D&D 5E Does Heroism end a frightened condition or suspend it?

[Maxperson]

Sure there is. You are interpreting the wording of the heroism spell as it interacts with the situation. The spell doesn't say anything about ending an existing frightened condition only that it confers immunity "until the spell ends..." Thus you have to extrapolate and interpret from there - and make the best ruling you can.

You're looking at the wrong thing. The key here is immunity as it is more specific than a spell. Nothing in Heroism says anything about how it interacts with immunity and immunity is silent as well. There is no RAW to interpret on this. There are only personal rulings.

 

[NotAYakk]

If you are immune to being frightened, an effect that merely frightens you is ended. If someone tries to apply it, you are immune. It isn't suppressed.

An effect that frightens you and also does something else isn't ended.

This is based off of a non-game-based understanding of what being immune to something means.

 

[aco175]

Reminds me of a story my father tells me about Viet Nam. Another soldier went on leave to Japan for a couple weeks and had malaria, but was drunk the whole time and it did not take hold until he returned and sobered up. He was 'immune' to it basically.

Not sure it answers the question, but it does show that it can have two ways.

 

[Ovinomancer]

I am on fire. I become immune to fire. Am I still on fire?

This is the rub -- does immunity mean that you are impervious to it but still subject to it or does it mean that it cannot affect you in any way. If the former -- if I can burn without burning -- then if my immunity goes away I am still on fire and deal with this. If the latter, then when I become immune, there cannot be any fire on me, so I am no longer on fire.

 

[Dausuul]

There are two scenarios here:

1. You become frightened, and then someone makes you immune to fear.
2. You become immune to fear, and then someone tries to make you frightened.

I find it very hard to imagine scenario #2 resulting in anything other than "the effect fails, end of story"--it doesn't hang around waiting to see if you lose your immunity somehow. I could go either way on scenario #1; but I like to keep my rulings as simple and consistent as possible, so I'd rule that #1 works the same way as #2. (As a bonus, that is also the option that involves the least bookkeeping.)

Thus, in my campaign, heroism will cause the frightened condition to slide off you. It's not suspended--it's gone. Even if the spell ends, it won't come back.

 

[Mordhau]

Yes. The condition is ended.

Simpler is better. And Heroism is hardly overpowered by it.

 

[aleleg]

I'm surprised nobody made any references to Calm Emotion.
"You can suppress any Effect causing a target to be Charmed or Frightened. When this spell ends, any suppressed Effect resumes, provided that its Duration has not expired in the meantime."

Also for dragons frightful presence : "If a creature's saving throw is successful or the Effect ends for it, the creature is immune to the dragon's Frightful Presence for the next 24 hours."

The general rule in 5e is " If it's not written, the simplest explanation prevail" More so if an indication from the same source book tend to specify it, why would'nt they specify it for Heroism?

So yes, it ends the condition. And gets you immune for 24 hours from that SAME dragon presence. But not from another dragon presence or a fear spell (or whatever) after the heroism wears off.

Anything else is house rule from my point of view.

At least that how I see it. As a player for 25 years and a GM for 10.

 

[Voadam]

I think it is ambiguous and calls for a DM ruling which can reasonably vary from table to table.

If something made you temporarily immune to being wounded I would not expect it to cure your existing wounds but to make you immune to new wounds for the duration of the effect.

I could see heroism being interpreted as having no effect on an existing frightened condition and only preventing being frightened in a new instance during the duration. I am being frightened can have a different temporal connotation than I am frightened.

I could see it interpreted differently as "being frightened" as an ongoing condition. I could see the immunity against being frightened being during the duration of the spell or immunity terminating the effect.

All three interpretations make sense to me.

DM ruling, not rules. That's 5e for you.