Pathfinder (2e): Basics of Thievery

[@HowItsPlayed]

See here for more great videos on Pathfinder: kzbin.info/aero/PLYCDCUfG0xJb5I-wDIezuDkTfbd8k21Km Want to help support the channel? Get you name listed at the end of my videos by joining my Patreon : ▶️ www.patreon.com/HowItsPlayed/ Thank me with a cup of coffee! ▶️ ko-fi.com/HowItsPlayed

[@Theely]

Explanation is so precise, even down the player complaining about multiple actions. Nothing is left out!

[@HowItsPlayed]

I always try to make realistic examples. :)

[@callmequaz9052]

As someone coming from dnd and learning pathfinder, hearing that a level 5 rogue "only rolled a 2 for a total of 15" is both mind blowing and a "Yeh that tracks" moment.

[@Realjaredschmeck]

Another excellent video. My group and I are shifting from 5e over to pathfinder 2e and are loving it! These videos help a ton!

[@demforr]

Yup, another good video. Two sessions ago my group tried breaking into a shop. The rules for picking locks are straight forward, so not many issues. Still, you did cover some stuff I missed my self when it comes to locks, like the double-check or how exactly the thievery training affects the check. I really like how the action system works in P2e compared to P1e, way more streamlined and straightforward, not having to gess what type of action who is doing lol.

[@HowItsPlayed]

I agree 100%. The way actions are handled in PF2 is far superior to PF1 (or DnD) IMO.

[@nugsnotdrugs7717]

Just noticed that the steal action seemingly has a typo. It reads "the GM may INCREASE the perception DCs of these observers if they are distracted" which seems like the opposite of what would happen

[@HowItsPlayed]

Indeed!

[@entheo302]

Playing my first thief now. This is great. Thanks.

[@HowItsPlayed]

Glad the video helped!

[@Dreadon1]

Love your videos. Please keep making more!

[@HowItsPlayed]

Thanks! As long as people are watching them, I'll keep making them!

[@TroySeward]

Another great video.

[@correpepor]

Thanks for another well explained video.

[@HowItsPlayed]

You're welcome!

[@manituan4956]

I can't get my head around moving from exploration mode to encounter mode just to open a door or disable a device. Is that even necessary?

[@djarrah]

Opening a door, if done in a room without enemies on the other side, can be done as part of exploration mode, as the flow of time is accelerated. But if there are people on the other side and you want to open it stealthy, or if the character is disarming a trap, the flow of time slows, as it requires people to make immediate stealth/thievery checks (your party cannot perform long activities in the 6 seconds you are doing the action)

[@lorenzovaletti4951]

Outstanding!

[@HowItsPlayed]

Thanks!

[@davea99]

Love your work. Thanks!

[@HowItsPlayed]

You're very welcome!

[@NaskaRudd]

Thankyou so much for such quality videos 🙂🙂🙂

[@HowItsPlayed]

You're welcome!

[@thealliedhacker]

Just to be clear, the Rules-as-Written for Stealth are basically that you can't use it (i.e. you automatically become observed) as soon as you use any action other than Hide, Sneak, or Step. So while I think allowing something like picking a lock or opening a door stealthily is something the GM could allow, it's not directly supported by the rules, as far as I can tell.

[@HowItsPlayed]

Thanks for the note! It's largely a matter of interpretation, but there is more to that rule about being observed if you use any action other than Hide, Sneak, Step.... it also says you do not become observed if the GM determines the act is "unobtrusive". The exact text is "The GM might allow you to perform a particularly unobtrusive action without being noticed, possibly requiring another Stealth check." Otherwise, taking a Recall Action or a Seek Action would make you observed, which IMO would be crazy. And it doesn't really define what unobtrusive is, but does give this as their list of actions that would reveal you: "Some actions can cause you to become observed again, but they’re mostly what you’d expect: standing out in the open, attacking someone, making a bunch of noise, and so forth." I think most people would agree that picking a lock on the other side of a door is less obvious than these examples. So, in this case, the GM determined that picking the lock would be "unobtrusive", but require a Stealth check. I do think it is supported by the rules. But also agree it's not spelled out in black and white and is 100% open to each GM's interpretation. :)

[@MrKogarou]

@@HowItsPlayed Same is true for Create a Diversion: "If you do anything else, you become observed just before you act unless the GM determines otherwise." - it's up to the GM, and that's fine. Roleplay it up, folks.

[@zavodneydl]

Thank you!

[@OfHollowMasks]

In the PF2E/R Player Core pg.259, i noticed for the pickpocket feat, it mentions "you can Steal of Palm an Object that's closely guarded, such as in a pocket, without taking the -5 penalty. What penalty is it even referring to?

[@hannahjones7345]

What the dc to steal someone’s organ while there sleeping

[@andrewhildner]

Question about stealing. If you attempt to steal from a creature (either out of combat or in combat with the pickpocket feat & being a master in thievery) could the creature get an attack of opportunity against you? The rules of steal imply that successes happen without the bearer noticing but attack of opportunities don't have any implication that you need to notice a manipulation to react.

[@kschleic9053]

These videos are great. Are you going to be continuing with PF2e videos? One on healing (magical, non-magical, disease) would be great.

[@HowItsPlayed]

Yes! Downtime Part 2 (Create Forgeries, Long-term Rest, Retraining, and Subsist) is going to members of the Patreon this Monday, and will be made public one week after that. And every month patrons vote on the topics they'd like me to cover -- Health and Healing is one of those options.

[@mikelundun]

Does 'On Guard' just mean the target is not 'Off Guard'? ie you are not hidden or concealed to the target, the target is not distracted, upset or off-balance etc?

[@HowItsPlayed]

No, "on guard" just means alert and watchful... this video predates the inclusion of "Off Guard" as a condition, so my use of "on guard" wasn't intended to refer to anything strictly mechanical.

[@mileslugo6430]

So if you critically fail Sabotaging a Carriage would you end up starting it on a roll?

[@PittsburghCitizen]

First, thanks so much for the fantastic videos! I'm working my way through them all now. One quick question about the Steal action. The action says, in part, "You might also need to compare your Thievery check result against the Perception DCs of observers other than the person wearing the object. The GM may increase the Perception DCs of these observers if they’re distracted." The second sentence doesn't make sense to me. Wouldn't the GM instead decrease the Perception DCs of the observers if they are distracted, making it easier to steal something? Maybe I'm missing something. Thanks again for the terrific videos!

[@HowItsPlayed]

Yeah, that's a good catch. It certainly seems to me that if they're distracted, their DCs would go down -- thus making it easier for you to steal! Sounds like an error, but I don't see anything about it in the errata.

[@PittsburghCitizen]

@@HowItsPlayed Thanks for the reply! Perhaps we'll see something in the next round of errata.

[@bluemonkey256]

With pick a lock, the complaints are humorous and accurate… but maybe also show a bit of system mechanical weakness? I guess seek, hide, interact. (To replace broken pick) May all be options…. What else?

[@natanoj16]

My First PF2 character a Chameleon Gnome Rogue called Teellum Mollusk (Teemo by friends) is happy for this ^^

[@sergeig]

So as far as 2e rules go there is nothing preventing a player from making as many attempts as they want, short of breaking their lockpicks? How would you deal with a player that keeps rolling against a lock (that's probably out of their level) until their picks break, then decides he wants to improvise picks to keep trying? I have one friend in my campaign that might just be this trolly.

[@HowItsPlayed]

I would probably rule that the character is able to recognize when a lock is out of their league and tell them they can stop trying to pick it.

[@Astragoth2]

awesome

[@hodldawg]

In 35 years of gaming I don't think I've ever had a character pick a lock during an encounter. It's always been an exploration activity.

[@rondurrans3979]

Loving these vids. Just started PF 2e and they are very helpful. One question. The DC checks are classified as "Expert" etc (CRB p234. Lock example 2. DC21 (expert)). But this use of the term is confusing as you can pass the check if you are just "Trained" with a D20 of 18. Or am I totally wrong ? Edit: Just watched "Lock example 3". These DC classifications are basically strong indicators as to the training level needed. The GM decides on cases such as when somebody is "burning" lock picks on a lock of too high a level.

[@HowItsPlayed]

I don't have the book in front of me to check page 234, but if a lock specifically includes a proficiency level with the DC, i.e. it says "DC21 (expert)", instead of simply "DC21", then you must have at least expert level proficiency in Thievery to succeed on a check to pick it. If you are only Trained in Thievery, then it doesn't matter how well you roll, you're not able to pick it. Although each GM handles things differently, I'm usually nice and assume players are able to recognize that a lock is out of their league so they don't keep wasting time and picks on it.

[@rondurrans3979]

@@HowItsPlayed Wow, thanks for the fast reply. P234 is a generic skill DC list, (locks etc not mentioned). If you look in equipment then locks do not have "expert" etc listed. I think that p234 is just an indicator. My original post said you could pass it with a roll of 18 , (I was assuming Level 1), but if you are level 5 (say) then that would be 14 (not too difficult, especially if you also include any stat mod that you get when not untrained). These rules can be a bit confusing, I think your GM approach makes a lot of sense.

[@HowItsPlayed]

@@rondurrans3979 Right -- the Core Rulebook doesn't have minimum DCs for locks, but IIRC there are adventure modules that do. If the DC for a check displays a proficiency level next to it, then you need that minimum proficiency level (you see this a lot with Hazards, like those on page 523). And you are correct... the generic skill list shown on 234 does not require those proficiencies to succeed... they're just guidelines to help set a DC. Page 503 explains it better than on 234... but basically some DCs scale with the players. The enemies they face get harder as they level up, so DCs based on those enemies also scale up with level. But other things, like climbing, do not scale with level (i.e. climbing a rope doesn't become harder to accomplish at higher levels... it is what it is). And that's what "Simple DCs" are for. In these cases the GM just says "I think this is the kind of thing you would expect an expert to do", and sets the DC at 20. But that doesn't mean you *have* to be an expert to succeed (in most cases).

[@rondurrans3979]

@@HowItsPlayed Thanks. I have just read all the relevant sections again and totally agree with everything that you say. Thanks for your time in explaining all this.

[@unclegeorge5644]

Thnx

[@HowItsPlayed]

👍

[@Mewzard]

Too bad the 5th level Rogue didn't take Trap Finder. She would have been able to pick Master locks even at Expert (and Legendary locks at Master proficiency).

[@TheOx1993]

It's the first time I actually read the name of Merisiel. I was always wandering why a female character was called Mauricio xDD

[@aettic]

Spending your third action to complain. Ah, my favorite past time.

[@lnflnltyLegend]

Pathfinder 2e needs a college class entirely dedicated to it 😂

[@robertwarren4734]

Valorus, stop ogling my butt and hold that darned torch steady!

[@sabin97]

mauricio is a weird name for a female.