Some Questions - Just Discovered S&W:WB

[iamtim]

The only difference in my reading is that you don't reroll all the hit dice "starting back at first level," but rather just the number shown for the new level.

Just out of curiosity, what do you base that on? I ask because...

The first paragraph says, "Hit points (HP) ... are determined by the amount of hit dice (HD) a character has at their particular class level. If a Player begins the game with a 1st level Fighter (1+1 HD) he would therefore roll 1 HD (1d6) and add “+1” to the end result to determine his PC’s starting HP."

The next paragraph starts with, "Hit points are re-rolled each time a Player Character advances in level..."

If HP are determined by HD, and HD includes the adds, and if you include the adds when you initially roll HP, why wouldn't you include them when you re-roll HP?

(FWIW, I find trying to hack out the meaning behind unclear text to be a fun challenge, so I'm not trying to nitpick or debate or anything of the sort.)

[Llenlleawg]

Just out of curiosity, what do you base that on?

Two main reasons:

(1) Keeping the +1 all along makes other progressions hard to interpret. So, e.g. a cleric at 4th level is 3+1. On your reading, at 5th level, which just says "4" he is really 4+1. Now, what do we make of 8th level? It reads "6+1". However, if we keep adding the +1 from 4th level all along, why is this not more accurately 6+2? (The same could be said of Magic Users. They are 1 at 1st, 1+1 at 2nd, 2 at 3rd, 2+1 at 4th. On your reading, this is really 1, 1+1, 2+1, 2+2. Maybe that's what they meant, but I think "reroll" just means roll the new hit dice score for the new level and keep if higher.)

(2) Memories of the original rules. In Volume 1: Men and Magic, the Fighting Man progression was: 1+1, 2, 3, 4, 5+1, 6, 7+1, 8+2, 9+3, 10+1; for Magic Users: 1, 1+1, 2, 2+1, 3, 3+1, 4, 5, 6+1, 7, 8+1, 8+2, 8+3, 8+4, 9+1, 9+2; for Clerics: 1, 2, 3, 4, 4+1, 5, 6, 7, 7+1, 7+2. It goes on to explain: This indicates the number of dice which are rolled in order to determine how many hit points a character can take. Plusses are merely the number of pips to add to the total of all dice rolled not to each die. Thus a Super Hero gets 8 dice + 2; they are rolled and score 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 5,6/totals 26 + 2 = 28, 28 being the number of points of damage the character could sustain before death. In other words, the +1 from first, fifth, and seventh level do not "carry over". The hit points for 8th level are simply 8d6+2. By analogy, the hit dice of a 2nd level fighter are simply 2d6, not 2d6+1 (i.e. not [1d6+1]+1d6).

Anyway, that's how I call it. The difference is hardly monumental.

[iamtim]

Interesting. So the adds become bonuses only at the level upon which they're granted. Ok, I'll buy that for a dollar.

[Norse]

The rules seem pretty clear and unambiguous to me.

"HD: This is the number of Hit Dice for that level"

Indicating that the number of HD given in the chart is the number of dice you roll for hit points at that level, and +1's don't carry on to further levels because the +1 is only listed on individual levels. The idea of the +1 levels seeming to me as an intermediary step between getting a whole new Hit Dice, with a slightly improved chance of getting a higher number of hit points than you did in the previous level.

If you want to roll it your way though, then of course that's your prerogative!

[The Bane]

Wow, 13 or so responses in the 24hrs since I posted... thanks each and everyone of you, and the "Welcome"s!

Either way, as I see two main approaches to this, is acceptable to me and in my mind's eye does not alter the overall total of hps at higher levels (both methods would result, IMO, to being similar overall)
Again, thanks. I was in the ballpark.

Not much comment on the "House Rule", but I appreciate the responses given and would to chime in, if I may. (Not I am not disputing any of the opinions, just wishing to extrapolate on the topic)

The CA house rule seems okay at first, but it would change the style of the game. Heroic characters would really pound the living crap out of lesser creatures, seriously mowing through them with their heavy damage and/or AC bonuses. This is perfectly acceptable (and appears a lot in literature), but it's a bit different from the usual style of gaming. I wouldn't call it old school or new school, it's just a house rule that may or may not add much fun for you and the other players in your game.

Hmmm, a 'handle' that I have seen around a bit... Anyway, I see your point and I conceded that; 1, I should play the RAW first and 2, play test before introducing them into publication (which I am entirely stoked on doing). But then:

<snipped for brevity, and agree (see above) that I should play RAW first> ...Since one of the key elements of WB is the quite low value of modifiers, I would urge against playing around with them too much, until you get the hang and feel of the game. If it can get what you want without fiddling, then leave it be. Otherwise, let your actual experience of play be your guide.

As far as BAB in WB, at least in my edition from Brave Halfling Publication, it's on p. 24, where it talks about using the Ascending AC system. Basically, it deconstructs the level vs. AC chart into a series of modifiers.

The BAB suggested in the document is for Ascending AC only, which I had missed and makes sense. I don't mind Ascending or Descending honestly <ducks>, but Ascending will be my course of action when/if I do mess with a "Combat Advantage" House Rule. What strikes me as odd, and what I am seeking clarification on, is that if I have a BthB of +5 at 8th Level and do as I suggest, where that +5 bonus would/could be divided between; Attack, Damage, or Armor Class, how would it cause the character to mow through "lesser creatures" as Random states? I am not disputing it, but admit I am dense on occasion and would like this clarified because if it is truly unbalancing or changes the 'feel' of the game I don't want to even bother waisting my time play-testing it.

I would like to add why I thought of the Combat Advantage, as there might be another approach that I have not considered and the more experienced hands here might suggest something. I had been reading the rules The Riddle of Steel, and rather liked the gritty and dangerous feel that fighting invoked in it's rules. After a quick play-test, it seemed too cumbersome for me and my young audience (more so for them). What I envisioned adding to S&W:WB was a bit of combat option. I saw a fighter wading in to a mob of Orcs (using the +5 example above) with a posture of +1 to hit, +1 damage, and +3 to armor. As he whittled down the numbers of opponents he might be a bit more aggressive, perhaps; +2 to hit, +1 damage, and +2 to armor. Wanting to finish of the stragglers he might throw caution to the wind and attack thusly; +2 to hit, +3 damage, and stock armor rating. <Realizing now that based on the HD and HP explanation earlier, S&W:WB might be lethal enough as is. Just inspiring conversation, hopefully>

Again, thank you all and it is turning out to be quite the privileged to be here.
The Bane

[iamtim]

Ok, this has been on my mind all day. Never in my lengthy D&D career have I ever considered rerolling total HD every level. But I started with Moldvay Basic and have only now gone back to 0e and games like S&W.

Honestly, I kinda like the idea. I think I might try it in my game(s).

[Random]

(Some people do a whole lot of minus one here and roll a new die, but this is really more trouble than it's worth. The system as I outlined [which I believe is the interpretation presented in the Whitebox edition] is simpler. Plus, it gives some chance of recovering from a poor roll for hit points at a lower level!)

I have no idea how this method is more trouble than it's worth.

Subtract one.
Add 1d6.

As opposed to...

Roll 2d6.
Set the larger of this and the previous total as the new total.

That is quite simply not simpler.

[The Bane]

Somehow this did not post earlier, but I was fortunetly able to 'go back' until I found my post in my browser history and copy/paste it again. If it comes through twice, eventually, I apologize.

Ok, this has been on my mind all day. Never in my lengthy D&D career have I ever considered rerolling total HD every level. But I started with Moldvay Basic and have only now gone back to 0e and games like S&W.

Honestly, I kinda like the idea. I think I might try it in my game(s).

I think I might like it as well. It does, as mentioned, allow for overcoming a bad HP roll early but requires you surviving that level in hopes of improving it on your next level. Gritty... Mmm good!

Best,
The Bane

[Llenlleawg]

I have no idea how this method is more trouble than it's worth.

Curses, you caught me in a little hyperbole!

Truth be told, I had in mind the somewhat wonky hit dice progression in the original books. Going from 9+3 to 10+1 by subtracting two and adding 1d6 or from 8+4 to 9+1 by subtracting three and adding 1d6 just feels funny. Not very compelling, is it?

I actually like the idea more because it allows some chance to overcome a bad roll of the dice at an early level and keeps it from haunting you all along while, at the same time, actually tending towards the average. However, you are quite correct to suggest that, as written in S&W:WB, merely subtracting one and adding 1d6 is hardly a mind-shattering bit of arithmetic!

[iamtim]

as written in S&W:WB, merely subtracting one and adding 1d6

Where is that written in WB? (I'm a CR guy, so forgive me if that's a stupid question, heh.)