Nazgûl and Denizen of the Dark

[Hermes Serpent]

Using Anydice.com to do some quick calculations.
Valour 2 vs Thing of Terror has about 7.5% chance of succeeding at TN14 (without Hope expenditure)
Valour 3 puts it up to around 24%
Valour 4 around 46%

So hitting the PC's with Dreadful Spells: Shadow of Fear after failing the Thing of Terror test could put them in thrall to the Nazgul for at least 14 weeks on a failure, plus an SP.

I really don't see Nazgul as underpowered even without the DotD boost to their Attribute level.

[Michebugio]

Valour 2 vs Thing of Terror has about 7.5% chance of succeeding at TN14 (without Hope expenditure)
Valour 3 puts it up to around 24%
Valour 4 around 46%

I don't know where did those numbers come from, but they are completely wrong.

The real values are these:

2 dices vs. TN 14 is 41.90%; while Weary, 31.25%

3 dices vs. TN 14 is 69.48%; while Weary, 47.72%

4 dices vs. TN 14 is 88.75%; while Weary, 62.64%

while 5 dices vs. TN 14 is a stunning 96.93%,

all of this without Hope expenditure.

Since Nazguls are supposed to be elite opponents, it's clear that even mildly experienced characters will have no problem whatsoever against Thing of Terror at TN 14.

[Glorelendil]

I don't know where did those numbers come from, but they are completely wrong.

I puzzled over this sentence for a minute, then I realized that it meant:

"Those numbers didn't look right to me so I did it myself and came up with something different."

[Michebugio]

I puzzled over this sentence for a minute, then I realized that it meant:

"Those numbers didn't look right to me so I did it myself and came up with something different."

Was it really so puzzling? I know my english is bad, but that sentence seems more or less correct to me

[Glorelendil]

I puzzled over this sentence for a minute, then I realized that it meant:

"Those numbers didn't look right to me so I did it myself and came up with something different."

Was it really so puzzling? I know my english is bad, but that sentence seems more or less correct to me

I was actually trying to gently suggest a more diplomatic way of correcting somebody else, rather than calling them "completely wrong".

[Hermes Serpent]

OK, what I did was use Anydice to determine the values from 2D6 etc for the Success dice and then got it to include the lowest of 2D11 (a Gandalf is a success but I wasn't sure if I should count this as you need at least one Tengwar). Then I looked at the results and assumed a maximum of 10 for the lowest of the two Feat dice and at least one six which means the worst success case is a roll of 17 (i.e. 10+6+1) for two Success dice. So I used the calculation for 17 or better to reckon up the chance of rolling successfully against the TN14 test as a ball park figure.

Alternatively I could have done it via straight math 6+3.5 (av D6) + 6 (av on Feat die) and fudged it down a bit which would have put it in the same ball park as your numbers.

Using the alternate method of declaring DotD allowing the Nazgul to double up his AL in the dark means that you are testing against a TN of 18+ which drops the possibility of succeeding quite a bit.

[Michebugio]

OK, what I did was use Anydice to determine the values from 2D6 etc for the Success dice and then got it to include the lowest of 2D11 (a Gandalf is a success but I wasn't sure if I should count this as you need at least one Tengwar). Then I looked at the results and assumed a maximum of 10 for the lowest of the two Feat dice and at least one six which means the worst success case is a roll of 17 (i.e. 10+6+1) for two Success dice. So I used the calculation for 17 or better to reckon up the chance of rolling successfully against the TN14 test as a ball park figure.

I'm honest, I didn't understand the method but I just used a binomial equation to do the job, which is very reliable.

With the same method, the chances against TN 18 would be:

2 dices, 16.44%

3 dices, 38.85%

4 dices, 65.18%

5 dices, 85.05%

IMHO a fair challenge for an experienced Fellowship.

[Hermes Serpent]

I'm not sure a binomial equation is any more reliable than my getting close and fudging it a bit. How were you accounting for the Gandalf rune? Obviously rolling a G rune and a tengwar is an auto success but rolling a G rune and no Tengwar is not a success. How are you accounting for that result? Rolling an Eye means no possibility of success even with two 6s on the success dice.
Are you saying that you plugged the numbers in to an equation without understanding how the equation deals with the numbers?

BTW I wasn't offended by your abruptness as I recognise that English is not many peoples first language here and make allowances for incorrect or uncertain phrasing.

[Indur Dawndeath]

Michebugio
I don't know where did those numbers come from, but they are completely wrong.

The real values are these:

I must say that your number are wrong. You have not taken into account that you need to score a Tengwar to succeed.
Zedturtle did a nice probability matrix some time ago, that's the only reason I can tell. So please if no one else can calculate the correct probability I would take Hermes results as the best example so far

With regards to the difficulty of the Nazgûl, then I think that it wouldn't harm giving them a little boost. Fear is the greatest weapon of the enemy. My problem with doubling the attribute is that in Rivendell it is made pretty clear that the TN for all Fear tests against the Witch King is TN18. If you double that, then the free people are facing TN34 when all Nazgûl are together. TN26 for the Witch King +8 for all the rest.
Try to beat that Aragorn on weathertop... Or perhaps that was not all nine Anyway, I think that the Black Dread is a better option. It will make it much harder but not impossible for high power players, whereas it will be almost impossible for low low power players.
The high TN will make it equally hard for low power and high power. They all need a Gandalf rune and a Tengwar to succeed.

[Indur Dawndeath]

Zedturtle
Probability:
DICE TN 10 TN 12 TN 14 TN 16 TN 18 TN 20
0 - NORMAL 16.67% 08.32% 08.32% 08.34% 08.33% 08.32%
0 - WEARY 16.67% 08.32% 08.32% 08.34% 08.33% 08.32%
1 - NORMAL 45.83% 29.17% 16.67% 09.71% 08.33% 08.33%
1 - WEARY 37.48% 25.00% 16.66% 09.71% 08.33% 08.33%
2 - NORMAL 74.07% 58.31% 41.89% 27.32% 16.43% 10.66%
2 - WEARY 57.40% 43.73% 31.24% 20.14% 14.59% 10.65%
3 - NORMAL 91.99% 82.64% 69.48% 54.16% 38.85% 25.71%
3 - WEARY 72.57% 60.42% 47.74% 35.21% 26.02% 18.05%
4 - NORMAL 98.38% 95.06% 88.55% 78.39% 65.19% 50.44%
4 - WEARY 83.00% 73.44% 62.63% 50.79% 40.06% 29.67%
5 - NORMAL 99.77% 99.02% 96.93% 92.54% 85.05% 74.34%
5 - WEARY 89.72% 82.80% 74.51% 64.52% 54.07% 43.19%
6 - NORMAL 99.97% 99.85% 99.39% 98.08% 95.16% 89.80%
6 - WEARY 93.92% 89.18% 83.24% 75.42% 66.37% 56.37%

Edit: This looked more nice in my word document. Sorry...
Zedturtle, is it difficult for you to extend this up to TN34?
Pretty please, with sugar on top