Prot from Evil question

[RSP]

Went with the RAW on this during play, but curious if there's RAI opinions out there. Here's the situation:

PC is attacked by homebrewed vampire w Battlemaster levels. PC has Prot from Evil up. Vamp hits PC and uses Menacing Attack. Ruled it as no save required due to the wording of Prot: "The target also can’t be charmed, frightened, or possessed by them."

I'm thinking we played it right but there's room for interpretation here (that is, the fear inducing ability had nothing to do with the Vamp's creature type). Thoughts?

[Corran]

RAI aggrees with RAW in this case, imo. Sure, the frightening effect may come from a battlemaster maneuvre, but in the end it does not matter at all, as all that matters is that the frightening effect originates from the vamire, against which the target is protected. A human battlemaster would perhaps be able to frighten the target, but the vampire cannot (dont think of the frighten effect originating from some class feature, but rather from an individual, in our case the vampire).

[pwykersotz]

I think it depends on how you interpret the power of Protection from Evil. If you use pure in-world justification, I can't help but think it wouldn't guard against the Battlemaster maneuver. However from a pure mechanical standpoint, it stands easily.

If I had to choose, I'd stand with Corran's point above, just to keep things simple. But I like to think of these things from a more organic perspective. What does the spell do? Does it ward off the supernatural emanations of these creatures? Does it provide a blessing from a creature beyond you to pick and choose what is affected? Does it flow out to undead in the area and affect their ability to affect you?

If you pick one of those, you get messy, messy results, but they can be fun to play out.

[JellyPooga]

I would go with the RAW as well, on this one.

If a spell is protecting you from the supernatural dread some creatures inspire, it's going to protect you from their mundane ones too.

This would include any attempts at intimidation or persuasion through mundane or magical means, I think.

[SharkForce]

speculatively, if a lich was to cast a fear spell (which comes from having been a spellcaster long before they were a lich), would the fear work? i would say no, personally. so i'd rule the same for the menacing strike.

[Gastronomie]

I would also rule the Menacing Attack doesn't work. No matter what the vampire does (including other abilities or skill checks), it wouldn't succeed. Otherwise "Protection~" would be really pointless and make no sense.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

[O]ne willing creature you touch is protected against certain types of creaturesThe spell is clearly offering its defenses and immunities based on what is targeting you, not how it is targeting you. So yes, Menacing Attack would not impose fear (though the damage would still go through), a Fear spell cast by a lich wouldn't work, and any other attempt by a listed creature type to impose a listed condition would fail.