So your side bag has 2 extra punches?
The item description, with his multiple section, don't apply well to a actual haversack.
Nope, my haversack has never had 2 extra punches. Fortunately, I've never been punched even once, much less 2 extra times by it. :)
As to pouches, yes, I have one with two pouches on the outside. They're pockets, sewn onto the main case. One's big enough to hold a canteen or bottle of soda. The other is big enough to hold a couple of paperback books. The main sack is big enough to hold a laptop, a couple of paperback books, and a power supply. Sure sounds like the Handy Haversack description , other than it not being a backpack (and yes, it does have buckles, on the strap, cause it's adjustable). Admittedly, the buckles are plastic not brass, but I hardly think that matters.
The item description list the capacity to recover the content with a move action without provoking an attack of opportunity as one of its major magical powers. Not as a function of its form.
Essentially it it thrust the content in your hand as soon as you pass it over the haversack and think about what you want.
I can as easily bend a hand over my back and get something that is thrust into my hand as i can put it on my hip to retrieve something that is thrust in my hand.
Wrong. Now you are reading things into the item that aren't there. It does not magically put the item in your hand if you 'wave your hand over' the backpack. Let's look at the ACTUAL description from the PRD.
Handy Haversack
Aura moderate conjuration; CL 9th
Slot —; Price 2,000 gp; Weight 5 lbs.
Description
A backpack of this sort appears to be well made, well used, and quite ordinary. It is constructed of finely tanned leather, and the straps have brass hardware and buckles. It has two side pouches, each of which appears large enough to hold about a quart of material. In fact, each is like a bag of holding and can actually hold material of as much as 2 cubic feet in volume or 20 pounds in weight. The large central portion of the pack can contain up to 8 cubic feet or 80 pounds of material. Even when so filled, the backpack always weighs only 5 pounds.While such storage is useful enough, the pack has an even greater power. for a specific item, that item is always on top. Thus, no digging around and fumbling is ever necessary to find what a haversack contains. Retrieving any specific item from a haversack is a move action, but it does not provoke the attacks of opportunity that retrieving a stored item usually does.
My arm has a elbow. I can easily bend it over my shoulder or the small of my back.
Unless you have two elbows and are double jointed, you are not reaching your hand into a backpack on your back. I have hyper-mobility in all my joints, and *I* can't do it. I sure as **** can't reach into a side pocket on my backpack while hitting someone with a stick in one hand and avoiding their stick in return. The operative word in the description is 'INTO' the bag. Not over, not waving at it from 4 inches away. You have to stick your hand (not your finger, not two fingers, your hand, one hand, whole) into the haversack. Again, unless you have 2 elbows and a 5 foot long arm, you ain't sticking your hand into a backpack on your back. You sure as heck aren't doing it while wearing leather armor, chain mail, or god forbid full plate (you do realize that armor tends to, uhm, limit your range of motion, to say the least? That's why it has an ACP). I might, might, see a dex based monk with high escape artist or a rogue in elven chain pulling it off, with an escape artist check to twist their arm back over their own head and touch the middle of their back while moving and dodging in combat (about how far you'd have to go to stick your hand INTO the haversack), but no str based barbarian or fighter in leather or chain or even breastplate is.
EDIT : Hmmm, Ok, I concede that if you're unarmed and unencumbered and not fighting, it's not too hard to stick your hand into the top of your backpack (dug mine out). Can't stick a hand into the side pockets though. However, this requires that the backpack be open at all times. If I have to open it, the shows over. A modern pack has to be unzipped, which is nigh onto impossible with one hand, and an older backpack actually has tie-downs on the flap. Since I doubt people, even with a haversack, are going around with the pockets open to anything that might land in them, I still think it's out of the realm for it to be a backpack and work as advertised.
|
I'm not understanding why a haversack can't have 2 smaller pouches. I've owned a number of them over the years and they generally have one main pocket and one or two smaller pocket.
Yes, that is a reasonable argument. As a general rule I would not overrule the magic item description about the kind and shape of the item when the magic of the item actually explain why it can permit something even if the real life version of the item will make that more difficult.
Retrieving something from your backpack when it is donned isn't so difficult as long as the item is in oen of the side puches or oon top of the content.
|
|
Unless you have two elbows and are double jointed, you are not reaching your hand into a backpack on your back. I have hyper-mobility in all my joints, and *I* can't do it. I sure as **** can't reach into a side pocket on my backpack while hitting someone with a stick in one hand and avoiding their stick in return. The operative word in the description is 'INTO' the bag. Not over, not waving at it from 4 inches away. You have to stick your hand (not your finger, not two fingers, your hand, one hand, whole) into the haversack. Again, unless you have 2 elbows and a 5 foot long arm, you ain't sticking your hand into a backpack on your back. You sure as heck aren't doing it while wearing leather armor, chain mail, or god forbid full plate (you do realize that armor tends to, uhm, limit your range of motion, to say the least? That's why it has an ACP). I might, might, see a dex based monk with high escape artist or a rogue in elven chain pulling it off, with an escape artist check to twist their arm back over their own head and touch the middle of their back while moving and dodging in combat (about how far you'd have to go to stick your hand INTO the haversack), but no str based barbarian or fighter in leather or chain or even breastplate is.
By the same logic I suppose you would argue that is not possible to draw a dagger put at your belt in the small or your back or in the centrer of your shoulder blades?
" and touch the middle of their back while moving and dodging in combat (about how far you'd have to go to stick your hand INTO the haversack)"
Now you are the one that is reading too much in the item description. My backpacks top reach to my shoulder blades, not the middle of my back. Reaches into it mean I have to put my hand in it, not reach to the bottom of the backpack with it.
By the same logic I suppose you would argue that is not possible to draw a dagger put at your belt in the small or your back or in the centrer of your shoulder blades?" and touch the middle of their back while moving and dodging in combat (about how far you'd have to go to stick your hand INTO the haversack)"
Now you are the one that is reading too much in the item description. My backpacks top reach to my shoulder blades, not the middle of my back. Reaches into it mean I have to put my hand in it, not reach to the bottom of the backpack with it.
See the edit above.
You still did not address doing it in armor, which is nigh onto impossible given how restrictive armor is with regards to bending your arms back like that.
As to the knife on the back, again, if you're wearing boiled leather armor or plate, no, you aren't putting your knife in the small of your back. That's for people that go with a chain shirt or cloth armor, who can bend their arms back that far. I'm also not seeing anyone putting a weapon on their back if they are in heavy armor, unless it's a reach weapon or very long (like a high riding bow). Just can't bend that arm back in armor.
|
|
A modern pack has to be unzipped, which is nigh onto impossible with one hand, and an older backpack actually has tie-downs on the flap. Since I doubt people, even with a haversack, are going around with the pockets open to anything that might land in them, I still think it's out of the realm for it to be a backpack and work as advertised.
For a normal backpack I mostly agree. I have thrust stuff like soda bottle in the side pockets, leaving the pockets open, and recovered them without removing the backpack, but it is not so easy as a maneuver and the bottles shape and rigidity help it. Similarly I have put things like a rain cap as the first item in my backpack, leaving some slack in the straps and recovered them without undoing the fastening. It will work only if the item has a "agreeable" [can't find a better term] shape.
For an actual haversack you have the same problem: you either leave the fastening undone and risk spilling the content during some maneuvers or you close them and will have a hard time opening the pack with one hand while in combat. A button instead of a strap can help but it is still difficult to manage. A automatic button seem to be above Golarion technological level.
For the magic item my personal opinion (it is not specifically supported by the rules, but it seem a reasonable assumption) is that the same magic that allow you to get the right item when you reach into the haversack will keep the content in even when the strap are undone, unless you purposefully dump all the content.
Note the description of the bag of holding (a item that is referred in the description of the handy haversack):
"If a bag of holding is [i]turned inside out[/b], all of its contents spill out, unharmed, but the bag must be put right before it can be used again."
So tu dump the full content of a bag of holding simply putting it upside down unstrapped isn't sufficient, you actually need to turn it inside out. I think it work on a similar way for a handy haversack.
I am stretching the rules of one item to a similar one, but it seem an acceptable assumption.
About the armor thing: true. On the other side of the coin our characters do a lot of stuff that will be very difficult or impossible while wearing armor in RL.
Penalizing characters for wearing armor in this regard while realistic is a bit hard.
[internet tone note: I am not accusing you of of wrong gaming Fu, I am simply saying that I would prefer not to limit characters wearing armour in this situation]
|
A haversack is a bag, usually carried by a single shoulder strap. Although similar to a backpack the single shoulder strap differentiates this type from other backpacks. There are exceptions to this general rule.
Is the Handy Haversack one of the exception to the general rule or not ?
For me, until now, I have always seen the Handy Haversack as a magic backpack, with the capacity to get something from your back during combat as ... you know ... magic:
- You raise your hand near your head, touch the top of the sack (the sack is like a trekking backpack and rise above your shoulders so I assume you can touch it even in armor) ; the sack magically open and the item you want is just there at your finger tips. (Hum ... that does not fit well with the small pouches that should be below your shoulders.)
- Or (why not ?) the Handy Haversack moves (magically) to your front, and opens, you take the item that is on top of one of the pouches and the Haversack (magically) moves back to your back.
Magic can do more strange and marvelous things.
But the new description is very appealing to me.
I see no problem with the haversack strapped on one shoulder only. Those bags can have a large central pouch and 2 smaller pouches and so fit with the description and I can see more easily how you can get easily in it during combat:
- the magic (besides the Bag of Holding capacity) is only in the fact that the item is always on top. That means you don't have to look in the sack but just to move your hand to your hip and grab the item, keeping your eyes focused on the combat, so : no Attack of Opportunity.
In the case of a haversack (!) type of Handy Haversack, I will allow for a regular backpack on the back.
Let the character select the type of bag he wants when creating the Wondrous Item and add a random selection for found Handy Haversack:
d%
1-x* : Backpack type Handy Haversack.
x*-100 : Haversack (!) type Handy Haversack.
(* let x be whatever number you want between 1 and 100)
Note that I don't know of any 'Back' or 'Hip' slots for magic items:
Body is for robes and vestments.
Shoulders is for capes and cloak.
Belts is for belts and girdles.
So it's not a problem of slots and, as the number of sack you can carry is not given by RAW (is it ?), it only depends if you accept both a backpack and an haversack.
From what I read in this thread, many people accept a backpack and a sack ; let this later one be a haversack and we're done.
For an actual haversack you have the same problem: you either leave the fastening undone and risk spilling the content during some maneuvers or you close them and will have a hard time opening the pack with one hand while in combat. A button instead of a strap can help but it is still difficult to manage. A automatic button seem to be above Golarion technological level.
Not really. Mine at least, I can leave the cover unbuckled, but it still stays down over the pocket. Same with the two smaller pockets. Because the flap hangs over and down, it keeps things inside, but it's a piece of cake to slide my hand into the pockets with the flaps just hanging without being buckled. Slide in from the side and lift up as I'm sticking my hand in (it's hard to describe the motions, but it's easy).
I can easily get something out of it while walking through a crowded airport (and have) dodging pedestrians and golf-carts.
|
This is my #1 pet peeve as a DM.
Players will load their characters with everything but the kitchen sink and point to the rules about weight. Often a backpack will be under the weight limit, but when you look at its contents, there would be absolutely no way everything would fit. For example, a backpack holds 60 lbs. That means a character can argue that he can store 2 30lb barrels in it. Or 15 Quarterstaves...
Ridiculous. Obviously I implement houses rules for this, but some players whine and say since it wasn't included in the core rules it should be allowed.
2nd edition introduced bulk points, something I think Pathfinder should do.
Some players like to carry several large weapons, too, and I penalize them by making them flat-footed at the start of every encounter and make the drop things when using something. But it becomes a major hassle keeping track of all that.
|
|
Okay, I will go through this again.
Your STR is counted as 1 higher for encumbrance, for what you are carrying in the masterwork backpack.
All are separate, and all only effect themselves.
So, for whatever you carry in backpack A, your strength score counts as 1 higher, and for whatever you carry in backpack B, your strength counts as 1 higher.
It does not matter how many masterwork backpacks you carry, your strength will only count as 1 higher for what you carry in each individual backpack.