Benefit of having 2 Ring of Wizardry of the same level?

[Shin Okada]

What will happen if, say, a Sorcerer who's base spells per day for 1st-level is 6 has 2 "Ring of Wizardry I" wear one on the right hand and one on the left hand?

That is not a spell effect nor bonus number (and even if so, that is nameless). So I guess just the rule for multiplying is applied and double + double = triple. Am I right about this?

 

[Thurbane]

Hmm, good question. I'd be inclined to agree that doubled x2 = tripled. Unless you ruled that it was two bonuses from an identical source and didn't allow any benefit from the second ring. But IMHO, tripled is the way to go.

 

[SteelDraco]

Personally, I'd rule that it was two bonuses from the same source, and thus the second ring wouldn't do anything. Whether or not it's typed, it's still exactly that - two bonuses from the same source.

 

[Brace Cormaeril]

So is this a "wizardring" bonus? What if I wear a Ring of Wizardry II, is this two "wizardring" bonuses.
To the OP, I would I agree with Thurbane. The text, RAW is "doubled", and there is a strong precedent for "doubling" in D&D.

 

[Darklone]

I'd go with doubled doubling is tripling. If the guy can afford two rings of wizardry, I don't see why e.g. two rings of level 3 spells should be that weaker than a ring of level 3 and a ring of level 4 spells.

 

[eamon]

With the motto that pile-it on play isn't fun, I'd say that the second rind has no effect. Ruling it as a doubling-doubling being a tripling is fine too, though. Also the ring explicitly only doubles the "base" spell slots, so even without the generic D&D ruling on such effects, it makes sense that two rings of wizardry would only multiply the base spell slots (and thus not the spell slots created by the other ring).

 

[Nifft]

It's a weak item for its price. I'd allow it, with each ring giving +100% the number of base (not bonus) spells, just like it says in the book.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Shin Okada]

It's a weak item for its price. I'd allow it, with each ring giving +100% the number of base (not bonus) spells, just like it says in the book.

Cheers, -- N

That is true. Actually, a pile of "Pearl of Power" is much effective for wizards. Pearl of Power I is only 1,000gp while Ring of Wizardly I costs 20,000gp. Who has 20 "base" spells per day for even level 1 spells? Still, the ring is usefull for someone do not prepare spells.

 

[Diirk]

It's a weak item for its price

For a wizard, its cheaper to get pearl's of power than a ring of wizardy, at any spell level. Altho it is slightly less versatile.

 

[Nifft]

For a wizard, its cheaper to get pearl's of power than a ring of wizardy, at any spell level. Altho it is slightly less versatile.

I'd argue that the Pearls of Power are actually more versatile -- though only if you calculate across multiple encounters. Enough Pearls of Power turns spells into per-encounter abilities.

Cheers, -- N