Why are rings the go-to jewelry for Fantasy of all kind?

>9 spells
>not 21
Do you even thumbs and toes?

If you're talking about D&D (and you are, since you're treating magical items like that), you're limited to benefiting two magic rings at a time no matter how many you put on your fingers.

Since this is self evidently the correct answer, let's have a more interesting question. Is there any compelling case for why you shouldn't be able to wear and use 10 rings at a time?

>thumbs
Rarely point the same direction as your fingies. Likely to cause problems if you're holding something
>toes
And light my slippers and robes on fire? I'd surely think not.

The Ring of the Nibelung

A) see post for why no thumbs
B) you're forgetting the most important ring of all, my friend. No better place to store that command word enlarge self ring.

your filename is wrong!

>noses, ears and prince Albert

because

*they are small
*you can wear multiple of them
*they are not seen as faggy even if showy
*you dont need to pierce anything to wear them
*they are worn in the hand which gives them a more dynamic role (laser rings)
*they dont easily slide off while necklaces and the other stuff can easily get taken away
*even races without fingers can wear them (i.e. Aboleth whiskers)

What does the "go to jewelry" even mean? Every fantasy setting has magical amulets, crowns, earrings and whatnot. Out of them, rings and amulets are more popular than the others because they can be worn by anyone. Crowns imply nobility and earrings are rarely worn by men.
You could argue that it's the "go-to" jewerly for real life too. Is there some other jewerly that people wear IRL more frequently than rings that I'm not aware of?

Depends, do you consider Earrings to just be rings?

In my own setting, this isn't quite the case.

An enchanment's power is largely reliant on how closely the spell you're enchanting an object with is tied to the object's 'concept'.

So, you can make a sword go for sharp to REALLY FUCKING SHARP, or a breastplate that lets you face tank cannon fire and laugh.

But rings, being mostly symbols of bonds, authority, wealth, or identity don't really have much you can enchant with. At least in my mind, I'm sure Veeky Forums can come up with some awesome tricks on those four categories.

this is a cool concept user, it always bothered me that a ring can make you faster and stuff like that, that shit should be reserved for magic shoes/pants

because they're round
they symbolically surround your finger, so bringing you a power

Rings go on your fingies, your primary interaction with the world. Rings of sure hold, telekinesis,spider climb, and dexterity wouldn't be abnormal. Considering their social connotation of representing life long bonds or achievements, wedding rings, rings as rewards for merit, championships, high school rings, they may also have social enchantments as well. Rings of communication, rings that "encrypt" speech except for those who also have a ring, things like that.

that can work too, thanks, my brain was a little stuck there.

Thanks, and while it is possible to enchant things outside of their 'concept' you just won't get as good results.

So, yes, you can enchant up a bunch of jewlery as a discreet way to protect yourself, but it'll only be as good as basically wearing a breastplate, so, ironically, a stiletto to the back of your neck is still gonna kill you.

Part of what led to this idea of mine was actually to explain 'what is the limit on how much internal volume you can enchant into things like bags, shelters, etc.?"

Sigil rings could grant bonuses to attack/defence etc through morale, loyalty etc. Open secret doors or be used to signify membership. On a base magic level they could be communication devices, allowing the user to call for help or summoning the spirits of fallen members of the order as an immediate band of reinforcements.

Rings signifying an office would be much the same, but without the attack/def stuff. They could have a magic purpose related to the office they signify, e.g. a scribe's ring could produce a small quantity of ink per minute, a guard captain's ring could offer protection from non-lawful players (and cause said captain's hand to wither if he ever becomes non-lawful).

Rings of wealth are a bit tricky, but they could be used to generate fake gold up to say 10% of their value per day, with the gold lasting for 24 hours until vanishing. Otherwise it's indistinguishable from real gold.

As for identity that's easy, just give it an absurd magical power related to the owner's house. Anything goes here since they will be rare and you can make sense of anything, even something like a ring of protection can be imagined as adding a weak magical forcefield to your clothing. If you have a noble house related to hunting, maybe it gives a bonus to hit vs non-monstrous creatures, or a bonus to survival etc. Nobles from a house skilled at diplomacy would get a bonus on sense motive, bluff, diplomacy etc. Skilled warrior houses get attack and damage. The possibilities are endless.

Only if you consider collars/chokers to be neck-rings.

it's one of the few if not the only piece of jewelry widely worn by men

They are easily put on and taken off, can be easily hidden and have an association to marriage, giving them some cultural heft.

Tee-Hee Maccaroni go, and stay go!

Doesn't "Prince Albert" also mean certain pattern of male genital piercing?

>The magic rings from the Arabian nights, The ring of Solomon, the ring of Gyges, Draupnir, Andvarinaut, Sir Yvain, and Sir Garet's ring all cough politely in your direction
Not his idea first.

Doesn't change that it was Tolkien that made it a staple in the fantasy genre. No one is saying Tolkien invented magic rings.

What I'm saying is he didn't need to make it a staple; magic rings were a subconscious staple of everybody's mythologies anyway. I'm not up on Chinese/Japanese mythology, but I wouldn't bat an eye if you told me they have famous magic rings.

Don't forget eyebrows, chest and belly button.

Then explain why things like magic girdles never caught on as wel, despite their prominence in Greek, Norse and Arthurian mythology.
Or magic spears.

Don’t be obtuse, user.

Eh. You can't really prove that. We live in a reality where most post-Tolkien high fantasy borrows heavily from Tolkien, including the prominence of magic rings. You could argue that it would have happened regardless of Tolkien, but that doesn't change the fact that it happened because of Tolkien.

You can't really prove that it did, as there was already a precedent

Most high fantasy takes cues from D&D nowadays. D&D itself took cues from Tolkien, but rather less than you think.
And D&D has a shitton of magic items, many of which are rings. From various inspirations, not just Tolkien. The strongest, most striking ring is the Ring of Three Wishes, taken straight from Aladdin, whereas the Ring of Invisibility is a minor footnote.

Then compare and contrast literature before and after his works.
If you see a prominence of magic rings in the relatively recent years before them then your assertion may have merit.

I don't really see a prominence of magic rings now. Whole lotta magic swords though. Tolkien started that too, right?

Is this really what you’re going with?

Not really. Swords in Tolkien never got much further than "unnaturally sharp" and "glow when enemies are near". That's another D&D thing, where swords can be on fire, freeze enemies, shoot lightning, magically multiply, be unbreakable, fight on their own, be thrown and return, be made of magic metals or crystal or dragonbone, shine like the sun and burn evil foes, or most famously, unerringly strike off the foe's head of its own accord (Vorpal). Again, taking more from general mythologies like Excalibur, Durendal, Claíomh Solais, etc. etc.

Are you dense? You just named how weapons, being one-use tools, are extremely limited, while multi-use symbolic tools are more versatile.
>ring that tells you who I am
>ring that tells you who I’m associated with
>ring that tells you what I rule
>ring that tells you what else I own
They could all be the same thing. A really gaudy and expensive wedding ring passed down through a royal line.

We don’t generally carry something useful on our belts anymore unless we work with our hands or we’ve gone through a process where the state allows us to carry a weapon. Or we’re a dad, in which case a cell phone clip magically appears there.
Spears, because they fell out of fashion mundanely.

>Most high fantasy takes cues from D&D nowadays
I highly disagree.
>D&D itself took cues from Tolkien, but rather less than you think.
This is up for debate. Gygax claimed, when he was older, that he didn't take much from Tolkien - but his works clearly have a lot of Tolkien-esque things in them and he was a really big fan of Tolkien when he was younger.
>The strongest, most striking ring is the Ring of Three Wishes, taken straight from Aladdin, whereas the Ring of Invisibility is a minor footnote.
You're not really seeing the big pictue. We're talking about the prominence of the concept of magical rings, not specific rings. And I'm sorry but the fact that you call the One Ring an "invisibility ring" and ignore all the other prominent rings tells something of your ignorance when it comes to Tolkien.

It's hard to lose a ring that you are wearing, and for the most part they won't get caught on anything.

D&D swords used to be along the lines of "unnaturally sharp" as well, which is why you have plain +1 and +2 weapons with unique backgrounds in older material. Diablo 2 treatment of magic items was a 3e thing.

Yes, but RAW doesn't say which two rings I'm benefiting from.

I know the One Ring is more than invisibility (for Sauron, Maiar, and elves, at least), but that'd be another thing D&D does not take from Tolkien thereby. There is no One Ring equivalent in D&D, none of the magic rings in it take their lineage from it.
>Gygax claimed, when he was older, that he didn't take much from Tolkien - but his works clearly have a lot of Tolkien-esque things in them
The only thing that is taken directly from Tolkien are the races of elves, dwarves, and halflings, really. And even the elves barely resemble each other. Very little about D&D actually follows anything Tolkien ever laid down beyond those races. The orcs are different, the innumerable species of D&D find no links from Tolkien, and the countless magic items, again, find more roots in mythology than anything the Lord of the Rings ever showed.

Frankly, you're just wrong. AD&D 2E had loads of magic weapons of the same varieties, it just had a magic bonus in addition, calling them "Sword +1, Flame Tongue" and "Sword +5, Holy Avenger" (both of which were in 1E as well).

Modern concepts of magic swords can largely be traced back to the Arthurian renaissance around the nineteenth century, which in turn inspired writers in the twentieth

If rings are associated with identity, then any aspect of my identity can be associated with rings. Therefore, if I am so renowned a swordsman that it could be called my identity, then I should be able to enchant rings with martial prowess.

Awesome side effect: all the good magic rings are relics of particular heroes and can't be mass-produced generics. Maybe "The Sigil Band of Sir Gregor of the Order of the Sword" and "Edmon Steelfist's Ring" are mechanicly identical, but they're still distinct items with a specific story behind their creation.

Maybe I just had a great DM, then.

>21

I see what you did there.

Came here to say all this. It's not JUST Tolkien, or the Bible (which uses rings mostly because amulets were an Egyptian thing and the ancient Jews wanted to be different. I mean, those too, but rings are more action-friendly. They don't get caught or swing around or fall off as easily. Isildur only got the Ring because Elendil and Gil Galad had already killed Sauron's body, so Isildur could take the time to cut Sauron's finger off and take the Ring that way. An amulet might have fallen off or been taken without killing him (as the silmarils were from when Morgoth fell unconscious and his crown fell off). A broach you put on and take off depending on your clothes.

Rings are small, discreet, secure, and unencumbering. And you COULD always wear a ring as if it were an amulet, as Frodo did.

The Ring of the Nibelungs?

Plato's ring of Gyges (which, surprise, surprise, turns you invisible)?

You're saying that he can't prove it, and you're right, but you can't prove the opposite either. If you're going to play the no- counterfactuals Humean skepticism card, then speculating about the process of causation is all EITHER of you can do.

What about Gurthang? The Witch King of Angmar's sword (no name that I recall) could be set ablaze. And Ringil was freezing cold, at least as I read it.

Magic in general in Tolkien tends to be subtle and based on what seems to be serendipity rather than overt flashy effects. Other than GURPS, I'm not even sure if any game systems can even handle Tolkien-style magic, including the Middle Earth games.

This is the real correct answer. In nordic mythos, rings were symbols of royalty, power, and wealth... I remember that in Beowulf, Kings and Thanes were defined as "ring-breakers", because that was what they did to signify the pact between them and their vassals, and that the tresaures of the monsters were called "rich in rings"

>Small and not cumbersome
>Can be simple or intricate
>Tolkien
>Rings as jewelry are one of the few pieces of real world jewelry that anyone can wear without looking like a complete tool.
>Goes with basically any outfit. A Fighter wearing fullplate and a magical pair of pearl erring would be silly

Need more bracelet

Balance.

>bunch of history that nobody gives a shit about
Tolkien did, of course, but he's the one everyone else were inspired by.

>bunch of history that nobody gives a shit about
>beowulf, ring cycle, and Tolkien
>on tg
the weakest of baits

>You're saying that he can't prove it, and you're right, but you can't prove the opposite either. If you're going to play the no- counterfactuals Humean skepticism card, then speculating about the process of causation is all EITHER of you can do.
Not either of those anons, but where are you going with this? The prevalence of magic rings in fantasy fiction can be traced to Tolkien, res ipsa loquitur, and by extension to his own (very well documented) inspirations for same.

Tut tut, reading comprehension, do it over please.

What about my spear and magic helmet!

Keep in mind that D&D is at least as much inspired by Dying Earth as it is by LotR, if not more. The early editions of D&D took a very "kitchen sink" approach to design... it was intended that you could do a one-ring quest, if you wanted, but plenty of other story types were also possible. They took inspiration from all over the place for what made it in to the game. The magic rings can be identified with tolkein's, but there are plenty of other things that come from other sources. Most obvious and famous is D&D's wizards were lifted straight from Dying Earth and look nothing like the Wizards in LotR (aside from a shared love of stylish millinery).

Thumbs and toes can be a ring that casts defensives or buffs.

>Everyone’s got a neck

That's part of why it's excellent, I feel. There's no real power creep going on where you keep getting more and more ridiculous things. A magical weapon doesn't shoot lightning, it's unnaturally keen edged, or perhaps infused with the hatred the smith held against certain creatures, making it glow when they're nearby and wounding them with greater ease, like how Gandalf carved up goblins with Glamring like a hot knife through butter.

That said, I think The One Ring did a decent job of depicting magic within the setting. You cannot really learn any magic, with the exception of some dwarf- and elf-lore that provide you with rudimentary spells, such as the dwarves' "Broken Spells", which are ancient half-remembered runes that alert you when an enemy crosses the threshold of your camp. Invisible and subtle.
As for weapons, there's a whole section on making magical items, with specific qualities like Dwarven, Elven, and Númenórean Craftsmanship, with each specifying which kind of items one might find of that quality. Then "banes", ie bonuses against specific enemy types such as Undead, Orcs, Trolls etc (which also depends on which people crafted the weapon). Then of course the other qualities, like a bow that lets you roll twice when attacking with it and gaining bonus damage if you succeed on both. Or a "Gleam of Terror" that inflicts fear in the hearts of your enemies when brandised at them alongside an Intimidate check (like how the goblins are feareful of Orcrist and Glamdring, or how Aragorn shows off his sword to everyone he meets). Or maybe it's covered in ancient dwarven runes that provide a slight bonus to Protection rolls etc.

Basically, they magical items are definitely there, but their qualities aren't obvious or overwhelming, and I think that really captures the Hobbit/LotR feeling well.

I should really check my posts for spelling more often.

(Also forgot to add that there's a table for cursed items which depends on both maker and where it was found. A blade found in an infested barrow is much more likely to be cursed than one found in a troll hoard)

fingers, toes, and neck. Follow the conversation.

>Almost 8 hours ago
The one good reason is why your ring finger isn't the pinky. Mostly because it's the first one that gets cut off in nearly every situation that only cuts off a finger.
The thumb is also not very ring-friendly, but other than that 4 to 6 rings is perfectly doable.

>a fighter in full plate wearing diamond earrings would be silly

UMMMMMMM

The world doesn't have that many magic rings

>The one good reason is why your ring finger isn't the pinky
HEY! I GOT PINKY RINGS
I DRIVE A CADILLAC

A good Western-centric answer is that after the fall of the Roman Empire, before coinage really got to be a thing again, the way that you showed off your wealth was with jewelry. If you wore a lot of rings, earrings, necklaces, amulets, etc. it meant you were a pretty powerful and wealthy person. (In Old English, the kenning "ring-giver" meant "king," because the king had so much wealth he could just give rings away.) And if you were wealthy and powerful, maybe you got it from magic. And maybe the magic came from your rings.

Short answer: Tolkien
Long answer: Tolkien's source material. If I'm not mistaken, rings held very great significance to Nordic society, being a ring bearer was a very prestigous title in society et cetera. Then there's also the fact that signet rings exist, which medieval European nobility used to sign and seal letters. All of that makes rings a very subtle way of expressing power. Subtle and portable, both important to murderhobos who can't just prance around with crowns on their heads.

>he could just give rings away

I'd say it was more that handing out expensive gifts was one of the major ways you had back then of ensuring the loyalty of fighting men, and having a bunch of loyal fighters around is what made you king. The king is unlikely to have had enough to just hand out to all and sundry.

They're pretty aesthetic, easy to hide, and doesn't get in the way.

id say 8

or at least give thumb rings a dex penalty

Magic helmet?

>because the king had so much wealth he could just give rings away.
That's an over-simplification if I've ever seen one. First off, the whole association between rings and kings was a thing in all Germanic cultures, not only in English. Second, giving away rings was how the king was expected to reward and pay his men for loyal service.

FUHGEDDABOUDIT

Yes. You're putting a magic ring through your dick

The clock's tickin, I just count the hours