[3.5] Psionics, yay? nay?

KoboldLord

Registered User
Validated User
It seems extremely unreasonable to treat those three examples as a comprehensive list, especially considering the Sudden Metamagics didn't even exist in 3.5 when that passage was written in the ExPsiHB. Even in the Core, if that's a comprehensive list you run into situations where problems arise. Golem magic immunity, for instance, is not a magic item, spell, or spell-like ability, but I wouldn't recommend arguing that psionics punches right through it, assuming transparency.

And incidentally, Metamagic Rods are magic items, and magic items are one of the things specifically listed as working just as well for both magic and psionics in the very passage you quotes. It takes a particularly tortuous interpretation to argue that they do not, considering you posted confirmation of my post yourself.
 

Jon Chung

I do it for the lulz
Validated User
It seems extremely unreasonable to treat those three examples as a comprehensive list, especially considering the Sudden Metamagics didn't even exist in 3.5 when that passage was written in the ExPsiHB. Even in the Core, if that's a comprehensive list you run into situations where problems arise. Golem magic immunity, for instance, is not a magic item, spell, or spell-like ability, but I wouldn't recommend arguing that psionics punches right through it, assuming transparency.
Go and read the rest of the SRD if you like. The wording is the same. Now...

A golem's magic immunity is treated as infinite spell resistance. Spell resistance is effective against powers, using the same mechanics. Likewise, power resistance is effective against spells, using the same mechanics as spell resistance. If a creature has one kind of resistance, it is assumed to have the other. Infinite spell resistance works fine.

As for sudden metamagics, make up psionic versions if you like, but the arcane versions won't work by default. You can't Sudden Maximize an Energy Missile any more than you could Empower Power a Fireball.

And incidentally, Metamagic Rods are magic items, and magic items are one of the things specifically listed as working just as well for both magic and psionics in the very passage you quotes. It takes a particularly tortuous interpretation to argue that they do not, considering you posted confirmation of my post yourself.
Metamagic Rods are magic items. You can freely apply their effect to any psionic power you like, if the psionic power was a valid target for that effect. Except that that effect is "apply this metamagic feat to that spell", not "empower that effect". There is a distinct difference between the two.

By the RAW, metamagic feats don't work on powers - feats are not included in transparency. "I apply Empower Spell to Energy Missiles" achieves absolutely nothing. Whether or not you could technically trigger the meta rod while manifesting it is utterly irrelevant.

If you want to make them generic meta-effect application items instead of metamagic feat application items, cool, but that's a houserule.
 
Last edited:

KoboldLord

Registered User
Validated User
All right, the golems were a bad example. But metamagic rods are a magic item that applies an effect to a spell. These are both explicitly and unambiguously on the list of transparency. Therefore, metamagic rods also work as psionic items that apply an effect to powers.

Even if we suppose that feats are not always transparent, which is questionable for reasons given above, the effect is clearly transparent here, because it is explicitly listed as transparent in the very passage you quoted.
 

Jon Chung

I do it for the lulz
Validated User
Metamagic rods are a magic item that apply a metamagic feat to a spell, not a generic meta effect.

Two out of three isn't good enough - even if you assume that spell is interchangeable with power in the above description, a metamagic feat is still incapable of modifying a power, because feats are not on the list of things that are transparent.

Because of that fact, I cannot use Empower Power on a spell any more than I could use Empower Spell on a power. The item is trying to do just that.
 
Last edited:

Ascanius

Use the singular they!
Validated User
It's not like it would be out of line by any stretch of the imagination to have an item which worked exactly like the metamagic rod, empower except for empowering powers rather than spells, so why the fuck are you people slapfighting about it?
 

Jon Chung

I do it for the lulz
Validated User
Because such an item would be a houserule.

Unless you haven't noticed, we're talking about RAW.

These things are not synonymous!
 
Last edited:

KoboldLord

Registered User
Validated User
It's not like it would be out of line by any stretch of the imagination to have an item which worked exactly like the metamagic rod, empower except for empowering powers rather than spells, so why the fuck are you people slapfighting about it?
I'm reaching the conclusion that's it is a simple matter of not wanting to be wrong, even to the extent of allowing alternate interpretations to coexist. It seems clear to me that a magic item that applies an effect to a spell that cannot normally be applied to a power, but applies the effect in such a way that the reason it cannot normally be applied to a power no longer exists, is explicitly covered under the transparency rule quoted.

I can see how Jon Chung's point may be stronger on, say, Sudden X, but this is hardly the only place in the rules where there is a list that may be non-comprehensive. The Sudden X feats did not appear until after the transparency rule, so it should hardly surprise anybody that they weren't specifically mentioned.

But ultimately, you're right. This is diverging from the point of the thread, so I'll let Jon Chung have his last word and then stop talking about metamagic rods.
 

Jon Chung

I do it for the lulz
Validated User
Hey, I'm not saying that's a bad houserule - whether it's creating metapsionic feat rods, creating metapsionic sudden feats, so on and so forth. I personally allow this with XPH characters in my games, because magical characters get a lot of extra options with every sourcebook they pick up, which is not the case for psionics.

Just pointing out that by the rules as written, it doesn't work, because feats, all feats, no matter how old or new they are are not psionics-magic transparent, by clear designer intent and implementation. As long as that's clear, I have no problem dropping it.

We can agree to disagree on whether the metamagic rods are applying a metamagic feat or an effect - I honestly can't see how you can arrive at that interpretation, since the language is pretty clear.
 
Last edited:

Ascanius

Use the singular they!
Validated User
My point was really that it doesn't matter. Whether the existing metamagic rods would work with powers, or whether you'd need to create a metapsionic rod, the only difference is that one could be used by a multiclassed psion/wizard (or whatever) on both powers and spells, but that's not exactly a power combo.
 
Top Bottom