Chill Touch and Undead [Archive] - Wizards Community

Chill Touch and Undead [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Seeker95
03-16-04, 05:38 PM The description of chill touch includes:An undead creature you touch takes no damage of either sort, but it must make a successful Will saving throw or flee as if panicked for 1d4 rounds +1 round per caster level.Under the condition panicked it reads:Characters who are panicked are shaken, and they run away from the source of their fear as quickly as they can. (SRD)

and

Panicked is a more extreme state of fear than shaken or frightened. (PHB)But undead are immune to mind-affecting effects:Undead Type: Immunity to all mind-affecting effects (charms, compulsions, phantasms, patterns, and morale effects).The spell cause fear is a mind-affecting effect.

Wouldn't fear count as a mind-affecting effect?
If so, how does a first level spell (chill touch) cause an advanced form of fear in undead?
mercurial67
03-16-04, 06:39 PM The part of the spell you need to pay special attention to is as if panicked. That doesn't mean the undead is actually panicked, you just treat them as if they were panicked for effects.
Seeker95
03-16-04, 07:30 PM What are they if they are as if panicked?

It is a mechanic that does not make sense in light of the existing rules or even the fantasy "logic" of the game.

I think I am more comfortable with a statement along the lines of it was a designer oversight than with a technicality-based-on-syntax explanation.

(And I was kinda hoping this had been explained already!)
tarkin
03-16-04, 07:41 PM I have to disagree here Seeker. It looks to me that you need to brush up on your english a bit.

As if means:

1) They are not the following.

2) They do however act in a similar manner.

As to what they are if they are not panicked, that is simple:

They are affected by a necromantic magic spell called Chill Touch.

The creator of the spell did not think it worthwhile to create a new "condition" just to describe the effect of a single spell.

If anything, I think I would describe the effect as beign similar to being turned, but by arcane magic instead of divine, so the effects are slightly different. By random chance, the effects happen to be almost identical to a panicked human being.
LordChronos
03-16-04, 07:57 PM Originally posted by Seeker95
The description of chill touch includes:Under the condition panicked it reads:But undead are immune to mind-affecting effects:The spell cause fear is a mind-affecting effect.

Wouldn't fear count as a mind-affecting effect?
If so, how does a first level spell (chill touch) cause an advanced form of fear in undead?

Does turning/rebuking not work either?

Chill Touch basically works like a 1d6 inflict, but when it comes to undead it works similar to a turning. Meaning they flee from the caster.
Thelon Fairblade
03-17-04, 09:43 AM The way we have played it is simply to force them to flee, with no other penalties or effects.
Seeker95
03-17-04, 11:35 AM This musta been a case of me over analyzing the spell mechanics. It still seems buggy to me, but I'll stop fretting over it.

Thanks for the feedback folks.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Seeker95 03-16-04, 05:38 PM	The description of chill touch includes:An undead creature you touch takes no damage of either sort, but it must make a successful Will saving throw or flee as if panicked for 1d4 rounds +1 round per caster level.Under the condition panicked it reads:Characters who are panicked are shaken, and they run away from the source of their fear as quickly as they can. (SRD) and Panicked is a more extreme state of fear than shaken or frightened. (PHB)But undead are immune to mind-affecting effects:Undead Type: Immunity to all mind-affecting effects (charms, compulsions, phantasms, patterns, and morale effects).The spell cause fear is a mind-affecting effect. Wouldn't fear count as a mind-affecting effect? If so, how does a first level spell (chill touch) cause an advanced form of fear in undead?
mercurial67 03-16-04, 06:39 PM	The part of the spell you need to pay special attention to is as if panicked. That doesn't mean the undead is actually panicked, you just treat them as if they were panicked for effects.
Seeker95 03-16-04, 07:30 PM	What are they if they are as if panicked? It is a mechanic that does not make sense in light of the existing rules or even the fantasy "logic" of the game. I think I am more comfortable with a statement along the lines of it was a designer oversight than with a technicality-based-on-syntax explanation. (And I was kinda hoping this had been explained already!)
tarkin 03-16-04, 07:41 PM	I have to disagree here Seeker. It looks to me that you need to brush up on your english a bit. As if means: 1) They are not the following. 2) They do however act in a similar manner. As to what they are if they are not panicked, that is simple: They are affected by a necromantic magic spell called Chill Touch. The creator of the spell did not think it worthwhile to create a new "condition" just to describe the effect of a single spell. If anything, I think I would describe the effect as beign similar to being turned, but by arcane magic instead of divine, so the effects are slightly different. By random chance, the effects happen to be almost identical to a panicked human being.
LordChronos 03-16-04, 07:57 PM	Originally posted by Seeker95 The description of chill touch includes:Under the condition panicked it reads:But undead are immune to mind-affecting effects:The spell cause fear is a mind-affecting effect. Wouldn't fear count as a mind-affecting effect? If so, how does a first level spell (chill touch) cause an advanced form of fear in undead? Does turning/rebuking not work either? Chill Touch basically works like a 1d6 inflict, but when it comes to undead it works similar to a turning. Meaning they flee from the caster.
Thelon Fairblade 03-17-04, 09:43 AM	The way we have played it is simply to force them to flee, with no other penalties or effects.
Seeker95 03-17-04, 11:35 AM	This musta been a case of me over analyzing the spell mechanics. It still seems buggy to me, but I'll stop fretting over it. Thanks for the feedback folks.