[PF] Magic item: Invisible haversack

[Dalebert]

Anything you placed inside would be hidden by the invisibility as well.

Is this how an invisible item would work or would you see inside it like how Wonder Woman was always seen sitting down flying through the sky?

How hard would this be to make? I know you can cast permanency on an invisible item but is there a way to make it via Craft Wondrous Item, for instance? Seems like it should be no more expensive than a handy haversack. An item with both would be pretty cool.

[Sayt]

Because handy haversacks are extradimensional spaces, the objects placed inside the sack are not inside the sack per se, But instead the mouth of the container is functionally a portal to the extradimensional space.

As for making it invisible... I'd go something like 24,000 gp on top of the standard hadny haversack.

From an equation of (Spell level (2) x minimum CL (3) x 2000)x2 [Slotless]

that said, I'm not quite sure how having a magical item with a spell effect only on the item works.

[Drachasor]

Imho, it shouldn't cost more than using Permanency; you can do the latter without needing a feat.

But remember, an invisible haversack is going to be annoying to use. You'll have to fumble around for the pouches and whatnot. I'd say you'd lose that move action access. Also, it's easy to lose since you can't see it.

[Fouredged Sword]

Making the invisibility part of the haversack should be slightly more expensive than permanency. It can't be permanently dispelled if it is part of the item.

That said, there is a rules legal way to do it, so I don't see the harm in folding it into the item.

[Drachasor]

Making the invisibility part of the haversack should be slightly more expensive than permanency. It can't be permanently dispelled if it is part of the item.

That said, there is a rules legal way to do it, so I don't see the harm in folding it into the item.

Yeah, but you also need a feat and more time. A lot of the permanency effects, especially for low level spells, are about the same price or cheaper to do with magic items (if an equivalent exists).

[Dalebert]

Yeah, but you also need a feat and more time. A lot of the permanency effects, especially for low level spells, are about the same price or cheaper to do with magic items (if an equivalent exists).

That's what I was thinking. A lot of the costs for permanency seem high to me given counterparts in magic items, though those require a feat (which can later be retrained).

BTW, just to be clear, I wasn't intending this item to necessarily be combined with a handy haversack, though it could. I was thinking of an alternative. The point of this item is to keep particular things safe(r); not to hold a lot of things.

I agree that it would not be practical for storing things that you need to retrieve rapidly during combat. On a side note, would detect magic allow you to find an invisible creature or item?

It doesn't seem like this item should be more expensive than a handy haversack.