Questions about Glove of Storing

[schreier]

The items held by a glove are held in stasis, shrunk down so small that they can't be seen and are held in the palm of the glove. Spell durations continue to run though

What happens if you take the glove off? I assume the item is still held in the glove.

If they stay in the palm, and you hold a glove of storing with an item, can you shrink the glove in your palm into your other glove? Could you hold several gloves with shrunken items in a bag in your palm and shrink them all?

What if you hold a portable hole full of items? Can you shrink and stasis the hole? If so, could you put that glove in a bag of holding without tearing a hole in reality?

Can you shrink a familiar like a raven? Will it be in stasis and thus unaware of the passage of time? Will it age? Will it starve or suffocate?

[Tzardok]

The items held by a glove are held in stasis, shrunk down so small that they can't be seen and are held in the palm of the glove. Spell durations continue to run though

Well, those are interesting questions. Let's takle them one for one.


What happens if you take the glove off? I assume the item is still held in the glove.

The description doesn't say one way or another, but I would concur and say it stays.


If they stay in the palm, and you hold a glove of storing with an item, can you shrink the glove in your palm into your other glove? Could you hold several gloves with shrunken items in a bag in your palm and shrink them all?

At this point we will need to make a decision: The glove can only store a single object, but is a container containing something a single object or not? If yes, then the glove can stack the way you want it. If not, then not (even if the items stored in the glove are shrunk, they are still there.)


What if you hold a portable hole full of items? Can you shrink and stasis the hole? If so, could you put that glove in a bag of holding without tearing a hole in reality?

Difficult. If you decided that a container is always a single object, this would of course work, but if you decided against it, you are still dealing with a object that holds things by putting them elsewhere. I would probably go for no on both decisions.
I would also assume that putting a glove holding a shrunk hole into a bag would create the tear, as the hole is still there, just shrunk, and its magical effects are still active.


Can you shrink a familiar like a raven? Will it be in stasis and thus unaware of the passage of time? Will it age? Will it starve or suffocate?

No. The glove explicitely holds only items, not creatures.

[The_Jette]

The items held by a glove are held in stasis, shrunk down so small that they can't be seen and are held in the palm of the glove. Spell durations continue to run though

What happens if you take the glove off? I assume the item is still held in the glove.

If they stay in the palm, and you hold a glove of storing with an item, can you shrink the glove in your palm into your other glove? Could you hold several gloves with shrunken items in a bag in your palm and shrink them all?

What if you hold a portable hole full of items? Can you shrink and stasis the hole? If so, could you put that glove in a bag of holding without tearing a hole in reality?

Can you shrink a familiar like a raven? Will it be in stasis and thus unaware of the passage of time? Will it age? Will it starve or suffocate?

I had a Glove of Storing once. My DM told me that if I tried storing my bag of holding in it, it would act like a portable hole and tear a hole into the astral plane. And, if we ever came across a portable hole, it would act the same way. He was kind of a ****, though. So, your DM may be more lenient.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

I had a Glove of Storing once. My DM told me that if I tried storing my bag of holding in it, it would act like a portable hole and tear a hole into the astral plane. And, if we ever came across a portable hole, it would act the same way. He was kind of a ****, though. So, your DM may be more lenient.There is nothing whatsoever indicating that extradimensional shenanigans occur with gloves of storing, so your DM was making stuff up specifically to mess with you.

[schreier]

No. The glove explicitely holds only items, not creatures.

I'm not sure it defines item .. the size is specified, but it doesn't say inanimate or not living

I'm ok with it being inanimate or not living but I'm not sure I would say it is perfectly clear

If you rule not living - could it be a construct? Iron cobra or homonculus for example

As far as container ... It gets to be dicey because
.. what is a single object? An arrow is made up of an arrow head, shaft and fletching ... Could it hold a string with 10 coins strung together? Gems in a pouch? A dagger in a sheath? A pair of gloves?

For me, as long as the the item is "contained" (pouch of coins, boots tied together), I would allow it

[the_tick_rules]

There is nothing whatsoever indicating that extradimensional shenanigans occur with gloves of storing, so your DM was making stuff up specifically to mess with you.

There is nothing explicit in the description but I would say it's a reasonable house rule. You can't put bags of holding in bags of holding and stuff like gloves of storing or casting and a belt of many pockets have similar dimensional storage.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

There is nothing explicit in the description but I would say it's a reasonable house rule. You can't put bags of holding in bags of holding and stuff like gloves of storing or casting and a belt of many pockets have similar dimensional storage.Well, that's another thing. There is only one pair of interactions of that sort in print anywhere that I'm aware of, and it's explicitly bag of holding ~> portable hole (or vice versa). There's not another thing printed anywhere for anything else, not even anything on other types of items and effects that such things occur.

[Tzardok]

I'm not sure it defines item .. the size is specified, but it doesn't say inanimate or not living

I'm ok with it being inanimate or not living but I'm not sure I would say it is perfectly clear

If you rule not living - could it be a construct? Iron cobra or homonculus for example


I'm sure that it doesn't need to say that because it's in the rules of the game itself: something is either an inanimate item or an animate creature, and nothing that targets specifically one category affects the other category unless otherwise mentioned.

So no, you can't store an Iron Cobra in a glove. You could store an unfinished Iron Cobra or an Iron Cobra's "corpse".