In defense of the original HD system

[Zulgyan]

When we are reading the original D&D booklets and we get to the section called "STATISTICS REGARDING CLASSES" (p. 17), we are at first astonished because of the weird, and unique to all editions of D&D, system for determining "Dice for Accumulative Hits" or Hit Dice.

In fact, OD&D is the only edition of D&D where the d6 is used for all classes. Looking at the tables we see a series of numbers, that don't really follow a regular pattern but that show a clear intention in the rules: fighting-men get the highest hit points, followed by the cleric, and finally we got the magic user with the lowest hit point expectation (this last issue may be arguable under some interpretations of the rules, but it's not really the point I'm trying to make here).

To many, the greyhawk system that later became the D&D standard, was a great "fix" to the otherwise quirky original system. But I've come to think: "not quite so, not quite so..."

I got some few but good reasons to think why the original system is better:

1. The Greyhawk system is too random, while the original system provides the guaranty of a more predictable "average total":

I'm NOT against randomness. But the greyhawk system might be too random. Fighters can roll from 1 to 8. There is a BIG difference between rolling an 8 and rolling a 1, that is so frustrating for many players that think their character got "spoiled" by a single unlucky roll. A lucky cleric may well have more hitpoints than an unlucky fighter.
But an "all d6 system" that assigns different quantities of d6s to each class, guaranties more "average results". Neither too low, neither too hight. Most results remain in the average. It also better guaranties that fighting men will usually have the highest hit point total, followed by clerics, and finally magic-users. I think it really helps for a more balanced game, where if you elected the high-hitpoint class, you won't lose that significant advantage to an unlucky and irreversible roll. You won't be outclassed by a secondary fighting class if you are playing the primary fighting class.

Also, if you are playing a magic user, giving a lower quantity of d6s to this guy, will better guaranty he stays as the lowest "avarege hitpoint" member of the party.

2. With the original system, fighting-men make the most of a high constitution score:

A character with a constitution of 15 or higher gets +1 to each die they roll for hit points. Note that, as fighting men are the ones who roll most dice, they will get a higher benefit from a high constitution score. And this can be considered an extra benefit for playing the class.

Compare: a 10th level F-M with 15 CON will receive, a +10 hp bonus. While a 10th level cleric with 15 CON will receive a +7.

I really like this. It's another benefit for our no-spellcasting class.


Finally, I'm not saying that the original system is perfect. The tables could get a bit of work for a better distribution of the amount of d6s everybody rolls. But the guiding principle is much better to the excessive randomness of greyhawk and all that came after (that has been house-ruled so much in order to reduce it's randomness).

I hope you liked my article and did not find my poor English difficult to understand.

Cheers,

Santiago

[foster1941]

Spot on, as always.

[jrients]

I agree totally with your analysis, Santiago.

[Zulgyan]

As appendix to the article, I think that the OETP gave the best answers to the mysteries of OD&D hit dice.

I'll give the answers OETP gives. This are the rules of that game, and not a personal opinion. Of course, they are not D&D, nor the authors official clarifications of the rules.

1. When do I roll for hit points?

Upon gaining a level.

2. What do I roll?

Instead of rolling 1 die and add it to the previous result, as in all later editions of D&D, you roll all the dice from the scratch. That means, if you reach level 4 of the F-M you roll all 4 dice.

3. What happens if the result turns to be lower than my previous amount?

You just keep the previous result. There is no HP gain for that level. Now, this may look bad. But if you had unlucky rolls in previous levels, it gives you a chance to recover from those unlucky rolls. I really like that, and find it more fair. Some players, when they roll a 1 for HPs (or maybe two times or three), they just don't want to keep playing their character, because it sucks, and will suck forever as you can't reroll. This system gives them the hope and a motivation to reach the next level and amend that unlucky roll.

4. What happens when I have passed the top of the table?

You roll the top HD for you table, and add the according amount, counting again from the bottom.

For example, a 15th level Lord rolls: 10+1 (top hd of the table) plus 5+1 (level 5th).


I'll be using this OETP rules in my OD&D.

[coffee]

Not only do I agree with you, but I do have to point out that your English is a lot better than you might guess. It's better, for instance, than that of some people I have gamed with in the past. And they grew up speaking it!

[korgoth]

I also rather like the "OEPT school" of interpretation when it comes to the original hit dice charts.

As a wargamer I am confident in saying that more dice are always better. Over time you will have a much better chance of being at or near your statistical expected value. So getting to reroll all of your hit dice at each new level is a huge boon for the player... especially given that the disadvantage of early unlucky hit point rolls is disproportionate to the advantage of lucky ones.

[Falconer]

I think the OD&D system is fine. I don’t like the “power inflation” that comes along with the Greyhawk system (because monster hit dice then moves up to d8). I also like how in OD&D the characters start as very similar at first level (the Veteran’s +1 to HP isn’t going to make much of a difference, neither will the one spell of the Medium, and they attack on the same table, do the same weapon damage), and only as time progresses do they become starkly different. This is almost the opposite of AD&D+UA, where your Barbarian/Cavalier/Fighter with Weapon Spec is a veritable tank against those 1d8 monsters, and your 1-4 HP Prestidigitator is nothing but a liability.

That said, I have a question.

Level  Fighting-Men  Magic-Users  Clerics  -- "name level" underlined
  1       1 + 1        1           1
  2       2            1 + 1       2
  3       3            2           3
  4       4            2 + 1       4
  5       5 + 1        3           4 + 1
  6       6            3 + 1       5
  7       7 + 1        4           6
  8       8 + 2        5           7    
  9       9 + 3        6 + 1       7 + 1
 10      10 + 1        7           7 + 2
 11      10 + 3        8 + 1       7 + 3
 12      11 + 1        8 + 2       8 + 1
 13      11 + 3        8 + 3       8 + 2
 14                    8 + 4
 15                    9 + 1
 16                    9 + 2
 17                    9 + 3
 18                   10 + 1

Not that I expect to play those higher levels much, but, it’s not at all obvious how it’s supposed to progress. And why does the OD&D MU get more hit dice at higher levels than the Cleric? The only clue is that the exchange happens when the MU reaches “Wizard” level. I can only guess—if, indeed, it was anything other than an oversight—that here Gary is trying to be true to the literature. There really shouldn’t be anything more powerful than a Wizard, and OD&D makes no bones about the fact. Any thoughts?

Another question. When, say, a FM advances from Veteran (1 HD +1) to Warrior (2 HD), do you subtract 1 then add d6? The rules seem to say that you roll the hit dice from scratch upon leveling, but I find it hard to imagine that that is really the intent. What say you? Regards.

[Falconer]

Hm, I see you have already answered the question about whether you reroll all your hit dice at each level. With the added rule that you keep your previous HP if it was higher, I like it a lot. Especially since the same method can make level drain easier to handle—no need to keep track of how many HP you had at each level previous. Just reroll all your HD and keep the lower result. Regards.

[Zulgyan]

falconer said:

I think the OD&D system is fine. I don’t like the “power inflation” that comes along with the Greyhawk system (because monster hit dice then moves up to d8). I also like how in OD&D the characters start as very similar at first level (the Veteran’s +1 to HP isn’t going to make much of a difference, neither will the one spell of the Medium, and they attack on the same table, do the same weapon damage), and only as time progresses do they become starkly different. This is almost the opposite of AD&D+UA, where your Barbarian/Cavalier/Fighter with Weapon Spec is a veritable tank against those 1d8 monsters, and your 1-4 HP Prestidigitator is nothing but a liability.

I wholly agree here.

That said, I have a question.

Level  Fighting-Men  Magic-Users  Clerics  -- "name level" underlined
  1       1 + 1        1           1
  2       2            1 + 1       2
  3       3            2           3
  4       4            2 + 1       4
  5       5 + 1        3           4 + 1
  6       6            3 + 1       5
  7       7 + 1        4           6
  8       8 + 2        5           7    
  9       9 + 3        6 + 1       7 + 1
 10      10 + 1        7           7 + 2
 11      10 + 3        8 + 1       7 + 3
 12      11 + 1        8 + 2       8 + 1
 13      11 + 3        8 + 3       8 + 2
 14                    8 + 4
 15                    9 + 1
 16                    9 + 2
 17                    9 + 3
 18                   10 + 1

Not that I expect to play those higher levels much, but, it’s not at all obvious how it’s supposed to progress. And why does the OD&D MU get more hit dice at higher levels than the Cleric? The only clue is that the exchange happens when the MU reaches “Wizard” level. I can only guess—if, indeed, it was anything other than an oversight—that here Gary is trying to be true to the literature. There really shouldn’t be anything more powerful than a Wizard, and OD&D makes no bones about the fact. Any thoughts?

Wait. Are those red numbers in the book? We don't really know them. And I don't think they can be deduced so easily, because the numbers don't really follow a regular pattern. And if they do, the deduction could be wrong too (even though it's a good and very well thought deduction).

EDIT FOR MORE ON THIS: Maybe the cleric would get higher HPs later in the game. We don't know it, and we will never will.

Magic-users can still, and certainly are, the most powerful class. And having lower hit points won't change that.

Another question. When, say, a FM advances from Veteran (1 HD +1) to Warrior (2 HD), do you subtract 1 then add d6? The rules seem to say that you roll the hit dice from scratch upon leveling, but I find it hard to imagine that that is really the intent. What say you? Regards.

My opinion is above. Seems that you were working on the table when I wrote that. ;D

[Zulgyan]

falconer said:

Hm, I see you have already answered the question about whether you reroll all your hit dice at each level. With the added rule that you keep your previous HP if it was higher, I like it a lot. Especially since the same method can make level drain easier to handle—no need to keep track of how many HP you had at each level previous. Just reroll all your HD and keep the lower result. Regards.

Wow, good sighting! I had not realized that, and it's great. :D

[Falconer]

zulgyan said:

Wait. Are those red numbers in the book?

Yes, they are not in the table but in the text on the next page (page 19 in the 5th printing). Regards.

[Zulgyan]

You are right.

This gives more food for thought.

[foster1941]

It's possible to extrapolate a system for higher-level hit dice from the charts -- it works for fighters and clerics and almost works for magic-users. I posted it once upon a time at the K&K Alehouse; if anyone's curious I can dig it up and re-post it here.

As for cumuluative vs. re-rolled hit dice, I've long been very reluctant to accept the latter (since the former is the way every later D&D edition handles it, and what EGG claims he always did even in the early days) but I think you guys have finally convinced me to embrace the latter. That over the long-term it will tend to make characters hew closer to the average, and that players who get 1 or 2 unlucky rolls early on won't be gimped for their entire careers, are both appealing. The only modification I'd make is that where the table shows only additional points, rather than additional dice (e.g. a cleric going from vicar (4 HD) to curate (4+1 HD)) I wouldn't re-roll the dice, I'd just give the extra point(s).

[Zulgyan]

Looks like a very reasonable way of doing it.

EDIT:

It's possible to extrapolate a system for higher-level hit dice from the charts -- it works for fighters and clerics and almost works for magic-users. I posted it once upon a time at the K&K Alehouse; if anyone's curious I can dig it up and re-post it here.

That would be great.

[ffilz]

I could be convinced to go with the original hit dice. I do see some advantages.

One thought I'm inclined to have is that you always gain at least one hit point on gaining a level (and conversely lose at least 1 hit point when losing a level [that causes reduced hit dice]).

I see a point to not re-rolling when you just gain a +1. On the other hand, it would be kind of cool to have the possibility of gaining more than +1. Then it might even be cool to re-roll every level also. Of course allowing a re-roll every time you at least gain a +1 would have implications for high level play when hit dice stop increasing and you just gain pluses (if that system carries back to the original system) in that you would slowly trend towars the highest possible roll (though progress would be very slow). Of course the original system doesn't imply a cap on hit dice.

Hmm, with this, if you pick up thieves, do they have the same HD progression as magic users? Or slower (since past level 10, they slow down compared to magic users per the Greyhawk HD system).

Frank

[foster1941]

zulgyan said:

It's possible to extrapolate a system for higher-level hit dice from the charts -- it works for fighters and clerics and almost works for magic-users. I posted it once upon a time at the K&K Alehouse; if anyone's curious I can dig it up and re-post it here.

That would be great.

Above name level (i.e 10th+ for fighters, 12+ for mages, 9th+ for clerics):

FIGHTING MEN: 1 die +1 on even-numbered levels; +2 points on odd-numbered levels
MAGIC-USERS: 1 die +1 on levels divisible by 3; +1 point on levels non-divisible by 3
CLERICS: 1 die +1 on levels divisible by 4; +1 point on levels non-divisible by 4

This matches the charts in the book for everything except 12th level magic-users (who by this formula would get 1D+1, but in the book only get +1)

Note: this system will lead to magic-users eventually surpassing clerics in hit points at high levels. This seems to have been intentional, because the same thing happens in Supplement I (where mages gain +1 hp/level above 11th while clerics only gain 1 hp/2 levels above 8th.

[Zulgyan]

Hmm, with this, if you pick up thieves, do they have the same HD progression as magic users? Or slower (since past level 10, they slow down compared to magic users per the Greyhawk HD system).

I've been developing a new thief class and it's HD progression is going to be somewhere in between the cleric and the magic user.

Note: this system will lead to magic-users eventually surpassing clerics in hit points at high levels. This seems to have been intentional, because the same thing happens in Supplement I (where mages gain +1 hp/level above 11th while clerics only gain 1 hp/2 levels above 8th.

The question would be: Why?

[ffilz]

If the mage gains a HD every three levels and the cleric every four, the mage will quickly catch up and pass the cleric.

Frank

[Zulgyan]

Yeah, but why really? What is the reason? Which was the intent of the author?

[Zulgyan]

Ok, so here is how I fixed "Dice of Accumulative Hits"



Notes:

Fighting-men: I gave them the OETP progression for warriors. This progression only adds some slight bonuses in some levels.

Clerics: I gave them the OETP progression. The progression is smaller at the low levels when compared to OD&D, but higher at the upper levels. Both issues I thought they needed a fix

Thief: new class I'm working on. I game them the progression of OETP magic-users, that's higher than the OD&D one in levels 1-10.

Psion: another new class. His progression lies bewteen the thief and the magic user.

Magic-User: I just kept the original progression from OD&D.

My system will work just as in OETP, that is:

1. When do I roll for hit points?

Upon gaining a level.

2. What do I roll?

Instead of rolling 1 die and add it to the previous result, as in all later editions of D&D, you roll all the dice from the scratch. That means, if you reach level 4 of the F-M you roll all 4 dice.

3. What happens if the result turns to be lower than my previous amount?

You just keep the previous result. There is no HP gain for that level. Now, this may look bad. But if you had unlucky rolls in previous levels, it gives you a chance to recover from those unlucky rolls. I really like that, and find it more fair. Some players, when they roll a 1 for HPs (or maybe two times or three), they just don't want to keep playing their character, because it sucks, and will suck forever as you can't reroll. This system gives them the hope and a motivation to reach the next level and amend that unlucky roll.

4. What happens when I have passed the top of the table?

You roll the top HD for you table, and add the according amount, counting again from the bottom.

For example, a 15th level Lord rolls: 10+1 (top hd of the table) plus 5+1 (level 5th).

[Finarvyn]

zulgyan said:

4. What happens when I have passed the top of the table?

You roll the top HD for you table, and add the according amount, counting again from the bottom.

For example, a 15th level Lord rolls: 10+1 (top hd of the table) plus 5+1 (level 5th).

This almost slipped past me when I read your post for the first time. What it could do is allow me to stop all of my level charts at 10th level with additional levels reasoned out at "ten plus one", "ten plus two" and so on. (Not that I ever use the charts that high ... I prefer capping off around 8th-10th level anyway ... but I might want to do so and it would be nice to have a rule in place.)

So a follow-up question is: would it be better to recycle through the chart after 10th level (which is easier since our number system is base-10) or after "name" level. This is a little tricky since for the fighting man they list actual numbers for 10th level even though "name" level is technically 9th.

[Finarvyn]

falconer said:

Level  Fighting-Men  Magic-Users  Clerics  -- "name level" underlined
  1       1 + 1        1           1
  2       2            1 + 1       2
  3       3            2           3
  4       4            2 + 1       4
  5       5 + 1        3           4 + 1
  6       6            3 + 1       5
  7       7 + 1        4           6
  8       8 + 2        5           7    
  9       9 + 3        6 + 1       7 + 1
 10      10 + 1        7           7 + 2
 11      10 + 3        8 + 1       7 + 3
 12      11 + 1        8 + 2       8 + 1
 13      11 + 3        8 + 3       8 + 2
 14                    8 + 4
 15                    9 + 1
 16                    9 + 2
 17                    9 + 3
 18                   10 + 1

I don't use these levels, either, but I did put together a chart for all classes up through 20th level (just for fun, and using Men & Magic only) and wondered about your interpretation of 18th level magic user. Here's what I had....

18 Wizard, 18th Level 9+4
19 Wizard, 19th Level 10+1
20 Wizard, 20th Level 10+2

I guess I assumed that since 14th level was listed at 8+4 the assumption was that this pattern would continue. (From a probability standpoint I would rather say that the +4 represents a new dice instead so that 8+3 at 14th would be followed by 9 at 15th, but that's not the way they did it in Men & Magic.)

[Zulgyan]

admin said:

So a follow-up question is: would it be better to recycle through the chart after 10th level (which is easier since our number system is base-10) or after "name" level. This is a little tricky since for the fighting man they list actual numbers for 10th level even though "name" level is technically 9th.

Name levels would still be 9th (F), 11th (M-U) and 8th (C). This is only a method to assign Hit Dice. And I think it's easier to work with a 10 level distribution.

[Falconer]

"an 18th level Wizard would get dice of 10 + 1" per M&M p. 19 (5th print)

[Finarvyn]

Sure enough -- that's what it says all right. I wonder how I missed that when I put my charts together.....

[busman]

Here's my charts out to 20:

Lvl	FM HD	FM HP	MU HD	MU HP	Cler HD	Cler HP
1	1+1	4.5	1	3.5	1	3.5
2	2	7.0	1+1	4.5	2	7.0
3	3	10.5	2	7.0	3	10.5
4	4	14.0	2+1	8.0	4	14.0
5	5+1	18.5	3	10.5	4+1	15.0
6	6	21.0	3+1	11.5	5	17.5
7	7+1	25.5	4	14.0	6	21.0
8	8+2	30.0	5	17.5	7	24.5
9	9+3	34.5	6+1	22.0	7+1	25.5
10	10+1	35.0	7	24.5	7+2	26.5
11	10+3	37.0	8+1	29.0	7+3	27.5
12	11+1	38.5	8+2	30.0	8+1	29.0
13	11+3	41.5	8+3	31.0	8+2	30.0
14	12+1	43.0	8+4	32.0	8+3	31.0
15	12+3	45.0	9+1	32.5	9+1	32.5
16	13+1	45.5	9+2	33.5	9+2	33.5
17	13+3	48.5	9+3	34.5	9+3	34.5
18	14+1	50.0	10+1	36.0	10+1	36.0
19	14+3	52.0	10+2	37.0	10+2	37.0
20	15+1	53.5	10+3	38.0	10+3	38.0

As you can see, the MU gets ahead of the Cleric only from 11-14 and after that they fall in sync with each other. This is why I believe the 8 + 4 is there for the MU at 14, to get them in sync.

The key is to remember that the expect hit points from a d6 HD is 3.5. Thus a +4 doesn't really make sense, as you might as well add an HD at that point.

BTW, for those wanting to make simple charts, all I did to make this chart was put

 
  before the data and the negate the pre and size after the data. Then I just pasted the info in from Excel and it maintains the tabs etc. pre is for "preformated text".

[Aplus]

I like the original HD system myself. Rerolling every level is the way to go, for any system in my opinion.

Now a question: Since the thief never got proper old-school HD treatment, how do you think giving him the M-U's HD from Men & Magic (along with XP progression from Greyhawk) would work out?

It seems in line with later versions where they both have the d4, but the thief levels much more quickly... It's easy to map this stuff by level, but more difficult once you take into account the varied XP progressions of each class.

[waysoftheearth]

Nov 29, 2011 13:46:11 GMT -6 Aplus said:

Since the thief never got proper old-school HD treatment

The original thief did get the "proper old-school HD treatment" which I've documented in another discussion on these boards here.

[Stormcrow]

Why all the love for this newly invented interpretation that has you reroll all your hit dice every time you achieve a new level? That's obviously not what was intended. I don't care if you like the idea and use it, I just don't understand the appeal.

"Leveling up" isn't about rolling more hit points, it's about getting more hit dice. A Hero has 4 hit dice. A new Hero already has rolled three of those hit dice; now he gets another hit die, which needs rolling.

A Seer has 1+1 hit dice. Let's say he rolls a 3 on the die, for 4 hit points. Now he becomes a Conjurer, with 2 hit dice. He's already got a 3, so he rolls the new die for a 2 for a total of 5 hit points. (The +1 he had as a Seer goes away, but it will return when he becomes a Theurgist.)

Yes, you should keep track of the score of each of your hit dice.

[mgtremaine]

Nov 29, 2011 19:33:49 GMT -6 Stormcrow said:

Why all the love for this newly invented interpretation

It's the season, we are just filled with love.

-Mike