Role-playing Games Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for gamemasters and players of tabletop, paper-and-pencil role-playing games. It only takes a minute to sign up.
Sign up to join this community
Every day there are questions on this site from people who are planning out level 1-XX of their character's stats without any randomness at all, just mixing whatever numbers they want, and skills and class progression before even playing a single session.
Ok there are a number of factors, in what you are seeing.
One is sampling bias. You have been looking at char-ops threads. Your sample is not all RPG players, only those who choose to talk about it on the internet. You have also likely looked only at systems you are interested in/have heard of. It is not a representative sample. Further, since this is just a general impression, rather than a intentional collected figures analysed with statistics, you are vulnerable to a number of subconscious human perception faults like confirmation bias.
A reason so much of this shows up online is: Theoretical CharOp is Fun. People enjoy optimising characters with no intent to play them. Things like Pun-Pun, The Omniscificer, The Omnicaster, were never intended for play -- they were mental exercises. It is fun to build characters, and play with numbers. Even if you are not doing the extremes of cheese, building say "the best character that can buff my friends without actual magic" is a fun way to spend a afternoon -- even if you never play it. But to do this building, and to have this fun, there needs to be an assumption of non-randomness. This explains alot of cases where class progression is assumed.
There is a actual tendency in many RPGs to take randomness out of the character creation/levelling process. For several reasons:
Similarly, for class progression. It is about putting the agency in Player's hands. When it comes to class progression, if the players can let the GM know that "my long term goal for this character is to have him become a dude who is all about becoming friends with ghosts." at the start of the campaign, and the GM thinks this concept is cool, then he knows to put a NPC who can teach the players about ghosts in the campaign.
While this is becoming more common [citation needed], it is by no means ubiquitous across game systems or play groups.
Randomly rolling dice to determine stats, and requiring training to use XP to level up, are rules in some editions of D&D but not in others.
Specifically, these were done away with or made optional as of 2nd edition AD&D. Gamers who started playing some form of D&D published within the last 25 years therefore don't consider training for levels normal, as you do; many have never even heard of the idea. With the advent of 3rd edition D&D the "standard array" became much more common in determining stats, and as such gamers who began playing within the last 14 years might not consider rolling to be the default.
Further, the game has changed. What's relevant to AD&D campaigns can't be assumed to be relevant to campaigns of other editions (different games, really), let alone be assumed the default.
Assumptions about how a PC fits into the fantasy world have changed over time. In D&D 4E, a level 1 PC is already beyond most of their society. In 3.5 (and Pathfinder) a level 1 PC is heroic, but might be outclassed by other heroes. Although I've never played D&D second edition, I have a handbook that seems to suggests low level PCs aren't exceptional.
Expectations about stats and progression changed as the PC became more exceptional. If the PC is beyond normal even at level 1, it isn't reasonable to expect them to train with relatively mundane NPCs. New abilities are learned throughout the adventure by experience.
Rolling stats sometimes makes it difficult to guarantee players a heroic character. Stat arrays are usually built with the idea that every character is above average.
Additionally, some of these changes coincide with the rise of wide-scale organized play. Stat arrays put every PC on the same ground, stat-wise. Requiring trainers for skills is impractical for something like D&D Encounters or Pathfinder Society, where adventures are entirely episodic.
