Ruby set in mithril Ring

[Harlas Ravelkione]

The ruby set in mithril necklace offers +3 to will saves and +3 to AC. The ring, however, looks like the old version with only +3 to will saves.

So I think... and hope... that it is a bug. (I just had it made :/ )


Harlas

[Skywatcher]

I had one of the old versions of the ruby set in mithril amulet and when I put it on my ox and updated it to the current version the AC bonus was added.  You might try putting the ring on your ox to see if it updates or it could be that the amulet is different from the ring but I doubt that.

[Harlas Ravelkione]

That works with the old necklaces from before the update.

This ring was made today. But to be sure I just tested it on the ox and perceived no changes on the ring.

It stays at +3 will saves.

[ShiffDrgnhrt]

I think they changed that because if the rings were the same, thats +9 Nat AC (if they stack)

[s0ulz]

I think they changed that because if the rings were the same, thats +9 Nat AC (if they stack)

They do not stack, fho sho.

[ShiffDrgnhrt]

Well then there is no point in putting it in the rings then, is there?

[s0ulz]

Well then there is no point in putting it in the rings then, is there?

Au contraire, if they'd stack they'd be ridiculously overpowered... and due to the fact that the items have the same ingredients, they should have identical properties...

[Harlas Ravelkione]

A necklace takes two mithril ingots to make and a ring only one. I chose to try to have a ring made for me. The outcome should be the same I think.

[osxmallard]

The higher amount of mithril must be what gives the amulet the extra benefit then.  =)

[ShiffDrgnhrt]

I think Soulz is kinda right though...

[Skywatcher]

All of the other jewelry has the same effect whether a ring or amulet so it seems it should be the same.

[Chongo]

Well, the simple truth here is that I never changed the rings like I did the amulets.  Also, ring AC is deflection.  I'm sure folks know that, just wanted to point it out in case anyone forgot that it's not natural like amulet AC.  Deflection AC is available in other gear slots, like cloaks and helmets.  It's also covered under spells like SoF and shield.  And no, it does not stack.
 
 The other major difference is the crafting recipe I believe.  An emerald set in mithril amulet for example requires 3 emeralds and 2 ingots of mithril.  (Someone confirm this from Raven).  I'm assuming the ruby amulets require the same.  So it's a bit more involved.
 
 My honest gut was that 1) who needs more deflection AC slots 2) rings have two slot opportunities and in most aspects should be weaker then amulets 3) the recipe is easier 4) I didn't want to punch the rings to level requirements as high as the amulets.  (24ish)
 
 If we want to alter these, lets go ahead and get a GM forum going on it, probably post in the grand gear balance discussion Harlas.  That forum needs a good wake up call anyhow right?
 
 :rolleyes:

[Dorganath]

The other major difference is the crafting recipe I believe.  An emerald set in mithril amulet for example requires 3 emeralds and 2 ingots of mithril.  (Someone confirm this from Raven).  I'm assuming the ruby amulets require the same.  So it's a bit more involved.

Correct.  The Emerald/Ruby mithril amulets take 3 gems and 2 ingots.  Rings take 3 gems but only 1 ingot.

[Harlas Ravelkione]

Alright. I see your pont Chongo. I just figured it was a bug - that the AC bonus should have been on there.

Just a bit bummed that I spend 3 rubies and that ingot on the ring now :/ . But I'll live.