If you're enjoying the content here, check out our new site, Thoughtcrime Games. Thanks for visiting!
Thievery as Mechanics.
Disable Trap: Check Thievery vs. the DC of the trap. The trap is disabled on a success, though some traps may require multiple successes. Gain a +2 bonus if you have thieves’ tools. The trap is triggered on a failure by 5 or more.
Pick Lock: Check Thievery vs. the DC of the lock. The lock is opened on a success, though some locks may require multiple successes. Gain a +2 bonus if you have thieves’ tools.
Pick Pocket: Check Thievery vs. the Hard DC of the target’s level. A small object is removed from the target on a success without the target noticing. (IMPORTANT: the target does NOT get a Perception check here!) No item is procured on a failure by 4 or less, but the target still is not aware of the attempt. The target IS aware of the failed pickpocket attempt on a failure by 5 or more.
Sleight of Hand: Check Thievery vs. the Passive Perception of all viewers. The maneuver is convincing to any creature whose Perception was beat by the Thievery check. The maneuver is obvious or unconvincing to any creature whose Perception was not beat by the Thievery check.
At first, I was not even sure why there’s a Thievery skill to be honest. In my game, there is no Thievery skill; there’s apparently a “Thievery or ” skill because I always call for “Thievery or Arcana, ” “Thievery or Dungeoneering, ” “Thievery or Stealth. ” Each one of the applications of Thievery seems like it would be quite feasible as a Stealth or Dungeoneering check, occasionally Arcana. Doesn’t picking someone’s pocket require knowledge of Stealth or are you just going to “ROLL A 4!!!”? If you go Dungeoneering on a regular basis, constantly on the lookout for traps, aren’t you going to know a thing or two about disarming them? Wouldn’t I need a solid understanding of Arcana to disarm a magical trap? I understand that the ‘nimble-fingered guy who tinkers with stuff’ is a big archetype in the fantasy world, but look – both Stealth and Thievery are based on Dex. Do we really need two different “I hide things” skills based on the same stat in a system where Spot, Search and Listen are all rolled into Perception? It seems redundant and a deviance from the theory behind what a skill does in 4E.
So to figure out what the intention behind the necessity of both Stealth and Thievery is, we go to the class skill lists as normal. Classes with access to Thievery are:
* Rogue (also Stealth and Dungeoneering)
* Warlock (also Arcana)
* Monk (also Stealth)
* Runepriest (also Arcana)
* Artificer (also Arcana and Dungeoneering)
* Assassin (also Stealth)
I studied this list for quite a while before coming up with what it is this very motley crew has in common: they’re all outsiders or outlaws!! That seems obvious, but just run with this for a minute. The traditional rogues and assassins are usually flat-out criminals. The runepriest is the only divine class that doesn’t actually channel divinity (both in terms of class features and in-game fluff). The warlock made a deal with some illicit shady being to gain power; the Artificer is at least as close science as magic. The traditional monk stays on the outskirts of civilization, living a very non-traditional ascetic lifestyle. Every one of these classes is doing something not just hidden, but utterly unorthodox. Thus Thievery is not simple concealment in the way Stealth is — it’s subversion. We’ll get into more examples as the article continues so just hold that thought in mind for the moment.
Does this change how I feel about Thievery vs the other skills? Maybe a little. In practice, I still find them relatively interchangeable. My game will probably always have the “Thievery or ” skill. I will let my players pick locks with Dungeoneering and pick pockets with Stealth. They will disarm magical traps with Arcana and pass off forged documents with Bluff. However, a combat Feint seems to make a lot more sense with Thievery now – a Dex based maneuver that subverts the general “I hit you with my weapon” tactic in favor of something else. Heck, I’d like to see Thievery subbed in for Heal to get the placebo effect when selling someone quack medicine. Basically when a character tries to use an object in a way that it was not intended to be used or otherwise attempts an action that is clearly counter to the ‘normal’ way of doing things, you can bet that “Thievery or ” will at least flash through my mind if not make an appearance.
Thievery as Platform
Thievery is sort of the ethical counterpart to Stealth’s moral grey. That is, while there are few Good reasons why a character would be trained in Stealth, there are similarly few Lawful reasons why a character might be trained in Thievery since Thievery automatically assumes some level of rebellion or unorthodoxy.
The Mad Scientist/Mad Arcanist should be trained in Thievery as well as the “base” skill (Dungeoneering, Heal, Arcana, etc) as a representation of the collection of odd bits of interdisciplinary knowledge the character has obtained and applies to his or her work. (Due to the number of different situations to which Thievery could apply; the “jack-of-all-trades” or “universal secondary” property of Thievery will come up often.) Fakers of all kinds, including the Heretic, Snake Oil Salesman and Pseudo-Arcanist use Thievery in a similar way plying bits of trivia, sleight of hand and clever ruses to appear as something they’re actually not. Then of course you have your conventional Larcenists who break into homes, cut loose bags of gold or do whatever to make their dishonest living and Treasure Hunters who delve into crypts and remove contents left to aid the dead in their next life.
One foundational question for the application of Thievery is “Who are you trying to be?” A poor man trying to be rich? A con artist passing herself off as a wizard or prophet? A commoner masquerading as foreign royalty? Thievery is about breaking the status quo; the “system” has somehow failed a character trained in Thievery,forcing him or her to learn and utilize methods frowned upon by the powers that be. Thus another way to approach your background due to Thievery training is “Where did things fall apart?” Did you start down an educational path that you later found faulty? Were you accused – or even found guilty – of a crime you didn’t commit? Did the authorities let someone who had wronged you go free? Maybe you just found a way to exploit society and are milking it for all it’s worth? Training in Thievery implies something ‘broken’ in a character’s past; it may not be evil or even tragic, but it is at least a little out of the ordinary.
Thievery as Sense
As a sensory skill, Thievery is wide open to interpretation and its uses aren’t necessarily obviously tied to one another. Like Bluff, it is on the lookout for easy marks, but where Bluff intends to confront said marks directly, Thievery seeks to do so tangentially. Suppose a Bluffing and Thieving character spot the same young naive adventurer-wannabe in the tavern. The Bluffing character notes the fresh, undented armor and wide-eyed confidence and begins thinking about what old garbage to pawn off or how best to coax the young’in into doing his or her dirty work. The Thieving character sees his quick income in the poorly placed coin pouch and obviously “hidden” extra boot dagger. The Bluffing character is looking to create a specific opportunity; the Thieving character takes advantage of whatever opportunity is already available.
In fact, “opportunistic” is the mainstay of the Thieving character. Due to his or her chaotic and unconventional nature, this character is not much of a planner but is an OUTSTANDING improvisationalist. DMs can further promote this trait by providing seemingly unrelated cues and subtly prompting the player to make creative use of them. For example, a group of PCs has the current bad guy cornered in a grain mill and are trying to physically capture him. The Perception-trained character makes a check to find restraining tools and notes only some empty grain sacks. The Thieving character makes the same check and is told that there is a loose grindstone, a leaky sack of chaff and a cat trying to hide in the rafters. As a DM, you may have no idea what to do with that information, but odds are the player THINKS you do and will try to come up with some outlandish way to make it work. Sit back and enjoy the ensuing hijinks. For fans of comic books, compare Bruce Wayne’s Batman to Dick Grayson’s. Both are trained in Thievery but Dick relies on it much more often to work with a situation ‘as is’ rather than come up with a more traditional Insight-based Batman Gambit.
Thievery also makes a very good ‘random knowledge’ or ‘common sense’ check when something just doesn’t fall neatly into another category. Where is the old wizard you’ve never met before likely to hide the key to his laboratory? What distance can you throw an unenchanted longsword and have it still be a legitimate weapon? What is the air speed velocity How long do I have before that angry mob chasing me can reload their crossbows while running? All these sorts of odd, niche questions can be handled nicely with a Thievery check.
Thievery as Social Skill
Using Thievery as a social skill is about the same as using Stealth or Bluff under the given circumstances. I got quite a few politely disagreeing comments and emails on last week’s Stealth installment, arguing that my uses for Stealth in social situations (subtle insinuation, double entendre, forgery, codes and ciphers) are really uses of Thievery or, more often, Bluff. The point of using non-Charisma based skills in social settings is to involve all players in a social scene, regardless of skill choice. 4E has gone a long way toward ensuring that all characters are effective in combat encounters in different ways, but ultimately failed (or rather chose not) to ensure that all characters are effective in social encounters in different ways. These “as Social Skill” sections are intended to rectify that and if it seems like they split hairs sometimes, so be it. I will continue to stand by my three variations of lying – Stealth (making an important message difficult to receive), Thievery (the twisting or convoluting of an important message into something of different content) and Bluff (altering the perceived importance of a message) – but I do so with some wiggle room. “Thievery or Bluff” is perfectly fine. Since we have discussed how Thievery overlaps in some amount with many other skills, I would encourage DMs to allow players to make a Thievery check at least once per social encounter in place of a Charisma-based skill, especially if they are trying something underhanded or politically complex. It may not fit the mechanics (i.e. Dex base of the skill) exactly, but it does fit very nicely with the overall feel of what the Thievery skill represents in terms of character background.
Hope you enjoyed that breakdown of Thievery! Next week’s penultimate article will cover Streetwise and then we end on my favorite skill, Religion. Thanks for reading!
Ryven Cedrylle was introduced to 2nd edition D&D by his father at age 8 and has been hooked ever since. When not out somewhere with his nerd-loving wife, he spends an inordinate amount of time staring at small objects - primarily beakers, stars, books about religion and virtual gaming miniatures. Follow him on 
Excellent and thought provoking post, as ever. Certainly got me thinking about how to encourage our Rogue to make better use of the Thievery skill in future, particularly in Skill Challenges.
Thanks!
I love these posts but I believe you overthought the Mechanics section. Stealth is about hiding and moving without being noticed, while Thievery is about manipulation of the environment — that’s the difference. Thievery and Arcana have nothing at all in common, but WotC wanted Thieves to be able to deal with magic locks and traps so they waved their hands and made it so. Dungeoneering is a catch-all, so it was bound to overlap with a number of other skills.
Where do you think the old 3.5 skill “Decipher Script” falls into the 4e skill list? It’s a stereotypical “Rogue” skill, so my knee jerk reaction is Theivery, but I could see Arcana too.
My very first 4E character was a rogue. When I saw the Thievery skill, I took note of the “sleight of hand” part of the description, and ran with it. He wound up as a part-time magician who also used throwing card shuriken as his ranged weapon. Which was pretty cool.
Thievery also covers the physical capability and manual dexterity required to implement trap disarmament and pocket-picking. A high-thievery character might be able to play a musical instrument well, have the coordination and training necessary to bust it out on the dance floor, or even perform surgery, which requires a very careful touch.
I always distinguished Stealth and Thievery by saying the former was control over ones entire body movements (thus could be used to tread carefully across a mine-ridden field) while the latter was control of specifically the hands and fingers (so picking locks, picking pockets, and fiddling with equipment was all here). Of course this means Stealth steps on Acrobatics a bit, so I defined Acrobatics as the ability to make quick movements as opposed to Stealth’s slow and quiet movement. It has worked flawlessly so far in all my games. My players still argue sometimes about Acrobatics and Athletics, but that’s another story (one that I still believe I’ve solved, even though they sometimes disagree).
What ever happened to synergy bonuses? I’m new to 4e so bear with me, but that’s my immediate reaction to your interchangeable argument. In every instance you site your argument seems plausible, but at the same time presumptuous. Wouldn’t it make more sense to always require a thievery check but just awarding a +2 for being trained in a related skill?