If you never played TOR1e you won't miss the advantage of being able to be so subtle in setting the level of a task or test.
But is it really an advantage? Being more subtle doesn't necessarily mean being more objective.
Based on what can you objectively determine if a given task has TN 12, 14, 16, 18...? Of course, the table in 1ed gave some guidelines, but it could likely happen that a task that I consider moderately difficult is easy for you, or vice versa. Or, if I consider it harder than average (which was TN 14), what is "average"? And how do I determine how much harder exactly (TN 16, or 18, for example)?. And, I would add, if being "subtle" is really an advantage, then why exclude 13, 15, 17 from the range of possible TNs?
With +/- 1d6 of course you lose granularity and predictability (but is that really bad? Think of the predictability of a d20 roll... one might argue that low predictability has been the key to success of d20 games for decades - not my cup of tea, tbh, but many others love it), but it also narrows the Loremaster's choice down to simply determining whether that task is easy, medium, or difficult, which is objectively easier than arbitrarily assigning a TN.
And, as others have rightly pointed out, you always have to possibility of assigning a
Success with Woe if you fear that a couple of freak rolls would radically upset the storyline.
It is not our part to master all the tides of the world, but to do what is in us for the succour of those years wherein we are set, uprooting the evil in the fields that we know, so that those who live after may have clean earth to till.