No, any creature that produces a “fear” effect will always automatically succeed at not being affected by their own “fear” affect.
It they did not, then for years any creature that has/had a “fear” effect would have need for a save against it’s own effect.
[ even monster lair effects would cause the home monster to have to make a save against it’s own defenses and that starts to boarder on “unintended” mechanics .]
that usually dont happens because their effects has a clause saying "any creature it chooses" or "any enemy on X area" which prevents the suer to fall for its own effect, but in Mass Fear from the goomstalker is not the case, it didnt say anything like that
That’s because in the other instances where a mass fear effect can happen and multiple creatures can be affected it’s implied that the source of the effect, in this case fear, has an automatic save that prevents the source from the effect.
Take a Tarrasqe for example, it’s “Mass Fear Effect” would cause the monster itself to have to save against the effect, ( the thing is massive enough that it would be well within it’s own line of sight. )
Ether you single out an individual instance and wave-off the source is affected, or you apply the same logic to every instance of the “fear/frightened” effect in that even the source of the effect has to make a save.
The answer should be obvious, the source of the fear effect has learned to not be affected by it’s ability, it automatically saves from and is not affected by it.
No need to try and justify anything about a creature being in line of sight, and if you do single out this one instance, you have to apply it to any and all instances of similar situations.
Easiest solution is to just retain the implied mechanism that the creature automatically is not affected by it’s own ability.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
" Darkvision doesn’t work in Magical darkness, and if something is magical, Never Trust it acts the same way as a non-magical version of that same thing!”- Discotech Mage over a cup of joe.
Take a Tarrasqe for example, it’s “Mass Fear Effect” would cause the monster itself to have to save against the effect
The 2014 version targets "Each creature of the tarrasque’s choice", and thus the Tarrasque chooses not to target itself. The 2024 tarrasque only has fear in a cone, and cone effects do not normally hit the origin. Every monster fear effect that I'm aware of doesn't affect the source because of targeting rules, not because of any implicit immunity to your own fear.
The phrase "Line of Sight" includes the word "Line". In mathematics, in order to create a line, there must be at least two points in space. It is not possible to draw a straight line from one point to itself. Therefore, you do not, and you cannot have Line of Sight to yourself or to your own location.
Because of this, in this situation you do not have Line of Sight to the source of your fear. You also can never move closer to the source of your fear. So, you could have the Frightened Condition, but it would have no effect on you.
Very succinctly put. This sums it up nicely.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
The phrase "Line of Sight" includes the word "Line". In mathematics, in order to create a line, there must be at least two points in space. It is not possible to draw a straight line from one point to itself. Therefore, you do not, and you cannot have Line of Sight to yourself or to your own location.
Locations are not points, they are areas. You can undoubtedly draw a line between one point in your area and another point in your area.
The phrase "Line of Sight" includes the word "Line". In mathematics, in order to create a line, there must be at least two points in space. It is not possible to draw a straight line from one point to itself. Therefore, you do not, and you cannot have Line of Sight to yourself or to your own location.
Because of this, in this situation you do not have Line of Sight to the source of your fear. You also can never move closer to the source of your fear. So, you could have the Frightened Condition, but it would have no effect on you.
but you are considering just that word, the rule says
"To determine whether there is line of sight between two spaces, pick a corner of one space and trace an imaginary line from that corner to any part of another space. If you can trace a line that doesn’t pass through or touch an object or effect that blocks vision—such as a stone wall, a thick curtain, or a dense cloud of fog—then there is line of sight."
The first sentence stablish that you are confirming line of sight between 2 places, it is NOT excluding that you can have line of sight between your place to the same plac in the grid, since then, they confirmed in the SAGE ADVICE, (which are an OFFICIAL way of confirming these misunderstandings and that ARENT WRONG because they are the source of the rules for these cases), that you can use the word meaning for this case:
The frightened condition says “while the source of its fear is within line of sight.” Does that mean you have disadvantage on attack rolls and ability checks even if the source is invisible but you have a clear line to its space?
No. If you can’t see something, it’s not within your line of sight. Speaking of “line of sight,” the game uses the English meaning of the term, which has no special meaning in the rules.
Which means, yes, the rule of Line of sight stablish the ruling for when is or not something in line of sight IF, and only IF you are searching for if there is line of sight BETWEEN TWO PLACES, which THIS IS NOT THAT CASE, that ruling dont apply to that case but that doesnt mean you dont have line of sight, only that THAT part of the rules dont apply to the case, is as was said before: you can target a sarm that is in your own space without problem
This is like saying that you can never see yourself in-game, which by all means, have been also confirmed by the "can you see yourself? if yes, apply" can confirm it here
The phrase "Line of Sight" includes the word "Line". In mathematics, in order to create a line, there must be at least two points in space. It is not possible to draw a straight line from one point to itself. Therefore, you do not, and you cannot have Line of Sight to yourself or to your own location.
Because of this, in this situation you do not have Line of Sight to the source of your fear. You also can never move closer to the source of your fear. So, you could have the Frightened Condition, but it would have no effect on you.
Very succinctly put. This sums it up nicely.
except you are searching 2 points, in this case is one point, you are drawing a line that starts and ends in your own place, meaning you are always in your line of sight, or if we play it RAW, you cant apply the rule as written since is a sinlge place, not 2 places, which means only that THAT version cant be applied, not that you dont have line of sight
which is worse, in these version of the rules they added a version that include those specifi rules, like Emanation: Emanation [Area of Effect] PHB'24 p366 An Emanation is an area of effect that extends in straight lines from a creature or an object in all directions. The effect that creates an Emanation specifies the distance it extends. An Emanation moves with the creature or object that is its origin unless it is an instantaneous or a stationary effect. An Emanation's origin (creature or object) isn't included in the area of effect unless its creator decides otherwise.
So such specifics exist, and specific beats general, meaning that if the effect didnt mention the ranger being inmune, it applies
Take a Tarrasqe for example, it’s “Mass Fear Effect” would cause the monster itself to have to save against the effect
The 2014 version targets "Each creature of the tarrasque’s choice", and thus the Tarrasque chooses not to target itself. The 2024 tarrasque only has fear in a cone, and cone effects do not normally hit the origin. Every monster fear effect that I'm aware of doesn't affect the source because of targeting rules, not because of any implicit immunity to your own fear.
If a tarrasque like a cat or dog scratches it’s butt by attempting to use it’s teeth, would it have to save against it’s fear effect?
The point is, 3 and a half pages of debate over this is kinda pointless, a gloom stalker afraid of it own effect is a recipe for other such nonsense to be used, and most of the responses are based on can a creature have line of sight on itself.
Problem is easily solved, a creature that produces an effect can easily succeed in not being affected by it’s own effect.
And what about if the gloom stalker is 20ft away from the creature that is effected? Does being in line of sight still force a save?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
" Darkvision doesn’t work in Magical darkness, and if something is magical, Never Trust it acts the same way as a non-magical version of that same thing!”- Discotech Mage over a cup of joe.
If a tarrasque like a cat or dog scratches it’s butt by attempting to use it’s teeth, would it have to save against it’s fear effect?
No, because it chooses not to target itself with its fear effect. If it chose to target itself, it would have to save.
Gloom stalker rangers hitting themselves with fear is no different from a wizard hitting themselves with fireball if they cast it 15' away. The reason monsters don't generally hit themselves with area effects isn't because they can't, it's because they choose not to.
Paradox_Traveler nowhere it says in the DMG that can pass a save against an effect made by itself, if that's the case, be a bard and cast fireball over yourself: did you pass the save automatically? do you get damage?
And being 20ft away is the RAI (they want people to just use rangers at range and nlt melee) and thats why they messed up the feature: the hitted creature is the point of origin for the creatures being afraind from you, you arent the origin of the effect, is 10ft around the creature hitted by you, which is exactly is medded up if yo go melle, is like trying to force the ranger into going range instead of melee, railroading the decisions.
"Mass Fear. The target and each creature within 10 feet of it must make a Wisdom saving throw against your spell save DC. On a failed save, a creature has the Frightened condition until the start of your next turn." nowhere says that you dont count, you are a creature, and if you are standing within 10ft of the target you hitted, you are a subject of your own feature. This is like a spellcaster using fireball centering it to a creture within 5ft of it: unless you have another specific feature, you are subject of such fireball, same for Mass Fear
@Plaguescarred i know is not an emanation, im just saying they literally created "a clause" of an "specific rule". When a specific rule exists establishing something, and something else have a similar description but dont have the specific of the other, it meas it doesnt apply to the second thing. Is like the objects around burning with fire spells: some fire spells specify that spread fire, others dont. That means that the spells that DOESNT specify it in the spells description DONT spread fire. In this case: Emanations is a new rule and SPECIFY that doest apply the user. In mass fear doesnt specify anywere that the feature doent affect the user, it doesnt mean distintions at all, probably because it was writted in a way of thinking that you would be attacking at long range, inetead of going melee
"No, because it chooses not to target itself with its fear effect. If it chose to target itself, it would have to save." where it say you can do that? it doesnt say "any creature you choose", it just say "The target and each creature within 10 feet of it"
"The reason monsters don't generally hit themselves with area effects isn't because they can't, it's because they choose not to." What? really, what? where do you get that this rule existed? mosnter dont hit themselves in AoE because the DM chooses WHERE TO PUT such AoE or they have immunity to such effect, like a demon casting fireball while being immune to fire damage, or because the festure stablish that they choose targets. Wizards CAN get damage for a fireball if you cast it at 15ft away without anythin in between (2014 rules also ignored corners so even with something in between it would reach you) and this is actually the cause of a lot of memes and jokes around more spellcasters and even for the Evocation wizard, now the evoker, since they actually gain a feature that let them "ignore" certain creatures that can see to not get any damage from their spells, but the feature says "When you cast an Evocation spell that affects other creatures that you can see, you can choose a number of them equal to 1 plus the spell's level. " Meaning the evoker wizard CANT choose himself to ignore the damage of its own spells, meaning yes, it can hit himself with a fireball, he can say he dont wanna, but it will hit hmself regardless of if he choosed or not. This has been addressed before in a sage advice wizard cant choose himself for the sculpt spells feature This also is now part of the Careful spell from the metamagics of the sorcerer, where also state "other creatures" and not "any creature" "When you cast a spell that forces other creatures to make a saving throw, you can protect some of those creatures from the spell's full force" If you think is a rule, say the page where is it to read it, cause i cant find it anywhere, there is a new rule about voluntarily choosing to LOSE a save, but nowhere is stablis that you can ignore yourself from your own effects
"No, because it chooses not to target itself with its fear effect. If it chose to target itself, it would have to save." where it say you can do that? it doesnt say "any creature you choose", it just say "The target and each creature within 10 feet of it"
"The reason monsters don't generally hit themselves with area effects isn't because they can't, it's because they choose not to." What? really, what? where do you get that this rule existed? mosnter dont hit themselves in AoE because the DM chooses WHERE TO PUT such AoE or they have immunity to such effect, like a demon casting fireball while being immune to fire damage. Wizards CAN get damage for a fireball if you cast it at 15ft away without anythin in between (2014 rules also ignored corners so even with something in between it would reach you) and this is actually the cause of a lot of memes and jokes around more spellcasters and even for the Evocation wizard, now the evoker, since they actually gain a feature that let them "ignore" certain creatures that can see to not get any damage from their spells, but the feature says "When you cast an Evocation spell that affects other creatures that you can see, you can choose a number of them equal to 1 plus the spell's level. " Meaning the evoker wizard CANT choose himself to ignore the damage of its own spells, meaning yes, it can hit himself with a fireball, he can say he dont wanna, but it will hit hmself regardless of if he choosed or not. This has been addressed before in a sage advice wizard cant choose himself for the sculpt spells feature This also is now part of the Careful spell from the metamagics of the sorcerer, where also state "other creatures" and not "any creature" "When you cast a spell that forces other creatures to make a saving throw, you can protect some of those creatures from the spell's full force" If you think is a rule, say the page where is it to read it, cause i cant find it anywhere, there is a new rule about voluntarily choosing to LOSE a save, but nowhere is stablis that you can ignore yourself from your own effects
In context, they are referring to effects where it specifies they can choose not to be affected. ( "The 2014 version targets "Each creature of the tarrasque’s choice"")
Jurmondur's, Yeah, thats exactly my point. The rule exists. But they didnt add it to the Mass fear, ergo, it doesnt apply, is not 'any creature from the ranger's choice thats within 10ft of the hitted creature' which then would allow the ranger player to choose which creature are affected, but it didnt say that, only says "The target and each creature within 10 feet of it" meaning that if you hit in melee, you, the ranger, count as 'one creature' when activating Mass Fear, and have to make the save and can be affected by the frightened condition until the start if your next turn, which also means you will have disadvantage on any other attacks or ability checks you make and the moving around is up to the DM since is a paradox to move at all away/close from yourself
Jurmondur's, Yeah, thats exactly my point. The rule exists. But they didnt add it to the Mass fear, ergo, it doesnt apply, is not 'any creature from the ranger's choice thats within 10ft of the hitted creature' which then would allow the ranger player to choose which creature are affected, but it didnt say that, only says "The target and each creature within 10 feet of it" meaning that if you hit in melee, you, the ranger, count as 'one creature' when activating Mass Fear, and have to make the save and can be affected by the frightened condition until the start if your next turn, which also means you will have disadvantage on any other attacks or ability checks you make and the moving around is up to the DM since is a paradox to move at all away/close from yourself
Yeah, but you didn't seem to realize they weren't referring to mass fear.
Also, you can move, as you are maintaining the same distance from yourself at all times. Frightened does not require you to be moving away from yourself.
But you can say you are also moving near yourself, is a paradox. You at all times move closer and away from yourself. There is not an exact rule for that case, which means is up to each DM. I asked around and is divided, some say you move closer, others that you move away, others agree that is a paradox so you cannot move, others say that cereal is soup, but regardless, that movement is part of the "when a rule is vague, ask the dm, he will have a last word until is talked calmly and make a rule for the table"
The other thing, yes, they aren’t talking about mass fear, but specific beats general. If a specific rule exists, it means that if something similar exists and DONT have that specific line addressing that specific ruling, it means it doesn’t apply. The rule about a feature ignoring the user or the user choosing targets exists, meaning that if mass fear doesn’t mention those rules, it doesn’t apply to it, so don’t discriminate targets, even the user is trapped in the effect if is activated by the ranger, like a wizard using a fireball at point blank range, it would have to do the same save against its own DC, just like the wizard-fireball situation, heck, there is another example: a wizard using some of its subclass creatures that allow to cast from that point (like the scribe or using a familiar), that let YOU cast the spell but let the other creature/magical thing being the origin point, you could cast Fear, the spell, and be affected yourself too since says "each creature in a 30-foot cone must succeed in a wisdom save or be frightened" which means is the wizard vs the wizard again and the source is the wizard, not the familiar or the scribe-thing, so you are afraid of yourself, same as the ranger
Edit: familiars can only deliver spells of 'touch', but the scribe's Manifest mind let you cast Fear as if you were in that place instead, the Cleric's invoke duplicity allow the same
But you can say you are also moving near yourself, is a paradox. You at all times move closer and away from yourself. There is not an exact rule for that case, which means is up to each DM. I asked around and is divided, some say you move closer, others that you move away, others agree that is a paradox so you cannot move, others say that cereal is soup, but regardless, that movement is part of the "when a rule is vague, ask the dm, he will have a last word until is talked calmly and make a rule for the table"
The other thing, yes, they aren’t talking about mass fear, but specific beats general. If a specific rule exists, it means that if something similar exists and DONT have that specific line addressing that specific ruling, it means it doesn’t apply. The rule about a feature ignoring the user or the user choosing targets exists, meaning that if mass fear doesn’t mention those rules, it doesn’t apply to it, so don’t discriminate targets, even the user is trapped in the effect if is activated by the ranger, like a wizard using a fireball at point blank range, it would have to do the same save against its own DC, just like the wizard-fireball situation, heck, there is another example: a wizard using some of its subclass creatures that allow to cast from that point (like the scribe or using a familiar), that let YOU cast the spell but let the other creature/magical thing being the origin point, you could cast Fear, the spell, and be affected yourself too since says "each creature in a 30-foot cone must succeed in a wisdom save or be frightened" which means is the wizard vs the wizard again and the source is the wizard, not the familiar or the scribe-thing, so you are afraid of yourself, same as the ranger
Edit: familiars can only deliver spells of 'touch', but the scribe's Manifest mind let you cast Fear as if you were in that place instead, the Cleric's invoke duplicity allow the same
You are 0 feet from yourself. That does not ever change.
This is probably the worst-written class ability I've seen in D&D since the Truenamer.
Well, it's not like the wording is hard to understand, and there's nothing per se wrong with an attack producing a burst that you don't want to be in, it's just that being afraid of yourself seems rather dumb.
Paradox_Traveler nowhere it says in the DMG that can pass a save against an effect made by itself, if that's the case, be a bard and cast fireball over yourself: did you pass the save automatically? do you get damage?
And being 20ft away is the RAI (they want people to just use rangers at range and nlt melee) and thats why they messed up the feature: the hitted creature is the point of origin for the creatures being afraind from you, you arent the origin of the effect, is 10ft around the creature hitted by you, which is exactly is medded up if yo go melle, is like trying to force the ranger into going range instead of melee, railroading the decisions.
"Mass Fear. The target and each creature within 10 feet of it must make a Wisdom saving throw against your spell save DC. On a failed save, a creature has the Frightened condition until the start of your next turn." nowhere says that you dont count, you are a creature, and if you are standing within 10ft of the target you hitted, you are a subject of your own feature. This is like a spellcaster using fireball centering it to a creture within 5ft of it: unless you have another specific feature, you are subject of such fireball, same for Mass Fear
@Plaguescarred i know is not an emanation, im just saying they literally created "a clause" of an "specific rule". When a specific rule exists establishing something, and something else have a similar description but dont have the specific of the other, it meas it doesnt apply to the second thing. Is like the objects around burning with fire spells: some fire spells specify that spread fire, others dont. That means that the spells that DOESNT specify it in the spells description DONT spread fire. In this case: Emanations is a new rule and SPECIFY that doest apply the user. In mass fear doesnt specify anywere that the feature doent affect the user, it doesnt mean distintions at all, probably because it was writted in a way of thinking that you would be attacking at long range, inetead of going melee
"No, because it chooses not to target itself with its fear effect. If it chose to target itself, it would have to save." where it say you can do that? it doesnt say "any creature you choose", it just say "The target and each creature within 10 feet of it"
"The reason monsters don't generally hit themselves with area effects isn't because they can't, it's because they choose not to." What? really, what? where do you get that this rule existed? mosnter dont hit themselves in AoE because the DM chooses WHERE TO PUT such AoE or they have immunity to such effect, like a demon casting fireball while being immune to fire damage, or because the festure stablish that they choose targets. Wizards CAN get damage for a fireball if you cast it at 15ft away without anythin in between (2014 rules also ignored corners so even with something in between it would reach you) and this is actually the cause of a lot of memes and jokes around more spellcasters and even for the Evocation wizard, now the evoker, since they actually gain a feature that let them "ignore" certain creatures that can see to not get any damage from their spells, but the feature says "When you cast an Evocation spell that affects other creatures that you can see, you can choose a number of them equal to 1 plus the spell's level. " Meaning the evoker wizard CANT choose himself to ignore the damage of its own spells, meaning yes, it can hit himself with a fireball, he can say he dont wanna, but it will hit hmself regardless of if he choosed or not. This has been addressed before in a sage advice wizard cant choose himself for the sculpt spells feature This also is now part of the Careful spell from the metamagics of the sorcerer, where also state "other creatures" and not "any creature" "When you cast a spell that forces other creatures to make a saving throw, you can protect some of those creatures from the spell's full force" If you think is a rule, say the page where is it to read it, cause i cant find it anywhere, there is a new rule about voluntarily choosing to LOSE a save, but nowhere is stablis that you can ignore yourself from your own effects
So your basically saying a caster can’t save when the DC is literally the casters own spell casting mod + 8, and the caster has to virtually save for it’s own effect. If a caster wants to set off a fireball point blank in their own face, i’d let them have advantage on the save considering they probably already have a solid idea of how much damage a fireball at min range can do. [ and who says the caster doesn’t have fire immunity at some point? ]
If the intent was to prevent close combat with the effect, they certainly failed. Can’t frighten yourself if the effect is capable of putting the caster in the same space that literally forces the caster to use the same DC needed for others to make a save, the caster would always make the save.
Paradox solved by just removing the one factor that makes it a paradox, the caster automatically saves and is not effected. Stupid but Simple, yet effective and cuts the cost of needless debate over what is the affect of the caster being frightened by their own effect.
Now if you absolutely must push the ridiculous implication , then the poor caster can’t do squat till the effect ends, and now you have a worthless character just standing there frightened for nothing. Wow look a punching bag, hope that player likes a dead character, cause that what you’ll have with that decision.
" Darkvision doesn’t work in Magical darkness, and if something is magical, Never Trust it acts the same way as a non-magical version of that same thing!”- Discotech Mage over a cup of joe.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
That’s because in the other instances where a mass fear effect can happen and multiple creatures can be affected it’s implied that the source of the effect, in this case fear, has an automatic save that prevents the source from the effect.
Take a Tarrasqe for example, it’s “Mass Fear Effect” would cause the monster itself to have to save against the effect, ( the thing is massive enough that it would be well within it’s own line of sight. )
Ether you single out an individual instance and wave-off the source is affected, or you apply the same logic to every instance of the “fear/frightened” effect in that even the source of the effect has to make a save.
The answer should be obvious, the source of the fear effect has learned to not be affected by it’s ability, it automatically saves from and is not affected by it.
No need to try and justify anything about a creature being in line of sight, and if you do single out this one instance, you have to apply it to any and all instances of similar situations.
Easiest solution is to just retain the implied mechanism that the creature automatically is not affected by it’s own ability.
" Darkvision doesn’t work in Magical darkness, and if something is magical, Never Trust it acts the same way as a non-magical version of that same thing!”- Discotech Mage over a cup of joe.
The 2014 version targets "Each creature of the tarrasque’s choice", and thus the Tarrasque chooses not to target itself. The 2024 tarrasque only has fear in a cone, and cone effects do not normally hit the origin. Every monster fear effect that I'm aware of doesn't affect the source because of targeting rules, not because of any implicit immunity to your own fear.
Very succinctly put. This sums it up nicely.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Locations are not points, they are areas. You can undoubtedly draw a line between one point in your area and another point in your area.
but you are considering just that word, the rule says
Line of Sight
"To determine whether there is line of sight between two spaces, pick a corner of one space and trace an imaginary line from that corner to any part of another space. If you can trace a line that doesn’t pass through or touch an object or effect that blocks vision—such as a stone wall, a thick curtain, or a dense cloud of fog—then there is line of sight."
The first sentence stablish that you are confirming line of sight between 2 places, it is NOT excluding that you can have line of sight between your place to the same plac in the grid, since then, they confirmed in the SAGE ADVICE, (which are an OFFICIAL way of confirming these misunderstandings and that ARENT WRONG because they are the source of the rules for these cases), that you can use the word meaning for this case:
The frightened condition says “while the source of its fear is within line of sight.” Does that mean you have disadvantage on attack rolls and ability checks even if the source is invisible but you have a clear line to its space?
No. If you can’t see something, it’s not within your line of sight. Speaking of “line of sight,” the game uses the English meaning of the term, which has no special meaning in the rules.
Which means, yes, the rule of Line of sight stablish the ruling for when is or not something in line of sight IF, and only IF you are searching for if there is line of sight BETWEEN TWO PLACES, which THIS IS NOT THAT CASE, that ruling dont apply to that case but that doesnt mean you dont have line of sight, only that THAT part of the rules dont apply to the case, is as was said before: you can target a sarm that is in your own space without problem
This is like saying that you can never see yourself in-game, which by all means, have been also confirmed by the "can you see yourself? if yes, apply" can confirm it here
except you are searching 2 points, in this case is one point, you are drawing a line that starts and ends in your own place, meaning you are always in your line of sight, or if we play it RAW, you cant apply the rule as written since is a sinlge place, not 2 places, which means only that THAT version cant be applied, not that you dont have line of sight
which is worse, in these version of the rules they added a version that include those specifi rules, like Emanation: Emanation [Area of Effect]
PHB'24 p366
An Emanation is an area of effect that extends in straight lines from a creature or an object in all directions. The effect that creates an Emanation specifies the distance it extends.
An Emanation moves with the creature or object that is its origin unless it is an instantaneous or a stationary effect.
An Emanation's origin (creature or object) isn't included in the area of effect unless its creator decides otherwise.
So such specifics exist, and specific beats general, meaning that if the effect didnt mention the ranger being inmune, it applies
The Stalker's Flurry: Mass Fear effect isn't an Emanation, it just affect the target and each creature within 10 feet of it.
If a tarrasque like a cat or dog scratches it’s butt by attempting to use it’s teeth, would it have to save against it’s fear effect?
The point is, 3 and a half pages of debate over this is kinda pointless, a gloom stalker afraid of it own effect is a recipe for other such nonsense to be used, and most of the responses are based on can a creature have line of sight on itself.
Problem is easily solved, a creature that produces an effect can easily succeed in not being affected by it’s own effect.
And what about if the gloom stalker is 20ft away from the creature that is effected? Does being in line of sight still force a save?
" Darkvision doesn’t work in Magical darkness, and if something is magical, Never Trust it acts the same way as a non-magical version of that same thing!”- Discotech Mage over a cup of joe.
No, because it chooses not to target itself with its fear effect. If it chose to target itself, it would have to save.
Gloom stalker rangers hitting themselves with fear is no different from a wizard hitting themselves with fireball if they cast it 15' away. The reason monsters don't generally hit themselves with area effects isn't because they can't, it's because they choose not to.
That ''you can see'' is not required. But being within 10 feet of the target is.
Paradox_Traveler nowhere it says in the DMG that can pass a save against an effect made by itself, if that's the case, be a bard and cast fireball over yourself: did you pass the save automatically? do you get damage?
And being 20ft away is the RAI (they want people to just use rangers at range and nlt melee) and thats why they messed up the feature: the hitted creature is the point of origin for the creatures being afraind from you, you arent the origin of the effect, is 10ft around the creature hitted by you, which is exactly is medded up if yo go melle, is like trying to force the ranger into going range instead of melee, railroading the decisions.
"Mass Fear. The target and each creature within 10 feet of it must make a Wisdom saving throw against your spell save DC. On a failed save, a creature has the Frightened condition until the start of your next turn." nowhere says that you dont count, you are a creature, and if you are standing within 10ft of the target you hitted, you are a subject of your own feature. This is like a spellcaster using fireball centering it to a creture within 5ft of it: unless you have another specific feature, you are subject of such fireball, same for Mass Fear
@Plaguescarred i know is not an emanation, im just saying they literally created "a clause" of an "specific rule". When a specific rule exists establishing something, and something else have a similar description but dont have the specific of the other, it meas it doesnt apply to the second thing. Is like the objects around burning with fire spells: some fire spells specify that spread fire, others dont. That means that the spells that DOESNT specify it in the spells description DONT spread fire. In this case: Emanations is a new rule and SPECIFY that doest apply the user. In mass fear doesnt specify anywere that the feature doent affect the user, it doesnt mean distintions at all, probably because it was writted in a way of thinking that you would be attacking at long range, inetead of going melee
"No, because it chooses not to target itself with its fear effect. If it chose to target itself, it would have to save."
where it say you can do that? it doesnt say "any creature you choose", it just say "The target and each creature within 10 feet of it"
"The reason monsters don't generally hit themselves with area effects isn't because they can't, it's because they choose not to."
What? really, what? where do you get that this rule existed? mosnter dont hit themselves in AoE because the DM chooses WHERE TO PUT such AoE or they have immunity to such effect, like a demon casting fireball while being immune to fire damage, or because the festure stablish that they choose targets. Wizards CAN get damage for a fireball if you cast it at 15ft away without anythin in between (2014 rules also ignored corners so even with something in between it would reach you) and this is actually the cause of a lot of memes and jokes around more spellcasters and even for the Evocation wizard, now the evoker, since they actually gain a feature that let them "ignore" certain creatures that can see to not get any damage from their spells, but the feature says
"When you cast an Evocation spell that affects other creatures that you can see, you can choose a number of them equal to 1 plus the spell's level. "
Meaning the evoker wizard CANT choose himself to ignore the damage of its own spells, meaning yes, it can hit himself with a fireball, he can say he dont wanna, but it will hit hmself regardless of if he choosed or not. This has been addressed before in a sage advice wizard cant choose himself for the sculpt spells feature
This also is now part of the Careful spell from the metamagics of the sorcerer, where also state "other creatures" and not "any creature"
"When you cast a spell that forces other creatures to make a saving throw, you can protect some of those creatures from the spell's full force"
If you think is a rule, say the page where is it to read it, cause i cant find it anywhere, there is a new rule about voluntarily choosing to LOSE a save, but nowhere is stablis that you can ignore yourself from your own effects
In context, they are referring to effects where it specifies they can choose not to be affected. ( "The 2014 version targets "Each creature of the tarrasque’s choice"")
Jurmondur's, Yeah, thats exactly my point. The rule exists. But they didnt add it to the Mass fear, ergo, it doesnt apply, is not 'any creature from the ranger's choice thats within 10ft of the hitted creature' which then would allow the ranger player to choose which creature are affected, but it didnt say that, only says "The target and each creature within 10 feet of it" meaning that if you hit in melee, you, the ranger, count as 'one creature' when activating Mass Fear, and have to make the save and can be affected by the frightened condition until the start if your next turn, which also means you will have disadvantage on any other attacks or ability checks you make and the moving around is up to the DM since is a paradox to move at all away/close from yourself
Yeah, but you didn't seem to realize they weren't referring to mass fear.
Also, you can move, as you are maintaining the same distance from yourself at all times. Frightened does not require you to be moving away from yourself.
But you can say you are also moving near yourself, is a paradox. You at all times move closer and away from yourself. There is not an exact rule for that case, which means is up to each DM. I asked around and is divided, some say you move closer, others that you move away, others agree that is a paradox so you cannot move, others say that cereal is soup, but regardless, that movement is part of the "when a rule is vague, ask the dm, he will have a last word until is talked calmly and make a rule for the table"
The other thing, yes, they aren’t talking about mass fear, but specific beats general. If a specific rule exists, it means that if something similar exists and DONT have that specific line addressing that specific ruling, it means it doesn’t apply. The rule about a feature ignoring the user or the user choosing targets exists, meaning that if mass fear doesn’t mention those rules, it doesn’t apply to it, so don’t discriminate targets, even the user is trapped in the effect if is activated by the ranger, like a wizard using a fireball at point blank range, it would have to do the same save against its own DC, just like the wizard-fireball situation, heck, there is another example: a wizard using some of its subclass creatures that allow to cast from that point (like the scribe or using a familiar), that let YOU cast the spell but let the other creature/magical thing being the origin point, you could cast Fear, the spell, and be affected yourself too since says "each creature in a 30-foot cone must succeed in a wisdom save or be frightened" which means is the wizard vs the wizard again and the source is the wizard, not the familiar or the scribe-thing, so you are afraid of yourself, same as the ranger
Edit: familiars can only deliver spells of 'touch', but the scribe's Manifest mind let you cast Fear as if you were in that place instead, the Cleric's invoke duplicity allow the same
You are 0 feet from yourself. That does not ever change.
This is probably the worst-written class ability I've seen in D&D since the Truenamer.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Well, it's not like the wording is hard to understand, and there's nothing per se wrong with an attack producing a burst that you don't want to be in, it's just that being afraid of yourself seems rather dumb.
So your basically saying a caster can’t save when the DC is literally the casters own spell casting mod + 8, and the caster has to virtually save for it’s own effect.
If a caster wants to set off a fireball point blank in their own face, i’d let them have advantage on the save considering they probably already have a solid idea of how much damage a fireball at min range can do. [ and who says the caster doesn’t have fire immunity at some point? ]
If the intent was to prevent close combat with the effect, they certainly failed. Can’t frighten yourself if the effect is capable of putting the caster in the same space that literally forces the caster to use the same DC needed for others to make a save, the caster would always make the save.
Paradox solved by just removing the one factor that makes it a paradox, the caster automatically saves and is not effected. Stupid but Simple, yet effective and cuts the cost of needless debate over what is the affect of the caster being frightened by their own effect.
Now if you absolutely must push the ridiculous implication , then the poor caster can’t do squat till the effect ends, and now you have a worthless character just standing there frightened for nothing. Wow look a punching bag, hope that player likes a dead character, cause that what you’ll have with that decision.
" Darkvision doesn’t work in Magical darkness, and if something is magical, Never Trust it acts the same way as a non-magical version of that same thing!”- Discotech Mage over a cup of joe.