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.

 

[TheSword]

Because it's not "corner cases". There are spells at every single level that do this. It's that some of these spells simply get brought out as the example because they are the worst offenders. And it's NEVER ENDING. You're trying to plug holes in the dike with your fingers instead of actually fixing any of the problems. I mean, Simulacrum is insane. You simply have your Simulacrum cast Simulacrum and on and on. Infinite Wish spells. Wahoo! Solves all that ruby dust problems. I have infinite wishes. I can just wish for ruby dust.

If it was only a "couple of examples", this wouldn't be an issue. But, of course, this is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. No criticism is valid. All problems are one hundred percent user error. Couldn't possibly be a problem in the game. Of course not.

The fact that WotC has gone through the spell list with a honking big nerf hammer and already adjusted dozens of spells? Naw, that's nothing. There was never a problem there. It's all just white board theory crafting.

And it never ends.

Do you really think I'm either that incompetent that I haven't already thought of the solutions (or seen them brought up in the last ten years)? That I haven't actually TRIED to resolve issues? Seriously? Howzabout, instead, we start from the position that I'm reasonably competent as a DM, that I am, in fact, ACTUALLY having problems, and suggest how we could solve those? I know that that's a totally off the wall idea. After all, that would mean that we have to admit that 5e isn't the pinnacle of perfection of game design. But, it's just such a wild and crazy idea that it might just work.

No, I agree with you about fixing things. I never said there is no problem. It’s an ongoing process. Just be clear on the problem you’re trying to fix.

If the spell is the issue, cut out the loopholes that let spells be abused. They’re already doing it for 2024 with things like Banishment being an ongoing save etc. have it so Simulacrums can’t cast the simulacrum spell, forbiddance needs the boundary to be paced during the casting of the spell. I hope they dial a number of spells down a notch. Simulacrum was already on my list of home-nerfed spells, as was Tiny Hut. You bet forbiddance is on there too now. It’s a good shout.

Having a disproportionate number of casters is a totally different issue.

If you have a problem is the very fact that Magic able to reshape reality exists, well then I think that is different problem again.

You say there is an issue with spells. I say fix the spells.

 

[Oofta]

Yeah. It's sadly not (just) the designers' fault. Plenty of great ideas, which would have been perfectly workable and oozing with flavor and roleplay potential, got shouted down by a ~30% minority who never want anything more flavorful than white bread.

Good thing that there's plenty of 3PP that support what the majority of people do not want. Nobody is "shouting down" anything when they express an opinion that they dislike something you personally like, people are entitle to their opinions.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Good thing that there's plenty of 3PP that support what the majority of people do not want. Nobody is "shouting down" anything when they express an opinion that they dislike something you personally like, people are entitle to their opinions.

Okay. My experience differs. Greatly.

Especially because as far as I've seen, DMs actively hate 3PP for 5e. None of the games I've applied for used any, any attempt to ask for it was either immediately shut down or (on rare occasion) given an "I'll consider it" before being inevitably told "no, sorry, not doing that."

3PP is cold comfort when it's effectively never available.

 

[Oofta]

Okay. My experience differs. Greatly.

Especially because as far as I've seen, DMs actively hate 3PP for 5e. None of the games I've applied for used any, any attempt to ask for it was either immediately shut down or (on rare occasion) given an "I'll consider it" before being inevitably told "no, sorry, not doing that."

3PP is cold comfort when it's effectively never available.

Then perhaps those DMs simply don't want to run the kind of game you want to play. I'm sorry that you can't find a DM that has the same vision you do, but I have yet to find a DM that runs the game exactly how I would want it run. When you have a group activity sometimes you have to accept compromises which means you don't always get what you want.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Then perhaps those DMs simply don't want to run the kind of game you want to play. I'm sorry that you can't find a DM that has the same vision you do, but I have yet to find a DM that runs the game exactly how I would want it run. When you have a group activity sometimes you have to accept compromises which means you don't always get what you want.

Gotta love how "any 3PP at all" or "let me play a PHB race" or "I dunno, don't make TPKs happen by throwing CR3 monsters at a level 1 party" is suddenly me being so overwhelmingly picky that it's my fault. Couldn't possibly be that there's a culture or game problem here, nope, gotta be that I'm just completely unpleasable.

I'm not the one who argued that one particular person in the group should always get what they want no matter what.

 

[Oofta]

Gotta love how "any 3PP at all" or "let me play a PHB race" or "I dunno, don't make TPKs happen by throwing CR3 monsters at a level 1 party" is suddenly me being so overwhelmingly picky that it's my fault. Couldn't possibly be that there's a culture or game problem here, nope, gotta be that I'm just completely unpleasable.

I'm not the one who argued that one particular person in the group should always get what they want no matter what.

I'm not saying it's your fault. I'm saying you can't always get what you want but if you try sometimes ... well you likely know how the rest of the song goes. I am saying that if you go to a Chinese restaurant that everyone else has agreed to and order a burrito you're likely to be dissapointed. One of the reasons I started DMing was because I couldn't find a good DM. Not the solution for everyone of course just saying that you are not the only one that can't find a DM that works for you. We all have different ways of dealing with that, I just don't think blaming other people for my issues is useful.

The TPK thing is not only completely out of left field but also a great way to no longer be a DM. Who does that and still has a group?

 

[Oofta]

No, I agree with you about fixing things. I never said there is no problem. Just be clear on the problem you’re trying to fix.

If the spell is the issue, cut out the loopholes that let spells be abused. They’re already doing it for 2024 with things like Banishment being an ongoing save etc. have it so Simulacrums can’t cast the simulacrum spell, forbiddance needs the boundary to be paced during the casting of the spell. I hope they dial a number of spells down a notch. Simulacrum was already on my list of home-nerfed spells, as was Tiny Hut. You bet forbiddance is on there too now. It’s a good shout.

Having a disproportionate number of casters is a totally different issue.

If you have a problem is the very fact that Magic able to reshape reality exists, well then I think that is different problem again.

You say there is an issue with spells. I say fix the spells.

When it comes to Tomb of Annihilation a couple of things. First, Forbiddance is a 6th level spell so you have to be 11th level to cast it which may or may not happen during the campaign, not to mention the 1,000 GP worth of powdered ruby when you've been walking through trackless jungle. Second, they simply state that

"Many spells have altered effects when cast in the Tomb of the Nine Gods, including spells cast from magic items or artifacts, and class abilities that duplicate the effects of spells."​

While they don't specifically mention Forbiddance, the DM is told to modify spells as they see fit.

Yes, that's a bit of a cheesy workaround, nothing is perfect. The alternative, of course, would have been to already have a Forbiddance spell in place but that would have likely made the tomb unplayable. Personally if someone started using the spell as an offensive weapon, which they hadn't, I'd simply house rule the spell like I've done with a handful of other things. It's meant to be a defensive measure, not a magic nuke.

 

[TheSword]

When it comes to Tomb of Annihilation a couple of things. First, Forbiddance is a 6th level spell so you have to be 11th level to cast it which may or may not happen during the campaign, not to mention the 1,000 GP worth of powdered ruby when you've been walking through trackless jungle. Second, they simply state that

"Many spells have altered effects when cast in the Tomb of the Nine Gods, including spells cast from magic items or artifacts, and class abilities that duplicate the effects of spells."​

While they don't specifically mention Forbiddance, the DM is told to modify spells as they see fit.

Yes, that's a bit of a cheesy workaround, nothing is perfect. The alternative, of course, would have been to already have a Forbiddance spell in place but that would have likely made the tomb unplayable. Personally if someone started using the spell as an offensive weapon, which they hadn't, I'd simply house rule the spell like I've done with a handful of other things. It's meant to be a defensive measure, not a magic nuke.

I think he was talking about Tomb of Horrors.

Though absolutely I agree with those suggestions. My preference is to house rule it so it can’t be used offensively. You must have seen the area to be warded at least once.

 

[TheSword]

… or "I dunno, don't make TPKs happen by throwing CR3 monsters at a level 1 party"…

Just for the record, many level 1 parties would confidently handle a single CR 3 boss monster. Using them is not strange. My next campaign starts with a CR 5 Troll.

 

[Mistwell]

It's not "Switch or we're not playing". But Joe switching from rogue to a cleric to have restoration or the DM telling Angie that fighter would be best because she's new.

Heavily nudging the new player to the fighter and the veteran to a caster is something I see often.

And if the DM doesn't telegraph throwing softballs or cities with casters, there is a discussion of someone switching to be a priest class. Especially if the DM adds "realism" houserules or says 5e is too easy.

Every game. Not once has anyone just make their characters independently and not try to influence each other.

And then 1 fighter,1 wizard,and 1 cleric get DNDB character sheets. And 1-2 humans.

I appreciate that's your experience. I encountered that while playing 1e I seem to recall. And we tried to cover different roles with 4e. But we have not had this issue with 5e. We've repeatedly had games with players playing the same class. We've had games of all spellcasters. And we've had games with almost no spellcasters. Most of our games have no cleric or druid. I am playing a cleric in one of our games, but not from external pressure just from having not played a Cleric yet in 5e and wanting to try one out.