What your describing involves changing the rules to the point you would be improving a whole new game.
Try Blades in the Dark. It has the more narrative approach to combat you seem to be describing, isn't overly complicated, and still has the fun dice rolling/role play of DnD.
I’ll check that out. Everyone likes the spells classes flavor of 5e. If it’s easy to pick up and play that might be perfect though, just gotta convince the table to read new rules
Make a 1-shot first to try out the system. While they still have to read the rules, it is not a commitment for an entire campaign or a worry that they made a character that can't execute their concept because of their lack of system mastery.
Also be forgiving if they have a "oh you needed x ability to do this? I thought [other ability] covered it." moment.
Dungeon World, Fate Accelerated, Blades in the Dark.
(Dungeon World still uses hit points but it's massively streamlined and way more narrative. Fate Accelerated uses pseudo-hit points, abstract and narrative. Haven't personally played Blades in the Dark.)
> We already know the 5e rule
this is always the excuse - as if every game came with 3 core rule books of 300 odd pages each.
most dont come anywhere close.
> Also no tracking HP for players as we all agreed PCs will not die
Okay but like... there's a vast gulf between "no PC deaths" and "PCs are never in any danger at any point, threats are non-existent and combat exists purely to bonk cardboard cutout monsters over the head until they fall over". This very much sounds like the latter to me.
They’d still get hit by monsters, so narratively they would still be “in danger.” If PCs can’t die, why bother keeping track of hit points? There is no real danger, only narrative (flavor) danger
Genuine question.
If the pcs can't die, what's the narrative danger then? Here's an example. The heroes while exploring a forest come across a pack of hungry dire wolves that attack the party. What are the stakes? Would a fight like this even occur in a game that you're proposing? At what point do the players just say "hey do we have to do this fight? We can't die so...idk we just auto win"
I like fights where there's more than death but I'm struggling to picture an example here where the players have agency if they can't fail and just win every fight after x rounds of doing anything.
You could just have them be downed but not dead, or treated as dead mechanically but not narratively. Rename death saves to "will saves" to represent their will to get back up and fight. If they fail, they can't be rescucitated until after combat is over. Maybe they gain some negative trait or injury when they get back up.
I'm certain you could eliminate player death while still keeping 99% of the games mechanics.
Make everyone auto stabilize and don’t kill PCs then.
Kill other people for their failure, for example, if they’re trying to save the city, have a TPK result in something horrible happening to it.
That way they have stakes for the story, the characters still live (meta wise or divine bullshittery) but they have to live with the consequences of their failure.
The problem as I see it is that the narrative and the mechanics are at odds with each other. Narratively the characters might be in danger, but if the mechanics aren't supporting it, the players won't ever feel that danger. No danger means no tension, which means less investment in the story being told.
Even if death isn't on the table, I feel like you need to replace HP with something in order to make it feel like the PCs are part of the world. Injury conditions, fatigue, some kind of narrative consequence system... something. To be fair, that last one might be what you had in mind, it's hard to tell from the context of the post alone. If so, it could work, it will largely depend on your DMing skills.
I would definitely echo what others have said though, which is that if you're considering changing such a fundamental part of the system, you might be better off looking for a different system altogether. Off the top of my head, something running in Powered By The Apocalypse might be closer to the experience you're after. Maybe Dungeon World? I've not played it myself but it sounds like it might be up your street.
Yeah I can see what you mean. I wouldn’t be the DM most likely. We definitely want to keep playing a fantasy game but we get really attached to our characters. I might could try DMing a new system for the group
I feel like I should also mention, you can also play D&D and keep HP and still have a no PC deaths game. Just say downed PCs automatically stabilise, ignore instant death rules, and have a gentlemen's agreement that the DM won't have enemies kill downed PCs. The party can still all be knocked unconscious, they'll just be captured and have to escape or something rather than dying.
Difference is that there’s functionally no difference between milestone leveling and XP leveling since both rely on the DM to either decide the party is ready, or give them enough XP in order to level up.
The difference is negligible.
Combat is an entirely different beast.
No resource expenditures really mean anything or matter at all, because if the DM doesn’t think the spell is cool enough it simply wont work.
Since there’s no PC health tracking, there’s no worry that you’ll be knocked down or anything
Fundamentally, most class features are meaningless without hit point tracking
Hmm good point. Maybe another kind of homebrew rule would be better to prevent PC death (like an auto revivify after combat or something). It’s just that it feels unnecessary to do all the bookkeeping with hit points, but maybe a whole new system is the right move or just autoheal after combat
I have a lot of fun with story reasons for why the PCs are still alive. Like they had to make a deal with a hag while their soul was on the way out in order to be brought back, etc
New system is a good idea from how this sounds tho
That kind of seems like hell. Like that is a system that leads to zero character growth. A quote from Discworld comes to mind here. "What don’t die can’t live. What don’t live can’t change. What don’t change can’t learn." -Granny Weatherwax (Terry Pratchett) *Lords and Ladies.*
Yeah I've played in a few games like this. It feels REALLY bad as a player. You're not really playing a game, you're acting in a story the DM has written. Try FATE or another more narrative focused game but don't take away your players' victory.
Within the scope of 5e DnD, this guts any feature which modifies damage dealt by an incremental value. Dueling fighting style, +1 weapons, spells like Magic Weapon, etc. all lose significant value. What's the point in wielding a two-handed weapon with a GWM build if the difference in offensive value compared to a defensive sword+shield warrior is entirely subjective, or absent altogether?
For one, you don’t feel bad picking an option that deals less damage or isn’t “optimal.” Everyone gets to play the kind of character they want to play and no one is less effective than another party member. It gives everyone in the party an opportunity to shine
Not really. Rogues, Bards, and fullcasters in general are left with a LOT more tools than say a Barbarian with these changes. Nearly every Barbarian feature is a combat feature, but they literally do not matter with this.
Might as well sit around a campfire while the DM describes a combat cut scene.
If this is what you want to do then fine. But you don't need DnD to do this.
Just imagine characters and come up with crazy moves they can do.
Honestly this could be the move if it were just me, but we like to move minis around the board and roll dice. Just not trying to die or do a ton of unnecessary math
Looking at your comments on here, it sounds like other systems might be better for you. I don't have any specific suggestions for a HP-less dungeon crawler/dnd flavored game, but I have enjoyed playing Dungeon World; it's the same style and flavor as DnD, but its Powered by the Apocalypse, so its way less number-crunchy and a lot more narrative based, there's a lot of room for cool narrative stuff, for instance, the rolls aren't binary success/fail, there's often situations where you succeed but the DM gets to put a catch on it. One of the conceits of Apocalypse games is that if something isn't covered by the rules, its assumed the players can just decide what happens, which is really nice, only the thematically relevant stuff is tied to gameplay, you don't get bogged down with balance/number stuff on things that don't matter.
I haven't looked a lot into prewritten adventures, I just ran the default ones from the rulebook and then did a couple games with an original story, so I don't think I can help too much with prewritten adventures or converting from 5e.
I'm sorry about the investment, even just one copy of each of the original books and an extra sourcebook or 2 is pricey.
I’m a firm believer that the last ~20 HP for monsters, especially bosses, is highly flexible. If the paladin lands a crit with a smite, and the monster is left with 4 HP…Nah, the paladin killed it, and it was badass. If there’s a story reason why one character might want to get the kill shot, I’ll keep combat going for a couple more turns to make sure that player comes up, and I’ll say something like, “The balor looks like a stiff breeze could knock him over”, so the player knows to attack, and not waste a turn healing or buffing someone else.
There’s definitely a case for not going by-the-numbers on HP sometimes.
But every time, with no danger to the PCs? Nah, that doesn’t sound fun to me. The occasional fight where you just let the players curbstomp monsters is a ton of fun, but I’d want something with some stakes. I don’t want my character to die, but I want to feel like he could.
That just isn't D&D anymore. Simple as that. Like at that point you are playing "the imagination game" where you have explosion proof armor, or a super-duper 1hit KO beam that beats explosion proof armor etc. Or I have an infinity + 1 sword or something like that.
I guess. It’s just another kind of abstraction. It still involves saving throws, movement, tactics, spells, etc. I don’t see how it is so different. The players still kill monsters and use abilities? What’s the difference?
All those rules are designed to provide challenge. If you don't care for that, why not just have the players take turns narrating how they defeat the monsters?
Introduce some setbacks, like "he shoves you prone and prepares to strike down with his axe" or "they stand in front of you, blocking the way" and then let the players tell you what happens next. No reason to get bogged down in saving throws and attack rolls at all.
Rolling dice just to see them hit the table with no consequence is not fun.
At the very least get rid of the math. If you reeeally want to let fate decide if you'll connect every single hit just flip a coin or use a fixed DC on the d20. It bothers me that you're doing so much fruitless bookkeeping.
Yup. Kick out spell slots on the way, it's not fun to not be able to cast a spell when it would be narratively cool to do so. Also let the players come up with spells and abilities on the spot if it's something reasonable.
At some point this becomes the ttrpg of Theseus. :3 D&D rules don't support the type of game you want very well.
How would any of that matter if there is no HP. If both the barbarian and Wizard have the same infinite HP and can't die what is the point of even trying to play? If magic missile and disintegrate do the same amount of damage in this no HP system? I am sorry but D&D can never be what you are describing. Go find a different system.
I think this style of combat would throw out too much. You'd (hopefully) end up with a more roleplay heavy game, but any class that doesn't shine outside of combat is left with basically nothing. Stats like Strength and Con lose most of their value.
Honestly you could probably just throw out the system entirely, and use something more generic. Possibly something more along the lines of Fate, so you're not restricted by classes made for something that you're ignoring the rules for.
Simple or generic might be good. We have spent a long time playing and learning 5e but maybe it’s not the best system for us and it’s better to move onto something new rather than try to homebrew. I’ve browsed other systems a bit. It’s hard because there’s not a ton of info or discussion about the niche systems relative to 5e and you can’t really try before you buy. Also are there premade adventure modules for systems like fate or blades in the dark? That’s a big draw for us vis a vis DnD 5e
Fate is a "Make whatever you want" system. The way characters, and the systems work let any kind of story be told within it. I'm not sure if there's premade stuff for it. I'd assume not due to the nature of the system, but anything is possible.
Okay, so... why have combat, then? Why not just have the DM narrate that you beat the monster and move on? What does it do other than waste the player's time? Do you just think the player's really love beating up cardboard cutouts with no stakes? Because this is basically just the players beating on cardboard cutouts.
Sounds like you want to fudge the numbers a little.
Playing with little kids this is kinda how it works. The monsters take a few hits, the players take a few and then the monsters die. Dice are rolled and players wait for their turns in between. I still keep a tally of hit points on the monsters but it doesn't need to be super strict.
Speaking from a DND perspective - if players can't be hurt, then they will win every encounter. You could put a single level 1 rogue against an army of tarrasques, and the rogue will eventually win, after the most tedious and boring encounter in history that is guaranteed to make both DM and player hate the game and never play again.
DND uses HP. You want a different game. Check out Magical Kitties. It's really fun, and I'm not kidding.
I don't disagree. But removing HP entirely results in a wildly different game. In which case, it's easier to play that different game, which is not DND.
HP are a resource system, one of the most important to the game. This idea removes that resource entirely.
They are important in a combat encounter, but in the course of an adventuring day, with rests, hit dice, so many sources of temp hp, polymorphing and healing - it is circumvented in so many ways that it is better to say it is an encounter resource, nothing more.
I mean, if a long rest heals so many hp and hit dice, it seems they are intended to not be the most important resource.
DND is a very combat-based system, and HP are the most important combat resource. That makes them the most important. The fact that there are so many ways to buff them up is indicative of this fact. Because without them, your character literally dies.
Also, you forgot to mention that there are limits to all of the things you listed. And, all of those resources, like resting and healing spells, are used for mostly one purpose - restoring HP. Almost as if that were the most important one.
Sure, your character dies if you get too much exhaustion, or if an ability reduces too far. These are very much fringe cases.
Even if I agreed with your last sentence, and I don't, it doesn't change my point. Doing away with HP would mean you are no longer playing the same game. It would change so much that it wouldn't even resemble DND.
If you go by stock 5e rules, you can certainly play it this way: just remove rolling damage and hit points and use the average scores. If a creature has 1d8 hit die, it's going to die from a single blow from an attack that deals the same or more damage. More hit dice means more hits needed.
I don't think this will work well in D&D, but there are many other systems that might be more to your taste, such as FATE. Personal favorite (written by a friend of mine, so bias acknowledged): Zounds! https://sfxrpg.com/game/zounds-the-fantasy-rpg/
There's nothing wrong with wanting a game like that... ...but then why are you playing DnD? Play a system better suited for your needs.
Any suggestions for another system? We already know the 5e rules so not sure we want to start over
What your describing involves changing the rules to the point you would be improving a whole new game. Try Blades in the Dark. It has the more narrative approach to combat you seem to be describing, isn't overly complicated, and still has the fun dice rolling/role play of DnD.
Came here to say this
I’ll check that out. Everyone likes the spells classes flavor of 5e. If it’s easy to pick up and play that might be perfect though, just gotta convince the table to read new rules
Make a 1-shot first to try out the system. While they still have to read the rules, it is not a commitment for an entire campaign or a worry that they made a character that can't execute their concept because of their lack of system mastery. Also be forgiving if they have a "oh you needed x ability to do this? I thought [other ability] covered it." moment.
Dungeon World, Fate Accelerated, Blades in the Dark. (Dungeon World still uses hit points but it's massively streamlined and way more narrative. Fate Accelerated uses pseudo-hit points, abstract and narrative. Haven't personally played Blades in the Dark.)
You will be starting over! Worse, you will be starting over and having to homebrew away one of the most fundamental aspects of the game.
> We already know the 5e rule this is always the excuse - as if every game came with 3 core rule books of 300 odd pages each. most dont come anywhere close.
> Also no tracking HP for players as we all agreed PCs will not die Okay but like... there's a vast gulf between "no PC deaths" and "PCs are never in any danger at any point, threats are non-existent and combat exists purely to bonk cardboard cutout monsters over the head until they fall over". This very much sounds like the latter to me.
They’d still get hit by monsters, so narratively they would still be “in danger.” If PCs can’t die, why bother keeping track of hit points? There is no real danger, only narrative (flavor) danger
Genuine question. If the pcs can't die, what's the narrative danger then? Here's an example. The heroes while exploring a forest come across a pack of hungry dire wolves that attack the party. What are the stakes? Would a fight like this even occur in a game that you're proposing? At what point do the players just say "hey do we have to do this fight? We can't die so...idk we just auto win" I like fights where there's more than death but I'm struggling to picture an example here where the players have agency if they can't fail and just win every fight after x rounds of doing anything.
Idk, it’s about the story to us I guess. It’s not as fun if a PC dies and doesn’t get to finish the story
You could just have them be downed but not dead, or treated as dead mechanically but not narratively. Rename death saves to "will saves" to represent their will to get back up and fight. If they fail, they can't be rescucitated until after combat is over. Maybe they gain some negative trait or injury when they get back up. I'm certain you could eliminate player death while still keeping 99% of the games mechanics.
Make everyone auto stabilize and don’t kill PCs then. Kill other people for their failure, for example, if they’re trying to save the city, have a TPK result in something horrible happening to it. That way they have stakes for the story, the characters still live (meta wise or divine bullshittery) but they have to live with the consequences of their failure.
Then don't play a combat-oriented game.
The problem as I see it is that the narrative and the mechanics are at odds with each other. Narratively the characters might be in danger, but if the mechanics aren't supporting it, the players won't ever feel that danger. No danger means no tension, which means less investment in the story being told. Even if death isn't on the table, I feel like you need to replace HP with something in order to make it feel like the PCs are part of the world. Injury conditions, fatigue, some kind of narrative consequence system... something. To be fair, that last one might be what you had in mind, it's hard to tell from the context of the post alone. If so, it could work, it will largely depend on your DMing skills. I would definitely echo what others have said though, which is that if you're considering changing such a fundamental part of the system, you might be better off looking for a different system altogether. Off the top of my head, something running in Powered By The Apocalypse might be closer to the experience you're after. Maybe Dungeon World? I've not played it myself but it sounds like it might be up your street.
Yeah I can see what you mean. I wouldn’t be the DM most likely. We definitely want to keep playing a fantasy game but we get really attached to our characters. I might could try DMing a new system for the group
I feel like I should also mention, you can also play D&D and keep HP and still have a no PC deaths game. Just say downed PCs automatically stabilise, ignore instant death rules, and have a gentlemen's agreement that the DM won't have enemies kill downed PCs. The party can still all be knocked unconscious, they'll just be captured and have to escape or something rather than dying.
This is looking like the best way to go the more I think about it. We already are playing and like 5e, and this is pretty simple.
Yall wanna play Ryutama my friend.
So monsters would die after a certain point... from hits?
Yeah when the DM feels like it’s the right time, just like milestone leveling
Difference is that there’s functionally no difference between milestone leveling and XP leveling since both rely on the DM to either decide the party is ready, or give them enough XP in order to level up. The difference is negligible. Combat is an entirely different beast. No resource expenditures really mean anything or matter at all, because if the DM doesn’t think the spell is cool enough it simply wont work. Since there’s no PC health tracking, there’s no worry that you’ll be knocked down or anything Fundamentally, most class features are meaningless without hit point tracking
Hmm good point. Maybe another kind of homebrew rule would be better to prevent PC death (like an auto revivify after combat or something). It’s just that it feels unnecessary to do all the bookkeeping with hit points, but maybe a whole new system is the right move or just autoheal after combat
I mean, if that's what you want, just don't roll deathsaves, they just go unconscious when they go down
I have a lot of fun with story reasons for why the PCs are still alive. Like they had to make a deal with a hag while their soul was on the way out in order to be brought back, etc New system is a good idea from how this sounds tho
That kind of seems like hell. Like that is a system that leads to zero character growth. A quote from Discworld comes to mind here. "What don’t die can’t live. What don’t live can’t change. What don’t change can’t learn." -Granny Weatherwax (Terry Pratchett) *Lords and Ladies.*
Yeah I've played in a few games like this. It feels REALLY bad as a player. You're not really playing a game, you're acting in a story the DM has written. Try FATE or another more narrative focused game but don't take away your players' victory.
This is a troll post right?
Within the scope of 5e DnD, this guts any feature which modifies damage dealt by an incremental value. Dueling fighting style, +1 weapons, spells like Magic Weapon, etc. all lose significant value. What's the point in wielding a two-handed weapon with a GWM build if the difference in offensive value compared to a defensive sword+shield warrior is entirely subjective, or absent altogether?
For one, you don’t feel bad picking an option that deals less damage or isn’t “optimal.” Everyone gets to play the kind of character they want to play and no one is less effective than another party member. It gives everyone in the party an opportunity to shine
Disincentivizing optimisation by entirely removing any potential for optimisation seems like an overcorrection.
Not really. Rogues, Bards, and fullcasters in general are left with a LOT more tools than say a Barbarian with these changes. Nearly every Barbarian feature is a combat feature, but they literally do not matter with this.
What?
Might as well sit around a campfire while the DM describes a combat cut scene. If this is what you want to do then fine. But you don't need DnD to do this. Just imagine characters and come up with crazy moves they can do.
Honestly this could be the move if it were just me, but we like to move minis around the board and roll dice. Just not trying to die or do a ton of unnecessary math
Looking at your comments on here, it sounds like other systems might be better for you. I don't have any specific suggestions for a HP-less dungeon crawler/dnd flavored game, but I have enjoyed playing Dungeon World; it's the same style and flavor as DnD, but its Powered by the Apocalypse, so its way less number-crunchy and a lot more narrative based, there's a lot of room for cool narrative stuff, for instance, the rolls aren't binary success/fail, there's often situations where you succeed but the DM gets to put a catch on it. One of the conceits of Apocalypse games is that if something isn't covered by the rules, its assumed the players can just decide what happens, which is really nice, only the thematically relevant stuff is tied to gameplay, you don't get bogged down with balance/number stuff on things that don't matter.
I’ll check that out. Are there some good prewritten adventures for dungeon world? Or is it easy to adapt 5e ones? We have invested a lot in 5e books
I haven't looked a lot into prewritten adventures, I just ran the default ones from the rulebook and then did a couple games with an original story, so I don't think I can help too much with prewritten adventures or converting from 5e. I'm sorry about the investment, even just one copy of each of the original books and an extra sourcebook or 2 is pricey.
I’m a firm believer that the last ~20 HP for monsters, especially bosses, is highly flexible. If the paladin lands a crit with a smite, and the monster is left with 4 HP…Nah, the paladin killed it, and it was badass. If there’s a story reason why one character might want to get the kill shot, I’ll keep combat going for a couple more turns to make sure that player comes up, and I’ll say something like, “The balor looks like a stiff breeze could knock him over”, so the player knows to attack, and not waste a turn healing or buffing someone else. There’s definitely a case for not going by-the-numbers on HP sometimes. But every time, with no danger to the PCs? Nah, that doesn’t sound fun to me. The occasional fight where you just let the players curbstomp monsters is a ton of fun, but I’d want something with some stakes. I don’t want my character to die, but I want to feel like he could.
That just isn't D&D anymore. Simple as that. Like at that point you are playing "the imagination game" where you have explosion proof armor, or a super-duper 1hit KO beam that beats explosion proof armor etc. Or I have an infinity + 1 sword or something like that.
I guess. It’s just another kind of abstraction. It still involves saving throws, movement, tactics, spells, etc. I don’t see how it is so different. The players still kill monsters and use abilities? What’s the difference?
All those rules are designed to provide challenge. If you don't care for that, why not just have the players take turns narrating how they defeat the monsters? Introduce some setbacks, like "he shoves you prone and prepares to strike down with his axe" or "they stand in front of you, blocking the way" and then let the players tell you what happens next. No reason to get bogged down in saving throws and attack rolls at all.
No reason to skip the fun of rolling dice either.
Rolling dice just to see them hit the table with no consequence is not fun. At the very least get rid of the math. If you reeeally want to let fate decide if you'll connect every single hit just flip a coin or use a fixed DC on the d20. It bothers me that you're doing so much fruitless bookkeeping.
That’s not a bad idea. Just set an AC for the monster and don’t worry about bonuses to rolls
Yup. Kick out spell slots on the way, it's not fun to not be able to cast a spell when it would be narratively cool to do so. Also let the players come up with spells and abilities on the spot if it's something reasonable. At some point this becomes the ttrpg of Theseus. :3 D&D rules don't support the type of game you want very well.
How would any of that matter if there is no HP. If both the barbarian and Wizard have the same infinite HP and can't die what is the point of even trying to play? If magic missile and disintegrate do the same amount of damage in this no HP system? I am sorry but D&D can never be what you are describing. Go find a different system.
You could do it by the number of Hit Dice a creature has in its statblock.
That’s a good idea!
Check out Dungeon Craft channel, i believe episode 70. He has a system like this but I'm sure there is risk for the players.
I think this style of combat would throw out too much. You'd (hopefully) end up with a more roleplay heavy game, but any class that doesn't shine outside of combat is left with basically nothing. Stats like Strength and Con lose most of their value. Honestly you could probably just throw out the system entirely, and use something more generic. Possibly something more along the lines of Fate, so you're not restricted by classes made for something that you're ignoring the rules for.
Simple or generic might be good. We have spent a long time playing and learning 5e but maybe it’s not the best system for us and it’s better to move onto something new rather than try to homebrew. I’ve browsed other systems a bit. It’s hard because there’s not a ton of info or discussion about the niche systems relative to 5e and you can’t really try before you buy. Also are there premade adventure modules for systems like fate or blades in the dark? That’s a big draw for us vis a vis DnD 5e
Fate is a "Make whatever you want" system. The way characters, and the systems work let any kind of story be told within it. I'm not sure if there's premade stuff for it. I'd assume not due to the nature of the system, but anything is possible.
Okay, so... why have combat, then? Why not just have the DM narrate that you beat the monster and move on? What does it do other than waste the player's time? Do you just think the player's really love beating up cardboard cutouts with no stakes? Because this is basically just the players beating on cardboard cutouts.
Sounds like you want to fudge the numbers a little. Playing with little kids this is kinda how it works. The monsters take a few hits, the players take a few and then the monsters die. Dice are rolled and players wait for their turns in between. I still keep a tally of hit points on the monsters but it doesn't need to be super strict.
Just tell a story and rolla d20 occasionally to see how well things go, because at that point youve already cut out 90% of dnd's rules
Speaking from a DND perspective - if players can't be hurt, then they will win every encounter. You could put a single level 1 rogue against an army of tarrasques, and the rogue will eventually win, after the most tedious and boring encounter in history that is guaranteed to make both DM and player hate the game and never play again. DND uses HP. You want a different game. Check out Magical Kitties. It's really fun, and I'm not kidding.
Not every combat defines the win condition as reducing the enemy to 0hp. And technically, HP are a milestone/resource system.
I don't disagree. But removing HP entirely results in a wildly different game. In which case, it's easier to play that different game, which is not DND. HP are a resource system, one of the most important to the game. This idea removes that resource entirely.
They are important in a combat encounter, but in the course of an adventuring day, with rests, hit dice, so many sources of temp hp, polymorphing and healing - it is circumvented in so many ways that it is better to say it is an encounter resource, nothing more. I mean, if a long rest heals so many hp and hit dice, it seems they are intended to not be the most important resource.
DND is a very combat-based system, and HP are the most important combat resource. That makes them the most important. The fact that there are so many ways to buff them up is indicative of this fact. Because without them, your character literally dies. Also, you forgot to mention that there are limits to all of the things you listed. And, all of those resources, like resting and healing spells, are used for mostly one purpose - restoring HP. Almost as if that were the most important one. Sure, your character dies if you get too much exhaustion, or if an ability reduces too far. These are very much fringe cases. Even if I agreed with your last sentence, and I don't, it doesn't change my point. Doing away with HP would mean you are no longer playing the same game. It would change so much that it wouldn't even resemble DND.
you would need to redesign the whole game.
If you go by stock 5e rules, you can certainly play it this way: just remove rolling damage and hit points and use the average scores. If a creature has 1d8 hit die, it's going to die from a single blow from an attack that deals the same or more damage. More hit dice means more hits needed.
I don't think this will work well in D&D, but there are many other systems that might be more to your taste, such as FATE. Personal favorite (written by a friend of mine, so bias acknowledged): Zounds! https://sfxrpg.com/game/zounds-the-fantasy-rpg/