Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 RCNovak Oct 20, 2014 15:07:15	So, I downloaded the PDF about the few example magic item spoilers that will eventually be available in the full DMG release.   A few questions revolving around their ruling...   Are the magical effects of an items always active, or must a character be 'attuned' to them to gain the benefit? I see certain items (chiefly weapons) that gain ADDITIONAL bonuses when a character has attuned to them, but also less-effective bonuses that are available when not.   The reason I ask is, they state a character can wear multiple instances of an item type as long as it makes sense for the slot (for example, you can wear 3 rings but not wear three pairs of shoes). If this is the case, does the character gain the benefit of all three rings simultaneously, or does he have to attune himself to each (using up his three attunement slots), even if they don't specifically state they have a unique property thats available only when attuned?   I ask because my original logic was that any enchanted item had to be 'attuned' to the character to benefit, thus maxing them out at 3 and reducing the whole 'fully loaded with magic stuff' feel that 3.5/4e/PF had going on. But if this is the case, I could wear like 5 rings and gain all of their benefits, while using my three 'Attunement' slots on my weapon/armor/misc item if need be.   I know the book isn't out yet and it might clarify some information then, but does anyone have a more figured out perception in the meantine?
#2 Fralex Oct 20, 2014 15:34:40	If it doesn't say it takes attunement to activate, just wearing/wielding it is enough. I was under the impression that rings were a special case, and only one could be worn on each hand, but maybe that's just the case for previous editions.
#3 vanadium322 Oct 20, 2014 21:53:33	The playtest rules had no restriction of 1 ring per hand, while some earlier editions did.   I have no specific knowledge of which will be the case in the DMG, but personally I think the whole attunement system kinda removes the need for the 1-per-hand type restrictions.  Rings were generally supposed to be pretty powerful, so having lots of them would have been problematic.  Now, powerful things require attunement, so it doesn't really matter if your few powerful items are all rings or other types of items.   But yeah, also from the playtest, any magic item that doesn't mention attunement doesn't need to be attuned, and just works all the time.  Obviously they could have changed this, but items printed with the Hoard of the Dragon Queen adventure suggest that they have not.
#4 Timborama Oct 21, 2014 7:03:11	Soon we'll be getting a preview for magical rings. My personal guess? They're all considered "Attuned" items, so you can actually wear 3 rings! But you must attune yourself to each one to get the benefit of them (and I doubt any will have an "always on" non-attuned magic feature), leaving you with 0 attunement slots left.   And to the OP, you gain their ability, or whatever is described, unless it requires attunement. I think a sword in an adventure works well without attunement, but is even better with. So a dude with 3 rings can wield it as a +1 Longsword, but won't get the +1d6 poison or whatever.   Balance is as balance does
#5 Sorxores Oct 22, 2014 4:24:00	RCNovak wrote:
(Reply to #5) Coredump00	Sorxores wrote:
#7 Timborama Oct 21, 2014 9:47:34	Not to mention the rules for "slots" DON'T EVEN EXIST YET.   DMG, guys. I know some of us can't wait (that includes me). But until we can, there's the DM to deal with any silly scenario a PC creates to try and break a system with incomplete rules...
#8 Theros Oct 21, 2014 11:15:56	Timborama wrote:
#9 Timborama Oct 21, 2014 12:17:08	Meh, I think that's okay, as it's a per-table basis anyway. Unless it's a player wailing about things to come? In which case I'd just tell them to chill and talk to their DM!   In fact, judging by the disparity between the different official AL encounters and the magic items they give out (like, 6 in one, 2 in another), that just reinforces that it's up to whoever is writing stuff to give out items. Either giving them like candy, just 1 per person, or none at all (sans a super-item which they can't keep by the end of the story, maybe). And DMs should adjust appropriately (since the base game is not "reliant" on Magic Items for balance or necessity)
(Reply to #4) Timborama	Timborama wrote:
#11 Coredump00 Oct 21, 2014 18:15:04	hmmm....  to me the fact that each of those 3 rings states it requires attunement, seems to imply that not all rings will require attunement.  If they all require it, then why mention it on each entry?
#12 MechaPilot Oct 21, 2014 19:37:34	Timborama wrote:
#13 Fralex Oct 21, 2014 20:08:44	Coredump00 wrote:
#14 Varden_Khol Oct 21, 2014 20:24:03	Someone pointed out that the Flametongue entry immediately follows the Figurines entry, which means that all the magic items are listed alphabetically. Since the rings are probably lumped in there too it makes sense that each item entry would list attunement, since they're not in a 'Rings-only' section.
(Reply to #13) Sorxores	Fralex wrote: