Hey everyone, another question for my campaign. Characters just reciently reached the level to have access to 8th and 9th level spells. The Wizard casts Mind Blank every night before bed:
Until the spell ends, one willing creature you touch is immune to psychic damage, any effect that would sense its emotions or read its thoughts, divination spells, and the charmed condition. The spell even foils wish spells and spells or effects of similar power used to affect the target's mind or to gain information about the target.
The wizard is arguing that this spell would make him immune to Fear effects and spells. Although i am on the fence, firstly it is getting harder and harder for me to make difficult encounters. But mostly i read this as spells that directly effect the mind, like Psychic Scream or Feeblemind. Spells that have Intelligence saves seem to make sense to me. I am having a hard time mostly because it feels like this wizard likes to try and break the game with spells that are vague.
Well it’s up to you, you’re the DM. The question here would be, does the frightened condition apply to “spells or effect of similar power used to affect the target’s mind”? Since that is the only part of the description that could be applicable to fear. I do see the logic in thinking that fear is something that affects the target’s mind, but I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that was not the original intention with this spell. Unfortunately I cannot provide a definitive answer for you.
Actually, I’d say no it does not apply to fear. The description specifically states the charmed condition. If it applied to fear they could have easily also listed the frightened condition right after it, but did not.
I've got to agree... if it stopped the frightened condition specifically it would. Keep in mind that most spells or abilities that trigger the frightened condition call for a Wisom Saving Throw, and not an Intelligence Saving Throw. It's not something that tweaks the target's mind and forces them to perceive something harmless as much more dangerous... it's just triggering someone's instinctual fight-or-flight response, which is more complicated. I would still address some of these things in a case-by-case basis... the spell Fear specifically states that it creates a Phantasmal Image of a creature's Worst Fear. This implies some degree of like... mind reading or some other effect, and I'd probably let that specific spell be blocked by Mind Blank. But something like a dragon's Frightful Presence is just the act of being a giant, dangerous, imposing creature.
I agree, had a heated debate at the end of our session just now. I ruled it as DM to not make you immune to fear unless they could find something official that it does. I dislike the spell specifying things effecting the mind when that isn't something explained in the rules. It should clarify and say Intelligence saving throws or X condition.
Another vote for him not being immune to fear. Descriptions of Spells and abilities do not imply anything. They only do what they say they do. If it doesn’t say it makes you immune to fear, then it doesn’t.
Just as an additional data point. A published WotC module has a creature with Mind Blank on them be unaffected by the greater restoration spell when used to try to cure their madness since the Mind Blank spell prevents magic from affecting the creature's mind.
It would be a DM call but the examples I have run across seem to have Mind Blank stopping any magical effect that is based on affecting the creatures mind. This could include suggestion, mass suggestion, phantasmal force or other illusions that directly affect the mind, and potentially any other spell that affects the mind to cause its effect which could include fear though, as always, it is up to the DM how they want to play it.
Just as an additional data point. A published WotC module has a creature with Mind Blank on them be unaffected by the greater restoration spell when used to try to cure their madness since the Mind Blank spell prevents magic from affecting the creature's mind.
This is an interesting switch on the spell, i would be curious whoch moduel this was in. If i had a poision effect the players mind for example, greater restoration wouldnt work? Hmm
I never considered dispelling it to be honest, an antimagic field wod only turn ot off while in the field correct?
Hm. That looks like a bad edit job. For comparison, here's what it said in 3.5e
The subject is protected from all devices and spells that detect, influence, or read emotions or thoughts. This spell protects against all mind-affecting spells and effects as well as information gathering by divination spells or effects. Mind blank even foils limited wish, miracle, and wish spells when they are used in such a way as to affect the subject’s mind or to gain information about it.
The 'even foils Wish' sentence appears to be the same thing as it was in 3.5e -- just a note that the immunity granted by this spell is not bypassed by Wish -- but because they edited the first part from "all mind-affecting" to a more limited list, it means the second sentence is inconsistent with the first sentence.
I would say that the intent is the first sentence and the spell is deliberately weaker than it was in 3.5e, but it could also be that they just screwed up the wording in sentence 1 and it's supposed to protect against effects such as Sleep, Confusion, and Frightened.
Hm. That looks like a bad edit job. For comparison, here's what it said in 3.5e
The subject is protected from all devices and spells that detect, influence, or read emotions or thoughts. This spell protects against all mind-affecting spells and effects as well as information gathering by divination spells or effects. Mind blank even foils limited wish, miracle, and wish spells when they are used in such a way as to affect the subject’s mind or to gain information about it.
The 'even foils Wish' sentence appears to be the same thing as it was in 3.5e -- just a note that the immunity granted by this spell is not bypassed by Wish -- but because they edited the first part from "all mind-affecting" to a more limited list, it means the second sentence is inconsistent with the first sentence.
I would say that the intent is the first sentence and the spell is deliberately weaker than it was in 3.5e, but it could also be that they just screwed up the wording in sentence 1 and it's supposed to protect against effects such as Sleep, Confusion, and Frightened.
Also, it was easier in 3.5 because "mind affecting" was an official descriptor. If a spell had it, Mind Blank protected against it.
Just as an additional data point. A published WotC module has a creature with Mind Blank on them be unaffected by the greater restoration spell when used to try to cure their madness since the Mind Blank spell prevents magic from affecting the creature's mind.
This is an interesting switch on the spell, i would be curious whoch moduel this was in. If i had a poision effect the players mind for example, greater restoration wouldnt work? Hmm
I never considered dispelling it to be honest, an antimagic field wod only turn ot off while in the field correct?
Thanks again,
Jon
Little late to reply to this but I'll answer it anyway. It's in the Curse of Strahd module, the creature is the mad mage
I'd also suggest since I saw this in the thread, that dispel magic wouldn't really work on this since the spell description specifically states that a Wish spell and other spells/effects used to affect the mind are foiled. If a Wish spell can't get rid of it, and technically you are affecting his mind with a dispel magic, I'd rule that would also be included in the list of spells that don't affect Mind Blank.
Just as an additional data point. A published WotC module has a creature with Mind Blank on them be unaffected by the greater restoration spell when used to try to cure their madness since the Mind Blank spell prevents magic from affecting the creature's mind.
This is an interesting switch on the spell, i would be curious whoch moduel this was in. If i had a poision effect the players mind for example, greater restoration wouldnt work? Hmm
I never considered dispelling it to be honest, an antimagic field wod only turn ot off while in the field correct?
Thanks again,
Jon
Little late to reply to this but I'll answer it anyway. It's in the Curse of Strahd module, the creature is the mad mage
I'd also suggest since I saw this in the thread, that dispel magic wouldn't really work on this since the spell description specifically states that a Wish spell and other spells/effects used to affect the mind are foiled. If a Wish spell can't get rid of it, and technically you are affecting his mind with a dispel magic, I'd rule that would also be included in the list of spells that don't affect Mind Blank.
Wish isn’t being used to get rid of it in this case, this would be where wish is being used to create an effect similar to a charm etc effect. If you wished the spell away the spell would be no more.
I'd also suggest since I saw this in the thread, that dispel magic wouldn't really work on this since the spell description specifically states that a Wish spell and other spells/effects used to affect the mind are foiled. If a Wish spell can't get rid of it, and technically you are affecting his mind with a dispel magic, I'd rule that would also be included in the list of spells that don't affect Mind Blank.
Mind blank blocks affecting the mind of the subject, but dispel magic doesn't target the mind, it targets the spell. Of course, it's an 8th level spell so PCs under level 15 would need to make a DC 18 non-proficient spellcasting ability check, which isn't super likely to work.
Little late to reply to this but I'll answer it anyway. It's in the Curse of Strahd module, the creature is the mad mage
I'd also suggest since I saw this in the thread, that dispel magic wouldn't really work on this since the spell description specifically states that a Wish spell and other spells/effects used to affect the mind are foiled. If a Wish spell can't get rid of it, and technically you are affecting his mind with a dispel magic, I'd rule that would also be included in the list of spells that don't affect Mind Blank.
Wish isn’t being used to get rid of it in this case, this would be where wish is being used to create an effect similar to a charm etc effect. If you wished the spell away the spell would be no more.
Mind Blank specifically states the spell foils wish spells, so that would obviously mean wish does not work in getting rid of Mind Blank.
I'd also suggest since I saw this in the thread, that dispel magic wouldn't really work on this since the spell description specifically states that a Wish spell and other spells/effects used to affect the mind are foiled. If a Wish spell can't get rid of it, and technically you are affecting his mind with a dispel magic, I'd rule that would also be included in the list of spells that don't affect Mind Blank.
Mind blank blocks affecting the mind of the subject, but dispel magic doesn't target the mind, it targets the spell. Of course, it's an 8th level spell so PCs under level 15 would need to make a DC 18 non-proficient spellcasting ability check, which isn't super likely to work.
That does make sense so, fair nuff, I was going to say the players would have to wait out the spells duration XP
Mind Blank specifically states the spell foils wish spells, so that would obviously mean wish does not work in getting rid of Mind Blank.
Wish does not work at affecting the mind of someone protected by mind blank. You could use it to dispel the mind blank and then use a second spell to actually affect their mind.
Little late to reply to this but I'll answer it anyway. It's in the Curse of Strahd module, the creature is the mad mage
I'd also suggest since I saw this in the thread, that dispel magic wouldn't really work on this since the spell description specifically states that a Wish spell and other spells/effects used to affect the mind are foiled. If a Wish spell can't get rid of it, and technically you are affecting his mind with a dispel magic, I'd rule that would also be included in the list of spells that don't affect Mind Blank.
Wish isn’t being used to get rid of it in this case, this would be where wish is being used to create an effect similar to a charm etc effect. If you wished the spell away the spell would be no more.
Mind Blank specifically states the spell foils wish spells, so that would obviously mean wish does not work in getting rid of Mind Blank.
I'd also suggest since I saw this in the thread, that dispel magic wouldn't really work on this since the spell description specifically states that a Wish spell and other spells/effects used to affect the mind are foiled. If a Wish spell can't get rid of it, and technically you are affecting his mind with a dispel magic, I'd rule that would also be included in the list of spells that don't affect Mind Blank.
Mind blank blocks affecting the mind of the subject, but dispel magic doesn't target the mind, it targets the spell. Of course, it's an 8th level spell so PCs under level 15 would need to make a DC 18 non-proficient spellcasting ability check, which isn't super likely to work.
That does make sense so, fair nuff, I was going to say the players would have to wait out the spells duration XP
The exact wording of the spell is
"The spell even foils wish spells and spells or effects of similar power used to affect the target's mind or to gain information about the target."
Notice the the grammer of the sentence means that they are referring to the use of a wish spell to affect the mind. If they meant blanket use of wish the sentence would be.
"The spell even foils wish, it also prevents spells or effects of similair power used to affect the targets mind ....."
A better wording of the spell would be
"The spell even foils wish spells when they are used in such a way as to affect the subject’s mind or to gain information about it."
So as a DM I take this to mean that if someone casts wish and uses it to either cast a spell that reads minds, or allows them to spy on a player (using wish to scry for instance), or uses it to try and directly read the mind of the individual then in this instance the wish spell fails. However, If a player wishes the character with mind blank be turned into a frog, or have their strength, dex and constitution reduced to 0, or wishes that Mind blank had never been cast, or was no longer active then wish would take effect. Mind blank is not a blanket Wish spell denier, if it was it would be far far far too powerful.
Mind Blank specifically states the spell foils wish spells, so that would obviously mean wish does not work in getting rid of Mind Blank.
Wish does not work at affecting the mind of someone protected by mind blank. You could use it to dispel the mind blank and then use a second spell to actually affect their mind.
Little late to reply to this but I'll answer it anyway. It's in the Curse of Strahd module, the creature is the mad mage
I'd also suggest since I saw this in the thread, that dispel magic wouldn't really work on this since the spell description specifically states that a Wish spell and other spells/effects used to affect the mind are foiled. If a Wish spell can't get rid of it, and technically you are affecting his mind with a dispel magic, I'd rule that would also be included in the list of spells that don't affect Mind Blank.
Wish isn’t being used to get rid of it in this case, this would be where wish is being used to create an effect similar to a charm etc effect. If you wished the spell away the spell would be no more.
Mind Blank specifically states the spell foils wish spells, so that would obviously mean wish does not work in getting rid of Mind Blank.
I'd also suggest since I saw this in the thread, that dispel magic wouldn't really work on this since the spell description specifically states that a Wish spell and other spells/effects used to affect the mind are foiled. If a Wish spell can't get rid of it, and technically you are affecting his mind with a dispel magic, I'd rule that would also be included in the list of spells that don't affect Mind Blank.
Mind blank blocks affecting the mind of the subject, but dispel magic doesn't target the mind, it targets the spell. Of course, it's an 8th level spell so PCs under level 15 would need to make a DC 18 non-proficient spellcasting ability check, which isn't super likely to work.
That does make sense so, fair nuff, I was going to say the players would have to wait out the spells duration XP
The exact wording of the spell is
"The spell even foils wish spells and spells or effects of similar power used to affect the target's mind or to gain information about the target."
Notice the the grammer of the sentence means that they are referring to the use of a wish spell to affect the mind. If they meant blanket use of wish the sentence would be.
"The spell even foils wish, it also prevents spells or effects of similair power used to affect the targets mind ....."
A better wording of the spell would be
"The spell even foils wish spells when they are used in such a way as to affect the subject’s mind or to gain information about it."
So as a DM I take this to mean that if someone casts wish and uses it to either cast a spell that reads minds, or allows them to spy on a player (using wish to scry for instance), or uses it to try and directly read the mind of the individual then in this instance the wish spell fails. However, If a player wishes the character with mind blank be turned into a frog, or have their strength, dex and constitution reduced to 0, or wishes that Mind blank had never been cast, or was no longer active then wish would take effect. Mind blank is not a blanket Wish spell denier, if it was it would be far far far too powerful.
That's not what the "And" means in that sentence. If they were specifying that Wish cannot be used on the mind due to Mind Blank then they would use a comma instead of an and, to denote that everything listed are the conditions which Mind Blank prevent from happening to the mind. The "and" is used to list what Mind Blank prevents which are two general things; it prevents Wish spells from being used on the target, and it prevents any other spells or effects of similar power used to affect the targets mind or to gain information about the target. Notice how I used "and" there and I didn't remove or change any words, I just expanded the sentence instead of rewording it. When you reword a sentence, you risk changing the narrative, where if you expand on a sentence you're less likely to do so especially when you expand it by 6 words that are basically the same words at the end of the sentence.
If they were to clarify to what you were saying, then they would have listed it as "wish spells, spells or effects of similar power..." which would include wish spells as part of the clarification of specific to mind alteration, but the and there means these are two separate instances of what Mind Break prevents. This would basically mean the reason why to include the mention of Wish spells to begin with is to indicate how powerful the warding Mind Blank has against outside magical forces. If it is not mentioned then we can presume normal wording with Wish, just as we can presume Despel magic can work on Tiny Hut, despite the fact Tiny Hut prevents magic from passing through its barrier, it can still be affected by Despel Magic because it does not state that it cannot be despelled. This is an instance of it being stated that Wish cannot remove Mind Blank.
That's not what the "And" means in that sentence. If they were specifying that Wish cannot be used on the mind due to Mind Blank then they would use a comma instead of an and, to denote that everything listed are the conditions which Mind Blank prevent from happening to the mind. The "and" is used to list what Mind Blank prevents which are two general things; it prevents Wish spells from being used on the target, and it prevents any other spells or effects of similar power used to affect the targets mind or to gain information about the target. Notice how I used "and" there and I didn't remove or change any words, I just expanded the sentence instead of rewording it. When you reword a sentence, you risk changing the narrative, where if you expand on a sentence you're less likely to do so especially when you expand it by 6 words that are basically the same words at the end of the sentence.
If they were to clarify to what you were saying, then they would have listed it as "wish spells, spells or effects of similar power..." which would include wish spells as part of the clarification of specific to mind alteration, but the and there means these are two separate instances of what Mind Break prevents. This would basically mean the reason why to include the mention of Wish spells to begin with is to indicate how powerful the warding Mind Blank has against outside magical forces. If it is not mentioned then we can presume normal wording with Wish, just as we can presume Despel magic can work on Tiny Hut, despite the fact Tiny Hut prevents magic from passing through its barrier, it can still be affected by Despel Magic because it does not state that it cannot be despelled. This is an instance of it being stated that Wish cannot remove Mind Blank.
I disagree.
The "and" is explicitly including Wish in the list of things that can not be "used to affect the target's mind or to gain information about the target".
If the spell was entirely immune to Wish then that would have been made into a separate sentence.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Hey everyone, another question for my campaign. Characters just reciently reached the level to have access to 8th and 9th level spells. The Wizard casts Mind Blank every night before bed:
The wizard is arguing that this spell would make him immune to Fear effects and spells. Although i am on the fence, firstly it is getting harder and harder for me to make difficult encounters. But mostly i read this as spells that directly effect the mind, like Psychic Scream or Feeblemind. Spells that have Intelligence saves seem to make sense to me. I am having a hard time mostly because it feels like this wizard likes to try and break the game with spells that are vague.
How does everyone else run with this spell?
Thanks for any input!
Well it’s up to you, you’re the DM. The question here would be, does the frightened condition apply to “spells or effect of similar power used to affect the target’s mind”? Since that is the only part of the description that could be applicable to fear. I do see the logic in thinking that fear is something that affects the target’s mind, but I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that was not the original intention with this spell. Unfortunately I cannot provide a definitive answer for you.
Actually, I’d say no it does not apply to fear. The description specifically states the charmed condition. If it applied to fear they could have easily also listed the frightened condition right after it, but did not.
Im in the same boat, I feel it shouldn't apply to fear effects. But i would be closer to saying it would work on a spell that causes fear.
I've got to agree... if it stopped the frightened condition specifically it would. Keep in mind that most spells or abilities that trigger the frightened condition call for a Wisom Saving Throw, and not an Intelligence Saving Throw. It's not something that tweaks the target's mind and forces them to perceive something harmless as much more dangerous... it's just triggering someone's instinctual fight-or-flight response, which is more complicated. I would still address some of these things in a case-by-case basis... the spell Fear specifically states that it creates a Phantasmal Image of a creature's Worst Fear. This implies some degree of like... mind reading or some other effect, and I'd probably let that specific spell be blocked by Mind Blank. But something like a dragon's Frightful Presence is just the act of being a giant, dangerous, imposing creature.
Watch Crits for Breakfast, an adults-only RP-Heavy Roll20 Livestream at twitch.tv/afterdisbooty
And now you too can play with the amazing art and assets we use in Roll20 for our campaign at Hazel's Emporium
I agree, had a heated debate at the end of our session just now. I ruled it as DM to not make you immune to fear unless they could find something official that it does. I dislike the spell specifying things effecting the mind when that isn't something explained in the rules. It should clarify and say Intelligence saving throws or X condition.
Dispel Magic is a thing. poof No more Mind Blank. We now return you to your regularly scheduled challenging encounter.
Not strictly on topic, I know, but a useful tidbit for helping you deal with your player.
<Insert clever signature here>
Another vote for him not being immune to fear. Descriptions of Spells and abilities do not imply anything. They only do what they say they do. If it doesn’t say it makes you immune to fear, then it doesn’t.
Just as an additional data point. A published WotC module has a creature with Mind Blank on them be unaffected by the greater restoration spell when used to try to cure their madness since the Mind Blank spell prevents magic from affecting the creature's mind.
It would be a DM call but the examples I have run across seem to have Mind Blank stopping any magical effect that is based on affecting the creatures mind. This could include suggestion, mass suggestion, phantasmal force or other illusions that directly affect the mind, and potentially any other spell that affects the mind to cause its effect which could include fear though, as always, it is up to the DM how they want to play it.
This is an interesting switch on the spell, i would be curious whoch moduel this was in. If i had a poision effect the players mind for example, greater restoration wouldnt work? Hmm
I never considered dispelling it to be honest, an antimagic field wod only turn ot off while in the field correct?
Thanks again,
Jon
Hm. That looks like a bad edit job. For comparison, here's what it said in 3.5e
The 'even foils Wish' sentence appears to be the same thing as it was in 3.5e -- just a note that the immunity granted by this spell is not bypassed by Wish -- but because they edited the first part from "all mind-affecting" to a more limited list, it means the second sentence is inconsistent with the first sentence.
I would say that the intent is the first sentence and the spell is deliberately weaker than it was in 3.5e, but it could also be that they just screwed up the wording in sentence 1 and it's supposed to protect against effects such as Sleep, Confusion, and Frightened.
Also, it was easier in 3.5 because "mind affecting" was an official descriptor. If a spell had it, Mind Blank protected against it.
Little late to reply to this but I'll answer it anyway. It's in the Curse of Strahd module, the creature is the mad mage
I'd also suggest since I saw this in the thread, that dispel magic wouldn't really work on this since the spell description specifically states that a Wish spell and other spells/effects used to affect the mind are foiled. If a Wish spell can't get rid of it, and technically you are affecting his mind with a dispel magic, I'd rule that would also be included in the list of spells that don't affect Mind Blank.
Or a magic null field that stops all spells and makes magic items null and void.
Also if he is burning his level 8 spell every day on this
Wish isn’t being used to get rid of it in this case, this would be where wish is being used to create an effect similar to a charm etc effect. If you wished the spell away the spell would be no more.
Mind blank blocks affecting the mind of the subject, but dispel magic doesn't target the mind, it targets the spell. Of course, it's an 8th level spell so PCs under level 15 would need to make a DC 18 non-proficient spellcasting ability check, which isn't super likely to work.
Mind Blank specifically states the spell foils wish spells, so that would obviously mean wish does not work in getting rid of Mind Blank.
That does make sense so, fair nuff, I was going to say the players would have to wait out the spells duration XP
Wish does not work at affecting the mind of someone protected by mind blank. You could use it to dispel the mind blank and then use a second spell to actually affect their mind.
The exact wording of the spell is
"The spell even foils wish spells and spells or effects of similar power used to affect the target's mind or to gain information about the target."
Notice the the grammer of the sentence means that they are referring to the use of a wish spell to affect the mind. If they meant blanket use of wish the sentence would be.
"The spell even foils wish, it also prevents spells or effects of similair power used to affect the targets mind ....."
A better wording of the spell would be
"The spell even foils wish spells when they are used in such a way as to affect the subject’s mind or to gain information about it."
So as a DM I take this to mean that if someone casts wish and uses it to either cast a spell that reads minds, or allows them to spy on a player (using wish to scry for instance), or uses it to try and directly read the mind of the individual then in this instance the wish spell fails. However, If a player wishes the character with mind blank be turned into a frog, or have their strength, dex and constitution reduced to 0, or wishes that Mind blank had never been cast, or was no longer active then wish would take effect. Mind blank is not a blanket Wish spell denier, if it was it would be far far far too powerful.
That's not what the "And" means in that sentence. If they were specifying that Wish cannot be used on the mind due to Mind Blank then they would use a comma instead of an and, to denote that everything listed are the conditions which Mind Blank prevent from happening to the mind. The "and" is used to list what Mind Blank prevents which are two general things; it prevents Wish spells from being used on the target, and it prevents any other spells or effects of similar power used to affect the targets mind or to gain information about the target. Notice how I used "and" there and I didn't remove or change any words, I just expanded the sentence instead of rewording it. When you reword a sentence, you risk changing the narrative, where if you expand on a sentence you're less likely to do so especially when you expand it by 6 words that are basically the same words at the end of the sentence.
If they were to clarify to what you were saying, then they would have listed it as "wish spells, spells or effects of similar power..." which would include wish spells as part of the clarification of specific to mind alteration, but the and there means these are two separate instances of what Mind Break prevents. This would basically mean the reason why to include the mention of Wish spells to begin with is to indicate how powerful the warding Mind Blank has against outside magical forces. If it is not mentioned then we can presume normal wording with Wish, just as we can presume Despel magic can work on Tiny Hut, despite the fact Tiny Hut prevents magic from passing through its barrier, it can still be affected by Despel Magic because it does not state that it cannot be despelled. This is an instance of it being stated that Wish cannot remove Mind Blank.
I disagree.
The "and" is explicitly including Wish in the list of things that can not be "used to affect the target's mind or to gain information about the target".
If the spell was entirely immune to Wish then that would have been made into a separate sentence.