Courage Spell

[Goblin-King]

But the visible monster only applies to the hero affected by the spell.
If HE loses LoS to any monsters the spell is broken.
Even if the other heroes can still see monsters.

[MadMickyG]

I know it doesn't count for other players LoS. There's an idea for another spell though.

But if you stand outside a door looking in to a room with a monster/monsters, while another monster is coming down the corridor toward you, there is going to be at least one of them in LoS, even if the players move and block LoS in the room. It's a stretch of rules, I know, but still counts as LoS in my book. All about creative play. My son will argue some rules to ridiculousness, but I do draw the line. If he, or his sisters can make a fair argument, then I always consider what they are saying.

[Daedalus]

The card states that it will temporarily increase the next attack by two combat dice, but also stats that the spell will be broken when the Hero can no longer 'see' a Monster.

I've always played it as the 2 extra combat dice lasting for every attack until the Hero can no longer 'see' a Monster. But now that I realise it says next attack, this leads me to believe that this is not the case. As the Hero would lose the effects should they lose sight of Monsters before their first attack anyway, I'm not concerned with that aspect. I'm wondering if I should interpret this as also only affecting the first attack and that the spell would also end after said attack, even if more Monsters exist in sight. This problem would greatly change the power of the spell, which I may just keep playing as I have regardless since I feel the other is too weak. Worth less than a potion of strength really.

Anyone else have any thoughts on this?

As already shown in this thread, comparing the EU and NA Courage Spell Cards changes the perspective of the original post a bit. I like things clear, so here are all three versions of the spell for comparison:

EU 1st edition	EU 2nd edition	NA version
. Courage This spell may be cast on any one player. That player may then throw two extra combat dice the next time he attacks. The spell is then discarded.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .	Courage This spell may be cast on any one player. That player may then throw two extra dice each time he attacks, until the spell is broken. The spell is broken when there are no more monsters visible to that player. The spell is then discarded.	. Courage This spell may be cast on any one Hero, including yourself. The next time that Hero attacks, he may roll two extra combat dice. The spell is broken the moment the Hero can no longer "see" a monster.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

The spell begins weak like a Potion of Strength, then gets some teeth in the second edition, and finally it seems to get weakened again (depending on your interpretation) by the apparently contradictory wording of the NA version.

Explanations for casting the spell in advance have already been discussed. I've hit upon another reason that I believe makes sense from the perspective of playtesting and evolving the spell description to the NA text. Consider how Courage interacts with these multiple-attack effects:

NA version	NA version	NA version
Orc's Bane When using this magical shortsword, you roll two combat dice to attack. You may attack twice if attacking an Orc. May not be used by Wizard. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .	Heroic Brew You are surprised to find a leather bag hanging on the wall. If you drink its contents before you attack, you can make two attacks instead of one. This may only be used once. Do not return this card to the deck.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .	Potion of Battle Rage Cost: 400 Gold Coins . Only the Barbarian can drink this purple-red concoction. It grants him 2 attacks per turn as long as there are monsters in sight. As soon as there are no monsters in the Barbarian's line of sight, this potion's effect wears off.

With Orc's Bane, Heroic Brew, or a Potion of Battle Rage in the mix, another difference is apparent regarding next attack and each attack. These items allow for an extra attack on the Hero's turn. If the Hero also has an EU 2nd ed. Courage spell cast on him, then he benefits twice from the spell on a turn, amounting to an extra four dice. If the Hero instead has an EU 1st ed. Courage or NA Courage spell cast on him, then he only benefits once on a turn from the extra two dice.

The return to "next attack" wording standardizes the effect with a Potion of Strength, just like the original 1st ed. spell. I believe knowing this sufficiently explains the the reason for the wording and how it is intended to be applied: "next attack" isn't an ending condition but rather a limit on damage in a turn. In this context, the last line about breaking the spell when a monster can't be seen makes sense as an extendable duration. It seems likely to me that the more useful 2nd ed. multiple-turn improvement was purposefully retained for its effectiveness and fun.

Tl;Dr: The extra two dice from the NA Courage spell aren't applied to any extra attack in a single turn, but they may carry over to attacks in following turns.

[Gold Bearer]

I respectfully disagree.

'This spell may be cast on any one Hero, including yourself. The next time that Hero attacks, he may roll two extra combat dice.'
You get two extra dice next time you attack.

'The spell is broken the moment the Hero can no longer "see" a monster.'
If at any time you can't see a monster before your next attack the spell is broken.

I think that's the only way to interpret it so that it makes sense.

[Anderas]

Seeing Daedalus' posting, I am now convinced that i follow the spirit of the Courage spell if i reword these effects a little bit.

Anderas version	Anderas version	Anderas version	Anderas version
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Orc's Bane Attack: When using this magical shortsword against Orcs only, you may take one extra attack action per turn. May not be used by Wizard. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .	. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Heroic Brew You are surprised to find a leather bag hanging on the wall. If you drink its contents before you attack, discard this card and make one extra attack action. Only one brew may be used per turn. Do not return this card to the deck. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .	. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Potion of Battle Rage Cost: 400 Gold Coins . Only the Barbarian can drink this purple-red concoction. It grants him one extra attack action per turn as long as there are monsters in sight. As soon as there are no monsters in the Barbarian's line of sight, this potion's effect wears off. Discard this card after use.	. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Courage Cost: Cast action, Discard this card Range: ranged magic Effect: The target model may throw two extra dice the first time he attacks each round, until the spell is broken. The spell is broken when there are no more monsters visible to the target model. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

[mitchiemasha]

I respectfully disagree.

'This spell may be cast on any one Hero, including yourself. The next time that Hero attacks, he may roll two extra combat dice.'
You get two extra dice next time you attack.

'The spell is broken the moment the Hero can no longer "see" a monster.'
If at any time you can't see a monster before your next attack the spell is broken.

I think that's the only way to interpret it so that it makes sense.

This is how i would interpret the words once it was put forward. As they are written, it is exactly what they say, no doubting it. However, i don't think they intended that originally, I think they messed up. If people were playing hardcore as the rules are written, I'd play it as Gold Bearer has said (obviously i have 2nd ed UK so i'd have to be on holiday in the US, lol)!!!

All this, "due to how it stacked with other effects", is way too far fetched. I doubt they thought that much into it. Even if they did, this makes the wording even worse for kids to play it correctly. It saying "next time" in no way would reference to the first attack only of each round but it can be used in the next round. I can see why you might make this conclusion but... Nope!

Orcs Bane and Courage,
EU version... Attack 2 Orcs or the same Orc twice, with 4Cd6 each time. If by some luck they survive, in the next round, same again.
US version... Attack 1 Orc with 4Cd6 and the second with 2Cd6, courage runs out (i do not like this version but accept it as written).

As simple as that. (edit: EU version... obviously, if they are still stood there and didn't run off, out of sight)

What would be the point of losing 2Cd6 in 1 attack this round only for it to return next round. It does make the Hero slightly weaker but for the sake of simple mechanics, they would of avoided it. Is that even how courage would work? I don't think so. For me, there are monsters infront of you, you are overwhelmed with might, all fear and doubt stripped from inside you. You get to attack all that you see, for the duration that you see them at +2Ad6. It's almost a mindful version of rage, as we are the good guys, courage.

The US version works thematically GB's way too, rather than it being all that you see, it's simply the next attack of what you see. One could argue that the reason the Hero gets the bonus in the first attack of each round but not the 2nd by saying they'd lost energy, but come on... the game was made for 10 year olds. No where near that level of thought.

[The Admiral]

I agree. If the intention was that only the next attack gets the bonus, then why all the stuff about breaking the spell. Why would they bother with all that verbage just to see whether the hero on whom the spell was cast loses LOS to a monster before he gets to make his one bonus attack?

This is a rare case of the UK version (both cards) being better written than the US version!

[cornixt]

It's so that the wizard can't buff up another hero in anticipation of fighting a monster that isn't yet in sight. Definitely abusable if the players know the quest and can prepare themselves before bursting into the room with the boss monster.

[knightkrawler]

It's so that the wizard can't buff up another hero in anticipation of fighting a monster that isn't yet in sight. Definitely abusable if the players know the quest and can prepare themselves before bursting into the room with the boss monster.

Again, that's thinking farther than I trust the writers actually did, like mitchiemasha and the Admiral have pointed out.

[Daedalus]

[Goldbearer quote]

This is how i would interpret the words once it was put forward. As they are written, it is exactly what they say, no doubting it. However, i don't think they intended that originally, I think they messed up. If people were playing hardcore as the rules are written, I'd play it as Gold Bearer has said (obviously i have 2nd ed UK so i'd have to be on holiday in the US, lol)!!!

In my earlier poston p. 2 of this topic, I had come to the same conclusion, so I can appreciate the viewpoint. I agree the wording should be better. Fortunately, we few...we proud few...are here to to make things right (for our own games, anyway.)

All this, "due to how it stacked with other effects", is way too far fetched. I doubt they thought that much into it. Even if they did, this makes the wording even worse for kids to play it correctly. It saying "next time" in no way would reference to the first attack only of each round but it can be used in the next round. I can see why you might make this conclusion but... Nope!

I think I didn't explain well enough. The choice to go back to "next" over "each" reveals standardization of text with the similar Potion of Strength. I think that is what the NA designers were after with the second sentence--regularity of wording and effect. The benefit of this leveling is more predictable, balanced combats. Perhaps EU plays of the second edition and general roleplaying experience showed a partial scaling back was desirable. Or maybe they were bounding extra attacks just to get standard wording.

The sketchy wording caused some debate before my group settled on multiple turns of bonus attacks back in the 90s. Like The Admiral, we rationalized the spell outlines further "next attack" instances until the "see" duration is no longer satisfied. We went with the more fun interpretation because that seemed to us the likely intention. From what I've read in this thread, other NA players as kids played it the same. It could be munchkining, or it could be playing the optimal way.

The EU second edition extended the duration of the weak UK first-edition Courage, addressing a problem. Reversing the NA duration so that it is weaker than even the UK first edition contradicts the original reason for extending the duration in the first place. I think the NA designers were aware of this. They also were motivated to deliver a well-made game that satisfied their customers. That points to the last sentence being included not to further limit the UK one-turn effect, but instead to continue the multiple-turn effect of the EU second edition.