Turn order: Rigid or flexible?

[Gold Bearer]

You’re thinking of the standard Sleep spell. Gold Bearer is talking about the Deep Sleep spell for the Elf which is different. It wears off the moment the next EWP turn starts, no dice roll required. The tradeoff is the monster doesn’t get a die roll when the spell is cast either, so it’s a guaranteed to keep the monster asleep for that short period of time.

Yea but regular US sleep actually becomes very weak if you're the last to go, they make the same MP test in a row and only need to pass one.

[Onan]

It's no more difficult than when the EW has to remember what monsters have moved or not?
And actions do not have to be tracked as it's tied to movement.
A character has to have his complete turn, move and action, then he is finished. Then next Hero.
No going back to take an action because your turn is over.

I said "acted", but I didn't mean his action, but his complete turn. So what I mean is that we would get confused if for example the 3rd player takes his turn first, then the first player, then the second player. Then it would be the third player's turn again, but he has already taken his turn, which we might forget and let him take a turn again.

Fixed order is unrealistic, doesn't encourage creative combat moves and can drag game out longer, especially at doorways.
For instance if barb goes first every time and he moves to doorway and attacks.
Next turn he attacks and moves away, dwarf moves in and attacks.
Then next turn barb loses a turn because he can't move to doorway because dwarf is in the way.
He has to wait till next turn for space to be vacant??

That's the typical problem when all heroes want to take the same path. This can be avoided by splitting the group (which works fine in the EU quests, not recommended for Frozen Horror ). Or as an alternative let the wizard go first or second. He can clean the doorway with a spell or cast Veil Of Mist on a blocked hero.

[wallydubbs]

Yes, the Elf Spell Deep Sleep has no use if the Elf is last in turn order. But that wasn't necessary what I was alluding to:
The regular Sleep spell grants the monster 2 chances to break if it is cast at the end of the heroes turns. For maximum effect the Wizard can cast this at the start of the heroes turn order. Other spells like Tempest or Chains of Darkness are best saved when the Wizard is last in turn order. If he casts it first on a Dread Warrior, the heroes can potentially wipe out that Dread Warrior before his turn comes up. Courage also has a smaller chance of dying if it's cast at the start of the heroes' turn order.

[Daedalus]

I'd like to propose another way to look at Sleep and Deep Sleep that has the same effect despite Hero turn order using the standard clockwise rule. It starts with the premise that ideally these spell effects are tied equally to a full round of turns. So if the Wizard cast Sleep, a round could look like setup A: WBDEZ or setup B: BDEWZ, depending on the chosen turn order from the start of the game. Assuming the monster failed to immediately break the spell, the most balanced effect would be equal, despite either turn order of the casting Wizard. Could this ideal effect have been intended, and if so, how can the wording support it?

This spell puts a monster into a deep sleep so that 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 against Mummies, Zombies, or Skeletons.

Most people, including my original group from days gone by understand/understood "on a future turn" to mean Zargon's turn, repeated if necessary. However, "on a future turn" literally can be a Hero's turn, if read Rules As Written. As far as I know, nobody does this, but the effect of literal interpretation would mean that in the case of setup A, Sleep might be broken on each of the Heroes' turns and on Zargon's turn in a full round (4 Heroes +1 Zargon = 5 checks), while in setup B, again the spell might be broken on Zargon's turn and each of the Heroes' turns in a full round (1 Hero +1 Zargon +3 Heroes = 5 checks). In either edge case, the effect is equal.

While this works well if all the Heroes are attacking a Gargoyle under a Sleep effect, Zargon is favored, weakening the spell. This would bring it more in line with the original EU version that allowed the monster to awake once attacked. The balance breaks down if only some Heroes attack the Gargoyle, however. Playing RAW, the NA spell could be ended on another Hero's turn, even if he wasn't in the same room. This odd inconsistency doesn't reflect the original intention, so why "on a future turn" rather than on Zargon's turn, something everyone seems to assume anyway?

I think the reason is because had on Zargon's turn been specified, this would necessarily affect the effectiveness of the spell dependent on the spellcaster's turn order, as already pointed out by others in this thread. This is not ideal as described in my opening paragraph. If the intent behind the spell is instead understood to be uncoupled from turn order, "on a future turn" should be applied to the single most fair turn in a round of turns, which is the spellcaster's next turn. In this way for the first round, the other three Heroes other than the spellcaster will always each get a chance to attack before the monster can again try to break the spell, irrespective of turn order. Playing this way always works with equal spell effect, but only for clockwise turn order. Should Heroes be allowed to choose their turn order and the spellcaster change his position, a full round of turns must be reconsidered. I wouldn't want to try that, so clockwise for me.

This spell may be cast on any monster within your line of sight, as long as the monster has 1 to 3 Mind Points. The monster falls asleep immediately. It says asleep until Zargon's next turn. The monster cannot defend against a Hero's attack while it is asleep.

Earlier comments on the effect of this spell assume that "until Zargon's next turn" applies to the same round of turns that the Spell is cast. As above, I think this assumption bears reconsideration. Why is it written that way when the assumed understanding could be more simply written as until Zargon's turn? I believe that by including "next" a differentiation is purposely introduced. In the context of adding "next" for another meaning, the spell duration could be understood to apply to the next round of turns, after Zargon's (first) turn has elapsed. If this interpretation is followed, Deep Sleep is useful as a spell choice in the solo Quests of MotM as well as not depending on the Elf going early in the turn order. I believe that the MB designers intended the spell to reach across all cases to keep it an attractive choice. If like me you can have faith in the designers intent, then I'd say don't read "Zargon's next turn" as having the same meaning as Zargon's turn.

[Daedalus]

Returning more directly to the response about flexible turn order affecting game balance, I agree that is the case. A counter turn for Zargon would be nice. What about allowing a monster that is affected by change in turn order to be given a turn as a reaction? For example, a Chaos Warrior that is killed by the Barbarian's 4 AD attack (turn order was adjusted for this) is allowed to attack before it is removed from the gameboard.

[Parzival]

I'd like to propose another way to look at Sleep and Deep Sleep that has the same effect despite Hero turn order using the standard clockwise rule. It starts with the premise that ideally these spell effects are tied equally to a full round of turns. So if the Wizard cast Sleep, a round could look like setup A: WBDEZ or setup B: BDEWZ, depending on the chosen turn order from the start of the game. Assuming the monster failed to immediately break the spell, the most balanced effect would be equal, despite either turn order of the casting Wizard. Could this ideal effect have been intended, and if so, how can the wording support it?

This spell puts a monster into a deep sleep so that 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 against Mummies, Zombies, or Skeletons.

Most people, including my original group from days gone by understand/understood "on a future turn" to mean Zargon's turn, repeated if necessary. However, "on a future turn" literally can be a Hero's turn, if read Rules As Written. As far as I know, nobody does this, but the effect of literal interpretation would mean that in the case of setup A, Sleep might be broken on each of the Heroes' turns and on Zargon's turn in a full round (4 Heroes +1 Zargon = 5 checks), while in setup B, again the spell might be broken on Zargon's turn and each of the Heroes' turns in a full round (1 Hero +1 Zargon +3 Heroes = 5 checks). In either edge case, the effect is equal.

While this works well if all the Heroes are attacking a Gargoyle under a Sleep effect, Zargon is favored, weakening the spell. This would bring it more in line with the original EU version that allowed the monster to awake once attacked. The balance breaks down if only some Heroes attack the Gargoyle, however. Playing RAW, the NA spell could be ended on another Hero's turn, even if he wasn't in the same room. This odd inconsistency doesn't reflect the original intention, so why "on a future turn" rather than on Zargon's turn, something everyone seems to assume anyway?

I think the reason is because had on Zargon's turn been specified, this would necessarily affect the effectiveness of the spell dependent on the spellcaster's turn order, as already pointed out by others in this thread. This is not ideal as described in my opening paragraph. If the intent behind the spell is instead understood to be uncoupled from turn order, "on a future turn" should be applied to the single most fair turn in a round of turns, which is the spellcaster's next turn. In this way for the first round, the other three Heroes other than the spellcaster will always each get a chance to attack before the monster can again try to break the spell, irrespective of turn order. Playing this way always works with equal spell effect, but only for clockwise turn order. Should Heroes be allowed to choose their turn order and the spellcaster change his position, a full round of turns must be reconsidered. I wouldn't want to try that, so clockwise for me.

This spell may be cast on any monster within your line of sight, as long as the monster has 1 to 3 Mind Points. The monster falls asleep immediately. It says asleep until Zargon's next turn. The monster cannot defend against a Hero's attack while it is asleep.

Earlier comments on the effect of this spell assume that "until Zargon's next turn" applies to the same round of turns that the Spell is cast. As above, I think this assumption bears reconsideration. Why is it written that way when the assumed understanding could be more simply written as until Zargon's turn? I believe that by including "next" a differentiation is purposely introduced. In the context of adding "next" for another meaning, the spell duration could be understood to apply to the next round of turns, after Zargon's (first) turn has elapsed. If this interpretation is followed, Deep Sleep is useful as a spell choice in the solo Quests of MotM as well as not depending on the Elf going early in the turn order. I believe that the MB designers intended the spell to reach across all cases to keep it an attractive choice. If like me you can have faith in the designers intent, then I'd say don't read "Zargon's next turn" as having the same meaning as Zargon's turn.

All very interesting. I will add that the App handles it as follows:
For Sleep, the Spell Break roll occurs immediately when cast, and if failed the monster falls asleep. When Zargon’s turn begins, this monster may try another Spell Break. If it succeeds, it wakes up and may act. If it fails, it remains asleep. This appears to have potential to continue infinitely, as long as no 6 is ever rolled by the snoozing critter. Which is pretty powerful.

For Deep Sleep there is no Spell Break, but the App simply treats the monster as having lost the entirety of Zargon’s turn (though it is showed as no longer being affected by the spell when Zargons’ turn begins). This gives credence to the idea that “next” does not mean the Zargon turn immediately following the casting, but the following Zargon turn after a round of hero action.
Like this: BWE(casts, monster falls asleep)DZ(monster takes no action but wakes this turn)BWEDZ (monster may now move and attack.
So in the case of Deep Sleep, if E casts it before another hero acts, that hero could attack the sleeping enemy and it would make no defense roll. And if multiple heroes attack the monster, it remains sleeping, even if it takes damage. On Zargon’s turn it wakes, but does nothing, as noted above.
With both spells, attacking the sleeping foe has no effect on the duration or process of the spell.

So even with a fixed turn order, the only drawback in casting Deep Sleep as the last hero action is that the critter will be awake when attacked and can defend on Zargon’s turn (though otherwise it can’t act). If E cast the spell before all other heroes act, you’ve got 3 tries to put the thing down without it defending, plus another 4 tries to whack it even with a defense, before it is able to act.

[Gold Bearer]

I'd like to propose another way to look at Sleep and Deep Sleep that has the same effect despite Hero turn order using the standard clockwise rule. It starts with the premise that ideally these spell effects are tied equally to a full round of turns. So if the Wizard cast Sleep, a round could look like setup A: WBDEZ or setup B: BDEWZ, depending on the chosen turn order from the start of the game. Assuming the monster failed to immediately break the spell, the most balanced effect would be equal, despite either turn order of the casting Wizard. Could this ideal effect have been intended, and if so, how can the wording support it?

This is a huge stretch. Until the start of the EWP's next turn means simply that, it couldn't be clearer.

As for a house rule, it makes deep sleep OP, it becomes tempest (already a great spell) plus round of attacks without them rolling defence dice.

It just means if you're playing a fixed turn order the players have to take their spells into account when they decide their turn order before the quest.

[Daedalus]

While Gold Bearer has been exiled related to comments in other topics--recent and otherwise--I'd like to answer his response.

I'd like to propose another way to look at Sleep and Deep Sleep that has the same effect despite Hero turn order using the standard clockwise rule. It starts with the premise that ideally these spell effects are tied equally to a full round of turns. So if the Wizard cast Sleep, a round could look like setup A: WBDEZ or setup B: BDEWZ, depending on the chosen turn order from the start of the game. Assuming the monster failed to immediately break the spell, the most balanced effect would be equal, despite either turn order of the casting Wizard. Could this ideal effect have been intended, and if so, how can the wording support it?

This is a huge stretch. Until the start of the EWP's next turn means simply that, it couldn't be clearer.

My post was quoting cards from the NA edition of Hero Quest. GB is referencing the British Sleep card. The conditions that end the spells are different, so the proposed application under the NA Sleep card is reasonable, though not obvious.

As for a house rule, it makes deep sleep OP, it becomes tempest (already a great spell) plus round of attacks without them rolling defence dice.

Yes, I can agree the spell is more powerful, but this is by design to enable the featured Hero, the Elf, to counter new, very powerful brute monsters in the EQP. While it can be considered OP against a Chaos Warrior, it should be saved for Giant Wolves and Ogres in the MotM. Also note that Deep Sleep differs from Tempest in that it can't be cast on monsters like a Chaos Sorcerer.

It just means if you're playing a fixed turn order the players have to take their spells into account when they decide their turn order before the quest.

Yeah, if that's what a group wants, it could be played that way, as well.