Results 1 to 4 of 4
07-18-2004, 07:18 PM #1
- Join Date
- Jul 2004
How many of you use the training for HP variant?
My advice: USE the train for HP rule. Trust me on this. Why? Simple. It is the justification for the longer lived races to be "better" than the average human. They can spend the time to maximize hp... which the human can not, due to aging. IMC, basically every dwarf or elf NPC, unless very young, or having some vocation that totally would not support it, has maximized or near-maximized hp. I play with 3e rules, that the PCs get max hp at 1st level, but after that, they roll randomly. NPC humans don't even get this advantage... so they generally have average hp. However, when that dwarven fighter or elven fighter takes on the party, they can expect a REAL good fight, and always remember, hp is not just toughness of resisting damage, but represents some skill in dodging blows. It also means that when you hear of a guy who trained for years to be one of the best, there is some justification OTHER than experience level.
Note that my views on this for the long life blood ability bear this out too. And, it is a great way to drain funds from characters on an adventuring level, spending time and money training. The characters that aren't regents get tougher, while the regent does not have time to do these things. It also "hardens" soldiers, who would naturally have better hp than the craftsman, which, while measured in hit die level means they may have an average hp 1 or 2 higher, doesn't actually happen.
The interesting side effect this had on one campaign I had was that the elf character took off for a bit to train, and the player got to retire him, bring in a new character. He seemed to have "no problem going off to train for 20 years... it's ONLY 20 years after all" The character may rejoin with the PC's heirs...
07-18-2004, 08:40 PM #2
At 09:18 PM 7/18/2004 +0200, epicsoul wrote:
> How many of you use the training for HP variant?My advice: USE the
> train for HP rule. Trust me on this. Why? Simple. It is the
> justification for the longer lived races to be "better" than the average
> human. They can spend the time to maximize hp... which the human can
> not, due to aging. IMC, basically every dwarf or elf NPC, unless very
> young, or having some vocation that totally would not support it, has
> maximized or near-maximized hp.
I think that`s an excellent point and a good way of incorporating the
domain level effect right into the adventure (character stat) level of
play. I`m always interested in such interactions.
In this case, I would suggest that there might be a method of applying the
concept by establishing a relationship between the age of the NPC and their
hp. For instance, one might assume that a character will have average +1
hit points per die if they are a century old, average +2 hit points per die
if they are two centuries old, etc. At a certain point the characters all
reach max hit points. Similarly, ability scores might be handled in a like
way. That is, a +1 to an ability score up to the standard array (or
whatever maximums the DM wants to set) for various NPCs.
In my D20 house rules, the above makes particular sense because I use an
alternate Vitality/Wound point system that gives full access to vitality
points only to "heroic" characters with total ability score modifiers of
+5. "Common" characters only get 1 VP per level rather than a hit die
until they reach the "heroic" ability scores. That way, for instance, I
don`t have to make the ambassador that the PCs are meant to protect a 2nd
level character. He can be 15th level--or whatever level that is higher
than the PCs--but still vulnerable to assassination in a way that a typical
D&D character of that level would not be if using hit points. Using the
training rules for ability scores as described above might explain some of
the dynamics of elven culture being more "individualistic" in certain senses.
07-18-2004, 10:40 PM #3
- Join Date
- Jul 2004
'sgood. Although, when PCs chose to not involve themselves in plots for/against assasins, I often simply reverted to the 1e assasination instant kill table to determine the success. Crude, but effective.
Since joining this board, I have noticed a few posts that are bothered by the relative power/level of the non-humans over the human NPCs. I find it rather amusing, really. My solution was the hp rule, but also, I feel I should point out one thing: all those NPCs were written with 2e in mind... as in, back when there such things as level limits. W/o level limits, perhaps cranking up the level of a few of them would be a good idea. That being said, people like Rhoubhe, by conversion, are already epic level.
07-19-2004, 09:08 AM #4
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Germany near Frankfurt
Personally I don't use the rule. It does also not fit very well in the 3. Edition concept.
HPs are a very sensitive balance factor which should be treated carefully.my purpose is now to lead you into the Pallace where you shall have a clear and delightful view of all those various objects, and scattered excellencies, that lye up and down upon the face of creation, which are only seen by those that go down into the Seas, and by no other....
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)