Ring of spell Storing - breaking games?

[Aaedimus]

So, the Ring of Spell Storing is super strong. One of the best uses my DM didn't forsee was us using it you give everyone a greater steed.

Than as a wizard I could use it to give martials huge boosts that extended to their mounts, and I went into combat with Tenser's Transformation and Crown of Stars extended to my mount (crown of stars is stretching the rules a bit... DM rulled the effect was to give you the stars whixh you vould use -self effect-, not the attack, so it was eligible for sharing)

With twinned haste from the Sorcerer that was 6 attacks with advantage with Tenser's bonus damage. IMO that made US much stronger than the game was designed to be

In conclusion: if you're a wizard with a rung of spell storing: it's super easy to abuse

What OP combinations did you do with it?

[Foolwise]

Give the ring to a non-caster and fill it with a concentration spell of choice so you can get two conc spells going at the same time.

[Jerrykhor]

How many Rings of Spell storing did your DM give out??

[Corey]

How many Rings of Spell storing did your DM give out??

The Find Greater Steed trick only requires one ring for the party, if you have enough time for serial re-attunement.

Also, the steeds shouldn't die, or else you have to go through that rigamarole all over again to get new ones.

[kazaryu]

So, the Ring of Spell Storing is super strong. One of the best uses my DM didn't forsee was us using it you give everyone a greater steed.

Than as a wizard I could use it to give martials huge boosts that extended to their mounts, and I went into combat with Tenser's Transformation and Crown of Stars extended to my mount (crown of stars is stretching the rules a bit... DM rulled the effect was to give you the stars whixh you vould use -self effect-, not the attack, so it was eligible for sharing)

With twinned haste from the Sorcerer that was 6 attacks with advantage with Tenser's bonus damage. IMO that made US much stronger than the game was designed to be

In conclusion: if you're a wizard with a rung of spell storing: it's super easy to abuse

What OP combinations did you do with it?

tbh that sounds less like ring of spell storing being strong and more like crown of stars being kinda BS. like...if that spell had been written for the PhB it woulda been concentration. but also you stacked like 3 buff spells. on a single character. thats gonna make them strong...kinda regardless. obviously having the extra guy (the steed) there helped, but a hasted, Tenser'd crown of stars person is gonna be pretty bonkers regardless. (and also super vulnerable to dispel magic)...anyway, thats not what your question was lol

-giving the rogue a familiar is a pretty strong use for them (realistically, if you have access to them you may as well give everyone in the part a steed and familiar)
-giving a ring of lvl 5 spirit shroud to a martial (a pam or xbe fighter would probably be optimal due to number of attacks), then casting holy weapon on them could be....pretty glorious. you could probably even stack a haste for another attack per round
-giving a martial (or, the party tank) 5 castings of shield and/or absorb elements could greatly increase their tankiness
-giving a pure martial access to healing word could be nice for redundancy

[Contrast]

Armor of Agathys is really nice on a number of classes - warlocks can also keep topping it up through the day whenever you have a short rest and they have a spell slot left (though at a certain level it does mean you can't fit other stuff in).

In a party with only one person who can Res, you can put a res spell in so that if they die you can still bring them back.

Giving everyone in the party a familiar is the small scale version of the Find Greater Steed trick.

Failing that, just Shield, Absorb Elements and Healing Word are all great in that they let the wearer carry on doing their normal schtick while giving them great action economy options and are super efficient in terms of space in the ring.

[KorvinStarmast]

Give the ring to a non-caster and fill it with a concentration spell of choice so you can get two conc spells going at the same time. Like bless (for the party, from the ring) and slow (from your caster).


tbh that sounds less like ring of spell storing being strong and more like crown of stars being kinda BS. like. Wait, what level is crown of stars again? I thought Ring of Spell storing could only store up to five levels. My favorite RoSS exploit is giving five people each a familiar. :smallsmile:

[kazaryu]

Wait, what level is crown of stars again? I thought Ring of Spell storing could only store up to five levels. My favorite RoSS exploit is giving five people each a familiar. :smallsmile:

its lvl 7, so you can't put it on RoSS...but noone was saying that it had been. i was talking about OP stacking RoSS with haste and tenser's xformation and doubling all 3 buffs onto their greater steed as well.

[Xihirli]

With twinned haste from the Sorcerer that was 6 attacks with advantage with Tenser's bonus damage. IMO that made US much stronger than the game was designed to be


How do you figure?
Tenser's lets you attack twice (2)
Haste gives you one more (1)
Crown of Stars gives you one (1)
And I suppose the steed's Crown as well (1)

If your mount is uncontrolled I suppose it can make 3 attacks, but then you're probably never where you're needed to do your attacks.

[KorvinStarmast]

its lvl 7, so you can't put it on RoSS...but noone was saying that it had been. i was talking about OP stacking RoSS with haste and tenser's xformation and doubling all 3 buffs onto their greater steed as well. OK. (And somewhere along the line my brain also took RoSS as Ring of Shooting Stars, so I need to go back and read all of that again! :smalleek:)

[kazaryu]

OK. (And somewhere along the line my brain also took RoSS as Ring of Shooting Stars, so I need to go back and read all of that again! :smalleek:)

its ok, it took me right up until i started typing my reply to realize that when you typed RoSS you meant ring of spell storing.

[Burley]

Ring of Spell Storing isn't that strong. Sure you can put a couple spells into it, but it's your usage of it that breaks games. If I was DMing a group that was "chain attuning" magic items so that everybody gets a big horsie, I'd ask why the group didn't just ask for big horses. Why'd they have to do all this chicanery? If they need a flock of griffons, we can arrange that.

It's all the stuff after the big horsies that's broken, though. (And, it's not even that broken. As a DM, if my players set up a "combo" like this, I'd make sure there were more targets than they knew there'd be. Because, let's face it, if a party of 13+ level adventurers need griffons and all these buffs, they'd better be going up against a demonic horde. Otherwise, what's the point?)

I like Ring of Spell Storing. My artificer likes to give it to the tanks with a heal and a buff inside. Or, give it to the rogue so they can fog cloud or dimension door out of trouble.

[KorvinStarmast]

Or, give it to the rogue so they can fog cloud or dimension door out of trouble. We have a winner. :smallsmile:

[kazaryu]

Ring of Spell Storing isn't that strong. Sure you can put a couple spells into it, but it's your usage of it that breaks games. If I was DMing a group that was "chain attuning" magic items so that everybody gets a big horsie, I'd ask why the group didn't just ask for big horses. Why'd they have to do all this chicanery? If they need a flock of griffons, we can arrange that.

It's all the stuff after the big horsies that's broken, though.

I like Ring of Spell Storing. My artificer likes to give it to the tanks with a heal and a buff inside. Or, give it to the rogue so they can fog cloud or dimension door out of trouble.

because there is a significant differences between ' a flock of griffons' and 'the entire party has a greater steed'

and it doesn't require any chicanery. its a smart use for the magic item. like...even in world its a smart use. its not cheese, it doesn't rely on a clever reading of the rules. its just...what makes sense.

[Burley]

because there is a significant differences between ' a flock of griffons' and 'the entire party has a greater steed'

and it doesn't require any chicanery. its a smart use for the magic item. like...even in world its a smart use. its not cheese, it doesn't rely on a clever reading of the rules. its just...what makes sense.

When you need to spend long rests to re-attune the item to every party member, it's not what makes sense. The point of attuning is to keep a magic item on one person, and not pass it around the party.
It's certainly bending the purpose of the spell, which is Paladin only and can only be cast once. You're using the ring to get around the "single mount per Paladin" intention of the spell.

Finally, the first line of the Ring of Spell Storing's description says "This ring stores spells cast into it, holding them until the attuned wearer uses them." When the Paladin casts the spell again to charge the ring, it'd end the previous casting of the spell. So, there. I broke your ring.

[kazaryu]

When you need to spend long rests to re-attune the item to every party member, it's not what makes sense. The point of attuning is to keep a magic item on one person, and not pass it around the party.
It's certainly bending the purpose of the spell, which is Paladin only and can only be cast once. You're using the ring to get around the "single mount per Paladin" intention of the spell.

Finally, the first line of the Ring of Spell Storing's description says "This ring stores spells cast into it, holding them until the attuned wearer uses them." When the Paladin casts the spell again to charge the ring, it'd end the previous casting of the spell. So, there. I broke your ring.

i mean...you spend a day or two in town to get everyone a griffon, thats not unreasonable, downtime happens. the only time you'd need to pass it around again is if literally everyone's griffons died.

and that last part...


While wearing this ring, you can cast any spell stored in it. The spell uses the slot level, spell save DC, spell Attack bonus, and Spellcasting ability of the original caster, but is otherwise treated as if you cast the spell. The spell cast from the ring is no longer stored in it, freeing up space.

all what you pointed out might mean is that the paladin is the last one to get their mount. and...even that isn't true. nothing in find steeds description says the steed disappears if you recast the spell. it just says you can't have more than one steed bonded. But casting find steed into a RoSS wouldn't cause you to form a new bond, so that clause is irrelevant.

why are you so opposed to this? whats so bad about the party having a small fleet of griffons at lvl 10? (at the earliest, assuming the party has a bard. lvl 13 if they rely on a paladin). summons already exist, so its not like you're worried about choking up the initiative. and if you *are* then you probably have a homebrew about summons to keep things from getting to crazy anyway. so really...whats the problem?

[MoiMagnus]

Finally, the first line of the Ring of Spell Storing's description says "This ring stores spells cast into it, holding them until the attuned wearer uses them." When the Paladin casts the spell again to charge the ring, it'd end the previous casting of the spell. So, there. I broke your ring.

Objection !
The paladin just need to give up on his steed temporarily. He cast into the ring (dispelling his own steed), then another person use the ring to summon a steed, then he cast again into the ring (he no longer has a steed, so no steed is dispelled), and another person use ring to summon a steed, etc. Finally, he can cast "find greater steed" to summon a steed for him again at the end.

(Also, one could argue that the "The spell has no Effect, other than to be stored in the ring." clause does mean that casting into the ring does not dispel pre-existing steed).

Admittedly, I would probably houserule the ring to prevent those chaining, by saying that while the user of the ring is the one to cast the spell, this spell is still "owned" by the original caster for all limitations like the one of "find greater steed", meaning that putting "find greater steed" in a ring of spell storing is a way to loan your steed to another person.

EDIT: One of the reason being that I don't like the world-building ramification of being able to sell steeds/familiars/etc to random strangers. Another is that I don't like when "class features" (which spells like "find greater steed" are, they're just disguised as spells) get handed for free to other characters.

[kazaryu]

Objection !
The paladin just need to give up on his steed temporarily. He cast into the ring (dispelling his own steed), then another person use the ring to summon a steed, then he cast again into the ring (he no longer has a steed, so no steed is dispelled), and another person use ring to summon a steed, etc. Finally, he can cast "find greater steed" to summon a steed for him again at the end.

(Also, one could argue that the "The spell has no Effect, other than to be stored in the ring." clause does mean that casting into the ring does not dispel pre-existing steed).

Admittedly, I would probably houserule the ring to prevent those chaining, by saying that while the user of the ring is the one to cast the spell, this spell is still "owned" by the original caster for all limitations like the one of "find greater steed", meaning that putting "find greater steed" in a ring of spell storing is a way to loan your steed to another person.

i mean thats fine as a houserule. if your lvl 10 party having access to a pack of cr2 creatures is breaking your game, then by all means. i just...if you're running a game with magic items i feel like there are far worse things to worry about.

[Keravath]

So, the Ring of Spell Storing is super strong. One of the best uses my DM didn't forsee was us using it you give everyone a greater steed.

Than as a wizard I could use it to give martials huge boosts that extended to their mounts, and I went into combat with Tenser's Transformation and Crown of Stars extended to my mount (crown of stars is stretching the rules a bit... DM rulled the effect was to give you the stars whixh you vould use -self effect-, not the attack, so it was eligible for sharing)

With twinned haste from the Sorcerer that was 6 attacks with advantage with Tenser's bonus damage. IMO that made US much stronger than the game was designed to be

In conclusion: if you're a wizard with a rung of spell storing: it's super easy to abuse

What OP combinations did you do with it?

A few comments. :)

1) Ring of spell storing is a cool and useful item. Sharing mounts is one option but it takes a while and to share find greater steed you either need a 13th level paladin and a week of downtime to refill the ring 1/day or a level 10 bard with magical secrets and the same week. Time required gets less with a 15th or higher level paladin. It is cool but not OP.

2) Crown of Stars is 7th level so the party is already pretty high level and is expected to be powerful. Adding a few mounts to the mix is the same as having a few followers/minions/NPCs - it really doesn't change things much. In addition, you need to have a generous DM to allow Crown of Stars on the mount. The spells are restricted not to ones labeled "self" but to ones that only target the caster. Clearly, Crown of Stars actually targets other creatures than the caster so it is not eligible (RAW) to be extended to the mount but a DM is free to house rule it.

Anyway, as levels get higher there are lots of ways available in the game to make characters stronger - there are also threats and opponents that could require the characters to be stronger.

[kazaryu]

A few comments. :)

1) Ring of spell storing is a cool and useful item. Sharing mounts is one option but it takes a while and to share find greater steed you either need a 13th level paladin and a week of downtime to refill the ring 1/day or a level 10 bard with magical secrets and the same week. Time required gets less with a 15th or higher level paladin. It is cool but not OP.



to be fair, you don't *need* a week of downtime. you could potentially fill out the party on the go if the paladin is ever left with their 4th level slot at the end of a day. it'll take longer, likely, but it doesn't need a week off.

[Burley]

why are you so opposed to this? whats so bad about the party having a small fleet of griffons at lvl 10? (at the earliest, assuming the party has a bard. lvl 13 if they rely on a paladin). summons already exist, so its not like you're worried about choking up the initiative. and if you *are* then you probably have a homebrew about summons to keep things from getting to crazy anyway. so really...whats the problem?

I don't have a problem with the party having griffons. But, it's annoying for a DM to deal with "combos" that turn the game upside down. The DM didn't say "Yeah, we can get y'all griffons," in response to players' requests. The players said, "We are getting them so we can all have 6 attacks per turn, and here's the flow chart of events. And, we're gonna spend 3 in-game days to do this, so, the princess may be dead by then. Now, run the game and make it fun." (I'm obviously not quoting.)

[KorvinStarmast]

And, we're gonna spend 3 in-game days to do this, so, the princess may be dead by then. Now, run the game and make it fun." (I'm obviously not quoting.) DM then observes: "Given that the princess is already dead, you don't have a quest now. What you do have one pissed off monarch, and his Champion, wondering what this band of adventurers she hired to save the princess were doing for 3 days that wasn't 'saving the princess.' You hear the town criers (Hear ye, Hear Ye!) spread the news that {by name, each PC} has been declared outlaw (in the original, formal, medieval sense) and they begin to realize that they may having to flee the to the borders of the kingdom, with every citizen's hand turned against them ..." :smallbiggrin:

Next encounter: NPC assassins, multiple, (CR 7) with spell caster support attempt to surprise the party during a rest ... :smallbiggrin:

Did I mention that the queen was pissed off?

[Burley]

DM then observes: "Given that the princess is already dead, you don't have a quest now. But, you do have one pissed off monarch wondering what this band of adventurers she hired to save the princess were doing for 3 days. You hear the town criers (Hear ye, Hear Ye!) spread the news that {by name, each PC} has been declared outlaw (in the original, formal, medieval sense) and they begin to realize that they may having to flee the to the borders of the kingdom, with every citizen's hand turned against them ..." :smallbiggrin:

Good thing they all have griffons to flee the kingdom, I guess.

[KorvinStarmast]

Good thing they all have griffons to flee the kingdom, I guess. Good thing. :smallsmile:

[kazaryu]

I don't have a problem with the party having griffons. But, it's annoying for a DM to deal with "combos" that turn the game upside down. The DM didn't say "Yeah, we can get y'all griffons," in response to players' requests. The players said, "We are getting them so we can all have 6 attacks per turn, and here's the flow chart of events. And, we're gonna spend 3 in-game days to do this, so, the princess may be dead by then. Now, run the game and make it fun." (I'm obviously not quoting.)

ok.. a few things

1: turn the game upside down: in what way does this do that. at the levels this has a chance of coming into play the party already potentially has access to spells like transport via plants and teleportation circle. or even teleport.

2. we are getting them to...: you're assuming that everyone doing this is gonna be actually bringing these creatures into battle. they're CR2 and have ~59 hp at most. they're literally as squishy as a wizard with a lower AC and no ability to cast shield/absorb elements. (although, of course the wizards could potentially benefit from those spells)|
2a: you're also assuming that thats why every group of players is doing it (or even why OP did it). just because they used their mounts that way, doesn't mean they originally acquired them for that specific purpose. so what if the players *did* do that? the extra attacks are that of a CR2 creature...super scary in tier 3.

3: we're gonna spend 3 in game...: this one is the weirdest to me. why are you assuming that the party is going to literally drop everything to do this? do you just...not give your party's any amount of down time? do the character just keep going non-stop for several months on end with absolutely no breaks here and there? seems unlikely. i mean, this is something that can be accomplished over travel time.
3a. and more...who cares if they abandon the princess in order to do this? are you really not prepared to the potential eventuality that the PC's fail to save her? what are your games like if the DM doesn't expect the players to lose? like, its fine if thats how you play and your party has fun. but...i mean really? it really isn't that much different than if they were to show up too late..what happens next?