Hey, my group are on a bit of a nostalgia kick at the moment and I'm going to be running a short AD&D second edition adventure (start at level 1, fight kobolds and carrion crawlers in a dungeon based mostly on the one in red box Basic). We played second edition a ton back when it was in print but then we upgraded to 3e and later 4e. We're all really keen to revisit our roots, so to speak, and see what we may have lost along the way.  

How did people handle stealth stuff before thieves came in? Even in 2e thieves have really crappy % scores, and their mere existence sort of implies that non-thief characters can't even try such things.

I'm thinking of implementing a house rule vaguely on these lines:

Anyone can move silently or hide in shadows on a Dex check. BUT this only works if you describe adequate precautions and no-one is specifically looking for you (ie a random patrol of kobolds is going past).

Thieves can roll Dex to stealth as above. If they fail, they can also use their % score as sort of a save against detection.

Thieves can also use their % score to hide from people who are actively looking for them, even where the circumstances are very unfavourable (minimum cover, creaking floorboards, etc). Stuff that a normal Dex check could never accomplish.

What do you think? Does this unfairly gimp thieves or not?

I know for 2e non thieves have a very low set of default percentages for things like climb walls. Believe non thieves can't do much to alter these base numbers either. If I recall the rules for non thieves doing this are in an odd spot in the book as well (took me a while to find when I ran my campaign last year).

I would consider treating the thief skill as move silently, meaning zero chance of detection if successful. Failure means you only move quietly like any non-thief, meaning you could be be detected by a perception check by the listener, or by "common sense" ruling by the DM.

Partly suggested by: http://www.philotomy.com/#thieves

Basically this makes sneaking a lot more viable for everyone. It also reflects my general dislike of using ability score checks--although, strangely, I have no strong objection to using an ability score for the aforementioned "perception" roll. Maybe because it's a passive check. Anyway, I'd say that moving silently would guarantee surprise, while moving quietly would give normal chance of surprise, and moving noisily would give no chance of surprise--all subject to the activity of the surprisees and environment. It's not hard to sneak up on someone with their back to you, if they're in a machine room or a rock concert.

(As for historically, in 1e I think I did the opposite--you were always heard if you didn't roll a successful sneak roll. This led to dissatisfaction and was probably part of the impetus to explore other systems.)

I seem to recall reading that LotFP gives everyone base scores for sneaking and other common adventuring activities.

Quote from: soviet;504796Anyone can move silently or hide in shadows on a Dex check. BUT this only works if you describe adequate precautions and no-one is specifically looking for you (ie a random patrol of kobolds is going past).

Thieves can roll Dex to stealth as above. If they fail, they can also use their % score as sort of a save against detection.

Thieves can also use their % score to hide from people who are actively looking for them, even where the circumstances are very unfavourable (minimum cover, creaking floorboards, etc). Stuff that a normal Dex check could never accomplish.

What do you think? Does this unfairly gimp thieves or not?

This is very similar to how I've handled it since 1975 when the Greyhawk supplement came up with the thief class. Anyone could try to hide in cover (in the brush, behind the sofa, etc.) if they did so when people were not looking for them or looking at them.  Thieves had an additional special chance listed in the table if they failed at this type of hiding AND could use their special chance to hide in shadows if their was no actual cover around or to fade into cover even if opponents were staring at them.

Thief abilities were simply above-and-beyond what non-thieves could do. Example, anyone could try to disarm a trap by describing what they did if they (the player) could figure it out, while thieves had a chance to disarm the trap even if the player had no idea how to do so. Thieves could try to pick pockets with no chance of detection where normally the target would get an saving throw to detect the attempt. Etc.

This explained why the chances of success were so low for low level thieves, the abilities were simply above and beyond what everyone else could even try to do -- thief training allowed thieves to develop what were basically "impossible/supernatural" abilities like those possessed by thieves and ninja in legends.

I'd use the surprise roll as the base mechanism for sneaking around.  That goes for Thieves, too, it's just that they have special abilities (e.g., move silently) that can give them an even better chance to surprise.

Example:  a PC wants to sneak through a moonlit garden and gain entrance to a tower at its center.  There is a guard the PC needs to sneak past.

If the PC is a Fighter, I'd allow him to use a surprise roll to sneak past the guard.  I'd modify the surprise roll if I thought the circumstances warranted it (e.g., the Fighter blackens his face and weapons, removes his mail and hard-soled boots, et cetera).

If the PC is a Thief, I'd use exactly the same approach as with the Fighter, but the Thief would also get a chance to apply his move silently ability.  If the Thief succeeds, he's making no sound that can be heard, which will definitely improve his chance of surprise.  If he fails, he's moving quietly, but not completely silently, just like the Fighter PC does when he sneaks around.

Note that this is BTB AD&D (at least 1e -- my 2e books are packed away in box, somewhere, so I don't have those handy).  The 1e Players Handbook says:  "...thieves, as well as characters able to move quietly because of a magical device such as boots of elvenkind have a chance to be absolutely silent when moving...Success indicates silent movement and an improved chance to surprise an opponent or slip past it." (PH pg 102)

Also, see this discussion.

I'm a heretic when it comes to this, but I like clean integration of mechanics.

For stealth, I'm assuming Finesse, which I associate with Dex (I translate DEX into Senses in my worlds, Senses composed of both Reflex and Perception -- so I don't have to deal with stupid things like "wise bears" or whatnot. This is otherwise TMI, you may as well ignore.)

So, as people have to normally describe what they are doing for their task resolution, any descriptives they give me provide details to adjudicate + or - modifiers. Any surrounding description I provide as GM gives another modifier.

Here's where I change things:

PCs without the Move Silently thief skill roll against their DEX as an attribute check. Trying to sneak up on your wife cooking dinner, roll under against your DEX, maybe +2 because she's really focused and not paying attention to other sounds. Generally very easy for me to use.

PCs with Move Silently thief skill get 20+(conversion of move silently % skill into 5% increments) as an attribute check. Thus a thief with 15% Move Silent has a "DEX check" = 20+3 = 23. If it was the same example as above to surprise your cooking wife, your thief would have to roll under 23 on a d20, basically an automatic success.

Since doing maths all the time is silly, I just have people convert their Thief Skill % into this d20 value beforehand. This is a powerful check value granted. But the application is sufficiently conditional that I'm fine with it being a class thing. Outside of thief skill application, I just make the PC use regular attribute checks.

Essentially, unless it's crazy hard to do, most thieves are trained in such skills as to not have to worry about the check. In this way low % doesn't mean anything bad, but high % means talent beyond just the amazing and into the epic.

So walking through a store overfilled with bell chimes while covered in spiky armor and carrying a delicately balanced teacups on saucers -- normally beyond average person's capacity -- is something that approaches an interesting challenge to a trained thief with a high Move Silently %.

I translate "Move Silently" as the thief moving with no noise whatsoever, as if the thief was in the radius of a Silence spell. That made the skill much more special.

As for "Move Quietly", anyone can do it. I let the players give me some roleplay about how their guy in full plate lugging 300 coins in a sack is going to move quietly, and then I put the die rolling onus on whoever may be listening.

Way back in AD&D, one of the things that we always did was to use the Elf and/or Halfling chance of Surprise(alone or with a group of only Elves and/or Halflings and not in metal armor) as a "Sneak" for non-thieves.

Non-Thieves get the Surprise roll. You can give them a bonus for really good precautions.

Count me in as a DM who interprets the Thieves' skill to Move Silently as a step above and beyond just "moving quietly", and as a DM who would allow any PC to sneak around, with a surprise roll modified by circumstances accordingly.

There is, in the Dungeon Masters Guide, a table that notes the % chance of given demihumans to hear noises.  I would use that as a starting point and rather than have the players have a skill to be silent (other than the thief), I'd have it as a chance for the monsters to hear.

Remember, your thief is skulking around in padded boots, oiled armor, black cloak, etc.  The redoubtable fighters are in clinking mail, carrying swords, etc.

It's integrated into the surprise roll.

33% chance of surprise if being quiet.
66% chance if moving silently and/or invisibly.
0% chance if wearing heavy armor and talking in normal voices.

The 'Surprise' roll is the stealth roll. It's just assumed you'll be attacking. If you gain surprise, but don't actually want to have an encounter, then you can back off or go around or pick their pockets and leave - and there won't be an encounter, because they never saw you.

edit: If your armor is making significant noise, you shouldn't be within 90 feet of the lead group. Fighters don't wear heavy armor in dungeons, in my games. Unless they know they're going to get into a fight, go back to the forward camp and armor up.

I handle it based on two assumptions:

1) Just as thieves can fight (though not as well as other classes), other classes can perform certain thief functions (though not as well as thieves).

2) The scores for such skills as moving silently, hiding in shadows, picking locks, etc are a baseline, and depending on the situation, they can be easier or harder. For example, a thief wearing a dark-colored cloak that blends in well with the shadows gets a bonus to his or her chances to hide. Wearing a cloak in safety orange while hiding gets penalties because it's stupid.

I use this formula for a quick and easy way to decide just how difficult a task might be:

Very easy (x3)
Easy (x2)
Standard
Difficult (half)
Extremely difficult (quarter)
You gotta be kidding me! (10% of base score)
Get da fuck outta here! (2%)

Round all fractions to the nearest whole number.

A non-thief trying to hide in the shadows of a dungeon corridor will do so at 1-3 steps* worse than a thief. For example, a thief might have a 25% to hide in shadows (not including DEX or racial adjustments). However, he's wearing a coarse dark grey cloak covering most of his body and on top of that, there are some very deep, dark shadows for him to hide in. So I would rule that the cloak gives a bonus of 5-10% (let's say 10% if it's a close match with the background) for 35%. Hiding among such dark shadows should be Very Easy (105%) for a thief. A fighter's base chance would be standard under those same conditions (35%), and for a cavalier or paladin it would be difficult at best (17%).


*
Thief/Monk/Assassin -straight up

Ranger/Druid/Bandit/Barbarian/Bard -1 (straight up in outdoor/wilderness conditions)

Fighter/Magic-User/Illusionist/Cleric -2

Cavalier/Paladin -3

Quote from: Kaldric;505299It's integrated into the surprise roll.

33% chance of surprise if being quiet.
66% chance if moving silently and/or invisibly.
0% chance if wearing heavy armor and talking in normal voices.

The 'Surprise' roll is the stealth roll. It's just assumed you'll be attacking. If you gain surprise, but don't actually want to have an encounter, then you can back off or go around or pick their pockets and leave - and there won't be an encounter, because they never saw you.

edit: If your armor is making significant noise, you shouldn't be within 90 feet of the lead group. Fighters don't wear heavy armor in dungeons, in my games. Unless they know they're going to get into a fight, go back to the forward camp and armor up.

Of course!  Here I am trying to reinvent the wheel.  Yes, use surprise.

(also, the fighters and armor thing is a tad weird; I don't think I could convince my players on a dare to go into a dungeon unarmored...!)

I think the surprise thing sounds like the best solution, yeah. Thanks everyone.

My main dilemma at this point is whether to go red box basic or actual 2e. There's a lot of 2e nostalgia building up in my group right now, so I'm probably better off going with that, but there are some things about red box that really appeal to me - the combat sequence, the gold for XP rule, the simplicity of the overall system, and also just the magnificence of the art.

2e was the first RPG I played, but red box Basic was the first RPG I bought. Hmm.