Dread Witch Question

[Crewgar]

Hello everyone, I've seen this debate on a few older forums, but it seems to largely come down to how you see it in the first place. Also all the threads were really old and I didn't want to do thread necromancy, so I figured I'd ask again. I also saw the old threads here where Mousefaratu said that he was the one who wrote the class, so thought you might provide an interesting take on it if you were interested (and if you see this ).

First of all I think it's a really cool class thematically, and I've created an interesting High Priestess of Hel NPC using it and the Dread Necromancer.

Anyway, the question is that the 4th level ability Greater Mastery of Terror which as part of it's ability says:
"In addition, your fear spells are now so potent that they can even affect individuals normally immune to fear, such as paladins, although the subject still gets a saving throw to resist the spell's effect. Only a target who's HD exceeds your caster level by 4 or more is immune to your mastery of terror."

Would a character who's immune to Mind Affecting abilities, say from the Mind Blank Spell or other similar abilities still be immune? Or would the fact that the ability allows you to "affect individuals normally immune to fear" (and being immune to mind affecting makes you immune to fear effects or at least spells with both discriptors). I've seen some people argue yes, and others argue that no it only bypasses the lesser immunity the specific "immune to fear" that some things has (like the Paladins in the example).

I'm still building the NPC regardless, as it's the concept that I'm going for, but one of the characters in the party is regularly immune to mind affecting effects, so I'm asking to have some reasons to present as to why I'm ruling that it does, or doesn't affect the character. We like to try and avoid 'because I said so' arguments, even from me as the DM, so I like to at least have a logical backing for judgements, though when we do get two equally valid arguments (or equally valid in my opinion at least), then I do fall back on picking the one I like. Only problem here is I see the logic on both sides

So if people didn't mind weighing in that would be really appreciated!

 

[Mouseferatu]

My intent was that it applies specifically to fear immunity. If the target is unaffected by mind-affecting effects in general, this ability won't trump that.

So, for instance, paladin, yes; undead, no.

Although, that being said, I actually have a longer, more complex answer. Will add that in a moment.

 

[Mouseferatu]

So, there are certain layers of DM judgment call that were frowned on in the official rules of 3e that might be okay in 5e. (I am not getting into which is better, and I ask nobody else to, either. I'm just saying, there are/were different design guidelines.)

In Heroes of Horror, as written, my intent was as I spelled out in the prior post. But in a more DM-fiat-style game--or in a 3e campaign where I trust the DM's judgment--how I actually prefer the power function is this:

If the immunity to fear and/or mind-affcting effects is innate to the creature, such as with undead, this power will not function against it.

If the immunity is not innate--is due to a class feature (paladin), spell (mind blank), magic item, or so forth--then this ability functions as written.

But again, that's the "author's note" version, not the as-written version.

 

[QuaziquestGM]

If you need a "mechanical" justification or explanation, explain that it works like Uncanny dodge and Sneak attack.

With Uncanny dodge, you can't be flanked unless by a rogue 4 levels higher, and a rogue can't sneak attack another rogue who is 4 levels higher.

Paladin vs Dread Necromancer seem to have the same set up.

 

[Crewgar]

Cool thanks everyone! Especially Mouseferatu! Always nice to see when the writers love their rules enough to answer people's questions

I kind of figured that that was what people would say from a rules as written perspective, but your second response was kind of where I was coming from in my thought process. Didn't really want something that could put fear into undead or constructs, but thought it might thematically still override the immunities granted by spells and such. I think I'll run it based upon the first ruling as we're nearly at the end of the campaign and don't want to be changing up too much stuff, especially unexpectedly, but will bare it in mind for future games as something to consider

Also interesting note on 5th ed, haven't had a chance to look at it yet, but have been meaning to talk to my brother as he's ordered the books, and I'll definitely get on that, as that was something we brought into 3rd as kind of a house rule, from when we played that way in second

Thanks again both of you for the quick replies