Grimmy, make sure to remind me not to post broken combos, even as a joke, in the future.
We just play with the common sense rule that spells can never cost lost then their original spell slot
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also note the trick doesn't work with Heighten.
Heighten has no +SL modifier to be reduced. You actually have to cast it out of the slot it's in for it to count as a spell of that level. So, no, you can't reduce the 'cost' of Heighten, because it doesn't have a cost, per se...it only has an effect.
Metamagicked spells retain their original spell level unless Heightened. So dropping this spell into an O level slot does not make it an 0 level spell, any more then meta'ing it up to a 5th level slot makes it a 5th level spell.
So it'll drop into the 0 level slot, and then be cast and burned, just like any other first level spell. It doesn't suddenly use unlimited level 0 casting.
Kindly note that meta'ing cantrips up doesn't mean you get unlimited cantrips either, if you try to reverse the logic, because the higher level spell definitely burns a spell slot when you add metas to it.
It's a nice trick for trying to develop a signature spell you can load cheap metas onto. In 3.5, Arcane Thesis did much the same thing.
And note that for many campaigns, you can't reduce the cost of a meta to a negative, which is what this post implies.
Lastly, for sorcerors not having level 0 slots, I'd just say it would burn out one of their cantrips for the day as a workaround...if you let it modify a spell negative, which I wouldn't.
==Aelryinth
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you use a higher level slot, for any reason, be it because it is modified with metamagic, or you just prepared it in a higher slot, it is consumed when cast, just like any other spell. Only when it uses a 0-level slot, it is not consumed.
There is some poor wording there that I am going to correct the next time I am able.
And please folks.. play nice.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo PublishingBolding mine.
Sorry not linkified.
Quote courtesy of Tels.
Found it
http://paizo.com/forums/dmtz1k9r&page=5?A-little-gem-about-0-level-spel ls#234
That wording is specifically referring to cantrips, i.e. you can't make a maximized Disrupt Undead for 6 pts that you can cast all day. It has no relevance to spells modified to a negative, which would refer back to 'spells of the original slot' casting rules.
==Aelryinth
Grimmy, make sure to remind me not to post broken combos, even as a joke, in the future.
You shouldn't have to hold back. As I've said before, people like you that have an eye for these things help get them patched.
However, Maguses gets so few spell slots it's still probably worth it to cast a Wayang+Lineage Intensified Shocking Grasp in the level 0 slots (expending them) and just hope your party members can replace the handy-dandy cantrips.
Contributor
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
I thought I had found a way to get us out of this RAW and RAI both, but maybe not... so let me see if I can break this down and get everyone on the same page with what the point of contention is.
First, the way the loophole is almost closed
Metamagic Feats
As a spellcaster's knowledge of magic grows, he can learn to cast spells in ways slightly different from the norm. Preparing and casting a spell in such a way is harder than normal but, thanks to metamagic feats, is at least possible. Spells modified by a metamagic feat use a spell slot higher than normal. This does not change the level of the spell, so the DC for saving throws against it does not go up. Metamagic feats do not affect spell-like abilities.
Emphasis mine. RAI for the bold would suggest you cannot lower the spell slot when using a metamagic feat, but the APG changes that.
Metamagic feats allow spellcasters to modify and change their spells, granting them new powers and effects. Such spells generally take up a higher-level spell slot than the normal spell.
Emphasis mine. This is, RAI, to account for +0 Metamagic feats, but if you get a player in PFS who wants to force "show me errata or explain why I can't use RAW" this opens the door again. Ultimate Magic uses the same wording as the APG. So...darn.
The point of contention: spell level vs. spell slot
I'm going to ignore the stacking of Wayang+Lineage. I'm not going to hunt for it now but I'm pretty sure I saw something saying that you can't stack the benefits from the same source for the same thing (i.e. can't get the -1 spell slot benefit from both traits).
So, this problem only comes up when you're using either the Wayang or Magical Lineage traits.
By eliminating the stacking-traits, this problem also only ever comes up with the Merciful Spell Metamagic Feat, which is the only +0 spell slot feat that I am aware of.
Magical Lineage
When you apply metamagic feats to this spell, treat its actual level as 1 lower for determining the spell’s final adjusted level.
Now, I am in total agreement with the exasperated people saying "Metamagic feats don't change spell levels, they change what slot it's prepared/cast in (prepared/spontaneous caster depending)." This especially applies to Wayang Spellhunter, which changes the slot of the spell's casting (meaning it's still memorized/prepared as a level 1 spell and is "wiped" from memory/allotment when used even at the lower power level).
However, the RAW for the Magical Lineage trait says "treat its actual level as 1 lower".
Now, given that this only works with Merciful spell, we can eliminate any level 1 spell that does not deal damage, so let's use Shocking Grasp as the example.
Merciful Shocking Grasp with Magical Lineage:
Original Unaltered Spell: Spell Level = 1
Metamagic Feat Adjustment: Spell Level = +0
Magical Lineage Trait: Spell Level = -1
"Spell's final adjusted level" = 0
The question(s) at hand:
Spontaneous Casters
For spontaneous casters, the RAW spell this out fairly clear, I think. The spontaneous caster can use Merciful Shocking Grasp as a 0th level spell, but as per metamagic feats RAW, it takes them a full-round action to cast this spell, eliminating the Magus ability to use it during Spell Combat (but not Spellstrike if used as part of the full-round action to cast the spell), and provokes an AoO as per normal rules (unless done defensively, concentration checks, etc). Now, since this is a touch spell, the charge can be "held" in the hand (or weapon for a Magus) and used in a subsequent round, but the caster would have to wait one more round to use this method again.
As I see it, RAW, this *does* allow for unlimited Merciful Shocking Grasp spells from a spontaneous caster, at the cost of each one being a full round action.
Prepared Casters
For prepared casters, this requires them to prepare the spell in advance with the metamagic feat already applied to it, which is where I think an official clarification or errata needs to be made, because of the following possibilities, all valid RAW:
1 - If the spell is prepared as a (final-adjusted) level 0 spell, it becomes a cantrip and thus can be used an unlimited number of times on a day when it is prepared.
2 - If the RAI for Magical Lineage meant "slot" and not "level" (even though it says "level" twice), the spell is a level 1 spell that uses up a level 0 slot. That's fine, so it gets cast with a DC (if it has one) as a level 0 spell, but since it was prepared as a level 1 spell initially the wizard still "burns" that spell from memory, unless he/she memorized multiples of the same spell (which makes using the Merciful+Lineage combo useless really).
-----
I think that's the main point of contention here - some are saying that RAW is that since the "spell level" is being adjusted by the trait that such a spell would count as a cantrip/orison, and others are saying that it's prepared/memorized/cast as a level 1 spell but the trait does not change what "memory slot" the spell uses in a caster's daily allotment of spells.
I know some people are saying no errata is needed here, but the language is so close that I'd really like to hope for one, because as I see it personally, RAI is "hah, funny, NO" but RAW is "in that one limited instance with one merciful level 1 damage-causing spell for a caster who uses this combo, yes, it can be done."
For spontaneous casters, I don't think the full-round-action tradeoff is worth it for unlimited casting of level 1 damaging spells, personally, but for prepared casters, being able to have a magic missile you can use every round, all the time, could be a life-saver in a PFS game.
-----
I hope I don't come off sounding too overbearing here...just trying to sort this all out, since as fun as it might be to think about, in a game I ran I'd side with the RAI, but in PFS games I run I don't have the authority to change RAW.
It's been a good discussion so far, and I'm sure it will continue to be one... I'm just personally ready to see a dev weigh in.
Thanks if you read all of that mess I wrote.
|
Contributor
|
You can't. Once your metamagic cost is zero, there is no longer a cost to reduce. You can't make your metamagic cost negative.
The thread is about using the +0 metamagic feat with one of the traits that puts a -1 to a spell that you use with a metamagic feat: 1 + 0 - 1 = 0, etc. It's covered earlier in the thread :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not true at all. RAW says exactly the opposite.
You are completely misreading the difference between the level of a spell and the slot in which a spell is prepared.
A cantrip is a 0-level spell.
A magically lineaged merciful shocking grasp is a 1st level spell in a 0-level spell slot. It is still a 1st level spell, in the same way a silent charm person is a 1st level spell, in a 2nd level spell slot. Note: the DC is the same whether its in the 1st or 2nd level slots, because it is still a 1st level spell.
The *only* way to change the actual level of the spell is with Heighten Spell, and that only goes up, not down.So all those people trying to claim unlimited casting because they managed to finagle it into a 0th level spell slot are not following RAW or RAI.
First of all Im not trying to finagle anything. I fully believe this isnt RAI and wouldn't try to use it. However by the wording of the spell a Cantrip is a 0-Level spell. IF it is in fact a 0-Level spell it is unlimited.
Now I see what you are saying about it just taking up a 0 level slot but still considered a 1st level spell... and you are correct.
From the SRD(Under Metamagic):
Spells modified by a metamagic feat use a spell slot higher than normal. This does not change the level of the spell, so the DC for saving throws against it does not go up.
So you are right. A Metamagic doesnt change a spells level. Great. This does present a big issue with Cantrips using metamagic's that cause it to use a higher level slot. By this logic those should still be counted as 0-Level spells and should be unlimited, but as others have pointed out... developers have stated this is not the case and that the wording needs work... fair enough.
However. My arguement still stands... here is why.
From SRD:
Magical Lineage: One of your parents was a gifted spellcaster who not only used metamagic often, but also developed many magical items and perhaps even a new spell or two—and you have inherited a fragment of this greatness. Pick one spell when you choose this trait. When you apply metamagic feats to this spell, treat its level as 1 lower for determining the spell's final adjusted level.
So as you can see. Its not the Metamagic that causes it to "become" a zero level spell. Its the Trait. The Metamagic is just the thing that "turns on" the trait.
Again Im not trying to use this. I, like others on here argueing it works, simply think a FAQ or Errata should change the wording of either Metamagics or The traits to eliminate this from working.
Edit: Dang CanisDirus... you snaked me!
You can't. Once your metamagic cost is zero, there is no longer a cost to reduce. You can't make your metamagic cost negative.That comment means that a cantrip from a prohibited school counts as two of the four cantrips he can prepare each day. So:
Regular, Regular, Regular, Regular
Prohibited, Regular, Regular
Prohibited, ProhibitedAll can be cast unlimited, it just affects the variety he has available
Thanks for that - brief brain-addled moment on my part apparently.
So now just back to the "if you somehow get a level 1 spell to use a level 0 slot... what happens?"
The rub is, Magical Lineage doesn't modify the adjustment, it modifies the level of the spell.
Magical Lineage: One of your parents was a gifted spellcaster who not only used metamagic often, but also developed many magical items and perhaps even a new spell or two—and you have inherited a fragment of this greatness. Pick one spell when you choose this trait. When you apply metamagic feats to this spell, treat its actual level as 1 lower for determining the spell's final adjusted level.
CanisDruis, you are just looking at getting a spell into a lower slot now right? You agree that even if you can, you can never get unlimited 1st level anything because a 0 level slot = / = a 0 level spell?
The "cantrips in 1st level slots" thing doesn't need to involve metamagic, you can just prepare cantrips in 1st level slots any time.
As for magical lineage, it says that you treat its actual level as 1 lower for determining the spell's final adjusted level.
The only thing adjusted level determines is what slot it takes up (unless Heighten Spell is involved), and the level isn't treated as lower for any other purpose.
|
Contributor
|
CanisDruis, you are just looking at getting a spell into a lower slot now right? You agree that even if you can, you can never get unlimited 1st level anything because a 0 level slot = / = a 0 level spell?
What I'm seeing, the way I'm reading it, is that in that one instance (merciful spell that causes damage with magical lineage trait) you can prepare it as a 0th level spell by the RAW. Personally, if this is a loophole, I'd want to see it closed asap. If that one instance is actually allowed RAI, well... I'm still going to rule against it in my home game, but I can't if I see it in a PFS game I'm running.
The "cantrips in 1st level slots" thing doesn't need to involve metamagic, you can just prepare cantrips in 1st level slots any time.
As for magical lineage, it says that you treat its actual level as 1 lower for determining the spell's final adjusted level.
The only thing adjusted level determines is what slot it takes up (unless Heighten Spell is involved), and the level isn't treated as lower for any other purpose.
I can see where your coming from. I still think it changes the actual level of the spell. The point I am trying to make is... it can be argued either way. A clarification, FAQ, Errata... something should address this.
If adjusted level only pertains to slots, then why do people say a heightened continual flame trumps deeper darkness?
|
Contributor
|
...I don't think I was one of those people. Everything I've been posting to the thread is going off the OP (and the magus post the OP referenced) about using traits to knock a level 1 spell down to level 0 and make it unlimited-castings-per-day.
Heck, before today I didn't even know what the Magical Lineage trait did (and I had never even heard of Wayang Spellhunter or Minata)!
@Grimmy
Heighten is a special case, the purpose of the feat is to break that particular rule about metamagic and let spells act as they were of a higher level.
CanisDruis, you are just looking at getting a spell into a lower slot now right? You agree that even if you can, you can never get unlimited 1st level anything because a 0 level slot = / = a 0 level spell?What I'm seeing, the way I'm reading it, is that in that one instance (merciful spell that causes damage with magical lineage trait) you can prepare it as a 0th level spell by the RAW. Personally, if this is a loophole, I'd want to see it closed asap. If that one instance is actually allowed RAI, well... I'm still going to rule against it in my home game, but I can't if I see it in a PFS game I'm running.
Ok but if you did prepare it as a 0level spell that way... do you think that would give you unlimited castings? Is that what you would want to see patched? Or do you also think that RAI, you shouldn't be able to prepare it in a 0 level slot at all, even if that didn't get you unlimited castings?
Because Aelriyel and EvilMinion say it would still be a 1st level spell, even in a 0 level slot, so no unlimited. I know they are right when it comes to meta magic changing the spell level, but I'm not so sure about magical lineage, RAW.
RAI, this is an obvious Brie cheese, I think everyone agrees about that.
@Grimmy
Heighten is a special case, the purpose of the feat is to break that particular rule about metamagic and let spells act as they were of a higher level.
Ok got it.
Anyway you have to admit this could at least benefit from some clearer wording.
...I don't think I was one of those people. Everything I've been posting to the thread is going off the OP (and the magus post the OP referenced) about using traits to knock a level 1 spell down to level 0 and make it unlimited-castings-per-day.
Heck, before today I didn't even know what the Magical Lineage trait did (and I had never even heard of Wayang Spellhunter or Minata)!
I came across this particular headack when writing my Trait guide.
If adjusted level only pertains to slots, then why do people say a heightened continual flame trumps deeper darkness?Heighten specifically references casting spells as if it were a higher spell level. other metamagic just says it uses a slot higher.
Enlarge Spell (Metamagic)
You can increase the range of your spells.
Benefit: You can alter a spell with a range of close, medium, or long to increase its range by 100%. An enlarged spell with a range of close now has a range of 50 ft. + 5 ft./level, while medium-range spells have a range of 200 ft. + 20 ft./level and long-range spells have a range of 800 ft. + 80 ft./level. An enlarged spell uses up a spell slot one level higher than the spell's actual level.
Spells whose ranges are not defined by distance, as well as spells whose ranges are not close, medium, or long, do not benefit from this feat.Heighten Spell (Metamagic)
You can cast spells as if they were a higher level.
Benefit: A heightened spell has a higher spell level than normal (up to a maximum of 9th level). Unlike other metamagic feats, Heighten Spell actually increases the effective level of the spell that it modifies. All effects dependent on spell level (such as saving throw DCs and ability to penetrate a lesser globe of invulnerability) are calculated according to the heightened level. The heightened spell is as difficult to prepare and cast as a spell of its effective level.
Ok so "effective level" = / = "adjusted level".
Got it. I think.
Don't change the subject. j/k
zrandrews I thought you meant you had an answer from a dev lol.
So....can a sorcerer use Magical Lineage(trait) and Intensified Spell(feat) to cast an Intensified Shocking Grasp using up one of his level 1 spells for the day, but getting use out of this spell past level 5??
Yeah, that's pretty much the point of the trait. That particular combination is something Magus builds do a lot. It would kind of suck for a sorcerer because metamagic is a full-round action for them so they can't cast and then move into melee.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As far as I'm concerned, this is not RAW... as there is no precedent for it AND THERE ARE NO ACTUAL RULES AS WRITTEN THAT DESCRIBE WHAT YOU ARE TRYING TO DO!!!
Which is... reduce a spell level to a 0-level cantrip or orison and cast it an unlimited amount of times. The description of a couple traits is being twisted around and people are making ASSUMPTIONS that you can lower the level of the spell and making ASSUMPTIONS that you can cast it unlimited times when it becomes a 0-level spell.
Also, it blatantly goes against the Rules as Intended for traits.
Don't even get me started on the fact that Wayang Spellhunter, AS WRITTEN, is a REGIONAL and CAMPAIGN SPECIFIC trait.
SO BY RAW, if you are in any kind of campaign that IS NOT GOLARION you are sh*t out of luck. Even if you are playing in Golarion, you may not be allowed to create a character from Minata, let alone Tian Xa.
So..... congrats to those Magus players who get to play in the Jade Regent AP? *slow clap*
I'd love to see someone argue this for an actual PFS game.
As far as I'm concerned, this is not RAW... as there is no precedent for it AND THERE ARE NO ACTUAL RULES AS WRITTEN THAT DESCRIBE WHAT YOU ARE TRYING TO DO!!!
Which is... reduce a spell level to a 0-level cantrip or orison and cast it an unlimited amount of times. The description of a couple traits is being twisted around and people are making ASSUMPTIONS that you can lower the level of the spell and making ASSUMPTIONS that you can cast it unlimited times when it becomes a 0-level spell.
Also, it blatantly goes against the Rules as Intended for traits.
Don't even get me started on the fact that Wayang Spellhunter, AS WRITTEN, is a REGIONAL and CAMPAIGN SPECIFIC trait.
SO BY RAW, if you are in any kind of campaign that IS NOT GOLARION you are sh*t out of luck. Even if you are playing in Golarion, you may not be allowed to create a character from Minata, let alone Tian Xa.
So..... congrats to those Magus players who get to play in the Jade Regent AP? *slow clap*
I'd love to see someone argue this for an actual PFS game.
lol, calm down buddy. No one is trying to argue this should be allowed in a game. On the contrary. We are saying it needs to be addressed.
We aren't assuming anything. As written it can be argued that it works exactly as its written. A line simply needs to be added to either the traits or the rules of metamagic that keep this from working. There's no need to be so agressive lol.
As far as I'm concerned, this is not RAW... as there is no precedent for it AND THERE ARE NO ACTUAL RULES AS WRITTEN THAT DESCRIBE WHAT YOU ARE TRYING TO DO!!!
Which is... reduce a spell level to a 0-level cantrip or orison and cast it an unlimited amount of times. The description of a couple traits is being twisted around and people are making ASSUMPTIONS that you can lower the level of the spell and making ASSUMPTIONS that you can cast it unlimited times when it becomes a 0-level spell.
Also, it blatantly goes against the Rules as Intended for traits.
Don't even get me started on the fact that Wayang Spellhunter, AS WRITTEN, is a REGIONAL and CAMPAIGN SPECIFIC trait.
SO BY RAW, if you are in any kind of campaign that IS NOT GOLARION you are sh*t out of luck. Even if you are playing in Golarion, you may not be allowed to create a character from Minata, let alone Tian Xa.
So..... congrats to those Magus players who get to play in the Jade Regent AP? *slow clap*
I'd love to see someone argue this for an actual PFS game.
That's a lot of shouting.
As several posters have pointed out, and supported with quotes from RAW, only 0-level spells can be cast without expending the slot. Spells that are metamagicked down to a 0-level slot still aren't 0 level spells and therefore do expend the slot.
It does seem, however, that using Magical Lineage or Wayang Spellhunter to reduce the slot requirement of a spell (say a Merciful Fireball with a 2nd-level slot,) is, in fact, RAW, much to my (and others) chagrin.
By the way, why wouldn't someone be allowed to create a character from Minta in PFS? Is the ISWG not PFS legal?
LOUD NOISES!!!!
|
So....can a sorcerer use Magical Lineage(trait) and Intensified Spell(feat) to cast an Intensified Shocking Grasp using up one of his level 1 spells for the day, but getting use out of this spell past level 5??Yeah, that's pretty much the point of the trait. That particular combination is something Magus builds do a lot. It would kind of suck for a sorcerer because metamagic is a full-round action for them so they can't cast and then move into melee.
Well, was planning mostly on using Spectral Hand to deliver the attacks from that point on, the character casting is not a very combat intensive kind of guy, and if he's in the middle of things he's probably doing something wrong.
Sorry, sometimes the Were-bear in me comes out, especially when confronted by ridiculous loopholes that no sane DM would allow.
I love theorycrafting as much as the next optimizer, but when something is so blatantly against RAI and isn't even clearly RAW... I can get a bit uppity, sorry.
The people in this thread that have been loudly pronouncing RAW RAW RAW are the ones that my ire is aimed at. It's been proven that you can argue as much against this, RAW, as for it... therefore it is NOT as cut-and-dry as some have said. I would even propose that there is so much interpretation involved... that any assumptions couldn't even be remotely considered RAW.
As for PFS... you could create someone from Minata, sure. The Dragon Empires Primer is even legal... but you would have to convince a DM/judge of this cheese in the first place. Good luck with that.
No problem ravennus. But I don't really think any one in is proclaiming RAW, RAW, RAW. Just "maybe RAW... unfortunately" and "Could use clarification."
Can you quote this because I've seen a few posts before saying that any spell prepared in a 0-level slot isn't expended when it's cast.Unlimited casting only goes for 0th level spells in 0th level slots. So no unlimited widened detect magic and no unlimited magical lineage + merciful shocking grasp.
this has been stated by the devs.
Yeah I dont understand why people continue to say this. A 0-level spell is a Cantrip. A Cantrip is a 0-Level spell. They are the same thing.
From the SRD:
Cantrips: Wizards can prepare a number of cantrips, or 0-level spells, each day, as noted on Table: Wizard under “Spells per Day.” These spells are cast like any other spell, but they are not expended when cast and may be used again.
Its the same thing. If you lower a spell to 0-level it is a Cantrip and are not expended when cast. THATS RAW.
Now as to your question. Yes both Traits stack. Yes if you had both and memorized an Intensified Shocking Grasp it would be a Cantrip. THATS RAW. RAI it is not. Im sure most DM's would say No. But going stricktly by the rules as they are written it works.
This was the post that got me riled, sorry.
I responded in Lycanthropic Rage before I read the rest of the thread and saw that saner heads prevailed and that Dragonamedrake compromised a little in his RAW argument.
Director of Games
|
| 14 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Question unclear. 32 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hey there Folks,
Magical Lineage was never intended as a way for you to actually lower a spell's level. It was put in to allow you to reduce the increase from a metamagic feat. So, no unlimited magic missiles. I will see to it that the language of this ability is clarified soon and I will get this added to the FAQ.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thanks so much Jason it's really cool to be playing a game where the lead designer is so in touch with the player base. It makes me proud to support Paizo with my gaming dollars.
|
Hey there Folks,
Magical Lineage was never intended as a way for you to actually lower a spell's level. It was put in to allow you to reduce the increase from a metamagic feat. So, no unlimited magic missiles. I will see to it that the language of this ability is clarified soon and I will get this added to the FAQ.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
FTW!
Thanks so much Jason it's really cool to be playing a game where the lead designer is so in touch with the player base. It makes me proud to support Paizo with my gaming dollars.
Indeed! Thank you so much for your response, Jason!
Seriously, I hope you guys NEVER change when it comes to communication with your players. You folks are a shining example to all developers.| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Indeed! Thank you so much for your response, Jason!
Seriously, I hope you guys NEVER change when it comes to communication with your players. You folks are a shining example to all developers.
It's true! I was drawn to Paizo and even Dragon Magazine because these guys had their finger on the pulse of the fans.
It can get daunting over the years, and it quickly seems thankless, but it's a strong reason why we love you guys at Paizo so much.
Thanks for chiming in Jason!
Hey there Folks,
Magical Lineage was never intended as a way for you to actually lower a spell's level. It was put in to allow you to reduce the increase from a metamagic feat. So, no unlimited magic missiles. I will see to it that the language of this ability is clarified soon and I will get this added to the FAQ.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Thank you. Im glad this is getting cleared up. Great news.