What is it about rogues?

[Janx]

I think the "rouge" stereotype is what's causing the problem.

People think it means "thief", which go figure, that's what the class used to be called.

In turn, it's easy to rationalize stealing from the party and being a nuisance as being in character.

The real problem is that playing a thief is better done in a solo campaign. A noisy party does little to help a thief do his job (except when the job goes wrong). The result would be game-play akin to watching the Decker do a run on the Matrix in ShadowRun.

Whereas, the real job a party needs a rogue for is to listen for trouble, spot and disarm traps, pick locks, and be the unexpected surprise in combat.

To solve it outside the game, you need to get the players to understand that acting against each other is "not good fun". And that trying to jockey for attention (by breaking off the party) will not be rewarded.

To solve in game, requires breaking the meta-game rule of "everybody gets to join the party". The affected PCs need to toss the thief into a jail cell or a deep hole. Additionally, the GM needs to not switch the focus to the solo rogue when he goes off by himself looking for trouble. make nothing useful happen, and the rogue will stop doing it.

This hits on the crux of the problem. Every group has a hidden social rule that every player gets to join the party. It's a trust extended to the PC, on behalf of the player so the game can move forward. In real life, somebody would have said, "that guy looks too shifty, I'm not working with him", and the party would have moved on leaving the rogue at the bar. The problem players abuse this trust, thinking it is in character to "betray the party" when in reality, the party never would have trusted him had this implied rule not been in effect.

 

[Daniel D. Fox]

This is a player issue, not a class issue.

 

[Mouseferatu]

A thief who doesn't steal isn't a thief.

But a thief who steals from his allies is a corpse.

Even if one is playing a rogue as a thief, that doesn't mean they have to steal constantly or indiscriminately.

This is a player issue, not a class issue.

Bingo. I've seen rogues played like the OP's talking about. I've also seen them played as thorough team players. It's all in the player, not the class.

 

[gizmo33]

I think the "rouge" stereotype is what's causing the problem.

People think it means "thief", which go figure, that's what the class used to be called.

Yea, it would be like people thinking that a "serial-killer" character class would have something to do with being a pscyhopathic murder. Such a stereotype. Sheesh - it's like people are reading the dictionary or something. My dwarven serial-killer is just an axe specialist that likes wearing a hockey mask. I'm not sure what the paladin's problem is.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

I get the first and third problems, but how is scouting ahead a bad thing?

"I see the enemies set up an ambush."
"OH GOD WILL YOU STOP DOING THIS? GEEZ. IT'S SO ANNOYING."

Sorry, that's the first thing that popped into my head

 

[Jeff Wilder]

As far as stealing from the party goes, it's interesting that things changed remarkably, somehow, between when I used to play 1E and 2E (I quit sometime around 1991) and started up again with 3E in 2000.

Back in the day, the rogue who didn't try to get one over on the group was the rarity. It was just accepted ... the rogue (er, thief) is going to try to steal the good loot.

But in our 3E games -- and I started 3E with strangers, 2400 miles from my 1E/2E games -- it just never happened. The rogue was as trustworthy (or not) as anyone else in the group. It was like an unwritten rule that changed between editions. Our 3E games are much more about teamwork than the older games I was in.

On the other hand, I don't see what the problem is with the rogue scouting ahead. That's what stealth is for, isn't it?

 

[Asmor]

I had this one player who whenever I'd tell the party to set up, he'd always have his character way outside the area where I told them to set up. I don't know why that always bothered me, it just did. Part of it was that it just seemed odd to me that this guy would be traveling for miles and miles and miles with the party yet never once actually be with the party.

 

[Oni]

If the thief wasn't trying to skim a little on the side I'd be a little surprised and maybe a tad disappointed. The one rogue I played for any length of time I certianly pocketed a little extra on the side. Part of the joy of playing a thief is being a coniving little bastard (within moderation of course you don't want to make the game less fun for the other players, and one problem is some people tend to take things too far.)

The second problem I think stems from how the class used to played more than anything. If you were with the group and caught out in the open you pretty much lost access to the abilities that allowed you to contribute. Playing a thief and getting caught with your pants down so to speak was considerably more detrimental to you than any other class. Again I think you have an issue with some people going too far in their precautions.

I find the last complaint a bit silly if you'll pardon me for saying so. Of course rogues/thieves are going to be the ones stealing all the time. If you're interested in larceny you don't pick a cleric as your class. That's like saying why do fighters always want to bash things over the head with their swords, it's because thats what they're built to do. You don't play a rogue not to steal stuff. Now of course it's just like real life, a little success in theft tempts you to keep upping the ante for the big score and it eventually comes back and bites you on the behind and consequently maybe your group as well. It's not unlike the fighter who charges into dangerous situations all the time, you get hooked on the high of success.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

it just seemed odd to me that this guy would be traveling for miles and miles and miles with the party yet never once actually be with the party.

That's not a good assumption to make, though. Would you also assume that he never had to relieve himself, if he didn't explicitly tell you when in-game?

If the "scouting rogue" bothers DMs, I'd suggest keeping the logistics in mind. Don't allow the player to engage in "while we walk" discussions with the other players, for instance. (Unless they find a way around the restriction, of course.)

 

[ProfessorCirno]

I think one of the issues with the whole "skimming on the side" and why it's not as much done these days is because money is connected completely to the christmas tree magic item effect. Skimming on the side means you're going to be "better" then the others, so they get irritated.

One thing I do is skim on the side, but keep it as a sort of side reserve that I don't tap into. To give an example, Haley from OotS certainly skimmed/skims/will skim on the side, but she doesn't use it on magic items, but instead is saving up for Plot Reasons. Likewise, my kobold rogue stole everything that was shiny and not bolted down, and would've had much more gold then anyone else in the party if I didn't save it to for Future Horde purposes.