D&D General Changing Order of Character Creation, from 1e to 2024

[Snarf Zagyg]

1e: It doesn't seem to particularly give a list (at least that I saw) and doesn't even say how to generate the ability scores. The order the things are discussed in are:

• Character Abilities (Ability Scores)
• Race
• Class
• Alignment
• Hit Points
• Languages
• Money
• Equipment
• Weapons

Two things-

1. The order is on PHB p. 8.

Each player develops the abilities of his or her character through random number generation (by means of dice rolling) to determine the basic characteristics of the persona, the abilities. The player then decides what race the character is, what the character's class is, the alignment of the character, and what the character's name is to be. The character will speak certain languages determined by race, class, and alignment. He or she will have a certain amount of gold pieces to begin with, and these funds will be used to purchase equipment needed for adventuring. Finally, each character begins with a certain number of hit points, as determined by the roll of the die (or dice) commensurate with the character's class. Class determines the type of die (or dice) rolled. All characters begin at 1st level.

So-
1. Abilities.
2. Race.
3. Class.
4. Alignment.
5. Name.
6. Languages.
7. GP and equipment.
8. Hit points.

Honestly, I think that the first four (which you have correct) are the only four that have to be done in the correct order. Abilities and race will determine what class you can choose. And what class determines your alignment choices. Everything else is whatever.


Next, on the issue of abilities. Yes, the DMG does have methods of rolling. But you have to remember the context. At the time of the PHB, 3d6 in order was the standard method. This is why there the PHB mentions that there are alternate methods in the upcoming DMG. The four methods are listed as "alternatives."

Alternatives to what? To the unstated assumption that people are using 3d6.

 

[Quickleaf]

Amazing when people discuss how AD&D could be played with characters with average ability scores often ignore how Gary himself said they should have two or more 15s to survive.

To be honest, I'd forgotten about that. I had a rather muddled initial experience with D&D though, cause my group was AD&D1e with some B/X added in, then next year 2e was released which we incorporated some of. So my memory is a tangled fusion of those three systems.

 

[TwoSix]

Amazing when people discuss how AD&D could be played with characters with average ability scores often ignore how Gary himself said they should have two or more 15s to survive.

To be fair, I came of age during 2e, when expressing an opinion like "Every PC should have 2 15s" would have been seen as extraordinarily munchkin.

Despite being like 95% the same game, the overall attitude between the two product lines was wildly different.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Class first makes sense to me, frankly.......

Hard disagree. Ability scores and then origin (if you need to qualify, otherwise the reverse is preferred), is the best for me. It reads much more realistic than the modern style.

 

[Zaukrie]

Hard disagree. Ability scores and then origin (if you need to qualify, otherwise the reverse is preferred), is the best for me. It reads much more realistic than the modern style.

sure, it's a style thing. I get that. I have almost no interest in realism in my fantasy games, but again, style is different for everyone. I'm good with that.

 

[SteveC]

My own group has been trying a ton of different systems to see what we're going to do once the new edition drops. And so we've been doing a lot of character creation. It's made me think about the order of doing things.

It all comes down to the different roles you can play in a game, and if roles are even an important thing in that game. We just finished up some DaggerHeart, and I found that there were roles that were important enough to discuss when creating characters for the group. So we sort of talked about Class first.

But we also just played some Feng Shui 2. In that game, you don't have the same importance on doing things. The most important thing our GM did was discuss if we were going to have vehicle-based characters so he would make that a more or less important part of the game.

We also did PF2, and although that game does an ABC, we talked about the "C" part much more so that we'd have a balance of different abilities to cover the bases of what the game expects out of you.

In our D&D game, we made sure we'd have spell casters, a healer, support characters and damage dealers. Again in those situations, class came first because we were designing a team.

At the end of the day, I guess I've found "class" is more important if different classes fill different roles for the group. I'm not sure that I like that, but it does seem to be how it worked out.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Ugh. I would absolutely hate that. Random characters are for gatcha games.

People who think character concept is the most important thing and people who don't are just never going to see eye to eye. We might as well be playing different games altogether.

 

[Cruentus]

Amazing when people discuss how AD&D could be played with characters with average ability scores often ignore how Gary himself said they should have two or more 15s to survive.

True, I often overlook that, of have a hazy memory of it being mentioned somewhere. I could never remember where.

Of course, this is what Gary said in the printed material for mass consumption. Every time I’ve been able to see ‘behind the curtain’ of games developers playing their own games, it very rarely hews to ‘rules as written’. In fact, sometimes I wonder if they’re playing the same game, but they are. So Gary might have written that in the PHB, but his home game was likely very different, much like as much as we talk about ‘playing DnD’, every single table is going to do things differently for a host of reasons.

We play OSE Advanced and roll 3d6 down the line. That determines your class, unless you want to play against type, or roll well enough to have a choice, but that’s us. For Beyond the Wall, you pick a playbook (class) and that determines your abilities and species and background in one go.

I find it counterintuitive to sketch out my character and concept and abilities before I’ve even rolled dice. I prefer it all to flow from abilities and class, and then the unfolding/emergent gameplay sketches out the rest.

 

[TwoSix]

People who think character concept is the most important thing and people who don't are just never going to see eye to eye. We might as well be playing different games altogether.

I enjoy both, but it very much depends on the system. Games that give some structure to the randomness (I'm thinking about Beyond the Wall, or the Without Number games as examples), or games that are relatively lightweight (like a Mork Borg) are games that I find fun to play with random characters.

Games that actively grant you a complex set of character building tools, and encourage you to imagine using those tools to design a character, are much less fun for me when randomness imposes a lot of undesired constraints on that imagination.

Obviously, restrictions caused by randomness can breed creativity, but it has to be restrictions that are deployed thoughtfully. Rolling 4d6k3 in order, for 5e, doesn't pass that test for me.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

So Gary might have written that in the PHB, but his home game was likely very different, much like as much as we talk about ‘playing DnD’, every single table is going to do things differently for a host of reasons.

On this (and not to threadjack the excellent thread that @Cadence started).

Going through the history, you have to remember that OD&D was, well, I often refer to it as more of a toolkit to make your game than a complete game system (especially with just the LBBs). Tables all had to decide how to play it, what sources to use, and so on.

AD&D was ... interesting. From a purely realistic standpoint, Gygax wanted to get paid. He wanted to present AD&D as THE ONLY D&D system, the one you had to run, the official one, don't accept any substitute. He definitely didn't want you using things like the Arduin Grimoire (which he took a shot at with the Vacuous Grimoire*). That's why he has so many comments about how you must play AD&D by the rules, etc.

On the other hand, he was still a hobbyist. He knew that people would do their own thing. And, most importantly, he did his own thing. He certainly didn't use all of the complicated systems and subsystems in 1e (no, he didn't use weapon v. ac).

That's why I often think of AD&D as "pick your own rules" kind of experience. There are the rules that everyone uses (Fighters get d10 hit points). There are the rules that some people use. And then there are the rules that almost no one uses. Despite what Gygax claimed, there was a high amount of table variability.

Which is also what made the prevalence of competition and tournament play so interesting!




*The description in the DMG-
A book of this sort is totally impossible to tell from a normal one, although if a detect magic spell is cost, there will be a
magical aura noted. Any character who opens the work and reads so much as a single glyph therein must make 2 saving throws versus magic. The first is to determine if 1 point of intelligence is lost or not, the second is to find if 2 points of wisdom are lost. Once opened and read, the vacuous grimoire remains, and it must be burned to be rid of it after first casting a remove curse spell. If the tome is placed with other books, its appearance will instantly alter to conform to one of the other works it is amongst.