D&D 5E Do you still roll a saving throw if you are immune to what you are saving against?

[ECMO3]

A question came up in play yesterday. Undead Warlock-Fey Wanderer Ranger in form of dread is immune to frightened condition.

Does she still make a save if targeted with something that causes frightened (dragon fear in this case) even though she is immune.

The reason this matters is beguiling twist - if she (or anyone) makes a save against frightened or charmed, she can use her reaction to target someone else with one of those conditions. So even though she is immune, the player wants to roll the save because if it is a success he can target someone (in this case the Dragon) with beguiling twist.

The question essentially is does she still get to throw the dice ?

 

[Haplo781]

I'd say DM's call. RAW I don't think you even pick up the dice.

 

[DND_Reborn]

There is no clear ruling on this that I know of. I've looked before and found arguments on both sides.

Personally, I would rule there is no save made assuming there is no other effect. For example, a creature might be immune to the poisoned condition, but not poison damage. So, a creature might need to make the saving throw for half damage against the poison still, but not be subject to the poisoned condition even if they fail.

In the case of Dragon Fear, the frightened condition is all there is, so if your are immune, you are not at risk. You only roll a saving throw if you are at risk due to the effect.

Would a fire giant bother rolling a saving throw against a fireball? No.

 

[Kobold Stew]

If she picks up the dice, there's a chance of failure. That's not what immunity is.

 

[jgsugden]

I'd say there is ambiguity, but there is nothing that expressly prohibits an immune creature from rolling the saving throw - and that means that as a DM, I'll rule in the most favorable way for the PCs.

 

[Umbran]

If she picks up the dice, there's a chance of failure. That's not what immunity is.

One could take immunity to mean that they automatically make the save, without having to pick up the dice.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I would count immunity as automatically succeeding on the save. It strikes me as silly, and un-fun, for a player to be punished because they are better-defended against a problem.

 

[Shiroiken]

Under the core process of play, no roll occurs, as there's no question of outcome. An elf cannot be magically put to sleep, so they would not actually roll a saving throw against a spell that just puts them to sleep on a failed save.

 

[Kobold Stew]

One could take immunity to mean that they automatically make the save, without having to pick up the dice.

My point exactly.

 

[Stalker0]

One could take immunity to mean that they automatically make the save, without having to pick up the dice.

That defintion fails though against fire immune creatures and spells like fireball