Where's the Thievery Gone?

[Skyscraper]

I think that one reason why rogues stealing stuff all the time are not liked at the gaming table, apart from the fact that they don't share with others, is that it takes time to advance the story in a useless direction.

The rogue stealing a purse every 5 gaming sessions is not a nuisance, but the rogue stealing something every opportunity he gets slows down play. Then, he needs to pawn the silver goblets and the other stuff he took, he might get in trouble with the law, he might get into trouble with the innkeeper, he might have the local thieve's guild trying to catch him, and so on. All that for what? A 15 gp silver goblet? When his share of the treasure for the last adventure was 2500 gp? What's the use? Is the character a thief or an adventurer? Trying to be both is spreading your energy in two completely different directions and you have to wonder if it's worth it. Personally, i think not. I'd rather accomplish something significant that steal trinkets.

We had a player who played a ranger a while back, he took time during gaming sessions to buy the best horse in town, tend to it, blah blah blah it was neverending. I mean, we got the point, no need to do it all the time!

This being said, important caveat: some actions including thievery are very interesting to promote role-play and create a personna for your PC. So the occasional pick pocket is not out of the question, but making it rare is the key. In the game where i DM, the rogue is just like that (and not because i asked him, if you wonder...)

Sky

 

[KrazyHades]

What's the point of stealing a few silver from an innkeeper? It's easy enough to find people you can kill and take stuff from and make more money than petty theft will get you, and with less consequences.

/ali

It's roleplay! If the opportunity is there, nobody's looking, and he knows there's just about no change he'll get caught, he'll do it. He's a ROGUE.

EDIT: Skyscraper, in this campaign they were a band of thieves! They multiclassed for some stuff, but for the most part specialized. You have your stealing thief, your urbane guy with high CHA and sense motive etc... It was somewhat untraditional I know.

Additionally, they went on to establish a thieves guild that ruled all the illegal activity on the continent. They became IMMENSELY powerful. T'was fun.

 

[Wraith Form]

I think that one reason why rogues stealing stuff all the time are not liked at the gaming table, apart from the fact that they don't share with others, is that it takes time to advance the story in a useless direction.

The rogue stealing a purse every 5 gaming sessions is not a nuisance, but the rogue stealing something every opportunity he gets slows down play. Then, he needs to pawn the silver goblets and the other stuff he took, he might get in trouble with the law, he might get into trouble with the innkeeper, he might have the local thieve's guild trying to catch him, and so on. All that for what? A 15 gp silver goblet? When his share of the treasure for the last adventure was 2500 gp? What's the use? Is the character a thief or an adventurer? Trying to be both is spreading your energy in two completely different directions and you have to wonder if it's worth it. Personally, i think not. I'd rather accomplish something significant that steal trinkets.

I have three players. One wanted to play a thief and the other a bard. The third wanted to play a dragon shaman.

It was very easy to create a party--I wrote about 24 "skeletons in closets" (backgrounds that you wouldn't want others to know), threw 'em in a hat, and had the players draw randomly. Some "skeletons" were obvious bad fits with the characters, so we re-drew poor matches.

Finally, I explained that a very large & powerful thieves' guild (think Mafia) had contacted each player, separately, and threatened to expose their secret if they didn't work with--and for--the guild. And it just so happened that they were all stuck together...

By Olidamarra, my gang is supposed to stop & steal, gamble, or swindle. Their first mission was to begin spreading a sack of counterfeit coins!

It's been fun--and when I get to play, I really prefer to be a rogue, so this is a great "fit" for my style of gaming!

 

[Jawar]

For more inspiration, read Vance's Eyes of the Overworld, and Cugel's Saga.

Gugel is absolutely the Complete Scoundrel!

 

[KrazyHades]

The Redemption of Althalus is great inspiration too.

 

[Aeric]

I actually hate those kinds of characters. We had one in the last campaign. Just because you are a rogue does not mean you are contractually obligated to engage in B&E every time the party rolls into town. Invariably, the thief gets caught, and we have to bail him out. Our good name is besmirched and we're run out of town on a rail. Not to mention the fact that the rest of us are forced to wait while he goes off and has his little solo adventure.

These also tend to be the same kinds of characters who skim off the top when it comes to treasure in the party. We had one thief who had stolen so much from the party that when she was killed, we opened her backpack and found enough gold to pay for her Resurrection. So we did, and then we told her to take a hike. I play D&D to have fun, not to keep a wary eye on one (or more) of my fellow PCs.

 

[Korgoth]

I expect that there's been a decline in larcenous characters in general. In the old days, you actually got XP for recovering gold on the adventure... in fact, that's where the majority of your XP came from, by the rules (you didn't get much for killing monsters). That means that the game was "oriented" toward getting the loot, not hunting down every last critter in the dungeon. You especially wouldn't want to waste your time fighting something that didn't have any treasure!

I think that was part of the "Swords and Sorcery" feel of the older editions. You're in this for the loot - if you can cart off the famous Black Pearl without even having to fight a monster, so much the better. You get XP and spending cash. That mentality places more emphasis on the light-fingered skills of the Thief.

Nowadays, I think the focus is more like "Fantasy Delta Force". You're supposed to do a surgical strike on the encounter location, thunderstoning the room, eliminating all the tangos and commandeering any heavy weapons. So you have your grunts (fighting classes), your pigman (the mage), your combat medic (the cleric) and your scout/sniper (rogue). Getting gold is usually your last concern - you're there to neutralize the OPFOR and accomplish your mission objectives.

So the current view of the game bascially downplays roguery.

 

[Vague Jayhawk]

I like playing rogues and I sympathise with players that do. I am a rogue friendly DM as long as the rogue doesn't make himself a nuissance.

A while back I was regularly playing with a group of people (two campaigns, two different DMs, same people). I found out that in both of the games they needed a rogue. I was pleased. I like playing rogues. Turns out that no one who had played with these guys before wanted to be the rogue. These two DMs were anti-rogue and actively discouraged the use of any rogue-type ability.

There was nothing for a rogue to do. It was a large outdoor campaign, hence no locks or traps. There were butt-tons of monsters that were not sneak attackable. No intrige or skullduggery of any kind. Every four or five gaming sessions I would get so bored and frustrated I would I would just try to steal anything from any NPC. I always got caught and had some horrible punishment or curse put on my character.

I still play a session with some of the same people. Our current gaming group is without a rogue and it works just fine because there would be no use for one.

 

[Elf Witch]

I know that when I have played with rogues like that in the end it has not been fun.

As others have pointed out it is not fun while they go on their solo adventure and you sit there for several hours waiting and holding your breath that the rogue does not get caught and cause the parry to either have to bail him out and wait around town for the trial or worse break him out and have to fell never to go back to this town again.

Also they like to steal from the party or skim off the top which leads to party conflict when they get caught.

I have said it before CN characters can cause more problems than having a lawful evil character in the game.

 

[MaxKaladin]

I expect that there's been a decline in larcenous characters in general. In the old days, you actually got XP for recovering gold on the adventure... in fact, that's where the majority of your XP came from, by the rules (you didn't get much for killing monsters). That means that the game was "oriented" toward getting the loot, not hunting down every last critter in the dungeon. You especially wouldn't want to waste your time fighting something that didn't have any treasure!

I think that was part of the "Swords and Sorcery" feel of the older editions. You're in this for the loot - if you can cart off the famous Black Pearl without even having to fight a monster, so much the better. You get XP and spending cash. That mentality places more emphasis on the light-fingered skills of the Thief.

Nowadays, I think the focus is more like "Fantasy Delta Force". You're supposed to do a surgical strike on the encounter location, thunderstoning the room, eliminating all the tangos and commandeering any heavy weapons. So you have your grunts (fighting classes), your pigman (the mage), your combat medic (the cleric) and your scout/sniper (rogue). Getting gold is usually your last concern - you're there to neutralize the OPFOR and accomplish your mission objectives.

So the current view of the game bascially downplays roguery.

That's a very interesting observation. I'll have to think about that.