Ring of the Wandering Wizard?

So, I started thinking about fun things to do with ring crafting, and I got an idea to make a ring fit for a Wizard who has had enough experience traveling that he makes himself a ring fit to handle such an endeavor.

Before I post what I figured, let me preface this by stating that any ability with a question mark next to it is one I think may be questionable as far as adding to the item. So, it's a tentative desire/suggestion, and not a bold insistence on having it added to the ring. Even the ones without a question mark are still not definitive items, but they're ones I'm less uncertain about being acceptable or fitting.

If you have any other ideas on what to add, feel free to post them, or critique the things I've thrown together.

I accounted for all of the factors in following the chart. The ones that say they were added all have the 1.5x modifier applied to them. If I miscalculated, feel free to let me know, but I highly doubt that I did. If you feel an ability should have a different price than by the book, go ahead and say why you think so.

All effects are continuous.

14000 - Ring of Invisibility (Wizards Only - 30% cheaper and applied the same to all further enchantments - It is a Wizard ring after all.)
2625 - Ring of Sustenance ADDED to Invisibility Ring
2310 - Ring of Feather Falling ADDED to Invisibility Ring
1050 - Ring of Endure Elements ADDED to Invisibility Ring
1575 - Ring of Detect Magic ADDED to Invisibility Ring
2625 - Ring of Perception +5 (Competence) ADDED to Invisibility Ring
2100 - ? Ring of Mage Armor ADDED to Invisibility Ring
4200 - ? Ring of Shield ADDED to Invisibility Ring
2100 - ? Ring of Protection +1 ADDED to Invisibility Ring
2100 - ? Ring of Natural Armor +1 ADDED to Invisibility Ring
1500 - Magic Aura Continuous Effect On Ring (Non-Magical) (Not Wizard Only due to Not Applicable since the effect is on the item.)

Total Cost: 36185

I'll start by discussing the Mage Armor and Shield abilities of the item, which are probably the most controversial. I would completely understand someone saying such a thing, but hear me out first. I know the magic item estimation chart covers AC bonuses itself, but it covers AC bonuses that scale with money input (and bonuses that STACK with other bonuses). Additionally, that pricing pattern allows for people to add armor special abilities to items like Bracers of Armor instead of just AC bonuses.

The item here has only flat bonuses, and ones that don't stack (except for the Protection +1 and Natural Armor +1 bonuses, which follow the chart specifically). Since Mage Armor lasts a really long time anyway, I think it can work as an item. It would mean almost nothing to a Fighter who uses heavy armor, since it wouldn't stack with his armor, but it's a way for a Wizard (or similar caster) to spend money to have a constant Mage Armor up, instead of just casting it once every day (or twice or more at lower levels) with an extend rod.

If there's really a strong opposition to having it continually effect Mage Armor and Shield, the item could instead use the chart to add Luck, Insight, Sacred, Dodge, Morale, Shield, and Competence bonuses to AC, as well as regular Armor bonuses (but I think going that far is a bit silly since it is practically just for the sake of cheese, which is not the point of this item, and something I'd rather avoid - it's not like this item HAS to provide AC boosts, it can do so many other fun things instead).

Additionally, I applied the Wizard class restriction to the item, not only to reduce the price but more importantly to not make it viable for another class (of course, other full arcanist classes could be used instead, like the Sorcerer or Witch, especially if they themselves make the item). It's also for the flavor of the item. It's a Wizard's tool.

Without being Wizard only, this item would value at about 51050 GP (comparable to a Ring of Shooting Stars or Ring of Spell Storing in price - this ring just has a bunch of little effects).

My prediction is that nobody will like suggesting the abilities with question marks next to them, and I'm perfectly happy to have the item be without those abilities (and in return perhaps different abilities).

As for suggesting different abilities to give the item, remember that the theme is of a wanderer or traveler who made or commissioned this item to assist in their travels and exploration (and, if it helps, they add each effect now and then instead of ALL at once).

By the strict rules you may be right- but under the "Custom rules must be passed by a DM first" rule- you lose.

You do NOT GET TO take a discount for making an item for yourself that only you can use.

RAW may say you can technically do it, but no sane DM is going to allow you to take that discount on an item you intend to only ever use for yourself.

-S

edited for rudeness

Add the following:

+ Protection from Evil
+ Protection from Good
+ Protection from Chaos
+ Protection from Law
+ Protection from Arrows

Hehehe. And yes, I would allow that Ring on my game. With the 30% discount and all.

I'd not allow the addition of Shield or the 30% discount, otherwise I think it's fine. The problem with Shield is that there are two magic items that cover the two parts of Shield already: the shield bonus to AC and the protection from magic missile. They are Ring of Force Shield and Brooch of Shielding. They cost 8500 and 1500 gp, and craft at 4250 and 750 gp, respectively. You have "shield" in at 4200, where adding those two items would cost 5250 to craft (with your discount, which I wouldn't allow).

That said, I'd probably allow the item in at a crafted price of 55,000 (slightly rounded up from the calculated price of 52,550) and put it in markets for 110,000.

I'd not allow the addition of Shield or the 30% discount, otherwise I think it's fine. The problem with Shield is that there are two magic items that cover the two parts of Shield already: the shield bonus to AC and the protection from magic missile. They are Ring of Force Shield and Brooch of Shielding. They cost 8500 and 1500 gp, and craft at 4250 and 750 gp, respectively. You have "shield" in at 4200, where adding those two items would cost 5250 to craft (with your discount, which I wouldn't allow).

That said, I'd probably allow the item in at a crafted price of 55,000 (slightly rounded up from the calculated price of 52,550) and put it in markets for 110,000.

Yeah, I considered the fact that there are existing items, but there's an important distinction. This item constantly casts the spell on you. The spell can be dispelled or otherwise negated. It's much easier to dispel a spell on a person than dispel an item (mainly, unless you target a single spell on a person, you get to use your dispel check against ALL spells affecting the target). Just because the item is continuous doesn't mean that the effect can't be dispelled if the item casts the spell. You would have to re-activate the ring's effect with a standard action (which, in combat, would be better suited to other, more important, tasks, or if nothing else cost you a standard action which is relatively valuable).

Also, I don't know if it was intentional or not, but the prices I list are the prices to BUY it. This is all before applying the fact that if you craft it it's half price cost.

Add the following:

+ Protection from Evil
+ Protection from Good
+ Protection from Chaos
+ Protection from Law
+ Protection from Arrows

Hehehe. And yes, I would allow that Ring on my game. With the 30% discount and all.

While that does seem like a good idea, and certainly fits my character (who is True Neutral, and by True Neutral I refer to the more classical definition of balance, a la Druids), it would be kind of expensive for all of that. Then again, those are valuable protections. The Arrows one might be worth doing, though. Perhaps I should add the "Gloves of Arrow Snaring" wondrous item's abilities to the ring instead (or even in addition)? It would give a way to intimidate opponents by catching and immediately returning an arrow.

I could always add these things later. Or, maybe make a companion ring so that not ALL of the abilities are tied to one item. Should I make this ring the utility ring (with the various travel assisting spells and the Mage Armor/Shield), and then make another ring the protection ring (with all of the protection types)?

By the strict rules you may be right- but under the "Custom rules must be passed by a DM first" rule- you lose.

You do NOT GET TO take a discount for making an item for yourself that only you can use.

RAW may say you can technically do it, but no sane DM is going to allow you to take that discount on an item you intend to only ever use for yourself.

-S

edited for rudeness

It's not an item that only I can use, it's an item that a Wizard can use. There may be other Wizards in the party (like, for example, an Arcane Trickster or Arcane Archer or such). Additionally, I'm making a themed ring in general, not just for my use. This specific ring is more of an experiment, since depending on what I learn when figuring out the kind of stuff I add, there's a chance that other themed items I make for other classes will be successful. Mainly, rings that enhance the specific class abilities or employ the class's own spells to effect on themselves.

You may have a point about a DM not allowing it, but this isn't a custom rule but a custom item using custom item rules (not custom rules). A custom rule would be saying that I can prepare extra cantrips due to my high Int (which I think would be a good custom rule, but regardless it would be a custom rule).

Of course, in either case, it would still be subject to DM approval. That's not my biggest concern at the moment, because I'm theorying right now. Sure, it would be fun if my DM would allow it, but I'm not attached to this or anything. I'd also like good input before I even suggest such an item or an item like it for another class.

Custom magical items must be vetted by the DM because of potential cost abuse and problems. Says so right in the item creation rules.

That is to flat out prevent stuff like.. this item. You are applying the 30% discount to reduce the price of an item. An item that is entirely too powerful even at the "not reduced" price.

Your 'effects' are somewhat hard to decipher- no offense meant. Are you saying you get the spell effects permanently? or is it a 1day casting of the spell at the lowest caster level? If its 1/day Mage Armor (and shield) then fine.. but if permanent bonuses? no.

You want mage armor? Bracers of Armor +4 are 16000 gold. You don't get to say "permanent mage armor" and go for the cheaper effect. Half of that would be 8k since you are creating it yourself.
"find the closest item" rule. Bracers of Armor not "permanent mage armor".

You need to go through every "effect" on your list and find a comparable magical item in order to appropriately price it. Only in the absence of such an item do you go to the true custom rules.

-S

Were these prices adjusted to account for the fact that this item has multiple abilities but is an item in a limited slot? I don't see a markup for things like duplicating the ring of sustenance, featherfalling, or protection. OK, it's there, but the markup doesn't look quite right; it looks like 10%.

Custom magical items must be vetted by the DM because of potential cost abuse and problems. Says so right in the item creation rules.

That is to flat out prevent stuff like.. this item. You are applying the 30% discount to reduce the price of an item. An item that is entirely too powerful even at the "not reduced" price.

Your 'effects' are somewhat hard to decipher- no offense meant. Are you saying you get the spell effects permanently? or is it a 1day casting of the spell at the lowest caster level? If its 1/day Mage Armor (and shield) then fine.. but if permanent bonuses? no.

You want mage armor? Bracers of Armor +4 are 16000 gold. You don't get to say "permanent mage armor" and go for the cheaper effect. Half of that would be 8k since you are creating it yourself.
"find the closest item" rule. Bracers of Armor not "permanent mage armor".

You need to go through every "effect" on your list and find a comparable magical item in order to appropriately price it. Only in the absence of such an item do you go to the true custom rules.

-S

Yes, I'm not arguing that it shouldn't or wouldn't be evaluated by the DM first before using it.

The spell effects are continuous, just like other continuous effect items (like the Cloak of Displacement, Minor). That's not exactly hard to decipher, you know.

Were it to be a 1/day casting item, the price for the spell abilities would be MUCH lower. They cost more because they're continuous.

Bracers of Armor as an item involves, as I mentioned, a moving bonus that can be increased with gold, and something that functions as armor, not as a spell. This item casts the spell on you. Yes, there IS a difference. Additionally, Bracers of Armor can be used to grant special armor properties instead of just AC. That is pretty powerful. Something that this item can't do.

Bracers of Armor is NOT "permanent Mage Armor". There is a difference. Additionally, as I noted, this item continually maintains the spell on you, which is different from an item granting a bonus. The effect can much more easily be dispelled.

As for going through and finding comparable magic items, I used the comparable magic item prices for all effects. In the case of Mage Armor and Shield, look at Cloak of Displacement, Minor. It follows the magic item creation guidelines exactly. There are even other items like it that follow the guidelines exactly.

I said at the start that I knew the Mage Armor and Shield components would probably be contentious, and that I'm not attached to them, exactly, and can drop them.

So, assuming I drop all of the abilities with a question mark next to them, would you be OK with this item?

Additionally, what would you demand from a separate item (just the Mage Armor and Shield abilities) that would try to replicate what's said? If you just insist that it's Bracers of Armor, then don't bother. I'm well aware of that item and I've mentioned the important differences.

I know that the Ring of Force Shield might seem like a comparable item to the Shield ability, but it uses a Wall of Force (if you care to read the spell or are familiar with it) which is MUCH more powerful even as a shield-like shape. So, I'm denying people insisting that it be equated to a Ring of Force Shield.

You might see these as just static bonuses, but there is a BIG difference between something like the Ring of Force Shield and the Shield spell, and between the Bracers of Armor and the Mage Armor spell.

Were these prices adjusted to account for the fact that this item has multiple abilities but is an item in a limited slot? I don't see a markup for things like duplicating the ring of sustenance, featherfalling, or protection. OK, it's there, but the markup doesn't look quite right; it looks like 10%.

They were adjusted to account for every ability beyond the first costing 1.5 times as much. My first post even mentioned that I applied the 1.5x modifier to them. They also have the .7x modifier applied for being class restricted (except for the Magic Aura ability which cannot qualify for class restriction since it targets the item itself).

Also, of note, the magic item creation guidelines seem to coincide with Permanency's cost (I was looking at Shrink Item as an enchantment to add to a huge chest, and thought the price was similar to the Permanency effect of making Shrink Item permanent, and it was).

Lathiira wrote:

Were these prices adjusted to account for the fact that this item has multiple abilities but is an item in a limited slot? I don't see a markup for things like duplicating the ring of sustenance, featherfalling, or protection. OK, it's there, but the markup doesn't look quite right; it looks like 10%.

They were adjusted to account for every ability beyond the first costing 1.5 times as much. My first post even mentioned that I applied the 1.5x modifier to them. They also have the .7x modifier applied for being class restricted (except for the Magic Aura ability which cannot qualify for class restriction since it targets the item itself).

Also, of note, the magic item creation guidelines seem to coincide with Permanency's cost (I was looking at Shrink Item as an enchantment to add to a huge chest, and thought the price was similar to the Permanency effect of making Shrink Item permanent, and it was).

Thanks, I missed that. That does make me ask however about whether or not the modifiers are applied in cases like these in series (multiply by 1.5, then by .7) or if they are applied as +50%, -30%. I'll need to look that up.

On topic. Yes, the shield and mage armor abilities are off. There have been a few threads about items that do these exact things, if you can find them you'll hear the gist of the arguments above. For the restriction of "wizard only": the item is restricted to one of several classes that are able to make magic items. Wait, that's all of them. And a common class. I'd probably not allow that restriction to affect the cost as it isn't really a restriction to you and not much of one to your party.

As a DM I would look long at hard at this ring. I don't know if I would follow the strict magic creation rules simply because of the sheer number of spell effects it grants. It's not so much that any of them overpower the game so much as it is that it's just so many effects that it seems cheesy to me.

I also am thinking hard about having "natural armor" and "protection" bonuses on the same item. I think I might rule that doing so effectively makes it a +2 protection item in cost. I'd probably rule that you can't put more than one kind of armor bonus effect on any single item because that seems like nothing more than a way to get around the cost of a higher level protection item. "I'm making a ring of natural armor +2 and protection +2 to avoid the cost of a +4 item".

And "shield" as an always on spell? Even for an epic level wizard, "Shield" would only last one encounter, not a whole day.

I might allow this ring in a campaign... but it would probably be at a much higher cost, and would have some changes.

Couple issues I'd have with this:

1. No way you pay only 6,300 GP to get a perpetual +8 to AC and total immunity to magic missile. Just no. At that point your ring is substantially better than a +2 mithril breastplate (No ACP, unlimited dex, immunity to a spell, and works v. incorporeal) and cheaper.

That paired effect should be priced along the lines of a +2 ghost touched BP with another spell thrown in.

2. From magic aura:

"If the targeted item's own aura is exceptionally powerful (if it is an artifact, for instance), magic aura doesn't work."

This isn't an artifact, but it also does 10? 12 things? Even if that were only 10 first-level spells working at once I'd say no, and several of those effects are better.

As a GM, I'd make that substantially more expensive, as well as warn of the dangers of an adventurer making a reputation for himself as "dude what put all of his money and power into this one ring that he always wears." Bad things tend to happen as a result of that.

Or, maybe make a companion ring so that not ALL of the abilities are tied to one item. Should I make this ring the utility ring (with the various travel assisting spells and the Mage Armor/Shield), and then make another ring the protection ring (with all of the protection types)?

Oooo, that would be cool. And flavorfull. I like it.

I would insist on mirroring the price (with inflation for inappropriate slot) for any item currently in existence that mirrors what you are trying to do. Especially things you are trying to exactly mirror.

To me, your argument for bracers falls flat. It says to me "but I don't want to pay that much for an identical function". The fact that you don't want to add some other armor ability to it is irrelevant. Bracers of Armor +4 aren't suddenly cheaper because you don't want bracers of armor +2 with a +2 addon equivalent. The price is the price for +4 bonus regardless of how you spend it.

Shield spell.
You want
Shield creates an invisible shield of force that hovers in front of you. It negates magic missile attacks directed at you. The disk also provides a +4 shield bonus to AC. This bonus applies against incorporeal touch attacks, since it is a force effect. The shield has no armor check penalty or arcane spell failure chance.

I would at least double the cost of the Shield spell- using the Force Shield ring as an example. And I'd apply the penalties of the Force Shield ring to yours. (no free hand while activated, etc..)

The magical items you copied exactly onto the ring I would have no issue with provided you 1) ditched the "wizard only" discount, 2) applied the "wrong slot" penalty (where applicable).

-S

A magic weapon can only have a total +10 of enchantments on it. I don't see a problem with applying that same sort of logic to any slot item. I would allow staffs to be more powerful, but +10 seems pretty good to me for any one slot item.

Plus I would not allow the armor bonuses on the ring to stack. This is essentially a +10 armor ring for a wizard which negates magic missile and does about ten other effects, some of which are better than first level spells.

The more I think about this the more opposed I am to it both in concept and in practical terms. It's just too much. A character wearing a ring like this would just become a target for every thief and bandit in the area. And for good reason. That's some badass ring!

Thanks, I missed that. That does make me ask however about whether or not the modifiers are applied in cases like these in series (multiply by 1.5, then by .7) or if they are applied as +50%, -30%. I'll need to look that up.

On topic. Yes, the shield and mage armor abilities are off. There have been a few threads about items that do these exact things, if you can find them you'll hear the gist of the arguments above. For the restriction of "wizard only": the item is restricted to one of several classes that are able to make magic items. Wait, that's all of them. And a common class. I'd probably not allow that restriction to affect the cost as it isn't really a restriction to you and not much of one to your party.

It doesn't matter the order in which they're applied, since it's all multiplication. Multiplying by 1.5 is equivalent to adding 50%. Multiplying by .7 is equivalent to removing 30%. This is simple math.

It is a restriction to the party because I'm the only Wizard (and I'd probably be the only one to play a Wizard who crafts). Do you have any idea how useful this ring would be to, say, a Cleric? Ridiculously useful.

Anyway, I am revising the ring's properties based on what I expected and what you guys said. I will, after all, NOT include the abilities with the question mark next to them (and, as I said at the start, I expected them to be turned down, but I'm still wondering and it's always good to hear the reasons why).

The ring will have absolutely no AC bonuses of any kind. It will, however, have more utility, which was the whole point of the ring in the first place, and this will help fill my role in the party (I'm partially making this item because I have to step up to be the detection/trap/lock monkey). It's also because I want some of the utility effects that are in this item. Let me know what you think of this revised version, and ignore the previous one.

14000 - Ring of Invisibility (Wizards Only - 30% cheaper and applied the same to all further enchantments - It is a Wizard ring after all.)
2625 - Ring of Sustenance
2310 - Ring of Feather Falling
1050 - Ring of Endure Elements
2100 - Ring of Detect Magic
1575 - Ring of Read Magic
1575 - Ring of Message
945 - Ring of Mage Hand
2625 - Ring of Spellcraft +5 (Competence)
2625 - Ring of Perception +5 (Competence)
4200 - Ring of Detect Secret Doors
1500 - Magic Aura Continuous Effect On Ring (Non-Magical) (Not Wizard Only due to Not Applicable since casting it on the item.)

Total: 37130

This one fits the theme more, and is probably less offensive. That total cost is the cost to buy it. I know the Detect Secret Doors ability is expensive, but I really think it's worth having especially if I'm filling in for a rogue. Perhaps I should make it a pair of Goggles of Detect Secret Doors instead, or a hat. That would be cheaper (actually, I think I'll do that instead, but I'm still posting it on the ring).

Couple issues I'd have with this:

1. No way you pay only 6,300 GP to get a perpetual +8 to AC and total immunity to magic missile. Just no. At that point your ring is substantially better than a +2 mithril breastplate (No ACP, unlimited dex, immunity to a spell, and works v. incorporeal) and cheaper.

That paired effect should be priced along the lines of a +2 ghost touched BP with another spell thrown in.

2. From magic aura:

"If the targeted item's own aura is exceptionally powerful (if it is an artifact, for instance), magic aura doesn't work."

This isn't an artifact, but it also does 10? 12 things? Even if that were only 10 first-level spells working at once I'd say no, and several of those effects are better.

As a GM, I'd make that substantially more expensive, as well as warn of the dangers of an adventurer making a reputation for himself as "dude what put all of his money and power into this one ring that he always wears." Bad things tend to happen as a result of that.

You're all making good points on the AC bit. I expected those responses and figured that it wouldn't make sense, but the question was still one I felt like asking since it was related. I agree that it's a bit much. If I were DMing and someone wanted to make any item that had Mage Armor or Shield like this, I'd allow them to do this if it ONLY had the Mage Armor or Shield enchantment effect on it, and if it was priced double based on the formula.

All of the auras are minor, and even if it was a strong aura from a 9th level spell, it would still be subject to Magic Aura. The description insists on the aura being exceptionally powerful. This would not qualify for anywhere near artifact level exceptional power, in my opinion. A lot of faint auras do not an artifact make. They may total into a moderate or even a strong aura if you insist, but they're all still faint auras.

Additionally, it's not all of my money and power, but it is a considerable portion. Then again, my Wizard is somewhat paranoid anyway and very cautious (which probably explains the ring). It would make some good story impetus, at least. If nothing else, were people to commonly know about it (which is highly unlikely), it would raise my reputation as a crafter.

I love the concept! In 3.5 I ran a home-brew setting and one of the hallmarks of the setting was that magic items were much more rare, and tended to be associated with powerful individuals. Basically, I made a few house rules that encouraged players to stack powers onto a small number of items rather than have 20 magic items each with a single ability. I feel like this item become a very important part of your character.

First, you know you need GM approval, we know you need GM approval, we don't need to argue about the fact that your GM can veto any magic item. That's a given.

Like many others, I would not allow you to make Mage Armor or Shield permanent the way you initially describe. You might add one or the other at the normal bracers/shield cost, or make the ring able to cast each spell at a fairly low CL once per day (as a backup to your usual defenses). If they're caster level 1, once per day, they cost 300g per spell?

I would have no problem with letting you add armor, natural armor, luck armor, etc. to the same item. Partially because it's RAW, and partially because you're paying 50% premium to have the powers stacked, meaning you probably won't want to raise each of them too much. When you get a spell benefit or a new magic item that adds a similar bonus, making the old bonus obsolete.

I have no problem with Magic Aura obscuring the effect of the ring. Magic Aura does allow a will save by anyone examining the object, so it's not like you could fool everyone all the time. It would function nicely to throw off the casual observer.

I've never been entirely happy with the "Can only be used by one class or alignment -30%" rule. It's purely a house rule, but I've occasionally changed that to be:

• 5 ranks in a related skill required -10%
  
• Specific race required -10%
  
• Specific class required -10%
  
• Specific alignment required -10%
  
• If the race, class, alignment, or skill is particularly inappropriate, -10% more. (Weapons only usable by wizards, or necromancy only usable by good characters)
  
• Maximum discount -25%

This thing has so many powers stuffed into it that it might as well be a magic shoehorn.

While I think "The Ring of the Wandering Wizard" is a nice name, I'd limit its powers to ones which befit a "wandering wizard" and not just a Swill army knife of everything that might be useful.

Alternately, I'd go with the rules from the 3.5 Magic Items Compendium and break it out into a magic items set so there'd be "The Ring of the Wandering Wizard," "The Robe of the Wandering Wizard," and "The Spectacles of the Wandering Wizard" then break up the appropriate powers into the appropriate slotted items, and designate the useful but not specifically slot-themed powers as the bonus powers you get when wearing part or all of the set.

Then I'd make up some business about how this set was made by some ancient mage known as the wandering wizard and how the scattered parts have been used to create new sets.

Something like this:

Ring of the Wandering Wizard
Feather Falling
Mage Hand
Message

Robe of the Wandering Wizard
Endure Elements
Sustenance

Spectacles of the Wandering Wizard:
Detect Magic
Read Magic
Perception +5 (Competence)

Ring + Spectacles
Detect Secret Doors

Spectacles + Robe
Spellcraft +5 (Competence)

Robe + Ring
Invisibility

Ring + Robe + Spectacles
Magic Aura Continuous Effect On Ring (Non-Magical)

I'd also ditch the "only for wizards" discount as that reeks of cheese.

I haven't bothered to price the above, but I think by using three slots and the "item set" rules, you come up with something the same price or cheaper and without cheesy stuff like trying for a "wizard only" discount. It's also more flavorful.

My own house rules on such an item as there is nothing official.

1. No discounts for a restriction that's not a restriction to the crafter.

2. Every effect is at a +50 percent per layer cost hike after the first. first one is plus 50 second one is 100 percent, and so on.

3. Every pr-existing effect adds at least +5 to the DC.

4. Failing the roll by 5 or more forces a will save for the item to not to be completely ruined at each step.

And while you might all my interpretations not RAW, neither is a stacked ring like the one you're trying to cheese up.

I believe this falls under this nice little paragraph:

MIC[/url]]Not all items adhere to these formulas. First and foremost, these few formulas aren't enough to truly gauge the exact differences between items. The price of a magic item may be modified based on its actual worth. The formulas only provide a starting point. The pricing of scrolls assumes that, whenever possible, a wizard or cleric created it. Potions and wands follow the formulas exactly. Staves follow the formulas closely, and other items require at least some judgment calls.

All of the auras are minor, and even if it was a strong aura from a 9th level spell, it would still be subject to Magic Aura. The description insists on the aura being exceptionally powerful. This would not qualify for anywhere near artifact level exceptional power, in my opinion. A lot of faint auras do not an artifact make. They may total into a moderate or even a strong aura if you insist, but they're all still faint auras.

No, but 9 1st level spells fill a spell-storing item just as much as 1 9th level spell.

Again, my ruling would be magic aura would not work on that. Given that your new version has:

Ring of Invisibility (2nd level)
Ring of Sustenance (at least 2nd level)
Ring of Feather Falling (1st level)
Ring of Endure Elements (1st level)
Ring of Detect Magic (0th)
Ring of Read Magic (0th)
Ring of Message (0th)
Ring of Mage Hand (0th)
Ring of Spellcraft +5 (Competence) (min 1st)
Ring of Perception +5 (Competence) (min 1st)
Ring of Detect Secret Doors (1st)

9 levels of spells, 11 if you count each 0th as 1/2, I feel that's totally justified. I'm not even taking into account being able to not worry about durations or simply ignore concentration on a number of these effects.

Compare this to one of the better minor artifacts for a wizard (spindle of perfect knowledge)

which gives:

+4 enhancement to a stat (2nd level spell)
tongues (3rd level spell)
Comprehend languages (1st level spell)
+5 to two knowledges (min 1st x2)
Telepathy....Not perfect but detect thoughts at 2nd is the closest analogue.

That's 10 levels of spells total? Probably 12 if you bump Telepathy to it's proper place?

So yeah, you are putting together something approaching artifact power, when you take all the mechanical bonuses you're looking for into account.

Remember, that's just one of the better minor artifacts, there are a number that are nowhere near as good.

This thing has so many powers stuffed into it that it might as well be a magic shoehorn.

While I think "The Ring of the Wandering Wizard" is a nice name, I'd limit its powers to ones which befit a "wandering wizard" and not just a Swill army knife of everything that might be useful.

Alternately, I'd go with the rules from the 3.5 Magic Items Compendium and break it out into a magic items set so there'd be "The Ring of the Wandering Wizard," "The Robe of the Wandering Wizard," and "The Spectacles of the Wandering Wizard" then break up the appropriate powers into the appropriate slotted items, and designate the useful but not specifically slot-themed powers as the bonus powers you get when wearing part or all of the set.

Then I'd make up some business about how this set was made by some ancient mage known as the wandering wizard and how the scattered parts have been used to create new sets.

I'd also ditch the "only for wizards" discount as that reeks of cheese.

I haven't bothered to price the above, but I think by using three slots and the "item set" rules, you come up with something the same price or cheaper and without cheesy stuff like trying for a "wizard only" discount. It's also more flavorful.

Being only for a Wizard doesn't reek of cheese. A Cleric would love an item like this, and so would a Rogue. I wouldn't have done it if it wouldn't fit the theme.

I made a few changes to the "item set" you proposed. These just made more sense to me based on the enchantments and abilities involved. Though, in the case of the item set proposed, I would add "Wizard Only" because it just makes sense.

Ring of the Wandering Wizard
Invisibility
Feather Falling
Sustenance

Necklace of the Wandering Wizard
Endure Elements
Mage Hand
Message

Spectacles of the Wandering Wizard:
Detect Magic
Read Magic
Perception +5 (Competence)

Ring + Spectacles
Detect Secret Doors

Necklace + Ring
Spellcraft +5 (Competence

Ring + Robe + Spectacles
Magic Aura Continuous Effect On Ring, Necklace, and Spectacles(Non-Magical)

Being only for a Wizard doesn't reek of cheese. A Cleric would love an item like this, and so would a Rogue. I wouldn't have done it if it wouldn't fit the theme.

Oh and the fact that the character you want to make this for...i.e. YOU just happens to be a wizard is of course mere coincidence. Rationalising your cheese does not get rid of the limburger smell. My ruling is simple if the restriction DOES not restrict the character, than it is not a restriction. In fact it's an added feature which not only does not give a discount but it merits a 10 percent price HIKE as it respresents an item that's kept away from "the unworthy."

You might see these as just static bonuses, but there is a BIG difference between something like the Ring of Force Shield and the Shield spell, and between the Bracers of Armor [+4] and the Mage Armor spell.

Other than the Shield spell being twice as good, plus stopping magic missiles, and the mage armor being 8 times cheaper, what difference is there? You've already admitted they are incredibly questionable. You've brought up using luck/insight/etc. to replace, but those (while still very cheesy) would at least cost Far Far more. Banish the thought from your mind, or pay for it.

As for the rest, several (as compensated for with the split out item sets) would have an additional price increase for being "off-spot". Such as vision items should be face or head, etc.

The -30% factor should never be applied to existing items by a player. Simple as that. Coming up with creative new items (that aren't simply combinations of old ones), to make an item that makes sense, sure.

Nigrescence wrote:

All of the auras are minor, and even if it was a strong aura from a 9th level spell, it would still be subject to Magic Aura. The description insists on the aura being exceptionally powerful. This would not qualify for anywhere near artifact level exceptional power, in my opinion. A lot of faint auras do not an artifact make. They may total into a moderate or even a strong aura if you insist, but they're all still faint auras.

No, but 9 1st level spells fill a spell-storing item just as much as 1 9th level spell.

Again, my ruling would be magic aura would not work on that. Given that your new version has:

Ring of Invisibility (2nd level)
Ring of Sustenance (at least 2nd level)
Ring of Feather Falling (1st level)
Ring of Endure Elements (1st level)
Ring of Detect Magic (0th)
Ring of Read Magic (0th)
Ring of Message (0th)
Ring of Mage Hand (0th)
Ring of Spellcraft +5 (Competence) (min 1st)
Ring of Perception +5 (Competence) (min 1st)
Ring of Detect Secret Doors (1st)

9 levels of spells, 11 if you count each 0th as 1/2, I feel that's totally justified. I'm not even taking into account being able to not worry about durations or simply ignore concentration on a number of these effects.

Compare this to one of the better minor artifacts for a wizard (spindle of perfect knowledge)

which gives:

+4 enhancement to a stat (2nd level spell)
tongues (3rd level spell)
Comprehend languages (1st level spell)
+5 to two knowledges (min 1st x2)
Telepathy....Not perfect but detect thoughts at 2nd is the closest analogue.

That's 10 levels of spells total? Probably 12 if you bump Telepathy to it's proper place?

So yeah, you are putting together something approaching artifact power, when you take all the mechanical bonuses you're looking for into account.

Remember, that's just one of the better minor artifacts, there are a number that are nowhere near as good.

For one thing, I think you're overestimating the Ring of Sustenance. It looks like it would place at about 1st level due to its pricing and comparison to other spells similar to it in function (Endure Elements primarily).

You're also severely underpricing the value of a +4 enhancement to a stat. As a constant effect equipment item, a +4 enhancement is closer to being comparable to a 3rd level.

Regarding Telepathy, Seek Thoughts at 3rd is even closer, so I doubt how much searching you did. More importantly, though, Telepathic Bond at 5th is the spitting image. Did you even pore over the spell lists? The artifact itself is even more powerful than Telepathic Bond, but it's the closest spell analogue.

Yeah, the artifact you pulled out is much more powerful than this collection of minor effects. If you're going to try to pull comparisons, actually make sure that they compare first.

Nigrescence wrote:

Being only for a Wizard doesn't reek of cheese. A Cleric would love an item like this, and so would a Rogue. I wouldn't have done it if it wouldn't fit the theme.

Oh and the fact that the character you want to make this for...i.e. YOU just happens to be a wizard is of course mere coincidence. Rationalising your cheese does not get rid of the limburger smell. My ruling is simple if the restriction DOES not restrict the character, than it is not a restriction. In fact it's an added feature which not only does not give a discount but it merits a 10 percent price HIKE as it respresents an item that's kept away from "the unworthy."

+1

The price reduction is intended to reflect a decrease in value due to its lack of usability. As a DM, I'd say, "Fine. We'll reduce the market price should you ever decide to sell it, but as you're attempting to build this restriction in, we'll increase the cost."

Nigrescence wrote:

Being only for a Wizard doesn't reek of cheese. A Cleric would love an item like this, and so would a Rogue. I wouldn't have done it if it wouldn't fit the theme.

Oh and the fact that the character you want to make this for...i.e. YOU just happens to be a wizard is of course mere coincidence. Rationalising your cheese does not get rid of the limburger smell. My ruling is simple if the restriction DOES not restrict the character, than it is not a restriction. In fact it's an added feature which not only does not give a discount but it merits a 10 percent price HIKE as it respresents an item that's kept away from "the unworthy."

Look, I'm not attached to it being Wizard only. If anything, this item would be FAR more powerful not class restricted to a class that can use all of the abilities tied to it, and THAT fits in with cheese quite nicely. The fact that you keep on insisting that it's cheese just indicates to me that you're the kind of person who ALWAYS thinks anything ever is always cheese, probably because you're the kind of person who would always goes for cheese. No, your Cleric won't be able to use these things because they aren't Cleric abilities. Your Fighter won't get these cantrips and detections because they're Wizard abilities that this item is meant to supplement.

If you're going to just insist on cheese this and cheese that, go to some other thread. I'm here for a discussion, and ideas. Take your pitiful accusations elsewhere, and return IF you get a brain.

Nigrescence wrote:

Being only for a Wizard doesn't reek of cheese. A Cleric would love an item like this, and so would a Rogue. I wouldn't have done it if it wouldn't fit the theme.

Oh and the fact that the character you want to make this for...i.e. YOU just happens to be a wizard is of course mere coincidence. Rationalising your cheese does not get rid of the limburger smell. My ruling is simple if the restriction DOES not restrict the character, than it is not a restriction. In fact it's an added feature which not only does not give a discount but it merits a 10 percent price HIKE as it respresents an item that's kept away from "the unworthy."

+1

What your DM/GM allows or disallows is his business, but just declaring that you smell no cheese and find it "thematic" does not mean others will agree or that they are wrong.

Moreover, as LazarX says, if the limitation is meant to keep the item out of the hands of the "unworthy," that should be a price hike instead of a discount.

Nigrescence wrote:

You might see these as just static bonuses, but there is a BIG difference between something like the Ring of Force Shield and the Shield spell, and between the Bracers of Armor [+4] and the Mage Armor spell.

Other than the Shield spell being twice as good, plus stopping magic missiles, and the mage armor being 8 times cheaper, what difference is there? You've already admitted they are incredibly questionable. You've brought up using luck/insight/etc. to replace, but those (while still very cheesy) would at least cost Far Far more. Banish the thought from your mind, or pay for it.

As for the rest, several (as compensated for with the split out item sets) would have an additional price increase for being "off-spot". Such as vision items should be face or head, etc.

The -30% factor should never be applied to existing items by a player. Simple as that. Coming up with creative new items (that aren't simply combinations of old ones), to make an item that makes sense, sure.

Yeah, I was just pointing out that it's possible to use other bonuses. I'm not planning on having any AC bonus related to it any more. It was a silly thought and it was for silliness that I mentioned it. The thought was banished before I even posted this thread. That doesn't mean I don't feel like discussing some of the things related to it. There may even be some good ideas that you guys have that I didn't consider (and there were some).

Also, this isn't an existing item with the restriction being added to it. It starts out with the class restriction.

This item gets a huge VETO at my table.

#1 The 'wizard' limitation does not fly in my book, it's also carved out specifically in the Game Mastery Guide as being a non-discount.

#2 Items that are crammed onto the ring that duplicate existing items should be more expensive than the individual item because they are not consuming a slot. - i.e. Adding the effect of a Ring of Sustenance to another ring should cost 50% more than the Ring of Sustenance, similarly with the feather fall effect.

Oh, and one other thing. I mentioned before that I was asking about this since I considered making other themed items... for other classes.

There's a sore lack of class restricted items, yet it's detailed in the magic item section.

Besides, having a class restriction IS, after all, a restriction. There are times in a campaign where it's enormously handy to give the Fighter or Rogue your Ring of Invisibility. That's just one example. There are many more. A class restriction is still a restriction.

This item gets a huge VETO at my table.

#1 The 'wizard' limitation does not fly in my book, it's also carved out specifically in the Game Mastery Guide as being a non-discount.

#2 Items that are crammed onto the ring that duplicate existing items should be more expensive than the individual item because they are not consuming a slot. - i.e. Adding the effect of a Ring of Sustenance to another ring should cost 50% more than the Ring of Sustenance, similarly with the feather fall effect.

1 - Can you quote the relevant section? It seems to conflict with the magic item creation section.

2 - I already factored in the 1.5x cost for additional enchantments, if you bothered to read my post.

Your item confilcts with two things listed in the game master guide:

1) Disadvantages that aren't - if the item can be used by the person the creator is making the item for, then it's not a restriction and shouldn't be given a discount.
2) Slotless items - the gist is that power level in the game is balanced around slots. Adding lots and lots of powers to an item sort of goes against this slot balance.

You are assuming the magic creation rules are something players can pick up and use at will. In reality, game masters need to look at this closely as those rules don't protect game balance. The game master guide gives game masters advice to prevent game imbalance.

There has never been a game where our group allowed restrictions to get a cost discount. We had new players come in and try and use the restrictions and they were corrected real quick.

Your item confilcts with two things listed in the game master guide:

1) Disadvantages that aren't - if the item can be used by the person the creator is making the item for, then it's not a restriction and shouldn't be given a discount.
2) Slotless items - the gist is that power level in the game is balanced around slots. Adding lots and lots of powers to an item sort of goes against this slot balance.

You are assuming the magic creation rules are something players can pick up and use at will. In reality, game masters need to look at this closely as those rules don't protect game balance. The game master guide gives game masters advice to prevent game imbalance.

There has never been a game where our group allowed restrictions to get a cost discount. We had new players come in and try and use the restrictions and they were corrected real quick.

1 - Yes, but I'm considering this item in general, not just as me making it. Hell, I'd even be fine with it being Wizard only and having no discount at all. You're focusing on the utterly IRRELEVANT part of this. It's an idea that I'm asking about now, because I'm interested in making other themed items for different classes. Of course, I wonder if you can recall any item that is class restricted. If people aren't even allowed to make class restricted items outside of play (i.e. making a slew of items for EVERY class, even though I'm not playing every class), then there's no point in the rule even being there.

I'm not the kind of person to pursue game-breaking or an abuse of rules. I'm merely proposing one item for consideration and alteration before I even try to go ahead and create items for other classes. What, have you guys never tried, you know, thinking and trying out ideas? Is everything just a matter of Jerk Player A trying to gimp Jerk Player B, or Jerk Player A trying to hoodwink the DM? That's not how I play, and that's not how anyone should play. Stop treating this as if that's what's going on, because it isn't. Perhaps reading what I've posted will clue you in to those things instead of just posting with your knee-jerk reactions. I said it before, if you want a discussion that's fine, but if you make mindless accusations and do not even read what has been said, then get out of here because you're obviously ill-suited for a discussion.

2 - This isn't a slotless item. It is in a slot, and it uses the mentioned rules for adding enchantments to slot items that already have enchantments. See, this is exactly what I was saying about people needing to read what has been said. If you're going to comment when you don't know what's even being discussed, then you're essentially spamming.

You asked for where the reference Ogre listed and I provided it. If you don't like the information I provided you can ignore it.

I personally don't care what you do in your own game. I merely listed suggestions that are in the game master guide.

You asked for where the reference Ogre listed and I provided it. If you don't like the information I provided you can ignore it.

I personally don't care what you do in your own game. I merely listed suggestions that are in the game master guide.

Ok, and that only qualifies for the character in the game making the item if they're making it for a PC in particular, not the price of the item in general (for example, as FOUND loot). I think you missed the whole point, which is not that I'm making this for myself, but that I'm making this as a bit of a test into making custom themed items, such that I make custom items for other classes and general custom items after learning a bit about making custom items.

Liking or disliking the information doesn't enter into it. What matters is the relevance.

Additionally, I'm not certain that you quoted it. You just said that there are two things this conflicts with, and listed off two (paraphrased, quite obviously). One of which does NOT conflict with the item (your slotless comment), and merely indicated the fact that you probably didn't even read the first post.

One of the small joys of the incredibly nitpicky GURPS magic item crafting system is being able to do this very thing, strap a half-dozen or more low-powered enchantments (armor 1, bless 1, shield 1, accuracy 1, puissance 1, lighten 25%, flaming weapon, shatterproof, etc.) on a single item, and, as cash and time becomes available, increasing stuff later.

D&D has never been designed to do this sort of thing. There are first level spells, like True Strike, that to create an always-on or use-activated item of is utterly broken.

D&D magic item creation and pricing is pretty much a subjective artform, but I think it's safe to assume that if one could make a CL 1 always-on ring of shield or mage armor for 2000 gp, then there wouldn't be bracers of armor +4 (for 16,000 gp) or rings of protection +4 (for 32,000 gp) in the book.

Another GURPS 'rule' I find useful in all games, including Vampire and D&D and M&M is that 'a drawback that isn't a drawback isn't worth any discount.' 'Only usable by me' isn't a bug, it's a feature.

I did read the first post.

I didn't really go over the second point in my post. While the section in the game master guide is listed as a section on slotless items, it goes into the number of items a player can have and game balance issues of slotless items. An item with many powers brings the same balance issues as slotless items. In fact worse, since you are paying +50% rather than +100% cost.

It really doesn't matter what anyone here posts as to whether your item can be created or not - it's up to your gm or you if you are the gm.

I don't think many game masters are comfortable letting the players use the rules to create custom magic items. If your game master is, then you don't need validation from me. However, I would believe that I am in the majority, rather than the minority.

As a general rule rings do one or two things quite well, this is a design principal which most rings follow. There are exceptions, but those exceptions are very tightly themed items such as the Ring of Elemental Command.

As far as 'themed' items go this one doesn't impress me. It appears an obvious effort was made to cram 15 useful things into one item to keep the price and slot usage to a minimum.

I suspect this is what most people are critical of here rather than any specific application of mechanics.

I have been thinking about this, and here is what I think.

In my game...

1. The Wizard only can be added on, but I don't think there should be a discount for it, other discounts might be ok.

2. I would allow all those items, the person making the item just needs to have a CL = to the total of all spells on the item, and you would need to make it yourself, or find someone to make it for you.

Counting those it's going to be a 50K dollar ring, with mostly minor affects that is vastly less effective then a Ring of Wizardry II in most circumstances and cost 20% more.

With that said I think the set is a even better idea.

One of the small joys of the incredibly nitpicky GURPS magic item crafting system is being able to do this very thing, strap a half-dozen or more low-powered enchantments (armor 1, bless 1, shield 1, accuracy 1, puissance 1, lighten 25%, flaming weapon, shatterproof, etc.) on a single item, and, as cash and time becomes available, increasing stuff later.

D&D has never been designed to do this sort of thing. There are first level spells, like True Strike, that to create an always-on or use-activated item of is utterly broken.

D&D magic item creation and pricing is pretty much a subjective artform, but I think it's safe to assume that if one could make a CL 1 always-on ring of shield or mage armor for 2000 gp, then there wouldn't be bracers of armor +4 (for 16,000 gp) or rings of protection +4 (for 32,000 gp) in the book.

Another GURPS 'rule' I find useful in all games, including Vampire and D&D and M&M is that 'a drawback that isn't a drawback isn't worth any discount.' 'Only usable by me' isn't a bug, it's a feature.

I agree that there are ways to break the system by the RAW guidelines for magic item creation, and that creating items is a lot like an art. This is why I posted the idea here instead of just doing whatever crazy thing I want. There were some good suggestions, but I hope you don't get hung up on my defending the difference (I play devil's advocate sometimes). As I said, I wouldn't allow the Mage Armor or Shield enchantments, but I do think there are valid reasons behind the significance between Mage Armor as the spell versus just armor. One can be dispelled easily. The other not so much. There are other differences, too, which I pointed out. But the fact that there are these relatively important differences doesn't mean that one should be allowed as suggested because of it.

Also, a deflection bonus stacks with a shield bonus, so you probably should have used an example other than the Ring of Protection.

Additionally, as I have said, it's a poor argument that this isn't a drawback and it's absolutely wrong that it's "only usable by me". To point to an example, an Arcane Bond item is only usable by the character and I'll tell you why this is a drawback. Any enchantment put onto it through the Arcane Bond's ability to enchant your item is stripped away when you choose a new item to be your Arcane Bond through the ritual. This is a drawback for several reasons. You can't sell the old item, any enchantment you put on it can/will disappear (meaning wealth is not preserved in such a case), and you can't share the powers with anyone else by loaning out the item (like the rogue borrowing your Ring of Invisibility example I gave). Also, before you get into even further suspicions, my Arcane Bond item is a necklace. Sometimes a wand, and sometimes a ring. It would be a rod if that were allowed.

So far, the best suggestion I've seen is to split it up into relevant slots for the various powers.

My idea is to remove the Ring of Invisibility part of it, so that the rest of it stands as utility, the overall value of it is much less, and its relative power is reduced to something more of pure utility for a wandering wizard (although Invisibility has great utility, it's also a 2nd level effect, and without it the ring has entirely 1st and 0th level effects, which may seem less of an offense to people's sense of balance).

Like I said, I'm not attached to the Wizard Only aspect, and this thread is about a general item proposal, NOT a specific for-me character item proposal. When I think I've got a good enough grasp on how people feel about balancing items, some good ideas for making items regarding style, and so on, I may start to put together other items and post them in a future thread for evaluation and just to give people ideas (and maybe even some fun items they could use in a game).

The point of this thread is content creation, not rules-bending or abusing cheese or any of that stuff. So all of you who are trying to jump down my throat about these accusatory things, just stop it. I'm almost tempted to ignore any post that mentions cheese (but I know that just mentioning it wouldn't and shouldn't invalidate all of the content of the post). Please understand that I'm not trying to break the system. I'm trying to expand the system.

There are already a good few items that have multi-spell effects on it, and they're themed. I love these items, and find that most items in PF are single-purpose. An item like the Helm of Brilliance inspires awe, wonder, interest, and amazement, while an item like the Belt of Physical Perfection +6 is just a bland stat-booster. They BOTH have their uses and strengths, but one is more fun than the other (at least IMHO).

I don't have time to go over the rules, so I'm doing this from memory. but I think the item creation rules don't care if it's beavers of armor or mabe armor being cast. all the rules care acute is the +4 ac.

I don't think you can get around this at all without basically cheating.

but basically a ring that does shield and Mage armor basically using the compare to existing items rule should cost what the beavers do plus 1.5x the cost of the dorce shield item shouldn't it?

as an aside I think content creation is neat but it can't twist the rules like a back room contortionist.

I'd love an interestingly-designed 'warding ring' that had;

1) 'Sudden Shield' usable three times / day for 1 round per activation. (Able to be activated as an immediate action to negate a volley of magic missiles, or to bump AC by four for 1 round.)

2) 'Mage Armor' usable for 3 hours / day in 1 hour increments. (Activated as a standard action.)

3) Sudden Counterspell 1/day (any one 1st level spell that you have prepared at the time (or known), as an immediate action. Using this option expends the spell prepared (or spell slot, for a sorcerer / bard)). Great way to 'block' a sleep or color spray, if you have one prepared and one is thrown at you by a foe.

Alternately, instead of mage armor, false life makes a neat defensive spell. 'Sudden False Life' could work like the Sudden Shield option, usable 3/day as an immediate action, but any remaining temporary hit points only last for one round. That makes it less 'false life' and more like 'one round ablative DR/1d10+CL,' but seems cool and appropriate. You could even throw on a special effect and say that the 'false life' appears as a pale blue misty suit of plate armor around you for an instant, and shatters and flies apart into steaming clumps of what looks like dry ice as the temporary hit points are either reduced by damage, or the spell expires. (and a similar floating translucent blue-ice-mist shield for the Sudden Shield option)

Using more limited effects like these, based on the shield, mage armor, false life, etc. spells, without just saying 'always on' might be a more palatable option to give the ring some defensive utility.

Sure, +4 to AC for 3 rounds a day is less cool than all day long, but, gosh, it's never a good idea, no matter your AC, to let your wizard get punched in the face more than 3 times a day!

I'd love an interestingly-designed 'warding ring' that had;

1) 'Sudden Shield' usable three times / day for 1 round per activation. (Able to be activated as an immediate action to negate a volley of magic missiles, or to bump AC by four for 1 round.)

2) 'Mage Armor' usable for 3 hours / day in 1 hour increments. (Activated as a standard action.)

3) Sudden Counterspell 1/day (any one 1st level spell that you have prepared at the time (or known), as an immediate action. Using this option expends the spell prepared (or spell slot, for a sorcerer / bard)). Great way to 'block' a sleep or color spray, if you have one prepared and one is thrown at you by a foe.

Alternately, instead of mage armor, false life makes a neat defensive spell. 'Sudden False Life' could work like the Sudden Shield option, usable 3/day as an immediate action, but any remaining temporary hit points only last for one round. That makes it less 'false life' and more like 'one round ablative DR/1d10+CL,' but seems cool and appropriate. You could even throw on a special effect and say that the 'false life' appears as a pale blue misty suit of plate armor around you for an instant, and shatters and flies apart into steaming clumps of what looks like dry ice as the temporary hit points are either reduced by damage, or the spell expires. (and a similar floating translucent blue-ice-mist shield for the Sudden Shield option)

Using more limited effects like these, based on the shield, mage armor, false life, etc. spells, without just saying 'always on' might be a more palatable option to give the ring some defensive utility.

Sure, +4 to AC for 3 rounds a day is less cool than all day long, but, gosh, it's never a good idea, no matter your AC, to let your wizard get punched in the face more than 3 times a day!

That's actually just about what I was about to work on at the moment as the companion ring (or a belt) to this thing (I mentioned making a defensive companion ring to a utility ring for a wandering wizard). I realize that constant Shield is unpalatable, but a limited use-per-day immediate reaction item seems fun and balanced (because it will only help them for so many times a day, and after that they're really in trouble if they still need those bonuses). In addition, the ring base for it would have been the Force Shield ring (and maybe even including deflection like the Ring of Protection for an upgradeable component).

As far as making/posting custom items, I'll never do it with assuming a class restriction, because people seem to hone in on that aspect and distract themselves.

For what it's worth, I've modified the ring and here it is. I changed the base to Counterspells or Detect Secret Doors. I think the latter option fits the theme more, as it's about exploration/discovery and things useful to someone partaking in that lifestyle. This item may be called "Ring of the Wandering Wizard", but since it doesn't have the "Wizard only" property at the moment, even your Cleric or Fighter can wear it.

4000 - Ring of Counterspells OR Detect Secret Doors (They're the same price.)
3750 - Ring of Sustenance
3300 - Ring of Feather Falling
1500 - Ring of Endure Elements (Continuous)
3000 - Ring of Detect Magic (Continuous)
2250 - Ring of Read Magic (Continuous)
2250 - Ring of Message (Use-Activated)
1500 - Ring of Mage Hand (Use-Activated)
3750 - Ring of Spellcraft +5 (Competence)
3750 - Ring of Perception +5 (Competence)
1500 - Magic Aura Continuous Effect On Ring (Non-Magical)

Total: 30550

I'm still debating splitting it up into separate items, like a ring, necklace, and spectacles. That sounds like a good idea, but since these are all mostly minor effects and four of them are cantrips, I like the compilation themed item. I know very well that it's extra costly to have all of these on one item as opposed to having it split up among three items (and even more costly since the Magic Aura is on it to prevent casual observation - and as someone noted, it won't stop in-depth observation at all, but it's entirely meant to stop just casual observation).

Where did you find the "Craft Artifact" feat? Seriously, this thing makes most artifacts look like kid's toys.

Where did you find the "Craft Artifact" feat? Seriously, this thing makes most artifacts look like kid's toys.

Are you kidding? I'd be glad to have just one of a fair few artifacts instead of this little trinket.

Though, I wonder if you're basing that off of the original post. If you scroll up just a little bit, you'll see a much more balanced item. Either way, I'd still prefer most artifacts compared to this thing.

There's also a possibility that it'll be split up into several items. I'll post the calculated items in a little bit.

Here's what it would all look like as a set of items. I split up the abilities into ones that felt like they would fit together. I put Endure Elements with Sustenance and Feather Falling since it fits those themes (I really didn't feel like separating Sustenance and Endure Elements would make sense at all). Alternatively one might change the Necklace base to a Necklace of Adaptation (because it fits the theme) and make the Spellcraft +5 bonus be a 1.5x cost extra ability on the necklace. That would make it much more expensive, though. Over twice as expensive. It would be worth it, in my opinion.

--- SET ---
------ Ring of the Wandering Wizard
4000 - Ring of Counterspells OR Detect Secret Doors
3750 - Ring of Sustenance
3300 - Ring of Feather Falling
1500 - Ring of Endure Elements (Continuous)

------ Necklace of the Wandering Wizard
2500 - Necklace of Spellcraft +5 (Competence)
1500 - Necklace of Mage Hand (Use-Activated)
2250 - Necklace of Message (Use-Activated)

------ Spectacles of the Wandering Wizard
2500 - Spectacles of Perception +5 (Competence)
3000 - Spectacles of Detect Magic (Continuous)
2250 - Spectacles of Read Magic (Continuous)

Ring: 12550
Necklace: 6250
Spectacles: 7750

Total: 26550

All listed prices are the purchase price.

Here's the list for the Adaptation Necklace instead.

------ Necklace of the Wandering Wizard
9000 - Necklace of Adaptation
3750 - Necklace of Spellcraft +5 (Competence)
1500 - Necklace of Mage Hand (Use-Activated)
2250 - Necklace of Message (Use-Activated)

Necklace: 16500
For a total of 36800

Stuff regarding power level/Magic aura

Yes, I did look through spell lists. No need to get snippy because we're finding fault with your item.

Sustenance is a combination of something on the order of dream feast (1st level) and a personal, less good version of nap stack (3rd) if you want to combine effects. It's way stronger than just a first level spell.

Telepathy is nowhere near as good as telepathic bond or seek thoughts, in that it doesn't allow mindreading and has a range of 100 feet, not unlimited. It's literally only a communication skill. So, you know, like message only with less range.

And yes, it does allow communication with almost anything....which Tongues does just as well?

+4 to a stat is pretty good, so is never having to memorize 10 spells and always getting their bonuses. +4 to a stat is also pretty easy to get in a variety of flavors.

So, this is what I came up with as a defensive item. I could either increase the number of uses per day and increase the price, or raise the CL of the Mage Armor and increase the price. The price has been increased considerably to account for the Immediate Action ability of it. I used items like Boots of Speed and Boots of Teleportation as guides for the pricing of the Reactive properties otherwise, and I arrived at double the cost of Use-Activated to move it from a Free Action to an Immediate Action.

As opposed to the Boots of Speed which give you the rounds from a CL 10 Haste split up as you choose per day (and the math gives the equivalent of just 1/day charge and no extra cost for being a Free Action as a Use-Activated item), I decided to make the Shield spell be cast twice a day, instead of having ten rounds split up as you choose (because one minute is equivalent to ten rounds). If you think doubling the cost is too much to move from a Free Action to an Immediate Action (and not being able to divide the rounds of the effect as you wish), then I would go with a 1.5x cost for the modified action. However, I think doubling the cost is fair for a strong action shift like that.

Additionally, 2/day means that there's a good chance you could end up wasting one of the uses if you're too liberal with activating it, or you might simply not have enough uses of it to last through the day. I felt that 1/day was both too restrictive and too cheap, and were I to do something like that, it would be casting Mage Armor as a Command Word item at CL 12, twice a day, for a ring with a base cost of 8640. In the end I felt that this was balanced enough overall, but I have a feeling there will be plenty of critiquing on this item, too. Go ahead, I'd like to hear thoughts/suggestions and such. And if you haven't seen my previous two posts where I provided a split up set of items and a hopefully better balanced ring, feel free to comment on those, too.

-------Ring of the Warded Wizard
8000 - Ring of Protection +2
6000 - Ring of Counterspells
2400 - Ring of Reactive Shielding 2/day (As An Immediate Action, can cast Shield that lasts for 1 minute.)
2400 - Ring of Reactive Armoring 2/day (As An Immediate Action, can cast Mage Armor that lasts for 1 hour.)

Cost: 18800