14

Is there a limit to the number of magic items I can wear?

For example, can I wear a magic ring on each of my fingers and each of my toes, a couple of magic amulets, a magic robe over my magic armor over my other magic robe, a magic cloak and a magic cape on each shoulder, and a boot of flying and a boot of striding and springing, and benefit from all of these items at once?

Hey I Can Chan
  • 191,258
  • 18
  • 357
  • 866
JasperNakamura
  • 4,346
  • 11
  • 41
  • 63

3 Answers3

42

You may equip as many magic items as you can properly wear, only three of which can be requiring attunement.

Many magic items require attunement, which is a process that lets a specific character make use of the item's magic abilities; non-attuned items only provide their non-magical benefits. Your character may only be attuned to three items at any given time. For details, see "Attunement" on pages 136-138 of the Dungeon Master's Guide

In addition to the three attunement slots, you may use as many items not requiring attunement as you can wear.

The other half of your question is answered on pages 140-141 of the Dungeon Master's Guide, under "Wearing Magical Items": items must be worn as intended. For example, a cloak must be properly over the shoulders, boots and gloves must be worn in matched pairs, a pair of gloves cannot be worn over another pair of gloves, etc.

Mike Riverso
  • 5,378
  • 35
  • 35
22

A character can only benefit from the magical qualities of items donned in the appropriate manner. The total number is not actually limited, but there are limits.

"A character can't normally wear more than one pair of footwear, one pair of gloves or gauntlets, one pair of bracers, one suit of armor, one item of head wear, and one cloak." (DMG, pg. 141, col. 1, para. 2.)

This entry continues with a caveat for the DM only to decide: "You [the DM] can make exceptions; a character might be able to wear a circlet under a helmet, for example, or be able to layer two cloaks." Therefore, ask your DM.

Further instructions state that: "Items that come in pairs - such as boots, bracers, gauntlets, and gloves - impart their benefits only if both items of the pair are worn." (DMG, pg. 141, col. 1, para. 3.)

Magical items must be donned in the intended fashion (DMG, pg. 140, col. 2, para. 3) including rings to be placed on a finger, digit (DMG, pg. 139, col. 2, para. 2), or tentacle (DMG, pg. 141, col. 1, para. 2).

The more powerful items (rings and otherwise) have an "attunement" requirement (DMG, pg. 138, col. 2, para. 1) which, among other details, limits the magical benefits to 3 such items. The character may wear/use more than 3 items requiring attunement, but can only be attuned to 3 at a time, and will only gain the magical benefits from those 3 attuned items (plus any other magical items not requiring attunement). An attunement process prevents switching attunements on the fly (DMG, pg. 138, col. 1, para. 3).

Given that, you could pile rings onto your fingers. However, don't be surprised if your DM then rules that your character risks one or more penalties to Dexterity, attacks, increased fumble, move silently, etc., when using such laden hands.

Everett Steed
  • 785
  • 5
  • 12
  • 2
    @Miniman It's not arbitrary to penalize munchkin behavior. Either the GM should not allow the behavior at all (my preference) or should make it so inconvenient that the behavior is strongly discouraged. – Corey Mar 21 '16 at 09:28
  • 5
    @Corey "Munchkin behaviour"? Ignoring the fact that we embrace all playstyles, if the DM gave you a bunch of rings, how is it "munchkin behaviour" to use the things? – Miniman Mar 21 '16 at 09:32
  • 7
    @EverettSteed Ah, but that's entirely different - that's not an arbitrary penalty, that's just actions having consequences. – Miniman Mar 21 '16 at 10:09
  • @EverettSteed How on earth do you remove someone's fingers without them waking up? – GMJoe Mar 21 '16 at 23:48
  • @GMJoe In DnD 5e, there are no rules stating that a person asleep (meaning non-magical sleep) is entitled to awaken, nor a saving throw to possibly awaken, even if taking damage. The condition "asleep/sleeping" is not listed in the Appendix A: Conditions (PHB pgs 290-292). But the condition "asleep/sleeping" subsumes the conditions "unconscious" (DMG pg 248, col 2, para 1 "Using and Tracking Conditions") and "incapacitated" (PHB pg 292, col 1, para 5 "Unconscious"). None of these entries make allowances for a sleeping character to awaken if attacked or damaged. – Everett Steed Mar 22 '16 at 20:53
  • @GMJoe (Continued) Methods to "physically modify" a sleeping opponent : If the victim is already asleep, and therefore "unconscious," then "Any attack that hits the creature is a critical hit if the attacker is within 5 feet of the creature" (PHB pg 292, col 1, para 5 "Unconscious"). Likewise, being reduced to 0 HP in a melee attack renders a character "unconscious" (PHB pg 198, col 1, para 4) with no save to awaken. Then remove the fingers. – Everett Steed Mar 22 '16 at 21:05
  • @GMJoe (Continued) Magical methods include an Imprisonment spell (PHB pg 253, col 1, para 3 "Slumber"). And poisons can also be successful, especially if the poison takes effect when the victim is sleeping (see DMG pg 258, col 1, para 3 "Carrion Crawler Mucus"; and col 2, para 2 "Torpor"). – Everett Steed Mar 22 '16 at 21:09
  • @GMJoe Warning: They get really touchy around here if you ask an unrelated game question in the comment section. I suggest you pose that question through the normal channels so that all may comment on it. If you do so, I will migrate all this information into the appropriate Answer field. Thanks – Everett Steed Mar 22 '16 at 21:11
  • @EverettSteed I didn't actually expect an answer - I was more pointing out how absurd the concept was, as a form of critique of your comment. – GMJoe Mar 22 '16 at 22:07
  • @EverettSteed In my campaign I probably would go with attempted murder, allowing the PCs checks to wake up based on sounds made and so forth; If a PC died as a consequence, so be it. But I actually meant that a thief being able to remove a victim's fingers without their waking up was absurd. Most plausible methods of removing someone's fingers without waking them are either so expensive, or so specialised, that it is hard to imagine the thief who would find them worthwhile. I suppose knocking the victim out is a possibility, but I'd say any blow that knocks you out also prevents true sleep. – GMJoe Mar 23 '16 at 04:35
-7

My typical rule concerning rings is that you can have only two working at the time and those are the rings that are on the ring finger because in the ring finger there is a vein or a nerve or some other biological feature which allows them to communicate their power to the wearer. This way you can have a semi-logical explanation of the limit you impose. Freely inspired by the traditional reason why the wedding ring must be on the ring finger

Triskeldeian
  • 105
  • 3
    I don't know precisely why they voted you down, but I suspect that it's because the question is specifically about what the 5th ed. rules state, not about how to fix a potential wrinkle in said rules. – Everett Steed Mar 21 '16 at 11:20
  • 4
    I suspect it has more to do with the fact that this answer isn't based in the rules at all. – LegendaryDude Mar 21 '16 at 14:33
  • 2
    @LegendaryDude: 3.5 and 4e both had the two rings rule, but it's lacking from 5e. – Mooing Duck Mar 21 '16 at 18:44
  • 1
    @MooingDuck Regardless of what the number of rings allowed in any previous edition was, this answer makes no attempt to address the actual rules involved in D&D 5e and thus does not make a good answer for RPG.SE, or for the question that was asked, especially since the question isn't asking for house rules. – LegendaryDude Mar 21 '16 at 19:00
  • 2
    @LegendaryDude: Totally. I was merely explaining the probable source of the posters error. – Mooing Duck Mar 21 '16 at 20:16