Is there a point in pure thief?
Chow
Member Posts: 1,192
Maybe it's just me, but I sort of feel that the thief, without any dual-/multiclassing or kits, is a pretty cruddy character. They have their thief skills, of course, like lockpicking and trapfinding and such, but there's basically no way they won't be improved with any of the other options.
Bounty hunters get all sorts of awesome throwable traps in exchange of few skill points that they'll get fairly enough in the end anyway. Swashbucklers get some cool flynning stuff and just lose backstab, which at least for me never could hit much anything because thieves as they are have pretty bad bonuses to hit, even with the backstab bonus. And assassins are the sneaky evil bastards, who may not have the skill points for lockpicking and trapfinding and other such things, but if you needed those, you'd play any of the other kits. They all have their drawbacks, but the benefits are more than worth it.
Or what if they're not? Just multiclass! Or maybe dual-class from a fighter or into a mage. A fighter/thief gets a whole slew of hit points and proficiencies and can actually hit something, even if he's not stabbing things in the back. A mage/thief opens a whole can of possibilities with spells for practically everything. Sure, the fighter will never be as good at beating things up as a pure fighter, and can't wear heavier armor if he wants to use his thieving abilities, and the mage can't get to his full potential until at the very end of ToB, but what does the thief half lose in any of these cases? Nothing whatsoever.
If you just think of them as a thief with some bonus stuff, instead of a balanced mix-up of two classes, then they're infinitely superior to the pure class. There's precisely one drawback, and that's less experience, but at least in my opinion, this isn't as much of a drawback as you might think: thieves level up fast, and in early game they lag behind less than one entire level from the rest of the party - or equal in level with the mage! Way later, like in ToB, when experience requirements for the next level stop just doubling from the last one, they'll start staying behind the rest of the group a little more, but at this point it doesn't matter anymore at all: once it begins, at level 8 or so, a fighter/thief is already close to as tough (especially with CON of 17 and more, which would allow him the warrior-exclusive HP bonuses) and can hit just as well as a level 16 pure thief (counting only raw abilities and proficiencies: the level 16 thief would probably have a better weapon in his hands by that point), or potentially do more damage with his backstabs if he has percentile strength. Or, a mage/thief could use his thieving skills just as well as a pure thief of several levels higher, because he could just put all his second level spells as Knock or Invisibility, and suddenly have a whole lot of extra thieving skills to put wherever he wants. In either case, even if they stuck as generalists and spread their skill points fairly evenly, they'd by this point start having enough thief skills to put everywhere they need them: a pure thief would have some more, but at this point they start to get almost unnecessary.
So you'll never reach those epic levels, but who cares about those at this point? They will not give you anything of true value anymore, nothing you would need. The only thing you do care about - the high-level abilities - is based on total experience amount instead of levels, so those will come at you precisely as early as they normally would have. It's a foolproof plan.
In case of dual-classes, it becomes a thing with the short term situation versus the long run, and I suppose I'm somewhat biased with this thing because I almost always think in the latter: up to the point where I'm already making plans for the BGEE character I created yesterday, plans that go all the way up to midpoint of BG2 or even beyond. So if you thought about the shorter term, like what's better for you right now, then I guess dual-classing might not be your thing (so multiclass instead: see above). After all, it'd mean you had to take several levels as fighter before becoming the thief you were destined to be, or go without your thieving skills just when they were getting good to learn the basics of wizard. But that never bothered me too much, and in the latter case, by that point of the game you'd get back your thieving skills soon enough anyway: you'd have dualed at around level 12 in the latest, which is when you'd have (or I would at least) all your thieving skills at the sort of levels where they will be pretty much enough even in ToB, and that would be when BG2 started to basically throw experience at you and your mage would catch up to thievery very quickly. In the former case, of course, you'd start up basically useless for all of five minutes, and then you killed off like two mooks and suddenly you're level two and slightly less useless, and it just keeps going from there: even before you get back your fightery things, your thieving skills will have developed well enough that you'll be able to disarm things and pick pockets for a while before you stab stuff again.
The normal single-class non-kitted thief has more levels than any of these guys, and is basically bloating of thieving skills, but very few of those skills are of any worth beyond 100 or so points, his backstab can't hit anything, and his high-level abilities are by now available for all. Hell, the fighter/thief has had most of Use Any Item on him for all of the game, with some extra proficiencies and better attack bonuses that actually allow him to swing that two-handed sword and hit something other than his own face! He got Carsomyr no later than the pure thief, but can use it better.
So, yeah. This is basically why I never roll up just a thief, why I usually pick Montaron over Imoen (or keep both but dual-class her into a mage), and why I have no friends.
Also, for those that haven't played AD&D on tabletop, this issue is even worse there. Because on tabletop, even thieving skills aren't just his anymore: they're not hard-coded into the system, and the other players are definitely going to dispute them sooner or later. "What do you mean only a thief can move silently without the enemy noticing? I have no armor and shoes, and I'm not going to sing With Catlike Tread as I go, you mean the orcs automatically hear me anyway?"
I don't know. I just had too much time to waste and felt like talking about something BG and AD&D related. Go ahead and pitch in if you feel like it. Tell me why you would like to still roll up a pure thief, I'm kind of curious to hear your counterarguments on my tired walls of text.
Bounty hunters get all sorts of awesome throwable traps in exchange of few skill points that they'll get fairly enough in the end anyway. Swashbucklers get some cool flynning stuff and just lose backstab, which at least for me never could hit much anything because thieves as they are have pretty bad bonuses to hit, even with the backstab bonus. And assassins are the sneaky evil bastards, who may not have the skill points for lockpicking and trapfinding and other such things, but if you needed those, you'd play any of the other kits. They all have their drawbacks, but the benefits are more than worth it.
Or what if they're not? Just multiclass! Or maybe dual-class from a fighter or into a mage. A fighter/thief gets a whole slew of hit points and proficiencies and can actually hit something, even if he's not stabbing things in the back. A mage/thief opens a whole can of possibilities with spells for practically everything. Sure, the fighter will never be as good at beating things up as a pure fighter, and can't wear heavier armor if he wants to use his thieving abilities, and the mage can't get to his full potential until at the very end of ToB, but what does the thief half lose in any of these cases? Nothing whatsoever.
If you just think of them as a thief with some bonus stuff, instead of a balanced mix-up of two classes, then they're infinitely superior to the pure class. There's precisely one drawback, and that's less experience, but at least in my opinion, this isn't as much of a drawback as you might think: thieves level up fast, and in early game they lag behind less than one entire level from the rest of the party - or equal in level with the mage! Way later, like in ToB, when experience requirements for the next level stop just doubling from the last one, they'll start staying behind the rest of the group a little more, but at this point it doesn't matter anymore at all: once it begins, at level 8 or so, a fighter/thief is already close to as tough (especially with CON of 17 and more, which would allow him the warrior-exclusive HP bonuses) and can hit just as well as a level 16 pure thief (counting only raw abilities and proficiencies: the level 16 thief would probably have a better weapon in his hands by that point), or potentially do more damage with his backstabs if he has percentile strength. Or, a mage/thief could use his thieving skills just as well as a pure thief of several levels higher, because he could just put all his second level spells as Knock or Invisibility, and suddenly have a whole lot of extra thieving skills to put wherever he wants. In either case, even if they stuck as generalists and spread their skill points fairly evenly, they'd by this point start having enough thief skills to put everywhere they need them: a pure thief would have some more, but at this point they start to get almost unnecessary.
So you'll never reach those epic levels, but who cares about those at this point? They will not give you anything of true value anymore, nothing you would need. The only thing you do care about - the high-level abilities - is based on total experience amount instead of levels, so those will come at you precisely as early as they normally would have. It's a foolproof plan.
In case of dual-classes, it becomes a thing with the short term situation versus the long run, and I suppose I'm somewhat biased with this thing because I almost always think in the latter: up to the point where I'm already making plans for the BGEE character I created yesterday, plans that go all the way up to midpoint of BG2 or even beyond. So if you thought about the shorter term, like what's better for you right now, then I guess dual-classing might not be your thing (so multiclass instead: see above). After all, it'd mean you had to take several levels as fighter before becoming the thief you were destined to be, or go without your thieving skills just when they were getting good to learn the basics of wizard. But that never bothered me too much, and in the latter case, by that point of the game you'd get back your thieving skills soon enough anyway: you'd have dualed at around level 12 in the latest, which is when you'd have (or I would at least) all your thieving skills at the sort of levels where they will be pretty much enough even in ToB, and that would be when BG2 started to basically throw experience at you and your mage would catch up to thievery very quickly. In the former case, of course, you'd start up basically useless for all of five minutes, and then you killed off like two mooks and suddenly you're level two and slightly less useless, and it just keeps going from there: even before you get back your fightery things, your thieving skills will have developed well enough that you'll be able to disarm things and pick pockets for a while before you stab stuff again.
The normal single-class non-kitted thief has more levels than any of these guys, and is basically bloating of thieving skills, but very few of those skills are of any worth beyond 100 or so points, his backstab can't hit anything, and his high-level abilities are by now available for all. Hell, the fighter/thief has had most of Use Any Item on him for all of the game, with some extra proficiencies and better attack bonuses that actually allow him to swing that two-handed sword and hit something other than his own face! He got Carsomyr no later than the pure thief, but can use it better.
So, yeah. This is basically why I never roll up just a thief, why I usually pick Montaron over Imoen (or keep both but dual-class her into a mage), and why I have no friends.
Also, for those that haven't played AD&D on tabletop, this issue is even worse there. Because on tabletop, even thieving skills aren't just his anymore: they're not hard-coded into the system, and the other players are definitely going to dispute them sooner or later. "What do you mean only a thief can move silently without the enemy noticing? I have no armor and shoes, and I'm not going to sing With Catlike Tread as I go, you mean the orcs automatically hear me anyway?"
I don't know. I just had too much time to waste and felt like talking about something BG and AD&D related. Go ahead and pitch in if you feel like it. Tell me why you would like to still roll up a pure thief, I'm kind of curious to hear your counterarguments on my tired walls of text.
1
Comments
That said, once you get into TOB, thieves have access to really, really good HLAs
Also note that Imoen can be dualed to a Mage, so she can be more useful than Montaron.
To this end it might be a good choice for an Ironman run, since you would be unable to reload if you screw up stealth or a pickpocket attempt.
Well, in any case, have a fighter dual class to thief at any level , so you can have specializations, dual wielding and stuff, so you can be more active in close combat.
So yes, a pure cleric may not be useless, but it is kind of pointless to have.
Kensais dualed to thieves are the best in terms of raw frontline damage.
In terms of utility mod-based adventurer kit thieves dualed to mage or cleric are the best.
And with a fighter/thief you might actually hit something.
Actually, this goes for the other classes as well. Pure mages and clerics are inferior to the dual class builds. For the thieves it's just more obvious.
I do think a pure thief in Baldur's Gate can be effective, due to utility value and the fact that they can still have decent damage output when built as archers. As the game is pretty low-level overall, you can really get away with weaker builds. I have always found dagger-oriented thieves totally useless, though. Maybe if the game had a few more and better non-combat options available, the situation would be different.
Roll-players and munchkin gamers might not see any point, but roleplayers might welcome the option.
Here's my list of options for the high-level pure thief:
1. Backstab. Awesome ability. Great for opening battles, gets stronger as you level up. You need to hit really hit levels to maximize the multiplier (e.g.: Assassin).
2. Set Snares. Devastating ability in BG2 and beyond. Probably better at killing opponents than Backstab. You get these very quickly in the epic game. Bounty hunters get lots of these. Makes power-leveling a snap.
3. Pick pockets. Great for stealing anything and everything. Never worry about GP again. You can really pump points into this (100+). This is a great place to dump your points as level.
4. (Swashbucklers only) Level-dependent bonuses to AC, damage, and to hit. Swashbucklers are decent warriors.
5. Rapid level accumulation will keep the game exciting for you. At least if you're ADD like me.
-Edit: Looks like I missed the boat on this one. I responded as if this were an argument about multi-class versus dual-class thief. It's really about kit vs. kitless. Sorry guys! -
Also I am using it quite a lot in BGEE. Set a trap, kite your target, win.
Like traps? Make a bounty hunter.
Like backstabs? Make an assassin.
Don't care about backstabbing or traps? Make a swashbuckler.
And for a plain any kit of a thief, all of them are weaker than a fighter / thief multiclass, or kensai / thief dual class.
In terms of dual classing from a thief, the swashbuckler kit is simply far too strong for that purpose compared to the others for the AC, hit, and damage bonuses.
Also if all you want a thief in your party for is to handle traps, dual classing a swashbuckler into a mage or fighter is a much more attractive option.
Backstab well.
Level faster than anyone else.
Have the highest points in thief skills.
Have decent - though not necessarily the most powerful - traps.
Pure:
Swashies can't backstab. Even Assassins don't really advance much beyond regular backstabbery until BG2+, so they're arguably worse than pure thieves if you don't much care for poison.
Bounty Hunters and Assassins have mediocre thief skills.
All thieves have pretty powerful Set Snares, the pure Thief and the Swashbuckler are the ones who get the skill points necessary to max them.
Dual/Multi:
Level more slowly, by definition.
So, if you really want to be a Jack of all Trades, master of Jack All, then Thief exists to fill that role. It's up to you whether that tradeoff is worth the hassle.