"Only licensed Dungeon Masters may view this content" Me with my back-alley underground illegal DMing: *sweating*

Back in the days of 3rd edition, there was a guy named Ryan Stoughton who capped the character level at 6. After that you could only gain feats. He created feat trees that gave a character the abilities of higher levels i. Their class, such as 4th and 5th level spell feats (the spell was a feat and it was only one spell per feat for 4th and 5th level spells). Later the E6 (stands for “epic six”) rules were modified for Pathfinder (called “P6”). It kept the “sweet spot” of D&D levels 3-8. You levelled until 6th and at 6th you gained a feat for every 5000 xp. So there was still advancement, just mot the insane power creep you saw in the 3.x/Pathfinder system.

I've been running games for about 16 years now. I've had campaigns get to the upper teens, and one campaign went all the way to level 20. The problem isn't the players getting op, the problem is DMs continuing to design adventures the same way as they did at level 1. There comes a point when a dungeon crawl is no longer appropriate for your characters. Higher level characters should be teleporting across kingdoms, fighting or stopping wars, plane shifting to alternate realms of existence, and fighting threats that can demolish entire armies on a whim. If you insist on putting a high-level party in a dungeon, consider the abilities of your party, and instead of limiting abilities you don't want them to use, design your dungeon in such a way that they are required to use those abilities to advance.

I like these low-hitpoints high-mortality systems.

5e uses rapid advancement until level 3, then becomes comparable with 1st edition for the middle levels (the sweet spot), but by 8th, they accelerate again to be able to push the levels all the way to 20th (1st edition level charts ended around 12th). The main difference is that they had to adjust for not getting XP from treasure anymore (which can be approximated by cutting XP requirements in half). Interesting side note, data gathered by WOTC shows that D&D games are played almost exclusively from levels 1-7 (Mike Mearls shared that tidbit on a panel discussion). I am experimenting now with 5e but using a slower level advancement (1,000 XP to reach 2nd instead of 300). I found that when playing 5e we would level up every few sessions (1st - 3rd level) and that amped up the power level of the characters so fast they were not proficient in running their characters (new players). Strategy and tactics used by old timers have been pushed aside by the implementation of new class powers and a radically accelerated HP recovery system. Characters are better, but Players are worse. The old game taught you important lessons on how to win a war. The new game makes you a medieval super hero. Superman is strong, bullet proof, and can fly. He didn't have much use for strategy and tactics, he'd just swoop in and punch his way to victory.

Great points! I've found, too, that leveling up is an arms race between the players and the DM. As the players get more powerful, the DM must throw more and more powerful monsters at them. As a consequence, battles can take longer. However, instead of completely reworking D&D -- lowering PC and monster hit points, reducing the damage monsters do, etc. -- wouldn't it just be easier to play a game designed out of the gate to mitigate the leveling "problem"? (You mentioned Dungeon World as an example of this.)

Here's my silver piece: 1) If you use HP caps, I would recommend you also use shieldbreaker rules; basically you can sacrifice a source of AC to get out of hit free. For example, Hicks gets hit with acid and fails his saving throw so instead of dying he invokes shieldbreaker and instead of dying by acid spray he looses his armor. Quicksilver rolls INIT and gets like 8 attacks on Apocalypse, Apocaypse ges to go and in one hit would kill Quicksilver, so instead Quicksilver invokes shieldbreaker rule, and he gets his AC bonus from his speed so the DM interprets it that Apocalypse breaks Quicksilver's leg. You can also allow players to sacrifice weapons, ie their bow is cut, their sword is cut in half. YOu can also let players shieldbreak other things of value like maybe they shieldbreak the 10,000gp diamond. 2) As players get higher in level as the D yo uhave to think more strategically for your NPCs. Technically speaking high level NPCs would also have all the same high level tricks, and years to prepare to defend against them. So IMO you the DM cannot just make things to foil players that is bad DMing,...however all of the NPCs themselves are literally sitting around all the time trying to figure out how to foil adventurers who would steal their stuff. In addition; a DM should never try to foil their players...however, as characters gained reputations across the lands the NPCs would start to hear about them, and could therefore the NPC (not the DM, i fyou see what I mean) would begin to use their abilities to create defenses against those specific adventurers. Pro ti[p: As a DM to sell this to your players, make sure to drop little hints that people are beginning to talk abotu them and their tactics, and give them little hints that they're being watched.

The way I see it, this can be broken down into three *problems:* 1. PCs gain too much HP per level, making them way too hard to kill later on = the game becomes boring. 2. The game becomes too slow at higher levels. 3. PCs get too many too strong utility spells in higher levels, = they can simply circumvent most problems. As for *solutions:* 1. Capping/reducing hit points obviously works, straight forward. But you can also make monsters with damage scaled proportionally to PC HP. This gives the players the nice feeling of bigger numbers; (downside: harder math because bigger numbers). Perhaps, a bit of both would be best. 2. A large part of this problem is only a side effect of problem 1. So solve problem 1 and this should be much less of an issue. More spells and options will make players take longer to think. I think that is fine to a degree. If it becomes too big of a problem, limit the amount of abilities/spells players can have, or simply put a timer on think-time. 3. This is a bit more tricky, I can see multiple things can work together: Design adventures with this in mind; more numerous, greater and more complicated problems where circumventing some of them with these strong spells/abilities becomes a necessity. Give these spells/abilities a higher cost, so they can only be used sparingly, and players will have to think strategically about what problem they want to circumvent, by using up one of these "get out of jail for free" -cards. Give these spells/abilities weaknesses and downsides. You can walk through a wall? Great, but if you roll low, and the wall is too thick, you will be stuck inside it. You can go invisible? Great, but since light then also passes straight through your retina, you will also be blind while invisible. You can read minds? Great, but if that person has some form of deep fear, ptsd, or other mental issue, you have a chance "inherit" it and become afflicted yourself. And if the above still is not enough, maybe you will have to put a stricter limit on the number of these OP spells they can learn. Making their OP-ness not as universal and more limited to specific situations.

Kryptonite was added in the radio show as a mcguffin to give the voice actor a break. It was added to the comics afterwards to solve the problem of invincibility. As to DM’ing higher level games, I prefer running higher end games over lower end games because the players are empowered to pursue goals and go toe to toe with actual problems, shaping the environment by their actions and decisions. It lets the players add to the game rather than just participate in the game. For me, leveling as a system is garbage and adds nothing other than gating access to the “real” story. I’d dump leveling in a heart beat if players didn’t cling to it like it’s the only thing keeping them from drowning (which it probably is). But that’s all my preference. I loved 4e DnD because lvl1 characters were no different from lvl20 characters in play, they just had less flexibility and options to pull from. Guess no one else did, since 4e seems to be the black sheep of the DnD family.

It dawns on me. The "film noir" voice you do; reminds me of the stealth master voice in Neverwinter Nights.

Once again, you've hit the nail on the head for me professor. I'm @ level 7 getting excited for new options & higher HP but I need to adjust my 2 page spread character sheet to maybe 3 pages so I can make use of a quick glance. Also as part of a team afraid of dying with like 60 HP & avoiding risks, a years gone by & we've changed absolutely nothing to the locations across the landscape. Eventually I got sick & had to take a break from the table & missed key moment after investing over a year to see! While recovering from my condition I ran a zero level DCC funnel for my kids and had an absolutely unforgettable time in just 3 sessions! Thanks Professor for not holding back and making this video! Cheers!

In 20+ years of playing, I've only had one character go up to 18th level and it was only because it was a published adventure designed to go that high. My friends and I agree that 3-5 level (and equivalent) is the sweet spot for most RPGs. A high level game can be very gonzo and full of meta-gaming. Players spend too much time thinking about mathematics instead of acting in character.

It's probably a good idea to throw in a lot of crappy minions just to give the illusion that they're rolling over stuff like a power house, a few higher level enemies as a hurdle and then at the end of the dungeon is where you put your brick wall.

I love these videos. I had a lot of ideas myself like “everybody rolls at once” instead of 5e initiative, and a wild magic system I’ve been working on, and I love how you also concur on many of those points, giving me the courage to just go for it and try it out! Thanks professor DM!

One flaw in this reasoning is that as players advance in levels their impact on the world changes and as such so does the fundamental nature of the story. At first level your just trying to get noticed by the king. At tenth level your the king's rival. That's a very different story. 10th level characters are serious power brokers in the world and they have alot to protect. They don't have time for dungeon crawling. They have to deal with the fact that their actions are being watched and many parties are seeking to take their stuff. Sure you can wipe out 100 goblins with ease. But what is the reaction to wiping out those 100 goblins? At low levels you might just go home after and forget about your encounter but at high levels your application of so much naked force has made you enemies. Don't be surprised if the master of those 100 goblins invades your lands soon after.

Started playing Traveller which is skill based. Your character hit points are finite and aren't magically healed so a problem when you get injured. Hand Grenade is likely to cause problems for any character. You don't have levels you have a career. Your character has opportunities to grow but you will never double your hit points ever. Players think a lot harder about engaging in combat. The idea that things have gone terribly sideways when they end up in violent confrontations is prevalent. Players are thoughtful and careful. When they manage to pull off a mission there tends to be a real feeling of accomplishment.

I’ve been contemplating on creating a system very much like “fallout” or “let it die” where there is a health cap but the equipment that they get can boost that health cap. The balance to the boost is that there’s durability to that equipment: once the extended health is gone, so is the equipment and all the bonuses that it gives you. This gives the players tension in every situation that they encounter: after fighting a dragon, goblins might seem like a walk in the park, but what if their equipment breaks? A sword swing from a goblin becomes a threat. That way monsters are disposed of when characters level up and they’re still tense situations with low-level monsters. What are you guys think?

Back-of-the-hand with two fingers up is the English/French "Up yours". It originated from the time the French cut off the first 2 fingers of English longbow archers. History is amazing :)

I really enjoyed the warning to the players! in fact, for a moment I felt immersed. Thanks for the great visuals ; )

10:15 thanks for that die sir. You are a gentleman

Fascinating idea. I may have to do some playtesting. Against the Giants was one of my favorites and I remember my groups being a bit anxious but still more reckless than any sane person in real life would be. The restriction on HP would certainly make even the most foolhardy warrior think twice before barging into the Hill Giant Chieftan's throne room.

Another trick to speeding up combat with big monsters and PCs with tons of hit pts is to use a hit pt track with a counter token. When receiving x hps damage, the DM or player moves the token up x spaces on his hp track until he hits the monster or PC's hp score and is dead or knocked out. This works because counting up is a little easier than doing mental subtraction.

Knowledge bomb! Thanks for this. Very helpful.

I make one shots for certain holidays or because I feel like it that are part of the same world and time as the campaign I run and the results of those one shots effect the normal campaign. For most of them, I have found my self either picking level ranges that avoid the creeping power affect, crating scenarios where combat and player power are not the focus, or designing the characters to be played in the one shot myself, ignoring and adapting any rule as needed and make those characters right around 25hp. Its was nice hearing someone else taking that idea and making it part of a more formal system for regular player characters.

I really like these ideas, as well as your "no more initiative" approach. In your "initiative" video, you said spells and ranged attacks go first, because being a spellcaster is pointless if they go last. But if you use that in combination with the HP cap, then spells can become more powerful, thus worth the delay of gesturing and speaking incantations. I think I would like to try a HP cap of "Double Constitution". In 5E, the max Con score for a PC is 20, meaning the most HPs a PC could possibly have is 40. I'll use your "no initiative" rules, but have spells go last. Instead of half damage for spells, I'll reduce it by 1/3. So a Fireball spell would round down to 5d6. Even though spells go off after ranged and melee attacks, their lethality should compensate. Thanks for the great ideas!

"It's going to become _too difficult_ to come up with scenarios to challenge your players." I object to that statement. I'm pretty sure I can take a single 5e Rakshasa, and kill an entire party of 15th level characters. It'll just take a week or two, and the collateral damage will probably wipe out a local town. It's a really simple plan too. Use invisibility to sneak in and just prick some commoner's arm with a claw in the middle of the night. Use invisibility again to escape undetected. Bam, cursed, no resting. Do this again and again until adventurers are called in to investigate the cause of the "Nightmare Plague". When the party shows up, the cleric will probably use up any Remove Curse spells they had prepared on curing some of the afflicted. Now the trap is set, one _scratch_ on that cleric and they *don't get* any more remove curse spells until someone else casts one on them. They're also going to die of exhaustion in a week without one. From here it's all hit and run. The Rakshasa has invis 3/day and plane shift 1/day. Pinning that bastard down is going to be a nightmare, especially when your cleric can't benefit from short or long rests. Also, I ran a single campaign of 2e exalted for a _decade_ playing every other week. By the end the PCs were Solars with well over two thousand XP, but even the last session came very close to the party failing in their goals. The trick to challenging a high level party is a combination of a few things. 1) Use monsters _intelligently._ Nothing with an int score over 8 should fight to the death if it has a choice. (obvious exception for protecting offspring and the like) It should _try_ to escape and come back with a plan. Players _HATE_ monsters who make hit-and-run attacks. I call your attention to Tucker's Kobolds(media.wizards.com/2014/downloads/dnd/TuckersKobolds.pdf). Kobolds, _fucking Kobolds_ Shredding a tenth level party through clever play. 2) realizing that _combat isn't always the answer._ It's not "can you kill the monster?" It's "At what cost?" You don't just throw one adventure at a time at the party, you throw four, but they only have the _time_ to handle one of them, _maybe_ two if they really really push themselves. You don't deny them chances to rest, you apply enough time pressure that _they decide_ they can't afford to rest.

This is... GLORIOUS!!! Praises to the sun! Just what I needed to do my next Sword and Sorcery campaign feel deadly and fast paced with combats.

I use really really slow advancement. That way leveling up is a huge deal. Also, I still use goblins and orcs at high levels but I use the rule s for fighting them as troops. So they become very dangerous as a troop and the fights are quick.

Love the idea of capping hit points! For higher level characters, I always resorted to situations they couldn't solve with violence. Problem solving, convincing NPCs to take action, or huge battles where they aren't in any danger (ie Aragon at Pelennor Fields) but their allies can still get wiped out.

I would suggest looking up E6 which was come up for 3.5/pathfinder era DnD to solve the scaling issue (also helps with power level scaling in general). Throw in incantations (Variant rule from Unearthed Arcana) or something like that, and then you can still have your world changing magics, but they can be quests in and of themselves to do, instead of a x times a day ability. Was something I was looking at doing for a campaign some years back and wish I had done that instead of normal progression.

Absolutely right professor. I ran into the same exact problem back in the 90’s when I had a level 16 cleric who had a ridiculous amount of HP. The game lost a lot of flavor because I could just run into any kind of danger with no worry of being seriously injured or killed. I Recently decided to cap HP at level 4 with my current party based on this most brilliant suggestion by you, at first they weren’t very happy about the thought of it but after I explained the thought process both from my own & your experience they acquiesced. I also pointed out that this logic was also successfully applied to the TV series Game of Thrones. I think one of the reasons why it was so popular was it’s ability to raise the anxiety level of the viewer given the fact that any one major character that they had become attached to may get killed off at any moment. This same logic needs to apply to the game as well otherwise we have nothing invested in it & it becomes bland & pointless.

I was thinking of ways to do this in my first campaign (stagnate leveling) because I truly hate higher level "other-wordly" monsters. I want a survival-based mind game as opposed to a high magic epic fantasy which seems to me less immersive because they're SOOO absurd!

I have many mixed thoughts after seeing this for the first time, which makes this a good video from Dungeon Craft

I have still to watch all your videos, though I am trying. I have been searching for a way to reduce the high drag of power leveling. The reduced hp option is a good idea, but I think it requires a lot of trust between players and the DM. What I mean, is in a VTT, I often run into players I have never played with before, especially in one shots. I have been a DM for decades and it is wonderful to still be able to learn from other DM's how to manage their games. I really enjoy your content and ideas. Admittedly I don't agree with all, but they still provide ideas and insights that I would not otherwise have. Thanks Professor.

THANK YOU! I think this idea is long overdue in level based rpgs. The earliest I can recall this idea was in the Arduin Grimoire system. The system based hit points on racial stock plus constitution score, plus constitution bonus, plus a set bonus per level that ranged from 1-5 depending on class.

Watching these early videos of yours is like listening to my own issues with the game, only better expressed and with video skills. I may just find the beginning and binge watch.

You are so awesome. I base all my games off your advice and it works.

I watched a video with B Dave Walter a while back in which he defends high level D&D. He made some very interesting points. The one that stuck out to me was that high level play is all about morality. At 20th level your character has the power to solve ANY problem but not EVERY problem. To GM a high level game you have to give the players several problems at the same time and force them to choose which one they want to fix. Does superman choose to save Lois Lane or the train car full of strangers. This isn't the way I would want to play D&D all the time but it is something that is fun to occasionally explore (assuming all the players are experienced and know their characters well so that they can take a turn in a reasonable amount of time).

One of my House rules is to divide all new HP gained past the 2nd level by 2, created out of the same concerns explained in the video. Its not as hard a solution as a fixed cap, but it helps. In 5th edition many monsters have already been toned down, except for Dragon's breath which is still ridiculously high imo. And monsters are not a concern, because you can always have another join the fray if its too easy or have a 2nd wave/encounter moments later, or the opposite, if its too hard have them roll a perception to notice that the monster is already wounded with wounds they didn't cause, the creature was wounded from a previous encounter(with someone other than PCs) or runs away for an unknown reason (warn the master, get rid of evidence, etc).

Counterargument to the HP solution: go the other way. As the characters gain HP, increase the damage of the monsters AND the players accordingly! Now the goblins (or other generic enemies) are dealing 3d6 per attack, instead of one. Instead of more attacks or more enemies, just make the numbers bigger! This still keeps the scaling closer, but the bigger numbers make the players FEEL powerful, and like the monsters are actually challenging.

Just finding your channel...great stuff. In my experience(35+yrs) rarely do groups/campaigns/players reach high level play. Someone moves away, wants to switch characters, the DM wants to play vs run the game, etc. So what I started doing as far back as 3rd edition is to make the lower levels last longer. I triple the XP progression for levels 1-3 and double the xp for levels 4-6, then XP as normal. The first few levels are so much fun, but they fly by. This way the "new car smell" lasts longer and the players love it. This has an added benefit in that there is much less meta gaming/optimizing going on, as class builds matter less than player choice.

This is a fantastic idea, and I think many commenters here are missing an important point. By limiting HP totals but not special abilities and magic spells and stuff, you still get to have the amazing 20th level plane hopping adventure and become gods. You just only have 20 hp while doing so and could actually die, or finish a combat in less than one session.

There’s a sweet spot around level 3-6 where everything makes sense and the game plays the best. I’m 100% OSR but I have great respect for the E6 concept.

With the example of the Private vs Sargent the difference would be ability to react and avoid the blast all together. So good example of having ability rather than more HP.

I largely agree. Something else I'll do as DM is have a monster deal a fraction of HP on hits with an according saving throw, instead of a straight dice number. (E.g. a Giant hit knocks ½ HP down, or ¼ on CON save). This keeps saving throws relevant in direct combat, but avoids bookkeeping while also maintaining (or improving) the threat level.

Leveling up still allows for a greater variety of monsters that you are able to fight.

@8:02 when someone shouts “grenade” the green recruit freezes, the grizzled veteran hits the floor

Hey PDM! May I please point out, you are THE BEST for advice on DMing I have come across. You take the time to explain things in such detail, a NOOB DM like my self can follow along(for the most part) I have played just 2 sessions of DND in my 40 years of existence. The DM at that table was a new DM (those two sessions were his first two as DM and only two sessions we got to play before the game fell apart) I loved the experience so much, I decided to play DM for another table of NOOBS. I am pumped up and terrified to play. I have a pretty good idea what NOT to do. I am watching all your videos and stealing SO MUCH! Thank you for putting such effort into your content. I appreciate you.

So funny. You really should take a look at Midgard the Fantasy Roleplay (actually in its 5th edition, first release in 1981. It's the first german RPG. And of course written in german.). The concept of Hitpoints are split in Lifepoints (which will almost never change, no matter if you're level 1 or level 20) and Endurancepoints (which will level up.) There is no armor-class. When been attacked a character rolls a parry roll against the attack roll. If he succeeds, the damage is only subtracted from the endurancepoints. If he looses, the damage ist also subtracted from the lifepoints. With zero endurancepoints you're exhausted and everything gets more difficult. Endurancepoints are also needed for using magic. A character can loose endurancepoints by exhaustion through harsh cold, hunger, long marshes etc.

I saw a system where every time the character's leveled up they would roll a new hit die and IF that die was HIGHER than their current HP, they could "swap up" to the larger die. They also didn't use CON for hp but did use a CON bonus. It was weird seeing a 5th level fighter with 12 hp but it worked. They did, however, have a "defense" system where both combatants rolled a D20 against a given target number (AC for the attacker and 10 + HD/LVL for the defender with all 5e bonuses applying) and the defender's roll over the target number (if any) was subtracted from the attacker's roll to see if the attacker could penetrate the target's "defense" and score damage. It was an interesting system for "dueling."

I got into TTRPGs with Steve Jackson's first RPG The Fantasy Trip. In that game your hp was between about 8-16 and weapons usually dished out 1-3 d6 points of damage. It didn't matter how high of a level you were, if you got jumped by bandits there was always that sinking feeling you might not make it out alive.

Good discussion Professor. I think the addition hp gain by level are just luck and skill additions, but the characters initial hp is their to hit to kill. In fighting and damage from adventuring they can use all their full hp, but if they do something outside of skill and luck, then only their initial hp stands. For example if the player says his character jumps off a 300 foot cliff, their is no luck to save them because they chose to jump and no fighting/adventuring skill can save them. So for a fighter they only have 1 d8 hp in this case. The same is if they were asleep or paralyzed. This would prevent a character from saying I will let the Orc slash at me without defending because I have 80 hp. In this case no skill or luck is used, so it would only be 1d8 hp and if the damage is greater than that the character would be dead.

Very thought-provoking! 20 hp maximum, that kind of blows my mind! Definitely good ideas to consider!

I've been a GM for 40 years. 3rd ed was a mixed blessing. everything was given exponentially more health. my method for char has- 1st lvl, max hp with con bonus. each additional lvl, add con bonus + 1. characters will have a limited improvement, but not become a tank or meat shield. this method means a con of 8 or more will maintain hp or improve, but even a con of 20 will only have a character gain a max of 6hp per lvl. ie; fighter with con 14 makes 2nd lvl. base hp 12 (base 10+2 con) will add 3 (1+2 con) or 15hp at 2nd lvl. the char has improved, but 5 goblins will still be a challenge.

Level 5 is the sweet spot. For my one shots I tell players to roll average HP, they get one +1 weapon. They're somewhat heroic but a dragon is still a threat. Theres enough class abilities and spells but not too many to bog the game down. I've been using the low HP high Damage monster model to speed up encounters while making them more dangerous creating more tension and less boredom. The Professor is spot on on all his advice. I'm going to try more of these pacing tricks my next session.

I love all his dungeon craft videos!

This is one of the great things about games like Traveller. The PCs start competent And only slowly improve and generally in areas where they weren’t already good rather than becoming the best in the galaxy at something.

I'm running a game right now and they wanted to begin as high leveled characters. I cannot agree more with you. Having to think of all the possible ways they can just ignore your traps, blow entire hordes of enemies without even bothering or just teleport away from the things you created for them may make the game more fun to them because they feel powerful, but gives the DM some serious headaches. And that's not the point of rol games, the DM should have fun too. He's not working for them, they're all playing this together. I will definitely try that no more hit points solution and see how it goes.

I've always been good at leveling up an adventure to deal with stronger parties.... And the problem with long combat rounds is easy to deal with. I worked out a system where a 9 player + DM game with 15th level average characters took less then 20 min per combat round. You just have t get it thrugh to the players... Say this slowly: "A COMBAT ROUND IS 6 SECONDS" That statement took 6 seconds... I will not give you 5 minutes each to decide what to do in 6 seconds.

But seeing numbers go up makes my brain release the good chemicals

Pretty much everything you said is why I love Dungeon World. It has a leveling system that allows characters to improve, but HP doesn't change. This really takes the cuffs off of DMs since level 1 characters could conceivably beat a dragon and level 10 characters could conceivably be killed by goblins. But it also maintains that aspect of leveling up that RPG players love because as you level you get new moves and your skills improve.

I’m interested to try this low HP concept. One fix I can think of for game breaking magic is to just have player roll a very high DC to use things like stone shape and dimension door. That way you aren’t ripping away their powerful spells, but instead the magical nature of dungeon or another enemy magic user makes their lives more difficult. As for high HP players, you can always make monster hit like a truck. I do understand that a player having 7 hit points and the monster rolling 2d6, is functionally the same as a player having 50 hit points and the monster damage being 8d6. But, rolling lots of dice can be really fun for the players, and on the flip side, rolling something crazy like 8d12 for a monster’s damage really freaks the players out.

Man, your channel is pure gold!!!! You are simply addressing all the problems that made me run away from D&D. I'm loving your ideas. That said, I think you should really check out these other games that have already solved this issue: Savage Worlds, Cypher System and Fate. If you already know these games, I'd love to know if and why you have disliked them. Cheers!

This is why I run OSR (B/X with the d20 mechanic stuck on) with a level cap of 6. At level 6, Fighters can withstand immense punishment. Wizards throw fireballs and lightning bolts. Rogues backstab foes and slay them in a single hit. Clerics can reduce undead enemies to ash, heal grievous wounds, and beseech their deity for answers. Giants, dragons, vampires, etc should *always* be terrifying foes.

Never had this problem with my high level games, I just finished a campaign that made it to level 17 and far from being indestructible they were still struggling to survive, at least one of the players would make a death save in any serious combat, and sure they were fighting high level monsters, sure, but they were also fighting people, in one battle they were up against 10 high level wizards who were trying to destroy Earth Heart using earthquake spells and other uber magic, the wizards were relatively squishy but the trouble was that the city could only stand so long, in order to save it they had to figure out a way of efficiently chaining their attacks so as to take them out before the city fell, and they only just managed it (half the city was gone but it was better than losing the entire thing). I love running high level games because I can use the entire monster manual, I also invent a lot of insane creatures that would just beast a low level party in the first rounds. You can really let loose with Epic Fantasy at high level.

Interesting. I'm a pretty new DM, with an only hours newer group. Once we get a bit more comfortable with the system as a whole, I think I'll start adopting this system.

This is especially true in D&D and other games that have a significant increase in power when leveling. All that power also effects the types of stories you can run in addition to making fights take longer.

With a cap on hp like that it sure makes spells like false life a lot more useful.

Interesting. GURPS characters usually have what amounts to around 9 to 15 h.p., which rarely change even as they gain experience. Skills and advantages are what keep them from getting hit. Death is usually a distinct possibility (although not nearly as likely as people think). The whole “leveling up” trap is mostly a non-issue.

This is the best thing I ever saw.

I am currently running a game using the AGE system. It also has a pretty bad health bloat but the character progression in my opinion is pretty good because they don't become super over powered they just get better at what they do as you might expect from killing tons of monsters. Instead of health every level I said you only get a D6 of health if you put a point into CON and this kept the health relatively low and made the characters focus on armor and stuff which is what it's there for after all.

I give out very few experience points. It slows players down. As a DM since 1980 or so I can think of only 2 times that we went past 10th level. My kids 1st campaign just ended a few weeks ago. It lasted 4 years and they maxed out at level 20. That is the only time I have ever DM that high. Wow crazy stuff. I figured hey why not. I let them do pretty much anything. I had this cool magic shop run by a bald guy named Mordenkainen, you might have heard of him. And he would buy and sell anything...Anything(no artifacts). So my kids had really cool stuff. the last battle killed 3 of the 5. But 3 were brought back to life. Now we are playing a gritter campaign very much like Prof DM here. Super slow progression is the key I think. I have also only played in 2 campaigns above 10th level. I tend to believe that 3-7 levels are the sweet spot. Tough enough to do some stuff but still vulnerable.

It's brilliant to hear your rather different perspective on DMing. Very inspiring. My current 5e d&d session has been going for almost 2 years (we play avg. 1-2/month, each session 2-3 hours), players are at level 12 and still having lots of fun. Nonetheless their last battle in a hollow tower with spiraling platforms against a Shamanic Troll Matriarch and her three daughters did last about 3 hours. We also unfortunately have to play online since players are in three different countries, so we use Fantasy Grounds. This does speed up things like taking care of initiative, but slows other things like applying effects and taking damage (also because we've not come around to use the targeting system effectively). Do you have any experience RPing online? I think a lot of what you have suggested in this and other videos can be applied to online sessions to great extent.

Yes! I recognized this as a player about a decade and a half ago, seeing that as levels went up, it was less about creative problem solving, and more about resource and inventory management. Then a friend of mine got a 3rd ed splat book for running horror style games. I can't remember the name (Darkness and Dread, maybe? I remember it was green; is that helpful?) The book recommended making hit points equal to constitution score plus level, multiplied by size, with medium size being a multiplier of 1. I saw this and thought "Oh wow; this sounds awesome! We should play like this all the time!" But my friends thought I was a glutton for punishment, or something, and we never played using those rules.

What about capping hit points as you suggested, but allowing players to increase their baseline AC by the to-hit bonus when they level up, similar to the defense bonus rule in 3.5. This prevents hit pt inflation and fixes the oversight in D&D rules where players get better at hitting opponents when they level up but not better at defending themselves with parries, blocks, dodging, etc.

This is brilliant.

I just found this video, and I love it. I usually cap my campaigns to level 10th... cuz I hate Higher level tiers due to players making more the Maths than truly playing the game as mentioned in one of the comments posted here. I believe capping the HP to a maximum like 20 HP probably help to keep the game interesting, but may be a bit overwhelming for the players. I haven't read XDM, ICRPG and Dungeonworld (but definetely need to get them.), so I don't know if this variant rule for HP have been mentioned there or in comments posted, but here it goes: What about..giving the players hit points 1st level as stated in the PHB D&D5E...say full HP+Con modifier, but at the following levels...they only get 1 HP + Con Modifier. Monsters apply the same rule to balance the scale. Say..an Orc with 2 HD get full HP+Con modifier on his first HD, and second HD he only gets 1 HP+Con modifier. This rule may speed up combat and also add some lethal-ity to the game. Guess I'll give it a try with a testing mini-campaign

Professor, I hear you loud and clear. I’m currently running an ADnD 1e campaign for mid-high Lvl PCs - 7-10th. It is very challenging to create scenarios that truly test them. I have thrown around the concept of capping hp and such but feel that punishes the players. I find I am best served by giving opponents exceptional, spell(like), and supernatural abilities that the PCs either have no access to in order to create the desired sense of danger. For instance, the Evil Temple causes good aligned clerics and paladins to operate as though they are X levels lower or certain spells such as curing are impossible. Magical wild or dead zones that nullify or dampen spell abilities and magic items. The environment can be a nearly undefeatable foe if the party finds itself stranded or separated.

This is sorta why I like the looks of WFRP 4e. I haven't actually gotten to try it out yet with a group, but the character advancement is a lot simpler and gradual, and characters don't really turn into omnipowerful demigods with hundreds of hitpoints and reality breaking spells. Rather than "leveling up" and gaining a bunch of stuff at once, players simply upgrade specific skills or characteristics one at a time with their exp. Plus it feels more natural than just suddenly gaining a whole bunch of stuff all at once, feels more like a proper progression of becoming better at what you do, one skill at a time.

The Talislanta fantasy rpg has a set number of hit points that never changes. Characters or mosters, and it's been around since 1987

I can see the hit point cap, there is the White Wolf/Onxy Path Storyteller system where characters only have seven health boxes that get ticked off based on type of damage and rules for how quickly you can heal that damage. I also see the limits on health with the BESM games. Both of those game systems, you earn experience points that can be spent on increasing attributes, skills and powers.

Gloomhaven has an interesting solution to this problem. The game forces you to retire your character and start a new one once they have achieved their objective in life. That way, the party stays at a low level throughout the campaign. On the other hand, they offset this by having a higher starting level for new characters depending on how 'prosperous' the world is at large...

thank you for this video. Perhaps a video on tips to make it easier running highly intelligent and deadly monsters at high level (if you haven't already:). Such as knowing weaknesses in your party. I have a group that attacks first and asks questions later currently at 6th level. It's fun for me to challenge them with higher level thinking. They were fighting an high level illusion until almost all spells were exhausted. Also, we use digital assistance with rolls so rolling 8d6 takes no additional time compared to rolling 2d6.

I really like a lot of what you have to say. Have you considered publishing a compilation of your rules? If you did, I know I'd be willing to put down some money to acquire it.

I have not played DnD in a very very very long time, being on Dark Heresy (wh40k rpg) for around 12-14 years. But the idea I had to simply modify the rules was, a 20 didn't make much difference on your dice damages. Instead, these were constitution damage, representing avery bad or critical hit, and a character reaching 0 constitution would die. So it made every combat with a chance that a 20 would roll very violent damages on the opponent, big monsters often one-shotting players in such a situation, while lesser creatures would still inflicts a lot of damage (A D12 +2 orc would still wreck the day of most characters). Anyway, it was an idea, but I've been too far from DnD for too long to analyse if there are other problems with such a system.

Excellent informative videos. I think Gygax came to the same conclusion when developed Lejendary Adventures around 20 years ago.

You could leave the hit points as they are and have the monsters do a certain amount of damage as the characters get higher in level. Example: characters now have approximately 100 HP, but every hit from an opponent does 10 damage, period. That's only 10 hits and the characters go down. It gives the players the illusion of leveling up their HP while leaving the actual number there for them to survive all the traps they have to endure before getting to the actual monsters. Anyway, the damage could always be 10% of the characters' HP, or an eighth, or quarter, etc. I find myself disagreeing with a lot of your advice, but I keep coming back for more videos because I respect you as a fellow DM and I like your content and usually end up with more ideas as a result. You've actually inspired me to create an added form of currency in my game - to debase the metals of the coins like the Romans did to make the gold value higher. So now there are nickel-brass and bronze coins long before the copper coins come into play, and the copper coins in my game seem to be at a value equal to the gold coins in regular D&D. While I have prices of food, clothing and housing in values of nickel-brass, bronze and copper, everything else remains on the gold standard to make everything a lot more expensive, but gold is more rare and the wealthy are using copper while only the super elite use silver. It's been fun so far.

Another way to fix the power creep is to make the monsters similar in strength, but more powerful monsters have cooler/more dangerous special abilities, like how as a player's wizard character gets more levels they would get more spells, but to avoid fourth edition slogging each creature has one easy to explain abilities

Another of your hacks I am almost certainly going to be implementing. Thank's Prof!

At or around 4:30 Professor Dungeonmaster says that Superman was created in 1933. While it is true that "Reign of the Superman" was published in January 1933, the character bears no resemblance to Superman, who was first published in June 1938. Both versions were created or co-created by Jerry Siegel. The next statement at about 5:00 was that Kryptonite was first seen in 1949 as a way to make Superman weaker is not correct, or at least Kryptonite was first introduced years beforehand. "K-metal" was suggested in 1940 but the comic that would have introduced it was rejected and unpublished. Kryptonite, as we know it, made its first appearance in the radio drama serial of Superman in June 1943 as a way to give the voice actor a way to take some time off from the show. Kryptonite was not seen in the comic books until Novemember 1949.

Well, pretty new around here but have played D&D all the way back to the point that there is a comb bound silver copy of Chainmail in my "archives" box. A lot of what you say here is very very true. During a wile that I was playing much more MMO than table top my friend players used to grief me because I tended to play low levels way more than "end game." As long as your playing level appropriately, low levels were much more "action packed" where as at high level the choice was a cake walk or a half hour (or more) of the same repetition of actions. In table top role play very little of the role play actually depends on level anyway. I would say however that since you have been "winging it" for a very long time you have an intuitive sense of what you want to happen and how to manipulate rolls to make it happen. I'm not going to call that a crutch because clearly it's more of a super power but it's just not an ability that is shared as the norm. I can't help but feel (from watching many of your videos over the past 2ish weeks) that what you play is no specific game and really pretty game independent. You've mentioned that your players don't read or own rule books in other videos and really that is because the rule books are inside your head. It's pointless to read the players handbook knowing that 40%-80% of it is invalid. The more I watch and understand how you do what you do the more I think that what you do is actually a massive amount of work. It might not feel as massive to you as it actually is because it is natural to you. Not natural as in automatic but natural as in it originated in your head so given the same circumstances you will come to the same resolutions. And just to be clear, I'm not kicking at your style. Your players must like it, you appear to be good with it, and as a player I am I'm sure likely to as well. But it all hangs off you. The rules exist for someone who does not have a natural sense of it all.

Fortunately, I'm gifted in that I can do math really fast, so I don't have to worry about this hit point thing TOO much; what I have to worry about is the SHEER NUMBER of character abilities and keeping track of what each one does exactly, especially spells.

Like the channel. OTOH, you don't tell people what is going to be talked about until we're a minute into the video. Brevity is the soul of wit - William Shatner

Mathematical "HP control" is important but that's just one of the solutions. There's other schools of thought, like : Limit rest/healing unless you're out of the "dungeon". This solution is better for games that are more geared toward exploration like a multi-party Megadungeon or living world, where your levelling up HP means you can go "deeper" before needing to head back to fully heal up. Fundamentally it's the same algebra.

First - Great videos as always ( and man, those minis ! ) How ever, as good advice this is. ( I personally never even bothered to play or DM high level adventures, for exact reason ) - What you propose would require extensive homebrewing from spells, monsters, weapons, items ... Everything is linked to this failed levelup system. Only actual alternative is using new systems that actually removed levels all together ( or considerably toned them down ) Like Cypher, Dungeon World, Tiny RPG ... etc

I level up the monsters to keep combat moving. The PCs can't just assume that the Goblin has 3HP. He could be a level 8 Rogue. A pair of flanking Goblin Rogues can do a lot of damage very quickly. Give a War Troll the Awesome Blow feat. Not only does it do massive damage, now the PC is flat on their back. Leaving them open to more damage. Spellcasting is where it gets tricky, but there are only three of us, so I can tailor an opposing caster for the party spell slinger.

In my current campaign Pathfinder 2e I'm experimenting with hit points for Ancestry 0 level (P2e rules), Class level 1, then rolling for hit points every second level and maxing at level 9 [0, 1, 3, 5, 7, 9]. Instead of using the Pathfinder Bestiary I use the D&D monster manual as the same monster is slightly weaker then tweak as needed. We'll see how it goes. If the party is too weak they are encouraged to hire a meat shield to fill out the group a bit. Funny how the hirelings always die during play :).

Hi. I subscribed a few days ago and have watched a number of your videos. I like your style and a lot of your ideas. I disagree with you about leveling, though and I guess that means I disagree with alot of so-called professionals too. Just so you know where I'm coming from: I started playing D&D when I was around 12 and I am now 51. I went through the whole "Satanic Panic" thIng back in the 80's with my parents coming out on the panic side. Over the years I've played at least 7 or so versions of the game, not counting other RPGs at which I've tried my hand. I'm a big fan of the DC Heroes RPG from the 80' & 90's, but I digress. I've DM'd/ GM'd alot of that time, mainly because the other players were too lazy to take their turn, as well as because I love the creative aspects of the game, especially creating unique monsters, NPCs and magic items and just GMing in general. I got into the RPGA with the Living Greyhawk, back during 3rd ed and 3.5. I think that Pathfinder generally improved the game even more, all though I didn't get it at the time. I managed to skip the so-called 4th ed version. Through it all I've run several long term campaigns where the player started out at 1st lvl and we played until they were all well beyond 20th. Mostly, with adventures I created, but also with many purchased materials. I ran the Blood Stone Pass adventures, and NightMare Keep, and still own the adventures. Yes, I've seen how power creep can be annoying, and how it can be difficult to challenge high level characters. BUT, it can be done, and let me tell you, if you really don't like killing your PCs, then there's nothing like a high level campaign to let you cut loose as a DM. Ever ran an Advanced Paragon Tarasque? A creature that was so big you had to use your gem bag for the stand in? It's a lot of fun. Setting traps where a Great Wyrm blue dragon clings spider climbed and invisible to the ceiling of his monstrous cavern, out of range of detect magic and see invisible, and most vission and light sources, only to have him levitate down behind the party and bounce his breath weapon so it hits every one in the part twice? BTW, I've only ever had one TPK, and that was because everyone failed their save verus a 1st ed fireball. I quickly changed that around, and made it so they were all affected by a Phantasmal Force spell, or some other illusion. I was only about 16 at the time. Yet, I've had players comeback time after time for those high level adventures. I admit, I do like a heroic, or maybe even super heroic style of play. I see my PCs, not as ordinary John & Jan Doe's, but as legends in the making. The Odysses, Achilies and even Hercules of my champaigns. Once upon a time, I even allowed some of my players to attain Demi-god status in my campaigns. My greatest disappointments through all these years are two fold: One, that I, myself, have never been allowed to play a character to such heights. 16 level is about as high as I've ever had another DM run a campaign or adventure. They all just give up because it becomes challenging and, I guess they don't feel as much in control of their game. And Two, that having lived mostly in small towns, it is a constant battle to find enough people with which to play regular games, especially these days when it seems so popular everywhere else.

In my pathfinder campaign I run hp as this. Their hp (wound points) are equal to their constitution. Every level they get vitality points that is determined by their class. In combat weapon damage goes against their vitality points once those are depleted the damage goes to their wound points. The major difference is that critical hits don’t do extra damage that damage goes directly to there wound points at 0 wound points they become unconscious. I actually got this from an old d20 Star Wars rpg.

I love the think other ideas.... I will test them soon.. :)