Why is the Extra Rings feat designated an Item Creation feat?

Laman Stahros

First Post

• Sep 14, 2004

• #1

The title pretty much says it.

Why is the Extra Rings feat designated an Item Creation feat?

I always thought that Item Creation feats had to do with creating magic items. The only thing this one does is allow you to wear two extra rings.

Please, can someone tell me why I should not change this in my homebrew to a General feat?

TIA

 

log in or register to remove this ad

X

xazil

Explorer

• Sep 14, 2004

• #2

Maybe for the balance of giving you two new item slots on your body it requires you to be high level, the prerequiste is you need to know is Forge Ring.

All of those Eberron feats seek to give some more edge to item creators. Making them item creation lets those casters pick them as normal general feats or as their bonus feats (for wizards and artificers). I think this is part of Eberrons push to be a 'more magical world'.

They are all quite good feats and thus should have a decent level prerequisite along with a feat which is something to consider if you want to change them to general.

 

Laman Stahros

First Post

• Sep 14, 2004

• #3

It has a requirement of not only Forge Ring, but also 12th caster level. That seems like a pretty good level requirement to me.

I can see what your saying about allowing wizards and artificers to pick it as one of their bonus feats, but, . . . I don't know.

 

X

xazil

Explorer

• Sep 14, 2004

• #4

To be honest, while I can that keeping atune magic weapon out of most fighters hands might be wanted, I can't see the gain in giving the extra rings feat only to 12+ level casters over other classes either. Of course I haven't played that much Eberron so I'm just leaving it at RAW right now.

 

Sejs

First Post

• Sep 14, 2004

• #5

Why is the Extra Rings feat designated an Item Creation feat?

Click to expand...

So wizards and artificers can take it as a bonus feat.

 

U

UltimaGabe

First Post

• Sep 14, 2004

• #6

xazil said:

I can't see the gain in giving the extra rings feat only to 12+ level casters over other classes either.

Click to expand...

Well, as far as flavor goes, it makes sense. PCs are limited in their body slots, possibly due to the amount of magic affecting them. For all we know, too many magic items could kill a person due to all of the raw magic in them, and the "limited body slots" could be a failsafe designed by all magic item creators so that they don't explode once they put on that new ring they found. Someone who makes magic items, however, similar to the Attune Magic Weapon description, is going to be able to adjust himself to accomodate more magic- hence, the ability to wear more rings.

As far as balance goes, you don't want all of those high-level Fighters running around with more magic items equipped. They have enough as it is. This way, it allows certain people to do it, but with hefty prerequisites.

And logic-wise, as far as the limitation goes, someone who makes magic rings (at a lower price than buying them) is going to have more rings than someone who pays full price for them, and possibly has limited access to magic rings. Thus, an Artificer is probably going to own several, whereas a Fighter may only own a Ring of Protection +4 and a Ring of Freedom of Movement.

 

X

xazil

Explorer

• Sep 14, 2004

• #7

UltimaGabe said:

...
As far as balance goes, you don't want all of those high-level Fighters running around with more magic items equipped. They have enough as it is. This way, it allows certain people to do it, but with hefty prerequisites.
...

Click to expand...

Oh, I understand and agree the flavour and logic statements. Its just the balance side of it.

I know that fighters and rogues are more gear dependant so two new slots would help them a little more than a caster. But if anything the noncasters need it more at these levels (12+) beause the casters really starting to hit their strides and others fall behind. Making the feat caster only seems to give a further edge to those already in front.

 

D

daTim

First Post

• Sep 14, 2004

• #8

So they can wear lots of rings of wizardry?

 

Laman Stahros

First Post

• Sep 14, 2004

• #9

I'm not saying that the prereqs need to be changed. I'm trying to understand the logic of Extra Rings being an Item Creation feat instead of a General feat. I like it's current prereqs, they fit the way I think of it.

 

A

AuraSeer

Prismatic Programmer

• Sep 14, 2004

• #10

Laman Stahros said:

I'm not saying that the prereqs need to be changed. I'm trying to understand the logic of Extra Rings being an Item Creation feat instead of a General feat.

Click to expand...

Labelling it as [Item Creation] makes it a possible bonus feat for wizards and artificers. Mostly artificers.