Any canon support for the idea that bags of devouring are connected to Dalmosh??

[Lassan]

So I was running some pals through a dungeon in 3.5 the other day.

And they ran into Dalmosh, as he had just been summoned by some nasty nasty cultists.

As in Dalmosh, from MM V, the literal physical incarnation of hunger.

One of the party members had been grabbed by the guy, and honestly the smart money was on them running like hell, and leaving him for dead;

or alternately them hitting him Really hard, really fast, hoping Dalmosh dropped the sucker, and running like hell.

What my players did INSTEAD.

was throw a bag of devouring they had gotten as a random drop at it!!

Ummm so yeah.

The description of of a bag of devouring implies that it's likely the feeding orifice of some extra-dimensional being.

http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Bag_of_Devouring

The party was looking at the literal avatar of the concept of hunger.

So a little light bulb went off in my head.

"So what if these bags of devouring are part of Dalmosh, and that the bag is going to literally try to eat the body, and vice versa?"

As the party's current quest is to use an arrow of ultimate destruction on a very, very high CR Dragon

You know, portable hole + Bag of holding == rip into astral plane on an arrowhead.

i've had a hard on for the damn things since I did my other thread on em over here:

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?426263-The-Portable-Hole-Bag-of-holding-warhead-as-an-siege-weapon

The logical conclusion seemed to be "you threw a part of the avatar of hunger, that leads to an extradimensional pocket dimension, at the full body of the avatar of hunger, that leads to an extradimensional pocket dimension??

So ah.... That means it's time for me to roll to see which plane you guys just landed on using the nice, nice table in the DMG???

Lucky for them, they wound up in the peaceful kingdoms of Arcadia, and got politely sent back to the prime materia plane (having a LG Moradin worshiper in the party helped)

But ah.

All that aside, is there any official, or semi-official "word of god" from WOTC about the bag of devouring being a part of, or connected to Dalmosh?

Personally, I like the idea enough where it's gonna be Fanon at my table, but seeing some official word on the matter would be nice.

[Troacctid]

I'm not aware of any such canonical link. AFAIK Dalmosh isn't mentioned outside of MM5.

[Inevitability]

No link I know of, but that makes so much sense I think I'll make it canon for my games.

[Biguds]

Hello there.

If you think high of Dragon Magazine, volume 271 has the article "The Ecology of a Bag of Devouring".

[Lassan]

@Biguds

hey thanks for the advice to check out Dragon #271

I consider Dragon magazine to be more on the lines of "soft canon" (about where things like the D&D video games are) as last I checked the "gold" standard for D&D canon is "if it's in a rulebook, or a published novel Canon, otherwise ehhhhhhh..... Not so much?

That being said, the "devourer's as having bags of devouring as mouths is a pretty fascinating idea, and a tolerable alternate explanation than the "part of Dalmosh" bit I came up with.

Tho honestly, really.

Not much of a reason why both couldn't exist alongside each other in a given campaign. I mean functionally, unless you survived getting eaten by a bag of devouring, you wouldn't know the difference between being in Dalmosh, to a "devourer" you'd still be just as dead. And lols. No reason why there can't be two (or more) types of magical creature/cursed items occupying the same "niche"

[Troacctid]

Actually, since Dalmosh's belly contains a portal to a pocket dimension, it could be the difference between being dead and being a plane shift away from safety.

[Mr Adventurer]

I don't think Dalmosh is "the avatar of hunger", as in a metaphysical expression by the multiverse? Like, he's a demon, so he's an Abyssal expression of hunger. But he's not a fundamental part of the cosmos.

And I love Dalmosh, IIRC.

[SangoProduction]

You don't need to make every sentence a paragraph. It gets hard to read.

[Mr Adventurer]

You don't need to make every sentence a paragraph. It gets hard to read.

No, it's fine. Consider the inverse! :D

[weckar]

You don't need to make every sentence a paragraph. It gets hard to read.

Actually, I personally find it easier to read, and I format all my emails that way. Not necessarily with whitespace between every sentence, but certainly starting new sentences on new lines.

[KillianHawkeye]

You don't need to make every sentence a paragraph. It gets hard to read.


No, it's fine. Consider the inverse! :D

I'm pretty sure there's a happy middle ground here. You can easily keep a few sentences together, especially if they're related to the same subject. And guess what? That's exactly how paragraphs are supposed to work!

See? That wasn't hard at all!