Bag of Holding VS Heward’s Handy Haversack

[Kerilstrasz]

From time to time i read in forums about the use of bag of holding...
even in RL games other players and occasional DMs seems to only know about 'em only...

WHat about Heward’s Handy Haversack? (DMG pg.259)

In my opinion they're great items..
well... it costs 2k (VS 2,5k of B.o.H.1) and holds the half...

BUT...

Retrieving any specific item from a haversack is a move action, but it does
not provoke the attacks of opportunity that retrieving a stored item usually does.
Also it weights 5 lbs (VS 15 of B.o.H.1) and because its a backpack it frees those 2lbs
from the ordinary backpack you used to carry...

the way i see it its a very good item for a llooww str PC (see Halfling with 5 str)..

dunno... whats your opinion?

[silverwolfer]

Sack for immidate OMg in the middle of battle items

bag for anything that DOES NOT need to be used for quick use.

[BowStreetRunner]

HHH for all of your gear, BOH for loot that you don't expect to need to pull out during combat. Just remember not to try to store your BOH inside your HHH!!!

[Agent 451]

That may have been the case in earlier editions, but I don't think there are any adverse effects placing a Heward's inside of a Bag of Holding in 3.5.

[Jack_Simth]

That may have been the case in earlier editions, but I don't think there are any adverse effects placing a Heward's inside of a Bag of Holding in 3.5.The only explicit interaction in 3.5 is the Portable Hole / Bag of Holding. There's a note in the Rope Trick spell that demands a table ruling, however, which basically means such interactions are up to the individual DM... and a lot of them are old school in that regard.

[Godskook]

That may have been the case in earlier editions, but I don't think there are any adverse effects placing a Heward's inside of a Bag of Holding in 3.5.

Actually, the bad effects are from Portable Hole + Bag of Holding. The only actual ruling concerning BoH and HHH is, afaik, FAQ-based and in favor of the two being allowed in combination.

[Agent 451]

There was an article about their interaction as well. (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20051101a)

[ericgrau]

HHH is better and is pretty much standard gear on most characters. The problem is that D&D has no guide on what's standard gear, feats or spell. They just give you a huge list and let you sort this out. One of the creators mentioned this problem saying that they wanted to reward system mastery but he regrets it and really they should have provided some sort of guidance instead. This quotation is taken way out of context all the time to claim intentional system unbalance btw. Really what it means is that you should get your weapon and armor first and the ring of the ram second, not that the ring of the ram is unbalanced or underpowered. I love that ring. Anyway it's a real shame that there was no such guidance and 3.5 has such a steep learning curve for new players.

As for putting extradimensional spaces into eachother the rules only clearly define bag of holding + portable hole. There's a brief mention in rope trick that putting one extradimensional space into another is dangerous, but no specific details nor a general rule elsewhere like 2e had. So some people like to fill in the details themself and claim they have RAW support, but in fact it is vague. There's a FAQ entry that says any combination goes boom and an article that suggests ignoring all mentions of trouble. In fact the designers didn't care that much about it so the DM should decide. I'd be a stickler for carrying logistics and say "boom, astral plane rift". But many others hate bookkeeping, allow bags in bags and don't tend to worry much about how you carry stuff.

[nedz]

I soft banned HHHs in one game simply because they had become so ubiquitous and I was bored with them.

If you take the opposite view to Skip BTW then your party can have Astral travel with a 2nd level spell and a disposable item. This could be quite fun.

[Curmudgeon]

My advice: never get a Bag of Holding. There's too much chance of destruction and loss. As a DM, any time I've got archers I'll have them check to see if they Spot anything that looks like a Bag of Holding among the PCs' possessions, and target those Bags.
If the bag is overloaded, or if sharp objects pierce it (from inside or outside), the bag ruptures and is ruined. All contents are lost forever.
An object’s Armor Class is equal to 10 + its size modifier + its Dexterity modifier.A Bag of Holding is a Small object (2' x 4'), giving it +1 to its AC, or 11 + the holder's DEX mod. Since it's made of cloth not more than ½" thick, it has hardness 0 and only 1 hit point. In other words, these are vulnerable items which might deprive you of significant resources when shot. Any savvy opponent is going to target them.

If you need more storage than individual Heward's Handy Haversacks can supply, get a Portable Hole. It's more cost-effective for the volume, and when it's tucked into an inside pocket it can't be targeted at all.

[Piggy Knowles]

I pretty much always look for a Heward's Handy Haversack, thanks to the move-action withdrawal of items.

I basically never look for bags of holding, and have only ever gotten them as a result of taking them off a dead body. If I'm actively seeking out a way to hold a whole lot of stuff, I generally seek alternative methods - packmules, carts, hoard gullets, etc. at low levels, and portable holes at high levels.

[Answerer]

As a DM, any time I've got archers I'll have them check to see if they Spot anything that looks like a Bag of Holding among the PCs' possessions, and target those Bags.
This makes absolutely no sense from the archer's perspective, most of the time.

The items in the bag are unlikely to be used in battle, thanks to the action cost and AoO. As a result, targeting them means giving up opportunities to just attack your opponents (improving your odds of killing them and therefore getting out with your own skin), in order to hurt the opponents' long-term odds (and eliminate your own loot, since they're not going to get whatever's in the bag after destroying it). That's not a choice most are going to make, particularly not if they are not part of a larger organization looking to thwart the PC's long-term aims.

That's pure meta-gaming, plain and simple.

[tyckspoon]

Haversack is your 'the weight of my personal gear no longer matters' item- once you get one you can start carrying around that 200 feet of rope and 20 iron spikes and Healer's Kit and spare torches and sachets of miscellaneous herbs and.. all the other stuff you want to have with you to be generally prepared and hand-wave off the "How/where are you carrying all that stuff??" question with "it's in the magic backpack."

Bag of Holding is the "the weight of the party's loot no longer matters" item- it's what lets you ransack that ancient library for rare books or carry away a dragon's bed without having to hire a village-worth of teamsters to haul it for you (although if your DM is paying attention you might have to anyway; the weight limits of a Bag of Holding are actually pretty easy to exceed once you start talking about significant numbers of GP.. as Curmudgeon says, a Portable Hole is actually better for this particular purpose, and should be switched to as soon as the party budget allows.)

[Curmudgeon]

This makes absolutely no sense from the archer's perspective, most of the time.

The items in the bag are unlikely to be used in battle, thanks to the action cost and AoO.
I disagree quite strongly here. Secondary storage is precisely where someone would carry non-primary weapons, such as those needed to bypass specific types of damage resistance, or unwieldy specialty weapons like Tanglefoot Bags (4 lbs. each) or caltrops. Taking out a Bag of Holding in the surprise round can prevent your enemies from responding with maximal effectiveness.

If I'm a melee combatant attacked by Fey archers, I'm going to want to get a cold iron weapon in my hands before closing with them. It's a single move action, and archers are going to attack long before they're close enough to be able to make an AoO; provoking won't be an issue.

[Mithril Leaf]

See if the rogue can get his hands on one of those fancy kobold enveloping pits. Those are even better than portable holes but require being a kobold, being lawful evil, or having UMD as well as being a relic.

[Godskook]

Any savvy opponent is going to target them.

No, any savvy DM(that's also meta-gaming his NPCs) is going to target them.

Savvy opponents aren't typically aiming to inflict the most financial harm before dying to fully healthy opponents. Savvy opponents are typically aiming to:
-Live
-Defeat
-Plunder

In about that order. Spending precious time doing something that runs counter to all 3 of those objectives is not something most people do. Sure, you could think of situations where spite-ing the PCs is the main objective, but most of the time? Not so much.

[Deophaun]

Yeah, it makes absolutely no sense to do something that A) will prolong combat and B) will significantly decrease any reward you get for surviving.

Besides, people who would think to switch to a cold-iron or whatever backup weapon tend to have the strength score to carry them around without a problem.

Plus, this problem is easily solved by place the bag of holding within another ordinary bag. Now it can't be targeted.

[Answerer]

And there are some corner cases where targeting the bag can help with the first two objectives (the fey archers given, perhaps), but those are not the norm. And Curmudgeon specifically said always.

[Curmudgeon]

No, any savvy DM(that's also meta-gaming his NPCs) is going to target them.

Savvy opponents aren't typically aiming to inflict the most financial harm before dying to fully healthy opponents.
I don't see where you're getting "financial harm" or "meta-gaming" from my arguments. How is it unreasonable for a Fey archer to want to strip the PCs of their cold iron backup weapons at the start of the battle? It just seems like a tactic that any savvy opponent would take to improve their chances of winning, since the cost (1 arrow) is very low and the potential improvement in combat odds is at least moderate. Also, targeting flimsy objects is viable at any distance, while targeting creatures may be best when they get to shorter range (generally the case if the archers have precision damage such as sneak attack or skirmish).

[Deophaun]

And there are some corner cases where targeting the bag can help with the first two objectives (the fey archers given, perhaps), but those are not the norm. And Curmudgeon specifically said always.
There are corner cases where stripping off all your armor and clucking like a chicken is also the way to go.

Unless you're running a high-level Oblivion-like campaign setting, where even the poorest bandits have the fanciest armor around, those fey archers aren't going to be expecting random people to have cold-iron weapons. And if those aren't random people they're up against, then those fey archers will be operating under the assumption that their opponents are also holding cold-iron weapons.

Also, when it comes to unwieldy ammunition, SOP is to keep one readily accessible, and the rest in the bag to be replenished after the fight. If you're burning move actions to retrieve items during a fight, well, you deserve what you get once your opponents discover you really are that dumb.

[molten_dragon]

My advice: never get a Bag of Holding. There's too much chance of destruction and loss. As a DM, any time I've got archers I'll have them check to see if they Spot anything that looks like a Bag of Holding among the PCs' possessions, and target those Bags. A Bag of Holding is a Small object (2' x 4'), giving it +1 to its AC, or 11 + the holder's DEX mod. Since it's made of cloth not more than ½" thick, it has hardness 0 and only 1 hit point. In other words, these are vulnerable items which might deprive you of significant resources when shot. Any savvy opponent is going to target them.

This is only a problem if your DM is a jerk.

[Deophaun]

I don't see where you're getting "financial harm" or "meta-gaming" from my arguments. How is it unreasonable for a Fey archer to want to strip the PCs of their cold iron backup weapons at the start of the battle?
Because, those items will not be in the bag. If your party is doing it that way, they are the exception, because it's just dumb.

It just seems like a tactic that any savvy opponent would take to improve their chances of winning, since the cost (1 arrow) is very low and the potential improvement in combat odds is at least moderate.
The cost is 1 arrow, one bag of holding, and all the contents inside. Also, your life, because if you're up against a competent party, you have done nothing to improve your chances in this fight, and you've wasted your attack. If you're up against an incompetent party that likes to keep its weapons out of easy reach, then you don't need to take out the bag in the first place.

Also, targeting flimsy objects is viable at any distance,
And detect magic has a range of 60 feet. So no, targeting a bag of holding amongst the various other mundane bags a single individual, let alone an entire party, is holding is not viable.

[Curmudgeon]

And detect magic has a range of 60 feet. So no, targeting a bag of holding amongst the various other mundane bags a single individual, let alone an entire party, is holding is not viable.
Who said anything about Detect Magic? Every Bag of Holding is about 2' x 4', so you only aim arrows at bags of the approximate right size. As I've said, the cost (1 arrow; no spells cast) is very low and the potential improvement in combat odds is at least moderate. The archers won't know what the Bag holds, but they do know that if they destroy it then whatever it held can't be used against them.

[Mithril Leaf]

Who said anything about Detect Magic? Every Bag of Holding is about 2' x 4', so you only aim arrows at bags of the approximate right size. As I've said, the cost (1 arrow; no spells cast) is very low and the potential improvement in combat odds is at least moderate. The archers won't know what the Bag holds, but they do know that if they destroy it then whatever it held can't be used against them.

If they don't that's that much more damage they could be not having to inflict though. I'd almost always take bonus damage over a small amount of likelihood that an item which costs the enemy a move action might slightly inconvenience me.

[only1doug]

Who said anything about Detect Magic? Every Bag of Holding is about 2' x 4', so you only aim arrows at bags of the approximate right size. As I've said, the cost (1 arrow; no spells cast) is very low and the potential improvement in combat odds is at least moderate. The archers won't know what the Bag holds, but they do know that if they destroy it then whatever it held can't be used against them.

What do you do once a group has grasped your trick and each character carries 20 mundane 2' x 4' bags?

[Curmudgeon]

If they don't that's that much more damage they could be not having to inflict though. I'd almost always take bonus damage over a small amount of likelihood that an item which costs the enemy a move action might slightly inconvenience me.
However, the difference between the AC of the Bag of Holding (11 + DEX mod) and the creature holding it (add armor bonus, natural armor bonus, shield bonus, deflection bonus, and various enhancement bonuses) will mean that the odds of hitting the creature would be low while the odds of hitting the Bag are still good. If you're taking iterative attack penalties and missing the creature, I'd reserve the last (worst penalty) shot for a bag.

What do you do once a group has grasped your trick and each character carries 20 mundane 2' x 4' bags?
Gee, I'd ignore the empty ones and shoot the one that obviously weighs at least 15 lbs. :smallbiggrin:

Alternatively, if every member of the party is walking around with 300+ lbs. of bags and still unencumbered, I'd just slink away and target a weaker group.

[nedz]

Sorry Curmudgeon but I've never seen this happen. Maybe you just don't like BOHs ? :smalltongue:

BOH are often kept inside a backpack, do your archers routinely target backpacks just on the off chance that they contain a BOH ?

Do your archers routinely target backpacks on the off chance that they are a HHH ?

For that matter do all of your player's characters carry multiple bags of the appropriate size ? This would seem to mean that all ambushes start with the archers taking out the PC's mundane handbags. Who needs mirror image: when a simple mending cantrip, after the battle, can be used to fix your handbag arrow attractor ?

[nedz]

Alternatively, if every member of the party is walking around with 300+ lbs. of bags and still unencumbered, I'd just slink away and target a weaker group.

Even better:
"What's the plan for getting into the castle Stan ?"
"Well, we all load up with 20 handbags: padded out to make them look full; and then we stroll up to the front door and walk straight in"
"What!"
"Its OK, the guards will just assume that we are far too powerful for them, and just slope off. Trust me!"

[Aegis013]

On shooting the Bag of Holding, I can certainly see it. Some games have an atmosphere where that would certainly not be an unreasonable thing to do. Have one or two archers specifically target extradimension/nondimensional storage spaces. After all, the adventurers probably wear a good deal of their wealth as gear. Other games certainly have an atmosphere that would point to "This DMs a jerk!" reactions.

Curmudgeon's games probably have an atmosphere where it would seem reasonably appropriate.

[Deophaun]

Gee, I'd ignore the empty ones and shoot the one that obviously weighs at least 15 lbs. :smallbiggrin:
And you know that how, exactly? There's nothing that says BoH look like they contain anything. They just weigh more than usual. Attached to someone's belt, you're not going to know the difference.

And again, all that you need is something to block line of effect to the bag (like another bag, or even kept under a long tabard) and you can't shoot them with an arrow. If your DM is being dickish, this would be a trivial task. And in a world where BoH are routinely being shot at, it would suddenly make sense for every BoH to have a protective container, standard.

[TuggyNE]

Were I to play in this campaign, I would obviously use only HHH, but spam empty bags that look like BOHs for, as mentioned, cheap mirror image replacements.

I have to wonder, though... what's the Spot DC to determine whether a sack weighs 1/2 lb or 15 lb? How about 5 lb vs 15 lb?

[ericgrau]

A HHH says it works like a bag of holding. It is likely subject to ruptures as well. If not 100% certain by RAW, then maybe by RAW and certainly by RAMS. Though I wonder why both wouldn't get destroyed by accident. Neither is small. They seem safe simply as a matter of system abstraction.

And then players start putting boxes around their extradimensional bags... Managing this might only cause headaches without accomplishing much.

[White_Drake]

Time to get a spun-adamantine slipcover. :smallbiggrin:

[Grendus]

Put the bag inside your backpack, hide it under your armor, or easier yet... get a DM who isn't a metagamer on a power trip.

[Curmudgeon]

A HHH says it works like a bag of holding. It is likely subject to ruptures as well. If not 100% certain by RAW, then maybe by RAW and certainly by RAMS. No, I don't think so. Only the two side pouches are in any way like a Bag of Holding, and the construction (finely tanned leather) bears no relation to a common cloth sack. Really, the only similarities are that they're all nondimensional storage: capacities fixed, but unrelated to the exterior dimensions.

Handy Haversack

A backpack of this sort appears to be well made, well used, and quite ordinary. It is constructed of finely tanned leather, and the straps have brass hardware and buckles. It has two side pouches, each of which appears large enough to hold about a quart of material. In fact, each is like a bag of holding and can actually hold material of as much as 2 cubic feet in volume or 20 pounds in weight. The large central portion of the pack can contain up to 8 cubic feet or 80 pounds of material.

[Teflonknight]

The main issue I have with targeting a BOH is more RL. When a suspect is shot and killed by a cop there is an outcry saying that cop should have shot the arm or leg. Cops, and by logical extension archers, are taught to shoot at the centre of mass, simply the torso. If you are looking at the numbers, yes it is easier to shoot the bag, but if you are role playing the character/npc they will shoot the body.

[blazinghand]

The main issue I have with targeting a BOH is more RL. When a suspect is shot and killed by a cop there is an outcry saying that cop should have shot the arm or leg. Cops, and by logical extension archers, are taught to shoot at the centre of mass, simply the torso. If you are looking at the numbers, yes it is easier to shoot the bag, but if you are role playing the character/npc they will shoot the body.

There's a number of issues with targeting bags, but mostly it has to do with the motivations and logic of the NPCs that the party is fighting with. If the NPCs are, say, a group of Fey doing battle with the PCs, they have no way of knowing which bags are bags of holding and which aren't. That wizard looks like the sack on his belt his heavy, but he's got 8 strength. Maybe the fighter has a heavy bag of holding on his belt, but he's got 18 strength can he sports it like a champ. Of course, maybe the party used some divinations and already has their cold iron (nearly indistinguishable visually from regular iron) weapons out.

Also, it's profoundly unwise to carry your weapons in battle-action-intensive bags of holding anyways. But I gotta say if I'm a Fey and some adventurers just showed up and started slicing the world up, I'd say motives are
1) survive
2) defeat PCs
3) collect their gear

EVEN assuming that A) PCs, in a fey area, aren't holding cold iron in their hands but B) have cold iron with them, C) but it's in their bags of holding, which D) I've identified, at range, based only on visual knowledge, and E) I'm capable of reliably shooting a bag off of a seasoned adventurer's hip at range, and F) I'm sure of both A), B), and E) even though this isn't something a Fey NPC would know off the top of its head...

I'm not sure this would be better than just using the surprise round to try to take out their wizard, or just run away and regroup later with others. There's a lot of assumptions involved with trying to target a guy's bags instead of him or his support. I'd say this tactic would be reasonable for, say, skeletal minions of the BBEG, who have been instructed to attack the PCs and sacrifice their (un)lives to hinder them in the long-run, but it's unrealistic, meta-gamey, and frankly kind of dickish to have enemies doing this to PCs-- I certainly haven't and wouldn't pull this kind of move in my game.

[Mystral]

Why aren't the archers, or melee combatants for that matter, targetting their other magical gear in a battle? That would actually accomplish something. Just hit their cloak and they lose their bonus to saving throws, a cloth item of that size can't be hard to hit or destroy!

I really doubt your meanness as A DM when your PCs aren't nacked and destitute after every battle!

[Deophaun]

No, I don't think so. Only the two side pouches are in any way like a Bag of Holding, and the construction (finely tanned leather) bears no relation to a common cloth sack.
And we don't know what a BoH is actually made of, because it only appears to be a common cloth sack. It could be made out of mithril chain or dragon hide for all we know.

[2xMachina]

Why aren't the archers, or melee combatants for that matter, targetting their other magical gear in a battle? That would actually accomplish something. Just hit their cloak and they lose their bonus to saving throws, a cloth item of that size can't be hard to hit or destroy!

I really doubt your meanness as A DM when your PCs aren't nacked and destitute after every battle!

Always Disjunct EVERYTHING! Then chain shatter it all!

[BowStreetRunner]

Why aren't the archers, or melee combatants for that matter, targetting their other magical gear in a battle? That would actually accomplish something. Just hit their cloak and they lose their bonus to saving throws, a cloth item of that size can't be hard to hit or destroy!!

Normally, you can only sunder with a melee attack using a slashing or bludgeoning weapon. So it may just be that the archers don't want to waste the feat.

That having been said, I think Ranged Sunder (CW 104) is a feat in which every good witch-hunter-style character should invest. Go for the spell-component pouch!!! :smallamused:

[Jeraa]

Note that while a Bag of Holding is described as looking like a common sack, it not the same size of sack as in the PHB.

You have to go back to the 3.0 PHB, but there is lists the 1/2 pound sack as holding 1 cubic foot of material. The Bag of holding is 2' wide by 4' long. Even if it was just a mundane sack of that size, it would hold far more then a single cubic foot of stuff.

Bags of holding are sacks like Santa Claus uses, or a trash bag. Regular sacks from the PHB seem to be closer to a grocery bag in size, or a sack of potatoes. (At least where I am in the USA. People elsewhere may have to make their own comparisons.)

[Deophaun]

Note that while a Bag of Holding is described as looking like a common sack, it not the same size of sack as in the PHB.
But it can be folded. In fact, I doubt anyone would carry it around in an unfolded/unwrapped state because of its size. Once you do that, it ceases to look like a large bag, and instead would look the same as about a hundred other cloth items.

[Philistine]

... The problem is that D&D has no guide on what's standard gear, feats or spell. They just give you a huge list and let you sort this out. One of the creators mentioned this problem saying that they wanted to reward system mastery but he regrets it and really they should have provided some sort of guidance instead. This quotation is taken way out of context all the time to claim intentional system unbalance btw. ...

If you're referring to Monte Cook's Ivory Tower Game Design (http://montecook.mulehill.com/line-of-sight/ivory-tower-game-design) article, I suggest you re-read it more closely. Specifically,
Magic also has a concept of "Timmy cards." These are cards that look cool, but aren't actually that great in the game. The purpose of such cards is to reward people for really mastering the game, and making players feel smart when they've figured out that one card is better than the other. While D&D doesn't exactly do that, it is true that certain game choices are deliberately better than others.

How is that anything but a claim of intentional system imbalance? (Though I hold with the common opinion that this was a post-facto rationalization - Pee-Wee Herman claiming "I meant to do that!" after falling off his bike.)

[Hecuba]

If you're referring to Monte Cook's Ivory Tower Game Design (http://montecook.mulehill.com/line-of-sight/ivory-tower-game-design) article, I suggest you re-read it more closely. Specifically,

How is that anything but a claim of intentional system imbalance? (Though I hold with the common opinion that this was a post-facto rationalization - Pee-Wee Herman claiming "I meant to do that!" after falling off his bike.)

That depends on where the choices in question pop up. For example, the relative merits of full defense versus withdrawl don't have substantive impact on game balance. To have a substantive impact on balance, such decisions also need to have some asymmetry of availability, either because:

1) They are available to only a certain subset of the people making the decision (barrier to entry)

OR
2) They require perminant allocation of scarce resources to access (barrier to exit)

While it is quite possible Monty was talking about Wizard vs Monk imbalance, it is also quite possible he was talking about the fact that fighting defensively is usually the wrong choice or the fact that it's usually better for a Wizard to leave some blank spell slots an prepare them later.

Monk vs Wizard would be a good indication of intentional systemic imabalance. The latter 2 would not: there is no barrier to entry or exit.

He simply wasn't specific enough to differentiate.

[ericgrau]

How is that anything but a claim of intentional system imbalance? (Though I hold with the common opinion that this was a post-facto rationalization - Pee-Wee Herman claiming "I meant to do that!" after falling off his bike.)
Context. white space!

[hoverfrog]

Haversacks are clearly better and not at all for meta game reasons. If I had a bag that held a lot I'd be happy. If i had a bag that held not quite as much but still a lot and I didn't have to half empty the damn thing to find my toothbrush at night I'd be even happier.

A man must always be able to find his toothbrush (or other articles for personal grooming) easily and that makes the world of difference. I mean imagine that you'd packed everything for the trip and customs asked for your passport. It's in your bag but you can't remember exactly where. The handy haversack is clearly the superior choice.

[jackattack]

If my characters can get their hands on a handy haversack, they start carrying all of their personal gear and professional/skill tools and supplies in it. (An alchemy lab weighs 40 lbs. Just sayin'.)

While some adventurers might carry secondary or specialty weapons in their BoHs, a lot of them carry their loot in them, or supplies. So targeting one might sometimes be like targeting someone's ankle holster, but a lot of times it's like targeting someone's wallet, or their lunchbox.

And in the description of the Portable Hole, the words "extradimensional" and "nondimensional" are used interchangeably. So RAW all of the TARDIS spells and items should interact negatively, even multiple instances of the same effect. It might just be sloppy editing, but if so it is sloppy editing that hasn't been corrected in over a quarter-century. (They can write all of the articles they want, but if they can't be bothered to correct the language in the actual rules...)

[Philistine]

Context. white space!

Bushwah. The context is clear if you bother to read the next paragraph in the article:

Toughness, for example, has its uses, but in most cases it's not the best choice of feat. If you can use martial weapons, a longsword is better than many other one-handed weapons. And so on -- there are many other, far more intricate examples. (Arguably, this kind of thing has always existed in D&D. Mostly, we just made sure that we didn't design it away -- we wanted to reward mastery of the game.)
Oh, look. That's a Feat he just specifically called out in the "some of the stuff we made just kinda sucks" category. Those were permanent build choices at the time (prior to retraining rules) - and some of them Just Suck. So no, this isn't a matter of knowing which gear to buy first and what to put off until later, as you claim - this is "learn some system mastery pronto, or risk wasting one of your seven feats ever on something that will never do your character any good."

[Jane_Smith]

This thread is kinda derailing - moral of story, go HHH, if anything for the convenience of it having multiple pouches, etc so you can keep everything neatly organized. I once kept a persaudo dragon pet in the back pouch of mine. Kept all my gold in that pouch as well for its "hoard". If anyone tried to steal my money, he would bite there hand inside the bag or sting them, and I kept a glyph of warding on the side pocket that I kept my unused magic items in. Had spells like harden, arcane mark, permanent fire/acid resist, etc put on it as well, sense I had my spellbooks in side (all of which were waterproofed, coded, and had individual seals locking them that required a activation word and my touch to unlock). >_> I was REALLY paranoid about my stuff getting stolen.

[molten_dragon]

Haversacks are clearly better and not at all for meta game reasons. If I had a bag that held a lot I'd be happy. If i had a bag that held not quite as much but still a lot and I didn't have to half empty the damn thing to find my toothbrush at night I'd be even happier.

A haversack isn't so much better than a bag of holding, as it is useful for different things.

A haversack is great to store things that you need to access quickly.

A bag of holding is better to store bulk items that you need to carry a lot of but not worry about getting to them quickly (though a portable hole is much better at this role).

[hoverfrog]

A bag of holding is better to store bulk items that you need to carry a lot of but not worry about getting to them quickly (though a portable hole is much better at this role).My loft is great for storing bulk items that I don't need often but I'd trade half the space for a way of putting my arm into the trapdoor and pulling out the Christmas decorations without having to move most of the other contents first. It is just a matter of convenience. I'm lazy and having the ability to reach into a bag and have what you want in your hand is almost worth not having any extra storage space at all.

[Axier]

I prefer HHH, just because you can get all the items you need for pretty much any situation and have it redially accessable. If you want a loot bag though, a BoH is really better, but PH is the best. I love being an artificer with a dedicated wright in a PH, working on magical items for the party.


As for DMs attacking magical storage, the only creature I can think of doing that are any magical Kobolds, who where clearly invented to harass and troll the party until they run out of resources, but they would attempt to destroy any magical item, and item that looks like it stores goods. Even mundane bags.

[Killer Angel]

Personally, I prefere the haversack. I need more to pick quickly things I need, than having huge carrying capacity (that the HHH still gives to me, although in a lesser way).
So, a portable hole IMO is useful only if you need to carry a lot of stuff, to the point that the HHH would be overloaded AND you don't have time to teleport the loot.


A bag of holding is better to store bulk items that you need to carry a lot of but not worry about getting to them quickly (though a portable hole is much better at this role).

True, but portable holes cost much more than a bag.




As for DMs attacking magical storage, the only creature I can think of doing that are any magical Kobolds, who where clearly invented to harass and troll the party until they run out of resources, but they would attempt to destroy any magical item, and item that looks like it stores goods. Even mundane bags.

Eh.
Even those fey archers should avoid to target the bags:

How is it unreasonable for a Fey archer to want to strip the PCs of their cold iron backup weapons at the start of the battle?
If you fear cold iron backup weapons, those will not be in the bag (the weapons are not easily accessible) but in the HHH (ready to use!).
After all, why should I keep my backup weapon in a place where I cannot reach it, if I need it quickly?


As I've said, the cost (1 arrow; no spells cast) is very low and the potential improvement in combat odds is at least moderate. The archers won't know what the Bag holds, but they do know that if they destroy it then whatever it held can't be used against them.
Anything in the bag, is basically useless during the current battle.
Only if the feys are losing, and they decide to retreat, and they fear that something in the Bag will be used later against them, then it could be logical to try a shoot at the bag while escaping. But that would be a particular case in an already rare scenario.

[DigoDragon]

This is only a problem if your DM is a jerk.

Or you roll an unlucky 1 on a saving through versus a damaging spell. :smallbiggrin:
Had that happen once and the poor PC's BoH ruptured. On the plus side, all those caltrops made all the enemy warriors around him share the pain.


Between the too bags, my PCs generally like the Haversack for personal items and Bags of Holding for party loot to divvy later.

[Firechanter]

No, I don't think so. Only the two side pouches are in any way like a Bag of Holding,

That's not true; the centre compartment also offers extradimensional space. It says "8 cubic feet", which equals over 200 litres. Compare that to a typical outdoor or military backpack, they have maybe 60-80 litres. There simply _is_ no backpack that holds significantly more than 80 litres.
Ergo, extradimensional space in each HHH compartment.

[Deophaun]

My loft is great for storing bulk items that I don't need often but I'd trade half the space for a way of putting my arm into the trapdoor and pulling out the Christmas decorations without having to move most of the other contents first.
Where does this analogy keep coming from? The most time it will ever take to pull something out of a BoH is six seconds. That's not replicating someone moving a bunch of stuff out of the way before he can get to what he wants. That's replicating an automated delivery system scanning through a meticulously organized inventory to find what he requested.

[Answerer]

The haversack is better, just not for the reasons Curmudgeon stated.

You might consider getting a bag of holding and a handy haversack, but the HHH would definitely be the one you'd want to buy first.

[jackattack]

My groups always play the BoH as first-in-last-out, last-in-first-out. If you want a specific item, you have to pull out everything you put in since that item went in the bag. If you want something fast, you have to dump the entire bag out.

And as a DM I rule that constructing a haversack requires a find object spell in addition to the standard secret chest, to justify the quick-finding aspect of the magic.

[Answerer]

I can think of absolutely no good reason for either houserule.

Do you like having to play the accounting minigame for keeping track of myriad random crap? That's not a game, to me, that's work.

[Aegis013]

I can think of absolutely no good reason for either houserule.

Do you like having to play the accounting minigame for keeping track of myriad random crap? That's not a game, to me, that's work.

I agree with that sentiment, but everybody is entitled to their own opinions. I've left tables because they wanted to play Accountants and Offices, and I wanted to play Dungeons and Dragons.

As in, they had a miasma of random additional junk to track which took up loads of session time, but I wanted to dungeon crawl and fight dragons and the like, I want to be clear that I am not saying that there is one true way to play; if they enjoy it, great. It's just not for me.

[hoverfrog]

Where does this analogy keep coming from?There was me thinking I was being all original. :smallredface:

[Psyren]

In a really gritty, high-difficulty campaign I could see going after the PCs' BOHs (or component pouches, spellbooks etc.) But I doubt it's so common as to render the bags themselves useless. Besides, any DM who tries this knows it will work exactly once before the PCs become so annoyingly paranoid ("there's a bag of holding in the treasure? Don't put anything in it, we can sell it later") as to negate any benefit the "gotcha" moment would have provided.

Most DMs I know hand out extraplanar storage just so the players don't turn the strength-based characters into glorified pack-mules inside of 5 sessions. (Assuming they don't just get actual pack mules instead.)

[nedz]

But mules have far more personality than BoH's, and can be used in much the same way: "We chuck that onto Muffin"

[Psyren]

But mules have far more personality than BoH's, and can be used in much the same way: "We chuck that onto Muffin"

Assuming you're not just joking - they aren't always practical though, e.g. going underground, or fighting something with AoE attacks (like a dragon), or climbing ladders etc. And for situations that function better with a small party (e.g. teleport, rope trick, group flight, group invisibility etc.) they count as extra party members, in some cases even multiple extra party members. Lastly, they're easy to kill, and once dead you're faced with the problem of making it back to town with everything they were carrying plus your own gear.

[Firechanter]

BoH and other ED-storage have been created in D&D to _remove_ bookkeeping and micro-managing carried weight, as to allow everyone to focus on the interesting parts of the game. Micromanaging them or making them unsafe totally defeats the purpose.

[jackattack]

I can think of absolutely no good reason for either houserule.

Do you like having to play the accounting minigame for keeping track of myriad random crap? That's not a game, to me, that's work.


IIRC, the BoH was originally an FILO/LIFO item, but that rule changed in an early edition.

And there's usually no accounting involved. When the party has ten minutes to spare, the player says "I get my ten foot pole out of my bag of holding" and the DM says "you find it about fifteen items in" and the player says "great, I repack the bag with the pole on top".

As for the extra spell for (H)HH, why does this item get such a great effect for nothing? RAW, there is no difference whatsoever in the creation of a BoH and an (H)HH, but one has a significantly different effect. Additional effect, additional spell. Makes perfect sense.

And as a side note, the BoH is 2'x4' because it is meant to be carried over the shoulder. It is also meant to be made of red velvet with white fur trim around the mouth.

[Psyren]

BoH and other ED-storage have been created in D&D to _remove_ bookkeeping and micro-managing carried weight, as to allow everyone to focus on the interesting parts of the game. Micromanaging them or making them unsafe totally defeats the purpose.

Precisely this



And as a side note, the BoH is 2'x4' because it is meant to be carried over the shoulder. It is also meant to be made of red velvet with white fur trim around the mouth.

I see what you did there

[ericgrau]

BoH and other ED-storage have been created in D&D to _remove_ bookkeeping and micro-managing carried weight, as to allow everyone to focus on the interesting parts of the game. Micromanaging them or making them unsafe totally defeats the purpose.

I don't agree with this since both the BoH and managing loot transportation were big parts of 2e. Carts, bandits who see your carts and mules, copper dragon hordes (in cp), creative looting of valuable but huge objects like iron or adamantine structures. Even stuffing characters and other living creatures into a BoH to circumvent obstacles. It's quite amazing the fun you can have simply with moving objects, especially when a campaign involves tomb raiding. As it often does, whether the DM loves it or hates it.

Ignoring lesser aspects of adventuring has all the advantages and disadvantages of video games: simpler but less creative. You have to strike a balance between keeping the campaign interesting and yet avoiding time consuming paperwork. Remove all the lesser details and it's just a monster grind with some unimportant cut scenes (no matter how well written they may be) in between.

The HHH is a nice compromise because it's wearable and allows rapid access to several small items for combat yet with an 80+20+20 lb. capacity you won't be stuffing any people or statues into it nor do you have instant access to a 1000 item inventory. You need the less convenient potato sack known as the BoH for those.

[Deophaun]

IIRC, the BoH was originally an FILO/LIFO item, but that rule changed in an early edition.
For a good reason.

And there's usually no accounting involved. When the party has ten minutes to spare...
And when the party doesn't have ten minutes to spare, what then? You need to have been playing an accountant the whole time.

As for the extra spell for (H)HH, why does this item get such a great effect for nothing?
Yes. Less than half the weight and a fraction of the volume for roughly the same price equates to nothing...

[jackattack]

For a good reason.

Yes, they had to change it from a place to put all of the loot the players wanted to pack out of the dungeon, into a place to put all of the gear the players wanted to pack into the dungeon.


And when the party doesn't have ten minutes to spare, what then? You need to have been playing an accountant the whole time.

Unless your DM handwaives what your players carry, there is probably a list of what's in your bag of holding. (And your backpack, and your belt pouch.) The last item in is probably at the bottom of the list. Work your way up from there.


Yes. Less than half the weight and a fraction of the volume for roughly the same price equates to nothing...

Does this mean that my magic user can produce whatever effect he wants with Craft Wondrous Item and a thousand gold pieces? (Cos now I can make a Gem of True Seeing into X-Ray Specs!) Or should my character be restricted to the spells he knows, and rewarded for having an extensive spell book?

The weight and capacity of the bag are in keeping with the BoH table. Logically, the price of an (H)HH should have been zero (prices drop in roughly 2500gp increments) or 1250gp (Type I is half the price of a Type II).

And around CL9, a thousand GP really isn't much, especially for the advantage of avoiding AoOs.

[ericgrau]

I believe the 3rd point was sarcasm. The HHH sacrifices carrying capacity for convenience; it's not strictly better than a similarly priced BoH (even though it's often better).

[Answerer]

Or should my character be restricted to the spells he knows, and rewarded for having an extensive spell book?
Yes, it's always a good idea to shaft spontaneous casters more than they already are, and give the prepared casters as much help they don't need as possible.

[blazinghand]

I believe the 3rd point was sarcasm. The HHH sacrifices carrying capacity for convenience; it's not strictly better than a similarly priced BoH (even though it's often better).

I believe ericgrau's assessment is accurate. That was almost certainly sarcasm, however ill-advised it might be to use it on an internet forum. Deophan, if I understand him correctly, is stating that HHH gives up carrying capacity for convenience, and there are times when it is not the optimal item for its price.

[jackattack]

Sarcastically stated, but still I think intended as a counterpoint. Which I address by restating that any caster with the secret chest spell can somehow reproduce a feat-quality effect without knowing an additional spell, RAW. I call that a bargain for the price...

[Firechanter]

Basically, in most cases just going by RAW you don't even _need_ ED storage for your loot, if only you have a large enough supply of gunnysacks and your DM doesn't starve you through weeks and weeks of wilderness and ghost towns before you can finally liquidate your hard-earned loot.

I once ran the numbers on this but I'm not sure where to look for them now; I'll just try to figure it out again: let's say your party kills an Adult Red Dragon (CR15) at level 12 and takes its stuff. The party Melee fighter alone has probably a Str around 24 by that time, which allows him to carry a Medium Load of up to 466 lbs. His armour and weapons account for maybe 66 lbs, leaving 400lbs to spare for hauling loot.
A CR15 dragon's hoard, on the other hand, consists of some coins and a pile of junk and brummagem weighing 330 lbs total, according to the Draconomicon.

The BSF by himself can haul off an entire dragon hoard and then some; not to mention that by that time, the party can probably simply teleport directly from the lair into a pawn shop. And I hope you wouldn't demand a level 12 party to slay more than one dragon at a time. ;)

--> ED storage like BoH is there simply for convenience and to avoid interruptions to the adventure, which would otherwise occur if the party had to return to town every time the inventory was full. Diablo, anyone?

HHH is even more convenient thanks to the "instant retrieval" property, it also allows the PCs to carry the gear required by the game system (various alternative weapons and items for different scenarios) without looking plain silly, so it's actually good for immersion without hampering flexibility.

[Answerer]

Sarcastically stated, but still I think intended as a counterpoint. Which I address by restating that any caster with the secret chest spell can somehow reproduce a feat-quality effect without knowing an additional spell, RAW. I call that a bargain for the price...
Who on earth cares? It costs a Wizard almost nothing to learn a new spell. It's almost always in his best interests anyway. The overwhelming majority of Wizards will get a Boccob's Blessed Book ASAP anyway, so it won't even matter much. By the time they fill up a BBB, the cost of a new one will be so trivial that it won't matter.

On the other hand, crafting, already a poor choice for a Sorcerer, who was already almost-strictly inferior to the Wizard, just became that much worse.

[molten_dragon]

My loft is great for storing bulk items that I don't need often but I'd trade half the space for a way of putting my arm into the trapdoor and pulling out the Christmas decorations without having to move most of the other contents first.

That really only matters in real life though. As a player, it's no more work to say "I grab the McGuffin out of my bag of holding" than it is to say "I grab the McGuffin out of my handy haversack". And as long as you're not in combat it doesn't matter how long it takes your character really.

[molten_dragon]

True, but portable holes cost much more than a bag.

I know, which is why bags of holding are still useful.

[molten_dragon]

In a really gritty, high-difficulty campaign I could see going after the PCs' BOHs (or component pouches, spellbooks etc.) But I doubt it's so common as to render the bags themselves useless. Besides, any DM who tries this knows it will work exactly once before the PCs become so annoyingly paranoid ("there's a bag of holding in the treasure? Don't put anything in it, we can sell it later") as to negate any benefit the "gotcha" moment would have provided.

The other thing is that from an in-universe perspective, if targeting an enemy's bag of holding to destroy the items inside was a common tactic, the people making bags of holding would very quickly start making them out of something much sturdier than cloth to defeat that tactic.

[Deophaun]

Unless your DM handwaives what your players carry, there is probably a list of what's in your bag of holding. (And your backpack, and your belt pouch.) The last item in is probably at the bottom of the list. Work your way up from there.
So the bags of holding in your campaigns are like Las Vegas? What goes into the bag stays in the bag? People aren't saying "Hey, I need object X right now, let's take that out?" It stays in the bag until you get it to Ye Olde Magic Shoppe to empty it? No one ever says "Hey, the wand of cure critical is more useful than that ornately carved, gold accented statue we just got. Be sure to put that on top?" Because if not, your counterpoint is not a counter at all, and that's why point #1.

[jackattack]

So BoHs in your universe are like a bazaar in a bag? Anything you want at the tip of your fingers, even if you didn't actually say it was in your inventory?

The original use of the BoH (intended or not) was to completely strip a dungeon of its contents without worrying about encumbrance. That's why jokes about parties taking furniture and statues exist -- they actually happened in games on a regular basis.

And yeah, everything in the bag could stay there until the party left the dungeon. That was the trade-off for being able to carry tons of stuff. Anything the players thought might come in handy could be carried elsewhere. And if they made an error in judgement, they had to find a safe place and find what they needed, or actually live with the disadvantage for a few minutes.

The modern use of the BoH (intended or not) is to completely equip a party for any and every contingency without worrying about encumbrance. And since the bag is full of mission-essential gear, it is unacceptable that the player should wait to get anything, or get the wrong thing. Or that the party should actually be limited in what they can carry, and be forced to make tough choices about their gear.

That's what (H)HH is for. That's why it has a sorting function. That's also why it has less capacity than even the smallest BoH. It is intended to fulfill the "need" to be uber-prepared with instant recovery and no risk during combat.

If you don't like accounting, don't do it. If you are comfortable saying "we buy everything we could possibly need and stuff it in a bag of holding", that's great. But I think part of the game is deciding what gear to equip my character with, bound by the limits of encumbrance and item cost. I think it encourages roleplaying when my character tries to research the upcoming dungeon, and it encourages player interaction when I ask the other people at the table whether I should bring the wand of fireballs or the ice sword +3.

And it's actually fun to overcome an obstacle or an opponent with the tools at hand, especially when you realize that you should have brought the ice sword +3 but didn't. Those are the stories that are fun to tell and to listen to.

And my last word on this topic (yay!) is that I started out by presenting two alternative approaches to a couple of common magic items without saying they were better, or that anyone need use them, or judging anyone else's play styles.

[Jack_Simth]

So the bags of holding in your campaigns are like Las Vegas? What goes into the bag stays in the bag? People aren't saying "Hey, I need object X right now, let's take that out?" It stays in the bag until you get it to Ye Olde Magic Shoppe to empty it? No one ever says "Hey, the wand of cure critical is more useful than that ornately carved, gold accented statue we just got. Be sure to put that on top?" Because if not, your counterpoint is not a counter at all, and that's why point #1.

Interestingly enough, Bags of Holding have specific rules on getting items out: "Retrieving a specific item from a bag of holding is a move action—unless the bag contains more than an ordinary backpack would hold, in which case retrieving a specific item is a full-round action."

So while you'd think putting the useful stuff on top might help... by RAW, it doesn't.

[tyckspoon]

The modern use of the BoH (intended or not) is to completely equip a party for any and every contingency without worrying about encumbrance. And since the bag is full of mission-essential gear, it is unacceptable that the player should wait to get anything, or get the wrong thing. Or that the party should actually be limited in what they can carry, and be forced to make tough choices about their gear.


..Yes, exactly, which is why the modern Bag of Holding *also has a quick-pull function.* It's a move action to get any specific item out of it, or at most a Standard if it's loaded beyond the capacity of a standard backpack. The difference between that and the Haversack is the Haversack is never more than a move, and getting something out of the Haversack doesn't provoke AoO. With neither item are you intended to have to dump the entire thing out and root around for what you want - the Haversack is just a little more convenient on a combat-relevant timescale, where the Bag will use up your more potent action and is unsafe to pull from while standing next to an enemy.

[Deophaun]

So BoHs in your universe are like a bazaar in a bag? Anything you want at the tip of your fingers, even if you didn't actually say it was in your inventory?
W. T. F. are you talking about?

[Killer Angel]

Unless your DM handwaives what your players carry, there is probably a list of what's in your bag of holding. (And your backpack, and your belt pouch.) The last item in is probably at the bottom of the list. Work your way up from there.


And if your character sheet was made using some Char generator, probably the list of said objects is in alphabetical order. :smallannoyed:
With HHH, the item you need is at hand, with BoH isn't, and you had to search for it.

[Sith_Happens]

Personally, I'm a fan of putting the BoH in the HHH. Yo dawg, I heard you like extradimensional storage.:smallbiggrin:

[2xMachina]

So BoHs in your universe are like a bazaar in a bag? Anything you want at the tip of your fingers, even if you didn't actually say it was in your inventory?

The original use of the BoH (intended or not) was to completely strip a dungeon of its contents without worrying about encumbrance. That's why jokes about parties taking furniture and statues exist -- they actually happened in games on a regular basis.

And yeah, everything in the bag could stay there until the party left the dungeon. That was the trade-off for being able to carry tons of stuff. Anything the players thought might come in handy could be carried elsewhere. And if they made an error in judgement, they had to find a safe place and find what they needed, or actually live with the disadvantage for a few minutes.

The modern use of the BoH (intended or not) is to completely equip a party for any and every contingency without worrying about encumbrance. And since the bag is full of mission-essential gear, it is unacceptable that the player should wait to get anything, or get the wrong thing. Or that the party should actually be limited in what they can carry, and be forced to make tough choices about their gear.

That's what (H)HH is for. That's why it has a sorting function. That's also why it has less capacity than even the smallest BoH. It is intended to fulfill the "need" to be uber-prepared with instant recovery and no risk during combat.

If you don't like accounting, don't do it. If you are comfortable saying "we buy everything we could possibly need and stuff it in a bag of holding", that's great. But I think part of the game is deciding what gear to equip my character with, bound by the limits of encumbrance and item cost. I think it encourages roleplaying when my character tries to research the upcoming dungeon, and it encourages player interaction when I ask the other people at the table whether I should bring the wand of fireballs or the ice sword +3.

And it's actually fun to overcome an obstacle or an opponent with the tools at hand, especially when you realize that you should have brought the ice sword +3 but didn't. Those are the stories that are fun to tell and to listen to.

And my last word on this topic (yay!) is that I started out by presenting two alternative approaches to a couple of common magic items without saying they were better, or that anyone need use them, or judging anyone else's play styles.

No accounting doesn't mean not having a list of items in inventory. It just means not having to figure out which item is ranked 1st till last in HHH at all times.

PC: I take out my Cure Light Wounds wand
DM: Wait! Didn't you take out (and put back in) a Knock wand last session?
PC2: I remember you stuffing your HHH with loot from that encounter too.
PC: ...

[panaikhan]

All of this reminds me of one party I DM'd for, where the Tank strapped one of those ED quivers to the inside of his tower shield.

That said, I prefer the (H)HH. I've used them to great effect, particularly with my PF Alchemist - where her HH was stocked with an unfeasable number of alchemical items. I've also seen BoH and PH 'built into' certain items (mostly homebrew) to provide almost limitless ammunition.