Rocmistro
Topic Author
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon 20 Jul 2020, 21:09

Adjusting TN's for Skill Difficulty

Mon 03 Jan 2022, 23:01

So one of my characters is attempting to fool an NPC adversary (treating it as a persuade) test.

I understand the TN is derived by subtracting his wits score from a base 20, which, in this case, equals 16.

I'm...baffled, though, at how un-nuanced the game system seems to be with respect to adjusting the TN based on a task's difficulty. For example, the same TN would apply regardless of whether the character were attempting to convince an old friend who was a town guard to "look the other way" for letting them through the gate after hours, vs. attempting to convince a highly suspicious villain who was given explicit instructions not to trust anyone.

So I've read through the main rulebook and I don't see any guidelines for adjusting a TN up or down based on how easy it is. The closest thing I can find is "complications" for Combat tasks but there don't appear to be anything for social/diplomatic encounters.

Thoughts?
 
Alphadork
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon 29 Nov 2021, 15:17

Re: Adjusting TN's for Skill Difficulty

Mon 03 Jan 2022, 23:36

The One Ring allows for the Loremaster to adjust the pool of Success Dice being rolled as opposed to the TNs
Think this is discussed in the Action Resolution/Rolling Dice section early in the Rulebook (don't have the PDF handy to check page numbers)

Adding or subtracting one or two dice from the number of Success Dice a players rolls will have an impact on their chance of hitting the TN of a given roll.
 
Spat
Posts: 95
Joined: Sat 04 Jan 2020, 13:32

Re: Adjusting TN's for Skill Difficulty

Tue 04 Jan 2022, 11:44

What you describe looks more like a Council Phase, than just a Persuade Test as you would do in D&D for example.
It is described p.104+ of the Core Rules, and it starts by "Set Resistance"...
 
User avatar
Harlath
Posts: 518
Joined: Sun 19 Jul 2020, 10:40

Re: Adjusting TN's for Skill Difficulty

Tue 04 Jan 2022, 13:25

Various good options for difficulty:

- Adding/removing 1d (or more) due to the circumstances: "It is possible for a Player-hero to be attempting something under favourable circumstances [for +1d]" or for penalty dice: "Adventurers wish they were lucky enough to enjoy only favourable circumstances… At times, fortune seems to conspire against them, they may put themselves in danger by their own volition looking for a greater benefit, or they may have fallen victim to some malicious power or spell. When this happens, a Player-hero may suffer from a penalty." (core rulebook p20-21)
- Adding/removing 1d (or more) due to an NPC helping/hindering, as outlined on p135-136. Perhaps the guard is "Perceptive" and the Stealth roll is at -1d. Or perhaps he is a "Drunkard" or "Lazy" and the Stealth roll is at +1d. In your sensible example, the guard might be "Suspicious" as a distinctive feature, and impose -1d, while the old friend might be "Permissive" and offer a 1d bonus.
- Where multiple rolls/successes are required (a council or Skill Endeavour) you can bump up the successes required relative to the number of rolls allowed.

Hope the above helps!
 
Spat
Posts: 95
Joined: Sat 04 Jan 2020, 13:32

Re: Adjusting TN's for Skill Difficulty

Wed 05 Jan 2022, 10:44

As said, I would treat that as a mini Council Phase.
If you attempt to convince a villain to betray his master, then the request is Bold (Resistance 6) or Outrageous (Resistance 9), depending upon what the adventurers propose in return.
If the adventurers have proper time to convince the villain, like around a beer in an inn, then you ask the players an Introduction, and then Interactions and what kind of skill they use, as in the Rules described p.104+.
If not, then the LM should adjudicate how many rolls they have : just a few seconds outside a city gate could be 1 Interaction roll for each character, thus implying that you have no chance at all to persuade him (which is just realistic) unless you have a special talent.
You also adjust with the villain attitude (reluctant -1d, open +0, friendly +1d).

In the example given, Aragorn persuading to allow Gandalf to bring his staff in the Hall, the request could be considered Reasonable, and Aragorn speech + Gandalf's acting could be enough to obtain the 3 needed Success. If Aragorn had asked to keep swords and axes, the request would have been Outrageous for example, and that would have implied no chance of success.

This is a procedure a bit heavier than a simple roll, but it has the advantage to be realistic and involve all character players.

Also, as said in the part "When to Roll" p.16 "If the description of an action does not leave any doubts about its outcome, there’s no need to make a roll." The sentence is said for an easy task with automatic success, but the opposite is true : there's no need to roll if the PC attempts something impossible, whether because of the superhuman strength needed (like opening a stone door locked by dwarves' magic), or because of the opposition determination (like persuading an Uruk hai to release them).
 
Sebastian
Posts: 246
Joined: Thu 01 Oct 2020, 04:58

Re: Adjusting TN's for Skill Difficulty

Wed 05 Jan 2022, 18:15

Convincing a villain normally wouldn’t be a council. It’s stated in the 2e that Councils should have an official character. I as the LM would just ask for one skill roll, modified by the difficulty and traits of the villain. So the range could be a +1d to -2d.
 
Spat
Posts: 95
Joined: Sat 04 Jan 2020, 13:32

Re: Adjusting TN's for Skill Difficulty

Wed 05 Jan 2022, 22:15

Yes I agree.
But as Rocmistro rightfully stated, a character with High Wits and good Persuade skill, why not Favoured, Mastery or Prowess, can easily brainwash everyone at key moments.
-2d is quite easily compensated by Hope or Support.
A LM could have to tweak the Rule As Written to cope for a player abusing this.
 
DylanRPG
Posts: 13
Joined: Tue 29 Jun 2021, 20:30

Re: Adjusting TN's for Skill Difficulty

Wed 05 Jan 2022, 22:17

In addition to being able to add/subtract dice to a roll, the Loremaster can also change the Risk Level (pg. 131) for a roll (between Standard, Hazardous and Foolish), with different Risk Levels having more dire consequences for failure.
 
DylanRPG
Posts: 13
Joined: Tue 29 Jun 2021, 20:30

Re: Adjusting TN's for Skill Difficulty

Wed 05 Jan 2022, 22:20

Yes I agree.
But as Rocmistro rightfully stated, a character with High Wits and good Persuade skill, why not Favoured, Mastery or Prowess, can easily brainwash everyone at key moments.
-2d is quite easily compensated by Hope or Support.
A LM could have to tweak the Rule As Written to cope for a player abusing this.
I'm a big proponent for not playing with players who would seek to "abuse" anything in a game, rather than trying to rule around them.

That said, if a character has high Wits and a good Persuade skill, then they deserve to succeed at Persuade a lot. There are inevitably other skills they won't succeed at very often, because they have put the points into Persuade.

A Loremaster can always determine that certain actions simply aren't possible to attempt as well, if it seems particularly ludicrous.
 
Dunheved
Posts: 494
Joined: Wed 11 Mar 2020, 02:07
Location: UK

Re: Adjusting TN's for Skill Difficulty

Wed 05 Jan 2022, 22:58

I think Harlath's response is exactly in tune with the way to go when adjusting TN difficulties. As a long term TOR1e player I still find the +/- (1d or 2d) mechanic as a case where the streamlining drive has simplified procedures too much.
When the OP (Rocmistro) describes the system as lacking in nuance, I feel that this is a symptom of being over zealous in realising the streamlining ambition.

On balance I can certainly see a case where all non-LM players would be slowed down if they had to cross reference several ideas, nor have to wade through different pages (on different books sometimes) in order to carry out a particular action. * And RPG time is precious to most folks, its usually good to move things along quickly. For that reason the Streamlining Drive is a sensible one for those who play live (at a table, or its virtual equivalent). It has the additional bonus that new players can quickly understand a majority of the things that they have to choose in play.

However, the LM seems unnecessarily shackled by being compelled to follow this mechanic in RAW. In the chapter on the Loremaster I think that an extra paragraph should be added to state that the control and organisation of events MIGHT follow the same mechanic as the players operate ( i.e. the +/- (1d or 2d) mechanic ). But all Players need to be aware that the LM has full discretion to use different mechanics AND GIVE EXAMPLES of different mechanisms: such as altering the TN as described by Rocmistro, or setting a limit to the number of rolls that can be used to achieve a Test.** In short the LM has a wider range of mechanics available to deploy.

*e.g. in TOR1e consider the advanced Combat Tasks and the additional Called Shots, all such extra 'moves' beyond the original Core book that a fighter might consider never speeded things up in gameplay. Though it certainly added a consistent variety of flavour.
** And I know that many people have suggested that an LM is free to apply House Rules as and when: or that Narrative responses cover the greater flexibility I am asking for. But with so much done already in TOR1e that was liked and was useful - why throw the familiar old mechanics out when it can so simply be added in as an example of an OPTION? Altering the TN is in fact incorporated in the rules in one specific case: for newbie characters and gamers it is accepted that the base TN be calculated as TN = 18 - Attribute, rather than TN = 20 - Attribute. Let's not forget that all the TOR1e players and LM have experience of and a familiar grasp of this mechanic: all that gaming experience and awareness adds its own streamlining in planning and enactment.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Panta Rhei and 3 guests