Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Storm Raven" data-source="post: 2129888" data-attributes="member: 307">Of course, that assumes that you can divine whether the desiners intended &quot;sustaining&quot; to be interpreted ridiculously narrowly or not. You haven't given any indication why they would have chosen your extremely limited and rarely used definition for the word.&nbsp;Except that your definition does run counter to how the ring works. Your definition would not allow for a person wearing the ring to recover from wounds, ability damage, poison, disease, or other debilitating conditions, since it would not provide the nutrition necessary to do anything other than &quot;sustain&quot; the wearer's body. Unless you make that ruling as well, which doesn't seem to be indicated anywhere in the description (and one would expect something as critical for adventurers as that to be specifically mentioned if it were true), then your &quot;baby&quot; ruling makes no sense and is directly counter to how the ring works.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Storm Raven, post: 2129888, member: 307"] Of course, that assumes that you can divine whether the desiners intended "sustaining" to be interpreted ridiculously narrowly or not. You haven't given any indication why they would have chosen your extremely limited and rarely used definition for the word. [i][/i] Except that your definition does run counter to how the ring works. Your definition would not allow for a person wearing the ring to recover from wounds, ability damage, poison, disease, or other debilitating conditions, since it would not provide the nutrition necessary to do anything other than "sustain" the wearer's body. Unless you make that ruling as well, which doesn't seem to be indicated anywhere in the description (and one would expect something as critical for adventurers as that to be specifically mentioned if it were true), then your "baby" ruling makes no sense and is directly counter to how the ring works. [/QUOTE]

Verification