Gsyfuy

Why does nature favour the Laplacian?

Reverse the word in a string with the same order in javascript

Can not tell colimits from limits

Why are the 2nd/3rd singular forms of present of « potere » irregular?

Does a creature that is immune to a condition still make a saving throw?

How to figure out whether the data is sample data or population data apart from the client's information?

Options leqno, reqno for documentclass or exist another option?

How to set the font color of quantity objects (Version 11.3 vs version 12)?

Is GOCE a satellite or aircraft?

Find the coordinate of two line segments that are perpendicular

Python "triplet" dictionary?

Minimum value of 4 digit number divided by sum of its digits

Help, my Death Star suffers from Kessler syndrome!

Bayesian Nash Equilibria in Battle of Sexes

Is thermodynamics only applicable to systems in equilibrium?

What are the spoon bit of a spoon and fork bit of a fork called?

Were there two appearances of Stan Lee?

Binary Numbers Magic Trick

Pulling the rope with one hand is as heavy as with two hands?

How to stop co-workers from teasing me because I know Russian?

Lock in SQL Server and Oracle

Transfer over $10k

Why do computer-science majors learn calculus?

Where did the extra Pym particles come from in Endgame?

Does a creature that is immune to a condition still make a saving throw?

Can a creature tell when it has been affected by a Divination wizard's Portent?Do you still roll a saving throw against effects that your character is immune to?Can a creature with blindsight that is not immune to the Blinded condition suffer the effects of Blindness?How much does a bard know when they decide to use Cutting Words?What happens if you become Immune to a condition, while suffering that condition?When immune to a condition, do you still gain the condition?How does nondetection interact with School of Divination's Portent?Is a creature immune to the prone condition also immune to being incapacitated by the Tasha's Hideous Laughter spell?Is this Homebrew “Boggart” balanced?Can you use Lucky (feat) followed by Portent to replace a roll that's already been made?Is this homebrew Bard College of Midnight balanced, compared to officially published subclasses?

.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}

7

$begingroup$

Let's say a 5th level Lore Bard casts fear on a violet fungus not knowing that that it is immune to the frightened condition.

Does the violet fungus still make a saving throw? In particular, is a saving throw rolled which the Bard can use (and admittedly waste) its Cutting Words on? (A divination Wizard's Portent feature could also be used on, and be wasted by, such a saving throw.)

dnd-5e saving-throw conditions immunities

share|improve this question

edited 1 hour ago

V2Blast

28.1k5101171

asked 1 hour ago

Someone_EvilSomeone_Evil

3,8941036

$endgroup$

add a comment | 

7

$begingroup$

Let's say a 5th level Lore Bard casts fear on a violet fungus not knowing that that it is immune to the frightened condition.

Does the violet fungus still make a saving throw? In particular, is a saving throw rolled which the Bard can use (and admittedly waste) its Cutting Words on? (A divination Wizard's Portent feature could also be used on, and be wasted by, such a saving throw.)

dnd-5e saving-throw conditions immunities

share|improve this question

edited 1 hour ago

V2Blast

28.1k5101171

asked 1 hour ago

Someone_EvilSomeone_Evil

3,8941036

$endgroup$

add a comment | 

$begingroup$

Let's say a 5th level Lore Bard casts fear on a violet fungus not knowing that that it is immune to the frightened condition.

Does the violet fungus still make a saving throw? In particular, is a saving throw rolled which the Bard can use (and admittedly waste) its Cutting Words on? (A divination Wizard's Portent feature could also be used on, and be wasted by, such a saving throw.)

dnd-5e saving-throw conditions immunities

share|improve this question

edited 1 hour ago

V2Blast

28.1k5101171

asked 1 hour ago

Someone_EvilSomeone_Evil

3,8941036

$endgroup$

share|improve this question

edited 1 hour ago

V2Blast

28.1k5101171

asked 1 hour ago

Someone_EvilSomeone_Evil

3,8941036

share|improve this question

edited 1 hour ago

V2Blast

28.1k5101171

asked 1 hour ago

Someone_EvilSomeone_Evil

3,8941036

edited 1 hour ago

V2Blast

28.1k5101171

edited 1 hour ago

V2Blast

28.1k5101171

asked 1 hour ago

Someone_EvilSomeone_Evil

3,8941036

asked 1 hour ago

Someone_EvilSomeone_Evil

3,8941036

2 Answers
2

active

oldest

votes

3

$begingroup$

Immunity to a condition would just mean that if this condition were to affect it, it would do nothing instead.

Each creature in a 30-foot cone must succeed on a Wisdom saving throw or drop whatever it is holding and become frightened for the duration.

The target still makes a saving throw as called for, but regardless of whether it fails or passes, it cannot be frightened. Any changes made by a portent or Cutting Words would be wasted if the characters were unaware of the immunity.

Another example would be a Wizard casting Sunburst on an Ochre Jelly

On a failed save, a creature takes 12d6 radiant damage and is blinded for 1 minute.

An Ochre Jelly is immune to the Blinded condition, but a saving throw is still called for.

Undead and oozes have disadvantage on this saving throw.

The Ochre Jelly is even making the saving throw with disadvantage, but is still unable to be affected by the blinding effect of the spell.

If a Paladin casts Thunderous Smite on the same Ochre Jelly;

Additionally, if the target is a creature, it must succeed on a Strength saving throw or be pushed 10 feet away from you and knocked prone.

The Ochre Jelly is immune to the condition that the spell inflicts, but a saving throw is still necessary because it can be pushed.

share|improve this answer

edited 1 min ago

answered 1 hour ago

SeidrSeidr

233111

New contributor

Seidr is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  You answer would be improved by citing a source. Someone else could easily logically say the target doesn't make the save, being immune. For instance, why would a creature incapable of sight save against light, or a creature without the ability to perceive sound save against it? I can find no rules to support either position. If you can make a rules-based argument, that's one thing; otherwise, it seems to me the rules don't specify.
  $endgroup$
  – Jack
  1 hour ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @Jack It is never said anywhere that each creature must make/succeed on a saving throw unless they are immune to the condition that this spell imposes. The spell specifically calls for a saving throw to be made. The spell is only inflicting the condition, the condition is not asking for a saving throw.
  $endgroup$
  – Seidr
  1 hour ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  It might also be worth citing examples of spells, monster abilities, or other effects where the condition is only one of multiple effects (e.g. damage) that are imposed on a failed save. Sometimes a creature might not take damage from a failed save due to immunity to that damage type but might be affected by a certain condition on a failed save - or vice versa.
  $endgroup$
  – V2Blast
  1 hour ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @Seidr If your argument is that the general rule is that the spell requires a save and there's no specific rule over-riding it, then you might consider putting that in your argument.
  $endgroup$
  – Jack
  59 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @Seidr I don't think Sunburst is the best example, since (at least as I read it) the jelly still takes radiant damage independent of being blinded, and the saving throw reduces the damage as well as resisting the blind
  $endgroup$
  – Saladani
  52 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

2

$begingroup$

No

The violet fungus would not make a saving throw.

In the PHB under Saving Throw it says:

A saving throw — also called a save — represents an attempt to resist a spell, a trap, a poison, a disease, or a similar threat. You don’t normally decide to make a saving throw; you are forced to make one because your character or monster is at risk of harm.

The violet fungus cited as an example would not make a saving throw. It is not resisting the fear spell, it is just incapable of being affected by it.

It is not "at risk of harm" from the fear spell, so it is not forced to make a save.

Similarly, a creature without vision would not save against being blinded, a creature incapable of being hurt by fire would not save against fire damage.

share|improve this answer

answered 1 hour ago

JackJack

10.5k44198

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  If you want to use your example as the general rule then you can, even using the specific trumps general ruling, then specifically the spell is calling for a saving throw. This means that even though it is not "at risk of harm" it still does need to roll a save. Strictly RAW, a save must be rolled because the spell states it, nowhere does it say that having immunity to what a spell does means that you don't roll the save.
  $endgroup$
  – Seidr
  16 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

Your Answer

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "122"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});

draft saved

draft discarded

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});

Sign up using Google

Sign up using Facebook

Sign up using Email and Password

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f147078%2fdoes-a-creature-that-is-immune-to-a-condition-still-make-a-saving-throw%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

3

$begingroup$

Immunity to a condition would just mean that if this condition were to affect it, it would do nothing instead.

Each creature in a 30-foot cone must succeed on a Wisdom saving throw or drop whatever it is holding and become frightened for the duration.

The target still makes a saving throw as called for, but regardless of whether it fails or passes, it cannot be frightened. Any changes made by a portent or Cutting Words would be wasted if the characters were unaware of the immunity.

Another example would be a Wizard casting Sunburst on an Ochre Jelly

On a failed save, a creature takes 12d6 radiant damage and is blinded for 1 minute.

An Ochre Jelly is immune to the Blinded condition, but a saving throw is still called for.

Undead and oozes have disadvantage on this saving throw.

The Ochre Jelly is even making the saving throw with disadvantage, but is still unable to be affected by the blinding effect of the spell.

If a Paladin casts Thunderous Smite on the same Ochre Jelly;

Additionally, if the target is a creature, it must succeed on a Strength saving throw or be pushed 10 feet away from you and knocked prone.

The Ochre Jelly is immune to the condition that the spell inflicts, but a saving throw is still necessary because it can be pushed.

share|improve this answer

edited 1 min ago

answered 1 hour ago

SeidrSeidr

233111

New contributor

Seidr is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  You answer would be improved by citing a source. Someone else could easily logically say the target doesn't make the save, being immune. For instance, why would a creature incapable of sight save against light, or a creature without the ability to perceive sound save against it? I can find no rules to support either position. If you can make a rules-based argument, that's one thing; otherwise, it seems to me the rules don't specify.
  $endgroup$
  – Jack
  1 hour ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @Jack It is never said anywhere that each creature must make/succeed on a saving throw unless they are immune to the condition that this spell imposes. The spell specifically calls for a saving throw to be made. The spell is only inflicting the condition, the condition is not asking for a saving throw.
  $endgroup$
  – Seidr
  1 hour ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  It might also be worth citing examples of spells, monster abilities, or other effects where the condition is only one of multiple effects (e.g. damage) that are imposed on a failed save. Sometimes a creature might not take damage from a failed save due to immunity to that damage type but might be affected by a certain condition on a failed save - or vice versa.
  $endgroup$
  – V2Blast
  1 hour ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @Seidr If your argument is that the general rule is that the spell requires a save and there's no specific rule over-riding it, then you might consider putting that in your argument.
  $endgroup$
  – Jack
  59 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @Seidr I don't think Sunburst is the best example, since (at least as I read it) the jelly still takes radiant damage independent of being blinded, and the saving throw reduces the damage as well as resisting the blind
  $endgroup$
  – Saladani
  52 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

3

$begingroup$

Immunity to a condition would just mean that if this condition were to affect it, it would do nothing instead.

Each creature in a 30-foot cone must succeed on a Wisdom saving throw or drop whatever it is holding and become frightened for the duration.

The target still makes a saving throw as called for, but regardless of whether it fails or passes, it cannot be frightened. Any changes made by a portent or Cutting Words would be wasted if the characters were unaware of the immunity.

Another example would be a Wizard casting Sunburst on an Ochre Jelly

On a failed save, a creature takes 12d6 radiant damage and is blinded for 1 minute.

An Ochre Jelly is immune to the Blinded condition, but a saving throw is still called for.

Undead and oozes have disadvantage on this saving throw.

The Ochre Jelly is even making the saving throw with disadvantage, but is still unable to be affected by the blinding effect of the spell.

If a Paladin casts Thunderous Smite on the same Ochre Jelly;

Additionally, if the target is a creature, it must succeed on a Strength saving throw or be pushed 10 feet away from you and knocked prone.

The Ochre Jelly is immune to the condition that the spell inflicts, but a saving throw is still necessary because it can be pushed.

share|improve this answer

edited 1 min ago

answered 1 hour ago

SeidrSeidr

233111

New contributor

Seidr is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  You answer would be improved by citing a source. Someone else could easily logically say the target doesn't make the save, being immune. For instance, why would a creature incapable of sight save against light, or a creature without the ability to perceive sound save against it? I can find no rules to support either position. If you can make a rules-based argument, that's one thing; otherwise, it seems to me the rules don't specify.
  $endgroup$
  – Jack
  1 hour ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @Jack It is never said anywhere that each creature must make/succeed on a saving throw unless they are immune to the condition that this spell imposes. The spell specifically calls for a saving throw to be made. The spell is only inflicting the condition, the condition is not asking for a saving throw.
  $endgroup$
  – Seidr
  1 hour ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  It might also be worth citing examples of spells, monster abilities, or other effects where the condition is only one of multiple effects (e.g. damage) that are imposed on a failed save. Sometimes a creature might not take damage from a failed save due to immunity to that damage type but might be affected by a certain condition on a failed save - or vice versa.
  $endgroup$
  – V2Blast
  1 hour ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @Seidr If your argument is that the general rule is that the spell requires a save and there's no specific rule over-riding it, then you might consider putting that in your argument.
  $endgroup$
  – Jack
  59 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @Seidr I don't think Sunburst is the best example, since (at least as I read it) the jelly still takes radiant damage independent of being blinded, and the saving throw reduces the damage as well as resisting the blind
  $endgroup$
  – Saladani
  52 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

$begingroup$

Immunity to a condition would just mean that if this condition were to affect it, it would do nothing instead.

Each creature in a 30-foot cone must succeed on a Wisdom saving throw or drop whatever it is holding and become frightened for the duration.

The target still makes a saving throw as called for, but regardless of whether it fails or passes, it cannot be frightened. Any changes made by a portent or Cutting Words would be wasted if the characters were unaware of the immunity.

Another example would be a Wizard casting Sunburst on an Ochre Jelly

On a failed save, a creature takes 12d6 radiant damage and is blinded for 1 minute.

An Ochre Jelly is immune to the Blinded condition, but a saving throw is still called for.

Undead and oozes have disadvantage on this saving throw.

The Ochre Jelly is even making the saving throw with disadvantage, but is still unable to be affected by the blinding effect of the spell.

If a Paladin casts Thunderous Smite on the same Ochre Jelly;

Additionally, if the target is a creature, it must succeed on a Strength saving throw or be pushed 10 feet away from you and knocked prone.

The Ochre Jelly is immune to the condition that the spell inflicts, but a saving throw is still necessary because it can be pushed.

share|improve this answer

edited 1 min ago

answered 1 hour ago

SeidrSeidr

233111

New contributor

Seidr is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

$endgroup$

share|improve this answer

edited 1 min ago

answered 1 hour ago

SeidrSeidr

233111

New contributor

Seidr is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

answered 1 hour ago

SeidrSeidr

233111

New contributor

Seidr is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

answered 1 hour ago

SeidrSeidr

233111

2

$begingroup$

No

The violet fungus would not make a saving throw.

In the PHB under Saving Throw it says:

A saving throw — also called a save — represents an attempt to resist a spell, a trap, a poison, a disease, or a similar threat. You don’t normally decide to make a saving throw; you are forced to make one because your character or monster is at risk of harm.

The violet fungus cited as an example would not make a saving throw. It is not resisting the fear spell, it is just incapable of being affected by it.

It is not "at risk of harm" from the fear spell, so it is not forced to make a save.

Similarly, a creature without vision would not save against being blinded, a creature incapable of being hurt by fire would not save against fire damage.

share|improve this answer

answered 1 hour ago

JackJack

10.5k44198

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  If you want to use your example as the general rule then you can, even using the specific trumps general ruling, then specifically the spell is calling for a saving throw. This means that even though it is not "at risk of harm" it still does need to roll a save. Strictly RAW, a save must be rolled because the spell states it, nowhere does it say that having immunity to what a spell does means that you don't roll the save.
  $endgroup$
  – Seidr
  16 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

2

$begingroup$

No

The violet fungus would not make a saving throw.

In the PHB under Saving Throw it says:

A saving throw — also called a save — represents an attempt to resist a spell, a trap, a poison, a disease, or a similar threat. You don’t normally decide to make a saving throw; you are forced to make one because your character or monster is at risk of harm.

The violet fungus cited as an example would not make a saving throw. It is not resisting the fear spell, it is just incapable of being affected by it.

It is not "at risk of harm" from the fear spell, so it is not forced to make a save.

Similarly, a creature without vision would not save against being blinded, a creature incapable of being hurt by fire would not save against fire damage.

share|improve this answer

answered 1 hour ago

JackJack

10.5k44198

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  If you want to use your example as the general rule then you can, even using the specific trumps general ruling, then specifically the spell is calling for a saving throw. This means that even though it is not "at risk of harm" it still does need to roll a save. Strictly RAW, a save must be rolled because the spell states it, nowhere does it say that having immunity to what a spell does means that you don't roll the save.
  $endgroup$
  – Seidr
  16 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

$begingroup$

No

The violet fungus would not make a saving throw.

In the PHB under Saving Throw it says:

A saving throw — also called a save — represents an attempt to resist a spell, a trap, a poison, a disease, or a similar threat. You don’t normally decide to make a saving throw; you are forced to make one because your character or monster is at risk of harm.

The violet fungus cited as an example would not make a saving throw. It is not resisting the fear spell, it is just incapable of being affected by it.

It is not "at risk of harm" from the fear spell, so it is not forced to make a save.

Similarly, a creature without vision would not save against being blinded, a creature incapable of being hurt by fire would not save against fire damage.

share|improve this answer

answered 1 hour ago

JackJack

10.5k44198

$endgroup$

share|improve this answer

answered 1 hour ago

JackJack

10.5k44198

answered 1 hour ago

JackJack

10.5k44198

answered 1 hour ago

JackJack

10.5k44198