Voadam
Legend
With regard to the success probabilities of attacks, thief skills, the damage outputs of various classes at various levels, NWPs in 2e, and anything else you wish to discuss, do you find that pre-3e versions of D&D have a good balance between success and failure?
The OP mentioned 2e in discussing NWPs, the rest is general pre-3e discussion.I think there are two things to consider.
1. The OP specifies 2e, which is much different than every other TSR edition in regards to thief (and bard) skills. You could be pretty successful at lower levels as a thief if you dumped your points into a specialization.
Even in 2e the percentages all start at 15% or less except for climbing. You got 60 points to add (no more than 30 in a single one) at 1st level and 30 points (no more than 15 added to a single skill) to add per level later.
So as a level 1 ninja/scout who hides and moves silently or a dungeoneer who picks locks and finds traps you start with a 40/35% chance for success which can go up to 85/80% in these two areas by 4th level to become decent at two out of the eight thief skills. It will take another five levels (9th) to bring a second pair of skills (not counting climbing) up to that level.
This is by far the best thieving option for success at a thief skill in pre-3e D&D.
In B/X a thief has a 10/15/20% chance to find traps at levels 1-3. All characters in B/X have a 1 in 6 chance (so thieves' percentage surpasses that baseline at 3rd level) to search for traps in an area (dwarves get a 2 in 6 success chance).
They were hardly balanced in my opinion.2. Remember, thief skills weren't the % chance of success for regular tasks. EVERY class could attempt to hide, pick a lock, etc. Those skills were only used for exceptionally tough scenarios where non-thieves would have no success at attempting. So a lower score didn't mean they could ever find a trap or pick a lock, only that for exceptionally hard tasks, the thief still had a chance. It goes back to player skill vs character skill.
So in that context, yes. They were balanced.
They were originally designed along the magic-user class chassis but instead of using spell slots for knock and invisibility they had never-expended uses of specific thief skills that did not automatically succeed like spells did. They got backstab, leather armor, and a few more weapon options than an MU to compensate for having no offensive or defensive spell equivalent skill capabilities. This later expanded to a d6 versus an MU d4 HD as well in AD&D. In AD&D demihumans could generally be unlimited level as thieves while limited in others and could multiclass thief with other classes. Thieves generally required fewer xp than other classes to level. I do not feel the thief skills or other mechanical benefits make them balanced with other classes in various versions of pre-3e D&D.
It would be great if PRe-3e thief skills were super powers of ninja coolness or swashbuckling panache or trickster misdirection but they are generally very specific and restrictive and a bit mundane.
In 2e move silently is at 1/3 your movement, which is fairly slow for scouting and is specifically called out to be generally useless if in plain view of their enemies. Hiding in shadows if successful they remain hidden so long as they remain virtually motionless, so useful for hiding when a bad guy comes by, but arguably not when you are trying to sneak past someone or escape. Find traps only works on small traps and alarms and specifically does not work on ceiling deadfalls or crushing wall type traps.
Halflings and elves in 2e who are not in metal armor move so silently (automatically) that if they are not within 90 feet of noisier types they gain a bonus on surprise.
Dwarves have a 50% chance to detect stonework traps in 2e.