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

[Clint_L]

This is anecdotal and is probably a fluke, but my players haven't been interested in playing rogue-like characters in any system for like 5-6 years - it's like the sneaky, backstabby chars have gone out of style. Even if I try to create situations in my campaigns where a streetwise stealthy dude obviously would have been useful - trying to rub in that it is a choice at character creation - they don't bite.

According to the most recent numbers WotC has provided, rogues are the second most popular class in 5e, after fighters.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Fighter & Rogue cover more familiar (high/S&S) fantasy heroes outside of Harry Potter and the like. They're more relatable. Much like humans (and half-humans, & elves, who are prettymuch idealized long-lived/harmony-with-nature humans) are the more popular races.
Familiar, relatable, readily understood, with examples from genre/pop-culture that feel 'cool'/capable, makes a choice popular.

 

[Raiztt]

...even Conan was a thief professionally for much of his life...

Was he a 'thief' in the pick pocket sense, or was he a burglar/smash-and-grab/mugging kind of guy?

 

[pemerton]

Because fun in every single moment of play isn't realistic, and because doing unfun things can lead to more fun things in the future?

Provided we allow for the fact that fun, in the context of a complex game like a RPG, is a pretty nuanced thing, then fun in every moment of the play of a game seems pretty realistic to me. There are other games that achieve this; why shouldn't a RPG aspire to it?

 

[Micah Sweet]

Provided we allow for the fact that fun, in the context of a complex game like a RPG, is a pretty nuanced thing, then fun in every moment of the play of a game seems pretty realistic to me. There are other games that achieve this; why shouldn't a RPG aspire to it?

Give me an example of a game that's fun in every moment of play.

In any case, as you say fun is nuanced. Playing the game in a full court press "get to the action" way, with no regard for the setting verisimilitude, would be decidedly unfun from my point of view. I really dislike that kind of advice, found in modern versions of D&D.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Verisimilitude is also a nuanced thing, and there's a wide range of it possible in the context of TT. Same with immersion. That range does not include anything close to perfection, since you are, at all times, gamers seated around a table, not your characters struggling in a fantasy world.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Verisimilitude is also a nuanced thing, and there's a wide range of it possible in the context of TT. Same with immersion. That range does not include anything close to perfection, since you are, at all times, gamers seated around a table, not your characters struggling in a fantasy world.

My preference is obviously to keep as much "characters struggling in a fantasy world" as is practical.

 

[pemerton]

Give me an example of a game that's fun in every moment of play.

I find backgammon fun to play more-or-less at every moment. Likewise the Reiner Knizia game Battle Line.

Off the top of my head I can't think of a game that I play regularly that I find to be not enjoyable in meaningful periods - maybe ship vs hip combat in Classic Traveller can have that problem? But that's probably why my Classic Traveller game doesn't feature ship vs ship combat, since I worked out that it's not really fun to play!

Playing the game in a full court press "get to the action" way, with no regard for the setting verisimilitude, would be decidedly unfun from my point of view. I really dislike that kind of advice, found in modern versions of D&D.

My preference is obviously to keep as much "characters struggling in a fantasy world" as is practical.

Well, as I've often posted, I'll put the verisimilitude of the settings in my RPGing up against what others seem to be doing any day of the week. And also the degree of "characters struggling in a fantasy world", as far as my Torchbearer game is concerned.

The idea that the only way to achieve a verisimilitudinous game of character struggle is by making the game boring for the participants seems wrong-headed to me.

 

[Retros_x]

Give me an example of a game that's fun in every moment of play.

In any case, as you say fun is nuanced. Playing the game in a full court press "get to the action" way, with no regard for the setting verisimilitude, would be decidedly unfun from my point of view. I really dislike that kind of advice, found in modern versions of D&D.

Verisimilitude just means that the game logic is coherent and the world seems truthful and immersive. I don't see how boredom or unfun situations help with that. Focus on the fun doesn't mean "get to the action". It literally depends on what your table and yourself are considering fun. If you know what that is, than it makes absolutely sense to optimize for most fun in your game session.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I find backgammon fun to play more-or-less at every moment. Likewise the Reiner Knizia game Battle Line.

Off the top of my head I can't think of a game that I play regularly that I find to be not enjoyable in meaningful periods - maybe ship vs hip combat in Classic Traveller can have that problem? But that's probably why my Classic Traveller game doesn't feature ship vs ship combat, since I worked out that it's not really fun to play!


Well, as I've often posted, I'll put the verisimilitude of the settings in my RPGing up against what others seem to be doing any day of the week. And also the degree of "characters struggling in a fantasy world", as far as my Torchbearer game is concerned.

The idea that the only way to achieve a verisimilitudinous game of character struggle is by making the game boring for the participants seems wrong-headed to me.

Boring is subjective. I'll keep beating that drum.