Forum

If it passes, it returns to full Endurance (24), and does it STILL have two Wounds. Or does it return to full Endurance and now has One Wound remaining?

Still 2 Wounds

If it passes, it returns to full Endurance (24), and does it STILL have two Wounds. Or does it return to full Endurance and now has One Wound remaining?

Still 2 Wounds

Yep. That's what I thought too, on first reading. I am not sure I like the idea that reducing an adversary over many attacks could have zero effect with one lucky dice roll for Protection. Considering younger players whose PCs have been battering away, they then get informed that a powerful enemy is back to full strength and capability? This is a feature that should cost 1 Hate to activate at least. And if there is no reason for this as toughness is a passive feature, then why does a Troll need to spend 1 Hate to activate its Thick Hide?



So it sort of worries me now. Coming back to cave-trolls, with thick hide ability to add +2d to a protection roll. Your company take a few turns of combat to erode the 80 Endurance. Then at the moment they get to that stage, the troll has plenty of hate to get back to 80 endurance by passing it with 5d6 on the protection roll. Or not. It seems a very big swing in fortune comes down to that precise die roll.

NOTE: In TOR1e there was an early issue with trolls needing at least one Successful Wound due to Great Size. You had to reduce it to zero endurance and then you had to wait until your players got lucky with a Wounding effort AND the troll failed the protection test. The zero endurance troll simply carried on hitting the company until the die rolled lucky. It was extreme enough to trigger some dissatisfaction with the actual play of the mechanic over time. A solution that surfaced was that any TOR1e troll reduced to zero endurance was considered Weary - making the protection roll far more likely to fail AND of course its attacks less likely to succeed. Now reducing the endurance of the troll did at least achieve something.
It sort of feels that a similar experience may be in the pipeline. And a tweak may be needed.

It sounds like the Orc needed to make two protection tests, one from each of the sword-wielders, and each roll may or may not pass on its own, so it could come away from that with zero, one, or two wounds, depending on if it passed neither, one, or both of the two tests.

It sounds like the Orc needed to make two protection tests, one from each of the sword-wielders, and each roll may or may not pass on its own, so it could come away from that with zero, one, or two wounds, depending on if it passed neither, one, or both of the two tests.

My calculations may be out in that case! This is how I came to my results: let me know where I am slipping up!

Longsword 2-handed is 5 Damage per hit. My strength 6 PC adds +6 for Heavy Blow and +1 because he is applying a two-handed weapon. Total is 12 damage. His actual 1d12 +3d6 roll is (say) 7 + (4 + 6 + 5). So this is not a Wounding strike it is simply 12 damage.
His twin sister, also with a 2h longsword, delivers a similar heavy blow, for another 12 damage. Her feat die roll comes up as an 8, and she also scores a single tengwar among her three Success dice.

The first strike by Twinboy is not a Piercing Blow, nor is the second strike by Twingirl, because neither Feat die is a '10' or 'G' . If the GOB had a higher endurance it would still be fighting on. BUT a Great Orc Bodyguard has Might 2, Endurance 24 and Hideous Toughness. SO this pair of 12 Damage strikes reduce the GOB to zero Endurance.
Therefore the LM correctly plays Hideous Toughness and must roll for a Wound attempt.

Now I assumed that since a 2h Longsword has an Injury value of 18 that must be the TN for the GOB to roll for their protection* because that is the weapon used to erode its Endurance in my example. If it fails the test, it takes a Wound. But only one Wound, and it returns at full Endurance. If it passes the test, it takes zero Wounds and returns to full Endurance. The only way the GOB would be finished when it reduces to zero Endurance in combat would be if it ALREADY had received a Wound, AND then it Failed a Wound Test.


* which raises the horrible "what if?" issue - what if Twinboy was in Forward, and scored two tengwars, claiming two heavy blows for 5 + 6+1 + 6 +1 = 19 damage; at the same time Twingirl rolls - also in Forward - who hit with an 2h Long Axe, but no Tengwar. 2h Long Axe is TN 20 but 2h Longsword is TN 18. What protection value does the GOB have to roll against?
Worse what if the final loss of endurance is caused by a blow from an unarmed combatant? They have no Injury TN.
[What if ALL the endurance loss was caused by brawling attacks? - what TN is it then?]

It sounds like the Orc needed to make two protection tests, one from each of the sword-wielders, and each roll may or may not pass on its own, so it could come away from that with zero, one, or two wounds, depending on if it passed neither, one, or both of the two tests.

It would only make one protection test, from the blow that reduces it to 0 Endurance, as neither attack was a piercing blow.

Which TN does the orc roll against if hit by a TN 18 long sword (2h) and then a TN 20 long axe (2h)? The TN is based on whichever blow reduced the Orc to 0 Endurance - PCs choose the order they go in if they are both taking the same stance.

What's the TN for Brawling attacks? Based on the weapon, so 14 for a Club/Dagger, 12 for a Cudgel and no TN possible for unarmed. You can't bring down a troll with bare handed attacks, unless you're a Beorning with the Brother to Bears!

Great Orc Chief - I don't think they need buffed with Hideous Toughness, given their much higher Endurance than Great Orc Bodyguards, better parry and 4d armour. 4d armour would make them very difficult to take down if they had Hideous Toughness too.

I haven't found Hideous Toughness problematic in play - alongside Endurance damage PCs are likely stacking up piercing blows. These make for exciting combats, but even these foes eventually fall!

PCs have access to tools to make protection tests tougher for foes:

- Make them Weary via reducing their Hate to 0, trolls even have a built in mechanism for this. A weapon with Gleam of Terror is great for reducing Hate, Rangers can even access such an item via a Virtue. Or a ranged weapon with Biting Dart (which a High Elf can add to an item via a Virtue). A High Elf/Elf of Lindon can take Gleam of Wrath to reduce an opponent's Hate. This helps make Elves good "boss-killers".
- Boost injury TN via Fell/Superior Fell.
- Make protection tests ill favoured via Splitting Blow/Fierce Shot virtues or the Foe-slaying reward. Again, Rangers/High Elves can access this reward via virtues, they don't need to rely on discovering an item.
- Generate more Piercing Blows via Pierce special damage option, Keen/Superior Keen rewards or Favoured attacks. Bardings with Dragon-Slayer, Hobbits with Sure at the Mark, Beornings that have been wounded, Dwarves shouting Barak Khazud and Woodmen in Opening Volleys/Round 1 can all access Favoured attacks.

Chuck enough protection tests at a foe and they'll fail some!

Yep. That's what I thought too, on first reading. I am not sure I like the idea that reducing an adversary over many attacks could have zero effect with one lucky dice roll for Protection. Considering younger players whose PCs have been battering away, they then get informed that a powerful enemy is back to full strength and capability? This is a feature that should cost 1 Hate to activate at least. And if there is no reason for this as toughness is a passive feature, then why does a Troll need to spend 1 Hate to activate its Thick Hide?

A similar ability (Deathless) does cost 1 hate to use (restoring to full endurance or cancelling a wound). So this is deliberately different.

Trolls get Thick Hide as their normal armour rating reflects their general toughness, but they've got the option to Spend Hate for 2d on Protection tests rather than the normal 1d. Or even 1d from Hate, 2d from Thick Hide. But even this helps PCs make progress, as they get the troll closer to Weary.

Thanks for a long and careful response Harlath. Lots of great stuff in there. And very easy to see how it links to the RAW. Your usual excellent effort.

I still cannot square what you said about this rule not applying in the (OK very rare) situation of the final blow being delivered by an unarmed or disarmed hero. This is simply one tiny occasion when the rule about Hideous Toughness could not have been considered. The actual rule does not state how the TN is set, but it is the most reasonable decision to call it as triggered by the weapon that does the final damage.

I think the important thing to remember here is that total loss of Endurance is not really the same as having a Wounding Blow: it is just another way of triggering the Protection Mechanism.
So I will respectfully disagree about Unarmed combat not being able to apply here. In the very rare case of such damage ver being caused by Unarmed combat I think I would now state that the TN for the Protection roll is simply (10 + Strength Attribute): and thanks to those who have added stuff. I am in less of a fog!

I agree and sympathising unarmed attacks triggering hideous toughness. I think a sensible approach is just to apply the tn from the last proper weapon.
TN 10 plus strength leads to odd cases where a punch is better than a spear/arrow from a bow, if it is a strength 6 or higher character delivering the punch: Tulkas return to middle Earth!

Fun to talk these things through, plus I have the benefit of having experienced some of these fights. Could even try to dig out the relevant bits of my play by post game on discord: that troll got pushed to 0 hate and died after a number of protection tests.

This is a couple weeks old, but to throw my 2 Treasure in, if it were one of the fringe case situations where an unarmed attack is what caused a Hideous Toughness enemy to go to 0 Endurance, I'd just go ahead and give it a TN of 10. That makes it weaker than a cudgel, which is as it should be. I can't imagine that this would be a very common situation though, if I were anyone but a Beorning with the right Virtues and found myself unarmed and fighting a monster with Hideous Toughness... I wouldn't punch it, I'd run!

@Deacon and @Harlath

Yes I can see that 10 + Strength attribute might be a bit devastating! So TN = 10 seems reasonable. Thanks for the outside POV from your thoughts.