How important Thievery skill is?

[keterys]

The in-combat thing will also depend on the DM and modules... delaying a trap (+5 bonus, makes the trap not do anything) is often far more effective than any disarm a trap skill challenge, and I've used Thievery to disable things that couldn't be attacked and turned off on a single check (for example, single squares or single blasts of a more extensive trap, to allow the party to escape an incoming boulder. I was very glad I had Thievery that encounter)

As a DM, I've allowed PCs to use Thievery to redirect trap effects and I very often allow checks as minor actions for in combat skill challenges where Thievery has seen good use (as has Diplomacy, Intimidate, etc). Minor actions open the in-combat skill challenge mechanic way up.

 

[Chainsaw]

They can always make untrained thievery checks to get through a lock or a trap. Worst comes to worst, the trap springs, they suffer some consequences, or maybe can't get into the vault, and have to find a key somewhere so their treasure acquisition is delayed a bit.

I certainly wasn't claiming the world should be tailored around the PC's. But allowing use of non-Thievery skills to get around such challenges or having them deal with consequences is often a feasible approach. They might think to themselves, darn we would have had more resources going into that last fight if we had someone with thievery. But there should never be a time when they see a locked door and say, pack up, this adventure is done, we're going home, we'll bring a rogue next time.

I think we're on the same page. Part of it depends a bit on player expectation.

If you've got the sandbox going, then the players ought to be aware that they will run into things (like locks) that are currently beyond their ability. Finding an NPC to address this could be an adventure in itself.

If you're doing more of an adventure path, then yeah, it's probably silly to throw something in their way that they can't handle.

 

[Saeviomagy]

Realistically, the only time you'll ever need to use thievery is when you want to do something and don't want anyone to know you've done it.

Doors and traps can be smashed and the guard with the important documents can be beaten unconscious, fooled, addicted or whatever.

So, if you see your campaign moving into serious espionage, you probably want to actually make sure you have thievery, and may actually want to spend some extra resources at being good at it.

Otherwise, don't worry. You may or may not end up with the skill, and either way your game will work.

 

[GeekKen]

I'll echo what most people have said here, it's largely dependant on the DM and what he throws at the players.

Is thievery necessary? I don't think so. I think a bad DM will punish a group if they don't have someone trained in the skill. Fortunately, with the aid other mechanic, you can also get a decent bonus just by having the entire party work together on disarming a trap.

Would I suggest someone in the party be trained in thievery? Absolutely. The broader the trained skills the group has, the better chances it has overcoming obstacles.

DMs should be diving into skill challenges. Thievery has a lot of applications out of combat. From lifting a key off a guards belt, lifting a ship manifest off a clerk's desk, to quietly opening a cell door to break out your buddy, thievery is a nifty skill. It's useful for someone in the party to be trained to tackle skill challenges and RP situations.

Consider that even with the level bonus of a party, the difficulty level for many traps and checks shifts with the party. It pretty much negates any bonus the group has due to their level, unless your DM is purposely throwing a low-level trap at them. So having that +5 bonus can be helpful. It will still pretty much make any moderate check have a 75% success rate (roughly).

I'll say that is one of the neat things about 4E, it's no longer 'dump points into this skill or you're screwed.' You can work around traps and such just fine without a thief, but it makes things a lot easier if you do have someone trained in the skill. Personally, I'd rather have the party function like a Swiss army knife than like a fine honed dagger (your campaign may vary).

 

[eriktheguy]

The party I DM for has no one trained in Thievery. I ask for thievery checks just frequently enough ... Usually they get around it with the Deva Shaman who gives himself a +5 or so using Speak with Spirits, and another d6 if needed.

I usually have multiple ways around a trap ... From a DM'ing perspective, players should never be stuck because they are lacking a skill.

And this is how you DM.

Just a note to all, if you have a trap in a combat that requires 5 thievery checks to disarm (from a module or something), that's way to high. Use 2, 3 max.