Ring of Mettle

[Rystil Arden]

Plus, the fact that there are a bunch of Save negates spells doesn't mean that being immune to the partial doesn't make you virtually immune. I mean think about it: If I can make the save for partial (and no effect with Mettle) then I can make the save to negate on the others. So between the save negates spells that you can already become 95% immune with saves, and the partial Reflex, Fortitude, and Will ones you are now 95% immune to thanks to Evasion + Mettle, you are now 95% immune to all spells that give saves, period. The only things that can hit you are spells like Magic Missile and Otto's Irresistible Dance. And I wouldn't suggest arguing that you can't easily do this in 3.5, now that they gutted save DCs on spells. I have had a PC whose *cohort* did this before I decided Mettle was bad, and she became virtually immune to spells.

 

[Shadeus]

It's not like Mettle gives you a bonus to your Fort save. If you are a 10th-level Wizard with no Con bonus and a cloak of resistance +2, your Fort save is +5. How is having the Mettle ability going to save you from a DC 17 slay living spell? And that's the absolutely minimum DC for that spell. I would expect it to be more like DC 20. That doesn't strike me as "virtually immune" by any stretch.

It seems to me that the ring is very class dependent. A character with good Fort saves will like the ring. Otherwise, a fat lot of good that ring did you if you FAIL your save vs. destruction.

 

[ARandomGod]

It's not like Mettle gives you a bonus to your Fort save. If you are a 10th-level Wizard with no Con bonus and a cloak of resistance +2, your Fort save is +5. How is having the Mettle ability going to save you from a DC 17 slay living spell? And that's the absolutely minimum DC for that spell. I would expect it to be more like DC 20. That doesn't strike me as "virtually immune" by any stretch.

It seems to me that the ring is very class dependent. A character with good Fort saves will like the ring. Otherwise, a fat lot of good that ring did you if you FAIL your save vs. destruction.

Yea, that's the main reason I"d say only X2. I'd go as high as that because it DOES affect two saves. But fort and will saves for partial aren't nearly as common as reflex saves for partial.

Now, a ring that gave all three I'd price at 3.5 times.
2 times for mettle, and 1.5 for added evasion (+50% to add an ability)
And a sweet sweet ring that would be ...
For a character with high saves and no evasion or mettle, that is...
Are there any such character types?

 

[Shadeus]

Yea, that's the main reason I"d say only X2. I'd go as high as that because it DOES affect two saves. But fort and will saves for partial aren't nearly as common as reflex saves for partial.

Now, a ring that gave all three I'd price at 3.5 times.
2 times for mettle, and 1.5 for added evasion (+50% to add an ability)
And a sweet sweet ring that would be ...
For a character with high saves and no evasion or mettle, that is...
Are there any such character types?

Umm...err...I forgot Mettle affected both Will and Fort saves. I stand humbled with my stupidity. I have to agree AR here, for the exact reasons he states.

 

[Rystil Arden]

It's not like Mettle gives you a bonus to your Fort save. If you are a 10th-level Wizard with no Con bonus and a cloak of resistance +2, your Fort save is +5. How is having the Mettle ability going to save you from a DC 17 slay living spell? And that's the absolutely minimum DC for that spell. I would expect it to be more like DC 20. That doesn't strike me as "virtually immune" by any stretch.

It seems to me that the ring is very class dependent. A character with good Fort saves will like the ring. Otherwise, a fat lot of good that ring did you if you FAIL your save vs. destruction.

Are you kidding? You may the claim that because the item isn't as good for every class, it should have its price lowered? That's like saying that Ring of Wizardry should cost less because my Fighter can't use it or that a Cloak of Charisma should cost less gold for everyone because some of the classes couldn't care less about Charisma. You can't claim balance based on sub-optimal choices, you need to base the price off of someone who would realistically want to buy it (i.e. not someone with terrible Fort and Will saves). And you've built an unrealistic argument anyway. Its absolutely absurd, in my experience, to find a 10th-level wizard with no Con bonus (they don't live to 10th level on a d4 hit dice without a Con bonus unless the enemies are really stupid, and players pretty much always put their second best stat in Con for a Wizard), so a Realistic 10th-level wizard has a Fort save of +7 or +8.

Clearly the Ring of Mettle would be a serious problem worn by a Monk, and basic unstoppableness would come into play if it was some sort of Paladin/Monk with good Charisma. A Pal3/Mnk6/Brd1 who is working to make use of Ring of Mettle will buy a Cloak of Resistance to help and take the save feats, so unless you play 25-point-buy, she will have *at least* +18 to all saves. I agree completely that the DCs are likely to be approximately 19-20, so it looks like the saves are not going to fail very often. And this is without stat buffs items for the relevant stats.

 

[Cheiromancer]

Some characters like to become tanks- they go for huge ACs, but are weak in other areas. Some like to deal out lots of damage, but are often quite fragile. Others are master spellcasters, but are weak in meleee. If a character wants to have virtual immunity to spells that allow saves, I am sure he will be weak in other areas.

For example, is a Brd1/Pal3/monk6 with a cloak of resistance and ring of mettle really that scary? It doesn't seem to have that impressive a BAB, nor many feats, nor spells, and the use of armor interferes with it in lots of ways. So it can be affected only by no-save spells; it doesn't look like it will break the game.

I would make a ring of mettle cost the same as a ring of evasion. I think mettle is a weaker ability than evasion (would you rather play a monk with mettle, or with evasion?), but the chance to gain both abilities probably requires a premium.

 

[iwatt]

I think mettle is a weaker ability than evasion (would you rather play a monk with mettle, or with evasion?), but the chance to gain both abilities probably requires a premium.

Maybe it's just me, but ref saves aren't erally that scary in my opinion. All they do is damage.
Anything that reduces save or die (and many enchantments are exactly that) spells is just great. That's because DnD doesn't reduce your ability depending on damage. A Monk 10 with one hp is just as effective at kicking others as one with full hps. The same Monk been dominated or failing a Slay Living is something else.

 

[ARandomGod]

Are you kidding? You may the claim that because the item isn't as good for every class, it should have its price lowered? That's like saying that Ring of Wizardry should cost less because my Fighter can't use it or that a Cloak of Charisma should cost less gold for everyone because some of the classes couldn't care less about Charisma. You can't claim balance based on sub-optimal choices, you need to base the price off of someone who would realistically want to buy it (i.e. not someone with terrible Fort and Will saves).

Actually, they HAVE made a special cloak of charisma for MUCH less gold for those characters who don't care about charisma. It's called a "circlet of persuasion". It gives a +3 enhancement bonus to all charisma based skills. That's equal to a +6 to charisma, if you aren't a spellcaster who uses that score. The circlet costs aroung 4,500 base (around) the cloak +6 costs 36,000 gold. A significant difference.

Just sayin'

 

[the Jester]

Anything that reduces save or die (and many enchantments are exactly that) spells is just great. That's because DnD doesn't reduce your ability depending on damage. A Monk 10 with one hp is just as effective at kicking others as one with full hps. The same Monk been dominated or failing a Slay Living is something else.

Yes, but mettle doesn't help you if you fail your save. If you make your save against a Will or Fort partial effect, you're usually not dead.

 

[ARandomGod]

And you've built an unrealistic argument anyway. Its absolutely absurd, in my experience, to find a 10th-level wizard with no Con bonus (they don't live to 10th level on a d4 hit dice without a Con bonus unless the enemies are really stupid, and players pretty much always put their second best stat in Con for a Wizard), so a Realistic 10th-level wizard has a Fort save of +7 or +8.

I do agree that it's likely that a wizard will have around +4 to con (14 to start and +4 item). I doubt he'll have more than that. BUT< any arguement about stat bonuses is likely to go to supporting the "mettle isn't that great" in this case. Because those saves are against spellcasters. And a spellcaster is likely to START at +4 to his relevant ability mod, and have at least a +6 item (for +3 more), so be at +7. And there's a good chance he'll be pumping that up, so by level 8 that's +8 to the DC.

Now sure, let's give the level ten spellcasting target a cloak of spell resist too... Probably not +5 at that level, so say +3.

That caster's not going to make those saves.

(this reply isn't to take a stance one way or the other on the actual issue, just to point out some relative bits about this part of the debate)