This seems like a silly question at first, but I am not clear how this works with rules as written.

The 1st level spell Sleep has the keywords Arcane, Charm, Enchantment, and Implement. It previously had the Sleep keyword, but this was replaced with Charm in the Player's Handbook errata.

An Armor Guardian is a level 20 creature that is immune to disease, poison, and sleep (Published in Tomb of Horrors, page(s) 139, Monster Manual 3).

Would an Armor Guardian be affected by the Sleep spell? Would the spell function normally since it does not have the Sleep keyword?

  • \$\begingroup\$ @kviiri, I updated the question with the source. \$\endgroup\$ – Skywalker Mar 24 '15 at 21:14

By RAW, Sleep should affect the Armor Guardian.

The Compendium states (emphasis mine) (from the Rules Compendium pg. 225):

Immune: A creature that is immune to a damage type (such as cold or fire), a condition (such as dazed or petrified), or another specific effect (such as disease or forced movement) is not affected by it. A creature that is immune to charm, fear, illusion, poison, or sleep is not affected by the nondamaging effects of a power that has that keyword. A creature that is immune to gaze is not affected by powers that have that keyword.

Since the armor is not also immune to unconsciousness, enchantment, etc. Sleep should affect it. However, a DM could decide to interpret the sleep as "another specific effect" and allow the armor to be immune anyway, since the wording vague enough to allow some wiggle room.

  • \$\begingroup\$ The Sleep spell used to have the Sleep keyword, but it was removed. I wonder if the Sleep keyword is now defunct. \$\endgroup\$ – Skywalker Mar 24 '15 at 22:41
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Interestingly, a check revealed two powers that did have the Sleep keyword on them: Whispers of the Dream King and Waves of Languor, so apparently the keyword is not gone. Why they removed it from Sleep and not everything is a mystery. \$\endgroup\$ – firedraco Mar 24 '15 at 22:49
  • \$\begingroup\$ Houseruling Sleep to (re)contain 'sleep' would remove the wiggle room and need for interpretation, no? \$\endgroup\$ – Frezak Mar 25 '15 at 23:48
  • \$\begingroup\$ I agree with @Frezak that houseruling the Sleep keyword back onto Sleep (and also keeping Charm) would be the easiest way to deal with this. If it's not added to this answer, it seems like it should probably be added as a separate one. \$\endgroup\$ – DCShannon Mar 27 '15 at 4:30
  • \$\begingroup\$ Well this is a RAW question, so I'm not sure if putting in the suggestion to houserule the keyword back on (especially since there was specific errata to remove it) would be good here. \$\endgroup\$ – firedraco Mar 27 '15 at 19:49

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.