Forgotten Kingdoms Forums

I think once again we are drifting with some of these posts.....

You have to look at Cyric's main idea here.: BALANCE

You may have a unique fighter that does this and that......blah blah. This is talk about the general way things are.

If a fighter can deal more damage and take more hits than a thief......why have a thief? Yes, yes....I know......their extra skills.....they can steal, pick lock, backstab, etc.

Look at it this way though. I am talking about ROUGH areas. Unless you are picking a lock, why have a thief?

Bash is much better than backstab for almost all situations. Circlestab is extremely similar to punch/kick and you don't need a '"diversion" for those. It goes straight back to the same question: If a fighter can deal more and take more.....why have a thief?

We are talking about how to make this possible and BALANCE things more. If you take away some of the damage fighters deal and give that to thieves....they become very valuable. IMO it does create more balance.

Cyric's idea works very well, I have seen it used other places. It creates a NEED for every class when you group. If you are missing classes, things can still be done, but you are handicapped. All classes creates a very powerful group and makes everything lots more fun IMO.

Balek's question about backstabbing during combat is basically outlining Cyric's sneak attack idea. Its a good idea and should be used.

I do agree that thieves NEED fighters, but I don't agree that fighters need thieves. After the first round of swings....there is not a lot to do for a thief but to hope they don't catch aggro from the mobs and possibly die. I have played thieves plenty and know how things work with them codewise.

They are actually one of my favorite classes. Try to think from an overall standpoint in your situations.....there are always exceptions.

Jake

I think you emphasize battle quite too heavily. A fighter is called a fighter because he, well, fights. A thief is called a thief because he, well, thieves. Remember that there is much more to the MUD than razing areas and killing things. Sure, when you want a lock picked, who do call? The thief. But when you need something bashed to pieces, who do you call? The fighter. The fighter is not much good for anything else. The fighter and the thief have their specific purposes. Fighter fights, thief steals and does thiefy stuff. If your thief is dying in battle, maybe you should not be going into that high level of an area. Or bring a priest/wizard/bard along. Their defensive/healing/buff spells will keep you from dying.

You mention balance but in my opinion, the thief is balanced. His lack of fighting capabilites is offset with unique extra-battle skills. Maybe the thief is not meant to be powerful, just as the woodsman is not meant for the city, or a mage is not meant to wield big swords, or a fighter is not meant to be stealthy.

Keep in mind that battle is not everything. But just my thoughts.

Indeed, as Argentia said, this game isn't about battle.

Thieves have their own unique form of roleplay, the thing that drives this entire game, that fighters and warriors cannot emulate. The same can be said of each class in the game.

But getting back to the topic of discussion, dual backstab, I cringe at the thought. Sneak attack would be interesting, though, I believe, but I've seen some pretty nasty backstabs that have drained a lot of health from a PC opponent in spars, and I do not believe thieves are any weaker than they should be to maintain 'correct' roleplay. There is a reason thieves are thieves and fighters are fighters. We make up for our shortcomings with alternative means, that's life

Obviously battle is not everything. But since that is the main topic of this WHOLE thread.....a COMBAT skill...... that should be the main focus.

Which was why I was talking about it. I am trying to get thieves more involved in battle. I think they should be more of an asset than a problem. That is why I am discussing it.

I think each class should have a place in almost any situation. Hence the term BALANCE that just keeps seeming to come up.

I am not looking for a Pking Assasin type class, if you think that....you are misunderstanding. I just think that each class should be able to hold their own in a variety of situations. I do not think the thief class has that currently.

I am going to shift my focus. I want something like sneak attack. That is the main point of this. I agreed with Cyric and think its a great idea. Everything else is fine as is. I just want another grouping type skill on the thief list....

Jake

Kregor wrote:I agree that fighters, in addition to being damage takers, have also always been the highest damage dealers, and that has pretty much always been the design in D&D from early on....

Fighters have always had the best hit table...

Correct. But those are hit die, meaning their ability to hit the monster is higher. But fighters have never had the ability to tack on 6d10 damage to an enemy (their str bonus is around +5 or +6 at 24ish str, I think.)

Now, take a fighter that at level 20 can do 4 attacks (on full attack). Lets say each landing for a average of 20 damage (weapon damage +hit or +dam and magical props of the weapon). +5 to each because of the str mod. 4 x 25 = 100 damage. (Assuming all land and beat the AC)

A level 20 thief attacks the same monster, solo. Thieves get 3 attacks (again, full attack). Sneak attack is only an option if he wins the initiative roll. Lets say, for the sake of argument, he doesn't. He's only doing 10 damage because of smaller weapon. +2 mod on str, because he isn't as strong. 3 x 12 = 36 damage. He's outclassed solo.

But if he attacks the same monster, WHILE the fighter is distracting, the thief gains the 6d10 Sneak Attack at level 20. That's an average of +30 damage per hit. 3 x 42 = 126 damage.

So, in this very simplistic model, a thief with the benifit of a party, can outdamage a fighter (with D&D settings).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, as to the roleplay behind a thief not being in battle.

Pick Lock - Bash & Knock take the place of pick-lock. Picking is only useful when the object in question has a specific program designed to only open for a thief. There are some in the game, and oddly enough, these are the least popular quests out there - This might or might not be attributed to the fact that thieves die quickly in a group, and add nothing to combat. I believe some priests classes get the skill as well, furthering the non-uniqueness.

Steal - Kill and get all corpse, or stun and get what is in the inventory is most often used for this problem.

Hide / Sneak - RP situations. Hide is good, if the thief wants to sneak around and scout. But mages with Invis are better -- You don't have to refresh them when stamina is low.

On the flip side, because a fighter is called a "fighter" and a thief is called a "thief" does not nessesarily mean that one should stick to battles, and the other should stick to stealing. On that note, should a mage stick to a laboratory and books? They can cast offensive spells, just as a thief can backstab. But should they be in battle?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm not pressing the issue, as I don't mind one way or another. Just putting down what I have observed.

Pick Lock - Bash & Knock take the place of pick-lock. Picking is only useful when the object in question has a specific program designed to only open for a thief. There are some in the game, and oddly enough, these are the least popular quests out there - This might or might not be attributed to the fact that thieves die quickly in a group, and add nothing to combat. I believe some priests classes get the skill as well, furthering the non-uniqueness.

There's actually a great idea in there, perhaps making chests and the like destroy their contents if bashed?

Knock is a magical spell for unlocking, but even that says it's great force, so it may be a good thing to add for knock too. If you break a chest or such thing with other items in it you risk destroying what's inside. while a thief can safely pick the lock.

Let it be known that I have never ever gotten doorbash to work, and only sucessfully managed to hurt myself.

Killing/stunning just to get the items - never done this myself, but you still need to be able to beat the person first. In fact I didn't even know you could take items from a stunned person...:: shrug ::

Invis - you can still tell when someone enters the room, ie the wizard is not sneaking and will make noise by stepping on branches, walking on cobblestones, rustling leaves, kicking up dirt, ect.

I will agree that the thief does get jipped in battle because of the code-makeup of the game. If grouped, they will automatically enter a fight without a chance to backstab. I have never played a thief, so I do not know if backstab can work during battle, but I love Balek's idea of config -autoassist and hiding, then backstabbing after the battle has begun. I wonder if this works when implemented in the game?

I can doorbash fine

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Thieves were never meant to go toe-to-toe with monsters. Just as fighters were never meant to pick locks.

Why aren't people doing the quests that require a thief? Probably due to the lack of properly aligned/faithed thieves. Sacrificing quest completion for good roleplay is an excellent trade, IMO.

Every class has it's strengths and weaknesses. Instead of trying to compensate for the weaknesses by increasing the class strengths, roleplay, make friends and adventure TOGETHER where the combined class strengths add up to be greater than the sum of their parts.

Every class has it's strengths and weaknesses. Instead of trying to compensate for the weaknesses by increasing the class strengths, roleplay, make friends and adventure TOGETHER where the combined class strengths add up to be greater than the sum of their parts.

This is the issue that we're debating here. It's not agreed upon that thieves really have many strengths.

The concept behind many of the ideas presented above is that thieves are, in most cases, a lot like bad fighters. In the rare case when one actually needs a thief, they're great to have around, but for 95% of the time their weaknesses greatly outweigh their strengths.

Thieves were never meant to go toe-to-toe with monsters.

The idea here is not to give thieves the ability to go toe-to-toe with monsters. We're not trying to up their AC or give them an unlimited number of dodges. What we're looking at is the possibility of finding something that a thief can do to be helpful to a group on a regular basis. In fact, the plan I outlined above doesn't involve any situations that don't involve groups.

Essentially, this idea would do nothing except encourage grouping.

I completely agree with what Balek said.

We are looking at the grouping aspect ONLY. That will, in turn, enhance this RP that you so greatly want.

JAke

Why aren't people doing the quests that require a thief? Probably due to the lack of properly aligned/faithed thieves.

I am going to have to agree with this statement. The reason why I have rarely ever grouped with a thief is because of thier consistant evil and chaotic alignments. Don't get me wrong, these alignments are completely fine. But my personal reason for never having grouped with thieves has nothing to do with their lack of abilities, but rather the confliction between my character's and thier alignments.

However, my fighter character did once venture into the Undermountain with a thief character. The thief actually stood up quite well and needed less rest than my fighter. Also, it was just the two of us. We did not go into the UM very deep, but I still feel that this is representative of the thief's adequate abilities. The thief did not even use backstab, not once.

Therefor, in my eyes it is not the battle-abilities that keep thieves from groups, but rather alignment and personality conflictions.(IE the lone-wolf rogue, the constant dressing in black[kind of creepy ], evil/chaotic rogues wandering Waterdeep, ect.) Have a little originallity with your rogues/thieves, get away from the whole all-in-black deal. Maybe come up with a creative faith, instead of the usual Mask.(Though Mask is always a wonderful diety!)

I can name five thieves of Tymora, who are all active, off the top of my head right now.

Danica

Active within the past... oh, three to six months?

That means for approximately 33-30 months I haven't really been able to find any thieves with whom I could roleplay and adventure.

See where this is going now?

I think it's great that there's been an upsurge in good aligned thieves. And yes, I have gone adventuring with a few of them.

But my personal reason for never having grouped with thieves has nothing to do with their lack of abilities, but rather the confliction between my character's and thier alignments.

That's my primary reason for not adventuring with thieves. Again, I don't see that it's the coded class that needs adjustment, rather the methods of roleplay employed by most thieves.

I can name five thieves of Tymora, who are all active, off the top of my head right now.

Yep, the very thief I adventured with was one of them. I have grouped with two others before, consistanty RPed with one, and occasionally with others.

Goods are not the only people to group and adventure. Not every character holds the morals of a paladin or a lawful character. To say no one groups with thieves because of their alignment is incorrect. I can also name three thieves right off the top of my head from prior to this time frame. Why is it such a bad thing people want to make thieves more giving in a group? No one in this thread is saying "omg i want to be ninja lolz". People who play thieves are coming forward and saying hey, I'm kind of getting left out here, and I'd like to be included. Many people are perfectly capable of playing a "properly" aligned thief. I play a Tymoran thief that most people don't even know is a thief until she tells them. She has never once been invited to go with a group, and I know that is not about my alignment. And on opposite roll of the die, I cannot name a single time I have had a thief along on an adventure as Daunyelle. Which I have been on many more with her than any of my goods combined. I think it's great to see a post that asks for a class to be made better for groups. Having a thief myself I completely agree and am very happy someone wants to make a thieves adventuring more plentiful by making them an asset to a group. This isn't about a thieves alignment or rp, that's not what the thread was made for and now people who play thieves are becoming offended and deffensive.


Danica

What about having a feat ability to train Dual backstab...I don't know I just see so many daggers and wonder how one can get them both into a fellows back with ease..I think a skill leading up to it might help. Of course I have not seen many backstabbings and could be a little off, mayhaps a dagger juggling skill feat that could enable you to train dual backstab?

Dagger Juggler feat:
You are used to dueling with two daggers and your balance is incredible. This feat allows you to dual wield daggers with expertise and opens the dual backstab skill.

...just an idea.

But my personal reason for never having grouped with thieves has nothing to do with their lack of abilities, but rather the confliction between my character's and thier alignments.

We're starting to miss the point here. You're giving us some reasons why you don't take thieves along with you. We're well aware that people who steal are inherently at odds with a paladin or or some other Lawful/Good character..

Let's look at this from a different angle. If someone's making a group, they might say, "I need a fighter to stand up front and take damage." or "I need a mage to go along and cast defensive spells and fireballs." or "I need a priest so that when I get hurt, I don't have to sit down and wait to heal for a half hour." No one, however, unless they're going to a dungeon (that they know in advance) has a lock that they need a thief for, will ever think about how much they would like to have a thief go along. They might say, "You know, if I can't find a fighter, I could use a thief in a pinch."

You're giving us good reasons to not include a thief, but those reasons could apply to any character of an opposing alignment. We're looking for good ways to improve the class and make them valuable to a group, rather than liabilities.

We're well aware that people who steal are inherently at odds with a paladin or or some other Lawful/Good character..

Not just the paladin or the lawful person, but really anyone not evil(Or CN) will be at ends with someone who steals, in my opinion. But I do not think I can count on one hand the number of thieves who have stolen right in front of my obviously law-abiding or generally good characters(Or even neutral). Seeing such theft right before my character's eyes, would you really expect my character to say "I think I'll group with a thief today" even if s/he has never grouped with that particular thief before? ICly, the character would feel nervous by the presence of such a person, and also would not want to be present when/if trouble arises, lest they be caught in it. There is, and you all must admit, a general bias against those who style themselves thieves. Again, the very common all-black-dress and the blatant disregard of Waterdeep rules/laws often times gives you away as a thief.

That aside, I still think dual backstab is too powerful for a normal thief to have. It would be acceptable, I think, and very much so for a prestige class skill. Or in the case of a reward to a well-RPed character. But I do not think I like the idea of every thief and his brother being able to jam two knives into other people's backs. I would imagine it is difficult enough to find a good spot to stick one knife in. Two would require time to stop and consider.

My idea: have a creative thief. I mean, really creative. How about a thief who follows Selune and uses his/her tracking skills to lead lost travelers to safety? A rogue of Corellon who steals back stolen Elven artifacts? A thief of Torm or maybe Tyr who uses his knowledge of stealth to combat the followers of Cyric, Mask, ect.? Players tend to enjoy creative and lively characters and want to spend more time with them, go on more adventures with them, because RP follows and finds a well-RPed and thought-out character, I think.
NOTE: Please don't take this as a bash in any way to existing thieves, because every character is great in their own way and without evils and chaotics, goods and lawfuls could not exist, and vice versa!

Not just the paladin or the lawful person, but really anyone not evil(Or CN) will be at ends with someone who steals, in my opinion.

I don't think that's entirely true. Someone who is CG or True Neutral could be fine with stealing, in my opinion.

But I do not think I can count on one hand the number of thieves who have stolen right in front of my obviously law-abiding or generally good characters(Or even neutral). Seeing such theft right before my character's eyes, would you really expect my character to say "I think I'll group with a thief today" even if s/he has never grouped with that particular thief before?

Well, this discussion isn't entirely about good, law abiding characters. No one goes out of their way to group with a thief. Evils don't. Neutrals don't. Chaotics don't. It's not just the characters who don't like theft who don't group with thieves. No one is questioning the fact that good, lawful characters don't want to group with slimy, shifty evil thief types. No one ever goes out of their way to get a thief in a group unless there's going to be a lock to pick. If a thief is in a group, it's either because he's friends with, or because the thief decided to cling to the group and no one objected to their presence. People will go out of their way to find a fighter, wizard or priest, but never a thief (unless, there is the rare situation in which a lock must be picked).

My second issue with this statement is that not all thieves steal. You outlined a a few examples in your post of atypical thieves. Even if someone followed through on those ideas, there would still not be anyone who runs around looking for a thief unless they need a lock picked. Good , non-stealing thieves would be in no higher demand than other thieves, except for quests involving a lock.

My idea: have a creative thief. I mean, really creative.

Well, that's all well and good, but this isn't the issue we're trying to address. We're not looking for new character ideas for thieves, we're looking for something that a thief can do to contribute to a group on a regular basis, apart from a glib tongue and a tendency to require healing.

I'll restate our idea from above. We're not really looking at a dual backstab anymore, Tretch agreed that Cyric's idea was better. It's essentially similar to the idea I outlined above, whereby a thief can backstab PCs and mobs that are already in combat, thus introducing a sort of "flanking." Further details are provided above.