|
Post by foster1941 on Aug 5, 2005 14:35:00 GMT -5
Gandalf, it looks like you're following the same train of logic that led me to this conclusion (namely that the thief is a poorly-conceived "misfit" class that doesn't really belong in the game).
|
|
|
Post by Gandalf Istari on Aug 5, 2005 14:48:24 GMT -5
Gandalf, it looks like you're following the same train of logic that led me to this conclusion (namely that the thief is a poorly-conceived "misfit" class that doesn't really belong in the game). I have read that thread, but indeed I arrived at the opposite conclusion, namely that the thief is a great concept that fits the game beautifully but needs some work, hehe. Funny how two people can be on to the same train of thought but end up at different stations!
|
|
|
Post by foster1941 on Aug 5, 2005 15:08:41 GMT -5
A thought on how to beef up thieves: in the same way that thieves are an exception to the general rule of demi-human level limits, perhaps they could also be an exception to the general rule of human multi-classing. In other words, even for humans, being a single-classed thief would actually be very rare, and most thieves would actually be thief-fighters, thief-assassins, thief-monks, thief-magic-users, thief-bards, thief-acrobats, thief-mountebanks, and so on. After all, think of the three literary models of the thief class -- The Gray Mouser, Bilbo Baggins, and Cugel the Clever; arguably the first is actually a thief-fighter, the second a thief-bard (not in the 1E "badass ninja" sense, but in the 2E "guy who sings" sense), the third a thief-mountebank.
BTW, I'm going to move this thread to the Houserules board since it seems to be moving more in that direction (trying to come up with ways to 'fix' the BtB thief rather than trying to come up with explanations on why it isn't actually broken after all). But if you want me to move it back let me know and I will...
|
|
|
Post by Gandalf Istari on Aug 5, 2005 15:18:33 GMT -5
A thought on how to beef up thieves: in the same way that thieves are an exception to the general rule of demi-human level limits, perhaps they could also be an exception to the general rule of human multi-classing. In other words, even for humans, being a single-classed thief would actually be very rare, and most thieves would actually be thief-fighters, thief-assassins, thief-monks, thief-magic-users, thief-bards, thief-acrobats, thief-mountebanks, and so on. After all, think of the three literary models of the thief class -- The Gray Mouser, Bilbo Baggins, and Cugel the Clever; arguably the first is actually a thief-fighter, the second a thief-bard (not in the 1E "badass ninja" sense, but in the 2E "guy who sings" sense), the third a thief-mountebank. I'm actually considering moving away from multiclassing altogether and simply creating classes that are combos of the core or archetypical classes. Kind of along the lines of thinking of the paladin as a cleric/fighter class, one that combines abilities from both as well as different abilities that neither have. Its funny that you mentioned the mountebank, as I'm considering using that for the name of a class that would be a thief/magic user combo. I have a few working names for a fighter/magic user class as well, but so far they're kind of lame so I won't share 'em... No sweat, I had a feeling it was going to drift in that direction anyways.
|
|
|
Post by Jerry Mapes on Aug 5, 2005 19:34:56 GMT -5
So, all in all, thieves are not the youngest starting class, and I'd say a good case could be made that they start their training ealier than 16. Yup I will cop to not looing it up and being accurate ;D But dangnit i have an excuse... i'm 35 miles from my books. Heh.
|
|
|
Post by Gandalf Istari on Aug 5, 2005 20:57:37 GMT -5
So, all in all, thieves are not the youngest starting class, and I'd say a good case could be made that they start their training ealier than 16. Yup I will cop to not looing it up and being accurate ;D But dangnit i have an excuse... i'm 35 miles from my books. Heh. No excuses tolerated! You should be able to quote chapter and verse by now... And he calls himself an old schooler. Sheesh.
|
|
|
Post by Semaj The Silent on Aug 5, 2005 21:21:02 GMT -5
Starting age for fighters is 15+1d4...thieves have 18+1d4.
|
|
|
Post by BonesMcCoy on Aug 6, 2005 0:25:57 GMT -5
Here's my thoughts on beefing up the Thief, making him more of a swashbuckler thief:
D8 HD Attack as Cleric All thieving skills as though 3 levels higher Fight with two weapons without penalty (giving him 2 attacks a round) +1 to hit with thrown weapons (thrown daggers mostly, maybe poisoned) No read lang skill Pick pockets is sleight of hand and can be used for palming, card tricks and so on
I always liked eggshell grenades from OA too. Maybe let thieves make and use them.
PS - I'd like to hear more of your non-multiclassed classes O Learned Istari.
|
|
|
Post by Gandalf Istari on Aug 6, 2005 14:09:25 GMT -5
Here's my thoughts on beefing up the Thief, making him more of a swashbuckler thief: D8 HD Attack as Cleric All thieving skills as though 3 levels higher Fight with two weapons without penalty (giving him 2 attacks a round) +1 to hit with thrown weapons (thrown daggers mostly, maybe poisoned) No read lang skill Pick pockets is sleight of hand and can be used for palming, card tricks and so on I've tried hard in my thinking concerning the thief and ways to change the class to resist making the thief tougher in combat. Essentially, I want the thief to remain a thief, not a weak fighter with some special skills. Sometimes though I think that "beefing" the thief up to be a better fighter might be the only way to go. If I were to go that route, I think what I'd do is increase thief damage output somehow, and increase his ability to avoid getting hit, but keep his hit dice the same. That way the fighter remains the prememinent class in terms of damage that can be endured, while the thief becomes better at dishing out damage and avoiding it, but remains weak when it comes to actually taking a hit. Read Languages to me is straight out of Leiber's Fafrhd and Gray Mouser stories, and for me I'd have a hard time divorcing the skill from the thief class. I want thieves to be more like Leiber portrays them, not less. I love Leiber's thieves! Sleight of Hand is actually a skill I have added to the thief class, so we're on the same page there. The Acrobatic skills from UA I've added to thieves in a modified form, as I personally don't see why anyone would want to actually play a Thief-Acrobat, and I've never had anyone ever play one. If I ever get around to making any of the classes, I'll post them here at K&K sometime for your perusal. The only combo classes that I've hammered out to any detail at this point is a necromancer class (cleric/magic user) and the bard (fighter/mu/thief). The necromancer I created is very, very nasty, and I'm leaning toward using him only as an NPC. Since both the bard and necromancer I've worked out are detailed in my extensive house rules system, I'd have to edit them to get them into 1e AD&D form, but I'll make a stab at it when I get a free moment if you're interested. The Mountebank so far is just a bunch of ideas rolling around in the back of my head, and the fighter/mu class I've been thinking about is nothing more than a vague notion at this point, and I haven't been able to come up with a single cool sounding name for him yet.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Cias on Aug 8, 2005 21:38:24 GMT -5
Well, I have briefly skimmed some of the replies so far, but I haven't fully read all of them yet so I don't know if what I have to say has been addressed yet or not, but here it goes. I have 3 main points: First - One should understand that the skills and abilities of a 1st level character of any class represent things that are beyond the capabilities of normal men (although only barely so in most cases). A 1st level fighter fights better (better "to hit" score and more hit points) than even a professional soldier with a life time of combat experience. A 1st level magic-user can cast only 1 spell/day, but that is one more spell/day than any ordinary human can cast. And while a temple might have an entire congregation of very devote and faithful believers, none of them are capable of weilding the powers of the gods themselves as even a 1st level cleric can. Following this same line of reasoning, one can conclude that the % chances for 1st level thief skills represent their chances to succeed at tasks that are beyond what any ordinary street urchin can do. For example, a 1st level thief has a 30% chance to pick pockets, but this 30% chance only applies to tasks that are above and beyond tasks that any "normal thief" can accomplish. In this regard, you could say that a 1st level thief has a 130% chance to succeed at a "normal" pocket picking. Anyone can pick a pocket if the circumstance is right (i.e. the victim is unware of the thief's presence and the item to be taken is exposed and unsecured), and I would consider such attempts by a 1st level theif to be automatically successful. However, a 1st level thief still has a 30% chance of success (and only a 50% chance of being detected) when attempting to pick pockets while having a face-to-face discussion witht the victim about potatos, having no idea whether or not the victim is carrying anything, where he is carrying it, or whether or not it is secured. The same goes for moving silently. Anyone can move quietly if they take their time; but the % chance for moving silently is the chance to succeed at moving absolutely silently, even when moving over a creeky floor, and while moving at full speed. Even if he fails his move silent roll he will still be moving quitely (just not absolutely silently) and doing so at full speed. Second - The chances of success for 1st level thieves are actually more in line with the abilities of other classes than you might first think. A 1st level fighter has at best 10 hit points (not counting ability adjustments, which would also affect thief abilities). Considering that most attacks 1st level fighters will be subject to will do an average of about 3.5 points of damage, a 1st level fighter can only take about 2 or 3 hits before being done for the day (or longer if he doesn't have access to magical healing). This means that a fighter is only good for about 1 or 2 fights per day. Of course the limited usefulness of 1st level magic-users is obvious. However, while a thief may fail about two-thirds of the time or more, he doesn't have a limited number of uses that is depleted. So what if he fails to pick 3 locks in a row, he can still try to pick the 4th one, and odds are he will succeed at one of them. Part of the problem is that some DMs will treat a failed thief roll as creating a worse situation than if the thief never made an attempt. For example, some DMs will treat a failed move silent roll as if the monsters automatically detect the thief, whereas if the thief didn't even attempt to move silently he would have recieved his normal 1-2 in 6 chance for surprise. Likewise some DMs rule that a failed find/remove traps roll automatically springs the trap, or a failed hear noise roll renders the character incapable of hearing even normal volume sounds. If, however, the DM deems that even with a failed roll the thief is still performing at the peak of normal human ability then perhaps more players would be willing to attempt to use thief abilities even if the chances of success are not that great. Third - Even considering what I have stated above (you have to admit those *are* pretty good arguements ) I too have considered starting thieves off with slightly better rates of success in exchange for less dramatic improvement. Currently I allow thieves to assign "points" to their various skills at 1st level and each time a new level is gained (similar to what was done in 2e, but still very different) and with this system it is very easy to change the rate of improvement without having to worry about uneven advancement.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Cias on Aug 8, 2005 21:42:38 GMT -5
As for "beefing up" thieves, long ago I posted two new abilities that I have introduced to the thief class in my games, detect doors and escape bonds. I find these abilities fit the thief archtype appropriately and are a great way to give something extra to thieves without increasing their combat ability (indeed, escape bonds is specifically for use after being defeated in combat!!). I've also considered just rolling some of the thief-acrobat abilities into the normal thief class.
|
|
|
Post by AxeMental on Aug 9, 2005 7:58:08 GMT -5
Foster: "Gandalf, it looks like you're following the same train of logic that led me to this conclusion (namely that the thief is a poorly-conceived "misfit" class that doesn't really belong in the game)."
I completely disagree with Foster here. Perhaps thats true in D&D but not so in AD&D which is (perhaps) more complex.
As for beefing up the thief, its not needed. Take a look at any game and see how it plays out. SKA is still alive in our B2 game at OSU and has had more fun then most (being the one to search rooms first, find traps, and be "clever"). I agree that the class doesn't really have a parallel in many books or movies (but niether does the AD&D cleric), but as a PC choice its extremely fun to play, challanging and balanced.
As for thieves loosing relavence at high level due to spells; thats not really true when you consider that spells such as detect traps don't really last that long and eat up slots. Much better to bring along some disposable thieves.
Also remember the thief often gets to the goodies first, so even though they face greater risk they often are the first to get "special help" via snached magic.
|
|
|
Post by order99 on Aug 13, 2005 21:37:17 GMT -5
I think Lord Cias hit the nail on the head. I used to assign"normal chance" scores for non-Thieves(I got tired of the other Classes/Players claiming"anyone can sneak around").A stranded warrior might have a STR% chance of getting out of a narrow ravine without a rope-to a Thief,this would qualify as Easy Wall,and he could darn near run up it with a full pack... Example: Rael the Illusionist(whispering)-"Just our luck-a Sentry at the gate,and his handbell within reach...any chances of sneaking past? DM-"You're in luck,it's foggy and the guard's a bit worse for drink...you have a 17 Dex and no armor,so a 27% or below gets it.The fighters will never make it with the metal armor though." Douggan the Thief-"I'm unarmored,with a 16 Dex,and a Hide in Shadows of 30%." DM "That's a 56% chance for you,then...but that won't help the rest of the party". Douggan-"Sure it will.(readies Sap)Be right back".
|
|
|
Post by Stonegiant on Aug 18, 2005 0:16:30 GMT -5
I would like to bring up just a few points on what was said in this thread-
1. As to the player giving detailed plans on how to pick the lock or search for the trap I think is saying that the player must have knowledge on the workings of locks and such which I maintain goes against what we play the game for which is to escape are reality for a moment and be something we are not. (If you are a teacher in real life do you really want to roleplay a teacher in the game?).
2. I myself am a Juvenile Detention Officer working for the State of Florida; Just as a modern day observation most of our incarcerated youths are incredibly skilled thieves by the time they reach 13-15 years of age. We have had them as young as seven in our facility and these are your lookouts and grab and runs. By 13-15 they are quite accomplished with some of them being trained by their parents and practising on other "pro's" (I am not going to get into the social commentary this brings up). You may say "If they are so good why are they caught?" One reason being modern science- fingerprints, micro-cameras, etc. Another reason is drugs: They get sloppy with their spoils buying drugs and alchohol and are caught by the cops in possession of stolen goods. Very few of the youths in our facility are there because they were caught in the act except for the very young ones who are cannon fodder anyways. I don't see this situation being any better for a youth growing up on the mean streets of Greyhawk or Watersdeep, in fact it is probably worse and harder thus requiring the thief to toughen up mentally and physically and to hone their skills pretty darn quickly to survive. The youngest person hung in England was a six year old for thievery (he stole two or three loaves of bread). I have to side with Gandalf on this one and say that the thief should have either across the board higher skills or maybe the compramise might be to allow the 1st level thief to specialize in a specific skill and recieve a +20 or 30% just with that skill (the Artful Dodger was a good pick pocket but probably couldn't pick a lock worth a darn!).
Anywho! That is my 2-cents worth take it as you like!
|
|
|
Post by BonesMcCoy on Aug 18, 2005 0:19:18 GMT -5
Informative post Stonegiant. Thanks.
|
|