A question here:

which holds more value? Is it subjective?

A Ring that has had an important bearer? But how would you define important? A general? a blood order holder?

OR

A Ring that is in a relatively good condition? A ring may be from a general, but it maybe have been very very badly worn.

OR

A Ring that was handed very early? Perhaps in 1936 as opposed to a later ring 1940s? Or does the date not matter?

Your learned opinions please.
Thank you

It's subjective.

I don't collect them, but I would think that the ring of a high ranking officer or the holder of a Knight's cross, or some sinister bad guy would be more valuable.

Dave

The top of the heap here would be H. Himmlers personal TK ring in new condition and well documented of course. I thought I had a lead on it a couple of years ago but it proved to be false.
After that Heydrichs or Detrichs ring or some other notable. IMO; It's pretty mundane past this point.
Jim

Well,, my top 5 or so to have would be:
A 1933 ring is one a collector wouldn't mind having.. Same with a 39 transitional ring..
A few Infamous personality rings ,,A high ranker or 2.. And to round up the group a minty Rohm putsch with roman numeral day...

This is something as Zorro mentioned and will be different depending on the collector.

I think the answer would vary from person to person on where the value lies and what makes a recipent a person of importance.
My opinion in order: 1st bearer, 2nd date, 3rd condition.

I think everyone would love to own a ring to a well known personality but any original ring was very important to the holder and is a unique piece of history.

thank you for your opinions gentlemen.