I have a question about Dungeon 126's Vampires in Waterdeep adventure (not sure if that was the correct title, I don't have it in front of me).
Not to spoil anything, I'll summarize thus:
Does the Detect Thoughts spell work on intelligent undead, like a Vampire?
The adventure seems to indicate that it can, but I thought undead were immune to mind-affecting spells. Detect Thoughts is listed as "mind-affecting, divination".
From the SRD3.5 there appears to be an opening for it to work: Divination isn't one of the types listed in the Undead entry.
Just curious how other people handle this. Thanks.
I have a question about Dungeon 126's Vampires in Waterdeep adventure (not sure if that was the correct title, I don't have it in front of me).
Not to spoil anything, I'll summarize thus:
Does the Detect Thoughts spell work on intelligent undead, like a Vampire?
The adventure seems to indicate that it can, but I thought undead were immune to mind-affecting spells. Detect Thoughts is listed as "mind-affecting, divination".
From the SRD3.5 there appears to be an opening for it to work: Divination isn't one of the types listed in the Undead entry.
Just curious how other people handle this. Thanks.
I haven't read through the whole adventure yet, so I'm not sure what text you're referencing, but... I looked up the detect thoughts spell and it appears that there is an opening for the spell to be at least partially effective.
It _is_ mind-affecting, but not in as direct a way as other spells, such as illusion. I'd think that detect thoughts would work normally vs. a vampire for at least the first two rounds. In round one, you would detect the "presence or absence of thoughts (from conscious creatures with Intelligence scores of 1 or higher)." That isn't directly targeting a single creature, so you could argue that a vampire's immunity would not apply. Likewise, in round two, you would be able to determine the "number of thinking minds and the Intelligence score of each." Again, it doesn't directly target a single creature, so you could argue for it to be effective.
However, in round three, when the spell allows you to detect the "surface thoughts of any mind in the area," the "target’s Will save prevents you from reading its thoughts." I would rule that, even if a vampire's immunities did not apply for the first two rounds, it would here. The fact that the target gets a Will save is what leads me to that conclusion.
However, in round three, when the spell allows you to detect the "surface thoughts of any mind in the area," the "target’s Will save prevents you from reading its thoughts." I would rule that, even if a vampire's immunities did not apply for the first two rounds, it would here. The fact that the target gets a Will save is what leads me to that conclusion.
It's not a significant part of the adventure, just mentioned as a potential problem with the stated beginning of the adventure.
Mainly, I asked because I thought I'd been doing such wrong!
Your ruling is how I thought it would work as well (although I might have been more strict, not allowing even Rounds 1 & 2).
Thanks.
According to the MM it reads as such:
Undead type:
- Immunity to all mind-effecting effects (charms, compulsions, phantasms, patterns, and morale effects.)
So it would mean that the mind-effecting (divination) would work on an intelligent undead.
According to the MM it reads as such:
Undead type:
- Immunity to all mind-effecting effects (charms, compulsions, phantasms, patterns, and morale effects.)So it would mean that the mind-effecting (divination) would work on an intelligent undead.
Ehhhh... I don't know. When WotC designed 3E, they were very particular about saying what they meant, and meaning what they said. Sure, some things slipped through, but when I read that "immunity to all mind-affecting effects," I tend to think they meant all. Recall how particular they've been about using the term "enchantment?" I have a feeling they're just as particular about such things. Mind-affecting is mind-affecting, no matter the source. If they're immune, they're immune.
However... The reason I said you might have some wiggle room in the case of detect thoughts is that, until the third round, the spell does not actually "affect" any minds. It's a pure Divination spell for the first two rounds ("Is there anybody out there? How many?"). The third round effect is almost like an attack, thus the Will save, and thus why I'd say it's mind-affecting... which is why a vampire would be immune to it.
Detect thoughts does not affect an intelligent undead's mind. It only allows you to know that it's there and what thoughts floating around in its skull. This is exactly why the undead description of its immunity to mind affecting affects specifies exactly what that means in parentheses after the statement. In other words something designed to fool, compel, mesmerize, or manipulate the creature's will by affecting its mind won't work. Detect thoughts doesn't try to manipulate a vampire's mind. It will work, but the vampire still gets its save to resist having its thoughts read just like any other thinking creature with a decent Int score.
Seems like an interesting Q: to but to The Sage. Mr. Williams?
In the bad old days (or was that good old days?) of 2nd Ed. intelligent undead could bombard creatures trying to read their minds with horrific images that could do a great deal of harm to the PC. I think the new Ravenloft edition uses something similar in game play, with the potential for PCs to be driven insane by the mental contact.
As for the ruling on the spell, its rather dicey. The spell is mind-affecting, but does not actually affect the undead's mind (that's a bit of a conundrum). I would say that the spell would work, as intelligent undead have thoughts. Of course, since Dhusarra's Will save is +11 the spell probably wouldn't work in the first place even if you allowed it to be used.
I looked at the description of the spell and my current impression as to why the designers had given the descriptor "mind-affecting" to Detect Thoughts is due to the fact that the spell "probes" the brains of creatures in the path of the spell's area to determine (a) the absence or prescence of thoughts from "conscious" creatures with an Intelligence score of 1 or higher, (b) the number of thinking minds and the Intelligence score of each, and (c) the surface thoughts of any mind in the area.
That sounds very much like a mind-affecting spell to me. However, it is true that the immunities listed in the vampire's description does not include mind-affecting divination spells. So, taken literally, Detect Thoughts should work on vampires and probably most undead, despite that the spell's tinkering with a creature's mind in order to determine its Intelligence score and surface thoughts.
That being said, I always thought it was silly (and non-dramatic) that you could go around determining people's Intelligence score and read their surface thoughts without much difficulty (only exception is when someone's Intelligence score is at least 26 and 10 points higher than your own). In my own honest opinion, there should be some more risk, possibly similar to the risks taken when using spells such as Detect Evil and Detect Magic, which has repercussions based on the intensity of the detected aura and the respective differences between the HD of the spell's caster and the HD of the source of the detected aura (or caster level, in the case of detecting magic).
After all, most standard wizards (if such a term could be applied to any pc by at least 8th level) will not be affected by the difference in Intelligence scores when using Detect Thoughts on, for example, a Pit Fiend or a Solar, even though it is most likely that the affected Pit Fiend or Solar can probably make their respective Will saves. But for the sake of argument, assume they fail their save. Just how is a DM/GM supposed to convey the horrors or beauty of the thoughts from a Pit Fiend or a Solar, respectively, who are both ideal archetypes of Lawful Evil and Lawful Good to the extreme? "Oh Bob, the Pit Fiend is just thinking about how to con you into selling your soul twice over, just for good measure, while convincing your friends that he can sell them back your soul, in exchange for, oh I do not know, an item that will make him look rather dashing in front of his colleagues back home, something like maybe a smoking jacket."
So maybe I was exaggerating there, and ranting a bit, but I digress. :)
CB Out.