TheRPGSite

Pen & Paper Roleplaying Central => Pen and Paper Roleplaying Games (RPGs) Discussion => Topic started by: cavalier973 on January 24, 2022, 06:41:24 AM

Title: This thread is CLOSED cause nobody won’t talk to me more nicer (D&D thieves)
Post by: cavalier973 on January 24, 2022, 06:41:24 AM
My perspective is that the D&D thief is not actually a thief—a criminal who steals things—even though the rules push that interpretation of the class. Lamentations of the Flame Princess gets it more right by changing the class title to “specialist”. This character has skills that are useful for exploring D&D-style dungeons. The whole, “build a hideout, and then a thieves’ guild” element of the rules for higher-level thieves seems tacked on to me. The idea that “thieves might steal from party members” is stupid, if the player does not envisage his character prone to that type of behavior.

The D&D thief made his money by exploring ancient ruins and twisting labyrinths, not by breaking into houses and banks, or extorting money from the small businesses in his neighborhood. What would the D&D thief know about running a successful criminal enterprise—anymore than a fighter, cleric, or magic-user? A magic-user would have an advantage if he wanted to engage in extortion rackets. “Pay the protection money or meet my little friend!” *casts magic missile—the proper one, that hovers threateningly over the magic-user’s shoulder for ten minutes* The cleric would be in a perfect position for conducting blackmail. “Lord Sherman just made his weekly confession; now I will write an anonymous letter, threatening to expose him if he does not send money.”

D&D thieves can pick locks and find traps, for sure, which would be useful for breaking into places. But he can make more money by using those skills in a dungeon—in the D&D world(s).

I posit that, instead of a thieves’ guild, the D&D thief should have access to an organization similar to the old explorers societies. A dungeoneers’ guild, where dungeon survival techniques are taught and practiced. Members can study maps of explored dungeons, sit in plush chairs by the fireplace to read the guild books about the exploits of past members, learn how to read ancient languages and eventually how to cast spells from scrolls (without, apparently, needing to cast “read magic” first). When the D&D thief acquires enough money, he can start his own dungeoneers’ club, where members pay dues and training fees.


Title: Re: Thieves are not thieves in D&D
Post by: Ghostmaker on January 24, 2022, 06:50:05 AM
A better word might be 'technician', but that would generally indicate someone from a more modern time.
Title: Re: Thieves are not thieves in D&D
Post by: Pat on January 24, 2022, 07:44:57 AM
I don't really have a problem with the thief as a thief. None of the other classes are dungeon-specific, after all. They're fighters, not tunnel warriors. Magic-users, not underdark mages. They're all roles that exist in the world outside graph paper maps. They just happen to possess skill sets that make them useful to the average adventuring party.

The closest archetype is probably the tomb robber.
Title: Re: Thieves are not thieves in D&D
Post by: Vidgrip on January 24, 2022, 08:13:36 AM
You can certainly use that interpretation in your world of course, but that was not the original concept. The Thief was designed to be either an active or former thief, a criminal.

In LotFP, the Specialist can take other skills, unrelated to thieving. Early D&D doesn't give the same options. Thief meant Thief.

Adventures in Middle Earth re-brands the class as Treasure Hunter and 5e calls it the Rogue, and they give various options to be something other than a criminal. These are fun classes and work well, but are certainly an evolution away from the original concept.
Title: Re: Thieves are not thieves in D&D
Post by: cavalier973 on January 24, 2022, 08:22:17 AM
I don't really have a problem with the thief as a thief. None of the other classes are dungeon-specific, after all. They're fighters, not tunnel warriors. Magic-users, not underdark mages. They're all roles that exist in the world outside graph paper maps. They just happen to possess skill sets that make them useful to the average adventuring party.

The closest archetype is probably the tomb robber.

That’s it.

I’m closing the thread.
Title: Re: Thieves are not thieves in D&D
Post by: cavalier973 on January 24, 2022, 08:24:32 AM
A better word might be 'technician', but that would generally indicate someone from a more modern time.

“Technician” is perfectly acceptable, since D&D is anachronism stew.
Title: Re: Thieves are not thieves in D&D
Post by: cavalier973 on January 24, 2022, 08:31:21 AM
I don't really have a problem with the thief as a thief. None of the other classes are dungeon-specific, after all. They're fighters, not tunnel warriors. Magic-users, not underdark mages. They're all roles that exist in the world outside graph paper maps. They just happen to possess skill sets that make them useful to the average adventuring party.

The closest archetype is probably the tomb robber.

You can certainly use that interpretation in your world of course, but that was not the original concept. The Thief was designed to be either an active or former thief, a criminal.

In LotFP, the Specialist can take other skills, unrelated to thieving. Early D&D doesn't give the same options. Thief meant Thief.

Adventures in Middle Earth re-brands the class as Treasure Hunter and 5e calls it the Rogue, and they give various options to be something other than a criminal. These are fun classes and work well, but are certainly an evolution away from the original concept.

(Ackshuwallie, you make a good argument; the fighter, cleric, and magic-user want someone who can quietly open locks and figure out if treasure chests are trapped. Thieves do such things professionally. My beef is that the class as presented seems shoehorned into being a criminal. I disagree with such restrictions.)

In my opinion, the best example of a D&D thief is Indiana Jones.

Al Capone, not so much.
Title: Re: Thieves are not thieves in D&D
Post by: Pat on January 24, 2022, 08:40:18 AM
In my opinion, the best example of a D&D thief is Indiana Jones.

Al Capone, not so much.
Indiana Jones doesn't just steal a few coins from the people, he steals their cultural heritage while leaving destruction in his wake.

Are you familiar with Fritz Leiber's Nehwon stories? The thieves guild of Lankhmar seems to be the primary inspiration for the thieves of D&D.
Title: Re: This thread is CLOSED cause nobody won’t talk to me more nicer (D&D thieves)
Post by: Persimmon on January 24, 2022, 08:42:41 AM
DCC offers an interesting variation in that one's particular skills vary by alignment, or at least how they advance.  That strikes me as a good way to do it.
Title: Re: Thieves are not thieves in D&D
Post by: cavalier973 on January 24, 2022, 08:55:53 AM
In my opinion, the best example of a D&D thief is Indiana Jones.

Al Capone, not so much.
Indiana Jones doesn't just steal a few coins from the people, he steals their cultural heritage while leaving destruction in his wake.

Are you familiar with Fritz Leiber's Nehwon stories? The thieves guild of Lankhmar seems to be the primary inspiration for the thieves of D&D.

Yeah, that’s true, but Jones also kills National Socialists, which makes it okay.

I will seek out the Newhon stories. Thanks for the recommendation. I thought that D&D thieves were based on Lieber’s Gray Mouser—a little bit of theft, a little bit of magic.
Title: Re: Thieves are not thieves in D&D
Post by: Zalman on January 24, 2022, 10:11:31 AM
I will seek out the Newhon stories. Thanks for the recommendation. I thought that D&D thieves were based on Lieber’s Gray Mouser—a little bit of theft, a little bit of magic.

Gray Mouser is one of the two main characters in Leiber's "Newhon" stories. Newhon is the world Fafhrd and Gray Mouser live in. The idea of a Thieve's Guild comes from those stories as well.
Title: Re: Thieves are not thieves in D&D
Post by: Zalman on January 24, 2022, 10:11:45 AM
.
Title: Re: Thieves are not thieves in D&D
Post by: thedungeondelver on January 24, 2022, 11:03:48 AM
I will seek out the Newhon stories. Thanks for the recommendation. I thought that D&D thieves were based on Lieber’s Gray Mouser—a little bit of theft, a little bit of magic.

Gray Mouser is one of the two main characters in Leiber's "Newhon" stories. Newhon is the world Fafhrd and Gray Mouser live in. The idea of a Thieve's Guild comes from those stories as well.

I unironically love the Nehwon mythos in Deities & Demigods.  Esp. Faf & Mou's stats!  :) 
Title: Re: This thread is CLOSED cause nobody won’t talk to me more nicer (D&D thieves)
Post by: Rob Necronomicon on January 24, 2022, 11:15:31 AM
But all this is relative... I mean, the conquistadors thought they were doing great things by stealing and looting and bringing their fine religion to the savages.

Were they ethical to do so? Well, they themselves would have said 'absolutely.'
Title: Re: This thread is CLOSED cause nobody won’t talk to me more nicer (D&D thieves)
Post by: Ghostmaker on January 24, 2022, 12:04:40 PM
But all this is relative... I mean, the conquistadors thought they were doing great things by stealing and looting and bringing their fine religion to the savages.

Were they ethical to do so? Well, they themselves would have said 'absolutely.'
Honestly, everyone involved was some variation on asshole and I find myself rooting for the diseases or animals to kill off as many of them as possible.
Title: Re: This thread is CLOSED cause nobody won’t talk to me more nicer (D&D thieves)
Post by: Eric Diaz on January 24, 2022, 12:08:53 PM
Sure, I agree. Use "specialist" or "expert". Bilbo is not a thief until he needs to be one.

Also, the thief, mechanically, is a high-offense, low defense class, opposite to the cleric.

(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ZlY2_Up6iuQ/XtvD0YQu-7I/AAAAAAAACmw/Rfkx07zjQ-YQbCPKbHK7HUtj_t_fvTvtgCK4BGAYYCw/s1600/Class%252Bwheel.png)

https://methodsetmadness.blogspot.com/2020/06/replacing-cleric-for-leader.html
Title: Re: This thread is CLOSED cause nobody won’t talk to me more nicer (D&D thieves)
Post by: Rob Necronomicon on January 24, 2022, 12:30:29 PM
But all this is relative... I mean, the conquistadors thought they were doing great things by stealing and looting and bringing their fine religion to the savages.

Were they ethical to do so? Well, they themselves would have said 'absolutely.'
Honestly, everyone involved was some variation on asshole and I find myself rooting for the diseases or animals to kill off as many of them as possible.

Indeed... No one is innocent.
Title: Re: This thread is CLOSED cause nobody won’t talk to me more nicer (D&D thieves)
Post by: Opaopajr on January 24, 2022, 12:46:49 PM
It's been ages, but if I remember correctly the Complete Handbook: Thief, and Masque of the Red Death had variations on an explorer's guild. But it's been ages. That and Newhon's Lankhmar had a whole D&D line for a bit there.
Title: Re: This thread is CLOSED cause nobody won’t talk to me more nicer (D&D thieves)
Post by: Lynn on January 24, 2022, 01:06:36 PM
I think it falls into a similar pit of occupation or social function vs skill set.

Many D&D products over the years have pointed out, for example, that temples are made up of people that fulfill a religious role, and that not everyone necessarily is a cleric. Someone that is a fighter could be a 'deacon' or a thief could be an altar boy. They'd likely be genuine believers as the actual clerics would have some way of verifying it via ceremony.
Title: Re: This thread is CLOSED cause nobody won’t talk to me more nicer (D&D thieves)
Post by: Aglondir on January 24, 2022, 01:44:51 PM
My perspective is that the D&D thief is not actually a thief—a criminal who steals things—even though the rules push that interpretation of the class. Lamentations of the Flame Princess gets it more right by changing the class title to “specialist”. This character has skills that are useful for exploring D&D-style dungeons. The whole, “build a hideout, and then a thieves’ guild” element of the rules for higher-level thieves seems tacked on to me. The idea that “thieves might steal from party members” is stupid, if the player does not envisage his character prone to that type of behavior.

The D&D thief made his money by exploring ancient ruins and twisting labyrinths, not by breaking into houses and banks, or extorting money from the small businesses in his neighborhood. What would the D&D thief know about running a successful criminal enterprise—anymore than a fighter, cleric, or magic-user? A magic-user would have an advantage if he wanted to engage in extortion rackets. “Pay the protection money or meet my little friend!” *casts magic missile—the proper one, that hovers threateningly over the magic-user’s shoulder for ten minutes* The cleric would be in a perfect position for conducting blackmail. “Lord Sherman just made his weekly confession; now I will write an anonymous letter, threatening to expose him if he does not send money.”

D&D thieves can pick locks and find traps, for sure, which would be useful for breaking into places. But he can make more money by using those skills in a dungeon—in the D&D world(s).

I posit that, instead of a thieves’ guild, the D&D thief should have access to an organization similar to the old explorers societies. A dungeoneers’ guild, where dungeon survival techniques are taught and practiced. Members can study maps of explored dungeons, sit in plush chairs by the fireplace to read the guild books about the exploits of past members, learn how to read ancient languages and eventually how to cast spells from scrolls (without, apparently, needing to cast “read magic” first). When the D&D thief acquires enough money, he can start his own dungeoneers’ club, where members pay dues and training fees.

It's a great character concept. One of my favorite characters was a medeival Indiana Jones type. It was a city game, where the dungeons were under the streets. Something like Waterdeep. His goal was to get maps of the dungeons before the party entered, to plan the raid. The campaign didn't last, but if it did, he would have established a guild something like what you described.

But I don't see the need to change the game or the name. I don't find "thief" that bad in a game with "monks" and "druids."
Title: Re: This thread is CLOSED cause nobody won’t talk to me more nicer (D&D thieves)
Post by: Mishihari on January 24, 2022, 01:57:57 PM
I don't really have a problem with the thief as a thief. None of the other classes are dungeon-specific, after all. They're fighters, not tunnel warriors. Magic-users, not underdark mages. They're all roles that exist in the world outside graph paper maps. They just happen to possess skill sets that make them useful to the average adventuring party.

The closest archetype is probably the tomb robber.

That’s it.

I’m closing the thread.

lolwut?  This guy again?!
Title: Re: This thread is CLOSED cause nobody won’t talk to me more nicer (D&D thieves)
Post by: Pat on January 24, 2022, 02:02:00 PM
^ I'm pretty sure it's a joke. Anyway....

The skill set of an Indiana Jones-style character doesn't really overlap much with the thief. Find traps, maybe, though Jones was more competent in discovering the nature of traps beforehand, or agilely avoiding their consequences, than not setting them off. He occasionally snuck around, but so did others; it doesn't appear to be a skill he's particularly adept at. No picking of pockets, and I don't recall any picking of locks. Hearing noise? Another not-skill. Climbing? Maybe, though that's more subsumed into general athleticism. Read languages, definitely, but the skill should be much broader. Read scrolls no (though that's out of genre, and was stolen from the Gray Mouser). No backstabbery.

So a dungeon-version might know traps, and locks wouldn't be unreasonable. But the rest of the thief skills are a poor fit, except for read languages which almost demands a great expansion. But how does archaeology and lost lore work in the dungeon? There's already a magic-user for things arcane, and dungeons aren't really lost tombs, cities, or artifacts being uncovered. It would be weird to roll to see if Orckiller Jones was able to uncover the plans for every trap in the dungeon. So I'm not sure it really fits, as an archetype.
Title: Re: This thread is CLOSED cause nobody won’t talk to me more nicer (D&D thieves)
Post by: Ghostmaker on January 24, 2022, 02:25:36 PM
I don't really have a problem with the thief as a thief. None of the other classes are dungeon-specific, after all. They're fighters, not tunnel warriors. Magic-users, not underdark mages. They're all roles that exist in the world outside graph paper maps. They just happen to possess skill sets that make them useful to the average adventuring party.

The closest archetype is probably the tomb robber.

That’s it.

I’m closing the thread.

lolwut?  This guy again?!
He's kidding. Relax.
Title: Re: This thread is CLOSED cause nobody won’t talk to me more nicer (D&D thieves)
Post by: GeekyBugle on January 24, 2022, 02:55:31 PM
But all this is relative... I mean, the conquistadors thought they were doing great things by stealing and looting and bringing their fine religion to the savages.

Were they ethical to do so? Well, they themselves would have said 'absolutely.'

At least Cortez was seen by all the other people subjugated by the Aztecs as a liberator, how else could he win against the Aztecs and their serfs? A few hundred against hundreds of thousands, forget your superior weapons you're fucked unless you had 20-21st century weapons.
Title: Re: This thread is CLOSED cause nobody won’t talk to me more nicer (D&D thieves)
Post by: Persimmon on January 24, 2022, 04:01:52 PM
It's been ages, but if I remember correctly the Complete Handbook: Thief, and Masque of the Red Death had variations on an explorer's guild. But it's been ages. That and Newhon's Lankhmar had a whole D&D line for a bit there.

For what it's worth, DCC currently has the Lankhmar license and they've produced a bunch of stuff for it.  Personally, I can't stand Leiber's writing style and could not care less about Lankhmar, but for those interested in such things, the resources are there.
Title: Re: This thread is CLOSED cause nobody won’t talk to me more nicer (D&D thieves)
Post by: HappyDaze on January 24, 2022, 05:05:15 PM
My perspective is that the D&D thief is not actually a thief—a criminal who steals things—even though the rules push that interpretation of the class. Lamentations of the Flame Princess gets it more right by changing the class title to “specialist”. This character has skills that are useful for exploring D&D-style dungeons. The whole, “build a hideout, and then a thieves’ guild” element of the rules for higher-level thieves seems tacked on to me. The idea that “thieves might steal from party members” is stupid, if the player does not envisage his character prone to that type of behavior.

The D&D thief made his money by exploring ancient ruins and twisting labyrinths, not by breaking into houses and banks, or extorting money from the small businesses in his neighborhood. What would the D&D thief know about running a successful criminal enterprise—anymore than a fighter, cleric, or magic-user? A magic-user would have an advantage if he wanted to engage in extortion rackets. “Pay the protection money or meet my little friend!” *casts magic missile—the proper one, that hovers threateningly over the magic-user’s shoulder for ten minutes* The cleric would be in a perfect position for conducting blackmail. “Lord Sherman just made his weekly confession; now I will write an anonymous letter, threatening to expose him if he does not send money.”

D&D thieves can pick locks and find traps, for sure, which would be useful for breaking into places. But he can make more money by using those skills in a dungeon—in the D&D world(s).

I posit that, instead of a thieves’ guild, the D&D thief should have access to an organization similar to the old explorers societies. A dungeoneers’ guild, where dungeon survival techniques are taught and practiced. Members can study maps of explored dungeons, sit in plush chairs by the fireplace to read the guild books about the exploits of past members, learn how to read ancient languages and eventually how to cast spells from scrolls (without, apparently, needing to cast “read magic” first). When the D&D thief acquires enough money, he can start his own dungeoneers’ club, where members pay dues and training fees.

It's a great character concept. One of my favorite characters was a medeival Indiana Jones type. It was a city game, where the dungeons were under the streets. Something like Waterdeep. His goal was to get maps of the dungeons before the party entered, to plan the raid. The campaign didn't last, but if it did, he would have established a guild something like what you described.

But I don't see the need to change the game or the name. I don't find "thief" that bad in a game with "monks" and "druids."
I think the one that seemed off to me a few years back was SotDL using "Dervish" for someone that specializes in two-weapon fighting.
Title: Re: This thread is CLOSED cause nobody won’t talk to me more nicer (D&D thieves)
Post by: Omega on January 24, 2022, 05:57:40 PM
I don't really have a problem with the thief as a thief. None of the other classes are dungeon-specific, after all. They're fighters, not tunnel warriors. Magic-users, not underdark mages. They're all roles that exist in the world outside graph paper maps. They just happen to possess skill sets that make them useful to the average adventuring party.

The closest archetype is probably the tomb robber.

That’s it.

I’m closing the thread.

lolwut?  This guy again?!
He's kidding. Relax.

Its a very unfunny joke then.
Title: Re: This thread is CLOSED cause nobody won’t talk to me more nicer (D&D thieves)
Post by: Pat on January 24, 2022, 06:42:22 PM
My perspective is that the D&D thief is not actually a thief—a criminal who steals things—even though the rules push that interpretation of the class. Lamentations of the Flame Princess gets it more right by changing the class title to “specialist”. This character has skills that are useful for exploring D&D-style dungeons. The whole, “build a hideout, and then a thieves’ guild” element of the rules for higher-level thieves seems tacked on to me. The idea that “thieves might steal from party members” is stupid, if the player does not envisage his character prone to that type of behavior.

The D&D thief made his money by exploring ancient ruins and twisting labyrinths, not by breaking into houses and banks, or extorting money from the small businesses in his neighborhood. What would the D&D thief know about running a successful criminal enterprise—anymore than a fighter, cleric, or magic-user? A magic-user would have an advantage if he wanted to engage in extortion rackets. “Pay the protection money or meet my little friend!” *casts magic missile—the proper one, that hovers threateningly over the magic-user’s shoulder for ten minutes* The cleric would be in a perfect position for conducting blackmail. “Lord Sherman just made his weekly confession; now I will write an anonymous letter, threatening to expose him if he does not send money.”

D&D thieves can pick locks and find traps, for sure, which would be useful for breaking into places. But he can make more money by using those skills in a dungeon—in the D&D world(s).

I posit that, instead of a thieves’ guild, the D&D thief should have access to an organization similar to the old explorers societies. A dungeoneers’ guild, where dungeon survival techniques are taught and practiced. Members can study maps of explored dungeons, sit in plush chairs by the fireplace to read the guild books about the exploits of past members, learn how to read ancient languages and eventually how to cast spells from scrolls (without, apparently, needing to cast “read magic” first). When the D&D thief acquires enough money, he can start his own dungeoneers’ club, where members pay dues and training fees.

It's a great character concept. One of my favorite characters was a medeival Indiana Jones type. It was a city game, where the dungeons were under the streets. Something like Waterdeep. His goal was to get maps of the dungeons before the party entered, to plan the raid. The campaign didn't last, but if it did, he would have established a guild something like what you described.

But I don't see the need to change the game or the name. I don't find "thief" that bad in a game with "monks" and "druids."
I think the one that seemed off to me a few years back was SotDL using "Dervish" for someone that specializes in two-weapon fighting.
It's from the phrase "whirling dervish". Which is ultimately derived from a religious dance, but the game use is more about the superficial associations (spinning, lots of energy) than real dervishes or their practices.
Title: Re: This thread is CLOSED cause nobody won’t talk to me more nicer (D&D thieves)
Post by: Rob Necronomicon on January 24, 2022, 06:44:16 PM
I do like playing vigilantes in fantasy. Ethical because you're stealing someone's life in order to make the world a better place. Yaay!
Title: Re: Thieves are not thieves in D&D
Post by: Jam The MF on January 24, 2022, 09:09:04 PM
A better word might be 'technician', but that would generally indicate someone from a more modern time.

How about, "Specialist"?
Title: Re: This thread is CLOSED cause nobody won’t talk to me more nicer (D&D thieves)
Post by: ShieldWife on January 24, 2022, 09:51:53 PM
I tend to think of D&D classes as sets of abilities rather than strictly defined character themes. A rogue or thief merely has a certain set of abilities, they may or may not use those abilities to steal. So it’s entirely possible to be a “thief” without actually stealing anybody’s property.

Now, is it ever moral to steal? Well, taking another persons property has the potential to be evil, then again so does killing people, yet there are cases when killing isn’t considered evil. Self defense, in war, or in carrying out justice. Stealing should probably be the same. You could steal something from a person who stole it themselves, that doesn’t necessarily seem immoral, especially if the property is going to a good cause or being returned to rightful owners.

If killing people in a war is morally acceptable, then stealing during a war would seem to be alright too. What about stealing the big weapon from the enemy camp before they have a chance to use it? What about stealing the enemy’s secret plans? Stealing resources from the enemy so they can’t use them for the war effort. A thief could be legally employed by the rightful authorities to carry out missions like this, not necessarily in war but against criminals or enemies of the ruling authority.
Title: Re: Thieves are not thieves in D&D
Post by: Persimmon on January 24, 2022, 10:44:53 PM
A better word might be 'technician', but that would generally indicate someone from a more modern time.

How about, "Specialist"?

You mean like a proctologist?   Ehh, no; I'll stick to thief.  Always thought that rogue was really lame too.  Sounds more like a womanizer than an adventurer.  "Who him?  Oh yeah, he's quite the rogue."  So we need a lock picked but that halfling bastard is picking up the barmaid.  Rogues....
Title: Re: This thread is CLOSED cause nobody won’t talk to me more nicer (D&D thieves)
Post by: Pat on January 24, 2022, 10:47:19 PM
I tend to think of D&D classes as sets of abilities rather than strictly defined character themes. A rogue or thief merely has a certain set of abilities, they may or may not use those abilities to steal. So it’s entirely possible to be a “thief” without actually stealing anybody’s property.

Now, is it ever moral to steal? Well, taking another persons property has the potential to be evil, then again so does killing people, yet there are cases when killing isn’t considered evil. Self defense, in war, or in carrying out justice. Stealing should probably be the same. You could steal something from a person who stole it themselves, that doesn’t necessarily seem immoral, especially if the property is going to a good cause or being returned to rightful owners.

If killing people in a war is morally acceptable, then stealing during a war would seem to be alright too. What about stealing the big weapon from the enemy camp before they have a chance to use it? What about stealing the enemy’s secret plans? Stealing resources from the enemy so they can’t use them for the war effort. A thief could be legally employed by the rightful authorities to carry out missions like this, not necessarily in war but against criminals or enemies of the ruling authority.
If we're going to start up the is thievery moral discussion again, I don't think the comparison to killing is useful. Because there are very few sets of moral principles where killing is given a blanket dispensation. Rather, such exceptions are typically restricted to self defense or defense of others, with war being an elaborate variation of the latter case. Life is typically considered sacred, not something to just throw away. That's why the prerequisite for many atrocities was a justification for why the targeted groups of people were subhuman.

Conversely, theft is considered a personal violation by many people, but it doesn't engender anywhere near the same response. Part of that is the distance; it's not a violation of someone's person, but of things on which the person has a claim. That's inherently weaker, and the degree of proximity is also a factor (personal possessions > title to some distant plot of land). Also, many moral philosophies define property in very different ways. Not everything is ancap; from communism or socialism, to feudalism, to concepts of personal property vs. public goods, to intellectual vs. physical property, to homesteading vs. rent seeking, to mineral or bandwidth rights, and so on there many different interpretations that all fall within the normal range of thought. On top of all that, it's generally considered a lesser evil. Even when morally condemned, stealing by the poor or to help the poor is often excused. Especially when the entity being stolen from is abstract, like a corporation, and thus any harm caused by the theft is widely distributed; or when the person is wealthy, which is often considered a kind of unjust taking or theft in itself, and thus fair retribution.

From a game standpoint, I've rarely seen much concern about the morality of stealing. If a thief wants to steal, that's just part of their character. What other players react to most is either stealing from them (never steal from the party), or stealing from sympathetic NPCs, particularly the poor.
Title: Re: This thread is CLOSED cause nobody won’t talk to me more nicer (D&D thieves)
Post by: Lunamancer on January 24, 2022, 11:56:02 PM
I view classes as being these things that have one foot in "abstract classifications" and "in-world organizations." The organizations help explain why the characters have such special skills, and they give characters ties to the game world. But they are also abstract categories in that, well, take a soldier for an example. It's not like a general is going to have the same hierarchical authority upon walking into an enemy camp. But at the same time, you're not going to negotiate a ceasefire with a private. You do recognize rank even in something that is technically a separate organization. So they're sort of universal in-game social organizations.

This ties directly into how I approach demi-human level limits. The common argument says that you need level limits in order for there to be a humanocentric world. Without them, demi-humans would take over. My take is the exact opposite. It's because I begin with the premise of a humanocentric world, the universal in-game social organizations are going to be mainly human social organizations. And therefore they can impose any limit they like. And so we have level limits. And this undercuts any argument to suggest they don't make sense.

The thief is the exception that proves the rule. Here we have the class of those who operate outside of the established (human) social order, and lo and behold, they are suddenly allowed limitless advancement.

Thieving as such is not something that fits in with the good alignment. But the thief class allows for rare instances of Neutral Good thieves. These are those who do not make a profession out of stealing per se, but they do operate outside of the established social order.

Title: Re: This thread is CLOSED cause nobody won’t talk to me more nicer (D&D thieves)
Post by: Slipshot762 on January 25, 2022, 12:00:25 AM
I have always disliked thief as a class entirely. It always felt poorly glued on to the rest of the framework. The D&D thief as we know it is little more than an agile locksmith who can be replaced in the party almost easily and seemlessly by using magic or just adding more fighter meat to the pile.
Title: Re: This thread is CLOSED cause nobody won’t talk to me more nicer (D&D thieves)
Post by: HappyDaze on January 25, 2022, 02:01:35 AM
My perspective is that the D&D thief is not actually a thief—a criminal who steals things—even though the rules push that interpretation of the class. Lamentations of the Flame Princess gets it more right by changing the class title to “specialist”. This character has skills that are useful for exploring D&D-style dungeons. The whole, “build a hideout, and then a thieves’ guild” element of the rules for higher-level thieves seems tacked on to me. The idea that “thieves might steal from party members” is stupid, if the player does not envisage his character prone to that type of behavior.

The D&D thief made his money by exploring ancient ruins and twisting labyrinths, not by breaking into houses and banks, or extorting money from the small businesses in his neighborhood. What would the D&D thief know about running a successful criminal enterprise—anymore than a fighter, cleric, or magic-user? A magic-user would have an advantage if he wanted to engage in extortion rackets. “Pay the protection money or meet my little friend!” *casts magic missile—the proper one, that hovers threateningly over the magic-user’s shoulder for ten minutes* The cleric would be in a perfect position for conducting blackmail. “Lord Sherman just made his weekly confession; now I will write an anonymous letter, threatening to expose him if he does not send money.”

D&D thieves can pick locks and find traps, for sure, which would be useful for breaking into places. But he can make more money by using those skills in a dungeon—in the D&D world(s).

I posit that, instead of a thieves’ guild, the D&D thief should have access to an organization similar to the old explorers societies. A dungeoneers’ guild, where dungeon survival techniques are taught and practiced. Members can study maps of explored dungeons, sit in plush chairs by the fireplace to read the guild books about the exploits of past members, learn how to read ancient languages and eventually how to cast spells from scrolls (without, apparently, needing to cast “read magic” first). When the D&D thief acquires enough money, he can start his own dungeoneers’ club, where members pay dues and training fees.

It's a great character concept. One of my favorite characters was a medeival Indiana Jones type. It was a city game, where the dungeons were under the streets. Something like Waterdeep. His goal was to get maps of the dungeons before the party entered, to plan the raid. The campaign didn't last, but if it did, he would have established a guild something like what you described.

But I don't see the need to change the game or the name. I don't find "thief" that bad in a game with "monks" and "druids."
I think the one that seemed off to me a few years back was SotDL using "Dervish" for someone that specializes in two-weapon fighting.
It's from the phrase "whirling dervish". Which is ultimately derived from a religious dance, but the game use is more about the superficial associations (spinning, lots of energy) than real dervishes or their practices.
I'm aware, but it still seemed off to me, just as using druid to describe shapeshifting spellcasters does.
Title: Re: This thread is CLOSED cause nobody won’t talk to me more nicer (D&D thieves)
Post by: Pat on January 25, 2022, 02:23:38 AM
My perspective is that the D&D thief is not actually a thief—a criminal who steals things—even though the rules push that interpretation of the class. Lamentations of the Flame Princess gets it more right by changing the class title to “specialist”. This character has skills that are useful for exploring D&D-style dungeons. The whole, “build a hideout, and then a thieves’ guild” element of the rules for higher-level thieves seems tacked on to me. The idea that “thieves might steal from party members” is stupid, if the player does not envisage his character prone to that type of behavior.

The D&D thief made his money by exploring ancient ruins and twisting labyrinths, not by breaking into houses and banks, or extorting money from the small businesses in his neighborhood. What would the D&D thief know about running a successful criminal enterprise—anymore than a fighter, cleric, or magic-user? A magic-user would have an advantage if he wanted to engage in extortion rackets. “Pay the protection money or meet my little friend!” *casts magic missile—the proper one, that hovers threateningly over the magic-user’s shoulder for ten minutes* The cleric would be in a perfect position for conducting blackmail. “Lord Sherman just made his weekly confession; now I will write an anonymous letter, threatening to expose him if he does not send money.”

D&D thieves can pick locks and find traps, for sure, which would be useful for breaking into places. But he can make more money by using those skills in a dungeon—in the D&D world(s).

I posit that, instead of a thieves’ guild, the D&D thief should have access to an organization similar to the old explorers societies. A dungeoneers’ guild, where dungeon survival techniques are taught and practiced. Members can study maps of explored dungeons, sit in plush chairs by the fireplace to read the guild books about the exploits of past members, learn how to read ancient languages and eventually how to cast spells from scrolls (without, apparently, needing to cast “read magic” first). When the D&D thief acquires enough money, he can start his own dungeoneers’ club, where members pay dues and training fees.

It's a great character concept. One of my favorite characters was a medeival Indiana Jones type. It was a city game, where the dungeons were under the streets. Something like Waterdeep. His goal was to get maps of the dungeons before the party entered, to plan the raid. The campaign didn't last, but if it did, he would have established a guild something like what you described.

But I don't see the need to change the game or the name. I don't find "thief" that bad in a game with "monks" and "druids."
I think the one that seemed off to me a few years back was SotDL using "Dervish" for someone that specializes in two-weapon fighting.
It's from the phrase "whirling dervish". Which is ultimately derived from a religious dance, but the game use is more about the superficial associations (spinning, lots of energy) than real dervishes or their practices.
I'm aware, but it still seemed off to me, just as using druid to describe shapeshifting spellcasters does.
Much less weird than level titles. It's really bizarre to go from 17th century France to the Heroic Age of Greece just by leveling from 5th to 6th level in fighter (swashbuckler to myrmidon). Or all the instances in the bestiaries where alternate spellings or names of the same monster (medusa/gorgon, cockatrice/basilisk, etc.) were turned into entirely new monsters. Other games do it too, like all the abuses of English and Romance languages in World of Darkness. RPGs have a long history of taking mildly obscure words, and turning them into terms of art to define a loosely related game object.
Title: Re: This thread is CLOSED cause nobody won’t talk to me more nicer (D&D thieves)
Post by: cavalier973 on January 25, 2022, 10:45:48 AM
I just did a quick scan-through of various editions and their description of thieves/rogues.
 
The class wasn’t in OD&D. I understand that the thief class was introduced in the Greyhawk expansion, but I do not have that book. I scanned through the copy I have (the pdf) , and it mentions that dwarves can identify traps, and in “the underworld” book it talks about traps, but I haven’t seen anything about the characters dealing with traps.

In B/X, it says that thieves are humans trained in the arts of stealing and sneaking, and that they do steal.

In BECMI, Aleena tells “you” that “you” “may think that thieves are bad, but many of them aren’t.” She mentions that you have to keep an eye on your coin purse, though. Later in the same book, it describes thieves as humans who specialize in “stealth, lockpicking, trap removing, and other activities.” It goes on to mention that thieves do steal, but not (usually) from members of their own party.

In the Rules Cyclopedia, the text is the same as in the Mentzer Player’s Book (the later description, not the part where Aleena is talking). As an aside, I recommend getting the Print on Demand of this book. For twenty bucks, you get the entire game in a hardback tome. A real steal!

Ahem...

The idea of a thief hideout and establishing a guild is introduced in B/X, and is developed in BECMI/the RC. The thief can become a “rogue” if he or she wishes not to settle down in one place.

In 1e, the thief profession is described as not dishonorable, but isn’t honorable, either. A couple of paragraphs down, it limits the alignment of the thief to neutral or evil (a thief can be lawful or good, but not lawful good). It says that the primary thief functions—pickpocketing, picklocketing, trap administration, moving about noiselessly, and hiding in shadows—are all self-explanatory. Then, the text helpfully explains these activities. The thief rounds out his functions with listening to doors, climbing surfaces—both up AND down—and attacking people when they turn their backs to the thief.

2e: the name of the class officially (I guess) changes to “rogue”. Nope, I am wrong. “Rogue” is the category; we still have our friend, the thief, but it is important to make new friends along the way. We meet the bard, here. The Thief is what we are looking at, though. Rogues generally, the book says, feel that the world owes them, and try to get as much as they can with the least amount of work. A list of skills is given, beginning with reading strange writings. Climbing (even better than hardy mountain men can) is next, then exceptional hearing, then “filching”. The next paragraph mentions picking pockets and...hmmm...detecting noise. 1e’s description of thievery being neither honorable or dishonorable is mimicked here. The text advises that thieves can be seen as romantic figures, but I don’t think it means that thieves are dreamy lovers. Ali Baba and Renault the Fox are mentioned. A chart with the thief skills is on the page, so they are not referenced directly in the text until a couple of paragraphs down, where a detailed explanation of each of the thief skills is given.

3rd Edition: unfortunately, I do not have any 3e products, so someone else may want to chip in on that edition’s description of thieves. I used to have the Basic Game—the one with 16 miniatures—but I can’t find it anywhere. I am afraid someone stole it.

Fourth Edition: The class is called “rogue”, here. The Core PHB gives some background ideas—an “agent from the deposed king’s intelligence network, an accused criminal on the lam, seeking to clear your name, a wiry performer whose goals transcend the theatrical stage, a kid trying to turn around your hard-luck story”, etc. Skills are not mentioned, except in the box that lays out the basic elements of the class (Hit points, defense bonuses, etc.) The rogue gets stealth and thievery, plus four others of the player’s choice. There are two builds—basically the thug and the sneak-thief.  In the 4e Essentials book, the “Thief” class is introduced as a particular rogue build. Skills *are* emphasized with the 4eE Thief.

5th Ed:(I only have the free Basic Rules for 5e) still a “rogue” here, rather than a “thief”; the emphasis is on the character’s variety of skills. In a later paragraph, the class is associated with “burglars, assassins, cut-throats, and con artists”, but allowance is made for rogues who are honest “locksmiths, investigators, and exterminators.”

D&D 6th edition: sixth edition dungeons and dragons keeps a lot of the core elements of the thief, but adds some very interesting twists that I think will please fans of the class, but I am not going to spoil those for you. You will just have to wait.
Title: Re: This thread is CLOSED cause nobody won’t talk to me more nicer (D&D thieves)
Post by: Ghostmaker on January 25, 2022, 10:51:46 AM
2E had four ... call them 'overclasses', where the classes were kind of set up. Warrior, Wizard, Rogue, Priest.

Warriors were fighters, paladins, and rangers. Wizards were mages/magic-users, and specialists (illusionists, etc). Rogues were thieves and (I think) bards? Priests were clerics and druids.

3E shifted the whole thief class to rogue (I guess the logic was that rogues weren't always thieves? Got me). Like I said, 'technician' or 'specialist' might be a better term, since 'skillmonkey' is so undignified :D Although Starfinder had 'operative' which would be neat too.
Title: Re: This thread is CLOSED cause nobody won’t talk to me more nicer (D&D thieves)
Post by: Armchair Gamer on January 25, 2022, 11:20:05 AM
Much less weird than level titles. It's really bizarre to go from 17th century France to the Heroic Age of Greece just by leveling from 5th to 6th level in fighter (swashbuckler to myrmidon).

  Try completely changing your religion when reaching 7th (B/X) or 8th (1E) as a cleric, becoming a "Lama", and then switching back to "Patriarch" at the next level. :)
Title: Re: This thread is CLOSED cause nobody won’t talk to me more nicer (D&D thieves)
Post by: cavalier973 on January 25, 2022, 11:26:02 AM
2E had four ... call them 'overclasses', where the classes were kind of set up. Warrior, Wizard, Rogue, Priest.

Warriors were fighters, paladins, and rangers. Wizards were mages/magic-users, and specialists (illusionists, etc). Rogues were thieves and (I think) bards? Priests were clerics and druids.

3E shifted the whole thief class to rogue (I guess the logic was that rogues weren't always thieves? Got me). Like I said, 'technician' or 'specialist' might be a better term, since 'skillmonkey' is so undignified :D Although Starfinder had 'operative' which would be neat too.

“Dungeoneers” or “Dunjuneer” is my particular favorite. “Treasure Hunter” also works. It is possible that simply calling the character an “adventurer” would fit, as well.
Title: Re: This thread is CLOSED cause nobody won’t talk to me more nicer (D&D thieves)
Post by: FingerRod on January 25, 2022, 01:19:12 PM
Much less weird than level titles. It's really bizarre to go from 17th century France to the Heroic Age of Greece just by leveling from 5th to 6th level in fighter (swashbuckler to myrmidon).

  Try completely changing your religion when reaching 7th (B/X) or 8th (1E) as a cleric, becoming a "Lama", and then switching back to "Patriarch" at the next level. :)

We typically used the titles to gauge relative strength. You weren’t literally a Swashbuckler, you could just fight as well as one. And then if you are on the high seas and run across fighters/pirates/whatever, they are likely to be Swashbucklers. If you found yourself fighting in an arena, you might be fighting a Champion. A Lord was the BBEG. The Village Priest was a level three cleric. 

We did that primarily because of the ridiculousness that you and Pat are pointing out. We couldn’t make it work in our heads. Of course, I later learned this is all due to the war gaming roots, etc., but that was not apparent to us at the time. Now it is a valuable tool when creating OD&D/early edition campaigns from scratch.
Title: Re: This thread is CLOSED cause nobody won’t talk to me more nicer (D&D thieves)
Post by: SHARK on January 25, 2022, 03:17:36 PM
Greetings!

Cortez, Pizzarro, and the other Conquistadors were all bad-asses with balls of fucking steel. They were often heavily outnumbered, and it was not certain they were going to win, through many battles they were in. And yet, the answer was always, load up the pistols, draw our swords, and God is with us!

Absolute courage. Rain or shine, they stomped and kicked ass. It's amazing what they accomplished!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: This thread is CLOSED cause nobody won’t talk to me more nicer (D&D thieves)
Post by: Ghostmaker on January 25, 2022, 03:21:52 PM
Greetings!

Cortez, Pizzarro, and the other Conquistadors were all bad-asses with balls of fucking steel. They were often heavily outnumbered, and it was not certain they were going to win, through many battles they were in. And yet, the answer was always, load up the pistols, draw our swords, and God is with us!

Absolute courage. Rain or shine, they stomped and kicked ass. It's amazing what they accomplished!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Cortez did benefit from being so obscenely lucky it was almost unfair. Seriously. Napoleon once quipped, when interviewing a general for a staff position, 'But is he lucky?'. Well, Cortez is the kind of guy who'd probably roll 3d6 six times for a D&D character and never roll below a 12.

It helped that he was able to (after a couple kickings) get the Tlaxcalans on his side, which gave him much better parity against the Aztecs in terms of numbers.

Now if the Spanish had been bright enough to realize 'El Dorado' was just a pipe dream...
Title: Re: This thread is CLOSED cause nobody won’t talk to me more nicer (D&D thieves)
Post by: Ruprecht on January 25, 2022, 04:12:25 PM
If I remember correctly Francisco Pizarro was super-lucky as well. Potato crops kept the Incas alive and they could only reliable be harvested during a small window of time and that required all hands. That and the Incas had just finished a civil war and the Inca emporer was busy at a big dinner to celebrate or something when Pizarro and his boys showed up.

A religious zealot would take that and Cortes's experience as a sign of divine favor no doubt.
Title: Re: This thread is CLOSED cause nobody won’t talk to me more nicer (D&D thieves)
Post by: Pat on January 25, 2022, 04:46:39 PM
In 1e, the thief profession is described as not dishonorable, but isn’t honorable, either. A couple of paragraphs down, it limits the alignment of the thief to neutral or evil (a thief can be lawful or good, but not lawful good). It says that the primary thief functions—pickpocketing, picklocketing, trap administration, moving about noiselessly, and hiding in shadows—are all self-explanatory. Then, the text helpfully explains these activities. The thief rounds out his functions with listening to doors, climbing surfaces—both up AND down—and attacking people when they turn their backs to the thief.
Did you look through the DMG? There's a whole section giving more detail on thief abilities.

D&D 6th edition: sixth edition dungeons and dragons keeps a lot of the core elements of the thief, but adds some very interesting twists that I think will please fans of the class, but I am not going to spoil those for you. You will just have to wait.
A looting skill?
Title: Re: This thread is CLOSED cause nobody won’t talk to me more nicer (D&D thieves)
Post by: GeekyBugle on January 25, 2022, 05:15:06 PM
In 1e, the thief profession is described as not dishonorable, but isn’t honorable, either. A couple of paragraphs down, it limits the alignment of the thief to neutral or evil (a thief can be lawful or good, but not lawful good). It says that the primary thief functions—pickpocketing, picklocketing, trap administration, moving about noiselessly, and hiding in shadows—are all self-explanatory. Then, the text helpfully explains these activities. The thief rounds out his functions with listening to doors, climbing surfaces—both up AND down—and attacking people when they turn their backs to the thief.
Did you look through the DMG? There's a whole section giving more detail on thief abilities.

D&D 6th edition: sixth edition dungeons and dragons keeps a lot of the core elements of the thief, but adds some very interesting twists that I think will please fans of the class, but I am not going to spoil those for you. You will just have to wait.
A looting skill?

Nah, the skill to tax people.
Title: Re: This thread is CLOSED cause nobody won’t talk to me more nicer (D&D thieves)
Post by: Melichor on January 25, 2022, 05:45:50 PM
It will be a social media grifting skill.
Title: Re: This thread is CLOSED cause nobody won’t talk to me more nicer (D&D thieves)
Post by: DocJones on January 25, 2022, 06:09:45 PM
There's only one class in  Thieves Guild  by GameLords.
Because "Sometimes it's more fun to play the bad guys"
Title: Re: This thread is CLOSED cause nobody won’t talk to me more nicer (D&D thieves)
Post by: Wntrlnd on January 25, 2022, 07:51:27 PM
Just reminded of that Gandalf (wizard) hired Bilbo to the party of dwarves (all fighters? Balin would probably be the one who fits "cleric" best, being the wisest of the dwarves, having a high perception and fearless) for the position of "burglar".

I know the younger me was very confused as to why Gandalf would call his friend basically a criminal and how what amounted to what looked to me a upper class british gentleman could be skilled in breaking and entering.

"Burglar" would be someone who break in and take things. Being stealthy and skilled in entering places they're not supposed to be.
In a game of Shadowrun or modern/science fiction that would be the Infiltrator, intrusion specialist, Security breacher or whatever that has a much nicer sounding name, but to modern to be used in a D&D game.

You need something more old fashioned named, and "thief" simply fits.

Title: Re: This thread is CLOSED cause nobody won’t talk to me more nicer (D&D thieves)
Post by: AtomicPope on February 17, 2022, 07:55:48 AM
Reading through the comments reminds me of Bilbo's argument with Thorin about being called "Burglar."  By the end of it he was a back-stabbing Thief and Burglar.

I really miss the AD&D titles.