# Starting hit points?



## Betote (Nov 24, 2008)

I would post it on the Paizo playtest forums, but they don't have (or I can't find) a poll option, so here it goes 

Which option from the ones proposed do you use for starting hit points in your Pathfinder 1st-level games? Is there a difference between what you do in PFRPG and what you do/did in 3.x? Do you have your own, better-than-anyone rule?


----------



## ShinHakkaider (Nov 24, 2008)

For the Pathfinder game that I'm running I made the pre-gen PC's with CON + Max HD and it's working pretty well. The PC's get banged around but only once have I come close to dropping a few of them to 0. And that was against some goblins in the Glassworks in BURNT OFFERINGS. 

They'd be more banged up if they didnt have a cleric in the party but for now I like the fact that I dont have to treat the PC's like made of glass at first level. theyre


----------



## Voadam (Nov 25, 2008)

My new game is incorporating a lot of pathfinder and 4eisms into a 3.5 base.

It is first level and I'm using non random hit dice (average round up) plus con bonus plus 10 bonus hp. 1st level does not max out the HD so this eliminates another issue of 1st level choice in multiclassing the same end build creating character differences.

We've been doing non random HD for years but I wanted to get rid of that 1st level choice factor influencing higher level numbers when double checking PC math. PF skills solved that for skill points elegantly. My choice was inspired not just by PF but also by Hackmaster which gives PCs and monsters +20 hp for extra hacking goodness.


----------



## Zil (Nov 25, 2008)

ShinHakkaider said:


> For the Pathfinder game that I'm running I made the pre-gen PC's with CON + Max HD and it's working pretty well. The PC's get banged around but only once have I come close to dropping a few of them to 0. And that was against some goblins in the Glassworks in BURNT OFFERINGS.
> 
> They'd be more banged up if they didnt have a cleric in the party but for now I like the fact that I dont have to treat the PC's like made of glass at first level. theyre




I'm curious what you did for NPCs and such.  Did you also bump up their 1st level hit points?  I debated going with one of the alternate hit point schemes, but I decided in the end that it would just create more work if I also had to adjust the hit points of all major NPCs and opponents in the adventure path (I was going under the assumption that it would be a level playing field with players and NPCs treated the same).   

[sblock]
The players didn't really have any problem with the Glassworks using the standard Pathfinder hit point array.  They did have a lot of problems with the quasit in the "semi-optional dungeon".   It took three different forays to finally defeat her, and she came pretty close to achieving a TPK on one the first attempt.   

So far the only permanent death was one player at the hands of Nuala.  

[/sblock]


----------



## ShinHakkaider (Nov 26, 2008)

Zil said:


> I'm curious what you did for NPCs and such.  Did you also bump up their 1st level hit points?  I debated going with one of the alternate hit point schemes, but I decided in the end that it would just create more work if I also had to adjust the hit points of all major NPCs and opponents in the adventure path (I was going under the assumption that it would be a level playing field with players and NPCs treated the same).
> 
> [sblock]
> The players didn't really have any problem with the Glassworks using the standard Pathfinder hit point array.  They did have a lot of problems with the quasit in the "semi-optional dungeon".   It took three different forays to finally defeat her, and she came pretty close to achieving a TPK on one the first attempt.
> ...




The rules I only bump up the HP if they're classed level NPC's. So Tsuto he got a big HP bump as I also average out HD. Example: a class that uses a D6 HD averages out at 3hp per level + con bonus. 

[sblock] So far they've had a skirmish with Tsuto and some goblins in the glassworks but when the PC's started cutting through his goblins ( I bumped up the number in that encounter from 8 to 12 because there were something like 6 PC's instead of 4) he bugged out. [/sblock]

Altering the HP for NPC's isnt that big of deal for me. At this point I'm doing it with a Post-it pad and a pencil and figuring out the HP in less than a minute or so. Then again I still do prep work with a published adventures, I print out the PDF of the adventure and make changes on the printout. I use the original copy for reading on the train or in bed. The printed PDF is my "work" copy for lack of a better word. 

Like I said I find the extra HP for the PC's liberating because I dont have to feeli like I'm handling them with kid gloves. Also and I dont know if this is a good thing or not, a few of the spellcasters (there are only 2 fighter types a Dwarven Fighter and a Half-Orc Barbarian out of 6 players...) are taking risks in combat that I dont think they would have normally and it's actually making the game a little more exciting. One of the sorcerers was still almost dropped to zero anyway. 

We'll see what happens when they fight classed leveled monsters and other NPCs.


----------



## Kerrick (Nov 26, 2008)

I was thinking of trying HD (random roll) + Con mod + Con score, instead of max HD + Con score. L1 PCs would still get a lot more hp than now, but not a _whole_ lot more - they're still 1st level, after all.


----------



## azhrei_fje (Nov 28, 2008)

Sorry, I see now that your poll says, "starting hit points".  In that case, I would be using choice #1:  Max + Con Bonus.

I just started CotCT a couple sessions ago and if we hadn't gone this route, the fighter with 12 hit points (or took 11 points of damage in a single attack) would've been dead meat. 

I tend to run pretty deadly games.  I play the creatures intelligently, as appropriate for their Int score, but some players aren't ready for that.  Because I tend to have tough combats, the PCs get Max+Con at first level, then 75%+Con at each succeeding level.

Calculating 75% is a bit of a pain when it doesn't work out cleanly on the die, though.  For example, 75% of a d8 is 6 -- easy.  But 75% of a d10 means taking 8 points one level and 7 points the next (averaging to 7.5).

I'm also leaning towards providing Max+Con if a PC should choose to take a level in a class they don't have yet (so no multiclassing penalty).  But my players don't seem interested in that so far.

This means I need to bump up other creatures, too.  I typically give them Max+Con at first level and then 50%+Con at succeeding levels.  So the beasties last a bit longer at 1st level, but the advantage goes away at higher levels.  That's because at higher levels I typically use more intelligent bad guys, so the focus changes from brute force to tactics. 

I have a Perl script that I can type in a dice string (like "3d8+3") and it'll figure out what the hp should be for either a PC or non-PC.


----------



## Aus_Snow (Nov 28, 2008)

Con score + HD for 1st. That's beein in my 3e house rules (and others' too, no doubt) from way back. Don't see why it should change, if I end up running some 3.PF some time.


----------



## Khairn (Nov 29, 2008)

I like the racial HD bonus.  Its simple and provides a further difference between the races without any additional clutter.


----------



## Thazar (Dec 25, 2008)

I agree with the racial hit die and class hit die at first level.  If you feel you need to increase the hit points of starting characters the is a nice way to incorporate it.  

If you use the fixed method there is little variation... and a little variety is a good thing.  If you add constitution score there is going to be too large of a difference between the starting characters possible.  

Letting dwarves and half orcs get a extra D10.  Humans and half elves get an extra d8.  And the "frailer" races (Elf, Gnome, Halfling) get and extra d6.  These are in addition to the class hit die and the con modifier.  This allows the Half Orc Barbarian player to be pretty tough and scary at first level without having to completely overshadow the halfling wizard.


----------



## TheAuldGrump (Dec 26, 2008)

I waffle between max + CB and 2x max + CB. For the game with younger players I have been going with the latter, and it does seem to make 1st level less dicey - they are able to take an average blow from an ogre without being knocked into negatives by the first hit.

But sometimes I miss that fragility, you know?

The Auld Grump


----------



## Abraxas (Dec 27, 2008)

I use my own system for Hit Points
Characters use the following formula to determine Hit Points per level.
levels  01-04  [Level x Fixed HP] + [Con Score + Con Mod]
levels  05-09  [Level x Fixed HP] + [(Con Score + Con Mod) x 2]		
levels  10-14  [Level x Fixed HP] + [(Con Score + Con Mod) x 3]
levels  15-19  [Level x Fixed HP] + [(Con Score + Con Mod) x 4]
levels  20+...[Level x Fixed HP] + [(Con Score + Con Mod) x 5]

Fixed HP Value determined as follows
4	Casters: Sorcerer, Wizard - generally any d4 class
6	Support: Bard, Cleric, Druid, Monk, Rogue - generally any d6 or d8 class
8	Tank: Barbarian, Fighter, Paladin - generally any d10 - d12 class


----------



## jreyst (Dec 30, 2008)

*Con score + 1 roll of class HD*

For my last (short-lived) campaign I had player's roll their class HD 1 time and add it to their Constitution score. For example, a fighter with a 14 Con gets 14 + 1d10. A Wizard with 10 Con gets 10 + 1d4. This allows for some randomness as well as providing a solid base of hit points.  However, in my next campaign I will probably revert back to just doing max HD + con modifier, as characters just had an insane amount of hit points quickly and fights just lasted longer.


----------



## jreyst (Dec 30, 2008)

Kerrick said:


> I was thinking of trying HD (random roll) + Con mod + Con score, instead of max HD + Con score. L1 PCs would still get a lot more hp than now, but not a _whole_ lot more - they're still 1st level, after all.



I do the same thing, just minus adding the Con modifier. The way I see it Con is already factored in when you add in their Con score. Adding in the modifier also double-rewards high Con characters.


----------



## Mokona (Jan 2, 2009)

Seems like 4th edition rules are winning the poll.


----------



## Corinth (Jan 4, 2009)

Initial HP equal the character's Constitution score, modified by his Size category.  (This is a multiplier; Small is .75, Medium is x1, Large is x2 and so on.)


----------



## Wulf Ratbane (Jan 4, 2009)

I give out (3 x max HD) + CON.

And then I beat the hell out of them with EL+2 encounters.

Big fun!


----------



## Darrin Drader (Jan 4, 2009)

I used to start games at level 3 and then make them earn all the XP to advance to level 4. I did this because I felt that level 1 and 2 characters were simply too weak, and between their overall lack of resources to spend on healing potions, and the frequent breaks they would have to take to heal up before adventuring on, the first couple levels were too much of a drag to bother with.

I've been using the Max HD + Con stat for starting hit points, and then started the PCs at the beginning of Rise of the Runelords, and worked out fairly well. What I found was that with increased HP, they were more likely to survive, which is good, but they were actually having a little too easy of a time with the adventure, so to counter this, I upped the difficulty of the encounters a bit to compensate.

At second level, the increased hit points were somewhat less noticeable, so I didn't compensate as much. By third level, it was hardly noticeable at all, so I ran things straight out of the book.


----------



## Max Money AWA (Jan 29, 2009)

*Current game*

I used the racial modifier option for my game. It is a war scenario where the party has a deep recon/skirmish role. The extra hit points from race was more than enough to keep this party going for extended runs behind enemy lines.

The other options would all depend on the type of game or game style. Though I must say, I'm kind of biased against the full HD + full Con score option as it's how 4E works.


----------



## Aus_Snow (Jan 30, 2009)

Max Money AWA said:


> Though I must say, I'm kind of biased against the full HD + full Con score option as it's how 4E works.



Heh. I get that. But, in my case, I had a house rule working exactly this way long before 4e came on the scene, so I don't even have a _potential_ problem with it.


----------



## Papa-DRB (Jan 30, 2009)

Max hit die, +con modifier, +racial.

Helped a *lot* with reducing the 15 minute adventuring day.....


----------



## delericho (Feb 3, 2009)

For Pathfinder, and future 3.5e campaigns, I'm toying with a "hit point advance" rule. Characters will start with the equivalent of their hit points at 3rd level (for a Fighter, this would be 10 + 6 + 6 + three times Con mod).

However, they then would not gain any more hit points until the new total they 'should' have exceeds their current max. For single classed characters, this will happen at 4th level. For characters who multiclass into a class with a different die type, it may happen at a slightly different time.

This has the dual benefits of giving low-level characters some additional sticking power, while not inflating the already high hit point totals at high levels even further.


----------



## Roman (Feb 4, 2009)

Delericho, I like your idea. So far I have been partial to a racial or a flat bonus at level 1 and I still think it has some advantages, but your idea has definite elegance to it as well. I would not, however, keep the maximum hit points at level 1 - that simply makes multiclassing unfair based on the order in which classes are taken - hit points from hit dice at any level should be determined using the same system (whether it is rolling, or average hit points or maximum hit points, or whatever).


----------



## delericho (Feb 5, 2009)

Roman said:


> I would not, however, keep the maximum hit points at level 1 - that simply makes multiclassing unfair based on the order in which classes are taken




Ah yes. I forgot a house rule I've been using ever since my first 3.0e campaign: when a character multiclasses into a (base) class with a higher hit die, he gets additional hit points to make up the difference. The total gain is the number of hit points he would have gained for a level in his old class plus the difference in the dice size.

So, a Wizard 3 would have 10 hit points (assuming no Con bonus). If that character took a level of Fighter, he would gain a further 9 hit points, to bring him up to what he 'should' have. (That is, 3 for gaining a level in Wizard plus 6 for the difference between d4 and d10.)

I have a similar house rule regarding skill points.

However...

I have been considering going with a slightly higher fixed number of hit points for all levels including first (as you suggest), especially if using the 'hit point advance' rule.

I have also been toying with dropping the "four times skill points at first level" rule, changing the max to 1 rank per level, and reducing all fixed skill difficulties by 3. (That or giving everyone 3 free ranks in every skill - that might be a simpler change with the same effect. Especially since I was also probably going to drop trained-only uses of skills.)


----------



## Lord Zack (Apr 14, 2009)

What I'm going to be doing is having them roll for hit points, but give +6 hp. That way when creating characters of a higher level you need not worry about which class was chosen first.


----------



## MRick (Apr 22, 2009)

Does anyone knows if folks at Paizo already decided what rule will be in the final release of Pathfinder ?
Do you think they would let these options open, or they will decide that one of them will be the "canon" ???

If yes, which one ???

We will start a new campaign using pathfinder beta rules but we'll probably switch to final rules when it will be available. If we play with Con Stat + Max HP and the future rules says otherwise...


----------



## DaveMage (Apr 23, 2009)

I'm really ok with any of them at this point, although I think the racial one is probably my least favorite since that would become one more thing to consider when creating or statting a race.

Reducing complexity (without reducing options) seems like a good idea where possible.


----------



## Roman (Apr 23, 2009)

MRick said:


> Does anyone knows if folks at Paizo already decided what rule will be in the final release of Pathfinder ?
> Do you think they would let these options open, or they will decide that one of them will be the "canon" ???
> 
> If yes, which one ???
> ...




I cannot tell you with absolute certainty, because none of the final rules have been revealed, but the latest thinking was that the core rules on starting hit points would not change from 3.5E and all those options would be presented in a sidebar as optional, so that will be the most likely final outcome. 

I might bear some responsibility for this development, since I 'campaigned' vigorously on Paizo boards against power increases of the characters and particularly targeted hit point inflation as one of the worst culprits. Of course, I actually like more starting hit points and was primarily concerned about things like increased hit dice, favored classes and the new toughness, which continue to provide more and more hit points whereas the starting hit point bonus only gives a one-time boost, but it seems that whereas my concerns with hit point inflation were noticed, they decided on a different solution than I would have chosen.


----------



## Hunter In Darkness (Apr 23, 2009)

I always use max HD+ con mod. I used the racial option once, and found it too much for my taste. If I want 3rd level pc's I will make them 3rd level  YMMV


----------

