Patch 0.3.0 - Requesting More Jewelry Options

For Patch 0.3.0, I urge GGG to consider adding more interesting jewelry options to the game, such as a few suggestions below. What jewelry would you like to see added, share your ideas below?

NEW UTILITY AMULETS

* Fortuitous Amulet (Lvl 15): (50-75)% Increased Quantity of Gold Dropped by Slain Enemies
* Mercantile Amulet (Lvl 25): (10-15)% Reduced Gambling Prices
* Cat's Eye Amulet (Lvl 25): (10-15)% Increased Movement Speed
* Celestial Amulet (Lvl 35): (15-25)% Increased Cooldown Recovery

NEW DEFENSIVE RINGS

* Jade Ring (Lvl 25): (5-7)% Increased Evasion Rating
* Mithril Ring (Lvl 25): (5-7)% Increased Armour Rating
* Onyx Ring (Lvl 30): (3-5)% Physical Damage Reduction
* Ivory Ring (Lvl 35): (3-5)% Increased Maximum Life

NEW MELEE RINGS

* Scarab Ring (Lvl 15): (3-5)% Chance to Poison on Melee Hit
* Carnelian Ring (Lvl 30): (7-10)% Increased Attack Speed

NEW CHAOS RING

* Iolite Ring (Lvl 80): 17-23% Increased Chaos Damage

NEW ELEMENTAL RINGS

* Garnet Ring (Lvl 8): Adds 3 to 5 Fire Damage to Attacks
* Aquamarine Ring (Lvl 12): Adds 3 to 5 Cold Damage to Attacks
* Citrine Ring (Lvl 16): Adds 3 to 5 Lightning Damage to Attacks
* Opal Ring (Lvl 80): 15-25% Increased Elemental Damage

I'm surprised people don't want more interesting ring and amulet options added to the game.

Caster rings, a type of ring that cannot roll X damage to attacks, Attack speed and such.
Most of the rings a caster can use drop bricked already so a ring that add X damage to spells would be welcome and something new.

Gaining flat damage from jewels is a good part of a build and we see it in every single martial build.
We could almost say it's very unfair to not have those kind of added flat damage to spells.

"

IILU81II#8410 wrote:

Caster rings, a type of ring that cannot roll X damage to attacks, Attack speed and such.
Most of the rings a caster can use drop bricked already so a ring that add X damage to spells would be welcome and something new.

Gaining flat damage from jewels is a good part of a build and we see it in every single martial build.
We could almost say it's very unfair to not have those kind of added flat damage to spells.

For the new low-level elemental rings I'm proposing, should they be flat damage or +3-5% damage for a particular element?

Let's see.
10-15% movement speed amulet implicit - mandatory - you can remove any other amulet base from the game.

'defensive' rings. 5-7% inc armour/evasion is way, way too little.
%max life implicit - agreed - should've been added from the get go.

'melee' rings - % attack speed - mandatory and not limited to melee, removes all other rings from the game for attack based archetypes.

3 to 5 flat ele damage is laughably small and lightning needs to have a higher range.
15-25 % inc ele damage becomes mandatory for every elemental based build, %inc chaos damage becomes mandatory for every chaos based build.

The reason there are no offensive rings in this game at the moment is because the only way to currently scale damage is either through skill gem level, or rudimentary % increases.
If you add the latter as implicits, then it limits choice instead of expanding it.

"

CharlesJT#7681 wrote:

For the new low-level elemental rings I'm proposing, should they be flat damage or +3-5% damage for a particular element?

We already have rings with %increased ele damage, we can get that on passive tree as well so lets say it's fine as it is.

When you start off the campaign with a caster, any class with wand/staff, all you need is spell damage. So you go to a vendor or drop a piece of jewerly, it will NEVER have what you need because they only roll cast speed and %increased damage, other damage mods are useless.

So maybe 3 new base rings like ruby, emerald, sapphire but with flat spell damage.
Or make it so that pearl ring (implicit cast speed) can roll spell damage instead of attacks related mods. It' a complete nonsense to design a ring that drops bricked 99% of the times for caster players.
I cant find the meaning for this thing.