A Quick Thought on Thieves

I was thinking about BECMI yesterday. I love those rules. Of course, I was well "advanced" when they came out, so they weren't my introduction. In point of fact, I've never played or ran a single session under these rules. I owned all the sets, though, and I longed to use them. My group, however, wasn't having it.

See, even in the mid/late 80's I was feeling drawn to a simpler D&D. It seemed to me that we could have a rousing good time with these sets, most especially the BEC components. From time to time I would drift back to them, but more for my own edification.

Anyway, one of the knocks against them is the thief progression. It was recalibrated from Moldvay/Cook to allow for (ultimately) a 36-level progression. Consequently the numbers were lowered. I've not taken an in-depth look to see how egregious the offense actually is, but it does get talked about a lot.

Here's an interesting thing, though. A 1st level fighter needs a 19 to hit an AC0 target, strength bonus not withstanding. That equates to a 10% chance. A 1st level thief can Find/Remove Traps and Hide in Shadows at 10%. A common thought would be "Yeah, but 1st level fighters don't usually tangle with AC0 opponents!" and you'd be right. Somewhere around AC4 is more of a "suitable" encounter. Better than that and it may be time for a retreat strategy.

Here's my question: Why not give the thief similar easement? Look at the percentages as serious tests of their skill. AC0 opponents for a 1st level fighter are likely to be life-or-death situations. Treat rolls at the base percentages the same for thieves. Otherwise give them bonuses, reasonable bonuses, based on circumstances. Say the party is held hostage in an orc outpost. Orc locks are likely to be clunky, unsophisticated affairs, so give the thief a bonus to picking one. To me is stands to reason that if an orc is easier for the fighter to defeat then so to should an orc lock be easier for the thief. There's a certain symmetry there.

Anyway, I know that for the most part my groups have rarely modified the thief tables, aside from Dex ands race. I know there are many of you that do it without a thought and all this is old news to you. Juxtaposing it with the fighter, though, really opened my eyes to the possibility.

All I can Say Is WOW!

I'm pretty sure I've been clear on my feelings concerning the Thief as a class. In case I haven't, I'll sum them up: I hate it. Not for itself, it's nothing personal. I hate it for what it represents. It represents the beginning of the end of the "any character can try anything" mentality of old-school style play.

Guess what? Through a comment on the latest post at Tenkar's Tavern, I saw this post at B/X Blackrazor. The sheer awesomeness of this is off the chart. It solves two huge problems I have with the thief:

1. It keeps low-level thieves from sucking so loudly. It really is insane that a class that is devoted to doing Thiefly Shit™ should suck so horribly at it.
2. Since thieves auto-succeed at mundane Thiefly Shit™ it makes it easier to allow non-thieves to attempt "thief actions" in mundane circumstances.

For me, the thief has gotten to the point that whenever I look at a new RPG that has any relationship to D&D, the first thing I do is check for a thief class. If it's there, I then start to consider the effects of exorcising it from the available classes. This one simple blog post may have saved the thief for me.

WOW!