tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post1098257740319728399..comments2024-03-18T20:22:06.331-04:00Comments on GROGNARDIA: I Still Don't Like ThievesJames Maliszewskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comBlogger81125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-38992103946106320262008-10-26T08:34:00.000-04:002008-10-26T08:34:00.000-04:00Two quick points:1. My problem with skills in D&am...Two quick points:<BR/><BR/>1. My problem with skills in <I>D&D</I> is a very specific one. Skills weaken the class system, particularly when you start conflating the idea of class abilities with skills.<BR/><BR/>2. I actually don't dislike skill systems in general, provided that they're used in conjunction with a class-less game and the skill descriptions/mechanics are vague enough to leave lots of room for referee judgment calls.James Maliszewskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-10712626670317170402008-10-25T18:04:00.000-04:002008-10-25T18:04:00.000-04:00It seems as though, if you just set basic "untrain...It seems as though, if you just set basic "untrained" thiefy type skills and defined the consequence of those skills, then you could come to love the thief again. <BR/><BR/>Just give the thief a bigger chance to succeed. <BR/><BR/>Or am I missing something. <BR/><BR/>From what I read on your blog (great blog btw) it seems you have a broader issue with skills in general, and much prefer GM judgment. Thieves, not only takes away from other classes (I think you have good argument there), but they also just introduce the new choice by players: the skill. And that opens up the slippery slope of by-passing the GM's fiat, by having implied, pre-described stakes before the dice even hit the table.Bongoshaftsburyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14146356521621891106noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-36000707443555911482008-10-25T15:34:00.000-04:002008-10-25T15:34:00.000-04:00I don't see Thief skills as problematic because th...I don't see Thief skills as problematic because they require referee adjudication to resolve, so I'm not quite sure about the analogy with spells. My problem with them is that, as written and as usually played, they're an example of taking away from every character inborn abilities that they all previously possessed and making them the province of a single class. Magic use is explicitly a special ability; it's not presume that everyone has the talent for spellcraft. However, everyone has the ability to find and remove traps, hiding in shadows, or sneaking around. The fact that the Thief is built around these mundane abilities is my problem, not the necessity of referee judgment calls.James Maliszewskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-58058696151682733502008-10-25T14:36:00.000-04:002008-10-25T14:36:00.000-04:00From what I understand you don't like generali...From what I understand you don't like generalized skills because they necessarily include implied stakes to the dice roll, which effectively neutralizes the DM judgment in resolving any issue. When I say implied stakes, I mean that the result of the action only depends on the dice roll, the consequences are understood by all at the table, and pre-established before the dice hit the table. <BR/><BR/>How, then, do you distinguish Spells from Generalized Skills? <BR/><BR/>From my perspective, on the scale of avoiding GM judgment, a spell seems to go even a step further than a generalized skill. They are even more troublesome to the DM judgment rule of what I'm understanding old schoolers enjoy the most, since it avoids the dice all together. The DM has little or no chance to introduce their ad hoc rulings. The challenge to argue the DM in allowing a character to do things has been removed. The player is essentially, at that point, playing by themselves. <BR/><BR/>Spells, from my experience, are treated as tools which allow entry by the players, to a new realm of play, where the implied stakes allow them to attempt greater and more amazing things, pushing the GM's judgment to the limits. Soon, players can control almost all the content of imagined play through the use of implied stakes, making the GM less and less important. And this is one of the larger gripes about D&D in general: that at high levels, the game breaks down (probably because the GM can no longer effectively challenge play through judgment and rulings). <BR/><BR/>Your thoughts?Bongoshaftsburyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14146356521621891106noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-28736749398260677352008-10-11T17:01:00.000-04:002008-10-11T17:01:00.000-04:00I've heard the arguments before that the paladin i...<I>I've heard the arguments before that the paladin isn't supposed to be a holy knight, but I've never much bought into it. The class has too many abilities that strike me as "miraculous" for it to represent a merely perfect secular knight in my opinion.</I><BR/><BR/>Depends on how you define "holy"; when the paladin commits a chaotic act he needs to seek out a lawful good cleric to confess his sins to, another paladin is not sufficient, but neither need the cleric be a devotee of a particular religion. Certainly, the paladin has some powers that must be divinely sourced, but that doesn't make him "holy", unless we define holy as being defined by having those powers and being able to lose them through misconduct.<BR/><BR/>Still, this is a different subject with no absolute answers, so perhaps such discourse is best suited for some other forum.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05646247954542936623noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-13953159851541564672008-10-11T16:39:00.000-04:002008-10-11T16:39:00.000-04:00I've heard the arguments before that the paladin i...I've heard the arguments before that the paladin isn't supposed to be a holy knight, but I've never much bought into it. The class has too many abilities that strike me as "miraculous" for it to represent a merely perfect secular knight in my opinion.James Maliszewskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-60642606903650738382008-10-11T16:26:00.000-04:002008-10-11T16:26:00.000-04:00It's a bit more like a religious knight (as oppose...<I>It's a bit more like a religious knight (as opposed to the paladin, which is a "holy knight," if the distinction makes sense)</I><BR/><BR/>I think such distinctions need to be carefully evaluated. The paladin as "holy knight" is more of a tale that grew in the telling, in my opinion. Interestingly, the D20/3e description studiously follows the 1e PHB in avoiding such terminology.<BR/><BR/>As near as I can tell, the paladin is the perfect secular knight, whilst the cleric occupies a nebulous space between the religious and secular world.<BR/><BR/>As noted in the 1e PHB, the cleric only bears a "certain resemblance to religious orders of knighthood of medieval times". Indeed, almost nothing but the space it occupies has any literary, historical, or mythological antecedents.<BR/><BR/>The Van Helsing explanation is a good starting point, but the class seems to have moved beyond that almost as soon as conceived.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05646247954542936623noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-77703066140456096842008-10-11T10:19:00.000-04:002008-10-11T10:19:00.000-04:00The Cleric owes more to the source material than a...<I>The Cleric owes more to the source material than any other class except fighter.</I><BR/><BR/>It's a tricky thing. The medieval historical element is certainly there and that was clearly due to Gary's love of the period (though he preferred early to late medieval, if I recall). At the same time, the cleric class, in its origins and even in its in-game description, isn't a completely good fit for medieval Christian priests. It's a bit more like a religious knight (as opposed to the paladin, which is a "holy knight," if the distinction makes sense), but its essential character is that of Van Helsing from the Hammer horror films -- a monster (i.e. undead) hunter. <BR/><BR/>It's complicated, to be sure, as it is with most things in <I>D&D</I>. That's why I love this mess :)James Maliszewskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-31339740556112158302008-10-11T10:15:00.000-04:002008-10-11T10:15:00.000-04:00I think it is reasonable to expect the game to div...<I>I think it is reasonable to expect the game to diverge some from the source material and elements will be introduced to make a more logical game world.</I><BR/><BR/>Very much agreed. I'm a huge proponent of emphasizing the pulp fantasy roots of the game, after more than a decade of the official downplaying of them, but <I>D&D</I> has never been "pure" in its inspirations, so I'm not opposed to some additional elements grafted on to the pulp fantasy superstructure of the thing. Indeed, I expect a purely pulp fantasy <I>D&D</I> would very quickly become another game entirely.James Maliszewskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-91797786281085609652008-10-11T10:13:00.000-04:002008-10-11T10:13:00.000-04:00These days though, I think most players of D&D...<I>These days though, I think most players of D&D - myself included - think of the Thief as part of the iconic party.</I><BR/><BR/>They do and that's why, my concerns aside, I am reluctant to ditch the Thief as a class. My cardinal principle has always been to accept the organic development of <I>D&D</I> where possible and that includes the Thief. I'm simply uncomfortable for the way the class has been implemented mechanically (and to a lesser extent thematically).James Maliszewskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-7865795782380742762008-10-11T10:08:00.000-04:002008-10-11T10:08:00.000-04:00All of which leads me to conclude that it is not t...<I>All of which leads me to conclude that it is not the thief class itself that is the problem, but its presentation and the resultant common interpretation of how the its functions relate to the other classes.</I><BR/><BR/>Possibly. I'd love to see someone come up with a new take on the Thief that addresses these concerns. As I said, I'm not opposed to the Thief as such, but I am adamantly opposed to the effect the introduction of the Thief had on the mechanics of <I>D&D</I>.James Maliszewskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-62639140049366630762008-10-11T09:13:00.000-04:002008-10-11T09:13:00.000-04:00"Gygax and Arneson looted every source they could ..."Gygax and Arneson looted every source they could get their hands on"<BR/><BR/>I do believe that is the first rule of DMing. At least it is at my house. :)<BR/><BR/>I chuckle whenever I hear a younger gamer use "kitchen sink" as a criticism for a setting. Particularly when their game of choice is d20 derived.Doctor Checkmatehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14931626536197815282noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-79281738070788624492008-10-11T05:31:00.000-04:002008-10-11T05:31:00.000-04:00[The Cleric] ... not supported by the S&S sour...<I>[The Cleric] ... not supported by the S&S source material, but deriving logically from the progression of the game.</I><BR/><BR/>S&S was not the only source material for OD&D. <BR/><BR/>There are clearly identifiable influences from a diverse range of sources. <BR/><BR/>Look at the list of monsters in "Monsters & Treasure". Many, like the Medusae are Greco-Roman, others like Djinn from Arabian Nights and some owe there place due to the influence of Hollywood - Skeletons (Ray Harryhausen) or Mummies (Boris Karloff).<BR/><BR/>Gygax and Arneson looted every source they could get their hands on so there is no single source material that thieves or clerics can or cannot fit into.<BR/><BR/>The most obvious source material is European from 600AD to 1400AD. All the weapons and armor in OD&D come from that period. Not surprising as it all evolved out of historical war-gamming. <BR/><BR/>Clerics are heavily based on this historical source material. <BR/><BR/>In early medieval times powerful priests held large areas of land and played an important part in war and politics. They often went on campaign, not necessarily to fight, but to administer blessings and keep an eye how their money was being spent. Even today, front line fighting units have priests who are deployed with them to provide pastoral care. <BR/><BR/>In a magical medieval world it is only natural that this priests would have powers associated with the Christian faith. Between a third and a half of the original cleric spells are miracles linked to Jesus, the saints or old testament figures.<BR/><BR/>The Cleric owes more to the source material than any other class except fighter.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12320809555801516161noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-12482497523034452272008-10-10T14:54:00.000-04:002008-10-10T14:54:00.000-04:00Good point. I'm basing my assumptions mainly o...Good point. I'm basing my assumptions mainly on my preferred games: AD&D and Moldvay Basic/Expert.Will Mistrettahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18403399118961902073noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-86401952879560989652008-10-10T14:51:00.000-04:002008-10-10T14:51:00.000-04:00Will, one note, the OD&D thief already fights ...Will, one note, the OD&D thief already fights on the cleric table. That actually makes the OD&D thief not quite so bad (though the d4 hit die sucks). AD&D seriously de-powered the thief's combat ability by leaving them at 1/4 levels step up in combat while increasing the cleric to 1/3 and the fighter 1/2.<BR/><BR/>FrankFrankhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15855679156477779666noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-30356831191897346252008-10-10T14:48:00.000-04:002008-10-10T14:48:00.000-04:00The source of the cleric of course has been acknow...The source of the cleric of course has been acknowledged. It arose in Dave Arneson's Blackmoor campaign to deal with a PC vampire.<BR/><BR/>So not supported by the S&S source material, but deriving logically from the progression of the game.<BR/><BR/>I think it is reasonable to expect the game to diverge some from the source material and elements will be introduced to make a more logical game world.<BR/><BR/>The cleric also isn't as problematical to play as the thief. It introduces some healing spells (another note - The Broken Sword hinted at resurrection magic and explicitly showed using magic to speak with the dead). Turning undead may be slightly problematical, but GMs have dealt with that by making some undead much harder to turn and recognizing that skeletons and zombies need to come in hordes or they will be summarily disposed of by the cleric.<BR/><BR/>FrankFrankhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15855679156477779666noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-47348087017122715242008-10-10T14:45:00.000-04:002008-10-10T14:45:00.000-04:00Basic recipe for a more S&S D&D:Fighter: A...Basic recipe for a more S&S D&D:<BR/><BR/>Fighter: As is.<BR/><BR/>Thief: As is except d8 hit die and cleric combat and experience charts.<BR/><BR/>Cleric: Nonexistant.<BR/><BR/>Magic-user: As is except comes in two flavors, black and white, which utilize either the existing combined magic-user and illusionist spells lists or cleric and druid spell lists respectively. <BR/><BR/>Black magicians must start out evil or neutral (chaotic or neutral in three-alignment D&D variants)and white ones good or neutral (lawful or neutral in three-alighment D&D variants).<BR/><BR/>Black magicians who become good (lawful in three-alignment D&D) and white magicians who become evil (chaotic in three-alignment D&D) can still use their old spells in addition to learning their opposing equivilents, but such use tilts their alignment back toward its original position and may eventually subject them to involuntary alignment change and its attendant penalties.Will Mistrettahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18403399118961902073noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-41384159702305721042008-10-10T14:43:00.000-04:002008-10-10T14:43:00.000-04:00The magic-user is also a poor fit for the source m...The magic-user is also a poor fit for the source material also. And the fighter, with the mechanical encouragement to use plate (and the realization that magical armor is only ever plate from what can be inferred from Monsters & Treasure and Greyhawk), isn't a very good match for much of the source material (though it's fine for The Broken Sword and Three Hearts and Three Lions).<BR/><BR/>I did note that The Broken Sword (which I just finished reading a few days ago) does at least provide a basis for the elf as fighter/mage, even providing support for only casting in magic armor (with iron/steel armor blocking magic).<BR/><BR/>FrankFrankhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15855679156477779666noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-49855228190759915952008-10-10T14:21:00.000-04:002008-10-10T14:21:00.000-04:00(my last post is intended as a reply to Matt)And I...(my last post is intended as a reply to Matt)<BR/><BR/>And I agree with Frank. In my opinion neither the Thief nor the Cleric really hit the S&S genre very well.Doctor Checkmatehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14931626536197815282noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-62800050283109753952008-10-10T14:14:00.000-04:002008-10-10T14:14:00.000-04:00I think it was both. Bad idea for the system as it...I think it was both. Bad idea for the system as it was then, and then poorly explained on top of that. These days though, I think most players of D&D - myself included - think of the Thief as part of the iconic party.Doctor Checkmatehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14931626536197815282noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-53848953380308300312008-10-10T14:12:00.000-04:002008-10-10T14:12:00.000-04:00Matthew raises an interesting point that I'm not s...Matthew raises an interesting point that I'm not sure has really been well addressed. The fact that a medieval wargame is a poor fit for the source material.<BR/><BR/>I've been longing for a system that modeled the less armored warriors of fantasy without really thinking about where the genre convention really came from. It seems that the genre mashes together a lot of periods. Conan's Hyboria comes across with an ancient feel, yet there are other bits that are medieval (or at least early dark ages) with a good dose of Norse. Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser seem to be from a later age in some sense but also seem medieval in other senses.<BR/><BR/>I think the thief is a combination of two things. One is providing a character mechanically adept at dealing with the locks and traps in the dungeon (perhaps as people were getting more into the "role playing" and drifting away from pure puzzle solving and mechanical/war-game-like combat resolution) and the idea of a lightly armored fighting type. Yet it really doesn't manage to hit any of characters we see in the source material.<BR/><BR/>FrankFrankhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15855679156477779666noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-18278788813740805792008-10-10T13:23:00.000-04:002008-10-10T13:23:00.000-04:00All of which leads me to conclude that it is not t...All of which leads me to conclude that it is not the thief class itself that is the problem, but its presentation and the resultant common interpretation of how the its functions relate to the other classes.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05646247954542936623noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-47249897116847974662008-10-10T12:20:00.000-04:002008-10-10T12:20:00.000-04:00"It always seemed to me like Gygax was assuming so..."It always seemed to me like Gygax was assuming some common sense on the part of his audience here. <BR/><BR/>This was always his Achilles' heel, if you ask me. :)"<BR/><BR/>bingo :DDoctor Checkmatehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14931626536197815282noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-57669860415602304582008-10-10T12:19:00.000-04:002008-10-10T12:19:00.000-04:00No, Will, they could not. One of us is not seeing ...No, Will, they could not. One of us is not seeing the forest for the trees here... Could be me. The Thief introduced a new mechanical subsystem. The existance of this system implied changes to the way the game was played. The way the game was designed casting spells were a class function. Swinging swords belonged to another class. That was fine.<BR/><BR/>Then comes along another class that has a whole set of functions that used to be something everyone could do. Does that make more sense now?Doctor Checkmatehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14931626536197815282noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-63243963418129475342008-10-10T11:42:00.000-04:002008-10-10T11:42:00.000-04:00"it seemed as though the Thief was supposed to be ..."it seemed as though the Thief was supposed to be the only one who did these things."<BR/><BR/>It always seemed to me like Gygax was assuming some common sense on the part of his audience here. <BR/><BR/>This was always his Achilles' heel, if you ask me. :)Will Mistrettahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18403399118961902073noreply@blogger.com