D&D 2E [COMPLETE] Looking back at the leatherette series: PHBR, DMGR, HR and more!
Alzrius
The EN World kitten
I really feel like I should open my next retrospective with a Seinfeldism: "So what's the deal with NPC classes?"
I ask because, notwithstanding the non-player-character slant of the previous leatherette book, I think that DMGR8 Sages & Specialists might be the first time we actually see fully fleshed-out NPC classes in a D&D product that isn't a magazine. (Though I'm sure you guys are rushing to check me on that even as I type this.)
Some quick checking through the Dragondex turns up roughly thirty-odd NPC classes in Dragon back in the day, which I strongly suspect is where most D&D aficionados know them from. After all, that's where we got the anti-paladin, the death master, the jester, and several other classes that were eventually reprinted in Paizo's Dragon Compendium Vol. 1. Beyond that, NPC classes are largely something that were formalized in Third Edition, which not only gave us five right out of the box, but also had the magewright introduced in the Eberron Campaign Setting. I like to think that the magician class, from the Birthright Campaign Setting is a sort of "spiritual ancestor" to the magewright - also being a sub-par arcane spellcaster that's setting-specific - but the book doesn't specifically say that it's NPC-only. Likewise, the templar is also technically a PC class when we see it in the original Dark Sun Boxed Set, though given its political class abilities and alignment restrictions it probably shouldn't have been; that was likely why it was quietly removed from the Dark Sun Campaign Setting (Expanded and Revised Edition).
But having overviewed NPC classes in D&D generally, what's in this book in particular? Well, basically it's ten full-on character classes dedicated to various niche roles that are, quite frankly, either too boring or too unimportant for PCs to worry about. I'm going to try not to retread the same ground that the Product History on the book's sales page on DriveThruRPG covers - since going into the nitty-gritty on ten different classes, NPCs though they be, is too tall an order for this overview - but I'll go ahead and reiterate what these are: apothecary, appraiser, blacksmith, cartographer, engineer, guide, healer, historian, scribe, and seer.
The book prefaces the introduction and each chapter (since each class gets its own chapter) with the tale of Martia, a warrior who goes to each of these sages/specialists in turn to help her complete her epic quest. The illustrations, I'll note, do a good job of following the action, being black and white pieces that spotlight each example character, with many of them having Martia also, and an ensemble piece after her quest is finished at the end of the book. The cohesiveness in this regard gives the book a very tight feeling (though I can't help but smirk at how we get a stat block for each of the example NPCs, but never one for Martia herself).
The classes themselves are given coverage that's so thorough it's exhaustive, making sure to overview the ability score requirements, how many proficiencies they get, their individual XP tables, etc. (odd note: apparently none of these classes actually belong to any of the meta-class groups, such as Warrior or Rogue. Also interesting: unless I'm misremembering, none of these classes are restricted by race). It feels weird for me to say that in a pejorative manner, because I'm all about completeness and new crunch; it's just that the book doesn't go into much detail about how to integrate these classes into your campaign. That's not too surprising, since what they're good for is fairly self-evident, but despite the case that the framing fiction tries to present, I'm honestly not sure how well it sells the idea that these are really useful...or at least, that they warrant this much coverage.
That is, I suppose, what the last section of the book is for. It talks about a system where you basically attach NPCs who've taken levels in these classes to your PCs, letting them gain levels as the characters do. I'll admit, this I liked, as it hearkened back to the importance of henchmen, hirelings, and followers which - while still technically present in AD&D 2E - was rapidly falling by the wayside. Creating a system to keep a "supporting cast" of NPCs who played non-combat (and quite often non-adventuring) support for the PCs seems like a good thing to me, as it helps to keep the party cognizant of the greater game world beyond the dungeon.
Having said all that, I'll note that there are a few interesting bits tucked away in here that could be extracted for use elsewhere, such as the system for damaging armor, shields, weapons, and magic items, a method of producing "concoctions" (similar to potions, though they don't have to be magical), and a handful of new proficiencies (though they're tied pretty hard to the new classes here).
I'll say in closing that this book was one I only picked up a few years ago, when I was completing my leatherette collection, and while it was certainly better than I expected it to be, I still felt justified in turning my nose up at it years earlier. What's here isn't bad, but it's given more of a spotlight than it arguably deserves. Were there any DMs out there who really needed an entire class based around decoding maps or copying spells for wizards?
Overall, this product feels like it vindicates the idea of limiting NPC classes to Dragon and similar venues, rather than giving them greater prominence.
Please note my use of affiliate links in this post.
I ask because, notwithstanding the non-player-character slant of the previous leatherette book, I think that DMGR8 Sages & Specialists might be the first time we actually see fully fleshed-out NPC classes in a D&D product that isn't a magazine. (Though I'm sure you guys are rushing to check me on that even as I type this.)
Some quick checking through the Dragondex turns up roughly thirty-odd NPC classes in Dragon back in the day, which I strongly suspect is where most D&D aficionados know them from. After all, that's where we got the anti-paladin, the death master, the jester, and several other classes that were eventually reprinted in Paizo's Dragon Compendium Vol. 1. Beyond that, NPC classes are largely something that were formalized in Third Edition, which not only gave us five right out of the box, but also had the magewright introduced in the Eberron Campaign Setting. I like to think that the magician class, from the Birthright Campaign Setting is a sort of "spiritual ancestor" to the magewright - also being a sub-par arcane spellcaster that's setting-specific - but the book doesn't specifically say that it's NPC-only. Likewise, the templar is also technically a PC class when we see it in the original Dark Sun Boxed Set, though given its political class abilities and alignment restrictions it probably shouldn't have been; that was likely why it was quietly removed from the Dark Sun Campaign Setting (Expanded and Revised Edition).
But having overviewed NPC classes in D&D generally, what's in this book in particular? Well, basically it's ten full-on character classes dedicated to various niche roles that are, quite frankly, either too boring or too unimportant for PCs to worry about. I'm going to try not to retread the same ground that the Product History on the book's sales page on DriveThruRPG covers - since going into the nitty-gritty on ten different classes, NPCs though they be, is too tall an order for this overview - but I'll go ahead and reiterate what these are: apothecary, appraiser, blacksmith, cartographer, engineer, guide, healer, historian, scribe, and seer.
The book prefaces the introduction and each chapter (since each class gets its own chapter) with the tale of Martia, a warrior who goes to each of these sages/specialists in turn to help her complete her epic quest. The illustrations, I'll note, do a good job of following the action, being black and white pieces that spotlight each example character, with many of them having Martia also, and an ensemble piece after her quest is finished at the end of the book. The cohesiveness in this regard gives the book a very tight feeling (though I can't help but smirk at how we get a stat block for each of the example NPCs, but never one for Martia herself).
The classes themselves are given coverage that's so thorough it's exhaustive, making sure to overview the ability score requirements, how many proficiencies they get, their individual XP tables, etc. (odd note: apparently none of these classes actually belong to any of the meta-class groups, such as Warrior or Rogue. Also interesting: unless I'm misremembering, none of these classes are restricted by race). It feels weird for me to say that in a pejorative manner, because I'm all about completeness and new crunch; it's just that the book doesn't go into much detail about how to integrate these classes into your campaign. That's not too surprising, since what they're good for is fairly self-evident, but despite the case that the framing fiction tries to present, I'm honestly not sure how well it sells the idea that these are really useful...or at least, that they warrant this much coverage.
That is, I suppose, what the last section of the book is for. It talks about a system where you basically attach NPCs who've taken levels in these classes to your PCs, letting them gain levels as the characters do. I'll admit, this I liked, as it hearkened back to the importance of henchmen, hirelings, and followers which - while still technically present in AD&D 2E - was rapidly falling by the wayside. Creating a system to keep a "supporting cast" of NPCs who played non-combat (and quite often non-adventuring) support for the PCs seems like a good thing to me, as it helps to keep the party cognizant of the greater game world beyond the dungeon.
Having said all that, I'll note that there are a few interesting bits tucked away in here that could be extracted for use elsewhere, such as the system for damaging armor, shields, weapons, and magic items, a method of producing "concoctions" (similar to potions, though they don't have to be magical), and a handful of new proficiencies (though they're tied pretty hard to the new classes here).
I'll say in closing that this book was one I only picked up a few years ago, when I was completing my leatherette collection, and while it was certainly better than I expected it to be, I still felt justified in turning my nose up at it years earlier. What's here isn't bad, but it's given more of a spotlight than it arguably deserves. Were there any DMs out there who really needed an entire class based around decoding maps or copying spells for wizards?
Overall, this product feels like it vindicates the idea of limiting NPC classes to Dragon and similar venues, rather than giving them greater prominence.
Please note my use of affiliate links in this post.
Last edited:
Orius
Legend
As for 1e's NPC classes, you left out the Witch and the Cloistered Cleric. 
And those classes were reprinted in the Best of Dragon long before Paizo touched them.
Remember the praise I heaped upon Villains and Necromancers? Well the DMGR series took a huge nosedive off a cliff with Sages.
The idea of NPC classes isn't a bad one, but 3e did a better job of it than this book. All the classes here could be much better handled with an Expert or Adept with the right focus. These classes are basically just a stripped down Fighter, Mage, Cleric, or Thief with a particular focus, and they tend to be pretty niche. And some are even more niche than others. I'd just backport a 3e NPC class into 2e to do this stuff, and they can be customized to serve particular needs. Some of the abilities aren't too bad, but I'd just use them to expand on existing NWPs. And some of the NWPs in this book aren't even new ideas and had appeared in 2e before if not the PHB.
Martia's story is okay, but stil pretty generic (not like Bakshra from Villains). The idea of attaching these NPC classes to the PCs as allies and support staff isn't bad, but it would have worked better if the classes weren't so specific. I think this book would have been better served by presenting one or two broad NPC classes like the ones from 3e that could have been customized with particular NWP focuses that could have been open ended enough to fit a wider variety of roles depending on what an individual campaign required. This book was really one of 2e's biggest letdowns for me.
And those classes were reprinted in the Best of Dragon long before Paizo touched them. Remember the praise I heaped upon Villains and Necromancers? Well the DMGR series took a huge nosedive off a cliff with Sages.
The idea of NPC classes isn't a bad one, but 3e did a better job of it than this book. All the classes here could be much better handled with an Expert or Adept with the right focus. These classes are basically just a stripped down Fighter, Mage, Cleric, or Thief with a particular focus, and they tend to be pretty niche. And some are even more niche than others. I'd just backport a 3e NPC class into 2e to do this stuff, and they can be customized to serve particular needs. Some of the abilities aren't too bad, but I'd just use them to expand on existing NWPs. And some of the NWPs in this book aren't even new ideas and had appeared in 2e before if not the PHB.
Martia's story is okay, but stil pretty generic (not like Bakshra from Villains). The idea of attaching these NPC classes to the PCs as allies and support staff isn't bad, but it would have worked better if the classes weren't so specific. I think this book would have been better served by presenting one or two broad NPC classes like the ones from 3e that could have been customized with particular NWP focuses that could have been open ended enough to fit a wider variety of roles depending on what an individual campaign required. This book was really one of 2e's biggest letdowns for me.
Voadam
Legend
I would think the Witch Doctor and Shaman from the 1e Dungeon Master's Guide would count.
But then they don't have xp tables.
Last edited:
Alzrius
The EN World kitten
You mean from the "Tribal Spell Casters" section (p. 40)? Because those are essentially just clerics and cleric/wizards with highly-restricted spell lists (and very low level caps, though that's apparently a function of the races listed).
Voadam
Legend
Exactly, 1e versions of 3e's adepts.
NPC Magic Users whose only offensive spells are push and scare.
Alzrius
The EN World kitten
Not to nitpick too much, but adepts are actually quite different from other classes. Their spellcasting ability goes up to 5th level - something no other class has - and their spell list, while not too expansive, is a mixture of cleric and druid spells, with a few wizard spells thrown in. Plus, they can summon a familiar despite technically being a divine spellcasting class. It's really an interesting oddity for how it's designed (even if the theme is clear, in that it's meant to be a "hedge witch"-style character).Exactly, 1e versions of 3e's adepts.
Voadam
Legend
Right, adepts are not a perfect analogy, they are sort of a witch doctor multiclass cleric magic user combined into one class with no turning.
But 3e's warriors are PC class fighters with no bonus feats and smaller HD. Like 1e shaman are PC clerics with less spell selection and no wisdom bonus to spells.
Similar Threads
