|
Post by captaincrumbcake on Apr 11, 2017 14:14:14 GMT -5
The creation of the thief as a class was a major turning point in the original game. The template for this was provided to Gygax by a California playing group, and his adjusted rendition appeared in the first supplement to the rules; known as Greyhawk*. While many embrace the idea of this class, some question its necessity. Why did some feel that such a class was needed, where others, didn't? Was there something in the original rules that discouraged character-players-- or worse, prohibit them!-- from performing certain actions? Not according to what I've read.
Consider the following:
Volume 1 (Men & Magic, p.10), Strength: ...will also aid in opening traps and so on.
(Ditto, p.7), Dwarves: ...they note slanting passages, traps, shifting walls and new construction in underground settings.
And this passage from Volume 3 (The Underworld & Wilderness Adventures, p.8), ...searching for anything (secret passages, hidden treasure, etc.), loading treasure, listening, ESP'ing, hiding, will be adjudged by the referee as to what portion of a turn will be used by the activity.
All the underlining by me.
All of this tells me that characters could always search for traps, "note" their presence, "open" them, and perform nearly every action that ended up becoming the functions of the thief class. Yet, no where in the Greyhawk supplement, does it tell the DM that all those actions found in the original volumes were void, and restricted solely to a thief. Did I miss something?
Suggested precise actions, such as Pick Pockets, Climb Walls, etc., described specifically for a thief in Greyhawk, are not prohibited to others; according to the original volumes. The "searching for anything (etc.)" should allow characters to attempt to filch keys from a jailer while within a cell, or climb walls in order to reach ledges and other spaces above or below ground level.
While much if not all of the above may seem unnecessary to point out (like, duh! you never knew that?), the idea that new players and referees should feel compelled to include the thief simply because such thiefy actions were/are not allowed in the original rules, needs to be dispelled. Groups can enjoy the game, without including a class(a thief!) they would rather not have in the party.
For your consideration.
* by G. Gygax & R. Kuntz
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Apr 11, 2017 15:20:02 GMT -5
We used the thief bitd, but that was mainly for the consistency between the two of us reffing. In my current campaign which will reach 8 years in June, I have never used the thief. That may change if I ever finish my re-write, but until then, no.
|
|
|
Post by magremore on Apr 11, 2017 18:02:07 GMT -5
Not playing in a campaign right now. Just my son and I doing make-shift one-offs. We're playing really loose and only using fighters and magic-users. But I consider thieves a core class (perhaps because I started in the early 80s with Moldvay basic). I agree all characters should have access to (most of) the thief skills. In our most recent games I've been using "reaction" rolls for actions of uncertain outcome, and that includes fighters in light armor attempting to sneak around unnoticed or hide in shadows. I think the key is remembering that low-level fighters attack as well as magic-users and clerics, so thieves skills should be based on that model: either they're the only ones who progress in their thieving skills, or else all can progress, but thieves progress faster. Anyway, here's my current draft for thieves, in case we add one into our game... Thieves are limited to leather armor and do not carry shields. Their arms typically consist of dagger, hand axe, sword, short bow, or light crossbow. Thieves have a set of thieving skills that are open to all characters (restricted to leather armor and with a –1 to pick pockets), but which only thieves advance in. The skills are open locks, remove small traps, pick pockets/filch items, move silently, and hide in shadows. Check attempts using 2d6, with success on a roll of the target or higher. Thieving Skill CheckLevel = Target 1 = 9 2 = 8 3 = 8 4 = 7 5 = 6 6 = 6 7 = 5 8 = 4 9 = 4 10 = 3 11 = 3 12 = 3 13 = 2 Only thieves may foil magical enclosures. They do this as a skill check –3 against hold portal and –4 against wizard lock. At level 9, the penalty against hold portal goes away, and wizard lock improves to –1. Thieves improve climbing (a 2d6 check every 10 feet) by +1 per level completed, and they have a +1 chance to hear noises when listening at doors, which increases to +2 at level 3 and +3 at level 6. Thieves also have a special ability to strike deadly blow from behind. Thieves receive the same +4 bonus as other characters, but they do two dice of damage, which increases to three dice at level 4 and four dice at level 9.
(For the sake of completeness: All figures use d6 for HD and all weapons use d6 for damage. If there were a thief of 4th level or higher, I'd probably revert to my previous rules for choosing possible other skills—more like Warlock—than automatically granting read languages and scroll casting.)
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Apr 11, 2017 19:05:50 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Apr 11, 2017 19:20:41 GMT -5
No thief for me.
Although I have designed one where all it meant was that you had better chances at the exploration rolls like find a secret door, open a door, listen at door, and a bonus to initiative.
I like it. But I still won't run it!
|
|
|
Post by Stormcrow on Apr 12, 2017 13:18:47 GMT -5
The point of being a thief is not to have special abilities X, Y, and Z; it is to make infiltration and theft your modus operandi. In fact, the point of having classes at all is not to provide special abilities to characters but to define how they go about adventuring in general. As I said over on odd74, the classes are broken broadly into those who fight, those who use magic, those who do both, and those who infiltrate. Each class can occasionally do something not in their purview, but it's not the norm. A fighter who can also open locks and climb walls is not a thief; he "one who fights" and who can occasionally open locks and climb walls.
(If you wanted to invent a new class for "those who both fight and infiltrate" or "those who both use magic and infiltrate," that's fine, but that's a new main class, not a tweak on an existing class.)
It's possible to have other main classes, though you have to start thinking hard to come up with them, since classes are so broad already. If you can play a character who invents technology and uses that technology instead of fighting, using magic, or infiltrating, that'd be a new class, and any other technology-user would also be part of that class.
So, "without a thief" is a bit misleading. You're asking why you need a thief when all his powers can be duplicated by other classes. You're not asking whether you'd be losing a mode of adventuring without the thief—you would. You would have no characters who choose infiltration as their standard operating procedure. Maybe your fighter can manage to find and disarm that trap, but when a horde of orcs comes around he'll be standing front and center, swinging his sword, 'cause that's what he really does.
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Apr 12, 2017 14:00:23 GMT -5
If I ran a thief, I would run it like this description I worked up:
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2017 17:46:24 GMT -5
I like the Tunnels & Trolls impression of the Thief, which was always called a Rogue going right back to the first edition. Wizards, Warriors and Rogues were patterned after Gandalf, Conan and Cugel the Clever.
Rogues in T&T are essentially 'neutral' characters, in thT they get no warrior combat/armour bonus or start with spell lists. However, they have no combat restrictions and they can learn individual spells from PC Wizards (and only PC wizards). They also have a level limit that can only be transcended by changing class to a full Warrior or Wizard.
I run thieves by the book in B/X, but for OD&D I don't think I have ever run one. If I ran them today I'd probably base it on the T&T rogue:
Basics: Hit dice, levels and combat abilities are as clerics Equipment: no equipment restrictions, and they may use magic items that are not otherwise restricted to magic-users Spells: as cleric; they must be taught their spells from clerics and magic-users Level limit: Limited to 5th level; after this they may only progress by changing class
|
|
|
Post by Vile Traveller on Apr 13, 2017 22:51:31 GMT -5
I like all-thief parties.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 14, 2017 16:18:56 GMT -5
Sigh.
The Thief does not replace other people doing things.
Anybody can climb a wall. A thief can climb a sheer wall without equipment.
Anybody can hide in darkness or behind a curtain. A thief can hide in shadows.
Et cetera.
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Apr 14, 2017 19:03:01 GMT -5
Sigh. The Thief does not replace other people doing things. Anybody can climb a wall. A thief can climb a sheer wall without equipment. Anybody can hide in darkness or behind a curtain. A thief can hide in shadows. Et cetera. Exactly how I currently run it, and currently I do not have thieves in the campaign. Just for the kicks I have run parties that were all one or other of the classes. A whole party of 1st level magic-users had the quickest TPK and the party of 1st level fighting men did the best with my group of the four classes with the cleric party a close 2nd. Now at 2nd level, the all cleric party was boss, with all those healing spells to spread around. That was my experience with it different players I would imagine would get different results. Players used to at least AC 4 have learning curve when they have to do with no armor or nothing better than leather.
|
|
|
Post by bestialwarlust on Apr 15, 2017 16:45:48 GMT -5
Sigh. The Thief does not replace other people doing things. Anybody can climb a wall. A thief can climb a sheer wall without equipment. Anybody can hide in darkness or behind a curtain. A thief can hide in shadows. Et cetera. A whole party of 1st level magic-users had the quickest TPK Did they pool their money to hire a bunch of body guards or did they forge on ahead without any?
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Apr 15, 2017 19:51:26 GMT -5
A whole party of 1st level magic-users had the quickest TPK Did they pool their money to hire a bunch of body guards or did they forge on ahead without any? They forged on ahead without any muscle. Last time they ever tried that. After that if they were weak on muscle they looked to hire some before leaving town. They also learned that it is often good to have some hired muscle in towns as well.
|
|
|
Post by docsammy on Jul 28, 2017 0:29:21 GMT -5
Sometimes I will consider using the thief in OD&D, but usually if I'm going to have an old-school D&D game with the supplementary classes, I'll go with AD&D 1e as it's more accessible as I own AD&D First Edition's Players Handbook and Dungeon Master's Guide, but do not own the OD&D supplements in any form at all. When I plan OD&D campaigns, it is with a retro-clone of the core Three Little Brown Booklets such as Full Metal Plate Mail or even Microlite74 Basic if I'm feeling super rules-lite.
So, generally when I plan an OD&D campaign, it is with the mindset of the three core classes of Fighter, Magic-User, and Cleric. Also, in some settings of mine (particularly the OD&D ones), one's character class is less of a profession or hard archetype and more of one's primary method of adventuring and surviving. A fighter need not be a soldier, mercenary, knight, or other martial type. They just need to be reasonably physically fit and rely primarily on physical combat over arcane magic or divine blessing to get by.
|
|
|
Post by scottanderson on Jul 29, 2017 0:28:56 GMT -5
Redesigning the thief class is the senior thesis of the OSR. If you are serious about the OSR ethic, you made up your own thief guy.
A ton of them are excellent. I made four different ones each based on different assumptions. Idk if they're any good.
Here is the important thing about being a thief guy: you have to act like the thief guy! As long as your man is acting like he's the thief, then that's what he is. He could actually be of any class or race. He doesn't need a character class to do thief guy things.
Mythical Journeys doesn't have a thief. Not in the front, not as a phony "bonus" class, and its not mentioned or honored in its absence.
Instead, the several Demi-men all have searching or sneaking abilities; there are pieces of equipment that a thief guy might use; and the Dex and Wis stats figure in to searching, spotting and sneaking.
There are some specific blind spots in this setup. For instance, magic locks are a harder barrier. People won't be climbing walls in combat. And there is no backstab mechanism. But most of the things a thief can do can be attempted by a guy who is thinking like a thief.
And that is the lesson I have learned about the thief guy: it's not necessarily a character class, but rather an approach to the game that make a guy into the thief guy.
|
|
|
Post by Von on Aug 3, 2017 1:02:16 GMT -5
I think that's the heart of the issue, Scott. If you're going to have this option for someone to choose "the Infiltration Guy" as their archetypal playstyle there needs to be something mechanical and palpable that only a dedicated Infiltration Guy can do.
The problem is that it's pretty reasonable to say that only a Spells Guy can cast spells and only a Miracles Guy can do Miracles. If they're both only sort of okay at fighting, that preserves the niche for the Fighting Guy. BUT: there's nothing about the Infiltration Guy that a careful or talented member of another class "shouldn't" be able to do. He nags at verisimilitude in a way that, for some reason, the Fighting Guy doesn't.
(I should add for justice's sake that I have some players who are very vocal about wanting their Spells Guys to be better at fighting or at least be able to wear armour and so on, because that limitation feels arbitrary and aesthetically motivated to them. That's what Elves are for.)
I'm of the opinion that the Thief exists in the same space as the Fighter. Anyone can swing a bit of wood with a nail in it about; the Fighter has been trained to do that better. Likewise, anyone can creep about, pick pockets, or stab you in the bum, but the Thief has been taught to do these things well.
I have them in my games mostly because people are sad if they can't play one. It seems to be an area in which people really want to specialise (or maybe it gives people a way to avoid obligations surrounding the Fighter - "I don't want to be the meat shield!" and all that).
|
|
|
Post by finarvyn on Aug 4, 2017 8:40:52 GMT -5
I like the "core four" classes, and thief has been a part of my game since almost the beginning. I think that much of the problem stems from characters like Conan or Fafhrd/Mouser where it seems like everyone can do thief-stuff, but other iconic S&S characters like Elric never seemed to be that thief-like to me and I have no problem with making multi-classing easy and encouraging players to pick a level of thief to go with their other main class if they want to do that stuff.
Actually, when I run a Lankhmar campaign I often make a house-rule that everyone has to have 50% of their levels in thief. It just seems to fit the campaign style.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2017 9:56:14 GMT -5
I like the "core four" classes, and thief has been a part of my game since almost the beginning. I think that much of the problem stems from characters like Conan or Fafhrd/Mouser where it seems like everyone can do thief-stuff, but other iconic S&S characters like Elric never seemed to be that thief-like to me and I have no problem with making multi-classing easy and encouraging players to pick a level of thief to go with their other main class if they want to do that stuff. Actually, when I run a Lankhmar campaign I often make a house-rule that everyone has to have 50% of their levels in thief. It just seems to fit the campaign style. Interesting idea about Lankhmar. Have you also tried giving everyone thief abilities in addition to their normal class, or do you think that would make them too powerful? I suppose you could also grant everyone thief abilities at half their current level. That's sort of like being a half-thief, and you can always still take on a full thief, who get to use their abilities normally and also soar through the levels with such low xp requirements.
|
|
|
Post by finarvyn on Aug 4, 2017 10:09:52 GMT -5
My problem is that I'm into low-to-mid level campaigns, so adding extra abilities doesn't work well for my style of play. I find that making players divide up their levels (I use a "unified" chart much like 3E did) keeps their overall power levels low but gives them options on doing thief stuff. I do a similar thing for my Middle-earth games where spellcasters have to be 50% non-spellcaster classes. (So, a 10th level Gandalf could actually be a 5th level Magic-user.)
|
|
|
Post by sixdemonbag on Aug 4, 2017 10:27:41 GMT -5
One way to handle thieving in 3 simple steps using the 3llbs:
1. Roll up a fighter. 2. Don leather armor. 3. Relevant 2 in 6 checks are doubled to become 4 in 6 checks.
Optional: Read scrolls and establish a guild at name level.
|
|
|
Post by Hexenritter Verlag on Feb 11, 2018 2:25:24 GMT -5
I have zero issue with the thief class; though I do not like the roll under percentage based skills. I like how Lamentations of the Flame Princess did skills with the specialist with D6 rolls.
|
|
|
Post by The Master on Feb 11, 2018 16:15:54 GMT -5
I have zero issue with the thief class; though I do not like the roll under percentage based skills. I like how Lamentations of the Flame Princess did skills with the specialist with D6 rolls. I agree, I don't care for the % rolls for thieves.
|
|
|
Post by mao on Feb 23, 2018 15:36:15 GMT -5
I surprised at the thief dislike, I'll admit its not my fav to play(maybe not in 30 or so years) or DM for, but I consider it essential.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 23, 2018 15:51:22 GMT -5
I surprised at the thief dislike, I'll admit its not my fav to play(maybe not in 30 or so years) or DM for, but I consider it essential. Much of the displeasure I've heard of the Thief class boils down to "they can barely pick a lock!" How I address it: - They can pick any standard lock in about a half-round. I've actually watched locksmiths pick locks and this doesn't seem outside of belief. Picking a magical lock, wizard lock or held portal, or high-tech/alien/etc. lock invokes the roll.
- Same with the rest of their skills: hiding, climbing, sneaking, etc. Under normal conditions they can easily perform these tasks. The roll comes in when the situation is not ideal. Hiding in a torch-lit corridor, climbing a wet stone wall in the rain, sneaking down a corridor having a creaky wooden floor, etc.
- Now the percentages themselves? I'm always free to modify them, again per the scenario. Taking your time, good lighting, relative safety ... positive modifiers! Dark, surrounding combat, desparation ... negative modifiers.
- Also regarding percentages? They're excellent rules of thumb for non-thief PCs attempting the same actions.
Hardly new and innovative, I've seen similar approaches over the decades since the 1970's, but it serves me well.
|
|
|
Post by mao on Feb 23, 2018 17:12:47 GMT -5
I surprised at the thief dislike, I'll admit its not my fav to play(maybe not in 30 or so years) or DM for, but I consider it essential. Much of the displeasure I've heard of the Thief class boils down to "they can barely pick a lock!" How I address it: - They can pick any standard lock in about a half-round. I've actually watched locksmiths pick locks and this doesn't seem outside of belief. Picking a magical lock, wizard lock or held portal, or high-tech/alien/etc. lock invokes the roll.
- Same with the rest of their skills: hiding, climbing, sneaking, etc. Under normal conditions they can easily perform these tasks. The roll comes in when the situation is not ideal. Hiding in a torch-lit corridor, climbing a wet stone wall in the rain, sneaking down a corridor having a creaky wooden floor, etc.
- Now the percentages themselves? I'm always free to modify them, again per the scenario. Taking your time, good lighting, relative safety ... positive modifiers! Dark, surrounding combat, desparation ... negative modifiers.
- Also regarding percentages? They're excellent rules of thumb for non-thief PCs attempting the same actions.
Hardly new and innovative, I've seen similar approaches over the decades since the 1970's, but it serves me well.
Not new or innovative, bu I likes
|
|
|
Post by docsammy on Feb 25, 2018 10:15:39 GMT -5
As I have stated before, I'm sort of ambivalent about the Thief class.
Currently planning an OD&D play-by-post and I'm unsure if I will include the Thief or not.
|
|
|
Post by Hexenritter Verlag on Feb 25, 2018 22:21:57 GMT -5
As I have stated before, I'm sort of ambivalent about the Thief class. Currently planning an OD&D play-by-post and I'm unsure if I will include the Thief or not. Tis up to you, but if I end up running my own PbP down the road, I'll likely include a Thief but use a D6 based Thieve's Skills mechanic if I can find one or develop one.
|
|
|
Post by makofan on Feb 27, 2018 9:41:16 GMT -5
I ran a dungeon recently without a thief being available, and nobody really missed it
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Feb 28, 2018 0:01:47 GMT -5
I ran a dungeon recently without a thief being available, and nobody really missed it I typically don't use thieves. I did back in the day when the other ref added them, but that was only so the players could easily move their characters between the two campaigns. They never caused me any problems, I just am philosophically opposed to them.
|
|
|
Post by Hexenritter Verlag on Apr 10, 2018 20:51:20 GMT -5
When I run my future OD&D campaigns I'll be snagging Delving Deeper's Thief for them.
|
|