Is it possible for a Thief character in This Edition of D and D to beat a fighter?

DKnight

This is a stupid question but aside from backstab, isn't there any way the thief can take down a medicre fighter/ranger or paladin IN A SOMEWHAT FAIR FIGHT. Ive always wondered that as it was one thing I contemplated and wished could happen. In ice wind dale 1 you can get items that add to health but in baldurs gate thats not possible at least in the first game.

Planescape has tattoos but they only make fighters better in the long run. You can only get the best tattoos for fighters and thief's just get locks and stuff that help.

Joey

I think if a thief could beat a fighter in a fair fight, there'd be no point in the fighter class. Assuming they're at equal levels, anyway.

The fighter would have better THAC0, weapons (assuming the theif doesn't have Use Any Items) and armour. The thief would have nothing.

true_shinken

Not surprisingly, Fighters are better than Thieves at fighting.
However, Swashbucklers could make that different, due to getting levels faster and those levels giving AC bonuses.

Schneidend

With good rolls, it's possible, but in general the Fighter has access to better weapons, better armor, and just naturally hits harder and is more accurate.

DKnight

Well if you give the assassin class a try, you not only get +1 to hit and damage, but you can poison the fighter. In later levels the fighter would win, but in low lvls, not even the barbarian would have a chance. Poison is a real you know what. Of course that wouldn't make it a fair fight, but oh well.

ZanathKariashi

Depends on the level and what equipment is allowed. A High level thief is basically a T/M, and would destroy a fighter, just like a mage does.

In a straight fight? Only if they're very lucky, and it depends on the equipment. All things equal, the fighter would generally win simply due to be being better in every way that counts. Especially if the characters are power-game built. Random rolls, it could go either way, though the fighter would still have an advantage, even with lower stats.



Thieves however are NOT meant for combat, direct or otherwise...their sole purpose for existence is the non-spell based utility they bring to a group. Their Backstab and traps (and if BG hadn't nerfed it, their specialization at dual-wielding) is just throwing them a bone so they aren't completely useless in combat situations.

Though if vanilla thieves got their lvl 10 scroll use ability like they're supposed to, they'd be better off, sooner.

Now the kits on the other hand are generally more offensively minded in some fashion or another (though the lack of the vanilla thief's scroll use makes it largely inferior to any of it's kits and removes it's one unique element of versatility).

If the fighter isn't immune to poison, the assassin would destroy them. And depending on level, the swashy could out damage/tank them. The Bounty hunter though would be no stronger then a normal thief (unless it's the PnP BH, which would kick the fighter's ass as well, due to ALSO being a poison specialist, just focusing on disabling instead of lethal ones).

CutlassJack

Rogues are specifically about not fighting fair. That's their skill set. Its like telling a mage they need to wear a gag in a duel.

Schneidend

The likelihood of the Assassin actually landing a non-backstab hit before he's chunked seems low.

lunar

In a fair fight, odds favour fighter. Fighter can get exceptional strength and consitution, higher hit points, weapon specialisation, can wear plate mail and helmets. Thief can get leather armor and a weapon with lousy skill and will be vulnerable to critical hits. It may be possible if the fighter rolls all critical misses, and thief rolls all critical hits, but is unlikely.

If the thief is allowed to use his skills fully, he can be a formidable opponent. Set traps, backstabs, hit/run and hide tactics, plus assasin's poison can turn the tables. A single dart hit from assasin's poison can wreck a lvl 1 fighter, then again that fighter can easily take down the lvl 1 assasin with a critical hit from a specialised composite long bow shot.

SCARY_WIZARD

CutlassJack said:

Rogues are specifically about not fighting fair. That's their skill set. Its like telling a mage they need to wear a gag in a duel.

Yeah.
And what's a "fair fight", anyways? If you gave them both swords and had them duel, who's to stop the Thief from trying to plant the crossguard of its sword into the Fighter's helmet?
Or who's to stop either of the combatants from sweeping at ankles, and pommel-bashing the other combatant's sinus cavity in.
People might argue that those are unfair tactics, but they're tried and true!

Shin

CutlassJack said:

Rogues are specifically about not fighting fair. That's their skill set. Its like telling a mage they need to wear a gag in a duel.

This. It's not very fair to tell a thief and a fighter they can only stand in plain view in front of each other and fight it out - every aspect of that is a clear advantage for the fighter. A bit like a monk challenging a fighter to a battle without weapons and armour - you know, to keep it fair.

Kamigoroshi

Fighter goes to sleep. Thief appoaches Fighter. Fighter attacks with snore attack. Thief backstabs Fighter. Fighter bites the dust. Thief gets XP.

Sounds fair to me.

Corvino

As with so many things: It depends. I can't really see a thief agreeing to a fair fight, and why would they? Thieves have a lot of tricks, traps and gimmicks that cannot come into play if they just stand there trying to stab a guy covered in armor.

However, if they ran away, set a few traps, sneaked back and backstabbed the fighter with a slowing/poisoning weapon and then led them towards said traps while attempting to re-stealth for another backstab. Well that's another matter.

Wilbur

Of course it is possible just not very likely. IMO it would be a fair fight if the thief would first fire a few shots with a bow and then when the fighter got close the thief would hide in shadows and backstab him. I mean that's what the thief is good at so I don't think it's unfair.

Southpaw

SCARY_WIZARD said:

CutlassJack said:

Rogues are specifically about not fighting fair. That's their skill set. Its like telling a mage they need to wear a gag in a duel.

Yeah.
And what's a "fair fight", anyways? If you gave them both swords and had them duel, who's to stop the Thief from trying to plant the crossguard of its sword into the Fighter's helmet?
Or who's to stop either of the combatants from sweeping at ankles, and pommel-bashing the other combatant's sinus cavity in.
People might argue that those are unfair tactics, but they're tried and true!

I'm sorry, but I would not call that a "dirty fight", just "fight". And no sane Thief would agree to something like that.
Now, let's pretend a Thief has agreed to a duel with a Fighter, tomorrow at sunrise...

The Thief would slip a nauseating poison into the Fighter's meal the evening before, place several convenient traps around the duel place, strike a deal with two guys with crossbows to fire them at the Fighter during the fight, cast some mirror image on himself and show up in front of the (puking) Fighter with a poisoned weapon and a flask of burning...

Eudaemonium

So basically, this thread is asking: 'Is there any way for a Thief to not be a Thief?'

Dino

At fighting? Probably not!

At sneaking? But ofcourse!

ZanathKariashi

@Schneidend

Landing hits is NOT a thief's problem...it's lack of bonus attacks (especially after BG nerfed their ability to dual-wield) and Ex fighter str that hold them back.

Depending on the poison used, 1 hit could be game winning.

Schneidend

ZanathKariashi said:

@Schneidend

Landing hits is NOT a thief's problem...it's lack of bonus attacks (especially after BG nerfed their ability to dual-wield) and Ex fighter str that hold them back.

Depending on the poison used, 1 hit could be game winning.

I'm not denying the kind of potency an Assassin's poison can have. You have to actually land a hit to proc the poison, however. Even then, poisons have saving throws.

Awong124

Schneidend said:

ZanathKariashi said:

@Schneidend

Landing hits is NOT a thief's problem...it's lack of bonus attacks (especially after BG nerfed their ability to dual-wield) and Ex fighter str that hold them back.

Depending on the poison used, 1 hit could be game winning.

I'm not denying the kind of potency an Assassin's poison can have. You have to actually land a hit to proc the poison, however. Even then, poisons have saving throws.

Also I seem to recall (I could be wrong) if an assassin uses poison weapon but the attack misses, it counts as being used up.

Schneidend

Awong124 said:

Also I seem to recall (I could be wrong) if an assassin uses poison weapon but the attack misses, it counts as being used up.

Depends on the Edition and class feature/power used, but usually, yeah. Not so in BGEE, though.

fighter_mage_thief

I understand where you're coming from...but there's always room for multiclassing! ^^

Would you prefer that the thief be an even match and still have all of these bonuses? (;

You also say "aside from backstab," yet backstab can instantly win the fight for the thief. ^_^

But I also think the fact that they play so differently is good, since you can get a very different experience from playing each. Sort of like in Planescape Torment, wherein you basically can only play as either one of fighter, mage, or thief at any time with the main character, creating the potential for radically different playthroughs.

There are some interesting differences between the editions though.

For instance, in 3rd edition, the thief (rogue) gets a 50% boost to thaco (called base attack bonus in 3rd) and will have at least 3 attacks per round by level 20, while the mage gets the progression that the thief had in 2nd edition (I think a 100% increase in thaco lol) and gets 2 attacks per round by level 20.

That alone changes a lot, considering multiple attacks were a defining feature of the fighter and fighter-themed classes (paladin, ranger, multiclasses, etc.) in 2nd edition.

Flashburn

Eudaemonium said:

So basically, this thread is asking: 'Is there any way for a Thief to not be a Thief?'

Swashbuckler.

etagloc

if he could. Why roll a fighter?

Eudaemonium

etagloc said:

if he could. Why roll a fighter?

Because Thieves have a better model, at least the female ones.

CutlassJack

Flashburn said:

Eudaemonium said:

So basically, this thread is asking: 'Is there any way for a Thief to not be a Thief?'

Swashbuckler.

Even a Swashbuckler is a rogue. Playing fair isn't part of their skillset either. They just look more dashing screwing you over. ;D

ChildofBhaal599

low level: classes are about equal here and I think it would go either way depending on rolls
medium level: fighter affords better armor to utilize his class, has better thaco, the fighter would pretty much win without the use of thief abilities
high level: while fighter has gained more thaco, ac, attacks per round, the thief has the best hla: use any item. magic, all the best gear, everything is available for the thief and he would win.

Time4Tiddy

ChildofBhaal599 said:

low level: classes are about equal here and I think it would go either way depending on rolls

Except that a thief can only get a max of 8 hp at level one, while a fighter could have 14, almost double. The thief weapons' damage ranges, even with an 18 str are unlikely to kill a fighter in one hit. If the fighter, on the other hand, has 18/00 and a specialized weapon, it's unlikely he WOULDN'T one shot a thief with 8 hp. The disparity gets worse as the levels increase, with fighter getting more attacks and an insane amount of hp in comparison - by level 3 would be 42 hp vs. 24 and the 18/00 fighter could still basically one shot the thief if you count extra attacks.

The only way a thief could defeat a fighter in "fair fight" is if the fighter had terrible stats and the thief had great ones. Say an elven swash with 18 str, 19 dex, 16 con using short swords vs. a human fighter with 13 str 14 dex 12 con.

Foggy

Possible only if you roll a wizard slayer.

DKnight

I think that Swashbuckler late in the game would kill all of them. The swash at lvl 40 would deal an extra +10 damage and can also evade attacks at +9 as well, or +10 if you single prof.

Just to test this, I took Dorn who has 19 strength, decent dexterity and 15 constitution (from tome) against my swashbuckler with dagger +2. My swashbuckler had the same 19 strength and a few less hp. He won without Dorn reaching my character's half health. It was a no contest. That's just a lvl 10 vs. 8. Think of a lvl 40 Swash vs that same blackguard or fighter.

Swashbucklers are like the kensai version for the thief and are one of my favorite classes. I only wish the assassin and regular thief had something that makes them different. Poison is all the assassin has and the regular thief is just versatile but that's it. Bounty hunter is very good although melee is not worthwhile.

Shadowdancer is the best backstabber due to the bug present in game. I killed Sarevok in 15 seconds with 3 back to back backstabs while Imoen played monopoly in the corner.

the_spyder

I guess I don't understand why (a) it makes a difference if a non-fighter type could beat a fighter type in hand to hand combat and (b) why anyone would want to hamper the thief by removing traps/back-stab from the equation. That's like saying "Ok, can a cleric heal, but without using divine magic." Yeah, (assuming the heal skill) just not very well.