Ritualist Ring broken

973 posts / 0 new
Last post
The Ritualist's Ring is broken; it allows you to halve the cost of creating a new magic item, which makes it a massive wealth generation engine as you can double the number of magical items you can make. It should be changed so that it cannot be used on any creation ritual, which prevents this item from acting as a wealth generation engine.
In my humble opinion you have a really strange sense of what is broken or not. We had a similar discussion already when we were talking about artificers.

Perhaps you believe that all players are like 13 year olds playing weird computer game with the only aim to create ridiculous characters. This is not a computer game! A character is not supposed to have a certain amound of money or number of magical items at a certain level. The DM may decide to strip the PCs of all belongings at basicly any given time. If the DM does not like a certain Item he may forbid or change it. The items in the AV are nothing but suggestions. I don't see any reason why it should be against the rules. Should it also be against the rules to loot your fallen companion, because they will be making a new character with new magic items and money? I am sure if it would be a computer game a lot of people would do exactly that only to get more money. What I want to say is that you can abuse nearly everything, but it is no reason to call everything broken.
The Ritualist's Ring is broken; it allows you to halve the cost of creating a new magic item, which makes it a massive wealth generation engine. It should be changed so that it cannot be used on any ritual which creates or repairs items, which prevents this item from acting as a wealth generation engine.

You do know you can only sell items for 1/5th their value? So even at half price you're still losing money.
You do know you can only sell items for 1/5th their value? So even at half price you're still losing money.

You aren't selling the items. You're using them. That's how it generates wealth.

Perhaps you believe that all players are like 13 year olds playing weird computer game with the only aim to create ridiculous characters. This is not a computer game! A character is not supposed to have a certain amound of money or number of magical items at a certain level. The DM may decide to strip the PCs of all belongings at basicly any given time. If the DM does not like a certain Item he may forbid or change it. The items in the AV are nothing but suggestions. I don't see any reason why it should be against the rules. Should it also be against the rules to loot your fallen companion, because they will be making a new character with new magic items and money? I am sure if it would be a computer game a lot of people would do exactly that only to get more money. What I want to say is that you can abuse nearly everything, but it is no reason to call everything broken.

Its worth noting that many players are in fact 13 year olds.

Secondly, its not the job of the DM to prevent the characters from breaking the game in half. Its the job of the game designer to prevent this situation from occurring in the first place.

That is what the errata forum is for. If you're not intrested in being useful in that regard, then you shouldn't be here.

This item is broken as written. Its very easily fixed by including a clause preventing its usage in certain sorts of rituals.
You aren't selling the items. You're using them. That's how it generates wealth.

I... don't understand your logic at all.
I... don't understand your logic at all.

by halving the cost of a creation ritual you are doubling the number of available magic items. this is wealth.

IMO, it should not work on anything with a cost of "special."
I would make Ritualist Ring not work on special cost items and also make the Milestone only work for one ritual, if you wish to create more half cost rituals get another milestone (also applies that one can only benefit from one Ritualist Ring)
Did it not occur to anyone that this may in fact be the entire point of this item?
Secondly, its not the job of the DM to prevent the characters from breaking the game in half. Its the job of the game designer to prevent this situation from occurring in the first place.

That is what the errata forum is for. If you're not intrested in being useful in that regard, then you shouldn't be here.

This item is broken as written. Its very easily fixed by including a clause preventing its usage in certain sorts of rituals.

I have a general quastion T Dragon, you have found a dozen or so "broken" items in the book, maybe a little more with Combos of items.

What if you are thinking on a diffrent power level then WotC??? What if the idea of this ring WAS to allow more powerful magic items, or just more magic items. You invest X (Cost o ring) and gain Y ( decrease cost of item creation) per use, after Z number of uses you have recouped X and are making profit.

That seams like how my freind Matt runs games, and how I have played many of combos. If you like Crafter style casters it makes you more useful. Since it doesn't give you more slots (Body slots) or more activations of daily powers, it really isn't that big of a deal.

If I have every slot I can have filled and a dozen woundrus items, all of witch I got from my friend who made them useing the ring, and the same is true for the other 4 plyers, what is the harm???
I remember a pre realase write up on items being less importsnt, and the example character was all decked out anyway. All it does is gives you more choices.

Lets Take the team of 5 with all the above items, and send them through a dungeon, then send a group through that was the same level (lets say 28) but useing the character with level guid lines, 1 item of level, 1 lower 1 higher, and gp equal to 1 item 1 level lower. Next lets find some people who leveled from level 1-28 doing PHB only items. What would we find??

Group A diffently has more options, but can only use 3+ milestones daily powers per day
Group B has the least options, but as above 3+ milestones
Group C is in the middle more items and options then B less then A, but still 3+ milestones.

If all three parties are Played and DMed equaly well, do you think there is a bg power diff?

There is no way to take all the vairables out of DMing, some will give more some will give less, some PCs will just have more options, but at the end if they are close...isn't that balance?

You have a whole list of 'Broken' items, if you put togather 1 character with every slot having the best option what would it look like? In fact what if it was a Fighter? now when looking at this power house fighter, if it was in a game of 5 players 1 wizard, 1 Warlord, 1 Rogue, 1 Warlock. and they all had starting gear 3 items + the gold. Would it ruin the fun of the game for them how powerful you were?

Before posting, ask yourself WWWS: What Would Wrecan Say?

The thing is, this looks to me that it is functioning exactly as intended. Players only get approximately enough gold to create\buy 1 magical item of their level per level, this ring doubles that, so it equates to an extra magical item per level.

I'm really not seeing the problem with this. It makes magical items cheaper, which would be the entire point (among other things) of halving the cost of rituals.


While TD has found some ovbiously broken combinations, i think he's overdoing it somewhat. This isn't broken, in fact until i see good evidence otherwise as far as i can tell it's working as intended.
if this was the 3.5 this ring will be really broken... but... this is 4th edition...

having 8 magic item... is not so much powerful...

yes there are item with powerful properties... but most of them have daily power...

in my group (I'm the DM) all character have about 6 or 7 magic all in the range of Character level+1/Character level -2 and they'r at 8th level... every day they activate at max 4 magic item (most of the time 2 or 3) so having 7 magic items only give them the choice of which activate... but every day they go to sleep without using ALL their magic item...

this is one of the most important change that i found from 3.5 to 4th...magic item are strong... but they don't make the character... they'r only a plus that player may use sometimes... a powerfull magic weapon don't make a wizard a good fighter but in the hands of a fighter it should sound interesting...

in add... most of the magic item with properties are those which have specific item slot... havin 15 or 20 magic item is useless when u can have only ONE neck item... ONE boots item... ONE head item... etc etc... You may have 4 or 5 magic weapon... but u may use one (or 2 if two weapon ranger) at a time...
if this was the 3.5 this ring will be really broken... but... this is 4th edition...

having 8 magic item... is not so much powerful...

yes there are item with powerful properties... but most of them have daily power...

in my group (I'm the DM) all character have about 6 or 7 magic all in the range of Character level+1/Character level -2 and they'r at 8th level... every day they activate at max 4 magic item (most of the time 2 or 3) so having 7 magic items only give them the choice of which activate... but every day they go to sleep without using ALL their magic item...

this is one of the most important change that i found from 3.5 to 4th...magic item are strong... but they don't make the character... they'r only a plus that player may use sometimes... a powerfull magic weapon don't make a wizard a good fighter but in the hands of a fighter it should sound interesting...

in add... most of the magic item with properties are those which have specific item slot... havin 15 or 20 magic item is useless when u can have only ONE neck item... ONE boots item... ONE head item... etc etc... You may have 4 or 5 magic weapon... but u may use one (or 2 if two weapon ranger) at a time...

I was about to say your players are underequipped since they should have some items of up to their level +5, but then i noticed you said they were using daily item powers 4 times per day.

At 8th they only get 1 daily item power. They get 2 at 11th, and 3 at 21st. Plus an additional use every milestone. You're giving them way too many uses of their item powers.

Unless they're somehow reaching 4 milestones per day, which seems very unlikely.
The Ritualist's Ring is broken; it allows you to halve the cost of creating a new magic item, which makes it a massive wealth generation engine as you can double the number of magical items you can make. It should be changed so that it cannot be used on any creation ritual, which prevents this item from acting as a wealth generation engine.

Yeah, I had no thought of that use for it initially, but yes, that is crazy broken.
I was about to say your players are underequipped since they should have some items of up to their level +5, but then i noticed you said they were using daily item powers 4 times per day.

At 8th they only get 1 daily item power. They get 2 at 11th, and 3 at 21st. Plus an additional use every milestone. You're giving them way too many uses of their item powers.

Unless they're somehow reaching 4 milestones per day, which seems very unlikely.

4 times per day means 3 milestone... 6 encounter in a day... not so much ^^ (and this only considering milestone every 2 encounter and not from secondary quest, or "intelligent solution")

I also said:

every day they activate at max 4 magic item (most of the time 2 or 3)

in add: u say that player should have item at pc's level +5... but why?

why list item with a max level of 30 if u would have them at 25th level? and what u will have at 30th?

some item of one or two level higher should sound ice... but alwais give item up to 5 level over the pc's level sound really too much...

and finally... if u look at item from level 10 and lower and item from level 11 and higher... u will find a large gap... this becose level 11th item are supposed to be for paragon character... putting a paragon item into the hands of a 6th level PC should sound really wired...
in add: u say that player should have item at pc's level +5... but why?

why list item with a max level of 30 if u would have them at 25th level? and what u will have at 30th?

some item of one or two level higher should sound ice... but alwais give item up to 5 level over the pc's level sound really too much...

and finally... if u look at item from level 10 and lower and item from level 11 and higher... u will find a large gap... this becose level 11th item are supposed to be for paragon character... putting a paragon item into the hands of a 6th level PC should sound really wired...

They should have some items of their level +5. In the space of time that the party goes from one level to another they should recieve 4 - 5 Magical Items, and enough GP for one of their level. The Magical Items they recieve should be up to their level +5.

You can say it sounds like too much all you want, that's what it says in the DMG. It's right there under the rules for what treasure to give your PC's.
They should have some items of their level +5. In the space of time that the party goes from one level to another they should recieve 4 - 5 Magical Items, and enough GP for one of their level. The Magical Items they recieve should be up to their level +5.

You can say it sounds like too much all you want, that's what it says in the DMG. It's right there under the rules for what treasure to give your PC's.

emm when quoting a manual it's better to reread it before ^^'

During the course of gaining that level, expect a
group of five characters to acquire four magic items
ranging in level from one to four levels above the party
level. In addition, they should find gold and other
monetary treasure equal to the market price of two
magic items of their level. So



4 level higher... and money equal to 2 item's market price.. and personally I found that even 4 level higher is a bit too much... but this is a personal opinion...
emm when quoting a manual it's better to reread it before ^^'

During the course of gaining that level, expect a
group of five characters to acquire four magic items
ranging in level from one to four levels above the party
level. In addition, they should find gold and other
monetary treasure equal to the market price of two
magic items of their level. So



4 level higher... and money equal to 2 item's market price.. and personally I found that even 4 level higher is a bit too much... but this is a personal opinion...

Whoops, i was a level off. My bad, i was thinking about the SoW campaign where it gives PC's items up to +5 of their level due to the levelling pace of the game. I apologise.

My point, however, still stands.
Did it not occur to anyone that this may in fact be the entire point of this item?

Only a moron would design an item that way.

Why?

Because it makes the ring into a non-option or it unbalances the game. Either must be true.

This is because it either:

A) Means that the party has too much wealth, and is thus too powerful for the monsters, making them too easy.

OR

B) Makes the ring non-optional; that is to say, every party MUST have one to get the proper wealth level.

Its either one or the other.

The ring, thusly, is broken, because it always causes A or B. Ergo, it must be fixed.

Any argument "maybe they meant for you to get more treasure than you do!" is automatically wrong. Why?

Because if that was the case then they'd have built it directly into the game. If they wanted to change it, likewise that would again involve building it directly into the game.

The item is broken because it is either a non-choice or is overpowered.

It needs to be fixed.

Its just that simple.
Only a moron would design an item that way.

Why?

Because it makes the ring into a non-option or it unbalances the game. Either must be true.

This is because it either:

A) Means that the party has too much wealth, and is thus too powerful for the monsters, making them too easy.

OR

B) Makes the ring non-optional; that is to say, every party MUST have one to get the proper wealth level.

Its either one or the other.

The ring, thusly, is broken, because it always causes A or B. Ergo, it must be fixed.

Any argument "maybe they meant for you to get more treasure than you do!" is automatically wrong. Why?

Because if that was the case then they'd have built it directly into the game. If they wanted to change it, likewise that would again involve building it directly into the game.

The item is broken because it is either a non-choice or is overpowered.

It needs to be fixed.

Its just that simple.

The balance of DnD is not so delicate that an extra magical item per level is going to unbalance the game. Not even close. The Ring is a level 24 Item, so the PC's are in Epic tier when it is available to them, and thus are going to already have a full deck of magical items. Now they can make a slightly more powerful magical item, or two weaker items. This is not even going to cause the balance to sneeze, all it does is open up more options for the PC's.
The balance of DnD is not so delicate that an extra magical item per level is going to unbalance the game. Not even close. The Ring is a level 24 Item, so the PC's are in Epic tier when it is available to them, and thus are going to already have a full deck of magical items. Now they can make a slightly more powerful magical item, or two weaker items. This is not even going to cause the balance to sneeze, all it does is open up more options for the PC's.

Yes it is. I'm sorry, but the treasure guidelines are present for a reason. That you don't understand them doesn't mean that they are unimportant.

I'm sorry, this item is not balanced, and doubling the number of items characters get to purchase each level is an enormous difference.
Yes it is. I'm sorry, but the treasure guidelines are present for a reason. That you don't understand them doesn't mean that they are unimportant.

I'm sorry, this item is not balanced, and doubling the number of items characters get to purchase each level is an enormous difference.

Really? Want to provide some evidence for this or shall we keep throwing baseless accusations at each other?
Really? Want to provide some evidence for this or shall we keep throwing baseless accusations at each other?

You are claiming that a 20% increase in treasure per level is not going to significantly alter the power of a party.

Beyond being rather silly on its face, its pretty obvious that this is untrue. Adding an additional person requires the same adjustment to treasure levels. If this was truly so irrelevant, why does the treasure change based on the number of characters in the party?

A simple demonstration is the fact that there are items which have static effects (that is to say, they're not use limited). There are more such items which you can purchase than you have money to purchase. Ergo, a character with more such items is going to be stronger than a character with fewer such items, all other things being equal. Ergo, a party with the ritualist's ring and thus extra items will be more powerful than a party without, as the ritualist's ring replaces itself and then adds more items.

It is quite possible for the party to completely equip every single character in the party in all of their item slots with top tier (level 26-30) items. Normally, this is a fairly difficult proposition; you only find 26, which means that the extra 14 slots (armor, head, ring 1, ring 2, arm, hand, foot, waist, neck, weapon) need to be filled out of pocket. Moreover, a normal party can only afford 1, maybe 2 level 30 magic items; a party with the ritualist's ring doubles that.
You are claiming that a 20% increase in treasure per level is not going to significantly alter the power of a party.

Beyond being rather silly on its face, its pretty obvious that this is untrue. Adding an additional person requires the same adjustment to treasure levels. If this was truly so irrelevant, why does the treasure change based on the number of characters in the party?

A simple demonstration is the fact that there are items which have static effects (that is to say, they're not use limited). There are more such items which you can purchase than you have money to purchase. Ergo, a character with more such items is going to be stronger than a character with fewer such items, all other things being equal. Ergo, a party with the ritualist's ring and thus extra items will be more powerful than a party without, as the ritualist's ring replaces itself and then adds more items.

It is quite possible for the party to completely equip every single character in the party in all of their item slots with top tier (level 26-30) items. Normally, this is a fairly difficult proposition; you only find 26, which means that the extra 14 slots (armor, head, ring 1, ring 2, arm, hand, foot, waist, neck, weapon) need to be filled out of pocket. Moreover, a normal party can only afford 1, maybe 2 level 30 magic items; a party with the ritualist's ring doubles that.

I call BS... you are argueing becuse rule A is this and rule B is diffrent...diffrent means wrong. I took the time to type out a whole post to you to try to see if you thought this through...I will do so again...

I have a general quastion T Dragon, you have found a dozen or so "broken" items in the book, maybe a little more with Combos of items.

What if you are thinking on a diffrent power level then WotC??? What if the idea of this ring WAS to allow more powerful magic items, or just more magic items. You invest X (Cost o ring) and gain Y ( decrease cost of item creation) per use, after Z number of uses you have recouped X and are making profit.

That seams like how my freind Matt runs games, and how I have played many of combos. If you like Crafter style casters it makes you more useful. Since it doesn't give you more slots (Body slots) or more activations of daily powers, it really isn't that big of a deal.

If I have every slot I can have filled and a dozen woundrus items, all of witch I got from my friend who made them useing the ring, and the same is true for the other 4 plyers, what is the harm???
I remember a pre realase write up on items being less importsnt, and the example character was all decked out anyway. All it does is gives you more choices.

Lets Take the team of 5 with all the above items, and send them through a dungeon, then send a group through that was the same level (lets say 28) but useing the character with level guid lines, 1 item of level, 1 lower 1 higher, and gp equal to 1 item 1 level lower. Next lets find some people who leveled from level 1-28 doing PHB only items. What would we find??

Group A diffently has more options, but can only use 3+ milestones daily powers per day
Group B has the least options, but as above 3+ milestones
Group C is in the middle more items and options then B less then A, but still 3+ milestones.

If all three parties are Played and DMed equaly well, do you think there is a bg power diff?

There is no way to take all the vairables out of DMing, some will give more some will give less, some PCs will just have more options, but at the end if they are close...isn't that balance?

You have a whole list of 'Broken' items, if you put togather 1 character with every slot having the best option what would it look like? In fact what if it was a Fighter? now when looking at this power house fighter, if it was in a game of 5 players 1 wizard, 1 Warlord, 1 Rogue, 1 Warlock. and they all had starting gear 3 items + the gold. Would it ruin the fun of the game for them how powerful you were?

The long and short of this is that since Characters have limits to whitch they can use...and they are limited in what they can make there level or lower) then this is only a small increase in power...


now as for your arguement



Only a moron would design an item that way.

Why?

Because it makes the ring into a non-option or it unbalances the game. Either must be true.

This is because it either:

A) Means that the party has too much wealth, and is thus too powerful for the monsters, making them too easy.

OR

B) Makes the ring non-optional; that is to say, every party MUST have one to get the proper wealth level.

Its either one or the other.

The ring, thusly, is broken, because it always causes A or B. Ergo, it must be fixed.

If player A wants to make custom items for a group (we will say an artaficer, or maybe just a wizard with a crafter concept) He shouldn't have items to make the game more fun for him??

and how is it a non-optional choose...I know plenty of groups that choose not to make there own gear...so to them this ring is worht it's 20% resale value, and not 1 gp more.
Heck it is only cool if your group decides this is what they are intrested in...heck I know people who don't care how much treasure they get.

It is a power game...I will give you that, if you want to min/max every moment of game then it is a non-optional item. However I don't want my game nerfed becuse someone 'MIGHT' abuse it, especialy when there are other safe guards to stop magic item novaing.

Items like this ring are great, they are epic, they are powerful...but they are fun, and they are ALWAYS optional. Some groups will love it, some will abuse it, some will never realize it is in the book.

The game is balanced on 3 items...implment/weapon, Armor, and Neck/NADS item. The designers have said this time and time again. There is no need for more then them. IF you have more they will expand your options and give you a minnor boost, but the system can hanndle it.

If I give your 10th level character UNLIMITED gold to buy items with, but tell you no neck slot items, no magic weapons or implments, and no magic armors, and nothiing higher then 9th level. Then I threw you (and a party of like) into a 13th level solo monster fight, what would you think?

What if I striped your 29th level character of all items, you are naked nothing, but gave you a training bonus of +6 to AC, Attacks, Damage, and Defences. Ithen let you have 40 gp to buy equipment, and send you after a level 29 encounter...do you think you could hndle it, or do you think you need all those items you would have?

If you belive that the designers balanced the game (the basic math) like they said they did, then the 10th level character above would be in for a hard fight, possible an impossible one, mean while the 29th level character would have a challengeing fun encounter.

If you DON't belive in the basic balance then this whole arguement is done, and I might as well direct further comments to the wall next to me.

Think about it this way, two Laptops, one with all the bells and whistles you don't need but could be fun, the other one that is slightly better then you need but much less bells and whistles, you need to decide on one for college. Yes one can do more and might be more fun, but both can get the job done, and one is cheaper...now it comes to choice...

Before posting, ask yourself WWWS: What Would Wrecan Say?

You are claiming that a 20% increase in treasure per level is not going to significantly alter the power of a party..

Actualy yes that is what we are saying 20% more treasure WILL increase your power, but not by a signficant ammount...

Beyond being rather silly on its face, its pretty obvious that this is untrue.

not according to WotC who play tested this...

Adding an additional person requires the same adjustment to treasure levels. If this was truly so irrelevant, why does the treasure change based on the number of characters in the party?

Now you are being silly...becuse there are 3 slots per character that NEEDs to be filled, and everyone wants equal treasure. 20% increase is spread out to the neccasary and the fun in this case, un like when you already have your 3 slots filled, then it is just iceing on the cake...


A simple demonstration is the fact that there are items which have static effects (that is to say, they're not use limited). There are more such items which you can purchase than you have money to purchase.

but you are limited to x number of body slots, so if you want boots, gloves, helmit,ring, ring,arm peaice that all have properties, then YOU just limited your self to about half the choices, becuse not all of those have that option.

Ergo, a character with more such items is going to be stronger than a character with fewer such items, all other things being equal.

Yes, but by a small amount, enough that it fits into the math, not breaking it.

Ergo, a party with the ritualist's ring and thus extra items will be more powerful than a party without, as the ritualist's ring replaces itself and then adds more items.

Yes the ring gives more options, and lets the players have fun crafting items, and casting other rituels...but it only increase there power a little. Not broken just strong...

It is quite possible for the party to completely equip every single character in the party in all of their item slots with top tier (level 26-30) items.

You can only craft up to your level so that is only true at level 30...at the end of your career..."OMG it is so broken my retired character can crft what ever he wants!!!"

Normally, this is a fairly difficult proposition; you only find 26, which means that the extra 14 slots (armor, head, ring 1, ring 2, arm, hand, foot, waist, neck, weapon) need to be filled out of pocket.

but the game is balanced if you have none of those, or all of those...atleast acording to WotC...

Moreover, a normal party can only afford 1, maybe 2 level 30 magic items; a party with the ritualist's ring doubles that

So a party of 5 can normaly craft 2 level 30 items, but can now craft 4....THAT IS NOT EVEN 1 PER PERSON!!!!!!!

Is it broken then if a 5 person team at level 28 battles thie big red dragon, 3 PCs die and don't come back, the new characters come in at 29th to finish the game, the 2 surviving characters have the treasure from the fight, and there friends bodies they can break down to make more items, meanwhile the 3 new characters come in with 1 3oth level, 1 29th level, and 1 28th level item each, and GP equal to a 28 item...sounds to me like free gold...and that is RAW PHB...

Before posting, ask yourself WWWS: What Would Wrecan Say?

Yes it is. I'm sorry, but the treasure guidelines are present for a reason.

Yes to help DMs manage the game, and decraes prep time.
That you don't understand them doesn't mean that they are unimportant.

you don't understand them, first they are a guide line, second they will never be the holy grail of rules...

I'm sorry, this item is not balanced

I disagree, sayingthe same thing gets us no where...so again prove it


and doubling the number of items characters get to purchase each level is an enormous difference.

OR it is a cool epic idea to give your players more fun options without overall breaking the math

The built in limit on item use, pluse the body slot limit, pluse the limit on making items your level or lower is whatg keeps this balanced...you are ignoreing all of these limits and looking at the ring in a vacume...if you don't like it don't play with it.

Before posting, ask yourself WWWS: What Would Wrecan Say?

Alright, let me put this in the clearest and cleanest terms possible.

As currently written, there are two uses for this item.

One of them is highly abusive; this is the ability to halve the cost of magic item rituals and other creation rituals. This allows you to create more magic items than you should be able to. This is broken. Why?

Because the item is a non-choice. The ritualist ring is free. Once you create your second item using this item, it cost you nothing. Third item, it is making you money. This item obviously cannot be free, as it is better than nothing, and yet you're claiming its fair as a balanced item. A free item is a non-choice; every character should have one.

Secondly, this is not hurting a single person who is using this item fairly, because the fair uses necessarily are what are NOT being changed or altered by the errata. The ability to cast raise dead for half its price, that still works. And this is exactly what it is supposed to be used for, and is its fair usage. Nothing about this errata hurts this fair usage.

If you are a munchkin, if you exist simply to maximize your power, then these forums aren't the place for you. D&D isn't your game. Your ability to make your friends unhappy is not to be encouraged or furthered.

If you aren't a munchkin, what do you care about this item being fixed? There's nothing fair about creating extra items; it shouldn't work that way because it gives you too much wealth. The claim "I'm not a munchkin, but this shouldn't be fixed!" rings very hollow, because its obviously untrue - if you aren't a munchkin, then the change doesn't affect you.

"People won't abuse it" is what people said about 3.x. Guess what? They were wrong. Every single time. It is the job of the game designer to make a fair, balanced game, not the DM to tell their friends "Sorry, that's broken". Or worse still, after seeing them use it, have to take it away because it is too strong.

As currently written, it is broken. It is a non-choice because it costs nothing, and actually generates wealth. It makes your character more powerful than they're supposed to be. A free item which makes you better is better than not having a free item which makes you better. That's how simple it is.
Alright, let me put this in the clearest and cleanest terms possible.

As currently written, there are two uses for this item.

One of them is highly abusive; this is the ability to halve the cost of magic item rituals and other creation rituals. This allows you to create more magic items than you should be able to. This is broken.

I disagree

Why?

Because the item is a non-choice. No, don't argue. Every single argument against this is wrong.

It is not a non-choice, No don't argue..you are wrong and are getting on my nerves, just becuse YOU want it doesn't give you the right to talk for everyone...

The ritualist ring is free. Once you create your second item using this item, it cost you nothing.

agreeed,

Third item, it is making you money. This item obviously cannot be free, as it is better than nothing, and yet you're claiming its fair as a balanced item. A free item is a non-choice; every character should have one.

Why...what if I want a diffrent ring, and want to use my daily powers for other things???


Secondly, this is not hurting a single person who is using this item fairly, because the fair uses necessarily are what are NOT being changed or altered by the errata. The ability to cast raise dead for half its price, that still works. And this is exactly what it is supposed to be used for, and is its fair usage. Nothing about this errata hurts this fair usage.

What about people who WANT to play crafters, this is the FIRST item for people of that mind set..

If you are a munchkin, if you exist simply to maximize your power, then these forums aren't the place for you. D&D isn't your game.

I 100% agree, infact I will repate this

If you are a munchkin, if you exist simply to maximize your power, then these forums aren't the place for you. D&D isn't your game.

If you aren't a munchkin, what do you care about this item being fixed?

becuse I know that it doesn't need it...and I feel as great as you are on this forem, and as much as I respect your thoughts, you are wrong..

There's nothing fair about creating extra items; it shouldn't work that way because it gives you too much wealth.

I disagree

The claim "I'm not a munchkin, but this shouldn't be fixed!" rings very hollow, because its obviously untrue - if you aren't a munchkin, then the change doesn't affect you.

OR...maybe there are people that are not munchkins that think diffrently then you...please read my arguement on balance and the math, stop ignoreing the parts that are inconvenant inless you are only here sturring up trouble...

"People won't abuse it" is what people said about 3.x. Guess what? They were wrong. Every single time. It is the job of the game designer to make a fair, balanced game.

I agree, but you are not looking at how this is balanced...there are no more books giving +5 to stats, no more +6 belts to every stat, items are balanced, so are these rings..,

As currently written, it is broken. It is a non-choice because it costs nothing, and actually generates wealth.

so what?

It makes your character more powerful than they're supposed to be.

by a small amount taken into account by the system...

A free item which makes you better is better than not having a free item which makes you better. That's how simple it is.

But it isn't even free...

It requires you hit a mile stone AND have a daily power left...

So how about this, the soonest it is in game I belive is 19th level..so 11 levels 10 encounter per level 110 total, saying you adventure 2 encounters each day then use this ring that is 55 uses of this ring...but no chance to use more then 1 other item per day...wow read my posts, there are many limits you are ignoreing...PLEASE>>you are a smart guy, use that head of yours...Re read my posts and realize you are wrong...

Before posting, ask yourself WWWS: What Would Wrecan Say?

Why...what if I want a diffrent ring, and want to use my daily powers for other things???

Because you don't. The reason is that using this ring is the most powerful thing you can do. Moreover, it makes you more powerful in the future.

Additionally, the other players will be angry if you don't. If they have gold and want it turned into money, they're going to pester you to use the item for their benefit. And its the correct thing to do, from a power perspective.

This is what you apparently don't understand. This is what the item is, it is what it does, and it is how things go down in-game.

What about people who WANT to play crafters, this is the FIRST item for people of that mind set..

This isn't a crafter's item. This is a broken item. The fact that crafters might use it is irrelevant.

Making crafting cheaper is always a bad idea. Always. It was a bad idea in 3.x, its a bad idea in 4th. Its not fair and it always causes the game to no longer function properly.

And "being a crafter" is really roleplay in D&D anyway. You don't go out and kill 500 boars to collect 50 boar tusks in D&D.

So how about this, the soonest it is in game I belive is 19th level..so 11 levels 10 encounter per level 110 total, saying you adventure 2 encounters each day then use this ring that is 55 uses of this ring...but no chance to use more then 1 other item per day...wow read my posts, there are many limits you are ignoreing...PLEASE>>you are a smart guy, use that head of yours...Re read my posts and realize you are wrong...

No.

You use it once per adventure, twice per level, for a total of 22 usages. It costs you a single magic item daily each time, but you get a new item out of it - by far the best thing you can do with a magic item daily because it helps you every time in the future. This is all you need it for. You create two items of your level every level rather than just one with your gold.

Any magic item daily which gives you a bonus not only now but for every adventure to come is going to be broken.

And remember, it doesn't even take up a slot. Sure, it SAYS its a ring, but in reality, you simply carry it around in your pocket, then put it on when you want to use it.
Because you don't. The reason is that using this ring is the most powerful thing you can do. Moreover, it makes you more powerful in the future.

No becuse YOU don't...not everyone thinks like you, some people want to play the game not run the numbers, and guess what...it still works


Additionally, the other players will be angry if you don't.

Then that is a not a game issue it is a player issue...reread your own statement

If you are a munchkin, if you exist simply to maximize your power, then these forums aren't the place for you. D&D isn't your game.

If they have gold and want it turned into money, they're going to pester you to use the item for their benefit.

see above

And its the correct thing to do, from a power perspective.

This is what you apparently don't understand. This is what the item is, it is what it does, and it is how things go down in-game.

In YOUR games maybe...I rearly see the same item over and over again (except boots of spring and stride...) so again player problme, the DMG has great guidlines for dealing with problme players, look to those not errata of fine items...

This isn't a crafter's item. This is a broken item. The fact that crafters might use it is irrelevant.

So an item that makes rituel casting, including crafting better is irrelvant???

Making crafting cheaper is always a bad idea. Always. It was a bad idea in 3.x, its a bad idea in 4th. Its not fair and it always causes the game to no longer function properly.

That is the problme...you are looking at this item from a 3.5 experance. 4e is completly new, and balanved were 3.5 was not..

And "being a crafter" is really roleplay in D&D anyway. You don't go out and kill 500 boars to collect 50 boar tusks in D&D.

Well I and many others have played wizards that crafts MAGIC ITEMS.





You use it once per adventure, twice per level, for a total of 22 usages. It costs you a single magic item daily each time, but you get a new item out of it - by far the best thing you can do with a magic item daily because it helps you every time in the future. This is all you need it for. You create two items of your level every level rather than just one with your gold.

OK so 22 uses is 11 extra items, for 5 characters to split, so 2 each...seams right in line with a LITTLE boost in power with some great boost in OPTIONS



And remember, it doesn't even take up a slot. Sure, it SAYS its a ring, but in reality, you simply carry it around in your pocket, then put it on when you want to use it.

I will give you that, but it still takes a use of a daily aactivation, and at its worst doesn't even fill the slots of the party...

Before posting, ask yourself WWWS: What Would Wrecan Say?

Actually, TDragon, you would have to show what extra items the ring actually gives you.

At best, it seems to give more options (a.k.a) but not more power due to the weird effect of the pricing scheme.

For example, at level 19, when you get it, the best you can do is gain another 2 19th level item. You can't cheat the system and create a higher level item so the party gains an extra 2 items per level.

Furthermore, there's the fact that the system itself has a lot more leeway in magic items than you calculate.

A newly created 19th level party is going to much, much fewer items than a 19th level party that started at level 1 yet the system is scaled to handle both scenarios.
Actually, TDragon, you would have to show what extra items the ring actually gives you.

At best, it seems to give more options (a.k.a) but not more power due to the weird effect of the pricing scheme.

For example, at level 19, when you get it, the best you can do is gain another 2 19th level item. You can't cheat the system and create a higher level item so the party gains an extra 2 items per level.

Furthermore, there's the fact that the system itself has a lot more leeway in magic items than you calculate.

A newly created 19th level party is going to much, much fewer items than a 19th level party that started at level 1 yet the system is scaled to handle both scenarios.

QFT

Before posting, ask yourself WWWS: What Would Wrecan Say?

The item isn't broken because it makes you so powerful that the game no longer functions properly. That clearly isn't the case, as items themselves just aren't that strong.

The item is broken because it's a non-choice. And all the arguments postulated thus far about that just being TD's choice are looking at it from the wrong angle.

Can you choose other items? Yeah, sure -- if, as GMfP says, you're not playing the game for the numbers.

But if you're not interested in how the game is played for the numbers, pardon me while I ask what in the world you're doing in a thread about how numbers aren't working properly?

TD is dead-on with this one. Game balance (in a game of numbers like this one) means interesting choices if you're playing from a numerical perspective. If you're playing D&D from a storytelling perspective, you don't care much about the rules anyways, so whether or not an item is numerically balanced properly has no effect on you.
The item isn't broken because it makes you so powerful that the game no longer functions properly. That clearly isn't the case, as items themselves just aren't that strong.

The item is broken because it's a non-choice. And all the arguments postulated thus far about that just being TD's choice are looking at it from the wrong angle.

.

There is another significant limitation on the use ring which prevents it from being abused.

Namely the use of the milestone mechanic (I do wonder if we should have more DMs judging these items...)

Furthermore, the ring itself requires the use of a daily and has an opportunity cost of being a level 24 item. You're assumption is that the level 24 item is a nobrainer but as you yourself pointed out, the effect of the item is not strong at all.

Looking at the level 24 table at the back of the book, there are way tronger items that will affect battles...
I'm not arguing that the item gives you a level of power that breaks the game. In fact, I stated just the opposite.

I'm arguing that every party should have one of these as soon as it's possible to acquire one even despite that.

And that is the problem.
The item isn't broken because it makes you so powerful that the game no longer functions properly. That clearly isn't the case, as items themselves just aren't that strong.

that was my point

The item is broken because it's a non-choice. And all the arguments postulated thus far about that just being TD's choice are looking at it from the wrong angle.

Can you choose other items? Yeah, sure -- if, as GMfP says, you're not playing the game for the numbers.

Ok, show us this slippery slope...usse examples please..how does this break the game???

But if you're not interested in how the game is played for the numbers, pardon me while I ask what in the world you're doing in a thread about how numbers aren't working properly?

First I play RPGA so errataing something for no reason SUCKS...
second not playing FOR the numbers doesn't mean I want broken items in game, hence why I agree with alot of the errtas here, BUT I think this item is fine..



TD is dead-on with this one.

no he is not he is overeacting from a 3e mindset...

Game balance (in a game of numbers like this one) means interesting choices if you're playing from a numerical perspective. If you're playing D&D from a storytelling perspective, you don't care much about the rules anyways, so whether or not an item is numerically balanced properly has no effect on you

WRONG WRONG WRONG...at my games home brew or RPGA I want balance AND good stories, but I don't want people over reacting to balance to run over my story...

Item balance is the same if you have 3 items at 29th level or 30 items...read the rules.

really show with an example, I think TD is doing more for my arguement then I am... some quites:


You use it once per adventure, twice per level, for a total of 22 usages. It costs you a single magic item daily each time, but you get a new item out of it - by far the best thing you can do with a magic item daily because it helps you every time in the future. This is all you need it for. You create two items of your level every level rather than just one with your gold.

Moreover, a normal party can only afford 1, maybe 2 level 30 magic items; a party with the ritualist's ring doubles that

this showcases what a minnor bonus it is, and it costs you...not gold but time and function...1 daily power when you reatch a milestone...it is not something for nothing...it is something for something other then gold..


now on to this whole non choice thing...

lvl 24 or lower items I think would be MORE helpful are:
24 Bloodthirst bracers
21 Longshot gloves 225,000
22 Gloves of the healer 325,000
21 Ioun stone of sustenance 225,000
22 Ring of fey travel 325,000
23 Ring of adaptation 425,000
20 Ring of spell storing 125,000
17 Ring of protection 65,000
20 Ring of flight 125,000
21 Ring of wizardry 225,000
24 Ring of regeneration 525,000

Wow...yea that is a non choice..and I avoided the implmets, weapons, armors, neck items that ARE power boosting just to make sure to do an apples to apples comparasion...

Heck I Bolded the only item I could craft with sutch an item if it was @ 19th level...

Before posting, ask yourself WWWS: What Would Wrecan Say?

Ok, show us this slippery slope...usse examples please..how does this break the game???

I neither claimed nor implied a "slippery slope." I said it's a non-choice, and that's why it's bad.

Let's say that there's an item you can buy that gives you a +1 to damage on all critical hits you make. Clearly not overpowered, right? Now let's say it costs 0 gold. It's free. Is it still not overpowered? Well... having it isn't going to break the game... but having it still isn't a real choice, because there's basically no reason not to have it.

WRONG WRONG WRONG...at my games home brew or RPGA I want balance AND good stories, but I don't want people over reacting to balance to run over my story...

Explain how fixing this ruins your story. It's just numbers.

If you think it's not possible to be an effective crafter without this item, then your real issue is clearly with the crafting rules, and you should be petitioning a change to them. An item is not a good fix to inadequate crafting rules.

this showcases what a minnor bonus it is, and it costs you...not gold but time and function...1 daily power when you reatch a milestone...it is not something for nothing...it is something for something other then gold..

Fight two encounters, make an item.

That's actually an even worse part of the design, because it encourages more resting. If you don't rest after every second encounter and use this item, you're actually giving away treasure.

lvl 24 or lower items I think would be MORE helpful are:

If you get the ritualist ring, then it is easier for you to get more of those lvl 24 or lower items, plus all the ones you didn't choose.

Basically, you defeated your own argument. It works like this:

Without the ritualist ring, you get X of those items.

With the ritualist ring, you get X+N of those items, where N > 0.
No becuse YOU don't...not everyone thinks like you, some people want to play the game not run the numbers, and guess what...it still works

And as my errata doesn't affect those people, and only affects people who are powergaming, this is for the best.

Then that is a not a game issue it is a player issue...reread your own statement

Nope. Its a game issue.

You see, game mechanics influence player behavior. If certain behavior is optimal, players are much more likely to do it than they would otherwise.

So you'll see this sort of behavior because the game encourages it.

I'm not arguing that the item gives you a level of power that breaks the game. In fact, I stated just the opposite.

I'm arguing that every party should have one of these as soon as it's possible to acquire one even despite that.

And that is the problem.

This is precisely correct.

now on to this whole non choice thing...

lvl 24 or lower items I think would be MORE helpful are:
24 Bloodthirst bracers
21 Longshot gloves 225,000
22 Gloves of the healer 325,000
21 Ioun stone of sustenance 225,000
22 Ring of fey travel 325,000
23 Ring of adaptation 425,000
20 Ring of spell storing 125,000
17 Ring of protection 65,000
20 Ring of flight 125,000
21 Ring of wizardry 225,000
24 Ring of regeneration 525,000

Wow...yea that is a non choice..and I avoided the implmets, weapons, armors, neck items that ARE power boosting just to make sure to do an apples to apples comparasion...

Heck I Bolded the only item I could craft with sutch an item if it was @ 19th level...

I already answered this objection. Please read my post.

See, the problem is you're wrong. You aren't taking these items instead. As Solik explains...

If you get the ritualist ring, then it is easier for you to get more of those lvl 24 or lower items, plus all the ones you didn't choose.

Basically, you defeated your own argument. It works like this:

Without the ritualist ring, you get X of those items.

With the ritualist ring, you get X+N of those items, where N > 0.

This is because the Ritualist Ring grants you the ability to make items for half price.

Use it the first time, you get a new item for half price.

Use it the second time, and you have an additional item, any item from that list you can craft, for free, because you wouldn't have been able to afford it previously and now you can.

When you level, you can do this again.

For every level you gain, you get to pick one additional item.

So in short, unless you're only going to have one extended rest between when you get the ritualist's ring and when the campaign ends, the ring costs absolutely nothing at all - it was a free item.
And as my errata doesn't affect those people, and only affects people who are powergaming, this is for the best.

I disagree you are putting a needless limit in a power becuse you are afraid people might force others to use it, and it might unbalance a game that is already balanced for it...



Nope. Its a game issue.

You see, game mechanics influence player behavior. If certain behavior is optimal, players are much more likely to do it than they would otherwise.

So you'll see this sort of behavior because the game encourages it.

I call BS that is like saying familars need to be nerfed becuse of Pun Pun...
The player that is not playing a rit caster telling the rit caster what item he MUST have, and infact what rit he MUST have, since not everyone crafts items...is a problme player, not a problme item...everything is optional



This is because the Ritualist Ring grants you the ability to make items for half price.

Use it the first time, you get a new item for half price.

Use it the second time, and you have an additional item, any item from that list you can craft, for free, because you wouldn't have been able to afford it previously and now you can.

When you level, you can do this again.

For every level you gain, you get to pick one additional item.

so what WotC has balanced having no items (except 3 needed bonuses), having a hundred, or anything inbetween. You are ignoreing that balance to instead say this ring will break that.

So in short, unless you're only going to have one extended rest between when you get the ritualist's ring and when the campaign ends, the ring costs absolutely nothing at all - it was a free item.

Have you stoped to consider how many other rits are expencive, and the fact that the ring can 'pay for itself' in other ways...


PLEASE READ THIS PART walk me down the road where 5-10 extra items your level or lower will mess the math up. It won't give extra uses of items, or extra bonus to the 3 main items, so it will be a MINNOR power increase, one the game is balanced around.

now to quite myself...again

1
Is it broken then if a 5 person team at level 28 battles thie big red dragon, 3 PCs die and don't come back, the new characters come in at 29th to finish the game, the 2 surviving characters have the treasure from the fight, and there friends bodies they can break down to make more items, meanwhile the 3 new characters come in with 1 3oth level, 1 29th level, and 1 28th level item each, and GP equal to a 28 item...sounds to me like free gold...and that is RAW PHB...

2
If I give your 10th level character UNLIMITED gold to buy items with, but tell you no neck slot items, no magic weapons or implments, and no magic armors, and nothiing higher then 9th level. Then I threw you (and a party of like) into a 13th level solo monster fight, what would you think?

What if I striped your 29th level character of all items, you are naked nothing, but gave you a training bonus of +6 to AC, Attacks, Damage, and Defences. Ithen let you have 40 gp to buy equipment, and send you after a level 29 encounter...do you think you could hndle it, or do you think you need all those items you would have?

If you belive that the designers balanced the game (the basic math) like they said they did, then the 10th level character above would be in for a hard fight, possible an impossible one, mean while the 29th level character would have a challengeing fun encounter.

If you DON't belive in the basic balance then this whole arguement is done, and I might as well direct further comments to the wall next to me.

Before posting, ask yourself WWWS: What Would Wrecan Say?

I neither claimed nor implied a "slippery slope." I said it's a non-choice, and that's why it's bad.

why is it a non choice..becuse you say you want it? becuse T dragon said so? through 4 editions the longsword has been seen as the BEST melee weapon, but people chose others anyway...it wasn't a non choice. There are rogue in 4e useing short swords, even though the dagger is seen as the more optimum weapon, but it still isn't a non choice.
if A is better then B and is the same in all other ways then it is a non choice
If A is better then B but B is diffrent..there is still a choice...

Let's say that there's an item you can buy that gives you a +1 to damage on all critical hits you make. Clearly not overpowered, right? Now let's say it costs 0 gold. It's free. Is it still not overpowered? Well... having it isn't going to break the game... but having it still isn't a real choice, because there's basically no reason not to have it.

OK, lets make this honnest now, what if there was a ring that cost 0 gp, and allowed a +1 to crit damage if you had feat A (stand in for rit caster, and the correct item rit) but there are two other rings with Much better powers, at more cost. Do you wast your time with a minnor free bonus, or go for what you want more???

Explain how fixing this ruins your story. It's just numbers.

becuse it is an unnessacry nerf to a power my PCs might want to use.


Fight two encounters, make an item.

That's actually an even worse part of the design, because it encourages more resting. If you don't rest after every second encounter and use this item, you're actually giving away treasure.

Once again, some power gamer min maxer minipulating the rules is NOT a reasson to change the rules that work for the oth 98% of players


If you get the ritualist ring, then it is easier for you to get more of those lvl 24 or lower items, plus all the ones you didn't choose.

but you can only use so many...and wear so many, as long as I use this "non-choice" I am limiting my other choices...kinda like a choice A or B

Basically, you defeated your own argument. It works like this:

Without the ritualist ring, you get X of those items.

With the ritualist ring, you get X+N of those items, where N > 0.

no becuse even if I had every item on that list, plus the normal treasure I should have for a level...IT IS NOT BROKEN...the rules limit items already, there is no need for you to limit it more

Before posting, ask yourself WWWS: What Would Wrecan Say?

If I have the item the stupid mummy hand that lets me have a 3rd ring, and I wear it, a Ring of Wizardry, a ring of Protection, and a ring of spell storeing, and I have a +x Implement, a+x armor, and a +x cloak, where X=the correct level for my level. I also have Bracers of wound closure, Dimmension strid boots, Gloves of accuracy, Casque of Tactics, Belt of Blood, Darkskull, Exodus Knife, Endless Canteen, Foe Stone, Solitaire (Citrine), and Golden Lion. am I too powerful?

What if all I have are those 3 +x items, and any 1 of the above other items, am I able to keep up in a agame with the other guy?

How is the game balanced if my items are a problme...what if a PC died, and I took his stuff did I just double my power...did his new PC with only a hangful of items end up being not worth playing?

If you want to play a game without that ring more power to you, but don't tell the rest of us what is and isn't an option..

Before posting, ask yourself WWWS: What Would Wrecan Say?

Is it broken then if a 5 person team at level 28 battles thie big red dragon, 3 PCs die and don't come back, the new characters come in at 29th to finish the game, the 2 surviving characters have the treasure from the fight, and there friends bodies they can break down to make more items, meanwhile the 3 new characters come in with 1 3oth level, 1 29th level, and 1 28th level item each, and GP equal to a 28 item...sounds to me like free gold...and that is RAW PHB...

Wrong. If the party gets to keep the items the previous PCs had, then the new PCs have their item count reduced by that amount.

why is it a non choice..becuse you say you want it?

Quit trying to make this about individual people. You're never going to understand the argument as long as you're looking at it from that way.

It's a "non-choice" from an objective gameplay position. What that means is that there is no meaningful impact in terms of gameplay with this decision.

Does that mean players will always choose it? No. Some players will purposefully choose weaker options, while others don't care about numbers, and still others don't have the sense to choose well.

This isn't about those players. This is about the game mechanics.

The item should be an interesting choice in all terms. Not just story terms or "it has a neat name" terms or even "it has interesting mechanics" terms. It should also be a choice in terms of trade-offs.

The item, as written, fails at this last point. There's no arguing that. All of your arguments have amounted to "it doesn't matter." Fine. It doesn't matter to you. Then there's nothing for you to see here. Move along, move along.

OK, lets make this honnest now, what if there was a ring that cost 0 gp, and allowed a +1 to crit damage if you had feat A (stand in for rit caster, and the correct item rit) but there are two other rings with Much better powers, at more cost. Do you wast your time with a minnor free bonus, or go for what you want more???

I get all three of them. Because it's free.

Of course, the reality of this is even worse. If I get this free ring, I can actually get those other two rings more easily afterwards -- and then more as my level continues to rise.

becuse it is an unnessacry nerf to a power my PCs might want to use.

I ask you for a story example and you talk straight power. Why am I not surprised.

Once again, some power gamer min maxer minipulating the rules is NOT a reasson to change the rules that work for the oth 98% of players

Your laughable made-up statistics fail to accurately represent the scenario. Even if that silly figure was right, there's no reason not to fix the item so that it works for 100% of the players.

but you can only use so many...and wear so many, as long as I use this "non-choice" I am limiting my other choices...kinda like a choice A or B

Wrong. You do not have to wear this ring throughout the day to gain the benefit from it. You only need to wear it when you're performing the ritual.

There is no choice. The only opportunity cost is a single magic item daily power. The milestone prerequisite is a non-issue that, as I illustrated, actually makes it worse.

no becuse even if I had every item on that list, plus the normal treasure I should have for a level...IT IS NOT BROKEN...the rules limit items already, there is no need for you to limit it more

By this logic, we should just give all level-appropriate non-consumable items to players. Here's the Adventurer's Vault, enjoy! I mean, it wouldn't really break the game a whole lot in terms of power.

That's not a good idea, though, is it? Because it does remove one very important aspect of the game -- interesting choice. Choosing which items to pursue, create, or purchase is an interesting choice that's source of a lot of fun. Some players will have less fun if they realize that, in order to get the most out of it, they should always get this item or that one. And they'd also have less fun if they're given all the items. Part of the fun is overcoming challenges to acquire the items.

The Ritualist's Ring damages that part of the fun for those players.

I will repeat myself: if you think crafting is underpowered to the point that players need this item to craft, then petition for changing the crafting rules. An item is not an appropriate solution to this.