Take what I say with a grain of salt, but I don't think Torchbearer encourages "GM vs. the players." The game is mean to the characters so the GM doesn't have to be. GMs should be fans of Torchbearer player characters, but part of that is putting them in adverse situations to see what they do. It's when they struggle that they get to shine.
I also think Torchbearer is heroic fantasy. It's just not power fantasy. If you choose to have your character try to be a hero, it's a real, significant choice. Being a hero in Torchbearer is hard. You'll probably gain wealth easier and faster if you're only concerned about yourself. Most people assume that you're at best a rootless vagabond that stands outside of society, so they'll meet you with suspicion. Respect and accolades will be hard to come by, Think of the A-Team: the people they help directly know who they are, but most people think they're criminals.
But if you do successfully take the heroic path, it's extremely rewarding! Your character earned that! Made something of themselves despite the odds!
Anyway, I fully agree that the game is not going to be everyone's cup of tea. Just wanted to share my perspective.
I was going to respond to the above, but this covers exactly what I was going to say. The most important thing to note here
@rmcoen is "
the game is mean to the characters so the GM doesn't have to be." I'm not sure how many times you've interacted with things I've written (on Torchbearer or other games), but I have called this "system's say" for a long while now.
In a game like Torchbearer, (a) the system has a ton to say and what is essential is both (b) everyone is aware of the dynamics of the "system's say" (it is a transparent game engine...it has to be for the dynamic to work at all) and, (c) because of the convergence of (a) and (b), the GM is fundamentally
not adversarial in TB. Adversarilism in TTRPGs are downstream of a combination of (i) rules opacity with (ii) the attendant prospect of "GM effery" looming over play. It creates a kind of "Is this Calvinball(?)" disposition for the players. It may not, in fact, actually be Calvinball...but they don't know for sure so that puts them in a very vulnerable position (both in their cognitive loop during play and in their faith/doubts matrix when it comes to the GM pulling some effery and unilaterally changing the play landscape).
In TB, the chips are out on the table. The system has its say. The GM has their say. The players have their say. This is kryptonite for an adversarial orientation to play.
In terms of what play produces, I've run 8 games (of varying length) of TB since TB1 came out. In terms of "in the pocket/moment" feel for the participants, it is indeed often harrowing...maybe even burdensome some times. But its extraordinarily rewarding (both in terms of the engagement with the varying play loops and engagement and the thematic payoffs therein), particularly when all parties understand their role, the system's role, and how all of that comes together. Most Mouse Guard games I've ran for new folks takes maybe 3-4 Mission/Player's Turn (Downtime) loops to grok the fullness of the gameplay. Torchbearer might be 1.5 x that or double that. But once you get there, there is absolutely a feeling of reward both in the moments of play and in the recounting of play.
And I would say that is totally about the intense and clear engagement with each constituent play loop, how that play loop intersects with subsequent loops and the whole of the thing. And then the thematic payoff. Once the participants know how to leverage their lateral intelligence to bring their relationships and their ethos into play, to stake those things, and that the system not only won't fight them but it will propel and reward that "thematic engine" type of play...that no one has to put their thumb on the scales...that no one has to actively tell a story, be adversarial, or railroad/force ideas onto play (and that is both player-side railroading and GM railroading)...that merely playing the game sincerely, aggressively, and correctly will produce hardship and heroism?
Its pretty damn great. But no, its not for everyone. Its intense, everyone has full responsibility for their part at every moment, and everyone has to possess the ability to "hold on lightly" because the system is going to have its (very ample) say...and that is a good thing.
And last bit. I've run TB games with early, but heroic and meaningful retirements or character exits. Their stories and sacrifice were more memorable than tons of other play I've GMed (in heroic fantasy games), even when brief by comparison (6 session spanning vs 6 month spanning). However, I've run longer term TB games into the latter levels with Precedence (social) and Might (violence) that lets the PCs take on serious antagonists in terms of the D&D milieu. The game can absolutely get to what would be the Paragon Tier of 4e play. Its just not an easy go of it...and in that "not an easy go of it," there is great reward (and relentless reward) if you're up for it.
TLDR: Torchbearer is about transparency, coherency, integrity, and functionality of game engine, participant role, and play loops. This kills adversarialism stone dead. Torchbearer's latter levels (with accrued boons, treasure, status, and levels) can absolutely gain the means (including Precedence and Might) to tilt well into the heroic end of the D&D genre. It just "ain't easy sledding" (there is no letup...no conflict-neutral free play...no passive touring of setting...no side quest detours to catch your breath) and you have to be willing and wanting to undertake that.
