That means so much to me. I have a few newspaper comics she cut out sitting in a stack on my office desk, but I'd forgotten that I had tucked a few into various D&D books as a "surprise" to my future self when looking through those books. It took me a bit off-guard when I flipped to that page and the comic was in there.
Great analysis. I particularly like how you mentioned that magic weapons were used as a way to balance Classes. The Cleric only using blunt weapons was for balance with the lore reason coming later.
Thank you so much. That was a completely off-the-cuff comment that I hadn't intended to talk about but thought I should address as to why it was pointed out that Thieves could use Magic Swords and Daggers. I'm glad you didn't find it irrelevant. Thank you so much for watching and commenting.
No need to apologize for the bit about your mom, it was heartwarming. Great video, as always! This is quickly becoming one of my favorite osr channels. Lots of well research, useful, or just plain interesting information. Keep'em coming!
I sincerely appreciate your comment so much. Thank you for watching, but also for taking time to leave a comment. It means a lot to me. And I'm glad the newspaper comic from my mom didn't affect your enjoyment. I have a few here on my desk but I forgot I'd put a few into various books as a "surprise" to my future self when I read them. It took me a bit off guard that this comic was on the exact page I needed it to be for this video.
The thief is probably the most contentious class to be added to the game. It introduced the skill system, which to this day many people do not like. I love the idea of the thief, but I think the original intent of them just succeeding on their abilities is much more fun for the player.
Yeah, it definitely created a bit of a division; as soon as you have a Thief class with a list of abilities that look like skills, it could imply that it means non-thief characters can't try those things. Having the abilities work automatically definite would speed up the game, but there is an issue with resource management, as thief abilities that always work with 100% success are a renewable resource with no downsides for using them. As always, thank you so much for watching and commenting!
@Daddy Rolled a 1 personally I like the school of thought that the thieves abilities are nearly supernatural. Anyone can hide behind objects, but a thief can hide in a shadow. Anyone can move quietly, but a thief can move silently. Anyone can climb with the proper gear, but a thief can scale a sheer surface without anything.
@@nicklarocco4178 That's exactly how I play it, too, in the game I run for my daughter. Otherwise, the Thief is completely nerfed. So I have the player roll the "supernatural" % chance to Hide in Shadows first. If that's not successful but there's still something to hide behind, I'll still let the player hide (a "normal" hide) and then I'll determine if the guards or monsters have a chance to see her. But if she's successful in her Hide in Shadows roll, they have no chance to see her. I related this interpretation to Darrold Wagner, and he said when he created the class, in his mind, ONLY thieves could do the things on the list. Meaning, only Thieves could hide, and other characters can't, because they don't have that "skill." I'm not a fan of that interpretation, even if it was what the creator of the class intended.
This is why when it comes to modern TTRPGs, Shadowdark is my favorite. The way it handles things like that which you'd just be good at is if there's no stress or time pressure, you just do it. If there is, you roll for it, applying your dex bonus. And it's consistent with other abilities a class or background would confer. Anyone can roll to climb a wall. A thief can do it without a roll, and without equipment. Anyone could roll to try and open a lock, but a thief is presumed to have the tools and skills, no roll necessary. The skills are automatic most of the time, and that's good because usually failing a roll is a bad time.
@@knghtbrd This is a good point, and it is also built into D&D/AD&D but folks often forget it. Dice were supposed to be used only when the outcome was uncertain and/or if there were a chance of failure with a consequence. That's what I was getting at with my mention of how in early D&D, characters were considered to be competent, so they didn't need to make checks to do things unless there were extenuating circumstances (time pressure, lack of tools, distractions, etc. - just like you mention). It sounds like Shadowdark does a much better job of articulating that, but what you describe is very similar to how I run my D&D game for my daughter and her friends. Thank you for commenting! This was really insightful and makes me want to check out Shadowdark!
That would be fun to play, especially if you could convince your fellow players to also play some ne'er-do-well types! Glad you enjoyed the video. Thanks for watching and commenting!
I am really happy to hear that! Thank you so much for watching and commenting. While I started playing in 1981 with Moldvay Basic, in terms of total number of hours of gaming, I spent the most time with 3E/3.5/Pathfinder1E (I just lump them all together) and I have tons of material for that edition. I'm still running a campaign using that system that began in May 2001! I appreciate your comments and support. Cheers!
One thing with thieves skills in the game that most people don't take into account is "the situation". What I mean by that is how a skill works given the situation at hand. Sneaking in the forest with leaves all about should get you a negative modifier. While sneaking in a clean castle while wearing soft boots should get you a positive modifier but not if you are wearing hard boots. And hiding in shadows wearing a dark cloak should be easier than if you had a yellow cloak. Or if you were in the forest a green or brown cloak would be better. Modifiers matter! And picking locks or removing traps. A "Quality Set" of picks and tools should give you a bonus and using improvised tools should give you a negative modifier. If the Thief is lucky he may even find the magical Tools of The Master Thief Soandso. And let's talk locks. Some are pretty basic like a latch hook. These easy locks should give the Thief no trouble at all. And your standard door/chest lock shouldn't be much of an issue. But when you get into quality locks, like those in a castle or mansion, those should be a little tougher. Perhaps no negative modifier but they take longer to pick. It's the purview of the DM to judge how hard or difficult something might be. A wall slick from rain is one thing but a slimey wall is a totally different story. However, if the Thief has climbing claws, they could offset some modifiers. I would always try to work with the DM, even if it meant that I got a negative modifier. If your Thief is a Brute wearing Jack Boots, then the DM needs to know this and adjust your sneak rolls accordingly. But on the plus side, when you stomp on somebody, the DM might add some damage because you told him about the boots you were wearing.
Absolutely - the situation is very key. Also, if there is no consequence for failure, I don't even make the Thief roll. I just "works." Other times, for stuff like "moving silently" - I treat it like: Anybody can *try* to sneak and move quietly. But a Thief (and only a Thief) can move completely silently. So, even if the Thief fails the move silently roll, I still allow them to try to sneak and give the opposing side an X-in-6 chance to notice, depending on the situation. Same with stuff like hiding behind a bunch of crates or an overturned table, etc. Anybody can do that. But a Thief (and only a Thief) can Hide in *Shadows*.
Complete Thief expanded on what kit a thief could carry around. Including your idea for camouflage clothes. Tools could give a thief a little +5 modifier to skills here and there or present some trick. Maybe you need to make a fake key, so you open up a snuff-box hiding a soft wax mold to quickly make a key impression with.
I've never been one for playing roguish classes in my games, all the information on skills, weapon damage restrictions and the fact the thief was originally treated as if it were a magic user was new to me, as was the cleric being limited to blunt weapons to keep them balanced. I've always been more of a Tim The Enchanter kind of guy, so I never had to learn about more weapons than daggers, staves and slings. You don't need to apologise for loving your mum, I found the story very heart warming.
Thank you so much. I really appreciate your comment. And yes, in all versions of D&D pre-3E, the Cleric class originally was only allowed to use blunt weapons, so no arrows, spears, swords, etc. The only ranged weapon available was a sling. The most common hand weapons were either the mace or the war hammer. Starting in the 2E era, the Complete Priest's Handbook was published and offered some variant rules where a Cleric could choose weapons that aligned with their Deity, so there were specific cases in which a "Priest" might be able to use an edged weapon. In 3E, Clerics by default are proficient in "Simple Weapons" which does include a mix of edged/pointed and blunt, but the edged/pointed weapons are things like Daggers, Spears, Sickles, Crossbows, Darts, and Javelins. The Simple Weapons category also includes the typical weapons initially associated with the Cleric, such as the mace, club, quarterstaff, and sling. But, a Cleric can take the Martial Weapons Proficiency feat, if they choose, to become proficient in swords and other martial weapons. Thanks again!
I remember the first time I visited, I was overwhelmed by the selection. I went after work and didn't read what time they closed (6pm). I didn't get there until about 5:45 and immediately began digging through all the stacks and finding all of these great treasures. Next thing I know, a "presence" is hovering over me without saying a word. I was startled and turned around, and it was Gary (I'm pretty sure it was him, based on what others have told me) and he just said, "It's about that time" without providing any context, and I finally figured out it was time to close. I went back a few weeks later and got there around 5:20 or so, so I had a whole 40 minutes to dig. Got some old Dragon magazines numbered in the 60s and if I recall some D20 thing. I remember the shop was still using the old style credit card machines with the carbon copies! Thanks for watching and commenting!
The base+point allocation for thieves was one of the things that helped me swing people over from the "1st edition is where I stay" players. Fun aside, thanks for the video!
Thieves were my favorite character class to play. And a Dwarf Fighter/Thief was by far the best. I know that thieves get a bad rep in some games but they are very useful. As long as you don't constantly steal from the players, most of them will trust you. And thieves have access to information that other classes are unlikely to find. Now we played the older editions. And when they came out with Unearthed Arcana and the new Thief Acrobat, most DM's didn't use them since they thought it was more of a "roleplaying" issue that should be linked to your background. And if you wanted your Thief to be different then you gave them a backstory of coming from the circus(Acrobat) or stagecraft(disguises/acting) or even a merchant(barter/values of goods). The secondary skills were good for this and a DM might let you take a skill to fit your character or make you use whatever skill you got to flesh out your character. One of my thieves rolled Lapidary on the secondary skills so I made him a Dwarf Jeweler and he had a better chance of valuing gems and jewelry.
That is such a great way to use secondary skills! At the time, while we always included them on our sheets, they almost never came up during the game. I, too, had a Dwarf Fighter/Thief! That was one of my very first characters. I recall using him in the I3-5 Desert of Desolation series that we played at a local library, where we'd started a club to teach D&D to new players.
I really look forward to your videos on the history of various topics in D&D. You are top of the line with research and information. I also thought it was amazingly sweet how your mother would clip out those cartoons for you.
Thank you so much! I'm glad you are enjoying them! And I appreciate your comment about my mom. I had completely forgotten that was in there, and it caused me to start flipping through some other books to find more.
One thing I never really understood about thieves back in the day was the way in which their abilities were supposed to work. Any class can sneak. Any class can find traps. Thief skills were highly technical, such as finding/removing small mechanical traps, or otherwise preternatural, such as blending in with shadow so as to be effectively invisible. It also makes sense now to know that, with the original thief concept, these things always worked. The unspoken mindset is that they are spell-like abilities, not simply an exclusive set of skills. Well done! Thank you.
Thank you for watching and commenting! And yes, I agree with your interpretation, which is partially why I struggle with the idea that the Thief class "invented" skills for D&D. Empire of the Petal Throne came out in 1975 and is built on D&D's engine, and it includes a separate skill list but has only the three original classes (Fighter, Cleric, and Magic-User). I always looked the Thief's abilities as just that - class "abilities," not skills. They're abilities that only the Thief can do, and they're specialized. Any character can try to hide (behind a box or table, etc.) but only a Thief can hide in shadows with no chance of being seen. Thanks again for your comment!
@@daddyrolleda1 Hide in Shadows is within human ability without being magical or a demihuman power but something above and beyond a normal bum. It can literally let people pull their hat down and appear to be a shadow on the wall. You can hide behind a barrel, but if the DM deems that the gnolls will look behind the barrel they will notice you. A good thief would not trust in their Hide in Shadows skill, but treat it as a last chance. You could do both, hide in a barrel and then roll Hide in Shadows to look like you're just a shady pile of potatos at the bottom of one the moment a bloke looks in.
Daniel from Bandit's Keep had a very literal interpretation of the percentages. Hide in Shadows is literally hiding by pulling your hat down, sooting your skin and weapons to a dull tone and hiding in nothing but a deep shadow. My own interpretation is that thief skills are never magic, they just represent the peak of human skill and ability. If an olympic athlete or real life thief can do a thing, you can argue me into making up a thief skill for it. A jump skill to vault over a river or a ventriloquist skill to throw your voice etc. Move Silent in his idea is literally moving silently. Everyone can move quietly and force the enemy to make a detect noice check to hear them, but a thief can Move Silent so good that they don't get that. A thief that fails Move Silent is still moving quietly, they are not constantly breaking twigs. The monsters don't automatically hear you behind a door, the same way you don't automatically hear them unless they're banging pots together or something. They make their own x-in-6 listen check.
I remember really liking how 2nd edition let us make our thieves specialize in different things rather than all being the same at each level. I also remember everyone thinking thieves in "1st edition" were so abysmally bad at their jobs for so many early levels!
They were pretty bad tho 😅 I wasn’t born until the 90s. But used to play the 1st edition a lot with my cousins. And my cousin would dm absolutely by the book lol. I feel like I’m the only person that grew up hating the class because of that
Kind of surprised you didn't mention Gygax's "Gord" series. (Starting in1985 with "Saga of Old City.) It gave the rogue, Gord, a reason for his skills and was a good read back in the day. (Might have to dust of those covers one more time.) All in all, it was quite a good analysis. (Though I am still surprised by the number of people thinking "miniatures" is new to D&D.) I'm old enough to remember "War Gamers" bringing out their miniatures to go over a battle from various periods. It was always a lot of fun to watch and question what they were doing.
Thank you for watching and commenting! There are so many different angles to take and a lot of other games I could've mentioned as well! The Gord the Rogue series could've been a good addition. I was mainly trying to focus on the source of where and why the Rogue was created. And yes, the original game even says right on the cover, "Rules for Fantastic Medieval Wargames Campaigns Playable with Paper and Pencil and Miniature Figures"! For my group as a kid, though, we never used minis in our games, mainly due to a combination of not having the money to spend on them and also lack of availability in our area. In the 3E era, we mainly used cardboard tiles since they were cheap and took up a lot less space (and time since we didn't have to paint them). I cover some of those early miniatures wargames and how they helped influence and evolve into D&D in my "D&D History" playlist, if you're interested: ua-cam.com/play/PLX6jue56rzl0uAZIFwywJXIMXWVULmTqh.html
@@daddyrolleda1, yeah, same problem for us. We used graph paper for the original and Advanced D&D. Easier to get when I was a kid. Later, as a Marine, it was easier to transport. Thanks for the recommendation. I'll take a look.
Another great video. Love the bit about your mom. I agree with calling the Thief Class a Rogue instead. It doesn't really matter, since it's just a name, but conceptually it makes more sense to me to refer to the Thief as a Rogue. You'll see this played out in my story too, which I think you'll enjoy. All Thieves are Rogues, but not all Rogues are Thieves. At least that's how I see it. If someone came up to your party and said, 'hi, I'm looking to join a party. I'm a Thief. Can I join you?' Would you say, 'sure, welcome aboard', or would you say, 'you're a Thief? I'm sorry, but no.' Also, I always thought it was weird that Gary said that Clerics can only use blunt weapons because they can't "draw blood", while they bash people with maces, lol. Lastly, I don't get why 1st edition made the Thief so weak, with some abilities being as long as 10%. I'd start them at around 40%, and don't think that would be overpowered at all. I think it would make the Thief (Rogue) more playable.
Thank you so much for your comment. I really appreciate it. I'm definitely behind on your story but I'll catch up when I get a chance. I do agree with "All Thieves are Rogues, but not all Rogues are Thieves." That's a great way to interpret it. Thanks again!
@@Dragonette666 I think it was too weak. Same with the Magic-User. It's very easy to make them better. 5e makes everyone too powerful. It's amazing to me how silly the game has become, when good balance is so easy to achieve
Hello, another wonderful video. Again, this is exactly the sort of thing I'm interested in, how concepts were introduced in DnD and how they evolved with each edition. To answer a few of your questions from my last comment, I think ANY concept that's currently in DnD is worth delving into, lol. I think something I'd really like to see is a "history of monsters" video where you delved into the history of classic DnD creatures, when they were added, how they've influenced the game and how they've influenced popular culture. Beholders, for example, the ICONIC Dungeons and Dragons monster, according to many. I imagine you could get a whole video out of just them. Created early on, but their lore was expanded upon with future settings. And WotC is VICIOUSLY letigious about other companies using Beholder imagery, since it's one of the few things that DnD "owns". Or something. Owlbears have a pretty interesting history, being based off a japanese toy one of his kids owned. Or so the story goes. And Otyughs.... 7 months after Star Wars comes out. Coincidence? Maybe, maybe not. Of course I'd like to see more videos about campaign settings. What makes Dragonlance Dragonlance, or Mystara Mystara? As for a video about you talking about introducing the game to your kids, heck yeach I'd be curious to see that. Unless you mean actually filming a session, which woudn't be my cup of tea since I don't particularly enjoy watching people PLAY dnd online but I do enjoy hearing them talk about it. I'm showing them 5e, and they're 9 and 11 respctively. I bought a 5e players guide in preparation for tomorrow, but I had no other books so my friend loaned me his whole 5e collection. When I showed the stack of books to my son he went wide eyed and asked if they REALLY needed all those books to play. I had to think about how to explain the concept of splatbooks to someone his age, and so I said "no, the extra books are like DLC" which was a concept he understood perfectly, heh. Thanks again for the lovely response and the video.
I am so glad you found my channel, as this is exactly the sort of discourse I was hoping to engage in. Videos on the various campaign settings are in my notes, so I will endeavor to get to them soon. For my videos on running the game for my daughter, I was definitely *NOT* thinking about Actual Play, as my teen daughter would refuse and call it "cringe" and for me, personally, I do not watch AP streams. It's just not for me. Nothing wrong with folks who are making them, of course. I just don't find them my cup of tea. It's more about tips and suggestions and showing my DM Notebook and why I changed things from the adventure I was using, etc. I really like your explanation about the multitude of 5E books to your son. Splat books have been around since almost the beginning, but I'm running 1981 Moldvay Basic with no additions straight out of the box (with homebrew monsters) for my daughter (she was 11 when we started) and it's worked totally fine.
Great video. I never knew any of that about the origination of the class. Plus, the little newspaper cartoon in the book was so very sweet. Your stories about your mom always make me smile.
Thank you so much. I was honestly taken a little off guard as I had forgotten about some of those cartoons I'd stuck on my books. I didn't want to stop and re-record the video, so I just kept going. I guess in a way it's just a nice way to remember her. Glad you liked the video - it was a fun one to make.
Thank you so much! I really appreciate you saying that, as I always dislike the sound of my own voice. I really appreciate you watching and commenting.
Thank you very much! I really appreciate you watching and taking time to leave a comment. And I'm really glad you like the video! It was a fun one to put together.
At 11:21, the introduction references "Bored of the Rings," I have a copy of "Bored of the Rings!" Funny book. "Toes, I love hairy toes!" -- Elf Maiden to Frito Bugger.
I was looking forward to your thoughts on the introduction of skills as a consequence (or perhaps an evolution) of the introduction of the Thief Class and its abilities. Very interesting the history in the very early days and the full circle in 3rd when they go back to "attack as Clerics". It would also be interesting to get the history of the Thief's abilities in the OSR.
Thanks - I appreciate you watching and commenting. I suspect over time I'll riff on various subjects I've mentioned before and some of these topics will come up organically. For the OSR Thief abilities, that's an interesting idea. One of the main ones I can think of off the top of my head is Lamentations of the Flame Princess, which calls the Thief a Specialist and changes all abilities to a D6 roll, and allows the player to customize the character by picking where to focus their abilities. Old School Essentials, Labyrinth Lord, OSRIC, and Swords & Wizardry mainly handle the Thief as originally presented in B/X, AD&D 1E, and/or OD&D (depending on which version of Swords & Wizardry you're using). Hyperborea also has a Thief class and is somewhat similar to AD&D 1E. Others stray a bit farther from the original rules and start to make significant changes. In Knave, all characters are rogue-types, so there are no "classes" as such. Deathbringer has the "Scoundrel" class who gets Advantage on all thief-like abilities (stealth, climbing, lock-picking, listening, searching, etc.; there's no defined skill list). That's just off the top of my head - there are a ton of others, of course.
So my girlfriend just made a thief for a game I'm running, and the night we did her character gen, we watched this as an intro. She's a TTRPG newbie who has only ever played OSR stuff, so I'm curious to see how her perspective grows and whatnot, but this video got her and I talking about how the tone of the D&D community just appears to have been so much different back then (we were born in the late 80s), and we're both kinda bummed we weren't alive for it, but super happy that we can experience it in at least a small way through old school gaming and videos like these.
Oh wow... that makes me so happy to hear! I had a lot of fun putting that video together, and I'm so glad to hear it was helpful and interesting to a newcomer to the game! Thank you very much for watching, for sharing it with your girlfriend, and for letting me know! I really appreciate it!
@@daddyrolleda1 Status report: we're now attending OSR conventions together and she's still playing her thief in my online game and another character in my in-person game. She's played a few sessions of 5th Ed but strongly prefers OSR and likes the puzzles and exploration a LOT more than higher powered games. At the recent convention she cleaned house in ShadowDark and found a bunch of construction tricks during a BX RAW game where she picked the pre-gen Dwarf. The whole table was like "...holy crap she's really good at this."
I kinda wish you’d covered the Player’s Option series contribution to the class. You read that book and see that it came out while WOW was in development and things make so much sense. Love the series
Thanks, I appreciate the compliment about the history series. I may delve into the Player's Option series in a later video. I can add it to the list. Thanks!
Thank you! I had a lot of fun putting this one together. I have a bit of a connection since I used to work pretty close to Aero Hobbies and shopped there a few times where I "met" Gary Switzer (without knowing who he was at the time). That shop was awesome. I found these huge piles of things where you could find a mint copy of Bushido from the 1970's/80's sandwiched inbetween the latest d20 releases. You just had to dig and could find all kinds of treasures.
I always run thief skills as being near magical abilities. Anyone can hide, like behind a curtain or under something, but only the thief can simply slip back into shadows and obscure themselves. Anyone can climb a wall, but the thief can make a roll and then they leap up the wall like it's parkour. Anyone can look for a trap by RP. "I dump my water on the floor in front of me" "it pools in a square and begins to seep out on the edges" that must be a pit. The thief can simply make a roll and find any trap in a 10' or so area. The same goes for disarming said trap. ANyone can RP disarming one but the thief just has to roll and the DM explains how it's done. "So you found a small hole in the side of the chest near the latch. Before you open it you jam a lockpick into it. While you are opening the chest you feel pressure on the lockpick, perhaps it's a poisoned needle trying to pop out , but your lockpick holds it back while the chest is opened" Anyone else could have found that needle trap but it would have taken a bit of RP and they would have needed to come up with a way to disarm it on their own. And if the thief player adds some RP to their "I disarm the trap" or they explain specifically how or where they are looking for a trap, I'll give them a bonus on the roll.
The crew found a good way to deal with needles. Get a wooden block, place it in front of the needle-hole and jammy the lock into triggering it intentionally. Needle rams forward but gets stuck in the block of wood. But if there is a secondary thing you missed, the thief has that skill chance to catch it. Hide in Shadows and other skills could be a fallback second chance. The thief can hide behind a low wall like everyone else and stay unseen. But if the DM decides that the gnolls feel like taking a look behind the wall, you have the second chance to squeeze yourself into the shadow and remain unseen even when a gnoll looks right over it. If you were an MU, the gnoll would see a nerd in a robe hunkered there and looking silly. Move Silent can fail, and the thief does not make a comical twig break. It just means you fail to remove the Detect Noice chance of the monster, but they still got to roll it. So I guess that's how I treat them, as backups and second chances and olympic athletic feats.
That is the best of compliments, Professor! Thank you so much! I really appreciate it, and I'm very glad you are enjoying my channel. You just made my day!
All the thieves in parties I've been in have been Lawful Good, interestingly. They specifically advertise themselves as specialists at contending with dungeon traps and obstacles, and location of otherwise difficult treasures. They're part of the righteous crusade alongside everyone else, and one I remember clearly was a Dwarf Thief/Cleric multiclass, who mostly saw herself as a tinkerer type of craftswoman rather than a heavy smith.
That is fantastic! I love that approach to Thieves. That's a really fun and creative way to incorporate those types of characters into an adventuring party. Thank you very much for sharing!
@@daddyrolleda1 It also fits with what we consider the iconic thief: Bilbo Baggins, and some implicit worldbuilding surrounding his hiring into Thorin's Company. "We're hiring a burglar, or as some prefer to say an _expert treasure-finder_ " and this was at some point common enough that Gandalf could write a single marking on Bilbo's door so those in the know would recognize him as selling such services.
The AD&D 2e Complete Dwarf had a kit for locksmiths, so I went for an LN dwarf thief. He is not a thief. He does not steal things. He is a repo man with an engineering degree. He builds and tears down security systems and started with little idea how to skulk around. The kit channeled you towards NWPs in engineering, crafts and construction.
@@RoninCatholic There are tons of ruins from past ages in LotR. In MERP, you're constantly walking past lookout towers and bridges from old dwarf empires or burrows with old ghosts. The lighter tone and the episodic adventures in Bilbo is a lot closer to what a troop of adventuring bums would do. Gandalf is also a more normal dude, sometimes wizards just drop by for tea without being ancient angels or whatnot.
Daniel from Bandit's Keep had a very literal interpretation. Everyone can hide behind a door or inside a barrel, but only a thief can Hide in Shadows and literally disappear in nothing but a shadowy spot. Everyone can climb a rope with some effort, but only a thief can Scale Sheer Surface and freeclimb an almost bare rock wall. Everyone can move quietly and hope the enemy fails their listening check, but only thieves can Move Silent and never even give them the chance. My own interpretation is that thief/rogue abilities should not be magical, but above and beyond what a normal bum can do. Or at least have a greater chance at doing that. A very well-trained or skilled human can freeclimb a wall or pickpocket someone. Describing an action and getting a good plan together is a way to avoid "punishment" by a skill roll. You can freeclimb walls with your 85% chance to show off, but some day you will roll that 15% chance to fall on your bum and look mighty silly or hurt. Unlike a spell, skills and to hit rolls can fail. Lamentations set all skills to x-in-6 chances. Everyone has at least 1-in-6 chance and stays there but a specialist can add more points to those chances at the start and with each level. Later on, Esoteric Enterprises added that your ability bonus gets calculated in. A deft fighter can have 2 or 3 in a few skills, and a clumsy one can end up with 0 in them. But a criminal will still have more points to dot out at the start and later to be sure they can nail a chance. A skill at 6-in-6 is the only odd part of that. Non-weapon proficiencies felt like a mix between skills and proto-feats. Most of them are skills or abilities performed with an ability check, but some are also closer to feats. Extra marching endurance and an extra roll to find rumours etc. Another customization was to place your thief skill points. Want to be the kind of thief who can pickpocket well, one that scales walls all day or one that can safecrack? Now you can choose. And tell your mates "Oh, but I'm not that kind of thief" when they learn you did not place points in Find/Remove Traps. WFRP skills were also a middle thing between skills and feats. A skill could give you +1 damage in close combat, allow you to speak a language, let you use a specialist weapon or allow you to roll your intelligence to perform surgery or your fellowship to sing a jaunty tune. Or sometimes both, people with singing or performance could earn a passive income busking on the street. WFRP 2e would split them into skills and talents, where a skill is always an ability check, with increments of +0, +5, +10 chance etc for repeatedly buying the skill. While a talent is always an ability of some sort, like the aforementioned +1 damage or extra running speed etc. BRP gave everyone skills. A soldier, a thief, an occultist and a dilettante in Call of Cthulhu all have skills but the professional thief will have their occupation skills in thief-related stuff. People sometimes did not expect a professional burglar or an NRA black bag man to be out fighting the mythos. There was two stealth skills. One for hiding and one for moving about while hidden. The second limited by the first. Another skill for hiding stuff on your person, and a few skills for the technical side of gaining entry. Sneaking around used the slightly cumbersome table for opposed skill rolls, where your evasion skill measured against the proper detection skill was supposed to give a single percentage roll.
"Balance" was so different back then versus how we think about it now. But, the game was new and the creators were really just making it up as they went along, and a lot lot of it was based on gut.
The thief/rogue is such a beloved archetype. I really enjoyed learning how it was introduced into the game. The first one I ever played was in 2e. I’m actually very disappointed with the 5e rogue because I don’t feel like it delivers on the expectation on damage dealing like it could. It’s too dependent on other people in my opinion. I understand the idea but I think they should be more effective when “behind enemy lines” on their own so to speak.
Thank you for watching and commenting! It's funny because, to me, a Rogue shouldn't be dealing a lot of damage, but rather sneaking around and using stealthy abilities, or perhaps social abilities via diplomacy, etc., to actively AVOID combat. The damage-dealing aspect of back-stabbing made sense in the initial version of the class because I felt like it was kind of a last resort and the only way a Thief could be effective in combat. In 4E, that changed by making the Thief a "Martial Power" character (versus Arcane, Divine, etc.) and had to separate the idea of the Tank/Defender (absorbing damage and mowing through minions) and the Striker (precision attacks for max damage). It's more of a role that "needed" to be filled and I never really liked the Rogue for that role. But because they made the game engine mechanics based on needing to have a Controller, Defender, Leader, Striker, they had to shoe-horn the Rogue into one of those roles and Striker made the most sense. I just don't like turning them into a Martial type character.
@@daddyrolleda1 I totally get that (and understand 4e). I don’t even necessarily disagree. I just remember looking at the sneak attack chart and my mind began to imagine all the damage I could do as a rogue. Then I played one and quickly did not enjoy it because of the expectation I had going in. The 2e Rogue (Thief) I played was very different. Much like the classic version you described. I knew he was an expert-style character and set my expectations accordingly.
CalTech-MIT Warlock D&D had very interesting thieves, who chose abilities as they leveled, like Magic Users had spells. So you could have thieves that specialized in traps, or sneaking, or back stab, and so on. Our play group in early eighties extended this idea to fighter abilities, mostly bonuses to specific weapons, again allowing for a variety of specialized builds. As weapon types mattered greatly versus specific armors, fighting styles were important. We found CalTech MIT Warlock combat so much more satisfying, that we continued to play it until D&D 3.5, skipping AD&D entirely.
Another great video!! I used to love playing Thief characters in AD&D. Do you think you would do a video on the Assassin class at some point? One of my favorite 1e AD&D characters was an Assassin. I had a lot of fun with her. Also, do you subscribe to Tim Kask’s UA-cam channel? He talks about the early days at TSR on his channel. Keep up the great work!!
Thank you so much! I really appreciate you watching and commenting! Glad you enjoyed the video. I can definitely add a video on the Assassin class to the queue! I had a Half-Orc Cleric-Assassin back in the day! And yes, I have watched Tim Kask's stuff before!
Wow, I had no idea that D&D once had no thieves/rogues; I started playing with the Moldvay edition in 1982 and thought thieves had always been there. In The Hobbit, Bilbo is recruited specifically as a “burglar,” and I had assumed that he was the model for the class.
I definitely think the Hobbit and Bilbo Baggins were inspirations as far as figuring out the class abilities and such once the folks at Aero Hobbies figured out they wanted a class. But even the Cleric was not part of the original game - while it was added in the initial published version, it was a late addition, which is why in the Rogues Gallery overview, you see most of the "personalities" section of the original PCs of the game creators and play-testers were mostly Fighters and Magic-users. Thank you for watching and commenting! I'm so glad you enjoyed the video. I also started with Moldvay Basic and I'm currently running that edition for my daughter and her friends!
What really muddled the thief class was the introduction of non-weapon proficiencies (i.e. skills). The roll under the ability score d20 mechanic while expedient, was out of whack with how thief skills work... not only using percentiles, but also not in scale. 3E solved this well, by having all skills work the same way.
We played 1st Edition AD&D in Jr. High, but we didn't always follow the limitations set for classes, such as which races were allowed. We had Monster characters. I played a Lizard Man and my buddy played a Jackal-Were. We were always thinking outside the box. Our DM was pretty creative, and would usually come up with a way to handle the curve balls that we would often throw. But if we got too out of hand he would resort to "The Blue Bolt from Heaven!" CRACK!!!! You wake up in a strange bed, you are naked and you have a beard. None of your gear is present. You don't know where or even who you are...
Ah, the old days! That sounds like a fun DM! Even the creators of the game didn't follow the rules as written. In the very early product "The Rogue's Gallery," there is a PC Lizard Man, who was originally a human fighter that died and got reincarnated by a druid. But they kept letting him play that way. They were a lot more creative and "flexible" with the rules, especially the folks who started with Original D&D. Thank you so much for watching and commenting!
Nice! The inspiration for my Lizard Man was a book called The Doomfarers of Coramonde by Brian Daley. There was a Lizard Man in the book named Kisst-Haa. My character was called Ksss-Taa. I know, not very original, but I was in 7th grade, what do you expect? That book influenced me profoundly, far beyond cribbing a D&D character.@@daddyrolleda1
Monsters! Monsters! for Tunnels & Trolls was a fun game where you got to play monsters. Any humanoid monster you can find in the book, too. Absolutely no thoughts of balancing. You get xp for doing monstrous things, like smashing stuff and exploring the dungeon to find valuables. Anything you find, you add to you own piled-up hoard. You fight other dungeon factions and nasty adventurers a lot.
I knew Gary Switzer very well. I grew up in his store. It is a shame that the store was destroyed by developers. It still sits there, unoccupied. Makes me sad every time I pass it.
I remember trying to go back (not realizing it was closed) and being so upset to see that. It was a true treasure of a store, partially just because of its place in D&D and TTRPG History! (Even though I think the location it was at, at the end, wasn't the original location). You must have some great stories. Thank you for watching and commenting!
Like an "Actual Play"? I can suggest some channels that have that if you're interested. I play B/X with my daughter, and she has also (very strenuously) requested that I don't show my face on camera, as she is currently navigating the drama of the transition from middle school to high school, so I don't plan to do any Actual Plays on my channel... at least for the time being. But let me know and I think I can send you some suggested channels.
It's kinda odd that despite purporting to be based on stories of the likes of Conan, Fafhrd & Grey Mouser, Satampra Zeiros & Bilbo Baggins there was no thief / rogue option in the early core rules. Conversely, while none of those stories include christian clergy, the cleric features prominently in early D&D.
Thanks for watching and commenting! My understanding is that in the original game, *all* of the classes were assumed to be "rogue-like" in terms of their motivations and skills. Meaning, they were all adventurers looking to find treasure, so a specific class dedicated to those skills didn't need to exist. The Gray Mouser, while being a "rogue" or "thief" was noted as both a skilled swordsperson and a dabbler in magic. Over the years, the players and the game publisher(s) have slowly evolved the definitions of the original classes to separate them into buckets, so only Fighters are good at Fighting, only Thieves are good at Thieving, etc. I think, based on my understanding, that these definitions were a bit more fluid in the early games. The Cleric represents a whole separate set of problems, especially when you read that at some points it's claimed to be based on orders of medieval knighthood, such as the Templars and Hospitalers, but then other times it's claimed that it's based on vampire hunters from old Dracula movies, and then the level titles include a mix of Christian and non-Christian terms (e.g., 1E using Acolyte, Adept, Curate, Lama, High Priest, etc.).
@@daddyrolleda1 One of my friends commented that few priests in Conan get spells from their gods. The gods are silent at best or completely absent at worst. Some priests learn sorcery and claim it is the manifestation of gods, or they learn alchemy and drugs or just find some horrible thing in a pit and claim to speak for it. Some of my friends simply smashed the cleric and wizard together. No clerical healing monopoly! For all the sorcerous might of a wizard, they did not get to Heal or Cure Disease.
Thank you for watching and commenting! I'm glad you enjoyed that little tidbit. It's kind of buried in there, but as I thought about it, I thought I should draw attention to it because I figured folks might find it interesting.
@@daddyrolleda1 I very much enjoy those tidbits of meta knowledge, especially when they're so foundational. Clerics and maces have been linked so inextricably that we rarely pause to think about why that's the case.
@@D--FENS Thank you! It was an off-the-cuff aside that I only went into while recording the video (I don't script ahead of time) and it occurred to me it's a pretty significant part of the video that really has nothing to do with the main subject. I'm glad you enjoyed it!
@daddyrolleda1 At the risk of badgering you with comments, I know that appreciation for one's efforts can be hard to come by when using social media, so there is one more thing I'd like to tell you. I've seen a great many videos regarding the history of traditional gaming, and I've not found a single person who knows the subject matter half as well as you do. Well done, and I anticipate learning more from you.
@@D--FENS Wow, that is a huge compliment and I sincerely appreciate it. Just the fact that you took the time to let me know really made my day. Cheers! I hope to continue producing videos you enjoy!
I am curious because this video had me thinking how much I like how old Final Fantasy DnD-type classes, are you planning on ever exploring like non-english/american spread and editions of the game? When did it reach Latin America, Europe, and Asia?
I've always liked the idea of the thief class, but it really isn't until name level that their skills become reasonably reliable to use, which is absurd. It's pretty much the only class that is mostly useless until name level, and other classes at name level have far more interesting things they can do than anything the thief can finally do with a reasonably good chance of success. The 2nd edition change of letting you choose where to put skill points was great, as you could very quickly become good at at least one or two things early on, so you can bring something actually useful to the party at low levels. But perhaps the worst part of the thief class is that nearly everything they can do, however poorly, magic-users or clerics can also do, with much greater reliability. Spider Climb as a level 1 MU instead of climb walls. Comprehend Languages at level 1. Invisibility at level 3 is much better than hide in shadows. Knock at level 3 is way, way better and infinitely safer than open locks. Silence at level 3 for move silently, although it has an area effect that might cause complications so it's not a perfect substitute, but depending on the circumstances it can do in a pinch. Find Traps at level 3. Even pick pockets can be replaced by careful use of Telekinesis, which obviously is a much higher level spell, requiring the mage to be level 9, but it also has less risk as it may not be immediately obvious who is trying to lift the item should its lifting be detected. Clairaudience at level 5 could substitute for hear noise in most circumstances. Really the only thief skill that can't be replicated by spell in remove traps. But if you know what kind of trap it is, and the Find Traps spell will make it obvious enough in most cases, you can find ways to harmlessly trigger most traps, whether by spells or other means. Once you know it's there, many traps lose their effectiveness due to ease of harmlessly triggering or entirely bypassing should be apparent in most cases. Obviously using these spells instead of a thief means you aren't using other, potentially more useful spells, and you can only cast so many spells a day while thieves can keep using their abilities as many times as they want in a day, so it's not necessarily a great idea to replace your thieves with mages and clerics, but it can be discouraging and humiliating as a thief to see a mage or cleric do something in a safer and reliable way that you utterly failed to do. Especially if you are a higher level thief, because even at name level you still have only 2/3 chance to open a lock, but that Knock spell, only a level 2 spell, will open it 100% success. Why, at 10th level, even bother with your unimpressive 65% chance of finding a trap when a cleric can more safely and reliably find it with a level 2 spell? What are you even doing at that level that such low level spells are vastly better options than your skills? Unfortunately, Gary really didn't balance the class as well it needed to be.
That is a very great analysis, and an argument I've heard many times, especially starting with 3E and onward, but it applies to older editions of the game as well. I think your point about making the decision to prepare utility spells versus offensive spells, and then when to spend them, vs the thief being able to use the skills "whenever," was intended a Gary's balancing factor, but I agree it's not really far enough. Gary seems to have looked at Thieves and Magic-Users are somewhat the same, mechanically: very squishy at lower levels (D4 hit points, magic-users have only one spell or a Thief only having a 10-20% chance to do something, etc.). But, as you mention, the Thief at higher levels is nowhere near as capable as any other character class at the same level. The only saving grace is the faster progression, but even with that, the Thief is usually only a single level above the magic-user.
A level 1 MU can definitely use their spell to instantly resolve a situation. Spells are mighty powerful. They also have exactly one spell per day, and need to decide in advance which one. Sure, you could take Spiderclimb. But then you won't have Sleep or Darkness. You can Knock a door open, but what if there's three more doors to go after that. MUs keep getting more spells later on. Not an infinite amount, but so much that you can have a couple spells in reserve for oddly specific situations. The crew's tactic was to make scrolls of low-level spells they might not need every day but wanted to throw immediately the moment that situation happened. Like a Hold Portal for emergencies. But the more spell slots and scrolls you burn on small things, the less you have for significant things. My MUs would always start by checking if the situation could be resolved without magic. And the scrolls are for emergencies, not convenience. I'm not made of 100-500 quid a pop scrolls! If the thief can jammy a door open with a knife, there's no need for extravaganza. My MU would be dragging around a rake or a trumpet or earmuffs like any other bum. Later thieves are at least sturdier than an MU, closer to clerics without being as sturdy as a fighter. I like that they're not completely squishy nerds. I like systems where players are given some choice to place the skills, so they can decide that their individual thief is a master of acrobatics or pickpocketing or scouting.
When you start seeing the progression, while 2E is much closer to 1E and OD&D, you can start the see the seeds being planted that lead us to 3E. This is a perfect example.
I really appreciate you saying that. I just took me a bit off-guard, as I forgot I'd put that in there. I have a few of these scattered around across various books but didn't realize it was going to be on the exact page I needed, so I kind of lost my train of thought. Thank you so much for watching and commenting.
Thank you for watching and commenting! And, yes, for sure. In hindsight, I should have added more context. I just always found it a bit funny that the example cited for Clerics using blunt weapons was the Bayeux Tapestry, and I don't think that's an accurate use of that source to make the claim. Also, several times, Clerics were said to be patterned on the "various knightly orders of the Crusades" such as the Templars and Hospitallers, but all of those used edged weapons.
I'd suspect another motive for changing the thief and making him have % chances, etc., was so Gygax could legally take credit for creating the thief as printed. It may not have been his idea originally but the version published was his creation as a result.
Were thief skills limited in the same way that M-U spell slots were, or were they "always on" abilities that could be applied at any time? E.g. could a 2nd level thief disarm traps twice per day / adventure, or could she attempt every trap found? If the former, what in-world rationale would explain losing access to that ability part way through an adventure?
A 2nd ed rogue would be able to use their percentage skills any time they liked. You can listen to as many doors as you like, jammy as many windows as you want. If you fail, you do not achieve what you want and maybe suffer some consequence. My interpretation is that time can be spent to try again. But then you suffer the consequences of spending time in a weird hellhole. Monsters can patrol by, you waste resources like torches etc.
It has been suggested that I would've gotten a lot more views if I'd used that as a sort of click-bait title in my thumbnail! Thanks for watching and commenting!
Very cool to learn the history of the thieves class. Super interesting. I remember that people LOVED to play thieves in my group, very fun and versatile and critical for success in a dungeon.
In the game I run for my daughter and her friends, at the beginning, 3 out of the 5 players wanted to be thieves. They mixed it up and ended up with only one. That player decided to retire her first character and create a new one, also a thief! Thank you for watching! I'm glad you enjoyed it!
It's been suggested by some folks that I should've used that line as my thumbnail text for a sort of "click-bait" title to get more views, but I think that could answer anger some folks. I've already been accused of "spreading bs" for suggesting that the person who created the thief was unhappy when he saw it in print, as he hadn't given his permission. I know this because I talked to the person directly!
I've always preferred 2nd edition thieves. Where they have a backstab which can 1 hit kill most things. I didn't like the implementation of sneak attacks when your flanked. Backstab should apply when a thief is behind an enemy for sure. The thieves skills made them useful instead of just putting all these skills available for other classes. I don't know any fighters in history or fantasy that were good at picking locks unless maybe Ren o the Blade from the Pool of Radiance series but he actually was a ranger/thief dual classed. Still, those books were written as adventures more than anything.
Somebody did a transcript that was much easier to read and posted it online and I'd grabbed a copy but it was quickly pulled down due to some copyright and/or other legal issues, so out of respect for the person who owns the original, I'm opting not to share it.
I'm sorry to disappoint you! I felt like I'd spent so much time on the origins of the class and that the end of the video was a bit rushed, and it was already really long. I *very briefly* talk about the Thief-Acrobat in my video on Unearthed Arcana, but it's always something I can revisit. I hope you liked the rest of the video, though.
A few people have pointed that out! I do wonder if Gygax really thought he was "stealing" the class - it was the wild early days of the hobby and there was a lot of exchanging of ideas going on. He might have felt that since the rules were "his" that anything created for those rules was fair game. Who knows? If you watched my video on Clerics-Paladins-Rangers-Druids-Bards, you'll see that all of those were created by other people, and Gygax did write a "thank you" in the preface to the 1st Edition Player's Handbook and listed each creator's name individually, but didn't specify what he was thanking them for.
@@daddyrolleda1 Well, no not literally but yea, pilfered all the loose ideas not nailed down. In those days it was.. an amorphous shifting thing of ideas I guess
This class has radically departed from its origins. I wish that the skills besides pick pockets and climb walls were more effective. At least a 50% chance for all skills. I wish longsword a could be used for sneak attacks in 5E as a legacy exception or just make them finesse and versatile. I really dislike the rogue being so focused on sneak attack. I wish they had the ability to enhance the exploration of all party members
Yes, starting with 3E but really making a hard-core shift in 4E and 5E is the idea of a Rogue as a "Striker" type character (and I even don't like saying that, as it puts too much emphasis on video-game terminology and strategy) but the original intent. In earlier editions, you didn't want your Rogue to be in combat at all! You only got D4 Hit Dice, so even at, say, 6th level, you'd have an average of 15 HP (unless you had a CON bonus or penalty). I played in a 3E campaign with a Rogue player who had decided his character's goal was to become the richest person in the entire world. He had articulated this to the DM (but not to the rest of us players) so every time we got into combat, he would "position himself to make a sneak attack" but after YEARS of playing with this character, we learned he was passing notes to the DM (and very well, I might add, as we *never* saw him do this!) to loot the area we were in to take treasure while the rest of us fought. He'd contribute occasionally, but his goal wasn't combat. It was treasure. At the end of the campaign, we learned that he had taken nearly 10x more in treasure value than the rest of us!
For some reason in pictured the thief being in Blackmoor and not Greyhawk. Therefore I've had it in my head that Dave invented the thief. Learn new things with every video, thanks. Your PHB is way too pristine by the way. 😂
Thank you very much for watching and commenting! Ah, yes, "Blackmoor" introduced the Assassin (a Thief subclass, which was carried over to 1E AD&D) and the Monk (a cleric sub-class, which was change to be a stand-alone class in AD&D). I did try really hard to take good care of my books. I would wrap them in paper when carrying them around and as a consequence most of mine from back in the day still have a bit of a "sheen" on the covers. The ones that don't look so great, such as my Monster Manual, are ones I acquired on a second-hand market.
Yes, it's been suggested I should have used a click-bait thumbnail/title to that effect to get more views, but I think that it kind of simplifies the actual issue a bit!
I am not really a fan of the thief name change for three reasons. The thief is a classic fantasy archetype. Rogue isn't really an archetype, roguish is more of an adjective, for instance a knight could be a rogue knight. The rogue element is not really part of a class. Finally, what they turned it into is not really a rogue either, something like expert or specialist would some more accurate to me.
Please don’t apologize for keeping the comics from your mom in the book. That was such a wonderful aside.
That means so much to me. I have a few newspaper comics she cut out sitting in a stack on my office desk, but I'd forgotten that I had tucked a few into various D&D books as a "surprise" to my future self when looking through those books. It took me a bit off-guard when I flipped to that page and the comic was in there.
Yeah, I thought that was a very sweet moment too.
@@KabukiKid I really appreciate that. Thank you.
It's great that your mother supported your hobby. You could have just glossed over that. Thanks for sharing.
@@ReekingGallant I really appreciate that. Thank you!
Great analysis.
I particularly like how you mentioned that magic weapons were used as a way to balance Classes. The Cleric only using blunt weapons was for balance with the lore reason coming later.
Thank you so much. That was a completely off-the-cuff comment that I hadn't intended to talk about but thought I should address as to why it was pointed out that Thieves could use Magic Swords and Daggers. I'm glad you didn't find it irrelevant. Thank you so much for watching and commenting.
No need to apologize for the bit about your mom, it was heartwarming. Great video, as always! This is quickly becoming one of my favorite osr channels. Lots of well research, useful, or just plain interesting information. Keep'em coming!
I sincerely appreciate your comment so much. Thank you for watching, but also for taking time to leave a comment. It means a lot to me. And I'm glad the newspaper comic from my mom didn't affect your enjoyment. I have a few here on my desk but I forgot I'd put a few into various books as a "surprise" to my future self when I read them. It took me a bit off guard that this comic was on the exact page I needed it to be for this video.
The thief is probably the most contentious class to be added to the game. It introduced the skill system, which to this day many people do not like. I love the idea of the thief, but I think the original intent of them just succeeding on their abilities is much more fun for the player.
Yeah, it definitely created a bit of a division; as soon as you have a Thief class with a list of abilities that look like skills, it could imply that it means non-thief characters can't try those things. Having the abilities work automatically definite would speed up the game, but there is an issue with resource management, as thief abilities that always work with 100% success are a renewable resource with no downsides for using them.
As always, thank you so much for watching and commenting!
@Daddy Rolled a 1 personally I like the school of thought that the thieves abilities are nearly supernatural. Anyone can hide behind objects, but a thief can hide in a shadow. Anyone can move quietly, but a thief can move silently. Anyone can climb with the proper gear, but a thief can scale a sheer surface without anything.
@@nicklarocco4178 That's exactly how I play it, too, in the game I run for my daughter. Otherwise, the Thief is completely nerfed. So I have the player roll the "supernatural" % chance to Hide in Shadows first. If that's not successful but there's still something to hide behind, I'll still let the player hide (a "normal" hide) and then I'll determine if the guards or monsters have a chance to see her. But if she's successful in her Hide in Shadows roll, they have no chance to see her.
I related this interpretation to Darrold Wagner, and he said when he created the class, in his mind, ONLY thieves could do the things on the list. Meaning, only Thieves could hide, and other characters can't, because they don't have that "skill." I'm not a fan of that interpretation, even if it was what the creator of the class intended.
This is why when it comes to modern TTRPGs, Shadowdark is my favorite. The way it handles things like that which you'd just be good at is if there's no stress or time pressure, you just do it. If there is, you roll for it, applying your dex bonus. And it's consistent with other abilities a class or background would confer.
Anyone can roll to climb a wall. A thief can do it without a roll, and without equipment. Anyone could roll to try and open a lock, but a thief is presumed to have the tools and skills, no roll necessary. The skills are automatic most of the time, and that's good because usually failing a roll is a bad time.
@@knghtbrd This is a good point, and it is also built into D&D/AD&D but folks often forget it. Dice were supposed to be used only when the outcome was uncertain and/or if there were a chance of failure with a consequence. That's what I was getting at with my mention of how in early D&D, characters were considered to be competent, so they didn't need to make checks to do things unless there were extenuating circumstances (time pressure, lack of tools, distractions, etc. - just like you mention).
It sounds like Shadowdark does a much better job of articulating that, but what you describe is very similar to how I run my D&D game for my daughter and her friends.
Thank you for commenting! This was really insightful and makes me want to check out Shadowdark!
Thanks for this. Thief is my favorite subclass in all DnD. It always makes me feel like I'm a medieval Danny Ocean
That would be fun to play, especially if you could convince your fellow players to also play some ne'er-do-well types!
Glad you enjoyed the video. Thanks for watching and commenting!
I am a 3.5 holdout who just started my first session playing in 1ed. I rolled up a Thief.
These videos are useful and relaxing to watch.
I am really happy to hear that! Thank you so much for watching and commenting.
While I started playing in 1981 with Moldvay Basic, in terms of total number of hours of gaming, I spent the most time with 3E/3.5/Pathfinder1E (I just lump them all together) and I have tons of material for that edition. I'm still running a campaign using that system that began in May 2001!
I appreciate your comments and support. Cheers!
NEVER need to apologize for having a mom who was AWESOME! ❤
Thanks very much - I really appreciate that. And thank you for watching and commenting.
One thing with thieves skills in the game that most people don't take into account is "the situation". What I mean by that is how a skill works given the situation at hand.
Sneaking in the forest with leaves all about should get you a negative modifier. While sneaking in a clean castle while wearing soft boots should get you a positive modifier but not if you are wearing hard boots.
And hiding in shadows wearing a dark cloak should be easier than if you had a yellow cloak. Or if you were in the forest a green or brown cloak would be better. Modifiers matter!
And picking locks or removing traps. A "Quality Set" of picks and tools should give you a bonus and using improvised tools should give you a negative modifier. If the Thief is lucky he may even find the magical Tools of The Master Thief Soandso.
And let's talk locks. Some are pretty basic like a latch hook. These easy locks should give the Thief no trouble at all. And your standard door/chest lock shouldn't be much of an issue. But when you get into quality locks, like those in a castle or mansion, those should be a little tougher. Perhaps no negative modifier but they take longer to pick.
It's the purview of the DM to judge how hard or difficult something might be.
A wall slick from rain is one thing but a slimey wall is a totally different story. However, if the Thief has climbing claws, they could offset some modifiers.
I would always try to work with the DM, even if it meant that I got a negative modifier. If your Thief is a Brute wearing Jack Boots, then the DM needs to know this and adjust your sneak rolls accordingly. But on the plus side, when you stomp on somebody, the DM might add some damage because you told him about the boots you were wearing.
Absolutely - the situation is very key. Also, if there is no consequence for failure, I don't even make the Thief roll. I just "works."
Other times, for stuff like "moving silently" - I treat it like: Anybody can *try* to sneak and move quietly. But a Thief (and only a Thief) can move completely silently. So, even if the Thief fails the move silently roll, I still allow them to try to sneak and give the opposing side an X-in-6 chance to notice, depending on the situation. Same with stuff like hiding behind a bunch of crates or an overturned table, etc. Anybody can do that. But a Thief (and only a Thief) can Hide in *Shadows*.
Complete Thief expanded on what kit a thief could carry around. Including your idea for camouflage clothes. Tools could give a thief a little +5 modifier to skills here and there or present some trick. Maybe you need to make a fake key, so you open up a snuff-box hiding a soft wax mold to quickly make a key impression with.
I've never been one for playing roguish classes in my games, all the information on skills, weapon damage restrictions and the fact the thief was originally treated as if it were a magic user was new to me, as was the cleric being limited to blunt weapons to keep them balanced. I've always been more of a Tim The Enchanter kind of guy, so I never had to learn about more weapons than daggers, staves and slings. You don't need to apologise for loving your mum, I found the story very heart warming.
Thank you so much. I really appreciate your comment.
And yes, in all versions of D&D pre-3E, the Cleric class originally was only allowed to use blunt weapons, so no arrows, spears, swords, etc. The only ranged weapon available was a sling. The most common hand weapons were either the mace or the war hammer.
Starting in the 2E era, the Complete Priest's Handbook was published and offered some variant rules where a Cleric could choose weapons that aligned with their Deity, so there were specific cases in which a "Priest" might be able to use an edged weapon.
In 3E, Clerics by default are proficient in "Simple Weapons" which does include a mix of edged/pointed and blunt, but the edged/pointed weapons are things like Daggers, Spears, Sickles, Crossbows, Darts, and Javelins. The Simple Weapons category also includes the typical weapons initially associated with the Cleric, such as the mace, club, quarterstaff, and sling. But, a Cleric can take the Martial Weapons Proficiency feat, if they choose, to become proficient in swords and other martial weapons.
Thanks again!
Aero Hobbies was an awesome place I miss all the clutter, Thanks for this video.
I remember the first time I visited, I was overwhelmed by the selection. I went after work and didn't read what time they closed (6pm). I didn't get there until about 5:45 and immediately began digging through all the stacks and finding all of these great treasures. Next thing I know, a "presence" is hovering over me without saying a word. I was startled and turned around, and it was Gary (I'm pretty sure it was him, based on what others have told me) and he just said, "It's about that time" without providing any context, and I finally figured out it was time to close. I went back a few weeks later and got there around 5:20 or so, so I had a whole 40 minutes to dig. Got some old Dragon magazines numbered in the 60s and if I recall some D20 thing. I remember the shop was still using the old style credit card machines with the carbon copies!
Thanks for watching and commenting!
The base+point allocation for thieves was one of the things that helped me swing people over from the "1st edition is where I stay" players.
Fun aside, thanks for the video!
Thieves were my favorite character class to play. And a Dwarf Fighter/Thief was by far the best. I know that thieves get a bad rep in some games but they are very useful. As long as you don't constantly steal from the players, most of them will trust you.
And thieves have access to information that other classes are unlikely to find.
Now we played the older editions. And when they came out with Unearthed Arcana and the new Thief Acrobat, most DM's didn't use them since they thought it was more of a "roleplaying" issue that should be linked to your background. And if you wanted your Thief to be different then you gave them a backstory of coming from the circus(Acrobat) or stagecraft(disguises/acting) or even a merchant(barter/values of goods). The secondary skills were good for this and a DM might let you take a skill to fit your character or make you use whatever skill you got to flesh out your character.
One of my thieves rolled Lapidary on the secondary skills so I made him a Dwarf Jeweler and he had a better chance of valuing gems and jewelry.
That is such a great way to use secondary skills! At the time, while we always included them on our sheets, they almost never came up during the game.
I, too, had a Dwarf Fighter/Thief! That was one of my very first characters. I recall using him in the I3-5 Desert of Desolation series that we played at a local library, where we'd started a club to teach D&D to new players.
I really look forward to your videos on the history of various topics in D&D. You are top of the line with research and information. I also thought it was amazingly sweet how your mother would clip out those cartoons for you.
Thank you so much! I'm glad you are enjoying them! And I appreciate your comment about my mom. I had completely forgotten that was in there, and it caused me to start flipping through some other books to find more.
One thing I never really understood about thieves back in the day was the way in which their abilities were supposed to work. Any class can sneak. Any class can find traps. Thief skills were highly technical, such as finding/removing small mechanical traps, or otherwise preternatural, such as blending in with shadow so as to be effectively invisible. It also makes sense now to know that, with the original thief concept, these things always worked. The unspoken mindset is that they are spell-like abilities, not simply an exclusive set of skills. Well done! Thank you.
Thank you for watching and commenting! And yes, I agree with your interpretation, which is partially why I struggle with the idea that the Thief class "invented" skills for D&D. Empire of the Petal Throne came out in 1975 and is built on D&D's engine, and it includes a separate skill list but has only the three original classes (Fighter, Cleric, and Magic-User). I always looked the Thief's abilities as just that - class "abilities," not skills. They're abilities that only the Thief can do, and they're specialized. Any character can try to hide (behind a box or table, etc.) but only a Thief can hide in shadows with no chance of being seen.
Thanks again for your comment!
@@daddyrolleda1 Hide in Shadows is within human ability without being magical or a demihuman power but something above and beyond a normal bum. It can literally let people pull their hat down and appear to be a shadow on the wall. You can hide behind a barrel, but if the DM deems that the gnolls will look behind the barrel they will notice you. A good thief would not trust in their Hide in Shadows skill, but treat it as a last chance. You could do both, hide in a barrel and then roll Hide in Shadows to look like you're just a shady pile of potatos at the bottom of one the moment a bloke looks in.
Daniel from Bandit's Keep had a very literal interpretation of the percentages. Hide in Shadows is literally hiding by pulling your hat down, sooting your skin and weapons to a dull tone and hiding in nothing but a deep shadow. My own interpretation is that thief skills are never magic, they just represent the peak of human skill and ability. If an olympic athlete or real life thief can do a thing, you can argue me into making up a thief skill for it. A jump skill to vault over a river or a ventriloquist skill to throw your voice etc.
Move Silent in his idea is literally moving silently. Everyone can move quietly and force the enemy to make a detect noice check to hear them, but a thief can Move Silent so good that they don't get that. A thief that fails Move Silent is still moving quietly, they are not constantly breaking twigs. The monsters don't automatically hear you behind a door, the same way you don't automatically hear them unless they're banging pots together or something. They make their own x-in-6 listen check.
I remember really liking how 2nd edition let us make our thieves specialize in different things rather than all being the same at each level.
I also remember everyone thinking thieves in "1st edition" were so abysmally bad at their jobs for so many early levels!
They were pretty bad tho 😅
I wasn’t born until the 90s. But used to play the 1st edition a lot with my cousins. And my cousin would dm absolutely by the book lol. I feel like I’m the only person that grew up hating the class because of that
Kind of surprised you didn't mention Gygax's "Gord" series. (Starting in1985 with "Saga of Old City.) It gave the rogue, Gord, a reason for his skills and was a good read back in the day. (Might have to dust of those covers one more time.)
All in all, it was quite a good analysis. (Though I am still surprised by the number of people thinking "miniatures" is new to D&D.) I'm old enough to remember "War Gamers" bringing out their miniatures to go over a battle from various periods. It was always a lot of fun to watch and question what they were doing.
Thank you for watching and commenting!
There are so many different angles to take and a lot of other games I could've mentioned as well! The Gord the Rogue series could've been a good addition. I was mainly trying to focus on the source of where and why the Rogue was created.
And yes, the original game even says right on the cover, "Rules for Fantastic Medieval Wargames Campaigns Playable with Paper and Pencil and Miniature Figures"!
For my group as a kid, though, we never used minis in our games, mainly due to a combination of not having the money to spend on them and also lack of availability in our area. In the 3E era, we mainly used cardboard tiles since they were cheap and took up a lot less space (and time since we didn't have to paint them).
I cover some of those early miniatures wargames and how they helped influence and evolve into D&D in my "D&D History" playlist, if you're interested: ua-cam.com/play/PLX6jue56rzl0uAZIFwywJXIMXWVULmTqh.html
@@daddyrolleda1, yeah, same problem for us. We used graph paper for the original and Advanced D&D. Easier to get when I was a kid. Later, as a Marine, it was easier to transport.
Thanks for the recommendation. I'll take a look.
Another great video. Love the bit about your mom. I agree with calling the Thief Class a Rogue instead. It doesn't really matter, since it's just a name, but conceptually it makes more sense to me to refer to the Thief as a Rogue. You'll see this played out in my story too, which I think you'll enjoy. All Thieves are Rogues, but not all Rogues are Thieves. At least that's how I see it. If someone came up to your party and said, 'hi, I'm looking to join a party. I'm a Thief. Can I join you?' Would you say, 'sure, welcome aboard', or would you say, 'you're a Thief? I'm sorry, but no.' Also, I always thought it was weird that Gary said that Clerics can only use blunt weapons because they can't "draw blood", while they bash people with maces, lol. Lastly, I don't get why 1st edition made the Thief so weak, with some abilities being as long as 10%. I'd start them at around 40%, and don't think that would be overpowered at all. I think it would make the Thief (Rogue) more playable.
Thank you so much for your comment. I really appreciate it. I'm definitely behind on your story but I'll catch up when I get a chance. I do agree with "All Thieves are Rogues, but not all Rogues are Thieves." That's a great way to interpret it. Thanks again!
@@daddyrolleda1 I'm looking forward to talking with you in the comments about my book, and D&D in general. Love your channel : )
@@Lightmane Cheers to that! Enjoy your Memorial Day / Remembrance Day Weekend!
I think the thief starts out weak just like the MU so you wont have everyone playing a thief. To offset it the thief had the cheapest XP progression.
@@Dragonette666 I think it was too weak. Same with the Magic-User. It's very easy to make them better. 5e makes everyone too powerful. It's amazing to me how silly the game has become, when good balance is so easy to achieve
Hello, another wonderful video. Again, this is exactly the sort of thing I'm interested in, how concepts were introduced in DnD and how they evolved with each edition. To answer a few of your questions from my last comment, I think ANY concept that's currently in DnD is worth delving into, lol. I think something I'd really like to see is a "history of monsters" video where you delved into the history of classic DnD creatures, when they were added, how they've influenced the game and how they've influenced popular culture. Beholders, for example, the ICONIC Dungeons and Dragons monster, according to many. I imagine you could get a whole video out of just them. Created early on, but their lore was expanded upon with future settings. And WotC is VICIOUSLY letigious about other companies using Beholder imagery, since it's one of the few things that DnD "owns". Or something. Owlbears have a pretty interesting history, being based off a japanese toy one of his kids owned. Or so the story goes. And Otyughs.... 7 months after Star Wars comes out. Coincidence? Maybe, maybe not.
Of course I'd like to see more videos about campaign settings. What makes Dragonlance Dragonlance, or Mystara Mystara? As for a video about you talking about introducing the game to your kids, heck yeach I'd be curious to see that. Unless you mean actually filming a session, which woudn't be my cup of tea since I don't particularly enjoy watching people PLAY dnd online but I do enjoy hearing them talk about it. I'm showing them 5e, and they're 9 and 11 respctively.
I bought a 5e players guide in preparation for tomorrow, but I had no other books so my friend loaned me his whole 5e collection. When I showed the stack of books to my son he went wide eyed and asked if they REALLY needed all those books to play. I had to think about how to explain the concept of splatbooks to someone his age, and so I said "no, the extra books are like DLC" which was a concept he understood perfectly, heh.
Thanks again for the lovely response and the video.
I am so glad you found my channel, as this is exactly the sort of discourse I was hoping to engage in.
Videos on the various campaign settings are in my notes, so I will endeavor to get to them soon.
For my videos on running the game for my daughter, I was definitely *NOT* thinking about Actual Play, as my teen daughter would refuse and call it "cringe" and for me, personally, I do not watch AP streams. It's just not for me. Nothing wrong with folks who are making them, of course. I just don't find them my cup of tea. It's more about tips and suggestions and showing my DM Notebook and why I changed things from the adventure I was using, etc.
I really like your explanation about the multitude of 5E books to your son. Splat books have been around since almost the beginning, but I'm running 1981 Moldvay Basic with no additions straight out of the box (with homebrew monsters) for my daughter (she was 11 when we started) and it's worked totally fine.
Very informative. Thanks for the share!!
@@stevenkennedy4130 So glad you liked it! Thanks for watching and commenting!
Great video. I never knew any of that about the origination of the class. Plus, the little newspaper cartoon in the book was so very sweet. Your stories about your mom always make me smile.
Thank you so much. I was honestly taken a little off guard as I had forgotten about some of those cartoons I'd stuck on my books. I didn't want to stop and re-record the video, so I just kept going. I guess in a way it's just a nice way to remember her.
Glad you liked the video - it was a fun one to make.
Very informative. Great voice and audio/video quality. Easy to listen to.
Thank you so much! I really appreciate you saying that, as I always dislike the sound of my own voice.
I really appreciate you watching and commenting.
Clear overview! Thanks
Glad you enjoyed it! Thank you so much for watching and commenting!
I love this. So informative and well presented!
Thank you very much! I really appreciate you watching and taking time to leave a comment. And I'm really glad you like the video! It was a fun one to put together.
He really is well-prepared for these. I now really look forward to these videos. :-)
@@KabukiKid I'm very happy to hear that. Thank you so much for your support.
At 11:21, the introduction references "Bored of the Rings," I have a copy of "Bored of the Rings!" Funny book. "Toes, I love hairy toes!" -- Elf Maiden to Frito Bugger.
Nice catch! I've yet to read it.
Thanks for watching and commenting!
I was looking forward to your thoughts on the introduction of skills as a consequence (or perhaps an evolution) of the introduction of the Thief Class and its abilities.
Very interesting the history in the very early days and the full circle in 3rd when they go back to "attack as Clerics".
It would also be interesting to get the history of the Thief's abilities in the OSR.
Thanks - I appreciate you watching and commenting. I suspect over time I'll riff on various subjects I've mentioned before and some of these topics will come up organically. For the OSR Thief abilities, that's an interesting idea. One of the main ones I can think of off the top of my head is Lamentations of the Flame Princess, which calls the Thief a Specialist and changes all abilities to a D6 roll, and allows the player to customize the character by picking where to focus their abilities. Old School Essentials, Labyrinth Lord, OSRIC, and Swords & Wizardry mainly handle the Thief as originally presented in B/X, AD&D 1E, and/or OD&D (depending on which version of Swords & Wizardry you're using). Hyperborea also has a Thief class and is somewhat similar to AD&D 1E.
Others stray a bit farther from the original rules and start to make significant changes. In Knave, all characters are rogue-types, so there are no "classes" as such. Deathbringer has the "Scoundrel" class who gets Advantage on all thief-like abilities (stealth, climbing, lock-picking, listening, searching, etc.; there's no defined skill list).
That's just off the top of my head - there are a ton of others, of course.
So my girlfriend just made a thief for a game I'm running, and the night we did her character gen, we watched this as an intro.
She's a TTRPG newbie who has only ever played OSR stuff, so I'm curious to see how her perspective grows and whatnot, but this video got her and I talking about how the tone of the D&D community just appears to have been so much different back then (we were born in the late 80s), and we're both kinda bummed we weren't alive for it, but super happy that we can experience it in at least a small way through old school gaming and videos like these.
Oh wow... that makes me so happy to hear! I had a lot of fun putting that video together, and I'm so glad to hear it was helpful and interesting to a newcomer to the game! Thank you very much for watching, for sharing it with your girlfriend, and for letting me know! I really appreciate it!
@@daddyrolleda1 Status report: we're now attending OSR conventions together and she's still playing her thief in my online game and another character in my in-person game. She's played a few sessions of 5th Ed but strongly prefers OSR and likes the puzzles and exploration a LOT more than higher powered games.
At the recent convention she cleaned house in ShadowDark and found a bunch of construction tricks during a BX RAW game where she picked the pre-gen Dwarf. The whole table was like "...holy crap she's really good at this."
I kinda wish you’d covered the Player’s Option series contribution to the class. You read that book and see that it came out while WOW was in development and things make so much sense.
Love the series
Thanks, I appreciate the compliment about the history series. I may delve into the Player's Option series in a later video. I can add it to the list. Thanks!
very good
Thank you! I had a lot of fun putting this one together. I have a bit of a connection since I used to work pretty close to Aero Hobbies and shopped there a few times where I "met" Gary Switzer (without knowing who he was at the time). That shop was awesome. I found these huge piles of things where you could find a mint copy of Bushido from the 1970's/80's sandwiched inbetween the latest d20 releases. You just had to dig and could find all kinds of treasures.
I always run thief skills as being near magical abilities. Anyone can hide, like behind a curtain or under something, but only the thief can simply slip back into shadows and obscure themselves. Anyone can climb a wall, but the thief can make a roll and then they leap up the wall like it's parkour. Anyone can look for a trap by RP. "I dump my water on the floor in front of me" "it pools in a square and begins to seep out on the edges" that must be a pit. The thief can simply make a roll and find any trap in a 10' or so area. The same goes for disarming said trap. ANyone can RP disarming one but the thief just has to roll and the DM explains how it's done. "So you found a small hole in the side of the chest near the latch. Before you open it you jam a lockpick into it. While you are opening the chest you feel pressure on the lockpick, perhaps it's a poisoned needle trying to pop out , but your lockpick holds it back while the chest is opened"
Anyone else could have found that needle trap but it would have taken a bit of RP and they would have needed to come up with a way to disarm it on their own. And if the thief player adds some RP to their "I disarm the trap" or they explain specifically how or where they are looking for a trap, I'll give them a bonus on the roll.
The crew found a good way to deal with needles. Get a wooden block, place it in front of the needle-hole and jammy the lock into triggering it intentionally. Needle rams forward but gets stuck in the block of wood. But if there is a secondary thing you missed, the thief has that skill chance to catch it.
Hide in Shadows and other skills could be a fallback second chance. The thief can hide behind a low wall like everyone else and stay unseen. But if the DM decides that the gnolls feel like taking a look behind the wall, you have the second chance to squeeze yourself into the shadow and remain unseen even when a gnoll looks right over it. If you were an MU, the gnoll would see a nerd in a robe hunkered there and looking silly. Move Silent can fail, and the thief does not make a comical twig break. It just means you fail to remove the Detect Noice chance of the monster, but they still got to roll it.
So I guess that's how I treat them, as backups and second chances and olympic athletic feats.
This is where Professor DungeonMaster goes to school.
That is the best of compliments, Professor! Thank you so much! I really appreciate it, and I'm very glad you are enjoying my channel. You just made my day!
All the thieves in parties I've been in have been Lawful Good, interestingly. They specifically advertise themselves as specialists at contending with dungeon traps and obstacles, and location of otherwise difficult treasures. They're part of the righteous crusade alongside everyone else, and one I remember clearly was a Dwarf Thief/Cleric multiclass, who mostly saw herself as a tinkerer type of craftswoman rather than a heavy smith.
That is fantastic! I love that approach to Thieves. That's a really fun and creative way to incorporate those types of characters into an adventuring party. Thank you very much for sharing!
@@daddyrolleda1 It also fits with what we consider the iconic thief: Bilbo Baggins, and some implicit worldbuilding surrounding his hiring into Thorin's Company.
"We're hiring a burglar, or as some prefer to say an _expert treasure-finder_ " and this was at some point common enough that Gandalf could write a single marking on Bilbo's door so those in the know would recognize him as selling such services.
The AD&D 2e Complete Dwarf had a kit for locksmiths, so I went for an LN dwarf thief. He is not a thief. He does not steal things. He is a repo man with an engineering degree. He builds and tears down security systems and started with little idea how to skulk around. The kit channeled you towards NWPs in engineering, crafts and construction.
@@RoninCatholic There are tons of ruins from past ages in LotR. In MERP, you're constantly walking past lookout towers and bridges from old dwarf empires or burrows with old ghosts. The lighter tone and the episodic adventures in Bilbo is a lot closer to what a troop of adventuring bums would do. Gandalf is also a more normal dude, sometimes wizards just drop by for tea without being ancient angels or whatnot.
I am really enjoying these History of vids!
I am really happy to hear that! Thank you very much for watching, commenting, and letting me know!
Daniel from Bandit's Keep had a very literal interpretation. Everyone can hide behind a door or inside a barrel, but only a thief can Hide in Shadows and literally disappear in nothing but a shadowy spot. Everyone can climb a rope with some effort, but only a thief can Scale Sheer Surface and freeclimb an almost bare rock wall. Everyone can move quietly and hope the enemy fails their listening check, but only thieves can Move Silent and never even give them the chance.
My own interpretation is that thief/rogue abilities should not be magical, but above and beyond what a normal bum can do. Or at least have a greater chance at doing that. A very well-trained or skilled human can freeclimb a wall or pickpocket someone. Describing an action and getting a good plan together is a way to avoid "punishment" by a skill roll. You can freeclimb walls with your 85% chance to show off, but some day you will roll that 15% chance to fall on your bum and look mighty silly or hurt. Unlike a spell, skills and to hit rolls can fail.
Lamentations set all skills to x-in-6 chances. Everyone has at least 1-in-6 chance and stays there but a specialist can add more points to those chances at the start and with each level. Later on, Esoteric Enterprises added that your ability bonus gets calculated in. A deft fighter can have 2 or 3 in a few skills, and a clumsy one can end up with 0 in them. But a criminal will still have more points to dot out at the start and later to be sure they can nail a chance. A skill at 6-in-6 is the only odd part of that.
Non-weapon proficiencies felt like a mix between skills and proto-feats. Most of them are skills or abilities performed with an ability check, but some are also closer to feats. Extra marching endurance and an extra roll to find rumours etc. Another customization was to place your thief skill points. Want to be the kind of thief who can pickpocket well, one that scales walls all day or one that can safecrack? Now you can choose. And tell your mates "Oh, but I'm not that kind of thief" when they learn you did not place points in Find/Remove Traps.
WFRP skills were also a middle thing between skills and feats. A skill could give you +1 damage in close combat, allow you to speak a language, let you use a specialist weapon or allow you to roll your intelligence to perform surgery or your fellowship to sing a jaunty tune. Or sometimes both, people with singing or performance could earn a passive income busking on the street. WFRP 2e would split them into skills and talents, where a skill is always an ability check, with increments of +0, +5, +10 chance etc for repeatedly buying the skill. While a talent is always an ability of some sort, like the aforementioned +1 damage or extra running speed etc.
BRP gave everyone skills. A soldier, a thief, an occultist and a dilettante in Call of Cthulhu all have skills but the professional thief will have their occupation skills in thief-related stuff. People sometimes did not expect a professional burglar or an NRA black bag man to be out fighting the mythos. There was two stealth skills. One for hiding and one for moving about while hidden. The second limited by the first. Another skill for hiding stuff on your person, and a few skills for the technical side of gaining entry. Sneaking around used the slightly cumbersome table for opposed skill rolls, where your evasion skill measured against the proper detection skill was supposed to give a single percentage roll.
Interesting stuff about attempts to balance the classes.
"Balance" was so different back then versus how we think about it now. But, the game was new and the creators were really just making it up as they went along, and a lot lot of it was based on gut.
The thief/rogue is such a beloved archetype. I really enjoyed learning how it was introduced into the game. The first one I ever played was in 2e.
I’m actually very disappointed with the 5e rogue because I don’t feel like it delivers on the expectation on damage dealing like it could. It’s too dependent on other people in my opinion. I understand the idea but I think they should be more effective when “behind enemy lines” on their own so to speak.
Thank you for watching and commenting!
It's funny because, to me, a Rogue shouldn't be dealing a lot of damage, but rather sneaking around and using stealthy abilities, or perhaps social abilities via diplomacy, etc., to actively AVOID combat. The damage-dealing aspect of back-stabbing made sense in the initial version of the class because I felt like it was kind of a last resort and the only way a Thief could be effective in combat.
In 4E, that changed by making the Thief a "Martial Power" character (versus Arcane, Divine, etc.) and had to separate the idea of the Tank/Defender (absorbing damage and mowing through minions) and the Striker (precision attacks for max damage). It's more of a role that "needed" to be filled and I never really liked the Rogue for that role. But because they made the game engine mechanics based on needing to have a Controller, Defender, Leader, Striker, they had to shoe-horn the Rogue into one of those roles and Striker made the most sense. I just don't like turning them into a Martial type character.
@@daddyrolleda1 I totally get that (and understand 4e). I don’t even necessarily disagree. I just remember looking at the sneak attack chart and my mind began to imagine all the damage I could do as a rogue. Then I played one and quickly did not enjoy it because of the expectation I had going in.
The 2e Rogue (Thief) I played was very different. Much like the classic version you described. I knew he was an expert-style character and set my expectations accordingly.
@@daddyrolleda1 I believe backstabbing is less of a combat feature, but rather a thing thieves do to SKIP combat and continuous exploration.
CalTech-MIT Warlock D&D had very interesting thieves, who chose abilities as they leveled, like Magic Users had spells. So you could have thieves that specialized in traps, or sneaking, or back stab, and so on.
Our play group in early eighties extended this idea to fighter abilities, mostly bonuses to specific weapons, again allowing for a variety of specialized builds.
As weapon types mattered greatly versus specific armors, fighting styles were important.
We found CalTech MIT Warlock combat so much more satisfying, that we continued to play it until D&D 3.5, skipping AD&D entirely.
Another great video!! I used to love playing Thief characters in AD&D. Do you think you would do a video on the Assassin class at some point? One of my favorite 1e AD&D characters was an Assassin. I had a lot of fun with her. Also, do you subscribe to Tim Kask’s UA-cam channel? He talks about the early days at TSR on his channel. Keep up the great work!!
Thank you so much! I really appreciate you watching and commenting! Glad you enjoyed the video.
I can definitely add a video on the Assassin class to the queue! I had a Half-Orc Cleric-Assassin back in the day!
And yes, I have watched Tim Kask's stuff before!
Wow, I had no idea that D&D once had no thieves/rogues; I started playing with the Moldvay edition in 1982 and thought thieves had always been there. In The Hobbit, Bilbo is recruited specifically as a “burglar,” and I had assumed that he was the model for the class.
I definitely think the Hobbit and Bilbo Baggins were inspirations as far as figuring out the class abilities and such once the folks at Aero Hobbies figured out they wanted a class. But even the Cleric was not part of the original game - while it was added in the initial published version, it was a late addition, which is why in the Rogues Gallery overview, you see most of the "personalities" section of the original PCs of the game creators and play-testers were mostly Fighters and Magic-users.
Thank you for watching and commenting! I'm so glad you enjoyed the video. I also started with Moldvay Basic and I'm currently running that edition for my daughter and her friends!
What really muddled the thief class was the introduction of non-weapon proficiencies (i.e. skills). The roll under the ability score d20 mechanic while expedient, was out of whack with how thief skills work... not only using percentiles, but also not in scale. 3E solved this well, by having all skills work the same way.
We played 1st Edition AD&D in Jr. High, but we didn't always follow the limitations set for classes, such as which races were allowed. We had Monster characters. I played a Lizard Man and my buddy played a Jackal-Were. We were always thinking outside the box. Our DM was pretty creative, and would usually come up with a way to handle the curve balls that we would often throw. But if we got too out of hand he would resort to "The Blue Bolt from Heaven!" CRACK!!!! You wake up in a strange bed, you are naked and you have a beard. None of your gear is present. You don't know where or even who you are...
Ah, the old days! That sounds like a fun DM!
Even the creators of the game didn't follow the rules as written. In the very early product "The Rogue's Gallery," there is a PC Lizard Man, who was originally a human fighter that died and got reincarnated by a druid. But they kept letting him play that way. They were a lot more creative and "flexible" with the rules, especially the folks who started with Original D&D.
Thank you so much for watching and commenting!
Nice! The inspiration for my Lizard Man was a book called The Doomfarers of Coramonde by Brian Daley. There was a Lizard Man in the book named Kisst-Haa. My character was called Ksss-Taa. I know, not very original, but I was in 7th grade, what do you expect? That book influenced me profoundly, far beyond cribbing a D&D character.@@daddyrolleda1
Monsters! Monsters! for Tunnels & Trolls was a fun game where you got to play monsters. Any humanoid monster you can find in the book, too. Absolutely no thoughts of balancing. You get xp for doing monstrous things, like smashing stuff and exploring the dungeon to find valuables. Anything you find, you add to you own piled-up hoard. You fight other dungeon factions and nasty adventurers a lot.
Im enjoying these historical narratives. I also wonder how other "fantasy RPGs" handle this type of character, in comparison.
Thank you very much - glad you're enjoying them, and thanks for commenting! That might be a fun subject for a future video!
I knew Gary Switzer very well. I grew up in his store. It is a shame that the store was destroyed by developers. It still sits there, unoccupied. Makes me sad every time I pass it.
I remember trying to go back (not realizing it was closed) and being so upset to see that. It was a true treasure of a store, partially just because of its place in D&D and TTRPG History! (Even though I think the location it was at, at the end, wasn't the original location).
You must have some great stories.
Thank you for watching and commenting!
Indiana Jones is a great example of a lawful thief. Imagine the other players' reaction to "It belongs in a museum!"
That's definitely a good example!
I would love to see gameplay of original D&D
Like an "Actual Play"? I can suggest some channels that have that if you're interested. I play B/X with my daughter, and she has also (very strenuously) requested that I don't show my face on camera, as she is currently navigating the drama of the transition from middle school to high school, so I don't plan to do any Actual Plays on my channel... at least for the time being. But let me know and I think I can send you some suggested channels.
It's kinda odd that despite purporting to be based on stories of the likes of Conan, Fafhrd & Grey Mouser, Satampra Zeiros & Bilbo Baggins there was no thief / rogue option in the early core rules. Conversely, while none of those stories include christian clergy, the cleric features prominently in early D&D.
Thanks for watching and commenting!
My understanding is that in the original game, *all* of the classes were assumed to be "rogue-like" in terms of their motivations and skills. Meaning, they were all adventurers looking to find treasure, so a specific class dedicated to those skills didn't need to exist. The Gray Mouser, while being a "rogue" or "thief" was noted as both a skilled swordsperson and a dabbler in magic. Over the years, the players and the game publisher(s) have slowly evolved the definitions of the original classes to separate them into buckets, so only Fighters are good at Fighting, only Thieves are good at Thieving, etc. I think, based on my understanding, that these definitions were a bit more fluid in the early games.
The Cleric represents a whole separate set of problems, especially when you read that at some points it's claimed to be based on orders of medieval knighthood, such as the Templars and Hospitalers, but then other times it's claimed that it's based on vampire hunters from old Dracula movies, and then the level titles include a mix of Christian and non-Christian terms (e.g., 1E using Acolyte, Adept, Curate, Lama, High Priest, etc.).
@@daddyrolleda1 One of my friends commented that few priests in Conan get spells from their gods. The gods are silent at best or completely absent at worst. Some priests learn sorcery and claim it is the manifestation of gods, or they learn alchemy and drugs or just find some horrible thing in a pit and claim to speak for it.
Some of my friends simply smashed the cleric and wizard together. No clerical healing monopoly! For all the sorcerous might of a wizard, they did not get to Heal or Cure Disease.
Finally, the *real* reason clerics use maces. Very interesting.
Thank you for watching and commenting! I'm glad you enjoyed that little tidbit. It's kind of buried in there, but as I thought about it, I thought I should draw attention to it because I figured folks might find it interesting.
@@daddyrolleda1 I very much enjoy those tidbits of meta knowledge, especially when they're so foundational. Clerics and maces have been linked so inextricably that we rarely pause to think about why that's the case.
@@D--FENS Thank you! It was an off-the-cuff aside that I only went into while recording the video (I don't script ahead of time) and it occurred to me it's a pretty significant part of the video that really has nothing to do with the main subject. I'm glad you enjoyed it!
@daddyrolleda1 At the risk of badgering you with comments, I know that appreciation for one's efforts can be hard to come by when using social media, so there is one more thing I'd like to tell you. I've seen a great many videos regarding the history of traditional gaming, and I've not found a single person who knows the subject matter half as well as you do. Well done, and I anticipate learning more from you.
@@D--FENS Wow, that is a huge compliment and I sincerely appreciate it. Just the fact that you took the time to let me know really made my day. Cheers! I hope to continue producing videos you enjoy!
Almost the Thief used the Cleric hit dice and etc. The Manual was the very first 3rd party supplement for D&D.
I am curious because this video had me thinking how much I like how old Final Fantasy DnD-type classes, are you planning on ever exploring like non-english/american spread and editions of the game? When did it reach Latin America, Europe, and Asia?
I've always liked the idea of the thief class, but it really isn't until name level that their skills become reasonably reliable to use, which is absurd. It's pretty much the only class that is mostly useless until name level, and other classes at name level have far more interesting things they can do than anything the thief can finally do with a reasonably good chance of success. The 2nd edition change of letting you choose where to put skill points was great, as you could very quickly become good at at least one or two things early on, so you can bring something actually useful to the party at low levels.
But perhaps the worst part of the thief class is that nearly everything they can do, however poorly, magic-users or clerics can also do, with much greater reliability. Spider Climb as a level 1 MU instead of climb walls. Comprehend Languages at level 1. Invisibility at level 3 is much better than hide in shadows. Knock at level 3 is way, way better and infinitely safer than open locks. Silence at level 3 for move silently, although it has an area effect that might cause complications so it's not a perfect substitute, but depending on the circumstances it can do in a pinch. Find Traps at level 3. Even pick pockets can be replaced by careful use of Telekinesis, which obviously is a much higher level spell, requiring the mage to be level 9, but it also has less risk as it may not be immediately obvious who is trying to lift the item should its lifting be detected. Clairaudience at level 5 could substitute for hear noise in most circumstances. Really the only thief skill that can't be replicated by spell in remove traps. But if you know what kind of trap it is, and the Find Traps spell will make it obvious enough in most cases, you can find ways to harmlessly trigger most traps, whether by spells or other means. Once you know it's there, many traps lose their effectiveness due to ease of harmlessly triggering or entirely bypassing should be apparent in most cases.
Obviously using these spells instead of a thief means you aren't using other, potentially more useful spells, and you can only cast so many spells a day while thieves can keep using their abilities as many times as they want in a day, so it's not necessarily a great idea to replace your thieves with mages and clerics, but it can be discouraging and humiliating as a thief to see a mage or cleric do something in a safer and reliable way that you utterly failed to do. Especially if you are a higher level thief, because even at name level you still have only 2/3 chance to open a lock, but that Knock spell, only a level 2 spell, will open it 100% success. Why, at 10th level, even bother with your unimpressive 65% chance of finding a trap when a cleric can more safely and reliably find it with a level 2 spell? What are you even doing at that level that such low level spells are vastly better options than your skills? Unfortunately, Gary really didn't balance the class as well it needed to be.
That is a very great analysis, and an argument I've heard many times, especially starting with 3E and onward, but it applies to older editions of the game as well.
I think your point about making the decision to prepare utility spells versus offensive spells, and then when to spend them, vs the thief being able to use the skills "whenever," was intended a Gary's balancing factor, but I agree it's not really far enough. Gary seems to have looked at Thieves and Magic-Users are somewhat the same, mechanically: very squishy at lower levels (D4 hit points, magic-users have only one spell or a Thief only having a 10-20% chance to do something, etc.). But, as you mention, the Thief at higher levels is nowhere near as capable as any other character class at the same level. The only saving grace is the faster progression, but even with that, the Thief is usually only a single level above the magic-user.
A level 1 MU can definitely use their spell to instantly resolve a situation. Spells are mighty powerful. They also have exactly one spell per day, and need to decide in advance which one. Sure, you could take Spiderclimb. But then you won't have Sleep or Darkness. You can Knock a door open, but what if there's three more doors to go after that.
MUs keep getting more spells later on. Not an infinite amount, but so much that you can have a couple spells in reserve for oddly specific situations. The crew's tactic was to make scrolls of low-level spells they might not need every day but wanted to throw immediately the moment that situation happened. Like a Hold Portal for emergencies.
But the more spell slots and scrolls you burn on small things, the less you have for significant things. My MUs would always start by checking if the situation could be resolved without magic. And the scrolls are for emergencies, not convenience. I'm not made of 100-500 quid a pop scrolls! If the thief can jammy a door open with a knife, there's no need for extravaganza. My MU would be dragging around a rake or a trumpet or earmuffs like any other bum.
Later thieves are at least sturdier than an MU, closer to clerics without being as sturdy as a fighter. I like that they're not completely squishy nerds. I like systems where players are given some choice to place the skills, so they can decide that their individual thief is a master of acrobatics or pickpocketing or scouting.
Aha! I didn't know that customising thief skills via assigning points to each skill began with 2e.
When you start seeing the progression, while 2E is much closer to 1E and OD&D, you can start the see the seeds being planted that lead us to 3E. This is a perfect example.
@@daddyrolleda1 Now you could go "But I'm not that kind of thief" when the crew discover you have only the base chance to spot a trap.
Bro you shouldn't apologize for remembering your mom on a video If anything it honors her
I really appreciate you saying that. I just took me a bit off-guard, as I forgot I'd put that in there. I have a few of these scattered around across various books but didn't realize it was going to be on the exact page I needed, so I kind of lost my train of thought.
Thank you so much for watching and commenting.
There is historical context for the whole clerics using blunt weapons, same reason inquisition use fire and crushing tortures
Thank you for watching and commenting!
And, yes, for sure. In hindsight, I should have added more context. I just always found it a bit funny that the example cited for Clerics using blunt weapons was the Bayeux Tapestry, and I don't think that's an accurate use of that source to make the claim. Also, several times, Clerics were said to be patterned on the "various knightly orders of the Crusades" such as the Templars and Hospitallers, but all of those used edged weapons.
I'd suspect another motive for changing the thief and making him have % chances, etc., was so Gygax could legally take credit for creating the thief as printed. It may not have been his idea originally but the version published was his creation as a result.
Were thief skills limited in the same way that M-U spell slots were, or were they "always on" abilities that could be applied at any time?
E.g. could a 2nd level thief disarm traps twice per day / adventure, or could she attempt every trap found?
If the former, what in-world rationale would explain losing access to that ability part way through an adventure?
A 2nd ed rogue would be able to use their percentage skills any time they liked. You can listen to as many doors as you like, jammy as many windows as you want. If you fail, you do not achieve what you want and maybe suffer some consequence.
My interpretation is that time can be spent to try again. But then you suffer the consequences of spending time in a weird hellhole. Monsters can patrol by, you waste resources like torches etc.
@@SusCalvinsure, but I'm asking about the Aero Hobbies 1970s version.
"Santa Monica California, best known as the setting for Three's Company"
I thought it was funny! You're the first person to comment on that!
@@daddyrolleda1 I laughed heartily about it
Great Vidya
So Gygax stole the thief class, that's hilarious.
It has been suggested that I would've gotten a lot more views if I'd used that as a sort of click-bait title in my thumbnail!
Thanks for watching and commenting!
Very cool to learn the history of the thieves class. Super interesting. I remember that people LOVED to play thieves in my group, very fun and versatile and critical for success in a dungeon.
In the game I run for my daughter and her friends, at the beginning, 3 out of the 5 players wanted to be thieves. They mixed it up and ended up with only one. That player decided to retire her first character and create a new one, also a thief!
Thank you for watching! I'm glad you enjoyed it!
Comment for the algorithm gods
The algorithm gods are appeased.
Or, at least the owner of this channel is. I appreciate your support!
Is there anything more flavorful than Stealing the Thief?
It's been suggested by some folks that I should've used that line as my thumbnail text for a sort of "click-bait" title to get more views, but I think that could answer anger some folks. I've already been accused of "spreading bs" for suggesting that the person who created the thief was unhappy when he saw it in print, as he hadn't given his permission. I know this because I talked to the person directly!
I've always preferred 2nd edition thieves. Where they have a backstab which can 1 hit kill most things. I didn't like the implementation of sneak attacks when your flanked. Backstab should apply when a thief is behind an enemy for sure. The thieves skills made them useful instead of just putting all these skills available for other classes. I don't know any fighters in history or fantasy that were good at picking locks unless maybe Ren o the Blade from the Pool of Radiance series but he actually was a ranger/thief dual classed. Still, those books were written as adventures more than anything.
There were originally four character types but the rogue was so stealthy no one knew about him
5:08 why aren't you allowed to share it?
Somebody did a transcript that was much easier to read and posted it online and I'd grabbed a copy but it was quickly pulled down due to some copyright and/or other legal issues, so out of respect for the person who owns the original, I'm opting not to share it.
Disappointed you didn't talk about the Thief-Acrobat from UA.
I'm sorry to disappoint you! I felt like I'd spent so much time on the origins of the class and that the end of the video was a bit rushed, and it was already really long. I *very briefly* talk about the Thief-Acrobat in my video on Unearthed Arcana, but it's always something I can revisit. I hope you liked the rest of the video, though.
The irony of the thief class being stolen
A few people have pointed that out! I do wonder if Gygax really thought he was "stealing" the class - it was the wild early days of the hobby and there was a lot of exchanging of ideas going on. He might have felt that since the rules were "his" that anything created for those rules was fair game. Who knows? If you watched my video on Clerics-Paladins-Rangers-Druids-Bards, you'll see that all of those were created by other people, and Gygax did write a "thank you" in the preface to the 1st Edition Player's Handbook and listed each creator's name individually, but didn't specify what he was thanking them for.
@@daddyrolleda1 Well, no not literally but yea, pilfered all the loose ideas not nailed down. In those days it was.. an amorphous shifting thing of ideas I guess
I find cynical humor in the fact that the thief class was stolen.
Totally! That's a funny insight and so true.
Thanks for watching and commenting, and for giving me a laugh. Cheers!
This class has radically departed from its origins. I wish that the skills besides pick pockets and climb walls were more effective. At least a 50% chance for all skills. I wish longsword a could be used for sneak attacks in 5E as a legacy exception or just make them finesse and versatile. I really dislike the rogue being so focused on sneak attack. I wish they had the ability to enhance the exploration of all party members
Yes, starting with 3E but really making a hard-core shift in 4E and 5E is the idea of a Rogue as a "Striker" type character (and I even don't like saying that, as it puts too much emphasis on video-game terminology and strategy) but the original intent. In earlier editions, you didn't want your Rogue to be in combat at all! You only got D4 Hit Dice, so even at, say, 6th level, you'd have an average of 15 HP (unless you had a CON bonus or penalty).
I played in a 3E campaign with a Rogue player who had decided his character's goal was to become the richest person in the entire world. He had articulated this to the DM (but not to the rest of us players) so every time we got into combat, he would "position himself to make a sneak attack" but after YEARS of playing with this character, we learned he was passing notes to the DM (and very well, I might add, as we *never* saw him do this!) to loot the area we were in to take treasure while the rest of us fought. He'd contribute occasionally, but his goal wasn't combat. It was treasure. At the end of the campaign, we learned that he had taken nearly 10x more in treasure value than the rest of us!
For some reason in pictured the thief being in Blackmoor and not Greyhawk.
Therefore I've had it in my head that Dave invented the thief.
Learn new things with every video, thanks.
Your PHB is way too pristine by the way. 😂
Thank you very much for watching and commenting!
Ah, yes, "Blackmoor" introduced the Assassin (a Thief subclass, which was carried over to 1E AD&D) and the Monk (a cleric sub-class, which was change to be a stand-alone class in AD&D).
I did try really hard to take good care of my books. I would wrap them in paper when carrying them around and as a consequence most of mine from back in the day still have a bit of a "sheen" on the covers. The ones that don't look so great, such as my Monster Manual, are ones I acquired on a second-hand market.
I had to repurchase all of mine. I only have the AD&D books as the red box is just too expensive. I lost everything to theft back in '92.
So ironic that the thief was considered to be STOLEN by Gygax from the original creators
Yes, it's been suggested I should have used a click-bait thumbnail/title to that effect to get more views, but I think that it kind of simplifies the actual issue a bit!
You know, the fact the Rogue class originated as a stolen idea is rather uncannily and comically appropriate.
Quite a few folks have suggested I should have used a click-bait title to that effect! Thanks for watching and commenting.
Ironic the thief class was stolen
I am not really a fan of the thief name change for three reasons. The thief is a classic fantasy archetype. Rogue isn't really an archetype, roguish is more of an adjective, for instance a knight could be a rogue knight. The rogue element is not really part of a class. Finally, what they turned it into is not really a rogue either, something like expert or specialist would some more accurate to me.