thief rules

[tetramorph]

All right. Well, like the song, "here I go again, on my own." But not exactly on my own. I imitate other, smarter people than me.

I have mentioned elsewhere and gotten good feedback about not liking "thieves." First of all, I don't even like the name. I feel like any class should be able to be any alignment (neutral clerics being "druids") but what can you do? I have found no suitable generic name for this. I don't even like my own solution: "scout."

So here goes again:

Skill-user

Follow Cleric HD, attack, STs and progressions.

AC7+
+50% to movement.
One more pip chance for: listen at door, open door (with skeleton-keys [5gp] / locksmith tools [25gp]), find secret door.
One pip less chance to trigger undiscovered trap.
10% chance per level to read language.
5% chance per level to read magic.

If read magic fails, 5% chance per level that failure does not mean failure to cast but a failed cast (like a fumble). Ref rolls d6:

1-2 backfire
3-4 misfire
5-6 friendly fire

Explanations/commentary:

Extra movement means more of a chance to "back stab," less affected by encumbrance, able to scout ahead a bit and report back, etc.
"Listen at door" mechanic can be deployed for any attempt to sense with any of the five senses, including equilibrium when trying something acrobatic. Useful for tracking, etc. Any PC may attempt. Skill-user gets bonus.
"Open door" mechanic can be used for any sealed or bound object or person. Any PC may attempt, skill-user gets bonus.
As masters of stealth they will be less likely to trigger a trap.

Backfire means the spell hits the reader. STs apply.
Misfire means a different NPC or object target, randomly determined by the ref, is "hit" by spell. STs apply.
Friendly fire means fellow PC, randomly determined by the ref, is hit. STs apply.

Background:

If I am going to have a "thief," I would rather modify core mechanics to EXPLORATION, already built in, than deploy what always winds up to me seeming like role-play-killing additional mechanics.

What think you? waysoftheearth, what did I do wrong this time?

[waysoftheearth]

Jul 23, 2015 16:45:38 GMT -5 tetramorph said:

waysoftheearth, what did I do wrong this time?

Possibly the only mistake was to ask me.

But seeing as I am an irredeemable thief fan, and seeing as you did ask me, I pretty much have to come up with something now don't I


* I appreciate that the class title is a matter of personal taste, but I'm not crazy about "Skill-User". For me, OD&D is not primarily a "skills" game, it's a "class" game. So bringing the notion of "skills" into focus is, IMHO, setting off in the wrong direction for an OD&D player-type.

Personally, I would prefer a title that is more evocative of the class' occupation/archetype. A few alternative possibilities (right off the cuff) to maybe think about could be: Sapper or Sappeur (a military engineer-type), Journeyman (a more crafty, or "Zen", or itinerant-problem-solver-type), Boothaler (a classic grave-robber/plunderer-type), Mountebank (perhaps a highway-man or gentlemen-thief type), etc. etc. I think my general favorite has been "Sneak" for a while now. Those are just a few ideas to kick around, I'm sure there are more*...

* Use of the cleric XP/HD progression hails back to Wager's original thief (invented circa 1973/74, printed in Spartan #9, 1975). Can't argue with that!

* Not sure you need to add 50% movement; your thief will have a movement advantage already if he sticks to padded or no armor.

* I love sticking to D&D's d6 checks for dungeoneering deeds. However, I don't like the "+1 pip" business; even this adjustment is a bit fiddly for me. And there's something else, something that nags me at a deeper level. Introducing a +1 adjustment will "wobble" the beautiful balance of D&D's existing 1/6, 2/6 and 4/6 chances; note how 4 is double 2 is double 1? Note how most of the time, when you have a 1/6 or 2/6 chance, the odds are stacked against you? This means, as a player, you're encouraged to find a way to not throw the dice. The elf's 4/6 chance is then almost the cheat's chance. The odds are--almost unfairly!-- stacked in the elf's favor. Introducing a 3/6 chance--even odds either way-- is kinda problematic (for me at least) in that it's neither here nor there. It's a "no best strategy" situation. For this reason I'd stick with D&D's existing framework: 2/6 for something that is hard to do, or 4/6 for something you're really good at it. I'd rule the thief is really good at (has the cheat's chance of success at) whatever is considered the "thiefy stuff". You need not list "thief skills" explicitly; I'd recommend you don't. Without an explicit list the thief player might be encouraged to invent ways of stretching his advantage, with one he might end up being pigeon-holed into constrained pattern of thinking.

* I agree the thief could have 1/6 (rather than 2/6) odds of springing a trap. Another angle might be the thief inherits the elf's odds of noticing secret doors, and extends it to noticing traps also.

* I don't go for the % odds per level of reading languages or magic. It's too fiddly for me and, realistically, an infrequently useful "ability" with only a 5% or 10% chance of success is only frustrating for the player. I prefer the original, simpler model which (from memory) has these abilities kicking in at 3rd and 9th level, respectively. I think (from memory again) the original thief's ability to "read languages" was more so an ability to read treasure maps without recourse to a spell. Also, there was no chance of scroll backfire prior to GH, and even then I think it was only spells above 6th level that had a 10% chance of being reversed. I'd drop the backfire stuff; it's fiddly, besides which by 9th level the thief probably deserves use of spell scrolls in order to stay in touch with the other classes.


A few other random comments: as a thief player it's your job to sneak past guards/monsters/traps and gather information and pinch loot; you'll need to exploit the class' capabilities cleverly to do it. As a ref you can work with the thief-player's scheming by requiring fewer dice throws, or work against him by requiring more dice throws; I recommend at most one throw per turn to sum it all up. It can be huge fun (for both player and ref!) doing thiefy stuff when there are reasonable odds of pulling it off. I once had a 1st level boy-thief sneak into a room of orcs, tie their spears together with string, sneak past them into the boss room next door to crawl under his bed as he was donning his armor, and grab a jeweled necklace from under his pillow before the boss orc noticed him. Then the boy-thief fled past the surprised orcs with the necklace, with the boss orc in hot pursuit yelling "Stop! Thief!". The odds of a GH % skills thief getting that far would have been crazy low. Who had more fun?

As a ref you can get amazing mileage out of surprise rolls. I.e., you can subsume a whole bunch of faffing about with hiding and sneaking rolls with a surprise check. Have your thief surprise 4/6 instead of 2/6, and you're golden. When the players get surprised allow a 4/6 chance that the thief is sulking along in the shadows, or immediately hides, at the moment of attack and therefore is not personally targeted.


Hope that helps some


* I have at least one more which I should knock into a "shareable" state sometime...

[Admin Pete]

waysoftheearth have an Exalt!

[tetramorph]

Jul 24, 2015 8:16:38 GMT -5 waysoftheearth said:

Possibly the only mistake was to ask me.

No, it is never a mistake. I learn too much from you.

* Use of the cleric XP/HD progression hails back to Wager's original thief (invented circa 1973/74, printed in Spartan #9, 1975). Can't argue with that!

Yeay! I did something good!

* I love sticking to D&D's d6 checks for dungeoneering deeds. However, I don't like the "+1 pip" business; even this adjustment is a bit fiddly for me. And there's something else, something that nags me at a deeper level. Introducing a +1 adjustment will "wobble" the beautiful balance of D&D's existing 1/6, 2/6 and 4/6 chances; note how 4 is double 2 is double 1? Note how most of the time, when you have a 1/6 or 2/6 chance, the odds are stacked against you? This means, as a player, you're encouraged to find a way to not throw the dice. The elf's 4/6 chance is then almost the cheat's chance. The odds are--almost unfairly!-- stacked in the elf's favor. Introducing a 3/6 chance--even odds either way-- is kinda problematic (for me at least) in that it's neither here nor there. It's a "no best strategy" situation. For this reason I'd stick with D&D's existing framework: 2/6 for something that is hard to do, or 4/6 for something you're really good at it. I'd rule the thief is really good at (has the cheat's chance of success at) whatever is considered the "thiefy stuff". You need not list "thief skills" explicitly; I'd recommend you don't. Without an explicit list the thief player might be encouraged to invent ways of stretching his advantage, with one he might end up being pigeon-holed into constrained pattern of thinking.

I learned something new here. This is brilliant. Yes, using a d6 to resolve a coin flip is pretty unsatisfying. I will fix.

* I agree the thief could have 1/6 (rather than 2/6) odds of springing a trap.

Yeay! I did something else good!

* I don't go for the % odds per level of reading languages or magic. It's too fiddly for me and, realistically, an infrequently useful "ability" with only a 5% or 10% chance of success is only frustrating for the player. I prefer the original, simpler model which (from memory) has these abilities kicking in at 3rd and 9th level, respectively. I think (from memory again) the original thief's ability to "read languages" was more so an ability to read treasure maps without recourse to a spell. Also, there was no chance of scroll backfire prior to GH, and even then I think it was only spells above 6th level that had a 10% chance of being reversed. I'd drop the backfire stuff; it's fiddly, besides which by 9th level the thief probably deserves use of spell scrolls in order to stay in touch with the other classes.

Okay, I understand your points, but I still like this. And the chance of failure is a Chainmail thing. I will rethink it.

Have your thief surprise 4/6 instead of 2/6, and you're golden. When the players get surprised allow a 4/6 chance that the thief is sulking along in the shadows, or immediately hides, at the moment of attack and therefore is not personally targeted.

Yes, thanks, will do.

[tetramorph]

Okay, I will give it another try after waysoftheearth's comments:

Stealth-user

Follow Cleric HD, attack, STs and progressions.
AC7+
No large weaponry.
+50% to movement.
Listen at door d6 = 1-2.
Open door (with skeleton-keys [5gp] / locksmith tools [25gp]) d6 = 1-4.
Find secret door d6 = 1-4.
Spiked door will remain shut on d6 = 3-6.
Trigger undiscovered trap on d6 = 1.
Surprised only on d6 = 1. If party surprised, stealth-user NOT surprised and remains hidden on d6 = 1-4.
When acting alone add +2 to rolls for initiative.

Read language d6 = 1-4.
Read magic d6 = 1-2.

If read magic fails, on a d6 = 1 failure does not indicate failure to cast but a failed cast (like a fumble). Ref rolls d6:

1-2 backfire
3-4 misfire
5-6 friendly fire

Explanations/commentary:

I still want a neutral name, so "stealth-user," is my current attempt. Stealth can be used for lawful, neutral or chaotic ends.
Extra movement means more of a chance to "back stab," less affected by encumbrance, able to scout ahead a bit and report back, etc.
"Listen at door" mechanic can be deployed for any attempt to sense with any of the five senses, including equilibrium when trying something acrobatic. Useful for tracking, etc. Any PC may attempt. Skill-user gets bonus.
"Open door" mechanic can be used for any sealed or bound object or person. The skeleton keys or locksmithing tools means that even failure may not demand a random monster roll as the activity is quieter than forcing a door - thus often only time is wasted. Any PC may attempt, stealth-user gets bonus.
As masters of stealth they will be less likely to trigger a trap.

Reading languages is for understanding ancient treasure maps, etc.
Magic by non-magic-users comes at a cost, or at least the possibility of one:
Backfire means the spell hits the reader. STs apply.
Misfire means a different NPC or object target, randomly determined by the ref, is "hit" by spell. STs apply.
Friendly fire means fellow PC, randomly determined by the ref, is hit. STs apply.

What think you now? waysoftheearth, any better?

[waysoftheearth]

Jul 24, 2015 12:36:25 GMT -5 tetramorph said:

I learned something new here.

That is the best outcome of these type forums! I'm glad to have shared something of value

Jul 24, 2015 12:36:25 GMT -5 tetramorph said:

the chance of failure is a Chainmail thing.

To be precise: CM specifies an increasing chance that lower ranked CM-Wizards will delay or fail to invoke increasingly difficult spells. There is no spell "backfire" in CM.

Over in D&D-land, a D&D-M-U cannot memorise those more difficult (now "higher level") spells at all, but scrolls of any spell level can be used by a D&D-M-U of any level, without any chance of failure. When a fighter uses a magic-sword's ability to read magic, it is presumably per the Read Magic spell. When the "original" EGG thief uses the class ability to read magic, it is presumably also per the Read Magic spell, so no chance of failure in either case. Interestingly, the possibility of a M-U reading a spell directly from a spell-book is an unmentioned "gap" in the D&D rules, wherein the CM rule for spell delay/failure could, plausibly, be presumed to still be in effect. The GH thief gets a 10% chance of reversing scrolls above 6th level although, to be honest, I can't clearly remember these spells (other than Wish) being used in any games I've been a part of.

Jul 24, 2015 12:56:19 GMT -5 tetramorph said:

What think you now?

* Title: What about Subterfuger (subterfugere is Latin: to escape by stealth, from: subter secretly + fugere to flee, delete the last "e" to make it look like a noun rather than a verb). Or, continuing with plausible medieval misspellings, possibly Subterfugeur (borrowing from the later, French Monseigneur and the like, possibly lending the title a shade of lawfulness)?

* Movement: I'm still not huge on the added movement, but it's up to you. FWIW, if you allow the thief 4/6 odds of surprising enemy you have effectively doubled his opportunities to backstab right there. Having extra movement as well might be superfluous. The way I run my own games, I can't see how extra movement would lead to additional opportunities to backstab. You might run your games differently, and that's fine.

* Skeleton Keys: I kinda like the idea of these... presumably they are one shot items?  Otherwise why would anyone purchase the locksmith tools for five times the price?

* Surprised on a 1. I have considered this myself, but it turns out that the reverse (surprising enemy 4/6) is simpler to handle and achieves a better outcome. Or at least, this is so the way I run games. The issue is: when a figure specifies his own odds of being surprised, it treads on other figures' odds of surprising him. Clearly it doesn't work out "neatly" when a figure with increased odds of surprising enemy comes across a figure with decreased odds of being surprised! The game runs smoother when each figure specifies only its own odds of surprising enemy, and doesn't mess with any other figure's odds of surprising him. Moreover, concurrent surprise checks will produce the "surprised less often" effect you're after anyway. For example, let's compare: a (sneaky) thief meets an orc, versus a (sneaky) thief meets a (sneaky) doppelganger, versus a man meets an orc:

In the case of the (sneaky) thief and the orc, the thief will surprise the orc 4/6, while the orc will surprise the thief only 2/6. Hence, when both dice to surprise the other concurrently, there is a 2/9 chance neither will be surprised, a 1/9 chance only the thief will be surprised, a 4/9 chance only the orc will be surprised, and a 2/9 chance both will be surprised.

In the case of the (sneaky) thief and the (sneaky) doppelganger, each will surprise the other 4/6. So there is a 1/9 chance neither will be surprised, a 2/9 chance only the thief will be surprised, a 2/9 chance only the doppelganger will be surprised, and a 4/9 chance both will be surprised.

In the case of a man and an orc, each will surprise the other 2/6. Hence there is a 4/9 chance neither will be surprised, a 2/9 chance only the man will be surprised, a 2/9 chance only the orc will be surprised, and a 1/9 chance both will be surprised.

Notice that when the sneak meets a non-sneak he is half as likely to be caught out as when either a sneak meets a sneak or when a non-sneak meets a non-sneak. In my view this is the more satisfying mechanic because it is achieved without treading on other figures' odds of causing surprise, and because the odds of the various outcomes shift relative to the abilities of the involved parties.

A final note, if your thief really will have 1/6 odds of being surprised, then the 4/6 chance of then being hidden when he is surprised is probably overkill.


* General odds: I appreciate why you have different odds for different things, but IMHO it's an unnecessary complication. The game will run smoother if it's just a flat 4/6 across the board. Also, IMHO the player will have more freedom to "try his hand" if he doesn't even have to pause to think whether he needs to throw a 1-2, or a 5-6, or 4-6, or 3-6, or whatever it is.  This comes back to my prior comment about lists of specific skills potentially limiting the player's thinking. The same goes for lists of specific odds. If the player is instead given this one, single advantage (a flat 4/6 chance of succeeding at any deed of subterfuge) he might be more likely to run with it and try to exploit it. Perhaps try it one time and see what happens

* Magic Backfire: see above. Another possibility I have considered is: if d6 < spell level, the scroll fails.  You could possibly add: if d6 exactly = spell level, the scroll is reversed.


All good fun to think about

[tetramorph]

Jul 24, 2015 22:59:17 GMT -5 waysoftheearth said:

waysoftheearth said:

* Skeleton Keys: I kinda like the idea of these... presumably they are one shot items?  Otherwise why would anyone purchase the locksmith tools for five times the price?

Yes, that is the idea. A skeleton key fits or it doesn't. In one exploration turn he can try his whole set (say, a ½ dozen). The roll indicates they fit (or he has made them fit anyway, somehow) or not. The locksmith tools allow continued retries.

* General odds: I appreciate why you have different odds for different things, but IMHO it's an unnecessary complication. The game will run smoother if it's just a flat 4/6 across the board. Also, IMHO the player will have more freedom to "try his hand" if he doesn't even have to pause to think whether he needs to throw a 1-2, or a 5-6, or 4-6, or 3-6, or whatever it is. This comes back to my prior comment about lists of specific skills potentially limiting the player's thinking. The same goes for lists of specific odds. If the player is instead given this one, single advantage (a flat 4/6 chance of succeeding at any deed of subterfuge) he might be more likely to run with it and try to exploit it. Perhaps try it one time and see what happens

Well, that makes sense, but many of the mechanics are secret rolls and I don't mind managing those distinctions as a ref. I mean, The random encounter, the listen at doors, the springing of a trap are all ref rolls and they all already have different odds.

So, I will try again in the next post!

[tetramorph]

To the tune of the popular song: "Here I go again with waysoftheearth, going down the only road he'll let me on. . . " etc.

Extractor

Follow Cleric HD, attack, STs and progressions.
AC7+
No large weaponry.
Listen at door d6 = 1-2.
Open door (with skeleton-keys [5gp] / locksmith tools [25gp]) d6 = 1-4.
Find secret door d6 = 1-4.
Spiked door will remain shut on d6 = 1-4.
Trigger undiscovered trap on d6 = 1.
When acting alone, will surprise monster on d6 = 1-4.
If when with party the party is surprised, extractor may roll for separate surprise. If unsurprised extractor hidden before encounter.
When acting alone add +2 to rolls for initiative.

Read language d6 = 1-4.
Read magic d6 + HD = greater than spell lvl indicates success; less than spell lvl indicates failure; equal to spell level indicates reversal.

Explanations/commentary:

I still want a neutral name, so "extractor," is my current attempt. Extraction can be used for lawful, neutral or chaotic ends.
"Listen at door" mechanic can be deployed for any attempt to sense with any of the five senses, including equilibrium when trying something acrobatic. Useful for tracking, etc. Any PC may attempt. Extractor gets bonus.
"Open door" mechanic can be used for any sealed or bound object or person. The skeleton keys or locksmithing tools means that even failure may not demand a random monster roll as the activity is quieter than forcing a door - thus often only time is wasted. Skelton keys may be used for one attempt, locksmithing tools for many. Any PC may attempt, stealth-user gets bonus.
As masters of stealth they will be less likely to trigger a trap.

Reading languages is for understanding ancient treasure maps, etc.
Magic by non-magic-users comes at a cost, or at least the possibility of one, hence "reversal."

What do you think?

Now what exactly does spell reversal mean, anyway?

[The Red Baron]

I like the idea of skeleton keys as a magic item that allows you to open one lock (as per the knock spell?). It should be very pricey though, and always work.

Maybe it can also be expended to instantly kill a skeleton, or maybe players find it as a once-in-a-campaign item inside a powerful undead skeleton.

Great idea guys.

[waysoftheearth]

I'm not trying to tell anyone what they can or can't, or should or shouldn't do; merely offering observations.

It's a fine effort tetramorph, I suggest you might playtest and see how it runs

[tetramorph]

Jul 25, 2015 22:56:45 GMT -5 waysoftheearth said:

I'm not trying to tell anyone what they can or can't, or should or shouldn't do; merely offering observations.

It's a fine effort tetramorph, I suggest you might playtest and see how it runs

I meant no offense but only to be playful.

waysoftheearth, you are one if those who helps me to know and love my favorite game even more.

Thank you for helping me think through this brainstorm and make something better, more playable.

Once I have a chance to play test I will report!

[Admin Pete]

Jul 25, 2015 22:56:45 GMT -5 waysoftheearth said:

I'm not trying to tell anyone what they can or can't, or should or shouldn't do; merely offering observations.

It's a fine effort tetramorph, I suggest you might playtest and see how it runs

I am not sure you understand how valuable those observations are, but they are exactly what we need is someone to bounce ideas off of and see how they look through someone else's eyes. Thank you (and anyone else to whom it applies) for being a great sounding board and advice giver. No one can think of everything and any observations are likely to trigger new ideas. Everyone who comes into a thread and comments, shares observations, offer a critique, gives advice, makes suggestions and etc., is helping move things forward in a big way.  I hope for that to happen in most threads on this site. I also hope to have more people day by day show up (we have several) that will do that. I also hope to have an ever growing number who will share their ideas and be open to the comments that come their way. NO one is asking anyone to change, the way they are doing it, but all the comments - pro and con - are a resource for others to take your ideas in their own unique direction.

Exalts to both of you!