A Land Far Away

Posted: **Thu Oct 04, 2012 2:46 pm**

Static Monsters shouldnt have full hp's, everything in dnd is based on a roll of the dice. The only advantage pc's have is they can stay a little longer and the ai sucks some times.
I keep reading about fireballs and high level spells taking out a group. And yes a group of archers can shoot the enemy to pieces before they go hand to hand. But full hp's will lead to more low level stupid deaths(rats,chickens,deer, a blind one legged old man who cant hear).

Some of you are starting to sound like you have a dm vs players mind set. Over twenty years of rpiing either by pnp or outlooks like alfa, one thing i know is that when dm's start to get that mindset and they are telling THEIR story and the pc's are nothing but npc tag alongs.....well the players will find somewhere else to play.

The players have a advantage in dnd because ITS THEIR STORY, not goblin spawn version 2.5.

Posted: **Thu Oct 04, 2012 3:08 pm**

Fireball is a level5 spell. I believe thats rougly around your level?
So no one mentioned high level spells. mid-level at best (which is the ALFA avarage atm)
With all due respect though... until you set an encounter or two or run a session or two...
You've much less of an idea on what should or should not work.

When you give me spawns with half HP I toss them away. I just wont use them.
They would break balance and any chance of a real challage.

PC fights an NPC. both fighters level4. PC 8 out of 10 times would win.
PC would invisi to run, PC would heal, PC would buff before fight with potions, etc etc.
NPC would hack until its dead.
PC is also likely better geared. Now...
You take that fight and you give that NPC fighter.... 24 HP vs the PC 48 or so...
And that is it. It is not even a challage any more.

Mobs without full HP would simply throw encoutner design and CR out the window.
If we just wanna give XP away thats fine. but there's no reason to ruin the combat system for it. lets just have free XP fridays where everyone can rejoice and be showered with XP and zero risk.

Posted: **Thu Oct 04, 2012 3:09 pm**

There are technical reasons we use full HP. I'll let others chime in on that, but starting threads about DMs vs players really is divisive and abusive.

I'm really not too happy to see multiple threads that basically complain about everything that we are doing wrong...

The complaint engine's really been revved up this year for some reason. Let's do a short overview of the year in ALFA whine:

1. There's no content - add more static activities
2. We add more, and the day after MS copied a few tiny scripted hunts from BG(mushrooms etc.) to give people motivation to explore:
3. Giant thread in DM forums on how mushrooms are killing ALFA, so we stop, inevitably there are new grumblings about how there's still not enough content.
4. DM comes back and starts a campaign - gets deemed "exclusion-ist" because it is a dwarf group - even though we have temp retirement and all are welcome to join
5. Months long complaints from various members about not having pet DMs to run plots purpose built for individual PCs, including tells in game bitching about it to DMs
6. Anger when we enforce the rules against cheating, anger when we don't. Discussion about how it's improper to dock XP earned by cheating (some believe a DM may not take XP from a player despite the DMG rules), then anger when the formal dispute process is used instead.
7. Not enough loot dropped by DM X, too much loot dropped by DM Y
8. Numerous complaints about the way areas in various modules look, down to the quantity and type of grass used by the builder

I have to ask who the F would admin or DM this project today? This is not some country club where you pay 50K a year in dues and can complain about the grass height on the putting green.

Posted: **Thu Oct 04, 2012 6:03 pm**

Stormseeker wrote:... Some of you are starting to sound like you have a dm vs players mind set. Over twenty years of rpiing either by pnp or outlooks like alfa, one thing i know is that when dm's start to get that mindset and they are telling THEIR story and the pc's are nothing but npc tag alongs.....well the players will find somewhere else to play.

The players have a advantage in dnd because ITS THEIR STORY, not goblin spawn version 2.5.

Congratulations, Stormseeker, you get it.

Posted: **Thu Oct 04, 2012 6:08 pm**

FoamBats4All wrote:
Stormseeker wrote:... Some of you are starting to sound like you have a dm vs players mind set. Over twenty years of rpiing either by pnp or outlooks like alfa, one thing i know is that when dm's start to get that mindset and they are telling THEIR story and the pc's are nothing but npc tag alongs.....well the players will find somewhere else to play.

The players have a advantage in dnd because ITS THEIR STORY, not goblin spawn version 2.5.
Congratulations, Stormseeker, you get it.

umm no, the complaint was OMG the monsters have full HP, despite PCs having full HP too. Last time I checked monsters were the DM's job. The dm v. players was a jab at the DM base here in ALFA (who also make a good chunk of the player base so it's not like DMs want to make the game suck for themselves).

You want to discuss the merits of whether our stock monsters could be improved? Fine. There's a place for that. The tone here is just awful.

Posted: **Thu Oct 04, 2012 6:30 pm**

Full hp monsters are fine.
What is likely not fine is that there is far too little low-level low-CR content for those who'd rather not risk their story for "goblin guard v2.5". Most statics are deadly until well into mid levels.

Posted: **Thu Oct 04, 2012 6:31 pm**

Just for the record i use to be a dm here years ago, so i do know a little about setting things up,let alone all my pnp time. See we ran into this in nwn1. Player A takes out monster b easy. Dm turns monster b into new and improve model. Now monster b can take out player a. But player c comes along and gets his arse handed to him. Player c hunts for gear to take out monster b. Now player a and c have gear to take out monster b easy. So dm upgrades monster b again.

That is a circle that doesnt end. I am not complaining about any dm's that have dmed me since i came back this summer. This is just a out of game observation from reading these forums.

lol there is no jab at the dm's and no omg either. I do have a advantage over everyone else here. With the meds and my memory problems i forget who is a dm,player,both, and what pc or dm they are in game. So i do not bring any of the drama with me when i play. And lord knows as long as i have been here this place would make a good "soap opera".

Posted: **Thu Oct 04, 2012 7:43 pm**

Couldn't one spawn another one or two beasties to make up for their lack of hitpoints?
Or do the servers not respond well to that sort of behavior?

-Bill

Posted: **Thu Oct 04, 2012 8:56 pm**

in some cases it could not. (repleacing a mage level6 who could be segnificant in a fight) with 2 lower levels or with canon fodder would not make for the same interesting fight. Putting in 2 mages level 6 could be leathal if you miss them. Making other changes (like putting a higher level mage) could kill the party.

You risk either making easy abttles, or inflating CR for no need. and of course farming would would become much easier. (You spot something from a far and kill it before battle even begins)

So no. It would be a lot less fun to DM and a lot less fun for the players. So far things have full HP and we do seem to mamage well. Asking for half HP for mobs in ALFA is the same as asking to double all PC HP just becuase or give everyone +5 and AC just cuase we think its cool.

It would break balance and CR and a lot of the fun of combat. (that would become much more like an MMO h&s)

I dont understand really, do we have a problem with the challange rating of our game?
Most of the toons I know kill stuff above thier CR as it is... so we want to actauly make mobs -easier-? why?
whats the benefit?

Posted: **Thu Oct 04, 2012 9:21 pm**

I was under the impression that ALFA currently had beasties that had half hit points, not full hit points.
Must've missed something along the way.

-Bill

kid wrote:in some cases it could not. (repleacing a mage level6 who could be segnificant in a fight) with 2 lower levels or with canon fodder would not make for the same interesting fight. Putting in 2 mages level 6 could be leathal if you miss them. Making other changes (like putting a higher level mage) could kill the party.

You risk either making easy abttles, or inflating CR for no need. and of course farming would would become much easier. (You spot something from a far and kill it before battle even begins)

So no. It would be a lot less fun to DM and a lot less fun for the players. So far things have full HP and we do seem to mamage well. Asking for half HP for mobs in ALFA is the same as asking to double all PC HP just becuase or give everyone +5 and AC just cuase we think its cool.

It would break balance and CR and a lot of the fun of combat. (that would become much more like an MMO h&s)

I dont understand really, do we have a problem with the challange rating of our game?
Most of the toons I know kill stuff above thier CR as it is... so we want to actauly make mobs -easier-? why?
whats the benefit?

Posted: **Thu Oct 04, 2012 9:41 pm**

There are some of both. many of the spawns you meet are at half health.
Zspawn which creates many of the NPCs creates them with full.

When I run anything given the choice I would use full HP creatures.

Posted: **Thu Oct 04, 2012 9:58 pm**

The problem I have seen is the AI.. Thats the big issue even on DM events.. When encountering a group of Creatures they 99% of the time focus all attacks on one PC. and so some spawns are relativly easy when you have a group of Players who are ranged. And it maybe that the spawns are set to attack the first toon Spotted I don't know. But making the spawns with a higher AC or giving them better equipment to offset them getting owned is ok as long as the loot dropped reflects that.

I will use a old NWN1 server for an example. The lowly kobold on DF got to the point where they could stand toe to toe with a group of level 9 PC's. Did the the level 9 PC get xp for them..umm nope..

Posted: **Thu Oct 04, 2012 10:05 pm**

Player vs. monster advantage doesn't really come into the debate. DMs and builders will generally always adjust their set-ups and spawns to achieve a desired difficulty. With half-HPs, this means stronger spawns or more of them. A half-HP or full-HP setting will not affect player difficulty in the long-term.

What does come into the debate is which setting more accurately represents a creature's CR? We reward XP, GP based on CR, and DMs design encounters based on CR. The more accurate the CR rating is, the better ALFA works.

Most all BG monsters have max HP, partially because this setting more accurately represents the creature's canon CR. We could of course adjust CR downward for half-HP mobs, but this would seem like a lot of work and mean that newly-tooled creatures could not use their Monster Manual CR rating.

Posted: **Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:08 pm**

Ronan wrote:partially because this setting more accurately represents the creature's canon CR.

not really... no :/

canon monster CR is based on the average hp (half the HD roll + con mod * number of hd).

PCs in pnp roll their HP, but do still get max HP at either just level 1 or often levels 1-3.

The CR for a monster in pnp is mostly based around it's special abilities/spellcasting capability/stats/attacks etc, those are compared to what a party of 4 PCs would in theory need to be in terms of level to be able to defeat the enemy and actually use up some of their resources (spells/consumables/other abilities)

Note that while PCs get additional HP, the do NOT get any other buffs. so the discrepancy is that PCs get POTENTIALLY more hp than in pnp, while monsters get HALF THEIR CONSTITUTION MOD * NUMBER OF HD LESS than in pnp.

To put that in perspective,
The Monster:
a 4HD ogre with a con score of 15 + toughness feat would have 29hp in pnp. in ALFA they have 21/22 (that ogre is CR3, not because of HP, but because it can comfortably 1 hit a fighter due to +8 AB, 2d8+7/x3 damage)
The PC
(assuming max on level 1, rolled thereafter)
a level 4 human fighter with a con score of 14 would have BETWEEN 21 AND 48 hp in pnp. in ALFA they have 48.
a level 4 human wizard with a con score of 12 would have BETWEEN 11 AND 20 hp in pnp. in ALFA they have 20.
(assuming max on level 1-3, rolled thereafter)
a level 4 human fighter with a con score of 14 would have BETWEEN 39 AND 48 hp in pnp. in ALFA they have 48.
a level 4 human wizard with a con score of 12 would have BETWEEN 17 AND 20 hp in pnp. in ALFA they have 20.

obviously the variance in PC hp will be higher at later levels, but honestly in pnp, whenever a player rolls a 1 for hp, they get a reroll from me *shrug* as has been mentioned, it's a story about the PCs, they're supposed to be better than the monsters.

To think that lowering the CR of an enemy for a few hp difference... is frankly laughable. The reason monsters die easier than they really should in ALFA, is because
a) the AI sucks horribly, sight ranges REALLY need to be sorted, and in theory movement speeds should be too (as they're also going to be part of working out the CR of an enemy, i.e. Can I run away? If not, the CR is higher)
b) Monsters are missing other abilities that they should have (grapple on most of the big things for example).

upping the HP is not the answer, as it doesn't solve either issue, and really still doesn't reflect the CR as now all you've done is make it an endurance game, which D&D isn't. By all means, lower CR on enemies that are missing abilities they ought to have in pnp though, as they are most certainly a lower challenge because of it.

in 5e, monsters continue to get half hp, PCs now get to roll hp or take half hp if they want.

Posted: **Fri Oct 05, 2012 12:38 am**

BHM,

We generally try to replace missing monster abilities with something suitable which is included in NWN2. Otherwise yeah, we lower it.

But we've also done lots and lots of testing with real PCs and copied ones. Over and over I find the max-hp mobs produce results more in-line with their rated CR (when DM-possessed and run of course). This is especially true for melee and mage mobs. As PCs nearly always get the jump on mobs with ranged attacks (especially in static contexts) anything which lets them survive long enough to get into melee or start casting spells greatly increases their difficulty. In an analysis I did in the DM forums, max HP on an ogre barbarian can easily increase its damage output over the course of an encounter by 3x. I think a mob's HP certainly effects its CR for these reasons.

As an example, those orogs you fought were originally half HP. I got "wow, are these guys supposed to drop this much loot?!" comments from three different players, and I switched them to max HP. Their logged death rates slowed and those comments stopped.

We do have PC movement rates on all mobs that should have it (though I'm not such a fan of this) and, sight-ranges are 45m vs. 50m for a PC. We cannot have mobs use PC sight range for a variety of reasons (AI and building related). Kiting is a real problem and it is much easier to kite a half-HP mob than a max-HP one.

We have a number of ways to increase encounter difficulty:

Add HD. I don't like this because we'd need some standard to adhere to. The MMs, while not perfect, are likely a better standard than ALFA is going to come up with.
Spawn more. I don't like this because of pathing issues for both mobs and PCs, as well as some sort of internal realism ("how many goblins were in this cave?"), for whatever that is worth in D&D.
Add better gear. This isn't an option for unintelligent monsters, and I really prefer to have my mobs drop what they use. As gear increases in value, this becomes less viable.

The MM entry CRs are presumably based off of the rules as written, which is max HP only at first level. Good point that lowbies get shafted from this, though. I think we should do things to help out level 1s anyway (such as start them with considerably more gold).

The PCs who get the shaft with max vs. half HP are of course damage-dealing casters (blasty wizards and sorcerers). Unfortunately I think max HP is still the lesser evil. Having played a blasty wizard in max-HP ALFA servers, I certainly did not feel gimped, though naturally wizard power is very dependent on the number of encounters per day (and thus play/DM style).

While builders and DMs will always adjust difficulty to suit their needs, players do have certain mechanical advantages vs. monsters of the same CR as their EL:

The -6 floor.
Much higher wealth (those orogs just have MW gear, for example).
Better ability scores.
Better (A)I.

Some numbers, relative HP gained by max vs. half HP settings as hd -> infinity:

Code: Select all

HP per die \ CON modifier:
     0        1        2        3        4        5        6        7        8
04	60.00%	42.86%	33.33%	27.27%	23.08%	20.00%	17.65%	15.79%	14.29%
06	71.43%	55.56%	45.45%	38.46%	33.33%	29.41%	26.32%	23.81%	21.74%
08	77.78%	63.64%	53.85%	46.67%	41.18%	36.84%	33.33%	30.43%	28.00%
10	81.82%	69.23%	60.00%	52.94%	47.37%	42.86%	39.13%	36.00%	33.33%
12	84.62%	73.33%	64.71%	57.89%	52.38%	47.83%	44.00%	40.74%	37.93%

Naturally the higher the CON modifier and the lower the HP die per HD, the less max HP helps. Mobs get shafted as they tend to have more CON than players, and mages get shafted - again.

A Land Far Away

No to full hp's

No to full hp's

Re: No to full hp's

Re: No to full hp's

Re: No to full hp's

Re: No to full hp's

Re: No to full hp's

Re: No to full hp's

Re: No to full hp's

Re: No to full hp's

Re: No to full hp's

Re: No to full hp's

Re: No to full hp's

Re: No to full hp's

Re: No to full hp's

Re: No to full hp's