Ring of Shield?

[reveal]

Looking through the DMG, there is no listing for a Ring of Shield. Does such an item exist? If so, how much would it cost to purchase/create?

Basically, I'm talking about a Ring that casts the Shield spell constantly.

 

[kreynolds]

Looking through the DMG, there is no listing for a Ring of Shield. Does such an item exist?

NAFAIK. The closest thing is the ring of force shield.

 

[Bauglir]

By the magic table on page 245, it could theoretically be made for 2000GP.

BUT that table is only meant as a rough guideline, and in many cases is just not applicable, particularly in the case of 'always on' items.

A good rule of thumb for pricing magic items is to compare it to existing items with similar effects. It's entirely up to the judgement of the DM. In this case, a similar price to Bracers of Armor +8 might not be unreasonable.

** Begins the rituals for Summon dcollins IX **

 

[Lord Pendragon]

Looking through the DMG, there is no listing for a Ring of Shield. Does such an item exist? If so, how much would it cost to purchase/create?

Basically, I'm talking about a Ring that casts the Shield spell constantly.

Such an item does not exist. As creating items that aren't in the book is solely at the discretion of the DM, the cost to create it would be whatever your DM decides.

If you are the DM of the campaign, I suggest that you disallow this item. Period.

 

[AuraSeer]

Basically, I'm talking about a Ring that casts the Shield spell constantly.

There isn't one. If you request it, your DM might create a new item for you; in that case, the way to price it is by the benefits it grants.

It basically grants a continual +7 to AC. If it were a natural armor bonus, it would go for around 98,000 gp, the same price as a (hypothetical) +7 Amulet Of Natural armor. However, a cover bonus stacks much better than the amulet does, which means it should be lots more expensive. It's probably not quite worth doubling the price, but I'd peg it at around 150,000 gp.

 

[kreynolds]

Re: Re: Ring of Shield?

However, a cover bonus stacks much better than the amulet does, which means it should be lots more expensive.

Except that the cover bonus is only effective from one side of the battlefield, not both. I'd probably just use the natural armor bonus value (98K).

 

[coyote6]

Re: Re: Re: Ring of Shield?

Except that the cover bonus is only effective from one side of the battlefield, not both. I'd probably just use the natural armor bonus value (98K).

It also gives immunity to magic missile, so I'd at least round up to 100k.

 

[kreynolds]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Ring of Shield?

It also gives immunity to magic missile, so I'd at least round up to 100k.

True, but I figured that's why I'd just price it as natural armor when coupled with the fact that the AC bonus is only half as effective as other bonuses. Immunity to magic missile is cool, but considering how many spells exhist in the PH alone, it's not that cool - cool enough to justify bonus x bonus x 2K though.

 

[AuraSeer]

Re: Re: Re: Ring of Shield?

Except that the cover bonus is only effective from one side of the battlefield, not both. I'd probably just use the natural armor bonus value (98K).

I thought about that, but in my experience it isn't a significant drawback in most combats. Keeping the "active" side pointed at enemies is relatively easy, especially since mages have access to mobility magic like fly, expeditious retreat, or dimension door. Even in ambush conditions, my sorcerer seldom if ever gets hit from the unprotected side.

It is a minor limiting factor though, and is part of the reason I priced the ring only 50% more than the +7 amulet.

 

[coyote6]

Of course, this will all be simpler with the 3.5e version of shield -- smaller bonus, no need to worry about coverage, different bonus type . . .