Standard Array for 2e

[LibraryOgre]

For those who aren't aware, WD&D has a "standard array".... you get a 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, and 8, arranged how you like, then altered for your race. This lets you have some decent attributes, without being fantastic, and the way WD&D's attribute bonuses work, it means that you get two +2s, 2 +1s, a +0, and a -1 (you could change this with careful attribute placement; a dwarf might put 8 in Constitution, and their racial bonuses would make it a 10).

So, if you were to make something similar for 2e, what would you set the numbers at?

[Scots Dragon]

For those who aren't aware, WD&D has a "standard array".... you get a 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, and 8, arranged how you like, then altered for your race. This lets you have some decent attributes, without being fantastic, and the way WD&D's attribute bonuses work, it means that you get two +2s, 2 +1s, a +0, and a -1 (you could change this with careful attribute placement; a dwarf might put 8 in Constitution, and their racial bonuses would make it a 10).

So, if you were to make something similar for 2e, what would you set the numbers at?

Just as an initial guesstimate; 17, 16, 15, 15, 13, 10, 8.

It'd be easier with Basic D&D, though, since AD&D has more variable definitions on what would generate a +2.

[Thrudd]

What would be the goal of the array? Is the array a "safe option" to use alongside rolling, to ensure you can have a decent base-class character, but might not qualify for some of the classes with stricter prereqs? Or is it intended to replace rolling altogether, so you should be able to qualify for any class with it?

To qualify for any PHB class, at a minimum we need 17, 15, 13, 13. If you want one score to generate some sort of penalty for at least some abilities, it needs to be 7. The sixth score might as well be 10.

17, 15, 13, 13, 10, 7 would allow any class and give 10% XP bonus to the four base classes only (assuming you put the 17 in your prime req).

If you want the 10% bonus for any/every class, then we need 17 16 16 14 10 7
That means the only 18's we'll see are demi-humans.

If we want the possibility of human fighters with exceptional strength, then change the 17 to 18.
7 should go down to 6 if you want the possibility of dex AC penalty or con HP penalty.

A base-class only array might be a single 16, so they get the XP bonus, and everything else average.
If we're thinking of mimicing the 5e array's odds on ability checks vs average difficulty (with proficiencies in skills only using your two best abilities) with 2e's NWP odds, then we should have 16 15 12 11 10 9. That would allow druids, bards, and specialist wizards but no rangers or paladins. It might be ok for a "safe" option that you can choose instead of rolling- if you want a chance at an 18 or the two "special" warrior classes, then take your chances rolling.

[LibraryOgre]

What would be the goal of the array? Is the array a "safe option" to use alongside rolling, to ensure you can have a decent base-class character, but might not qualify for some of the classes with stricter prereqs? Or is it intended to replace rolling altogether, so you should be able to qualify for any class with it?

In playing WD&D, I've gotten to like having the array, simply because it starts everyone on a reasonably even keel. If you have one guy rocking a 18/xx strength (another thing I dislike), and another with a 16, the game heavily favors the guy with the 18 strength. And, sure, better attributes should be better, but if you've got a guy who's rolled really well on all six stats, and someone else who is a bit more reasonable, then it eats into the statistical side of the game.

So, a standard array which allows any one character to be any legal class/race combination they like, and opens up a few other options, including some multiclasses and dual classes. I'm not terribly interested in the 10% prime req bonus as a guide to whether I've done well, but I do think having the ability to dual-class is important... it's part of the human package.

I went to 17, 15, 14, 13, 10, and 8.

[Beelzebub1111]

I'm a bit late but an alternate method could be a variation of Rolling Method VI from the phb:

Spoiler: Method VI

Show

Each ability starts with a score of 8. Then roll seven dice. These dice can be
added to your character’s abilities as you wish. All the points on a die must be
added to the same ability score. For example, if a 6 is rolled on one die, all 6 points
must be assigned to one ability. You can add as many dice as you want to any ability, but no ability score can exceed 18 points. If you cannot make an 18 by exact count on the dice, you cannot have an 18 score.

Only instead of rolling you can just take the average of 1,2,3,4,4,5,6. this will give a better array of options for players that really want that superior strength for fighters or want to avoid low rolls.

[Telok]

In playing WD&D, I've gotten to like having the array, simply because it starts everyone on a reasonably even keel. If you have one guy rocking a 18/xx strength (another thing I dislike), and another with a 16, the game heavily favors the guy with the 18 strength. And, sure, better attributes should be better, but if you've got a guy who's rolled really well on all six stats, and someone else who is a bit more reasonable, then it eats into the statistical side of the game.

Lots of people talk about that, but I played a couple str 14 fighters and had a blast. Trick is to realize earlier eds didn't truely have a "statistical side" like the post 2000s. Making good use of a wagon and a couple 50 gallon barrels of lamp oil did more than another 4 points of str. Likewise the fighter I played with an 18/7...6?ish.. str didn't really matter for the strength, it was a high con and willingness to chug haste poitions, nagical ageing system shock roll and all, that defined him. Ad&ds aren't predicated on "level appropriate" or "fights per day" metrics.

That said, if someone rolls up a character that can only qualify for wizard with a 11 int and a con penalty... yeah, they need a reroll or backstop stat array if they want it because there is the potential for unfun.

Personally I like rolling 3d6 three times, then subtracting from numbers to get the other three scores. 3e it was like 25, 23, 21, with an 18 cap on the score. Ad&ds I'd do maybe 21, 19, 17, with a 5 minimum on the score. Characters have three even numbers, three odd numbers, and highs offset by lows.

[oxybe]

A 2d D&D fighter with a 14 str in a group with a fighter with 18/% isn't in a terrible position

looking at the fighter 18/% charts we have
18/01-50 is a +1/+3
18/51-75 is a +2/+3
18/76-90 is a +2/+4
18/91-99 is a +2/+5
18/100 is a +3/+6

you definitely have a couple extra points of damage and a slight accuracy boost, but the game isn't built around a required 18str for your fighter. looking at the strength chart as a whole, between 6 and 16, the only real difference is a -1 to hit and a +1 damage and the extra XP bonus for high stats if you use that.

18str guy gambled on the RNG nature of dice rolling and got lucky as he could've just as easily gotten a 3 or 4.

remember that 2e isn't as fussy as 3rd ed or newer system with your stat requirements for a playable PC (you might not have the stats for a ranger or paladin but a fighter is still respectable). a 14 str fighter should do fine.

[Lord Torath]

The 14 Str fighter has a carrying capacity of 55 lbs before becoming encumbered. That limits the armor they can wear fairly severely. The Str 18/% fighter has a carrying capacity of 135 to 335 lbs. They can wear better armor, carry a wider array of weapons and equipment, and generally move faster. Strength is much more than just a combat bonus.

[Telok]

The 14 Str fighter has a carrying capacity of 55 lbs before becoming encumbered. That limits the armor they can wear fairly severely. The Str 18/% fighter has a carrying capacity of 135 to 335 lbs. They can wear better armor, carry a wider array of weapons and equipment, and generally move faster. Strength is much more than just a combat bonus.

Depending on which PH or DMG are used, & which options are turned on, that encumberance may only really affect maximum movement speed and dex bonuses to stealth/surprise. It may also be overridden completely by your choice of shield. Being reduced from 12" to 9" and +1 surprise to +0 may not be an issue if you already have a dwarf cleric in the party.

[oxybe]

The 14 Str fighter has a carrying capacity of 55 lbs before becoming encumbered. That limits the armor they can wear fairly severely. The Str 18/% fighter has a carrying capacity of 135 to 335 lbs. They can wear better armor, carry a wider array of weapons and equipment, and generally move faster. Strength is much more than just a combat bonus.

By that logic, if even light encumbrance is such a huge penalty that a 14str fighter is "limited", i guess due to less movement (i'm assuming that's your point), a Dwarf, Gnome or Halfling (base speed 6, half of a human's 12) must be nigh unplayable by default.

As far as carrying gear, if we're going by the books, practically speaking the 18str guy is really only better off at the low levels.

Our 14str human fighter can still comfortably carry 85lbs of gear while easily outpacing a butt-naked dwarf and when burdened with 115lbs of gear, a footrace would require a photo finish to see who wins. So let's give our theoretical fighter a decent gear setup: some chainmail, a small shield, a longsword, a longbow with 2 dozen arrows and a backpack of about 30lb of misc, but still good quality, adventuring gear. Our 14str human fighter may have 84lbs of weight already spoken for but this is still within the realm of light encumbrance, if barely. Now if you make that some magical +1 chain mail? we're now back to 44/50 encumbrance (ie: unencumbered), but 84/175 max.

In both situations, remember he's still outpacing the dwarf. our 14str fighter's 9 movement speed isn't as much as a 18str one in the same gear or the lightly equipped thief moving at full 12, but 9 speed isn't bad. even once he's between 86-115lb of gear , but we have to consider... how much is he really gonna be practically carrying, especially once we're past the lower levels?

Why do I say only the lower levels? because if we're gonna be a stickler for encumbrance, we have to consider that a backpack can only carry 50lbs of gear.

Once you have magical armour, which the non-magical type accounts for a large chunk of your encumbrance, you have the couple of weapons that it's feasible to carry easily (a 1-hander+sheild or a 2-hander and maybe 2 backups or a backup and a side pouch for a couple of potions. at best a bandolier of daggers on your front), a bow, and your 50lb-stuffed full backpack. that's like a solid 70-80lbs of gear. on the top end it's still putting you in the light encumbrance and close to medium, but even magical full place doesn't put a 14str fighter near max encumbrance.

No matter how much the unencumbered or light load value an 18 or 18/% strength character has theoretical access to, they can't be running around with 2 fully stuffed backpacks, 3 battleaxes and 5 burlap sacks of coin. You'll need to put those extra axes, the spare backpack and those coin sacs in a wagon and pull if you want to move about with it on your own accord, because while you can technically carry 300+lb of mass, there is only so much you can put on you before seams tear, hooks bend, cloth tears and rivets pop.

Finally, I'd say modern D&D is too generous with it's carrying capacity comparatively, but that's by design. a 5e 14str fighter can easily carry 15 times their str value, 210lbs, without issue. that's just shy of the top end of a 2nd ed 18/01-50 medium encumbrance load of 213. And that's because modern D&D doesn't really want you to care about encumbrance. Encumbrance is an answer to a question 5e doesn't really care to ask. The rules are there, but it's largely a formality there because D&D has always had encumbrance rules.

Encumbrance in 2nd ed is there to force you to choose your loadout: what you bring into the dungeon and what you keep hidden away in camp outside. You can't just shove everything that isn't nailed down into your backpack without care as you make your way through the dungeon. You have to weigh your options on what to leave behind until you're ready to leave (or you're forced to leave by means of angry kobold horde nipping at your heels). if you've cleared out a dungeon but there's too much stuff, you'll either have to make multiple trips taking up lots of time in-game, or hire a retinue of porters and maybe even extra guards to help carry out the lot back into town.

a 14 str fighter is 100% viable in 2e. yes the 18str one will outperform him slightly and have better options available in the early game by design. but mid-late game when you have some magical armour and can afford to hire teamsters to clear out the dungeon you've blitzed your way through or find magical haversacks/back of holding/portable holes to mitigate that backpack's 50lb capacity? the encumbrance difference matters little.

That doesn't make the 14str fighter unplayable the slightest.

[vasilidor]

It is not just movement, it is the armor you can wear. For front line fighters this is a huge drawback if you actually track encumbrance.
Banded mail 200 gp 35 lbs.
Brigandine 120 gp 35 lbs.
Bronze plate mail 400 gp 45 lbs.
Chain mail 75 gp 40 lbs.
Field plate 2000 gp 60 lbs.
Full plate 4,000-10,000 gp 70 lbs.
Helmet -- --
Great helm 30 gp 10 lbs.
Basinet 8 gp 5 lbs.
Hide 15 gp 30 lbs.
Leather 5 gp 15 lbs.
Padded 4 gp 10 lbs.
Plate mail 600 gp 50 lbs.
Ring mail 100 gp 30 lbs.
Scale mail 120 gp 40 lbs.
Shield -- --
Body 10 gp 15 lbs.
Buckler 1 gp 3 lbs.
Medium 7 gp 10 lbs.
Small 3 gp 5 lbs.
Splint mail 80 gp 40 lbs.
Studded leather 20 gp 25 lbs.

You become limited in being able to carry food, treasure, and other things. Of course this is why some DMs try to encourage getting a wagon, and then have said wagon attacked by wild animals or bandits the second the Players leave it with the NPC guards they hired.

[oxybe]

What's the average weight range of most of those more affordable armours (you know, the sort of armours a first, second or third level PC would reasonably look towards getting)? 30-40lbs, which I did mention taking up the large chunk of your low-level character's encumbrance multiple times. Do you know what else limits a frontline fighter in an encumbrance tracking game's ability to carry food & treasure, something i mentioned on more then a few occasions you don't mention?

the standard backpack has a carrying capacity of 50lbs, tops. I don't care if your 18/69% fighter can carry 160lbs unencumbered. you're not sauntering out the dungeon with 3 burlap sacks of coin, 2 stuffed backpacks, a small armory of various weapons on their person and the Lich's fancy divan like it's barely nothing because "it's still a light load". you can technically carry the mass, but the volume of stuff won't fit on you without being EXTREMELY awkward and looking like an overworked henchman from the old Nodwick comics.

If you want to haul back a horde of coin, gems and artwork you'll need to manage that very limited backpack storage space regardless of strength score or do the smart thing and hire a group of porters/teamsters with wagons to carry out your loot, unless you plan on leaving your rations, potions and other gear bits on the dungeon floor as you hike through the 12 miles of forest back to town.

And yeah if your GM keeps ganking your camp guard, it's either

A) A Richard move because the GM wants to keep you perpetually poor and he'll find other ways of removing your stuff.
B) maybe a hint that you should hire more then just one or two dudes, unless those dudes happens to be like, Robocop or something and able to handle a group of mooks singlehandedly.

And again, i'll mention that once you're past the lower levels and you start finding magical armour (who's weight ONLY COUNTS towards your max carrying capacity, not encumbrance) and extra dimensional storage like handy haversacks, bags of holding & portable holes (or even gauntlets of ogre power/girdle of giant strength to raise the 14str guy to an 18/00 or higher strength). This helps even the playing field of encumbrance management.

so yes, as i agreed with, the 18 str fighter has an advantage, but that doesn't make the 14 str fighter any less viable.

[Lapak]

In playing WD&D, I've gotten to like having the array, simply because it starts everyone on a reasonably even keel. If you have one guy rocking a 18/xx strength (another thing I dislike), and another with a 16, the game heavily favors the guy with the 18 strength. And, sure, better attributes should be better, but if you've got a guy who's rolled really well on all six stats, and someone else who is a bit more reasonable, then it eats into the statistical side of the game.

So, a standard array which allows any one character to be any legal class/race combination they like, and opens up a few other options, including some multiclasses and dual classes. I'm not terribly interested in the 10% prime req bonus as a guide to whether I've done well, but I do think having the ability to dual-class is important... it's part of the human package.

I went to 17, 15, 14, 13, 10, and 8.

This is solid; it gives two stats with a positive bonus and allows for a wide array of multiclassing (and/or mage specializations) without being overboard, while leaving room for players to want to find ways (wishes, stat tomes, etc.) to get that last point or points of [stat] for niche purposes like percentile strength, 9th level spells, no limit on spellbooks. Makes for practical choices as well, like whether you want that +1 from your 15 in CON or DEX since you can't expect to have both.

I'm a bit late but an alternate method could be a variation of Rolling Method VI from the phb:

Spoiler: Method VI

Show

Each ability starts with a score of 8. Then roll seven dice. These dice can be
added to your character’s abilities as you wish. All the points on a die must be
added to the same ability score. For example, if a 6 is rolled on one die, all 6 points
must be assigned to one ability. You can add as many dice as you want to any ability, but no ability score can exceed 18 points. If you cannot make an 18 by exact count on the dice, you cannot have an 18 score.

Only instead of rolling you can just take the average of 1,2,3,4,4,5,6. this will give a better array of options for players that really want that superior strength for fighters or want to avoid low rolls.

Gotta say I like this as well; allows for more variation but with the same overall-parity in stats. I might suggest tweaking it slightly to drop the 'start value' to 7 so that players who truly dump a stat are taking a mechanical penalty for it, but then you have to adjust everything else. Probably throw another couple of 'dice' with a value of 3 into the set array of addable numbers to balance it out?

[ImmanuelRant]

This is solid; it gives two stats with a positive bonus and allows for a wide array of multiclassing (and/or mage specializations) without being overboard, while leaving room for players to want to find ways (wishes, stat tomes, etc.) to get that last point or points of [stat] for niche purposes like percentile strength, 9th level spells, no limit on spellbooks. Makes for practical choices as well, like whether you want that +1 from your 15 in CON or DEX since you can't expect to have both.

Gotta say I like this as well; allows for more variation but with the same overall-parity in stats. I might suggest tweaking it slightly to drop the 'start value' to 7 so that players who truly dump a stat are taking a mechanical penalty for it, but then you have to adjust everything else. Probably throw another couple of 'dice' with a value of 3 into the set array of addable numbers to balance it out?

The 18/00 thing always bugged me, as did the fact that anything under a 15 was useless in almost every situation. This is all secondary to the array question, because the numbers have to be skewed because of it.

I liked modifying by home rule to 13-15 +1; 16-17 +2; and 18 +3 so that a 15 or 16 strength fighter was viable. In the original rules - because of the 18/00 nonsense, even a 17 str fighter was just too far back from even an 18/01 one that it hurt my soul.

That would make a standard array a bit easier. Of course, that doesn't solve the issue for a spell caster that wants to use 9th level spells at some point . . . so matbe the array needs a way to get to 18 anyway.

[Lapak]

That would make a standard array a bit easier. Of course, that doesn't solve the issue for a spell caster that wants to use 9th level spells at some point . . . so matbe the array needs a way to get to 18 anyway.

This is, to be honest, a niche case. I played about a dozen years of various campaigns in OE/1E/2E and not once did the characters hit a level that would bring 9th level spells into play; even if they had I'm willing to bet that a combination of stat tomes / wishes / etc. would have been in play to make it possible without needing an 18 from the jump.

[ImmanuelRant]

This is, to be honest, a niche case. I played about a dozen years of various campaigns in OE/1E/2E and not once did the characters hit a level that would bring 9th level spells into play; even if they had I'm willing to bet that a combination of stat tomes / wishes / etc. would have been in play to make it possible without needing an 18 from the jump.

True enough. I never got to those levels even in a long term campaign.