Should rings be able to function for low level characters?

[danbuter1]

I personally don't like the idea at all. But this is one I will houserule right out of existence.

 

[Eldragon]

The good news is that any DM can house rule this out. However, not all DMs are going to remove this utterly stupid restriction. So now whenever I want to be a PC, I have to beg the DM to let my level 9 character craft a Ring of detect magic, or other ring, belt, boots or questionable power.

Furthermore, this is going to taint every D&D Computer RPG that uses 4e from here on out.

Level restrictions on items should be based on the power of the item, not what slot it uses. It seems like half the new rules in 4e exist to tie the hands of the DM, not help him out.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

The point about magic rings in LoTR is actually in favor of this change. With the exception of the One Ring, we never see a non-major power wielding a Ring.

That's one way of looking at it.

Nothing except Galadriel's assertion says that less powerful beings are incapable of using the rings.

Another way to look at it is that Sauron made the tactical decision to put those rings in the hands of people in power to maximize the payoff & power of the One Ring. Its possible that their power comes with a "curse" similar to the One Ring's, which drives the rings up the scale of persons with power as time goes by. With dormancy, the rings might accept lesser beings as bearers, if only to make them more available to those with the power to take them as their own and actually use them.

Its what I'd do, anyway. No matter what happens, the rings would always rise towards the upper stratas of society.

(Heck, there's even precedence for something similar in nature. Some parasites can make their hosts engage in behaviors that make them easy prey, getting the parasite a new, healthier host...)

 

[Amphimir Míriel]

"Most biased poll wording of the month" award!

This

 

[Khairn]

In answer to the OP ... Sure. Why not?

As arbitrary rules go, this one seems to be pretty much a "poster child". But since magic items are one of the easiest things to "house rule" I don't see a problem with it. And as 4E is being designed with attracting new players in mind, core rules that "hold the players hands" are to be expected.

 

[Lizard]

In answer to the OP ... Sure. Why not?

As arbitrary rules go, this one seems to be pretty much a "poster child". But since magic items are one of the easiest things to "house rule" I don't see a problem with it. And as 4E is being designed with attracting new players in mind, core rules that "hold the players hands" are to be expected.

Holding the player's hand -- good.
Nailgunning the player's hand to the table -- bad.

"Options, not restrictions" my shiny metal ass.

 

[ThirdWizard]

"Options not restrictions" is, in fact, the most beneficial mantra for designing a new edition of D&D. What I don't understand, though, is how it can have become so hollow.

Wow... just... wow. Hollow because of one tiny rule.

That's probably not what one should come away with from an article that talks about how a DM in 4e is more easily able to customize magical item commonality in his or her own game, but the ability to make a mountain out of a molehill is one of the Powers that the Internet Poster gets. Sure, why not. "Let them wear Rings!" and all that.

 

[LostSoul]

The mnore versatile the toolset, the more potential playsteyles it appeals to and therefore the more potential customers it creates. There's really no benefit or justification for these kinds of inherent limitations.

If you try to please everyone, you end up pleasing no one.

 

[Celtavian]

re

It is the province of the DM to decide what the player receives, not the province of the game designer. A magic ring is just an item. It should work if put on unless it has some kind of ability that only a particular class might understand. The idea that you have to be a certain level to use a ring is ludicrous. One of the greatest fantasy stories of all time wouldn't even have happened with a level limitation concerning rings. How could Lord of the Rings have happened if a ring can't be used until a certain level? Level limitations on items takes from the DM their discretion. I'll house rule this out if it is included.

 

[Zamkaizer]

It is the province of the DM to decide what the player receives, not the province of the game designer. A magic ring is just an item. It should work if put on unless it has some kind of ability that only a particular class might understand. The idea that you have to be a certain level to use a ring is ludicrous. One of the greatest fantasy stories of all time wouldn't even have happened with a level limitation concerning rings. How could Lord of the Rings have happened if a ring can't be used until a certain level? Level limitations on items takes from the DM their discretion. I'll house rule this out if it is included.

In this thread, we act as though there's some basis for magical items and how they function in real life, that designers have no right dictating how those relics, entirely divorced from the realms of logic and physics work, and that Lord of the Rings was a Dungeons & Dragons campaign.

You're right that rules dictating what items a characters receive, and how they function, is a DM's providence, just like any other rule. But the designer of whatever system that DM chooses gets to decide, by virtue of his role, what that rule will initially be presented as.