AD&D Character Creation Rules for 5th Ed

[Anonimicon]

Okay, so. My GM wants to start making it so all of our characters follow the old adnd rules in character creation. By this I mean rolling out the stats and placing them down in the order rolled, then seeing which classes and races your character is applicable for. He told me to find out how to do this for all of the classes and races in 5th ed since not all of them were available in adnd. So I was hoping someone on here could help me find it somewhere out there on the internet (i have looked for about 30 minutes as of this post).

If this is not the right area to post this thread, I apologize. I admit I'm not really a forum person and the etiquette for such things allude me.

[Oscredwin]

There are no race or class stat restrictions in this edition.

[Anonimicon]

There are no race or class stat restrictions in this edition.

Yes, I know. My GM is specifically wanting to make that a homebrew rule but we don't know how to go about doing that and were hoping to find someone who already had.

[Oscredwin]

Yes, I know. My GM is specifically wanting to make that a homebrew rule but we don't know how to go about doing that and were hoping to find someone who already had.

Then you might want to try the homebrew forum.

[Scirocco]

Look at the multi-classing page; there are attribute requirements to multiclass into various classes though the numbers are not particularly high.

[Anonimicon]

Then you might want to try the homebrew forum.

Okay, thank you.

[Thrudd]

Okay, so. My GM wants to start making it so all of our characters follow the old adnd rules in character creation. By this I mean rolling out the stats and placing them down in the order rolled, then seeing which classes and races your character is applicable for. He told me to find out how to do this for all of the classes and races in 5th ed since not all of them were available in adnd. So I was hoping someone on here could help me find it somewhere out there on the internet (i have looked for about 30 minutes as of this post).

If this is not the right area to post this thread, I apologize. I admit I'm not really a forum person and the etiquette for such things allude me.

So you want to know if someone out there has already made a house rule for 5e assigning minimum ability score requirements for the races and classes? That, I think, you will not find.
Or you want to know what the requirements were in 1e? That is easy

Minimum Ability Scores for classes:

Fighter: 9 Str, 5 or lower Int can only be a fighter
Magic User: 9 Int, 5 or lower Str can only be a magic user
Cleric: 9 Wis (13 for multiclass), 5 or lower Dex can only be a cleric
Thief: 9 Dex, 5 or lower Wis can only be a thief
Druid: 12 Wis, 15 Cha
Ranger: 13 Str, 13 Int, 14 Wis, 14 Con
Paladin: 12 Str, 9 Int, 13 Wis, 9 Con, 17 Cha
Illusionist: 15 Int, 16 Dex
Assassin: 12 Str, 11 Int, 12 Dex, 5 or lower Cha can only be assassin
Monk: 15 Str, 15 Wis, 15 Dex, 11 Con

Minimums and Maximums for races (Racial bonuses can be applied in order to meet the minimum score):

Elf: 8 Int, 7 Dex, 6 Con, 8 Cha
Dwarf: 8 Str, 17 Dex Max, 12 Con, 16 Cha Max
Halfling: 6 Str, 17 Str Max, 6 Int, 17 Wis Max, 8 Dex, 10 Con
Gnome: 6 Str, 7 Int, 8 Con
Half Elf: 4 Int, 6 Dex, 6 Con
Half Orc: 6 Str, 17 Int Max, 14 Wis Max, 14 Dex Max, 13 Con, 12 Cha Max

You know that almost everything is different between 1e and 5e. So really, this info won't be of much use as-is. Your GM should know that what he wants are house rules which will require a fair amount of consideration. Maybe you guys just want to play 1e AD&D, since the system is already designed to do this?

[Eslin]

So you want to know if someone out there has already made a house rule for 5e assigning minimum ability score requirements for the races and classes? That, I think, you will not find.
Or you want to know what the requirements were in 1e? That is easy

Minimum Ability Scores for classes:

Fighter: 9 Str, 5 or lower Int can only be a fighter
Magic User: 9 Int, 5 or lower Str can only be a magic user
Cleric: 9 Wis (13 for multiclass), 5 or lower Dex can only be a cleric
Thief: 9 Dex, 5 or lower Wis can only be a thief
Druid: 12 Wis, 15 Cha
Ranger: 13 Str, 13 Int, 14 Wis, 14 Con
Paladin: 12 Str, 9 Int, 13 Wis, 9 Con, 17 Cha
Illusionist: 15 Int, 16 Dex
Assassin: 12 Str, 11 Int, 12 Dex, 5 or lower Cha can only be assassin
Monk: 15 Str, 15 Wis, 15 Dex, 11 Con

Minimums and Maximums for races (Racial bonuses can be applied in order to meet the minimum score):

Elf: 8 Int, 7 Dex, 6 Con, 8 Cha
Dwarf: 8 Str, 17 Dex Max, 12 Con, 16 Cha Max
Halfling: 6 Str, 17 Str Max, 6 Int, 17 Wis Max, 8 Dex, 10 Con
Gnome: 6 Str, 7 Int, 8 Con
Half Elf: 4 Int, 6 Dex, 6 Con
Half Orc: 6 Str, 17 Int Max, 14 Wis Max, 14 Dex Max, 13 Con, 12 Cha Max

You know that almost everything is different between 1e and 5e. So really, this info won't be of much use as-is. Your GM should know that what he wants are house rules which will require a fair amount of consideration. Maybe you guys just want to play 1e AD&D, since the system is already designed to do this?

What happens if you roll a character with 8 strength and 5 int?

[jkat718]

What happens if you roll a character with 8 strength and 5 int?

Reroll?

[Thrudd]

What happens if you roll a character with 8 strength and 5 int?

Yeah, the DM lets you reroll. In fact, most of the ability score generation methods include rolling more than just six times, or let you arrange the scores as you want, so that getting an unusable character is not likely. For instance, one method is to roll the 3d6 in order, but you roll six times for each ability and keep the best one. Another is to roll 3d6 in order, but roll enough for twelve characters and keep the set of scores you want.

[Valefor Rathan]

Look at the multi-classing page; there are attribute requirements to multiclass into various classes though the numbers are not particularly high.

This.

As for the minimum/maximum stats per race, that seems silly.

[randomodo]

I've never actually done the math, but under 1e rules, I think the odds of even qualifying for MAD characters like rangers and druids are so bad that your DM might as well just dictate that everybody has to play a fighter, magic user, cleric or thief.

It's his (or her) game, and his (or her) rules. But to my mind, one of the best things that 3e did (mirrored in subsequent editions) was to get rid of race/class/ability score restrictions.

[Eslin]

I've never actually done the math, but under 1e rules, I think the odds of even qualifying for MAD characters like rangers and druids are so bad that your DM might as well just dictate that everybody has to play a fighter, magic user, cleric or thief.

It's his (or her) game, and his (or her) rules. But to my mind, one of the best things that 3e did (mirrored in subsequent editions) was to get rid of race/class/ability score restrictions.

With the usual character creation rules, your odds of qualifying for monk are 0.04%. That's 4 in 10,000.

Qualifying for a bard, which required Str 15, Int 12, Wis 15, Dex 15, Con 10, Cha 15 and 5 levels of fighter and 5 levels of thief had a 0.0017% chance of happening with straight 3d6, which is seventeen in a million.

Worst of all is the Unearthed Arcana paladin, which required Str 15, Int 10, Wis 13, Dex 15, Con 15, Cha 17 - expect two out of every million characters to qualify.

[Perseus]

The first time I played AD&D my DM used the arrays the 2e PHB gives you for the paladin as stat generation.

Took all the trouble out of everything.

[Jlooney]

So you want to know if someone out there has already made a house rule for 5e assigning minimum ability score requirements for the races and classes? That, I think, you will not find.
Or you want to know what the requirements were in 1e? That is easy

Minimum Ability Scores for classes:

Fighter: 9 Str, 5 or lower Int can only be a fighter
Magic User: 9 Int, 5 or lower Str can only be a magic user
Cleric: 9 Wis (13 for multiclass), 5 or lower Dex can only be a cleric
Thief: 9 Dex, 5 or lower Wis can only be a thief
Druid: 12 Wis, 15 Cha
Ranger: 13 Str, 13 Int, 14 Wis, 14 Con
Paladin: 12 Str, 9 Int, 13 Wis, 9 Con, 17 Cha
Illusionist: 15 Int, 16 Dex
Assassin: 12 Str, 11 Int, 12 Dex, 5 or lower Cha can only be assassin
Monk: 15 Str, 15 Wis, 15 Dex, 11 Con

Minimums and Maximums for races (Racial bonuses can be applied in order to meet the minimum score):

Elf: 8 Int, 7 Dex, 6 Con, 8 Cha
Dwarf: 8 Str, 17 Dex Max, 12 Con, 16 Cha Max
Halfling: 6 Str, 17 Str Max, 6 Int, 17 Wis Max, 8 Dex, 10 Con
Gnome: 6 Str, 7 Int, 8 Con
Half Elf: 4 Int, 6 Dex, 6 Con
Half Orc: 6 Str, 17 Int Max, 14 Wis Max, 14 Dex Max, 13 Con, 12 Cha Max

You know that almost everything is different between 1e and 5e. So really, this info won't be of much use as-is. Your GM should know that what he wants are house rules which will require a fair amount of consideration. Maybe you guys just want to play 1e AD&D, since the system is already designed to do this?

There were also racial limits on classes. A human and gnome are the only ones that could be an illusionist (which was a wizard that only knew illusion spells) but you also had to have a 16 dex to qualify for the class. However, if you have 16+ in both attributes (in this case dex and int) you gained a +10% experience boost.

In the same vein, Humans are the only ones that could dual class, which is you go to class level x, start a new class (back to 0 exp) and only got exp if you didn't use anything from your first class (other than HP and I think saves) until your new class outleveled your original class. After that you are free to use all abilities.

Demi-humans could take more than one class at once. Elves as a race back in the basic rules are multi classed fighter/mage/clerics. They divide all exp by 3 and evenly distribute the Exp amongst the three classes. Yes, this cause some classes to level at different times. (if anyone else wants to know more you can ask)

However an elf could only reach level 17 wizard. Many classes had that restriction. the only race that could to level 20 in any class was human.

I love 2nd edition.

[Jlooney]

With the usual character creation rules, your odds of qualifying for monk are 0.04%. That's 4 in 10,000.

Qualifying for a bard, which required Str 15, Int 12, Wis 15, Dex 15, Con 10, Cha 15 and 5 levels of fighter and 5 levels of thief had a 0.0017% chance of happening with straight 3d6, which is seventeen in a million.

Worst of all is the Unearthed Arcana paladin, which required Str 15, Int 10, Wis 13, Dex 15, Con 15, Cha 17 - expect two out of every million characters to qualify.

If you were using the unearthed arcana, and seeing as only human could qualify for bard, you got a special variant of dice rolling. You got 6d6 to roll for charisma and 4d6 for Str and things like that.

[Eslin]

There were also racial limits on classes. A human and gnome are the only ones that could be an illusionist (which was a wizard that only knew illusion spells) but you also had to have a 16 dex to qualify for the class. However, if you have 16+ in both attributes (in this case dex and int) you gained a +10% experience boost.

In the same vein, Humans are the only ones that could dual class, which is you go to class level x, start a new class (back to 0 exp) and only got exp if you didn't use anything from your first class (other than HP and I think saves) until your new class outleveled your original class. After that you are free to use all abilities.

Demi-humans could take more than one class at once. Elves as a race back in the basic rules are multi classed fighter/mage/clerics. They divide all exp by 3 and evenly distribute the Exp amongst the three classes. Yes, this cause some classes to level at different times. (if anyone else wants to know more you can ask)

However an elf could only reach level 17 wizard. Many classes had that restriction. the only race that could to level 20 in any class was human.

I love 2nd edition.

...why? I mean rolling for stats is a silly method of doing it in the first place, it ensures some players are permanently ahead of others for no good reason, but why would you reward them for having an unearned permanent advantage with an experience boost?

[Fwiffo86]

With the usual character creation rules, your odds of qualifying for monk are 0.04%. That's 4 in 10,000.

Qualifying for a bard, which required Str 15, Int 12, Wis 15, Dex 15, Con 10, Cha 15 and 5 levels of fighter and 5 levels of thief had a 0.0017% chance of happening with straight 3d6, which is seventeen in a million.

Worst of all is the Unearthed Arcana paladin, which required Str 15, Int 10, Wis 13, Dex 15, Con 15, Cha 17 - expect two out of every million characters to qualify.

Pretty sure its 5 levels (5 but before you get to 7) of fighter, then 7 levels of thief (but before you get to 9, then class change again to druid. where you get your powers finally.

[Jlooney]

...why? I mean rolling for stats is a silly method of doing it in the first place, it ensures some players are permanently ahead of others for no good reason, but why would you reward them for having an unearned permanent advantage with an experience boost?

There is no answer to your question that you will accept. From all the posts you've made it's simply optimization > fun.

Also only humans got this rolling method as they are crap compared to EVERY other race.

[Eslin]

There is no answer to your question that you will accept. From all the posts you've made it's simply optimization > fun.

Also only humans got this rolling method as they are crap compared to EVERY other race.

Having some players have worse characters than others because of complete luck is fun?

[Jlooney]

Having some players have worse characters than others because of complete luck is fun?

Ok, let me put it this way. A Halfling gets theif skills. Period. Elves have a 90% chance to resist charm and sleep. Both had racial stat adjustments and can dual class. A human doesn't get any of that.

[Eslin]

Ok, let me put it this way. A Halfling gets theif skills. Period. Elves have a 90% chance to resist charm and sleep. Both had racial stat adjustments and can dual class. A human doesn't get any of that.

From the sound of things they probably aren't balanced, but I'm willing to assume that every race is perfectly balanced against each other - that doesn't stop having some characters be randomly better than others fun. Power should be earned, not randomly assigned.

[Beleriphon]

Having some players have worse characters than others because of complete luck is fun?

Keep in mind that stats had limited to no impact on characters except with exceptionally high stats. A 16 in strength for example provided a whopping +1 to hit and damage.

From the sound of things they probably aren't balanced, but I'm willing to assume that every race is perfectly balanced against each other - that doesn't stop having some characters be randomly better than others fun. Power should be earned, not randomly assigned.

They weren't and assuming as much will only end in pain. Mind you the idea that "balanced" classes or races hadn't really come up at the time the games were designed, so nobody really noticed or cared. The fact that the fighter had a 2/3 (that's not two-thirds; thats two then three) attack rotation compared to wizards casting time stop and other spell also didn't seem to bother most people so much. For the most part stats were largely irrelevant to game play beyond carrying capacity (if you used that rule) and how much additional AC you gained while wearing full plate. Don't look at 1E/2E AD&D as anything other than what it is, an older game with weird rules that don't make much sense to people that started play with more modern game design conceptions.

[randomodo]

There are a few ways to get the flavor of what the DM seems to want without building overly-complex house rules. For example:

The mere act of rolling randomly for stats and placing the numbers in the order rolled will in and of itself result in many players (probably even most players) picking a class that is compatible with their rolls. You won't have the "the rules won't allow you to be a fighter with a strength less than 9" thing, but let's be honest, if a player rolls a 7 for strength and a 17 for intelligence, he's probably not going to play a fighter anyway.

On race, there are a couple ways to manage it. I once was in a game in which the DM said "My world is predominately human, if you want to play a demi-human, you've got to beat my roll on a d20." That cut down notably on the number of scimitar-weilding dark elves in the party (this was the early 90s).

Another fairly simple way is to do the random rolls/place in order, then compare it to the bonuses for the races in the 5e PHB. Say that anyone can pick a human character, but if you want to play one of the other races, then you have to pick one where your highest stat matches a stat for which that race gets a bonus.

Thus, in our example above, if the player's highest stat was a 17 in intelligence, he'd have to play either a human, or a race that gets an INT bonus (which is...hmm...high elf or gnome, I think. Not quite sure how to manage half-elves).

That, I think, meets the spirit of what the OP's DM wants without bogging things down.

Just my 2cp...

[Thrudd]

I like Dungeon Crawl Classics' solution. Each player starts play with three or four level 0 characters who each have completely random ability scores, races and professions (no classes yet). Whichever of these characters can survive a few encounters and earn XP enough to get to level 1 will gain a class. There will be variation in scores, but overwhelmingly characters will have mediocre scores with small or no bonuses and penalties. In the rare chance that someone is insanely lucky and rolls multiple high scores, they will have their choice of classes, but that is pretty much where the advantage ends, the differences in bonuses and the occasions to use those bonuses are fairly low.

5e is probably the wrong edition for this sort of thing. Ability scores have more of an impact on the game than they do in AD&D and similar rule sets. In older editions, they mainly serve to determine what class you qualify for. There were no skills based on abilities, saving throws were based completely on class and level, thief abilities were based on level. High scores gave relatively low bonuses compared to 3e and 5e and were applied to fewer things.
The rules were not developed with balance in mind, at least not at first. The rules for D&D haphazardly evolved over years, with things being added here and there and not all with the same design goals. Many rules were included for verisimilitude/simulation purposes, not for the purpose of making sure everything was fair and equal for all the players. If you get lucky and roll really high on your abilities, good for you! You might qualify for a few extra-cool classes like Ranger, Paladin, or Monk. Each of those classes is objectively better than the others in some ways, and to compensate they have some restrictions.

[Person_Man]

Random generation of ability scores, treasure, monsters, etc, was a big part of AD&D. (At least in my numerous childhood experiences). Death occurred very, very often. Races and classes with higher requirements were intentionally better then classes with lower requirements, because it was assumed that you would only play those classes rarely. Humans sucked, and were only worth playing if you happen to roll well enough to be a Paladin or wanted to risk attempting duel classing (which sucked at low levels, but was awesome at high levels). Similarly, Magic-users/Wizards/etc were intentionally terrible at low levels and amazing at high levels, because it was assumed that the vast majority of them would die at low levels, and you had to "pay for" their high level awesomeness by sucking so much for most of your career. The game was much more about careful resource management and decision making, and much less about roleplaying or character customization.

Frankly, random generation or minimum ability score requirements for anything does not fit very well with the current edition of D&D, or modern RPG in general. Randomly generated roguelike games are much better suited to computer games, which can handle all of the randomly generated stuff much more easily.

[ProphetSword]

What happens if you roll a character with 8 strength and 5 int?

You play a Cleric or Thief? Neither of these scores keep you from playing either of those classes.

You would also meet the requirements for a Dwarf or Half-Elf. So, embrace those negative values, friend!

[thepsyker]

Pretty sure its 5 levels (5 but before you get to 7) of fighter, then 7 levels of thief (but before you get to 9, then class change again to druid. where you get your powers finally.

Actually you would then go into Bard, where you get your Bard powers, the different Druid powers and access to some Druid spells.

It is also worth pointing out that straight 3d6 in order wasn't among the recommended Character Generation methods for AD&D, although it was used with different twists as mentioned earlier and many people did choose to carry it over from Basic.

Ok, let me put it this way. A Halfling gets theif skills. Period. Elves have a 90% chance to resist charm and sleep. Both had racial stat adjustments and can dual class. A human doesn't get any of that.

Halflings getting thief abilities was a Basic thing where they were their own class. Halflings and elves did get bonuses to hiding if operating on their own out of armor and they did get racial bonuses to thief skills if they played a thief, as did most of the other demi-humans. Elves also got bonuses to hit with certain weapons and halflings got bonuses to save vs magic along with other special abilities. Also dual classing was the Human only ability to switch to a second class after character creation, Halflings and other demi-humans could choose to multi-class at character creation, which would let them advance in two, some times three, classes simultaneously splitting xp equally between the classes equally.

[FaerieGodfather]

This thread warms my heart.

Just to have something useful to say, my advice to your DM is not to worry about ability prerequisites-- roll the stats, then let the players choose their classes normally. Chances are, they're going to play along with what they rolled, anyway.

[Shining Wrath]

I recommend to your DM that he use roll 4, choose 3. Even in 2nd edition that was an option.