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.
