[UPDATED] Most D&D Players Prefer Humans - Without Feats!

I've played in games that don't allow multiclassing, but never games that don't allow feats. Go figure.

 

[Morrus]

WotC's Jeremy Crawford posted about some D&D-related data -- most people play humans, without feats, and base their choices on the character's background rather than starting with a class (update - clarified, below).

Here's what he had to say.

• With data from more than one edition of D&D, I can confidently say that people play more humans, elves, and dwarves than all other races combined. No matter how powerful we've made other race options, this fact hasn't changed. Story & aesthetics often appeal more than power.
• Want to know which D&D race is played more than any other? Humans, by far.
• We have never witnessed a correlation between (a) power in the game and (b) which races are most popular. Story, aesthetics, characterization, literary and cinematic models—most often those drive the choice, rather than which options are perceived to be most powerful.
• The popularity of humans, elves, and dwarves has been true for multiple editions of D&D, regardless of game mechanics, regardless of the rules for organized play, and regardless of what the competing racial options have been.
• Another piece of D&D data: a majority of D&D characters don't use feats. Many players love the customization possible with feats, but a larger group of players is happy to make characters without feats. Feats are, therefore, not a driving force behind many players' choices.
• Most D&D players make their primary character-building choices based on a character's fantasy archetype, backstory, personality, appearance, and place in the world. To flesh out those things, players are usually satisfied with choosing race, class/subclass, and background.

UPDATE! Jeremy Crawford dropped me a note with some clarifications. Here's what he said:

"Quick clarification: I said that humans are the most-played race, and characters with feats are in the minority. In contrast, the website's story states that I said most characters are humans without feats—not quite right.

I also didn't say anything about a character's background being more important to the player than the character's class."

(I misunderstood that last bullet point there, but thanks to Jeremy for the clarification!)

 

[Olrox17]

I can confirm that 100% of D&D games I played/DMed/watched allowed feats. Color me surprised.

 

[Salamandyr]

He's very careful in what he says...he says a majority of players don't USE feats, not that they don't play in games that allow feats. He's using the fact that lots of builds don't revolve around feats to minimize their importance to those that do.

This feels like a half truth; or he's deriving the wrong lesson from his data.

I'd also like to see where his data comes from. If, as seems likely, half of all characters are first to third level and the game actively minimizes human characters, it's no wonder most characters don't have feats.

 

[Yunru]

Without citation the statement has no sustenance. Just empty words.

Of course, give that ASI are usually more power than a feat for general use, combined with the low level of characters in play, of course it can look like that. Twice over for spellcasters.

So of course not many take feats, thry made the cost too high.

 

[Tellerian Hawke]

Now that I think about it, that is definitely true, at least for me. My two most powerful D&D characters ever were a Human and a Half-Elf. And most of my other characters have always been either Human, Elf, or Half-Elf. I never really thought about it before now, but yeah. When I have played oddball characters in the past (I once played an Orc Ranger named Schultz) I always had to make more of an effort to get the feel for them, and they never did seem as real to me. Huh, go figure. I guess the old adage is true: Write about what you know. It's true for novels, and for character backgrounds, it would seem.

 

[Morrus]

[MENTION=55621]mikal768[/MENTION], apologies - I was merging the two threads and your post disappeared. My fault!

 

[RevTurkey]

Er...okay Jeremy. Thanks for clearing that up.

 

[mikal768]

No worries. Your post is much more concise than mine. Sorry I missed it.

 

[Warmaster Horus]

Interesting and it's great that a character's story and concept is seen as being so important. That said, the ASI for +2 to a stat is still a pretty sweet reward. It's not like those players aren't getting anything for their ASIs, after all. Some games dissuade the use of feats and in other cases the players may not like the complexity that feats toss onto a PC along with their other class bonuses.