would it make sense to give everyone the thief's backstab ability, and the assassin's assassinate ability?

Sure.

But why wouldn't you use thieves? It's like saying, if we didn't use fighters, should we let everyone wear platemail? Yes, but why?

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;281430...
But why wouldn't you use thieves?...

0e D&D (the 'White Box' version) didn't have thieves -- just clerics, fighters, and magic-users.  The thief class didn't appear until the Greyhawk supplement.  So if you like that version of D&D, you're not going to use thieves.

Also, some people prefer to let any character try to figure out traps, attempt to sneak, and so forth.  The thief class seems to cut down on what other characters can try to do by codifying rules for 'hiding in shadows', etc., and making them the exclusive (or at least primary) domain of that class.

Finally, the thief class, as written for 0e D&D and Classic (B/X/RC) D&D, is extremely weak (d4 HD, very low chances of success with thief skills at low levels, etc.).  The thief is not much fun to play (IME).  

In my current 0e campaign, we're not using thieves.  We haven't missed them at all.  

Personally, I'd be fine with some sort of bonus to all characters when attacking an unaware opponent from behind, but I might tone it down, especially at high levels.

As for assassins, I've eliminated the class completely from my games, so no, I wouldn't allow any of their special skills for any other class, either. It's a bland and redundant class, which screams "we just wanted to make a human multi-classed fighter-thief in a rule system where humans can't multiclass". I mean, look at its class-specific abilities:

- Learning alignment languages. Lots of DM's don't use alignment languages at all, but even disregarding that, there's already an established class-independent mechanic for learning lots of languages, making this one redundant. It's called "high INT score".

- Disguise. This is something that anyone should be able to attempt via ad hoc rolls and DM rulings. What's next, an Eater class whose special ability is consuming food and beverages, with the implication that other classes cannot perform the same activity?

- Assassination. Based on lots of online discussions, DMs fall into one of two camps here. One camp says that the assassination is basically a superpowered version of backstab, a single lethal strike with your weapon. If we go with this interpretation, then the ability is a completely redundant and munchkinny "Greater Backstab", and has no reason to exist. The other interpretation is that a single assassination roll represents a longer, pre-planned, involved process that might involve infiltration, a charade, slipping poison into food, or a Rube Goldberg machine. This interpretation I've always found to be idiotic, since it skips roleplaying/executing the actual activities that make the assassin an assassin.


But to get back on track, I'd think that the thief's other class abilities would be even better candidates for redistribution to the masses. Even more so than backstabbing, moving silently, hiding in shadows and climbing steep surfaces are things that anyone should be able to attempt.

Quote from: Age of Fable;281428would it make sense to give everyone the thief's backstab ability, and the assassin's assassinate ability?

I think it would make sense to give everyone backstab, but I think it would be better to just toss assassination. I don't think the Assassin class was much put into practice by the TSR guys (like a lot of the stuff 'Born in Blackmoor') and "in the wild" was rare and mostly an avenue of player abuse.

Quote from: Premier;281437But to get back on track, I'd think that the thief's other class abilities would be even better candidates for redistribution to the masses. Even more so than backstabbing, moving silently, hiding in shadows and climbing steep surfaces are things that anyone should be able to attempt.

Quote from: Akrasia;281431Also, some people prefer to let any character try to figure out traps, attempt to sneak, and so forth.  The thief class seems to cut down on what other characters can try to do by codifying rules for 'hiding in shadows', etc., and making them the exclusive (or at least primary) domain of that class.

Finally, the thief class, as written for 0e D&D and Classic (B/X/RC) D&D, is extremely weak (d4 HD, very low chances of success with thief skills at low levels, etc.).

I concur. But if you're going the "No Thieves" route, the abilities by percentile give you a lower success rate than you really ought to have by common sense. When I was playing Basic or 1E, I judged these "exceptional situation" abilities. In "non-exceptional" situations, any character could try.

For example, sneaking up on someone in an alley was more of a Dex roll situation, versus moving silently being slipping up on the evil priest in the middle of the ceremony. Or, hiding under a pile of leaves? Dex roll. Hiding behind a 1 foot wide column by standing in profile to it? Thief's "Hide in shadows."

Let's zoom out a little and look at traps. Per Greyhawk, even a 5th level thief has only a 35% chance of circumventing a trap by the dice. A 1st level thief has 10%. Black Dougal, we hardly knew ye.

I think that even if you ARE using thieves, a player who can point out where a trap is from the room description and explain a reasonable course of action for disabling it ought to be able to do so. If a player can figure out how to jam a trap door or put a block of wood in the way of a needle on his own, he ought to have better than those grim odds the table suggest. I allow this even in games with skill systems.

On the other hand, I feel the thief isn't necessarily ruinous to the game and those long-shot abilities could be used to deal with the kind of traps that are beyond player analysis. To you "3 books only" OD&D guys : what's your take on traps with complex or abstract mechanisms that "only an expert" (i.e. not just a layman player hearing a description could disable). Sometimes they could be presented as a puzzle a la Infocom, but I think if you want to keep things rolling, some of the more complicated traps without a dice-based way aroung them begin to turn into conceptual pixel hunts.

Thoughts?

Quote from: Cole;281454On the other hand, I feel the thief isn't necessarily ruinous to the game and those long-shot abilities could be used to deal with the kind of traps that are beyond player analysis. To you "3 books only" OD&D guys : what's your take on traps with complex or abstract mechanisms that "only an expert" (i.e. not just a layman player hearing a description could disable). Sometimes they could be presented as a puzzle a la Infocom, but I think if you want to keep things rolling, some of the more complicated traps without a dice-based way aroung them begin to turn into conceptual pixel hunts.

Thoughts?

I think that's the original concept behind the disarm traps skill, actually.  The original Thief had no special ability to find traps, but he did have the ability to "remove small trap devices (such as poisoned needles)."  In combination with the "open locks" ability and "thieves tools," I see this as someone who had some knowledge of and expertise with small mechanical devices: spring-loaded needles, locks, and similar small mechanisms.  (Note that this put the Thief in the same boat as everyone else, as far as traps like pits, falling ceilings, crushing walls, and such.)  If such knowledge is needed, I'd treat it much like other "expert hireling" NPCs like engineers or mining specialists.

FWIW, here's my opinion on the Thief class.  That said, if I were to use a Thief class, it would be something like this, using existing mechanics and subsystems more than the Greyhawk Thief does:

Level/HD/Attacks as Supplement I Thief

Stealth - When actively sneaking or hiding, the Thief gets +1 to surprise (e.g. instead of a standard 2:6 chance of surprise, the Thief gets a 3:6 chance of surprise). At level 9, this increases to +2 to surprise. (Note that a group uses the surprise chance of the least stealthy group member.)

Perceptive - The Thief is only surprised on a 1:6, rather than the standard 2:6. He can detect secret doors on a roll of 1-3. When listening, he hears noises on a roll of 1-2. At level 6, his ability to hear noises improves to 3-6.

Mechanical Manipulation - With proper tools, the Thief has a chance of opening mechanical locks without damaging them, or of removing or disabling small mechanical traps, like spring-loaded poison needles and the like. (Note that traps can also be disabled or bypassed with other precautions, described in-play.) His chances to do so are as follows:
Level 1-4 = 2:6 (roll 1-2 on 1d6)
Level 5-8 = 3:6 (roll 1-3 on 1d6)
Leve 9+ = 4:6 (roll 1-4 on 1d6)

Sneak Attack - When making a melee attack on an enemy who is unaware of the PC, a successful attack deals maximum damage. At level 5, this improves to maximum damage + 1d6. At level 9, this improves to maximum damage + 2d6.

Amazing Climber - The Thief can climb sheer surfaces that most would find impossible without ropes and climbing gear. His chances to climb such surfaces are as follows:
Lvl 1-4 = 17:20 (roll 4-20 on a d20)
Lvl 5-8 = 18:20 (roll 3-20 on a d20)
Lvl 9+ = 19:20 (roll 2-20 on a d20)

Here's how I'd handle your examples:

Quote from: Cole;281454For example, sneaking up on someone in an alley...

Non Thief:  Surprise check.
My Thief: Surprise check (my Thief gets a built-in bonus to surprise as part of his stealth ability)
Greyhawk Thief:  Roll Move Silently.  If successful, apply a bonus to the surprise check.

In all cases, the exact circumstances might modify the surprise check's chances.

Quote...moving silently being slipping up on the evil priest in the middle of the ceremony.

Surprise checks, as above.

Quotehiding under a pile of leaves?

For this one, I wouldn't consider the Greyhawk Thief's  "Hide in Shadows" skill applicable.  The leaves and the amount of coverage would modify a surprise chance (up to 100%, depending on the circumstances), no matter who you are.

QuoteHiding behind a 1 foot wide column by standing in profile to it?

Again, I'd just apply a modifier to the surprise chance.  For a Greyhawk Thief, I'd allow a Hide in Shadows roll to add an even bigger surprise bonus if the area was poorly lit with shadows present.

(Note that, in some case where I talk about a surprise bonus, I might rule that the circumstances allow auto-surprise -- depends on the situation.)

From Philotomy Jurament's link:

QuoteWhen I allow Thieves, their class skills are treated as extraordinary capabilities. That is, anyone can hide, but a Thief can hide in shadows. Anyone can move quietly, but a Thief can move silently, without even making a sound. Anyone can climb, but a Thief can climb sheer walls. Et cetera.

I think this is a really important distinction.

Sadly it rarely works that way anymore even with experienced players.

Just last year I was in a game with a bunch of guys, all around 40 and up. We were confronted by a trapped locking door that led to a trapped squish you like a bug hallway.

And when my fighter pulled out a hammer, crowbar and various other tools and began actually removing the entire door from its frame the  GM and the other players practically did everything in their power to stop me from bypassing the game logic.

We had no thief who could 'untrap' the door and we were all set to spend an hour staring at the hallway coming up with wildly improbable ideas on how to bypass it, or stop it once we'd set it off.

Eh.

The rise of metalogic for games makes me sad, but everyone playes the D&D...

Quote from: Stuart;281474From Philotomy Jurament's link:

(stuff)

I think this is a really important distinction.

This is a good way of looking at it, I think.
Also, in classic, thieves have arguably the most interesting name-level play IMO (thieves guild, skilled followers, the ability to read languages and use scrolls and such).  Not to mention, that for as bad as their skills are at first level, they are very good at high levels... a thief is definitely a class that improves well.

Thieves hit second level faster than other classes - which can make a big difference at low levels.

Quote from: Spike;281497And when my fighter pulled out a hammer, crowbar and various other tools and began actually removing the entire door from its frame the  GM and the other players practically did everything in their power to stop me from bypassing the game logic.

I doubt a medieval style dungeon door is built like the doors in your house.  Not to mention the "otherworldly" nature of an old school dungeon.  

Unless the character was a dwarf or had some sort of pre-existing carpentry back-story, I'm not sure it'd go along with something like that either.  You could take your axe to the door and try and chop it to pieces if you wanted.

That'd make an awful lot of noise, and take quite some time though... ;-)

Quote from: Spike;281497And when my fighter pulled out a hammer, crowbar and various other tools and began actually removing the entire door from its frame the  GM and the other players practically did everything in their power to stop me from bypassing the game logic.

Unless there was something special about the way the door was made, I'd likely allow that to succeed. It'd take time and probably be noisy, however, so there would be a wandering monster check or two.  And if there was anything on the other side of the door with any type of intelligence, it'd be ready for you when you finally got the door off.

Quote from: Age of Fable;281428would it make sense to give everyone the thief's backstab ability, and the assassin's assassinate ability?

Not to me.

A bonus to hit, sure, but double damage or insta-kill takes requires special skill, in my humble opinion.

Quote from: Spike;281497Sadly it rarely works that way anymore even with experienced players.

They were drongos.

The whole point of D&D - fuck, the whole point of any roleplaying - is being creative and social. Use of intelligence and imagination should be rewarded with success, or at least a dice roll which might lead to success, or else players will say, "fuck it then" and be dumb and uncreative. And what fun that would be.

That doesn't mean there shouldn't be a thief character class, though, any more than it means there shouldn't be a fighter character class or a combat system. Can't I just use my imagination for combat, too? No, because we all have limits. Not all players are brilliantly creative, and every player has their off day. Those players on those days ought to be able to say, "I dunno, I just disarm the trap," and roll.

Spike, your guys should look into the history of real people who delved into old tombs to loot them. The Great Pyramid of Cheops, for example, a guy just fucking tunnelled into it.

"You come to the edge of the pyramid, there is no door anywhere that you can see, just an endless expanse of stones. Hah!"
"We start digging."
"..."

My aim in suggesting this was to encourage sneaky tactics - ambushing then running away rather than charging in. I'm surprised no one's mentioned that, as there are often big differences of opinion on that.

Also so that, instead of saying you don't have thieves, you could say "in this game everyone's a thief - a fighter is really a fighter/thief, same for the other classes."