In 5e why no Stat minimums for classes?

Why do you think there aren't any stat minimums in 5e? Why do you think this is a good/bad thing?

Personally I think its not a good thing mainly because it doesn't make since to me. Lets take wizard for example. I don't think any master would take on an apprentice who doesn't have the potential to be at least as good as he is, there are exceptions of course but (my opinion) extremely rare (everyone else is dead and he needs help so he training the int 4 surviving person. Collages would be close to the same thing.

The wizard example would work for most classes I think.

At least this is my opinion on why I think no minimums is not good.

In your game world, you're free to have wizard colleges administer intelligence tests (as a series of INT checks), and only intelligent people are good at magic anyway (a low INT means the DC's of your spells are low).
Mechanically though, stat requirements add nothing to the game. If something happens in the story that makes the fighter want to take classes in warlock, stat requirements would only restrict that option without adding anything of value. Fortunately, 5e was written with the spirit and intention that groups customize it to their liking.

I think there are stat minimums for multiclassing, and they are open for them in prestige classes. In both cases, I think it makes sense - you are doing more than excelling at one thing and are either breaking into incredible specialization or more general ability.

Breaking magic from stats was super important - it means magic items work for anyone which is muh more organic than a "use magic device" requirement. Now a fighter can use wands or scrolls, and the DCs are hard coded into level and ability score.

I'd still like to see ability scores mattering less - even more than they do in 5e.

I think the designers just trust the players to make characters the way they want to play them. Some players might want the challenge of playing a wizard with an Intelligence of 8, but most want to play wizards with Intelligences of 18--or more!

(everyone else is dead and he needs help so he training the int 4 surviving person. Collages would be close to the same thing.

That right there is the reason not to make minimum stat requirements a default part of the core rules. The rules aren't just for your campaign, they're for all campaigns, ever, about all characters in all worlds, including the example you just gave.

Most of the time you won't have a wizard with low intelligence. That is enforced in the rules my making lots of wizard abilities dependent on intelligence. In rare circumstances, you might want a wizard with a low intelligence, and that's why the rules allow for that possibility. There aren't explicit minimum stats for classes because
a)In almost all circumstances, those minimums would be followed whether they are listed or not, so most of the time they would just be a waste of ink
b)In rare circumstances there could be a reason to have a character with an unusually low ability score for a class, and having minimums in that case would be harmful to the game.

As mentioned, multiclassing has stat requirements.

@hiiamtom: Fighters can use some wands, but some require Attunement by a Spellcaster (which a Fighter could be, as an Eldritch Knight). Likewise, Spell Scrolls can't be used unless the spell is on your class's list.

Jacob Saltband wrote:

(everyone else is dead and he needs help so he training the int 4 surviving person. Collages would be close to the same thing.

That right there is the reason not to make minimum stat requirements a default part of the core rules. The rules aren't just for your campaign, they're for all campaigns, ever, about all characters in all worlds, including the example you just gave.

Most of the time you won't have a wizard with low intelligence. That is enforced in the rules my making lots of wizard abilities dependent on intelligence. In rare circumstances, you might want a wizard with a low intelligence, and that's why the rules allow for that possibility. There aren't explicit minimum stats for classes because
a)In almost all circumstances, those minimums would be followed whether they are listed or not, so most of the time they would just be a waste of ink
b)In rare circumstances there could be a reason to have a character with an unusually low ability score for a class, and having minimums in that case would be harmful to the game.

You could just as easily remove the minimums for extreme cases instead of not having them at all.

Its probably just theory crafting but I'm see alot of characters posted that dont come close to following the unlisted minimums. One example was 4 int 20 wis wizard.

@hiiamtom: Fighters can use some wands, but some require Attunement by a Spellcaster (which a Fighter could be, as an Eldritch Knight). Likewise, Spell Scrolls can't be used unless the spell is on your class's list.

There's other scrolls like Scroll of Protection that work, and technically you just need that ability to read the spell scroll to attempt to activate it with a d20 roll versus DC 10 + spell level (like a Rogue's UMD or using comprehend languages or a warlock using Eyes of the Rune Keeper).

I personally house rule anyone can do it with the activation DC and knowing the spell just means you can cast it without the activation check, but the larger point is that it's not a 100% caster-only situation. I'd still prefer it to be more open than it is (hence the house rule), but I still get wands and staves being caster only in come cases.