## Durable feat issue

25 posts / 0 new
mvincent
Joined Dec 1969
The Durable feat says: "Whenever you roll a die to increase your hit point maximum (such as when you gain a level)... you can roll twice and use the higher result."

This feature seems like it would often be wasted, as most groups I've encountered use the average option when levelling up max HP (and that is normally the expectation in official, public games).
CarlT
Joined Dec 1969
The Durable feat says: "Whenever you roll a die to increase your hit point maximum (such as when you gain a level)... you can roll twice and use the higher result."

This feature seems like it would normally be wasted, as most groups use the average option when levelling up max HP.

So you don't take the feat.

It also affects the roll of hit dice used when recovering hit points during a rest.

But the bottom line is:  If you don't think its worth it, you take a different feat.  That is true of any feat.

In our group, most of the players take the 'average' option.  The one player who has that feat rolls instead.

Carl
mvincent
Joined Dec 1969
So you don't take the feat.

Thank you. However, the purpose of this forum (and indeed 'playtests' in general) is to point out issues, possibly to aid in redesign.

When a feat as written does not match with the way the game is most commonly played, that can be a potential issue.
Lord_Kyrion
Joined Dec 1969
Every group I've ever been has rolled for it. I don't know how you decide that your way is the most common. Rolling is the default, and choosing the above-average number is an option, so the feat is fine.

But what you could do for players who don't roll if make the feat give them 75% of the hit die instead of 50%, because that's what the math does to the roll anyway.

d6: 5
d8: 6
d10: 7
d12: 9

With the d6 I had to use a number above 75% because the 4 granted by the rules is already 75% rounded down. Picking the static number always rounds up from the average even though the universal rule says always round down, so I don't think it's a fair alternative to rolling as it is. But this is how I'd use the feat when not rolling.
talamare
Joined Dec 1969
That is one of the feats I suggest removing completely, and moving the secondary effect to resilience
mvincent
Joined Dec 1969
Every group I've ever been has rolled for it.

Interesting. I haven't yet encountered a group that rolled (especially because that would be problematic with public play games), but now I'm curious how many do, so here's a poll for it.

Saelorn
Joined Dec 1969
Does anyone remember when MtG assumed everyone was playing with ante, and included cards that interacted with it? This feels a lot like that.
The metagame is not the game.
randl
Joined Dec 1969

In my group rolled 1 die for hitpoints, with the average being the second roll.  If he beat the average, he gets more HP's.

PinkRose
Joined Dec 1969
Sounds like a great fix, randl.
If I have a dwarf in my "take-the-average" group, that's the way I'm going with it.
Viva La "what ever version of D&D you are playing right now!"
Veggie-sama
Joined Dec 1969
Then you end up getting well-above average HP values(~75% vs ~50% of maximum possible values), which needlessly increases the staying power of PCs, which you might end up trying to fix by raising monster damages or monster HPs.
Lord_Kyrion
Joined Dec 1969
Every group I've ever been has rolled for it.

Interesting. I haven't yet encountered a group that rolled (especially because that would be problematic with public play games), but now I'm curious how many do, so here's a poll for it.

Of course we're split right down the middle on the poll so far. But I don't get why public games have such a problem with rolling dice (for stats and for HP). Is it really that big of a deal if every player isn't equal?
Gatt
Joined Dec 1969
Every group I've ever been has rolled for it.

Interesting. I haven't yet encountered a group that rolled (especially because that would be problematic with public play games), but now I'm curious how many do, so here's a poll for it.

Of course we're split right down the middle on the poll so far. But I don't get why public games have such a problem with rolling dice (for stats and for HP). Is it really that big of a deal if every player isn't equal?

Have you ever seen the temper tantrum that can result when you have a random poorly-adjusted person at a public table?  There's enough people out there that it makes public games extremely uncomfortable.  I'm not surprised public games opt for not rolling,  just to avoid dealing with those personality types.

That said,  I'd never join a non-rolling game.  I prefer rolling.
CarlT
Joined Dec 1969
I always saw the public table issue as the simple fact that some people do cheat.  And when half of the table shows up claiming to have rolled 9s and 10s for their hit points - for each of their nine levels (and to have rolled at least three 18s for their abilities) - it tends to make the players who rolled their dice legitimately feel marginalized.

Carl
talamare
Joined Dec 1969
Rolling any hp or stats doesnt work for wandering games

people WILL cheat, and it usually ruins the experience for everyone
Lord_Kyrion
Joined Dec 1969
Seems unfair to the legitimate players to cater to the bad ones, though. But you three do have a point.
randl
Joined Dec 1969
Then you end up getting well-above average HP values(~75% vs ~50% of maximum possible values), which needlessly increases the staying power of PCs, which you might end up trying to fix by raising monster damages or monster HPs.

Well, you are paying a feat for it.  Actually, since you usually round up, there is less than 50% chance of getting extra hit points.  Easy example is the fighter.  Generally, 6 is considered the average (so 60% maximum).  This means you have a 40% chance at extra hit points each level.  It should be noted that the bigger the hit die, the better this feat is.  With a d6, you get 67% your maximum and only a 33% chance to gain additional hit points.
mvincent
Joined Dec 1969
I don't get why public games have such a problem with rolling dice (for stats and for HP).

The DM/party in public games can change each session. Rolled stats would tempt players to fudge their rolls, and/or suspect others of fudging.

Also in public games, players are usually expected to have their characters generated ahead of time. Even in my home games I expect players to be able to make PC's on their own.

mvincent
Joined Dec 1969
Seems unfair to the legitimate players to cater to the bad ones

Heh. A 'legitimate' player is a mythical beast ;). I've seen even the most honest of players decide to go with the rolled HP method. Then after a few levels of low rolls decide to go with average HP. See what they did there?

chuck80
Joined Dec 1969
Every group I've ever been has rolled for it.

Interesting. I haven't yet encountered a group that rolled (especially because that would be problematic with public play games), but now I'm curious how many do, so here's a poll for it.

Of course we're split right down the middle on the poll so far. But I don't get why public games have such a problem with rolling dice (for stats and for HP). Is it really that big of a deal if every player isn't equal?

Have you ever seen the temper tantrum that can result when you have a random poorly-adjusted person at a public table?  There's enough people out there that it makes public games extremely uncomfortable.  I'm not surprised public games opt for not rolling,  just to avoid dealing with those personality types.

That said,  I'd never join a non-rolling game.  I prefer rolling.

You just convinced me to never EVER play in a public game

Cheating?????? in a DnD game? I stopped that crap when I was 11
Lord_Kyrion
Joined Dec 1969
Seems unfair to the legitimate players to cater to the bad ones

Heh. A 'legitimate' player is a mythical beast ;). I've seen even the most honest of players decide to go with the rolled HP method. Then after a few levels of low rolls decide to go with average HP. See what they did there?

Well I don't know where you're finding these players who care so much about numbers. If I want to guarantee decent HP, I put a good stat into Con and don't worry so much about the rolls. If they're that obsessed with having high HP, they should take the Durable feat.
mvincent
Joined Dec 1969
I've seen even the most honest of players decide to go with the rolled HP method. Then after a few levels of low rolls decide to go with average HP. See what they did there?

I don't know where you're finding these players who care so much about numbers.

All D&D players care about numbers to some degree. Part of the game is looking for advantages. Rolling high is an advantage.

The aforementioned player probably didn't even realize he was cheating. He just observed that switching to average HP would be advantageous.

It also doesn't take much effort to discover that changing PC's (or letting one die) allows permanent low rolls to vanish. Have you never been careless with a poorly rolled character, or asked your DM if you could roll up another?
talamare
Joined Dec 1969
Issues with Durable
- Rolling HP is subject to cheating
- Rolling HP is subject to massive disparity between characters
---- A level 20 with d12 per level can have anywhere between +20 hp and +240 hp from the HD
- It gives disproportioned benefits depending on your hit die
---- A level 20 with d12 per level will average ~40 more hp than one without Durable
---- A level 20 with d6 per level will average ~20 more hp than one without Durable
- Toughness exists, which is a more fair, balanced and most importantly CONSISTENT way of implementing additional health
- Resilience exists which is a more consistent way of regaining health per hit dice
---- Resilience is also more effective, the average of improvement of a d12 using Durable is 1.99 (0.97 for d6) , Resilience is a guaranteed 2
another_rules_lawyer
Joined Dec 1969
Issues with Durable
- Rolling HP is subject to cheating
- Rolling HP is subject to massive disparity between characters
---- A level 20 with d12 per level can have anywhere between +20 hp and +240 hp from the HD
- It gives disproportioned benefits depending on your hit die
---- A level 20 with d12 per level will average ~40 more hp than one without Durable
---- A level 20 with d6 per level will average ~20 more hp than one without Durable
- Toughness exists, which is a more fair, balanced and most importantly CONSISTENT way of implementing additional health

But don't forget that durable also helps in regaining HP.
talamare
Joined Dec 1969
But don't forget that durable also helps in regaining HP.

Which is covered by the feat Resilience, but I will add it to the list
another_rules_lawyer
Joined Dec 1969
Issues with Durable
- Rolling HP is subject to cheating
- Rolling HP is subject to massive disparity between characters
---- A level 20 with d12 per level can have anywhere between +20 hp and +240 hp from the HD
- It gives disproportioned benefits depending on your hit die
---- A level 20 with d12 per level will average ~40 more hp than one without Durable
---- A level 20 with d6 per level will average ~20 more hp than one without Durable
- Toughness exists, which is a more fair, balanced and most importantly CONSISTENT way of implementing additional health
- Resilience exists which is a more consistent way of regaining health per hit dice
---- Resilience is also more effective, the average of improvement of a d12 using Durable is 1.99 (0.97 for d6) , Resilience is a guaranteed 2

Though Durable may be less consistent, it requires only one feat choice.  And if a lack of feats was not an issue, I'd take all three, assuming I have the requisite 11 CON (which I think should not be a prerequisite).  Of course, my group rolls HP, so ymmv.