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.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

It's too specific, and despite being a DnD base class for almost 40 years still doesn't fit under the "generic fantasy" umbrella.

Yeah, I've been a DM for about as long as monks have been a playable class and I always have to figure out how they fit into game worlds. The very Asian-flavored ones often just don't ("uh, your character is a visitor from a country off the edge of the map"), and to date, the PHB has never flavored them as a tavern pugilist, which seems like it would be the easiest way to insert them into most settings.

 

[Clint_L]

It's too specific, and despite being a DnD base class for almost 40 years still doesn't fit under the "generic fantasy" umbrella.

They also have a history of...not being that great. Especially in 5e, where they have pretty much been considered the consensus worst class since it launched.

However.

I am currently play testing the 2024 rules for monks on my level 10 Way of Mercy monk and I confidently predict that the class is going to see a huge uptick in popularity. This new version finally plays like the monk always should have. It's super fun.

 

[bedir than]

Another note

In other news, the most popular claimable of 2023 was the Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves collection,

That beats at Vecna, BG3 (which was characters only), Monstrous Compendiums and a couple of adventures

 

[ECMO3]

I am currently play testing the 2024 rules for monks on my level 10 Way of Mercy monk and I confidently predict that the class is going to see a huge uptick in popularity. This new version finally plays like the monk always should have. It's super fun.

The new Monk is arguably OP, but I don't think it is going to cause a big uptick in popularity as there is no evidence of correlation between popularity and being weak or strong class.

The three most popular classes in the newest numbers are Fighters, Rogues and Barbarians. Fighters and Rogues are moderately underpowered, and Barbarians are right there next to Monks as one of the the weakest classes in the game (the weakest from probably level 11 on).

I think Monks are the weakest class in most of tier 2, where the majority of the game is played, but they are stronger in other tiers and at the top of the non-caster pile both at very high level and very low level. The chief complaint - shortage of ki - is not really an issue after level 8 or 9. I also think players tend to play Monks poorly by spamming FOB, using both their ki and their bonus on something that is not that great and generally not ideal.

I recently played a Dhampir Long Death Monk in a 1-20 campaign and she was bonkers at high level.

I think the ONE Monk will work fine from about level 4-8. I am not sure it will be a positive at other levels, especially when multiclassed.

 

[Hussar]

Barbarians are one of the weakest classes in the game? Errr. Since when?

 

[Clint_L]

For another thread, I combed the internet for class tier lists, specifically for 5e, from as many sources as I could find. Fighter was consistently ranked middle to top tier, as was barbarian. Rogue was generally middle tier. That reflects my personal experience, as well. So I definitely do not concur that these are weak classes.

Monks were always in the bottom tier, and last more than any other class.

I suspect those tier lists reflect how those classes first play in a lot of actual campaigns: very effectively. Certainly in my own games, and the ones I watch on live stream, they aren't struggling.

 

[Hussar]

For another thread, I combed the internet for class tier lists, specifically for 5e, from as many sources as I could find. Fighter was consistently ranked middle to top tier, as was barbarian. Rogue was generally middle tier. That reflects my personal experience, as well. So I definitely do not concur that these are weak classes.

Monks were always in the bottom tier, and last more than any other class.

I suspect those tier lists reflect how those classes first play in a lot of actual campaigns: very effectively. Certainly in my own games, and the ones I watch on live stream, they aren't struggling.

I'll admit, I think the casters might be a bit too powerful, but, I'd hardly call any class in 5e actually flat out weak. With a couple of exceptions I suppose. But Barbarians and Fighters are weak? Not really.

Heh, it's funny how this argument goes around. I talked in another thread some time ago how I thought that the casters were putting the non-casters to shame when it came to damage dealt. I still think it's pretty true if you account for AoE's total damage, rather than simply single target damage. But, in any case, I got told repeatedly, in no uncertain terms, that I was 100% wrong. That the fighter types were more than keeping up with the Joneses and even surpassing the casters in some cases.

But now we have people claiming that Barbarians are one of the weakest classes? Even I don't go that far.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Another note


That beats at Vecna, BG3 (which was characters only), Monstrous Compendiums and a couple of adventures

They literally had data about the demand for DADHAT D&D content ...

 

[TheSword]

I'll admit, I think the casters might be a bit too powerful, but, I'd hardly call any class in 5e actually flat out weak. With a couple of exceptions I suppose. But Barbarians and Fighters are weak? Not really.

Heh, it's funny how this argument goes around. I talked in another thread some time ago how I thought that the casters were putting the non-casters to shame when it came to damage dealt. I still think it's pretty true if you account for AoE's total damage, rather than simply single target damage. But, in any case, I got told repeatedly, in no uncertain terms, that I was 100% wrong. That the fighter types were more than keeping up with the Joneses and even surpassing the casters in some cases.

But now we have people claiming that Barbarians are one of the weakest classes? Even I don't go that far.

It will be because of individual table experience rather than the theorycraft. So much depends on the style of combats. Lots of single creatures in small rooms - as published adventures often contain - casters get less benefit. Also casters are often called upon to do other tasks - battlefield control, debuff, buff etc so that prevents damage for a round. My two weapon rogue seems to be consistently doing large damage round after round where the wizard has sporadic novas surrounded by single fire bolts. It means the played experience is that the rogue does more damage even if it isn’t always the reality.

I’ve been thinking about this issues lately and I think the other element is the nature of spell slots in real time adventuring. You never want to run out completely because the DM could pull a fast one before you get time to rest (I’m looking at you @GuyBoy). We’re currently exploring the Scarlet Citadel and it’s clear that no-where is really safe for us, not even the base village. So the wizard never uses everything. Even outside of that casters are often waiting for that big encounter that might not come. So I regularly see them only using 2/3 to 3/4 of spell slots before the party as a whole long rests.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

It's not "how powerful" that matters, it's "how fun". I've noticed in my group players don't want to play full casters because learning what all the spells do it too much like work.