TOPIC: Rules Question on Rings

In the thread on Ring of focus VS Mithral Chain, it was suggested that players could trade the ring of focus back and forth for use in post battle healing.  So Gary (Cleric) and I (Druid) could cast all our post battle spells sharing one ring. <br /><br />The rules section on rings (page 5 of token guide), states that during combat rings may be interchanged (one player equiping a different ring in his posession) by taking a one combat round penalty.  So after battle a player could equip or unequip a ring of focus for post battle healing and take no penalty.  <br /><br />There is no comment about an exchange between players.  Since the rules are in general, "anything not forbidden is OK", I assume that the ring of focus can be exchanged between players. <br /><br /> Does anyone know of a conflicting rule?  Or would anyone (Jeff?) care to create such a rule?

My oppinion (for what it is worth)  is that one round of combat is time to do such a thing. being that this is taking place outside of combat I can only say that we were telling players that they needed to put the 2 rings and the amulet that they were going to wear in there badge holder so it can be seen so that the DM in each room knew what they were wearing! if rings can be changed in the dungeon then why do we need to do this?<br /><br />But heck Gary is the one that was doing this so know I am more confused than when I started this post!!!

The horn of plenty should be in the badge holder because if you choose that amulet you cannot change to any other amulet in the dungeon.  Or more techically, if you take the Horn off, you can't but it back on.  <br /><br />There was some confusion among the coachs that I had about what should be in badge holder.  Some said rings and amulet, some said all armor, some said nothing.  Sounds like a training issue for next year.  <br /><br />I think it should be weapon (to make it easy to get to), amulet and rings but that is just me. <br />

Hmmm yep I will make sure I stay up on this topic! <br />

The things that are to be held in the badge holder are things that modify saves or provide special, continuous effects. The cloak of resilience, rings of resistance/saves, boots of elvenkind, and things of that nature. Things you need to show to the DM to prove that you have them, like the masterwork tools too. Now, for certain well stocked people, this made the badge holder pretty stuffed, but you could usually get 4 tokens comfortably in the small ones. For most players this was fine, and they just held the weapon to have it out.<br /><br />I am going to recommend that the party cards for next year have saving throws on them, as too many items impact saves, and they were used quite frequently. Perhaps a seperate melee/ranged to hit box would also help out. The less things people need to keep out and can be kept on the party card, the better. But we don't want to go overboard with horn of plenty checkboxes and make the thing look like a tax form.

Amulet, 2 Rings, Weapon, +2 Cloak, Boots, Helm of Fort, DS shield, <br /><br />A well equiped fighter needs 8 tokens in his badge holder. 

Have you tried having 8 tokens on your badge holder?  Mine was getting pretty unwieldy this year with just four tokens in it.  And it's tough to get more than two to display at any one time.  Perhaps True Dungeon should make new character cards that have slots in them to put tokens in for display.  It wouldn't be that hard to do - staple (or otherwise fasten) a portion of a token binder page on it, with the tops of the token pockets held shut with velcro. 

I made and used a more or less permanent item holder with with slots for armor, rings, amulets, bracers, girdles, ioun stones, masterwork tools, cloaks, boots, etc on the front and equipment items like rope, tinder boxes, mirrors, etc. on the back.  These were more or less in a permanent location, visible to the DMs, and not easily changed.  In another badge holder like pouch I kept weapons, wands, scrolls likely to be used, etc., in other words tokens I needed to be able to remove quickly and use.<br /><br />Personally, I think a ruling should be made that during an adventure, that rings, amulets, etc should be magically attuned to the person who began wearing them (like the Horn of Plenty) and unless they die (and the body looted), no one else can use that item during the course of the adventure.  For the magic user to use the ring of focus during the battle and then the cleric and druid to use the same ring after to heal, just doesn't seem right, my precious.  Who in their right mind would share a ring of power?<br /><br />Just some thoughts.<br /><br /><br />Widseth

I hadn't even thought of adding the wizard into the mix.   <br /><br />Yep I think we will need to get a rule added here.<br /><br />Proposed rule addition:  If a player uses any magic item to produce any effect in a room, no other player may use that same item to produce any effect (in the same room).  (comments?)<br /><br />

But what is so wrong with rings moving around??<br /><br />I mean I think it is pretty creative for a party to hand the Barbarian a Fire Rez ring to use to check out a buring trick/trap taking advantage of good natural save throws and high hit points.<br /><br />I like saving some of the "attune rules" for more powerful items and rings just are not there yet in my opinion. 

I will talk to Jeff, but I am inclined to say that sharing the items (unless specifically forbidden) is good strategic use.  We wanted people to display the rings so that they were somewhat set as they walked into a room or started combat, preventing the "yah I got one of those" mad search and swap out for the ring with the best effect in a room.  I have no problem with people changing their minds and swapping rings out.  If I had three and could only wear two, I would want to be able to change if the situation warrented it.  I just do not want people walking into a fire trap and saying "yah, umm sure I had my ring of Fire reisistence on", when they clearly did not.  <br /><br />There technically is not a restriction about swapping an entire set of armor in the dungeon from one person to another if time permits (but the stats accounting would be murder).  <br /><br />So for me a ring swap outside of combat, would be little different than the paladin saying to the Fighter, here take my tower shield as you approach the opening, it will give you more protection....<br /><br />I do see Widseth's point as well, like I said I'll discuss with Jeff and let you guys know.<br /><br />Dave

As long as you guys have thought about it and think that it is reasonable, then I have no problem with ring sharing.  <br /><br />In that case, we should likely clarify that concept in the token guide so that all GMs have the same understanding.