The 7-sentence NPC

(Dragon #184)

I’m wary - Dragon #184 is deep into 2e. C. M. Cline’s short article on creating gameable NPCs gets lots of love online. Is it deserved?

What’s it about?

We put effort into major antagonists and allies but neglect minor NPCs, defaulting to repetitive stereotypes. Guilty as charged—my town watch, innkeepers, and blacksmiths all blend together. Cline offers a fix that keeps the workload manageable: 7 sentences to define an NPC.

• Occupation and History - Consider what the NPC did before their current occupation.
• Physical Description - Hinting at occupation
• Attributes and skills - High and low attributes should figure in the description with numbers called out. Skills seem to be about occupation/interests but seem to be subtly referencing the awful idea of non-weapon proficiencies.
• Values and motivations - This is described as something players can exploit to get the NPC to do a thing. They also help the DM decide how the NPC reacts.
• Interactions with others - Roleplaying cues (loud, obnoxious, condescending etc.).
• Useful Knowledge - Feels more relevant for investigative games.
• Distinguishing feature - Players forget NPC names, but not the bad Irish accent.

Cline provides four examples that prove his point but are too long to use at the table with gameable information hard to find. If implementing his advice brevity and relevance to the game should be front of mind.

Is this a keeper?

No. The 7-sentence technique delivers a long paragraph that could be useful for major protagonists, henchmen, and key town NPCs. My players enjoy engaging with factions in my megadungeon game, so I see its value for factional NPCs. However, I find rolling/picking random personality, mannerism, appearance, and physical detail to be more useful - particularly as it delivers a punchy easy to parse single sentence. This is not making the best-of list—there are simpler ways to make NPCs.

***

I applied the 7-sentence approach to an NPC the party will be dealing with in tonight's session. For select NPC's you're sure the party will interact with I can see its use as its too long to use for every tavern keeper and beggar the group interact with - oddly it's the bit part NPCs that the article encourages you to use the 7-sentence approach - that will produce a padded adventure and be a ton of extra work for the DM - it's a bad idea. On further reflection I don't like it anymore. I'd rather roll or pick a random personality, mannerism, appearance and physical detail. You end up with a single punchy sentence rather than the paragraph+ of the 7-sentence NPC. Anyway, here's my 7-sentence effort with Minor Arden Vul spoilers:

Killik

Occupation: Killik is a trusted lieutenant of King Weskenim and charged with running the ‘Wet Caves’. 

Physical: Wiry and battle-scarred, with eyes that gleam with intelligence and a snaggle tooth grin, Killik carries himself with the pride of a ruler.

Attributes: Killik has a wiry strength (attacks as a gnoll) and is a shrewd negotiator.

Values/Motivation: Killik values respect, diplomacy, and the strength of cooperation, striving for stability in the Wet Caves.

Interaction: He speaks in the third person, interacts with charm, confidence, calculation and authority.

Knowledge: He knows about Gog (5-2), Riglon the Varumani (5-54), the troll lifts, goblin town and King Weskenim.

Distinguishing Feature: Speaking in the third person.

Monsters Have Feelings Too

(White Dwarf #38)

Oliver opens with a story showing a contrast: a dull goblin ambush versus a well-planned evil party assaulting a merchant caravan. His point? There's no reason monsters shouldn’t be as tactical as players.

What’s it about?

Monsters—aside from the undead and constructs—value their lives and shouldn’t attack without reason, whether it's racial hatred or sadism. Oliver states 'If a monster can achieve its aims without resorting to out-and-out violence, and therefore putting its life at risk, it should do so'.  Animals are noted as not attacking things that aren’t easy kills. He makes the oft repeated point - if players use oil and poison, so can monsters. He concludes by suggesting you bring the monsters to life just as the players bring life to the PCs.

The article then shifts as Graeme Davis presents ‘Extracts from the Uruk-Hai Battle Manual’. It's a fun brief read and the heart of the article. This well-written, practical guide covers lair defense: terrain, sentries, alarms, force composition, morale, spellcasters, and traps.

Is this a keeper?

Yes. The opening is fine, but the Uruk-Hai Battle Manual is essential, packed with actionable advice for organizing humanoid lairs. A definite ‘best of’.

The Naked Orc - A Study in Orcish Society

(White Dwarf #53)

A short article on Orc’s with lots of evocative John Blanche artwork to fire the imagination.

What’s it about?

Art inspires the reader and elevates RPGs. Russ Nicholson and John Blanche make White Dwarf feel so much bigger. In this article Rufus Wedderburn looks to move orcs beyond their Monster Manual depiction towards Tolkien.

The article introduces various orc types: cowardly Snaga slave-orcs, disciplined Soldier Orcs, elite Uruks, and the fearsome Olag-Hai (an orc-troll hybrid). Stats are provided for males, females, and children—except for the Olag-Hai. However, I find the stats questionable. A base movement of 15’ makes orcs faster than all player races without explanation, though this is easily adjusted. Soldier Orcs are given 2–4 HD, making them too strong for a level 1 party; they will have to fight Snaga instead. 

The various breeds of orc are described, as are the types of leaders they look to, favored weapons and armor, and combat tactics. It also details clan composition, breaking down the ratios of males, females, children, and different orc types.

Is this a keeper?

Yes. Orcs are given variety and fleshed out, returning them to their Tolkien. It provides a model for expanding on a staple humanoid and keeping them credible across levels. This article helps establish orcs as a formidable force in your world—more than fodder, but a rival civilization. I'm adding it to the 'best of'.

Town Planner - Part II: Designing towns and cities

(White Dwarf #32)

Paul Vernon's 'Town Planner' series continues this time looking at the layout of towns and cities.

What’s it about?

Paul looks asks did the town grow from a village or is the town planned? If planned, it’s likely owned by a noble, church, or merchant group, often near a castle, abbey, or river crossing. Like villages, towns need an economic foundation—trade is their lifeblood. Streets are often named after trades (e.g., Pot Row, Fish Row). Fairs occur outside town up to twice a year, with shops closing for the event - all trade occurs at the fair. Water access is crucial for transport and sustenance, and agriculture surrounds the town. Shops cluster at the center or near gates, while wealthier stone buildings, the guild hall, and the court dominate the heart of town. Religion, town walls, and a castle are common features. 

Cities house admin/govt buildings, palaces, a prison, and a larger military presence. In a D&D world, they might also feature magic colleges, monk and bard trainers, adventurers’ guilds, a mint, libraries, theatres, an arena, or even a zoo—depending on the campaign's flavor. A socio-economic breakdown of a medieval town is provided:

• 30% poor
• 30% upper working class (wealth ~50gp)
• 30% lower middle class (wealth 100–500gp)
• 7% middle class (wealth 500–2000gp)
• 3% wealthy (>2000gp)

For a who’s who, start with detailing the government and powerful nobles. Fighters run the military, often with retired adventurers as trainers. Magic colleges have their own staff, temples should note the highest-level priest, and assassins’ guilds exist but require official sanction to be plausible. Thieves’ and Assassins guilds would have “forbidden lists,” and large cities could have multiple competing thieves' guilds. Paul goes into impractical detail with keying the town.

Is this a keeper?

No. The level of minutiae is overwhelming and not gameable. The series is losing me.

Town Planner - Part I: Designing and running villages

(White Dwarf #31)

Paul Vernon kicks off this well-regarded series with a focus on authentic medieval village design.

What’s it about?

Villages need an economic base—usually agriculture, livestock, or resource extraction (mining, fishing, forestry). Strategic locations, like crossroads, a mountain pass or river crossings, may also provide the reason for the village existing. Fresh water is essential. Without an economic base you don’t have a village.

Monsters in the area should have marked lairs, hunting ranges, and encounter chances within that range, but their territory shouldn't overlap with frequented village areas.

Village layouts revolve around key features: a village green, pond, moated manor, mill, guildhall (if a thriving cottage industry is present), bakehouse, or wine/cider press. Instead of taverns, expect ale-wives; inns only appear on trade routes. Other structures might include a toll-house and stocks. A religious edifice is setting optional but typically present.

Paul details villager roles, social structure, trades (weaver, miller, carpenter, smith, etc.), and services. Stone is reserved for churches and manor houses—other buildings are wooden with thatched roofs, spaced apart with their own plots. Markets, fairs, festivals, and seasonal impacts on village life are covered, along with ideas for petty rumors/gossip and village encounters.

Is this a keeper?

Yes. Heavy on medieval realism, with useful insights into village function and design, but also a lot of minutiae keeping it from the 'best of' list.

The Dungeon Architect Part III: The Populated Dungeon

(White Dwarf #27)

Last in the series. Roger Musson tackles the challenge of filling a dungeon with monsters and treasure.

What’s it about?

Roger sees dungeons as a fallback when inspiration runs dry, offering routine through reconnaissance, mapping, target identification and looting. At the same time dungeons feel productive—yielding XP, treasure, and items—the real work lies in populating rooms, which can be daunting with hundreds to fill.

A fully random approach is quick but unsatisfying, often failing to balance risk and reward. If using randomness, he advises tweaking results and placing treasure deliberately. His preferred method is structured: determine the percentage of occupied rooms, generate encounters and treasure, then assign manually to ensure logical distribution and variety.

For unprepared areas, he suggests an Emergency Room Register—a list of 20 pre-made rooms with monsters, loot, and details. If the players enter an unprepared space, roll a d20 and pull from the list.

Joke dungeons, he warns, can easily derail immersion.

Treasure can go beyond gold and magic items. Maps should reveal parts of the dungeon more often than lead to new sites. False maps can misdirect players into traps. Documents—clues, riddles, or descriptions like “I hid the Widowmaker in the oval room past the Hall of Wights”—are a sort of treasure. Minor magic items, like a Badge of Orc Impressing, serve as flavorful, low-impact rewards. Keep a list of minor loot to reward clever searches.

To make a dungeon feel real, monsters should have lairs and finite populations—30 orcs means 30 orcs, with no replacements. Patrols, guards, and any magic items should be used, and off-duty monsters should roam. Dungeon denizens should interact, and conflicts independent of the players can make the dungeon feel real, where things happen.

Is this a keeper?

Yes. Lots of good actionable advice. This is a ‘best of’.

The Dungeon Architect Part II: The Constructed Dungeon

(White Dwarf #26)

Roger Musson discusses dungeon layout—rooms, corridors, and traps - with an emphasis on disorienting the party.

What’s it about?

Musson favors large dungeons, settling on 200 rooms a level (fewer below 4th level) to provide plenty of treasure for leveling before descending and opportunities to get lost.

Verticality: With 40' between levels, he suggests pits, galleries, sloping floors, and high passages starting near the ceiling. Including large multi-level features (e.g., a vast circular hall with galleries) adds verticality while giving access to new levels. Thieves should have chances to climb.

Fast Access: He suggests teleportation for quick lower-level access. The teleportation system should be accessible from the dungeon entrance.

Traps, Corridors & Water: Corridor traps should be suspicious but mostly harmless. Consider water like rivers and subterranean lakes - make some rooms only accessible via waterways. Corridors should feel as rich as rooms, with statues, alcoves, and interesting debris. They can be barricaded and held by various factions.

Getting Lost: Irregular layouts with varied passage widths, curves, and odd angled junctions complicate mapping.  Trapdoors, one-way doors, portcullises, and teleport traps can disorient players, forcing them to explore unfamiliar territory. Shifting dungeon layouts, with rooms moving/rotating as the players explore, can heighten confusion but risk frustrating players unless they can disable the mechanism.

Is this a keeper?

The advice on room count, verticality, water, and corridors is solid, but the heavy focus on disorienting players feels excessive. Shifting the adventure's goal to "getting out" works occasionally but shouldn't define the dungeon. Is a difficult to map dungeon that desirable? Not a "best of."

The Dungeon Architect Part I: The Interesting Dungeon

(White Dwarf #25)

Roger Musson argues that NPCs and their plots are the key to creating an interesting and fun dungeon.

What’s it about?

Musson critiques the “randomly generated dungeon,” where encounters are assembled without thought or flavor, resulting in a dull, procedural experience. While this might seem like a straw-man argument, I’ve played in dungeons like this, so the criticism holds weight.

 

He compares D&D not to a game but to a pastime like fishing: while the objective may be to catch fish—or gain treasure—the true goal is to enjoy the experience. Rules, treasure, and dice alone aren’t enough; creative play is essential.

For time-pressed DMs, Musson presents the dungeon as a reliable fallback but insists it should be treated like a novel, with characters and plots driving the experience. A compelling dungeon starts with a strong cast of NPCs who are as dynamic and active as the players. Their plans and actions generate interest, and the interplay between NPC goals and player decisions creates the best moments of gameplay.

Musson categorizes NPCs into four groups: the creators of, or reason for, the dungeon, its inhabitants - why are they there, how do they survive, notable figures in nearby areas - how do they tie to the dungeon, and rival adventurers. Each group is given a series of questions to help tease out dungeon related content. These characters provide context, drive plots, and make the dungeon feel alive. The success of a dungeon, he argues, is how many interesting characters it has, it's all about plans and plots.

Is this a keeper?

Yes, though it’s not making my “best of” list yet. The focus on NPC-driven design offers a fresh perspective when contrasted with procedural dungeons. While I’ve played plenty of adventures where NPCs weren’t central and enjoyed them, I see Musson’s point. I’ll need to reflect more on how this fits into my own approach.

Beyond the rule book: Procedure and style tips for good GMing

(Dragon #75)

How do you DM—not the mechanics, but the approach? Lew Pulsipher offers 20 tips in what may be his magnum opus for Dragon or White Dwarf.

What’s it about?

Lew stresses consistency, logical application of rules, and establishing clear boundaries - don’t let players push you around. Not all published rules are good, so apply them sensibly. Avoid mid-session rule changes, share house rules beforehand, and revisit rulings if players make strong arguments. Prepare enough to keep the game flowing—i.e. pre-rolling treasure to eyeball its appropriateness—but don’t overprepare. Let players face consequences of reckless actions, even character death, and address disruptive players directly. If needed, remove them.

Balance levity by allowing players to joke, don’t be that DM that treats every joke as an in-game action. Lew supports mild fudging to keep characters alive should the dice turn against them (I disagree). He emphasizes building a group that aligns with your DM style, as blending theater-focused role-players and war-gamers often leads to mismatched expectations.

Lew suggests advancement be as slow as possible while maintaining player interest and criticizes double-digit level play as unbalanced (I disagree). He advises erring on the side of stinginess, halving the treasure you’d normally give—another point where I differ. Stick to the rules, even if they stomp an encounter, and avoid making major changes like letting magic-users wield swords or introducing anachronisms like gunpowder. Don’t remove the fear of death—it keeps the game exciting. If players devise clever solutions, let them succeed, and write flexible scenarios that can handle player creativity.

Is this a keeper?

Yes. Despite some minor disagreements, the article offers valuable advice. It’s one of Lew’s best and deserves a spot on my “best of” list.

The Alchemist

(White Dwarf #20)

Tony Chamberlain expands on the alchemist outlined in the DMG.

What’s it about?

This article provides rules for generating alchemists (levels 1-6, most at level 3), predominantly human, not as a playable class but as NPCs to flesh out your hired help. Alchemists can cast a limited selection of spells (e.g., slow poison and legend lore), with costs comparable to those in the DMG.

Expanding on the DMG, where alchemists assist with potion creation, this article allows them to help craft all magic items. It details laboratory equipment, costs, and rules for reducing item creation time by up to 50%. However, time reduction feels unnecessary—potions are already quick, and enchanting items takes around 10 days if DM requirements are met. Notably, alchemists can oversee work for 1-4 days, letting supervising magic-users or clerics step away temporarily.

Where the article stumbles is in its handling of risk. Each month, an alchemist must save vs. spells or trigger a lab explosion, with effects ranging from costly lab repairs to death. A level 3 alchemist has a 15% chance of dying monthly, while a level 1 has a 25% chance—making the profession absurdly perilous. You are going to want to hire a level 5 or 6 alchemist as they can be expected to survive the still regular lab explosions. The article doesn't vary the cost of hiring an alchemist by their level but you should do this as the DM.

Anything insightful?

• Alchemists as limited spellcasting for hire offer an alternative to temples or town wizards.
• Breaking alchemists down by skill level is a useful addition.
• Allowing brief supervision absences is a practical touch for gameplay.

Is this a keeper?  

I want to like it. It needs more work. Explosions, while fun in theory, happen too often, making an alchemist's life ridiculously deadly.