We've had 5 sessions so far (Marsh Bell and the first two scenarios from Tales of Wilderland). The PCs are all still hanging in there - there have been times when they've picked up 4-5 shadow over the course of a scenario, or been knocked unconscious. We had a fatality on Wednesday when Ulf the Beorning took 3 hp from a Goblin Archer with a jagged knife, went to zero END and took a second wound (how embarassing) but that was the first one (and TBH we forgot that he could have been knocked back for only 2 hp damage and just gone unconscious on two wounds). PCs seem remarkably resilient to me. The Dwarf was fighting Weary most of the time in "Leaves and Stewed Hobbit" and he still managed to take out lots of Goblins and Orcs. He's just put his Mattock skill up to 3 since then.

They are currently on about 12 XP total, some of them are up to Wisdom/Valour 3.
(2 XP per session + 1 per 2 sessions per end of scenario).

It feels about right to us so far. Each time it's a trade off, are you willing to risk corruption, fatigue, success or failure in combat?

I would agree here. Someone with skill of Sword 6 fighting Goblins is not a hero.
The same character, low on END, Weary, possibly Miserable, holding off Goblins so that the party can escape, is a hero. Why? They are taking a risk. The rules even imply this, under the section where Permanent shadow is not removed from the bonus XP for a player's next character if the first PC dies a hero's death.

"...bonus XP for a player's next character if the first PC dies a hero's death. "

Yeah, I remember reading something about that.

"When a hero dies a proper heroic death, the Loremaster
should reward the character by treating it as if the hero
retired willingly - and thus shouldn’t reduce his Heroic
Heritage bonus by the hero’s permanent Shadow rating,
as the adventurer cleansed the memory of his flaws by
sacrificing himself for the benefit of others."

Not exactly a hard and fast rule, more a suggestion.

Just need 40 XP to get a bonus of 6 Skill points. 40 xps to get 2 skills at 3? Why not have that in the first place? Perhaps the PC wouldn't be taking a dirt nap.

That's the quote I was thinking of. Seems like a rule to me (although the definition of a heroic death could be open to interpretation I suppose).

40 XPs isn't too bad, play through Marsh Bell and Tales from Wilderland and you should end up there. It would probably be better to spend the 6 XP on skills to go from 0->1 than 2->3 though.

Besides as I say, we've found the PCs to be rather tougher than they first appear.

Why not give the PCs lots of starting skills at 5 or 6? Still doesn't make them a hero.

My preferred metric is to use Keep on the Borderlands and compare how an average party of four characters would fare versus 1st edition D&D. I would MUCH rather take four new TOR characters through Keep on the Borderlands than four 1st level D&D characters. Inelegant, perhaps, but I think it underlines how much much more capable starting TOR heroes are than their equivalents in the best-known RPG of all time.

That's the executive summary. For some specific examples, compare TOR to DnD:
* find a secret door (auto with trait or TN 14 with 1-3 success dice + Hope vs. 1 in 6)
* hit a common orc (TN 10 for Forward with 1-3 success dice + Hope vs. ~4-6 in 20)
* kill a common orc (wound or 1 - 3 hits depending on weapon and successes vs. 1-5 hits)
* open a lock (auto with trait or TN 14 with 1-3 success dice + Hope vs. really low [book not handy]
* survivability (potentially very high vs. one hit except for fighters or those with high CONs)

If the players actually make an effort to optimize the party, synergies become possible in TOR at the very beginning that don't have equivalents until mid-level play in D&D. For example, a Barding in defensive with high Wits, a shield and longsword, and Swordmaster can give his fellowship focus a defence of 20+ and a modified TN to hit of 10; if said fellowship focus is a Beorning with Great Spear 3, they can reliably killing at least one, if not two, common orcs every round. So long as they're not grossly outnumbered, their Legolas stand-in with Bow 3 can reliably kill one to two orcs every two rounds. The fourth hero could stand there doing nothing and this party is still going to cleave through common orcs faster than any equivalent 1st edition D&D party.

But wait, there's more! Say you pit a troll against a group of 1st edition D&D PCs: let's not even bother rolling since they can either run or die. Note that I'm not talking about a D&D troll here, either (no regeneration, for example). A large 4-6HD creature with the appropriate number of attacks and damage is going to mop up a group of 1st edition 1st level D&D PCs no sweat. However, our TOR fellowship actually has a chance. Not a good one, to be sure, but they have the chance to win with a bit of luck and the right tactical choices.

I simply cannot accept that a typical starting adventure is too tough for starting heroes in TOR using the RAW. Inexperience and ignorance of the rules can certainly make the game more challenging, but that's true with any system. In TOR, however, I really think the system is comparatively generous to starting characters and even moreso once you've had a chance to grow your character a bit.

Well, that would be atouch overboard, all I'm saying is that they should have couple of more skills at level 3 starting off, which would bring the skill level up to "average". Instead of the majority being around 2. I have to say I guess my group is not as lucky as everyone else. Because, from what I have observed we are having a hard time of it most of time.

No, it would make them Heros, but they would be a little more heroic.

Yes it would be a bit overboard - I was just being a bit hyperbolic as it's Friday

I can't see a problem with giving some skills at 3, or a few more points in character generation (say from 10->15?), or you could even drop the standard TN difficulty to 12, which would make 2 dice more likely than not to succeed. Tweak it to whatever works for you, I say!

I'm satisfied with the rules as they are, but I intend to give more character generation points to new characters who join the party, unless the players want to start at the bottom again. I could see a problem if someone got killed and had to make a new character in a group of experienced heroes. That could be frustrating, because you have to make rolls in order to gain APs, but very often the only player who rolls is the one that has the highest value in the required skill.

I actually like the fact that you can make a new starting character and join a group, which has a few adventures under their belt, and you won't be seriously outclassed. I find it quite refreshing.

I agree. I have found the system to be quite natural. Yes, more advanced characters are better at skills they have advanced, but not everything. I love Star Wars Saga, but higher level characters are more powerful in all areas.

TN 14 is sometimes hard to accomplish in the beginning, but not so much that it stops anyone from trying, or using a Hope point in the most important moments. I love the fact that combats carry on for more than a few rounds. It is much more realistic. And with the help of Traits, Automatic actions ensure that players are able to do things without even rolling the dice if need be.

If a group is having a difficult time getting anywhere because of TN 14, I would suggest lowering all of their tests to an easy TN 12 or very easy TN 10. At least until they have had a couple of adventuring phases under their belt. For any tasks they propose, I would have them describe their tasks as easy or very easy tasks. In other words, maybe you should not have them attempt moderate tests or try moderate tasks unless they want to risk failing.

This post has been edited by JamesRBrown on Dec 7 2012, 02:23 PM