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.

 

[Maxperson]

I don't think that's true - that the implication is that they don't. The implication is that we don't know and that it's quite possible that some of them don't. AND that was only in response to the idea that the ONLY explanation is that "people enjoy them". It's not the only explanation.

The explanation that the only reason martials are so high is that people enjoy them is almost surely correct, as I've pointed out. That doesn't mean that some didn't enjoy playing a martial or weren't pressured. It's just those reasons can't account for martials leading by such a large margin. The lead by so much because they are generally enjoyed.

It is very likely true that a lot of people enjoy playing Fighters (I know I do!) but it being the "only" or even the "absolute biggest" reason for this statistic? Who knows? Maybe?

It's incredibly unlikely for it not to be the primary reason for those numbers.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Nah. It's not pressure. "Pressure" as the term is used in normal language goes above and beyond simple asking. When someone asks me to pass the salt at dinner, they aren't pressuring me to pass the salt.

Sure, but Gamers don't tend to state their opinions in a "Hey, you should play a fighter, or not, whatever you like!" Sort of pressure-free way. Nor do gamers tend to take peer-pressure, even mildly intended, as something that they can choose to ignore or not, with no ruffled feathers. In particular when you're playing with a variety of experience levels, people with stronger or weaker personalities, people with greater or lesser authority (for example, MY opinion, as owner of the store we play in, probably has greater weight, whether I mean it to or not).

Sure, it can be easy in a lot of groups to have someone suggest a class and ignore them. But everywhere? I really doubt it. I doubt that you can say with any real conviction that no one has ever felt pressure to play a fighter. And that's only one minor reason other than "enjoyment".

The biggest reasons (other than expected enjoyment) is probably that it's Free, and it's quick to make choices for. (Don't have to pick spells). Never underestimate ease of use.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

The explanation that the only reason martials are so high is that people enjoy them is almost surely correct, as I've pointed out. That doesn't mean that some didn't enjoy playing a martial or weren't pressured. It's just those reasons can't account for martials leading by such a large margin. The lead by so much because they are generally enjoyed.

It's incredibly unlikely for it not to be the primary reason for those numbers.

I agree that it's likely the single biggest reason. I'm not sure anyone has ever intended to argue otherwise. As is typical here, the arguments tend to start with absolutist statements.

"Your argument is not true because it is not true 100% of the time!"
"Yeah, well your argument is not true because it's only true some of the time!"

Both sides are true... some of the time.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

There's nothing in 5e that "pushes" people to play martials.

Other players in their group. Genre tropes. YouTube videos saying it's the easiest way to learn the game.

It's fine to make inferences, but you have to acknowledge that's what they're doing.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

And I think that's a silly position to take. We don't KNOW that the people making all of those martials and casters enjoy playing D&D at all. The sheer numbers of them is a really, freaking strong indicator that they do, enjoy playing them, though.

A "strong indicator" is still an inference.

I'm not sure why this seems to bother you, but this is just the way data works.

We know people are doing X. We do not know why people are doing X unless we ask them -- and even with a well-designed survey, we only know what the people whom we surveyed tell us, not what everyone feels.

 

[Oofta]

People play classes for a wide variety of reasons. I just find it difficult to believe that 1 in every 4 people playing fighters would rather be playing a wizard or some other caster class. Because that's the size of the gap we're talking about.

People play for all sorts of reasons but most campaigns are over quickly enough that if you try a class and you don't enjoy it I see no reason you're going to play it again.

I could see some people playing fighters for reasons unrelated to what they want to play. I could dee DDB numbers being a bit off. I just see no way it's going to account for such a significant difference unless people simply like playing fighters.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

People play classes for a wide variety of reasons.

Yup.

I just find it difficult to believe that 1 in every 4 people playing fighters would rather be playing a wizard or some other caster class. Because that's the size of the gap we're talking about.

I don't think that was claimed, but you're right that any single reason is probably NOT 1-in-4. Maybe ALL the alternate reasons account for more than that, though! Who knows?

People play for all sorts of reasons but most campaigns are over quickly enough that if you try a class and you don't enjoy it I see no reason you're going to play it again.

Depends on why you didn't enjoy it? Subclass, for example, can make a HUGE difference. I (for one) wouldn't give up on the fighter after having one bad experience.

I could see some people playing fighters for reasons unrelated to what they want to play.

I think that's what you've been arguing against, though?

I could dee DDB numbers being a bit off.

Well, they are what they are. They're DDB numbers. They're skewed by "what's Free" and "what's not" among many other factors. They're interesting to look at, but they don't mean much without context.

I just see no way it's going to account for such a significant difference unless people simply like playing fighters.

Here's the difference between you and me: I think that it's a GIVEN that "people like to play fighters" and therefore the least interesting thing that could be discussed about these statistics. That people like to play fighters has been true for 50 years. Boring!

What else can we learn here? Nothing, if we're shut down when we try to talk about the things that we can't know by looking at these charts.

 

[Maxperson]

Other players in their group. Genre tropes. YouTube videos saying it's the easiest way to learn the game.

It's fine to make inferences, but you have to acknowledge that's what they're doing.

Your new player who picks up the books and asks friends to play with him isn't going to be looking up general tropes and likely isn't looking at YouTube.

 

[ECMO3]

Other players in their group. Genre tropes. YouTube videos saying it's the easiest way to learn the game.

I think this is true in some places, but I think this is not overall good for the game.

In my groups I make it a point to tell people to play what they want. We got a new gamer in a game we started 3 weeks ago and he said he wanted to play a Paladin. The rest of us, who have been gaming together for years came in with - melee Fighter, Barbarian and Ranged Ranger. Then the new guy (who was the first to say what class he was playing) said, hey "we seem melee heavy, maybe I should play a Cleric or another casters"

I chimed in and said "play what you want, we will make it work". The entire rest of the group agreed "If you want to play a Paladin, play a Paladin".

We ended up adding a Druid later too, so we did have one full caster in the end, and my Drow Fighter has a ton of magic (for a fighter). The thing is though, players should try hard to make sure other players are not backed or pressured into playing something they don't want. The great thing about 5E is you have to work really hard to make a character or group that won't work. As I said before you can walk into most 5E campaigns with a party of 4 fighters and those same 4 fighters are going to walk out the other side.

Some might come in and say that party was not well built or balanced and they are probably right, but the thing with peer pressure is players need to worry about their character, not other people's character and if you think "the party needs X" then make sure YOUR player has X, don't pressure someone else to get X. There is no legitimate reason to pressure someone else into making a certain character.

Another side note - same gaming group a few years back the DM made fun of us because we were going through Acerak's dungeon in tomb of anihilation and had no one in the entire party proficient in Thieves tools (we had a Barbarian, Bard/Ranger (me), Fighter and Sorcerer). DM - "no one thought it was important to bring a Rogue or at least someone with a background proficiency in Thieves Tools to a Dungeon known for its traps". In the end we were probably challanged more at times than we would have otherwise been, but we made it through.

 

[Maxperson]

A "strong indicator" is still an inference.

I'm not sure why this seems to bother you, but this is just the way data works.

We know people are doing X. We do not know why people are doing X unless we ask them -- and even with a well-designed survey, we only know what the people whom we surveyed tell us, not what everyone feels.

Sure, and I'm inferring that since it has been 65 million years since the last extinction asteroid impact that it won't happen tomorrow. Do I KNOW that it's not going to happen tomorrow? No. I'm just about as sure the numbers are due to enjoyment of the classes.