D&D 5E D&D Beyond Releases 2023 Character Creation Data

D&D Beyond released the 2023 Unrolled with data on the most popular character choices for D&D. The full article includes a wide variety of statistics for the beta test of Maps, charity donations, mobile app usage, and more. However, I’m just going to recap the big numbers.

The most common species chosen by players are Human, Elf, Dragonborn, Tiefling, and Half-Elf. This contrasts with the stats from Baldur’s Gate 3 released back in August 2023 where Half-Elves were the most popular with the rest of the top five also shuffling around.

Also, keep an eye on the scale of these charts as they’re not exactly even. It starts with just over 700,000 for Humans and 500,000 for Elf, but the next line down is 200,000 with the other three species taking up space in that range. This means the difference separating the highest line on the graph and the second highest is 200,000, then 300,000 between the next two, 100,000 between the next, and finally 10,000 separating all the others.

Top classes start off with the Fighter then move onto the Rogue, Barbarian, Wizard, and Paladin. The scale on this chart is just as uneven as the last, but the numbers are much closer with what appears to be about 350,000 Fighters at the top to just over 100,000 Monks in next-to-last with under 80,000 Artificers. This contrasts far more from the Baldur’s Gate 3 first weekend data as the top five classes for the game were Paladin, Sorcerer, Warlock, Rogue, and Bard.

And the most important choices for new characters, the names. Bob is still the top choice for names with Link, Saraphina, and Lyra seeing the most growth and Bruno, Eddie, and Rando seeing the biggest declines from last year.

Putting that together, it means the most commonly created character on D&D Beyond is Bob the Human Fighter. A joke going as far back as I can remember in RPGs is, in fact, reality proven by hard statistics.

 

[Minigiant]

See, the problem is, as soon as you try to have "standard" forms, the fandom will lose their collective poop (or at least the 30% that's needed to block any changes) and scream about how they are restricting play, forcing change for changes sake and various other standard complaints.

The odds that you could make that significant of a change to a class and get it past is very, very close to zero. No matter how many passes you attempt. At least, that's been my takeaway of the playtest.

Given time and enough "standard forms", you could get enough of the community behind the change that you can use the onus to fix a problem as the backing to tell the remaining 30% to wait or ask the DM.

But you won't have that history to bolster you in the start of the edition.

This is why the last 3 core classes are druid, sorcerer, and monk.
Making those classes popular requires breaking tradition.

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

Well, the templates were a big step down from the (IMO) overpowered level moon druid options. They should have taken another run with slightly better numbers and some spells supporting wild shape buffs granting extra features (poisoned claws, heavy scales/chitin, etc).

I think the shock of the difference between the playtest and the 2014 rules was a big factor in the overall downvote. The main complaint was that people wanted to use the special abilities of the forms, like a buffet or a toolbox. They wanted to feel like that beast. The first draft of the template design didn't go far enough, but it could have worked if it was developed further. There absolutely was design space to include an array of Bestial Special Abilities to enhance the template.

But instead, the current playtest design removes that greater selection of options because you only get a limited number of forms to choose from in a particular day. You have a much smaller toolbox. Consider this scenario: "While running from the gnolls who are tracking you, you come across an immense herd of cattle. Unfortunately you can't wildshape into a cow and hide in their midst because you didn't select that form today." That would suck for a druid.

I think it would be much better to be able to change into any beast at the drop of a hat, and an enhanced template design would have allowed that.

 

[Stormonu]

See, the problem is, as soon as you try to have "standard" forms, the fandom will lose their collective poop (or at least the 30% that's needed to block any changes) and scream about how they are restricting play, forcing change for changes sake and various other standard complaints.

The odds that you could make that significant of a change to a class and get it past is very, very close to zero. No matter how many passes you attempt. At least, that's been my takeaway of the playtest.

I guess I fall into that 30% because I really dislike"standard" forms - wildshape, polymorph or for the various summon spells. They feel forcibly false and restrictive. I'm not particularly enamored with the current process however, as it can be really hard to get past choosing turning into something like a mouse vs. a panther because of the utter disparity between such a choice - and the Wild Shape entry is long enough as it is without adding riders or restrictions for choosing this form or that. I just don't want some 3-option template to become the only thing allowed.

 

[Minigiant]

I guess I fall into that 30% because I really dislike"standard" forms - wildshape, polymorph or for the various summon spells. They feel forcibly false and restrictive. I'm not particularly enamored with the current process however, as it can be really hard to get past choosing turning into something like a mouse vs. a panther because of the utter disparity between such a choice - and the Wild Shape entry is long enough as it is without adding riders or restrictions for choosing this form or that. I just don't want some 3-option template to become the only thing allowed.

What about a 10 option template?
I mean there were only 5 or so good forms for combat and out of combat forms don't really need full statblocks.

Druid had too much going on and too little inspiration to be popular. If Monk wasn't a mess, Druid would be dead last.

 

[Stormonu]

What about a 10 option template?
I mean there were only 5 or so good forms for combat and out of combat forms don't really need full statblocks.

Druid had too much going on and too little inspiration to be popular. If Monk wasn't a mess, Druid would be dead last.

Not sure if you're serious about the 10 option, that seems like a lot of page space to clutter up a class description. But it is hard to make the difference between turning into a mouse, sparrow, horse, deer, panther and bear different enough from each other without devolving in a morass of limitations and stipulations. And then someone's going to want to turn into an Owlbear 'cuz they saw the D&D movie... I don't know the right answer, but if I want to turn my druid into a bat and the guy over there wants to become a crocodile, I don't want to see either of us not get our way because those both seem reasonable forms a druid should be able to assume.

As far as the 2014 druid class goes, I've felt like it was fine as it is, just not a huge incentive to NOT choose a combat form while wild shaping (and call lightning took a serious beating with a nerf bat).

 

[Hussar]

Given time and enough "standard forms", you could get enough of the community behind the change that you can use the onus to fix a problem as the backing to tell the remaining 30% to wait or ask the DM.

But you won't have that history to bolster you in the start of the edition.

This is why the last 3 core classes are druid, sorcerer, and monk.
Making those classes popular requires breaking tradition.

I remain very skeptical. After what, almost a year or more of play testing we’re left left with only the most minimal of changes. Anything more was shot down.

People keep talking about how the revised edition is a cash grab. Try g to repackage the same thing and sell it again. That ignores the fact that the fandom absolutely will not allow any significant changes.

Any suggestion of change is just never going to get the pass.

 

[Stormonu]

I remain very skeptical. After what, almost a year or more of play testing were left with only the most minimal of changes. Anything more was shot down.

People keep talking about how the revised edition is a cash grab. Try g to repackage the same thing and sell it again. That ignores the fact that the fandom absolutely will not allow any significant changes.

Any suggestion of change is just never going to get the pass.

Perhaps what the surveys bore out was that the game didn't really need a change at this time as far as the community was concerned, and WotC is trying to push for something we're not ready for or really want?

 

[Minigiant]

Not sure if you're serious about the 10 option, that seems like a lot of page space to clutter up a class description. But it is hard to make the difference between turning into a mouse, sparrow, horse, deer, panther and bear different enough from each other without devolving in a morass of limitations and stipulations. And then someone's going to want to turn into an Owlbear 'cuz they saw the D&D movie... I don't know the right answer, but if I want to turn my druid into a bat and the guy over there wants to become a crocodile, I don't want to see either of us not get our way because those both seem reasonable forms a druid should be able to assume.

As far as the 2014 druid class goes, I've felt like it was fine as it is, just not a huge incentive to NOT choose a combat form while wild shaping (and call lightning took a serious beating with a nerf bat).

What I was saying was to 10 primal beast statblocks in the PHB and have the Moon Druid's wildshape, Beastmaster Ranger's beast companion, and the Conjure animal spell refer to them. CR based wildshape, campanion, and summons would be a DM option.

So a primal bear would work for a bear, owlbear, or even gorrila. Big meaty beasts with claws that can climb.
Whereas the primal wolf would represent wolves, big dogs, hyenas, or even drakes with their strong senses, team tactics, and bite.
This creates a simpler list of forms to think about while allowing for flexibility.

The "all the beasts are possibilities" on top of a full caster guarantees low use. Druid was OP in 3e and people still didn't play it.

If someone comes to a stable with a druid, there a good 50% of trouble because there is a high chance of newish player not fully utilizing the class or a veteran who knows too much.

 

[fluffybunbunkittens]

See, the problem is, as soon as you try to have "standard" forms, the fandom will lose their collective poop

All I know is that...
Same stat block printed twice, but with different official critter names at the top = good
Same stat block you can adjust to cover multiple animals in one go = bad

 

[Sulicius]

Let’s be fair, they have had a decade of testing. Right now the game is fun, the most succesful TTRPG ever, and the rules work. All they have to do is not break it, give it a polish and use what they learned from a decade of publishing content for the system.

Obviously, everyone is going to have an issue with some change. First level feats, weapon mastery, spell nerfs, buffs, half-race changes; there is lots to like or dislike.

I would have loved generic stat blocks for the druid wildshape, shame to see it taken out. Keeping players out of the Monster Manual is a good thing.