Mind Immune Undead

[Username17]

So in our Illithiad review, we noticed that Bruce Cordell went off on a rant about how Illithids couldn't see Undead because Undead don't interact with the mental plane and were immune to almost all forms of psionics. This struck both AncientHistory as extremely weird, because neither of us could remember a rule to that effect in previous books. So we've been hunting, and I have to say that I still can't find anything saying that anywhere. Certainly not in the rules for Ravenloft (where it specifies that specific bad things happen to you if you read the mind of a vampire, thus implying directly that their minds can be read). Also not in Darksun, where there are special rules that make Undead subject to mind affecting spells that they wouldn't normally be affected by. And not in either the rules for the Complete Psionics Handbook or the rules in Player's Options: Skills and Powers, which basically don't mention anything special about Undead and telepathy at all.

Going back to the 2nd edition Player's Handbook, I can kind of see how you could walk away with the idea that Undead had a blanket immunity to mind affecting effects. They are specifically immune to Charm Monster, Hold Person, ESP, Cause Fear, Spook, Scare, Fear, Eyebite, Sleep, Suggestion, and Mass Suggestion. But they only have a blanket immunity to Illusions that lack a quasi-real component (so Undead automatically see through Invisibility in this edition). They are totally affected by Charm Person, Hold Undead, Hold Monster, Charm Person or Mammal, Domination, and Mass Charm.

Interestingly, I think I've found out why Beholders have both a Charm Person eye and a Charm Monster eye. The Charm Monster eye affects any "living creature", while the Charm Monster eye affects humanoids (and demi-humans) whether they are living or not. Weird but true. But I'm still no closer to figuring out where the fucking hell Bruce Cordell got this "rule". Was he just trying to be a glossator and failing badly?

-Username17

[schpeelah]

That's quite honestly unexpected. I always assumed the mind-affecting immunity was because of the Undead type being written with zombies and skeletons in mind the same way Construct was written with golems in mind which is why every clockwork creature and living doll has magic immunity.

[Winnah]

The Monstrous Compendium folder, with the original 2e Mind Flayer description has a note about the typical Mind Flyer city with an Elder Brain.

The Elder Brain scouts the surrounding area telepathically (2-5 mile radius), then relays that information to it's colony. Consequently, Mind Flayers can only be surprised by mindless creatures in that area, such as skeletons and zombies.

I recall something about undead being invisible to infravision as well, but that might be a hold over from AD&D when it was described more as heat vision.

Ju-Ju Zombies are explicity immune to all mind effecting spells, including illusions, though most undead just have an immunity to sleep, charm and hold spells listed. I only skimmed through the MC1, so there may be a number specific Monsters with an explicit immunity to mind effecting spells.

Some immunities are effectively hidden in spell or power descriptions, such as the spell ESP, which can't be used on undead.

Finally, if you're using Ravenloft rules for Madness Checks, using spells or items to interact with the mind of undead creatures can force a Madness Check.

But no, Undead have no blanket immunities, at least not as laid out in 3rd edition.

[Wiseman]

I don't think every construct has magic immunity. At least going by 3.5 rules, i haven't seen any non-golem constructs with magic immunity yet. But then again, I haven't read any previous edition sourcebooks that aren't planescape.

EDIT: ...Ninja'd...

[ishy]

Certainly not in the rules for Ravenloft

Undead, as a class, are immune to any mental-control power or mind-altering ability while in Ravenloft. This includes many of the powers in the telepathic discipline.

Don't really know much about the topic other then what ddg tells me though.

[shadzar]

But I'm still no closer to figuring out where the fucking hell Bruce Cordell got this "rule".

out of his ass. by the time the book was made there was no longer continuity between AD&D products. so many supplements existed that testing them all together would have taken years, and even longer since testing and checking materials wasnt allowed by LW.

this is also the overlap time when WotC took over TSR and LW was no longer there, and they just needed to push shit out to keep people interested in the game while they whipped up 3rd edition.

Monstrous Arcana, was less a series of supplements but a separate setting. or more each product was its own setting related to the monsters, etc in each product.

he just made the shit up is all. supplements never reflect the correct core of the game, they are things to add if you so choose.

or it could be implied, that the physical brain was required to exist and be functioning since Mind Flayers you know.. eat them. so a zombie that is not using a functioning brain could be "unseen", as well a ghost which has no physical brain.

AD&D you added the bits you wanted and left out the ones you didnt, and changed whatever you wanted to play your game your way. this is what Bruce did.

later supplements after 2.5 pretty much were like 1e MM -> PHB -> DMG -> UA. things were changed in the process and people didnt look back to see if they were doing it right. thus why 2.5 and core games dont mesh well, much like 3.0 and 3.x games where you are using that one or two rules that contradict each other.

there isnt really much decent Bruce did in regards to D&D.

Return to White Plume, he just rewrote someone elses work.

Illithiad he jsut slapped a fancy sounding word to Illithid and merged with Illiad to get greek geek cred to the book.

Reverse Dungeon was a novel idea, but complete failure in execution.

Keep on the Shadowfell....does it need to be said how bad that is?

Dungeon Builder's Guidebook was just the old geomorphs and 1e Appendices redone with a lot of words for people not smart enough to just map out a dungeon and put shit in it.

[Username17]

Keep on the Shadowfell....does it need to be said how bad that is?

It actually does. Written by Mike Mearls and Bruce Cordell, Keep on the Shadowfell was supposed to be the intro adventure for 4th edition. It was really bad. Nothing fucking worked, and even the encounters were way too powerful by simple arithmetic. The story was lame, which could be forgiven in a slapdash intro adventure. But the fact was that all they managed to show off about the mechanics was that they didn't work and the authors didn't understand how or why they didn't work.

It is amazing to me that both Bruce Cordell and Mike Mearls still have jobs after that.

-Username17

[Prak]

Well, Mind Flayers and undead do interact in strange ways. A daily question on D&D's facebook page made me realize that vampires can just rock mind flayers, because having their brain eaten doesn't actually do anything to them. This also means that, as long as the mind flayer doesn't mind brain spam, a vampire is basically their perfect meal source. (assuming no weird house rules about brain nutritional value are in effect).

Flavour-wise, it's a cool idea that undead are invisible and immune to psionics, but it heavily affects balance.

[Aryxbez]

You saying Vamp-brains will just come back Prak? If that is the case, that sounds like an adventure, or antagonistic faction right there. Elder Brain? or group of Flayers partner up with Vampires, having them make an army under their control, so the vampire lackeys bring in their own kind to be used as food source, since their brains will apparently regenerate anyway.

[shadzar]

well regenerate as an ability of gaining the 3hp back doesnt say it isnt also like the necromantinc spell of the same name, so many probably play it close to the same, with the bonus healing ability wherever specified.

it is where the rules dont mention anything so you are either left with or allowed to use mythology as you know it.

the problem then lies in the case of cutting off the head of a vampire, etc... if not placed in a grave correctly facing etc, the vampire would be able to come back even after being beheaded.. so i would guess this means the brain DOES grow back with those circumstances too.

[darkmaster]

I can't say where it's from, but I will say that someone probably mistakenly mixed up mindless undead like skeletons, and non-mindless undead, like vampires, rather than someone intentionally cocking tings up. Which is pretty stupid, but you know, people.

[Prak]

Yeah, I'm assuming they would, because it's not an autokill for vampires.

A mind flayer that begins its turn with all four tentacles attached and and that makes a successful grapple check automatically extracts the opponent's brain, instantly killing that creature. This power is useless against constructs, elementals, oozes, plants, and undead. It is not instantly fatal to foes with multiple heads, such as ettins and hydras.

So, extract just says that Undead are blanket immune to extract, even if they have brains.

The Vampire template says that a vampire reduced to 0 hp turns gaseous. Except that Extract is a death effect, it doesn't inflict hp damage.
The entry on destroying a vampire doesn't even mention decapitation or destruction of the head or brain as a method of destroying vampires:

Slaying a Vampire

Reducing a vampire’s hit points to 0 or lower incapacitates it but doesn’t always destroy it (see the note on fast healing). However, certain attacks can slay vampires. Exposing any vampire to direct sunlight disorients it: It can take only a single move action or attack action and is destroyed utterly in the next round if it cannot escape. Similarly, immersing a vampire in running water robs it of one-third of its hit points each round until it is destroyed at the end of the third round of immersion. Driving a wooden stake through a vampire’s heart instantly slays the monster. However, it returns to life if the stake is removed, unless the body is destroyed. A popular tactic is to cut off the creature’s head and fill its mouth with holy wafers (or their equivalent).

As a proof, you can check Vorpal, which does specifically call out Vampires as being vulnerable to the attack.

So, yeah, Extract is essentially harmless to vampires. At worst you could assume it does tentacle damage to the target, or maybe 1d6 acid, since they're supposed to have an acid which aids the creation of a hole in the skull. Given fast healing, I would assume the vampire would regrow the brain matter, even if they, apparently, don't actually need it...

[zeruslord]

fast healing explicitly doesn't allow regrowing lost bodyparts, so it wouldn't work unless there's a spell to regrow body parts for undead (regenerate only applies to living creatures.) On the other hand, regeneration has a clause saying that attacks causing instant death only do so if they use a weapon which deals lethal damage, so anything with regeneration should be able to survive having its brain eaten.

EDIT: even if you assume that there's acid damage, the Kyton and most high-CR devils have regeneration beaten by good/silver.

[shadzar]

(regenerate only applies to living creatures.)

no.

Regenerate

(Necrmancy)
Reversible

When a regenerate spell is cast, body members (fingers, toes, hands, feet, arms, legs, tails, or even heads of multi-headed creatues), bones, and organs grow back.

Copyright 1999 TSR Inc.

Even if attacked with and harmed by magical weapons, vampires regenerate 3 hit points per round.

Copyright 1999 TSR Inc.

contradictory rules using the same keyword.

ergo DMs judgement as said above when faced with...

The creature must be lving to receive the benefits of this spell.

Copyright 1999 TSR Inc.

ever heard of levels?

[Desdan_Mervolam]

I figure the whole "All undead are immune to mind-affecting effects" thing is probably a house rule from Cordell's table that he forgot isn't RAW.

Either that, or he believed it SHOULD be RAW and acted as it it was whenever he wrote stuff, no matter how much "No, that's stupid" he got around the office for it.

[Bill Bisco: Isometric Imp]

If you thought 3rd edition designers didn't understand their own rules, that goes doubly for the designers of 2nd edition.

[shadzar]

If you thought 3rd edition designers didn't understand their own rules, that goes doubly for the designers of 2nd edition.

except there is no such thing as 2nd edition designers in regards to the book, they are 1st edition editors basically, and MOST probably didnt understand the rules as they were all lackeys of LW, much like 3.x, 4.x, and 5.x designers are lackeys of HASBRO.

Gary understood, but couldnt articulate and didnt have an editor, and he was the designer of 2nd.

[Ghremdal]

I remember the first time I encountered the "fact" that undead were immune to mind effecting. It was in one of the Drizzt books.

Could it be possible that Cordell took that from Salvatore instead of the other way around? Books were published in 1990, so that gives us a timeframe at the very least.

[shadzar]

AHA! while looking up undead and any immunities, i found the vampire part that explains the brains and regeneration...

as with ALL TSR editions, things were left out form edition, but still meant to be played the same, errata exists heavily to prove this.

TROLLS: Thin and rubbery, loathsome Trolls are able to regenerate, so that beginning the third melee round after one is hit it will begin to repair itself. Regeneration is at the rate of 3 hit points per turn. Even totally sundered Trolls will regenerate eventually, so that unless they are burned or immersed in acid they will resume combat when they have regenerated to 6 or more hit points.

Vampire: They regenerate during combat as do Trolls, but they do so immediately upon being hit at the rate of three hit points per turn.

same book says undead CAN be controlled in some fashion beyond spells...

Men types killed by Spectres become Spectres under the control of the one who made them.

i would think this is a soul or essence control if you will rather than a mind control.

i will keep reading when i have some more time and see if i cant track back the immunity.

[shadzar]

It is amazing to me that both Bruce Cordell and Mike Mearls still have jobs after that.

-Username17

does the lack of L&L article this week mean Mearls no longer does?