A character in my game found a secret room with treasure in it and wants to try to stuff 330gp from a chest in to his pockets using slight of hand without the other PC's knowing. Slight of hand is just for small pocketable items not a huge amount of coins would stealth be more appropiate? Also what type of (huge) minus should I give to his roll?
Bonus question: Would you consider this an evil act or just chaotic? (His alignment is CN.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
it's not the act that determines it's alignment but the justification.
"ooo shiny" goes under chaotic for sure though.
also, roll sleight of hand 330 times at a DC of 10.
And there's nothing evil about stealing gold from a treasurechest.
Well i ment evil in that he's essentially stealing from the rest of the party.
Unlawful yes. Evil? Maybe he's going to sponsor some orphans with it.
CN or role playing is not enough of a justification for stealing from your party.
Taking it from a treasure hoard sounds more CN to me. Taking it from his party's belongings would be NE. Killing his party to achieve a one way split would be CE. Stealing from the found loot pile is a jerk move, but it's not evil.
If someone was walking ahead of their two friends, and they found an envelope with five $100 bills, pocketed two of them, then told their friends "look, $300, let's split it", it would make them a liar, and not a great friend, but not villainous either. Then again, they're all taking found money that doesn't really belong to them, so who's really clean in all this?
As for mechanically, have him make a few checks that represent pocketing some coins with each handful passed into a bag (or whatever means they use to move loot) but feel free to roll some opposed checks to see if the party notices. (Although I suggest you roll those checks, and don't say why unless one of them is high enough that a character notices.)
CN or role playing is not enough of a justification for stealing from your party.
This one is what i agree with with here.
Stealing from the party is PVP so it is important whether the gaming group in question is ok with having pvp and to which extend. Normally punishment for a thief is the loss of his strong hand. Would the thief player be ok with that consequence should he be found out? If not he should not be a dick and refrain from starting PVP in the first place.
Depending on how the gold is stored, time may be a factor. Try and covertly grab 330 small items. I promise it'll take you more than 6 seconds.
He's probably going to be able to palm a couple, sure, but if he gets greedy then the fact is he's not going to be able to get all the coins if loose or hide a massive sack of cash if it's already stored like that.
EDIT: Stealing from the guys who're covering your ass is wrong, in the same way that the fighter pranking party members in the middle of a fight is wrong, or the wizard hitting the bard with baleful polymorph because he's playing an accordion is wrong. You're a team. Pranks are fine if they don't put any member of that team in real danger, but outside of that...
In summary: any time you need to have your game face on, such as in a dungeon, the party has to be able to rely on you completely and you need to be able to rely on them completely. If the rogue and the paladin have issues, they save it until you're back in the inn. While you are in the dungeon you must be trustworthy, or shockingly no one will trust you!
|
politics aside...
i say he must make a standard DC 10 check to stuff the coins down his shirt securely without dropping them, modified by -20 for their general unwieldiness and bulk, opposed by all party members' Perception (assuming they are in or near the room).
when time comes to divvy up the loot, and it comes up noticeably shy (330gp out of how much? is that the entire chest? is it only a teeny tiny portion?), assuming he doesn't come clean, call for opposed Bluff vs Sense Motives (or Appraise?). if he's been caught stealing from the party before, stack a cumulative -10 penalty for every previous instance.
in future treasure room situations, assuming he has been caught before and is tempted to steal again anyway, call for another Bluff vs Sense Motive round, stacking the same -10 cumulative penalty for each instance he's been caught.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Meh...using Sleight to grab 330 loose coins wouldn't happen at my table. Using it to grab a percentage depending on the success/failure of the roll against the other PC's Perception is absolutely fine.
And its a chaotic trait to steal from the group, certainly not evil. Unless the PC has Lawful anywhere in its alignment go for it. That said be prepared for fall out if the other PCs catch on.
This weekend my group just left behind a PC because he pulled a dick move. No more 4th level fighter.
CN or role playing is not enough of a justification for stealing from your party.
Finders keepers.
Wasn't their chest... yet.
Course, a real smart thief would only take a bit, then turn the rest over to the party and then take his cut later.
If the party keep finding or get handed empty treasure chests, they may doubt his honesty.
It's not sleight of hand to open a chest unoticed. And, unless the chest contained a bag with all coins in, he needs to roll sleight of hand much more than once when he gets the chest open to get all 330 coins or stuff worth 330gp.
It's not the amount of gold you steal that makes it stealth, it's the way he does it.
And stealing is evil. If he plans to do this more than once, or directly from the party, talk to the player. Or you may need to change his alignment or kick him from the group. In general it's not a good idea to not share information with the party, let alone stealing from them.
Stealing is evil?
So Robin Hood is evil?
Pick pocketing the dark cleric's stuff is evil?
Robbing a dishonest guard (that takes bribes) so that you can later feed the orphans is evil?
Stealing isn't always evil, and taking a bit more of the treasure for yourself is dishonourable and potentially selfish, but it isn't evil.
Stealing is always evil (little e not big E), but the reason and justification behind can negate the slight evil of theft. As well as the financial circumstances of who/what you're stealing from.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Stealing is always evil (little e not big E), but the reason and justification behind can negate the slight evil of theft. As well as the financial circumstances of who/what you're stealing from.
If the justification can negate the "evil" aspect of stealing, then you have just proven that stealing is not always evil (big or little e).
Stealing is always evil (little e not big E), but the reason and justification behind can negate the slight evil of theft. As well as the financial circumstances of who/what you're stealing from.If the justification can negate the "evil" aspect of stealing, then you have just proven that stealing is not always evil (big or little e).
I guess at this point we're arguing semantics, but there is a difference between:
1) stealing isn't evil
2) stealing is evil, but giving all the money to charity makes the net "alignment gain" not evil.
I see a significant distinciton between the two. Stealing is inherently bad. What you do with it afterwards might not be, and could negate what you've just done.
Think of it as: I owe you $20. So I'm at -$20 to you. But then I buy you a new copy of the Core Rule Book for $50. Now, it's -20 + 50 = 30, a net positive. So you owe me. Under your idea, the act of theft isn't a -20, it's a 0. It doesn't even enter into the equation.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Stealing isn't evil big e or little e. The entire idea of stealing is a social construct. If you culture doesn't have personal property, then taking something that isn't being used is natural, regardless if someone else sees it as theirs. This outlook on life is Chaotic, but it isn't Evil in alignment terms.
In game, Law, Chaos, Good, and Evil are absolutes that have no bearing on real-world moral values of good and evil or any societies individual laws.
|
Stealing isn't evil big e or little e. The entire idea of stealing is a social construct. If you culture doesn't have personal property, then taking something that isn't being used is natural, regardless if someone else sees it as theirs. This outlook on life is Chaotic, but it isn't Evil in alignment terms.
In game, Law, Chaos, Good, and Evil are absolutes that have no bearing on real-world moral values of good and evil or any societies individual laws.
Alignment is in the game and does need to be a consideration for GMs...so for players as well.
As far as stealing being a social construct, so is banding together as a group to work together towards a common goal. Normally, it is understood that within an adventuring party that the spoils are split evenly. The thief's selfish deviation from that contract would fall under the game term of evil.
Stealing is certainly evil, but it is not a 'big' evil as others have pointed out when compared to murder, torture, etc.
Stealing from the common loot pool is a dick move unless it is Mature players that agree that stuff like that is fun. But for stuff like that is only usefull for the story if it comes out at one point. And then the rest of the gang have to decide how to deal with a guy they dont trust.
ATM i play i guy that nobody trust and he only get loot if the others Think he deserve it. It is great fun because everybody are in on it and the thief( who happend to be a wizard) is not just me ripping of the other players.
Stealing isn't evil big e or little e. The entire idea of stealing is a social construct. If you culture doesn't have personal property, then taking something that isn't being used is natural, regardless if someone else sees it as theirs. This outlook on life is Chaotic, but it isn't Evil in alignment terms.
In game, Law, Chaos, Good, and Evil are absolutes that have no bearing on real-world moral values of good and evil or any societies individual laws.
Wrong, in a society where there is no personal property people will notice you gathering stuff that's for everyone to share and not share it but keeping it for yourself only! And you will be punished for it!
And about the stealing: Would you allow a paladin to steal something, without falling from grace???? I don't think so either.|
|
Stealing is always evil (little e not big E), but the reason and justification behind can negate the slight evil of theft. As well as the financial circumstances of who/what you're stealing from.If the justification can negate the "evil" aspect of stealing, then you have just proven that stealing is not always evil (big or little e).I guess at this point we're arguing semantics, but there is a difference between:
1) stealing isn't evil
2) stealing is evil, but giving all the money to charity makes the net "alignment gain" not evil.I see a significant distinciton between the two. Stealing is inherently bad. What you do with it afterwards might not be, and could negate what you've just done.
Think of it as: I owe you $20. So I'm at -$20 to you. But then I buy you a new copy of the Core Rule Book for $50. Now, it's -20 + 50 = 30, a net positive. So you owe me. Under your idea, the act of theft isn't a -20, it's a 0. It doesn't even enter into the equation.
Note, I did not take an absolutist stance. I am stating the stealing is not always evil. You are dividing it up into two distinct camps and stating it must be in one or the other, but with extenuating circumstances it isn't. In essence you are stating that stealing is evil, except when it isn't. Which is the same as saying that stealing is not always evil.
Your example is also somewhat flawed as 1) you are ascribing to me a stance that I did not take, and 2) owing someone a debt is completely different than theft. If it was theft you were wanting to use, it should have been something more along the lines of "you stole $20 from me, you buy me a CRB because you feel guilty about it, but then want me to pay you for the book." Is that evil, nope. Is it a jerk act, yep. But jerk != evil.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Lets take a look at Kender in Dragonlance. They they don't have a societal concept of personal property, and are all notorious thieves as a result. They see something shiny that isn't being actively used by someone else, they take it.
They are not doing evil by doing this. It isn't wrong to them, and they expect anyone else to do the same to them.
This is Chaotic, but there is no malice, and it is not Evil.
Chaos is not Evil in game terms.
Lets take a look at Kender in Dragonlance. They they don't have a societal concept of personal property, and are all notorious thieves as a result. They see something shiny that isn't being actively used by someone else, they take it.
They are not doing evil by doing this. It isn't wrong to them, and they expect anyone else to do the same to them.
This is Chaotic, but there is no malice, and it is not Evil.
Chaos is not Evil in game terms.
Kender in Dragonlance were never fun for any one but the one playing them. It was forcing the group to be babysitters for a asocial kleptomanic in 5 out of 6 games. It dosent matter if it is evil or not if the PC cannot be trusted it is forcing the other PCs to act and that sort of stuff need to be in the pregame talk.
|
|
Stealing isn't evil big e or little e. The entire idea of stealing is a social construct. If you culture doesn't have personal property, then taking something that isn't being used is natural, regardless if someone else sees it as theirs. This outlook on life is Chaotic, but it isn't Evil in alignment terms.
In game, Law, Chaos, Good, and Evil are absolutes that have no bearing on real-world moral values of good and evil or any societies individual laws.
Wrong, in a society where there is no personal property people will notice you gathering stuff that's for everyone to share and not share it but keeping it for yourself only! And you will be punished for it!
And about the stealing: Would you allow a paladin to steal something, without falling from grace???? I don't think so either.
[thread derail]
Ah the pally argument. It could easily be argued that it was due to breaking the lawful aspect of his or her alignment that caused the fall, as theft is not a lawful act. So this becomes a law vs chaos, not good vs evil issue.If you have the pally adhering to the law of the kingdom rather that the law or their deity. If the deity's strictures teach that it is indeed fine to steal if the reason for the theft is to aid those in need, then no, there would be no fall.
The problem with any argument using a paladin violating their code as the basis for a stance of "this is evil" is that it could be a violation of the lawful nature of the code ... or it could be that the individual paladin's code does not apply to certain situations that another paladin's code would (I prefer to have a Paladin's code actually spelled out before character introduction as different paladins will follow different codes, depending on the deity, etc.).
But as stated this is all a derail. Back to the discussion at hand.
[/thread derail]
|
|
Kender in Dragonlance were never fun for any one but the one playing them. It was forcing the group to be babysitters for a asocial kleptomanic in 5 out of 6 games. It dosent matter if it is evil or not if the PC cannot be trusted it is forcing the other PCs to act and that sort of stuff need to be in the pregame talk.Lets take a look at Kender in Dragonlance. They they don't have a societal concept of personal property, and are all notorious thieves as a result. They see something shiny that isn't being actively used by someone else, they take it.
They are not doing evil by doing this. It isn't wrong to them, and they expect anyone else to do the same to them.
This is Chaotic, but there is no malice, and it is not Evil.
Chaos is not Evil in game terms.
True, and I'm not saying that doing that isn't a jerk move to the rest of the players, and worthy of out of game sanction.
What I am saying is the simple act of theft should never be an alignment change to evil issue.
I'd think the rogue needs to make 330 Sleight of Hand checks. See, there's this pile of coin, and pretty much by definition he can't just scoop it up efficiently to shovel it into a pocket. No, he needs to do this pretty much one at a time to avoid making a LOT of noise.
It'd be fair to abstract things by just saying he takes 20, which means rolling everything from a 1 to a 20. If any of the party have a Perception that is going to catch his 1 + modifiers roll, well, sorry, it's not going to happen that he's going to sneak 330 coins from in front of them.
Go figure.
If it's 330 gp of loose coins, then yeah, a Sleight of Hand check for each coin, which is a standard action. The rest of the party may become suspicious if he's just standing there for several minutes and might end up bringing the opposed Perception checks around.
If it's 330 gp in a sack, then it's really too big for Sleight of Hand (being 6.6 lbs and all). If there are any gems in the chest, it would be safer and more profitable to take one of those and leave the coins (and other gems) for the others.
This is assuming the rest of the party are in the same room. If the rogue is off scouting ahead and found it, he'd probably have a bit more time. Still 6.6 lbs is heavy, so check his encumbrance and perhaps give the party some perception checks to notice him walking with extra weight.
Alignment-wise, it's a CN act. And he's only indirectly stealing from the party (since they haven't compiled the treasure yet). I played a similar character who would snag small things while he was off scouting. I kept it small and made sure it wouldn't really affect WBL that much (I think across 12 levels he netted maybe 1k worth of stuff). He also spent more on frivolities.
It's a group game and everyone wants to have fun (and taking a large portion of loot for oneself tends to cut into other people's fun).
Note, I did not take an absolutist stance. I am stating the stealing is not always evil. You are dividing it up into two distinct camps and stating it must be in one or the other, but with extenuating circumstances it isn't. In essence you are stating that stealing is evil, except when it isn't. Which is the same as saying that stealing is not always evil.Your example is also somewhat flawed as 1) you are ascribing to me a stance that I did not take, and 2) owing someone a debt is completely different than theft. If it was theft you were wanting to use, it should have been something more along the lines of "you stole $20 from me, you buy me a CRB because you feel guilty about it, but then want me to pay you for the book." Is that evil, nope. Is it a jerk act, yep. But jerk != evil.
We clearly have two very different views of how things work, and that's okay. But I disagree with your breakdown, and while we might have different views on how we get there, we do effectively arrive at the same point. However, in my view point the paladin stealing even to give it all to the orphanage still loses his powers.
Regardless, this is merely a semantic debate at this point anyways and is detracting from the original point of the thread so I shall discontinue further discourse on it.
To the original point, I agree with others who say it would take multiple checks and lots of time to loot the entire contents of the chest. The time spent would arouse greater suspicion from anyone around and would likely get him caught. He would only be able to take a handful of coins, or gems, or whatever was in the chest/box/whatever. If it's in a chest, and then in a bag he doesn't have any way to get the gold without someone noticing him opening both containers.
Lets take a look at Kender in Dragonlance. They they don't have a societal concept of personal property, and are all notorious thieves as a result. They see something shiny that isn't being actively used by someone else, they take it.
They are not doing evil by doing this. It isn't wrong to them, and they expect anyone else to do the same to them.
This is Chaotic, but there is no malice, and it is not Evil.
Chaos is not Evil in game terms.
Most players just played them as cleptomaniacs. But they got it wrong. Not having a concept of ownership also means that you freely give away stuff others need at the moment. Giving away your hoopak +4 because someone needs a stick to feel for solid ground during swamp travel, that's playing a kender right.
Kender..
As to the OP:
From the PRD.
Sleight of Hand
Check: A DC 10 Sleight of Hand check lets you palm a coin-sized, unattended object. Performing a minor feat of legerdemain, such as making a coin disappear, also has a DC of 10 unless an observer is determined to note where the item went.
One check per coin as a standard action, or as a move action at -20 to the roll. Your thief is gonna be robbing that chest for quite awhile.
-S
That all depends on the hows whys and where's of it. Stealing someone's sword before combat could easily be attempted murder if not negligent homicide, at the very least. Repeatedly doing so, in a medieval type of society, I could easily see leading to the perpetrator's death.
more spoilery goodness cuz of off topic stuffs.