Thieves

[Celjabba]

Originally Posted by Anthony

It's 15 points for a bonus to a roll that will probably be attempted (let alone failed) fewer than 15 times per campaign. It's worth maybe 5 points and is a dubious investment even at that price.

It's 15 points for *not rolling*.

This lets you walk along a tightrope, ledge, tree limb, or other anchored surface without having to make a die roll.

It is useless on a featureless plane, or in a dungeon made of 2 meter wide and 2 meter high stone straight corridors between rooms ...

It is great, amazing even, in a place with deep chasm and narrow bridges to be crossed inside a no-mana zone, when visiting tree dwellers, when crawling among humongous spider webs or exploring a city carved inside a glacier where every single surface count as slippery ...

One of my player with an enchanted rope that could be anchored (almost) anywhere loved the advantage and the mobility it gave him.

The +4 against knockback (hello mr air elemental ...) and the +6 when moving across slippery surface are nice to have too when everyone else is falling down around you.

The only modification I gave the advantage is to also allow it to cancel up to -6 penalties for bad footing in combat (ie almost always, since the base is -2/-1) if these are due to wet, slippery, or unstable ground.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Celjabba

It's 15 points for *not rolling*.

I didn't say "you can't have it", I said "make it optional", with a prediction that people won't actually think it's worth 15 points.

[Celjabba]

Originally Posted by Anthony

I didn't say "you can't have it", I said "make it optional", with a prediction that people won't actually think it's worth 15 points.

If a player asked me to move it to the optional list and free the 15 cp (likely to make a more "assassin" focused built), I wouldn't say no.

But I was disagreeing on your statement "it is a terrible advantage", not on the "make it optional".

Also, one of my houserule since the first day I started playing DFRPG is that all my players get one level of luck free (so 2 level if there is a mandatory one in the template).
So the thief and a few other have much more flexibility on their options choice, since most player would want luck.
This may have helped, but I can say that the player that ran a thief in my game was happy with the character, even with the split attribute making him less "point-efficient", and used perfect balance many times. Certainly more than 15 times :)
But i ran a campaign that visited (among other places) ice caverns with elementals, a treetop city, a giant spider lair and other places where the thief (and the druid) had opportunities to shine.

[sir_pudding]

The ninja in one of my games certainly made regular use of the being able to run on tightropes part.

[mburr0003]

Originally Posted by sjmdw45

In dungeon crawls, the thief does already have a Gizmos which sort of symbolizes the same thing, and access to Serendipity, but Gizmos can only produce tools, not relevant documents or contacts, and players don't control Serendipity.

Two simple changes: Allow Gizmos to cover single use Contacts and Allies, ala "I paid them in advance" (I'll have to double check the cost of single use Contacts and Allies), and I always give the Player input control over Serendipity.

Because otherwise it'll never come up because I'm not incharge of remembering the PC's Advantages...

Originally Posted by Celjabba

The only modification I gave the advantage is to also allow it to cancel up to -6 penalties for bad footing in combat (ie almost always, since the base is -2/-1) if these are due to wet, slippery, or unstable ground.

I like that, consider it yoinked. Because the only PCs I've ever seen take where parkourista 3rd story cat-burglar types... and even then it very, very rarely was worth it in my opinion.

[tbone]

Originally Posted by Dalin

I'm curious about improvements to Perfect Balance. My adult group is in a distinct minority in that many of them love that disadvantage even though I've told them that the community at large finds it overpriced.

I take it from your players' response that you're doing the right thing: giving them challenges that showcase PB. Really, it's not a bad advantage; it's superhuman, Legolas-like balance, as you mention elsewhere.

That said: While PB's big balance bonuses to stay standing on a dangerous perch, after knockback, etc. are nice, where non-extreme balance challenges are concerned, the thief needs PB less than most delvers, as DX 15 alone is usually enough.

For any GM facing a thief unhappy with PB, there are plenty of ideas floating around out there. Like any of these:

• Readily let thief players drop PB from the template if they want. (Thieves don't all have to have the Legolas shtick; DX alone gives them impressive balance. But the GM should still toss in the occasional challenge that'll make the player look longingly at PB...)
• Let thieves (or anyone) buy Balancing (+5 to balance rolls for [5]) from Action 3 as a low-cost alternative to PB.
• A borrowing from Action 4: Let PB include the Sure-Footed perk for all terrain types (i.e., no penalties on attack or defense for bad footing). That's a big improvement to the advantage, and a benefit that DX alone doesn't grant.
• Extend PB's +1 skill bonus to more skills: say, Acrobatics, Climbing, Dancing, Immovable Stance, Light Walk, and Skiing. (Granted, the additions aren't solid thieving skills, but they arguably make sense all the same.) This makes PB akin to a 10-point advantage (sort of along the lines of Sensitive Touch) plus a 5-point Talent.
• Let PB allow the purchase of Light Walk (another Legolas trick!) and Immovable Stance.
• Let PB grant +1 to resist takedowns and throws (which rely heavily on taking the target off balance).
• Use whatever DF Denizens: Thieves ends up suggesting as ways to boost PB.

Something among those should please those thieves feeling burdened by PB...

[Dammann]

I agree with anyone suggesting PB should be optional, and it is a significant point sink. I still think that the central reason Thieves seem difficult to play is that they divide their points between a brainy and a nimble focus. It’s a bit like Holy Warriors, only more so; Holy Warriors are not Knights with cleric-lite strapped alongside, they’re a template that covers multiple focuses, and sacrifices depth for breadth. At least they have a cheap talent to help; Thieves need their own analogue to Holiness. Is Rascal a thing? Knave? Scoundrel? We need a term of art or two and we’re set.

I like the idea of using talents and lowering the load on IQ, or alternatively on DX. I can see a (under)world where there are smart thieves and nimble thieves, with some switch hitters. Maybe Scoundrel boosts DX based skills that Thieves need while Rascal boosts IQ skills. Then Thieves choose IQ or DX so that they have more general aptitude.

There are just some templates that are easy, some that are hard, and some that are really tricky if the adventure isn’t designed with the template in mind. Swashbucklers, Knights, and Barbarians are pretty straightforward. With a good spell list, Wizards are too. Thieves are utility generalists with demanding and high stakes roles, Druids get nerfed once they’re in most dungeons, Martial Artists bring a fist to a sword fight, although that isn’t the only option, and Holy Warriors have one foot in the fight and one foot in holy feats (though the Holiness talent makes this much less onerous). I try to let players know what they’re getting into if they’re new, and rely on experienced players to make informed choices.

Anyway, I bet Mr. Rice has lots of clever suggestions, and I can’t wait to see that Denizens entry. It’s been on the way for a while, gotta be out soon (fingers crossed).

[tbone]

Originally Posted by sjmdw45

P.S. #DailyHouserule on Twitter is terrific!

A belated "thank you" to the couple of kind people saying this. To recap, since last Feb 1 I've been posting #DailyHouserule tweets, one a day for a year, with some sort of small house rule, GM tip, new gear item, whatever, just for the fun of it and to get the #GURPS hashtag out there more.

Less than two months left in this little project (and I think Twitter will still be alive to see me to the end : ).

===

To connect that to this thread: From the start, I thought that as soon as Thieves came out, I'd take any ideas that I had tossed out in the Thieves playtest but that didn't make the book, and if any of those ideas still seemed worthy, I'd turn them into #DailyHouserule tweets. Well, Thieves may or may not appear soon enough for that, but I'm sure I'll find a future home for any skullduggery ideas that didn't make the book. (If any do appear in the book, the way to nab those will of course be to buy the tome!)

===

And to segue from that to Perfect Balance: One thing I recall suggesting for Thieves was a look at the business of clambering atop giant creatures , presumably to do nasty things to them up-close. Surprise, the just-released Serpents of Legend tackles that sort of action (so there's another reason to go forth and buy that!). It's focused on climbing on creatures and maintaining a grip up there (all of which is cool!), whereas I had a more thief-related image in mind: balancing atop a creature, even running about up there, like Legolas hanging ten on a Mûmakil.

That's the sort of crazy task that Perfect Balance would aid immensely. But I also had in mind another thief specialty: backstabbing. That is, if a giant beast has no way of blocking, parrying, dodging, or really even seeing that little thief clinging to its back, would that meet the condition of "...a melee attack that allows no active defense...because the victim couldn’t see it coming"?

I can see arguments made either way. It doesn't have to be easy for a thief to claim that expert backstab bonus; perhaps it should require solid success on really tough rolls to balance or maintain grip atop that twisting, bucking target. But I recall there was a lot of talk in the playtest about thieves needing more "big kill" abilities. I think Thieves will offer some new goods there, but I still love the image of a thief seizing her moment as a Giant Monster Killer through nothing more than Perfect Balance, Expert Backstabbing, and insane daring. (That's the sort of craziness we want to encourage, IMO...)

===

Alas, IIRC, there wasn't much interest in exploring the beast-surfing idea in the playtest, so I don't expect the book will address it. (We'll see.) If it doesn't, I'll play with it more and write up something. In the meantime, go check out Serpents to get PCs climbing up big monsters - and then, GM willing, use amazing balance and maybe even thiefly backstabbing prowess to wreak some havoc up there.

[malloyd]

Originally Posted by tbone

It's a pretty obvious improvement for any thief player wanting to help out more in combat.

But makes you look increasingly like a Swashbuckler. This is actually I think much of the problem with "thieves" in gaming. A lot of the stuff they actually do in stories, we've offloaded to some other class - they scout things (pushed off to Rangers and Scouts), they con people into doing things for you (pushed to Bards), they gather information (pushed to Sages or the rumor table), they fight competently with light weapons (pushed to Swashbucklers) or kill people from ambush (pushed to Scouts or Assassins).... Any time there is something cool a fictional thief does, it's cool enough to spin off into its own class, leaving the "thief" for just the residue.

You see traces of similar complaints about wizards in systems with a lot of specialist magicians, especially if you actually forbid the split off spells to wizards, which is why games mostly don't, allowing "classical" wizards to remain generalists. Yeah healing is traditionally an exception, but if you banned wizards from using illusions or summoning or elemental spells too....

[sjmdw45]

I've been on the lookout lately for "thief" archetypes in fiction and I think I found a decent one: in Jim Butcher's novel The Aeronaut's Windlass, the viewpoint characters consist of an airship captain, a talking cat, and two noble-born cadet guardswomen (one of whom is lower-class despite her noble birth and who speaks Cat, the language, and one of whom is a highly-trained engineer despite her noble birth), and one apprentice wizard (etherealist).

And then there's this supporting character:

“Stern,” he said, fighting to keep his voice steady and calm. “Get a look; come back quick, no dawdling.”

“Captain,” said a slender, dark-haired man a good many years younger than the average crew member of the Predator. Stern had been a grubby midshipman in the deployment that had ended Grimm’s career, and had (against Grimm’s express instructions) followed him from the Fleet onto Predator. He had remained small and thin as he grew into an adult, and could move as quickly and quietly as any warriorborn when he needed to do so.

...

Stern came hurrying back to the group. “The vattery is made of spirestone,” he reported, “so there’s no blasting a way in. Lancaster retainers are holding the door so far, but there aren’t enough of them to keep it much longer.”

...

“Mmmm,” Grimm said, and narrowed his eyes, thinking. “Why wait?” Then he felt his lips bare his teeth in a smile. “Why indeed. Because they are waiting. Perhaps they’re expecting reinforcements. Stern, where are they positioned?”

“There is a masonry wall around a little garden between the vattery and the house, Captain. It’s been chewed up by gauntlet fire, but they’re using it for cover.”

...

“We captured four of their long guns intact, sir. Shall I issue them to the men?”

Grimm nodded once. “Excellent notion. Give one to Mister Stern. He’s a fine shot. Have him pick a squad to use the rest.”

...

He took a quick look around and said, “Excellent shot, Mister Stern.”

A slender little man holding a long gun touched a finger to an imaginary cap. “Baker made the good shot, sir. Legged him. We’ve got a prisoner to talk to.”

...

“Mister Creedy,” Grimm said. “You will take a squad to get the civilians to safety and the prisoner and confiscated material to a secure location. I will continue the sweep and meet with you back at House Lancaster. Mister Stern, take point again, if you please...” And as quickly as they had come, most of the aeronauts and their captain departed.

...

Sorellin grunted and nodded, and the pair of them started down the gangplank. Halfway down, Grimm looked up to see Stern returning to Predator. The wiry young man was dressed in disgraceful-looking tattered rags, and covered in grease, oil, and soot. When he saw Grimm coming down the ramp, he stepped aside to let his captain pass.

“Mister Stern,” Grimm said. “What is that covering you from head to toe? For a moment I took you for my shadow.”

“Soot and engine grease, Skip,” Stern said, grinning.

“I take it you amused yourself thoroughly this evening.”

“Indeed I did, sir. All went well.”

“I am relieved to hear it—but I can’t have one of my aeronauts wandering about looking like a tunnel rat. Clean yourself up.”

...

“This time, Mister Kettle, I struck first.”

“Sir?”

The grim captain’s voice grew a few shades more satisfied. “I sent Mister Stern aboard Mistshark a while ago. He painted the inside of their Haslett cage with what was left of that stew I almost cooked in the galley the other night.” The pilot made a choking sound. Then his belly laugh emerged again. The grim captain did not bend so far as to laugh, but the smile that suddenly suffused his features was beatific.

...

“I need a piece of chalk,” Grimm said, and raised his voice. “Who has some?”

“Skip,” called Stern. The little man hefted his long gun onto his shoulder, dug in his pocket, and came out with a lump of chalk, which he tossed to Grimm underhand.

...

“Their only chance is for us to get in fast and hard, find the prisoners, and get out again before the Enemy can react properly. We need to go in from a direction they do not expect.” He pursed his lips. “A coin toss may be the best we can hope for. Mister Stern?”

“Aye, Skip?” The lean young officer came forward.

“I trust that you brought the blasting charges we acquired from the Aurorans in Habble Morning.”

Stern gave Grimm a wide, hungry grin.

Mr. Stern is everywhere, but so subtly that I wasn't even conscious that he existed as a character the first time I read the book. He's the captain's go-to guy for reconnaissance, dirty tricks, leading sniper squads, setting blasting charges, and coming up with random objects (Gizmos [5] can surely produce chalk).

He's basically a D&D thief. (Since the author's best-known character, Harry Dresden the Wizard, was genuinely rolled up with D&D stats originally and has character traits explicitly inspired by his low Wisdom and Charisma, it's far from impossible that the author had D&D thieves explicitly in mind when he created Stern.)

What if thieves are a supporting character archetype, not a main character archetype?