The Book of Ragnor

[jwalker]

Next off, Ragnor. For a champ of his costs he should have 3 attack. Instead he has 2, but gets fury. Again if fury doesn't trigger, he's not very good. If fury triggers once, he's a bit better, and if he gets it a few time in a row, he's getting lucky and having a good turn.

True the base stats are not impressive. I personally however rate Ragnor very high. If you look at the different abilitys in the game, normally to be able to attack twice (even with a reduced dice amouint - see Swordmaster, Shikwa) does increase the unit cost nearly by one magic. Ragnor is not only 2,66 dice he is able to destroy two units and that's very potent.

[Talamare]

Now, with those extra rolls. First off, even if fighters do fury, they're effectively now a 2 attack, 1 cost, 1 life unit. Just like JE Lioness, PE Warrior, and some other units. So clearly they are not very good unless they fury. Fighters also give up lots of magic. If you have some decent commons out, running Fighters at them is probably a bad strategy by the TO.

Next off, Ragnor. For a champ of his costs he should have 3 attack. Instead he has 2, but gets fury. Again if fury doesn't trigger, he's not very good. If fury triggers once, he's a bit better, and if he gets it a few time in a row, he's getting lucky and having a good turn.

Fury is not just +1 Attack

Fury is essentially giving that specific unit another entire turn!

It is allowed to use its full movement again, its allowed to attack again and its allowed to use its ability again

this makes it much much stronger than those listed 2 attack/1 health/1 cost guys

and extremely overpowered if it succeeds fury more than once, and game breaking anymore than twice

edit - note, im not saying the ability in itself is too strong, im saying the fact you can use it several times per turn is what is too strong

[thenightsshadow]

Talamare, as an example, I've had a game where Ragnor pulled off a Fury five times in a row. It's not broken, because of how ridiculously low the chance is to get that sort of thing.

1+ Fury: 33.3%
2+ Furies: 11.1%
3+ Furies: 3.70%
4+ Furies: 1.23%
5+ Furies: 0.412%

Etc.

Yes, it does happen, and yes, I've been a victim of it. But I would never say that it's broken. For every game that Ragnor gets 5 Furies, there's another 130+ games where Ragnor gets 0 Furies. If Ragnor doesn't get to use Fury twice in a row or three times in a game, then he's worth less than his cost. And personally, I don't mind that.

Heck, my first post here was about how wonderful it was that my brother rolled 11 Furies in a row with a Fighter to kill Sneeks. Yes, wonderful. It was a crazy game that only took one turn, but it was exciting.

[killercactus]

I'll tell you what. Let's get on Vassal an play 10 games. You're only allowed to summon TO Fighters, and I'm only allowed to summon PE Warriors.

Let's see who wins more.

[Ranior]

Fury is not just +1 Attack

Fury is essentially giving that specific unit another entire turn!

It is allowed to use its full movement again, its allowed to attack again and its allowed to use its ability again

this makes it much much stronger than those listed 2 attack/1 health/1 cost guys

and extremely overpowered if it succeeds fury more than once, and game breaking anymore than twice

edit - note, im not saying the ability in itself is too strong, im saying the fact you can use it several times per turn is what is too strong

Well, I'll respond to this in a way that I hope you can try to understand, but I think tns made it quite simplified and did a good job.

First off, fury is not just +1 attack, but it's also only a 33% thing. Whereas +1 attack is constant and you can plan it into your turn.

Fury is a wild thing, and can win a game....but a majority of the time it's just not that useful.

Next off, you claim it is "extremely overpowered" if it succeeds more than once, and game breaking if more than twice. I'm not sure what game you're playing, but that's just false, or extremely overstated. If a TO fighter furies 3 times on a turn, they would have 4 attacks, and lots of extra moves. Alright. On average they do about 3 wounds. Frankly....that's not very game breaking. I'm confident you can consistently come back from that, as for every TO fighter succeeding on 3 furies in a row, there are over 25 others that just don't.

Ragnor of course would be even more attack dice, but quite frankly he too just won't get off that many furies. It's possible you've witnessed a few games with a sick number of furies, but in the long run, you'll see that TO Fighters are actually not that great, and Ragnor is a fun and ok champion, but nothing remarkable.

I'd suggest you also try to keep track of how often your opponent fails to fury...if you are just paying attention to how often it is happening, you're gonna have a bias about how often you think it's occurring.

Over the course of a few games I'm sure fury will be right about the 1/3 chance it should be.

[airdroppers]

Yeah, Fighters are not amazing or broken.

A Mind Witch with Fury backed by Sorgwen is though...

[Talamare]

I'd suggest you also try to keep track of how often your opponent fails to fury...if you are just paying attention to how often it is happening, you're gonna have a bias about how often you think it's occurring.

Over the course of a few games I'm sure fury will be right about the 1/3 chance it should be.

We did 3 games today with TO
Fighter/Ragnor failed Fury - 7x
Succeeded Fury 1x in a row - 6x
Succeeded Fury 2x in a row - 3x
Succeeded Fury 3x in a row - 2x
Succeeded Fury 4x in a row - 0x
Succeeded Fury 5x in a row - 2x

Didnt get any more in a row than 5x

We consistently switched dice and rolled the dice in the box to make sure it bounced around a lot

I know statistically it shouldnt occur very often which is why when I read about the 2 factions PE and TO, I thought PE would be the one that would be OP

[thenightsshadow]

So 28 successful furies and 20 unsuccessful furies. Wow, that's like my luck IRL when I roll.

[PePe QuiCoSE]

We did 3 games today with TO
Fighter/Ragnor failed Fury - 7x
Succeeded Fury 1x in a row - 6x
Succeeded Fury 2x in a row - 3x
Succeeded Fury 3x in a row - 2x
Succeeded Fury 4x in a row - 0x
Succeeded Fury 5x in a row - 2x

WOAH! If I had 3 games like that with Ragnor I would never ever take him away from my deck!
On a more serious note, Fury's value starts diminishing over the games when you start making better use of other abilities and the rule of average rolls start kicking in (so you don't have so many crazy games in a row).
The lack of threads or comments about Fury since it was released (2+ years) is a soft evidence that there this ability isn't really game breaking and you are on the edge of the Gauss bell.

[Ranior]

WOAH! If I had 3 games like that with Ragnor I would never ever take him away from my deck!
On a more serious note, Fury's value starts diminishing over the games when you start making better use of other abilities and the rule of average rolls start kicking in (so you don't have so many crazy games in a row).
The lack of threads or comments about Fury since it was released (2+ years) is a soft evidence that there this ability isn't really game breaking and you are on the edge of the Gauss bell.

PePe gots it, but if your games have fury kicking in 58.3 percent...I'd probably be wanting to change Ragnor too! If you feel you need to house rule him so he can only fury 2 times a turn or something, go for it.

The one other thing though...your percentage and distribution are EXACTLY what I would expect if you are playing fury wrong.

To be clear, when rolling for fury, Ragnor rolls just ONE die, not his Attack Value of 2. He rolls one single die to determine fury.

Your distribution and success rate closely mirror a Ragnor rolling 2 dice to determine fury every round...and if that's the case, I'd grow to hate him too. So I'm just going to make sure we're on the same page, Ragnor rolls 2 dice to attack, but one die to determine fury.