Artificers and Metamagic Item

[Phylion]

Okay, so my DM and I are having a dispute about the Artificer Infusion Metamagic Item. Thusfar I have built a Blastificer. I was talking to him about how I was able to lock myself down in a resilient sphere and spend the next 5 rounds using Metamagic Item to apply all of my Metamagic feats to my Wand of Scorching Ray. I dealt like 384 damage to this Succubus, but that is besides the point. I was telling him about it after the session wrapped up and everyone had left. Apparently he was under the impression that I had used the Metamagic Spell Trigger class feature to blow out a bunch of charges. When I explained to him that I only had to blow two charges because of all of the stuff I did with Metamagic Item, he insisted that I would have to spend extra charges...
Could the community please help me convince him that that is not how the infusion works; that you don't have to spend extra charges? It was rather distressful considering I had built my entire character around Metamagic and was really relying on Metamagic Item to save me a couple of bucks.
P.S.-Explaining the difference b/t the infusion and the class ability would help, and he even hinted at not caring which way it worked but making me take up the charges anyway, which defeats the purpose of the infusion entirely, so if we could help change his mentality it would be kind of nice.

[Telonius]

Okay, so my DM and I are having a dispute about the Artificer Infusion Metamagic Item. Thusfar I have built a Blastificer. I was talking to him about how I was able to lock myself down in a resilient sphere and spend the next 5 rounds using Metamagic Item to apply all of my Metamagic feats to my Wand of Scorching Ray. I dealt like 384 damage to this Succubus, but that is besides the point. I was telling him about it after the session wrapped up and everyone had left. Apparently he was under the impression that I had used the Metamagic Spell Trigger class feature to blow out a bunch of charges. When I explained to him that I only had to blow two charges because of all of the stuff I did with Metamagic Item, he insisted that I would have to spend extra charges...
Could the community please help me convince him that that is not how the infusion works; that you don't have to spend extra charges? It was rather distressful considering I had built my entire character around Metamagic and was really relying on Metamagic Item to save me a couple of bucks.
P.S.-Explaining the difference b/t the infusion and the class ability would help, and he even hinted at not caring which way it worked but making me take up the charges anyway, which defeats the purpose of the infusion entirely, so if we could help change his mentality it would be kind of nice.

Imagine that the "Metamagic Infusion" infusion doesn't exist at all. You can use your Metamagic Spell Trigger to spend charges and apply a Metamagic Feat that you know to a spell trigger item, right? So, why would the infusion do the exact same thing that the class feature already lets you do? It would be like giving Druid a "Wild Shape" spell that lets them turn into an animal.

A bit beyond that, it does sound like the DM got a little blindsided by what the combination can do. Resilient Sphere is basically a time-out, mid-combat. Unless somebody has Dispel Magic prepared, it's, "Please wait 37 seconds while we combine into the giant robot." If he wasn't expecting that, he's probably thinking, "Aw, crap, he's going to do that every time I send something scary after him now, isn't he?"

I know this is going against your instincts as a gamer, but you have to clue him in to a few things. One: five rounds is a long time in combat. During that time, you will not be able to help your teammates. His enemies can concentrate fire on the remaining team members. This is risky.

Two: You don't need a rod of cancellation, just a targeted dispel magic to get rid of the effect and put you back under threat. If you don't have a full round to cast the infusion, the infusion won't be an issue. There are other things that the enemies can do during this time to neutralize your effectiveness: antimagic fields, encase you in Walls of Stone to disrupt your line of effect, Disintegrate an area directly under the sphere...

Three: "Death Blossom." You went nova, and used ... four? ... third-level infusions to take out a single foe. Your resources are down significantly for the rest of the day. This is not getting "free damage."

[Aharon]

Also, because of the stacking rules, IMO you were wrong:


Same Effect with Differing Results

The same spell can sometimes produce varying effects if applied to the same recipient more than once. Usually the last spell in the series trumps the others. None of the previous spells are actually removed or dispelled, but their effects become irrelevant while the final spell in the series lasts.


seems to apply here. So you can get one metamagic feat via the Infusion, and if you try to get a second one, it would override the first.

[Phylion]

Thank you very much. To illustrate why I used my time out and why it was no threat to my other teammates (although he very well could have made it a threat), we were fighting a Succubus which had successfully charmed 2/5 the party, one of the charmed persons killing another 1/5 and the only other two people left in the party were the wizard and I. He may be a Conjuration specialist, but we weren't prepared to take on half of our party, a dragon shaman focused into metabreath and a rogue/fighter spiked chain death machine with our measly life totals. So, we used my ONE AND ONLY scroll of Resilient Sphere to give ourselves a break, then pop out a couple of rounds later to blast the Succubus to death and remove the charmed effect. Not exactly something we do on a regular basis.

And thanks for the input Aharon, BUT, I have a couple of counterarguments. Firstly, it says it USUALLY trumps the other, not always, so that aspect is debatable as to whether or not it trumps the previous castings.
Secondly, Artificer's don't use spells (everyone sees that it says spells, right?), they use infusions, which, according to class flavor stuff, function far separately from spells and are not spells...just saying.

[Urpriest]

The basic point to make to your DM: if the infusion uses extra charges, what is the formula for how many charges are used? It doesn't say in the infusion description, and Metamagic Spell Trigger is a totally unrelated ability that the infusion doesn't reference.

[Aharon]

Infusions: An artificer is not a spellcaster, but he does have the ability to imbue items with magical infusions. Infusions are neither arcane nor divine; they are drawn from the artificer infusion list (see Chapter 5: Magic). They function just like spells and follow all the rules for spells. For example, an infusion can be dispelled, it will not function in an antimagic area, and an artificer must make a Concentration check if injured while imbuing an item with an infusion.
(bolding by me).
Stacking rules apply to infusions.

Concerning the "usually": If something works unlike the usual way, this is pointed out explicitly. If something is meant to stack despite the general rule, we are told so (example from feats: multiple Toughness).

[Phylion]

Okay, so the rules do say that infusions follow all of the rules for spells...I still don't think this prevents me from putting multiple metamagic feats on the wand. SO here's a copy of the Combining Magical Effects Rules.

Combining Magical Effects

Spells or magical effects usually work as described, no matter how many other spells or magical effects happen to be operating in the same area or on the same recipient. Except in special cases, a spell does not affect the way another spell operates. Whenever a spell has a specific effect on other spells, the spell description explains that effect. Several other general rules apply when spells or magical effects operate in the same place:

Stacking Effects
Spells that provide bonuses or penalties on attack rolls, damage rolls, saving throws, and other attributes usually do not stack with themselves. More generally, two bonuses of the same type don’t stack even if they come from different spells (or from effects other than spells; see Bonus Types, above).

Different Bonus Names
The bonuses or penalties from two different spells stack if the modifiers are of different types. A bonus that isn’t named stacks with any bonus.

Same Effect More than Once in Different Strengths
In cases when two or more identical spells are operating in the same area or on the same target, but at different strengths, only the best one applies.

Same Effect with Differing Results
The same spell can sometimes produce varying effects if applied to the same recipient more than once. Usually the last spell in the series trumps the others. None of the previous spells are actually removed or dispelled, but their effects become irrelevant while the final spell in the series lasts.

One Effect Makes Another Irrelevant
Sometimes, one spell can render a later spell irrelevant. Both spells are still active, but one has rendered the other useless in some fashion.

Multiple Mental Control Effects
Sometimes magical effects that establish mental control render each other irrelevant, such as a spell that removes the subjects ability to act. Mental controls that don’t remove the recipient’s ability to act usually do not interfere with each other. If a creature is under the mental control of two or more creatures, it tends to obey each to the best of its ability, and to the extent of the control each effect allows. If the controlled creature receives conflicting orders simultaneously, the competing controllers must make opposed Charisma checks to determine which one the creature obeys.

Spells with Opposite Effects
Spells with opposite effects apply normally, with all bonuses, penalties, or changes accruing in the order that they apply. Some spells negate or counter each other. This is a special effect that is noted in a spell’s description.

Instantaneous Effects
Two or more spells with instantaneous durations work cumulatively when they affect the same target.


That put there, there are some spells that definitely fit into a category in there, like ones that provide bonuses to attributes. Some spells obviously don't stack, like Bull's Strength, etc., but this one is one of those grey areas.
It really doesn't fit under the same effect different results category, because that is more geared toward things that require like saves and things so people can't say, "You cast it twice but I succeeded on the first save, so I'm good, you can't try again," not to prevent something that does not allow a save to provide different effects.

[Phylion]

In the end all I can understand the no stacking rule, which our group, I have just discovered, isn't familiar with and hasn't been using terribly effectively. I can understand it. I think it is a gray area that is certainly debatable, but my primary concern is using up charges. I would be fine if I had to blow a couple every once in a while to get that extra special one, but I don't want to have to spend five charges every time I use my main build.

[Just to Browse]

This isn't a stacking problem because there are no overlapping numerical benefits involved. If I use anyspell to grant bear's endurance and then anyspell to grant invisibility, the second does not override the first.

This works fine. But you're an artificer and that means you're OP. Sandbag a little.

[Aharon]

@Just to Browse
You are right, stacking isn't invoked, but


Same Effect with Differing Results
The same spell can sometimes produce varying effects if applied to the same recipient more than once. Usually the last spell in the series trumps the others. None of the previous spells are actually removed or dispelled, but their effects become irrelevant while the final spell in the series lasts.

is. (I grouped it with the stacking rules in my mind, obviously, it is slightly different.)

Anyspell is a bad example, since it has instantaneous duration. The PHB actually has an example:


For example, a series of polymorph spells might turn a creature
into a mouse, a lion, and then a snail. In this case, the last spell in the
series trumps the others. None of the previous spells are actually
removed or dispelled, but their effects become irrelevant while the
final spell in the series lasts.

This is exactly what happens with metamagic item: a series of metamagic item infusions grants empower, widen, twin,..., but the last one cast trumps the others.

[Aharon]

To actually add helpful content:

Are you playing with action points? The usual way for Artificers not to blow charges is Persistent unfettered heroism (spell from Races of Eberron, IIRC), combined with Wand surge.

If you want blasting with metamagic, it costs you charges. You have to weigh wether the expenditure is worth it in a given situation - instead of spell slots, your ressource management is about charges.

[Sith_Happens]

@Just to Browse
You are right, stacking isn't invoked, but

is. (I grouped it with the stacking rules in my mind, obviously, it is slightly different.)

Anyspell is a bad example, since it has instantaneous duration. The PHB actually has an example:

This is exactly what happens with metamagic item: a series of metamagic item infusions grants empower, widen, twin,..., but the last one cast trumps the others.

Note the "in this case" instead of "usually" in the PHB version. The rule in question is pretty clearly referring specifically to spells where you can't logically apply both results together. As in, you can't be a tiger and an elephant at the same time, but there's no reason you can't be both Protected from Fire and Protected from Acid.

[Lanson]

Same Effect with Differing Results
The same spell can sometimes produce varying effects if applied to the same recipient more than once. Usually the last spell in the series trumps the others. None of the previous spells are actually removed or dispelled, but their effects become irrelevant while the final spell in the series lasts.

This ^ It would not work, as the last metamagic applied would override the previous castings.

Note the "in this case" instead of "usually" in the PHB version. The rule in question is pretty clearly referring specifically to spells where you can't logically apply both results together. As in, you can't be a tiger and an elephant at the same time, but there's no reason you can't be both Protected from Fire and Protected from Acid.
Actually, if I recall correctly, each of the Protection from X spells are taken separately, and therefore count as different spells with different effects. Or is that just the "Protection from X Alignment" only?

[TuggyNE]

Actually, if I recall correctly, each of the Protection from X spells are taken separately, and therefore count as different spells with different effects. Or is that just the "Protection from X Alignment" only?

Protection from energy and resist energy are one spell each. There are not separate forms.

[avr]

Protection from energy and resist energy are one spell each. There are not separate forms.
I remember Curmudgeon pointing this out once. He's usually right when it comes to odd details which everyone misses.

Basically if your DM wants to rule that you can't pull this trick off and escape using a bunch of charges - and it sounds like he does - there's certainly room in the rules to support his view.

[Phylion]

So I guess this has turned into a thread devoted to the debate over stacking spells, and so I will embrace it. Thank you Sith! You summed up what I failed to communicate to my DM earlier today. The idea is that only one thing stacking applies to only things that could logically not have multiple things. Although this is a bit flavor-based, the no stacking only applies to things that could logically not be stacked. Things like Polymorph could not stack because they alter the things of the world, like something's physical attributes, but things like Metamagic Item create structures of magic that change the way in which things interact with each other, not the things themselves and could logically be altered, at the same time, in multiple ways.

If you want to know how this went down with my DM today, he agreed to let it not consume charges but as of yet has not budged on the whole no stacking issue.

[Madcrafter]

I agree with Sith and others here. The main argument I would posit would be the last line of that rule there, where it says the the other spells' "effects become irrelevant". That seems clear to me that it only is meant in the situation where something completely illogical is happening, since it doesn't say that the spells are changed in any way. Just that effects that aren't compatible can't both happen at once.

So yeah, you can stack the infusion, but as avr says, your DM has enough leeway in rules interpretation that he can complain bitterly about it.

[Aharon]

I conceed. As Sith_Happens said, the actual wording in the PHB lacks the sentence "Usually the last spell in the series trumps the others.", chosing a wording that implies this only happens when it's Logical.

[Hackulator]

Ok so I just accidentally necroed an old post while looking for info on something, sorry.