Forum

Looking at the character sheet I very often get the impression that the stats "Endurance", "Hope" and "Parry" were created and distributed to exactly one attribute just so that every attribute ... well ... has one stat each and all three have the same weight. I see the point from a game designers view in regards of balancing, don't get me wrong. So a character who just relies on Strength wouldn't be favored too much respectively characters that DON'T rely on it wouldn't be punished for that decision. And visually it also looks more balanced on the sheet.
So the connection Strength-Endurance totally makes sense to me. Check!
Same with Heart-Hope.
But: It still feels kind of odd to me that someone, who is very witty (and let's be honest: these are, at least in Fantasy settings, usually NOT the characters, who are the best [melee] fighters ... imagine e. g. Grima Wormtongue being one of the most efficient fighter in LotR, at least when it comes to dodging blows) has the best chance of parrying/avoiding a hit. I understood Strength is the attribute which covers everything related to "physical exercise". So far so good. But why is Strength connected to e. g. hitting an Orc with a sword, but parrying with the exact same sword suddenly is NOT a Strength related stat anymore? How can Intelligence help me dodging blows? By anticipating my opponent's moves like (RDjr.'s) Sherlock Holmes does maybe?
For me melee fighting (hitting and blocking) always relied on the same physical requirements and couldn't be split up into several attributes (especially two attributes that are more or less on opposite sites of the spectrum: physical <-> non-physical).
So does anybody know if the designer(s) explained or mentioned eventually why connecting Parry to Wits and not putting both (combat proficiencies, endurance AND Parry) under Strength makes perfect sense here? I really want to get a better feeling for the system (especially when explaining it to veteran RPG players who don't know TOR yet and definitely are going to ask me because it doesn't make sense at the first glance at least).

Wits is Intuition and Perception. If you are quick witted enough to see the impending attack you can't hope to parry/dodge.

Is it a stretch? Sure, but all RPG stats are, really. Striking the balance between a believable simulation and a fun game is not easy, and the fewer attributes you have the harder it gets. A lot of issues like these bug me, but I try and remember that simulation is not what the game is about. If it was then the Journey would be much more in depth and Councils would be totally different etc etc.

In my opinion, if you don't like it, house rule it, lol. Maybe make it the greater of Strength or Wits or something like that. Or maybe, since the same argument can be made that attacking involves quick thinking, let the player choose at character creation which one does what for their character between them. Or something else I didn't think of on my morning break lol.

Good luck!

High wits characters have the attentiveness to spot attacks quickly, and aren't fooled by feints either.

Wits isn't the only thing that influences parry, some cultures have particularly high/low parry. For example, Rangers of the North & Mirkwood Elves get 14+Wits Parry, much higher than most other cultures.

Additionally, you can use virtues to represent being good at defending yourself, for example taking "Nimbleness" as a Virtue for +1 Parry.

Plus from a balance point of view it spreads the stats around.

The reason is game design symmetry.

The in-game rationale is whatever works best for you.

The reason is game design symmetry.
...
Plus from a balance point of view it spreads the stats around.

Yes, that's what I feared. Meaning: if not Wits but Humour would be the third attribute, the character would parry his way out of an attack with his ability to tell jokes. Mhmm ... not sure, if I like that thought.

High wits characters have the attentiveness to spot attacks quickly, and aren't fooled by feints either.
Wits isn't the only thing that influences parry, some cultures have particularly high/low parry. For example, Rangers of the North & Mirkwood Elves get 14+Wits Parry, much higher than most other cultures.
Additionally, you can use virtues to represent being good at defending yourself, for example taking "Nimbleness" as a Virtue for +1 Parry.

As already mentioned, when Wits is going to be the very attribute that helps my character dodging blows it should also help him hitting an enemy because high Wits then also means I know where to put my sword in the best way to do damage and not only how to anticipate feints and spot incoming attacks. It's the same kind of ability, trained skill whatever ... when learning to fight with a sword you don't separate blocks or movements to avoid being hit to actually hit the opponent yourself. It's the same flow of movement you know?... the same mindset (however you want to call it).
The implementation of the cultural bonus or virtues are absolutely fine with me, since this reflects imo just the physical training and experience in the wilderness (because it improves the parry rating itself and not the Wits rating) and not sitting in the library for years, only studying theoretically how to fight and then go out and know exactly how to move in a fight (which still is a physical ability).

Wits is Intuition and Perception. If you are quick witted enough to see the impending attack you can't hope to parry/dodge.

Is it a stretch? Sure, but all RPG stats are, really. Striking the balance between a believable simulation and a fun game is not easy, and the fewer attributes you have the harder it gets. A lot of issues like these bug me, but I try and remember that simulation is not what the game is about. If it was then the Journey would be much more in depth and Councils would be totally different etc etc.

In my opinion, if you don't like it, house rule it, lol. Maybe make it the greater of Strength or Wits or something like that. Or maybe, since the same argument can be made that attacking involves quick thinking, let the player choose at character creation which one does what for their character between them. Or something else I didn't think of on my morning break lol.

Same here: If Perception and Intuitition (btw: wouldn't this be Heart then? Like Insight, Battle etc.) are important for dodging and parrying it should also be vital for dealing blows.

To be honest: I'm not a big fan of houseruling when it comes to basic rules that are deeply rooted in the game mechanics. E. G. I'd never change some engine parts in the front of my car just because I don't like how they are arranged (at least as long as I haven't learned to be a car mechanic). You never know what else you are changing with it ... till it is too late in the worst case.
Maybe I just need a good (ingame) explanation for my inner Monk that helps me grasp this (for we: weird) game mechanic.

I like to tinker with rules, and have even made a couple of rpgs (on itch.io) so making such changes don't scare me much anymore, but yeah, if you can't see how everything connects, houserules can be really dangerous lol... I mean, dangerous might be a strong word, but you get what I mean, lol

If a player objected strongly, my plan was to let them choose to base their Parry score on Wits OR Strength. They have to pick one and stick with it. That might upset game mechanics to a point. But, in my opinion, the worst thing you can do is force someone to play a character they don't like.

I have no issue with the ruling. A physically weak but dexterous Hobbit (or shorter a Hobbit) has a low Strength rating but most will agree that he still is sneaky and potentially hard to hit.
When we see the three attributes as abstract concepts that all may contain physical, emotional and rational aspects then we can accept why stealth and parry aren’t Strength based.

But yeah, it’s a question of balancing. And I like the resolution.

I did a quick calculation. The first number is the average Wits score for the culture. The second is the Parry score they end up with.

Bardings: 3 - 15
Dwarves: 5 - 15
Elves: 6 - 18
Hobbits: 5 - 17
Bree Men: 6 - 16
Rangers: 3 - 17

It would be pretty easy for a dwarf to carry a shield and bump that up to 17, but Bardings are out of luck. Keep that bow handy I guess. Rangers were a surprise. They are at the bottom of the Wits ranking but have the second-highest Parry. The stupid elves are OP as usual.

Overall I like this. Elves and hobbits are hard to hit. Dwarves are very dangerous over short distances. Rangers probably have a lot of practice getting out of the way. If I were doing it I might have given the Bardings another point of Parry. But yeah...

Yes, that's what I feared. Meaning: if not Wits but Humour would be the third attribute, the character would parry his way out of an attack with his ability to tell jokes. Mhmm ... not sure, if I like that thought.

But it's not humour, it's wits, so I don't understand your point.