D&D 5E Thievery in 5e - still relevant?

[Larnievc]

This is almost certainly an unpopular answer but a lot of these problems, to me, can be rephrased as "what if your DM isn't very good at DMing?" and the answer to that question is either 1.) sucks to suck/too bad for you or 2.) find a different DM.

This makes perfect sense to me. I remember back in the day people discussing how rubbish stealth was in D&D.

To this day I don’t why it was so difficult for people to use. Creeping up on a guy? Stealth check. Pass? You did what you wanted. Failed? They detect you.

I’ve yet to find and action that couldn’t be resolved with me (DM) asking for a dice roll to resolve.

 

[jmartkdr2]

This makes perfect sense to me. I remember back in the day people discussing how rubbish stealth was in D&D.

To this day I don’t why it was so difficult for people to use. Creeping up on a guy? Stealth check. Pass? You did what you wanted. Failed? They detect you.

I’ve yet to find and action that couldn’t be resolved with me (DM) asking for a dice roll to resolve.

Usually it’s because dms often start with “should I allow stealth to work in this situation?” and either the dm wants more guidance there or they say “no” often enough that players feel bad for trying to be a stealthy character.

 

[James Gasik]

Usually it’s because dms often start with “should I allow stealth to work in this situation?” and either the dm wants more guidance there or they say “no” often enough that players feel bad for trying to be a stealthy character.

Yeah, if the DM is fine with you stealthing, you make a roll, no problem. If they're not, they suddenly become very strict on the exact wording of the rules, if you have cover/concealment, how fast you can go, how far away your allies need to be...and expect to have to deal with the combined perception scores of large groups of enemies until someone inevitably detects you and you have to flee for your life.

A scenario I've seen more than once is "the bandit camp". Character tries to reconnoiter an area. Queue 50 perception checks as you suddenly have to elude the eyes of everyone present because surely there's no way anyone would be distracted or not be on their guard at all times, lol.

Trying to stealth in a dungeon? All your foes have the ability to see in the dark or otherwise sense your presence due to scent, echolocation, tremorsense, etc.. Traps designed to entrap lone scouts or raise the alarm will be everywhere.

A manor house? Nightingale floors, guard dogs, ninja maids...

You get the idea.

 

[pemerton]

Long enough for the party to do whatever shenanigans they are up to.

<snip>

But when a PC tries to trick a guard into going out of the room to confirm the orders that the party belong in the jail you don’t need to know how many minutes the guard is away from his post. If the check succeeds the guard is gone for long enough for whatever shenanigans they are planning to do to escape.

Like dig a tunnel? Cast a spell that requires 10 minutes of chanting? Or pass a note through the bars?

I never said DM interpretation occurs in combat. Combat in D&D is very structured. Because it needs to be.

I know that combat in D&D is very structured. It doesn't "need" to be, though - there are excellent RPGs without D&D's style of structured, wargame-y combat (eg Prince Valiant, Apocalypse World). Conversely, it is possible to put more structure around distracting guards than D&D does.

 

[ad_hoc]

Yeah, if the DM is fine with you stealthing, you make a roll, no problem. If they're not, they suddenly become very strict on the exact wording of the rules, if you have cover/concealment, how fast you can go, how far away your allies need to be...and expect to have to deal with the combined perception scores of large groups of enemies until someone inevitably detects you and you have to flee for your life.

A scenario I've seen more than once is "the bandit camp". Character tries to reconnoiter an area. Queue 50 perception checks as you suddenly have to elude the eyes of everyone present because surely there's no way anyone would be distracted or not be on their guard at all times, lol.

Trying to stealth in a dungeon? All your foes have the ability to see in the dark or otherwise sense your presence due to scent, echolocation, tremorsense, etc.. Traps designed to entrap lone scouts or raise the alarm will be everywhere.

A manor house? Nightingale floors, guard dogs, ninja maids...

You get the idea.

Just make 1 stealth check and compare to the passive perception of the bandits.

Any DM that wants to make the game miserable for everyone can do so regardless of the game rules.

That doesn't mean there are actual problems though with the game.

 

[bloodtide]

Then explain me, whose playstyle I am certain you would agree you hate, constantly talks about how talks about how haughty and preening my bard is; how she's managed to con a group of outsiders AND the party into thinking they're ambassadors to that world under the auspices of the local bardic college, or the outsiders she's friends with and plans outings to convince them they're VIPs while quietly disposing of all the letters I'm getting from the college to cease and desist.

I'm not sure what to explain from your odd playstyle example. Are you saying your bard character Twice did some non-combat bardic stuff, over a long period of time...maybe a year? Or more? So what did your bard do the rest of the time? Combat?

I'm a filthy Modern game who is soft and doesn't like boring things, but I'm somehow not an evil 'optimizer' who only talks mechanics and dice.

What?

Might be because Modern gaming is a much bigger tent than we're given credit for and there's nothing wrong with any of it and there's no justification to set 'Kyle' up as an object of ridicule if that's how he has fun.

If you skipped over the part: Kyle is one of my regular players. So there was no 'ridicule'.

Kyle isn't to be ridiculed. The poor guy's just using what the game gave him to use when playing a Rogue, hard to blame him for that.

It's what the game gave him that might be worthy of ridicule, from the perspective of an old-school Thief type.

Well, Kyle does think "a rogue" is a front line melee striker. He sees "rogue" as a "free spirit" in the most "Disney" sort of way. He is fine with mass slaughter, but thinks "stealing" is bad. Even if in a game with more "theivery" abilities for his character, he simply would not use them....after all, he does not do so in 5E.

And he has the huge shadow of Modern Sensibilities. His idea of robbing a bank is to attack the bank, slaughter all there and then loot. He would not even consider doing anything that was not combat. And he is fine stealing from big banks or 'evil' companies, but has a problem with stealing from "people".

I doubt few modern gamers would like your use a "Thief Class" in 5E: both DMs and Players. They would just skip it.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I'm not sure what to explain from your odd playstyle example. Are you saying your bard character Twice did some non-combat bardic stuff, over a long period of time...maybe a year? Or more? So what did your bard do the rest of the time? Combat?

Oh my god, can you stop with the shots?

 

[pemerton]

Oh my god, can you stop with the shots?

Are you asking the other poster to snipe less, or to sober up? Maybe both?

 

[bloodtide]

Oh my god, can you stop with the shots?

Did you mean questions?

 

[Tony Vargas]

Are you asking the other poster to snipe less, or to sober up? Maybe both?

"Four more shots, please!"