Quote from: jeff37923 on May 30, 2022, 09:44:06 PM
I allow maximum possible hit points at level 1. Player Characters still end up getting killed, though.

Same. We play almost completely BtB Rules Cyclopedia at my table, but one of the few things I do change is allowing max HP at first level.

Try playing BX then. Dead at zero HP and things like raise dead are few and far between. Clerics do not gain access to it till level 7. Though in AD&D they do not get it till level 9.

And CON bonuses were not as high yet. 13-15=+1, 16-17=+2 and 18=+3.

And class HD were smaller for some classes. Magic user and Thief use a d4. Cleric, Elf, and Halfling use a d6. Fighter and Dwarf use a d8.
Compare that to AD&D where the cleric gets bumped up to a d8, the Thief a d6 and the Fighter a d10.

Old school lethality is a two edged sword. It raises the stakes, but you get less characterization of your PCs until they reach a level where killing them takes more effort.

Quote from: Ghostmaker on May 31, 2022, 09:32:13 AM
Old school lethality is a two edged sword. It raises the stakes, but you get less characterization of your PCs until they reach a level where killing them takes more effort.

Does it really raise the stakes?

If your PC is just Bob #8495 and they die so often then are you really going to care if they die. In a way it makes the stakes lower because it's not a big deal if you die, you just reroll and move on to the next guy... as opposed to the games where people write pages of backstory and commission art of their character.

I am not surprised to hear that your players enjoyed the higher stakes lethality brings to the game. I recently left a campaign because the threat of lethality was never present.

I roll in the open for my OD&D game a vast majority of the time, and always in combat. 'Combat as war' has turned into a bit of a cliche, but it is true. Plus using reaction and morale, random tables, and btb stocking rules...a fair amount of mitigation out of the box is provided.

If I were to house rule, I would leave rolling for level 1 HP as written which is 1d6 3LBB, or variable if using supplements. However, any spill over damage beyond taking the player to zero would subtract from Constitution. Using the standard Constitution table from M&M, I'd have them roll to withstand adversity based on their adjusted score. If survived, Constitution would regenerate at one point per week of complete rest, but max is permanently lowered by one.

Quote from: FingerRod on May 31, 2022, 09:52:11 AM
I am not surprised to hear that your players enjoyed the higher stakes lethality brings to the game. I recently left a campaign because the threat of lethality was never present.

Two of my friends/players had to leave our game towards the end of last year because they were moving out of state for work. One of them has been back to visit family a few times since then, and she's made a point to stop by on game night while in town. Apparently the only game they've been able to find to get in on in the small town they moved to is a paid DM, and she said it's horrible because the threat of death is more or less non-existent; the DM's afraid of pissing off a player by killing their precious PCs, especially since the players are paying to play. "I miss dying" has been said more than once, haha.

Quote from: Mithgarthr on May 31, 2022, 10:00:55 AM

Quote from: FingerRod on May 31, 2022, 09:52:11 AM
I am not surprised to hear that your players enjoyed the higher stakes lethality brings to the game. I recently left a campaign because the threat of lethality was never present.

Two of my friends/players had to leave our game towards the end of last year because they were moving out of state for work. One of them has been back to visit family a few times since then, and she's made a point to stop by on game night while in town. Apparently the only game they've been able to find to get in on in the small town they moved to is a paid DM, and she said it's horrible because the threat of death is more or less non-existent; the DM's afraid of pissing off a player by killing their precious PCs, especially since the players are paying to play. "I miss dying" has been said more than once, haha.

Hah, exactly. That is rough, but I am not surprised to hear it. Actions needs to have consequences or the game turns into Mr. Roger's Neighborhood. I hope your friends are able to find a good game soon.

A paid DM should understand the importance of in-game consequences and know how to market it properly/set expectations.

And just to clarify, we always play lethal old school games.  This wasn't a comment of surprise.  I've never run any version of D&D beyond house-ruled 1st edition AD&D or BECMI or various house-ruled retroclones or DCC.  We're always tweaking things, but it's not about being shocked coming from 5e or whatever.  The essential point is that you can't presume the characters will even make it to second level.  We explicitly created characters to gain a level or two before trying Dwarrowdeep and lost nearly half the party in the first mini expedition.  But now the survivors will recruit a couple more characters and go out again, hoping to gain those levels before the real challenge.

Incidentally, that's what caused our group to quit Barrowmaze a couple years ago.  They lost half the party and decided to try Archaia, where they lost another PC but replaced him with a freed captive.  This happened again in other scenarios but now that particular group of PCs is preparing to play Necropolis when I get my copy in about a month.  I think only 3 of the original 10 PCs of that group are still alive.  They're all 8th-9th level now and the other PCs in that group are various characters they've picked up along the way.  But it's created a fun backstory dynamic for that particular party because they've been through a lot.  To me, this is the real charm of old school play.  Now they can raise dead, but even then, certain situations make that impossible or they might fail that resurrection check.

There are some misconceptions about OS lethality.

A goblin (or orc etc.) is no more dangerous in OS than 5e; you have more HP in 5e, but so does the goblin, and both deal more damage. In fact, some big monsters are more dangerous in 5e IIRC, which I appreciate.

The main difference is "dead at 0 HP" and "unconscious at 0 HP". Chances of a TPK are about the same, but a single PC dying will be a lot harder to happen in 5e.

Quote from: Eric Diaz on May 31, 2022, 12:18:27 PM
There are some misconceptions about OS lethality.

A goblin (or orc etc.) is no more dangerous in OS than 5e; you have more HP in 5e, but so does the goblin, and both deal more damage. In fact, some big monsters are more dangerous in 5e IIRC, which I appreciate.

The main difference is "dead at 0 HP" and "unconscious at 0 HP". Chances of a TPK are about the same, but a single PC dying will be a lot harder to happen in 5e.

No; I'd say the main difference is the lame ass video gamey short rest, long rest, heal up mechanics that are used in 5e.  It's not simply about hit points & damage.  It's how easy one can recover them.  Save or die is another big one.  None of these lame losing ability scores temporarily mechanics.  You blow the save, it's over.  You don't get 2-3 more chances.

Old school play wears you down through attrition in a way that 5e does not.  Old school play is predicated to a much greater degree on resource management. 

Quote from: Persimmon on May 31, 2022, 04:24:21 PM

Quote from: Eric Diaz on May 31, 2022, 12:18:27 PM
There are some misconceptions about OS lethality.

A goblin (or orc etc.) is no more dangerous in OS than 5e; you have more HP in 5e, but so does the goblin, and both deal more damage. In fact, some big monsters are more dangerous in 5e IIRC, which I appreciate.

The main difference is "dead at 0 HP" and "unconscious at 0 HP". Chances of a TPK are about the same, but a single PC dying will be a lot harder to happen in 5e.

No; I'd say the main difference is the lame ass video gamey short rest, long rest, heal up mechanics that are used in 5e.  It's not simply about hit points & damage.  It's how easy one can recover them.  Save or die is another big one.  None of these lame losing ability scores temporarily mechanics.  You blow the save, it's over.  You don't get 2-3 more chances.

Old school play wears you down through attrition in a way that 5e does not.  Old school play is predicated to a much greater degree on resource management.

Not disagreeing with the criticisms of 5e, but with the game world working like it does, it makes you wonder why every baddie doesn't take one more attack at a downed PC just to ensure they already have two failed death saves going against them. The nasty part is that this coup de grâce can come from even the most pitiful of attackers, so let the big monster knock them down and have the peons finish off the fallen. Of course, this is probably considered "poor form" by modern 5e players where the GM's bad guys are, for stupid reasons, expected to give the PCs a "fair chance" (even while PCs are under no such obligations)

Quote from: Eric Diaz on May 31, 2022, 12:18:27 PM
There are some misconceptions about OS lethality.

A goblin (or orc etc.) is no more dangerous in OS than 5e; you have more HP in 5e, but so does the goblin, and both deal more damage. In fact, some big monsters are more dangerous in 5e IIRC, which I appreciate.

The main difference is "dead at 0 HP" and "unconscious at 0 HP". Chances of a TPK are about the same, but a single PC dying will be a lot harder to happen in 5e.

I was not one of the individuals talking about 5e in this thread, but I am not sure I agree with the goblin comment.

Goblins have 7 HP in 5e, and hit for 5 point of damage. Technically, the goblin does 1d6+2 damage (dex bonus and finesse weapon in there) which is 5.5, so taking that 5 is rounding down. But even if you round up, the worst HP class, a Wizard, has 6 + con bonus hit points.

In OD&D (3LBB) you get 1d6 HP and all weapons do 1d6 damage. Even if you start with 4 HP, you will die 50% of the time you are hit at level 1. Even if you manage 15+ on your Con, which less than 10% achieve, you will still die a third of the time, on average. Nobody dies a third of the time in 5e when hit by a goblin.

You already pointed out the dead at 0 HP difference, so we are in agreement there.

The other I would point out, especially for OD&D, those To Hit tables are stacked against you until you get someone to Hero. For fighting-men (FM) that is level 4.

Quote from: Elf Example
Elves are 1+1 HD monsters with 5 AC. Level 1 FM also has 1+1 HD, and can have 5 AC with chain mail. However, the elf will land hits 5% more often, needing a 13 instead of a 14 to hit AC 5.

It gets worse from there.

Quote from: Dryad Example
Dryads are 2 HD monsters with 5 AC. A level 2 FM also has 2 HD, and 5 AC if wearing chain. The FM still hits on a 14, but the Dryad only needs a 12. This does not count the insane charming ability they throw out a majority of the time.

At any rate, I would like to hear more. I have read just about your entire blog, so I respect how much you know about this stuff. I'm just not seeing it (yet).

Quote from: HappyDaze on May 31, 2022, 04:36:19 PM

Quote from: Persimmon on May 31, 2022, 04:24:21 PM

Quote from: Eric Diaz on May 31, 2022, 12:18:27 PM
There are some misconceptions about OS lethality.

A goblin (or orc etc.) is no more dangerous in OS than 5e; you have more HP in 5e, but so does the goblin, and both deal more damage. In fact, some big monsters are more dangerous in 5e IIRC, which I appreciate.

The main difference is "dead at 0 HP" and "unconscious at 0 HP". Chances of a TPK are about the same, but a single PC dying will be a lot harder to happen in 5e.

No; I'd say the main difference is the lame ass video gamey short rest, long rest, heal up mechanics that are used in 5e.  It's not simply about hit points & damage.  It's how easy one can recover them.  Save or die is another big one.  None of these lame losing ability scores temporarily mechanics.  You blow the save, it's over.  You don't get 2-3 more chances.

Old school play wears you down through attrition in a way that 5e does not.  Old school play is predicated to a much greater degree on resource management.

Not disagreeing with the criticisms of 5e, but with the game world working like it does, it makes you wonder why every baddie doesn't take one more attack at a downed PC just to ensure they already have two failed death saves going against them. The nasty part is that this coup de grâce can come from even the most pitiful of attackers, so let the big monster knock them down and have the peons finish off the fallen. Of course, this is probably considered "poor form" by modern 5e players where the GM's bad guys are, for stupid reasons, expected to give the PCs a "fair chance" (even while PCs are under no such obligations)

Great call out. And a good DM does this, which admittedly does make 5e more lethal. The last 5e game I played was Strahd with my wife as DM. She regularly smoked down targets. She killed me three times in that campaign, twice while I was downed. And she isn't what I would even call a good DM. She was just brand new and following logic.

Quote from: Persimmon on May 31, 2022, 04:24:21 PM
No; I'd say the main difference is the lame ass video gamey short rest, long rest, heal up mechanics that are used in 5e.  It's not simply about hit points & damage.  It's how easy one can recover them.  Save or die is another big one.  None of these lame losing ability scores temporarily mechanics.  You blow the save, it's over.  You don't get 2-3 more chances.

Old school play wears you down through attrition in a way that 5e does not.  Old school play is predicated to a much greater degree on resource management.

Which is why if you want to move 5E closer too or even all the way to old school play, the very first thing the GM will do is use the optional rules to make the rests occur less frequently and reliably.  It won't stop there if you really want to do old school, but that's where it starts.  For me, the next step was using the exhaustion rules more or less as written, but being a bit more hard-core about inflicting them with a few house rules--such as every time a character hit zero hit points, take a level of exhaustion.  That doesn't do anything about killing a character in the current fight, but it sure does make them hurt and introduce some resource management back into the mix.

Of course, to go all the way or even close to actual old school, that's as much table attitude as anything, not to mention a few more rules tweaks, as has already been discussed.  The real problems with 5E and old school are what that implies:

- If the players don't want to try old school, then 5E is a lousy place to start, because the defaults in 5E are not only not old school, if anything they've gone more than halfway to the opposite side.  Even some players that don't want to do old school aren't not entirely happy with all hit points coming back overnight, but the ones that want that are not likely candidates for old school.

- It takes too long to make a 5E character to play it old school.  People get too invested.  So you have to start trimming other things. 

- The WotC take on skills is substandard for old school play.  You can twist it to kind of, sort of, work, but it's not ideal.

- At that point, there are a heck of a long list of better starting places to get where you are going, even for the "not quite old school", where starting with something old school and house ruling to be a little less so is a better approach.

As for the GM and playing the monsters, I've always thought a middle ground between coddling and killer was a good mix.  Namely, whether it was 5E or old school, I'd run the monsters according to their personality and let the chips fall where they may.  This meant that goblins weren't likely to focus on downed opponents unless in a snit, but the gnolls and ghouls were.  The players weren't scared of every monster, but they learned real quick that some took different tactics unless you wanted a character shredded.  On the other hand, fighting relatively civilized foes, it might be a good idea to not develop a reputation for being completely bloodthirsty, unless you wanted it to come back on you later.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic on May 31, 2022, 09:48:23 AM

Quote from: Ghostmaker on May 31, 2022, 09:32:13 AM
Old school lethality is a two edged sword. It raises the stakes, but you get less characterization of your PCs until they reach a level where killing them takes more effort.

Does it really raise the stakes?

If your PC is just Bob #8495 and they die so often then are you really going to care if they die. In a way it makes the stakes lower because it's not a big deal if you die, you just reroll and move on to the next guy... as opposed to the games where people write pages of backstory and commission art of their character.

I don't necessarily see this as a plus, though, this depends a lot of what type of game you're trying to play, how fast character creation is, and how easy it is for you to schedule play.

I know that many here like to bring up the idea of "snowflake" characters and associate them with wokesters and a certain type of players, but no matter how much you like to pontificate about snowflakes the reality remains that play time is a limited resource that's hard to schedule for most adults and coincide with other people's free time to actually get together and finally play. And having a character get killed five minutes into combat from a lucky damage roll, cuz low level characters in D&D have such ridiculously low HP, they're more likely to get killed from a single blow that a normal couch potato would in real life, is a waste of time. Specially if you're playing a game with any type of customization options that increase character creation time*.

This isn't to say that a game shouldn't have lethality, but I'd prefer a happy medium between one-hit kill level 1 old school D&D characters and modern, back to full HP from a single long rest cake walks. And TBH, I don't think that the utter randomness having a low HP character get killed from a single max damage roll emulates the excitement of difficult, deadly combat that well. It just feels like a coin toss to me, with very little you can do once you get thrust into a situation where the attack roll is coming guaranteed. It's not like those crazy difficult video games were you need every drop of skill and reflex evading enemy attacks to avoid getting killed as you navigate through the game world, but you can still skid by through sheer skill. It's just a random coin toss every time you get hit, and hope the rest of the group kills the bad guys before the next the round, cuz you ain't surviving another hit if the enemy manages to roll low enough this time around.

Strategy can help minimize the chances of getting hit initially, but there's only so much you can do once combat becomes inevitable, cuz often retreating is just a free attack for the enemy, and won't accomplish much unless you can get into a more defensible position, which won't happen if you get hit on the way getting there.

*Which I know is another thing that some people like to put down, but personally, if a game doesn't have any customization options I won't play it.