Do you develop chars the PHB order?

[Tanarii]

I'm curious how many people generate their characters using the method from the PHB?

Specifically:
1) Pick Race
2) Pick Class
3) Roll stats / use array
4) Pick alignment, background, & personality.

Often when people are talking about making a character, they seem to do the following: Pick class; generate stats & select race simultaneously, the select background. Sometimes people that roll stats generate stats first, then select class then race the background. Once in a blue moon I see people select background first, and work backwards from there. The few times I see people thinking about race first is for non-standard races, especially Drow.

What's interesting about the PHB method to me is that it indicates a completely different mindset. Almost as if the most defining characteristic of your character is what race he is. :smalleek: The very first thing to think about, how you entered the world, the thing that sets the underlying default assumptions about personality and worldview as you were raised, and everything else that developed into the eventual end character gets layered on top of it.

Mechanically, in the case of rolling stats, it's also interesting to not know if your racial bonus or class being SAD/MAD will have strong or weak support from your rolled attributes.

[TheTeaMustFlow]

Or it could just be because race happens first, as it were - you were a dwarf long before you joined the clergy, for example. (Or at least, that was probably the original reasoning - the real reasoning is that it's been that way around in every PHB for at least four editions.)

[Arkhios]

As to answer your question: Yes and no. Depends on occasion.

If I wish to play a character that can be taken seriously, in a campaign that can be taken seriously, and playing the character so that it could be taken as a real person and not just another statblock with legs and arms, then yes, I'd prefer to use the PHB order.

However, if I chose to make a character for a massively multiplayed Tabletop Game such as AL, or Pathfinder Society, where most if not all characters tend to be something between comic relief and a min/max G.I.Joes on steroids, I generally prefer "rolling" stats and choose race simultaneously with the class already in mind, and then think about its background and more visually defining aspects.

[DanyBallon]

I often create my character this way:

1- Find a inspiring image
2- Decide what type of background story would fit the image
3- Select appropriate race
4- Select class
5- Select background
6- Assign stats (point buy)
7- Complete backstory, alignement and personality

So that's pretty much PHB character creation but inspiration come from an image.

From time to time, I like rolling stats, usually using a restrictive method (3d6, in order, swap once, etc.), then see what I can make out of this set of stats.

[Lvl 2 Expert]

That is pretty weird, now that you mention it, because race is actually not that big a part of the game. When you start thinking up a concept you'll probably have a class in mind pretty soon, sometimes it's literally the first thing you think of. "I want to do a cleric, with the death domain, but a good alignment", "I want to do a high intelligence low or no magic ranger who gets about on her wits and her mad skills", "I want to be a bard on a quest of vengeance after a dragon ate his lute". The amount of thought put into race is often not much more than "this one gives me a bonus in strength, and all I pay for it is my charisma dropping from 4 to 2, sweet!" It can be part of the core concept, "I want to be a minotaur who was raised by pixies", but I think that's much rarer than the class coming first, and often you'll even have an idea of what, story wise, your background is long before you even start looking up the pro's and con's of both races and mechanically defined backgrounds alike.

In defense of this method, I think they're going for a bit of an organic method of character creation. In the old days of "roll your stats in order" they would even have switched step 2 and 3. The bonuses from your species and the random results of our stat rolls decide what you'll be good at, and thus what class and background you should take. If you know your stats before your species you can use the race selection to tune your stats, which would be cheating. Later they decided that people should have an opportunity to play whatever class they want and still have decent stats for it and switched those two around while not trying to mess with the rest of the philosophy or process, so the resulting mixture of ideas now looks weird. If you were designing the process from the ground up you would not arrive at this order of doing things no matter what philosophy you had about it, but that's how things often end up after growing through evolutionary process. I don't think we should look much deeper into it than that.

(EDIT: although as the posters above indicate, I could well be horribly wrong and a lot of people maybe would design the process this way.)

[Tanarii]

Or it could just be because race happens first, as it were - you were a dwarf long before you joined the clergy, for example. (Or at least, that was probably the original reasoning - the real reasoning is that it's been that way around in every PHB for at least four editions.)You summarized part of my post nicely in one sentence. But for sure the main reason is the PHB order, including chapter order, is a sacred cow. It's been the same basic order for every edition as far as I know.


From time to time, I like rolling stats, usually using a restrictive method (3d6, in order, swap once, etc.), then see what I can make out of this set of stats.I love doing that too, especially in older editions where the restrictive methods were the default methods.


However, if I chose to make a character for a massively multiplayed Tabletop Game such as AL, or Pathfinder Society, where most if not all characters tend to be something between comic relief and a min/max G.I.Joes on steroids, I generally prefer "rolling" stats and choose race simultaneously with the class already in mind, and then think about its background and more visually defining aspects.Theres definitely a major flavor difference between AL/Official Play and many home games. I find that it stems from two factors: larger groups making spotlight on specific characters less common; rotating players / PCs making specific subtle character development less memorable. And it can, but doesn't have to, have a heavy combat play/focus (and associated optimization focus). That often leads stereotypical characters, or ones with blatant personality 'hooks' that are easy to showcase.

[Tanarii]

That is pretty weird, now that you mention it, because race is actually not that big a part of the game.

(EDIT: although as the posters above indicate, I could well be horribly wrong and a lot of people maybe would design the process this way.)

It's not necessarily a big part of the game (or character) mechanically, but it's potential a huge part for role-playing (ie decision making in-character) purposes.

And I don't think you're "horribly wrong". It just sounds like you have a mechanical focus during character creation. That's a perfectly valid way to do it. But different points of view on it are why I created the thread.

[Arkhios]

Though I've known it (sort of) from the day I first read the 5th edition rules thorougly, I think it's worth noting that:

Following the order of the PHB like it was an universal law, is rather funny, actually, because how the rules are laid out, you can be a cleric with wisdom 10 or lower, and still be able to cast all of your spells from each levels you take in cleric. Only thing restricting you from that point forward is will you be able to multiclass to another, perhaps more reasonable, class due to the fact that you must meet minimum requirements for both (or all) classes you have.

Let's say you picked human, chose to become a cleric, and then rolled utterly horrible row of stats and you'd have to keep it in order. Something like 11, 12, 10, 9, 8, 5, ending up with a Human Cleric with Str 12, Dex 13, Con 11, Int 10, Wis 9, Cha 6. You'd be stuck in cleric for the rest of your career, as you must have a minimum of wisdom 13 to multiclass to and from cleric. However, nothing in the rules restricts you from casting your cleric spells. You'd just have very few of them due to low wisdom, and those few would have horrendously low Saving Throw DC's and other dependables :P But as said, you could. Good for you, you might increase your wisdom to 13 come level 8, cast only spells that don't have a DC and won't require you to make spell attacks for example. Perhaps being the worst healer a random group short of one could hope for! :D

Edit: I got wound up in this particular character idea a little too much, apparently, as I realized how genious it would be to first level up to 8 as a cleric, who never could be as good as his peers in clergy, then in resentment turn into violence, become a rogue, and eventually an assassin, driven by years of scorn and hatred, only aim in life to end the lives of those who bullied him all the time!

[Blacky the Blackball]

When I'm thinking of a character it's generally some combination of race/class/background that appeals to me. I generally think of my characters in a very visual way and there will be some combination that I can picture adventuring in a way that would be fun to play.

My image is unlikely to include all three of race/class/background, so I'll then fill in the blanks and make the decisions to get the full combination.

After that, I'll generate ability scores (usually standard array) and choose specifics like subclasses if they weren't part of my original picture of the character.

I don't do multiclassing or "builds", so - other than subclass - I don't do things like advance planning of what ASIs and feats I'll take. I make those decisions as I go up levels depending on how the character (and party) is doing.

[Tanarii]

Let's say you picked human, chose to become a cleric, and then rolled utterly horrible row of stats and you'd have to keep it in order.keeping stats rolled in order isn't the PHB standard, but it certainly can make for interesting characters.

Compare to 1e: not only did you have to select you class after rolling stats, but your stats determined what classes you qualified for. Some rolls (5 or less) restricted you to a single class! In fact, it was possible to roll stats that couldn't legally play any class. Such as Dex 5 or less (Cleric only) and Wis 8 or less (can't be a Cleric).


Edit: I got wound up in this particular character idea a little too much, apparently, as I realized how genious it would be to first level up to 8 as a cleric, who never could be as good as his peers in clergy, then in resentment turn into violence, become a rogue, and eventually an assassin, driven by years of scorn and hatred, only aim in life to end the lives of those who bullied him all the time!Sounds like a good character concept for a high Str / Dex with dumped caster stat character to me. Regardless of specific classes involved. ;)

[Arkhios]

keeping stats rolled in order isn't the PHB standard, but it certainly can make for interesting characters.

True, it's not, but it's by far the most common "hardcore" house rule I've heard of :D


Compare to 1e: not only did you have to select you class after rolling stats, but your stats determined what classes you qualified for. Some rolls (5 or less) restricted you to a single class! In fact, it was possible to roll stats that couldn't legally play any class. Such as Dex 5 or less (Cleric only) and Wis 8 or less (can't be a Cleric).

Ouch! Just to imagine how you'd feel if something like that happened to you when rolling for a new character...! x_O


Sounds like a good character concept for a high Str / Dex with dumped caster stat character to me. Regardless of specific classes involved. ;)

True, again. You could easily just disregard your casting stat and go with improving your physical attributes as much as possible, and it would still end up competent character. Eventually. But before that, you just might get some odd frowns upon your choice of career x)

[Douche]

I pick a class first, then usually pick the race to support what I want out of it.

It also helps that I actually think certain races fit better as certain classes... A prissy half-elf doesn't make sense as a barb to me.

Anyway, I usually already have a concept to start with, then I put it together afterwards.

[ImSAMazing]

WHen I create a character, I take the following steps:

I think of what kind of character I want to play. Do I want a martial, a caster, a half-caster? Heavy armor? S&B, or a heavy weapon?
Based on that, I choose a concept and a main idea. Do I want to play a ninja-like character? A Samurai? Or do I want to play a Knight, with a White Horse?
Then I choose an appropiate starting class. I also plan out possible Multiclassing for my concept, like starting with Fighter 1, then going Fiend Bladepact.
Then I create my scores. In my group, we almost always roll a single array of scores using 4d6b3, with at least a total modifier of +3.
Then I select a Race, appropiate to my scores and my concept. I never play Vumans, cuz I don't like the idea of humans, I just can't RP them.
Then I choose a background and Alignment
Then I select my class skills.

[Arkhios]

I've seen this "4d6b3" a few times before, but now I couldn't resist but ask: what does it exactly mean? Most importantly, what does the b3 refer to?

[HoarsHalberd]

I've seen this "4d6b3" a few times before, but now I couldn't resist but ask: what does it exactly mean? Most importantly, what does the b3 refer to?

It's the same as 4D6D1. B3 is best 3 and D1 is drop 1. So you roll 4d6 and pick the three highest dice.

EDIT: Deleted the wrong message. That's annoying.

Anyway. I prefer to design the person around the class and race and get them from the concept I want to play. I do it this way because it's the way I have fun, but the other ways are perfectly legitimate. But I would recommend not designing the person too much until you've rolled stats at least because they (especially mental ones) have such an effect on how the person acts.

[Daishain]

I do base concept first, then mechanics. So class selection either comes first or at the same time as race, since what a character does is typically more important to a concept than what he is. After that comes background choice (or more accurately I custom make a background that fits the concept since the PHB options have yet to fully satisfy) Last comes stats and other such details

[Blacky the Blackball]

Ouch! Just to imagine how you'd feel if something like that happened to you when rolling for a new character...! x_O

Happened to me in AD&D once. Rolling 4d6 drop lowest (in order) I ended up with a character whose highest stat was his 9 Int.

The DM said I could re-roll but I thought it might be a fun challenge so I played the character (he was a magic-user who I decided was a terrible apprentice who had eventually got kicked out by his master as "unteachable"). He managed to survive until 5th level - no mean feat in AD&D - whereupon his familiar died and the permanent loss of hit points combined with his Con penalty meant that he was down to 4hp when fully healed.

At that point I retired him, and he went back home to his village a rich man with lots of money and tales of adventure to throw in the faces of everyone who said he'd never amount to anything!

He was one of my favourite characters I've played.

[Randomthom]

If I'm concerned that the GM will be very tough on the party & I feel the need for some power my order would be;
Class > Stats (& Feats*) > Background > Race
*If starting as variant human or starting at higher levels of play.

If I'm more expectant of good roleplay opportunities then I'd probably go;
Race > Background > Class > Stats

[JumboWheat01]

I tend to be a little "ooh, shinny..." when making my characters. Though I almost always decide on class first before anything else. It tends to go like this.

I want to play a druid all of a sudden. Time to go to to Giant's forums and pop open a guide for druids. Maybe see what guides I have saved as pdfs on my computer. Oh hey, Elemental Evil, haven't read that thing in a while, let's take a peak. Hey, water genasi have stats that work pretty good for a druid, an extra cantrip and some watery abilities would fit interestingly into a coastal land druid. That sounds like an idea. Let's just pull open my phb and see what else I can work with. Hmm... I like the hermit background, but not the religion skill. I'll just take the phb stated ability to make custom backgrounds, completely plagiarize the hermit background, but replace religion with nature. Seems much more fitting for a druid.

Let's flip back to druid. What skills... hmm... well, perception's on the list, I should probably grab that. With my (eventually) capped out wisdom, nothing will sneak up on me. I already have medicine and nature, so... survival makes sense too. I mean, I am out in the wilds often enough, so it sounds like a good idea. Yes, perfect sounding. Oh right, I need to decide my stats. Well, I'll just use the standard array, its nice and easy. Hmm... I'll have to make con end in an odd number so I can grab resilience for it later. So 16 (15+1) wis, 15 (13+2) con, 14 dex, 12 int, 10 str and 8 cha. Hey, that doesn't sound too bad. Can easily throw my first two ASI into wisdom, then grab resilience, then cap off con.

Cantrips time, this is important, can't simply change them whenever. Well, I already have Shape Water from being a water genasi, so let's see what the druid guide has to say. I only opened them up ages ago. Well naturally I want Druidcraft, I'm a freakin' druid. Produce Flame seems like a decent opening cantrip for attacking and lighting. Hah, my water genasi's getting into fire spells. Ah, well. Anything else look interesting for later? Well I got to have Shillelagh for later. Hah, I still love how that's pronounced compared to how its spelled. Maybe Mending for later. Oh right, I get one more for being a land druid (eventually,) maybe Guidance? Ooh, but Thorn Whip could be fun. Pull them off an edge, pull them closer to the fighter so he can hack them into little pieces.

It trails off into little details after that, but that's pretty much the process I follow.

[Temperjoke]

I usually think about the sort of character I want to play, personality/RP-wise, then build from that, usually with a race, then background, then class. Then the rolls come to flesh out the stats.

[Naanomi]

It varies a lot, I tend to start with some concept (often a mechanical one: 'hey, a giant crab pet!' Or 'what if I had expertise in every INT skill'; but sometimes just flavorful: 'an adventuring dwarven brewmaster') and build out from there; which can mean starting at skills or race or class... Whatever is central to the idea and then how to best support it in whatever order makes sense from there

[SpawnOfMorbo]

I think of it as if I'm describing someone.

Bob is an accountant, he's really good with finding the numbers that others miss, I heard he grew up in Sweeden and was basically raised in doors.


Name:
Class:
Skills:
Background:

Race, for me, can be any. The race of a character is a mixture part fluff and mechanics. Though when DM use the +2/+1 or +1/+1/+1 rule then racial choice is a lot less about mechanics for me (goes from 50/50 to 75/25) as I can shape the character's image how I see fit. I made a +2 Str/+1 Con High Elf fighter once, his name was Hans and he had the Friend cantrip and he would "pump, you up" and yeah you may not liked that he used magic to motivate you but... You like the results.

[Newoblivion]

First I will think about the person I would like to RP, playing with the idea in my head for a while. Then I will start thinking about races and classes that will work well with the idea, or will farther twist it to something cool.

For example:
I want to play a character that straggles daily with some past trauma, he uses humor and silliness as a way to coup with the pain every day. Some might see him as a clown, but deep inside he is a sad person. Friends and loved ones are very important to him and aid him in his daily struggle. Making someone laugh lightens the burden. He hopes that one day he will be able to make peace with the darkness of his past.

I can now asign classes and races. Maybe an illusionist or a bard can work, they use illusions the way they use their humor, to hide the truth. Or maybe a swashbuckling rogue with a charming smile but there's darkness in his eyes.

Race will add this ethnic uniqueness to the character but by now I have quite a good grasp for what I am going to play.

[darkrose50]

I do not follow the order on purpose, but perhaps on happenstance sometimes. Usually I have a class roll to fill, and start there.

I can also start with a concept, and often the concept can be more than one class. Often I have several concepts.

[gfishfunk]

I think it is easiest to walk new players through:


Image what you want to be: kick@ss dwarf.

Ok, now what type of dwarf? Barbarian? Fighter?

Etc.

Really easy to walk people who are new to the game that way.

My method is usually to grab a weird concept and then see what would make it work, and from there arrange class / race. Usually, its around using something from a feat or spell, then I find out which classes have it, and then figure out which races would work with it....but often I will readjust several times because once I get the concept, I start getting the RP elements in my mind, I adjust regardless of optimization.

[darkrose50]

I enjoy rolling, with some sort of opportunity not to get stuck with a gimped character. My group strongly prefers point buy.

In the past I have been pleasantly surprised by a Wizard with an 18 Constitution, and in Alternity a Doctor with a 16 Dexterity. It is fun having unexpected results. The Wizard was interesting as she had a rather large amount of hit points, and the Doctor was surprisingly the best shot in the group as it happens the group was largely a non-combat group.

[TentacleSurpris]

I find the PHB order a little illogical though. A character is born a member of a race, grows up as part of a background, and then starts his adventuring career as part of a class. So it should be arranged in that order. If you want to emphasize roleplaying, why have the bonds/traits/flaws as the LAST thing in the order, as if an afterthought?

Besides that, getting the static 2 skills from your background usually makes you flip back to the class to reassign duplicate skills, so the order doesn't even flow very well.

That being said, you really usually choose the class first, and decide on a race with good stats for it.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

I find the PHB order a little illogical though. A character is born a member of a race, grows up as part of a background, and then starts his adventuring career as part of a class. So it should be arranged in that order. If you want to emphasize roleplaying, why have the bonds/traits/flaws as the LAST thing in the order, as if an afterthought?

Besides that, getting the static 2 skills from your background usually makes you flip back to the class to reassign duplicate skills, so the order doesn't even flow very well.

That being said, you really usually choose the class first, and decide on a race with good stats for it.

Because this game isn't a role-playing game first? Yeah you can role-play with it, but I can also role-play using monopoly as the base game rules.

[Tanarii]

I think it is easiest to walk new players through:
Actually, that's probably a very good point. A lot of the PHB is based around new players. I find that veteran players have a tendency to skip straight to mechanics when a new edition is released.

I made a concerted effort this time around to read the 5e PHB as a book: pages in order, no major jumping around. I did use the spells section more as a reference, but other than that I read all the character creation section, then all races including the all the flavor, then all classes again making sure to read all the flavor, then the entire personality & backgrounds chapter, and so on.

I know that's affected my view of lots of things in 5e. I'm sure it's locked me into more 'traditional' thinking about the races, classes and backgrounds, which can be cool but also limits imagination. But it's just blindingly obvious to me when people have skipped the built in flavor, especially with the personality system and backgrounds, to focus on the mechanics. IMO they're missing a lot that can help even veteran players ground their character concepts, but that's obviously it's totally valid approach: just make up all your own flavor, don't let the baked in stuff limit your imagination, and just use the crunch.

[DiBastet]

1) Pick alignment, background, & personality.
2) Pick Race and Class at the same time
3) Use array

I just can't start without my concept in mind.

[Gwendol]

No, it's much more chaotic as a process. If I roll for stats, then that is always done first. Then look at the campaign, the world, etc. After that, it's really whatever will fit.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

So I made a level 5 character using my way of character creation (kept RASI)

Name: Thorton Dwindlebottom
Class: Wizard (Transmutation)
Skills: Sage
Background: Abandoned at birth, this half-orc was found by a pair the Dwindlebottom gnomes (known for making fabulous pants called Dwindles). In order to live up to the gnome name, Thorton (the elephant in the room) always poured himself into his studies. Now Thorton is out in the world so that he can hone his trade (pants making and transmutation) and show that he can be the best damn Gnome around.

Level 5

Str: 10
Dex: 14
Con: 16
Int: 16
Wis: 10
Cha: 8

HP: 37
AC: 15 (Mage Armor)

Level 4 ASI: Observant (+1 Int)

Trained Skills:
Arcana, History, Investigation, Insight, Intimidation.

+×÷%

If I would have thought of the race, name, or background first I don't think I would have gotten to the same character.


Half-Orc resilence is fabulous for a wizard though the bonus to weapon crits is not. Maybe if I picked up greenflame blade it might be useful (but not really).

[Theodoxus]

Hmm, I guess I pick race first, because so far, it's always been Half-elf... I've toyed with a cleric idea as a dwarf, and I played a session and a half as a Half-orc, but any legitimate character has always (and probably always will be) a Half-elf (they're too mechanically powerful for what I like to play).

Then, I pick a class, but again, based on what I like to play, that's always been Rogue (except that one off Half-orc, which was a Barbarian - so completely stereotypical, it wasn't even funny.) So, I know that Rogue isn't generally seen as a strong contender for Half-elf (pre-SCAG, why bother?) and my first character was a Rogue/Cleric (so that Cha boost did very little) - but, with Swashbuckler, Cha has gained an important stat - not just social skills, either - but a Initiative boost as well? Shoot, Half-elf becomes pert near the preeminent race for someone who buckles their swashes.

After that, I groom my attributes to fit the concept - SPBI makes it super easy - but I've yet to play in a Roll in Order type game, so stat generation is pretty low on the stress level.

Then it's skills - which can drive Background, but seriously, with a Rogue's skill list, and an extra two from Half-elf, Backgrounds become nearly superfluous - in fact, I've taken to building my own that heightens a particular aspect I can't warp from the pre-gen backgrounds for my character. The skills at that point become secondary to whatever boon I want to explore and Background attributes that generate Inspiration.

[Coidzor]

Party Role > Race+Class > Concept+Personality+Background > Ability Scores and filling in the numbers on the character sheet

Sometimes it's Concept+Personality > Party Role > Race+Class+Background > Ability Scores and filling in the numbers on the character sheet.

[Knaight]

My method is basically to have a concept in broad strokes, work through the mechanics and pin down details as that goes, then establish the details of the character in play*. While this could theoretically result in following the PHB order, it's not exactly likely. Alignment is an afterthought label, so it actually will stay last. Background and personality are liable to end up split, and neither of them is particularly likely to come after things like race and class.

*It's basically the same technique I use for NPCs, as a near-permanent GM.

[Logosloki]

If I were to roll stats, I roll first but if we are using array then the stats come last.

Otherwise, once I get to crunch stage my order of creation is Background/Personality, Class, Stats, Race and then Alignment. Sometimes I don't even bother with alignment unless someone bugs me about it IC or OOC.

[Arkhios]

I, too, prefer not to pay much weight on alignment, as I feel it a bit too restricting concept. Unless it's absolutely necessary for a character concept to work (like in earlier editions with some classes which have to be of certain alignment), I usually leave it be "unaligned" unless stated otherwise. To put it other way, I don't want my character be categorized by an alignment, I'd rather have my character's morale qualify for one or the other through his/her own actions in-character.

[KorvinStarmast]

For 5e, I pick a class and background first, and as I ponder the story of "how the character got here" race gets folded in.

Then head over for stats.

Alignment is last consideration.

Back in the day, what usually happened was roll the dice, see what the scores were, choose a class ... then a race ... and then go into the background story depending upon the campaign we were playing. Again, alignment was the last consideration.

[gfishfunk]

Yes to the above post.

I only tackle alignment when I'm filling in the character sheet, and I see it needs an entry. Then, I think about what I already presume the character is like.

[Syll]

I'd say concept> class > backstory > background > race > stats > and then class a few more times since I'll agonize over what I want vs need to realize my goals mechanically... And then race again.

A default feat at first level really would make this much easier for me, as I'm usually in a constant fight with myself over v. Human vs everything else

[Shining Wrath]

Usually I know what sort of character I want to run (class), and then pick race and background. Generating #s is done last in-group.

[PoeticDwarf]

I'm curious how many people generate their characters using the method from the PHB?

Specifically:
1) Pick Race
2) Pick Class
3) Roll stats / use array
4) Pick alignment, background, & personality.

Often when people are talking about making a character, they seem to do the following: Pick class; generate stats & select race simultaneously, the select background. Sometimes people that roll stats generate stats first, then select class then race the background. Once in a blue moon I see people select background first, and work backwards from there. The few times I see people thinking about race first is for non-standard races, especially Drow.

What's interesting about the PHB method to me is that it indicates a completely different mindset. Almost as if the most defining characteristic of your character is what race he is. :smalleek: The very first thing to think about, how you entered the world, the thing that sets the underlying default assumptions about personality and worldview as you were raised, and everything else that developed into the eventual end character gets layered on top of it.

Mechanically, in the case of rolling stats, it's also interesting to not know if your racial bonus or class being SAD/MAD will have strong or weak support from your rolled attributes.

How I do
1) I have a cool character idea with class and race, I probably have the class before the race. Parts of your point 4 I already made up but not everything
2) I roll stats or make it with pointbuy
3) I do personality, and sometimes I have to get alignment and background still

[Rusvul]

I come up with a neat idea mechanically first- Say, a Fighter/Rogue sniper/medic with Precise Shot and the Healer feat.

I'll build something mechanical first (usually Class(es) and then Race), then do a little bit of thinking on background and personality. I'll select a background based on what makes sense rp-wise as well as based on what skills it grants. I'll then write a bunch of elaborate descriptions of the character and their backstory.

So, generally speaking, I go in this order: Mechanical concept > Class/es > Race > Rp concept > Background > Spells (if any) = Skills > Equipment

[eastmabl]

When I come up with a character idea, it varies greatly. Sometimes I have a concept which dictates some of the options (e.g. "shirtless raging halfling" means halfling barbarian), while others allow for more choices (e.g. "halfling magical screwup that runs with the wrong crowd" is more fluid, and became lightfoot halfling wild magic sorcerer with criminal background). I don't know why I've started playing halflings almost exclusively now in 5e.

When it comes to filling out the character sheet, I absolutely go out of order. Since my background gives me no choice of skill proficiencies, I start there. Then, I go to my class and choose my skill proficiencies, saving throws and note my abilities. Then, I go to my race and subrace and note my racial abilities. Once completed, I generate my ability scores based upon whatever method the DM tells me, and then fill in the rest of the character sheet from there (fill in bonuses, buy equipment, choose spells, etc.)

Then again, I've been doing this for a dozen years or so.

[Tanarii]

I, too, prefer not to pay much weight on alignment, as I feel it a bit too restricting concept. Unless it's absolutely necessary for a character concept to work (like in earlier editions with some classes which have to be of certain alignment), I usually leave it be "unaligned" unless stated otherwise. To put it other way, I don't want my character be categorized by an alignment, I'd rather have my character's morale qualify for one or the other through his/her own actions in-character.5e Alignment is a tool for the player to use to define one aspect of their character: moral and social/order attitudes. In other words, it's not really necessary if you've either already baked in moral and social/order attitudes into your character's personality, are going to ignore those aspects of personality, or are planning on winging it.

I'm a huge advocate of the 5e Personality system, including the Alignment portion. I think 5-6 sentences about character beliefs and motivations it is a powerful RP tool to assist players, both new and veterans, in getting into character while playing. But that doesn't mean it's for everyone.

[JakOfAllTirades]

I find the PHB order a little illogical though. A character is born a member of a race, grows up as part of a background, and then starts his adventuring career as part of a class. So it should be arranged in that order. If you want to emphasize roleplaying, why have the bonds/traits/flaws as the LAST thing in the order, as if an afterthought?

Besides that, getting the static 2 skills from your background usually makes you flip back to the class to reassign duplicate skills, so the order doesn't even flow very well.

That being said, you really usually choose the class first, and decide on a race with good stats for it.


Bold text above is exactly what I was thinking.

And yes, D&D is a role-playing game. It was, in fact, the very first RPG.

[Tanarii]

Bold text above is exactly what I was thinking.

And yes, D&D is a role-playing game. It was, in fact, the very first RPG.
But one that descended from war games, with a heavy focus on mechanics and detailed rules for combat, exploration and interactions in dungeons/adventuring.

Ie the chapter order in the PHB is kind of a sacred cow, and Backgrounds and a Personality system are relatively newer concepts. Ones used to flesh out the character after other 'key' components are defined. Using key to mean the ones primarily relevant to tradition and dungeoneering/adventuring.

I think they're damn important ones though. ;)

[ad_hoc]

We use cards.

First we draw 3 cards which suggest events and motivation in the character's life. Then we draw cards which determine stats in order.

After that it is up to the player but usually it goes class, background, then race.

It is funny that race is often last for us. I think it is because we wait to see what race would make the most sense for the character to come from based on their background.

[Shining Wrath]

BTW, I often play "swing man" and choose my character concept last and fill in holes in the party.

[Dimers]

I think of it as if I'm describing someone.

Bob is an accountant, he's really good with finding the numbers that others miss, I heard he grew up in Sweeden and was basically raised in doors.


Name:
Class:
Skills:
Background:

I really thought you were going to put Race between Skills and Background, since "Swedish" comes between "finding numbers" and "raised indoors". :smallsmile:


Fighter/Rogue sniper/medic with Precise Shot and the Healer feat.

Nickname: 'Needles'. :smallamused:

I usually start character creation with what I want to be able to *do*. Bend minds, bend steel, walk around unnoticed, breathe underwater, cure plagues, destroy abominations, talk abominations out of eating my world because there's a much tastier one right over there ... ? Usually class is next because the most flexibility in achieving those goals comes from class abilities. But sometimes skills, feats, background ability or race will be the best answer instead.

I like D&D as a problem-solving game, and if I can't *do* something that can potentially solve problems, if I don't have a mechanical way to interact with the world, then I'm probably not going to have much fun.

[Mara]

1) Pick Race
2) Pick Class
3) Roll stats / use array
4) Pick alignment, background, & personality.

I:

1) Pick Class
2) Pick Race
3) use point buy (Rolling stats is of the devil :P)
4) Pick alignment, background, & personality.

[oxybe]

Rarely. I normally go from a mechanics point "what would be fun to play?" and once I can find something that interests me, I build a character either around that concept or would use that to further their goals.

At that point it kinda snowballs from there but "what kind of gaming experience would be fun to play?" is my number 1 priority.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

Bold text above is exactly what I was thinking.

And yes, D&D is a role-playing game. It was, in fact, the very first RPG.

Yes, because nothing changes or evolves :smallconfused:.

D&D came from a combat game, became a role-playing game, and has now went (primarily since 3e) back to being a combat game.

There is nothing wrong with that, it's what people want. A combat game that you can role play with. And that is the primary difference between what use to be D&D and what IS D&D. What used to be D&D was rules made from the idea it is a role-playing game, now rules are made from a gamist point of view.

If you want a more true role-playing game then look else where. D&D has evolved past that, it's what keeps it at number 1.

The rules for combat are numerous, the rules for role-playing is "ask your DM".

[Telwar]

It depends.

For a short Aeneid-based game, I took the DM's offhand suggestion of "sure, other races are okay, they'll be nationalities, like say dwarves are Egyptian" and created an Egyptian exile, Nakhtmin, Son of Ay, Son of Nakhtmin, Son of Ay, rightful pharoah of Egypt and sworn foe to the Ramessids, who proudly fought with his flail of office and shield, protected only by his cotton kilt and bracers. Amusingly, the timing was *just* about right historically for the accepted fall of Troy.

Mechanically, Nakhtmin Son of Ay Son of Nakhtmin Son of Ay was a noble-background mountain dwarf totem warrior (totem = hippo) barbarian. Once I had the concept, i went with dwarf, then barbarian, picked a stat array, and then set his background and proficiencies.

My other concept would have been a dragonborn fighter from Babylon, one of the secret Reptoids hiding as a human, but the DM wouldn't let me take a breath weapon, even as a Great Shout sort of thing.


For our current Iron Kingdoms game, I decided we needed a paladin to boost the party's saves to a reasonable point. Looking at the DM's house rules, I decided that I'd go with a trollkin (as the DM gave them good Str and Cha and useful racial abilities), whose One Unique Thing was that he was the only paladin of Dhunia in the world. After that, it was a matter of stats and backgrounds and proficiencies.

A lot of my characters in more, ahem, mechanically robust systems start their lives as design concepts, like "how many dice can I get as a starting character to a weapon skill in Shadowrun?" These can and do evolve significantly; the aforementioned "lotsadicegunbunny" is now a social adept who has yet to fire a pistol in anger.

Other times, it's just a name. My tiefling fire elementalist in our 4e Al Qadim game, Mikael Al-Khelyej, was inspired by the thought that I could make a character who was a living Michael Bay movie. He was great fun, though I was devastated when it became a better idea to admix Cold into his Firebolt rather than Thunder. Le sigh.

[Zman]

Concept
Race
Background
Class
Ability Scores

[Tanarii]

BTW, I often play "swing man" and choose my character concept last and fill in holes in the party.
I find home games tend more to "fill the roles" than pick-up/official play. It changes the equation for character creation considerably when you're effective designing a team, and not an individual.

[MaxWilson]

I usually draw inspiration from my stat rolls. For instance, via brockjones.com:

13 7 10 13 14 8

That's kind of a boring array, nothing exceptionally good nor exceptionally bad, multiple decent stats but none that stand out... so I think that becomes a tanky fighter of some kind. Therefore human. But pure fighters aren't ideal tanks, and I haven't done an abjuror yet, so how about:

Human Fighter 1/Abjuror X
Str 16 Dex 8 Con 13 Int 14 Wis 10 Cha 7
Feat: Heavy Armor Master

His only outstanding characteristic is that he's as strong as a gorilla (honestly 5E, you underestimate gorillas and overestimate humans) and he will eventually know a lot of magic... but for now he's just a tank in chain mail.

Now for personality/background/alignment/etc., hmmm. His Wisdom is dead average, so his temper is likely normal. Low Charisma, low Dexterity... for some reason I don't feel like this guy is low-Cha due to standoffishness, I feel like he's a loud, obnoxious dork. But a friendly one. He's That Guy who makes you wince at his juvenile humor and is always dropping in at inconvenient times to chitchat with no real awareness of what's a normal bedtime and no ability to take a hint. But he's a friend, so you put up with it instead of blowing your top, although you do get snippy with him sometimes. Big and clumsy too, so he probably breaks your stuff. But at least he's loyal to his friends, and a good meatshield.

Background: feels like a Folk Hero. Maybe he tells cow jokes and expects you to laugh at them with him. *wince* The guy has no Theory of Mind at all.

Alignment: could be anything really. Even evil guys can have dorky friends. But let's say his name is Lenny, he likes fast horses and pretty girls, he's loyal to his friends but generally tries to treat others as he would like to be treated, except for people who are unfair or mean and then he gets mad. He's Neutral Good.

Conclusion: I think I went stats, class, race, stats, personality, background, alignment, bond, alignment.

[Tanarii]

Conclusion: I think I went stats, class, race, stats, personality, background, alignment, bond, alignment.
Interestingly, I really liked your approach. But that's because it felt organic, and because it resulted in a 'basic hero'. As opposed to a heavily narrative one. Given my roots in old 'Bob the Fighter died and is replaced by Bob the Fighter II' Dungeon Delving D&D, and my preference for sandbox any-man hero style games that's hardly surprising. Also my preference for simple personality & motivations over complex backstory.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

His only outstanding characteristic is that he's as strong as a gorilla (honestly 5E, you underestimate gorillas and overestimate humans) and he will eventually know a lot of magic... but for now he's just a tank in chain mail.

Well, in all fairness, this is an abstract fantasy type game. Humans in the game aren't simulating humans no more than gorillas are simulating real world gorillas.

In this game it is rather easy for the special ones to take on a gorilla.

So it isn't really about underestimating or overestimating anyone or anything.

[Arkhios]

well, given that a regular human farmer might be an average of a human in the game's terms, a farmer would have a strength of 10 or 11. A value of 16 is HUGE compared to that. Farmers in general, I think, tend to be rather strong, as their lifestyle requires it. This is how an adventurer stands out from the common folk. They can do astonishing feats in the eyes of the common folk.

[rlc]

Though I've known it (sort of) from the day I first read the 5th edition rules thorougly, I think it's worth noting that:

Following the order of the PHB like it was an universal law, is rather funny, actually, because how the rules are laid out, you can be a cleric with wisdom 10 or lower, and still be able to cast all of your spells from each levels you take in cleric. Only thing restricting you from that point forward is will you be able to multiclass to another, perhaps more reasonable, class due to the fact that you must meet minimum requirements for both (or all) classes you have.

Let's say you picked human, chose to become a cleric, and then rolled utterly horrible row of stats and you'd have to keep it in order. Something like 11, 12, 10, 9, 8, 5, ending up with a Human Cleric with Str 12, Dex 13, Con 11, Int 10, Wis 9, Cha 6. You'd be stuck in cleric for the rest of your career, as you must have a minimum of wisdom 13 to multiclass to and from cleric. However, nothing in the rules restricts you from casting your cleric spells. You'd just have very few of them due to low wisdom, and those few would have horrendously low Saving Throw DC's and other dependables :P But as said, you could. Good for you, you might increase your wisdom to 13 come level 8, cast only spells that don't have a DC and won't require you to make spell attacks for example. Perhaps being the worst healer a random group short of one could hope for! :D

Edit: I got wound up in this particular character idea a little too much, apparently, as I realized how genious it would be to first level up to 8 as a cleric, who never could be as good as his peers in clergy, then in resentment turn into violence, become a rogue, and eventually an assassin, driven by years of scorn and hatred, only aim in life to end the lives of those who bullied him all the time!

All of this is based on the mindsets for previous editions, though. I think the default for this edition is using the array and I don't think it even mentions keeping everything in order for rolling. And, I could be wrong, but I don't think spells known has anything to do with your stats here. So really, a lot of your spells would just suck if your casting stat is low, and a lot of people don't even care about multiclassing.

[Mr.Moron]

Well there really is no race picking for me as I always or almost always play Human. If it's super compelling from a charOP and I'm playing in that sort of game I might consider going half-elf or something like Aasimar. I generally have a hankering for a class/concept long before I set down to do charGen so that's generally taken care of.

This means generally I'll be assigning:

Background
Stats

In roughly that order. Right now if I was going to playing in a game I'd want to be playing a Human/Scholar background paladin going for Devotion Oath if I couldn't get the GM to approve my Home brew Illumination Oath. I'm really just not open to considering anything else. Maybe if you twisted my arm hard you could get me to play a Cleric devoted to a knowledge deity, but it'd take some hard arm twisting.

[MaxWilson]

All of this is based on the mindsets for previous editions, though. I think the default for this edition is using the array and I don't think it even mentions keeping everything in order for rolling. And, I could be wrong, but I don't think spells known has anything to do with your stats here. So really, a lot of your spells would just suck if your casting stat is low, and a lot of people don't even care about multiclassing.

I believe stat-rolling is the first method listed. The array is option #2.

[Tanarii]

I believe stat-rolling is the first method listed. The array is option #2.You're correct in a way, but they also don't particularly distinguish between the two, or make any effort to stress that the first option (rolling) is any more default. Merely being listed first lends some weight of course, but that doesn't make it any more 'default' in my eyes. They're both valid default options. Now point buy is a different matter. That's a variant rule. Ie perfectly valid, in fact required for AL, but not the default in the PHB.

Edit: But RLC is right, rolling in order isn't part of the 5e options presented at all. Nor do you get less spells from a lower spellcasting ability score.

[JakOfAllTirades]

Yes, because nothing changes or evolves :smallconfused:.

D&D came from a combat game, became a role-playing game, and has now went (primarily since 3e) back to being a combat game.

There is nothing wrong with that, it's what people want. A combat game that you can role play with. And that is the primary difference between what use to be D&D and what IS D&D. What used to be D&D was rules made from the idea it is a role-playing game, now rules are made from a gamist point of view.

If you want a more true role-playing game then look else where. D&D has evolved past that, it's what keeps it at number 1.

The rules for combat are numerous, the rules for role-playing is "ask your DM".

Maybe you should play D&D your way without telling me how me and my group should be playing D&D, and take your "badwrongfun" flamebait elsewhere.

[Arkhios]

All of this is based on the mindsets for previous editions, though. I think the default for this edition is using the array and I don't think it even mentions keeping everything in order for rolling. And, I could be wrong, but I don't think spells known has anything to do with your stats here. So really, a lot of your spells would just suck if your casting stat is low, and a lot of people don't even care about multiclassing.

A cleric knows all spells in his or her spell list, true, it's got nothing to do with those example stats. However, a cleric can only prepare spells per day equal to your wisdom modifier + your cleric level (minimum one spell) plus any domain spells you qualify, leaving your first few levels almost devoid of prepared spells. And just like I said, most of your spells would suck (that's basically what I referred to by horrendously low DC's, btw). But you know what? A cleric spell list includes a lot of spells that care very little (read: not at all) about your Wisdom modifier, and with so few preparable spells, you fill your daily repertoire with spells like these easily, fair and square.