Who needs Feather Fall? (Slickest move I've ever pulled)

[Crgaston]

At tonight's session, we were fighting a Beholder. I won't give too much expository, but a couple of rounds in, the Druid in Earth Elemental form has the Beholder grappled, and the Monk and Spirko, my Dwarven Battlemaster/Thief, have him flanked. Spirko had stabbed him twice for 44 damage between Sneak Attack and Goading Attack on the first round, so right before Spirko's next turn, the Beholder uses his last Legendary Action of the round to target him.

DM rolls the Telekinesis ray.

And we're next to a 300' deep pit.

I roll a 2 on his Str save and Spirko gets moved out over the pit and dropped. But now it's his turn in the Initiative order.

DM: Ok, I guess you have an action or whatever if there's anything you can do.

I glance down at my character sheet.

Me: Fast Hands... He opens up his Bag of Holding, takes a deep breath, pulls it over his head, and crawls inside.

DM:...

(realization sets in) ...!!!

Table: YOOO!!!

The Beholder takes some more damage and teleports (magic item, apparently?) away. The party cleans up his Nothic allies and then Earthglide/Fly/Levitate down to see if Spirko is ok. They find him in an antechamber hiding behind a rock, keeping an eye on the passage out, and none the worse for wear.

[bendking]

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news but...
"If the bag is overloaded, pierced, or torn, it ruptures and is destroyed, and its contents are scattered in the Astral Plane."
You mean to tell me the spikes didn't pierce this bag?

[D-naras]

That was awesome and props to your DM for not being a spoilsport and foiling your cool solution!

[ProsecutorGodot]

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news but...
"If the bag is overloaded, pierced, or torn, it ruptures and is destroyed, and its contents are scattered in the Astral Plane."
You mean to tell me the spikes didn't pierce this bag?

Nothing about spikes here but it's important to note that the inside diameter is 2ft. The outside opening is the size of a bag. A Dwarf isn't fitting inside of that bag without tearing it and destroying it. Even if the bag is large enough on the outside for the Dwarf to squeeze in, there's a good chance that the 2ft diameter interior won't be large enough to contain them. At least Dwarves are usually shorter than 5ft so there's a good chance he was short enough to fit as it's only 4ft deep to boot.

Cool moments like these are usually worth bending the rules though.

[BarneyBent]

Nothing about spikes here but it's important to note that the inside diameter is 2ft. The outside opening is the size of a bag. A Dwarf isn't fitting inside of that bag without tearing it and destroying it. Even if the bag is large enough on the outside for the Dwarf to squeeze in, there's a good chance that the 2ft diameter interior won't be large enough to contain them. At least Dwarves are usually shorter than 5ft so there's a good chance he was short enough to fit as it's only 4ft deep to boot.

Cool moments like these are usually worth bending the rules though.

The diameter of the opening is 2ft. The internal capacity is 64 cubic ft, which translates to about 4x4x4. Plenty of room for a Dwarf, if a little squishy.

[ProsecutorGodot]

The diameter of the opening is 2ft. The internal capacity is 64 cubic ft, which translates to about 4x4x4. Plenty of room for a Dwarf, if a little squishy.

Like I said, that's the diameter of the interior space. He still has to fit his entire torso through a satchel's opening without tearing it. It's only bigger on the inside.

[BarneyBent]

Like I said, that's the diameter of the interior space. He still has to fit his entire torso through a satchel's opening without tearing it. It's only bigger on the inside.

2ft diameter is pretty wide. I’d hazard a guess your average Dwarf can fit through that without trouble. Maybe make an acrobatics check, DC 12ish.

[ProsecutorGodot]

2ft diameter is pretty wide. I’d hazard a guess your average Dwarf can fit through that without trouble. Maybe make an acrobatics check, DC 12ish.

You're misunderstanding. Only the interior of a bag of holding is 2ft wide. Unless your bag of holding is an enchanted potato sack, you're not fitting anything that large into the normal sized exterior opening without tearing it.


This bag has an interior space considerably larger than its outside dimensions, roughly 2 feet in diameter at the mouth and 4 feet deep. The bag can hold up to 500 pounds, not exceeding a volume of 64 cubic feet. The bag weighs 15 pounds, regardless of its contents. Retrieving an item from the bag requires an action.

If the bag is overloaded, pierced, or torn, it ruptures and is destroyed, and its contents are scattered in the Astral Plane.

For the record, you don't want your head to be "contents" when you tear that bag open squeezing your broad dwarven shoulders into the satchel.

[BarneyBent]

You're misunderstanding. Only the interior of a bag of holding is 2ft wide. Unless your bag of holding is an enchanted potato sack, you're not fitting anything that large into the normal sized exterior opening without tearing it.



For the record, you don't want your head to be "contents" when you tear that bag open squeezing your broad dwarven shoulders into the satchel.

It’s also 64 cubic ft in volume. Which means it’s 2ft at the opening, but substantially wider than 4ft diameter at the base. How much wider depends on the shape of the interior.

The important thing is there’s 64 cubic ft of volume, so once you’re through that 2ft wide opening you’re fine.

[ProsecutorGodot]

It’s also 64 cubic ft in volume. Which means it’s 2ft at the opening, but substantially wider than 4ft diameter at the base. How much wider depends on the shape of the interior.

The important thing is there’s 64 cubic ft of volume, so once you’re through that 2ft wide opening you’re fine.

{scrubbed}

The interior is probably large enough. This opens up the issue of how much the Dwarf and all of his equipment weighs, how much is in the bag of holding and the like. This is the hypothetical problem because the real problem happens sooner.

You can't fit in the bag. The outside opening is not 2ft in diameter. That's the interior.

It's like a Tardis, it's bigger on the inside. If you don't fit in the door you still can't get in. You could also think of it like a bottleneck, the interior volume may be larger but you have a rigid stopgap that will have disastrous consequences for pushing it past it's intended limits.

It's a cool idea and I'm glad that it was fun for OP and their table. It's not how a Bag of Holding works though.

[BarneyBent]

{scrub the post, scrub the quote}

The interior is probably large enough. This opens up the issue of how much the Dwarf and all of his equipment weighs, how much is in the bag of holding and the like. This is the hypothetical problem because the real problem happens sooner.

You can't fit in the bag. The outside opening is not 2ft in diameter. That's the interior.

It's like a Tardis, it's bigger on the inside. If you don't fit in the door you still can't get in. You could also think of it like a bottleneck, the interior volume may be larger but you have a rigid stopgap that will have disastrous consequences for pushing it past it's intended limits.

It's a cool idea and I'm glad that it was fun for OP and their table. It's not how a Bag of Holding works though.

I don’t see any evidence for the size of the opening on the exterior being different to the size of the opening in the interior. If that’s the case it would open up all sorts of weirdness.

The most likely scenario is that the exterior opening is 2ft in diameter, just like the interior opening. I picture a drawstring opening myself. But on the exterior, it might only be 1 ft deep, for example, whereas the interior is 4ft deep and however many ft wide.

Unless there’s evidence that the exterior opening is somehow narrower than the interior opening, then the simplest explanation is that it’s 2ft wide.

[ProsecutorGodot]

I don’t see any evidence for the size of the opening on the exterior being different to the size of the opening in the interior. If that’s the case it would open up all sorts of weirdness.

The most likely scenario is that the exterior opening is 2ft in diameter, just like the interior opening. I picture a drawstring opening myself. But on the exterior, it might only be 1 ft deep, for example, whereas the interior is 4ft deep and however many ft wide.

Unless there’s evidence that the exterior opening is somehow narrower than the interior opening, then the simplest explanation is that it’s 2ft wide.

The kind of weirdness that lets a 15lb bag hold 500lbs of junk? The interior is a separate space with its own dimensions. The exterior is a bag. If we're supposed to accept that the exterior mouth is matched to the interior mouth we should really count the depth the same too, it only makes sense.

A Dwarf would be hard pressed to squeeze themselves into a 2ft opening regardless, they're not called the stout folk for no reason, they're much wider than humans.

[BarneyBent]

The kind of weirdness that lets a 15lb bag hold 500lbs of junk? The interior is a separate space with its own dimensions. The exterior is a bag. If we're supposed to accept that the exterior mouth is matched to the interior mouth we should really count the depth the same too, it only makes sense.

A Dwarf would be hard pressed to squeeze themselves into a 2ft opening regardless, they're not called the stout folk for no reason, they're much wider than humans.

But we’re talking about the opening, I.e. the point at which the inside becomes the outside. If they aren’t the same size, what happens to your hand as it passes through? What about when your fingers stick in? If there’s a creature inside, do they see your fingers suddenly go from finger size to gigantic meat sausages relative to the size of the opening?

The simplest interpretation is that the external opening is the same size as the internal opening - it’s the depth, width and volume that is bigger.

You can of course rule otherwise but as a player I’d be baffled at what you imagine this bag to look like from the inside.

[ProsecutorGodot]

But we’re talking about the opening, I.e. the point at which the inside becomes the outside. If they aren’t the same size, what happens to your hand as it passes through? What about when your fingers stick in? If there’s a creature inside, do they see your fingers suddenly go from finger size to gigantic meat sausages relative to the size of the opening?

The simplest interpretation is that the external opening is the same size as the internal opening - it’s the depth, width and volume that is bigger.

You can of course rule otherwise but as a player I’d be baffled at what you imagine this bag to look like from the inside.

Extradimensional spaces don't follow conventional logic. Rope Trick can hold 8 medium or smaller creatures even though the entrance is only the space around the rope, you can see from the inside out through a 3ft by 5ft window. Mordenkainen's Magnificent Mansion creates an entire mansion entered through a 5ft wide 10ft tall door out of 10ft wide cells, you can use 50 of those cells in any configuration you want. It could be an entirely vertical tower if you wanted. Let's not forget Demiplane, a medium sized door into a 30ft wide room.

These spells are extradimensional spaces, same as the Bag of Holding.

There's no gigantification or shrinking or nonsense like that. It's literally an opening into a different space. It's not bound by the dimensions of its container, it literally exists outside of those dimensions.

The bag, however, is a very real object. Even if we assume that it has a 2ft diameter opening (which is quite large for a bag) you're going to run the risk of tearing that opening if you try to squeeze through it unless you're a particularly lithe person. That's the generous ruling.

The strict ruling is that only a small or tiny creature could squeeze into a bag of holding, medium creatures can't squeeze into a space that small.

[Justin Sane]

In situations like these, there's a little DM trick I've learned from my WoD days: "I'll allow it this time".

Rule of Cool + Rule of Fun > Rules as Written.

[ProsecutorGodot]

In situations like these, there's a little DM trick I've learned from my WoD days: "I'll allow it this time".

Rule of Cool + Rule of Fun > Rules as Written.

Which is what I lead with. Just pointing out that a DM who would rule against the idea isn't being a complete killjoy. Character death is as much of an aspect to DND as surviving by the skin of your teeth is. Both can lead up to memorable moments that you'll want to share the story of.

[JellyPooga]

Regardless of whether the interior or exterior opening is 2ft, anyone with shoulders wider than 2ft across is...well, quite a large person and that's assuming a straight "bag-over-the-head" maneuver (as opposed to angling to get in). Whether a Dwarf has such a physique, whether you can wriggle in before you hit the deck and the issue of the other contents of the bag, is another set of questions, of course.

[ProsecutorGodot]

Regardless of whether the interior or exterior opening is 2ft, anyone with shoulders wider than 2ft across is...well, quite a large person and that's assuming a straight "bag-over-the-head" maneuver (as opposed to angling to get in). Whether a Dwarf has such a physique, whether you can wriggle in before you hit the deck and the issue of the other contents of the bag, is another set of questions, of course.

For a human, absolutely, shoulder to shoulder average for an adult male is somewhere near 16 inches. Someone in heavier armor might run into some difficulty but it should be possible. Humans are almost certainly too tall to fit in the bag though.

Dwarves are wide though. The best side by side I could find was in the 3.5E phb, at least 3-4 inches wider. The 5E PHB says that they weigh as much as a human 2ft taller than them so that's gotta show up somewhere. A Dwarf in heavy armor is almost certainly too wide and possible too tall since 4ft is the short end of a Dwarf's expected height.

Meanwhile Halfling's and Gnomes will just slide right into a bag of holding, no questions asked. Sadly, even a lean Half Orc or Dragonborn is out of the question. A single Dragonborn Paladin could just about meet the weight limit all on his own even if you did manage to cram him in.

The falling rate certainly is an issue. PHB assumes you fall instantly, XGtE puts the rate at 500ft per round.

[Laserlight]

In situations like these, there's a little DM trick I've learned from my WoD days: "I'll allow it this time".

Rule of Cool + Rule of Fun > Rules as Written.


I say "This does not create a precedent, but go ahead."

[Imbalance]

Extradimensional spaces don't follow conventional logic. Rope Trick can hold 8 medium or smaller creatures even though the entrance is only the space around the rope, you can see from the inside out through a 3ft by 5ft window. Mordenkainen's Magnificent Mansion creates an entire mansion entered through a 5ft wide 10ft tall door out of 10ft wide cells, you can use 50 of those cells in any configuration you want. It could be an entirely vertical tower if you wanted. Let's not forget Demiplane, a medium sized door into a 30ft wide room.

These spells are extradimensional spaces, same as the Bag of Holding.

There's no gigantification or shrinking or nonsense like that. It's literally an opening into a different space. It's not bound by the dimensions of its container, it literally exists outside of those dimensions.

The bag, however, is a very real object. Even if we assume that it has a 2ft diameter opening (which is quite large for a bag) you're going to run the risk of tearing that opening if you try to squeeze through it unless you're a particularly lithe person. That's the generous ruling.

The strict ruling is that only a small or tiny creature could squeeze into a bag of holding, medium creatures can't squeeze into a space that small.

You're grossly over-analyzing the point. A standard manhole opening is 24", and I've personally known some fairly large fellows who work underground and can scamper through them quickly when they're motivated. Even if a dwarf is 20" at the shoulder with 2" pauldrons on both sides, he can shrug and narrow himself. They literally dig tunnels, you know - it's an innate talent to squeeze through tight spaces. All you've got to poopoo this event is a lot of verbose speculation and little imagination. Certainly nothing RAW says the dwarf can't fit.

[tKUUNK]

First of all, awesome move! I love it.

I agree with ProsecutorGodot, in that I don't picture a dwarf squeezing into the bag, not easily anyway.

But when I run games, I usually reward players for this level of quick thinking and creativity.

[ProsecutorGodot]

You're grossly over-analyzing the point. A standard manhole opening is 24", and I've personally known some fairly large fellows who work underground and can scamper through them quickly when they're motivated. Even if a dwarf is 20" at the shoulder with 2" pauldrons on both sides, he can shrug and narrow himself. They literally dig tunnels, you know - it's an innate talent to squeeze through tight spaces. All you've got to poopoo this event is a lot of verbose speculation and little imagination. Certainly nothing RAW says the dwarf can't fit.

I can quote the strict RAW

Squeezing into a Smaller Space
A creature can squeeze through a space that is large enough for a creature one size smaller than it. Thus, a Large creature can squeeze through a passage that's only 5 feet wide. While squeezing through a space, a creature must spend 1 extra foot for every foot it moves there, and it has disadvantage on attack rolls and Dexterity saving throws. Attack rolls against the creature have advantage while it's in the smaller space.

Medium Creatures are able to squeeze into the space that a Small creature could fit, which happens to also be 5ft. The mechanics do make note that a medium creature is rarely 5ft wide but squeezing doesn't really care how wide you actually are.

Squeezing through tight tunnels where the worst that could happen is you get stuck and have to force your way through is one thing, squeezing through a bag of holding head first and having it tear when you misjudge your pauldrons size (or sharpness) is another matter entirely.

But again, I'm just pointing out that someone who would veto this type of maneuver isn't doing it just to be a killjoy. There are mechanical reasons that this maneuver shouldn't have worked. Despite those reasons, I personally think it's better overall that it did work.

[tieren]

Frankly, I would say RAW this isn't possible for a dwarf.

Per the squeezing rules a creature can only squeeze through an opening one size smaller. The 2' opening is tiny (as in "tiny" the game term) familiars and the like can go through without squeezing, small creatures (gnomes and halflings) would need to squeeze, medium and larger creatures just can't go.

[Segev]

If the Bag of Holding's "exterior" opening were less than 2 ft., there would be no point to defining its "interior" opening as 2 ft. because nothing could use the 2 ft. opening as everything would have to pass through the smaller opening anyway. The only logical parsing, taking all context into consideration, is that the bag does open to a 2 ft. diameter opening on both sides of the opening.

[KorvinStarmast]

The inner and outer dimensions of the bag of holding do not match.

The transition point -- the opening -- matches. (Which I think is what Segev was pointing out).

Bizarre physical analogy.

My bathroom that adjoins our living room is a much smaller / different sized room than the living room. The doorway that connects the two rooms is the same size going in either direction. The dimensions of the rooms on either side of the doorway are not the same, and don't have to be.

For the OP: The ruling was excellent, as was the move into the bag.

Bags of holding have certainly raised interesting in play situation since they were introduced into the game (https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/114714/22566). It is important to remember that they are magical. The existence in the fantasy world of these extradimensional spaces, which we do not have experience with IRL, leads to some bizarre possibilities (https://rpg.stackexchange.com/q/125282/22566).

[Darkstar952]

Frankly, I would say RAW this isn't possible for a dwarf.

Per the squeezing rules a creature can only squeeze through an opening one size smaller. The 2' opening is tiny (as in "tiny" the game term) familiars and the like can go through without squeezing, small creatures (gnomes and halflings) would need to squeeze, medium and larger creatures just can't go.

Thats more a problem that the system developers are apparently idiots that have no understanding of actual sizes or scales and just seem to have randomly and arbitrarily thrown some numbers at their own abstractions without examining the resulting consequences. And then others apply those moronic numbers/abstractions in the strictest of terms.

The average shoulder width of a human male is approx 17 inches (varies by country), so assume the dwarf is 40% broader than a human and you get to 23.8 inches. So roughly equal to the opening of the bag, so probably not simple to just pop it over their head and disappear inside, but also not totally impossible to squeeze their way in. Probably appropriate to make it a test.

[Crgaston]

Wow, lots of responses! Thanks everyone!

Some points of clarification...

1. I have always described Spirko as being on the tall and slender side for a dwarf... like 4'8" and 150 pounds or so. His armor is a breastplate. No spikes. And he has the Squat Nimbleness feat.

2. The Bag was only recently acquired. The only other things in it are personal gear (spare Healer's Kits, bedroll, etc.).

3. Re: fall time... it was literally the beginning of his turn and as a Thief he has Fast Hands. Plenty of time in a 300' fall if we're going by Xanathar's.

[JellyPooga]

It's probably worth noting that this is a sack. Not a hole in the ground. It's deformable. At it's maximum extension (imagine a sack laid flat), the opening is the circumference of the opening (Pi x 2ft) divided by two, or roughly 3ft in this case. Allowing for wiggle room (a nice specific calculation:smallwink:), we can certainly allow for more than the 2ft diameter at the opening. Just sayin'. You know, if you want to split hairs on this. :smallbiggrin:

[Dessunri]

All this discussion over wheather or not a Dwarf could fit into a bag of holding is distracting from the real point of this post. The player was able to think quickly and come up with an unconventional solution to a lethal problem. At my table, if a player were to try this manuever, I'd ask for a couple of skill checks that would be a relativley low DC and allow it to happen while letting the players know that I'll allow it this time, but it does not mean that this can be a common tactic going forward. I tend to DM with the mindset that 'rule of cool + creative thinking > RAW'

[Segev]

I do love the mental image of the dwarf hurling over the side of the cliff, and then an empty bag landing with a soft "plop" on the ground at the bottom.

[Mellack]

3. Re: fall time... it was literally the beginning of his turn and as a Thief he has Fast Hands. Plenty of time in a 300' fall if we're going by Xanathar's.

I thought Xanathar's said you instantly fall up to 500 feet.

[Mud Puppy]

Someone's been reading Critical Failures!

Great solution to a problem that would've normally ended with you rolling up a new character!

Justin Sane said it best



In situations like these, there's a little DM trick I've learned from my WoD days: "I'll allow it this time".

Rule of Cool + Rule of Fun > Rules as Written.

[Bloodcloud]

I mean, dwarf may be wide, but a rogue dwarf with squat nimbleness (acrobatic I guess?), I'd definitely let it happen. Lot more believable he's got some cirque du soleil contorsion possibility. Plus, it is quite fun.

[Trickery]

People are misunderstanding the Squeeze Through a Smaller Space rules. Small creatures are not assumed to be 5' by 5', nor are medium ones. They take up that much space on a grid. That's a big difference.

How tall is a halfling, and how wide? The basic rules say that a halfling is about 3 feet tall. Unless the halfling is cubic, they can comfortablly fit into a 2 foot wide, 4 foot deep hole.

Thus, a medium creature can squeeze into that space. Period. There really is no debate to be had, here.

Don't let your own misunderstanding of game mechanics get in the way of a fun session.

[MagneticKitty]

We killed an ancient green dragon with feather fall. I won't Give to much expository, but: the bard hit a dragon with hypnotic pattern, and she chose not to use a legendary save because she was falling and assumed she would wake when hitting the ground (she was only like 30 feet up). And the wizard is all like: nothing says you can't use feather fall on enemies.
The whole table goes quiet. Yeah.. nothing says that. So the dragon floats down landing prone and we all get several rounds of prep and a round of attacks at advantage against it, killing it.

So don't you go dissing feather fall.

[Trampaige]

People are misunderstanding the Squeeze Through a Smaller Space rules. Small creatures are not assumed to be 5' by 5', nor are medium ones. They take up that much space on a grid. That's a big difference.

How tall is a halfling, and how wide? The basic rules say that a halfling is about 3 feet tall. Unless the halfling is cubic, they can comfortablly fit into a 2 foot wide, 4 foot deep hole.

Thus, a medium creature can squeeze into that space. Period. There really is no debate to be had, here.

Don't let your own misunderstanding of game mechanics get in the way of a fun session.

I've been away from the forums for a few months, but it's good to see that some things never change.

Common doorways are 30-36" wide in the real world. Do adult humans have to squeeze through every doorway in D&D? Do you literally believe the door to every peasant's cottage you visit is five feet wide? It takes up a part of the grid, not the whole 5 foot length.

And the suggestions that an adult human couldn't fit in a 4x4x4 cube is ridiculous. How big do you think airplane seats are?

(Hypothetical 'you's' here aimed at other posters, obviously I agree with you)

[Crgaston]

I thought Xanathar's said you instantly fall up to 500 feet.

You’re correct, but it also says that you then hang out in mid air for 6 seconds and then instantly fall (teleport?) another 500 feet at the end of your next turn.

I was just meaning in reference to 500’/ round


Someone's been reading Critical Failures!

Great solution to a problem that would've normally ended with you rolling up a new character!

Justin Sane said it best

What is this Critical Failures of which you speak?

[Crgaston]

We killed an ancient green dragon with feather fall. I won't Give to much expository, but: the bard hit a dragon with hypnotic pattern, and she chose not to use a legendary save because she was falling and assumed she would wake when hitting the ground (she was only like 30 feet up). And the wizard is all like: nothing says you can't use feather fall on enemies.
The whole table goes quiet. Yeah.. nothing says that. So the dragon floats down landing prone and we all get several rounds of prep and a round of attacks at advantage against it, killing it.

So don't you go dissing feather fall.

That is bloody brilliant! :)

[Mellack]

You’re correct, but it also says that you then hang out in mid air for 6 seconds and then instantly fall (teleport?) another 500 feet at the end of your next turn.

I was just meaning in reference to 500’/ round



My point is that by that rule our dwarf shouldn't have had time to do anything. It makes the whole debate of if he fits into the bag moot. It is a cool idea, but I don't think it works by the rules regarding time.

[tieren]

People are misunderstanding the Squeeze Through a Smaller Space rules. Small creatures are not assumed to be 5' by 5', nor are medium ones. They take up that much space on a grid. That's a big difference.

How tall is a halfling, and how wide? The basic rules say that a halfling is about 3 feet tall. Unless the halfling is cubic, they can comfortablly fit into a 2 foot wide, 4 foot deep hole.

Thus, a medium creature can squeeze into that space. Period. There really is no debate to be had, here.

Don't let your own misunderstanding of game mechanics get in the way of a fun session.

You are confusing actual squeezing with game term squeezing.

In game terms it means you go slower, have disadvantage to attack rolls and Dex saves and creatures have advantage to hit you.

The hallway outside my office is barely 4 feet wide, I don't have to "squeeze" to walk down it or even to pass another person going the other way. However I don't pretend I could stand there and swing a sword as effectively as someone out in the open nor do I think I could dodge as well given the lack of places to move to.

So yes, halfling can get through a 2 foot entryway, but not at the same speed they could traverse a larger opening (perhaps represented by sliding through or dropping to knees to crawl).

[Mud Puppy]

What is this Critical Failures of which you speak?

Dude.... oh man.... look up Critical Failures by Robert Bevan... he is up to 7 books in the series now, but it's basically about a group of PCs that get magically teleported into the game. In one of the books they use something really similar to your bag of holding trick to escape a situation.

The series is freaking hilarious, if super raunchy. Totally worth the read. 10/10 would recommend.

[Chronos]

OK, I just took a measuring tape and measured the circumference of my shoulders. It came out to a little under 48 inches, and I'm on the broad-shouldered side for a human. A bag opening with a diameter of 2' has a circumference of approximately 75 inches. 75 is much greater than 48. My measuring tape is only 60 inches long, and even when I let it out to that size, there was still plenty of room. Even granting that dwarves are wider than even above-average humans, they're not that wide.

[Trickery]

You are confusing actual squeezing with game term squeezing.

In game terms it means you go slower, have disadvantage to attack rolls and Dex saves and creatures have advantage to hit you.

The hallway outside my office is barely 4 feet wide, I don't have to "squeeze" to walk down it or even to pass another person going the other way. However I don't pretend I could stand there and swing a sword as effectively as someone out in the open nor do I think I could dodge as well given the lack of places to move to.

So yes, halfling can get through a 2 foot entryway, but not at the same speed they could traverse a larger opening (perhaps represented by sliding through or dropping to knees to crawl).

I get the impression that you would impose difficult terrain on a halfling trying to walk through a 2 foot wide, 4 foot tall doorway because halflings control 5 by 5 feet on the grid.

[Vorpalchicken]

It definitely sounds like you'd splat at the bottom of the pit before your turn came up. As far as fitting in the bag, sounds borderline but I'd allow it. If you told me as a DM you were planning that for your next turn's action (where technically you'd already be at the bottom) I'd bend the rules for your cool move too.

Really it would take about 4 seconds to drop 300 feet (rather than instantly plummeting 500) if this weren't the D&D rules-verse.

[Crgaston]

It definitely sounds like you'd splat at the bottom of the pit before your turn came up. As far as fitting in the bag, sounds borderline but I'd allow it. If you told me as a DM you were planning that for your next turn's action (where technically you'd already be at the bottom) I'd bend the rules for your cool move too.

Really it would take about 4 seconds to drop 300 feet (rather than instantly plummeting 500) if this weren't the D&D rules-verse.

Both good points. And this reply is to the thread as a whole, because a lot of people are making different points...

The reason Spirko was falling in the first place was the use of the Telekenetic eye ray as a Legendary Action on the part of the beholder because the turn of the player who was immediately before Spirko in the initiative order ended. The DM knew he was fixin' to stab the heck out of the beholder, so that's why the beholder targeted him. The random die roll decided that it would be the TK ray, and rather than just push Spirko away, he decided (wisely) to take Spirko entirely out of the fight. So technically, as soon as the beholder released him, it WAS Spirko's turn.


Interestingly, the XGtE rules for falling more than 500 feet...


When you fall from a great height you instantly descend up to 500 feet. If you're still falling on your next turn you descend up to 500 feet at the end of that turn. This process continues until the fall ends.

...enable the following lunacy from a a Battlemaster/Thief (lets say he's Level 6/5. It gets really wacky if he's 17/3)

1. You're on a Carpet of Flying hovering 500 feet above and 5' away from a locked window in the highest floor of a guarded tower. Let's say it's the Treasure Room. You step off and fall 500'. It happens immediately, and since you don't fall farther than 500', and no time has passed, you still have the rest of your turn.
2. Fast Hands to pick the lock using your Bonus Action.
3. Use a Free Object Interaction to open the window.
4. Smirk insultingly at the 2 guards standing 5' inside the window.
5. Let your turn end.

6. On their turns, the guards attack you with halberds. One hits and one misses.
7. Use your Reaction to Riposte with your whip, get Sneak Attack damage.

8. Your next turn starts. You're still hovering, because you don't continue falling until the end of your turn.
9. Use 10 feet of Climbing Movement to pull yourself in the window.
10. Use Bonus Action Fast Hands to Sleight of Hand the keys from the guard's belt.
11. Use 10-15 more feet to move past the 2 guards.
12. Draw an opportunity attack from each of them. One hits, the other misses.
13. Use your Reaction (which renewed at the start of your turn) to Riposte with your whip, get Sneak Attack damage, and use Pushing attack to shove the guard out the window.
14. Use your Action to Attack the remaining guard. Also Sneak Attack. Also Pushing Attack.
15. You're now standing in the Treasure Room with a solid floor beneath you, holding the keys, A Free Object Interaction unused, movement remaining, and an unused Action Surge.
16. Damage taken = 0.

Heck, you could actually do Pushing Attack on both guards (pushing them further back into the room) from outside the window and THEN climb inside.

Am I wrong?

I feel like letting the fall happen in a realistic rate of time is probably the better choice, all things considered.

[Mellack]

You still fell 500 feet. As soon as you pulled yourself inside, you would take the 20d6 for the fall as the fall has now ended, IMO.
Also, according to the rule, poor Spirko wouldn't get a chance to pull out his bag. You fall up to 500' immediately. Since the pit is only 300', he hits the bottom by the end of the legendary action.

[BarneyBent]

You still fell 500 feet. As soon as you pulled yourself inside, you would take the 20d6 for the fall as the fall has now ended, IMO.
Also, according to the rule, poor Spirko wouldn't get a chance to pull out his bag. You fall up to 500' immediately. Since the pit is only 300', he hits the bottom by the end of the legendary action.

Question - does “instantly descend” mean you hit the ground immediately? Or does it mean your fall commences immediately? Because if it commences immediately, it just means you are 500ft closer to the ground by the start of your next turn.

I’m not sure if it’s been clarified elsewhere but to me either reading is semantically valid and the latter makes far more sense (instantaneous 500ft teleportation would just be weird).

[ProsecutorGodot]

Question - does “instantly descend” mean you hit the ground immediately? Or does it mean your fall commences immediately? Because if it commences immediately, it just means you are 500ft closer to the ground by the start of your next turn.

I’m not sure if it’s been clarified elsewhere but to me either reading is semantically valid and the latter makes far more sense (instantaneous 500ft teleportation would just be weird).

It's not really ambiguous.

Rate of Falling
The rule for falling assumes that a creature immediately drops the entire distance when it falls. But what if a creature is at a high altitude when it falls, perhaps on the back of a griffon or on board an airship? Realistically, a fall from such a height can take more than a few seconds, extending past the end of the turn when the fall occurred. If you’d like high-altitude falls to be properly time-consuming, use the following optional rule.

When you fall from a great height, you instantly descend up to 500 feet. If you’re still falling on your next turn, you descend up to 500 feet at the end of that turn. This process continues until the fall ends, either because you hit the ground or the fall is otherwise halted.

Base Rules: You instantly hit the ground when you're thrown off the ledge.
XGtE: You descend 500ft immediately, if you are still falling you fall 500ft further at the end of your next turn. The process ends when you hit the ground, which can happen as soon as step 1 where you immediately fall 500ft.

You can't fall 500ft from the top of a 300ft pit without hitting the bottom. In both cases that creature is in for pain as soon as it happens. Unless they have a reaction (Featherfall) that can slow their descent.

[BarneyBent]

It's not really ambiguous.


Base Rules: You instantly hit the ground when you're thrown off the ledge.

Would argue it is actually ambiguous. “Immediately” in this context is as compared to the next variant, which breaks the fall into 500ft increments. As such, “immediately” could be interpreted as “you make the entire fall in one go”, not “you are instantly at the end of the fall”. Highly ambiguous but possible support for this interpretation can be seen in the PHB which quotes the falling rules as such (emphasis mine):


A fall from a great height is one of the most common hazards facing an adventurer.
At the end of a fall, a creature takes 1d6 bludgeoning damage for every 10 feet it fell, to a maximum of 20d6. The creature lands prone, unless it avoids taking damage from the fall.

The wording “at the end of a fall” implies the fall has time. There is nowhere else that I can see in the rules that implies the fall is instantaneous - it doesn’t even suggest that the whole distance is fallen in one go, it just doesn’t address it one way or the other.



XGtE: You descend 500ft immediately, if you are still falling you fall 500ft further at the end of your next turn. The process ends when you hit the ground, which can happen as soon as step 1 where you immediately fall 500ft.

You can't fall 500ft from the top of a 300ft pit without hitting the bottom. In both cases that creature is in for pain as soon as it happens. Unless they have a reaction (Featherfall) that can slow their descent.

Again, “falling immediately” doesn’t specify whether the fall starts immediately or ends immediately.

If I’m at the top of some stairs and suddenly see something downstairs that I want, I might “descend immediately”. Doesn’t mean I’m at the bottom immediately, it means I start the process of descending immediately.

Now to be clear, I’m not arguing that this interpretation is the only correct one. Can 100% see why people read the rules and interpret them to mean an instantaneous transportation downwards because honestly that’s how I read them too. But I’d argue there is some ambiguity and it’s possible these rules aren’t quite as ridiculous as they seem to read.

[ProsecutorGodot]

SNIP
If you immediately descend 500ft down a 300ft hole, you hit the bottom and take damage immediately.

There aren't really two ways to read that. It's not something you control, it just happens. You fall 500ft. If falling 500ft causes you to impact something, you impact it. If you didn't impact something the first 500ft then you have time where you can act before falling an additional 500ft at the end of your turn.

Fun fact, for those calling this ridiculous, is that it was an honest attempt to make falling more realistic. Freefalling 500ft takes about 5.5 seconds which is very near the 6 second time of a round.

[BarneyBent]

If you immediately descend 500ft down a 300ft hole, you hit the bottom and take damage immediately.

There aren't really two ways to read that. It's not something you control, it just happens. You fall 500ft. If falling 500ft causes you to impact something, you impact it. If you didn't impact something the first 500ft then you have time where you can act before falling an additional 500ft at the end of your turn.

Fun fact, for those calling this ridiculous, is that it was an honest attempt to make falling more realistic. Freefalling 500ft takes about 5.5 seconds which is very near the 6 second time of a round.

Wait, I think we might be arguing slightly different things.

If you fall down a 300ft pit at the start of your turn, do you get to take an action or bonus action on that turn before you hit the ground?

I’m saying the rules are potentially ambiguous. Immediately descending may suggest you instantaneously hit the ground. But it may also suggest only that you immediately start descending, giving you time to do things before you splat.

In fact, the wording of “Feather Fall” indicates this is probably the intended (and common sense) interpretation:


Choose up to five falling creatures within range. A falling creature's rate of descent slows to 60 feet per round until the spell ends. If the creature lands before the spell ends, it takes no falling damage and can land on its feet, and the spell ends for that creature.

Emphasis mine. Creatures are described as “falling”, which implies that there is a state between “not falling” and “splat”. Based on the “instant” interpretation of PHB, there would be no valid targets for this spell, ever. Based on the “instant” interpretation of XGTE rules, you would only be able to cast this on creatures falling greater than 500ft (else the same instant splat mechanic comes in). A creature’s “rate of descent” is also mentioned - of course, no previous rate of descent is established, but it does imply “immediate fall” does not mean “instantaneous splat”.

Now, it’s easy enough to hand-wave away this as a fairly minor semantic problem but it does suggest that the game designers had falling as something that occurs over time in mind, even if that timeframe was never actually articulated or even considered.

Point is, the idea that if you fall 300ft on your turn you can’t use a bonus action before you hit the ground is fairly well supported by the rules but isn’t quite as unambiguous as it seems. I can see how I might have written the rules (both PHB and XGTE) with this interpretation in mind, even though to a casual reader the instant splat interpretation seems the clearer one.

Either way the rules are terribly written and just plain stupid.

[ProsecutorGodot]

Wait, I think we might be arguing slightly different things.

If you fall down a 300ft pit at the start of your turn, do you get to take an action or bonus action on that turn before you hit the ground?
That really depends, but generally when something happens to you, the thing happens first and then your actions happen after. There are exceptions to this but the rules just have you falling immediately, either the full distance or 500ft.

On your turn, you can long jump 20ft and cast misty step at the end of your jump without ever having been considered "falling".


I’m saying the rules are potentially ambiguous. Immediately descending may suggest you instantaneously hit the ground. But it may also suggest only that you immediately start descending, giving you time to do things before you splat.
I don't follow your logic here. Immediately descending 500ft means you've gone 500ft immediately, as in right away, as soon as possible, instantly.

Once your DM has ruled that you are falling, you fall the distance (either all or 500ft per turn) unless you have something to stop yourself.

In fact, the wording of “Feather Fall” indicates this is probably the intended (and common sense) interpretation:

Emphasis mine. Creatures are described as “falling”, which implies that there is a state between “not falling” and “splat”. Based on the “instant” interpretation of PHB, there would be no valid targets for this spell, ever. Based on the “instant” interpretation of XGTE rules, you would only be able to cast this on creatures falling greater than 500ft (else the same instant splat mechanic comes in). A creature’s “rate of descent” is also mentioned - of course, no previous rate of descent is established, but it does imply “immediate fall” does not mean “instantaneous splat”.
Featherfall's specific rules for falling do not imply how falling works in the absence of Featherfall. Featherfall specifically lets you react to falling just like Shield specifically lets you react to an attack or Counterspell lets you react to a spell.

As for the bolded part, it implies no such thing. The rules plain and simple say you fall and take damage for every 10ft you fell. If anything the implication is that you do fall immediately and you do splat at the same time. This is supported in XGtE where it says:

The rule for falling assumes that a creature immediately drops the entire distance when it falls.
The entire distance meaning "to the ground" which ends your fall and causes the damage.


Now, it’s easy enough to hand-wave away this as a fairly minor semantic problem but it does suggest that the game designers had falling as something that occurs over time in mind, even if that timeframe was never actually articulated or even considered.

Point is, the idea that if you fall 300ft on your turn you can’t use a bonus action before you hit the ground is fairly well supported by the rules but isn’t quite as unambiguous as it seems. I can see how I might have written the rules (both PHB and XGTE) with this interpretation in mind, even though to a casual reader the instant splat interpretation seems the clearer one.

Either way the rules are terribly written and just plain stupid.
On the bolded note, the casual reading is usually the intended one. It's one of the core design philosophies of 5E. If you've got to dig deep and make assumptions beyond what is written clearly then it's not RAW and likely not RAI either.

As far as I'm concerned, the rules for falling are too generous. I recall seeing a signature of one of the regular posters here (who it is escapes me right now) making fun of the fact that a character can fall from orbit in this edition and suffer a maximum of 120 damage. My 15th level Paladin could do it twice before resting with his effective hit point total. He could go a third time after an hour break.

If a Barbarian needs to scale down a mountain it's more efficient for them just to jump off of it. One with 14 Con can guarantee he survives the landing by raging as early as level 6 or 7.

[BarneyBent]

I don't follow your logic here. Immediately descending 500ft means you've gone 500ft immediately, as in right away, as soon as possible, instantly.

I’ll go back to my stairs example. If I am at the top of a staircase and I suddenly see on the lower level someone I really want to see, I would immediately descend the stairs to say hi. Did I instantaneously teleport down the stairs? Or did I immediately start descending the stairs?

Basically, “to descend” can mean both to complete a descent and also just mean the act of descending. Both meanings are entirely semantically valid.



Featherfall's specific rules for falling do not imply how falling works in the absence of Featherfall. Featherfall specifically lets you react to falling just like Shield specifically lets you react to an attack or Counterspell lets you react to a spell.

I’m trying to imagine how falling works based on this. Ground gives way, party falls X ft. Reactions still take time. So what’s happening when the person reacts? According to the instantaneous splat definition, you’re either not falling or you have fallen. There is no point at which the reaction could occur to target creatures who are “falling”, i.e. in the process of making that descent. A reaction doesn’t have to occur on your turn but it does still take time.



As for the bolded part, it implies no such thing. The rules plain and simple say you fall and take damage for every 10ft you fell. If anything the implication is that you do fall immediately and you do splat at the same time.

I don’t see how this relates to the bold. That a rate of descent exists as a concept implies that characters fall at a rate, rather than instantaneously.



This is supported in XGtE where it says:

The entire distance meaning "to the ground" which ends your fall and causes the damage.

I agree that this is by far the strongest evidence for “instantaneous splat”. However, if you’ll read a few comments up, “immediately” in contrast to “500ft at a time” could just mean the whole distance is covered in the one chunk and not separates over multiple rounds, and doesn’t necessarily address whether somebody has time to take an action if they happen to fall in their turn. Slight stretch but not an unheard of use of the term “immediately”.



On the bolded note, the casual reading is usually the intended one. It's one of the core design philosophies of 5E. If you've got to dig deep and make assumptions beyond what is written clearly then it's not RAW and likely not RAI either.

Also agreed. I’m not actually advocating this as RAW or RAI. I’m suggesting there’s just more ambiguity than appears at first glance, and really highlighting, more than anything, what a cluster**** the falling rules are.

[Crgaston]

You still fell 500 feet. As soon as you pulled yourself inside, you would take the 20d6 for the fall as the fall has now ended, IMO.
Also, according to the rule, poor Spirko wouldn't get a chance to pull out his bag. You fall up to 500' immediately. Since the pit is only 300', he hits the bottom by the end of the legendary action.

Wow these rules are crazy :-) That is a reasonable interpretation regarding the "...fall ends...take damage..." rule. However, this rule...


At the end of a fall, a creature takes 1d6 bludgeoning damage for every 10 feet it fell, to a maximum of 20d6. The creature lands prone, unless it avoids taking damage from the fall.

...suggests that it is possible to avoid taking damage. Some ways to avoid taking damage are specified, such as a Monk's Slow Fall or the Feather Fall spell. However, it is reasonable to assume that stepping or climbing laterally onto a surface while you are hovering is also a way to avoid taking fall damage.

If you disagree with that interpretation, would you agree that someone inside the room casting the Fly spell on our hovering character would also end the fall and proc the damage?


In related silliness, if you don't actually pull yourself in, you can basically get two full turns hovering outside the window after you unlock and open it. For a Fighter (any) 17/Thief 3 using both your Action Surges, that would be 12 attacks through the open window.

[Segev]

In related silliness, if you don't actually pull yourself in, you can basically get two full turns hovering outside the window after you unlock and open it. For a Fighter (any) 17/Thief 3 using both your Action Surges, that would be 12 attacks through the open window.
"Silliness" is all in how you describe it. The fighter/thief falling past the window, hurling it open and firing 12 daggers/javelines/darts/whatever through the opening as he flashes past is potentially awesome.

The guards see a flicker at the window, and then suddenly a dozen projectiles are flying at them as fast as they notice the vague figure falling past. When they recover - if they recover - they notice that the window is now open.

[Mellack]

Yeah, it is a game and not really trying to simulate reality. There are weird effects, especially on unusual corner cases. If it were to really bother a DM, they could use the standard rule where you fall any total distance immediately. I wouldn't allow climbing in a window save any damage because you are actually still falling at that point. You never actually "hover". You didn't stop your falling. The game is just giving you actions that you can do while you are still falling. Because of the way the game gives discrete turns and actions to describe the action, weird things happen. It is the same way your fighter isn't moving and swinging at an orc, then standing there like a statue while everyone else takes their turn. Things are narratively happening simultaneously even though in the game they are run consecutively.

[NRSASD]

@OP

Brilliant! I love tactics like that!

[Willie the Duck]

Featherfall's specific rules for falling do not imply how falling works in the absence of Featherfall. Featherfall specifically lets you react to falling just like Shield specifically lets you react to an attack or Counterspell lets you react to a spell.

Even if we take it as precedent, it would imply that fall-prevention is something that should happen as a reaction on the turn where the TK was used. It's my understanding that immediate actions (the 3e precursor to reactions) were introduced originally to make featherfall actually useful by RAW (in basic/classic and AD&D almost everyone undoubtedly house ruled, but as written you pretty much had to cast it and then jump off a ledge (making it extra situational).

Here's another question, why did the beholder just boot him out over the cliff instead of hurling him down the chasm as hard as he could? This is TK, not just shoving him over the edge?

Regardless, I would rule for this action based on rule-of-cool/rewarding inventive thinking. So good job OP.

[tieren]

I have a level 9 warlock with the tomb of levistus invocation.

When I take damage I can use a reaction to encase myself in ice and gain 10 temporary hp per level (90 thp) which takes as much of the triggering damage as it can.

If I fall from ANY height I can "ice block" to absorb 90 hp of the fall damage and just be incapacitated but otherwise fine the next turn.

I love the visual of getting more hard and brittle to avoid taking the falling damage.

[Crgaston]

Even if we take it as precedent, it would imply that fall-prevention is something that should happen as a reaction on the turn where the TK was used. It's my understanding that immediate actions (the 3e precursor to reactions) were introduced originally to make featherfall actually useful by RAW (in basic/classic and AD&D almost everyone undoubtedly house ruled, but as written you pretty much had to cast it and then jump off a ledge (making it extra situational).

Here's another question, why did the beholder just boot him out over the cliff instead of hurling him down the chasm as hard as he could? This is TK, not just shoving him over the edge?

Regardless, I would rule for this action based on rule-of-cool/rewarding inventive thinking. So good job OP.

That's a good question. The Beholder was grappled, and the mouth of the pit was shrouded in magical darkness/fog, so the beholder would lose sight of him once he started going down.

Thanks!


I have a level 9 warlock with the tomb of levistus invocation.

When I take damage I can use a reaction to encase myself in ice and gain 10 temporary hp per level (90 thp) which takes as much of the triggering damage as it can.

If I fall from ANY height I can "ice block" to absorb 90 hp of the fall damage and just be incapacitated but otherwise fine the next turn.

I love the visual of getting more hard and brittle to avoid taking the falling damage.

That's a cool image and and clever use!

[darknite]

I had a PC that got proned out while flying over a chasm, then fell 100' (no hover). Good thing he's a barbarian...

[NRSASD]

I have a level 9 warlock with the tomb of levistus invocation.

When I take damage I can use a reaction to encase myself in ice and gain 10 temporary hp per level (90 thp) which takes as much of the triggering damage as it can.

If I fall from ANY height I can "ice block" to absorb 90 hp of the fall damage and just be incapacitated but otherwise fine the next turn.

I love the visual of getting more hard and brittle to avoid taking the falling damage.

Our party's warlock did precisely that to get away from Strahd by jumping off Castle Ravenloft. It almost worked too!

[Trickery]

Seems to be some argument as to whether a PC could crawl into a bag while falling 500' when it isn't his turn. That's a DM question - whether the DM will allow a reaction or how long the DM decides it takes to fall that long. In this case, the DM made a ruling, so that's what happened. Rule 0, folks.

[Mellack]

Seems to be some argument as to whether a PC could crawl into a bag while falling 500' when it isn't his turn. That's a DM question - whether the DM will allow a reaction or how long the DM decides it takes to fall that long. In this case, the DM made a ruling, so that's what happened. Rule 0, folks.

DM's are always able to rule whatever they want. What people are discussing is if that matches the Rules As Written, or RAW. A DM could decide that characters can flap their arms and fly like a cartoon, but that is not supported by the rules in the books.

[Trickery]

DM's are always able to rule whatever they want. What people are discussing is if that matches the Rules As Written, or RAW. A DM could decide that characters can flap their arms and fly like a cartoon, but that is not supported by the rules in the books.

Trouble with RAW for falling is that it's all over the place and is contradictory. If you knock a dragon prone in the air, does it fall immediately? If you look at the PHB only, yes. If you add Xanathar's, no. And how could it be instant if players have time for a reaction spell?

This is one where DMs are very frequently have their own say in the matter and don't really care what the rules say. I've seen it often enough at 5e tables that I can say that for sure. And, regardless, we weren't talking about a hypothetical example. We know what the DM said in this case. That's why I mentioned rule 0.

[ProsecutorGodot]

Trouble with RAW for falling is that it's all over the place and is contradictory. If you knock a dragon prone in the air, does it fall immediately? If you look at the PHB only, yes. If you add Xanathar's, no. And how could it be instant if players have time for a reaction spell?

This is one where DMs are very frequently have their own say in the matter and don't really care what the rules say. I've seen it often enough at 5e tables that I can say that for sure. And, regardless, we weren't talking about a hypothetical example. We know what the DM said in this case. That's why I mentioned rule 0.

And in this actual example, even with the XGtE rules, they would have hit the ground immediately. I'm not seeing anything contradictory about the falling rules either, XGtE is optional to begin with and specific tools to use your reaction to something is a mechanic found in many places in the game.

I've said it before, I'll say it again, despite this tactic having several reasons that it wouldn't work I think the DM made the right call in allowing it. I just like having clarity on an issue. The more information we present, the better prepared everyone in the discussion will be if they need to make their own decision on it.

Having this sort of discussion might not be your cup of tea, but I enjoy it.

[Trickery]

And in this actual example, even with the XGtE rules, they would have hit the ground immediately. I'm not seeing anything contradictory about the falling rules either, XGtE is optional to begin with and specific tools to use your reaction to something is a mechanic found in many places in the game.

I've said it before, I'll say it again, despite this tactic having several reasons that it wouldn't work I think the DM made the right call in allowing it. I just like having clarity on an issue. The more information we present, the better prepared everyone in the discussion will be if they need to make their own decision on it.

Having this sort of discussion might not be your cup of tea, but I enjoy it.

Fair enough. I just wanted to point out that there is no "right" or "wrong" for falling. It's too contentious.

And DMs can be pretty inconsistent on it, too. If the DM decides to pull a dragon out and I knock it prone in the air, what do you think is the likelihood that the dragon will hit the ground and take falling damage? The DM's dragon, that he wants to be a credible threat, is going to get taken out by a prone effect? Not likely. I've done this before using sleet storm (great spell for dealing with fliers), and the only effect was to make the dragon waste its turn. Lots of DMs would have handled things differently, and that's my point. We can't let ourselves get too caught up in the specifics of RAW.

[ProsecutorGodot]

Fair enough. I just wanted to point out that there is no "right" or "wrong" for falling. It's too contentious.

And DMs can be pretty inconsistent on it, too. If the DM decides to pull a dragon out and I knock it prone in the air, what do you think is the likelihood that the dragon will hit the ground and take falling damage? The DM's dragon, that he wants to be a credible threat, is going to get taken out by a prone effect? Not likely. I've done this before using sleet storm (great spell for dealing with fliers), and the only effect was to make the dragon waste its turn. Lots of DMs would have handled things differently, and that's my point. We can't let ourselves get too caught up in the specifics of RAW.

Well a suitably high level dragon (adult or ancient) can choose to save on sleet storm with a legendary resistance, not being knocked prone. Being knocked prone while airborne is probably threatening enough to the dragon that the DM wouldn't want it to do that, it would also lose any tactical advantage it had while prone. I'd call this an effective spell use if you took out a legendary resistance with it. You might even burn two since the Dragon needs to save again a the start of their turn as well as when you cast it. There's even an incredibly unlikely chance of a third saving throw if they don't manage to escape the aoe on that turn.

If you've had a DM who flatout said that it didn't work, that's a DM problem, not a rules problem. It's not just RAW being spit on at that point, it's going against the spirit of the game.

[Trickery]

Well a suitably high level dragon (adult or ancient) can choose to save on sleet storm with a legendary resistance, not being knocked prone. Being knocked prone while airborne is probably threatening enough to the dragon that the DM wouldn't want it to do that, it would also lose any tactical advantage it had while prone. I'd call this an effective spell use if you took out a legendary resistance with it. You might even burn two since the Dragon needs to save again a the start of their turn as well as when you cast it. There's even an incredibly unlikely chance of a third saving throw if they don't manage to escape the aoe on that turn.

If you've had a DM who flatout said that it didn't work, that's a DM problem, not a rules problem. It's not just RAW being spit on at that point, it's going against the spirit of the game.

I don't see it as a problem when a DM changes or ignores a particular rule. All DMs do that with different rules. You go into campaigns expecting there to be houserules. At least, I do. Back when I didn't, I was disappointed every time, and that's no fun.

And I think you're getting too caught up on one tree. I'm not trying to complain about my old DM or anything. I'm just saying that falling rules, specifically, vary widely by table. Asking what happens when you fall isn't the same as asking how much damage a greatsword does. Falling rules frequently get houseruled, ignored, or changed on the fly. That's all.

[flat_footed]

The Fullmetal Mod: Congrats to Crgaston on their quick thinking, but this discussion has run its course from the original intent. I won't discourage anyone here from creating a new thread to debate the finer points of Bags of Holding and Falling, and if you do, keep it civil.