|
| 15 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Normally I see folks play that you can use all three of an Efficient Quiver's compartments to hold arrows. Just how many arrows the other 2 compartments can hold is usually up for debate although typically I see people go with each compartment holding up to 60 arrows
My question is a) how does everyone else handle this, and b) has there ever been any kind of official ruling on this one way or the other?
Thanks!
I would allow bundles of arrows to be stored in the other compartments, theoretically quite a few. However, they would not be available to draw and fire, you would have to use them to reload the arrow section the quiver.
RAW, Efficient Quiver can hold up to 60 arrows total, no more, since the other compartments do not mention being able to hold anything smaller than a javelin or bow respectively.
It would seem to me they could hold at least 60 + 24, since I would find it pretty hard to say you can't make an arrow case the same general size and shape of a javelin that holds an arrow. Obviously this isn't available for quickly drawing and firing, but purely as storage would be functional.
From there, the GM would have to decide if such a case could be designed to hold more than one arrow, and if so, how many, could fit in such a case. Personally I would go with about 5 in a javelin sized bundle and probably a full quivers worth of 20 in a bow sized bundle, but this would certainly be a GM call. It isn't RAW in that such bundles don't exist on the equipment list, but it is reasonable and fully in line with the 'general size and shape' proviso of the Efficient Quiver.
I wouldn't do this in PFS, since causing confusion or using anything not clearly spelled out is bad manners in such an environment, but in most games a reasonable definition of specific alternative that satisfy the size and shape of a javelin or bow should be able to be worked out.
As written, it's quite an inefficient magic item unless you have a cause to need arrows (sure, everyone with a bow), a second bow (yeah, if it's your survival), AND javelins (completely unnecessary to anyone prioritizing the other two).
I've shoved a spear in one and didn't tell...
RAW That Crazy Alchemist is right, the quiver only fits 60 arrows. That said, I'd have no problem with using the extra space for arrows or quivers. Truth be told, I think the Efficient Quiver is kind of underwhelming.
Generally speaking you're better off splurging an extra 200 gp for a handy haversack to keep your spare arrows in and simply wearing a few quivers normally.
It's also one of the most cost-efficient ways of carrying coins.
If you figure that a 3' javelin hollowed out and stuffed with 10 coins per inch, and a 6's staff for the same, you can get away with 18x 360 coins + 6 x 720 coins. Or, 10,800 coins. I think it's 20 coins to the pound, so that's over 500 lbs of coins.
And it doesn't even gain weight.
===Aelryinth
|
Not to burst any bubbles, but the quiver says "items of the same general size and shape of _____"
A bundle of 20 arrows has the same weight as a longbow. Additionally, arrows tend to be in the same general size and shape of an unstrung bow, or spear or staff.
By that, it seems you could store an additional 20-120 arrows in bundles of 20. These arrows would not be available to fire, needing to be untied from a bundle, but it is extra storage.
A "Bundle of Arrows" is not an item that exists in Pathfinder anymore than duct taping 10 Ogres together makes them one single super-Ogre. It is a group of singular objects: Arrows. The other compartments make no mention of being able to hold arrows or arrow-sized objects and therefore cannot hold arrows. 60, by RAW is it's maximum.
I agree with you alchemist.
As a house rule, I have seen it that you can trade either of the other 2 compartments (javelins/bows) for additional 60 arrows. So you could have 180 arrows and nothing else. Or 120 arrows and 6 bows. Or however you want to mix and match. One wizard did 18 javelin and 12 staves. But thats because he convinced our GM that metamagic rods qualified as "javelin" sized.
A "Bundle of Arrows" is not an item that exists in Pathfinder anymore than duct taping 10 Ogres together makes them one single super-Ogre. It is a group of singular objects: Arrows. The other compartments make no mention of being able to hold arrows or arrow-sized objects and therefore cannot hold arrows. 60, by RAW is it's maximum.Not to burst any bubbles, but the quiver says "items of the same general size and shape of _____"
A bundle of 20 arrows has the same weight as a longbow. Additionally, arrows tend to be in the same general size and shape of an unstrung bow, or spear or staff.
By that, it seems you could store an additional 20-120 arrows in bundles of 20. These arrows would not be available to fire, needing to be untied from a bundle, but it is extra storage.
Their are several instances of a collection of items listed as a single item[look at any kit] so it's disingenuous to say that because the game doesn't list a certain collecting it doesn't work. It all boils down to what the ending size and shape is. That ends up being an agreement between the item's owner and the DM.
Myself, I could see several arrows lined up and bundled to get around the right size/shape. javelins are 6+ feet long and arrows are 22" long, so you take 3 bundles of 6 arrows and lay them end to end. Add thin branch/wire/ect through bindings then wrap it with a cloth. 18 then come out fairly close to a javelin.
But that's just me. I'm not overly nitpicky. Though I wouldn't have left the rods go unless it was an overly large one. They are normally 2-3' long, so you'd have to tie 2-3 together to get it around the same size/shape. Now it's close to an arrows size/shape... What's odd is the last section. It fits staves and those can be as small as 4' making the bow section able to accept smaller items.
Using it all for arrows is boring. I had a pc with craft (candle making) who stored lots of different candles in the quiver. Some, like insect repellant candles, were not only fluff.
@topic: GM territory. But I would say one thing I'm sure on: I would not allow to store ready to fire arrows in the larger compartments. Just bundles.
But on the other hand I treat quivers with simple, nonmagic, non masterwork arrows like spell compartment pouches. If my wizard can have unlimited sulfur, rotten eggs, live crickets, sand, rose petals, tiny hourglasses, iron blades and loadstones, just to name some examples, then the archers can easily have unlimited arrows.
|
|
Their are several instances of a collection of items listed as a single item[look at any kit] so it's disingenuous to say that because the game doesn't list a certain collecting it doesn't work. It all boils down to what the ending size and shape is. That ends up being an agreement between the item's owner and the DM.
Myself, I could see several arrows lined up and bundled to get around the right size/shape. javelins are 6+ feet long and arrows are 22" long, so you take 3 bundles of 6 arrows and lay them end to end. Add thin branch/wire/ect through bindings then wrap it with a cloth. 18 then come out fairly close to a javelin.
But that's just me. I'm not overly nitpicky. Though I wouldn't have left the rods go unless it was an overly large one. They are normally 2-3' long, so you'd have to tie 2-3 together to get it around the same size/shape. Now it's close to an arrows size/shape... What's odd is the last section. It fits staves and those can be as small as 4' making the bow section able to accept smaller items.
You are right there are several instances where a collection of items is listed as a single item. A bundle of arrows is not one of them. Simply tying items together does not turn it into a singular item unless as a special case that that grouping of items exists in the rules as a singular item.
Don't get me wrong my point is not "It doesn't work by RAW therefore it's the be all end all and no one can ever change that, so there!". Gm's can toss the published books out the window and do whatever they darn well please. I was just citing the RAW on how this item works, and the RAW says 60 arrows and is quite airtight about that.
I also urge caution to GM's who wish to stray from the RAW on this particular item as it should not be treated as a cheaper haversack with no weight limit.
You are right there are several instances where a collection of items is listed as a single item. A bundle of arrows is not one of them. Simply tying items together does not turn it into a singular item unless as a special case that that grouping of items exists in the rules as a singular item.Don't get me wrong my point is not "It doesn't work by RAW therefore it's the be all end all and no one can ever change that, so there!". Gm's can toss the published books out the window and do whatever they darn well please. I was just citing the RAW on how this item works, and the RAW says 60 arrows and is quite airtight about that.
I also urge caution to GM's who wish to stray from the RAW on this particular item as it should not be treated as a cheaper haversack with no weight limit.
I think you are misinterpreting the RAW here. The main compartment can hold "up to" 60 items of the same shape and size of an arrow. 60 arrows is given as a comparison to the maximum shape and volume that it will hold not as the absolute necessary size and shape.
That means it can hold one item the size of a pencil, one item the same same size and shape of an arrow, one item the size and shape of 60 arrows all the way up to 60 items the same size and shape as an arrow and everything in between. Anything that is roughly equivalent in size and weight to 60 arrows will fit. The same is true of the other compartments as well.
|
|
You are right there are several instances where a collection of items is listed as a single item. A bundle of arrows is not one of them. Simply tying items together does not turn it into a singular item unless as a special case that that grouping of items exists in the rules as a singular item.Don't get me wrong my point is not "It doesn't work by RAW therefore it's the be all end all and no one can ever change that, so there!". Gm's can toss the published books out the window and do whatever they darn well please. I was just citing the RAW on how this item works, and the RAW says 60 arrows and is quite airtight about that.
I also urge caution to GM's who wish to stray from the RAW on this particular item as it should not be treated as a cheaper haversack with no weight limit.
I think you are misinterpreting the RAW here. The main compartment can hold "up to" 60 items of the same shape and size of an arrow. 60 arrows is given as a comparison to the maximum shape and volume that it will hold not as the absolute necessary size and shape.
That means it can hold one item the size of a pencil, one item the same same size and shape of an arrow, one item the size and shape of 60 arrows all the way up to 60 items the same size and shape as an arrow and everything in between. Anything that is roughly equivalent in size and weight to 60 arrows will fit. The same is true of the other compartments as well.
You misunderstand me. I'm not saying it can only hold arrows. I'm saying it can only hold up to 60 arrows. What you quoted there was a rebuttal to the people claiming that Efficient Quiver can hold more than 60 arrows by putting more of them in the other two compartments where by RAW are unable to hold arrows.
I understand it can hold other things (a pencil by the way would not qualify as it is significantly shorter than an arrow). But those things need to abide by the guidelines given by the item to function by RAW. There are very few items in the game which would qualify as having the same basic size and shape (it does not say weight btw) as the items listed and is largely in the hands of the GM, who, as I mentioned, should be cautioned to not allow this item to function as a cheaper and more powerful version of an existing item.
You misunderstand me. I'm not saying it can only hold arrows. I'm saying it can only hold up to 60 arrows. What you quoted there was a rebuttal to the people claiming that Efficient Quiver can hold more than 60 arrows by putting more of them in the other two compartments where by RAW are unable to hold arrows.
I understand it can hold other things (a pencil by the way would not qualify as it is significantly shorter than an arrow). But those things need to abide by the guidelines given by the item to function by RAW....
I'm not rebutting those who say it can hold other things, I'm agreeing with them. I think you misunderstood my argument. I read this text to say it will hold items that are:
Up to the same size and
Up to the same shape as
Up to 60 arrows
Those are maximum limits not absolute requirements. It makes no sense that a pencil will not fit in an extra dimensional space that will hold even a single arrow much less one that will hold 60 of them. That is a clue that that is not a correct reading of the text.
Im just curious...what would happen if you "tried" to put arrows in the other spaces? I mean they would actually "fit" or would the now intelligent quiver say "No way your not putting your filthy arrows in my pristine staff slot."?
Im just curious...what would happen if you "tried" to put arrows in the other spaces? I mean they would actually "fit" or would the now intelligent quiver say "No way your not putting your filthy arrows in my pristine staff slot."?
Exactly, that makes no sense. The object does not have to be exactly the same shape and size as the staff. It can be up to that size and shape. It can't be more but it can be less.
So you could stick as many arrows that would fit in a compartment the size and shape as a staff in the staff slot.
|
|
I'm not rebutting those who say it can hold other things, I'm agreeing with them. I think you misunderstood my argument. I read this text to say it will hold items that are:
Up to the same size and
Up to the same shape as
Up to 60 arrowsThose are maximum limits not absolute requirements. It makes no sense that a pencil will not fit in an extra dimensional space that will hold even a single arrow much less one that will hold 60 of them. That is a clue that that is not a correct reading of the text.
You are adding words that aren't there. In Pathfinder if an effect does not say "up to" then in cannot be smaller. Just as a Fireball's 20 ft radius cannot be changed to 15 to suit the caster's needs, by RAW this item is unable to hold items smaller or larger than the example items mentioned.
You are adding words that aren't there. In Pathfinder if an effect does not say "up to" then in cannot be smaller. Just as a Fireball's 20 ft radius cannot be changed to 15 to suit the caster's needs, by RAW this item is unable to hold items smaller or larger than the example items mentioned.I'm not rebutting those who say it can hold other things, I'm agreeing with them. I think you misunderstood my argument. I read this text to say it will hold items that are:
Up to the same size and
Up to the same shape as
Up to 60 arrowsThose are maximum limits not absolute requirements. It makes no sense that a pencil will not fit in an extra dimensional space that will hold even a single arrow much less one that will hold 60 of them. That is a clue that that is not a correct reading of the text.
The first and smallest one can contain up to 60 objects of the same general size and shape as an arrow. The second slightly longer compartment holds up to 18 objects of the same general size and shape as a javelin. The third and longest portion of the case contains as many as 6 objects of the same general size and shape as a bow (spears, staves, or the like).
The words up to are in the text. My contention is that the words "up to" are intended distributively. So up to 60 items, up to the same size and up to the same shape as arrows.
As I said reading it the other way makes no sense since a pencil won't fit in a compartment the sized for 60 arrows.
|
|
Grammatically your reading of this item is incorrect. With the way the sentence is structured the "Up to"s are describing the numbers that immediately follow, not the size and shape part that comes later. Otherwise it would say "...up to the same size and shape...". Just because it says "Up to" in one part of the sentence does not mean it applies to every subject of the sentence.
Also, going by what "make's sense" is neither RAW nor is it a good way of handling a magical effect.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Grammatically your reading of this item is incorrect. With the way the sentence is structured the "Up to"s are describing the numbers that immediately follow, not the size and shape part that comes later. Otherwise it would say "...up to the same size and shape...".
Also, going by what "make's sense" is neither RAW nor is it a good way of handling a magical effect.
When the RAW is in doubt going with what makes sense is a good way of determining the correct reading. I completely disagree with your reading of this one. So of the two opinions which one makes more sense? That a pencil can't fit in a space large enough for 60 arrows or that the space can hold one or more objects that collectively take up no more space than, and can conform to roughly the shape of, 60 arrows.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Alchemist, you clearly have a strong opinion on this, and that's cool, but let's try not to let this thread devolve into back and forth arguing.
Remember, the original question wasa) how does everyone else handle this, and b) has there ever been any kind of official ruling on this one way or the other? Not, who is right and who is wrong, OK?
Once again, PLEASE click the FAQ link so we can all hopefully get some clarification
Thanks!
Alchemist, you clearly have a strong opinion on this, and that's cool, but let's try not to let this thread devolve into back and forth arguing.
Remember, the original question wasa) how does everyone else handle this, and b) has there ever been any kind of official ruling on this one way or the other? Not, who is right and who is wrong, OK?
Once again, PLEASE click the FAQ link so we can all hopefully get some clarification
Thanks!
Clicked.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Elf Wizards want them. Stick a bow, arrows, rods and wands in them. Ta-dah!
You just got this added to my list for my wizard.
I'm fairly sure Paizo isn't going to create a faq for this, and I honestly don't think they need to. The question comes down to a) how liberally or stringently one interprets 'general size and shape' and b) how willing are you to let a player have something not specified on the list of equipment.
There will be a bit of variation in this, all within RAW, and I think reasonable people can understand and live with that.
As for me, I am pretty willing to anything fairly close to the size specified count, and open to having things in the game world beyond what is listed as equipment to buy. I even once allowed a player character to make turducken, even though turkey is not listed as an animal one can buy.
I'm fairly sure Paizo isn't going to create a faq for this, and I honestly don't think they need to. The question comes down to a) how liberally or stringently one interprets 'general size and shape' and b) how willing are you to let a player have something not specified on the list of equipment.
There will be a bit of variation in this, all within RAW, and I think reasonable people can understand and live with that.
As for me, I am pretty willing to anything fairly close to the size specified count, and open to having things in the game world beyond what is listed as equipment to buy. I even once allowed a player character to make turducken, even though turkey is not listed as an animal one can buy.
Turducken should not even exist in real life much less be brought into the game! It is an abomination I tell you! Stuffing wet bread up a dead birds butt isn't bad enough so we now have to stuff another bird up there. Still we can't leave it alone we have to stuff yet another dead bird up the second dead birds butt! This is madness!
|
|
Turducken should not even exist in real life much less be brought into the game! It is an abomination I tell you! Stuffing wet bread up a dead birds butt isn't bad enough so we now have to stuff another bird up there. Still we can't leave it alone we have to stuff yet another dead bird up the second dead birds butt! This is madness!
See, this is why I'm a vegetarian! :P
It was an evil campaign....
It was an evil campaign....
Were they fighting the League of Vegan Extremists?
I agree that this won't ever see the FAQ light of day.
Its GM purview to what fits besides the listed items. Is a wand the same "size and shape" of an arrow? Maybe. Is a metamagic rod? Is the rod the same size/shape as a javelin instead? Magic staves and quarterstaffs are included in the larger item list.
Could a dagger be placed instead of an arrow? I mean, really, the number of items which could or could not match are too numerous to bother making an exhaustive list for it. Ask your GM, make a case for why X is like Y, and that it should fit, and abide by the ruling. The only time to really argue about it is if he doesn't let you put arrows, javelins, bows, staves or spears in it.
Since the quiver doesn't stipulate any size limitations, you could argue that your arrows are the same general size and shape as a tiny-sized staff. ;)
Either way, this does not strike me as a question that needs a FAQ.
Another option (not PFS) would be a custom wondrous item that is a quiver with abundant ammunition continuously on it. Call it an Endless Quiver or something.
Spell Level 1 x Caster Level 1 x 2,000x2 for minutes duration x2 for no slot = 8,000gp for a Endless Quiver.
Sure, it costs more, but it does more for you to and follows the guidelines.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
At the request of OP I'm not going to argue this further, but I will add a closing statement to wrap up my point. The RAW is quite clear on this item. If a GM wishes to allow other things he is perfectly within his rights to do so. Hell, as a GM I'd probably allow it too. My only point is that nowhere does it state you can put pencils or anything other than arrows, javelins, bows, or staves in it and only in the amounts indicated by the item. Therefore, without GM's approval, you cannot, that is how RAW works.
OP, I've clicked it, but I'm in the boat that this is unlikely going to get answered, nor does it really need to be answered. It's an item largely in the hands of the GM other than the RAW items it's mentioned and I'm certain the Dev's will likely want to keep it that way. Good luck to you on it all the same though :)
At the request of OP I'm not going to argue this further, but I will add a closing statement to wrap up my point. The RAW is quite clear on this item. If a GM wishes to allow other things he is perfectly within his rights to do so. Hell, as a GM I'd probably allow it too. My only point is that nowhere does it state you can put pencils or anything other than arrows, javelins, bows, or staves in it and only in the amounts indicated by the item. Therefore, without GM's approval, you cannot, that is how RAW works.
OP, I've clicked it, but I'm in the boat that this is unlikely going to get answered, nor does it really need to be answered. It's an item largely in the hands of the GM other than the RAW items it's mentioned and I'm certain the Dev's will likely want to keep it that way. Good luck to you on it all the same though :)
It is precisely because there isn't likely to be an official answer on this that there should be a discussion. Also saying basically "The RAW is clear, I'm right" does nothing to actually help resolve the question which will never get an official response. However, since everyone just wants to shut it down I'll close with this.
The description says it "can hold up to 60 objects of the same general size and shape as an arrow".
Now the RAW can be read to mean that it can hold from 1-60 non-specific items each of which must be exactly the same size and shape as an arrow. However, that results in the senseless conclusion that you can't put a pencil in an arrow sized slot for some reason. It would also mean you can't put crossbow bolts in it, as they are significantly shorter than arrows, and you could especially not put hand crossbow bolts in it.
It can be also be read to mean that it can hold 1-60 items each of which may be no larger than the same general size and shape of an arrow.
Finally it can be read to mean that it can hold an undefined number of items which collectively must be no more than the same general shape and size of 60 arrows.
All three of those are different possible interpretations of RAW. The last seems to make the most sense, since each compartment is described as a single extra dimensional space, and the first clearly makes the least sense.
Are there any examples of a container being unable to hold objects smaller than those that it is intended to hold?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think the quiver's great for wizards--holds sixty wands (arrow-sized), 18 rods or scroll cases (javelin-sized), and 6 staffs (bow-sized) in one handy compartment within easy reach of themselves, their familiar, or an unseen servant spell to retrieve.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think the quiver's great for wizards--holds sixty wands (arrow-sized), 18 rods or scroll cases (javelin-sized), and 6 staffs (bow-sized) in one handy compartment within easy reach of themselves, their familiar, or an unseen servant spell to retrieve.
I think the item is arguably more useful for a wizard than an archer lol.
Are there any examples of a container being unable to hold objects smaller than those that it is intended to hold?
Efficient Quiver
Aura moderate conjuration; CL 9thSlot —; Price 1,800 gp; Weight 2 lbs.
DescriptionThis appears to be a typical arrow container capable of holding about 20 arrows. It has three distinct portions, each with a nondimensional space allowing it to store far more than would normally be possible.
The first and smallest one can contain up to 60 objects of the same general size and shape as an arrow. The second slightly longer compartment holds up to 18 objects of the same general size and shape As a javelin. The third and longest portion of the case contains as many as 6 objects of the same general size and shape as a bow (spears, staffs, or the like). Once the owner has filled it, the quiver can quickly produce any item she wishes that is within the quiver, as if from a regular quiver or scabbard. The efficient quiver weighs the same no matter what's placed inside it.
since it uses the wording of 'the same size and general shape of X' if gives some wiggle room
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The RAW is quite clear on this item.
LOL I agree with this statement but disagree with your interpretation of said RAW. Myself, I make no distinction between in it for collections of items as long as they are wrapped as a single item. If something could hold something the size and shape of a book, I wouldn't discount a binder of loose papers.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The description says it "can hold up to 60 objects of the same general size and shape as an arrow".Now the RAW can be read to mean that it can hold from 1-60 non-specific items each of which must be exactly the same size and shape as an arrow. However, that results in the senseless conclusion that you can't put a pencil in an arrow sized slot for some reason. It would also mean you can't put crossbow bolts in it, as they are significantly shorter than arrows, and you could especially not put hand crossbow bolts in it.
It can be also be read to mean that it can hold 1-60 items each of which may be no larger than the same general size and shape of an arrow.
Finally it can be read to mean that it can hold an undefined number of items which collectively must be no more than the same general shape and size of 60 arrows.
All three of those are different possible interpretations of RAW. The last seems to make the most sense, since each compartment is described as a single extra dimensional space, and the first clearly makes the least sense.
I go with the first.
The item was originally a quiver of Elhonna, the Greyhawk nature goddess of rangers, unicorns, and good fairies.
It is a fey-magic-style quiver that holds more arrows, javelins, and extra unslung bows.
It can be tricked into thinking things of roughly the right shape and size are appropriate. Like that wands are arrows and staves are unstrung bows but it will not mistake a pencil for an arrow or a pile of coins the same mass as a bunch of arrows.
If you think of it as fey extra space for specific stuff and not physically a space of x dimensions then the restriction works in a more narrative fey-magic appropriate sense.
And that is a cooler way to think of the magic item IMO than as just a quiver shaped bag of holding.
Having read a couple of very lengthy threads on this item in the past (before deciding it wasn't worth the headaches to try in PFS), the only major argument I remember that isn't in this thread is what I'll call the too-deep argument.
Putting a pencil (or a wand) in a slot designed for an arrow means it will fall to the bottom and be unable to be retrieved quickly. Some of the people in this camp concede that you can put a smaller item in but it's a move, or maybe full-round, action to retrieve it.
This argument ends up disallowing crossbow quarrels in this quiver because they are considerably shorter than arrows (12" vs 30-40").
Note: None of the above is an endorsement of any position, just an attempt to get this thread caught up.
|
If you really want a FAQ you may want to have a clear and concise question. Your original post doesn't really ask the appropriate question for the answer you are looking for.
What's the best way to get a FAQ answered?
A short, concise question is much more likely to get a FAQ than a post that is a page of supposition, links to other discussions, with no actual question presented or with a question buried in the middle of a paragraph.
A post with one question on one topic is much more likely to get a FAQ than a post with multiple questions, especially if they are about different topics. This is because the staff can't clear a FAQ-flag for just part of a post, which means they have to answer all questions in that post to clear it, and some of those questions may be harder to answer (meaning “takes more research and time”) than others. In other words, the most difficult or complex question in a multi-question post tends to slow down getting any questions in that post answered.
Just throwing it out there. I would like an answer to this debate finally too as it keeps popping up in the threads with folks on both sides of the fence claiming their interpretation is the correct one.
You shouldn't have to upend the quiver -- but you may have to put your entire arm into the larger section to retrieve arrows from the bottom. How quickly you can retrieve such arrows would only matter in the rare situation where you are able to use up your entire supply of arrows from the main arrow compartment in one battle.