|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 9, 2008 20:26:28 GMT -6
Long have we heard the problems with the greyhawk thief class. It changes how the game works. Fighting-men suddenly kinda lose their sneaking abilities, and thief abilities introduce a "skill-like" system that brings lots of problems into figuring out what can a character do and what he can't. Better explanation of these issues can be found here. <--- LINK. What I want to do, is to re-work this class, cause the concept is great, and loved by many of my players. I know that a Fighting-man who wears no armor, has high dex and does stealthy stuff can work just fine, but I want to make a class that better models the thief and clearly differs from a warrior-like and combat-oriented class. The final result may be very different from the greyhawk thief, and that's totally OK. I just want to create a new class that can be called: "thief", and adds a substantial contribution to the original trio. My objective is to create a thief class playable in a "pre-supplement I" D&D, without all the problems of the greyhawk thief. So, first, I have to warn you that I'm not into classic demi-humans right now. I play a "human only" campaign. So the thief class will be borrowing some of the demi-human stuff. This have been my initial thoughts for the class:1. They should fight like clerics (2nd class fighting ability). 2. They should have the best saving throws in most categories. This makes this class natural avoiders and evaders of danger. Maybe it reflects the sort of natural "luck" of the sneaky. In B/X and further, clerics have the best saves. This never made much sense to me. 3. Their hit points should be close to that of the clerics, maybe a bit lower. 4. Their weapon selection should be restricted to small, easy to handle (and hide) weapons. Now... unto the "special abilities". Certainly the hardest part of it all. Let's begin with "back-stab". This ability is totally usable in a pre-suplement I D&D and has no problem at all. A thief who gains surprise or otherwise gets behind an enemy can back-stab an opponent. It's in. Also, I thought about a crazy idea... As I don't use elves IMC, I thought that the thief could take some of it's stuff. One of them, is the elf's to ability detect secret doors. With this ability, the thief class becomes an awesome dungeon, castle, etc. infiltrator. He's a tomb looter, who finds it's way through secret passages and tunnels. I think this is a very cool ability for the thief to have. It gives him a nice flavor, that works well for heavy dungeon adventuring and contributes in a significant way with the party. So, this thieves, as master complex infiltrators, can: # detect secret doors 1-4 in 6. # notice secret door 1-2 in 6, when passing by them. Also, the thief class can use the +1 in 6 chance to listen at doors that all demi-humans enjoy. This ability is also a fine ability for them, and fits well. Remember, I play in a "only human" campaign. So this ability gives the thief a special scouting capability. Also, all of us know that OD&D elves are "nearly invisible in their gray-green cloaks(M&T p. 16)". Could this ability be taken by the new thief class?? It will certainly be cool to play it. We need to adapt the ability, and instead of "gray-green cloaks", we can say the thief needs "the appropiate clothing that melds with the predominant backround". Thus, in a dungeon, the thief can wear a black, stealthy suit. In the wilderness, appropriate camouflage clothing, etc. Finally, I was thinking something like "surprises 1-3 in 6", instead of the normal 1-2 in 6. This helps to model it's sneaky, ambusher nature. ......... So, what's out? So far, all the "%" abilities that cause so much trouble. They are out of this re-worked class. Many things are still to be done: 1. Is there another special ability that would be a good incorporation for the class? 2. Which would be an appropriate XP progression? I hope you like this ideas, and all suggestions are welcomed. Let's get the thief done right
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 10, 2008 1:04:43 GMT -6
Ok, here is a first draft on Saves and HD progression. Fighting progression should be as clerics (every 4 levels)
Levels: 1-4
Death/Poison: 12 Wand/Polymorth/Paralisis: 13 Stone: 13 Dragon Breath: 14 Staves Spells: 14
Levels: 5-8
Death/Poison: 10 Wand/Polymorth/Paralisis: 11 Stone: 11 Dragon Breath: 11 Spells: 11
Levels: 9-12
Death/Poison: 7 Wand/Polymorth/Paralisis: 8 Stone: 8 Dragon Breath: 8 Spells: 8
Levels 13+:
Death/Poison: 4 Wand/Polymorth/Paralisis: 5 Stone: 5 Dragon Breath: 4 Spells: 7
.............................
HD Progression:
I - 1 II - 1+2 III - 2+2 IV - 3+1 V - 4 VI - 4+2 VII - 5 VIII - 6+1 IX - 7 X- 8+2
|
|
Stonegiant
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
100% in Liar
Posts: 240
|
Post by Stonegiant on Feb 10, 2008 9:06:47 GMT -6
One of my big gripes with the thief is that at low levels they aren't good at doing anything. I felt that their thieving abilities should start out higher. I mean the first level thief has what a 15% chance to hide or move silently, where would the Magic-User and the Cleric be if their spells only worked 15% of the time or that they Turned Undead only 15% of the time. Many people have called the low level Magic-User a one hit wonder, well the thief isn't even that. Yes they progress the fastest of any class as written but they really aren't capable of much until 5th level or higher, Magic Users at least get more spells and 2nd level spells before 5th level. My suggestion would be for the Thief to be at least passable as a thief starting from first level. The method that was talked about in another thread where the thief got to choose abilities like a magic user gets to choose spells was an interesting concept and a possible solution to this problem. Here is the link to that thread LINKI would use the older system posted in the thread, the link to the revised one is just way to complicated (IMO).
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 10, 2008 10:00:07 GMT -6
|
|
Stonegiant
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
100% in Liar
Posts: 240
|
Post by Stonegiant on Feb 12, 2008 7:09:35 GMT -6
Here is a link to download my alternative thief ability system, it is still a work in progress but I would love to here what you and everyone else has to say about it. Alternative Thief Ability System.pdf (28.3 Kb ) **If you are having trouble downloading this file please let me know.
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 12, 2008 7:34:04 GMT -6
Interesting approach. Had never seen something like it. But don't you find it a bit too complicated? That's are lots of tables! I see hard work in there. But maybe situational modifiers can be adjudicated on the fly by the DM.
Also, the saves seem quite hard in the beginning levels! Don't you think?
The idea is very good, though maybe not what I'm looking for right now, because your system also departs, as Greyhawk did, from the OD&D way of playing stealth and finding stuff (the "descriptive way"). Your system is in essence quite similar, but changing the d100 for a d20, and using different tables for different situations.
What I'm trying to do, is to rebuild the class to better fit the 3LB, and without altering the type of game that derives from it.
|
|
Stonegiant
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
100% in Liar
Posts: 240
|
Post by Stonegiant on Feb 12, 2008 8:09:17 GMT -6
The idea is that the thief is using the Saving Throw mechanic from the 3LBBs and it use the descriptive system in that the system is designed around the idea that is the DM feels that none of the Saves are present/needed than the DM should roll 1d20, as long as a 1 is not rolled than the thief succeeds in their action, thus if the player can describe their plan well enough it will be successful.
|
|
|
Post by Wothbora on Feb 12, 2008 8:50:24 GMT -6
Stonegiant, this is really good. I'd never thought of having a sliding-type of scale that takes into account the difficult circumstances that would negatively influence a skill. The only homebrew that I've used over the years was to convert the percentage based skill-check to 3d6 (see below) rather than pure 1d100. I believe that this came from some Judges Guild conversion after they lost the D&D Licensing (so that they could create a material for generic fantasy). I've used this because it's seems like it is more attainable to roll a 6 or less on 3d6 than 10% on 2d10. I think the odds are the same, but I could be wrong... 3d6 = %d 3 = 1% 4 = 2% 5 = 3-5% 6 = 6-10% 7 = 11-17% 8 = 18-27% 9 = 28-35% 10 = 39-50% 11 = 51-62% 12 = 63-73% 13 = 74-83% 14 = 84-90% 15 = 91-95% 16 = 96-98% 17 = 99% 18 = 100%
|
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 12, 2008 9:33:53 GMT -6
The idea is that the thief is using the Saving Throw mechanic from the 3LBBs and it use the descriptive system in that the system is designed around the idea that is the DM feels that none of the Saves are present/needed than the DM should roll 1d20, as long as a 1 is not rolled than the thief succeeds in their action, thus if the player can describe their plan well enough it will be successful. Oh, this really cleared up things for me. Your work is nice. I still prefer something more free-form. That's too many tables for my taste. Anyway, totally good what you have done. So, have you thought about XP progression? Here's a draft version for mine. XP is higher that the greyhawk thief, since I consider my developing version quite stronger. Thieves Apprentice 0 Footpad 1.800 Robber 3.600 Burglar 7.200 Cutpurse 14.000 Sharper 28.000 Pilferer 56.000 Master Pilferer 110.000 Thief 220.000
|
|
Stonegiant
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
100% in Liar
Posts: 240
|
Post by Stonegiant on Feb 13, 2008 10:02:09 GMT -6
Here is an idea-
Using the AC scale 9= worst/easiest to 2= best/hardest Have the thief use the fighters to hit chart (at the thief's level) with the DM deciding the level of difficulty for the task described and have the thief roll d20 "to hit" the number needed to succeed at the task.
Another system is have the DM make a on the fly judgement of how difficult the task is and assign a saving throw category to the the task (e.g. The DM decides moving silently past the guard is equal to the Dragon Breath saving throw category)
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 13, 2008 10:18:58 GMT -6
But that's still the "hit a button and do stuff" problem of the greyhawk thief.
The idea is to get away from that, and handle things in the descriptive fashion of OD&D.
My attempt is to no longer have "thief skills". I just give the thief what elves and other races got in OD&D 3LB.
I give them the ability to become "near invisible" when using the appropriate clothing.
I will also give them the elvish ability to spot secret doors.
I'm also giving thieves the dwarven abilities of trap detection. Not as a skill. Just like it is described in the 3LB for dwarves. And nothing else is needed "rules-wise". Just that guideline for referee adjudication.
I also give thieves the +1 in 6 chance to detect noise at doors all demi-humans have in the 3LB.
I still think backstab is totally playable in a pre greyhawk OD&D game.
Here is what I have written for my OD&D Supplement Protect, Men & Magic section:
Thieves: this sneaky and stealthy characters can become nearly invisible in the appropriate clothing that melds with the predominant background. In dark, shadowy areas, this will typically be a black or dark suit. Camouflage clothing may be used in the wilderness. Thieves excel at finding secret doors as well as other secret or hidden things such as traps. They are also very good at opening locks without breaking them, if they got the right tools. A sneaky and clever thief that goes unnoticed can strike silently from behind, gaining two advantages: First, he adds a +4 bonus to hit this adversary. Secondly, he does double damage when he so attacks, rolling double damage die. A 5th level, he can hit for triple damage, rolling 3 die. Finally, at 9th level, he strikes for quadruple damage, rolling 4 damage die upon a hit. Note that if the thief is detected, this attack type is spoiled. Thieves can wear only leather armor and cannot employ shields. Their proficiency in arms is limited to the dagger, hand axe, sword, short bow, and light crossbow. Other information regarding thieves will be found in the appropriate sections of this booklet.
................................
His ability to detect secret doors will be described in the Underground & Wilderness Adventures section. Just in the same way it is done with demi-humans in the 3LB. I will also state the thief +1bonus to surprise others in that section.
I'm trying to re-do the thief with "3LB only" raw material. It should work.
Remember that I plan to play this thief in a "human only" campaign. So this class absorbs the roles demi-humans got in a normal OD&D 3LB only game.
|
|
Stonegiant
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
100% in Liar
Posts: 240
|
Post by Stonegiant on Feb 13, 2008 11:29:40 GMT -6
So you don't want a game mechanic at all to express success or failure, success or failure will be up to the whim of the DM (I am not trying to be rude or anything, I am trying to make sure that I understand what the OP is asking for). If this is the case you might want to check out Amber the Diceless roleplaying game as an example of how to set up this type of system (Fin runs a Amber site and could probably offer some tips in this venue. I myself am a dice man, to me D&D is all about rolling dice, allot of them and in different shapes and sizes.
From what I understand from reading about EGG's original games and from Dave Arneson's games it seems that they would except the description of the task attempted and then applied a dice chance of success usually using a d6 or 2d6. Heck these guys were wargammers they would apply a d6/2d6 chance to just about everything. IIRC someone posted about Gary giving elves d6 chance bonuses to surprise opponents as their move silently.
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 13, 2008 11:39:41 GMT -6
Is there a formulated mechanic for the elven ability to become "near-invisible in their grey-green cloaks"?
Is there a formulated mechanic for the dwarven ability to find traps?
If you search in the OD&D 3LBs, no mechanic at all is given for those abilities. So yes, it's up to the referee's ad hoc adjudication. It could be a roll of the die. But it's not necessary. Not all the time. And the player does no need (or should not) know the specific mechanic the referee is using.
That's what OD&D is all about, isn't it?
I'm just taking away demi-humans and giving their stuff to the thief class, since those abilities suit him well. The thief is "absorbing" those roles in my game. That way, I'm adjudication things in a pre-greyhawk fashion.
|
|
Stonegiant
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
100% in Liar
Posts: 240
|
Post by Stonegiant on Feb 13, 2008 13:31:24 GMT -6
Is there a formulated mechanic for the elven ability to become "near-invisible in their grey-green cloaks"? Is there a formulated mechanic for the dwarven ability to find traps? If you search in the OD&D 3LBs, no mechanic at all is given for those abilities. So yes, it's up to the referee's ad hoc adjudication. It could be a roll of the die. But it's not necessary. Not all the time. And the player does no need (or should not) know the specific mechanic the referee is using. That's what OD&D is all about, isn't it? I'm just taking away demi-humans and giving their stuff to the thief class, since those abilities suit him well. The thief is "absorbing" those roles in my game. That way, I'm adjudication things in a pre-greyhawk fashion. I guess my concern would be as/for a player in said campaign what is the tangible reward for level advancement? The fighter as they go gains the ability to fight better and take more damage, the magic-user gains more spells, the cleric gains spells and better combat ability, what would the reward be for the thief that is a tangible reward other than "you just do it better". Again this not an attack on your idea because I find it very intriguing but I am playing the devil's advocate here. I think that the class needs some measurable way of saying at 5th level I am able to do the things my class does better than when I was at 5th level.
|
|
|
Post by ffilz on Feb 13, 2008 14:24:28 GMT -6
Stonegiant: I think you have a good point there about the thief being better at something as he advances.
Elves and dwarves can have static abilities because they are also envisioned as fighters (and magic users in the case of elves).
One thing I was starting to think is that thieves perhaps actually could benefit from a 3rd ed style task DC and skill bonus system. That would allow task DCs to be set dependent on the dungeon level, which feeds into allowing the players to manage their risk vs. reward.
Of course this need not be done for all tasks. I think having a level based task for bypassing traps would be all that is really necessary, with failure resulting in trap triggering (with effect dependant on precautions the thief took - just as the fighter might be able to avoid a door or chest trap while bashing things open depending on what precautions he takes).
Opening locked doors can be static since it just allows an option to the open doors roll that fighters get, which is also static.
Frank
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 13, 2008 14:31:38 GMT -6
Is there a formulated mechanic for the elven ability to become "near-invisible in their grey-green cloaks"? Is there a formulated mechanic for the dwarven ability to find traps? If you search in the OD&D 3LBs, no mechanic at all is given for those abilities. So yes, it's up to the referee's ad hoc adjudication. It could be a roll of the die. But it's not necessary. Not all the time. And the player does no need (or should not) know the specific mechanic the referee is using. That's what OD&D is all about, isn't it? I'm just taking away demi-humans and giving their stuff to the thief class, since those abilities suit him well. The thief is "absorbing" those roles in my game. That way, I'm adjudication things in a pre-greyhawk fashion. I guess my concern would be as/for a player in said campaign what is the tangible reward for level advancement? The fighter as they go gains the ability to fight better and take more damage, the magic-user gains more spells, the cleric gains spells and better combat ability, what would the reward be for the thief that is a tangible reward other than "you just do it better". Again this not an attack on your idea because I find it very intriguing but I am playing the devil's advocate here. I think that the class needs some measurable way of saying at 5th level I am able to do the things my class does better than when I was at 5th level. That is a good point. I'll give you an answer now, but this had made me think. Maybe I'll have to reconsider some things. Answer:Well, you really get better by gaining HD, better attacks and better saves. Back-stab also improves. So, what do fighting-men gain as they level? Just that too: HD, better attacks, and saves. There are no feats or something similar in OD&D. Consider the thief to be a "light fighting man" with some special abilities.
|
|
mearls
Level 1 Medium
Posts: 23
|
Post by mearls on Feb 13, 2008 23:28:57 GMT -6
Consider the thief to be a "light fighting man" with some special abilities. Interesting point, and a good argument for keeping the thief in the game. I like your re-worked thief, but as I use demi-humans in my game I'm not keen on giving the thief their abilities. However, I did have an idea for an alternative, one that emphasize the thief's place as the light fighting man. I particularly like your idea of making thieves the best characters at saving throws, and I agree that such a rule makes thematic sense. I've taken the idea of the thief as a clever fighter who can avoid danger and came up with: A thief may carry a dagger in one hand in addition to a one handed weapon, such as a sword, in the other. If the thief suffers a hit in combat, he may roll 1d20. If this die roll is greater than or equal to his attacker's roll, that attack is successfully parried. The thief must be aware of his attacker to use this parry. (Alternatively, you could use this rule without the off-hand dagger, but I like the idea of a thief modeled on Leiber's Gray Mouser.)
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 13, 2008 23:46:02 GMT -6
Thanks for your contribution! Neat idea that parry stuff. I can't believe a mayor designer of D&D 4th edition is commenting on my house-rules... ...a house-rule from a lost guy somewhere in Argentina! Cheers!
|
|
mearls
Level 1 Medium
Posts: 23
|
Post by mearls on Feb 13, 2008 23:58:02 GMT -6
Thanks for your contribution! Neat idea that parry stuff. I can't believe a mayor designer of D&D 4th edition is commenting on my house-rules... ...a house-rule from a lost guy somewhere in Argentina! ;D In the end, we are all DMs playing the game. Some of us are just lucky enough to get our ideas printed in the rule books. I think D&D should foster a healthy sense of house ruling and design in DMs, not because the game itself needs to be fixed, but simply because it's fun to tinker with the game. Besides, only a DM knows what's best for his campaign.
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 14, 2008 0:07:48 GMT -6
That is so 100% truth. I'm a natural tinkerer. And a flexible, open game, can provide countless of different and varied campaigns, because when you tinker with the rules, you are shaping the game world that is going to be presented to your players.
3E edition was really bad at allowing that freedom. I played 3E for about 4 years, cause my friends liked it. And it was really frustrating. I felt totally bounded as a DM and my creativity was dumbed by the game-system.
OD&D is all about freedom and letting your imagination go wild, because new stuff and ideas are SO EASY to implement. As an amateur, I find it so easy to create new things, it's a dream. I'm 22 years old, so discovering OD&D was a big thing for my hobby.
I'm really happy if that is the intended direction of 4E. Not because I'll play it, but because new generations of gamers will learn the game in a much richer mindset, and learn how to use their imagination and not succumb to the dictates of the original game designer.
I really hope the objectives of the 4E game designers are fulfilled, and that we can go back to the times of the famous TSR slogan: "Games of your imagination".
Nice to exchange thoughts with you Mike!
|
|
WSmith
Level 4 Theurgist
Where is the Great Svenny when we need him?
Posts: 138
|
Post by WSmith on Feb 15, 2008 7:34:37 GMT -6
One point I want to make really quickly is that the "x in 6" or "x in 10" chance helps with making the thief a little more "passive skilled." The ref can just roll a d6 (or a d20 labeled 0-9 twice ) if there is a chance for something to happen. Yes, the same can be done with the greyhawk d% but the rate of success is a lot less incremental using a smaller die, hence not making the thief an inept clutz for the first 2-3 levels.
|
|
|
Post by dekelia on Feb 15, 2008 10:53:33 GMT -6
I really like this idea of the thief, works perfectly to me.
+1 suprise as move silent...great.
Also, one thing about a class based system that I like is that you can just decide that character could do something because of it's class. I really don't like everything being up to the dice and many times, if I think a character should do that, they just can. You want to climb...you're a thief, sure you can climb.
For picking locks and disarming traps, you'll just have to ad-hoc it, but you might want to give guidelines on how. I would suggest that locks be given a level (ie. difficulty). If the thief is the same or better, they do it. If it is higher level than them they get a -1 for each level difference (e.g. 5th level thief with a 6th level lock - 1-5 they do it). If you really wanted to, you could make it always a d6 roll with a 6 of fail and 1 succeed, but I like the idea that some locks/traps/etc, they can just always disable. I would only use this for small mechanical traps though. I like my big traps to be disabled by description.
|
|
|
Post by foster1941 on Feb 16, 2008 0:30:40 GMT -6
Zulgyan got it mostly right in the very first post of the thread -- the "archetypal role" that people want a thief-class to fill (sneaky trickster guy who relies on wits rather than brute strength) is pretty much already filled by the elf. Take the elf's abilities, change the name, and you've got a pretty good rogue-trickster character. Perhaps instead of letting him actually cast magic-user spells, just let him use mu-only magic items (including wands and scrolls, but maybe not the big staves or misc. magic items) with a chance of failure that starts out high and goes down with each level (cf. Cugel the Clever and The Grey Mouser trying to cast spells and screwing it up). Note that the same thing can also be done with the other races: take the abilities of the dwarf (at least the saving throw bonus and knowledge-based abilities, maybe not the combat bonus against large humanoids or ability to use the +3 war hammer) and call it the "wise old uncle" character -- he's too decrepit to really be a front-line fighter anymore, but he's resilient (save bonus) and knows everything. Or take the abilities of the hobbit and call it the "plucky but naive kid" character, a la Lyra Bellacqua. Note that you can do this even in a kid that does include demi-humans when a player says "I want to play a character like (trickster/grumpy uncle/plucky kid) but I don't want to play an (elf/dwarf/hobbit)." You don't even need to tell the player what you're actually doing -- let him think you've got some entirely new class written up.
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 16, 2008 10:55:45 GMT -6
Excellent post Foster. You really cleared up the idea and went with it much further! Nice So, I've been thinking about:The thief should:- Have a HD progression that is higher than the M-U, but lower than the cleric.
- Attack progression as cleric.
- Use cleric saves, but add 4 levels when saving (too strong?? this is the dwarven ability)
- Become near-invisible as an elf.
- Detect secret doors as an elf.
- Hear sounds at doors as all demi-humas (+1 in 6)
- +1 to surprise others.
- Backstab
- Find traps as a dwarf.
- Armour limited to leather.
- Weapons limited to dagger, hand axe, sword, short bow, and light crossbow.
What do you think?? Too strong?? It would need 1800 XP to reach second level, and the following levels are based on this number.
|
|
|
Post by coffee on Feb 16, 2008 17:23:14 GMT -6
Except for the +4 levels on the saves, I think you've really got something here.
The thing with the saves is this: Once you get to about 10th level or so, and save as a 14th level, you're going to be pretty well invulnerable except occasionally. Maybe that's what you're going for, but it seems a bit strong to me.
Other than that, I like it.
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 17, 2008 0:13:33 GMT -6
So maybe just give him his own saving throw table:
Levels: 1-4
Death/Poison: 12 Wand/Polymorth/Paralisis: 13 Stone: 13 Dragon Breath: 14 Staves Spells: 14
Levels: 5-8
Death/Poison: 10 Wand/Polymorth/Paralisis: 11 Stone: 11 Dragon Breath: 11 Spells: 11
Levels: 9-12
Death/Poison: 7 Wand/Polymorth/Paralisis: 8 Stone: 8 Dragon Breath: 8 Spells: 8
Levels 13+:
Death/Poison: 4 Wand/Polymorth/Paralisis: 5 Stone: 5 Dragon Breath: 4 Spells: 6
What I don't like about is, is that I need bigger tables. So maybe it could be better to use saves from another class, but give him +1 or +2 on every roll. Thinking...
|
|
|
Post by coffee on Feb 17, 2008 1:33:02 GMT -6
Either way would work.
The thing with the dwarf and the hobbit is, they're limited in levels. So the +4 level thing doesn't unbalance the game. Humans would be unlimited, I would assume, so potential for something getting screwy down the line crops up.
|
|
WSmith
Level 4 Theurgist
Where is the Great Svenny when we need him?
Posts: 138
|
Post by WSmith on Feb 17, 2008 5:24:52 GMT -6
I would actually prefer a saving throw table like the one you posted to go along with the supplemental thief. Also, are there conditions for them becoming "near invisible" like the elf, e.g., in a dungeon or city, low lighting, etc.?
|
|
WSmith
Level 4 Theurgist
Where is the Great Svenny when we need him?
Posts: 138
|
Post by WSmith on Feb 17, 2008 6:52:10 GMT -6
Also, I like the idea of a static "open locks" ability, if you were going to use that ability at all. Taking from the demi-humans, perhaps a 1 or 2 on a d6 opens the lock, BUT only if the thief has the proper tools. The only problem I see with this is that the demi-humans are capped in levels, where the thief will not be. So somewhere own the road they should get a better chance. Perhaps at 4 level, they get a 4 in 6 chance, and at 9th level they can open a lock with no chance of failure as long as the tools are utilized, and start a 2 in 6 chance progression with no thieving tools.
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 17, 2008 10:10:55 GMT -6
Either way would work. The thing with the dwarf and the hobbit is, they're limited in levels. So the +4 level thing doesn't unbalance the game. Humans would be unlimited, I would assume, so potential for something getting screwy down the line crops up. Yes. I had the same thought. Yes. The idea is to replace the "grey-green cloaks", with the appropriate clothing. In most cases, this will be the arquetypical black/dark suit with the black hood. You use that kind of dark clothing if you want to make use of this ability.
|
|