Variant: Racial HD for everyone!

[brian c]

Hulk, 1st level Half-Orc Barbarian is made using a 11s and 10s array, so he has a +0 to constitution. He has d12+0 hit points, averaging 6.5

Pointdexter, 1st level Gnome Barbarian has the same stat array, but his +2 racial modifier to constitution gives him a +1 con modifier. He has d12+1 hit points, averaging 7.5

At level 20, Hulk has 20d12 hitpoints, averaging 130 (max 360)

At level 20, Pointdexter has 20d12+20 hitpoints, averaging 150 (max 380)


Hulk is about 6'3", 290 pounds.

Pointdexter is about 3'3", 43 pounds.

Pointdexter is significantly harder to kill, even if we disregard his increased AC for being small. If we tie both of these guys down and hit them with swords, Pointdexter can take a lot more punishment than Hulk. How does that make any sense at all?

Because PCs only get HD based on their class, not racial. I propose that race should have a greater impact on a character's hp total.

Proposal #1: Racial HD for everyone!

Every race has its own racial HD. Upon gaining a class level, characters add not only 1d(whatever) for their class, but also an amount for their race (plus constitution modifier, of course)

Halflings: d3
Gnomes, Elves: d4
Humans, Half-Elves: d6
Dwarves: d8
Half-Orcs: d10

(numbers subject to change)

In this system, monsters would get double HD compared to normal, and in general everything would be a little bit harder to kill. This should be comparable though to games played with full hp (d12 => 12 always) which I know that some people play with apparently few balance issues.

Racial HD would be full at first level, but rolled every level thereafter.


Proposal #2: Racial hp bonuses for everyone!

Instead of rolling a die, each race gets a set bonus number of hp added at each level, in addition to their con modifier.

Halflings: +0
Gnomes, Elves: +1
Half-elves: +2
Humans: +3
Dwarves: +4
Half-orcs: +5

This is less random than proposal #1 and has a lesser overall effect. Monsters would get between 0 and 10 extra hp per HD, depending on their toughness (Ogres, Trolls and Dragons would get 8-10, Kobolds 0)





Comments, questions, concerns, ideas and critiques would be appreciated.

[Poppatomus]

It's an interesting alternative system, but it doesn't jive with my own understanding of HP, which I've always felt is meant to encompass more than just physical toughness. It seems like the real problem is that, rather incongruously, gnomes get +2 to CON and half orcs don't.

As such I prefer the second system to the first, but a redoing of HD to be based on species rather than class would be fascinating. Combat would be more realistic, likely deadlier, and class choices more reasonable. but I think you'd need to also redo combat somewhat to recapture some of the bonuses the small races get when they go melee.

[brian c]

It's an interesting alternative system, but it doesn't jive with my own understanding of HP, which I've always felt is meant to encompass more than just physical toughness. It seems like the real problem is that, rather incongruously, gnomes get +2 to CON and half orcs don't.

As such I prefer the second system to the first, but a redoing of HD to be based on species rather than class would be fascinating. Combat would be more realistic, likely deadlier, and class choices more reasonable. but I think you'd need to also redo combat somewhat to recapture some of the bonuses the small races get when they go melee.

Well, the thing is that Small characters get a +1 to attack and +1 to AC just for size in combat, and in terms of combat there's no real reason not to be small aside from using smaller weapons (which isn't much difference at higher levels) and the strength penalty.

I know that hp has to do with training, and by no means would I want to get rid of class HD- among humans, I agree that a barbarian should be able to take more damage before being knocked out than a wizard would. My problem is that a halfling and a half-orc have the same resistance to physical punishment, even though the half-orc is twice as big. Perhaps that's a better example than Gnome, because the +2 Constitution itself isn't the problem, it just compounds the problem.

[Maldraugedhen]

And now Dwarf Mage doesn't look so bad.

[TheGrimace]

And now Dwarf Mage doesn't look so bad.

Dwarf Sorceror still doesn't sound so hot...

although, when did sorcerors ever really sound good?

[DraxtonSmitz]

I like this idea but how about a combo of race/class?

Say a human (1d6) studies to become a wizard and is more fragile so drops down a die level to a 1d4. But a human training to fight would move up one to a 1d8.

[Gralamin]

At level 20, Hulk has 20d12 hitpoints, averaging 130 (max 360)

At level 20, Pointdexter has 20d12+20 hitpoints, averaging 142 (max 372)
You might want to check your math. You seemed to add 12 instead of 20 here.

[brian c]

You might want to check your math. You seemed to add 12 instead of 20 here.

Whoops, that was a silly mistake. Corrected.



Does anyone else have any opinion about this? Does it make sense? Is it unbalancing, and if so how could one go about balancing it?

[Tracersmith]

I like this idea but how about a combo of race/class?

Say a human (1d6) studies to become a wizard and is more fragile so drops down a die level to a 1d4. But a human training to fight would move up one to a 1d8.

I like this a lot better.... take racial HD then modify the dice type by the class

[Falrin]

Which is bassicly adding a hp-only con penalty.

So to take his list:

Halflings: -2
Gnomes, Elves: -1
Half-elves: 0
Humans: +1
Dwarves: +2
Half-orcs: +3

Steps up or down in HD. Bas HD is still given By class.
Possible HD: 1d2, 1d3, d4, 1d6, 1d8, 1d10, 1d12, 1d14, 1d16, 1d18.
Problem witht he higher ones as you'll need a computer & very case sensitive.

So a halfling wizard would be: 1d4 - 2 steps = 1d2
and the half-orc barbarian gets: 1d12 +3 steps = 1d18

This system gives the half-orc a nedded boost, still leaves the half-elf in the cold and nerfs the halfling to oblivion. Dwarfs Should become the primary race with this.
As you might notice somethings still wrong with game-balance & the number.


Or 1d10+1d3, 1d12+1d3 & 2d6+1d4 for the big numbers. This will give a more average hp, but hey.

[Poppatomus]

Which is bassicly adding a hp-only con penalty.

So to take his list:

Halflings: -2
Gnomes, Elves: -1
Half-elves: 0
Humans: +1
Dwarves: +2
Half-orcs: +3

Steps up or down in HD given by class.

1d2, 1d3, d4, 1d6, 1d8, 1d10, 1d12, 1d14, 1d16, 1d18.
1.5 2 2.5 3.5 4.5 5.5 6.5 7.5 8.5 9.5

Or 1d10+1d3, 1d12+1d3 & 2d6+1d4 for the big numbers. This will give a more average hp, but hey.

The second seems far more reasonable. using it as an added bonus buffs everyone, which might require a damage increase by the DM, but it also preserves the general balance between the classes. Shifting down on the dice is much more dangerous and would require a lot more to fix.

Under the first system, a halfling mage rolling a 1d2 has an average 15 hp at level 10 and can be killed by a strong wind. By contrast a half orc mage has as many hit points as a human fighter, 55 hp more than 4x as many hit points just seems somehow too great a disparity, even harder to justify than the gnome and the barbarian having the same number of HP.

Let's take the example from the OP of the two barbarians.

now hulk the half orc has 190 max (360) hp at level 20

meanwhile

poindexter the gnome barbarian has 130 max (200) hp.


maybe that's what you're going for, but it seems too drastic to me. a 20 pt. defecit that seemed a bit silly has now become an 80 point defecit, up to 160, that basically means the gnome barbarian should just go hang up his long sword.

[D Knight]

the idea is sound from my point of veiw and i agree fully with every1 that says get racial HD + class HD would make the game more real life.

[Poppatomus]

another way to balance it would be to increase the range of critical strike weapons against creatures based on damage size. This should only apply to regular crit strikes, not things like vorpal, etc... but it would make sense. Hitting a gnome in exactly in the heart is much harder than hitting a half orc in the same place.

[Fax Celestis]

Perhaps a flat HP bonus/penalty based on race, but not as extreme as you're talking would work.

Halflings, gnomes, and elves: -1 HP per HD
Humans, half-elves: +0 HP per HD
Dwarves: +1 HP per HD
Half-orcs: +2 HP per HD

[brian c]

maybe that's what you're going for, but it seems too drastic to me. a 20 pt. defecit that seemed a bit silly has now become an 80 point defecit, up to 160, that basically means the gnome barbarian should just go hang up his long sword.

Seriously now... a gnome barbarian? What I'm saying is, I don't see why that should be a viable character in the first place- it's a freaking gnome! It should be allowed, but such a character will be very underpowered, to about the same extent that a Half-Orc wizard would be.


Perhaps a flat HP bonus/penalty based on race, but not as extreme as you're talking would work.

Halflings, gnomes, and elves: -1 HP per HD
Humans, half-elves: +0 HP per HD
Dwarves: +1 HP per HD
Half-orcs: +2 HP per HD

I think the numbers would have to be more like this to avoid having to increase monster HD too, but I wanted it to be able to show more separation between say humans and half-elves.

Man... an elf wizard with the Quick trait would be super fragile using this system.

[Umarth]

Seriously now... a gnome barbarian? What I'm saying is, I don't see why that should be a viable character in the first place- it's a freaking gnome! It should be allowed, but such a character will be very underpowered, to about the same extent that a Half-Orc wizard would be.


Here's what it's really all about. You don't like gnome barbarians. Okay that's fine just say gnomes can't be barbarians.

The HP system your recommending is wildy borken and makes a huge swath of race/class combos so weak as to be unplayable.

The one question I'd say to really ask yourself this when looking at these rules is "Does this make the game more fun?"

If I was a player in your game I think that answer would be no and that should be enough of a reason to not use these rules.

[Matthew]

I don't get the point of this variant. If you tie a guy down, you coup de grace him and he dies. Hit Points represent a whole bunch of things, as do Attribute Scores, but I think the core problem is that you are thinking Bigger = more Hit Points.

[Tinranor]

If you a use a combination race/class to determine HD, you'd need to give the races with -HD more abilities to offset or implement a race-based LA system to give people some incentive actually be a race with a crappy net HD.

[brian c]

If you a use a combination race/class to determine HD, you'd need to give the races with -HD more abilities to offset or implement a race-based LA system to give people some incentive actually be a race with a crappy net HD.

This variant is being used with my races; there's a post about them on here somewhere, but I think it got buried a couple pages back by now. The incentive to play the low HP races is that those races do have a lot of abilites. For example, my Gnomes have +2 Int, +2 Cha, -2 Con, -2 Str, and -1 hp/HD. Sure they're fragile, but they make the best wizards and Bards. Or you could be a Half-Orc with +2 Str, -2 Cha and +1hp/HD and be a very good warrior. I don't want to ban any particular character choices, I just want to make some of them as unappealing as they logically should be, such as Gnome Barbarian. Obviously with my racial adjustments that would be an exceedingly non-optimal choice, but it's one that you could make nonetheless, and sometimes weak characters are fun to play from a RP perspective.

[Arqane]

Yeah, I'd have to disagree with size/weight meaning more HPs. There's a reason why they showed it that way.

I once played a gnome wizard with 20 con who role-played it very well. Gnomes like to tinker, and my gnome liked to tinker more than others, and with much more dangerous things. The amount of times that things blew up in his face made him very resilient.

Besides, the mechanic that you want is already in there, just not the way you're expecting. Larger weapons do more damage, and only larger characters can use them. Take a gnome and half-orc of equal level and equal equipment compared to their sizes. The extra hp the gnome has would be countered by the fact that the orc's weapon does more damage.

[brian c]

Yeah, I'd have to disagree with size/weight meaning more HPs. There's a reason why they showed it that way.

I once played a gnome wizard with 20 con who role-played it very well. Gnomes like to tinker, and my gnome liked to tinker more than others, and with much more dangerous things. The amount of times that things blew up in his face made him very resilient.

Besides, the mechanic that you want is already in there, just not the way you're expecting. Larger weapons do more damage, and only larger characters can use them. Take a gnome and half-orc of equal level and equal equipment compared to their sizes. The extra hp the gnome has would be countered by the fact that the orc's weapon does more damage.

Okay, that brings up a new point then.

Suppose you have a fight between two fearsome Gnome Barbarians. Using their 1d10 greatswords, they hack away at each other until one of them dies, and this takes X number of rounds.

Next to them is a similar duel, but between two Half-Orc Barbarians. Once again, these are two guys who are the same size and have the same weapons (appropriate for their size). Since Half-Orcs don't have any more hp than Gnomes but their weapons do more damage, this duel takes X-3 or some number of rounds, less than X rounds anyway.

My point is that just because Half-Orcs are bigger, they kill each other sooner. By giving them more hp (which is roughtly based on size, yes) that would balance out the fact that their weapons do more damage and make the fights last the same amount of time, in theory.


I've said it before though and I'll say it again: I won't force you to use this variant. I wanted to know what people thought. Quite a few people liked it, and other people disliked it. It's something that I plan on using in the future, and if you like it then you can use it too. If you don't like it, then feel free to not use it.

[Matthew]

You are thinking about it the wrong way. Hit Points represent Health, Skill, Luck and Divine Favour. Any outcome is rationalised after the fact in those terms. They do not hack at each other until one drops down dead. Most 'hits' are the most glancing of blows with X Hit Points expended to make it that way.

[Poppatomus]

You are thinking about it the wrong way. Hit Points represent Health, Skill, Luck and Divine Favour. Any outcome is rationalised after the fact in those terms. They do not hack at each other until one drops down dead. Most 'hits' are the most glancing of blows with X Hit Points expended to make it that way.

Or to put it another way:

Gorrock swings his mighty great sword at the laughablly small creature, and the blade lands with a satisfying "thwap".

The Gnome flies backward several feat, landing in a heap. Then Gorrock hears the pitiful creatures screams of... laughter?

"Is that the best you can do big guy," the gnome chuckles to himself, "Got to say, I've been thrown farther. Got to learn to turn down that velocity a bit against a smaller opponent, especially one that knows how to roll with the punches."

But in the end, Brian_C, your right. its a perfectly valid way to think about it, and I hope the campaign is enjoyable.

[Joltz]

One thing that sticks with me from the basic rules is that the HP system is called an "abstract". It's not "you can get stabbed this deply this many times before you die".

It's a simple representation of a character's complex ability to avoid lethal blows but slowly loose strength. Eventually a character's hp runs out, they fail to turn a lethal strike into a glancing blow, and that's when they finally get impaled.

[brian c]

One thing that sticks with me from the basic rules is that the HP system is called an "abstract". It's not "you can get stabbed this deply this many times before you die".

It's a simple representation of a character's complex ability to avoid lethal blows but slowly loose strength. Eventually a character's hp runs out, they fail to turn a lethal strike into a glancing blow, and that's when they finally get impaled.

Well, I would argue that the bigger you are, the more there is to glance off of. Again, this is just a variant. If you don't like it or don't think it makes sense, then just don't use it, I won't be mad.

[Triaxx]

Bigger fighters tend to last longer because they're generally more steadily built. Smaller fighters may have a lower center of gravity, but they're built lighter.

A Gnome Barbarian might seem an odd choice but two things to consider:
A) He's got a size bonus which partially compensates for his loss of 2 during a rage.
B) Barbarians aren't meant to absorb damage the way a fighter is, but deal it out. A gnome can do that just as easily as a Half-orc.

[brian c]

Bigger fighters tend to last longer because they're generally more steadily built. Smaller fighters may have a lower center of gravity, but they're built lighter.

A Gnome Barbarian might seem an odd choice but two things to consider:
A) He's got a size bonus which partially compensates for his loss of 2 during a rage.
B) Barbarians aren't meant to absorb damage the way a fighter is, but deal it out. A gnome can do that just as easily as a Half-orc.

Um... Gnomes have -2 to strength and Half-Orcs have +2, so if they both rage the half-orc is still stronger on average. Also, gnomes use smaller weapons which do less damage.

[RyanM]

I can think of 2 ways that having a racial HD would work.

Method 1:
Each level, roll a racial HD and a class HD, and add 'em together. In this case, the class HD would be modified. Probably something like:

Halflings: D2
Gnomes, Elves: D3
Humans, Half-Elves: D4
Dwarves: D6
Half-Orcs: D8

Sorcerer, Wizard: D2
Bard, Rogue: D3
Cleric, Druid, Monk, Ranger: D4
Fighter, Paladin: D6
Barbarian: D8

So a Gnome barbarian would get an average of 2 + 4.5 per level, while a Half-Orc barbarian would be 4.5 + 4.5.

Method 2:
Alternate. Use the racial hit die for the odd-numbered levels, class die for even-numbered. So at level 20, Hulk would have 65 (max 120) HP from class, 55 (100) from race, for a total of 120 (220). Poindexter would have the same 65(120) from class, but his racial hit dice would contribute only 25 (40), so his HP would be only 90 (160).

Looks like both ways would generally increase HP across the board, though.

[Tormsskull]

I am actually utilizing Racial HP in my own custom created RPG. However, my entire system is much different than D&D so I am not sure if any of this will help you.

Each of the races in my system have a base Vitality (HP) starting point. This is to reflect their race's natural, physical ability to resist damage, i.e. their body's ability to sustain injury. Vitality is divided between White numbers on the left, which represents parrying, deflecting attacks, dodging, etc, and Red numbers on the right, which reflects a character's bodily resilence (starting Vitality determined by race).

When they gain skill points through adventuring (like accumulating exp, this is a classless system), they can purchase a skill that improves their ability to defend themself (White numbers), but only magical effects or items can increase their bodily resilence (Red numbers).

[Blinkbear]

First thing first, I would stick with the standard system. With this, no offense is meant in any direction. Here my arguments against your system, they are from a rather technical point of view, but since you are a dm, you will understand my concerns. :smallamused:

1) A small comparison of small vs. medium in combat. This is probably not complete, though it should cover the biggest part.

Small has +1 to attack and ac.
Small has -2 to strength. This at least changes the following: attack rolls (not if using weapon finesse of course), damage rolls, trip checks, grapple checks.
Small uses smaller weapons which do at least 1 less damage.
Small gets -4 to grapple and trip.
If I sum this up, this means about +0 to attack, +1 to ac, -5 to trip and grapple, -2 damage rolls.
Often small races are slower than medium ones (dwarf is an exception).

This leads me to the opinion that smaller races already are less effective in combat. I think that the size boni in the area of grapple and trip are very important since trip is an excellent battle field control choice and grapple is useful against monsters who try to grab you etc.

Of course there are always (most of the time completely race specific) cases like throwers or similar which makes a small character more effective than a medium one, but there are much more broken medium (or larger) size chease builds.

2. Changing the power of different races
I would either restrain from changing their power or you have to be rather careful what you do. Or of course you completely remake the whole races system. And taking away HP from races means to give them something else.

3. Stereotypes
I think your system tends to make stereotypes even more attractive than before. Maybe this is what you want. It's not what I like though. Because IMO there will be fighters in any race. Or clerics, or what you want. Maybe a gnome would never listen to a dwarf bard with +2 CHA (which is already very good for a dwarf), but don't you think dwarfs like music? Additionally: Let's say you change the gnome +2 to con against some +2 int or stuff. Do you think it is a good idea that a gnome wizard (we forget the bonus on touch attacks and the better ac and dumping of a wizard-unrelated stat for this moment) is so much better at casting than his human colleagues (sp?)?

All in all I think that your idea is to change hp based on creature size is an interesting thing. But to be honest I wouldn't mess around it too much. Additionally do not forget that this is a game system and not the real world. It is made to have fun. And one of the most important things for this is a good balance (which is sad of course, but this is another topic). Other than that, this here is fantasy. There do not have to be logical reasons behind everything, imho.

My conclusion is that your system might work - but not without consequences. You have to re-balance the classes and also think of what that changes in your game world (is there a way that halflings are still alive?). I would advise you to explain your idea together with your new races if you want to know what people think of it in balancing etc.

Please don't take my post as an offense. And please also excuse my bad english. :smallwink:

[brian c]

Blinkbear, I actually did re-do races for my setting. I won't bore you with the details, but if you're interested there's a link to that in my sig. The short of it is that Gnomes do in fact get an intelligence bonus: they were a race created specifically to be wizards. Halflings are split into two races, one admittedly fragile and one slightly more martially-oriented.

Also, although this does tend to encourage some stereotypes like the big strong warrior, it makes some usually rare race-class combinations more friendly, when combined with my modified ability adjustments. In this system, a Half-Orc wizard and a Human wizard are on equal footing intelligence-wise, but the extra hp from being a Half-Orc might make it a nice choice. Of course they won't be common, but it can in fact switch up some class choices instead of just keeping the same old, same old.

[Chronos]

There's already a mechanic in place to give some races more hitpoints per level than others. That mechanic is racial modifiers to ability scores, specifically Constitution. Elves have fewer hitpoints than humans do, on average, because elves have a penalty to con. Dwarves have more hitpoints than humans, on average, because dwarves have a bonus to con. Expressed in these terms, it looks like your complaint is just that half-orcs don't get a con bonus.

But I think that's reasonable. Think of the way orc armies are traditionally presented and used: The big bad evil guy commanding the orcs doesn't care how many of them die, so long as they do a lot of damage in the process. So orcs get a bonus to strength (letting them deal more damage), but no bonus to con (since they're expendable).

Another system I've considered (though never actually tried) is to extend the concept of monster classes to everyone. So a commoner would be a first-level human, while a starting adventurer might be a human 1/fighter 1. A dwarf would have a larger die for that first "monster" level than a human, and a human would have a larger die than an elf, but after the first level, they'd be on an even footing (aside from their con modifiers). By giving starting characters two hit dice total instead of one, this would also help with the problem common in RPGs of starting characters being too fragile to run interesting adventures for.

[The_Blob]

I have always thought that 1/2 orcs got "boned" by having STR considered such a high-priority stat that it was worth double the other stats (which is exactly what a to-be-remained-nameless WOTC 3.5 designer told me was the reason it wasn't changed in 3.5, you know who you are) which I think is ka-ka. Has anyone considered using the racial paragon levels out of UA & PHBII (or is it DMGII?)? IMHO they can really flesh out a character concept & have already been play-tested... just a thought.

[Ashtar]

Personally, this variant doesn't appeal to me. Maybe go and have a look at Vitality and Wounds in Unearthed Arcana, there is a whole chapter with variants there.

It's just my impression that with the variant you propose, many races get badly shafted. Oh well, as long as the DM and Players are happy, feel free to experiment!

[brian c]

Since this thread got revived, I want to point out that I've dropped this mechanic from my setting. I still think the concept is good, but I don't know exactly how to balance it. Besides, with 4e coming up, races will have a lot of other new differentiations too, apparently.