D&D 2E 2e Fighter vs Fighter/Thief vs Thief Play Balance

[dmhelp]

When we played 2e we always wanted a thief, but never wanted a pure thief. Fighters can specialize if single classed. Wizards can specialize if single classed. A cleric or druid at least gets faster access to high level spells.

Is a single classed thief the option you just pretend doesn't exist? Or is it for someone that specifically wants a weaker character?

If you think fighter vs fighter/thief vs thief isn't balanced then how would you fix it in 2e rules?

 

[James Gasik]

This is really dependent on 3 factors. The first is, how much Dexterity do you have?

You might think this is an odd question, but an 18 Dexterity gives you the equivalent of 50 more Thieving ability points, where a 16 gets you 5.

Then, the next question is how badly do you think you're going to need high numbers at low levels. Is your DM likely to immediately throw out death traps?

The third is if Kits are on the table.*

Generally speaking, if you need high thieving abilities fast, the best thing you can do is be an Elf or Halfling and find a useful Kit. It is worth noting that a Dwarven Locksmith does get very high Open Locks and Find/Remove Traps despite being less optimal as a Rogue. Then you can rely on fast xp progression to earn you more points to develop your abilities.

If, however, you are going to be asked to do more than be just the "Trap Guy" and/or you have a high Dexterity, then multiclassing is not a bad way to go. However, I would say that Fighter/Thief is only a good choice if you're going to use a Bow.

As your abilities are still penalized by armor heavier than leather, your AC and hit points are going to be woeful compared to a Fighter (and even a Ranger is tougher than you). Since most DM's require Backstab to be melee (no sniping), you're basically firing 2 arrows a turn and offering utility outside of combat.

*It's worth noting there are a few multiclassed kits as well.

As a straight Thief, however, you don't provide a lot of utility in combat. You can also use a shortbow, but you can't get exceptional Strength to use a composite short bow, and your Thac0 progression is outsripped by the Fighter, even with your rapid level progression.

So, again, unless you're going into a massive dungeon right off the bat, you may want to consider Mage/Thief, or even Cleric/Thief (though this requires the less optimal Gnome race). Cleric/Thief is especially nice because most parties will love having an extra Cure Light Wounds around and you can still use a Sling. Plus, Clerics have better low level advancement than Mages.

This can go especially well if your DM allows Specialty Priests to be multiclassed, or you have access to some of the better Specialty Priesthoods (some, like Coyote, give you Thieving Abilities as well, making them an amazing alternative to a Thief!).

 

[cavetroll]

When we played 2e we always wanted a thief, but never wanted a pure thief. Fighters can specialize if single classed. Wizards can specialize if single classed. A cleric or druid at least gets faster access to high level spells.

Is a single classed thief the option you just pretend doesn't exist? Or is it for someone that specifically wants a weaker character?

If you think fighter vs fighter/thief vs thief isn't balanced then how would you fix it in 2e rules?

We never fixed it with rules, we fixed balance by giving the party magic items that addressed specific characters weaknesses. Pure thieves gained levels quicker, give them items to help them stealthier and survive, issue resolved.

 

[James Gasik]

Wow, I must have been tired when I posted. You wanted to know if the Thief was balanced, and I'm giving you a Thief guide, lol. Let me try and rectify that.

So yeah, the single classed Thief does go up levels quickly, but with the second-worst Hit Die and Thac0 progression, as well as a fairly lackluster saving throw progression (I mean look at that Breath Weapon save- sure Thieves can get their Defensive Adjustment from Dexterity added to that, but so can everyone else, and this is something you'd expect Thieves to be good at!).

The issue becomes what is a Thief supposed to be doing inside of combat- his utility outside of combat will eventually become pretty good, but at low levels, few, if any, of his Thieving Abilities are especially reliable.

He is too fragile for melee combat, and Backstab is very tricky to pull off- either he goes in alone and tries to assassinate a target, then has to survive for his friends to back him up, or, as cavetroll suggests, he finds a Ring of Invisibility at a low level (even Tolkien balanced his game this way!).

As a ranged attacker he is also lackluster, and at 10th level he gains the ability to use scrolls...more or less. In his "Gord the Rogue" novels, Gary allowed his main character, a Human Thief, to gain "weapon training" in the long sword, for a +1 to hit and damage, which brought his combat ability roughly in line with a Cleric; I remember seeing a Kit for Thieves, I think from Al-Qadim, that offered a Rogue Weapon Specialization. I think allowing that to Thieves as a baseline might not be bad; just not at 1st level. Allow it when they get their next weapon proficiency slot (I believe at 4th level). +1 to hit, +2 to damage, and the increased attack rate might be decent for a Rogue.

But this still presents the issue of survival- the Thief's hit points might not be as bad, as he's nearly level 3 when a Fighter is level 2, but eventually he will fall behind. The larger issue is his AC, as while he can wear heavier armor, the penalties to his thieving abilities are too restrictive, and the bonuses for wearing no armor at all are pretty tempting! The noise generated by +1 more AC is sufficient to reduce Move Silently by 20%, which I find ridiculous (especially in light of the Ranger). In light of this, I would remove the penalties to Thieving Abilities for Studded Leather Armor (and reduce the penalties for Elven chain by 5% across the board), and give Thieves the ability to use at least a buckler or small shield.

 

[cavetroll]

I was thinking more like an elven cloak. In 2e the DM was pretty generous in letting the thief head to the corners of the room, sneak behind someone, and backstab them, usually the enemy caster, but yeah you might have to survive a bit or run if your backup is not on the way.

 

[James Gasik]

The only problem with that, Cavetroll, is by giving a Thief character a magic item that grants a 95-99% chance to Hide in Shadows (note that Thieves themselves cannot claim a 96% chance or higher to Hide, no matter how many points they put into the ability), you are just saying "scratch Hide in Shadows off your sheet, and I hope you didn't waste discretionary points on it".

 

[cavetroll]

The only problem with that, Cavetroll, is by giving a Thief character a magic item that grants a 95-99% chance to Hide in Shadows (note that Thieves themselves cannot claim a 96% chance or higher to Hide, no matter how many points they put into the ability), you are just saying "scratch Hide in Shadows off your sheet, and I hope you didn't waste discretionary points on it".

Its just example, maybe thats something I would have given a different class, its been too long. The point is look at the campaign, the other characters and provide a magic item that is obvious for a particular person (e.g. halfling sized shoes for the thief) and make sure the item benefits them and shores up their weaknesses so that each character feels useful.

 

[James Gasik]

I have no problems with the approach overall, magic items are a great source of balance in the game, and people who refuse to see that, deny players the ability to get things they want/need, or even go so far as to try and remove them outright, need to learn how to adjust their expectations. But at low levels, when the class can't even function without being given potent magic items, it feels like the D&D cartoon- where it's not about the character's abilities, but the minor artifacts they tote around, lol. Basically, if a 1st level Thief can't do anything, because he has a less than 50% chance to succeed, maybe there is something that should be done at a class level before saying "oh don't worry, pal, you kill a couple orcs, and wow, would you look at that, it's leather armor +2!".

But that's just how I feel, YMMV.

 

[dmhelp]

So what if you had a fighter/thief and a thief in the same party? You can’t really direct who gets which magic item….

 

[cavetroll]

Basically, if a 1st level Thief can't do anything, because he has a less than 50% chance to succeed, maybe there is something that should be done at a class level before saying "oh don't worry, pal, you kill a couple orcs, and wow, would you look at that, it's leather armor +2!".

Yeah but when we played 2e there was no need to give a thief anything at low levels, they were just cool, thats why people picked them, not because of their combat ability, that was up to the fighters to front line. The thief was sneaking around backstabbing people or maybe looking for treasure that he can pocket for himself. The whole "every class needs to be balance in combat" didn't exist, the fight was a team responsibility.