Limited Magic Immunity. The rakshasa can't be affected or detected by spells of 6th level or lower unless it wishes to be. It has advantage on saving throws against all other spells and magical effects.
Innate Spellcasting. The rakshasa's innate spellcasting ability is Charisma (spell save DC 18, +10 to hit with spell attacks). The rakshasa can innately cast the following spells, requiring no material components:
At will: detect thoughts, disguise self, mage hand, minor illusion
3/day each: charm person, detect magic, invisibility, major image, suggestion
1/day each: dominate person, fly, plane shift, true seeing
Multiattack. The rakshasa makes two claw attacks.
Claw. Melee Weapon Attack: +7 to hit, reach 5 ft., one target. Hit: 9 (2d6 + 2) slashing damage, and the target is cursed if it is a creature. The magical curse takes effect whenever the target takes a short or long rest, filling the target's thoughts with horrible images and dreams. The cursed target gains no benefit from finishing a short or long rest. The curse lasts until it is lifted by a remove curse spell or similar magic.
This is probably one of those things where it is CR 13 if you run it in a very certian way (that the books don't tell you about) it is deadly for its CR.
Its a stalker, highly inteligent, nearly impossible to find, it should jump out, deal damage and then run away, wittling down the parties HP without giving them a good chance to attack. If this was used to its fullest, its deadly to a lv 13 party. Will the vast majority of DMs run it in this way? probably not. The monster manuals need to add instructions on how to run a monster.
Arcane shot is a feature, that would depend though on what level the class is as eventually it does count as magical but as a weapon attack, not a spell. It would have piercing immunity until the weapon attack counts as magical
That would be correct, true seeing is a 6th level spell and it is immune to 6th level spells
Would the Rakshasa be immune to the damage of any of the Smite Spells?
One of my favorite villains.
This is such a great villain. I picture them as a leader of a thieves guild in a major city, sort of like Little Finger from GoT only way, way more deadly.
A fight vs a Rakshasa should include a lot of minions fighting alongside them and traps, illusions etc making for a really deadly encounter. If you end up fighting this in a good old hand to hand, trading off blows-type fight, the DM has failed, imo.
You know how clerics and paladins can use divine sense, are Rakshasas safe from that?
Soooo let's say I may or may not have made a deal with a Rakypoo to help in a fight... how bad would you say the deal will be and or the outcome possibly will be.. 🥴
An inability to heal, recover spell slots, or class abilities. What a terrible curse that costs a fireball to remove, with no saving throw, that only shows up to you when you sleep. Led by a conniving monster hitting you with an advantage as it's invisible. That you can't see without a 6th-level divination spell or ability, not to mention they can be outfitted with weapons and magic items and likely has a castle of minions... Dude, are you lacking in imagination, or do you not get that a +7 and auto curse and plane shift are busted?
Depends on the setting of the campaign.
If your encounter is in the middle of nowhere .. finding a cleric etc. Might be hard and earning no be edit means also that you don't get the rest and thus... You will suffer exhaustion and at a certain level of that ... You die
I don't care if he's evil this is my husband I can fix him
you raise a point. CR is not very accurate keep that in mind.
Taking a look at the limited magic immunity, it makes sense for it to be CR 13 since no spell of 6th level or lower effect it and most parties would have some casters in it rendering lower level spells useless.
I wouldn't since true seeing isn't affecting or detecting the rakshasa directly it's granting truesight, then the truesight is just giving the player an auto success against the rakshasa's disguise, for example imagine a player uses Skill enhancement, or enhance ability to increase their intelligence or investigation, you wouldn't remove those buffs when discerning their disguise.
Another more distant example of this principle is tenser's transformation, a good 6th level spell against the rakshasa and pretty much nothing else because of how much it gimps casters,
you might rule against the extra force damage, but you wouldn't for example negate the extra attack against the rakshasa because that wouldn't make much sense, nor would you negate the advantage, nor would you take away the saving throw proficiency against the rakshasa's spells, because these abilities are enhancing the player rather than targeting the rakshasa.