psycarnum infusion + midnight metamagic

[newguydude1]

metamagic. midnight metamagic. not augmentation. metamagic.

so anyone with the wild talent feat can grab a psionic focus.
psycarnum infusions only prerequisite is a con score so pure spellcasters can grab it pretty easy.

so how do these two feats interact?

midnight metamagic:
1. 1/day you can invest in this feat.
2. every point invested lets you reduce metamagic cost by 1. only caveat is that you have to reduce it all the way to 0.
3. after casting the spell all invested points leave the feat and return to your pool.

psycarnum infusion
1. expend your psionic focus
2. treat a feat as if you have invested max essentia.

---

so from my reading...
1. after you cast midnight metamagic spell, the feat becomes "uninvested". because there are no more essentia points left in the feat.
2. so that means every time you expend your psionic focus, the feat becomes "re-invested" to max. because its treated as if it has max essentia points invested into it.
3. so that means every time you expend your psionic focus, you can apply metamagic for free to any spell you want as long as you cast it before the start of next round.

im not exactly sure this is right, so lets have it. why am i wrong? why wouldnt this work? lets figure this out.

[InvisibleBison]

I'm not sure this works. The Benefits section of Midnight Metamagic says: "The next time you cast that spell, the spell gains the effect of that metamagic feat". The key phrase here is "the next time" - next relative to what? As far as I can tell, it's relative to your investing essentia into the feat and choosing the spell(s) and metamagic feat(s) to use it with. Psycarnum infusion doesn't reset that timer, because it doesn't actually invest any essentia in anything.

Assuming the reasoning above is wrong, though, and the trick does work, point 3 of your reading isn't quite right. The choice of spell(s) and metamagic feat(s) you made when you first invested essentia into Midnight Metamagic isn't reset when you cast the spells or when you use Psycarnum infusion, so you have to stick with the initial choices and can't metamagic to any spell.

[newguydude1]

I'm not sure this works. The Benefits section of Midnight Metamagic says: "The next time you cast that spell, the spell gains the effect of that metamagic feat". The key phrase here is "the next time" - next relative to what? As far as I can tell, it's relative to your investing essentia into the feat and choosing the spell(s) and metamagic feat(s) to use it with. Psycarnum infusion doesn't reset that timer, because it doesn't actually invest any essentia in anything.

Assuming the reasoning above is wrong, though, and the trick does work, point 3 of your reading isn't quite right. The choice of spell(s) and metamagic feat(s) you made when you first invested essentia into Midnight Metamagic isn't reset when you cast the spells or when you use Psycarnum infusion, so you have to stick with the initial choices and can't metamagic to any spell.

i dont think this line of reasoning is quite correct.
you have a feat that has nothing invested in it.
psycarnum infusion lets you treat that feat as if you invested maximum in it.
so your contesting that when this happens you dont get to choose the spells that receive the benefit of midnight metamagic.

but i think your wrong.
the feat must have spells selected if its invested. you can't have no spells selected yet 4 essentia invested into it. its illegal
psycarnum infusion lets you pretend you invested max essentia into the feat.
therefore you have to select spells, its mandatory, if you activate psycarnum infusion for this feat. because max essentia investment with no spells selected is illegal.

selecting midnight metamagic with psycarnum infusion is legal.
"as if you invested in the feat" includes choosing what spells you invested because you can treat midnight metamagic as if you invested in it without selecting spells.

[illyahr]

metamagic. midnight metamagic. not augmentation. metamagic.

so anyone with the wild talent feat can grab a psionic focus.
psycarnum infusions only prerequisite is a con score so pure spellcasters can grab it pretty easy.

so how do these two feats interact?

midnight metamagic:
1. 1/day you can invest in this feat.
2. every point invested lets you reduce metamagic cost by 1. only caveat is that you have to reduce it all the way to 0.
3. after casting the spell all invested points leave the feat and return to your pool.

psycarnum infusion
1. expend your psionic focus
2. treat a feat as if you have invested max essentia.

---

so from my reading...
1. after you cast midnight metamagic spell, the feat becomes "uninvested". because there are no more essentia points left in the feat.
2. so that means every time you expend your psionic focus, the feat becomes "re-invested" to max. because its treated as if it has max essentia points invested into it.
3. so that means every time you expend your psionic focus, you can apply metamagic for free to any spell you want as long as you cast it before the start of next round.

im not exactly sure this is right, so lets have it. why am i wrong? why wouldnt this work? lets figure this out.

Highlighted why this doesn't work. You could spontaneously decide on a spell and metamagic feat once but would not be able to do it again until the next day.

[newguydude1]

Highlighted why this doesn't work. You could spontaneously decide on a spell and metamagic feat once but would not be able to do it again until the next day.

through the feat. you cant invest it through the feat again until the next day.
psycarnum infusion forces the feat to be treated as if it is invested again with max essentia.

[InvisibleBison]

i dont think this line of reasoning is quite correct.
you have a feat that has nothing invested in it.
psycarnum infusion lets you treat that feat as if you invested maximum in it.
so your contesting that when this happens you dont get to choose the spells that receive the benefit of midnight metamagic.

but i think your wrong.
the feat must have spells selected if its invested. you can't have no spells selected yet 4 essentia invested into it. its illegal
psycarnum infusion lets you pretend you invested max essentia into the feat.
therefore you have to select spells, its mandatory, if you activate psycarnum infusion for this feat. because max essentia investment with no spells selected is illegal.

selecting midnight metamagic with psycarnum infusion is legal.
"as if you invested in the feat" includes choosing what spells you invested because you can treat midnight metamagic as if you invested in it without selecting spells.

Having essentia invested in Midnight Metamagic but no spells chosen is not something that can ever happen, I agree. However, Psycarnum Infusion doesn't invest any essentia in anything; it merely lets you act as if there was essentia invested in a thing. Since you can only choose what spells and metamagic feats to use with Midnight Metamagic when you invest essentia in it, activating Psycarnum Infusion doesn't let you make that choice. You're stuck with whatever spells and feats you selected the last time you invested essentia in Midnight Metamagic.

Highlighted why this doesn't work. You could spontaneously decide on a spell and metamagic feat once but would not be able to do it again until the next day.

No, this isn't correct. Psycarnum Infusion doesn't actually invest any essentia in anything, so it doesn't trigger Midnight Metamagic's 1/day limit.

[newguydude1]

Having essentia invested in Midnight Metamagic but no spells chosen is not something that can ever happen, I agree. However, Psycarnum Infusion doesn't invest any essentia in anything; it merely lets you act as if there was essentia invested in a thing. Since you can only choose what spells and metamagic feats to use with Midnight Metamagic when you invest essentia in it, activating Psycarnum Infusion doesn't let you make that choice. You're stuck with whatever spells and feats you selected the last time you invested essentia in Midnight Metamagic.

thats a reasonable interpretation. so in other words, you can quicken a spell all day everyday.

can psycarnum infusion be used alongside the 1/day investment? so you dont have to invest in a bajillion incarnum feats to get your essentia pool count up.

[InvisibleBison]

can psycarnum infusion be used alongside the 1/day investment? so you dont have to invest in a bajillion incarnum feats to get your essentia pool count up.

I think so, yes. The 1/day restriction only applies to investing essentia in Midnight Metamagic and choosing what spells and feats to use it with. Since Psycarnum Infusion doesn't let you do either of those things, there's no limit to how often you can use it on Midnight Metamagic (other than the rate at which you can regain your psionic focus, of course).

[magicalmagicman]

Having essentia invested in Midnight Metamagic but no spells chosen is not something that can ever happen, I agree. However, Psycarnum Infusion doesn't invest any essentia in anything; it merely lets you act as if there was essentia invested in a thing. Since you can only choose what spells and metamagic feats to use with Midnight Metamagic when you invest essentia in it, activating Psycarnum Infusion doesn't let you make that choice. You're stuck with whatever spells and feats you selected the last time you invested essentia in Midnight Metamagic.

I don't think this is correct.

Lets say your essential pool is 2, and your essentia capacity is 4.
You invest 2 points into empower spell for magic missile and cast it.
Now activate Psycarnum Infusion. With your interpretation, 2 points will be reinvested into magic missile and empower spell, and 2 points will be not invested, which as pointed out before, is illegal.

So newguydude1 is correct. You select new spells and metamagic everytime you activate Psycarnum Infusion on an empty Midnight Metamagic. Because the correct interpretation has no illegal scenarios.

[InvisibleBison]

I don't think this is correct.

Lets say your essential pool is 2, and your essentia capacity is 4.
You invest 2 points into empower spell for magic missile and cast it.
Now activate Psycarnum Infusion. With your interpretation, 2 points will be reinvested into magic missile and empower spell, and 2 points will be not invested, which as pointed out before, is illegal.

So newguydude1 is correct. You select new spells and metamagic everytime you activate Psycarnum Infusion on an empty Midnight Metamagic. Because the correct interpretation has no illegal scenarios.

There's nothing in the text of Midnight Metamagic that says you can't invest more essentia in it than the sum of the metamagic feats' spell level adjustments. It would be rather silly to do so, but it is legal. So the scenario you're describing isn't a problem.

[newguydude1]

There's nothing in the text of Midnight Metamagic that says you can't invest more essentia in it than the sum of the metamagic feats' spell level adjustments. It would be rather silly to do so, but it is legal. So the scenario you're describing isn't a problem.

i think this is where you cross from objective-no-man, to someone actively trying to lawyer something from working.

you can invest essentia into this feat and choose one or more spells that you know (and have prepared, if you prepare spells) to apply the effect of a metamagic feat that you know.

you have to invest and choose a spell. you cant invest and not choose a spell.

[magicalmagicman]

I think the original premise of his argument is incorrect as well. When you activate Psycarnum Infusion, you need to use the invest part of the feat description.

I mean for other feats, you invest, and receive a bonus. If you activate Psycarnum Infusion, you have to invoke the "invest" rules to see what the consequences are. "As if you have invested", so what does "as if you have invested" look like? You look at the "invest" part of the feat description, and invoke it until you reach your max essentia capacity.

It's the only way this all works. Making a special exception for Midnight Metamagic goes into house rule territory.

[Darg]

Once per day, you can invest essentia into
this feat and choose one or more spells that you know
(and have prepared, if you prepare spells) to apply the
effect of a metamagic feat that you know.

Once per day you choose your spells.

The next
time you cast that spell, the spell gains the effect of that
metamagic feat without any change to its level (or casting
time, if you cast spells spontaneously).

The effect only applies on the next cast of the spell. Even if you were able to reinvest in the feat, you couldn't choose new spells to affect so the essentia would be wasted. It also can't retroactively re-enhance the spells previously affected by the feat.

There's nothing in the text of Midnight Metamagic that says you can't invest more essentia in it than the sum of the metamagic feats' spell level adjustments. It would be rather silly to do so, but it is legal. So the scenario you're describing isn't a problem.

However large your essentia pool is, you can only invest a
certain amount of essentia into any one soulmeld, feat, class
feature, magic item, or other incarnum receptacle. Your
character level determines this essentia capacity, as shown
on Table 2–1.

Everything is limited by this maximum capacity. Not to mention the feat also mentions this capacity in the description:

as long as you had at
least 3 points of essentia to invest, had an essentia
capacity (see Table 2–1: Essentia Capacity) of
3 or greater, and knew both the Empower
Spell and Enlarge Spell feats.

[magicalmagicman]

Once per day you choose your spells.



The effect only applies on the next cast of the spell. Even if you were able to reinvest in the feat, you couldn't choose new spells to affect so the essentia would be wasted. It also can't retroactively re-enhance the spells previously affected by the feat.

Other feats can only be invested once a day. That limit doesn't stop Psycarnum Infusion from invoking those rules many times through out the day.

Once again you are using the "invest" part of the feat description in full for all feats when you activate Psycarnum Infusion. Midnight Metamagic is no different. You select spells when you invoke this part of the feat description.

[nijineko]

The general problem with Psycarnum Infusion is that it doesn't "invest" anything at all. There is no act of "investing" mentioned as part of the feat. Here is the text:

Benefit: To use this feat, you must expend your psionicfocus. Until the start of your next turn, one of your soulmelds,
incarnum feats, class features, or other incarnum
receptacles is treated as if it had essentia invested in it equal
to its maximum essentia capacity. You don’t gain any bonus
essentia from this effect.

Therefore, what Psycarnum Infusion actually does is treat the targeted receptacle "as if it were already full" thus, only feats which have an ongoing or usable effect when they have incarnum in them are affected by Psycarnum Infusion. Feats or abilities which trigger "when you invest" aren't affected. Technically.

If it said instead "as if you had just invested essentia in it equal to its max..." then it would work with any target.

So... with Midnight Metamagic, it could probably be targeted, but as another pointed out the PI feat doesn't let you select spells. Thus you would probably have to fill the feat as normal to set what spell it affects for the day, and thereafter you could use the PI and MM feats to re-trigger the SAME effect, thus only affecting the same spell. Sound like a good deal for a spontaneous caster, but not so much for a prepared caster.

That's my take. I may have missed a logical spot so feel free to point it out if I did.

[InvisibleBison]

The general problem with Psycarnum Infusion is that it doesn't "invest" anything at all. There is no act of "investing" mentioned as part of the feat. Here is the text:


Therefore, what Psycarnum Infusion actually does is treat the targeted receptacle "as if it were already full" thus, only feats which have an ongoing or usable effect when they have incarnum in them are affected by Psycarnum Infusion. Feats or abilities which trigger "when you invest" aren't affected. Technically.

If it said instead "as if you had just invested essentia in it equal to its max..." then it would work with any target.

So... with Midnight Metamagic, it could probably be targeted, but as another pointed out the PI feat doesn't let you select spells. Thus you would probably have to fill the feat as normal to set what spell it affects for the day, and thereafter you could use the PI and MM feats to re-trigger the SAME effect, thus only affecting the same spell. Sound like a good deal for a spontaneous caster, but not so much for a prepared caster.

That's my take. I may have missed a logical spot so feel free to point it out if I did.

I came here to make this exact post, but since it's already been made I'll just say that I agree with it.

[Darg]

Sound like a good deal for a spontaneous caster, but not so much for a prepared caster.

You choose spells and then only the next cast of the spell benefits. A prepared caster has the benefit of applying the benefit to each prepared spell so you could have the same spell benefit multiple times: 3 enlarged fireballs. A spontaneous caster would have to apply the benefit to different spells instead as the next cast consumes the benefit. If you enlarge a fireball three times your next fireball cast is enlarged 3 times, but bonuses from the same source don't stack negating any benefit.

[ExLibrisMortis]

"As if it had essentia invested in it" does include "as if there was an essentia-investment event in the past". "Had invested" is past perfect, in this context resultative. That is, the "investing" happened prior to something in the past, and the result at that moment in the past is what you're talking about. Note that this is relative to the event mentioned just before, which is "the start of your next turn", so "the past" is, in this case, during your turn, and the investment is assumed to have happened at some time prior to that.

Midnight Metamagic wouldn't be "as if it had essentia invested in it" if the inferred investment event didn't include the selection of a spell and metamagic feat (the current benefit of the feat changes with the details of the investment event). The feat doesn't specify how you should infer what the investing looked like. In cases like this, there's basically two ways to go: it doesn't say you get to decide, so you can't, or it up to the player to infer whatever they want. In this case, the first doesn't apply (neither does the second, really), because the investment event is in fact patterned after real events that have their own rules (as per Midnight Metamagic), and it doesn't say the inferred investment is any different from a regular investment. Hence it's up to the player to set the parameters, subject to all the normal restrictions.

[InvisibleBison]

"As if it had essentia invested in it" does include "as if there was an essentia-investment event in the past". "Had invested" is past perfect, in this context resultative. That is, the "investing" happened prior to something in the past, and the result at that moment in the past is what you're talking about. Note that this is relative to the event mentioned just before, which is "the start of your next turn", so "the past" is, in this case, during your turn, and the investment is assumed to have happened at some time prior to that.

Midnight Metamagic wouldn't be "as if it had essentia invested in it" if the inferred investment event didn't include the selection of a spell and metamagic feat (the current benefit of the feat changes with the details of the investment event). The feat doesn't specify how you should infer what the investing looked like. In cases like this, there's basically two ways to go: it doesn't say you get to decide, so you can't, or it up to the player to infer whatever they want. In this case, the first doesn't apply (neither does the second, really), because the investment event is in fact patterned after real events that have their own rules (as per Midnight Metamagic), and it doesn't say the inferred investment is any different from a regular investment. Hence it's up to the player to set the parameters, subject to all the normal restrictions.

Investing essentia in Midnight Metamagic and choosing the spells and feats that Midnight Metamagic applies to are seperate things, though. So if your interpretation is correct (which it very well may be, I'm not very familiar with the minutia of grammar), it still wouldn't let you swap what spells and feats Midnight Metamagic is affecting.

[newguydude1]

in case anyone is wondering, im probably not gonna use this combo because, even i think its super iffy and requires like an entire essay on grammar rules to not convince but simply explain to a dm how the interaction works.

but still, id like to know how this discussion ends so continue please!

[ExLibrisMortis]

Investing essentia in Midnight Metamagic and choosing the spells and feats that Midnight Metamagic applies to are seperate things, though. So if your interpretation is correct (which it very well may be, I'm not very familiar with the minutia of grammar), it still wouldn't let you swap what spells and feats Midnight Metamagic is affecting.

They are not. You choose what type of investment you make (what metamagic feat for what spell), and the essentia cost depends on that, as does the feat's effect. You can't separate out the choice and the investment.

in case anyone is wondering, im probably not gonna use this combo because, even i think its super iffy and requires like an entire essay on grammar rules to not convince but simply explain to a dm how the interaction works.

but still, id like to know how this discussion ends so continue please!

Any sentence requires an essay to explain how its grammar gives rise to a certain interpretation. Language is not trivial, even when what is being said is simple and straightforward. It's just that most of the time, you don't have to be too detailed, too precise, and people will forgive you any small errors in the interest of smooth communication. But when you're forced to do a close reading of rules text, preparing an argument that stands up to scrutiny, you're going to take up a bit of space laying out all the details. As far as I'm concerned, the reading I'm presenting is the natural reading, but even then it takes some time to dissect.

I mean, if you think it's too iffy, fair enough, but there's no reason to throw the feat out on my account. I'm just being exceptionally pedantic.

[InvisibleBison]

They are not. You choose what type of investment you make (what metamagic feat for what spell), and the essentia cost depends on that, as does the feat's effect. You can't separate out the choice and the investment.

My attempts to refute this argument have convinced me that it is correct. Using Psycarnum Infusion on Midnight Metamagic does let you change what spells and metamagic feats you apply the effect of Midnight Metamagic to.

[newguydude1]

My attempts to refute this argument have convinced me that it is correct. Using Psycarnum Infusion on Midnight Metamagic does let you change what spells and metamagic feats you apply the effect of Midnight Metamagic to.

really? so you guys all agree that a spellcaster with
wild talent
psycarnum infusion
midnight metamagic

can reduce the cost of every single metamagic in the game by your essentia capacity?
so in other words, every spell is now twinned or quickened for free? assuming you spend an action to get the psionic focus beforehand?

[InvisibleBison]

really? so you guys all agree that a spellcaster with
wild talent
psycarnum infusion
midnight metamagic

can reduce the cost of every single metamagic in the game by your essentia capacity?
so in other words, every spell is now twinned or quickened for free? assuming you spend an action to get the psionic focus beforehand?

Yeah, but bear in mind that you don't get an essentia capacity of 4 until 18th level, or 12th level if you spring for the Improved Essentia Capacity feat and have at least 18 Constitution.

[newguydude1]

Any sentence requires an essay to explain how its grammar gives rise to a certain interpretation. Language is not trivial, even when what is being said is simple and straightforward. It's just that most of the time, you don't have to be too detailed, too precise, and people will forgive you any small errors in the interest of smooth communication. But when you're forced to do a close reading of rules text, preparing an argument that stands up to scrutiny, you're going to take up a bit of space laying out all the details. As far as I'm concerned, the reading I'm presenting is the natural reading, but even then it takes some time to dissect.

I mean, if you think it's too iffy, fair enough, but there's no reason to throw the feat out on my account. I'm just being exceptionally pedantic.

thanks man, i called it in too soon.

now what to do with this newfound power...

still amazes me how this trick isnt mentioned in every single metamagic related discussion ever made.

[InvisibleBison]

still amazes me how this trick isnt mentioned in every single metamagic related discussion ever made.

Unfortunately, I think I might have figured out why this is the case. Using Psycarnum Infusion requires a standard action, since it's a psionic feat (and thus a supernatural ability) that doesn't specify what kind of action it takes to use. Thus, you have to find a way to get two standard actions per round to benefit from this combo, which is a significant disadvantage compared to other forms of free metamagic.

[newguydude1]

Unfortunately, I think I might have figured out why this is the case. Using Psycarnum Infusion requires a standard action, since it's a psionic feat (and thus a supernatural ability) that doesn't specify what kind of action it takes to use. Thus, you have to find a way to get two standard actions per round to benefit from this combo, which is a significant disadvantage compared to other forms of free metamagic.

ive seen this debate before. expending psionic focus is a free action, and thats what triggers the feat. and this is the only interpretation that doesnt destroy the functionality of more than half of the psionic feats in existence.

all psionic feats that trigger off psionic focus expenditure is a free action unless stated otherwise in the feat description.

[InvisibleBison]

ive seen this debate before. expending psionic focus is a free action, and thats what triggers the feat. and this is the only interpretation that doesnt destroy the functionality of more than half of the psionic feats in existence.

all psionic feats that trigger off psionic focus expenditure is a free action unless stated otherwise in the feat description.

I'd be happy for this to be the case, but "a bunch of feats wouldn't be useful if the rules worked this way" doesn't strike me as a particularly convincing argument, given the number of feats that are just plain not useful. I'm perfectly willing to believe that the people writing the psionic feats accidentally wrote them in a way that makes them non-functional.

[newguydude1]

I'd be happy for this to be the case, but "a bunch of feats wouldn't be useful if the rules worked this way" doesn't strike me as a particularly convincing argument, given the number of feats that are just plain not useful. I'm perfectly willing to believe that the people writing the psionic feats accidentally wrote them in a way that makes them non-functional.

if we have two "valid" interpretations, and one makes over half the feats unusable, which of the two "valid" interpretations is most likely to be the correct interpretation?
if i was trying to force something that doesnt work by raw with this argument then id see your point. but triggering off a free action is a raw valid interpretation.

[InvisibleBison]

if we have two "valid" interpretations, and one makes over half the feats unusable, which of the two "valid" interpretations is most likely to be the correct interpretation?
if i was trying to force something that doesnt work by raw with this argument then id see your point. but triggering off a free action is a raw valid interpretation.

A "RAW valid interpretation" is an oxymoron. Any interpretation is inherently not RAW. Only what's actually written in the rulebooks constitute Rules As Written.