Ring of Sustenance and Growing Up

[frankthedm]

I run the ring in a similar manner, the wearer does not suffer numeric penaties and damage from hunger thirst and lack if sleep. Hunger and thirst still gnaws at you and you'd kill for a nap, but thats as bad as it gets, unless the ring come off....

I myself say the kid would grow up on the small side with a -2 or -4 to STR and CON, but the way your dm runs it sounds fine to me.

You could also get him the ioun stone tha sustains without air, tie him up and toss him in a bag of holding if your PC wants to bypass parenting.

I recommend just asking for a few years downtime, have the father talk with is other family members and when the child can be kept with an uncle or such do so.

Perhaps the father should do the responcible thing and retire from his hazardous line of work?

 

[Storm Raven]

I run the ring in a similar manner, the wearer does not suffer numeric penaties and damage from hunger thirst and lack if sleep. Hunger and thirst still gnaws at you and you'd kill for a nap, but thats as bad as it gets, unless the ring come off....

So, basically, the ring is a slow drip of amphetemines into your system?

 

[The_Universe]

you could also get him the ioun stone tha sustains without air, tie him up and toss him in a bag of holding if your PC wants to bypass parenting.

OMG that would be a messed up kid!

 

[The_Universe]

The ring provides life-sustaining nurishment. I wonder what your DM thinks would be a sustaining nourishment for a baby that wouldn't also help it grow.

Nourishment that sustains the life of a person would have to contain the vitamins, minerals, etc. that would also allow the body to grow. There is not one without the other, IMO. I think the ring would be an excelleng choice for the infant.

EDIT: Let me put it this way: If your body has what it needs to survive, it also has what it needs to grow, if there is still growing left to do. I just can't see it being otherwise.

What children need as they are growing to actually grow, and what adults need to sustain themselves are widely different.

Infants, for instance, need colostrum for the first few weeks of their lives, and then they never require it (or anything like it) again.

The argument is that while the ring can sustain the average adult (or PC), it's not meant to provide the means to rapid growth that children require.

Let's remember that this:

1. The act of sustaining; support; maintenance; subsistence; as, the sustenance of the body; the sustenance of life.

is the PRIMARY definition, and this:

2. That which supports life; food; victuals; provisions; means of living; as, the city has ample sustenance. "A man of little sustenance." "For lying is thy sustenance, thy food." (Milton)

the secondary. There is a reason that they are ordered as such in dictionaries.

Further, I don't think anyone is going to argue that the ring is going to provide the emotional connection and support that a mother (or surrogate) would - or are they? Does it sustain that, too?

But if you want to run it differently, by all means....

 

[domino]

The argument is that while the ring can sustain the average adult (or PC), it's not meant to provide the means to rapid growth that children require.

And yet, it's assumed to work for half orcs and halflings both, when there's a widely different nutritional need present. Thus, it can be safely assumed that it provides what the wearer needs, for any size, for any reason.

 

[The_Universe]

And yet, it's assumed to work for half orcs and halflings both, when there's a widely different nutritional need present. Thus, it can be safely assumed that it provides what the wearer needs, for any size, for any reason.

Halflings aren't growing into Half-orcs - they're on a basically human scale, adjusted for their ultimate adult sizes.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

And yet, it's assumed to work for half orcs and halflings both, when there's a widely different nutritional need present. Thus, it can be safely assumed that it provides what the wearer needs, for any size, for any reason.

And dragons. And deer. And aboleths. And illithids.

 

[frankthedm]

OMG that would be a messed up kid!

I think that will be my next character

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Is "The Universe" the DM in this case? Or is he merely on the DM's side?

 

[Storm Raven]

What children need as they are growing to actually grow, and what adults need to sustain themselves are widely different.

Infants, for instance, need colostrum for the first few weeks of their lives, and then they never require it (or anything like it) again.

The argument is that while the ring can sustain the average adult (or PC), it's not meant to provide the means to rapid growth that children require.

Let's remember that this:

is the PRIMARY definition, and this:

the secondary. There is a reason that they are ordered as such in dictionaries.

Only in the version you quoted, which was the second set of definitions I provided. In the first version, the first definition runs counter to your assertion, and indeed flatly contradicts it. To wit:

n 1: a source of materials to nourish the body [syn: nutriment, nourishment, nutrition, aliment, alimentation, victuals] 2: the financial means whereby one lives; "each child was expected to pay for their keep"; "he applied to the state for support"; "he could no longer earn his own livelihood" [syn: support, keep, livelihood, living, bread and butter] 3: the act of sustaining life by food or providing a means of subsistence; "they were in want of sustenance"; "fishing was their main sustainment" [syn: sustentation, sustainment, maintenance, upkeep]

In other words, you are picking and choosing, because that definition gives the order you like, while the other doesn't. Which point also demolishes your silly argument that defintions are ordered in some mystical way that makes one more important than another.

Further, I don't think anyone is going to argue that the ring is going to provide the emotional connection and support that a mother (or surrogate) would - or are they? Does it sustain that, too?

The physical well-being of the child is not the same as the emotional well-being of the child. I don't see how the odd ruling that a ring that can indefinitely support a fully grown ogre recovering from 22 hit points of regular damage, 18 points of Strength damage, and mummy rot is incapable of supporting an infant in a manner that allows it to grow makes any difference to the emotional well-being of the infant.