D&D General Nostalgia : Thief Percentages

[Ruin Explorer]

Do you have names of these wargames? I only recall d6 resolution for that period. d100 feels weird for combat resolution for a wargame. d10 maybe.

[TMP] "Rules that use a d100 % for combat mechanics?" Topic

Here are some WW2 ones, some of which were around in the 1970s or earlier (too lazy to research them individually!).

I know there were plenty of others, particularly homebrew ones, as well. It's very easy to build stuff and put in modifiers with a percentile system - basically any idiot can do it, whereas using a d6 or the like requires you to be a bit more on the ball. An awful lot of earlier RPGs use percentile systems too, as a result (esp. those not directly aping D&D). I think it's a little unlikely an initially-unpopular class with a weird mechanic, which was in one specific supplement (which obviously most people wouldn't have) influenced all of them to go "By jove, I'll use percentile dice!". If anything I think it was a way of differentiating oneself from D&D, initially.

 

[Umbran]

Do you miss percentages? Do you see yourself using those with a post 2e edition of D&D?

I can't say that I do, or that I would.

There's an inconsistency in design approach between those skills and the rest of the skill system that does not seem to be well-justified.

 

[reelo]

One of the big problems was with skills that you'd expect other classes to be able to at least try. "Climb Walls", "Detect Noise", "Move Silently": how do you resolve those if a non-Thief (or non-Ranger) wants to do a bit of scouting? Mostly it ended up with ability checks, and then it turns out that your Fighter with a decent STR (or DEX, whichever ability you chose) is better at climbing walls than your supposedly skilled Thief.

Looking at this from a BX angle, the Thief's abilities, while initially having low scores, are almost supernatural.
Take traps: everyone has a base chance to find traps. Room traps, that is. Things like spiked pits, tripwires, etc. Itbis heavily implied that te thief's % chance applies ONLY to "treasure traps". Room traps and treasure traps are 2 different things.
Climbing: everyone can climb, but the thief's skill applies to SHEER surfaces.
Move silently: everyone can sneak, but a thief, if he makes his roll, is DEAD SILENT, no matter the ears of the guards.
Usually, in older editions, dice rolls are really a last resort. If the player is describing in detail what he intends to do, and it is plausibly feasible, there is no need to roll at all.

 

[Dormammu]

I'd be surprised if it really was the direct inspiration - percentile resolution was extremely common in wargames and the like of the era.

While I wouldn’t be so bold as to claim this is untrue, I find it highly unlikely. As much as D&D grew out of wargaming, my recollection is the vast majority of other RPGs took their inspiration directly from D&D.

there is very little trace of wargaming in most RPGs. That D&D serviced the interests of non-wargamers is a big part of its success.

 

[Monayuris]

Looking at this from a BX angle, the Thief's abilities, while initially having low scores, are almost supernatural.
Take traps: everyone has a base chance to find traps. Room traps, that is. Things like spiked pits, tripwires, etc. Itbis heavily implied that te thief's % chance applies ONLY to "treasure traps". Room traps and treasure traps are 2 different things.
Climbing: everyone can climb, but the thief's skill applies to SHEER surfaces.
Move silently: everyone can sneak, but a thief, if he makes his roll, is DEAD SILENT, no matter the ears of the guards.
Usually, in older editions, dice rolls are really a last resort. If the player is describing in detail what he intends to do, and it is plausibly feasible, there is no need to roll at all.

Agree.

Criticism About thief skills in old school D&D usually comes from modern paradigms. Old school style approaches are much different. Modern D&D looks at skills as the primary form of interaction in the game, which is why significant effort is put into making the game rules allow for success. The game has been developed to allow for rolling the die to determine success or failure.

Old school thief skills come from a different approach. Normally there were no rules or skills for doing many of the thief skills. Players and DM's had to come up with their own approach to these actions. It was player description and action that determined success or failure. I don't know the impetus for introducing thief skills into the game, but I've always took them as something more aligned with magic user spells. Thief skills are low in precent chance to succeed but that is because they are more than mundane. It has already been assumed in the course of D&D that any character can hide, sneak, climb and so on. These are given. The thief skills are intended to be beyond what any normal character can do.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

While I wouldn’t be so bold as to claim this is untrue, I find it highly unlikely. As much as D&D grew out of wargaming, my recollection is the vast majority of other RPGs took their inspiration directly from D&D.

there is very little trace of wargaming in most RPGs. That D&D serviced the interests of non-wargamers is a big part of its success.

I don't think you understand the environment RPGs came from, and I don't think you're suffiently familiar with early RPGs.

Talking stuff like there being "little trace" of wargaming in "most RPGs" is true now, in 2020. It was true even in 1990, albeit notably less true. It was not, however, as true in 1980, or earlier. Most people designing RPGs in that, perhaps all, had some kind of wargaming background.

The idea that a specific, slightly unpopular class, in a specific non-main rulebook (Greyhawk, which was nowhere near as widespread as the actual OD&D rules), "directly inspired" (your exact words) all early percentile-based RPGs, when percentile mechanics were relatively common in wargames, especially homebrew ones, of that era, is not, to my mind, a plausible contention and you've offered no argument in support of your position. It seems like one of those things people assume because it's easier than thinking about the actual environment. It seems like if it had been directly inspired, you'd have a quote from one of the designers - people were not shy about admitting influences back then.

The first RPG that used percentile mechanics apart from the Thief, that I'm aware of (there may well be others, I haven't got PDFs on hand to check), is Lou Zocchi's Superhero 2044 (1977). It uses them in a very distinct fashion from the Thief class, and obviously, as Zocchi manufactured dice, he was familiar with percentile and other mechanics, and IIRC, had used them in wargames before. Given that a number of RPGs chose the mechanic around same time, I'd suggest that the ease of use of the mechanic, together with early designers talking to each other was probably the origin.

Also, was the Thief even the first time a percentile mechanic appeared in OD&D? I haven't got a copy to hand to check.

 

[Voadam]

Agree.

Criticism About thief skills in old school D&D usually comes from modern paradigms. Old school style approaches are much different. Modern D&D looks at skills as the primary form of interaction in the game, which is why significant effort is put into making the game rules allow for success. The game has been developed to allow for rolling the die to determine success or failure.

Old school thief skills come from a different approach. Normally there were no rules or skills for doing many of the thief skills. Players and DM's had to come up with their own approach to these actions. It was player description and action that determined success or failure. I don't know the impetus for introducing thief skills into the game, but I've always took them as something more aligned with magic user spells. Thief skills are low in precent chance to succeed but that is because they are more than mundane. It has already been assumed in the course of D&D that any character can hide, sneak, climb and so on. These are given. The thief skills are intended to be beyond what any normal character can do.

This still leaves you with the problem (that has been there since the beginning) that thieves are low HD characters with little armor who are more likely than not to fail when using their abilities, leaving them effectively as Magic-Users with no spells and leather armor.

Even for magic user spells that have saves, low levels is when they are most likely to be successful. In general you expect the 1st level MU to successfully sleep or charm or magic missile a goblin, you expect a 1st level thief to fail when trying to hide in shadows or move silently or climb a sheer wall to avoid a goblin.

The low percentage abilities are problematic and lead to a lot of failure, the only class ability a PC can really rely upon is their situational backstab ability.

There is a lot of love for the Gray Mouser archetype that the thief class is based on, but the execution leaves a lot to be desired.

 

[atanakar]

Also, was the Thief even the first time a percentile mechanic appeared in OD&D? I haven't got a copy to hand to check.

There are three (3) main classes of characters: Fighting-Men, Magic-Users, Clerics. The thief, with percentages, appeared in 1975 in the Book IV, Greyhawk Supplement.

 

[Minigiant]

Old school thief skills come from a different approach. Normally there were no rules or skills for doing many of the thief skills. Players and DM's had to come up with their own approach to these actions. It was player description and action that determined success or failure. I don't know the impetus for introducing thief skills into the game, but I've always took them as something more aligned with magic user spells. Thief skills are low in precent chance to succeed but that is because they are more than mundane. It has already been assumed in the course of D&D that any character can hide, sneak, climb and so on. These are given. The thief skills are intended to be beyond what any normal character can do.

This still leaves you with the problem (that has been there since the beginning) that thieves are low HD characters with little armor who are more likely than not to fail when using their abilities, leaving them effectively as Magic-Users with no spells and leather armor.

Even for magic user spells that have saves, low levels is when they are most likely to be successful. In general you expect the 1st level MU to successfully sleep or charm or magic missile a goblin, you expect a 1st level thief to fail when trying to hide in shadows or move silently or climb a sheer wall to avoid a goblin.

I think its the Mundane Tier issues all over again.

The percentage thief skills well supposed to be "super heroic" or paragon tier actions.
But
Many DMs and players didn't want want nonmagical "super heroic" actions. They instead downgraded it to the system for apprentice and heroic tier action.

This mindset spread and thief skills looked weak. As years past, the power of skills increased and skill monkey could spec out superheroic actions. This eventually evolved to day where nonmagical superhero/paragon actions are just always on. There is no pass/fail for Second Story Work or Land's Strde. You just had to reach a high enough level to get it.

 

[jgsugden]

If you want this feel in 5E, just break up expertise. Instead of giving them expertise in 2 skills at levels 1 and 6, give them expertise or proficiency in a subset of skill uses and do so once per level. They could choose from a list like the below:

1.) Athletics (strength) when used to climb.
2.) Athletics (strength) when used to jump.
3.) Athletics (strength) when used to swim.
4.) Sleight of Hand (dexterity) when used to pick pockets.
5.) Sleight of Hand (dexterity) when used to hide objects.
6.) Stealth (dexterity) when used to move silently.
7.) Stealth (dexterity) when used to visually hide yourself.
8.) Perception (wisdom) when used to hear something.
9.) Perception (wisdom) when used to see something.
10.) Thieves tools (dexterity) when used to pick locks.
11.) Thieves tools (dexterity) when used to disable a trap.
12.) Deception (charisma) when used to tell a lengthy lie.
13.) Deception (charisma) when used to pretend to be someone else.

You could also add some options for replacements/augmentations rather than proficiency/expertise:

1.) Use dexterity instead of strength for athletics checks.
2.) Use intelligence, instead of wisdom, for perception checks.
3.) Use intelligence, instead of charisma, for persuasion checks.
4.) Use any set of tools (or other materials approved by the DM) to make thieves tools (dexterity) checks.
5.) You can move an additional 5 feet when using stealth and moving without incurring a penalty to your stealth role. This adjusts the distance you can move without penalty to your skill roll, not your movement speed.

You'll get that incremental feel back. You'll also see the rogue continue to develop for a longer period. In the end, they'll end up with more in the way of skills than they would under the normal rules, but it will take longer. However, as they can front load the most useful abilities, they will not suffer too much early on relative to the baseline rules.