What's the Best Way to Handle HP?

[@Jeromy1986]

Horse Power = amount of health because people say "healthy as a horse" ?

[@asquirrelplays]

Lord have mercy I think we've cracked the code

[@Akinohotarubi]

Minus 5 horse points.

[@Kajnake]

Honda ur-V has 190 hp and a horse has 1 hp

[@blakereid5785]

I always wondered. Thanks!

[@therealtijuanaman]

Here's an idea; if the party is only doing an average of 15 points of damage per turn, maybe don't put them against an enemy with 12,000 hp

[@damsonrhea]

Mutant's and Masterminds had an interesting system. I think you would probably count it as a 'strike' system (though it wasn't exactly that), but there was no garentee every hit would do damage. Instead, you got a saving throw that got harder every time until you failed one. It was made to simulate superhero fights, where people kept getting knocked around, but sometimes a single blow could take someone out. Nobilis is another interesting one. It has a strikes system, but they're tiered. Every time you took a wound you gained an affliction (which... is its whole interesting thing), but taking away someone's last health level required something epic.

[@asquirrelplays]

Interesting! I like the idea of the saving throw getting harder over time, but with each failed one? Seems like you'd get the double whammy. You get the initial blow for failing, then a second blow due to the increased difficulty. Really feel that failed roll!

[@cybermerlyn2]

I am a huge fan of wound levels (WEG Star Wars, Vampire etc.). I also love the idea of "death spirals", the one thing that drove me crazy about HPs was if someone was down to the last 2 points, nothing changed as far as the ability to hit etc. So there was no impact to the character until they hit 0. That being said, I am also a big fan of the way that 13th Age uses the escalation dice, the longer you are in combat the more likely you are to get hurt.

[@asquirrelplays]

oooo I've not heard of escalation dice, but I like the concept of combat getting more dangerous as time goes on. That sounds interesting. Depending on how you define death spirals, you might like what "Break!!" brings to the table. Players get about 2-4 hits, but they refill after each combat. Thing is though, every hit you take after you reach 0 inflicts a wound you roll for, and they get progressively worse. It can start snowballing really fast. Also, I suppose you can technically say that when ye olde goblin gets down to 2 hp, he's struggling/wounded, easier to hit, misses a turn, or something, but that's entirely on the GM. The rules generally present it as anything above 0 = totally fine without saying otherwise. Whether that falls under homebrewing or just adding flavor, I don't know.

[@Mittens_Gaming]

I like the way vampire handles to too.

[@NefariousKoel]

Over the years, I've come to appreciate the hybrid method WFRP has used in all it's editions. The character is fine until a strike takes them into negative numbers, so they can shrug off the first couple-three hits as close calls or whatnot. However, when damage knocks characters into negative values, they have to roll on the Injury table along with a modifier based on how far into the negative that hit took them. That's when you'll start getting a bone crushed, an eye knocked out, lost fingers, or worse. That's when you start taking the "death spiral" penalties which are linked directly to the type of injury rolled, but you still have a decent buffer before that starts happening. So you'll still usually have the opportunity to change tactics or flee before getting into serious injury territory if things are going bad. In WFRP your Wounds (i.e. "HP") are a fairly small number, usually in the teens for PCs, and don't grow much over time - their defensive skills & aspects do. Therefore, even highly experienced PCs can still come under threat in a relatively short time. Instead of being a huge HP bag with the extended "tree chopping" going back and forth for many turns. Despite having an injury table, the combat isn't longer in comparison and bravely running away can become an earlier consideration.

[@infinitedm5396]

Death spirals I find are really fun in theory but terrible for players in practice. It's just not *fun*. There's some that are built for it. But largely it's just an annoying mechanic. Positive feedbacks like escalation is a better method. Consider also buffing enemies instead of debuffing players for death spirals.

[@tomraineofmagigor3499]

For the game I'm making once you hit 0 hp you can basically choose to either be out of the combat or to fight a last stand. Of the different magic elements one of them is death. Every living creature has weakness 5 to death. This means that once they're at 0 or less they take death damage equal to the negative and add the weakness to death. They take the damage to both mana and stamina. Once all 3 are at 0 or less you're dead. You can choose to keep fighting potentially to your death or you can make either a medicine or endurance check to reduce the death damage you take. This check can be the only thing you do on your turn meaning you're basically out of the combat. The reason for the check is that some injuries might be so bad that you're only slowing down your death or otherwise you're stuck holding your wound either till you've had enough time for a rest or gotten help

[@chameleondream]

Your channel is one of my all time favorites on YT, don't ever stop playing that sax!

[@asquirrelplays]

welllll thanks man! That's some mighty high praise. I'll make sure the squirrel keeps on dootin' on the sax.

[@Mittens_Gaming]

I treat the main pool of HP as minor wounds and Stamina. When the character reaches 0 HP they take a major wound, or die. So you roll a d20, 1 is death, otherwise the character recieves a wound of some sort.

[@asquirrelplays]

I mentioned it another comments, but "Break!!" has a pretty cool wound system that gets progressively worse the more you get wounded. Or can, depending on the luck of your rolling.

[@principleshipcoleoid8095]

In Wildermyth there are distinct story chapters. First time hero loses all hp they get a choice between heroic sacrifice or running away. First can be a huge damage attack as retaliation, second ones usually include losing a limb or getting a scar, or max hp debuff for the rest of the campaign. There are more choices specitic to other things that happened to hero before. One reason why lost limbs aren't catastrophic forever is because heroes can change their bodies through magical altars and events, which not many RPGs even have tbf

[@kacin1292]

Holy crap! Your description is so detailed with all the music you're using. So awesome I hope more youtubers will do it like you! Awesome video btw.

[@asquirrelplays]

Glad somebody noticed! I do it for two reasons. 1 - it feels like the right thing to do and 2 - there's been so many times I wanted to know what music somebody used and there's absolutely 0 mention of it in their description. On that note though, I had been copy/pasting the outro song information and didn't realize until just a couple videos ago that "Artist" was misspelled. Nobody ever told me T_T

[@Akinohotarubi]

As you quickly mentionned, Basic D&D smaller HP pools solves 3/4 of the modern D&D HP problems. A goblin has around 3 HP, and a Dragon around 45. The PC also have way lower HP, you just stop rolling above 9th level and get +1 HP per level (+2 if you are a fighter). If you add in the optional weapon mastery rules even high level fights can be insanely fast and brutal.

[@asquirrelplays]

Sounds pretty good to me. Now if we can just get the players to decide what they're gonna do BEFORE it's their turn ...

[@Akinohotarubi]

@@asquirrelplays Group initiative has sped up my fights drastically, even when I was still GMing PF 1e, I was surprised how smooth things went when players were actually able to come up with a stategy. Old school combat turn structure also makes it way smoother to resolve each player intended action, and even makes it fun to roll initiative *each round*, something I would've never even dreamt of, even in a fever dream, in my 3e/PF days.

[@asquirrelplays]

@@Akinohotarubi I'm a fan of the group initiative. It's way faster, but one thing I've noticed that's kind of funny (and this just might have been my groups), is that it does take a couple rounds or so for the players to figure out who likes going first. That initial "not wanting to step on any toes" or making sure they don't butt in/ahead or something. But after a fight or two? They get into a groove just fine. Just kind of funny to see that initial "soooo ... you wanna go first? Me? No, after you."

[@Shaso-xv3tw]

Savage worlds has probably the best answer to this I’ve seen that I want to shamelessly steal. You get a number of wounds that is small, low damage strikes only cause temporary disorientation rather than causing a wound (making it easier to wound until you recover), and each wound comes with a penalty to our physical rolls and makes damaging you easier. This makes combat feel gritty and dynamic while adding real stakes to taking a wound, especially when you only have 3 of them.

[@asquirrelplays]

Nice. I need to try some more systems that deal with wounds more. Been going through all the comments and it sounds like I'm really missing out in that department.

[@Lampoluke]

Cyberpunk converted me to old grognard. 1-2e you are locked at 30 hp, 4e it depends on statistic with a range of 5 to 50 (average is still 30). In that game a handgun deals 2d6 with a modifier depending on the manifacturer, your generic gun deals 3+2d6. Since a handgun shoots twice, there is a small chance to be killed in one attack. On top of that, there is location damage with different effects, for example headshots deal double damage. There is a funny rule that if you take more than 8 damage in a body part that part will be rendered useless. So if I hit someone in the head with my average handgun and roll the minimum of 5, that is 10 damage to the head, which means that I have blown the guys head and killed him.

[@asquirrelplays]

Just get a new head. Easy. Be back to work in 2 days, tops.

[@stm7810]

to be fair that's how headshots go.

[@devinplombier6918]

Personally, I love City Of Mist's system for tracking statuses with a narrative condition associated with a number from 1 to 6. Works so well in the narrative, and very satisfying interaction with the other mechanics

[@Googie_Oogie]

It's funny to think about, but I believe the game "Fear and Hunger" follows both a narrative and numbers based HP system, with both you and your enemy being able to chop off limbs and target attacks in ways that significantly alter the fight throughout each encounter. It's pretty cool!

[@asquirrelplays]

Sure sounds cool. I will add it to my ever growing list of "TTRPGs I need to look at". Send help

[@Googie_Oogie]

@asquirrelplays oh, it's not a ttrpg, just a video game, lol Much luck on your never-ending journey :)

[@littlehorn0063]

There's a fan TTRPG adaptation in the works, but it won't be done any time soon. Art for the rulebook is pretty, though

[@Googie_Oogie]

@littlehorn0063 If I recall correctly, I think Miro started the series based on a tabletop campaign he'd designed and hosted with his friends Although I don't remember where I heard that, I hope the fan version turns out well :)

[@aquadros]

For the third option there is a middle-ground. Which are those weird-looking Battletech character sheets (full of dots on every part of the robot). I once played a basic scenario of battletech and that idea simply blowed my mind! Every part (or in the case of a "normal" character, every limb) of the mech would have its own hit points and once they reach zero, then, the narrative magic would happen! It's nice because it makes a mechanically "grounded" strategy to go after those narrative consequences...

[@asquirrelplays]

I've heard of some systems like that, but I always wonder how much it slows down gameplay due to keeping up with multiple parts and pools. Did it seem to go fairly smoothly for you? I've yet to play any mech games. I was scheduled for one a while back but the GM got called into work last minute so we never got to play. 😭

[@aquadros]

@@asquirrelplays Get a look at the character sheets, basically the whole game is about managing HP... lol... I would make a streamlined version of it, maybe only for some parts, dunno...

[@TheGoldenPhoenix-nm8qe]

I like the narrative damage and numbers of HP combined. Makes things more fun and interesting to describe.

[@asquirrelplays]

"The good news is that you still have 20 HP left. The bad news is ... you have one less arm."

[@BenjaminMarra]

Great video! I prefer the EZD6 method for tracking HP. Professor DM broke it down with averages between weapon damage and an enemy's HP and it basically comes down to a number of hits anyway so you can skip all the math. I also love narrative conditions in combat as well, so I like to fold that into the EZD6 method. Makes combat move quickly and has lasting consequences.

[@asquirrelplays]

ohhh I think I remember that video! Man, that would have been a good point to bring up. Ah well. I suppose if I brought up every good point then we'd be here all day. But that's true. You can just yeet the math out and call it a day and pretty much get the same result.

[@mikfhan]

"Hey, mister... Don't you know hit points are the stairway to heaven?" -- obnoxious little frog

[@asquirrelplays]

not my fault Cowboy Bebop has all the good music

[@AvenueStudios]

This is a great breakdown man! As I've always said, I'll have fun with whatever system I'm playing in LOL. But I am loving how DC20's handling this - small HP pools, but damage is base numbers. There's no rolling for damage which is an interesting way to deal with it too cuz I definitely agree you get that crit and then you roll all ones on your damage - it just takes all the fun out of it.

[@asquirrelplays]

I think you mean 5e just takes all the fun out of it AYOOOOOOO

[@AvenueStudios]

@@asquirrelplays 🤣🍺

[@colbyboucher6391]

My favorite RPG by a longshot is a game called Mythras, and I'd say it uses a "strike" system that manages to avoid the near-instant death problem by being something of a hybrid, and by it's whole combat system sort of factoring into things. It's... a little much but somehow less clunky than GURPS in the end. You've got HP, but it's entirely locational. If a hit location drops to 0 it'll be rendered useless (if it's your abdomen, chest or head, you make a save to see if you fall unconscious for a few minutes). Hit locations can drop all the way down to negative max HP which represents massive trauma like compound fractures or losing a limb, or instant death. If you've got no armor and some buff dude with a greatsword uses Choose Location: Head, and rolls damage well, they might just chop your head off. Except... - You could've parried the attack, which is what you attempt the majority of the time - You could've had your shield passively protecting your head - Why weren't you wearing a helmet? It reduces damage directly, ALWAYS wear armor - You have Luck points which you can use to force re-rolls, among other things In practice, with the randomness of damage, hit locations and armor in the picture, you often only get superficial wounds or take no damage at all, the armor saves you. In fact if that was the whole system fights could last a damn long time. But there's Special Effects at play. People get to use Special Effects if they roll well, both attacker and defender. And the thing is, some of them can end a fight if you deal any damage at all. If you try Bleed or Impale, actually deal damage, and they fail the save for it, usually the victim needs to just surrender. Not dead but will be if they continue. And, And!! You get fatigued by fights just going on too long. Two highly skilled opponents in full plate will often come down to someone getting tired, knocked over, and stuck with a rondel dagger. What's particularly nice about all this is that while there is _technically_ a death spiral, it takes a lot for it to occur, it's telegraphed, and it comes so hard and fast that it doesn't really feel like one.

[@jan_harald]

that definitely sounds pretty much perfect fights won't drag on forever, aren't over instantly, got several ways to protect, etc also sounds tricky to minmax, because of there being so much stuff to consider

[@colbyboucher6391]

@@jan_harald Speaking of min-maxing, Intelligence is actually a useful stat for fights alongside Dex- it influences your initiative and how many action points you get.

[@asquirrelplays]

Somebody else had mentioned a game where the fight got more dangerous the longer you went so it wouldn't drag on too long. Getting fatigued from a lengthy fight would function the same way I feel like (as in motivation to make the fight faster). Interesting! It sounds complicated, but it does sound really neat. I wonder how much HP my tail gets.

[@thesirenfox3017]

I did a VERY short scroll through the comment and didn't see this so allow me to put on my nerd specs 🤓 Ackshually dragons can have more then 2 thumbs because in nature wings are modified forearms *snork* This a great video!

[@asquirrelplays]

I've been going through the comments 1 by 1 since the video came out trying to respond to everyone, so I can assure you as of this point, nobody has mentioned it. Truly, you are the king/queen of nerds. NEEEERRRRRRRRRD! ♥ (I appreciate your knowledge of dragon anatomy)

[@viktormadzov5286]

Speaking as someone that mostly had experience with video game RPG's, I never sow the problem with the "HP pool" in and of itself. From a logical worldbuilding point of view it just makes sense that powerful monsters like a dragon or T-rex would be able to endure way more damage or other harmful effects them a lowly goblin or village nightguard. Something like "hit and strike" and "narrative damage" flattens the tactile experience of your character growing more powerful in a fleshed out living breathing world through the course of the campaign. Not to mention that with everyone having smartphones with access to all kinds of calculators and simulators at there fingertips, the larger numbers for damage and HP shouldn't really slow things down all that much even if you have terrible math skills. That TTRRPG combat can get boring and dragged out has little to do with big HP pools and a lot more with the combat system in general. Tacking Dnd combat as an example, you first need to roll to check if you can even hit the target, manually adding up all the different buffs and bonuses to your dice roll, and then IF you do manage to hit the target, you do the same process all over again to calculate the damage......just so that your character makes one swing with his sward or one shot of his bow at the enemy. Then you have to wait for everybody else to go repeat the same process, and if you failed to eather hit the target or roll hight damage (which is a relatuvely hight chance), then it can feel like your waisting your time😅 Lets face it, Dnd style rpg's are not suited for capturing the feel of high orcane fantasy battles that modern audiances want to emulate. The roots of the system is bassed on the mechanics of clasical wargames, where it was mostly about tactics and methodical planing. Spending a few minutes to simulate of an entire armies atack hits a bit different to spending a few minutes to simulate 6 secunds of combat between a handfull of combatents. So yeah, I feel that removeing HP pools and even numbers all together is less of a solution to stagnant TTRPG combat, and more of a bandat to patch up a battle system that is in deep need of streamlining and removing archaic mechanics

[@asquirrelplays]

I was about to use 5e as an example of why even with a calculator it's still slow, but you already did it for me lol. But yeah, that's why I said HP Pools aren't solely to blame for slow combat, especially in 5e, but it can also contribute if you're not careful. HP Pools 100% have their place, just like everything else, and your examples of dragons and T-Rexs being able to endure more is a great example of that. I would also say it's nice to see your damage number go up as your grow, but if you're still averaging the same number of hits to down the enemies, then did you really grow? Or did the numbers just get bigger. That's why I really appreciate when video games have you either backtrack through a once difficult area after you've done a lot of growing and you're able to breeze through it, or throw a bunch of enemies at you that were once boss fights. Both of those definitely reflect your growth and is fun to experience.

[@TalesFromElsewhereGames]

Oh wow, didn't realize you had made a video about this a while ago! I grappled with this issue for a while when designing my own TTRPG, and ended up with an Injury system, rather than Hit Points at all. What I built is a mix of how you described "hits and strikes" and "narrative damage", where you're inflicting discrete, individual "injuries" that also carry narrative riders (like "bleeding", and so forth). Such systems are pretty lethal in comparison to traditional HP, but I think they're significantly more evocative!

[@asquirrelplays]

I was surprised with how many people said they use/like wound systems. It's cool though. It definitely makes things more interesting than just "I hit for 17 damage". I've had your video sitting in the queue since it got posted in the server. I swear I'm gonna have to start scheduling some time on the weekend or something to binge KZbin and catch up with everyone.

[@TalesFromElsewhereGames]

@@asquirrelplays Haha I feel you! Who has time to watch KZbin when you gotta produce for KZbin?!

[@AndrewBrownK]

If HP is on the chopping block, so is every other point based system. If you find 1 HP goblins annoying, then throwing your hands in the air and say “8 str greatsword does same damage as 20 str greatsword” is NOT the better way to run an RPG.

[@DanielMWJ]

I mean, you're going to have problems "hitting" high AC enemies at all with only 8 str compared to 20 str.

[@bananabanana484]

A method of equipment modification can use a mechanic inspired by Daggerheart: if you deal more damage by getting a high attack, just add a +1 to hit. Give every creature a Threshold for a normal hit and a second Threshold for a “Big” hit, and then an accuracy boost is also a damage boost without being overpowered.

[@asquirrelplays]

I agree. EZD6 does a similar thing too, and then the reverse to make a warrior guy "tankier", despite having the same amount of strikes. He's just a lot harder to hit.

[@DMTalesTTRPG]

Very nice. I enjoy EZd6’s take on damage, but appreciate hybrid approaches like Knave - where wounds reduce inventory. Cypher is interesting because the pools get used to activate abilities or reduced difficulty for tasks (like dodging or deflecting an attack) so they aren’t just reduced by enemies hitting with attacks and when pool points are spent it becomes part of the narrative. Narrative damage sounds interesting, how do you set parameters for yourself to make a victory feel earned or defeat not feel cheap?

[@asquirrelplays]

You could do a simple hit or miss approach. So a player would say "I want to aim for the goblin's neck" and you give them a number to pass. If they pass it, you as the GM narrate what happens. If it's a regular goblin, you could let them hit the neck and that's the end of the story. If it's an important/boss goblin, you can have them hit the neck but the sword strikes something metal/solid under the goblin's collar (assuming he was wearing anything). You landed the hit, but you discovered that area is protected. Now they have to take a new approach. Another way you could do it is on a scale. The farther past the number they roll to hit, the better their hit. So if it was 12 to hit a gobbo (on a d20) and they rolled a 13, it might not do a whole lot. Might just be a cut on their arm, clipped a piece of their leather armor off, knocked them off balance, or something else. Whereas if they rolled an 18, that just might be it for that poor guy. It's a very loose system, and one you would need to know your group well so they don't think you're just messing with them or being unfair. The way I did it was using my system, which has a "sliding difficulty". Every time the players want to do something, the GM sets a challenge roll for them to pass. You want to chop the dragon's tail off in one swing? Sure, but I'm going to set the difficulty really high and you'll have to expend a lot of resources to make it happen, but you CAN do it if you have said resources and roll well.

[@justinblocker730]

So a minor wound * 3 = Major wound * 2 = Scar/bleeding wound. And lastly the crippling damage where the hand, leg, eyeball goes flying, or your arm is broken. Also a neat idea, shield breaking. Choosing to let your shield shatter and stop a bleeding, or crippling wound from happening, but leaves you open for future damage.

[@asquirrelplays]

Yeah, breaking equipment was something I never did in our two 5e campaigns. Wanted to, but it didn't feel right with the way everything else worked. EZD6's fighter/warrior class has an ability that lets them destroy their shield to save themselves. So that's pretty cool.

[@the10thiris]

I love the analysis. A game I loved to run was 'Quest RPG' part of it was because it uses a 'strikes' HP style. For many of the reasons you mentioned in the video I found it enjoyable and easier to run and players found combat more engaging. Some additional reasons may be due to the boss monsters I created following the 'spirit' of the rules and not the 'letter' of the rules and some of it is probably the rolling system which prioritized things happening.

[@asquirrelplays]

sounds like a good time to me. I've become a huge fan of the "strikes" system.

[@bob12884]

Just watched this after your Tricube Tales videos. I love their "Resolve Tokens" system which I think will fall under Narrative Damage. You start a character with 3 Resolve Tokens and taking a negative effect reduces them. Once your character hits 0, that character is out of the scene and gains an Affliction based on how they lost their Resolve Tokens. Once a character has 3 Afflictions, they are retired from play until they go below 3 Afflictions. I'm a big fan of this system because it does not mean taking wounds/damage is the only form of losing tokens. Many things can turn away an adventurer!

[@asquirrelplays]

Tricube Tales is such a great little system. Some of that "big brain simplicity". Honestly it needs more exposure/credit. Sad to see things like it and EZD6 not getting much stage time because of the big bad wizards of the coastline.

[@TheCyanideStorm]

This reminds me a lot of the 16 HP Dragon framework! Might be worth looking into, since you're hanging out in a similar space!

[@asquirrelplays]

Never heard of it, but I just went and did a quick search. Very quickly skimmed an article about it and I think I'm picking up what it's putting down. Got me a note and the link saved to follow up though!

[@SlinkyTWF]

In our first two editions of Pangenre, we tried to 86 the whole idea of hit points in favor of a wound system. It worked okay (definitely enabled us to model firearm combat well), but not as well or as simply as we would have liked. If we ever do any further RPG system development, we will likely use a mix of hit points and body points to differentiate between fatigue and light wounds and more serious damage that takes more time or resources to heal. The important factors are making it play fast and keeping the math simple.

[@asquirrelplays]

I'm always a fan of fast and simple. I went and searched for Pangenre and found (I'm assuming) your site, but the links point to DriveThru and there's nothing there. You temporarily off the market or am I bringing you surprising news?

[@kabosustan2484]

I'm working on a game with a hybrid system between HP pools and strikes. The way it works is that you roll to hit with a dice pool (what kind of dice and how may depend on weapon) and damage is flat, not rolled at all. This has a few positives * It allows to have thoes small diffrences between a sword and a plus 1 sword whithout the swingy-ness of rolled damage. * It also means you can make enemies and know EXACTLY how many normal hits from each party member it will take to kill them. * This makes the strenght of enemies more predictable since, that goblin you expected to go down in 3 hits will never get lucky enough to survive a 4th (although your players could still all miss * Has the intensity of always knowing how many hits each enemy will need to kill you (and that number being low) with the added fear of getting hit by a stronger enemy beinging you close to death and a few negatives * Players need to remember what dice to roll (mitigated by only having 8 weapons (there is a secrate 9th that players can't use bc it's bad) in the game and each player only having 2 weapons total) * It takes time to build and count the dice pool (not rolling for damage removes a roll and there are no "add your strenght+proficiency," to bog you down so this takes only margenly longer than rolling in 5e does) * Knowing that simpily hitting an enemy would leave them with 1HP when your ally would outright kill them disencourages players from even taking the shot (mitigated by all players taking their turn at the same time, allowing them to just ask the other player to take the shot and by characters having special abilities that allow them to deal more damge meaning they can spend resources to kill enemies quicker witch is good)

[@asquirrelplays]

I’m curious about your second negative there. Does it really take longer (or even as long as) than 5e? I would think counting the dice rolled in front of you would be a lot quicker than 5e where there’s multiple steps to doing damage to an enemy, along with all the different things you add to your roll. I’m guessing the time comes from figuring out how to build the dice pool?

[@kabosustan2484]

@asquirrelplays yes but you underestimate how long it takes to actually find the right dice. In my play testing players arent always 100% sure what to roll until they've made the attack.

[@ICLHStudio]

Honestly, I think the biggest advantage of Health-pool style systems (by far) is the extra axis it gives for customization, balance, and reliability (even if many games are terrible at actually making proper use of this feature). What I mean by extra axis is this: In a hits-and-strikes style game attack effectiveness is determined almost entirely by accuracy; an attack that is likely to hit is good and one that is likely to miss is bad (and varying degrees along the spectrum between those two). But once you add in a decently large health pool and varying damage levels, suddenly attacks can now be inaccurate and weak, or accurate but still weak, or inaccurate but strong, or both accurate and strong. This opens up way more options for character customization, allows you (either as player or designer) to fine-tune the balance and especially the swingy-ness much better, and every additional axis added to the mix compounds the possibilities even further. Pathfinder 1E, for example, has the best TTRPG martial classes precisely because there is so much freedom to specialize or generalize to many degrees along accuracy, sheer damage, number of attacks, and even how conditional or universal each of these traits are; and each aspect can be built relatively independently from one another (and with multiple flavors and approaches to each). Pathfinder 2E, for all its strengths, loses out on a lot of customization by virtue of eliminating the majority of attack quantity options and more severely limiting accuracy options (5E's bounded accuracy has a similarly limiting effect, but without the balance and system benefits that PF2 has).

[@asquirrelplays]

100%. There was another comment where this was mentioned, and I told them it wasn't until I tried making some custom weapons for the players in an EZD6 game (hits and strikes) when I realized it. I had a big "oh, man" kind of moment as it set in. HP Pools definitely help support custom gear.

[@Wanderer_of_Sol]

I ran a narrative only health game for several years and I still think it was one of the best campaign I've ever done. The trick to fighting normal guys was to give them the exact same narrative ability as the players. They would aim for weak sport, do dirty tricks like throwing sand in player's eyes, lay down covering fire (it was a sci fantasy setting, so guns, magic, all kinds of explosions), and they'd taunt the players and banter with each other. Really, I think half the battle with normal/non-boss encounters in narrative was to set up good encounters. Trick your players into getting into a gun fight in a basement, or on the other end of a long hall with shots wizzing by them. And let the narrative do more than inform when an enemy is dead. Invent status effects as things happen. As soon as the bad guy threw sand in a player's eye, pocket sand became a viable tactic for the players, as did crippling and wounding enemies to slow them or worsen their aim or attacks. I think the best part of narrative health is that there's no balance to worry about, which allows for crazy stuff to happen. Stuff that would never have actual rules, but simple common sense rulings could be made on the fly. Suddenly nothing is off limits and you can get crazy heroic and tragic moments all as the story goes on.

[@jan_harald]

it kinda depends on whether the goal is purely to have fun being the hero, or if it's trying to be more realistic y'know, it can be too easy to have the players narrowly escape death for the 5th time, lol, but if you just want to have fun, then it doesn't matter that they're undying, if anything it'd add more fame as "those guys never stay dead, they're always up and kickin' in a few days" it's best when optimizing for fun, not accuracy, or balance

[@asquirrelplays]

POCKET SAND! I would imagine there was a lot of shooting in the legs too to keep people from running away. Honestly, sounds like a lot of fun. I think one of the main tricks to make narrative damage work well is to run it with good/close friends, or at least a group that you know well and can play well with. It being so loose requires a lot of trust on both sides of the table I feel like. And you know, helps to have everyone on the same page too and want the same thing. You can be absolutely heroic and silly with narrative damage, or deadly serious.

[@occultnightingale1106]

The way I handle HP in my system is an HP Pool determined at base to be equal to the character's Constitution Score, and then they gain a bonus based on the size of their Hit Dice (determined by Race, and modified by Class choices), between 1-5 Hit Points per Level the character has taken. If the character goes below 0 Hit Points, they're in the Dying State, taking more damage and suffering Fatigue (-1 to all d20 rolls per Fatigue stack, instant death if they reach 20 Fatigue) the longer they remain in the Dying State. If a character goes to a negative number of hit points equal to their Constitution Score, they roll a Death Saving Throw, and on a success (10 or higher), they survive, but fall unconscious and suffer a wound of some sort. However, if they roll a 9 or lower, they fail the roll, and get a Death Action (one Action they can perform for free as a last hurrah), and then fall to the ground dead. If the other players are quick enough to resuscitate, they can bring the character back to life, but they still suffer the wound, and the DC for their next Death Saving Throw is increased by +1. It's worked out pretty well for me so far, as HP pools are low enough that combat can be quite dangerous (Weapons usually deal an average of 15 damage at Level 1, and only continue increasing the more levels are taken), so my players usually strategize thoroughly, and avoid combat if it's not totally necessary. The times things have gotten dicey, my players usually do a good job focusing on protecting the party members in danger, which I appreciate, as I think good teamwork is very important.

[@asquirrelplays]

ooooo I like the Death Action. Getting to do one last thing on your way out is a good idea. I've had a few larger enemies do that to the players before. It'll start flailing wildly doing multiple attacks but then just falls to the ground dead. And yes, teamwork makes the dream work!

[@sorenrohrbach2361]

I'm working on a game that kinda combines hp pools with narrative damage by incorporating an injury system. Basically any time a character takes damage equal to or surpassing their current hp, they take an injury related to the damage type

[@asquirrelplays]

Sounds good to me because when it happens you can "Now that's a lotta damage! ... and an injury."

[@rustybrooks8916]

I find that treating every hit as dealing the same amount of damage (1 point) just doesn't feel good to me. Getting stabbed in the stomach by a rapier or smashed by a club that is twice the size of your body, the idea that they are both equally dangerous just doesn't jam with me. But hey, this is why we have options out there, lots of different people with different needs.

[@Dragoniiia]

in Apocalypse World diffrent weapons do diffrent amout of damage. From 0 (like taser) to 3 (heavy riffle). Each Player character has the damage clock with 6 spaces to fill. Also in the last three spaces, the wounds get worse with time if noone heals you. I think it is a good use of "strike(?)" system. As in - you either hit or dont, but the damage depends on the weapon. Also there is armor that blocks damage, but if you for example hit someone in the unprotected area they take full blow.

[@rustybrooks8916]

@@Dragoniiia That is more like standard hp systems, except that the damage and hit points are simplified and streamlined, plus it sounds like some sort of added wound system? I actually like that. The damage that you would reasonably take from a dagger or a short sword are very similar, but the damage from a knife and a shotgun are quite far apart.

[@Dragoniiia]

@@rustybrooks8916 tbh imo strike system is just HP poll but with less HP. Like, they work basically the same.

[@asquirrelplays]

You're exactly right. We got options! I love picking on 5e and really don't want to play it ever again, but I'm certainly not about to try and take it away from somebody because I know good and well there are people that like things like individual spell descriptions, hp pools, level up paths, and all that. Some people like more structure, some people like less. It's a shame though that a lot of people feel like you're trying to take something away from them when you're just talking about parts of it you don't like/think aren't very good. Thankfully though, this video has been very well received.

[@macoppy6571]

I'm currently experimenting with Stravagante! This system blends the Strikes and Narrative types. Remember, there's always pee in the pool ☠️

[@asquirrelplays]

I'm not even gonna try to pronounce that name.

[@AllMindControl]

Ive always played with hp pools AND narrative damage. Like if the player rolls a crit, or they describe doing something in a really creative way, just fudge the numbers a little.

[@asquirrelplays]

I do love a good number fudgin'

[@alexanderchippel]

I think the big problem with HP is that a lot of games just have the number be way too high. In my homebrewed heavily modified version of 5e, you only get more Hit Points on ASI levels. So that 1d4 + 1 dagger attack from the goblin stays lethal longer. Monsters also have less Hit Point so it balances out more. Combat is quick and lethal and if you get stabbed, it actually feels like you got stabbed.

[@asquirrelplays]

There's some interesting videos by people much smarter than I that get into the psychology behind "big numbers" in video games. It's pretty interesting what the average person is drawn to. For example, a lot of people will say it feels better to do 100 points of damage (and see it on screen) to a monster with 1,000 HP than it does doing 10 points of damage to a monster with 100 HP. It's silly, but it's interesting, because that's what big companies focus on. What makes you THINK the game is enjoyable, not actually making the game enjoyable.

[@alexanderchippel]

​@@asquirrelplays Another case of something working in video games not working in table top. Like in a computer program you can just make a script that generates a number between 350 and 475. But in table top, you're limited to the mathematics and probability of real physical dice. You have to worry about distributions and bell curves.

[@ikksnay]

I have never felt more like an internet dog than I do now, watching an internet squirrel in a window e: wanna recommend my friend's game Fellowship for my fav approach to narrative damage! it uses some features of strikes, to good effect. rather than hp, you attack ability scores/features/traits; when your Strength is damaged, rolls you make using Strength are penalized; when you attack an enemy's Stone Skin or Hypnotic Eyes or the Stone of Spectral Forme in their hand, you specifically disable whatever advantage that offered them. when all your stats are damaged, you're KO'ed; when all of an enemy's traits are damaged/removed, they're defeated. e: e: I am the only person I know who does not have the cilantro soap gene, but still dislikes cilantro

[@asquirrelplays]

I see a Fellowship on Drivethru and Itch.io that's a PbtA based system. Is that the one?

[@Catlord98765]

I like HP steak sauce

[@asquirrelplays]

the butcher would say that

[@VeneficusCubes]

6:05 - Biblically accurate squirrel

[@asquirrelplays]

strange times back then

[@viktorvladeriow2239]

You won me in the introduction

[@asquirrelplays]

That's how you do it!

[@avengingblowfish9653]

I'm tired of HP pools. After I finish my current D&D 5E campaign I plan on moving to Savage Worlds which has a wounds system.

[@asquirrelplays]

I was so glad to finally finish our 5e campaign lol. Players were great, characters were great, adventure was fun, but man, it honestly felt like those rules were doing everything they could to take the joy out of it. I know that's personal taste, but geez. As the GM, I felt so restricted.

[@BX-advocate]

Not an old grognard but I do agree with the HP pools and then being low. I was about to make the comment saying exactly that a second before you said it. You really called us grognards and OSR players out.

[@asquirrelplays]

My preferred TTRPG KZbinrs are the older ones like Old Grognard Says, Professor DM, and DM Scotty, so despite being on the newer side to the TTRPG world, I feel like I can get a decent idea of what they like. I would have loved to had folks like that around me when I was a kid. Maybe they'll still adopt me despite being in my late 30s.

[@principleshipcoleoid8095]

I like how in Starfinder there is Stamina and Health. Stamina is easier to recover and goes away first; Health needs more time to replenish. There are also Resolve points, used on a lot of things, from replenishing Stamina and stabilising at will to class or feat active abilities.

[@okamichamploo]

How would you keep some weapon variance with the hit/strike method? It sounds like attacks per turn and dexterity would trump everything else, so no one would use a slow and heavy two handed axe over dual wielding daggers. And wouldn't this make a rock just as effective as a crossbow? Could I venture out with a wooden spoon and be just as viable as my mace wielding companion?

[@asquirrelplays]

I think this is where personal taste/preference comes in. If you want different types of weapons to make a difference, then you'll need additional mechanics to support that, like armor types and also HP pools. Bigger weapons will do more damage to HP, but something like a spear will give you the benefit of reach and the ability to pierce certain armors. When you use a simpler system like hits and strikes, it gets harder to add weapon variance, but for some people they don't mind that. They're fine wielding a chef spoon alongside their greatsword friend. In the system I'm working on, there's 3 "styles" of damage to choose from. You have Defensive, Combo, and Heavy. Defensive does 1 damage and can't crit but can refill an important resource the game uses. Combo does 1 damage and 2 on a crit, but also has exploding crits, meaning it can keep going. Heavy does 2 damage on a basic hit and 3 on a crit. There's some other nuances to go with these skills to balance them out but that's generally it. The weapon you choose is entirely up to you. Your "combo" skill could be dual wielding daggers, a machine gun, a gunslinger really good with a six-shooter, a really fast samurai with a katana, whatever. Flavor and roleplay is important, and the GM can use your chosen flavor to balance the fight accordingly. If you flavored your Heavy as a giant sword, the GM can let your weapon not only do the 2-3 damage, but also break the enemy's armor and expose him to easier hits for the other non heavy hitters in the group. Meanwhile, the Defensive guy might have flavored his weapon as a simple sword and shield, and he's struggling to get past that armor. Again, it's just personal preference. Some want the numbers and rules, some people just want a basic damage number and more roleplay. It's possible to add some weapon variance with hits and strikes, it's just a lot harder to do mechanically.

[@TourFaint]

Most "hit/strike" systems i played have you roll to hit, then roll for damage. You first have to hit, then if you hit, you need to roll enough damage to pass some threshold (like armor, toughness, save, whatever) and only then you deal a "strike". That allows you to have different weapons (big dmg, vs big accuracy, or maybe faster attacks but weaker) and still has the simplicity of having few big hit points.

[@okamichamploo]

@@asquirrelplays thanks for the well thought out reply. I used to use a damage type system Slash/Pierce/Blunt/Chop so I might experiment with incorporating that into a hit/strike system. Your combo, defensive, heavy system sounds interesting as well. I’ll stay tuned for future videos to hear more. Love the channel, and for some reason my 2 year old finds the squirrel hilarious to watch as well ;)

[@darkranger116]

made my own Handbook for a Dark Sun Campaign, did HP as follows.. HP = 1/2 Constitution Stat + Level. A level 1 Fighter with 16 Con has 9 HP. Punching does 1+str mod dmg, a dagger does 1d2+str mod, a sword 1d4+str mod, a great weapon 1d6+str mod Players at 0 HP have 1/2 movement and -2 to every roll, players become unconscious once they reach -1 and die once they reach the negative value of their max HP. Combat was brutal, deadly, chaotic and ferocious for WAY longer than usual. I REALLY dig it.

[@asquirrelplays]

That sounds really interesting and neat. I don't know why but the idea of a big barbarian with a little dagger still averaging more damage than the less strong guy with a "better" weapon due to the strength difference amuses me. Jokes aside, that's a pretty neat approach. Does the damage stop at 0 before progressing into the negatives, or do you just go straight from a positive down into a negative if the damage is enough? Meaning: if you were at 3 HP, and somebody hit you for 5, would you stop at 0 then the next attack starts going into the negative, or would that first attack go straight to -2?

[@darkranger116]

@@asquirrelplays Making the choice between the two is actually very important. If your players are veterans then you can run with High Fatality for sure. But if your players are used to playing 5th edition or are just new in general, then you're going to want the "damage stops at 0 before dropping further" so they dont get discouraged to play. Playing with High Fatality AND such a low HP system was incredible with my veterans. It really pushes immersion to the next level knowing your character is as close to death as you would be in any given situation. Cover from terrain and armor become major considerations instead of "class expectations". Figuring out how to bring down an ogre or a large drake becomes a quest in of itself instead of a "practice run for my new sword".

[@ruathawylderkin2268]

As a game design hobbies, I never use any of these, lol. My most recent find is a dice wound mechanic where wounds five dice but I'd they roll badly, the wound gets worse, leading to unconscious/dead/or whatever fits the damage type or described action. Initial playtests are quite promising.

[@asquirrelplays]

Brilliant. I've seen a couple mention games with wound systems and how they can get progressively worse over time. The only wound system I've had experience with so far was "Break!!". If I remember correctly, you have a table of 1-20 wounds. Your first wound rolls like a d6 or something, and each wound you use a bigger die. The higher the number, the worse the wound. So technically you could take multiple smaller/lesser wounds, but you got more and more chance for worse ones. Might be something to check out for ideas/inspiration.

[@Hilianus]

I enjoy me some utterly anime combats, man. Mid-level and ESPECIALLY high-level D&D (as well as Godbound system) are ones where heroes have 50+ hp, monsters have 100+ or 200+ even, and regular person has... about 10, maybe 20-30 if they are a trained soldier. This means that a direct hit from a ballista bolt (3d10) is ONLY gonna graze someone, taking maybe 1/5 to 1/2 of player's hp at best. Some people DREAD IT, saying it's unrealistic, that it's a problem... But is it really a problem that a monster can throw a barbarian THROUGH a building and they just stand up and charge back into melee with it? Is it a problem that the wizard has put so many permanent wards on themselves that even being bitten by 3 hydra heads and thrashed about only leaves them scraped and bleeding, but very much in one piece? I say - NO. This is merely an opportunity to show off how ABSOLUTELY AWESOME THE PLAYERS ARE! Have NPCs MARVEL at how tough and resilient the players are! "How did you even survive that?!" kind of thing. "Oh yeah my skin is just this tough to damage, you see? A stab from a dagger does basically nothing to me, even if it's in the gut, because it just can't penetrate my flesh more than an inch deep!" I embrace the silly and the heroic and the epic, making my fights into goddamn anime spectacles with appropriately HYPER narration. This is my way, and I ain't about to stop, man. And while my method relies mostly on HP Pools, the Narrative Damage method is also utilized, though mostly against monsters and bosses. Sometimes it's even players that have an idea and make me ADD a narrative element mid-fight! For instance, one time players were against a celestial serving GOD OF CARNAGE AND BLOODY SLAUGHTER, it's form being that of a cerberus with a spherical red moon above it's body. I planned for the moon to be intangible, or just share HP with the monster, but then the players figured "hey what if it's gonna weaken it if we shoot that instead of the monster?", and... Indeed, each head was doing 3d12 radiant damage on each hit on top of physical damage, and I could work with it. I improvised that the moon had 60 hp and a bunch of resistances/ immunities, and takign it to 2/3 hp would remove 1d12 from celestial's attacks, taking it to 1/3 another one, and SHATTERING THE MOON is gonna not only remove the radiant damage, but also deactivate a fear aura the celestial had on! It was quite the fun fight that I did NOT expect my players to win, since this was some CR 16 monster against level 7 players... but oh well! I guess CR system is busted, but that's another topic entirely! :V

[@asquirrelplays]

It's only a problem if you're not having fun, but it sounds like you're having a blast so nothing to worry about there. Nobody trying to take it away from you. Although I will admit I'm surprised to hear that your high level players were 50+ HP. We're talking 5e right? I might be remembering wrong but in our campaign they capped at level 10, and even the little rogue had over 50, whereas the Barbarian and Fighter had 100+. Anyway, carry on with your moon shooting spectacles. They sound like a good time.

[@aquadros]

Also I really like the way the game The Banner Saga treats health and damage as the same Strength atribute. Which makes the armor (and armor breaking) an extremely important thing in the game. It's a very intuitive charateristic, that when we are injuried our hability to do damage decreases accordingly, but that we hardly see on videogames. Vampire and Burning Wheel (and it's derivatives) are nice TTRPGs examples of that.

[@o_enamuel]

I need a GM hat

[@asquirrelplays]

Well I was gonna be funny and find a silly one on Amazon to link you to but I don't see a good one. Guess I'm gonna have to start making merch.

[@kpfields7130]

I like the hits/strikes approach. It's kind of what DC20 is doing. Also, I've heard that they've identified the specific gene that makes cilantro taste like soap to some people.

[@asquirrelplays]

I just watched Avenue Studio's stream on DC20 last night! They were making a very silly character. As for the cilantro gene, does that mean they're coming up with a way to "fix" it? I was kind of under the impression there wasn't really something to fix. It was just your body picking up/being more sensitive to the part of cilantro that does have a soapy flavor to it or something.

[@johnfielder2064]

always liked the wound system in shadowrun

[@asquirrelplays]

wound systems are fun, and I got a ton I need to look into after this video.

[@VorpalBlad3]

You get a like just for that introduction.

[@the_epipan]

The third alternative/option is very like the one used in Dwarf Fortress. Only in addition to the sum of cuts and loss of body parts, even teeth and fingers, there is something like an HP pool in the sense that there is a counter for liters of blood... and when the creature bleeds out it dies. If it survives until its wounds close, the creature survives with any parts it has lost as scars. The interesting thing is that if a creature is wounded enough it will continue to lose blood until it dies, which can lead to dramatic situations such as a warrior who defeated a creature in a difficult combat... but ends up dying himself too from the wounds received. But, Mr. Squirrel, if a goblin has less than 10 HP and a dragon has 1200 HP... it is to represent something. Perhaps in medieval folklore, or even Greek mythology, dragons were only slightly larger than a horse (even Cerberus was smaller than a horse). But in the lore of D&D, and what is already installed in the collective imagination through so many movies, there is a gigantism in which the dragons are enormous... at least the size of whales. It wouldn't make much sense for a goblin to have 3/3 Hits while a dragon larger than a 3 story building has only 15/15 Hits, for example, and if you make the dragon 120/120 Hits you are not changiing the thing very much. So... the situation would be like that of a cat confronting a human, or a rat: that human would be capable only of scratching the dragon that would only cause annoyance/anger. Or at most, just like a cat or rat, it could only do considerable damage if it attacks a very specific point like the eyes... and even then the cat/rat could not kill the human just as the human could not kill the gigantic dragon. But well... I suppose that with magic existing... it could be possible to have magical weapons that cut everything like butter... but it would be the typical solution that has literally been used for centuries. Or what about advanced weapon technology?... like gunpowder, but it would be something that an entire kingdom would have to be involved in and would need more people to operate the weapon than just one guy wielding a sword, but it wouldn't give rise to the typical heroic image of a few, or a single guy, slaying a dragon. Perhaps images like that of Saint George slaying the dragon should be rescued? a dragon the size of a horse. And there is that phrase: "fairy tales are fairy tales not for saying that dragons exist but for telling you that they can be defeated"... at least by a simple man in armor with a sword. Perhaps then, to maintain the image and weight of a dragon that we know today (being something that truly inspires fear), it should be said that dragons are invulnerable simply by virtue of their great size... and that with a single blow they could kill any human-like. So to defeat a dragon you must force it by other means, such as taking away its food source, burning its lair/surrounders, or using another equally large creature to confront that dragon... or talking to the dragon and making a pact.

[@asquirrelplays]

I can see the reasoning for giving larger creatures bigger HP pools, but what makes sense doesn't always equate to "fun", fun being incredibly subjective. People might find it more enjoyable to inflict 100 hits on the dragon, because doing some damage, even if small, is positive feedback for them. For others, that might ruin the immersion for them. Others might prefer it to be harder to inflict damage on the dragon, but only need to do it about 5-10 times. On the same token, people might find it discouraging to constantly "miss". I remember in my first 5e campaign I had tried something different with one of the bosses. She was a wizard, so I gave her a really small HP pool but gave her a really high AC. To me, it made more sense for the wizard to be "fragile" because she was only human at the end of the day, and could only take a couple strikes from a sword. However, because she was a wizard, she was able to use magic to keep said swords away. After the fight and session was over, I asked them what they found more engaging. High HP and low AC, or low HP and high AC. It was unanimous across the group. They preferred being able to hit a damage sponge, even if narratively it made no sense. And I can get that. Different folks, different strokes and all that.

[@the_epipan]

@@asquirrelplays I understand, it's something psychological. If they do damage to the enemy, even if it is really almost nothing, the vast majority still prefer it because it feels like progress towards the objective... the other option is perceived as no progress at all. I have forever stuck to D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder 1e. And I've learned not to do anything balanced, just do what makes sense for the narrative and situations. Many times what the Challenge Value tells you is to put characters that are much weaker or just 1 at a power level similar to 1 of the player characters. I remember a situation where a group of 3 level 1 characters had to fight about 3 drunks/junkies in the alley (it was just before starting the events of the Korvosa campaign of the Crimson Throne)... and so I did those drunks as NPC combatants of level 1, 3 vs 3. The combat lasted quite a bit but the players really liked it because of how it made the drunks act and what they did. I think I managed to make it feel more realistic or feels natural, and even with one of them I started experimenting with the grip/choke rules. Since that moment I have stopped taking into account the challenge balance rules, I only do what makes sense... if the kobold tribe has at least 40 individuals in they tribes/clans, then that is what it has and if the conditions are met... the entire tribe will join to fight together instead of just in groups of three. I think it's kind of old school where the fights felt more exciting and risky, because things weren't as scripted or measured. Of course, I suppose it influences how I interpret the characters. Sadly I'm not a good actor, but I seem to interpret situations and motivations/personalities well. That's why in a way I prefer the online roleplay through posts forums or discord chatbox. Personally, I prefer clear and objective things, I don't like "narrative" things, even since I am a GM, but as a player it is leaving everything to the convenience of the script or the arbitrariness or whims of the GM... which lends itself to that the plots feel more guided. I prefer that everything be decided by the dice, the world feels more alive if I am not the one deciding what is going to happen. That way I have even been able to be a player GM, playing a character within the group, because even I am surprised by what the dice dictate. Random generation tables are also very good for keeping details of the plot unknown even to me, but even more important is to always ensure that everyone has their turns and meaningful contributions and that my character in the group always remains more of a support than as someone who wants to stand out. But I admit that it is still difficult for me to be completely objective, and I often play the "mom gm" by making the enemy make decisions that are convenient for the group... like stopping attacking a certain character or considering them defeated to attack another who can survive it. Sometimes in that moments it's hard even for me to remember that in D&D and Pathfinder it's very easy to get people to pay to cast spells to revive characters or spells that keep the corpse from rotting. But it is true that there are people who do not take kindly to their character dying and/or already consider it the end, wanting to leave or create another character instead of thinking about possibilities to revive them.

[@asquirrelplays]

@@the_epipan ha! "mom GM". I'm gonna have to remember that one. I'm 100% guilty of it. Surprised I haven't heard that one before.

[@the_epipan]

@@asquirrelplays Really? I'am also surprised, I have heard the expression in many places, perhaps it is more common in spanish communities but I have heard it on some English channels too. By the way... you are a squirrel. Tell me, do you like Starfinder 1e? Mouse Guard RPG? Redwall?

[@asquirrelplays]

@@the_epipan Haven't played Starfinder, haven't heard of Mouse Guard RPG, but yes I like Redwall. And Mausritter is pretty great too. Looking at this Mouse Guard right now and I'm liking what I see. And apparently it was a graphic novel? Ooooooooo

[@BCMZeroZero]

The next game I want to run is called Chasing Adventure. It's a fantasy PbtA game based on Dungeon World. It's HP system can be described as a blend between strikes and narrative. Each character has five ability scores, and when the PC gets hit, the player picks which ability receives a condition. If all five abilities have a condition marked, a big dramatic thing happens, like death or a class change. When you roll using an ability that has been hurt, you roll with disadvantage, but you gain exp. This lets the player have some narrative control over how their character gets wounded, and gives them fun choices to make.

[@asquirrelplays]

That sounds really cool! And I actually know what PbtA is! I have my Dimday Red video to thank for that lol. It kind of reminds of Crown and Skull in a way. Whenever you got hit, your equipment, items, and I think abilities too (depending on the type of hit you took) get damaged. Your gear was your HP. It was an interesting approach. I joined a game as a player and had a lot of fun. Still haven't got to play a PbtA game though! That's definitely on the list.

[@BCMZeroZero]

@@asquirrelplays I highly recommend it. When talking about games like Dungeon World or Chasing Adventure, I like to describe it as "what you imagined D&D would be like before you saw how many rules there were." (I can't remember who originally said that.) The more narrative rules really help facilitate cool stories around the table.

[@unamericano]

At long last, a ttrpg person not talking about dnd and dnd clones all the time. Thank you for your service.

[@asquirrelplays]

Just wait till you see the next video I'm working on. 10 EPIC TIPS TO MAKE YOUR DND NOT SUCK!!!!111! Not really. I was just telling someone in another comment that since I wrapped up my 5e campaign, I've just about filtered out any and all dnd content. I just have no interest in it because I just really, really, really do not enjoy it. I've got a few really old videos I made about dnd stuff, and while they do tend to perform a little better, I just don't wanna lol. Now I just pick on it or use it as a base point to explain something since most people are familiar with it. Luckily my wellbeing doesn't depend on being youtube famous so I don't have to be like others and make dnd content. I'm glad somebody appreciate me staying away from it.

[@unamericano]

@@asquirrelplays I don't want to yuck people's yums, but I tend to agree and take my catharsis in private groups dedicated to the disparagement of what frustrates me. The hobby is so expansive and full of amazing, massively creative talent and new ideas! I just want people to be more open to experiencing them.

[@asquirrelplays]

@@unamericano "yuck people's yums" - Either we both watched the same episode of EFAP or you're the only one of two people I've ever heard say that.

[@unamericano]

@@asquirrelplays Iunno It's just a thing I hear! Also I am the worst with Acronyms.

[@asquirrelplays]

@@unamericano It's "Every Frame a Pause". It's a mixed bag of individuals talking about current movies/shows. Some are . . . better than others, for sure. The guests are hit and miss but the guy that runs it really knows his stuff, and he has his own channel, but he rarely posts anything over there.

[@CakeDayZ]

I like modern in-development ttrpgs, that typically use hp pools with very small inflation. Daggerheart converts damage into a small, medium, or large hit which deals 1-3 hp. Players and Enemies have very low hp amounts. A starting player has 6 hp, and an endgame player can have 12 hp. Dc20 has some starting hp pool that only increases by 1 per level, and a couple more from some other talents and might.

[@asquirrelplays]

oooo I like the sound of that. I've heard/seen Daggerheart mentioned a couple times here and there, but nothing that specific. I'm gonna have to look into that.

[@Vieyram]

Horse power reminds me of the movie speed. You could have a mad max style racing game with stopping equaling death because it triggers a bomb to go off.

[@asquirrelplays]

Oh man. Damaging your car reduces horsepower, 0 horsepower means no movement. No movement means KABOOM! Makes perfect sense. Now you just have to call the game "Gotta Go Fast or Die".

[@principleshipcoleoid8095]

I wonder if Slice and Dice 3.0 has fun ways of working with hp. Some enemies have hp that can only be taken away one at a time, others have that on the last n hp. Depending on the game individual health pips could be changed to trigger effects upon them being lost/healed...

[@asquirrelplays]

Ooo I like the idea of getting to a point where you can only lose so much HP at a time. That's interesting. (takes notes)

[@markcochrane9523]

Personally I prefer to use "wound" based systems, where everyone has more or less the same small number of wounds they can take, and the difference between a wimp and tough creature is how difficult it is to inflict a wound.

[@asquirrelplays]

I like the sound of that. The wizard and barbarian being able to take the same amount of stabbings makes sense, but one might definitely be harder to hit than the other. Big 🧠

[@markcochrane9523]

@@asquirrelplays Oh, no, it's not about difficulty to hit, it's about difficulty to injure. For example, a punch to the face that gives the barbarian a black eye would have knocked the wizard out cold, while it would only mildly annoy an ogre.

[@asquirrelplays]

@@markcochrane9523 that makes even more sense! I like it. Imagine punching an orc and only hurting your own hand on those tusks.

[@DigitalinDaniel]

In my ttrpg, I basically use something very similar to EZD6 hits and strikes, with exploding damage... but I was inspired by Zelda hearts. Each player gets 3 hearts, each piece of heavy armor (head, body, legs) can give you +1 hearts up to +3 total. One race gets +1 heart as an ability. (So max is 7 hearts technically, but usually 6). Monsters HP is pretty similar but also based on size, and some other abilities. (I think the max is 18? But I create for flavor not min-maxing.) One of my friends recently showed me the videogame Armello, which is surprisingly similar to my ttrpg in both themes and mechanics and has been giving me a lot of new ideas to work with.

[@asquirrelplays]

I've not heard of that game but went and looked. It's interesting. Very pretty. I'll have to keep an eye on it and watch for a sale. As for the TTRPG, I like the idea of tying additional hits to armor. That way it makes sense why you can only have so many extra hits.

[@boris_bulletdodger9109]

Positive comment

[@asquirrelplays]

I do love me a good positive comment.

[@ZarHakkar]

What about Subsystem Damage (from TVTropes) as a 4th way of handling HP? Different body parts have seperate HP pools, damaging one enough disables that body part and capabilities requiring it. Disable enough parts (or one very important part) and the entity dies.

[@asquirrelplays]

Would be interesting, for sure. If there's a Fallout TTRPG, I would look there first. Would be shocked if they didn't have that, what with VATS and all. Someone else also mentioned some mech systems where you have several limbs/components with their own HP. It's a fun idea in theory, but I haven't tried it myself yet and my fist concern would be how cumbersome is it to keep up with multiple HP/hits for one character.

[@BuilderB-dt1f8]

TDL. I’m putting that acronym in the bank 🧠📖 for later use.

[@lydiasteinebendiksen4269]

I think hp works well to ensure that even attacks that "fail" can do at least somethig, but systems like D&D 5e where you can still miss and do nothing completely overlook this for most attacks, though many spells do half damage even when resisted. I think about a third of the damage of a full hit is apropriate, that way your turn feela meaningful even if less impactful, and you escape the "null result" of making desicions and having nothing change because of bad luck.

[@asquirrelplays]

Yes! Love mechanics that give you a little something for a failed roll. It stinks when you sit and wait patiently for your turn then get nothing for it. Mausritter your attacks automatically hit, so you don't have to worry about missing. You just go straight to rolling damage, so even if it's a low roll, you still get something out of it. A failed roll in EZD6 gets you a karma point, so if you're having a string of bad luck, you can stock up points and come back with a bang. DM Scotty made a more universal rule similar to that you could use in other games. Lucky Dice I think they were called? Anyway, you get the idea. It's weird to me how you can land a crit in 5e but still do less than your average damage if your damage roll ends up being poor. That's very not fun.

[@fighterguystudios]

All protagonists in my game have 10 hit points and a point where they become injured and have to roll a bane die making all physical tests harder once they are injured. If they have an 8 physical stat they can take 8 points of physical damage before they are injured then 2 more till fading (near death). If they have a 3 they can only take 3 physical damage before they are injured but then 7 more before fading. Same applies for mental health - except higher mental health means they become injured sooner (much more aware of the trauma they are experiencing). Mental health isn't insanity.. More just being less capable of thinking straight while experiencing stressors.

[@asquirrelplays]

I'm too dumb to be wounded! Honestly sounds pretty interesting. Kickstarter when?

[@fighterguystudios]

@@asquirrelplays honestly, I'll probably never publish it.. But it's fun to make! I published a few 2 pages games a while back but the stress of release me me into a depression spiral.

[@asquirrelplays]

@@fighterguystudios Understandable. As an individual who has gone through the editing/publishing process (non TTRPG related) ... yeah, it's not the most enjoyable thing lol

[@SkittleBombs]

You have HP = luck and fight stamina before taking a wouldn’t that would put you KO or on deaths door. Hp= wound tracking represents damage actually taken

[@crallsfickle2994]

Squirrel is getting pretty good with that sax. I like hits and strikes because they’re simple and fast and intense.. but sometimes I wish there were a bit more than just a 3-4 hits. I’m totally fine with hp pools so long as they’re small. I do like there being narrative and mechanical consequences to damage. The injury rolls can be fun as well as the attribute decreasing and gaining conditions like in Mausritter. One thing I’m working on is trying to make it less of that “I swing again” or “I do this move this time.” Maybe for weaker enemies that’s fine, but I like the idea of greatly benefiting from using clever tactics that don’t even do damage, just allow you to hit more/do more damage/cripple them in some way.

[@asquirrelplays]

He's been practicing! I suppose technically you can add "narrative damage" to any other style of HP. You could do it in 5e, but it's just a lot harder (I tried). You want a hit to do something narratively, but when 5 players do minimal damage in a row to something that should have been dead in a couple hits . . . well, it gets a little wonky lol I'm sure some people can make that work, but I sure couldn't. Was too much for my 🧠 to keep up with the numbers AND narrative wounds/conditions. Break!! has a good thing going with its 2-3 hits and then wounds. Probably should have brought that one up. Kind of mixes hit and strikes with a "guided" narrative damage system.

[@crallsfickle2994]

@@asquirrelplaysYeah that’s true. I suppose you could do stuff like.. at half damage something happens, at quarter damage etc but that sounds a bit too gamey to me. Oh another thing, with the conditions and/injuries, it also lasts beyond the battle which can be another fun aspect.

[@asquirrelplays]

@@crallsfickle2994 You lost an eyeball in that fight. Common traders distrust you, raising the prices of all their goods when selling to you. However, pirates are now your friends.

[@zhornlegacy7936]

Large hp pools like in high level dnd only make sense in the context of "healing is hard, and more potential damage is between you and a safe place to restore that hp back up". I cover this in conversations often; but dnd is fundamentally designed around an attrition style model, but the guidance on running the game is poorly executed and the community generally pushes for the 5min adventuring day (ie: one encounter, then rest to full). The 5min adventuring day is because it is the 'less-work' model. Plan less content, track less numbers, a drop in-and-out style of play that doesn't require commitments to regular games as each session is self contained and nothing carries over between session. This model functions fine at lower levels, but falls apart at higher tiers of play. It's why you see most games fizzle out past level 10, or the complaints about the CR system, etc. the model of play is just not compatible with the base design of the system. Add to that the new devs and later releases in dnd 5e are built around raising the power floor in lower levels making the drop-off point that much sooner. "not many groups play in the higher tiers... but we have the more powerful stuff in the higher tiers... lets move the power to the lower tiers so players are more powerful sooner in the tiers they do play!" it's a fundamental misunderstanding of why the drop-off is happening. So on the DM side to compensate, a single encounter is instead built around HIGH damage. "Players can nova the monster down in 2-3 rounds? well make the monster able to burn the whole party down in a similar time" Players each have 200 hp, but the monster deals 100+ damage on a hit. Functionally you're playing rocket tag, and the effective play is no different to a level 1 player vs a goblin, where everyone is always 1-2 hits from death, regardless of how many encounters in the day there are. High level dnd works on an attrition model: you can take a lot of hit (or at least a few BIG hits), and you have multiple encounters of the day. The goal isn't ever about one single fight; there's just a bunch of encounters between you and the objective (save the dragon, obtain the triforce, etc). Every round of combat is a risk of damage, chipping away at the hp pool. Healing is half as effective as damage, so using resources to heal shortens your adventuring day faster than using those resources to progress. Any change that makes healing fast/easy/cheaper will spiral the system into the rocket tag scenario, just as compressing the adventuring goal into one fight does. The goal is NEVER "beat the lich in combat"; the goal is finding and destroying their phylactery, a goal that exists independent of any single combat. To make high level dnd work, you need to steer away from objectives that boil down to "race the BBEG to zero hp before they race you down, but unfortunately all the low level training has conditioned groups to only think that way."

[@asquirrelplays]

That's a really good writeup, honestly. Lot of good points being made. Since finishing my 5e campaign, I'm pretty much filtered out 5e content because I just have 0 desire to do anything with it ever again, and I have no interesting in keeping up with its changes. Which, to be fair, is probably counterproductive considering what I make videos about. That said, I did happen to see a snippet of some changes they were making to fighter, and paladin and yeah, it just sounds like things are getting buffed across the board. I think they even said a lot of actions are getting moved to bonus actions, meaning you'll be able to do even more each turn (and in turn, making combat even slower). I really don't want to watch any content of the new dnd, but at the same time, it will be interesting to see how it pans out. I'm guessing the majority will like it, because I feel like the majority of 5e fans are the type that enjoy a power fantasy. And with everything getting buffed and more powerful, well, kind of a match made in heaven, isn't it?

[@zhornlegacy7936]

@@asquirrelplays "the majority of fans will like it" I cannot deny this. It's true a large portion of the fanbase are drawn to higher power at lower levels. But it's also true that the majority of play is not run in high level games because "it all falls apart". The majority of players don't DM because "its too much work" The majority of homebrew is overpowered or gamebreaking, because most people are not game designers and don't have a strong grasp of game balance. This isn't meant as an insult, just highlighting chasing mass appeal in this way isn't all it's cracked up to be. "We (WoTC) are going to make player characters more powerful" sounds great "We want to give players more options" is appealing "We want to get tables into more heroic encounters sooner" will draw in a lot of the crowd but it's all being done via sacrificing the low level of play by buffing it into mid level play; characters hit harder and have more effective health (more AC, temp HP, recovery) and not addressing changes to make high level play more appealing (issues with hp bloat, guiding principles on moving past 5min adventuring days that rely on rocket tag) Low level monsters get decimated too easily, and so they see play less often Common NPCs are then defanged as they cannot pose any meaningful resistance to players strong-arming with their now even larger power-gap (think of how often we see players threatening townsfolk and dismissing guards with how easily they can overpower them) To enforce low level consequences, shop owners are all stated out like high wizards, level 20 paladins, etc, which then breaks the suspension of disbelief of them ever needing the players for anything. Not without them buffing the BBEG and other threats into even higher realms of high numbers in hp and damage bloat. but now you need to buff the players with more overpowered weapons and spells to feed into the power fantasy... it all a destructive spiral feeding into itself and causing more and more of the number bloat. Players en masse vote in favour of getting their power fantasy buffs early, and we'll continue to have the same issues that existed beforehand, only with even bigger numbers next.

[@asquirrelplays]

@@zhornlegacy7936 So, there's something I realized a while back. Are you familiar at all with modern roguelite video games? Personally, I hate them. They encourage you to break the game and come up with stupidly overpowered builds that make your run a snoozefest. I could go on for days, but my point is, I've noticed a lot of overlap between this and 5e players. For them, the game is finding the loopholes. The challenge is trying to break it. Some take it to a whole new level and try to break the GM, but that's a whole other problem. My point is, "it falling apart" is what a lot of people want. When they stroll into an encounter and do some silly magic combo that completely shuts the whole thing down in an instant, they think they "won". That was the goal for them. They don't consider the fact they ruined the rest of the evening and what was prepared, or that it would have been more fulfilling to actually be challenged and to overcome said challenge, because their goal was completely different. All that to say, I feel like buffing (and simultaneously destroying) low level play will go over quite well with this part of the crowd. I don't like it and I think it's stupid, but at the same time I don't want those types of people at my table trying to break the game either, so if that keeps them entertained and away from my table, it sounds like a win-win to me. I'll still moan and groan about it though and wish more people would realize there's more to TTRPGs than DnD, but that's just me being a grumpy old squirrel. 🙃

[@SkittleBombs]

You have HP = luck and fight stamina before taking a wouldn’t that would put you KO or on deaths door. Or Hp= wound tracking represents damage actually taken

[@heavymetalmystic2430]

I usually use a form of Hit & Strikes but instead of just being 3 hits for everybody, I make 1 hp to 5hp equal 1 point. So a creature with 20 hp would have 4 points instead. That way the players can still roll their damage dice and combat is a little quicker. If the PC deals 7 damage then I would subtract 2 points of damage and the creatures hp goes from 4 points to 2 points. Hopefully that makes sense. 😅

[@asquirrelplays]

Makes perfect sense because I've done the same thing before! I tried a handful of different things to try and make 5e run a little smoother, and this was one of them.

[@eoincampbell1584]

I'm not sure your idea of what makes classic HP pools work better in videogames holds up. Lots of games have turn based combat where you're not literally running and jumping around (in fact, with standard turn based RPG videogames there is no movement or environment interaction, something you can always have in tabletop RPGs). I think the big difference is simply that 1) in a videogame you don't have to calculate the damage yourself and 2) you usually get to actually see the HP pool of the enemy. It goes by a lot faster when a machine does all the rolling for you, and when you see how much damage you're doing in relation to the full HP bar the effect you're having is a whole lot more tangible. D&D 5e combat was ported pretty directly to Balder's Gate and it's really fun there for both of these reasons. For some reason GMs are allergic to ever just saying an enemy's remaining hitpoints. I do think that always telling where every enemy is at would bog things down too much, but there are times where its appropriate. Systems where being at half HP is a noted mechanical state (eg: 4e had bloodied, VtM5th has impaired) strike a good balance of giving tangible feedback but not constantly going over all the exact numbers. In D&D I allow players to get the H of an enemy by making a medicine check. And on Dimension 20 sometimes Brennan Lee Mulligan will write a monster's current HP on a sheet which he then reveals after damage is rolled to show that they hit the number and took it down, which is a way of using the minutae of the numbers that really gets the players hyped up.

[@asquirrelplays]

Yeah I was thinking more active video games like Dark Souls that have something to keep you busy between swings. Old Final Fantasy games you're just sitting there in the battle screen, but I guess even those were at least "real time", as in it wasn't completely turn based. If you spent too much time scrolling through items you would keep getting smacked. Not that I ever did that of course. Nope nope nope. Definitely right about video games speeding things up by doing the math for you. That's why detrimental effects and buffs work so much better in video games. Can just shove all that into the background calculator. I know when I first started GMing 5e (I never even got to be a player, I was thrown into the GM spot), I had 0 experience with TTRPGs. We were using a VTT, but I kept the health hidden solely to give myself room for mistakes. I'll admit, even later in the campaign I was still tempted to hide them a lot of times. But only 5e. I've no problems with showing the health in games like EZD6 for some reason. Not sure why. Bosses are kind of fun to keep a mystery though.

[@Kajnake]

I made my own system wgere first of all your hp is how much you're hurt (you start at 0 and add on) and only after you reach max hurt you get narratively wounded which needs to be taken care of. Then I cut off the roll to hit and made you roll for dmg only. Then I made everyone's hp low as hell, like a tanky player has like 24 hp It's cracked, a bit easier, most importantly, really dangerous for everyone involved

[@asquirrelplays]

MAXIMUM HURT! That's a fun spin on it though, starting from 0 and filling ye olde HP bar up as damage comes in. I like it. Ya'll killing me with all these homebrew concepts.

[@benedict6962]

I'm not against HP pools for big gigantic things/creatures. There is a single digit number of inches of flesh before you're going to need way more than a few knife stabs. I've considered a hybrid system where armor has hp pools and anything that gets through armor deals Wounds. Primarily because it's hard to give crits variety if you only have hits/wounds to work with. But I'd never do narrative damage. I don't know enough about anatomy to systemetize it efficiently, but I know enough to call bull on magical fire doing anything more than singing my eyebrows.

[@asquirrelplays]

I find armor systems interesting and things like shields absorbing X amounts of damage before breaking or something to be really interesting, but hard to implement in a "simple" way. Simple being in quotes because everybody has their idea of what's simple and complicated.

[@benedict6962]

@@asquirrelplays oh no, nothing like that. So, lemme spitball a system. Armor is a flat HP pool that regenerates to full every round. Attacks have a Pierce and Shave value. Pierce reduces Armor, while Shave reduces max Armor for the rest of the battle. You can stack pierce with multiple characters in the same round, or whittle away with high Shave attacks. Bosses could have multiple Armor "shells" for the different bodyparts you need to wound. They can be cocky, pretending they didn't feel an attack right up until a wound is inflicted. Spells can have a time delay or multi-round effect to keep the pressure on, Explosives have Shave equal to their Pierce, and you lose any throwing/projectile weapons, but they increase all Shave damage for the rest of the battle.

[@asquirrelplays]

@@benedict6962 Gotcha. That's pretty cool. I mentioned it another comment, but your flat HP that regenerates reminded me of it. There's a game called "Break!!" that gives the players 2-4 hits, but those hits refill after every combat. Thing is, if you get to 0 and hit again, you start rolling wounds, with each progressive wound having a chance of becoming more deadly. I can't remember if there was a limit of wounds you could take before just dying or if you had to actually roll deadly wounds. Anyway, the regenerating HP made me think of it. That's a fun approach for sure. But after every round? Innnnnnteresting. I like your thinking. You're onto something here. Big 🧠

[@benedict6962]

@@asquirrelplays It allows smallfry to be oneshot or twoshot as needed, with differences in effectiveness between small and big weapons. Numbers will need to be crunched for bosses, but Shave can work in increments of 5 to keep things rounded. Probably for the best if damage isn't rolled, though.

[@juauke]

HP pools usually are bloat, except when those are reduced as in Tales of Argosa for instance So I love EZD6 take on this but I feel like we lose a bit of variability (and upgrades are much easier with HP pools directly)

[@asquirrelplays]

Yeah, when I first got into EZD6 and saw the strikes system I was like "oh man, that's gonna be so much better." And it was! But then I started prepping for another game and wanted to give them some weapons to find along the way and was like "...oh no." lol Had to step back a bit and reorient myself. Can't just give it the ol' +2 or something silly. Had to be a bit more creative. So naturally I gave them a fire sword that could accidentally set themselves on fire. The only logical solution.

[@juauke]

@@asquirrelplays this was exactly my thoughts and I was pretty much at a loss for simple upgrades but your idea made me laugh; On my side, I used some ICPRG (modified to use d6s but pretty cool still) loot in my games to make up for it

[@TourFaint]

If your fight boils down to "you hit him then he hits you, repeat until 1 dies" then it's a bad fight. Why would you make a fight like that

[@asquirrelplays]

Because that's generally how turn-based combat works. Granted, things like 5e have reactions and opportunity attacks you can use for an extra move, but for the most part, it is still wait your turn then do something. Unless you're meaning you can do other things like healing and various status effects?

[@TourFaint]

@@asquirrelplays Just off the top of my head things that happened in my latest sessions' final battle that werent just hitting a dude: - Circling the enemies so they can't escape - Taking an unconcious enemy hostage - Hiding underwater in a pond to later sneak attack - trying to pull a dude into said pond to drown him - Taunting the boss so he accepts a 1on1 duel without his minions interfering - cheering on during said duel to give the player dueling a morale boost - Snagging enemies light sources so they are blind (enemies had no dark vision, players did) And im sure im forgetting something that happened during the fight. Granted, a lot of actions my players took WERE attacks or spells, but having a fight thats ONLY just hitting someone with a stick and tanking until someone dies sounds so like you are playing a jrpg, and not a good one.

[@asquirrelplays]

​@@TourFaint But don't those essentially just boil down to taking turns bonking one another until someone hits 0? Pulling a guy into a pond to drown him is a faster way to get him to zero, but if initiative was already rolled, it's still waiting your turn to do it. 1v1 with the boss would be a series of back and forth bonks. Circling the enemy so they can't escape is several bonks (unless you just have them give up). Knocking an enemy unconscious is still getting them to 0 right? There's loads of creative ways to get your target to 0, as you've shown, but it's still taking turns and exchanging blows. And if you have a lot of HP to churn through, that's where things can get a little sluggish. And if you're playing with a party (as TTRPGs typically do), then you're having to sit idly by waiting for your teammates to take their turn, whereas in a video game (or at least, non turn-based ones) you're constantly moving. And again, this is not a statement of "HP Pools are bad". It's just something I've seen/witnessed where they can cause a problem, but they don't have to.

[@TourFaint]

@@asquirrelplays "Not attacking the enemy essentially just boil down attacking him" am i reading this right? I believe that there is some misunderstanding between us, as that doesn't seem right. It seems you have a problem with turn based systems (which is like 99% of tabletop games, i know of one that isn't and its a card game) and hp is the scapegoat because it makes combat take longer (it shouldn't but it might seem it does if the combat is badly designed). What i was focusing on is that a combat in a ttrpg shouldn't play as just 2 statblocks exchanging full attacks till one dies, as that is very boring. And that problem doesn't really have anything with HP in of itself. So my initial topic was kinda off-topic and i apologise for that, i just got annoyed by stating that combat in dnd looks like that, as that is very much not the case if the gm and the players think about their actions.

[@asquirrelplays]

@@TourFaint I think you're right (about there being a misunderstanding). I don't have anything against turn based games (other than I royally suck at them when it comes to video games). My point in the video was that a TTRPG, which is a turn-based system, is essentially you make a move, the other guy makes a move, rinse and repeat. And when you have a large HP Pool to deal with, it CAN get bogged down. Doesn't mean it will 100% of the time. Just like hits and strikes have the potential to make your fight too short and accidentally kill your players way too fast, HP Pools have the potential to drag things out and get a little repetitive, which can be hard to narrate and keep interesting. Like most TTRPG mechanics, there's some GM skilled involved to make things work smoothly. That does not mean HP Pools are bad, because you're absolutely right in what you said. It shouldn't be just 2 statblocks exchanging full attacks till one dies. No need to apologize. While I do love the running joke of me picking on 5e, I was not at all stating that all dnd combat looks like the goofy example I provided. I've had 5e combats that were pretty intense, some that were insultingly short because the players did "that thing", and then I've had fights where we go 4 whole rounds without anybody hitting anything.

[@thanganbabp5570]

i heard cilantro tasting like soap is a genetic thing sort of like how some people are tannin sensitive

[@asquirrelplays]

Here's straight from Britannica: "Of course some of this dislike may come down to simple preference, but for those cilantro-haters for whom the plant tastes like soap, the issue is genetic. These people have a variation in a group of olfactory-receptor genes that allows them to strongly perceive the soapy-flavored aldehydes in cilantro leaves." So really, I just have extra refined tastebuds that allow me to pick up on things better. Right? Riiight?

[@KodyackCasual]

in regards to TTRPG health pools: in 5e this is a serious issue, but that's an issue of the game, not the system of hp pools. Pathfinder 2nd edition does a pretty good job of managing this with the balance between output and pools as levels go up. Our barbarian in our last session crit a creature for 100 points of damage, removing it from the board pretty reasonably quickly. Now had *we* got hit by that attack, that would have sucked, but we would survive. those big swings can happen, though the monsters often have less damage bonuses than a barbarian- we are level 10 for context- but they aren't game ending or winning on their own. Items, strategies, and planning often decide the day. Healing is also much easier to do in PF2e. We can have big hp pools, it's just about how you interact with them and how much each hit *can* influence the battle.

[@kgoblin5084]

"Pathfinder 2nd edition does a pretty good job of managing this with the balance between output and pools as levels go up. " I'll call out that there is a bit of a shell game going on here... where if the designers are balancing damage to HP so that combats remain the same length, then likely the math works out to where both the HP & damage increases are ultimately pointless. It only matters when you have low-level PCs go against high-level monsters, where there IS a differential between damage & HP... which I would state is generally rare in games that would use that kind of balancing because the entire culture around those games is to not have that ever happen - GMs are encouraged to match player level to challenge rating.

[@KodyackCasual]

@@kgoblin5084 Not quite! while I understand the hesitation- especially with people who spread deliberate lies about the system some time back (looking at you, taking20), that's not exactly how it works. The main thing influencing the damage and health is abilities. That barbarian crit was with a power attack, and he swung into a lower level enemy. Keep in mind that crit rates are not just natural 20s in PF2e, as any success by 10 or more is a critical hit as well. so a raging barbarian power attacking does a huge crit- but were he hit by the same attack, he likely would have been injured, but not dead. and a heal from our cleric would likely put him back in the fight with no worries, as a good level heal would do about 70 health. fights *can* take a long time, if they are large combats or against difficult opponents. but that time is not through hitting a sponge of health, it's because of abilities. the extra health gives more variance and space for those abilities that increase damage to shine, making choice of when to use them and how matter a lot more. My ranger uses dual weapon fighting, for example, and does a lot of very small hits. My damage is about half that of the barbarian per hit, but I have a ton of attacks to put out in various methods. over a turn, I often match his output, but more reliably do at least some damage, rather than missing completely.

[@WolforNuva]

@@kgoblin5084 It's close to this, but not quite since different classes progress in different fields (AC, saving throws, hit rates, damage, etc.) at different rates, so it doesn't just stay completely stagnantly the same all the way up. But even if the math was tuned so tightly that it was I don't think this concept is a bad one. The point of leveling up and getting stronger is to face stronger monsters, or more easily deal with the ones of previous levels. What would even be an alternative to monsters and players getting stronger at equal rates? Either monsters get strong faster, making level ups feel like you're getting weaker by comparison, or the players scale faster and quickly loose all tension in the combat or the GM ends up throws harder and harder things at them to mimic what it would have been like if monsters just scaled at the same rate as players. Gloomhaven while not a TTRPG is an example I've played where monsters get stronger faster than the players, so while all those cool level up abilities were really neat, I ended up preferring to play at lower levels where I felt I had some more room for failure. D&D 5e is of course the obvious example of the latter, where players get strong so fast, that I've had a party kill enough things in one encounter to go from freshly level 7 to mid way through level 9 (if we were using exp rules). Compared to those, I'm quite happy with PF2e where a deadly encounter is deadly at each level, and a trivial encounter is trivial at each level.

[@asquirrelplays]

"in regards to TTRPG health pools: in 5e this is a serious issue, but that's an issue of the game, not the system of hp pools" - 100% correct. That's why I made sure to mention (albeit very briefly to avoid getting sidetracked) that the fight I mentioned taking 44 minutes wasn't solely because of HP Pools, but at the same time they didn't exactly help. The biggest offender for that time was just how long it takes to do your turn in 5e. If you want to see the breakdown, here's the link to the video: kzbin.info/www/bejne/hKeadaqCm651fac (the breakdown starts at 4:45) I can give you the main bits though. When I ran the fight in 5e, there were 44 actions taken in 44 minutes, whereas in the EZD6 fight, 63 actions were taken in only 15 minutes. 5e is just slow, which isn't a bad thing by default. Some people prefer that. I have the attention span of a, well, squirrel, so naturally I'm not a fan of it. As shown, there's tons of videos on ways to speed things along and change it up, but at some point you gotta ask yourself "why even play 5e if I'm gonna change so much of it". Anyway thanks for coming to my TedTalk

[@KodyackCasual]

@@asquirrelplays Yep! 5e having little rules and the rules they do have being... tedious, is what pushed me away from it to PF2e, and I don't regret it at all. I just wanted to provide an example of hp pools in a TTRPG done decently- though obviously not perfectly- to illustrate that it's a valid option.

[@ChristopherRoss.]

I would like to ask a question in good faith: What doe people mean when they say "bloated hp numbers"? That statement doesn't make any sense to me, and I've yet to encounter anyone who can explain it in a way that makes sense. It seems like everyone is parroting each other, and no one actually knows what it means. I understand that they mean "number too big, number better smaller", but why does that matter? Is it just a "2e good, 5e bad" thing? I get the feeling that some people are saying that they want the combat to be more deadly, or swingy. Others say that it takes too long. Perhaps people think that more HP makes the game too easy. But no one has directly articulated to me that this is the actual problem that needs solving, only that the numbers are higher than they used to be, and this is bad. In this video, it was alluded to that the length of combat was a problem, but also that this wasn't the direct fault of HP bloat, so I'm still not sure what the point was. All of those things are completely arbitrary, and up to the DM. You have the power to throw bigger badder baddies at the PCs at any time. You can increase monster damage output if you so desire, and give PCs magic items out the wazoo to stomp monsters into the ground in a single round. I just really don't understand the issue, yet people throw this complaint around as if it completely breaks the game.

[@TheGreenHatter]

As I see it, HP bloat in 5e and similar games is a problem because it causes other numbers to bloat along with it. It can increase anywhere from 1 on a low roll with low Con, to 17 with a max Con Barbarian rolling a 12; more often than not, it's going to be in the 5-10 range each level. To keep up with that, monster damage goes up... and player damage has to go up, too, so the player feels like they're punching as hard as their level suggests. But if damage goes up, monster health has to go up to keep them in the game long enough to deal that higher damage... and so the cycle repeats. After all that, effectively nothing important changes - the number of hits to drop a level-appropriate enemy aren't so different from level to level. If it takes 3 or 4 hits at level 1, and at level 5, and at level 11, and at level 17... what's the point of having all of these big numerical increases? After all, it doesn't change much (if anything) hit-wise, but it does increase the math associated with health tracking and attack calculation. That doesn't mean that tangible progress is bad, mind you! Being noticeably stronger is important for player investment, and it's very satisfying to quickly take down something that was a challenge a few levels ago. But "numbers go brrr" doesn't have to be used to serve that part of the player fantasy, and the bookkeeping may actually take away from it for some people.

[@asquirrelplays]

I think "HP Bloat" can be used a few different ways (though I totally get what you mean about people parroting). Generally, I think it's a design issue. One example would be poor and lazy scaling in video games where harder difficulties just increase the HP of enemies without giving you the tools to account for it. Technically, the enemy isn't any more difficult. He has all the same moves, patterns, and whatever else. The fight just takes longer because you have more HP to hack through. In Skyrim, your damage output is reduced AND they get more HP (I think), which makes the fights super boring. Another way HP Bloat is a thing is when both enemies and players get super high HP numbers, but nothing actually changes between the two. If it took you 2-3 hits to kill a goblin with 10 HP at level 1, and then at level 20 it takes you 2-3 hits to kill a goblin with 10,000 HP, nothing has changed other than you've given yourself more math to do. I think Professor DM had a video on this a while back about removing needless math. HP Bloat can also be when the numbers are just stupid high right out of the gate because people like big number, but that's more of a video game issue I think than TTRPG. What I was getting at in the video is that bloating enemy HP for a "harder difficulty" can be an easy trap to fall into instead of doing what you said and giving your enemies better tools to make them more dangerous. A dragon that can bite 6 times on a single turn but only needs to be hit about 10 times from a player before dying is a lot more interesting than a dragon that can bite 1 or 2 times per turn but needs to be hit 30 times before dying. HP Pools aren't solely to blame for slow combat, but they can be a contributing factor, and that's when they get called "bloated". Or at least the way I use it. Also, and most importantly, it is personal taste. I think my bitey mcbitey dragon is more interesting, but others may absolutely prefer the less bitey one that takes 3 times as long to kill.

[@RoamingAdhocrat]

the cilantro/coriander = soap thing is genetic, apparently. will taste like soap for ~10% of people. sorry you're missing out ;)

[@asquirrelplays]

🙃

[@oldgrognardsays]

You are correct on the part about giant hp pools. Not a fan. I also like the "bloodied" game mechanic from 4e, especially having it affect what creatures can or can't do in some way. I don't have an overall preference for hp pools or wounds/ effects and generally go with whatever the system uses, at least in the case of characters or creatures. I like having narrative effects (reduced movement, destroyed weapons, ship takes on water, etc.) if there are vehicles involved, regardless of system.

[@asquirrelplays]

ooo I'll have to check out the bloodied thing. I don't know anything about DnD outside of 5e. I'd like to sit down one day and look at some kind of comparison between the systems with 5e being the point of reference. Feel like it'd be pretty interesting to see how different it's become since it started.

[@oldgrognardsays]

@@asquirrelplays Bloodied is a condition that is triggered when a creature is reduced to half hp (rounded down) or less. Glad to see that you're almost to 2k subscribers.

[@matthewparker9276]

I like being able to differentiate between singular heavy hits and multiple smaller hits, which is a lot easier to do in a hp pool system than a system of binary hits. I like even more when there are meqningful differneces between taking damage from one hit vs many, which is where damage reduction vs varying hp pools comes in. Damage reduction protects you against small hits, high hp protects you against heavy hits. Wheels and dials to tweak.

[@asquirrelplays]

Good points! I suppose in a hits and strikes system, you could have the heavy armor guy just avoid damage more often, which is what EZD6 does, but yeah, when the damage lands you're just as hearty as the little rogue next to you.

[@amehayami934]

In my game's if someone crits I don't make them roll for damage. They do max damage and double damage. If someone crits why are you making them roll for damage? Let them do max damage. Besides it works both ways And also to make combat more brutal I have an injury chart that I roll on. If you're fighting more then likely you're not walking out of there pretty like a super hero. You're going to get fuked up. My combat is more like the movie the Raid. You will have a minimum of cuts and bruises. I make my combat where I make my players ask themselves if they can afford to do this fight or not. Besides there is no long rest on the spot you have to go back to town or find a place where it's considered safe. On top of that short rest only gives you back spell and and some hp if you have injuries. if you have injuries you need to take a long rest for that and that is only at town. Example: Fighter kicks an Orc threw the wall And jumps on him and stabs the Orc threw the face. Then an Oger cones out hit the fight with the club and the fighter goes flying back the oger picks the fight up and slams him threw the wooden floor as the fight falls to the floor below him. (Besides the wind getting knock out of him he also broke a rib). By the end of the fight everyone was helping everyone getting carried out lol

[@asquirrelplays]

Lot going on here that I feel like is good stuff. I really like the idea of critting automatically maxing out your damage at double the potency. Making it work the same way for your baddies is a nice way to even that out and add some fear factor. Also loving the approach for long rests requiring something like a town or a place that is actually safe and not a tent in the middle of a dungeon. And wounds! All sounds like good stuff to me.

[@Wrathura]

1200??? My near godly bbeg dragon only had 700hp against max level characters lol

[@asquirrelplays]

lol I was just exaggerating to make a point humorously. That said though, are we talking 5e? Because I would think level 20 players could tear through a 700hp dragon in no time unless he had a lot of special abilities or was super hard to hit or something. Take note - a level 10 party is the highest I've ever done.

[@Grizabeebles]

Part of me feels like characters in an rpg only really need 2 "hit points" for storytelling purposes --> a character with 2 hp is "healthy", a character with 1 hp is wounded, a character with 0 hp is dead, dying or "down and out" depending on how lethal the game is. A character with more than 2 hp would have some kind of augmented or supernatural durability.

[@asquirrelplays]

1 more HP and it's pretty much EZD6, except there's no "official" wound mechanics. Obviously you can throw in whatever you want as the GM. But yeah, you're right. Maybe some armor to absorb some blows?

[@Grizabeebles]

@@asquirrelplays -- Personally, I"d attach some of the conditions from the mech RPG "Lancer" to each lost HP -- It's already my house rule for when mechs lose "structure" points in that game. Exposed -- take double damage Shredded -- lose armour resistance Jammed -- Can't communicate with other players, use reactions or take actions other than move, grapple, and Improvised Attack Immobilized -- can't use any move actions

[@asquirrelplays]

@@Grizabeebles Mannnnn I was all geared up to play Lancer a while back, but the guy that was gonna run it for us got called into work the day we were supposed to play.

[@warmmilk9480]

Do you ever think about the fact that the squirrel in your pfp and the one primarily used in your video is an Eastern Gray Squirrel? It has a maximum recorded lifespan of about 12 years in the wild, and 20 in captivity, however its average lifespan is about 6 years. This means many of the squirrels on your KZbin pictures and thumbnails are likely no longer alive. This has been an Unpleasant Fact. I'll be back with more Unpleasant Facts in future videos. Stay tuned.

[@asquirrelplays]

why must you hurt me so

[@flikersprigs5641]

hp is tension's drug, have too much and it overdoses

[@asquirrelplays]

you know ... that's a really good way to put it.

[@flikersprigs5641]

@@asquirrelplays thanks

[@amehayami934]

Other option throw out how damage is done. In sted of giving a D whatever to damage give a number. Like 10 and then you add any str and bonuses to that and just always do max damage. Basically it's do you hit or not? Besides the only people that should be rolling for damage is the Town or city NPCs because they are not trained in fighting. Most likely your charater is. And if you get a crit do max double damageand then add any bonuses on top of that. Trust me make the fights go by much faster. Keep the HP the HP isn't the problem the way how D&D does damage is the problem.

[@asquirrelplays]

In our second (and last) 5e campaign, I did end up throwing out the damage rules completely without telling the players. It was just to make my life easier. I won't say it works for 5e as a whole, as I just made it for the characters/players I had at the time, and I'm not even sure I remember it all at this point. Enemies just had hits/strikes. Anybody with a two handed weapon, like our barbarian and fighter, would do 1 damage on a hit, and if their damage die (no bonuses) rolled over the halfway point, then it was another 1 damage/hit. 1 handed weapons did 1 damage and I ignored their damage rolls. Crits for everything added another hit. When everybody got their multi-attack ability, it was essentially just rolling with advantage because that's less to keep up with for the same result. Then for our rogue's sneak attack, I think what I did was if she did a sneak attack, it was an automatic +1 hits, and then another +1 for any 6 she rolled on the d6s for sneak attack damage. There was lots of other things to account for, and I don't claim it to be a good system, but it certainly worked for what we did and made life a lot easier on my end. I'm sure reading this has made the soul of 5e fans leave their body 💀

[@amehayami934]

Oh another way to do armor. Give your Armor damage reduction And hp. If the attack doesn't get pass the damage reduction it does no damage but if it does get pass DR. it first does damage to the armor. Essentially everyone gets 2 pools of hp one for armor and their own. Once the armor has 0 hp your armor is useless if anything then your just carrying dead weight If the armor hasn't fallen off of you yet.

[@HenshinFanatic]

Complete abstraction. Viewing HP as meat points is just dumb.