Night Hag... Give Me a Break...

[darkadelphia]

No house rule is necessary. Sleep is sleep, so page 263 applies.

Any other ruling makes the power a god killer which is clearly not the intent of the rules (you'll notice NONE of the 4E rules are insta-death).

Just. Common. Sense.

It's not "Just. Common. Sense.," since it does seem to be under the same set of circumstances as the sleep spell, which, as discussed, has a specific resolution. It is a reasonable inquiry and clearly something that needs errata.

Here ends my response to a Needlessly. Condescending. Response.

 

[useridunavailable]

No house rule is necessary. Sleep is sleep, so page 263 applies.

Any other ruling makes the power a god killer which is clearly not the intent of the rules (you'll notice NONE of the 4E rules are insta-death).

Just. Common. Sense.

Since when does unconscious = asleep? Unconscious is a condition which can be caused by a number of factors, including being at zero or fewer hit points. If page 263 applies to all unconsciousness, then it also has to apply to a character who is at zero or fewer hit points.

AFAIK, page 263 does not officially apply to the Sleep spell, whose bestowed condition ("unconscious") is identical to that caused by Wave of Sleep. If this has changed, please let me know - a link would be nice, but not completely necessary. Otherwise, enough with the strawman already.

I get it - everyone thinks it's okay as long as page 263 applies. I agree. The problem is that page 263 does not apply to all cases of unconsciousness, and it does not apply to the condition caused by Wave of Sleep unless the official or semi-official position on the Sleep spell has changed.

Basically, the only valid response I'm getting is that yes, it's broken by RAW as the rule stands. Common sense and RAI are completely separate issues and are irrelevant to the question. Thanks.

 

[Kordeth]

(no save) is clearly a relic of an older iteration of the game, like the drow warrior having (X2) instead of the language of a secondary attack.

Check out the Oni night haunter; it also has (no save) on one of its powers, which was errata'd to (save ends). They almost certainly just didn't catch same the error on the night hag.

In short, like nearly every other duration-based power in the game, wave of sleep should be (save ends).

 

[Anguirus]

I have to agree, this is abusive and terribly unfun. What might mitigate the effect is the guideline that monsters generally don't spend X number of rounds killing an unconscious person out of sheer spite. She's going to try to KO everyone. But if this is the case, there is no reason for Night Haunting to even exist.

I would either alter the monster or (as I am seriously considering) take a long, hard look at all unconsciousness effects. I see no real in-game or out-game reason why "Sleep" is "unconscious" while "Knockout" is "unconscious but wake up after taking damage."

 

[GoodKingJayIII]

Customer service rulings are circumspect at best. I realize it's the best thing to an official response, but you can't always rely on them.

page 263 does not apply to all cases of unconsciousness, and it does not apply to the condition caused by Wave of Sleep unless the official or semi-official position on the Sleep spell has changed.

Aside from the customer service response, do you have a reference for this assumption? A page number, or even something in the Compendium? (I ask because I don't know, not to be argumentative.) If you don't have one, then it seems that your DM has his own house rule, that says page 263 does not apply to all cases of sleep or unconsciousness which makes Sleep and Wave of Sleep problematic.

 

[Chen_93]

I suspect the reasoning behind not making it (along with Sleep) is the fact that sleep is so easily gotten around (free action to wake them). It seems to me the errata need to be added to both sleep and this power to make it similar to the rogue powers that render a creature unconscious (where they "wake" upon taking any damage).

 

[useridunavailable]

What might mitigate the effect is the guideline that monsters generally don't spend X number of rounds killing an unconscious person out of sheer spite.

While this does help to mitigate the Dream Haunting power, it still doesn't solve the problem that the only way to wake a character affected by Wave of Sleep is still to kill and then raise him or her. My point is basically this: there is obviously a misprint involved, whether it be the "no save" clause, some omission such as "until the end of the encounter," or something else entirely. I just wanted to find out if I was missing something which, by RAW, made the power more reasonable. Apparently I'm not - all proposed solutions involve the inference of RAI, which can involve a multitude of different approaches under the reasonable person standard.

The main problem is that our DM, although he does agree that something is terribly wrong with the wording of Wave of Sleep, is so complacent in his glee over discovering such a wicked and nasty trick to pull on the PCs that he's reluctant to make a compromise that reflects what I (and apparently many of you) see as even close to the actual RAI. In such a case, official errata is really a requirement for any modicum of fun to continue to exist in our group. I really can't blame the DM - we tend to powergame against him quite a bit, and he's merely trying to respond in kind, which in most cases we all see as both fun and fair. He saw the discovery as very clever, and I tend to agree, but he seems incapable of making an unbiased ruling on the issue. What really bothers me is that this will probably not be the last such hangup. WotC is, in my experience, as slow about officially correcting such errors as they are prolific in making them.

 

[Mengu]

(no save) is clearly a relic of an older iteration of the game, like the drow warrior having (X2) instead of the language of a secondary attack.

Check out the Oni night haunter; it also has (no save) on one of its powers, which was errata'd to (save ends). They almost certainly just didn't catch same the error on the night hag.

In short, like nearly every other duration-based power in the game, wave of sleep should be (save ends).

This.

 

[useridunavailable]

Aside from the customer service response, do you have a reference for this assumption?

The entire paragraph in question on page 263 of the PHB is prefaced by the qualifying statement "When you're asleep," which the condition applied by neither Sleep nor Wave of Sleep specifically entails, nor does Wave of Sleep contain any reference to any means of waking up as do (I believe) all other powers capable of imposing the unqualified unconscious condition. Finally, the closest thing we have to an official ruling on the Sleep spell (customer Service's position) clearly precludes the application of the sleeping rules to the Wave of Sleep power as written. Therefore, in my view, the evidence clearly indicates that RAW excludes the application of the paragraph in question to the powers Sleep and Wave of Sleep.

While I completely agree that Wave of Sleep as written can't possibly be in keeping with RAI, I find that ruling any way other than that there is simply no way to wake up barring death and the Raise Dead ritual (according to RAW) involves far more conjecture than the alternative.

 

[aurance]

(no save) is clearly a relic of an older iteration of the game, like the drow warrior having (X2) instead of the language of a secondary attack.

Check out the Oni night haunter; it also has (no save) on one of its powers, which was errata'd to (save ends). They almost certainly just didn't catch same the error on the night hag.

In short, like nearly every other duration-based power in the game, wave of sleep should be (save ends).

I third this interpretation.