I like Hit points and rolling for damage. Am I a bad person

[Dean]

The question I pose here is can hitpoint tracking systems that use die rolling to, at least partially, determine damage ever be balanced?

See I'm a big fan of balance and I am intellectually -aware- that Damage DC systems like those in Shadowrun or Mutants and Masterminds are more balanced. They work better and more easily allow one to progress appropriately in power along with ones party . They are even capable of allowing things to happen which HP systems fall apart when trying to handle. Things like called shots.

The problem is I don't -like- them.

I see more happiness derived in groups I have both run and seen when hitpoints systems are used when it comes to damage rolls. I feel like people like it. They like that way of handling things I think and if players like something I like it too because as DM my job is essentially at its heart to be a fun generator. The greater acceptance is probably at least partially caused by the fact that it's a well known part of the RPG genre to the outside world. Rolling to hit with your axe and saying "I hit the Orc for 19 damage" is something people understand who don't even play games within our hobby.

The one easy solution I can see for this is to make everyone have the same amount of HP, say 100 points. And just allow everyone different amounts of AC and DR. That way a Dragon could still be way tougher than an Orc but you would still be able to pretty accurately tell that an attack that deals 50 damage when DR tops out at 20 is probably too much.

The problem -that- generates of course is a replication of the same exact problem I see come up in Damage DC systems which is that there is such a glut of players successfully rolling to hit and then rolling to wound and doing -nothing- and then dying a little inside each time. Sure in D&D fairly rarely you will hit a Stone Golem or something and not be able to bypass its DR but that is very very rare in the broad scheme of things. At least in D&D's normal system even if you attack the Lich King and deal 6 damage you know that you have done -something-.

So how about it? Who has ideas about Hitpoint systems

[TarkisFlux]

I've been toying with a fixed(ish) hit point total and a measured success damage boost on and off for a while now, and so far it seems to give you the things you want without suffering standard problems. It's similar to your fixed hp, variable AC and DR setup, just with varying damage instead of DR.

The plan is to give you a hit die that's comparable to weapon damage dice in size, so the 3.5e dnd hit dice and weapons are a fair point of comparison. Then we give you 4 of them at level 1 (plus some attribute modifier if there is a comparable attribute modifier to weapon damage for parity). And you get 1 hp (yes, 1 hp, no more rolling) per level that adds on to that randomish pool of starting hp. From there we say you have your defense bonus is equal to you attack bonus (armor needs to do something else in this setup, TBD). You now have a level appropriate attack and defense numbers, assuming reasonable attribute policies for attack and defense bonuses are in place.

When you roll to hit, if you hit by 10+ you deal 4x damage. If you hit by 5+ you deal 2x damage. If you hit by less than that you get regular damage. Crits are otherwise nonexistent (and this means that weapon differentiation will need to happen some other way, also TBD). So you get to swat down mooks fair easily since you hit them by a lot more than they hit you, and you just take bigger hits from guys higher level than you. And the single hp growth with level allows magic damage bonuses / properties to live in the system without breaking stuff (though attack bonuses would need to be separate things or just go away).

The measured success damage bonuses make it such that fights don't generally go longer than 4 rounds, cause padded sumo is retarded and overly swingy isn't that great either. It also generally fits with the standard power curve since 2 guys are a damage match for 1 guy 2 levels higher, 4 guys are a damage match for a guy 4 levels higher, and 8 guys are a damage match for a guy 6 levels higher, and then it starts to break down which is fine because no one cares if you one-shot tons of guys 8 levels lower than you (in these systems anyway). It also breaks down when multiple attacks get added into it. It handles called shots well enough though, just take a -8 penalty and if you hit you deal 4x damage (with limits on when you can even do this).

[PoliteNewb]

The problem -that- generates of course is a replication of the same exact problem I see come up in Damage DC systems which is that there is such a glut of players successfully rolling to hit and then rolling to wound and doing -nothing- and then dying a little inside each time. Sure in D&D fairly rarely you will hit a Stone Golem or something and not be able to bypass its DR but that is very very rare in the broad scheme of things. At least in D&D's normal system even if you attack the Lich King and deal 6 damage you know that you have done -something-.

You could always make DR a percentage-based thing...so that even if the Lich King is mostly tremendously tough vs. physical attacks (90%), your awesome blow of 50 damage still deals 5 points instead of nothing.

[CCarter]

The question I pose here is can hitpoint tracking systems that use die rolling to, at least partially, determine damage ever be balanced?

See I'm a big fan of balance and I am intellectually -aware- that Damage DC systems like those in Shadowrun or Mutants and Masterminds are more balanced. They work better and more easily allow one to progress appropriately in power along with ones party . They are even capable of allowing things to happen which HP systems fall apart when trying to handle. Things like called shots.

Not sure I agree that they're more "balanced" / progress appropriately?
(Have we got some math for this somewhere?). All the implementations of damage DC systems I've seen have this have seem fairly mediocre...white wolf being the star example...(I'm not overly familiar with the current edition of Shadowrun, which I'd suspect is perhaps more likely to have a more workable system).
I'd have thought a damage save system with a d20 (e.g. M&M) is impracticable swingy...mook rolls a 20 and accidentally decapitates the PC...though it might be workable to use it to supplement hit points, e.g. using a damage save to determine damage multiplier just for critical hits.
I also like hit points since a successful blow is always going to mean some damage...it makes little sense to me when a character gets stabbed with a sword and nothing happens (Warhammer's "naked dwarf" effect).

As far as HPs go, I'd tend to prefer relatively static HPs, roughly matched up with damage so a target can take 3-4 hits from a same level opponent. Relatively slow HP progression with level is probably good, but I'd then want character abilities to be designed to pump up damage significantly against lower-level opponents (but not evenly matched enemies) so that characters can still take out lots of 'minions' fairly quickly.

Also, how does a damage save resolve called shots particularly well ?

[Dean]

Also, how does a damage save resolve called shots particularly well ?

Well since "damage" in these systems is basically just a series of tiered debuffs and status effects such as

-1 to toughness saves for one round
-1 to all future rolls
-2 to all future rolls, dazed for one round
-5 to all future rolls, stunned for one round, can't run

and other bullshit like that it is pretty easy to adjudicate penalties that you could apply if your player wants to shoot someone in the eye. If you can make called shot effects and penalties in line with the effects already in the system then they're probably fine. And in something like mutants and masterminds for instance there are only two d20 rolls (one to hit and for damage dc) making a penalty occur to one for a boost to the other (like it being hard to hit an eye but if you do the damage DC will be pretty nasty) is generally pretty balanced.

Additionally you are correct that MnM combat on a d20 can be kinda swingy. And it's sort of an established problem that fights can occasionally go Whiff, Whiff, Whiff, Whiff, KO!!!!

And that is lame but it isn't a problem that is endemic to the system itself so steps -could- be taken to solve it.

[baduin]

Here is a simple damage system with fixed hitpoints. It is based on True20, therefore Defense equals more or less AC (but depends on Dexterity and Combat Bonus, not armor), and Toughness depends on size, Constitution and armor.

Hit Points
Each character has, when uninjured, 16 hit points. The most common way that your character gets hurt is to take lethal damage and lose hit points. No matter how many hit points it loses, the character isn’t hindered in any way until his hit points drop to 0 or lower.

Disabled (0 to -9 hit points)
If a character has from 0 to -9 hit points, he is disabled. He can only take a single move or standard action each turn (but not both, nor can he take full-round actions). He can take move actions without further injuring himself, but if he performs any standard action (or any other strenuous action), he drops to -10 hit points and becomes Dying.

Dying (–10 to –19 hit points)
When your character’s current hit points drop to between –10 and –19 inclusive, he’s dying. A dying character immediately falls unconscious and can take no actions. A dying character loses 1 hit point every round. This continues until the character dies or becomes stable (see below).

Dead (–20 hit points)
When your character’s current hit points drop to –20 he’s dead.

Critical Hits
When your attack roll is equal to opponent's Defense +10, you score a critical hit. A critical hit increases the attack's damage according to the type of weapon or attack. If unspecified, a critical hit increases damage by +4.

Damage
When you hit with an attack, you may deal damage. Each attack has a damage bonus. This is typically a weapon's damage modified by your Strength. However, some attacks have a fixed damage.

Damage Bonus = Weapon Damage + Strength+Size Modifier

Lethal Damage
When an attacker hits his target with a damaging attack, he makes a Damage roll. Damage roll equals d20 plus the attack’s damage bonus minus target's Toughness. The result of the roll is the number of hit points subtracted from the target's total.

Hit point Damage = d20 + Damage Bonus - Toughness

[fatmonkey13]

I have always like the way that HP were dealt with in GURPS, it would be hard to apply it to DnD, but I think that the huge window from when gets incapacitated and dies would help, as would the way called shots work in the system.

The problem is that it is built around pretty much non-scaling HP, and it would get kind of ridiculous after a while with large numbers for HP.

One option that could work is treat CON as HP, and other sources of HP as the type of armor, I forget the name of, which is decreased like HP with use.

[Judging__Eagle]

I've taken a step back from the whole "damage dealt" and "damage taken" game.

Attacks dealing a range of damage .... doesn't really matter once the game becomes more powerful.

After a while, characters caring about the base weapon damage of their weapon sort of.... goes away. The 1d6 or 2d6 of their weapon is just "an other dice" in their damage pool of 5-11 dice.

I've decided to pare down "weapon" 'damage' to very easy to remember numbers. Right now, 1 for everything; and 2 for anything that needs two hands to use.

Getting more damage means the the creature using it can hit harder than usual [Form]; the creature knows how to deal damage [Ability] ; or the weapon is special [Resource]. Creatures can spend their dice "where ever", but the results add up in much the same way.

[PoliteNewb]

One option that could work is treat CON as HP, and other sources of HP as the type of armor, I forget the name of, which is decreased like HP with use.

I think the word you're looking for is "ablative", perhaps?

If you can reconcile the weird functioning of healing (or find another way to do it), you could even go with a Final Fantasy style mechanic, where armor literally DOES add HP.

To Baduin:

Your system would seem a lot more intuitive to me if you changed the "Dying" threshold point to 0, instead of -10. So you'd have:

Full: 25 HP
Disabled: single-digits
Dying: 0 HP
Dead: -10 HP

I guess I just figure "positive number = doing something", "negative number = lie there bleeding".

[Lokathor]

I don't get why rolling for damage is unbalanced...

Also, in FFT land having armor add to HP makes partial sense because it means that a person who does 10 damage to you before you put on armor and 10 damage after you put on armor is doing less of your total life in damage to you after you've put on armor. Thus, the armor is protecting you. So, that makes sense pretty much.

[Dean]

It's not necessarily the rolling that's unbalanced. In standard DnD allow me to ask you how good it is to add +1d6 to an attack. The answer is "Good...I guess, but maybe useless? I'm unsure" and that's reasonable in a system that provides monsters at challenge rating 5 who have 3hp (Pixies) and at challenge rating 3 who have 52 hp and DR 10 (large construct).

Damage doesn't really have any scaling mechanism in place. What does +2 damage to your sword even mean really? How much faster will that make combats go? Statistically it probably doesn't even have a significant enough impact to be provable. The same bonus to damage that is game-changing at some levels is totally insignificant at others and you can't even tell where those points are because NO ONE KNOWS HOW MUCH DAMAGE YOU SHOULD BE DEALING. There seriously is nothing in place to let you know. If all powers and abilities were attempted to allow a character to deal, on average, 5 X Level damage per round then you would have somewhere to start and measure things from but you don't have that. And since we don't have good points of measurement to work off of we can't really balance properly.

Except I still love it. So I want to know what can be done to make a system work where I will know about how much damage I should be able to output per round, be rolling dice to generate that damage, and have an HP system that advances properly with damage.

[Username17]

Except I still love it. So I want to know what can be done to make a system work where I will know about how much damage I should be able to output per round, be rolling dice to generate that damage, and have an HP system that advances properly with damage.

Play HERO system?

-Username17

[hogarth]

Except I still love it. So I want to know what can be done to make a system work where I will know about how much damage I should be able to output per round, be rolling dice to generate that damage, and have an HP system that advances properly with damage.

Play HERO system?

-Username17

I'm not sure how "is totally decoupled from" equates to "advances properly with". It's still one of my favourite systems, though.

[CCarter]

It's not necessarily the rolling that's unbalanced. In standard DnD allow me to ask you how good it is to add +1d6 to an attack. The answer is "Good...I guess, but maybe useless? I'm unsure" and that's reasonable in a system that provides monsters at challenge rating 5 who have 3hp (Pixies) and at challenge rating 3 who have 52 hp and DR 10 (large construct).

Damage doesn't really have any scaling mechanism in place. What does +2 damage to your sword even mean really? How much faster will that make combats go? Statistically it probably doesn't even have a significant enough impact to be provable. The same bonus to damage that is game-changing at some levels is totally insignificant at others and you can't even tell where those points are because NO ONE KNOWS HOW MUCH DAMAGE YOU SHOULD BE DEALING. There seriously is nothing in place to let you know. If all powers and abilities were attempted to allow a character to deal, on average, 5 X Level damage per round then you would have somewhere to start and measure things from but you don't have that. And since we don't have good points of measurement to work off of we can't really balance properly.

Except I still love it. So I want to know what can be done to make a system work where I will know about how much damage I should be able to output per round, be rolling dice to generate that damage, and have an HP system that advances properly with damage.

Well even in D&D, things like pixies (and half-dragons) are outliers. Perhaps D&D needs creatures/monsters that actually have CR = HD = level, instead of having classed things theoretically (but unless fairly optimized, not actually) having CR = level. So your CR 5 pixie could belong to the Pixie class at 5th level. Basic D&D tried this, though the implementation was patchy (too much xp to level up for most monsters).

Wizard base damage I suppose increases fairly parallel to HPs (1 spell = d6/lvl or so)...though Con bonus throws this out from the targets end.
For warrior types its more complex given that they might have multiple attacks, so that +d6 might actually be +5d6 across a round.