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.

 

[Oofta]

I don't think Wizbang is at all saying that people are forced into playing fighters. He's saying that we don't KNOW if they enjoy playing them. All we can know from the DDB data is that people make a lot of Fighters on DDB. We don't know how much they enjoy playing them.

And this is not disparaging Fighters! I mean, I love playing Fighters. Do I think that the design of the Fighter could be better? Yes I do. Do I always enjoy playing every fighter I ever make? Usually, but not always.

I'm simply applying Occam's Razor. The simplest solution is that people like playing fighters, barbarians and rogues. The same way that they enjoy playing dragonborn. Meanwhile we don't see anyone saying people feel like they are being pushed into dragonborn. Unlike this post

Because we don't know how they feel about playing them.

See: decades of people grumpily playing clerics because they felt pushed into it.

Which to me heavily implies that people primarily play fighters because they feel pushed into it. So I assume the most likely reason people play fighters: they enjoy playing them.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

On the basis of my limited experience, I cannot think of anyone ever feeling pressured into playing a fighter (or other martial type). I have seen people feeling pressured into playing healers and other full casters.

Indeed, one of the reasons I'm currently playing a sorcerer is because I'm the only one who knows what the spells do.

 

[ECMO3]

If you count monk as a non-caster, 4 of the 12 classes are non-casters. That means that if you add up all the numbers, casters will need to have 66% of the total just to break even in popularity. If they have less 66% of the total, then non-casters are more popular. With the top 3 being non-casters and having significantly higher numbers than the next nearest class, it appears that casters may not hit that 66% number.

It is pretty close. non-casters, including Monk, are slightly over represented, but not by a lot.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Well they did that in the original playtest and are doing it now in the current playtest.

Assuming that you trust that WOTC listened, this would indicate that players were happy with the class designs as of 2014.

I don't. Their survey design is rotten garbage. And it was worse back during the D&D Next playtest. They did open, unabashed push-polling. One particularly notorious example, which got deleted in one of the numerous WotC-official-site purges, literally did not have the option to say no. Every option in the poll was some flavor of "yes," ranging from enthusiastic to qualified.

I don't think this is true.

We got confirmation about all of these things. Some of it from a leaked image of a WotC presentation (showing things like Berserker having below 50% satisfaction before the 5.5e playtest), some of it from WotC directly (e.g. Crawford explicitly saying that Ranger has been low on satisfaction surveys for years.)

You can think it is incorrect all you like. WotC said otherwise.

This bring up another point though, there are A LOT of players who want Wizard to be objectively more powerful than other classes. So if satisfaction is important should we consider that position valid? In another words is player satisfaction more important than balance if a majority of players want more imbalance and want stronger classes to remain stronger or even more imbalanced than they are now?

I don't believe a majority want that. I believe an extremely vocal, aggressive minority want it.

If we are basing this on player satisfaction I see no evidence at all of this and you have provided none to suggest it is true.

Again: We literally got a picture of a WotC presentation that showed Berserker below 50% and (IIRC) Champion in the low-50s. Those are terrible numbers. When about as many people dislike an option as like it, that's bad.

Yes WOTC said this, and the early Warlock UA (playtest 5?) was buffed and changed to a long rest mechanic. WOTC changed it back in playtest 7 making it much more like the current Warlock with a short rest mechanic and few buffs at all. Presumably they did this because people were not satisfied with the buffed Warlock and wanted a weaker version.

No. People were upset because the new version removed all of the cool identity and uniqueness. Which exactly supports my point: Folks have noticed that Warlock is underpowered, they want it to be better, but they want it to be better while retaining its identity. The theme is the first priority. Balance may not be the first priority, but it is a priority nonetheless.

Meanwhile, Wizards got a huge boost in the playtest 5 and the playtest 7 version is still significantly more powerful than the PHB Wizard.

I don't recall seeing this. What, exactly, did they get?

I think your experience is not reflective of the larger community or what the playtest results so far would indicate.

Ditto. Where does that leave us?

 

[ECMO3]

No one is going to any lengths. But you cannot assume that because people play a class that they are happy with it. For evidence, look at nearly any ENWorld thread discussing any given class.

You can't assume they are not either.

I understand your complaints about DNDBeyond data, but anything from ENworld is less compelling.

You can't use ENWorld threads to draw the conclusion that people don't like fighters or any other class for multiple reasons:

1. It is not a sample of D&D players at large, it is a specific subset.

2. There is no statistical data available and any that we would get would be survey data and susceptable to sampling bias.

3. Most of the threads have at least a plurality saying players generally like to play fighters. Most of the ENWorld threads would indicate A LOT of people generally like fighters.

 

[Minigiant]

That is one of the things that makes the game awesome IMO and I don't see the reason to do that with non-magic options. I mean if I am a Wizard and take the Weapon Master feat or take a 1 level in fighter dip, should I get 3 attacks a round with a weapon at 11th level? I just don't think that makes much sense thematically, would not be great fiction and would kind of screw up the game mechanics.

No I mean how Fighting Styles are a single choice and have no scaling outside of a single feat AND use different ability score AND soon Masterys.
So you go from being good at 5 weapons at level 1 to very good at 1 weapon at level 8.

None of the races expan nonmaic choice. Like how drow used to come with TWF. Elves could come with Archery allowing a martial to have 2 fighting styles.

 

[ECMO3]

I don't. Their survey design is rotten garbage.


We got confirmation about all of these things. Some of it from a leaked image of a WotC presentation (showing things like Berserker having below 50% satisfaction before the 5.5e playtest), some of it from WotC directly (e.g. Crawford explicitly saying that Ranger has been low on satisfaction surveys for years.)

You can think it is incorrect all you like. WotC said otherwise.

Berserker is not a class in 5E.

You claim that Monk, Fighter, Barbarian and Ranger were all classes needing work, please provide "confirmation" of that. You say it exists and you say that is not based on opinion.

I will accept Crawford's statment about Rangers without looking it up, while also saying it is likely biased by pre-Tasha's data (when I said I thought it was unsatisfying).

Now go ahead and provide the "confirmation" for the other three classes

I don't believe a majority want that. I believe an extremely vocal, aggressive minority want it.

You believe that, but I don't and you have no evidence to back up your claim. Further WOTC is buffing the Wizard in the 5.5E playtest.

I think it is an aggressive, vocal minority that thinks fighters are bad or need to be buffed and the playtest results so far would seem to support that with fighters getting smaller buffs than most other classes.

You also dodged the question - if it is a majority - is their satisfaction more important than balancing the classes?

Again: We literally got a picture of a WotC presentation that showed Berserker below 50% and (IIRC) Champion in the low-50s. Those are terrible numbers. When about as many people dislike an option as like it, that's bad.

And we got nothing about the Fighter or Barbarian classes.

If you had stated people were dissatisfied with the Berzerker or Champion or the Undying Warlock or the Valor Bard or the Storm Sorcerer I would agree with you, but that is not what you said.

You stated it was Barbarian and Fighter. Back up that claim!

No. People were upset because the new version removed all of the cool identity and uniqueness. Which exactly supports my point: Folks have noticed that Warlock is underpowered, they want it to be better, but they want it to be better while retaining its identity. The theme is the first priority. Balance may not be the first priority, but it is a priority nonetheless.

They specifically changed it back to a short rest mechanic and made it less powerful.

A current Undead or Hexblade using the current rules is more powerful than anything they offered through playtest 7.

I would agree the theme is the priority, but I think it is in playing too and that is why I think most players like playing most martial classes.

I don't recall seeing this. What, exactly, did they get?

Here are the significant changes Wizard had in playtest 5:

Scholar: Expertise in History, Arcana, Nature or Religion

Memorize spell: Change out a spell prepared to another spell in a minute of studying your spellbook

Modify spell/Create Spell/Scribe Spell: Allows you to chang a spell in your book, by altering one of the following: remove components, make it so damage can't break concentration, change damage type, increase range by 30 times wizard level, make it a ritual, make it only affect allies or enemies. At level 11 you can alter 2 of those things, at 13 3 of those things, 15 4 of these things ......

Playtest 7 removed modify spell which was way OP, but memorize spell is still a huge buff considering the limit on prepared spells was the primary thing stopping the Wizard from being able to be "the guy" for any situation. Giving a Wizard expertise, while also having spells to accell at or bypass checks walks all over the martial classes who need to get by with proficiency while also needing to devote more resources to combat abilities that are less useful in skill checks.

Through playtest 6 Wizards got the largest buff of any class. As of playtest 8 I think it is probably second or third, after Monks and roughly equal to Rogues. That is just in terms of how much they were improved, the Wizard also started and will remain the premier class in terms of power if the current playtest stands.

 

[Warpiglet-7]

You can't assume they are not either.

I understand your complaints about DNDBeyond data, but anything from ENworld is less compelling.

You can't use ENWorld threads to draw the conclusion that people don't like fighters or any other class for multiple reasons:

1. It is not a sample of D&D players at large, it is a specific subset.

2. There is no statistical data available and any that we would get would be survey data and susceptable to sampling bias.

3. Most of the threads have at least a plurality saying players generally like to play fighters. Most of the ENWorld threads would indicate A LOT of people generally like fighters. If you are going to use ENWorld threads as your metric it would seem most players like fighters!

I am responding generally here not specifically to you alone so forgive my expounding…though I agree with you.

All of this cuts both ways. Which is why I think published data is interesting and entertaining and good conversation starters but…that’s a bout it.

Some folks on a forum constantly talk about the royal “we”—- players in general.

Their experience rarely reflects my experience. BUT I play with friends generally. I was not playing AL, was not in a game club. My group are just dudes who love the game. Which brings up the notion about sampling…

What percentage of D&D players use Beyond? Are these class choices parts of multiple character-building exercises? I make lots of characters I don’t play…if I don’t play them much or do a one shot, how qualified am I to expound on the class?

Again, I love the data! Keep it coming! But let’s take it with a grain of salt.

Anyone on here saying “no one likes this,” “everyone wishes this,” “clearly this is hated,” “it was all a conspiracy to make a crappy game that just panders to x”….these folks have an opinion. That’s it. It’s not always an educated one in a strict sense. It does not add up logically either.

I know my experience. I know my observations. Other than folks with data in the company that is all there is. They surely have enough to try to market their wares.

The idea that the game would purposely suck is so absurd it defies logic. As a result, I assume/reason that a portion of the design choices are based on what folks believe is WANTED by paying consumers.

The profit motive alone suggests—-but does not prove that.

The idea that the designers are purposely making something crappy according to their own data makes no sense. The company’s not pandering to a secret cabal of a demographic that everyone knows is dying off.

This almost sounds like lizard people running the government. And I don’t have data disproving that fact but…yeah…

Say what you think is going on but understand opinion for what it is.

 

[ECMO3]

No I mean how Fighting Styles are a single choice and have no scaling outside of a single feat AND use different ability score AND soon Masterys.
So you go from being good at 5 weapons at level 1 to very good at 1 weapon at level 8.

Most of the fighters I see played lately take Archery, Superior Technique or Defense (and lately they have also been changing styles with ASIs).

So they are as good with weapons at level 8 as at earlier levels.

Also the save DCs on superior technique do scale, both with increases to strength/dex and increases to PB.

I am not sure what feat you are talking about that gives scaling. Do you mean Sharpshooter or GWM? Both of those affect multiple weapons and if you are taking that feat you are making a purposeful decision to specialize in those weapons.

None of the races expan nonmaic choice. Like how drow used to come with TWF. Elves could come with Archery allowing a martial to have 2 fighting styles.

Drow do come with weapon proficiencies though and if you are not allowed to swap out they are the exact ones you want for a dex class that doesn't have martial weapon profiency. That is why they are my go-to race on a Bladesinger.

 

[bedir than]

If the survey data is that people are unsatisfied with a class (and the solve is mechanics) but people still play the class why are they doing that?

These unsatisfied with mechanics people are picking the class for something, almost certainly that something is story. Unless there's some kind of mystical inference that tens of thousands of D&D players are being forced to play unsatisfying mechanical classes for reasons