Monstrous Compendium Vol. 1: Spelljammer Creatures
Frozen Sick
D&D Beyond Basic Rules
Basic Rules (2014)
Sign in to view your library & saved favorites.
Sign in- Marketplace
Monstrous Compendium Vol. 1: Spelljammer CreaturesFrozen SickD&D Beyond Basic RulesBasic Rules (2014)Sign in to view your library & saved favorites.
Sign in
A creature is immune to Psychic Damage, Fear, and Charm.
If it gets attacked by Dissonant Whispers or Mind Sliver do you have it suffer the secondary effects or no because it is immune to psychic damage?
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
So I have been told, at great length and in a lot of detail, if you are immune to a primary effect, you are also unaffected by any secondary effects, even if you wanted to be for some reason.
<Insert clever signature here>
I think they do take the secondary effects - mainly because the secondary effects are part of failing the saving throw - not as a result of the damage. If they weren't effected due to an immunity - I think it would have to explicitly say so (like Suggestion).
I see no reason why the target wouldn’t suffer the non- damage effects.
Yes, absolutely. Same reason a creature immune to poison damage is not immune to non-damage effects from a poison.
So if a creature were immune to poison damage and the poisoned condition, you would still have it fall asleep from Drow poison?
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
No, because the text on Drow poison states that the creature is only unconscious while poisoned. If it's immune to poisoned, then because the poison only makes the target unconscious while poisoned, they don't become unconscious. But that's not relevant to your original question, because you asked about spells with no such rules text.
If the Drow poison instead stated that it knocked targets unconscious without requiring them to be poisoned, then it would work on targets immune to both the damage and the condition, because neither immunity would matter. The spells you listed don't have effects that interact with the damage or condition immunities you listed.
If immunity to damage or a condition would block effects that aren't specifically those things (damage or condition), then I think the spell/effect would have to tell you so. So in the two cases in the OP I'd say the secondary effects would still be valid on a creature with immunity to psychic damage that failed the save.
It would suffer from the other effects as they are not directly identified as fear or charm effect.
Fire resistance or immunity makes you immune to con saves against extreme heat, which is how 5E handles heat exhaustion. Frost giants absolutely can be disadvantaged by frostbite. If cold immunity was intended to block frostbite's rider, the spell would specify that the rider only applies if the damage does, just like how contact poisons differ from injury poisons in the DMG.
White dragons can't slip on ice - even the youngest ones have ice walk.
Well, no, the youngest ones don’t 😛
Agggggggh dammit. Here, take my upvote.
This is not true. In 5e, the rules tell you what they do. If a creature is immune to psychic damage then they do not take damage from psychic sources. If an attack or spell does something in addition to psychic damage then the creature is still susceptible to those effects even if they don't take any damage.
Examples:
Chill touch - does necrotic damage AND the target can't regain hit points until the start of your next turn. Even if the creature takes no necrotic damage, it still can not regain hit points. Undead targets also have disadvantage to hit you whether or not they took any damage.
Synaptic static - 8d6 psychic damage - 1/2 on a failed save. In addition, after a failed save, the target has muddled thoughts - so it rolls a d6 and subtracts it from attack rolls, ability checks and concentration saving throws until it passes an int save. The second effect is not dependent on whether the creature took any psychic damage or not.
There are many more examples. The secondary effects are not dependent on the target taking any of the damage from the spell or effect (unless the description says otherwise). So the secondary effects apply on a hit or failed save even if the target takes no damage.
I should know better than to post in the Rules & Game Mechanics forum by now. :-) I was in a thread about how the Foresight spell was cancelled out by the Mind Blank spell, since the inability to read your own mind somehow negated your ability to remember your knowledge of the future. Post after post, and I never did get a satisfactory answer on why that should be, but it was made very, very clear to me that if your were immune to something, you were utterly immune to all other effects.
<Insert clever signature here>
Abilities do what they say. Compare:
* Chill Touch "On a hit, the target takes 1d10 Necrotic damage, and it can’t regain Hit Points until the end of your next turn."
* Spirit Shroud "Any creature that takes this damage can’t regain hit points until the start of your next turn."
Spirit Shroud explicitly says that the can't regain effect only applies if you took damage; so if you are immune to the damage (e.g. Necrotic), or reduce it via something like Backlash, then you would not be affected.
Chill Touch contains no such limit, so works exactly as written: if hit, you take Necrotic damage (perhaps reduced to zero if you are immune), and also can't regain hit points (irrespective of whether you took the damage or not).
That being said, a GM could change as they want, e.g. it sounds reasonable for Dissonant Whispers to be negated by Fear Immunity. So a GM could house rule it to say "If you fail ... and you are Frightened until the end of your Reaction. While Frightened you must immediately use your Reaction to ...".
Many GMs do rule that negating or being immune to the primary damage also negates secondary effects. As GM, they can interpret it this way. Check with your GM.
Mind Blank and Foresight, if those are the correct spells, seem to be completely independent and have no rules that would interact with each other.
The only vague argument I can see is that if one create has Mind Blank and "no spell can gather information about" them, then it negates the ability of Foresight (i.e. advantage) with respect of "limited ability to see into the immediate future", because predicting the future is some kind of information.
I think this is a bit of a stretch and don't see gather information as directly related to the limited ability to see the future; maybe they don't see the future creature, but they see the future sword strike, or they see a blurred entity hitting them (like the actual Mind Blank target is censored/blurred).
Of course a GM can decide / house rule whatever they want. The above is just my take.