Goodman Games

Are you still allowing (assuming you did) pcs to begin with maximum hit points at first level?

No. I am going to make them roll for HP like we did in the old days. If it turns out to be to lethal I might go back to max HP at first level.

I'm going to go with something like this:

D4: A 1 is a re-roll
D6: A 2 or less is a re-roll
D8: A 3 or less is a re-roll
D10: A 4 or less is a re-roll

I have them re-roll hitpoints every level. If they get higher, they go up. If they get lower, they stay the same.

Same here. If for some reason they start at level 1 or above instead of level 0, then they can roll twice and take the better result.

I like this method because it causes hp amounts to gravitate towards the average over time, perhaps a bit above average.

I made a compromise wherein pcs get 1/2 the Stamina score plus a die roll. This gives them a base of at least a few hps. I'm considering not allowing Sta bonuses at further levels, just go by the die roll.

I use rolls - just a simple roll the new hit die and add, no max unless you roll it approach.

Though the idea of rolling your collected hit dice each time you level sounds pretty interesting, so I think I am actually going to try it out for a while and see how my players feel about it.

I like that it changes "gotta be careful not to even get hit or I will probably die," from something a player might have to practice for numerous levels until they finally have more hit points than can be taken from them in an average monster attack, to something they have to practice until they level up and likely roll better than their previous terrible roll.

The player and I both roll. The pc gets the better roll. I'm going soft.

Also, keep in mind that they get the extra 0-level d4 that they don't get in most other games...

I'm not 100% set yet, but I wouldn't give max HP. If I wanted to soften the potential of rubbish HP rolls, I'd be more inclined to offer Players a choice:

a) Take the average of the dice roll, rounded down (so a dwarf's 1d10 gives 5 HP)
or
b) Roll and take your chances!

Colin

I have considered having them re-roll all hit points at the beginning of every session. My players didn't really like the idea. I may still try selling them on it.

Im also a vote for the reoll every level, though I like the minimum to be, after all bonuses from Sta etc, 1 higher than the character had.
This appeals to me especially in this version of d&d with warriors getting such a high hit die a low hp roll for a couple of levels can be crippling. What cn I say, if Im playing the warrior I want more HPs than the thief!

This is a hit point variant that I hadn't heard of until just a few years ago (I guess some folks have done it forever) and now it's my method of choice.

If they get a lucky roll early on, it's likely that they won't gain any more hit points for a while. If they get an unlucky roll early on, they just have to survive one level and they get another shot at being decent. It's sort of self-correcting.

I hadn't heard of this method before, but I like it as a compromise over the "pure roll" approach.

We play using a slight variation of this: the player rolls, and if he doesn't like it, then the judge rolls and the player takes that roll, whatever it is.

That's because I made it up on the spot a couple of months ago. I had a zero with one hit point go warrior, and rolled another one. I threw 11, and just decided to give it to him. Then, I had to be fair to the rest of the table, so it stuck.

If I do make a change I think I will go with this last option. I think it would build the tension to have your character's HP total depend on how lucky the DM's new roll is.

I'll admit that while I like most of the DCC rules, this one is where I'll most likely house rule. I want characters to be distinctly more survivable if they are fortunate enough to go up levels. I hate it when players roll sub-standard hit point dice. Most likely I'll let folks roll and then give them half die value if their roll was under that.

With a lot of aspects of the game, there is compelling story telling to come out of the challenges the game presents. Can anyone articulate the argument for why it is good that a warrior has a chance of only getting 1 new hit point when going up a level. Has anyone ever actually done something within the story (rather than rules changes) to give players a way to adjust this roll prior to going up the level?

I tried this last night with someone who rolled up six 0 level guys. Two had a 1 for HP. The DM's second chance roll did add a little tension but not much. One guy went to 2 HP and the other stayed at 1 because of bad ability scores. Both are one hit wonders destined for a quick death. I hope the tension will build at higher levels.

I've found that the random elements of the game help make things more interesting. I've had a few really good roll-ups on some Wizards and an Elf. They survived the funnel and then...

The Wizard that had the best stats (incredible, really) rolled great spells. He was just obscenely good and then he rolled another 1 for hit points. He has 2 hp and is now an overly cautious (gutless) wonder. The random element really evens things out and can make for some very interesting results.

The Elf also had really good stats, including an 18 Luck and he rolled Charmed House and really poorly for his spell results. First adventure he ended up with a magic shirt that helped AC. At first level he is AC 19. He is also a Barrister, so I made him Lawful. Adventuring and random chance has made him very interesting!

Sometimes the characters are just more interesting with random elements.

Personally I'd make the player roll twice and pick the best result, instead of rolling myself as a judge. Same thing, you say? As a player, having the illusion of controlling your PC's fate is clearly a fun part of the game. And the most important rolls of the game are the HPs and the 6 ability scores and consequently the ones I will put the most hope in. Having the judge roll for me kind of cheats me from that control, in a completely irrational way. In the same way that I wouldn't want the judge to determine how my PC is, I'd rather roll for my scores, including HPs, myself. Even if the result is exactly the same.

Hey, I'm the guy that has two die pouches. One for me, and one for everyone else.

That's just how I play

For years I had no re-roll rule, but seven or eight years ago we had a fighter (this was 3rd edition D&D) who rolled 1's for hit points three times in a row. He was fifth level with something like ten hit points. This was silly, albeit memorable. Ever since this I've allowed players to roll twice at each level and take the better of the two rolls; haven't had any egregious problems with this house rule.