D&D's misplaced "dungeon crawl" rules

In my previous post I argued that the Thief was the first true D&D class, as the Fighter, Magic-User and Cleric were very much still Chainmail classes[1] playing in a D&D game. The Cliff Notes version of that contention was this:

1. Chainmail was a combat game, while D&D was a roleplaying game with both combat and dungeon exploration elements.
2. The Thief was the first class to have a significant chunk of rules dedicated to both of D&D's major sub-games. The others were combat only.

The focus of this post is how the Thief's skills were (poorly) integrated into the D&D game and how it could have been done in a different and better way.

It was a Class Skill; It should have been a Rule System

For reasons I am not aware of it was decided that certain skills (such as opening locks, finding traps, etc.) would be presented as a skill exclusive to members of the Thief class, and not as a generic ability to which D&D Thieves would have preferential access. Contrast that with the D&D combat system, where even the Magic-User is presented with a to-hit advancement table regardless of his suitability for engaging in melee combat. The Cleric and Thief can make fighting retreats. Could you imagine if the entire combat chapter had instead been presented as Fighter/Cleric class abilities which the Thief and Magic-User simply didn't have access to?

I think most D&D players view the stats, saving throw and combat systems of D&D in much the same way that surfers view water. It is the medium on which the activity is engaged in, and while it is oft discussed its centrality and importance to all participants is never deeply questioned. The Thief skill system sticks out like a sore thumb because it is central and important to only one of the classes and none of the others. This is particularly problematic because opening locks and removing traps are non-magical skills that every D&D character has a vested interest in learning to some degree, for survival reasons if no other. More specialized or arcane abilities, such as spellcasting or weapon specialization make better candidates for class abilities than the ability to "climb walls."

You can also contrast the Thief skills with the Open Doors rule under the Strength Table. Everyone can Open Doors, because really, how hard is it to put your shoulder into a stuck door and give it a shove? Yet apparently the ability to stick a piton into a trap mechanism is something that only Thieves are good enough to have a rule for. Everyone else has to roleplay it out and have the DM make an ad hoc judgment.

Lastly, take a moment to contrast the Thief Skills with Saving Throws. Everyone can try to save vs. Death or Breath Weapon. We don't expect all classes to be equally good at these things, but saving vs. perilous encounters is at the heart and soul of a good dungeon crawl and is essential to D&D. It only makes perfect sense (from a game design point of view) that an activity which all players would engage in from time to time would have mechanics that apply to all players. Saving Throws are generic mechanics, just like combat and stats.

So why do these three generic mechancis, the combat system, the saving throw system and the stat tables, apply to all classes when Thief skills are a class ability? Why should the "Dungeon Exploration System" (as I think of Thief skills) be any different when "dungeon exploration" is something that everyone engages in? I can't think of any reason, and I think presenting it as such in Supplement I set D&D off in a poor direction that would take until 4E to really rectify.

Oh, let's just get rid of the Thief after all...

You're entitled to that opinion, but I think there's a very good argument for having rule to mediate activities which (1) come up a lot during typical D&D adventures and (2) have meaningful consequences as to success and failure. We don't need rules for running a Ye Olde Dry Goods Shoppe because that doesn't come up often (typically). If it's ever necessary DM hand-waiving or rolling a d100 to reflect how well business is doing is good enough.

We also don't need rules for cooking meals and doing the necessaries. We sort of assume those things happen at regular intervals during D&D, but you really shouldn't have to worry about losing HP or Saving v. Paralysis during these activities (we hope).

Moving Silently, Detecting Traps and Opening Locks however (1) come up a lot during typical D&D adventures and (2) can kill you if you do it wrong. Just like combat and Save v. Poison. We could benefit from rules for that.

A "TSR D&D" Dungeon Crawl System (DCS)

The purpose of this section is to propose a collection of rules (grandiosely referred to as "the DCS" because it makes me feel virile) which all classes can participate in, just as all classes have rules for combat mechanics and saving throws. It should be compatible with any pre-d20 version of D&D.

The simplest method would be to present the DCS an advancing table of static numbers from 1 to 100 that the player would seek to roll under on a d100. Essentially you draft a Thief skills table for each of the classes. Include racial modifiers if playing AD&D. The Thief would still be the best in most, but a Wizard might start with a better pick pockets (street magic practice) and Read Languages. Fighters could start with a good climb walls. Some skills, such as Open Locks might be considered specialized enough that only the Thief would have a score above 1% (everyone would have at least a 1% shot) at 1st level. We nix Move Silently and just note that Thieves get a +1 to Surprise when travelling alone or solely with halflings, elves, and other thieves none of them in metal armor. It's the mirror image of the Ranger ability, and they cancel each other out (until 5th level, when it becomes +2, then +3 at 10th, etc.).

The other method (and my preferred one, because it's easier for the DM to modify for task-specific difficulty) is to present a "to hit" table for each of the skills (we still nix Move Silently though) according to each of the classes' abilities. Thieves might start with +5 CW, +2 Open Locks, etc. Modify with the appropriate Dex or Str modifiers only. The system would work like this:

DM: Describes what the PCs can perceive. "There's a trap."
PCs: Describes what they want to achieve and their plan for doing it. "We disable it by sticking this iron helmet in the gears."
DM: Determines whether the PC's actions warrant a roll. "OK. Roll for Traps. Beat a 10."
PCs: {Rolls 2d6+modifiers} "Crap!"
DM: {Maniacal Laughter} The gears suck the helmet through and crush it like an empty Miller Lite under a Frost Giant's boots. With a groan of ancient lumber and a shriek of rusty iron wheels the ceiling begins to descend and the port cullis slams shut behind you. What now, hot shots? {Evil Chuckling}

The part in italics is critical. If the player cannot describe what his character is doing there's no way to earn a roll. The bold & italics bit is the core mechanic of this rule. Each thief skill category would have a defined failure mode (e.g., Traps that aren't disarmed "go off" on 1-3/6. Or 1-5/6 if you hate players.).

I don't have it all worked out, but I think Move Silently and Hide in Shadows should be eliminated. They would be replaced by a Thief class ability (Sneaky) to improve Surprise (+1 at 1st, +2 at 4th, +3 at 8th, etc.). They are the opposite of the Ranger's ability Wary. All of the other class abilities should be available to everyone at some point, except possibly Read Magic Scrolls (and that depends on your campaign world preferences).

From an organizational point of view I think these rules should go near the movement, vision and encumbrance rules.

Preserving the OD&D Trap-Solution Methods

I do want to emphasize that this system would not replace role playing with roll playing. First, as I mentioned above, sufficient role play interaction with the environment to state a plan and goal is necessary to even get a roll.

Secondly, I recognize that exercising one's wits to be essential to playing D&D. D&D has a long history of presenting players with challenges (rather than their characters) and I wish no hard to that tradition.My second point regarding the preservation of old school riddles however cannot be found in any rule, and must be found at the dungeon design stage of gaming (which is the individual DM's responsibility, not the game designer's). Any adventure should contain a mix of "Locked door. Do you have Thieves picks?" rolls and player-directed (rather than character-directed) challenges. And player-directed challenges should often be fully resolvable without the need for a roll.
By example, imagine two trap rooms. One can only be disabled by carefully manipulating the gears of the trap. This would call for a roll of some dice. The other room can be escaped by breaking one of four magic mirrors (but the other three will release poison gas into the room). It would be up to the players to determine which mirror to break, but once the decision is made no roll would be necessary. The DES will not help you with this puzzle, or ones related to random teleportation. Only good brain work can help a player in this regard.

It's not a Generic "Skill System", nor a Universal Mechanic

As a last point, please note that this would be a limited set of adventuring related skills - not an open ended skill system (like 3E, with its Perform, Craft and Profession) or any kind of stupid universal mechanic. Secondary avocations are not what the system is trying to model, and I suggest C&C's Secondary Skills or AD&D's Non-Weapon Proficiencies if that's what you want. I speak only of those activities which D&D adventurers actually engage in as part of their "primary job" of adventuring. It largely overlaps with Thief skills and might also include basic first aid, map-making and parlay rules.

[1] Yes, I am aware that there was no Cleric class in Chainmail and that the Cleric was developed by Dave Arneson as part of his proto-D&D Blackmoor campaign. Nevertheless, the Cleric is primarily a Fighter with some abilities tuned to protective magic and combatting the undead. His rules are still primarily related to combat and he would make a decent Chainmail class.