D&D 5E Hold Person/Monster vs. Undead?

[The_Gneech]

This came up in the game session last night and my Google Fu has not turned up a meaningful answer. So I'm tossing it out here for discussion.

Would hold person work on a vampire (or more specifically, a vampire spawn)? The text of the spell specifies a humanoid, so I took that to mean explicitly of the humanoid type. But then looking at hold monster, it says "a creature," and calls out specifically that it has no effect on undead (which hold person doesn't specify).

At the table as a "decide now and revisit later to keep the game moving" I ruled that the caster could try it but that the vampire would have advantage on its saving throw, as a compromise. The caster eventually decided to do something else instead anyway.

Upon further reflection, I think I was right in my initial decision that the text specifically employs the keyword "humanoid," while vampires are of the undead type, and so it wouldn't work (especially since hold monster, the bigger-better version, doesn't work on undead at all). But I'm interested in what anyone else might have to say before I make my final ruling.

-The Gneech

 

[Zinnger]

I would rule the same way you did. Hold PERSON is designed for a normal humanoid person. When or if the type changes from humanoid to any other creature or type, then it is no longer a humanoid and is no longer able to be affected by the magic for humanoids. Hold Monster needs to specifically state that it does not affect undead because it is designed to affect most creatures, not just humanoids and it needs to clearly state that undead is not part of the creatures that this type of magic is useful on. I think you did good and I think you were more than fair to offer a quick resolution with advantage on the saves for the undead.

 

[Unwise]

Out of interest, why wouldn't it affect undead? The spell is pretty clear about who it does and doesn't affect. It is arbitrary, but pretty clear. What is the issue you are looking to fix by ruling that undead are not affected?

If it was a mindless undead, then I could see that you might decide you want them to be immune to some attacks vs Wis/Int/Cha, but why this one and not all? As the target was a vampire, it clearly has a psyche and will that can be attacked and overcome, so what makes it special to be immune?

The things that irk me a bit at my table is hold person being used on Draconians with tiny wings, or mutants with 3-4 arms. It kind of feels like having an extra limb should not make you immune to a spell, but if you allow that, then where do you draw the line?

P.S. Oh I had not read the word Humanoid as a Keyword, I just read it as a word, hence the rather different views on the topic.

 

[steeldragons]

Undead have always been immune to "charm, hold and sleep" spells from the dawn of the game. I would imagine that is why hold monster [or Person] doesn't work on undead.

Always made sense [to me]. Undead don't sleep. They are either mindless or have minds fueled by negative energies or consumed by evil emotions...not really a "normal mind" that would be susceptible to a basic enchantment type spells...with sleep, charm and hold, all, always have been.

 

[jrowland]

Well, technically, 5E does away with keywords and relies on DM rulings. So "Humanoid" is whatever whatever you rule it to be.

I think you made a fair table ruling. Personally, humanoid undead are still humanoid.

 

[Wik]

I think your initial reading was correct. "Humanoid" IS a creature type, after all. That's fairly clear. Hold Monster, which affects a broader spectrum of creatures, specifies that undead are not covered, whereas hold person doesn't need that ruling because it ONLY affects humanoids. Note that hold person, at no point, says "it doesn't affect undead, dragons, beasts, etc". It doesn't need to.

 

[iserith]

This came up in the game session last night and my Google Fu has not turned up a meaningful answer. So I'm tossing it out here for discussion.

Would hold person work on a vampire (or more specifically, a vampire spawn)?

No. Hold person affects humanoids. A vampire is not a humanoid in game terms - it is undead.

 

[Jester David]

It almost certainly means "humanoid" the creature type and not "humanoid" the body shape, otherwise it would specify that it doesn't affect undead.

 

[The_Gneech]

Out of interest, why wouldn't it affect undead? The spell is pretty clear about who it does and doesn't affect. It is arbitrary, but pretty clear. What is the issue you are looking to fix by ruling that undead are not affected?

If it was a mindless undead, then I could see that you might decide you want them to be immune to some attacks vs Wis/Int/Cha, but why this one and not all? As the target was a vampire, it clearly has a psyche and will that can be attacked and overcome, so what makes it special to be immune?

The things that irk me a bit at my table is hold person being used on Draconians with tiny wings, or mutants with 3-4 arms. It kind of feels like having an extra limb should not make you immune to a spell, but if you allow that, then where do you draw the line?

P.S. Oh I had not read the word Humanoid as a Keyword, I just read it as a word, hence the rather different views on the topic.

I'm not looking to fix anything, just looking to interpret the text at hand. Certainly not every intelligent creature is a "person," hence the existence of hold monster, but hold monster specifically doesn't work on undead in the spell description. So if we work on the assumption that hold monster is an extrapolation of the same magic of hold person, then it makes sense that the "lesser" spell has at least the same limitations of the greater one.

Thus...

"Hold Monster" = "Hold all creatures, except for undead."

"Hold Person" = "Hold all creatures, except for undead, aberrations, beasts, celestials, constructs, dragons, elementals, fiends, fey, giants, monstrosities, oozes, and plants."

That's my reasoning, anyhow.

-The Gneech

 

[MonsterEnvy]

Well, technically, 5E does away with keywords and relies on DM rulings. So "Humanoid" is whatever whatever you rule it to be.

Not correct. 5e does not do away with Keywords, All monsters have their type of written under their name. So a Humanoid is a Humanoid.

I don't know why you would think this.