The Tavern

Apparently they have four arms, and presumably also four hands, so why only one pair of gloves?

The same reason humans can't wear 50 rings and 10 amulets.

duvessa wrote:The same reason humans can't wear 50 rings and 10 amulets.

It would be incredibly garish?

Of the formicid's two pairs of forearms, they have one pair that are strong, hooked pincers suitable for burrowing through solid rock and one pair that are smaller but well-articulated pincers that are better for fine manipulation. When wielding what is normally a two-handed weapon, they just pair up one of their big pincers with one of their precise manipulators and get a mix of raw power and precision. Gloves, though, only fit on the smaller dextrous manipulators because the big pincers can't really be called hands. Similarly, a ring can fit between the articulations of their smaller digits and stay there, but they don't fit over the big pincer, which is the thickness of a human wrist even at its narrowest.

just reword their description to "two strong arms already", I mean COME ON

duvessa wrote:The same reason humans can't wear 50 rings and 10 amulets.

It's a super-common RPG convention, some race having four arms but NO ACTUALLY they don't really is not.

The two rings "rule of thumb" thing that games seem to adopt readily goes back to D&D rules where characters were allowed to have two Magic Ring slots activate at any time which I guess prevented some hoarding and other min-max (twinky?) behavior. So it sticks around 30-40 years later and people still have to obey it because. Everyone could wear tons and tons of rings (or multiple suits of armor for that matter or hats and so on ...) but only two magical rings are considered "In Use" at a time (except in the case of Octopods.) And what better way to highlight the one race that flouts that rule? Octopods have so much going against them that they NEED those extra ring slots. And it makes them unique. Which imho is the real point.

Koboldlord holds an advanced degree in crypto-entomology, so he's in the best position to speak authoritatively to this matter.

Proposal: Pirate species that can wear a bunch of rings and jewelry and have v good sb apts

Greyr wrote:Proposal: Pirate species that can wear a bunch of rings and jewelry and have v good sb apts

And can move in deep water with no penalties THANK THE LORD

Formicids can't wear 2 pairs of gloves for the same reason that humans with one hand can still wear a pair of gloves.

That's right, they wear them on their feet.

Patashu wrote:
Greyr wrote:Proposal: Pirate species that can wear a bunch of rings and jewelry and have v good sb apts

And can move in deep water with no penalties THANK THE LORD

You need a pirate ship first (xl69420 mutation)

I cant believe that was not asked before, I mean, its pretty obvious!
why did the tavern just ignored this issued and did not post that question over and over again?

Rings are very easily named to "bracelets" if people no longer find the 1-ring-per-hand justification to be sufficient.

Brannock wrote:Rings are very easily named to "bracelets" if people no longer find the 1-ring-per-hand justification to be sufficient.

I like it, but it adds 4 more characters to every ring item name, though it may actually support the 4-bracelet-formicid argument.

Hopeless wrote:The two rings "rule of thumb" thing that games seem to adopt readily goes back to D&D rules where characters were allowed to have two Magic Ring slots activate at any time which I guess prevented some hoarding and other min-max (twinky?) behavior. So it sticks around 30-40 years later and people still have to obey it because. Everyone could wear tons and tons of rings (or multiple suits of armor for that matter or hats and so on ...) but only two magical rings are considered "In Use" at a time (except in the case of Octopods.) And what better way to highlight the one race that flouts that rule? Octopods have so much going against them that they NEED those extra ring slots. And it makes them unique. Which imho is the real point.

One ring per limb. If you wear more than 1 magical ring on a hand, it immediately blows up due to magical contamination feedback, and the limb is gone.

XuaXua wrote:
Hopeless wrote:The two rings "rule of thumb" thing that games seem to adopt readily goes back to D&D rules where characters were allowed to have two Magic Ring slots activate at any time which I guess prevented some hoarding and other min-max (twinky?) behavior. So it sticks around 30-40 years later and people still have to obey it because. Everyone could wear tons and tons of rings (or multiple suits of armor for that matter or hats and so on ...) but only two magical rings are considered "In Use" at a time (except in the case of Octopods.) And what better way to highlight the one race that flouts that rule? Octopods have so much going against them that they NEED those extra ring slots. And it makes them unique. Which imho is the real point.

One ring per limb. If you wear more than 1 magical ring on a hand, it immediately blows up due to magical contamination feedback, and the limb is gone.

So...4 rings for most hominids?

Brannock wrote:Rings are very easily named to "bracelets" if people no longer find the 1-ring-per-hand justification to be sufficient.

How about cufflinks? Or if that's too gender specific how about... Arm brooches...?

You are all forgetting that these are Magical rings we are talking about. Their power is so immense that one can not hold them too close together. It is like trying to hold two strong magnets close together. Having 2 magical rings in the same hand would make it impossible to close your fist and in case of more powerful rings might rip your fingers off. Octopodes can wear eight rings, since they can hold them sufficiently far apart from each other, formicids can't physically fit rings in their extra hands. Problems solved, now I can continue crawling.

This is fantasy, people! Be creative.

MrRokkomies wrote: Be creative.

Wrist circlets?

Sar wrote:just reword their description to "two strong arms already", I mean COME ON

then rename them to 'mountain dwarves'

mountain dwants

do it for pubby

Brannock wrote:Rings are very easily named to "bracelets" if people no longer find the 1-ring-per-hand justification to be sufficient.

except

Spoiler: show

FR: all races have tentacles for hands

KoboldLord wrote:Of the formicid's two pairs of forearms, they have one pair that are strong, hooked pincers suitable for burrowing through solid rock and one pair that are smaller but well-articulated pincers that are better for fine manipulation. When wielding what is normally a two-handed weapon, they just pair up one of their big pincers with one of their precise manipulators and get a mix of raw power and precision. Gloves, though, only fit on the smaller dextrous manipulators because the big pincers can't really be called hands. Similarly, a ring can fit between the articulations of their smaller digits and stay there, but they don't fit over the big pincer, which is the thickness of a human wrist even at its narrowest.

But then why do formicids extend their mandibles when digging instead of using their beefy digging arms? This seems impractical at all.

Arrhythmia wrote:
duvessa wrote:The same reason humans can't wear 50 rings and 10 amulets.

It would be incredibly garish?

There isn't actually any magical restrictions stopping anyone from gaining the benefits of large amounts of jewelry, the inhabitants of the world of Crawl are just incredibly fashion-conscious.

The truth is, wearing more than 1 ring on a should grants the full benefit of both rings, but inflicts 500d10,000 damage. It's a no-brainer not to wear two rings, so the game simply prevents you from doing it. Formicid arm pairs share a shoulder, at least as far as magic is concerned, therefore they would incur the terrible damage if they wore multipe rings on one hand-pair.

Octopode's tenticles luckily each have a separate 'shoulder', that's why they can wear 8 rings.

This is all heavily implied by the in-game lore, I can't believe people don't already know this...

The Tavern

Why can't formicids wear 2 pairs of gloves?

Why can't formicids wear 2 pairs of gloves?

Re: Why can't formicids wear 2 pairs of gloves?

Re: Why can't formicids wear 2 pairs of gloves?

Re: Why can't formicids wear 2 pairs of gloves?

Re: Why can't formicids wear 2 pairs of gloves?

Re: Why can't formicids wear 2 pairs of gloves?

Re: Why can't formicids wear 2 pairs of gloves?

Re: Why can't formicids wear 2 pairs of gloves?

Re: Why can't formicids wear 2 pairs of gloves?

Re: Why can't formicids wear 2 pairs of gloves?

Re: Why can't formicids wear 2 pairs of gloves?

Re: Why can't formicids wear 2 pairs of gloves?

Re: Why can't formicids wear 2 pairs of gloves?

Re: Why can't formicids wear 2 pairs of gloves?

Re: Why can't formicids wear 2 pairs of gloves?

Re: Why can't formicids wear 2 pairs of gloves?

Re: Why can't formicids wear 2 pairs of gloves?

Re: Why can't formicids wear 2 pairs of gloves?

Re: Why can't formicids wear 2 pairs of gloves?

Re: Why can't formicids wear 2 pairs of gloves?

Re: Why can't formicids wear 2 pairs of gloves?

Re: Why can't formicids wear 2 pairs of gloves?

Re: Why can't formicids wear 2 pairs of gloves?

Re: Why can't formicids wear 2 pairs of gloves?

Re: Why can't formicids wear 2 pairs of gloves?