Why do we need thieves??

[GMMichael]

I would argue the need on the basis that, thieves do not have special powers, just skills.

So some thief designers are saying, "okay, we handed out the special powers to the classes. Ugh, you know what we forgot? To make the classes that don't have special powers!" I'm skeptical.

The need for thieves ( classes) is to fulfill the players' desire to emulate their favorite sneaky heroes. Or just put a label on it. E.g. I want to play Arya Stark, but I don't want to choose from "knight," " maester, " or "princeling" to do it. It's gotta say "thief" or "no one!"

 

[Micah Sweet]

You don't have to call it "thief" or "rogue" (to use the modern parlance), but in order to have a reasonable simulation of a world, fantasy or otherwise, IMO a skill-based character is very important, to complement the combat or magic/technology-based characters. If those things are all aspects of the setting, I feel they need to be included as options for characters, PC or NPC. Heck, I wish more games cared about diplomacy and commerce, and live the games that do. Anything that you can do in the setting should be a character option in the game IMO.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I do have to point out niche protection isn't a priority in a lot of games. You can argue whether that is a good idea or not, but its less and less considered necessary the farther you get away from the D&D sphere. Since the OP is as coy as they are about their system, its hard to tell how relevant it is.

I'm just glad they aren't specifically talking about D&D, or I wouldn't be allowed to participate.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Then, of course a system doesn't have to be based on classes. It can be based on individual abilities or "skills". In which case, you also do not a "warrior".

Well, you can have a "thief" or a "warrior" in those systems too; its just its then become a description of the particular skills each of them focuses on/is good at. They just aren't baked in with niche protection assumptions, as there can be overlap, even considerable overlap, in such systems.

 

[Reynard]

Mary-Sue was a parody of literal author self-inserts. I understand that the definition and usage has broadened, but when it's applied in a way which seems to cover any broadly-competent hero (not protagonist; hero), I think it loses utility.

But, again, here is doesn't "cover any broadly competent hero." We are talking about Howard writing the man he would want to be. That's self insert.
Also, completely off topic.

 

[pawsplay]

Conan isn't Howard. It seems pretty straightforward. He doesn't look like Howard or talk like Howard, he doesn't have Howard's name or a background or a history similar to Howard's. A lot of authors have written heroes whom the authors wishes they could be, or be like, but that's not the same as the character being themselves in a wish-fulfillment scenario (which is, e.g., a common issue in amateur LitRPG, right?)

In fact, Howard makes some comments about Conan's lack of education. In many ways Conan is an anti-Howard. He's like, what if someone was really smart but didn't have a civilized education? Conan is also really brash and violent, whereas Howard was shall we say bookish in real life; I think it's safe to say Conan was a kind of wish fulfillment, but Howard also recognized that going around fighting everyone all the time was probably not going to lead to a long life or happiness.

In regards to the topic, Conan is written by someone who observed that up until the early modern period, stealing from strangers was generally considered okay.

 

[Committed Hero]

Besides Conan and the Gray Mouser, there are other fictional thieves the rogue class emulates, like Hal's robber friends in Henry IV. And that burglar from the Shire.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Besides Conan and the Gray Mouser, there are other fictional thieves the rogue class emulates, like Hal's robber friends in Henry IV. And that burglar from the Shire.

Fiction and myths are FULL of sneaky/stealthy/skillful/deadly characters. It's just hard to name them because usually they are not the hero, or even an ally of the hero, and often aren't even given names.

 

[cbwjm]

If you want a thief character from the Conan that's similar to the classic DnD class, look no further than Taurus of Nemedia, Prince of Thieves. He wasn't a major character, rather he just helped the story along. He even had the bad saves of an ADnD thief, dying from a little spider bite, shame.

 

[Mannahnin]

Conan isn't Howard. It seems pretty straightforward. He doesn't look like Howard or talk like Howard, he doesn't have Howard's name or a background or a history similar to Howard's. A lot of authors have written heroes whom the authors wishes they could be, or be like, but that's not the same as the character being themselves in a wish-fulfillment scenario (which is, e.g., a common issue in amateur LitRPG, right?)

Mary-Sue was a parody of literal author self-inserts. I understand that the definition and usage has broadened, but when it's applied in a way which seems to cover any broadly-competent hero (not protagonist; hero), I think it loses utility.

But, again, here is doesn't "cover any broadly competent hero." We are talking about Howard writing the man he would want to be. That's self insert.
Also, completely off topic.

So by that light is not Aragorn Tolkien's Mary-Sue? He's certainly more perfect than Conan. Or maybe Beren, whose name Tolkien had put on his grave stone?

Sorry for the digression, but writing a man you wish you could be is not what a self-insert means.