Ye Olde Inn

Just a new quest treasure I made because I came up with a simple idea that I like.

Edit:
The top one is the newest version, the other one is just for reference so you can see what we're talking about.

I like it, but simple it is not.
So most the time you cast a spell it goes away, but there is a chance to retain the spell via the ring for a second go around.

Now to be that girl....So if I cast a spell from the ring, I no longer have a spell in the ring...can I attempt to rescue the spell via this ring? I would be 'discarding' the spell card....

The basic idea is simple but like anything if gets more completed when you apply it every variable. Just look at how the standard game sacrificed clarity for 'simplicity'. I might try to figure out a better way of wording it so that all this is covered and it still fits on the card but that won't be easy. I hate this problem because it happens a lot, even with simple ideas.

I did think about that but I wanted it to be as simple as possible so any time you're about to discard a spell (including from this ring or the ring of wizardry) it can be stored in the ring if you roll a white shield. I definitely don't think it should apply to scrolls though, '(not scrolls)' definitely needs to be added to the text.

The other issue is whether you can carry over a spell in the ring to the next quest. The way it's written yes you can because it doesn't say that you lose the spell at the end of the quest.

It's quite a powerful item so a lesser version could be that it doesn't work on spells where any other item is involved and doesn't carry over between quests. You could also make it lose the spell in the ring on a skull instead of a black shield but I decided against that because it would make it less fun if you'd be better off not casting any spells until you're ready to use the one in the ring.

Gold Bearer wrote:The basic idea is simple but like anything if gets more completed when you apply it every variable. Just look at how the standard game sacrificed clarity for 'simplicity'. I might try to figure out a better way of wording it so that all this is covered and it still fits on the card but that won't be easy. I hate this problem because it happens a lot, even with simple ideas.

Let me try my hand at fixing the linguistics of this card:

Ring of Sorcery
flavor text goes here
Whenever you cast a spell, roll a combat die. If you roll a white shield, you may store that spell in this ring instead, discarding any other spell currently stored. You may cast the stored spell from this ring, discarding it as normal.
If you lose or give away this ring, you must immediately discard any spell stored in it.

Another issue is the wand of recall. If you're about to discard two spells then you'd be better off rolling for the one you want to keep the most after the other one because you stand twice as much chance of rolling a black shield for the one you roll for first. I suppose this isn't really a problem but it's another ambiguity so maybe I'd be better off ruling that it doesn't work with spells cast using items. I like the idea of it combining with the ring of wizardry though so the spell travels from one ring to the other.

Maybe I'll word it 'when you're about to discard a single spell' so that it doesn't work with the wand of recall but even then you don't really discard them at the same time so that's still not entirely clear. Hmm, I'll have a think and another go at the wording later or tomorrow. Why do simple ideas also have to get so complicated?

Count Mohawk wrote:Let me try my hand at fixing the linguistics of this card:

Ring of Sorcery
flavor text goes here
Whenever you cast a spell, roll a combat die. If you roll a white shield, you may store that spell in this ring instead, discarding any other spell currently stored. You may cast the stored spell from this ring, discarding it as normal.
If you lose or give away this ring, you must immediately discard any spell stored in it.

Nice but I really think that if the ring has a spell stored in it when you roll a white shield you should get the choice of keeping the one already stored instead of replacing it because again, that would mean you're better off not casting any spells until you're ready to use the one in the ring if the one in the ring is a really good spell, like a healing spell.

Gold Bearer wrote:

Count Mohawk wrote:Let me try my hand at fixing the linguistics of this card:

Ring of Sorcery
flavor text goes here
Whenever you cast a spell, roll a combat die. If you roll a white shield, you may store that spell in this ring instead, discarding any other spell currently stored. You may cast the stored spell from this ring, discarding it as normal.
If you lose or give away this ring, you must immediately discard any spell stored in it.

Nice but I really think that if the ring has a spell stored in it when you roll a white shield you should get the choice of keeping the one already stored instead of replacing it because again, that would mean you're better off not casting any spells until you're ready to use the one in the ring if the one in the ring is a really good spell, like a healing spell.

If I understand both The Count's wording and your qualms right, I think there's no problem because what you want possible is in the "you may store" and the "You may cast".
I read it as the stored spell changing as often as you cast or staying the same once you like what's stored, theoretically ever-upgrading and thus encouraging spellcasting.

Yes you're right, sorry Mohawk. My brain's in a frazz from figuring out the right way to word the text. I'm okay writing a rule description if I'm doing it like this and free to use as many words as like but getting just the right wording for a card I find much more difficult.

'Roll a combat dice whenever you're about to discard a spell unless the spell is from a Scroll, if you roll a white shield then you may store that spell in this ring, discarding any other spell currently stored. You may then cast the stored spell from this ring in a future turn, discarding it as normal.
If you lose or give away the ring then you must immediately discard any spell stored in it.
A spell stored in the ring when a quest ends is carried over into the next quest.'

It needs the future turn bit to stop you from casting the same spell twice in the same turn with the wand of recall which I don't think you should be able to do, it's supposed to store a spell. I think that should work.

I'm using 'discard' instead of 'cast' so that if dispel is cast on you the ring can save the spell which I think is pretty neat. Reworded it to say spell CARD because that takes care of scrolls and items that contain their own spells and also shortens the text. Spells don't carry over between quests because the nice thing about storing a spell that's just been discarded is that you can put the spell card with the ring card which you might not be able to do if the ring starts a quest with a stored spell. Bit of a shame but it's cleaner.

Thanks for the feedback, really helpful. If nobody can see a problem with the new wording that should be it.

cynthialee wrote:I like it, but simple it is not.
So most the time you cast a spell it goes away, but there is a chance to retain the spell via the ring for a second go around.

Now to be that girl....So if I cast a spell from the ring, I no longer have a spell in the ring...can I attempt to rescue the spell via this ring? I would be 'discarding' the spell card....

I was gonna be 'that guy' & try to defend the Ring of Sorcery cause I like to think it's common sense that the Ring won't attempt to immediately Restore a cast spell it was storing, but the wording is as poor as the Hero Quest system in that they don't explain the act of discarding a spell. Long story short, I'm sure both imply when you discard a Spell Card.

Maybe I'm missing something but this Ring of Sorcery is referenced as an amulet for some reason and that's just plain, No No. On to how I might word this...

"Anytime you discard a cast spell card you can try to store a copy of that same spell into the Ring of Sorcery. Only 1 spell can be stored this way, any successful attempt to store another spell will replace a previously stored spell with the new one. To store a spell roll 1 combat die, if you roll a black shield, a copy of the discarded spell card is successfully stored. A stored spell can be cast once as explained on the copied spell card."

I'd probably leave it like this. Letting Heroes pass spells around is an invite for disaster, don't do it. If you insist on letting them pass spells around, I'd add this to the end, "A stored spell will remain within the Ring until it is cast or until the wielder of the Ring falls unconscious."

Jafazo wrote:Maybe I'm missing something but this Ring of Sorcery is referenced as an amulet for some reason and that's just plain, No No.

Where is referred to as an amulet?

Jafazo wrote:On to how I might word this...

"Anytime you discard a cast spell card you can try to store a copy of that same spell into the Ring of Sorcery. Only 1 spell can be stored this way, any successful attempt to store another spell will replace a previously stored spell with the new one. To store a spell roll 1 combat die, if you roll a black shield, a copy of the discarded spell card is successfully stored. A stored spell can be cast once as explained on the copied spell card."

"A stored spell can be cast once as explained on the copied spell card." I'd reword that bit.

Jafazo wrote:I'd probably leave it like this. Letting Heroes pass spells around is an invite for disaster, don't do it. If you insist on letting them pass spells around, I'd add this to the end, "A stored spell will remain within the Ring until it is cast or until the wielder of the Ring falls unconscious.

They can't pass the stored spell around. I did it like that because of custom heroes. I didn't want casters to get access to spells that they wouldn't normally have access to by passing the ring around.

Edit:

Gold Bearer wrote:I like the idea of it combining with the ring of wizardry though so the spell travels from one ring to the other.

I think it's called the spell ring, not ring of wizardry.

Slight rewording:-