Why do we need thieves??


log in or register to remove this ad

Debate me, and if you like thieves, what do you like about them?
I like thieves, but because they have a niche: urban stealth. This is often expanded to criminal contacts and techniques.

They are not "skill monkeys" in my mind. That's not a niche, that's a rules mechanic. They don't have spells, certainly, but their abilities are greater than just a collection of skills.

Or, they should be.

One of the things that I try to effect is that a high level thief can infiltrate an area even though it's blanketed with magic.
 

So with a great deal of systems, I see a dedicated profession of thief. I would argue the need on the basis that, thieves do not have special powers, just skills. You could play a warrior, and rob people, take advantage of someone you caught off guard, a servant could walk away with important documents, or a locksmith could open locks. Debate me, and if you like thieves, what do you like about them?
This was questioned in another thread. You could say the thing about any class.

You don't need a paladin, you only need a cleric.

You don't need a monk, only a fighter.

You don't need a druid, only a wizard.

You don't need a barbarian, only a fighter.

Etc.

The truth of the matter is you only need two, a melee and magic user. But people like the flavor of differentiation. Or, the game system mechanic's require it. In the end, it is what is best for the system, not what is logical.
 


Also, is there a thief equivalent in something like Vampire the Masquerade?
Clan Nosferatu. They are described as masters of spycraft. Obfuscate, as a discipline, focuses on stealth

I referenced WoD earlier. You can build "thief" if you like, it's matter of taking specific skills (stealth, subterfuge, larceny, streetwise). With systems like WoD, you have limited resource, in this case XP, which you directly spend on raising everything, stats,skills, disciplines, willpower, and higher you wanna raise something, more it costs. So you need to decide to you wanna be really good at few things or mediocre in lots of things.
 

The truth of the matter is you only need two, a melee and magic user. But people like the flavor of differentiation. Or, the game system mechanic's require it. In the end, it is what is best for the system, not what is logical.

Not what is logical... I would add that in context. So in my world , it is based off of reality, but what if dragons and magic were real? In this instance, logic still applies. Perhaps it could be reworded to within reason. If that is the case, then everyone should have at least some magical training, or nearly anyone who takes on a profession. This might leave for BGC's, (Background characters) like farmers, blacksmiths etc, to not have magic. Arguably even they could have magic, due to certain skills, or past professions even. The goal of my game in particular was to take pretty much any architype in pop culture, and be able to recreate a reasonable facsimile to be role played within the game. Thus avenues for specific powers are related to your core professions and then backed up with skill choice.
 

Thieves and Fighters are distinct enough to warrant separate classes. Take away the skills and Backstab (the class's defining features) and you still have differences in HD, attack tables, allowable weapons/armor, and the use of magic.

There's a reason why Thieves/Rogues are included in just about every fantasy game (table or video) ever made and why they are all modeled after the D&D concept of: Fighter strong, slow, focused, and tanky; Thief fast, deadly, skillful, and fragile.

That is just surface level. Every edition of the game has it own nuances of why Thieves deserve to be a separate class. For instance, AD&D and demi-human muli-classing. Feel free to be specific and we can dig deeper if needed.
I am taking by your response, you have a heavy DnD background?
 

Remove ads

Top