On rope trick....Anyone experienced the extradimensional space "hazardous" results?

[Astralia123]

The rope trick spell says, "It is hazardous to create an extradimensional space within an existing extradimensional space or to take an extradimensional space into an existing one."
It is also quite famous that a portable hole and a bag of holding can destroy each other and produce tricky effects.


Yet I've never heard anyone died due to, like, opening a bag of holding in rope trick space, or things like that. It doesn't seem that doing this would be of any significant risk.


So have any DMs actually let this "hazardous" thing happen in real play? Or is there any examples or guidelines regarding this in any publications or FAQs?

[legomaster00156]

I think very few players are stupid enough to try. Those that do receive the infamous GM saying, "Are you sure?"

[Astralia123]

I think very few players are stupid enough to try. Those that do receive the infamous GM saying, "Are you sure?"

I mean it doesn't sound that risky. If you have a rod of security and a bag of holding on you, it is kind of inevitable you'll bring the bag of holding into that space, isn't it?
Bag of holding and Heward's handy haversack are at least as common as wrist watches or lighters - not everyone has them, but they are really, really common and often needed. If that would be problematic, we are sure to have heard more on that.

[BowStreetRunner]

The problem here is that the Portable Hole + Bag of Holding situation is the only one in which there is actually a RAW mechanic for dealing with the interaction. I don't believe there is a single other place in the rules where it tells what would happen. So this ominous warning that this is hazardous really is left up to the creativity of the DM to fulfill. I think most just don't bother.

[Jack_Simth]

So have any DMs actually let this "hazardous" thing happen in real play? Or is there any examples or guidelines regarding this in any publications or FAQs?
For 3.5, there's a Rules of the Game article that "recommends" ignoring it. See Here (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20051101a). The 3.0 FAQ says no problems (page 33), but it didn't make the 3.5 FAQ at all.

Rules of the Game and the FAQ have... shall we say "varying opinions" on their validity, so your mileage may vary. Ask your DM.

Pathfinder went with such things simply being inaccessible, as I recall.

[The Magister]

Some of my players did that with rope trick one time. They seemed to have forgotten that extradimensional spaces are.... extradimensional. They just casually hopped right into the bloody thing with no regard for the fact that they had three bags of holding. I was getting a little frustrated (they had been doing stuff like that for the entire session for some reason), so I told them that the force of the explosive formation of the astral rift created by their ignorance sent them careening into a colour pool to the Blood Rift in the Astral Plane before they could gain their bearings. While the effect itself didn't kill them, the yugoloths certainly did.

Personally, I like the fact that mixing extradimensional spaces can have disastrous results. It's just one more way to keep players from exploiting the mechanics to make things too easy, not to mention that it makes them weigh the risks of potentially losing their gear versus ending up in a dangerous part of the Astral Plane (and still losing their gear). Of course, they've found ways around even that, but I find that most people generally put up with it.

[Astralia123]

Some of my players did that with rope trick one time. They seemed to have forgotten that extradimensional spaces are.... extradimensional. They just casually hopped right into the bloody thing with no regard for the fact that they had three bags of holding. I was getting a little frustrated (they had been doing stuff like that for the entire session for some reason), so I told them that the force of the explosive formation of the astral rift created by their ignorance sent them careening into a colour pool to the Blood Rift in the Astral Plane before they could gain their bearings. While the effect itself didn't kill them, the yugoloths certainly did.

Personally, I like the fact that mixing extradimensional spaces can have disastrous results. It's just one more way to keep players from exploiting the mechanics to make things to easy, not to mention that it makes them weigh the risks of potentially losing their gear versus ending up in a dangerous part of the Astral Plane (and still losing their gear). Of course, they've found ways around even that, but I find that most people generally put up with it.

Well in that case I would suggest (at least pretend) rolling a 1d20 each time they do so and have it explode on an 1/20 basis.
We have a DM who would do such things here anyway. Anticipation appreciated.

[Astralia123]

My DM had it exploded when a wizard tries to wish back a destroyed Heward's handy haversack in a rod of secure space just 2 hours ago.

Well, he explains that it was more due to "conjure things lost in void back within an extradimensional space" than to "open a bag of holding within an extradimensional space".


The result was a lost wizard in void (who wished his belongings appear 5 ft away from him) and a save vs. disintegrate for the rod of secure (which miraculously saved with a roll of 20).

[Kelb_Panthera]

I used to have a table for this stuff with varying degrees of "bad things" for the interactions of lesser extradimensional devices and effects.

Stuff like "random creature summoned" or "random items/the user is shunted into the astral" and a few things in between those two.

I'm not a total monster though. Except for the bag v portable hole interaction I required the PC to actively use such devices within the extradimensional space to trigger the "bad things."

[BowStreetRunner]

So assuming the DM wanted to give the PCs a chance to know the risks, would that be Knowledge (arcana), or Knowledge (the planes) to figure it out?

[Kelb_Panthera]

So assuming the DM wanted to give the PCs a chance to know the risks, would that be Knowledge (arcana), or Knowledge (the planes) to figure it out?

Yes. There's overlap here between the two.

[Psyren]

Pathfinder went with such things simply being inaccessible, as I recall.

Correct. But as far as the "hazardous" clause in Rope Trick, Pathfinder removed that line from the spell entirely.

However they also made it impossible to pull the rope up behind you, so you have to exercise caution with where you put the spell. (i.e. don't just cast it in the middle of a patrolled hallway - find an out-of-the-way storage room in the dungeon whose door you can lock and cast it there, for instance.)

[Jack_Simth]

You're thinking of the "bag inside hole" scenario. For Rope Trick, Pathfinder removed that line from the spell entirely. It's actually a general rule in Pathfinder, and explicitly includes Rope Trick:
Source (http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/coreRulebook/magicItems/wondrousItems.html#wondrous-items):

Extradimensional Spaces

A number of spells and magic items utilize extradimensional spaces, such as rope trick, a bag of holding, a handy haversack, and a portable hole. These spells and magic items create a tiny pocket space that does not exist in any dimension. Such items do not function, however, inside another extradimensional space. If placed inside such a space, they cease to function until removed from the extradimensional space. For example, if a bag of holding is brought into a rope trick, the contents of the bag of holding become inaccessible until the bag of holding is taken outside the rope trick. The only exception to this is when a bag of holding and a portable hole interact, forming a rift to the Astral Plane, as noted in their descriptions.(Emphasis added)

[Psyren]

It's actually a general rule in Pathfinder, and explicitly includes Rope Trick:
Source (http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/coreRulebook/magicItems/wondrousItems.html#wondrous-items):
(Emphasis added)

Not that line - I'm talking about the "hazardous" clause from the OP being removed.

[Jack_Simth]

Not that line - I'm talking about the "hazardous" clause from the OP being removed.

Dude, look at the chunk of my post you actually quoted.

[Psyren]

Dude, look at the chunk of my post you actually quoted.

Dude, I know what you're talking about. Yes, bags and rope tricks = inert access, you're right. I was specifically talking about the other thing. Capisce, dude?

[Jack_Simth]

Dude, I know what you're talking about. Yes, bags and rope tricks = inert access, you're right. I was specifically talking about the other thing. Capisce, dude?
No, seriously. Stop, go back a bit, and look at what you actually quoted. Here....

The section you quoted:

Pathfinder went with such things simply being inaccessible, as I recall.
And your reply:

You're thinking of the "bag inside hole" scenario. For Rope Trick, Pathfinder removed that line from the spell entirely.

However they also made it impossible to pull the rope up behind you, so you have to exercise caution with where you put the spell. (i.e. don't just cast it in the middle of a patrolled hallway - find an out-of-the-way storage room in the dungeon whose door you can lock and cast it there, for instance.)
The section of my post that you quoted says zilch about "Hazardous". Yet, you speak as though I don't know what I'm talking about, as though I'm mistaken on what I'm referring to. Sure, you were referring to the Hazardous line, which is no longer present. You formatting things as though you were replying, rather than simply making an unrelated comment - which your later comments have shown to be the case. Basically, it looked like you were telling me I was mistaken, so I responded by actually quoting the relevant rule to match what I'd said. THEN you tell me no, that's not what you were referring to.

[Psyren]

Basically, it looked like you were telling me I was mistaken

Is that what this crusade is about? Then sorry if I wasn't clear, I wasn't saying you were mistaken. I'll go edit the post. Happy now?