Classes

3. Cleric (6.6.9*...3.6.6) (*13 if multi-classed half-elf) (WIS+2)
4. Druid (6.6.12...6.6.15)
       The Druid & The DM +
5. Fighter (9.3.6...6.7.6) (STR+2, CON+1)
6. Barbarian
7. 01-50 = Ranger (13.13.14...6.14.6) (STR+2, CON+1), 51-00 = Anti-Ranger
8. Magic-User (3.9.6...6.6.6) (INT+2, DEX+1)
9. Illusionist (6.15.6...16.3.6)
10. Thief (6.6.3...9.6.6) (DEX+2, INT+1)
    The Thief: A Special Look
11. Assassin (12.11.6...12.6.3) (STR+1, DEX+2, INT+1)
12. Hunter
13. Oriental Barbarian
14. Bushi
15. Kensai
16. Monk (15.6.15.15.11.6)
       He's got a lot to kick about!
17. Ninja (roll again) (OA)
18. Samurai (OA)
19. Shukenja
20. Sohei
21. Wu Jen
22. Yakuza
23. Good Priest
24. Neutral Priest
25. Evil Priest
26. Knight of the Crown
27. Magician
28. Tinker
29. Bard
       The Bard: Singing a new tune +
30. Accountant*    "Character That Really Counts, A"   Dean Coldham 48(15 1/2) D&D1
31. Alchemist    "Better Living Through Alchemy"    Tom Armstrong 130(34) D&D1
32. Anti-Paladin    "Try This For Evil: The Anti-Paladin NPC" Laking & Mesford 39(8) D&D1
33. 01-50 = Archer, 51-00 = Archer-Ranger
34. Astrologer    "NPCs For Hire: One Who Predicts..."   Roger E. Moore 45(10) D&D1
35. Bandit    "Bandits!"      Armstrong & Moore 63(22) D&D1
36. Battle Dancer    "Rhythm Warriors"     Joseph R. Ravitts 159(74) D&D1
37. Beastmaster    "King of the Jungle"     Ed Greenwood 119(30) D&D1
38. Berserker "Wild Warriors, The"     Tom Griffith 133(76) D&D1
39. Bureaucrat    "Bureaucrats and Politicians"    Lakofka & Nystul 74(8) D&D1
40. Bounty Hunter
41. Charlatan    "First Impressions Are Deceiving"   David A. Bellis 120(28) D&D1
42. Necromancer (Death Master)    "For NPC's Only: The Death Master"   Len Lakofka 76(10) D&D1
43. Dreamer    "Beyond the Gate of Dreams"    John Nephew 132(16) D&D1 (Roll again)
44. Duelist    "Duelist, The"      Arthur Collins 73(6) D&D1
45. Juggler
46. Acrobat
47. Troubador
48. Escrimador    "Kicks and Sticks"     Joseph R. Ravitts 124(40) D&D1
49. Geisya    "Geisya, The"      Gregg Sharp 121(38) D&D1
50. Halfling Guardian   "Don't Sell Them Short!"    Peter Dosik 129(26) D&D1
51. Hopeless*    "Rules To Lose By"     Roger Koppy 96(54) D&D1
52. <Liar: Illusionist-Assassin> (12.15.6...16.6.6) (STR+1, DEX+2, INT+1)
53. Incantatrix    "Enchanting Incantatrix, The"    Ed Greenwood 90(8) D&D1
54. Jester*    "Jester, The"      Roger E. Moore 60(45) D&D1
55. Jock*     "Duh Jock"      Jon Mattson 72(50) D&D1
56. Mariner    "For Sail: One New NPC"     Scott Bennie 107(38) D&D1
57. Merchant (6.12.12...6.6.6)    "Taking Care of Business"    Anthony D. Gleckler 136(22) D&D1
58. Diviner (Oracle)    "Oracle: When He Talks, Everybody Listens, The" Andrew Dewar 53(14) D&D1
59. <Swindler: Illusionist-Thief> (6.15.6...16.6.6) (DEX+2, INT+1)
60. Myrikhan (NG)
61. Garath (CG)
62. Lyan (LN)
63. Paramander (N)
64. Fantra (CN)
65. Illrigger (LE)
66. Arrikhan (NE)
67. Paladin    (SEE Paladin)
68. Politician    "Bureaucrats and Politicians"    Lakofka & Nystul 74(8) D&D1
69. Psionicist    (SEE Psionicist)
70. Savant    "Savant, The"      Vince Garcia 140(16) D&D1
71. Scribe    "Scribe Non-Player Character, The"   Ed Greenwood 62(21) D&D1
72. Sentinel    "Halt! Who Goes There?"     Andy Pierce 89(34) D&D1
73. Shaman    "Hey, Wanna Be a Kobold?"    Joseph Clay 141(41) D&D1
74. Smith     "Smith: Test the Metal Of This NPC, The" Ed Greenwood 70(4) D&D1
75. Sumotori    "Where There Is One Sumotori..."   Stewart Wieck 157(32) D&D1
76. Thief     (SEE Rogue)
77. Timelord    "Timelords"      Lewis Pulsipher 65(32) D&D1
78. "Witch, The"      Bill Muhlhausen 114(8) D&D1
79. Witch Doctor    "Hey, Wanna Be a Kobold?"    Joseph Clay 141(43) D&D1
80. <Crusader: Cleric/Fighter> (9.6.9...6.7.6) (WIS+2) (STR+2, CON+1)
81. <Paragon: Cleric/Fighter/Magic-User> (9.9.9...6.7.6) (WIS+2) (STR+2, CON+1) (INT+2, DEX+1)
82. <Preacher: Cleric/Fighter/Thief> (9.6.9...9.7.6) (WIS+2) (STR+2, CON+1) (DEX+2, INT+1)
83. <Eco-terrorist: Cleric/Ranger> (13.14.13...6.14.6) (WIS+2) (STR+2, CON+1)
84. <Adeptus: Cleric/Magic-User> (6.9.9...6.6.6) (WIS+2) (INT+2, DEX+1)
85. <Theocrat: Cleric/Magic-User/Thief> (6.9.9...9.6.6) (WIS+2) (INT+2, DEX+1) (DEX+2, INT+1)
86. <Pulpitationist: Cleric/Illusionist> (6.15.9...16.6.6) (WIS+2)
87. <Evangelist: Cleric/Thief> (6.6.9...9.6.6) (WIS+2) (DEX+2, INT+1)
88. <Fanatic: Cleric/Assassin> (12.11.9...12.6.6) (WIS+2) (STR+1, DEX+2, INT+1)
89. <Warden: Druid/Fighter> (9.6.12...6.7.15) (+2 STR, +1 CON)
90. <Guardian: Druid/Ranger> (13.13.14...6.14.15) (+2 STR, +1 CON)
91. <Ecologist: Druid/Magic-User> (6.9.12...6.6.15) (INT+2, DEX+1)
92. <Activist: Druid/Thief> (6.6.12...9.6.15) (DEX+2, INT+1)
93. <Bladesinger: Fighter/Magic-User> (9.9.6...6.7.6) (STR+2, CON+1) (INT+2, DEX+1)
94. <Shadow: Fighter/Magic-User/Thief> (9.9.6...9.7.6) (STR+2, CON+1) (INT+2, DEX+1) (DEX+2, INT+1)
95. <Director: Fighter/Illusionist> (9.15.6...16.7.6) (STR+2, CON+1)
96. <Skirmisher: Fighter/Thief> (9.6.6...9.7.6) (STR+2, CON+1) (DEX+2, INT+1)
97. <Sniper: Fighter/Assassin> (12.11.6...12.6.6) (STR+2, CON+1) (STR+1, DEX+2, INT+1)
98. <Green Wizard: Ranger/Magic-User> (13.13.14...6.14.6) (STR+2, CON+1) (INT+2, DEX+1)
99. <Spellfilcher: Magic-user/Thief> (6.9.6...9.6.6) (INT+2, DEX+1) (DEX+2, INT+1)
100. <Spellslayer: Magic-user/Assassin> (12.11.6...12.6.6) (INT+2, DEX+1) (STR+1, DEX+2, INT+1)

OUT ON A LIMB

Article ideas

Dear Editor:
I have never been one for reading magazines
until I recently bought an issue of
Dragon #39 (no, this is not an old letter just
now being sent, it is an old Dragon just now
being bought). I have enjoyed every page that
I have read so far, and I plan to read every
page — from front cover to back.
I really enjoyed George Laking and Tim
Mesford’s article on the Anti-Paladin. Are
there any more NPCs to come? How about
someone out there doing an NPC on the
Bounty Hunter? I have heard several requests
for such a NPC in my gaming career, but I
personally have neither the time nor the
resources for such a task.

For a long time I have wanted to incorporate
two warring nations (for example) into
my campaign — for war provides intrigue,
espionage, and a setting for adventure. But so
far, I have not found a satisfactory system to
resolve such a large-scale battle involving
hundreds or even thousands of men. Have
you any ideas?

Dave Hansen
Conroe, Tex
(Dragon #46)

We’re grateful to Dave for the kind comments
— and for the two suggestions for articles.
Perhaps one of you writers who happens
to read this will sit down and produce just
such a story, and we’ll be able to make Dave’s
wish come true.

— Kim
(Dragon #46)

NPC overdose?

Dear editor:
I’ve been buying your magazine for a while
now, and subscribing was one of the best
things I ever did. The quality of your magazine
is very high and I have yet to be displeased,
except (there is always an exception)
I feel that in the past couple of issues
(#39 and #43 specifically) there has been
entirely too much room devoted to NPCs. I
realize that Anti-Paladins and Witches will be
used as NPCs by many people, and that if
you’re going to use them that the rules should
be usable, fair and complete. But I happen to
agree with Mr. Gygax (Out on a Limb, issue
#41) that Anti-Paladins are as useful as a third
leg. As noted above, my main complaint is
space. Why couldn’t these articles have been
put out in 2 parts? The Anti-Paladin (according
to my calculations) was about 5 1/5 pages
long, which really isn’t long, but considering
it’s devoted to a single NPC, that’s long. Now,
the Witch article. I have it counted at 9 pages.
I really feel that is way too much space to
devote to a single NPC. Again, why not run
the article in two parts?

I have really appreciated your modules
recently and especially was surprised to find
the Traveller module (Why? I don’t know) in
Dragon. I enjoyed it a lot and am working on
fitting it in somewhere.

It may be beating a dead horse, but I’d like
to get in my two cents’ worth about character
inflation. I chose a Fighter to represent me in
my friend’s world. Well, before I reached 2nd
level I was the ruler of a country and was
setting out to conquer new lands in my highly
magical warships. Even though I wasn’t too
familiar with the rules at this time, I still felt
this wasn’t the way it was supposed to be —
considering that I could still meet my maker
after suffering just one decent blow from a
sword.

One bit of advice: Books and stories are
great to base an adventure on, but DMs
should not expect to be able to follow the plot
line verbatim.

As far as Runequest is concerned, I’d really
like to add it to the log of games I know,
except I can’t find anyone willing to teach it to
me. (I usually don’t like to buy a game until
I’ve played it at least once; the exception was
Traveller.)

Terrance Mikrut
Jacksonville, N.C.
(Dragon #49)

Perhaps the best way to respond to Terry’s
criticisms about the NPC articles is to consider
the alternatives he proposes or seems to
propose. Why don’t we publish articles of
such length in two parts? Primarily for the
benefit of the thousands of people who are
interested in such things, so they aren’t given
half of what they want and need and then told
to wait another month for the rest of it. And,
so those thousands of people won’t think
we’re trying to pull a fast one by forcing them
to buy two issues just to get all of a single
article. Those are the alternative complaints,
which we avoid by publishing articles all at
once, even though this sometimes means
using a relatively big chunk of space within a
single issue.

It seems as though Terry wouldn’t mind the
appearance of “useless” (to him) NPCs as
long as the articles could be condensed so
they occupied fewer pages. This alternative is
practically impossible in certain cases where
the scope and potential of the subject matter
necessarily carries an article beyond “normal”
size. We considered the Anti-Paladin
and the Witch to be two such cases — subjects
that deserved to be covered in great
detail and examined from as many sides as
possible.

— Kim
(Dragon #49)

BATTLESYSTEM +

'Enough NPCs’

Dear Editor:
I have had enough of your NPCs! Sure,
they help you and balance the game, but on
the other hand they can ruin you.

The character is the main flow of the game.
Everything focuses around him. I keep seeing
new toys for the DM. Why not help us players
a bit, too?

Michael S. Pacyna
Bowling Green, Ky
(Dragon #52)

‘High-handed’

Dear Editor:
I’ve been a DM for three years, and a faithful
reader of your magazine for two. However, in
recent issues I have noticed something that
disturbs me. Why do you persist in publishing
only new NPC’s? Why not let your readers
have some new player characters instead?

Several of the NPC’s you have published,
notably the Anti-Paladin, the Witch, and the
Samurai, seem as if they were prevented from
becoming PC’s. All the information needed to
run them as PC’s is there: the experience levels,
the hit dice, the special abilities, etc. If
they were never intended to be played as
PC’s, why do you publish the experience
points necessary to attain levels?

In DRAGON #49 in the Samurai article, it
says, “In accordance with this magazine’s policy
the Samurai is presented as a non-player
character.” You go on to say that if certain
NPC’s were used as PC’s it could unbalance
games, and even whole campaigns; agreed.
But why not publish some player characters
that attempt to keep campaigns in balance?
Your readers could use them as NPC’s if they
so desire.

Who do you think you are? You have no
right to dictate how we DM’s run our campaigns.
Don’t you think we are capable of
keeping a campaign in balance without being
prevented from using new PC’s? You seem to
think you have a monopoly on good ideas,
One gets the feeling that the D&D game system
is so fragile that it instantly becomes unbalanced
when someone adds their own ideas,
DM’s who unbalance their campaigns by making
foolish additions deserve what they get.

I cannot stop you from publishing whatever
you want. But I know I would be much more
interested in a new player character for my
group to use than a NPC that I will probably
never put into action. Stop trying to protect
us. Let the customers choose, and stop being
so high-handed!

Adam Rosenblatt
New York, N.Y.
(Dragon #53)

‘Too scalding’

Dear Editor:
I think “Out on a Limb” is a very good feature
to have, and it shows what people really
think of your magazine. But it seems to me
that when a person writes in a criticism you
are (just maybe) a little too scalding with your
answer. Take DRAGON #53 and the letter by
Adam Rosenblatt about you being too “highhanded.”
Take a little time out to read your
reply. See? Whew! You’ll be lucky if he buys a
DRAGON magazine, let alone touches one!
Perhaps you could be a little more amiable
with your editorial responses.

Now, if what I have been trying to tell you
sinks in, your response to my letter will be one
of understanding. If not, well then, at least it
will be amusing to others as they read it.
Jeff Rabkin
New York, N.Y.
(Dragon #58)

Dear Jeff:
We think “Out on a Limb” is a very good
feature to have, too. But it seems to us that
when people write in a criticism they are (just
maybe) a little too scalding in their accusations.
Take a little time out to read some of the
mail we get. See? Whew! We’ll be lucky if we
can ever again work up the courage to open a
letter. Perhaps readers could be a little more
amiable when they call us high-handed.

Now, if what I have been trying to tell you
sinks in, your reaction to this response will be
one of understanding. If not, I hope somebody
gets a chuckle out of it.

— KM
(Dragon #58)

Perhaps this letter should have been answered <link>
by Kim, who is in charge of high-handedness
around here (see Out on a Limb,
#45). Who do we think we are? We are the staff <link>
of DRAGON magazine, a monthly adventure
role-playing aid—no more, no less. Certain/y
we have never claimed nor assumed the right
to dictate how individual DM’s run their campaigns.
Even if we had the right (which, I repeat,
we don’t), we would have no way to
enforce our will on our readers. So back off,
Jack, and listen up as I quote from the preface
to the Dungeon Masters Guide:

“As the creator and ultimate authority in
your respective game, this work is written as
one Dungeon Master equal to another. Pronouncements
there may be, but they are not
from ‘on high’ ” (Recognize that phrase,
Adam?) “as respects your game.... it must
have some degree of uniformity, a familiarity
of method and procedure from campaign to
campaign within the whole. ADVANCED D&D
... is above all a set of boundaries for all of the
‘worlds’ devised by referees everywhere...,
what is aimed at is a ‘universe’ into which
similar campaigns and parallel worlds can be
placed. With certain uniformity of systems
and ‘laws,’ players will be able to move from
one campaign to another and know at least
the elemental principles which govern the
new milieu, for all milieux will have certain
(but not necessarily the same) laws in common....
This uniformity will help not only
players, it will enable DMs to carry on a meaningful
dialogue and exchange of useful information.
It might also eventually lead to
grand tournaments wherein persons from any
part of the U.S., or the world for that matter,
can compete for accolades.... Variations and
difference are desirable, but should be kept
within the boundaries of the overall system.”
(Is this sinking in, Adam?) “...creative addition
can most certainly be included... Keep
such individuality in perspective by developing
a unique and detailed world based on the
rules of ADVANCED D&D. No two campaigns
will ever be the same, but all will have the
common ground necessary to maintaining
the whole as a viable entity about which you
and your players can communicate with the
many thousands of others who also find
swords and sorcery role-playing gaming as
an amusing and enjoyable pastime.”

DRAGON magazine has, over the past five
years, presented hundreds of variants, additions,
and suggestions for or about the D&D
and AD&D games. Certainly, we have never
been so high-handed as to say that they must
all be used, and then only in the manner presented
— indeed, many of the things we’ve
published would contradict each other if they
were used together. What we have done is to
provide a forum for presentation of aspects of
play that may be incorporated into play if desired,
and further, presented these aspects in
a manner that, we hope, agrees with the philosophy
outlined in the preface to the DMG.

For example, an anti-paladin could be incorporated
into a game as an NPC with whom
the player characters interact. Those same
player characters could move into another
DM’s world, where the “big nasty” of the moment
is a lich or an evil high priest. The players
could operate in this world just as easily
even if the second DM had never heard of an
anti-paladin.

If, on the other hand, the players all have
characters who are anti-paladins, witches
and samurai warriors, and the second DM
doesn’t happen to read the magazine, everything
grinds to a halt faster than it takes to
describe it. It’s like if you and a friend play
chess and, between yourselves, decide to allow
pawns to move backward. That will work
fine as long as you only play each other, but if
you take on a new opponent who doesn’t
know your rules, you’re in for problems.

If you want to allow NPCs that appear in
DRAGON magazine to be used as player
characters, go right ahead. We estimate that
we have a readership of 200,000 people, but
we also estimate that about 3,000,000 people
play D&D or AD&D games. So, only about 7%
of all players have even heard of the DRAGON
version of the anti-paladin or the witch or the
samurai. If you insist on using those classes
for player characters, you’ll be limiting the
scope of your playing experience to only a
fraction of that 7%. And then who’s being
high-handed?

we also estimate that about 3,000,000 people
play D&D or AD&D games. So, only about 7%
of all players have even heard of the DRAGON
version of the anti-paladin or the witch or the
samurai. If you insist on using those classes
for player characters, you’ll be limiting the
scope of your playing experience to only a
fraction of that 7%. And then who’s being
high-handed?

— JJ
(Dragon #53)
<check this letter>

“Welcome addition”

Dear Editor:
I was pleased to find BEST OF DRAGON
Vol. II for sale in my local hobby store. I was
even more delighted to find NPC’s such as the
Anti-Paladin, Samurai and Berserker. “The
Sorceror’s Scroll” held great interest for me <link>
and “Poison: From AA to XX” was a must!

Has anyone ever thought of making a second
Players’ Handbook containing a few of
the best NPC’s published in DRAGON Magazine
as player characters? That, of course,
would require a sequel to the DMG with new
combat tables and miscellaneous rules. This
would be a welcome addition to the AD&D
family.

Many times I have tried to play an Archer-
Range r or Bounty Hunter in various campaigns,
but the DM either didn’t have sufficient
information, or in some cases, he just
wouldn’t try; thus, out comes the old Fighter,
Cleric or Thief

In the tradition of all AD&D books, these
two new books would not be a necessity to the
game, but would instead be just a supplement,
a fine addition to the AD&D spectrum. If
there is controversy on an imbalance in the
playing of one of these characters, I believe a
good DM would be able to handle it. There
have always been choices when creating a
new character, but the ideas I have proposed
would open up even more options for the
AD&D player.

Hugh Weiler
Worthington, Ohio
(Dragon #62)

What Hugh suggests isn’t a bad idea, but it’s
based on a misinterpretation. The character
classes presented in BEST OF DRAGON™
Vol. II were not designed to be used by player
characters, but only as NPC’s with whom
player characters might interact. Maybe we’ll
put out a volume of NPC’s some day, but
that’s what they’ll be — they won’t be portrayed
as classes that players can choose for
their characters.

Why not? For one thing, we don’t presume
to have the knowledge or the power to drastically
alter the fabric of the AD&D™ rules.
Classes for player characters are specifically
defined and “limited” (though there is still an
abundance of choices) in order to make the
game system as a whole work properly. Why
should a DM have to correct an “imbalance”
anyway? A well structured role-playing game
that isn’t tampered with to a great degree
shouldn’t — and in this case doesn’t — have
any imbalances to begin with.

Those of you who’ve been following “From
the Sorceror’s Scroll” know that Gary Gygax
is at work on expansion material for the AD&D
rule system. The expansion volume will almost
certainly contain some new player character
classes — such as Gary’s version of the
Barbarian, which will be previewed in the July
issue of DRAGON™ Magazine. For Hugh and
everyone who feels the same way, that should
be something to look forward to.

— KM
(Dragon #62)

‘For the DM’

Dear Editor:
Back in issue #53, Adam Rosenblatt (Out on
a Limb) asked why DM’s were recommended
not to use variant NPC’s as new character
classes. In my opinion, this is because NPC’s
are primarily for the DM, to meet and challenge
(and in some cases befriend) the player
characters in a campaign. The charts in the
articles (this is my firm conviction) were intended
for the DM, to aid in raising the levels
of NPC’s that the player characters interact
with during a campaign.

And who says DMs can’t have an adventure
or two on their own? An adventure is just right
for raising the levels of NPC’s to correspond
with the passing of time.

Thomas Gellhaus
Kingston, N. Y.
(Dragon #63)

Cleric's Weapons
Ranger Skills
Thieves' XP
Shukenja: Turn Spirits +

Greed of Splatbooks (a Norse kelling)

Paladin	-	Myrikhan	-	Garath
Lyan	-	Paramander	-	Fantra
Illrigger	-	Arrikhan	-	Anti-Paladin