The core design of classic #DnD character creation is to play the hand you're dealt, while in modern versions you create the hand you want. It is not a trivial difference. It has *fundamental* impact on how the game plays. [thread]

In classic D&D (and most #OSR clones) luck is a defining aspect of character creation and choice is limited. In modern D&D luck has little or no impact, and the the vast amount of character options gives players lots of choice.

Classic D&D character creation basically tells you; "Here's your guy, for better or worse. Now help him survive and prosper in a world of dangers". Modern D&D tells you to create the hero you want, down to the finest detail.

Some would argue that the modern take creates a character the player is more invested in. I'm not so sure that is necessarily true. I like the scroungy little fuck I just rolled up, and I'll be damned if I won't do all I can to keep him alive. From grime to glory.

In classic D&D the important choices aren't made when the character is created. The big choices - the ones that will define your character - are made during the course of the adventure and the campaign.

Characters of classic D&D are not created unique, they are molded and forged by the perils they face. This is how they come to life. They are what they are because of what they have been through, not because of the character idea the player had at the start of the campaign.

To me the classic approach creates more investment in the character than a rule set that allow me to tailor make the hero I want. [end of thread]