If one follows this process, the meaning of the Ring's description becomes clear in that it is clearly talking about spell slots of a particular level.If you are cutting fine lines of distinction for metamagic rods, then you should do the same for other items out of consistency.
When electing to memorize a 1st level spell into a spell slot not granted to you via a high INT score or by specialization you can actually memorize two 1st level spells rather than just one. This is what a ring of wizardry I grants you.
Whether you elect to memorize a 1st level spell via a 2nd level spell slot or a 1st level spell slot should not matter, because strictly by RAW the term 'spell slot' is not used here at all. In either case you are talking about 1st level spells, so it applies.
I agree that fine distinctions should be made.
The wearer's arcane spells per day are doubled for one specific spell level. A ring of wizardry I doubles 1st-level spells [per day], a ring of wizardry II doubles 2nd-level spells [per day], a ring of wizardry III doubles 3rd-level spells [per day], and a ring of wizardry IV doubles 4th-level spells [per day]. Bonus spells [per day] from high ability scores or school specialization are not doubled.
I have taken the liberty of rendering the appropriate quotation under the regular rules for English sentence, paragraph, clause, and linguistic construction, with the fragments I added enclosed by [].
A wizard can cast only a certain number of spells of each spell level per day. His base daily spell allotment is given on Table: Wizard.
Spell Slots
The various character class tables show how many spells of each level a character can cast per day. These openings for daily spells are called spell slots. A spellcaster always has the option to fill a higher-level spell slot with a lower-level spell.
Because the Ring calls for the doubling of "the wearer's arcane spells per day ... for one specific spell level," and the Spell Slots entry quoted above renders a general statement about the equality of the concept of "spells per day" and "spell slots," it is clear that the following statement is uniquely valid: "While wearing a Ring of Wizardry, the wearer's arcane spell slots are doubled for one specific spell level. A ring of wizardry I doubles 1st-level spell slots, a ring of wizardry II doubles 2nd-level spell slots, a ring of wizardry III doubles 3rd-level spell slots, and a ring of wizardry IV doubles 4th-level spell slots. Bonus spell slots from high ability scores or school specialization are not doubled."
While it remains true that "a spellcaster always has the option to fill a higher-level spell slot with a lower-level spell," these higher level spell slots are not doubled even if filled with lower-level spells.
A wizard can cast only a certain number of spells of each spell level per day. His base daily spell allotment is given on Table: Wizard.And higher level spell slots can be used for lower level spells.
Your spells per day of level 1 can be higher than the table by electing to memorize level 1 spells in level 2 (and higher) slots.
So how many spells per day can a 10th level wizard have of 1st level? The sum of all of his 1st through 5th level slots.
Now I certainly agree with you that your reading should be correct. But I think that having to cross reference different things (and spells per day are slightly different than spell slots you should admit) in order to do so makes for bad rules writing.
In general the word 'level' is far, far, over-used in D&D and really something should be done about it.
Whether metamagic rods' restriction on spell level refers to the 'spell level' for purposes such as minor globes, etc or to the 'slot level' or somewhere along those lines is ambiguous and this overuse of level for every term under the sun is to blame.
-James
I don't disagree that a wizard *can* memorize 1st level spells in higher-level slots, just that a Ring of Wizardry can be read in a way so as to include those other higher-level slots in the set of doubled slots.
As regards a body of rules, just because the need to cross-reference to find that "spells per day" are exactly the same as "spell slots" exists does not make the rules that say this any less valid. I admit only that the exact English words used to describe the concept vary. The block I quoted from Wizard spell preparation makes it very clear that "spells per day" are "spell slots" and vice-versa when it says: "The various character class tables show how many spells of each level a character can cast per day. These openings for daily spells are called spell slots."
I agree that the "level" concept-word is overused in the rules, especially as regards spells. I agree that, in general, the need to cross-reference rules to arrive at clarity-of-meaning is less than stellar workmanship (this is my biggest complaint about the tax codes, for example). Nevertheless, regardless of how convoluted and cross-referenced a body of rules is, the fact that such a cross-reference exists is not invalidated by the fact that a cross-reference was necessary.
As far as this pertains to the question of metamagic rods, I have to agree with Sangalor about how the rules are *written* (that is, the text defining how a spell is prepared with metamagic and the text defining to which spells a Metamagic Rod can apply indicate that the rods apply to spells without consideration of other non-Heighten metamagic feats).
For the record, I also agree with the notion that the Rods *should* be restricted to modifying spells prepared in slots in the indicated ranges, and it is with this interpretation that I run my games.