cleansing touch ends feeble mind

[Askeladd]

https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?p=25034605

wanted to see more thoughts on this.
i beleive a paladins cleansing touch does end the effects of feeble mind, and that the paladin would in fact be able to attempt to cleanse it on himself.

if we were to read the wording on both the spell and the ability, there is nothing stopping cleansing touch from being used.
and secondly if we are to assume the wording "ends the spell" on feeble mind actually means "spell effects" then logically we too must assume the same goes for cleansing touch, afterall its not called dispelling touch.
some point out that the spell lists specifically which spells end it.. however it does not say only those spells end it rather lists them as examples.

as for those who say "spell duration is instantaneous" the spell says that every 30 days a saving throw can be used to end the spell.

no errata has also changed the wording of feeble mind for "clarification" so we are to assume that its written as intended. so the only conclusion is that cleansing touch can end the spell.

[MaxWilson]

https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?p=25034605

wanted to see more thoughts on this.
i beleive a paladins cleansing touch does end the effects of feeble mind, and that the paladin would in fact be able to attempt to cleanse it on himself.

if we were to read the wording on both the spell and the ability, there is nothing stopping cleansing touch from being used.
and secondly if we are to assume the wording "ends the spell" on feeble mind actually means "spell effects" then logically we too must assume the same goes for cleansing touch, afterall its not called dispelling touch.
some point out that the spell lists specifically which spells end it.. however it does not say only those spells end it rather lists them as examples.

as for those who say "spell duration is instantaneous" the spell says that every 30 days a saving throw can be used to end the spell.

no errata has also changed the wording of feeble mind for "clarification" so we are to assume that its written as intended. so the only conclusion is that cleansing touch can end the spell.

Hmm. My initial thought was "Feeblemind is like Inflict Wounds or Plane Shift or Meteor Swarm: ending the spell doesn't help you (it's already over). You need Greater Restoration to fix the damage it did. Cleansing Touch isn't applicable."

However, you make a good point in bold there, well enough to persuade me that Feeblemind is sloppily written and that the RAW are incoherent. Therefore as DM I might as well interpret the ambiguity in a way that will make a player happy, so yes, you've convinced me that it should work.

[Evaar]

I was going to say the Duration of Feeblemind is Instantaneous so the spell is already over, the saving throw to recover your Int/Cha represents mental healing from the damage the spell did much like spending healing surges represents physical healing from the damage done by a Fireball.

However, as you note, Feeblemind says the following:

At the end of every 30 days, the creature can repeat its saving throw against this spell. If it succeeds on its saving throw, the spell ends.

So if you have another method of ending a spell, I guess it works.

[Angelalex242]

The real trick is, can the Paladin fix his own mind with cleansing touch?

That is what my original thread was about, after all.

Casting Feeblemind against a Paladin is a smart move for a mage, after all.

[CountDVB]

The real trick is, can the Paladin fix his own mind with cleansing touch?

That is what my original thread was about, after all.

Casting Feeblemind against a Paladin is a smart move for a mage, after all.

I would guess so. The fact they can still protect their friends indicate some sort of presence left of personality and given the supernatural nature of the Oath, I would think that would be enough,

[Kane0]

I was going to say the Duration of Feeblemind is Instantaneous so the spell is already over, the saving throw to recover your Int/Cha represents mental healing from the damage the spell did much like spending healing surges represents physical healing from the damage done by a Fireball.

However, as you note, Feeblemind says the following:


So if you have another method of ending a spell, I guess it works.

Cleansing Touch also adds onto the base healing thing paladins do anyways, so it would work either way unless you rule that feeblemind removes a section of your brain and needs regeneration/wish or whatever.

[quindraco]

Feeblemind has an error in its rules text, so your DM has to house rule to fix it. The spell claims it is instantaneous, and then later lists ways it can end later. That's impossible, by definition. An instantaneous spell ends as soon as it's cast. That's what instantaneous means. If the latter claim in Feeblemind is true, the spell is permanent, and can be dispelled or cleansing touched. If the former claim is true, the listed end conditions end the spell's effects but do not end the spell, and neither dispel nor cleansing touch will work. But RAW, Feeblemind contains a fundamental contradiction.

[Askeladd]

The real trick is, can the Paladin fix his own mind with cleansing touch?

That is what my original thread was about, after all.

Casting Feeblemind against a Paladin is a smart move for a mage, after all.

Casting feeble mind against any spellcaster is a smart move, however cleansing touch exists specifically to end spells like this one.

Why not. Int and charisma are 1 but your wisdom stays in tact. There are plenty of monsters with 1 int who still use their full arsenal of abilities. Paladins abilities that aren’t spells they are more reflexive rather than studied. They simply touch someone and will them to be healed.

Medicine is a wisdom skill after all, not affected by feeble mind.

[Valmark]

Cleansing Touch wouldn't remove Feeblemind's effect (imo) because like you said the spell is already gone and CT only removes spells, not magical effects in general.

There are features and/or spells that explicitely differentiate between spells and their effects- it's the case with Flame Arrows. As such it can be inferred that spells are different from their effects and something that removes only spells wouldn't remove a spell's effect if the spell has already ended.

Same thing if someone used something like Dispel Magic- the spell isn't there anymore so it wouldn't work. Further shown by the fact that Feeblemind lists the spells that can remove its effect and Dispel Magic doesn't figure in the list.

[MrStabby]

Yeah, I think it can end feeblemind.

If every aspect of the spell ended after it was cast then the part of the spell allowing you to save in 30 days would aslo have ceased to be in effect so you could never get rid of it.

There are explicitly listed spells that can end feeblemind - if it ended after "instantanious" then these could not end the spell. I think some of the wording/structure was to avoid dispell magic being a solution.

[ProsecutorGodot]

There are explicitly listed spells that can end feeblemind - if it ended after "instantanious" then these could not end the spell. I think some of the wording/structure was to avoid dispell magic being a solution.

It's that list of restrictions that make most believe Cleansing Touch would not work, not necessarily the duration of the spell.

I've personally ruled both ways, depending on the circumstances and players opinions.

[Valmark]

I think some of the wording/structure was to avoid dispell magic being a solution.

Dispel Magic and Cleansing Touch both end Spells though, with the difference that DM ends all spells while CT ends one spell at a time. How's CT a solution but DM isn't?

[Askeladd]

It's that list of restrictions that make most believe Cleansing Touch would not work, not necessarily the duration of the spell.

I've personally ruled both ways, depending on the circumstances and players opinions.

The spells it mentions are ways to cure it, but does not say they are the only way. Normally the spells it mentions don’t end spells

Dispel Magic and Cleansing Touch both end Spells though, with the difference that DM ends all spells while CT ends one spell at a time. How's CT a solution but DM isn't?

Dispell magic isn’t limited to a willing creature. Cleansing touch is meant to be recuperative, much like the spells mentioned that can end it that normally don’t end spells.

Cleansing Touch wouldn't remove Feeblemind's effect (imo) because like you said the spell is already gone and CT only removes spells, not magical effects in general.

There are features and/or spells that explicitely differentiate between spells and their effects-

Except the spell itself does not do that, at the bottom it mentions that passing a saving throw after 30 days ends it implying it’s still active.

lists the spells that can remove its effect and Dispel Magic doesn't figure in the list.

Much like I said to godots point.
It lists spells that can end it. Does not say “only these spells” normally most of those spells could not end spells.

[Valmark]

Dispell magic isn’t limited to a willing creature. Cleansing touch is meant to be recuperative, much like the spells mentioned that can end it that normally don’t end spells.

Except the spell itself does not do that, at the bottom it mentions that passing a saving throw after 30 days ends it implying it’s still active.

Much like I said to godots point.
It lists spells that can end it. Does not say “only these spells” normally most of those spells could not end spells.

Nothing there is a reason for Dispel Magic to not work if Cleansing Touch does, though.

True, but it's also an Istantaneous spell. So the question is- is it an error in the text and the spell already ended (so CT and DM wouldn't work) or is it an error in the duration (so DM and CT would work)?
Imo it's the former.

There's something to be said about making a list and intentionally leaving something out- that said, like above. Can DM dispel it (so it's not Istantaneous) and so can CT or can't DM do that?

[ProsecutorGodot]

The spells it mentions are ways to cure it, but does not say they are the only way. Normally the spells it mentions don’t end spells

There are two ways to read the restrictive list, first is that it gives those spells permission to do so since they don't have that permission by default (feeblemind is not covered by any of the conditions that greater restoration normally ends) and the other is that since it comes directly after the spells own conditions to end, these are the only allowed alternative methods.

For what it's worth, I know there is a tweet from JC that signifies the intent is for the latter (can't comb though Twitter at work) but again I'm willing to rule for or against that intent if the table demands it.

[JonBeowulf]

Cleansing Touch isn't a spell. No big surprise that Feeblemind doesn't include it in the list of spells that end it.

Death of the target also ends it... not listed.

[Valmark]

Cleansing Touch isn't a spell. No big surprise that Feeblemind doesn't include it in the list of spells that end it.

Death of the target also ends it... not listed.

But the fact that a list only includes spells doesn't mean that it's a spell list.

[Evaar]

There are two ways to read the restrictive list, first is that it gives those spells permission to do so since they don't have that permission by default (feeblemind is not covered by any of the conditions that greater restoration normally ends) and the other is that since it comes directly after the spells own conditions to end, these are the only allowed alternative methods.

For what it's worth, I know there is a tweet from JC that signifies the intent is for the latter (can't comb though Twitter at work) but again I'm willing to rule for or against that intent if the table demands it.

Here's the tweet:
https://twitter.com/jeremyecrawford/...959170?lang=en

That said, this is RAI. RAW, I agree with Askeladd.

[BerzerkerUnit]

My reading is no. You can think of feeblemind like a damaging spell that deals Int-1 int damage and provides specific rules for how to recover the lost Int the same way a shadow’s strength drain attack does.

The fact it’s written poorly isn’t relevant to my interpretation. At the end of the day Imprison can’t be ended by cleansing touch either. I’m fine with straight level comparison being the bar. Feeblemind is a level 15 effect, Cleansing touch is a level 14 feature.

[Samayu]

The interpretation that CT (or Dispel Magic) won't end the effects, depends on the loss of mental faculty not being sustained by magical means. In other words, you just lose the brainpower, and the saving throw is not to end the magic, but just to organically regain your faculties.

Seems kinda strange that it's so all-or-nothing, though.

[Askeladd]

My reading is no. You can think of feeblemind like a damaging spell that deals Int-1 int damage and provides specific rules for how to recover the lost Int the same way a shadow’s strength drain attack does.

The fact it’s written poorly isn’t relevant to my interpretation. At the end of the day Imprison can’t be ended by cleansing touch either. I’m fine with straight level comparison being the bar. Feeblemind is a level 15 effect, Cleansing touch is a level 14 feature.

you assume automatically that it is written poorly in the sense that the duration is accurate, but if its written poorly it might be just so that in fact the duration is incorrect since its worded entirely opposite of the classified duration.
and yes cleansing touch is a level 14 feature, but seeing as nowhere in the description of cleansing touch does it limit it only to spells of a specific spell level, or character class level. but rather tailor suited to end spells that cause debilitating effects on willing allied creatures. then we must assume by raw that it includes feeble mind, since it is the exact purpose of the feature. your not going to say that all spells acquired after level 14 are now immune to cleansing touch?

if the spell was ability damage it would have said so. it does not. a shadows strength drain lasts only until a short rest, and is not the effect of a spell. whilst this one not only is the effect of a spell, but indicates that it is due to the spell still being active, since you must make continued saves vs the spell

and as for cleansing touch not being able to end imprisonment. i disagree entirely.

[RSP]

My reading is no. You can think of feeblemind like a damaging spell that deals Int-1 int damage and provides specific rules for how to recover the lost Int the same way a shadow’s strength drain attack does.

The fact it’s written poorly isn’t relevant to my interpretation. At the end of the day Imprison can’t be ended by cleansing touch either. I’m fine with straight level comparison being the bar. Feeblemind is a level 15 effect, Cleansing touch is a level 14 feature.

Not sure why level of ability matters: GR is a “9th level ability” and Heal an “11th level ability” though technically either could be cast off a scroll at a much lower level.

I’d say the level argument is completely moot.

[Thunderous Mojo]

The real trick is, can the Paladin fix his own mind with cleansing touch?

Yes...I think a good case can be made to allow exactly this. A Paladin is literally a Charismatic, in the academic, Comparative Religions sense of the term.

A being suddenly being restored to mental acuity, after a period mental diminishment, is an oft cited example of a Charismatic Spiritual Gift of Healing.

Feeblemind being able to be removed through Cleansing Touch, and a Paladin being able to use their Spiritual Gifts to heal themself, seems an ideal use based off theme alone.

[Unoriginal]

I don't think a Feebleminded Paladin would be smart enough to remember they can cure themselves.

Same way that a Feebleminded Cleric wouldn't remember they can attempt Divine Intervention.

[Valmark]

I don't think a Feebleminded Paladin would be smart enough to remember they can cure themselves.

Same way that a Feebleminded Cleric wouldn't remember they can attempt Divine Intervention.

Ironically I've done just that with my cleric. I would think that pleading to your god in your time of need doesn't require much thought since you're a cleric (meaning everything you can do comes from them).

Just like I think a paladin would remember they can cure themselves, since they've been doing that from level 1 (arguable wether they could distinguish between LoH and CT)- though like I said above I'm also of the mind that CT doesn't remove Feeblemind so it's a bit moot.

[Thunderous Mojo]

I don't think a Feebleminded Paladin would be smart enough to remember they can cure themselves.

Same way that a Feebleminded Cleric wouldn't remember they can attempt Divine Intervention.

Charismatic Spiritual Gifts are generally considered somewhat beyond the exact control of those blessed with the gift.

Sometimes, 'The Spirit' just works through people...without those people truly understanding nor exactly controlling what is going on.

My first reaction was similar to Unoriginal's but upon further reflection, thematically, the state of a Paladin's Reasoning ability is largely irrelevant vis a vis Charismatic Spiritual Gifts.

A '1 Intelligence' creature could still have an inchoate notion of Divine Providence, and gods, (or other Divine Analogues), don't necessarily need prayers to be formed in language.

[ProsecutorGodot]

Charismatic Spiritual Gifts are generally considered somewhat beyond the exact control of those blessed with the gift.

Sometimes, 'The Spirit' just works through people...without those people truly understanding nor exactly controlling what is going on.

My first reaction was similar to Unoriginal's but upon further reflection, thematically, the state of a Paladin's Reasoning ability is largely irrelevant vis a vis Charismatic Spiritual Gifts.

A '1 Intelligence' creature could still have an inchoate notion of Divine Providence, and gods, (or other Divine Analogues), don't necessarily need prayers to be formed in language.

It could be argued that lacking the ability to communicate in any intelligible way extends to your thoughts, you can't beseech your god for any specific aid regardless of your intentions because they can't understand what you want.

Of course, this doesn't apply to the vast majority of Paladin whose abilities aren't sourced from a God/Higher Power.

[Angelalex242]

Deities have intelligence and wisdom scores in the high 20s or even 30 flat.

Common sense would tell such a deity that the feebleminded Paladin probably wants to be cured.

If we're not using deities, however, you might consider Cleansing Touch more like white blood cells...you don't have to be intelligent for your immune system to function.

[Thunderous Mojo]

It could be argued that lacking the ability to communicate in any intelligible way extends to your thoughts, you can't beseech your god for any specific aid regardless of your intentions because they can't understand what you want.

While a Feeblemind spell should prevent Telepathic communication by preventing the subject of the spell from (to paraphrase), being able to "communicate or understand language"; nothing in the rules, that I am aware of would stipulate that it also prevents 'inchoate prayers'.

This type of thematic addition would be a particular ruling by a particular gaming group...(it is a cool idea, admittedly 👍), but is not mandated by the rules themselves.

Charismatic Spiritual Gifts, are in religious literature often granted to persons whom were not seeking, and might of even been opposed to the idea of receiving such gifts.

Just because a Paladin is dumbstruck, and lacking some agency doesn't mean that powerful forces in the multiverse won't cause Cleansing Touch to remove the effect.

Of course, this doesn't apply to the vast majority of Paladin whose abilities aren't sourced from a God/Higher Power.

The PHB describes the Paladin class as a "Holy Warrior" whom swear oaths. Divine, Sacred, Holy....these words and concept are primarily used in conjunction with the concept of Divinities.

I think it safe to say the concept of the Paladin class, also embraces those characters that serve Divine Forces, (5e just eliminates the mandate that a Paladin must serve Divine Forces).

Also, most Charismatic faiths found in the United States of America, are inclined to also believe in a "Divine Creator". I thought I had been somewhat transparent that I was viewing Charismatic Faith through the prism of how the term is used in the study of Religion, and not just the D&D ability score.
I must have been unclear, my apologies.....

[ProsecutorGodot]

While a Feeblemind spell should prevent Telepathic communication by preventing the subject of the spell from (to paraphrase), being able to "communicate or understand language"; nothing in the rules, that I am aware of would stipulate that it also prevents 'inchoate prayers'.

Divine Intervention requires the Cleric to implore their God for aid, they need to ask. They can't ask if they can't communicate.