D&D 2E 2E Thief Rewrite

[PHATsakk43]

So I made the opposite inference. Listen is the only thief skill with with the same mechanic and same starting chance as everyone else so the ones that do not have that power explicitly as a thing that anyone can try seem to be intentional in not doing so. So I inferred things like picking locks and picking pockets are not things that can really be done by the untrained/unpracticed. I IRL certainly would not expect to successfully pick a lock having had no experience even trying to do so.

I suppose that is actually RAW really. The Detect Noise is specifically called out in the 2E DMG and nothing else. I simply made the inference since the values were the same as for a base thief.

I made an argument to expand that to Hiding & Moving Silently on r/adnd a year or so ago, but I can see your point, especially regarding locks and traps. Even though both would be effectively a Hail Mary level attempt with only base skills, and likely impossible without tools anyway.

 

[soviet]

My recollection from Old Geezer's posts on rpgnet many years ago was that the thief % abilities were intended to be basically ninja stunts above and beyond what regular people could do.

So, anyone can hide if there's something to hide behind. No roll required. But a thief has a chance to stay hidden without an obstacle, just 'using the shadows'.

Similarly, anyone can sneak around to avoid guards. But a thief can move silently enough that there is no chance to hear them.

Anyone can climb a rough stone wall, or use a rope. But a thief can climb a sheer surface without a rope.

 

[PHATsakk43]

My recollection from Old Geezer's posts on rpgnet many years ago was that the thief % abilities were intended to be basically ninja stunts above and beyond what regular people could do.

So, anyone can hide if there's something to hide behind. No roll required. But a thief has a chance to stay hidden without an obstacle, just 'using the shadows'.

Similarly, anyone can sneak around to avoid guards. But a thief can move silently enough that there is no chance to hear them.

Anyone can climb a rough stone wall, or use a rope. But a thief can climb a sheer surface without a rope.

I suppose that is accurate. My only concern is how to adjudicate the situation when it’s not clear that it’s either an automatic success or obvious failure.

To your point about thief abilities being akin to “ninja skills” is apt. Especially when you take that and compare it with say, the NWP system in 2E. Thief skills, one can suppose are innate, extraordinary talents. They can be improved upon, but the aptitude is specific to those who dedicate themselves to their craft. NWPs are more like technical or vocational abilities. With proper equipment and training, most people can learn to climb. Not everyone however can free climb.

 

[soviet]

I suppose that is accurate. My only concern is how to adjudicate the situation when it’s not clear that it’s either an automatic success or obvious failure.

To your point about thief abilities being akin to “ninja skills” is apt. Especially when you take that and compare it with say, the NWP system in 2E. Thief skills, one can suppose are innate, extraordinary talents. They can be improved upon, but the aptitude is specific to those who dedicate themselves to their craft. NWPs are more like technical or vocational abilities. With proper equipment and training, most people can learn to climb. Not everyone however can free climb.

I think for sure if the ninja special skills thing was the intent, it was not communicated well and got lost in translation as the game took off. Almost everyone understood thief skills to be fairly mundane.

 

[PHATsakk43]

I guess the issue is, the RAW weren’t particularly clear either.

Given the “extraordinary” nature you and I are attributing to the skills, it seems to conflict with stuff like how locks are portrayed, with mundane locks requiring the base ability of the thief. This implies that the skills are more mundane than it seems it should be.

That said, I think there is also a risk that modifying the class to make it more “thiefy” at low levels risks creating an exponential thief the way many view wizards. Except that the base of the curve starts far higher on the power axis and then ramps exponentially.

One thing that probably needs to be discussed is that the thief is actually a deceptively difficult class to build and play. 2E made the thief better in how points are allocated, but it also creates a situation where if a player tries to balance the skills, they end up with little to no chance to accomplish anything until 5-6th level.

If they instead take advantage and really focus their skill tree, they can have +75% to any two skills by 4th (30 points at 1st split into two skills, and 15 each at the following levels) but completely base on the remainder.

The main risk with this approach is the player may allocate skills points towards abilities that aren’t necessarily in demand by the game.

It’s also important to remember that a 4th level thief with 5,000xp has a solid extra level compared to the other groups, which don’t reach 4th level without significantly more xp. In a 5,000xp party, the thief has the second best THAC0 at 19. Priests and Wizards are still at THAC0 20. Only Warriors have higher, and only by 1, at 18. The thief also has 4d6 hp, an average of 12hp, with Priests 3d8, Warriors 3d10, and Wizards 3d4, which puts our thief surprisingly close to the Priest with an average 15hp.