Sleep spell re-usable?

[nedius]

I came across this issue in my first play through in ages.

I was games master, and we agreed that sleep would be reuseable, and I dont feel like it was massively over powered. In fact, we agreed that it balanced the fact that the wizard has no available equipment other than a staff.

We were without the dwarf, which may have helped balance it a bit.

I agree that there are good reasons why sleep should be discarded, but is it really that bad not being so?

[el_flesh]

You won't know until you play with full party - and the dwarf is pretty strong to not include! The fact that the game was OK even without the dwarf tends to show it being a little OP I would guess. The wizard should be in mortal peril at least once a game.

Make it your own call.

[Daedalus]

Upon rereading the North American Sleep Spell, I noticed something I never took into consideration before:

This spell puts a monster into a deep
sleep so it cannot move, attack, or
defend itself. The spell can be
broken at once or on a future turn
by a monster rolling one red die for
each of its Mind Points. If a 6
is rolled, the spell is broken. May
not be used aginst Mummies,
Zombies or Skeletons.

The wording I'm talking about is "The spell can be broken at once or on a future turn." My group used to play this like the European rules, where the future turn refers to Zargon's/Morcar's future turn. However, that isn't what is printed on the card. Each Hero has a turn, as does Zargon/Morcar, for a total of 5 turns in a round of play. That means a monster has not 1, but 5 chances in a round of play to break the Sleep Spell (plus the immediate chance when the spell is cast).

Is this simply a misprint? That's a big thing to miss. If instead the spell is meant to be played as worded, then pretty much every monster is likely to have broken the spell by the time the Wizard gets another turn (assuming four Heroes are playing). This would certainly differentiate the Sleep spell from the Deep Sleep spell from the Elf Quest Pack, where it is explicitly stated that the monster may not wake until Zargon's next turn.

Has anybody played this by the book, or has everyone house ruled future turn to mean Zargon's future turn? European members needn't answer how you've played, as the EU Sleep Spell Card doesn't have this issue. Your opinions are important, however, so you can chime in as well on what you think of the NA Sleep Spell Card.

[knightkrawler]

You may be panicking there...
"on a future turn" is something different than "on any future turn".
I'm not a native speaker, but my instinct tells me "a future turn" still means that monster's turns, not all players' turns.
I'd interpret the wording "on any future turn" as meaning just that, all players' turns.

Aside from that, "on a future turn" read as you did would almost literally mean "at any point of time" - or more thoroughly action-move-attempt to break spell-move-action-attempt-action-move-attempt, which would render the entire sentence obsolete.
As you point out, the spell would be completely useless.

in my opinion, attempting to break the spell is still an action for the monster. As any figure only gets one action per (its own) turn and the card does not overrule this through its wording unless you want to read it like that, it can attempt to break the spell at each of its future turns.

[drathe]

We've always played it as an opportunity to break the spell immediately (the hero or monster uses their mental abilities to block the spell before it takes effect), and at the beginning of the target's turn(s) until the spell is finally broken.

If you take it literally, word-for-word, there's really only one chance to break the spell. As it reads "...at once or on a future turn..." which would mean they choose one or the other, not both. Not every future turn either. Just a future turn. Just one chance to break the spell. It would be a devastating spell taken literally. This is one of those, Spirit of the Law vs. Letter of the Law situations. I go with the spirit. Keep the game sensible and fun.

[Daedalus]

Thanks for your well-reasoned responses.

@knightkrawler-

I agree with your instincts and interpretation. Once every monster turn makes sense. Interesting thought that breaking a spell is an action. Do you mean the monster may not attack the same turn that it breaks the spell? The Mind Blast chaos spell from the EQP works just that way, and explicitly states it:

...To break free of the spell, the Hero, on his turn, rolls 1 red die for every Mind Point he currently has. If a 6 is rolled on any die, the spell is broken and the Hero can move and attack normally again on future turns.

I always assumed the general case of breaking a spell was a kind of free action in addition to the other actions.

@drathe-

I agree that the Spirit of the Law is the correct guide to interpreting this wording. I've since checked, and there are a few other instances in the various spell cards that include the phrase "on a future turn", particularly in the chaos spells. So the phrase on a future turn is taken to mean a future turn of the monster or Hero that needs to break the spell. Therefore breaking a spell is a kind of (free?) action taken on the spell target's turn. Two special cases are the immediate chance to break a spell stated on a spell card and Mind Blast, in which breaking a spell is not a free action.

[Goblin-King]

This is how we play it:

Only one use. The general rule is that all spells are one-use only. Period. The missing "Discard" text is an error.

At once means exactly that. In the instant the spell is cast the monster gets a free try to break the spell. Future turn means each time it's Morcar's turn (or the target's turn, to be more general).

(Didn't read whole thread, so sorry if I repeat something that is already said...)

[torilen]

I gotta agree with Goblin - that's how I've always read the card, and that's how I would
play it if I had a group with which to play HQ.

[knightkrawler]

Interesting thought that breaking a spell is an action. Do you mean the monster may not attack the same turn that it breaks the spell?.

To be honest, I didn't think that comment through. I guess it's a matter of taste if you want to see breaking a spell as an action.
I think, for monsters, I do. As their only available action is attacking or (in a few cases) casting a spell, I won't give them any action immediately after breaking a spell.
Move they can, but I'll interpret a "waking up and getting concentrated again"-phase in there.

[Goblin-King]

Interesting thought that breaking a spell is an action. Do you mean the monster may not attack the same turn that it breaks the spell?.

To be honest, I didn't think that comment through. I guess it's a matter of taste if you want to see breaking a spell as an action.
I think, for monsters, I do. As their only available action is attacking or (in a few cases) casting a spell, I won't give them any action immediately after breaking a spell.
Move they can, but I'll interpret a "waking up and getting concentrated again"-phase in there.

We play that breaking spells are part of the "start of turn phase" - ergo the monster can move and attack normally. A turn where you can't attack is almost as bad as a turn asleep.