D&D 5E Do Immunities to damage confer immunities to additional affects linked to the damage?

[Gwarok]

There are several abilities in the game that deal damage and also have a side effect. Ray of Frost deals cold damage and slows, Phantasmal Killer deals psychic damage and fears, etc... If you are immune to the damage type of the attack, are you also immune to the side effects? Or vice versa? Does immunity to fear prevent the damage from Phantasmal killer as well?

Reason I'm asking is my players are going into a mind flayer nest soon, and I imagine one of them will get their mits on Mind Blank or something. I wanted to know if that would prevent them from being stunned when they get mind blasted or just prevent them from taking damage. But it does apply in other areas as well.

 

[Li Shenron]

No, the secondary effect still applies (unless it is triggered only if the target takes some minimum damage).

 

[Satyrn]

I don't know what the rules say on this, but before looking it up - and if I had to figure this out during the game instead of being prepared like you - I'd probably rule that negating all the damage would negate the extra effect. I certainly would rule that way for the mibd blank example you gave, since it seems like it ought to be a solid defense against the mind flayer's psychic assault.

But now I go off to investigate the rules.

 

[Ancalagon]

I think this would be a very case by case basis. For example, if someone was (for example), immune to arrows, and he got shot with a poisoned arrow... he's not going to get poisoned is he? You're going to have to make a call.

 

[Shiroiken]

By RAW, the secondary effects still occur, IIRC.

I would examine things on a case by case basis myself. Most secondary effects are a result of the damage itself, such as being slowed by the cold (Ray of Frost), so I'm just as likely to have them ignored. Some effects seem disassociated with the damage, such as Fear of your deepest nightmare (Phantasmal Killer), so those would remain.

 

[Satyrn]

Aye. I found nothing in the rules about this (rolled my Investigate check with disadvantage because I was distracted byy bartender), but I really do think that ruling based on the circumstances makes sense, exactly as [MENTION=6775477]Shiroiken[/MENTION] lays out.

 

[jaelis]

For ray of frost in particular: I imagine the slowing effect happens because you've got a coating of ice on you. That would happen whether you are immune to cold damage or not, so I would still have it take effect.

But if you imagine it differently, you might come to a different conclusion.

For another example, if you were immune to lightning damage, I don't think I'd have the secondary effect of shocking grasp apply.

 

[the Jester]

A lot of these effects specify "If you take any damage", IIRC.

 

[jaelis]

A lot of these effects specify "If you take any damage", IIRC.

When they do then it is easy. But often they don't as well (cf ray of frost, shocking grasp, or phantasmal killer).

 

[the Jester]

When they do then it is easy. But often they don't as well (cf ray of frost, shocking grasp, or phantasmal killer).

I can see all of those spells' secondary effects working despite damage immunity. Ray of frost could create physical ice enshrouding you; even if it doesn't hurt, it slows you down. Phantasmal killer might not hurt you, but could still scare you. Etc.