Thieves: How to include a class you hate.

[Finarvyn]

I suspect that Falconer is also referencing the fact that OD&D gives thief advantages to elves, so Gary & Dave thought they had sneaky potential as well.

[Falconer]

He’s just baiting me.

[ritt]

Nefarious Acts of Skulduggery:

Sneaking, breaking into places, scaling walls, picking pockets, planting evidence, and the like are Nefarious Acts of Skulduggery. Any character can attempt them: You succeed in the act if you make a successful Save Vs. Wands (+1 to the throw if your DEX is 13+, +2 if DEX 18). If you are wearing chain, the save is against Dragon's Breath. If wearing plate, NAS are almost always impossible.

Boom. "Thieves" in OD&D.

[xerxez]

I have not understood why people dislike this class.

The character type has roots in much of the fantasy literature that inspired D&D. I can think of three different series at least.

The class has a definite skill set that comes in useful in both dungeon and town settings.

It is a realistic medieval profession, after one grants that the least skilled in the profession will stand to the gibbet.

And as has been stated, there is a certain sort of player who takes to the thief class like a duck to water...who doesn't imagine being a rogue from time to time?

As Inkmeister stated, one need not let every secret door or trap be a matter of a mere dice roll--a DM can design a specific mechanism that requires actual problem solving by players but still have run of the mill traps that thieves can dice for (or rather, let the DM dice for).

Unless you are playing in a culture that absolutely abhors rogues (like Tekumel or Arthurian fantasy), I think the thief is an indispensable player choice.

Can't tell you the number of brand new players to D&D I have had who were drawn to this class.

Don't get the hesitation at all.

[Vile Traveller]

I'm sure a large part of it is the fact that it was not one of the original three classes (or the original two, if you hark back further). On the other hand, I do get why the mechanical differences introduced by the thief would put people's back up. Personally I don't think the answer is to ban the thief or give the class so many restrictions that it becomes unplayable. I thing the 2d6 skill system used by many house rules and clones is a great way of tying thieves' skills into the core system more tightly that percentiles*. I personally love thieves and played almost nothing but in the early days. Much better to work with your players and try to find a way to integrate the class into your game. Or talk to your player and hope he/she sees your side and chooses a fighter to play in a thief-like way.

Like other posters have said, everyone is here to have fun.

*I don't dislike percentiles if they are the core - as a 30+ year player of RuneQuest I love my d%. But I don't like mixing up systems too much, which I have to admit old school D&D does quite a lot of: d20 rolls, 1d6, 2d6, d% ... anything seems to be fair game.

[Deleted]

Jul 8, 2014 23:01:36 GMT -6 xerxez said:

I have not understood why people dislike this class.

I'm assuming the flavor simply doesn't appeal to them, just as some folks enjoy vanilla ice cream, other chocolate, and still others will eat an apple instead of either.

It's a matter of taste and sometimes the reasons are so subjective they are hard to put into words. We all have a vision of the ideal game but this board highlights very well that not everyone will see another's campaign as the best way to roll the dice. De gustibus non est disputandem and all that.

[jdjarvis]

Having thieves in the campaign shouldn't change play styles at all. Everyone can describe actions and give things a shot, having a thief doesn't stop that. Thieves abilities are on top of that, which really gives thieves a huge boost.

Dungeons aren't made for thieves? What? The place is full of shadows, if the party has lanterns and torches they are carrying shadows with them for their buddy to hide in and strike from. Dungeons aren't flat planes just because they are drawn on graph paper, there's plenty to climb. If a nonthief can find a trap by fiddling so can the thief, but when the thief does something dangerous that would get someonees hand ripped of or peppered with darts the thiefs special abilities let the thief dodge that when other folks wouldn't be as likely.
Thieves might not fit everyones image of who adventurers should be but they fit in dungeons just fine.

[tetramorph]

I like this class, but I don't like the name "thief" or "rouge." I call it, generically, "scout," (best generic I could come up with) so that there is no alignment limitation. Chaotic scouts are thieves, rogues, spies, assassins, whatever. Lawful scouts are Robin Hood and Zorro and maybe even Indiana Jones.

I agree with the worries that thief-skills tends to skill-i-fy things that should rather force players to role play. I like mechanics that enhance, rather than mitigate role play. So here are some thoughts:

What if we just used our ability scores for ability checks a whole lot more? What if someone who wanted to be a "scout" just had to make a whole lot of 3d6 against INT and DEX? I like it when the abilities mean something and are used. Not to avoid character role play, but to increase randomization and probability curving so that outcomes are not fatalistically determined by the DM, but oracularly determined by the throw of the dice. This is more fun for me as a DM, because then I don't know everything and things turn up new for me as well.

What if we used "listen at door," for exploration attempts based not upon the 6 abilities but upon sense in general? So you listen at a door, you taste a drop of water to discern if it is brackish, you smell to find the scent of a particular beast you are tracking, you peer to see something small in a dark tunnel, you feel to find that little crack that indicates a hidden door or trap mechanism. These exploration capacities based upon sense also sometimes (though not usually) deserve an element of randomization or probability added to them. You could house rule up a simple level based progression for this as well.

What if some things were so tough you had to combine the two: both an ability and a "sense" check. Two rolls are not a big deal, we do that in combat all the time.

What about the need for a scout to feel like the character is progressing in capacities? We already have a "to hit" progression. What if really difficult feats of exploration could be assigned a relative AC. This could then progress at a house-ruled rate of progression along a "to hit" schedule. I am thinking of something like this for some things we traditionally think a "thief" might do:

"AC" / Feat of

9 / Agility
8-7 / Stealth
6-5 / Acquisition
4-3 / Machination
2 / Detection

Agility would be things like scaling smooth surfaces and acrobatic feats (think the circus performer in Oceans 11 -- a great heist film that I find inspiring for D&D!). Stealth includes things like hiding in shadow, sneak attacking, etc. Acquisition is like "pick pocketing," or like the opening scene of Raiders of the Lost Ark (the little monkey skull thing and the rolling ball trap). Machination is picking locks, disarming traps, dealing with devices. Detection is tracking and bounty hunting and keeping on the trail or even luckily finding a trap mechanism.

Combine the "to hit" with a regular DEX or INT check and we would have something that anyone could attempt, but that a "scout" would progress along more swiftly than other classes.

Thanks for all y'all's thoughts. I couldn't have thought these without y'all's. Peace

[Keps]

I hate Pick Pockets. That single ability breaks(Tarnishes)the class. It was removed along with Backstab in place for the use of a small shield in the GAZ 1 "Rake" class.

[scottenkainen]

One skill the thief has always been missing is an increased ability to find secret doors. I think every party would want to include a thief, even at higher levels, if they had this skill.

~Scott "-enkainen" Casper

[tetramorph]

I just had a rethink on this one.

What players want is something special that they do and they want to feel that this ability progresses with experience gained. I think this is our "OSR" problem with the thief class. Here is what I mean:

Fighting-men have the best "to hit" progression. Yeay fighters! Magic-users get more and higher spells as they progress. Yeay magic! Clerics have something like magic-users, but also "turn" undead with greater probability. Yeay clerics!

What do thieves want to do? What everyone else wants to do: get in and out of a dungeon still alive with a mountain of treasure. How do they want to do it? By none of the above. They want to live by their "wits." And we love game-play that emphasizes player skills rather than character skills. We want to hear them role play through this stuff: "How do you sneak up on him?" "How do you search for the trap?" As is often pointed out, anybody can attempt this.

Well, anybody can engage in combat. Fighting men just have better odds as they progress. And I can imagine house-ruling scenarios where casting spells just takes an intelligence check and a save against insanity. But magic-users progress with this regard. Any lawful character should be able to hold up a silver holy symbol and hope for the possibility of some result. But clerics progress with this regard.

Players need to role play exploration -- all characters explore. I like it when DMs really use the abilities with ability checks -- not to diminish role play, but to keep the outcome free from fatalistic DMing. What does a player want who selects "thief," (or "rogue," or my "scout")? I think they want to feel like they are progressing in a skill that makes them cool and that others need and appreciate.

As I've thought about this more, I think I can boil it down (for myself at least) to two things: stealth and mechanics. The party needs someone who is particularly sneaky without an invisibility spell. The party needs someone who is good with machines (in the ancient sense, e.g., locks, trap-mechanisms, etc.) without hitting it with a crowbar and without blowing it up with a fireball. I think that is the archetype we are trying to get at, at least for me. (I add to my "scout" something like a Robin Hood style skill with archery, but that is legendarium specific.)

Everybody can do a DEX check for climbing walls, "picking pockets," or an INT check + "sense" check for detecting something difficult. (scott: I think anyone should be able to look for secret doors. I would make it a combined check as I've just described.) But the thief would progress in his/her skill of stealth/mechanics. Maybe something as simple as:

Lvl / At least on 2d6

0-1 / 11
2-3 / 9
4-7 / 7
8-11 / 5
12+ / 3

[Vile Traveller]

I think you've hit it on the head, tetramorph. It's not about what characters can or cannot do, it's whether they're better at it than other classes and whether they get better at it as they gain experience.

[Lorgalis]

LotFP does this with the specialist Vile and Tetramorph. Also anyone can sneak and hide that was the assumption in Crypts and Things allowing other classes those abilities.

From Crypts & Things by D101 games

Note about Thief skills.

1. When to roll and when not to roll. The Crypt Keeper may sometimes judge a roll unnecessary, if the player describes his/her character's actions in such a way that the Crypt Keeper thinks guarantees success or failure.

2. Other classes. It is important to keep in mind that any character of any class may attempt any of the above kinds of tasks – if the Crypt Keeper judges that it is possible for that character. Non-thief characters, however, simply do not receive the same bonus (+3) that the thief does. Thus it is possible for a fighter with a good dexterity, and not wearing armour (or only leather armour), to be quite good at the ‘thief-like' tasks summarized above, despite not enjoying the special bonus that thieves do.

And from LotFP by James Raggi

fighters are adventurers because they are so inured to death that they cannot settle down to a normal life. Magic-Users are those that have pur-sued the dark arts and are no longer welcome in society. Clerics are charged by their god to go forth and perform their special duties. Specialists? They do it because they want to. Whether inspired by greed, boredom, or idle curi-osity, Specialists are professional explorers risking life and limb simply because a less active life is dis-tasteful to them. In some ways this makes them the only sane and normal adventuring characters, but in other ways it makes them the most unusual. The Specialist is unique because the character class has no special abilities of its own. Instead, a Specialist is better at certain activities that all char-acters are able to do at a basic level. The Specialist begins at the same default level in these activities as other characters, but receives “points” which can be allocated to improve his ability in the chosen skills. The available skills (and their default starting values for all characters) are:

Architecture (1 in 6) Bushcraft (1 in 6) Climb (1 in 6) Languages (1 in 6) Search (1 in 6) Sleight of Hand (1 in 6) Sneak Attack Stealth (1 in 6)¶ Tinker (1 in 6)

Most of the rules covering these skills can be found in the Adventuring: Rules of the Game section of this book. For skills that are “x in 6” , allocating a point increases the chance by one. For example, Languages begins at 1 in 6. A Specialist allocating a point to this skill increases his chance to 2 in 6.

For other characters, Sneak Attacks are merely attacks made by surprise. A Specialist can multiply the damage done by a Sneak Attack by allocating points to this skill. Assume that the damage mul-tiplier is × 1 for all characters, but for every point allocated to the skill by a Specialist, the damage multiplier is increased by one. If a Specialist has any points in Sneak Attack, then he also gets a +2 bonus to hit above any other bonuses he already has when performing a Sneak Attack. When use of an ability is attempted, the player must roll d6 and if the result is equal to, or less than the ability, the action is successful. In some cases the Referee will make the roll if the character would not immediately know if he was successful. For example, the character will easily be able to tell if he has successfully picked a lock or not, so the player can make that roll. On the other hand, the character would not know, after searching for traps, if he has failed to find a trap or if there simply is not one pres-ent. In this case, the Referee will make that roll. If a Specialist has a skill with a rating of 6 in 6, the roll to succeed is made with two dice, and only if both dice come up 6 does the attempt fail. The Specialist must be unencumbered to use any of the class abilities involving movement or suffer a one point skill penalty per level of encumbrance. They must have Specialist Tools (see Equipment section) to use Search for finding traps or to use Tinker for opening locks or other such activities.

I hope this helps.

[Vile Traveller]

Jul 12, 2014 10:41:41 GMT -6 Lorgalis said:

LotFP does this with the specialist Vile and Tetramorph.

I think LotFP is currently my favourie approach to the "thief".

[tetramorph]

Loraglis - Thanks for sharing those two game mechanics! Yes, those folks already saw and designed what I was getting at. And, like Vile, I like LotFP's description. I am going to start dreaming how to house-rules those into my campaign. Thanks!

[exploderwizard]

I don't think the thief is good enough to be it's own class. However I do understand the player's desire for their characters to use some of these types of abilities. In my OD&D games there are only 3 classes but each player may also choose a background (I was doing this WAY before 5E). Athlete, Assassin, Healer, Scholar, Soldier, Ranger, Thief.


Each comes with its own perks and any class can choose any background. You can play a magic user ranger, or a fighter scholar if desired. I don't see the need to turn every character type that is just a slight variation on a theme into a full class.

In addition there are secondary skills available of the craft, professional, and performance variety. Want to make a bard? Roll up a fighting man with the scholar background and choose appropriate performance skills.