Talk:Ring of Protection 5e

Okay, I'm a bit confused as to WHY you guys forbid game statistics on a website devoted to the game, but I'm willing to change it. – User:Geoffryn Kaladon


 * Because we're a lore-focused wiki and printing out game statistics and crunch would inevitably lead to copyright infringement accusations from WotC. We keep it minimal: +N or Level N for comparison, key descriptors, and generally only in the sidebar infoboxes.
 * As we already have a ring of protection article, consider adding the information (rewritten in your own words, not copied from text) there. Have a look at our other articles, particularly new ones and feature articles, so understand the format and wiki codes we use. I think it would be best to just delete this page. Ask as admin if you have any questions. — BadCatMan (talk) 03:21, February 9, 2015 (UTC)

That's not correct. WoTC has issued an Open Gaming License; Paizo uses it all the time. Besides, I don't believe they would "sue" you for helping them in the sales of their books and products. Question: How do I add a "sidebar" box?

The article for a 5e Ring of Protection is required, expressly because WoTC has CHANGED the function of the rings. No longer does it merely grant a plus to AC, but it also grants pluses to Saving Throws.

I don't know who this kid dark winter is, but I find it more than frustrating and annoying that he edits my work and deletes the illustrations that I add to it! – User:Geoffryn Kaladon


 * This "kid" is an admin of the Forgotten Realms Wiki... and High admin BadCat has asked you to nicely stop adding fanon and unreferenced material... now I am asking you... please refrain from uploading this material... thank you. - Darkwynters (talk) 03:46, February 9, 2015 (UTC)

They've also shut down sites like Crystal Keep that have presented game statistics and rules, as here. The OGL only covers certain aspects of core material, not the splatbooks, but to be consistent in our rulings and to stay safe, we avoid all crunchy details, claiming only a few bare essentials.

A sidebar, or infobox as we call them, can be added through the templates. Item is the one for a magic item like this. Have a look at quiver of plenty, claw of the revenancer, Ilbratha, shield of senses, and Thakorsil's Seat for some examples of good magic item pages that use the template, references, and are laid out in a good way.

Everything changes with every edition, but they still seem pretty close in function. Just say, "After the Sundering, rings of protection also provided a resistance to a range of harmful effects." No crunch, no redundant article.

As Darkwynters said. I've been deleting that ring image too. Please see the Talk page for why. And please stop uploading it. — BadCatMan (talk) 03:49, February 9, 2015 (UTC)

Fine. I am a professional writer with a DEGREE in Creative Writing from New Jersey University...back in 1988. If you constantly delete my hard work without my consent, then I don't see why I should continue to waste my time on this site. You never even bothered to give a reason, valid or not, as to WHY you keep deleting my illustration for the article. I take it as a personal insult when someone deletes part of my work, as if you were spraying graffiti.


 * So? I'm a professional technical editor. DW's a teacher. But spitting qualifications at each other doesn't meant squat when we argue over magic rings. The wiki has rules many experienced users have decided on over almost a decade, and there are laws we follow. We're making judgments based on those rules.
 * You haven't wasted any time on this site. You haven't read our rules, help pages, and policies. You haven't read any existing articles to get a feel for how we do things. This is a lore-based, canon wiki, not for homebrew. It's not your illustration, you took it from some jewellery company without permission or cause. I gave you our reasons for deleting it at File talk:Realm of the Dragon Ring.jpg. We've put of effort into cleaning up your mess, showing you the ropes, and patiently explaining our rules to you, so it seems we were the ones wasting our time. I'm sorry it didn't work our for you. — BadCatMan (talk) 04:06, February 9, 2015 (UTC)