounded accuracy out of the window.
For ability checks? Needs Play Testing.

- Could be spent to mitigate attacks, damage or negative status conditions (e.g. "spend one HD to ignore the Poisoned condition for 1 round")? For Fighters, Barbarians? Yes. rangers and paladins? Yes. Monks? Maybe. Nobody else.

- Were used to fuel Class or Racial abilities instead of arbitrary independent limits (e.g. instead of a Druid being able to use Wild Shape twice per short rest, it cost them 1HD to do so)?
While I am more like "use proficiency bonus number" rather than mess with HD, a few ideas do rise. Costs 1 HD per CR 1/2 creature. (1/4 and below are without cost in this case). At level 20, you get to CR 10 beast. Or, 1 HD per CR 1/4th. At level 20, you get 1 CR 5. Needs Play Testing, obviously.

- Could be used to empower "heroic actions" (e.g. swinging on the chandelier to avoid OA's or jumping down from elevation for extra damage)? For Ranger, Paladin, Barbarian, Fighter? Sure. Rogue? Maybe, they have expertise. Monk? Maybe. And Nobody Else. :smalltongue:

- Could be spent to grant a player narrative agency (e.g. "I spend a HD to include a table in this room" or "I spend a HD to have the Goblin Scout have a peg leg"). No thanks, DM is in charge of world building. Previous comment about BiTD germane.

For example, the Vargouille.
Their challenge rating is a 1. Good example.

No, HP isn't what makes someone - monster or PC - powerful.
It's what they can do. Good post.

Hit dice in 5e are very much a post-facto justification once the desired standard HPs have been decided for the creature.
Which is likely why there are few things you can do with HDs.
For PCs, the level is also more important than HDs for measuring strength or power, in term of game math. yes.

Cure Wounds I felt was a bit underused compared to Healing Word, so when cast I allow the recipient to also roll one of their Hit Die if they want to get some extra healing out of it, upcasting allowing additional Hit Dice as well as the standard more healing. It adds to the bulk healing it can perform with one action but doesn't do so freely as the HD are still expended. Neat idea, I'll discuss it with my players.

Another concept I was toying with was basically the same sort of thing but the caster can 'donate' hit dice to someone else, probably with Spare the Dying or similar. Ooh, I like that even better. Upgrade Spare the Dying, but give it a cost. I like it.

That CR:1 Vargouille you used as example might not be so intimidating against someone with 10HD and a slew of uses for them. It's a CR 1 creature. A level 10 PC ought to be able to handle it. Your riposte doesn't seem to fit.

Level (in this context) is synonymous with HD. There's actually a solid argument to remove the term "Level" from Classes to avoid confusion between Class Level and Spell Level. Or just read the book and let it explain to you what each one means. They still do that, and have been doing it since AD&D 1e. (Mind you, I'd not mind seeing spell level being named 'circle' or 'order' or 'rank' since they don't walk hand in hand with character level. (At 3rd level, your sorcerer can now cast 2d rank spells works for me) ... a matter of taste.

Describing Classes in terms of HD is in no way inaccurate (e.g. a 5HD Barbarian is always Level 5, assuming they're a PC and haven't multiclassed).
It is now. And a level 5 wizard is always 5 HD, but they are d6 not d12.
If you go back to OD&D, though (Men and Magic, p. 17)

Fightine Man, levels 1-5, with hit dice adjacent
Veteran 1 + 1
Warrior 2
Swordsman 3
Hero 4
Swashbuckler 5+ 1

Magic User levels 1-5, with hit dice adjacent
Medium 1
Seer 1 + 1
Conjurer 2
Theurgist 2+ 1
Thaumaturgist 3
I think you have seen a part of the thing, not all of it.


2) HD healing is typically pretty low. I wouldn't want to rely on it in a pinch. Our experiences differ a lot. It's a major source of healing in two campaigns I am in.

3) Short Rest Healing is slow. It takes an hour and requires a place to rest. Not convenient a lot of the time; the main reason anyone needs healing is because they're expecting imminent combat.
Then the thread you want is the Short Rest/Long Rest thread.

5) Not everyone needs a lot of, if any, healing. I have seen this also, it's quite variable, but it's got nothing to do with HD and every thing to do with (1) a bit of luck, and (2) how the party fights. Some players are just bad at tactics and lose a lot of hit points, while others have a run of horrible luck and lose a lot of hit points. Associating that with "HD, the mechanic" is roughly a non sequitur.

But thanks for the opportunity at brainstorming. :smallsmile:

[Man_Over_Game]

Personally I wouldn't add more uses generally, when you eat into used HD then you very quickly start to compromise the healing the game assumes everyone has.

Hmm...I guess my question is, why is that a bad thing? It's not like the game assumes how many encounters your party has or how difficult they were or what resources you spent on them or what classes your party was made of for it. There's a lot that the game doesn't assume for you, why should it assume the value of Hit Dice (that most parties aren't even using in the first place?).

If anything, it feels like it'd increase the difficulty of 5e by making damage more impactful. And, from my experience, difficulty and keeping damage relevant are both things that 5e is very laid-back on. There's a lot of room to grow and few reasons not to, I think.

I can see how the conversion of a healing feature into damage might turn the game into Rocket Tag, but there's more than raw damage that a Hit Die could potentially improve, like mobility, defenses, etc. that don't inherently speed up the game through bigger numbers.

[Dork_Forge]

I don't think the "more uses for HD negatively impacts healing" argument holds too much water. Yes, HD can be spent to heal on short rests, but there are several factors to consider;
1) A lot of parties forgo short rests as a matter of course. Go read some threads about how weak Monks and Warlocks are for proof enough of this.

A vocal minority seems appropriate here, people that have the problem voice it, they make threads or are drawn to threads on that topic. When 15 people in one thread say they don't short rest often, that feels like a lot, but that is not an effective metric of anything but the participants in those thread's experiences.

There's also a difference between 'not enough short rests' and not short resting at all. Warlock and Monk players could very well feel done down by only having a single short rest depending on the pacing and number of encounters. But they are still long resting.

This also doesn't match up to, well any of my experiences really apart from very new players. The 5 minute work day might work for some tables, but I really don't see it being the standard, especially when so many classes and races have short rest recharges.


2) HD healing is typically pretty low. I wouldn't want to rely on it in a pinch.

In comparison to what? Because on average the full pool should be your max hp, unless you're boosting it outside of standard leveling (Tough, Hill Dwarf and so on, these are minor exceptions).

The only reason that HD healing shouldn't cover you, is if you're working with a partially expended pool or are unlucky and roll below the average overall.

Trying to replicate that amount of healing across an entire party would not be resource cheap.


3) Short Rest Healing is slow. It takes an hour and requires a place to rest. Not convenient a lot of the time; the main reason anyone needs healing is because they're expecting imminent combat.

I disagree with the premise, you need healing because you are hurt. If you choose to continue adventuring whilst injured, when you do not have to, then you are asking for trouble.

And of course, it's slower than spells etc. it's actually resting. There are a very, very large amount of abilities that tie to short rests, so even if people felt like it was a long time to heal (which I don't understand from anything but a meta-perspective), that's unlikely to be the only benefit you gain form it.


4) A Long Rest heals to max.

Which is great for starting the day, anddd that's about it.



5) Not everyone needs a lot of, if any, healing.

This is very, very much a table thing. If the adventuring day consistently goes that some party members are not getting injured or at least, meaningfully depleted of hp, then frankly what is the point?

Where is the tension in that? As a DM I would consider that a failure of encounter design. The caster standing in the back should get challenged and attacked, the opposition should (when appropriate) have a ranged component to cover distances, save for half effects. Then there's traps and environmental hazards...

If there is no danger to your character then that's a certain way to play, but it's certainly not one I could find much joy in, certainly not for more than the odd session.


Between all five factors, I'd be willing to bet that most characters end their day with some HD left in the tank. Not because they want to have them ready for the next day (given that a Long Rest only replenishes half your HD), but because they simply didn't have a need or the opportunity to use them.

Opportunity to use them: this is largely in the DM's purview, if they don't provide reasonable opportunities to short rest, then it's a self-creating problem. If the party simply decided to not rest, then that's their choice not a problem with the system.

Ending the day not empty: Good? If you're expending all of your hit dice in a day consistently, then you're circling a bad time. This is probably indicative of needing a healer, or more healing needing to be done. It's a 'top you up' kind of healing, not the be all, end all of it. It'd say on average you should spend half or less of your hit dice, this more applies in Tier 2+, unless the adventure is only taking place over the span of 3 or so days.


I'm looking for possible uses to make that resource valuable rather than forgettable.

Here's the interesting thing about making HD a resource for more than just healing; martial/caster parity.

- Casters typically have lower HD values than martials; Fighter d10, Wizard d6, etc.
- Casters are also typically the ones in least need of healing (lower HP means they tend to avoid situations where they're likely to lose HP).
- Therefore, the characters that get the greatest benefit from using HD proactively (i.e. martials) are also the ones that are most likely to want to save them for healing. Conversely, those that are most likely to be willing to spend them (i.e. casters) get the least value.

There's a satisfying kind of balance going on there.

This still assumes that a caster can choose to, and effectively implement, evading sources of damage if they even want to play in that manner.

What makes you think that this particular mechanic should be used for more? It was designed as a source of limited rest based healing and a yardstick for hp increase. It fulfills that purpose well and I can't see any reason you've presented that isn't a table difference.

The game doesn't assume you ignore short rests whilst still getting in the standard amount of encounters. Heck, there are multiple features that directly connect to spending HD.

And then there's the other thing: Even if you believe that martials need more, this is a universal buff. Classes and builds that certainly didn't need it will get it, it's power creep literally for the sake of using something you feel is underused.



The question then is "why have HD at all?" HP can be set independently of HD easily enough, so why have them in the 1st place? Yes, yes, sacred cows and all that, but if we're going to hold on to that notion and use HD at all, then we may as well lean in to it. From a design point of view, giving HD more practical use alleviates the need to make independent rules.


Hit dice have a use that they fulfill well, the pool isn't large enough and doesn't refresh fast enough for significant taxing with another system on top of it, unless of course you play a table that doesn't use them to begin with.

They don't seem like a sacred cow at all, and I've only ever played 5e, they seem like a reasonable way of providing a limited rest heal during the day.


Hmm...I guess my question is, why is that a bad thing? It's not like the game assumes how many encounters your party has or how difficult they were or what resources you spent on them or what classes your party was made of for it. There's a lot that the game doesn't assume for you, why should it assume the value of Hit Dice (that most parties aren't even using in the first place?).

Do you honestly think that most parties, out of the millions of people that play 5e, really don't use a core mechanic universal to all characters?

And since when didn't the game make assumptions? Unless I'm mistaken there is an assumption of 6-8 encounters per day, with 2 SR, with more deadly encounters if you use less. Just because people may not stick to that, doesn't mean that the system doesn't expect it. And just because the game doesn't fall apart, doesn't mean it still isn't expected.



If anything, it feels like it'd increase the difficulty of 5e by making damage more impactful. And, from my experience, difficulty and keeping damage relevant are both things that 5e is very laid-back on. There's a lot of room to grow and few reasons not to, I think.

Removing SR healing is a way to deal with difficulty, but it sure isn't the approach I'd take.

It doesn't resolve rez magic, or yoyo healing, if anything it pushes a greater reliance on those things.

If you want to make 5e harder, then make going down have more consequences and make dying harder to come back from. Heck, just make the encounters harder or use more damage-dealing traps.


I can see how the conversion of a healing feature into damage might turn the game into Rocket Tag, but there's more than raw damage that a Hit Die could potentially improve, like mobility, defenses, etc. that don't inherently speed up the game through bigger numbers.

No matter what you make them do, it will be power creep to whatever system they effect, and that is not necessary.

Here are just a few off the top of my head things that already interact with, and enhance, your examples:

Mobility
-Monk class
-Rogue class
-Any race that has a higher move speed
-Goblins
-Tabaxi
-Orcs
-Mobile
-Battle Master (now potentially every Fighter or anyone with martial weapon prof)
-Gloom Stalker
-College of Swords
-Ranger Optional changes
-Spells, like Longstrider, Expeditious Retreat etc.
-Literally anything that teleports, which extends to class features, subclass features, races, spells, and feats

Defenses
-Temp hp generators like the Artillerist, Twilight Cleric, Glamour Bard, Inspiring Leader etc.
-Fighting Styles
-Feats
-So, so many spells, from AC bumps like Shield of Faith, to denial like Sanctuary, Blur, Blink etc.
-Racial abilities, say like the Half Orc and Goliath
-So so many class and subclass features

Here's a bonus round:

Skills
-Expertise a.k.a. double prof, found in two core classes and roughly half a million subclasses and a couple of feats.
-Guidance
-Enhance Ability
-Bardic Inspiration
-Reliable Talent
-Psi Bolstered Knack
-Samurai 7th level
-Jack of All Trades

Is there some kind of undeveloped niche I'm not thinking of? Something that doesn't already have a plethora of things applying to it through class, subclass, race, spells, and feats?

Even if you feel like Hit Dice should have more uses because your table doesn't use them much, that doesn't answer the question of should they have more uses when looking at what they'll be adding to?

[Man_Over_Game]

Even if you feel like Hit Dice should have more uses because your table doesn't use them much, that doesn't answer the question of should they have more uses when looking at what they'll be adding to?

Not everyone gets access to the lists you mentioned. Everyone gets access to Hit Dice.

Just because it might be redundant for Hit Dice to add one kind of feature to a class doesn't mean it's redundant for another. Whispers Bards would be very happy with a DPR bonus. Barbarians might like a way to Disengage or Dodge that wouldn't risk losing them a use of Rage. Sure, a Samurai wouldn't need to get THP or knock a target prone, but that doesn't mean there aren't things they still can't do that a caster or another martial could.

Limiting the options for players is a sound strategy for the sake of balance, it doesn't always make sense for the sake of fun though.

I think I'd have more fun as a Monk if I could consistently knock targets prone without it being expensive (A subclass feature or a skill, and locking me out of unarmed strikes until level 5). As long as it's not overly strong, who benefits from me not being able to do that?

[Dork_Forge]

Not everyone gets access to the lists you mentioned. Everyone gets access to Hit Dice.

The lists were explicitly examples, not a comprehensive list, and feature races and feats, which any class can choose to be.

Some of what I mentioned were spells that can be cast on anyone.

And then there's the concept of specialisation, it's not a bad thing if the threshold for any old character doing x isn't very high. It's a party game.


Just because it might be redundant for Hit Dice to add a damage option doesn't make it any more redundant to Bards. Whispers Bards would be very happy with a DPR bonus. Barbarians might like a way to Disengage or Dodge that wouldn't risk losing them a use of Rage. Sure, a Samurai wouldn't need to get THP or knock a target prone, but that doesn't mean there aren't things they still can't do that a caster or another martial could.

I never said it was redundant, my whole point has largely been about power creep, pushing ceilings higher, and to a lesser degree, removing what specialisation there is.

Your examples don't hit home for me either, a Whispers Bard, the smiting Bard, wouldn't mind a damage bump? I could see other Bards liking it, but the Bard that has a niche of spike damage, isn't screaming for a way to do spike damage.

And whilst I'm sure some barbarians might want that, I'm not seeing how that is benefiting the game other than making it easier? Reckless Attack you can cancel out the negative of yourself? Removing risks? This isn't letting PCs do new and interesting things, it's reducing the various costs of doing what they largely already could.


Limiting the options for players is a sound strategy for the sake of balance, it doesn't always make sense for the sake of fun though.

Agreed, and needlessly pushing what balance there is doesn't necessarily make for more fun either, though I'll throw out that this largely makes the DM's job so much harder. The PCs suddenly gain a huge amount of utility and power, so combats should account for that, but they also no longer have reliable healing available to all.

The DM is a player too,


I think I'd have more fun as a Monk if I could consistently knock targets prone without it being expensive (A subclass feature or a skill, and locking me out of unarmed strikes until level 5). As long as it's not overly strong, who benefits from me not being able to do that?

Cheap, reliable prone isn't overly strong?

Diluting what the Open Hand was good at is going to be a good experience for the player playing one?

This feels like wanting to have your cake and eat it too, the benefits without what is felt as meaningful cost.

[Man_Over_Game]

And then there's the concept of specialisation, it's not a bad thing if the threshold for any old character doing x isn't very high. It's a party game.

....



I never said it was redundant, my whole point has largely been about power creep, pushing ceilings higher, and to a lesser degree, removing what specialisation there is.

Personally, I think specialization is a plague when it comes to roleplaying games.

You could do Option A and Option B at level 1. At level 2, you can choose to remove Option B to give a +1 to Option A. So now you're doing Option A+1, but now with half as many relevant things to do.

Reminds me a lot of Diablo 2, actually. Players would use multiple different skills based off of circumstance, but would eventually settle on the one ability that is most effective for what they want to do, do nothing but that one ability, and continue to use that one ability for the next 40 hours of gameplay, until they get bored and make a new character to do it all over again. Getting stronger shouldn't come at a cost of having less of the game to play with. In fact, it should be the opposite. You want players to look forward to mastering your game, and you don't do that by rewarding players for playing less and less of it. You can kinda see how RPG developers have learned this lesson from D2 and similar games, because nobody is making RPGs with a hyperfocus on specialization like D2 or Path of Exile did.

And while I agree specializations add weaknesses for the rest of your party to compensate around, those weaknesses doesn't necessarily make the game more fun.

When the PAM + GWM Barbarian has to deal with flying enemies, and nobody has Fly, the fact that the Ranger is able to deal with the flying enemies doesn't mean that the Barbarian is having any more fun. Conversely, the Ranger wouldn't have any less fun if the Barbarian was optimized for throwing weapons.

I think that giving players tools to optimally adapt themselves around a problem means they're always relevant, and often those same tools are things that can support your teammates. For instance, a Sorcerer might pick up Enlarge/Reduce as a solution for locked doors, but it also happens to synergize well with the party Monk. I'd say that Enlarge/Reduce is more fun than a spell that was more specialized (like Knock).

What is more meaningful than the Barbarian picking up PAM and GWM is that the Sorcerer picked up Enlarge/Reduce, because Enlarge/Reduce added more game​ to their game, more options for themselves AND the party, while the weapon specializations subtracted. I think if the classes had fewer weaknesses and more general utility, we'd see a lot more party interaction.

And just because someone takes Magical Adept doesn't mean you don't have a need for a Wizard. As long as the solution isn't nearly as efficient as when someone else does it, you won't be stepping on someone's toes by giving out some of their tools to other people. Obviously, you'd need to be careful with that (Arcane Archer vs. Ranger), but they call it "Extreme" for a reason.

[Grod_The_Giant]

- Could be spent to enhance (additively) ability checks, attack rolls and/or saving throws?
...I actually quite like this, at least for ability checks. Hit die are kind of unusual in that they're both a) universal and b) notably more powerful for martial characters--tying them to utility like this is a nifty way of boosting them more than mages with no weird qualifiers required. I might try it out in my next campaign. Be good for a more heroic feel, if nothing else.

If you're worried about NPCs being able to spam hit-dice-boosted abilities at the players, you could add a maximum of (Proficiency Modifier) per short rest.


- Could be used to empower "heroic actions" (e.g. swinging on the chandelier to avoid OA's or jumping down from elevation for extra damage)?

- Could be spent to grant a player narrative agency (e.g. "I spend a HD to include a table in this room" or "I spend a HD to have the Goblin Scout have a peg leg").

I'm a little more iffy on these-- I very much enjoy having a metagame currency players can use to justify things that would normally be a bit beyond the rules, but I'm not sure hit die are the right place to do it. I'd rather just add hero points.

[PhoenixPhyre]

I'm a little more iffy on these-- I very much enjoy having a metagame currency players can use to justify things that would normally be a bit beyond the rules, but I'm not sure hit die are the right place to do it. I'd rather just add hero points.

Yeah. I've expanded Inspiration to include those metagame factors (well, at least the "declare a fact" ones). With the addendums that
* you can hold more than one at a time
* you start every arc with one, but lose any extras at that point
* you can get more if everyone (players, not DM) agrees that you did something cool or if someone calls out that, based on your character, you really should do <unfavorable or complication-generating thing> and you accept.
* if you don't want to use it for metagame, you can instead use it as a Lucky point (re-rolling any d20 roll that you make)

Basically mixing in Fate points.

[Dork_Forge]

Personally, I think specialization is a plague when it comes to roleplaying games.

You could do Option A and Option B at level 1. At level 2, you can choose to remove Option B to give a +1 to Option A. So now you're doing Option A+1, but now with half as many relevant things to do.

This isn't what's happening in 5e though, you're either getting new options or getting better at existing options. There's not much in the game that could work like you described, the best I can think of is Martial Arts and Rage, and even then I don't think it really fits.


Reminds me a lot of Diablo 2, actually. Players would use multiple different skills based off of circumstance, but would eventually settle on the one ability that is most effective for what they want to do, do nothing but that one ability, and continue to use that one ability for the next 40 hours of gameplay, until they get bored and make a new character to do it all over again. Getting stronger shouldn't come at a cost of having less of the game to play with. In fact, it should be the opposite. You want players to look forward to mastering your game, and you don't do that by rewarding players for playing less and less of it. You can kinda see how RPG developers have learned this lesson from D2 and similar games, because nobody is making RPGs with a hyperfocus on specialization like D2 or Path of Exile did.

Replaying a game with a different build to experience it differently isn't worse than being better at all things. If anything it increases replayability of the game.

I've never played the games you've listed, but I've played video game RPGs and think I understand.



And while I agree specializations add weaknesses for the rest of your party to compensate around, those weaknesses doesn't necessarily make the game more fun.

When the PAM + GWM Barbarian has to deal with flying enemies, and nobody has Fly, the fact that the Ranger is able to deal with the flying enemies doesn't mean that the Barbarian is having any more fun. Conversely, the Ranger wouldn't have any less fun if the Barbarian was optimized for throwing weapons.

I think that giving players tools to optimally adapt themselves around a problem means they're always relevant, and often those same tools are things that can support your teammates. For instance, a Sorcerer might pick up Enlarge/Reduce as a solution for locked doors, but it also happens to synergize well with the party Monk. I'd say that Enlarge/Reduce is more fun than a spell that was more specialized (like Knock).

What is more meaningful than the Barbarian picking up PAM and GWM is that the Sorcerer picked up Enlarge/Reduce, because Enlarge/Reduce added more game​ to their game, more options for themselves AND the party, while the weapon specializations subtracted. I think if the classes had fewer weaknesses and more general utility, we'd see a lot more party interaction.

And just because someone takes Magical Adept doesn't mean you don't have a need for a Wizard. As long as the solution isn't nearly as efficient as when someone else does it, you won't be stepping on someone's toes by giving out some of their tools to other people.

Not being as good as people that have invested to some extent in a thing is not necessarily a weakness. These are the kinds of things where the DM can shine the spotlight on certain characters.

I think generalism has it's place, I just don't think making it system wide on this scale is a good thing.

Your argument of not being able to do it as well as a specialist also seems to conflict with your proning Monk example earlier.

It just feels like specialists get less special, and numbers go up because the normal DCs become meaningless and so on. It'd be different if the system gave new things to do, but just doing existing things better doesn't feel good to me.


I also think HD is utterly the wrong place to put this, just give everyone a new resource instead of trying to retool something that already has a place and purpose.

[DarknessEternal]

Whatever you decide to use HD on, it needs to be rolled for value. It can't just be a HD cost. Otherwise you're saying a Barbarian's and Wizard's HD have the same value.

[Man_Over_Game]

I also think HD is utterly the wrong place to put this, just give everyone a new resource instead of trying to retool something that already has a place and purpose.

Normally, I'd agree, but the alternative means creating a resource that would probably work almost exactly the same way (Rest-based resource that everyone gets that scales with level), when many players aren't running out of Hit Dice in the first place (thus the title of the thread).

We already have too much of something. I think it'd make more sense to repurpose the excess instead of creating something new that's conceptually similar, especially since that means fewer rules for the player to memorize and remember in-game (we already have a hard time getting players to use Inspiration consistently).


This isn't what's happening in 5e though, you're either getting new options or getting better at existing options. There's not much in the game that could work like you described, the best I can think of is Martial Arts and Rage, and even then I don't think it really fits.

Polearm Master (Melee, Spears, consistent BA strain)
Defensive Duelist (Melee, consistent Reaction strain)
Great Weapon Master (Melee, Heavy Weapons)
Crossbow Expert (Crossbows, consistent BA strain)
Sharpshooter (Ranged Weapons, Cover)
Slasher/Crusher/Piercer (specific weapon types)
Dual Wielder (specific weapon types)
Elven Accuracy (To a degree, generally only picked with specific party or class setups)
X Armor Master (armor types)
Elemental Adept (Specific elemental types)
Spell Sniper (Specific spell types)


That's just the feats.

I could, for example, go as a Soulknife Rogue, pick up 2 levels into Fighter for Thrown Weapon Expert, take a feat for Duelist, and deal about 24 damage before Sneak Attack, but I'm basically locked into just using my Soulknives with the Attack Action for the remainder of the 14 levels in that game. Alternatively, I could have gone Arcane Trickster, grabbed Mask of Many Faces as my feat, be a level 6 Rogue at the same amount of time and had a lot of tools to leverage around my party (and adding options my party could leverage around me).

Feats like Poisoner are what I think a good example of how combat feats should be. It adds some specializations that doesn't take much away (You're not going to be constantly spamming Poison Damage spells even if you can ignore Resistance) and it gives teamwork options to compensate.

There's not much difference between a PAM + GWM + Sentinel Fighter and a Barbarian and a Monk. You're stuck using the same weapons that are used in the same circumstances, for almost every fight and every enemy. Your 'options' for a situation that doesn't cater to your specialization is "Be suboptimal", and 5e isn't a game that's known for its rules on adapting around your weaknesses.

[False God]

I let people use HD to do several of those things.
You can add it to any roll; check, save, attack, whatever. Declared before the roll.
You can add it to defense, declared after a hit but before damage.
You can add it to the DC of a spell, declared when casting.

I just limit it to 1HD per thing per tier.

Works fine.

[Dork_Forge]

Normally, I'd agree, but the alternative means creating a resource that would probably work almost exactly the same way (Rest-based resource that everyone gets that scales with level), when many players aren't running out of Hit Dice in the first place (thus the title of the thread).

No, 'we' don't have this problem, some tables do. I've never had this problem as a DM, I chose to fuel magic items with Hit Dice to give the players a risk/reward situation instead of just a straight benefit. Hit Dice get spent just fine in both my long-running games, in pretty much every game and one-shot I've ran actually.


We already have too much of something. I think it'd make more sense to repurpose the excess instead of creating something new that's conceptually similar, especially since that means fewer rules for the player to memorize and remember in-game (we already have a hard time getting players to use Inspiration consistently).

I also don't have a problem with players using Inspiration, I handle it a little differently in that they can use it as a reroll, but at least one Inspiration is given at the beginning of every session to the player that does the recap. Players forget Inspiration if it's few and far between, if it's actually a piece of the regular game experience they remember it just fine ime.

And so what if there's a second resource that works the same? Second Wind is literally a hit die with level instead of Con. If players are going to have trouble remembering rules, they're going to have a hard time remembering to use it in the first place, or what all of these new additions do.

A resource is just a box on their character sheet that they decrease or a die that they rotate.




Polearm Master (Melee, Spears, consistent BA strain)
Defensive Duelist (Melee, consistent Reaction strain)
Great Weapon Master (Melee, Heavy Weapons)
Crossbow Expert (Crossbows, consistent BA strain)
Sharpshooter (Ranged Weapons, Cover)
Slasher/Crusher/Piercer (specific weapon types)
Dual Wielder (specific weapon types)
Elven Accuracy (To a degree, generally only picked with specific party or class setups)
X Armor Master (armor types)
Elemental Adept (Specific elemental types)
Spell Sniper (Specific spell types)


That's just the feats.

Not one of those things is making you worse at option B, they incentivise you to use option A... the one that you invested in. I don't see this as the thing you were describing whatsoever. This is just 'why would I do the worse thing?' if both options were applicable and... yeah why would you unless it was for fun or a situational reason?

I don't understand why you see things as consistent BA/Reaction strain etc. when the proposed mechanic would take something that is, in your experience, an underused resource and then hyper-strain it with desirable options on top of it's default function.

Is it not limiting options for those with healing, when they have to spend more resources healing the party because they're burning their Hit Dice on these options? It doesn't take much, as soon as you dip under half your available pool you're on a spiral to constantly being at half at best until you get downtime.

But in general I just don't agree with any of that ^, you paint making your character better at something as a negative, when the alternative is to be a generalist that will likely be average overall but more applicable? In its own way that's locking the character out of certain things, if you hardcore go the generalist route, then it's hard to actually be really good at something, and sometimes what the game needs is for a character to be really good at something.



I could, for example, go as a Soulknife Rogue, pick up 2 levels into Fighter for Thrown Weapon Expert, take a feat for Duelist, and deal about 24 damage before Sneak Attack, but I'm basically locked into just using my Soulknives with the Attack Action for the remainder of the 14 levels in that game. Alternatively, I could have gone Arcane Trickster, grabbed Mask of Many Faces as my feat, be a level 6 Rogue at the same amount of time and had a lot of tools to leverage around my party (and adding options my party could leverage around me).

What? How are you locked into doing that? How is Mask of Many Faces even relevant to your example?

That Soulknife would still be one of the best characters in the game at the skills they're proficient or Experts in. They'd still be able to teleport, use telepathy, and turn invisible.

Just because you choose to focus on the thing you're investing in doesn't mean those other options don't exist. And I say this as someone that played a Soulknife Rogue with the Thrown Style.


Feats like Poisoner are what I think a good example of how combat feats should be. It adds some specializations that doesn't take much away (You're not going to be constantly spamming Poison Damage spells even if you can ignore Resistance) and it gives teamwork options to compensate.

How is that not constant GP and BA strain?

Why did you choose a feat that primarily makes you good at using poison with weapons, for spells? Yes, it can be done, but that's hardly going to be the usual reason PCs take it. On a weapon user, it's nothing but strain from the point of view you're using. If you're going to take this stance you could just as easily say that CBE isn't locking you down because its benefit also applies to spells and bows.


There's not much difference between a PAM + GWM + Sentinel Fighter and a Barbarian and a Monk. You're stuck using the same weapons that are used in the same circumstances, for almost every fight and every enemy. Your 'options' for a situation that doesn't cater to your specialization is "Be suboptimal", and 5e isn't a game that's known for its rules on adapting around your weaknesses.

Yeah no, not buying it. You basically praised the Arcane Trickster, but that Fighter couldn't be an Eldritch Knight? Psi Knight? Rune Knight? Inclined to Shove since they're clearly Str-based and have the attacks for it?

That Fighter is the same as a Monk, even if that Monk could be a seamless Switch Hitter with Sun Soul? A caster with 4E? A healer with Mercy, or a grappler with Astral Self? The Barbarian is niched down a little, but even they have the option of putting the big stick away and taking out a shield to take some heat, or drawing a bow or thrown weapon and pricing Ancestral Guardian at a distance.

You don't have to build as a generalist to have more options than the one that does the most damage, and 5e works just fine embracing that.

And you know what? It's okay to not be at peak efficiency every combat, it allows others to have their moment. The same thing comes around when your strength is what's needed and theirs doesn't work.

[JellyPooga]

No, 'we' don't have this problem, some tables do. I've never had this problem as a DM, I chose to fuel magic items with Hit Dice to give the players a risk/reward situation instead of just a straight benefit. Hit Dice get spent just fine in both my long-running games, in pretty much every game and one-shot I've ran actually.

So...you agree with my premise that HD are lacking in function and could be used for something else, then?

I have to ask; does letting players "fuel magic items" with HD put strain on healers? Why not just introduce a separate resource for that purpose? How is using HD the way you do a risk/reward but it's not for any of my suggestions (or those of others in this thread)? Do you think your players would be spending HD "just fine" if you didn't have your "magic item fuel" houserule? If so, why? If not, why not?

You can't have your cake and eat it! :smallwink:

[Dork_Forge]

So...you agree with my premise that HD are lacking in function and could be used for something else, then?

I have to ask; does letting players "fuel magic items" with HD put strain on healers? Why not just introduce a separate resource for that purpose? How is using HD the way you do a risk/reward but it's not for any of my suggestions (or those of others in this thread)? Do you think your players would be spending HD "just fine" if you didn't have your "magic item fuel" houserule? If so, why? If not, why not?

You can't have your cake and eat it! :smallwink:

I thought I had already explained this but I'll try and be more clear:

My general experience is that players want to, and do, short rest and spend hit dice accordingly, sometimes very heavily. In fact my higher level group (a boon fat 13th) regularly run low, or run out of HD completely.

The group that has that set of magic items (matching team cloaks) also short rests and uses hit dice, again sometimes heavily. I didn't give the cloaks that feature because I thought HD were under utilized, they were used pretty heavily each game, I did it to give them an interesting choice to make:

They can reduce damage now, at the risk of not being able to naturally heal it later.

And yes, since those cloaks have shown up magical healing and potion consumption has increased. The Druid crafts healing potions and uses Aura of Vitality, the Paladin uses their lay on hands and upcasts Cure Wounds, and the Ranger uses their Aasimar Healing Hands (they didn't take Cure Wounds).

So no, I don't agree with the premise that they're lacking, and whilst you certainly can use them for something else, I think you need to be careful about that. I used it as a double-edged sword, because they already have and fulfill their purpose.

[Man_Over_Game]

No, 'we' don't have this problem, some tables do. I've never had this problem as a DM, I chose to fuel magic items with Hit Dice to give the players a risk/reward situation instead of just a straight benefit. Hit Dice get spent just fine in both my long-running games, in pretty much every game and one-shot I've ran actually.

Alright, it doesn't work for your table. That makes sense.

What are some solutions you'd suggest for implementing this kind of option for a table it does work for?

[Dork_Forge]

Alright, it doesn't work for your table. That makes sense.

What are some solutions you'd suggest for implementing these options for a table it does work for?

I'd rather see a go down thing where you have to spend a HD when you get back up from 0 to avoid exhaustion or something. But if it must be used for something else it should be tied to a physical thing, preferably an act of showing of endurance, and preferably a new mechanic not just another way to get a bonus or advantage.

Burning HD for something that benefits a skill other than Athletics/Acrobatics, or anything that's to do with magic on anyone but a Sorcerer just doesn't make sense to me. It's a physical reserve inside everyone.

[KorvinStarmast]

Whatever you decide to use HD on, it needs to be rolled for value. It can't just be a HD cost. Otherwise you're saying a Barbarian's and Wizard's HD have the same value.Thanks for taking on one of the many points I threw into my post and making a nice, concise point about HD being a variable asset. +1.

[Man_Over_Game]

Thanks for taking on one of the many points I threw into my post and making a nice, concise point about HD being a variable asset. +1.

On this note, I do think that it could be reasonably solved by adding THP on top of whatever the feature did that only lasts until the start of your next turn.


Adding THP means that classes like Barbarians will get value out of their larger Hit Dice as a relevant feature.
Making it extra temporary means that it encourages players to take immediate risks or get out of immediate danger (instead of setting themselves up for an advantage for future turns). It also makes it worth a lot less than the HP from using HD the normal way.
Making it THP also means you can't effectively burst them all at once - it's more efficient to space out your Hit Dice expenditures over time - which mitigates the effectiveness of whatever bonus it'd otherwise give you.


If folks ever wanted to do something really cool, but would be OP when combined with the THP bonus, you could have the flashier and more-powerful maneuvers expend the THP as a bonus effect (such as dealing extra damage to one of the affected enemies).

This gives room for both really small maneuvers (move 5 feet without provoking OAs) or really big maneuvers (As a Special Attack, throw a medium or small object at a location, causing each target within 5 feet of the impact to make a Dexterity or Strength save against your Strength Mod + Prof as the DC, knocking a target prone on a fail. If you had THP, it is spent to increase the DC by that amount, and you deal that much bludgeoning damage to 1 target that failed the save) while keeping both types really interesting.