The Defensive Stance "Problem"

[Falenthal]

Also, engaging a properly-built Hobbit is crazy under TOR rules no matter the stance. Those guys are tiny little murder machines that are impossible to hit and have a stupefyingly efficient means of transforming Hope into Wounds. If I were an Orc, I'd take the Beorning every time.

I know it's a derrangement from the OP, but just wanted to say that I finally decide to adjust Hobbit weapons by reducing their Damage and Injury by -2. Edge and Encumbrance remains the same.
But, at the same time, I added one more Combat task for every stance, including Taunt or Hinder an enemy (thanks to Elfcrusher and Rich H's ideas).

This way I tried to make Hobbits less fighters and more support figures when combat arises.

[Murcushio]

Although I've been playing my first games with the house-rule of "Forward allows for a maximum of 3 Tengwars/Damage, Open for 2 and Defensive for 1", I have to agree with your logic.
Parry rating doesn't scale, but you can "scale" your TN to be hit.

On the other hand, I see how my dwarven and beorning players like to be in Forward stance -regardless of numbers and TNs- because it's how they imagine their characters would face goblins and wolves. Once their weapon ranks rise, I wouldn't like to also force them into Defensive stance because Forward or even Open doesn't make sense or doesn't get them any more benefits than Defensive.

I would submit that the first few times they get knocked out, they might start re-evaluating their tactical options. It's hard to wound a Beorning or a Dwarf with the proper Virtues or armor, but someone fighting in Forward or Open all the time should just be bleeding Endurance as they get knocked around. Especially once you graduate to fighting things that can inflict terrifying amounts of damage in a single blow; send a troll in against that Fellowship and watch how fast they scramble out of Forward.

Unless, of course, they both raise their Awe sky-high and start explicitly adopting plans of draining whole swathes of enemies of their Hate, imposing Weary on them. That's a little-used but entirely legitimate tactical choice, and an entire Fellowship that adopts it can do things like instantly suck a Nazgul dry of Hate in a single round, forcing it to flee. It's high-risk but very high-reward; five dudes with Awe 5 can basically be a walking zone of "don't feck with us."

[Glorelendil]

Well, I'm not going to argue the point anymore. One could rationalize it either way, and if the way that punishes leaving defensive stance makes you enjoy the game more, I'll not try to talk you out of it.

[Falenthal]

Especially once you graduate to fighting things that can inflict terrifying amounts of damage in a single blow; send a troll in against that Fellowship and watch how fast they scramble out of Forward.

Again, I agree here.

I was thinking more of the situation where a high skilled hero faces low-level enemies, like goblins and attercops. If I get it right, with the RAW, even agains such runts a Defensive stance would be more benefitial to a 4 or 5 ranks skilled hero.

[zedturtle]

Although I've been playing my first games with the house-rule of "Forward allows for a maximum of 3 Tengwars/Damage, Open for 2 and Defensive for 1", I have to agree with your logic.
Parry rating doesn't scale, but you can "scale" your TN to be hit.

On the other hand, I see how my dwarven and beorning players like to be in Forward stance -regardless of numbers and TNs- because it's how they imagine their characters would face goblins and wolves. Once their weapon ranks rise, I wouldn't like to also force them into Defensive stance because Forward or even Open doesn't make sense or doesn't get them any more benefits than Defensive.

I would submit that the first few times they get knocked out, they might start re-evaluating their tactical options. It's hard to wound a Beorning or a Dwarf with the proper Virtues or armor, but someone fighting in Forward or Open all the time should just be bleeding Endurance as they get knocked around. Especially once you graduate to fighting things that can inflict terrifying amounts of damage in a single blow; send a troll in against that Fellowship and watch how fast they scramble out of Forward.

Unless, of course, they both raise their Awe sky-high and start explicitly adopting plans of draining whole swathes of enemies of their Hate, imposing Weary on them. That's a little-used but entirely legitimate tactical choice, and an entire Fellowship that adopts it can do things like instantly suck a Nazgul dry of Hate in a single round, forcing it to flee. It's high-risk but very high-reward; five dudes with Awe 5 can basically be a walking zone of "don't feck with us."

Yeah, I've got two heroes with Awe 4 and Battle 3; they can do a number on the enemy's Hate and then have a couple more people in Defensive cover for them. I'm going have to throw a ton of mooks at them in the next fight.

[HotSnow50]

Why not just describe the scene as such:

"One of the <insert desired monster with Elusiveness here> bounds continuously out of your range and becomes increasingly harder and harder to see when farther and farther away... If you can catch it in close enough range, however, maybe your attempts will reach their mark..."

Now wait and see if your party knows that it must switch into Forward stance to move swiftly enough to chase the opponent down

[JoeArcher]

For my wfrp conversion I'm thinking about completely removing the stances. I have a dice pool splitting rule where you can save dice for defense. This does the same as the stances, as saving dice for defense makes it harder to hit and harder to get hit. It scales perfectly as you get higher ranks in weapon skills. At the same time it will decrease your chance of dealing extra damage. I haven't gotten around to change it yet, but really having both stances and splitting your dice pool is pointless. Anyway just an idea to remove the issue. That means there are two stances, melee and rearward. The more dice you save, the more defensive you are. You can even use it for doing stuff like intimidating and split that dice pool. For defending allies you can simply throw your defensive dice on the table in defense of your ally.

[Majestic]

That said, I just thougt that you're right in that Defensive stance shouldn't be made worse. But here's an idea that just popped out of my mind:

All stances
Attack multiple foes: The hero can substract 2 ranks from his weapons skill for every foe above 1 he wants to attack in the same round. The hero must be engaged with those foes.

OR

Rise the TN to hit (but not to be hit) by 3 for every foe above 1 the hero wants to attack in the same round. The hero must be engaged with those foes.

This maneuver can be used also in Defensive stance, although the greater difficulty to hit makes it more appropiate for Forward or Open stance. In fact, it should only become really useful for "high level" characters against "low level" enemies (goblins, attercops,...).

The first questions that rise for me next are:
Can I reduce my weapon skill/ raise the to hit TN to attack twice or thrice the same target?
Can a hero in Rearward stance also use this maneuver?

I will have to think about this.

One thought I have (and I'm adapting this mechanic from a different RPG): A simple way to allow multiple attacks is to go with the rule that if you attack more than one person, then all attacks have to hit (if even one misses, then they all miss). This serves to be a built-in hindrance that ends up (usually) preventing abuse.

[DaviSalles]

As many of you I also have adapted some new stance "powers". For forward I had two other ideas:

Cleave, increase the TN +3 to split the damage amoung one more creature than normal. You may do it more than once. (Someone had pretty much the same idea here)

Powerfull attack, increase the TN +6 to increase damage by you body score. You may do it more than once. You may use it with cleave.

I think these two would make forward stance quite desirable for many players without decreasing the defense stance quality. It would be good to have other alternative "powers" for other stances too.

[zedturtle]

Looks interesting.

I'm less concerned with the Defensive Stance Problem than I was before. In a game system like TOR, where increasing Endurance is very rare, being able to move into Defensive in order to mitigate your expected damage is very useful. And enemies can still challenge those heroes, by having a high Parry score or by having special abilities (including Deadly Elusiveness, forcing heroes to go Forward).