Can Enemies use Hate to add Attribute Score to their rolls?

[delazar]

For example, A Great Orc (attribute 7) has Hate 8.

When he attacks with his 2-H scimitar (rank 3, favorite), he rolls 1d12+3d6+7.

But if he also spends a Hate point, can he add another 7 to this roll?

[Rich H]

Short answer: no.

[delazar]

somehow I had the feeling it was wrong, but my brain still thinks that Hate is the Hope equivalent for enemies...

thanks for the quick (and short) answer!

[Hermes Serpent]

LMB p64 says Attribute Level "is added as a bonus every time that a creature attempts a roll using a characteristic indicated as favoured (without the need of spending any point to invoke the bonus) and as a Damage bonus to be applied when the creature hits an opponent in combat rolling a great or extraordinary success."

LMB p50 the example of combat "The Attercop’s primary attack is ensnare, a favoured ability: it adds its Attribute level of 3 to its roll against its TN 16, scoring an extraordinary success!"

So while you can't use hate to add the AL to a creatures attack if their attack is a Favoured one they automatically add their Attribute level so the Great Orc adds 7 to his weapon dice as you note.

I can tell you that a Great Orc is terrifying enough when taken on by five heroes of lowish rank without adding an extra 7 to his attack roll. Hitting a target for up to 21 Endurance loss is nearly enough to one shot many heroes, they don't need the odds shifted even more out of their favour.

[Rich H]

somehow I had the feeling it was wrong, but my brain still thinks that Hate is the Hope equivalent for enemies...

thanks for the quick (and short) answer!

A pleasure and I agree that Hate is the equivalent of Hope. TOR is one of those games where NPCs/adversaries engage with the system differently to PCs - this is just one example, being wearied is another, etc. It can lead to confusion and often seems a little unfair from a PC perspective - eg, PCs have to consider the encumbrance of armour and how it can lead to weariness, NPCs/adversaries don't face such a challenge/issue, which does seem more than a little strange.

[Hermes Serpent]

@Rich H, the load on the LM is already much higher than that on any single player. They only have to remember their own Rewards and Virtues while the LM has the whole of the menagerie of creatures to deal with. I've noticed that players often have a tendency to forget their bonuses and advantages until you remind them but there is no such help for the LM

The asymmetrical approach to heroes and adversaries used by TOR helps a lot in relieving the LM of some of the arduous parts of running a game and leaves them to concentrate on the story which is how it should be.

[Rich H]

@Rich H, the load on the LM is already much higher than that on any single player. They only have to remember their own Rewards and Virtues while the LM has the whole of the menagerie of creatures to deal with. I've noticed that players often have a tendency to forget their bonuses and advantages until you remind them but there is no such help for the LM

I know/suspect what the intent was, I just don't think it works like that for all LMs.

The asymmetrical approach to heroes and adversaries used by TOR helps a lot in relieving the LM of some of the arduous parts of running a game and leaves them to concentrate on the story which is how it should be.

I don't necessarily agree with that. For the OP's question this is certainly not the case:

* Removing elements and replacing them with other rules (eg, spending Hope to add attribute to skill rolls vs. not spending Hate in the same situation) means that LMs have to remember a different rule which can equally be forgotten and cause confusion, as the OP's query demonstrates. This is counter productive if the intent of such 'simplification' was to remove the burden to LMs as they not only have to remember/support their players for how it works for PCs but then they also have to remember a different rule for their NPCs/adversaries. That's not simplifying, that's adding extra rules/complexities. A simpler rule would just be to have Hate and Hope work the same way when being used to boost skill rolls by adding an attribute rating to it.

I agree that removing the wearied check on Armour for PCs does simplify the job of the LM but:

* Removing the wearying affect of armour for NPCs/adversaries is taking away the one drawback in the game for wearing armour for NPCs but not for PCs - which is counter intuitive and potentially flawed for many gaming groups as previous and multiple threads on this very forum have demonstrated, although this isn't the main driver for those discussions, granted. Taking a devil's advocate view I can see how many gaming groups would see this as strange, which is why I pointed it out.

[Rocmistro]

Rich/Hermes:

On the Armour / Weary thing, don't you think this is why most man-sized model NPC's have so much less endurance than PC's though? The idea is that, for a PC, when he loses a certain amount of endurance he goes Weary first, then unconscious. Most PC's have somewhere between 24 and 30 Endurance (Let's call it an average of 27, then).

An Orc Guard has 16 endurance and wears (Leather Corslet (2d, Enc 8), Shield (enc 3), Spear (enc 2) and "bent sword" (let's call it a short sword, enc 1). That totals Fatigue 14. So Endurance 16 + Fatigue 14 = 30 "endurance", ie, the high end of a PC's starting endurance.

So really, I think an Orc Guard, for example, is meant to be about as powerful as a hero. But, instead of having a weary condition, they just drop at the same point at which a hero would normally go weary. So while it looks like an advantage to NPC's, I think the fact that NPC's drop when their endurance rating hits 0 is really meant to favor PC's (and help Loremasters).

[Hermes Serpent]

@Rocmistro, take a look at the Loremaster's Book regarding LM Characters p 27 where a table show that LM characters have Endurance scores from 10 to 18 plus their Attribute level if they are described as combat types.

So a Veteran Elf warrior has 19 or 20 Endurance with weapon skills rated at 3 or 4 ranks.

That shows the authors thinking about named/important NPC's and the section provides an overview of how to set up any characters that the company should come across in their travels.

Edit: Caranthir, the pregen in the Adventurer's book, has Endurance 24, Fatigue 16 leaving 8 points of slack. He/She (it's difficult to tell with Elves) has 2 ranks in (Spears) and 1 in Sword. This shows that Heroes are slightly better Endurance-wise than veterans but less good with weapons as befits fresh adventurers.

[Rocmistro]

Understood and agreed, Hermes.

But the preceeding text invites the LM to outfit his NPC's any way he sees fit and declares that the usual rules for encumbrance do not apply.

So again, we take the suggested Endurance, and outfit the NPC "as the LM sees fit", without any regard for fatigue or encumbrance. So equip any of the NPCs with an average/normal array of gear (let's say in the 10-15 range of encumbrance including weapons and armor), then add that to the Endurance ranges posted on page 27, and you get ranges from 20-33.

I kind of think it supports the idea that it's really a simplified way of tracking Endurance for NPCs' that doesn't involve having to manage the wearied condition, but where the overall endurance total is meant to be on par with Heroes. If that's the case, the ruling that suspends weariness for NPC's is really meant to favor the players. They have their own goodies (such as the adding of attribute level to all favored skills).

I'm not saying having a different ruleset for governing NPCs is better or worse, I'm just saying that's what appears to be the designers intent. (equally powerful but less fidgety)