Does anyone else thing the Nagas are really in need of an update? I absolutely love nagas in fantasy (particularly the human head-meets snake body kind), so I want to love the 2nd edition's Nagas... but... blah. Every time I use them, they end up really disappointing me.

For a big monster like the naga, I'm not sure why the Act I versions start off with such little health. The Black defense die could excuse it... but even in Act II, they only get one black die, and their health only goes up slightly. I hope in the Heroes & Monsters sets, when they bring the Naga back, they either update the health to be higher, or give them a brown/gray die later on. Even their offensive abilities are lacking (Sorcery 3 is nice but that's really the only thing they have going for them).

Has anyone else had any experiences with the naga monsters?

Not really sure what your complaint is - they seem pretty much in line with the other monsters with their group size. (2/1 at 4 players - I saw Medusas and Carrion Drakes as the only two other members of their group.)

They get a red die, ranged, with sorcery, which is a strong combo. They've got grab, which is a strong ability, 4 movement on a...!!!!

Wait, hold on a second, a large monster? I assumed they were 2x1, but they're 2x2?

Yeah, I have NO idea what you are talking about. Is there any other group in the game that gives you three 2x2 bases? That alone is worth something. (Ugh, looks like Chaos Beasts are also in the 2/1 group and are 2x2... Nagas are better than Chaos Beasts in virtually every stat.)

So... fast, strong/flexible attack, tough, numerous, large. I'm just not sure what they're missing that you expected them to have...

Hybrid Sentinels are another 2/1 at four players.

I don't have the conversion kit or the naga, but they don't sound weak or useless.

Chaos Beasts are useful when heroes pick up a 3 Dice Weapon relic in Act 1. Turning its power on them is ... satisfying.

Jee

I like Naga's they are versatile. Primarily I use them as hit and run blockers. I position them to hit heroes and run or have one attack and hit hard using their sorcery ability (yes, they usually die on the heroes turn). They can move into a blocking position as well if need be to annoy the heroes. If you can get your traps out and prevent heroes from getting close they are also really effective.

I agree they are weak health wise but I have found them to be potent if you can keep them alive or great distractions otherwise.

I agree with Rfisha and Ringslipper. I love using Nagas but sometimes they don't feel like they have much. Act II they are just not really good in light of Ice Wyrms or other like beasties. Act I they are much better.

Hit and run tactic is great. When I use sorcery I try to be right in my heroe's faces so all or most of range can be converted. Then have them run. Force the heroes to move and attack. A slow walk for the heroes if they need to get past them. If nothing else it keeps the hero's attention while you go about your way in other areas.

I guess I'm also comparing them to more recent monster groups which seem to have a lot more originality in them. But when I think of nagas... I think masterminds-of-monsters (and the first edition blurb about them even mentions that). It just feels like the assortment of abilities they're given, paired with the low health (for a big monster) makes them lower tier. I definitely agree with Kunzite that they are better in Act I, but even adding a brown defense die to them in Act II would make them better IMO. They are so flimsy... I dunno who would choose them over Barghests (which you get one more than a naga... even if they aren't as big as nagas).

I hope they get a little increase in the H&M collections.

Hybrid Sentinels are another 2/1 at four players.

But they aren't large (2x2 base) monsters, which is what amoshias was referring to.

Bane Spiders are 2x2 base monsters and give 2/1 at four players. They're better than the Nagas in Act II, for sure.

Wow, I missed a whole bunch of 2/1 monsters, I guess :-) Master Bane Spiders are better than Master Nagas in Act II, although not by much - they get two extra hit points, and their abilities are just about a wash. Cocoon is better than grab, but not by a whole lot, they both get surge: poison, and surge: pierce 3 is about even with sorcery 3.

The same definitely does not go for minions - Minion Nagas are almost strictly superior to minion Bane Spiders. Same movement and hit points, better defense for the nagas, blue/red ranged attack for both, and Sorcery 3/Grab blows surge: pierce 2 and surge: poison out of the water with just a blue/red attack. (With the Master's additional yellow die, the surges will hit much more often, but with blue/red two surge abilties are really weak.)

Inspector Jee - I don't *think* there are any three-die Act 1 relics... I could easily be wrong though. What relic are you thinking of?

Ynfernael rune has three dice.

Okay, yeah, and Mace of Aver has three dice also. But still, blue/red/green in act 1 isn't exactly "punishing" the heroes... better to play Archyturas instead of Chaos Spawn, then you're getting a monster that's ALWAYS good :-)

Valyndra's Bane is an Act 1 Relic that rolls Blue/Red/Yellow, surge for Pierce 3. The Dire Flail from Trollfens rolls Blue/Yellow/Green, as well as the aforementioned Mace of Aver. Also, be mindful of anyone carrying the Sun Stone, as they get an additional green die no matter what they roll.

As for Nagas? Kunzite plays a mean set by maximizing the effects of Sorcery and having them slither away. They're much more fearsome in Act 1 than Act 2, but they can't ALL be hilariously good. Arachyura tend to be really stupid-good in the beginning as well, rolling three dice, spamming Immobilizes and keeping two Non-Logan-Lashley heroes essentially stuck unless it misses/deals no damage/dies. They're not as good in act 2 either, but some monsters are better suited to Act 1, others (Chaos Beasts, for example) are better for Act 2.

If a particular monster is always good, that's a problem. The idea is that your open group choices should differ from map to map and act to act.

Senior WhiteBread beat me to it. Valyndra's Bane; might as well be called "Overlord's Bane" or "Golem Demander."

Jee

Senior WhiteBread beat me to it. Valyndra's Bane; might as well be called "Overlord's Bane" or "Golem Demander."

Jee

The campaign where Bread welded Valyndra's Bane was the campaign they learned what I can do with small monsters. I only used large monsters when I had to. And I have learned the value of all my monsters and what range can do for me.

While it is also the "overlord's bane", it doesn't stop a crafty Overlord. In saying all of that, I HATE THAT SWORD! ^.^ pigeon holing your overlord might be bad for your health. Just saying.

Senior WhiteBread beat me to it. Valyndra's Bane; might as well be called "Overlord's Bane" or "Golem Demander."

Jee

The campaign where Bread welded Valyndra's Bane was the campaign they learned what I can do with small monsters. I only used large monsters when I had to. And I have learned the value of all my monsters and what range can do for me.

While it is also the "overlord's bane", it doesn't stop a crafty Overlord. In saying all of that, I HATE THAT SWORD! ^.^ pigeon holing your overlord might be bad for your health. Just saying.

And that's why you never ever play that rumor card unless they force you to.

Senior WhiteBread beat me to it. Valyndra's Bane; might as well be called "Overlord's Bane" or "Golem Demander."

Jee

The campaign where Bread welded Valyndra's Bane was the campaign they learned what I can do with small monsters. I only used large monsters when I had to. And I have learned the value of all my monsters and what range can do for me.

While it is also the "overlord's bane", it doesn't stop a crafty Overlord. In saying all of that, I HATE THAT SWORD! ^.^ pigeon holing your overlord might be bad for your health. Just saying.

And that's why you never ever play that rumor card unless they force you to.

strategy wise, maybe, but I like the quests because I love playing the games. BTW, I still won that campaign.

I agree that nagas seem, if not neccessarily underpowered, less fun or unique then they could have been. They simply don't have the survivability to be worthwhile. Defense is far too hit or miss to be reliable, and nagas have abysmal health. Getting a naga close enough to grab is a death sentance.

Oh, and maybe I'm missing something, but why is being a large monster neccessarily a good thing? They can move a bit faster with the "large steps" between movements, and they are good at blocking passages, but they take up space and block line of sight for your own monsters and are huge targets who can rarely hide around corners. To top it all off, many of them (especially the ranged ones like nagas, elementals, manticores, and chaos beasts) are overall weaker than many of their smaller counterparts. I've only used large monsters a handful of times when given the choice, usually only for the fortitude of giants, and I have no trouble winning a majority of quests.

Oh, and maybe I'm missing something, but why is being a large monster neccessarily a good thing? They can move a bit faster with the "large steps" between movements, and they are good at blocking passages, but they take up space and block line of sight for your own monsters and are huge targets who can rarely hide around corners. To top it all off, many of them (especially the ranged ones like nagas, elementals, manticores, and chaos beasts) are overall weaker than many of their smaller counterparts. I've only used large monsters a handful of times when given the choice, usually only for the fortitude of giants, and I have no trouble winning a majority of quests.

Someone else finally backing up my argument. While road blockers are good for some things, Hybrid Sentinels are normally MUCH better at getting the real job done. If played right, a road block might stall out your game a turn or two, but the real damage is in numbers and speed. There are only a few good road block options, and most of them (if not all before SoN) are in the conversion kit. Even then, there are only a few good act two options.

Oh, and maybe I'm missing something, but why is being a large monster neccessarily a good thing? They can move a bit faster with the "large steps" between movements, and they are good at blocking passages, but they take up space and block line of sight for your own monsters and are huge targets who can rarely hide around corners. To top it all off, many of them (especially the ranged ones like nagas, elementals, manticores, and chaos beasts) are overall weaker than many of their smaller counterparts. I've only used large monsters a handful of times when given the choice, usually only for the fortitude of giants, and I have no trouble winning a majority of quests.

One of the bigger reasons is from the reinforcement rules from the base-game campaign (The Shadow Rune). When it comes to reinforcing, you can reinforce your entire monster group in a single turn (or half w/ 4 players) for many big monsters and a much smaller fraction of that with the smaller monsters. I've heard some of the other campaigns may have fixed some of these issues, but I can't point to a specific example yet.

Oh, and maybe I'm missing something, but why is being a large monster neccessarily a good thing? They can move a bit faster with the "large steps" between movements, and they are good at blocking passages, but they take up space and block line of sight for your own monsters and are huge targets who can rarely hide around corners. To top it all off, many of them (especially the ranged ones like nagas, elementals, manticores, and chaos beasts) are overall weaker than many of their smaller counterparts. I've only used large monsters a handful of times when given the choice, usually only for the fortitude of giants, and I have no trouble winning a majority of quests.

One of the bigger reasons is from the reinforcement rules from the base-game campaign (The Shadow Rune). When it comes to reinforcing, you can reinforce your entire monster group in a single turn (or half w/ 4 players) for many big monsters and a much smaller fraction of that with the smaller monsters. I've heard some of the other campaigns may have fixed some of these issues, but I can't point to a specific example yet.

There are quests in Labyrinth of Ruin where they value monster reinforcements based on their size. For example, one quest gives you a certain amount of tokens for reinforcements: small monsters cost 1 and bigger monsters cost more.

Which just goes to show that FFG doesn't understand the tactics of their game particularly well :-)

Don't know which adventure Whitewing is talking about, but there's also one where you spend tokens to buy reinforcements based on their HP - each token gives you 8 HP worth of reinforcements. Still not balanced, but better than monster size...

Which just goes to show that FFG doesn't understand the tactics of their game particularly well :-)

Don't know which adventure Whitewing is talking about, but there's also one where you spend tokens to buy reinforcements based on their HP - each token gives you 8 HP worth of reinforcements. Still not balanced, but better than monster size...

I might be confusing a few different quest reinforcement mechanics and merging them together =p.

It's been a long time since I looked at the LoR quests: haven't had a chance to play them recently.