Within this dungeon, in area 2, there are two pieces of matching staircases. There is some text in the quest which states the following:

"The staircase in this area costs 3 movement to use, and may only be used by a hero with a Speed of 5 or more."

The question we have is one of interpretation of this statement. Normally, both monsters and heroes can use a staircase.

Does the above statement read as a qualifier only in so far as it limits heroes utilization to those with a speed of 5 or more, and monsters can use it freely, or is it stating that only heroes can use the staircase, but the only heroes that can are those with a speed of 5 or more?

Your guidance would be appreciated.

I read that as saying that only heroes can use the staircase, but I can only guess at the intent.

The problem is, you can reasonably read this statement as any figure can use the stairs if they spend 3 movement points, but heroes are limited to using it at all unless they have a speed of 5 or more.

This whole game (all of the expansions including SOB and RTL) leave much to be desired when it comes to interpretation and intent.

Quite frankly, this game (as well as the 2nd edition) could really use someone with an english/writing degree to work with the game developers and actually write all of the texts for quests, cards, etc.

Perhaps then, we would have consistency when it comes to using terms such as figures, heroes, monsters, etc. There are too many times when they use certain terms as interchangeable, when they really aren't.

Anyway, unless we hear from others, I guess we are going to move forward and say that only heroes can use the staircases.

Based on other situations like this, and many years of playing the game. I would have to agree with you. Only heroes can use the staircase. If monsters were able to use it too, they would have used the following:

"only figures with a movement of 5 or more may use the staircase"

As an example of course.

According to the base rules only heros are allowed to use staircases in general. Single-space monsters were allowed to do so via a FAQ entry later.

So it may very well be that WoD was out before that particular FAQ ruling.

I would think that 1-space monsters should be able to use the special "staircase" in said quest.

I thought of that. Which is why I decided to see if that particular errata was included in the mini-FAQ at the end of the WoD rulebook...which it is.

We are aware of the timing of both the FAQ ruling, and the order of the releases of the expansions. Since we have all of the expansions, and are playing with all of them, as well as with the FAQ and GLOAQ, we always work with the assumption that single square monsters can use the staircases.

There just was a fair amount of debate between us (the heroes and the Overlord) as to whether or not the "intent" of this particular quest was to limit its use. It seems given the responses to this thread that there seems to be varying opinions from the rest of you as well.

We normallty play RTL, but we just ended two long ACs, and decided to go back a play a bit of vanilla Descent for a break. I guess we shouldn't have. Ha !

Thanks for all of the replies.

any2cards said:

Can you?

"The staircase in this area costs 3 movement to use, and may only be used by a hero with a Speed of 5 or more."

There are two statements, separated by a comma and the two statements do not overlap.
The first tells you the cost of use, the second limits who is allowed to pay that cost.
I'm not saying I am right and you are wrong definitively, I just don't understand how you can read that to claim that anyone who is not a speed 5+ hero can use the staircase? How do you qualify to use the staircase if you are not "a hero with speed 5 or more"?

As you noted, the statement reads:

"The staircase in this area costs 3 movement to use, and may only be used by a hero with a Speed of 5 or more."

The second part of this statement, past the comma, can simply be limiting to heroes that have a speed of 5 or more, but no limit on monsters. Just because it doesn't mention monsters doesn't mean they can't use it. In fact, since monsters normally can use staircases, one can make the argument that if monsters were not allowed to use the staircases, the quest would have specifically mentioned that, as it would be a contradiction to the normal rules.

In other words, it is not saying anything for monsters, so they can use the staircase. But for heroes to use it, they must have a speed of 5 or more. I realize that you disagree, as you feel that it is interpreted as "only heroes can use the staircases, and if they attempt to do so, they must have a speed of 5 or more to be successful".

We actually made an interesting compromise. We allowed both monsters and heroes to use the staircase, but since it required 3 movement points to transition from one to the other, we decided that meant it also required a range of 3 to strike for ranged and/or magic figures, with melee figures not being able to attack at all. It made for a very interesting mechanic, and subsequently a very interesting dungeon.

"...may only be used by a hero with a speed of 5 or more."

Corbon thinks this clause can only be read as meaning that the use is restricted to heroes only. I agree that is the most straightforward and natural reading in context. However, in order for that to be the only possible reading of that clause, we would need to apply precisely the same reading regardless of context, right?

But suppose the rules had said something like this, instead:

"The staircase in this area costs 3 movement to use. It may be used by any 1x1 monster, as normal, but may only be used by a hero with a speed of 5 or more."

That uses exactly the same clause, word for word. Do you read this example as being self-contradictory, or do you see another possible reading of that clause now?

Antistone said:

Sure, now I see another possible reading for that modified statement , but only because of the explicitly contradictory middle clause. So I guess I see that as being self contradictory, but solvable.
With that middle statement added I see a badly written sentence that technically contradicts itself, but enough sense can be made of it that we can figure out what was intended, as opposed to what is written. I think that is because 'only' now refers to a split conditional ( any X, but only some Y immediately means that X and Y have different conditions), rather than a primary and only conditional, but I don't have the technical background to know if this is why. Sorry Antistone, I know that will probably annoy you but this is genuinely interesting to me partly because it can be important but I don't know what the technical rules that govern it are, or even if any are defined. Or possibly, I just don't know the technical language used for defining them so am sort of making it up as I go along trying to explain/understand it..

I'd have thought that changing the context as significantly as you did could change possible readings? At least possible technical readings.

If the monster part is not included then the only information we have about who can use it is a blanket restriction to "heroes with 5 or more speed". Anyone who is not "a hero with 5 or more speed" is excluded from use by the 'only' clause. I can't see what gives monsters an 'out' from this clause.
It isn't like they wrote "Heroes must have 5 Speed or more to use this staircase", which is a condition on a sub-group, rather than a blanket condition.

Note, this is really more about how to interpret written english than the actual rule, I guess.