Loophole for at-will teleport for certain monsters?

[Adamantly d20]

the legion archon gets greater teleport [at-will] for self + belongings.

If someone [who didn't need to breathe air via whatever means you want to use, it doesn't matter etc etc...] were to give the legion archon a bag of holding and then proceed to climb into the bag of holding... would they be able to be teleported when the archon used their ability? As they would be in an extradimensional space inside the "held gear/ belongings" of the archon?

[Xervous]

Good old bags of holding. The only speed bump you may run into is the GM looking at you sideways at the mention of an archon manipulating a bag of holding.

[magicalmagicman]

the legion archon gets greater teleport [at-will] for self + belongings.

If someone [who didn't need to breathe air via whatever means you want to use, it doesn't matter etc etc...] were to give the legion archon a bag of holding and then proceed to climb into the bag of holding... would they be able to be teleported when the archon used their ability? As they would be in an extradimensional space inside the "held gear/ belongings" of the archon?

It's a common tactic used with the spell Create Lantern Archon.

[Adamantly d20]

Good old bags of holding. The only speed bump you may run into is the GM looking at you sideways at the mention of an archon manipulating a bag of holding.

don't legion archons have hands?

[Adamantly d20]

It's a common tactic used with the spell Create Lantern Archon.

so I'm assuming its not total cheese? And is at least rules legal?

[Emperor Tippy]

the legion archon gets greater teleport [at-will] for self + belongings.

If someone [who didn't need to breathe air via whatever means you want to use, it doesn't matter etc etc...] were to give the legion archon a bag of holding and then proceed to climb into the bag of holding... would they be able to be teleported when the archon used their ability? As they would be in an extradimensional space inside the "held gear/ belongings" of the archon?

It's entirely rules legal, and one of the reasons to always have a Bag (or Bags/Portable Hole) larges enough to carry the whole party with some extra space.

You call an Archon up and have them port you wherever. It's quite useful for various other self only travel abilities.

And once you get 9th level spells, a Wizard or Sorcerer should have Shapechange up essentially all day (Greater Rod of Extend and CL 20 and it will last 6.6 hours). That allows you to do all out of combat travel via shifting to Archon form and having everyone jump into the bag for a few moments; thus saving you from having to spend a spell slot on Teleport or Greater Teleport.

[Xervous]

don't legion archons have hands?

An error on my part as I have no recollection of legion archons my brain defaulted to lantern archon. What’s the source for them again?

[Adamantly d20]

Excellent, thank you all so much for replies!

[Adamantly d20]

An error on my part as I have no recollection of legion archons my brain defaulted to lantern archon. What’s the source for them again?

Pathfinder bestiary page 28 according to the wiki

[magicalmagicman]

It's actually not that clear cut now that I think about it.

If you put a small creature in a mundane backpack and use the greater teleport, you can't teleport the creature in the backpack. So why is Bag of Holding different?

So a DM might use this line of reasoning to say it doesn't work. So it's not air-tight rules legal. Teleporting a creature in a bag is still teleporting a creature.

Now if you're teleporting a "portal to a different dimension", that's a different story entirely, but reading Bag of Holding's description, I'd say it's more akin to a magic backpack than a portal to another dimension.

So ask your DM.

[Xervous]

Pathfinder bestiary page 28 according to the wiki

That explains everything. I’m in the dated camp of assuming it’s a 3.5 thread in the absence of a PF tag. Thanks for the clarification.

[Nifft]

If you put a small creature in a mundane backpack and use the greater teleport, you can't teleport the creature in the backpack. So why is Bag of Holding different?

Short answer: Magic.

Long answer: The bag is just a window into an extra-dimensional space. Moving the window isn't moving the extra-dimensional space. You could pick up a mundane window and teleport, so you can pick up a magical window and teleport too.

[Emperor Tippy]

It's actually not that clear cut now that I think about it.

If you put a small creature in a mundane backpack and use the greater teleport, you can't teleport the creature in the backpack. So why is Bag of Holding different?

So a DM might use this line of reasoning to say it doesn't work. So it's not air-tight rules legal. Teleporting a creature in a bag is still teleporting a creature.

Now if you're teleporting a "portal to a different dimension", that's a different story entirely, but reading Bag of Holding's description, I'd say it's more akin to a magic backpack than a portal to another dimension.

So ask your DM.
Because the creature never moves, you are teleporting the entrance to an extradimensional space. The contents of that extradimensional space is utterly irrelevant.

[magicalmagicman]

Short answer: Magic.

Long answer: The bag is just a window into an extra-dimensional space. Moving the window isn't moving the extra-dimensional space. You could pick up a mundane window and teleport, so you can pick up a magical window and teleport too.

But when you pull the bag inside out, everything in it spills forth and the extra-dimensional space doesn't exist anymore. So arguably you are moving the extra-dimensional space when you're moving the bag of holding. Because the space is clearly affected by the borders of the bag.

Is a possible ruling.


Because the creature never moves, you are teleporting the entrance to an extradimensional space. The contents of that extradimensional space is utterly irrelevant.

Do you have a clear cut rule about that somewhere? Some kind of extra dimensional space general rule maybe? Or something about if the bag of holding is violently shaken the insides of the content is unaffected?

I think there might be, but it might just be my imagination. That would settle this in an instant.

[Nifft]

But when you pull the bag inside out, everything in it spills forth and the extra-dimensional space doesn't exist anymore. So arguably you are moving the extra-dimensional space when you're moving the bag of holding. Because the space is clearly affected by the borders of the bag.

Is a possible ruling.

You're trying to make an argument based on the idea that a thing existing is the same as the thing not existing.

That seems like incorrect logic at best.


Sure it's possible that the DM is spitefully making an argument in bad faith, but that's not a possible good-faith argument.

[Troacctid]

Bags of holding are actually nondimensional, not extradimensional. Whatever that means, anyway.

I think a portable hole is a better bet.

[Calthropstu]

Bags of holding are actually nondimensional, not extradimensional. Whatever that means, anyway.

I think a portable hole is a better bet.


Actually, it's naan dimensional space. See, each time you insert an item into a bag of holding, a sandwich is created on the elemental plane of naan. That sandwich consists of the item squeezed between two pieces of naan bread. That's how the bag of holding works and keeps items separated. Each item creates a new sandwich, and that sandwich is what the bag actually references.
It CAN happen that the sandwich gets eaten by a monster. That's how bags of devouring form. They are actually normal bags of holding, but their opening has been noticed by a creature that likes sandwiches and that creature eats anything that is made into a sandwich. So this trick can work, just watch out and don't attract sandwich monsters.

[Fizban]

If you put a small creature in a mundane backpack and use the greater teleport, you can't teleport the creature in the backpack. So why is Bag of Holding different?
Because most people think of Bag of Holding/Handy Haversack/Portable Hole as effectively being portals that link to their own personal pocket dimension. However, as you have noted, that's not actually how it works. The Bag makes no such statement, and defines the "nondimensional space" term right there in the item description. The inside of the bag ignores normal weight and size up to a specific limit and flatly supports any creature for 10 minutes before suffocation. That is the only effect, aside from other interactions.

Well done.

The Portable Hole on the other hand, is the one that mentions an extradimensional space. It has defined boundaries and specifies that each hole opens to its own extradimensional space.

I expect the confusion comes from how the most common question is (or was) whether bad things happen if you involve the Rope Trick or Magnificent Mansion spells with one of the items. Those spells also refer to extradimensional spaces, so there are three things using a word that just sounds better, and one that does not, so one word ends up getting used all the time- and only a careful re-reading of the original entries with the specific intent to find such a distinction will cause one to notice they do not in fact use the same term. It's further un-helped by the fact that both items have spells which involve planar travel in their prerequisites, despite their mechanics being an iteration of legacy items, items from previous editions before crafting was a thing. Secret Chest would imply that the Bag puts stuff on another plane, but the item description is what matters, and it doesn't do that. Yet more reason the Bag should be using Shrink item (aside from being waaaay to cheap for a 5th level spell item).

The reason people will say to climb into a Bag of Holding, is of course because the Bag is much cheaper, and naturally they want to do this as early as possible. A 5th level character can cast Create Lantern Archon, but they can't afford a Portable Hole, nor can a 7th level with Improved Familiar or Summon Monster 4, unless they're allowed to represent 3/4 of their wealth with a single item. It is not in the interest of this player to notice that a Bag of Holding does not let them do what they want to do, so they will not.

But it doesn't. You'll need a Portable Hole. Which was better for the Lantern Archon version of the "trick" anyway, since as a bit of cloth it's at least somewhat plausible that they could "carry" it.

*There may of course be some published material that does do this, or an FAQ or Sage ruling, but arguing about which "official" source gets to be official at what time is a whole different bit of hilarity.

(This post based on the 3.5 wording, if Pathfinder changed it then whelp that's their problem).

Edit: No, okay, I looked it up and that really is hilarious. Pathfinder managed to muck up every part of the question. The Bag of Holding entry is almost the same, but the wiki links to a separate rule governing extradimensional spaces that lists the Bag as among them, with an editor's note pointing out that the Bag does not say it is an extradimensional space (PF seems to have created this rule specifically to shut down interaction questions and limit them to just the original Bag vs Hole one). Go over to the Portable Hole, and once again it's almost exactly the same, except the PF version has added the phrases "portable extradimensional space" and "[anything inside the hole remains], traveling with the item." (Emphasis added). But the whole point of the original Hole and extradimensional spaces was that they don't move around, it's just a connection to another space, it can't be portable and that's why it would be a useful hack. PF has added their own idea of "not existing in any dimension" in trying to mash the items together under one rules heading, while simultaneously specifying that items within the Portable Hole travel, even though they're supposed to not exist, or be somewhere else, or basically anything but traveling. So the Bag of Holding, which isn't actually an extradimensional space, is more of an extradimensional space than the Portable Hole, because it doesn't directly contradict their own extradimensional space rules.

It's. . . beautiful.