From: rsm58307@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Ron)
Subject: Re: house-rules
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 01:46:31 GMT

PLEASE NOTE: I am Not arguing that a thief doesn't need to be changed.
I'm just putting my own thoughts into this thread.

>>Well, gee, you might as well just say "A cleric can spank a mage.  Let's
>>switch the mage and cleric attacks and hit dice."
>Please tell me this is a joke.  A cleric can't spank a mage.  Win?
>Perhaps.  But certainly not a sure thing (sleep, color spray,
>fireball, etc. come to mind).

High level Clerics can give a mage a run for his money as long as they
have some (slight) preparation. Personally, having a stone of continual
darkness in one of my pockets is a favorite. (and since you may need to
go after drow, why not one of continual light?!)

Mage spells normally depend upon distance. If I had to say why mages are
more powerful I'd pin it down to the ability to research NEW spells that
a cleric isn't the least prepared for.

>>You find a scroll with a spell that the mage already has in his
>>book.  What do you do?  Give it to the thief!  Besides, the mage
>>can *write* scrolls for the thief to use.
>We don't usually have parties of 10th level plus people running
>around.  And your mage must be really bored penning scrolls for the
>thief (unless your GM is really lenient about writing scrolls).

Hmph. No mage has ever given my thief scrolls, not after I claimed
all the stealth type items. Anyway, I'm not sure I'd want a 25% chance
of having an 8th level spell malfunction ontop of me, even if it IS
a better chance than a mage's. If there would be one scroll I'd search
for it is dispel magic (and hey, maybe Find Traps).

>>  Now, when you run into that 20th level drow cleric/mage, that's
>>when the thief comes in and backstabs.
>You overestimate the backstab (and underestimate the opposition).  At
>5th level (again, we don't run around fighting 20th level people) you
>get really mondo and do triple damage.  Let's say you're fighting a
>7th level cleric/mage who has some henchman (or do you fight really
>stupid opponents who wander around alone?).  Ok, how do you get behind
>the cleric/mage?  Or do your opponents close their eyes and ignore
>you?  Ok, somehow you've gotten behind the the cleric/mage and
>backstab him.  Big shock:  he probably won't die.  Longsword = d8 * 3
>+ X (where X is your bonus to damage).  Probably totalling around 17
>points (and remember 5th level is the first level you can do this,
>your multiplier won't increase until 9th level).  Probably not a fatal
>blow, and now your in the midst of several angry opponents and will be
>shredded.  

I'd agree with that. Since strength is quintupled at 15th, I'd say a 15th
level thief with a very large damage roll weapon and a fighter like strength
might have a sweet backstab; outside of that, I've seen the goddamn paladin
do more in his normal hit than I did in my "superior" backstab attack, and
he gets 2 attacks a round (with an ungodly thac0). A thief tends to depend
on poison for his combat (or magic items). I think this should be changed.

>>Well, I've never played a thief before, but I'm hoping to play one in a
>>campaign that a friend of mine will be starting soon (hint, hint, Matt ;-)
>>and I'm really looking forward to it.  I think the thief offers the
>>best role-playing possibilities.
>Agreed, the thief is the most fun (you may reevaluate the thief's
>power  after you've reached 6 or 7th level though).  

Hell yeah! Why else would I play 'em? Definitely not for the power rush
and the realistic roleplaying experience I can get with some other character.

>>You may as well argue that the thief isn't as effective in combat as
>>a fighter.  No kidding!  That's not his job.
>True, but the fighter isn't as useful as the cleric out of combat is
>he? (so I'd hope)

If you use the kits one solution is to get the swashbuckler kit, which
has rapier and epee and saber (I'm missing a weapon I think) at fighter
thac0. Then again, you could get the dm to okay your own kit. (My favorite
is one who has specialization in dagger, and uses no other weapon; It's
not as great as it sounds (uhoh a skeleton???) )

>>Now that depends, doesn't it?  A 4th level thief is much more effective
>>than a 4th level mage in combat, and possibly even out of combat.
>No.  A 4th level mage rocks in combat.  Consider:  4 1st level
>fighters happen upon a first level (probably specialist) mage.  Who
>will win?  (assuming no surprise, my money is on the mage).  

He's got you there. Sleep, Colorspray ... The Linebackers ARE TOAST.

>>Mage: Oh, I'll have my unseen servant set off the trap.
>>GM:  OK, he does.  A block drops from the ceiling, and everyone takes 10d6
>>     points of damage.
>Thieves aren't that good at traps.  Why?  If a thief puts all his
>points in 2 abilities he can get them to reasonable levels by 4th
>level (imo).  So now what else can he do?  Not much.  Finding traps
>counts as one of these, which is the other (open locks is the obvious
>choice, but now you're useless at sneaking, backstabbing, etc.).  And
>if you can't pick locks you get some amusing scenarios "Well, I've
>disarmed the NUKE O DOOM but can't open the damn door!"

And the worst is those goddamn magic traps. Halve your ability to detect
'em and heaven help you if you don't. ("What, we have to rest ANOTHER
day just for the thief to get back up to full hp after setting off that
blindness/4d6 fireball combination trap-o-hell?")

>>A mage who spends all of his spell slots learning Unseen Servant, Knock,
>>and other thief-imitating spells is pretty damn useless for anything else.
>Unseen Servant is much more than a thief imitating spell.  Of course,
>you have to have a reasonable idea of what you're going to be doing
>ahead of time.

Personally I like using it to tap people from behind. Big menacing people.
It's sort of funny. "You see before you the antipaladin, garbed in dreaded
plate of ebon steel, spikes on his gauntlets, the huge sword Draskolith 
glowing within his - <pass note> - uhh, the menacing figure turns around.
Anyone want to surprise him?"

>> But when you keep in mind that thieves aren't supposed
>>to run into combat, they don't seem so weak.  I don't understand why
>>you feel this need to turn thieves into fighters.
>Think about it.  You're turning clerics into fighters.  Are clerics
>powerful in combat without their fighting abilities?  Yes.  Are
>clerics powerful outside of combat?  Yes, they tend to be influential
>among peasants or can gain at least minimal aid from a temple.  And
>they get spells that can gain information, aid in stealth, and help
>cure a party, and spells that have combat uses.  Seems like a well
>rounded class *and* they have fighting ability.

I tend to think clerics are the most powerful class. They also go up
fast as hell (faster than everybody than thieves and thieves pay for
it). Most people don't send their clerics into battle, although they
are obviously capable of going. (That's most people I've seen, don't
want to disparage any of you REAL MEN who have played clerics in the
past)

>>Most of your points seem to be centered around combat. 
>Well, half of my point was that thieves aren't that great outside of
>combat because their thief abilities are dominated by magic (look at
>the number of spells that impose *severe* penalties on thieving
>abilities), and there chances of success are so low.  Clerics have a
>*very* wide spell selection, are very useful out of combat, and are
>almost as good as fighters.  
>	joe

I'd agree with that. He's got you on almost all counts. Thieves suck
without extensive preparation, and even then you have to have a kind
hearted dm ("Nope, can't move silently in these conditions" "But goddamn
it, it's dark!" "Sure, but the ground is somewhat soggy from the rain
two nights past. Hmm ... No, you don't have a chance.")

	- Ron