Mind Blank : Rule Investigation

[Necrosnoop110]

Mindblank (https://roll20.net/compendium/dnd5e/Mind%20Blank#content) seems very sweeping.

The first sentence seems relatively clear, understandable, and specific:


Until the spell ends, one willing creature you touch is immune to psychic damage, any effect that would sense its emotions or read its thoughts, divination spells, and the charmed condition.

However, the second sentence seems much more problematic to adjudicate. Seemingly incredibly broad.


The spell even foils wish spells and spells or effects of similar power used to affect the target’s mind or to gain information about the target.

Any guidelines on what this second sentence covers? Will this stop even beneficial or harmless things that affect the target's mind? Telepathy? Mind sliver? Message?

[Rukelnikov]

Mindblank (https://roll20.net/compendium/dnd5e/Mind%20Blank#content) seems very sweeping.

The first sentence seems relatively clear, understandable, and specific:



However, the second sentence seems much more problematic to adjudicate. Seemingly incredibly broad.



Any guidelines on what this second sentence covers? Will this stop even beneficial or harmless things that affect the target's mind? Telepathy? Mind sliver? Message?

I mean given Wish is unambiguously the most powerful spell in the game, I think it rules out pretty much everything outside of artifacts or divine intervention from working, maybe legendaries? But if I was the DM a legendary wouldn't cut it either.

Regarding what it stops, yeah, everything, even if its beneficial, no telepathy, no message, no sending, etc.

[NecessaryWeevil]

While that's certainly a reasonable interpretation, I read the first sentence as fully defining the scope of effects it protects against, and the second sentence as clarifying that you can't overcome those protections simply by adding more power.

[Keravath]

The first sentence describes a set of conditions that the target of Mindblank becomes immune to ...

"Until the spell ends, one willing creature you touch is immune to psychic damage, any effect that would sense its emotions or read its thoughts, divination spells, and the charmed condition. "

However, the first sentence is very limited and in most cases wouldn't be worth an 8th level spell slot. I typically interpret the second sentence as written. This means it substantially broadens the range of effects that Mindblank protects against and makes it worth the 8th level slot.

In particular, "spells or effects of similar power used to affect the target’s mind", this does not overlap in any way with sense its emotions or read its thoughts which are listed in the first sentence. In addition, neither sensing emotions or thoughts actually affect the target's mind - they give information about the target's state of mind but do not affect it in any way.

So ... when I run it, MindBlank protects against anything that tries to affect the target's mind.

The 2nd level Suggestion spell is one example. If you only consider the first sentence then Mindblank does not protect against suggestion. Suggestion does not do psychic damage, it doesn't sense emotions or read thoughts, it isn't a Divination spell and it does not impose the charmed condition. If you read just the first sentence, Mindblank would not protect a creature from the mind affecting abilities of Suggestion or Mass Suggestion. Which makes no sense to me since the spell is supposed to protect the mind and requires an 8th level spell slot to cast. For this reason, I treat the second sentence of the Mindblank description as describing a broad range of effects that are also blocked by Mindblank. (which to me makes sense for an 8th level spell).

Here are some examples of spells or similar effects that would be blocked by Mindblank
- Suggestion and Mass Suggestion
- Command
- Power Word Stun
- Feeblemind - if you only consider the first sentence then the 4d6 psychic damage would be stopped but the charisma and intelligence would still be set to 1 since Feeblemind's effect is not covered in the first sentence but in the second.

I'm sure there are others but for an 8th level spell, I interpret it as blocking any spell or effect that can affect the mind in any way which is appropriate for a defensive 8th level spell in my opinion.

[NecessaryWeevil]

The first sentence describes a set of conditions that the target of Mindblank becomes immune to ...

"Until the spell ends, one willing creature you touch is immune to psychic damage, any effect that would sense its emotions or read its thoughts, divination spells, and the charmed condition. "

However, the first sentence is very limited and in most cases wouldn't be worth an 8th level spell slot. I typically interpret the second sentence as written. This means it substantially broadens the range of effects that Mindblank protects against and makes it worth the 8th level slot.

In particular, "spells or effects of similar power used to affect the target’s mind", this does not overlap in any way with sense its emotions or read its thoughts which are listed in the first sentence. In addition, neither sensing emotions or thoughts actually affect the target's mind - they give information about the target's state of mind but do not affect it in any way.

So ... when I run it, MindBlank protects against anything that tries to affect the target's mind.



You've left out the second half of the second sentence however: "or to gain information about the target." Sensing emotions, reading thoughts, and divination spells in general do exactly that. If the second sentence is intended to include all of that and more, what's the point of the specific limitations in the first sentence?

[Segev]

While suggestion doesn't impose the Charmed condition, it also doesn't affect creatures that "cannot be Charmed." Creatures under mind blank cannot be Charmed.

I am inclined to agree that mind blank is broadened by its second sentence, but suggestion is not a case where the first sentence fails to protect the target.

[RSP]

While suggestion doesn't impose the Charmed condition, it also doesn't affect creatures that "cannot be Charmed." Creatures under mind blank cannot be Charmed.

I am inclined to agree that mind blank is broadened by its second sentence, but suggestion is not a case where the first sentence fails to protect the target.

Command, I believe, fits the bill here. It works on creatures immune to Charm, but isn’t in the scope of the first sentence, but is in the scope covered by the second.

[Segev]

Command, I believe, fits the bill here. It works on creatures immune to Charm, but isn’t in the scope of the first sentence, but is in the scope covered by the second.

That's a better example, yes. I would, personally, argue that the second sentence of mind blank does apply to denying command the ability to compel the behavior of the one mind blank is protecting.

[Necrosnoop110]

You've left out the second half of the second sentence however: "or to gain information about the target." Sensing emotions, reading thoughts, and divination spells in general do exactly that. If the second sentence is intended to include all of that and more, what's the point of the specific limitations in the first sentence?
That's my issue as well. The second sentence seems so comprehensive why do we need the first part, at least for the charms, divination, and emotions/thoughts aspects?

[Necrosnoop110]

While suggestion doesn't impose the Charmed condition, it also doesn't affect creatures that "cannot be Charmed." Creatures under mind blank cannot be Charmed.

As a separate question to the main one of the thread: Isn't it implied that Suggestion imposes the Charmed condition? I mean why else would Cham immunity work? I realize it doesn't explicitly say it.

[greenstone]

Does mind blank make the target immune to illusions? They affect the mind.

Calm emotions?

[Dualight]

Does mind blank make the target immune to illusions? They affect the mind.

Calm emotions?

Calm emotions definitely would be stopped, as it affects the mind of the target.
Illusions would depend on how the illusion works. Something like phantasmal killer that is visible to those targeted only would be stopped by mind blank, while stuff like mirage arcane or even minor illusion that creates an image that is independent of anyone being available to be targeted would not be stopped by mind blank.

At least, that is how I interpret and would rule mind blank.

[Segev]

As a separate question to the main one of the thread: Isn't it implied that Suggestion imposes the Charmed condition? I mean why else would Cham immunity work? I realize it doesn't explicitly say it.

It doesn't say it applies Charmed, so it doesn't. It says creatures immune to the Charmed condition are immune to suggestion to grant immunity to suggestion if you are immune to being Charmed.

The Charmed condition does two things: grant the imposer of it advantage on social rolls vs. the Charmed creature, and make the Charmed creature unable to attack the creature that has it Charmed. Suggestion does neither of these things, because it does not impose the Charmed condition.

[JackPhoenix]

As a separate question to the main one of the thread: Isn't it implied that Suggestion imposes the Charmed condition? I mean why else would Cham immunity work? I realize it doesn't explicitly say it.

Charm immunity works because the spell says it does. Sleep does the same thing. If Suggestion was supposed to cause Charmed condition, it would have to explicitly say so.

[Keravath]

While suggestion doesn't impose the Charmed condition, it also doesn't affect creatures that "cannot be Charmed." Creatures under mind blank cannot be Charmed.

I am inclined to agree that mind blank is broadened by its second sentence, but suggestion is not a case where the first sentence fails to protect the target.

Yep ... I would tend to agree. :) ... a creature that is immune to the charmed condition can't be charmed so it wouldn't be a valid target for Suggestion even if Suggestion doesn't impose the charmed condition. (my bad :)).

I agree with you though that the second sentence expands the power of Mindblank.

----

Considering the entirety of the second sentence :)

"The spell even foils wish spells and spells or effects of similar power used to affect the target's mind or to gain information about the target."

This is far more general than the first sentence. Mind blank prevents Wish or a similar power affecting the target's mind or gaining information about the target.

If you only consider the first sentence then one could cast Wish and say "I wish to know where <X> is and what they are doing now."

This wish is conjuration magic, it doesn't do psychic damage, it doesn't sense emotions or thoughts and it doesn't impose the charmed condition. Based on the first sentence you can cast Wish to gain information about the target EXCEPT the second sentence explicitly states that you can't do that. So, the second sentence isn't a clarification, it is clearly an extension of the limited set of items listed in the first sentence. If the first sentence was all that was intended then they did not need the second sentence at all.

In addition, the second sentence isn't limited to Wish - it includes wish and any other spells or effects of similar power that affect the target's mind OR gain information about the target. Information is not limited to sensing emotions or thoughts. Information is far more general. If anything, the second sentence defines the true scope of the spell and the first sentence is just clarifying a few specific examples and leaving the rest up to the DM.

[Chronos]

This is where 3rd edition's spell descriptor tags came in very handy. If a spell was labeled [Mind-affecting], then it affected the target's mind, and Mind Blank protected against it. I'm not sure why 5th edition did away with that, especially when at the same time they did things like making 13 explicit damage types and making all damage one of those types.

[Segev]

This is where 3rd edition's spell descriptor tags came in very handy. If a spell was labeled [Mind-affecting], then it affected the target's mind, and Mind Blank protected against it. I'm not sure why 5th edition did away with that, especially when at the same time they did things like making 13 explicit damage types and making all damage one of those types.

If I had to guess, they were trying to do away with tags that had to be present for things to latch onto, but which were not always part of a thing. That is, damage will always need a type, so they could make explicit damage types and, if ever damage were listed without a type, it would be clearly an error, not a case where players would be left wondering why this was the "untyped" damage type rather than the more "obvious" kind it "should" be by flavor. It's obvious that it's an error, so the DM should make a ruling as to what damage type it is.

On the other hand, not every spell would have the [mind-affecting] tag. If a spell lacks it, is this an erroneous omission, or an intentional feature? If suggestion is [mind-affecting] but command is not, is it deliberate? Or did somebody flub the write-up? So, rather than have umpteen tags to interact with that may or may not be present, and whose absence could be read as a statement about the spell, they just describe the spell and leave it to the DM to adjudicate whether that "affects the mind" or not. (Which still leaves us with the interesting question as to whether hold person is affecting the mind or the body.)

I am not saying it is the right or a perfect solution; I am just laying out what my guess is as to why spell tags are gone despite damage having an array of explicit types.