But I agree with bitflipr about the Brutish Deeds. More importantly, they lack the fluid quality that makes the Mighty Deed system work, in my opinion. I don't want my players to have to spend too much time figuring out what they need to roll in order to succeed.
Its the same as the standard deeds system; a 3 or better on the deed die does the trick!
This system just adds a failure mechanic which, again, adds an element of risk that isn't there in the current system. It underlies the concept of the half-orc being a hard luck case.
Can you expound on what you mean by "lacks the fluid quality that makes the Mighty Deed system?"
Thanks for the feedback; I agree with your other points about the scent ability and the brawling.
That was not clear, I apologize. Mighty Deeds is essentially a fiat feat/combat maneuvers system. Off the top of my head, they include: blinding, disarm, trip, pushback, and precision attacks, as well as offensive, defensive, and rallying maneuvers. The book also specifies that situation appropriate deeds can be tailored to situations on the fly. I'm okay doing that as a DM because of the scope of the mechanic.
I don't feel that way about Brutish Deeds. The three you've outlined have pretty rigid uses, it seems. Hack and Slash is a damage booster, Dirty Deeds establishes that Half-Orcs fight Dirty but is more or less a blinding attack, and the Bonecrusher feat is like a mini-crit table in terms of effects.
I also don't think you should write the effects of failure into the table and just use a catch all mechanic for any deed that doesn't succeed. For example:
-If any attempt at a Brutish Deed results in a natural 1, roll on the fumble table using +1d up the dice chain
-If any attempt at a Brutish Deed results in failure, but not a natural 1, roll on the fumble table normally