Bag of Holding


Magic Items

1 to 50 of 123 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Am I reading this right? I need to spend a resonance point every time I open/close the bag? p382


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yes, it would appear so.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules, Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

That seems a steep price for extra storage. I could possibly see a single daily RP expenditure to "power" the bag, but should be free to put items in and out. Otherwise it is not worth getting unless its insanely cheap, like 100 GP or something.


19 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I just... I can't even fathom what kind of person would find it enjoyable to decide whether or not to open a bag in case they might need to drink a potion later.

Resonance is garbage.


Where does it say it requires a resonance point to open/close it at all?

EDIT: I see it says it costs 1 Resonance point to activate it. That is strange.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

This is sad. Costing 1 resonance to be part of your belongings was enough. 1 resonance to activate is overkill and makes me want to house rule it away immediately.

Grand Lodge

7 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules, Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Resonance seems to me to be a unnecessary add on to the game especially in regard to items that have charges. Not only do you use a Rp to use the item, you need to keep track of the charges on the item.

Dark Archive

Where are you seeing the cost of 1 resonance to open? I see the Invested trait which means you spend a point at the beginning of the day (invest an item activity) to use for the whole day.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Paizo Charter Superscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Legends Subscriber; Pathfinder Tales Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
brad2411 wrote:
Where are you seeing the cost of 1 resonance to open? I see the Invested trait which means you spend a point at the beginning of the day (invest an item activity) to use for the whole day.

Where do you see the Invested trait? I only see Conjuration, Extradimensional, and Magical. Are we talking about the entry on page 382?


Zaister wrote:
brad2411 wrote:
Where are you seeing the cost of 1 resonance to open? I see the Invested trait which means you spend a point at the beginning of the day (invest an item activity) to use for the whole day.
Where do you see the Invested trait? I only see Conjuration, Extradimensional, and Magical. Are we talking about the entry on page 382?

I was about to say the same thing, the bag of holding seems to not require rp at all, just as mark said in the comments of the magic item blog

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Activating a magic item allows you to spend RP. Then you take the Operate Activation action.

It is in the activating magic iterm section p376.

Grand Lodge

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Maps, Modules, Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Agree, this seems really awful. It has an activation action. You activate something by spending rp. I really hope this dies a swift death, the more I see it, the less I like it.

It seems like bags of holding just became useless nonsense. So much for we're getting rid of the big six so you can use flavorful magic items.

These used to be really desirable magic items.


Page 376 wrote:

Activating Magic Items

Activated magic items produce effects only upon activation. The Activate an Item activity allows you to spend Resonance Points for this purpose.

The bag of holding however does NOT have the invested trait, so you don't need to spend 1 RP just to carry it around. It would better that it was invested though and free to activate (which will probably be my house rule).

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Bit confused if its intended for it to use resonance or not, but its definitely silly if activating it requires resonance(investing is debatable, but better than rp per activation). I mean bag of holding's whole purpose is to make it easier to track items and weight since you can just stick them into the bag, so making it spend resonance points every time you want to stick loot into it is just silly


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
CorvusMask wrote:
Bit confused if its intended for it to use resonance or not, but its definitely silly if activating it requires resonance(investing is debatable, but better than rp per activation). I mean bag of holding's whole purpose is to make it easier to track items and weight since you can just stick them into the bag, so making it spend resonance points every time you want to stick loot into it is just silly

Well it won't surprise me if it's fixed quickly, however it *does* use the same activation language the rest of the items that *obviously* are intended to use resonance use.

If it was a mistake, or an overlook, that's fine - but the fact that it's confusing at all shows the entire 'this is how resonance works' needs quite a bit of polish - because there isn't any ambiguity in the rules for the magic item section, yet we have many people that seem confused as to how this items works, only because they can't fathom it working how it's presented in the book.

This wouldn't be an issue for 'new - never named items' - but in a game using item names that are iconic, it is an issue because people expect them to work a certain way, and if the rules cause a mental contradiction it will cause confusion - and thus a great source of FAQ threads :)


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Hmm.

Some Numbers:
A Type 1 Bag of Holding is level 4, 80gp, is 1 bulk, but holds 25 bulk.

Important Note: In PF2 your carrying capacity is Str modifier + 5 before you are encumbered, that is, 5 bulk for a Str 10 character, or a max of 12 bulk for a Str 24 character (the max). This means that even a type 1 bag is a massive boon.

If Affair at Sombrefell Hall is any indication, a 7th level PC can be expected to have one 6th, two 5th, one 4th, two 3rd level items and 125gp of other items. Odds are high that one of those magic items will be a Type 1 Bag of Holding - because 24 extra bulk. And if you wanted, you could spend 80gp of your free cash for a second such bag, for an additional 48 bulk of storage!

Conversely, a Type 2 Bag of Holding is level 7, costs 300gp and contains 50 bulk. This is a gain of 49 bulk - one more than a pair of type 1 bags, but at just over half the price.

Given that, A) Player wealth may no longer bounded as tightly by level, and B) how the bag of holding scales, unless there is some other restriction, then no PC should ever run out of carrying capacity or bag space - regardless of their Strength - and there is negligible real value in seeking the higher end bags as Type 1 is always the best bang-for-buck.

If the design intent is that the bag of holding is just a cash-tax on being able to ignore inventory rules, then applying resonance is unnecessary.

If the design intent is that players should not be able to simply "cash away" inventory concerns, then something needs to make the bag of holding not handed out like grocery store bags at every Magic Item Mart. And in PF2, that "something" is resonance.

More numbers:
A 7th level character with a Charisma of 12 would have 8 resonance. As per the above, they'd potentially have 6 magic items - some requiring investment (e.g. worn items), some not (weapons, shields etc).

Let's say this goes for a magic weapon (no investment), armor (no investment), bag of holding (no investment, spend to use), a necklace of fireballs (invest 1, spend to use), and a ring of fire resistance (invest 1).

They've invested 2 resonance of their 8, and have 6 left. Assuming they don't want to lob all their fireballs in one day (it's an expensive piece of weaponry, after all), and leaving 1 resonance spare, that gives up to 5 activations of the bag of holding - this is definitely restrictive, but not prohibitively so unless the PC cannot actually carry their regular equipment without being encumbered. You can easily use the bag to store or retrieve the party's camping gear, or open it a couple of times to store loot. You can also attempt to open it when out of resonance with a flat check - and other people can always open it for you, if you are out and failed your flat check. Most PCs do travel with a few friends, after all.

If the intent is to make magic storage wondrous and valued, but not relied upon as the primary means of carrying equipment, then applying resonance for activation is a suitable way to achieve it in Pathfinder 2.

For me, the key discussion is not about whether bags of holding should be free of restrictions, but exactly how those restrictions are implemented:

Discussion Points:
1) Would it be better to have bags of holding instead be an invested item that doesn't require resonance to open?

This limits the number of bags you may have, but not how often you can use them.

2) If resonance-on-access is the method used, is the resonance cost balanced against other items and the quantity of resonance characters receive?

If not, would a larger pool of resonance, with higher end items (e.g. belt of giant strength) costing more than 1 resonance to invest, be a more balanced system?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Raynulf wrote:

Discussion Points:

1) Would it be better to have bags of holding instead be an invested item that doesn't require resonance to open?

I would go with this combined with reducing how much extra Bulk they give you. 1 Resonance per day to effectively remove the only reason to have Strength for most non-melee characters (and you only need one in the party at 25 bulks, thats like having someone with a 40 Strength carrying your stuff for you.) Invested 1 for 8-24 Bulk seems much more reasonable.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Malk_Content wrote:
Raynulf wrote:

Discussion Points:

1) Would it be better to have bags of holding instead be an invested item that doesn't require resonance to open?
I would go with this combined with reducing how much extra Bulk they give you. 1 Resonance per day to effectively remove the only reason to have Strength for most non-melee characters (and you only need one in the party at 25 bulks, thats like having someone with a 40 Strength carrying your stuff for you.) Invested 1 for 8-24 Bulk seems much more reasonable.

My suggestion would be to remove the resonance cost - but only allow the bag to hold items that are light bulk or less.

This finally gives an easy way to identify what 'fits' in the opening of a bag of holding - so you can pour the horde of coins into it - but not the suits of armor and all that.

Then you can have items that have bigger openings but take resonance to open - bags of holding weren't meant to hold the *entire* dragon horde - but they should always give someone a way to explain why they have a library of Alexandria on their back.

Shadow Lodge

Raynulf wrote:
Analysis

I like your analysis. I'm starting to like this idea of reduced magic items and magic item use, as it removed the Christmas Tree effect and reduces reliance on magic items and reduces the idea that you *have* to have certain items or even have to build for them.

Opens up magic items as more flavorful additions to the game.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

I thought the same thing for my group until one of the players asked the simple question, "Come to think about how often do we go into the bag in a single day?"

This came out to about 2-3 times a day depending on the story, and that was followed up by the statement of "and the party can share the cost of activation since it takes two hands to keep open, so one person opens and the other puts in or gets out stuff."

So think about that in that way i don't see any issues as a party the cost.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yeah, I sort of LIKE the activation cost for this. I mean, opening a door to another dimension over and over again can't be good for you - seems like it should definitely cause cancer or something.. ;-) The resonance limit seems appropriate for this. Investing doesn't make sense for an item that can easily be passed between party members, so the activation cost is about right. I think they just need to include WHAT the interact/Activation action actually entails. 'Holding it it both hands and opening it'. A bag of holding is not something anyone can rummage through on their own, as the activating person opens it, and the other person rummages around, pulls out what they need, and you carry on.

Now, if you want something that is designed for much quicker access for more routine storage of items that can be grabbed at a moment's notice, THAT is what the Handy Haversack should be designed for. One handed activation to grab a single item from the bag...


By comparison, the 'Gloves of Storing' can only hold a single item, and are Invested (pay a resonance every morning). They ALSO require an operate activation to store an item in the gloves (1 resonance to do so), but recovering the item into a free hand is a free action triggered when you turn begins or when you complete an action. So 1 action to zoink the item into the hidden pocket, and no cost to recover it.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm not going to even talk about how awesome the "Knapsack of Halflingkind" is.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
CraziFuzzy wrote:
Now, if you want something that is designed for much quicker access for more routine storage of items that can be grabbed at a moment's notice, THAT is what the Handy Haversack should be designed for. One handed activation to grab a single item from the bag...
Ckorik wrote:

My suggestion would be to remove the resonance cost - but only allow the bag to hold items that are light bulk or less.

This finally gives an easy way to identify what 'fits' in the opening of a bag of holding - so you can pour the horde of coins into it - but not the suits of armor and all that.

Then you can have items that have bigger openings but take resonance to open - bags of holding weren't meant to hold the *entire* dragon horde - but they should always give someone a way to explain why they have a library of Alexandria on their back.

And if you combined these two ideas, you could wind up with:

A) The Bag of Holding, which has its activation cost, but is good for (literal) bulk storage - armour, dragons hoards etc, as a single bag can hold between double (Type 1) and eleven times (Type IV) the PC maximum - including the feat.

B) The Handy Haversack, which could either be invested (or have no resonance cost), but have only a small capacity and be limited to light items - and still occupy 1 bulk itself (physically restricting how many you can carry). If it was similar in price and level to a Type 1 bag (i.e. Level 4, 80gp) I'd suggest something like a maximum capacity of 8 bulk - two in each side pocket and 4 in the centre.

If you want bulk storage for the whole party, the bag of holding is the unparalleled champion. If you want a personal convenience device to take care of lots of fiddly bits of equipment, the handy haversack would do that for you.

I'll be running the playtest with the rules published, as it's counterproductive to do otherwise, but the above is something I could see working in games I run post-playtest, if the haversack niche isn't filled by Paizo... though I'd include an investment cost, personally.

Dark Archive

4 people marked this as a favorite.

TBh if it was changed to 1 resonance at the start of the day to attune, that still sucks, its a group item but one person has to give up a resonance for it. Seeing how resonance is used for magic items one group member would basically have to say "I have one less magic use so the party can carry loot".


WatersLethe wrote:
I can't even fathom what kind of person would find it enjoyable to decide whether or not to open a bag in case they might need to drink a potion later.

Seems pretty much the same as every other resource management decision in these games. "Should I use a spell slot to cast Ant Haul to make it easier to carry stuff, or should I save that slot to cast Cure Light Wounds instead?"


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Rahod wrote:

I thought the same thing for my group until one of the players asked the simple question, "Come to think about how often do we go into the bag in a single day?"

This came out to about 2-3 times a day depending on the story, and that was followed up by the statement of "and the party can share the cost of activation since it takes two hands to keep open, so one person opens and the other puts in or gets out stuff."

So think about that in that way i don't see any issues as a party the cost.

2-3 times seems really low to me. My groups tend to use the Bag of Holding after every battle, and other times when they need to retrieve potions or wands to use out of combat. So I'd say they go into their bag more often than what you said.

Plus, when I play an arcane spellcaster or an alchemist, I like having a handy haversack to store my potions and scrolls and be able to retrieve them. For my alchemist, I used to grab a bomb or an elixir 2-3 times per battle. If it costs 1 RP to open it, like for the bag of holding, all my scholars will throw away their haversack.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Matthew Downie wrote:
WatersLethe wrote:
I can't even fathom what kind of person would find it enjoyable to decide whether or not to open a bag in case they might need to drink a potion later.
Seems pretty much the same as every other resource management decision in these games. "Should I use a spell slot to cast Ant Haul to make it easier to carry stuff, or should I save that slot to cast Cure Light Wounds instead?"

I guess if every spell slot had a hefty gold cost and you could only prepare them in town, that'd be a pretty apt comparison.

It's still taking a resource mechanic that has tried and failed to balance casters since the 70s, and applying it to putting on pants in the morning.

There's a reason most niche spells got sidelined into scrolls, and lists of must-have spells found their way into every caster guide.

Spellcasting is at least self contained and familiar, people making casters are prepared and sign up for the resource management game in exchange for massive narrative power.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I think accessing a Bag of Holding should take time and no resonance cost. Maybe a minute each time you want to open it.

That way you can store all the non-essential gear and loot in it, and keep combat ready potions, scrolls, ammunition etc on your person. That effectively gives you an "active" kit that you should care about the weight of so that encumbrance matters. The weight of loot can then be safely ignored.


Under the rules, 10 L bulk items is 1 Bulk. If you have 10 str, you can carry 5 bulk without penalties. Even if you, for some reason, have medium armor and a sword and a light shield with 10 str, you still ought to be able to carry 10 wands/potions in a satchel. Why would you need to keep small stuff like that in a Bag of Holding?


3 people marked this as a favorite.
O. N. wrote:
Under the rules, 10 L bulk items is 1 Bulk. If you have 10 str, you can carry 5 bulk without penalties. Even if you, for some reason, have medium armor and a sword and a light shield with 10 str, you still ought to be able to carry 10 wands/potions in a satchel. Why would you need to keep small stuff like that in a Bag of Holding?

Because you also have to carry your backup weapon. Or maybe you want to store your spellbook, your basic crafter's book, your crowbar, your rope, your healer's tool or your lantern somewhere safe and not have to bother about it until you need it. Or you just looted three heavy armors from your ennemies and don't want/can't to run through the dungeon with them on your back or run to the nearest town to sell them. Or you have 5000 silver pieces (5 bulks) because you looted the treasure of a small, poor dragon.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Almarane wrote:
you looted the treasure of a small, poor dragon.

Now that's just sad. Let's pour one out for the little guy.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think this rule is a good one. For the first time the Bag of Holding feels like a real magic item. Something people think about if they need to open it or not. Something that makes people think about where to put a latern, where a crowbar, where does they store the rope, what is this thing called backpack... They look for alternatives, they improvise and maybe they treat the Bag of Holding more conscious.

I do understand, that if something was for free and suddenly it isn't anymore, people will feel betrayed.

But I think the rule makes it way more interesting where to store your stuff, then just the universal answer: "I just put it in my Bag of Holding."


Almarane wrote:
O. N. wrote:
Under the rules, 10 L bulk items is 1 Bulk. If you have 10 str, you can carry 5 bulk without penalties. Even if you, for some reason, have medium armor and a sword and a light shield with 10 str, you still ought to be able to carry 10 wands/potions in a satchel. Why would you need to keep small stuff like that in a Bag of Holding?
Because you also have to carry your backup weapon. Or maybe you want to store your spellbook, your basic crafter's book, your crowbar, your rope, your healer's tool or your lantern somewhere safe and not have to bother about it until you need it. Or you just looted three heavy armors from your ennemies and don't want/can't to run through the dungeon with them on your back or run to the nearest town to sell them. Or you have 5000 silver pieces (5 bulks) because you looted the treasure of a small, poor dragon.

Well, I said what I said because that's what you said you used it for (wands, potions, bombs), when such small things you use all the time in combat should probably be in your pockets and not on your luggage. I'll give you the backup weapon, though if you have 10-12 str then you'll probably have a L bulk secondary weapon, I think.

The other things you mentioned now are loot and downtime and daily preparation stuff, which is what the bag of holding is actually for, I would say (though personally I'd never put my spellbook in a hole to another dimension, but that's me and my paranoid PC).


5 people marked this as a favorite.
.Georg. wrote:

I think this rule is a good one. For the first time the Bag of Holding feels like a real magic item. Something people think about if they need to open it or not. Something that makes people think about where to put a latern, where a crowbar, where does they store the rope, what is this thing called backpack... They look for alternatives, they improvise and maybe they treat the Bag of Holding more conscious.

I do understand, that if something was for free and suddenly it isn't anymore, people will feel betrayed.

But I think the rule makes it way more interesting where to store your stuff, then just the universal answer: "I just put it in my Bag of Holding."

For the exact same reasons you list, I think this is a bad rule, so bad that I feel it must be a mistake. The Bag of Holding has rarely, if ever, been anything more than a lesser convenience. It doesn't help you win battles, protect you from harmful effects, heal your wounds, solve diplomatic issues, improve your stealth checks, identify dangerous monsters or arcana, and so on. All it does is carry stuff around for you.

This rule makes the Bag of Holding feel like a magic item, since it's being treated like other magic items, but it balances the minor (at best) benefits of the item with a significant drawback in your character performance. 1 resonance to add 1 die to your weapon damage, or improve a skill check roll by +3? Maybe. But to open a bag and put something into it? Come on.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
.Georg. wrote:

I think this rule is a good one. For the first time the Bag of Holding feels like a real magic item. Something people think about if they need to open it or not. Something that makes people think about where to put a latern, where a crowbar, where does they store the rope, what is this thing called backpack... They look for alternatives, they improvise and maybe they treat the Bag of Holding more conscious.

I do understand, that if something was for free and suddenly it isn't anymore, people will feel betrayed.

But I think the rule makes it way more interesting where to store your stuff, then just the universal answer: "I just put it in my Bag of Holding."

Being able to say "I just put it in my Bag of Holding" is exactly what *makes* it feel like a magic item for me.


6 people marked this as a favorite.

Welp, that's another mark against resonance.
Choosing between accessing your gear or healing should never come up in game.


13 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Player 1: "I'm going to drink this potion of enlarge person and kick some butt!"

Player 2, counting on her fingers: "Wait, don't. We've already burned through all our bag openings, you're up next and we gotta save a use for carrying all that loot."

Player 1: "Oh yeah, that's such an immersive and thrilling decision!"


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I totally understand you. And yes, spending a resonance point for opening the Bag of Holding may seem a bit much if you just want to throw something into it from the last loot.

But with a bag of holding with no restrictions you are making so many items obsolete. Why the need for a backpack? What is a Belt Puch for? Why use Saddlebags? Satchel? Scroll Case? Water Skin? And so on... The bag of Holding is so great, that you do not need those items anymore.

You have to travel through the desert? Bag of Holding with waterskins in it. Party saved!

You need to drain pasta? Put the pasta with the water into the Bag of Holding and ask for the water to come out. Dinner Saved!

You can fly over an hostile encounter and carpet bombing them by turning your bag inside out. Whole encounter solved with just one point of resonance!

You can do so many great things with a Bag of Holding that You can spend weeks to read all the ideas people came up with it, where they saved the party from certain death, killed the BBEGs, saved Towns...

I think after all it is a small price to pay for a whole party to make use of such a great item.

But as I said, instead of complaining, that it should be free... Improvise, think of something new. Use the other Items listed above. Use Ant Haul. Maybe even a mule... I am sure there are thousands of good ideas you can come up with!

So I think it is not taking away from the game if you have to think twice if you really need to open and close the bag 20x a day. It is adding more to the game since you will use a lot more items than before!


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Georg. wrote:
So I think it is not taking away from the game if you have to think twice if you really need to open and close the bag 20x a day. It is adding more to the game since you will use a lot more items than before!

I'm aware that there are good arguments made, and kudos to everyone for that, but I still feel like I'm having a stroke when people say opening a bag 20 times a day is too much. Like I've been playing a totally different game for the past 20+ years of my life.

I'd still like to address your points, though.

A bag of holding is not a perfect organizational tool, and requires some awkward fenangling to get things out of. It's unrealistic to use it in combat to fish out weapons and scrolls, since it doesn't magically summon up the things in it when you open it. Backpacks and belt pouches are great for keeping your important items close to hand. A scroll case will be important if you want to keep your scrolls from getting ripped up by all the heavy gear you put in your bag. A water skin is likewise going to be important unless you want everything soggy and your water to taste like crap.

Saddlebags are honestly not a concern of mine. I could tell you that they're nice and cheap and probably available with any saddle and also great for keeping things close at hand, but honestly I would not notice if saddlebags were absent from the game.

Traveling through the desert? Keeping a stock of water skins in your bag of holding is just plain smart, and not at all impacted by this system. But wouldn't it be a hoot to make camp an realize all your water was in the bag and you had no resonance? What a delightful addition to the game.

Draining pasta is a big deal in all of my games, so I take this very seriously. The bag of holding doesn't automatically sort things for you, thankfully, so you can't make weird tasting pasta with it.

Flying over a hostile encounter and carpet bombing them is interesting. What are you using for bombs? Actual bombs or rocks? I feel like if you have access to flight you could use a necklace of fireballs if you wanted to and that way you don't have to disturb your pasta.

So, if the old unlimited bag of holding is beyond the pale, I think it's reasonable to say reaching into a space bigger than the bag you're holding is so awkward you have to take a full minute to get things out of it.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Georg. wrote:

I totally understand you. And yes, spending a resonance point for opening the Bag of Holding may seem a bit much if you just want to throw something into it from the last loot.

But with a bag of holding with no restrictions you are making so many items obsolete. Why the need for a backpack? What is a Belt Puch for? Why use Saddlebags? Satchel? Scroll Case? Water Skin? And so on... The bag of Holding is so great, that you do not need those items anymore.

So I don't need a list of mundane containers when I go plane hopping? You've convinced me that spending RP for the bag is a bad thing. When I think epic and engaging game play, what I don't think if is a shopping list of camping gear and clothes items. I've never said 'boy, that BELT POUCH saved my life when the demon lord showed up...'


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Georg. wrote:

I totally understand you. And yes, spending a resonance point for opening the Bag of Holding may seem a bit much if you just want to throw something into it from the last loot.

But with a bag of holding with no restrictions you are making so many items obsolete. Why the need for a backpack? What is a Belt Puch for? Why use Saddlebags? Satchel? Scroll Case? Water Skin? And so on... The bag of Holding is so great, that you do not need those items anymore.

Belt Pouch: For things you need immediately to hand.

Waterskin: For drinking from.
Scroll Case: For protecting scrolls from getting torn
Backpack/Satchel: For carrying the Bag of Holding hands free.

And again, covering most storage issues is exactly the fantasy people want fulfilled by a Bag of Holding.


WatersLethe wrote:
But wouldn't it be a hoot to make camp and realize all your water was in the bag and you had no resonance? What a delightful addition to the game.

That's probably sarcasm, but I think it would be a pretty entertaining moment in a game if the party had a ton of water but no way to access it, so had to go thirsty for a day.

Rules question: Is it practical to capture goblins (or whatever) and force them to use their Resonance on your behalf?


I'd like to see stats about how many players bought/crafted a Bag of Holding and how many RP they spent on it compared to how many times they looted stuff during the playtest. Plus know if they wanted to use it but did not and for which reason. Might be usefull data to settle this.


6 people marked this as a favorite.

I find it interesting that there is such a volatile reaction to the restrictions on using/owning a bag of holding, and in particular that so many are drawing conclusions from how it and carrying capacity function in Pathfinder 1, rather than Pathfinder 2.

Perhaps it is time... for more numbers!

Baggage Math:

If we look at the numbers both for how encumbrance works, and how magical storage works, for each system, we can get a rough idea of its functionality.

In Pathfinder 1E:
1) Anything more than a light load slowed you and incurred penalties
2) Your light load depended on your size and Strength score
3) Raising any ability score (such as Strength) after 1st level requires expending exclusive resources - i.e. if you raise Strength you do not raise another attribute, which you may care about more.
4) At character creation, if a character is not Strength based, there is a reward (better non-Strength stats) to reducing Strength even below the base of 10.
5) The extremely cheap muleback cords turns shoulder slots into a +8 equivalent Strength bonus for carrying capacity.
6) A Strength based character such as a fighter could have a Strength of 22 by 10th level (LL: 173 lbs)
7) Taking the above fighter and applying magic: muleback cords raises Str to effectively 30 (LL: 532 lbs). Applying a casting of ant haul onto that character triples it for 10 hours to 1,596 lbs at the cost of a 1st level spell slot.
8) A Strength 10 human wizard has a light load of 33 lbs, which ant haul would raise to 99 lbs.
9) All items were tracked by their weight in pounds, and currency was a mere 50 coins per pound.
10) A bag of holding Type 1 cost 2,500gp, weighed 15 lbs and could hold 250 lbs (12,500 coins).
11) A bag of holding type 2 cost 5,000gp, weighed 25 lbs and could hold 500 lbs (25,000 coins).
12) A bag of holding type 3 cost 7,400gp weighed 35 lbs and could hold 1,000 lbs (50,000 coins)
13) A bag of holding type 4 cost 10,000gp, weighed 60 lbs. and could carry 1,500 lbs (75,000 coins)
14) A handy haversack[/b] cost 2,000gp, weighed 5 lbs and could hold 120 lbs (6,000 coins)

Result: Individual carrying capacity at 10th level varied from 26 lbs. as a light load (Str 8 human) to 1,596 lbs for a tricked out fighter. The largest bag of holding would put the former into heavy load by itself, and could hold slightly less than the latter could carry without encumbrance. In relative terms, the [i]bag of holding was bulky in and of itself, and didn't hold very much.

At 1/3rd the weight of a Type 1 bag, and half the capacity (plus action economy bonuses), the handy haversack was the go-to solution for carrying capacity on Strength-dumped characters in Pathfinder. Bags of holding were thus there primarily for carting loot and other bulky, heavy objects around - especially if you didn't have anyone in the party who was Strength based, and no one had an animal companion.

Pathfinder 2E:
1) Anything more than your light load slows you down
2) Your light load depends on your size and Strength, but for Medium creatures is simply 5 + Strength Modifier in bulk.
3) 5th, 10th, 15th and 20th level you raise four ability scores, allowing you to raise even secondary scores (such as Strength) without penalising your key attributes to do so.
4) At character creation, you also raise 4 ability scores, as above.
5) There are no magic items that raise carrying capacity (that I can see), and ant haul only increases your light load by 3.
6) A 10th level Strength-based fighter would be looking at a Strength of 20 and a light load of 10 bulk. 13 with ant haul and 15 if they took the feat also.
7) A 10th level human wizard who refused to ever raise Strength (really wanting Dex, Con, Int & Wis?) is looking at 5 bulk. 8 with ant haul.
8) Items are categorized by the amount of bulk they take up, or being Light (1/10th of a "bulk"). Coins are now 1000 per bulk.
9) A bag of holding type 1 costs 80gp, has bulk 1, and holds 25 bulk (25,000 coins).
10) A bag of holding type 2 costs 300gp, has bulk 1, and holds 50 bulk (50,000 coins).
11) A bag of holding type 3 costs 1,200gp, has bulk 1, and holds 100 bulk (100,000 coins).
12) A bag of holding type 4 costs 2,400gp, has bulk 1, and holds 150 bulk (150,000 coins).

Result: In Pathfinder 2, the bag of holding no longer poses serious encumbrance problems on low Strength characters as it no longer has escalating weight. Additionally, each category holds (loosely) twice as much stuff as its Pathfinder 1 equivalent. Lastly, how much a person can carry has been both raised and lowered; rather than 1,300 coins (Str 8 wizard) to 79,800 coins (buffed fighter) being the range, it is typically 5,000 coins (Str 10 wizard) to 13,000 coins (Str 20 fighter + feat + ant haul), which makes the bag of holding, which changes the role magical storage plays in the game.

Despite the similar names, the bag of holding and the role it plays in games looks to be very different in PF2 compared to PF1.

In PF2 weak characters can carry up to triple what they could in PF1, making magical storage less mandatory, while the upper limits for carrying capacity are toned right back, making magical storage also more powerful. Furthermore, the bag of holding is more portable (always bulk 1) and holds roughly twice as much as it did in PF1, making it even more powerful again.

In short, it is a cool but optional magic item for carrying large amounts of supplies or loot, rather than a bespoke part of every character sheet.

TL;DR: If you take the changes to the item in context with the changes to the magic item, placing restrictions on access to bulk storage is quite sensible.

Additionally, I'd also add to the comments questioning why anyone would store potions, bombs, backup weapons or similar such personal items within a bag of holding, where they require a full-round action that provokes an AO to recover. Even storing such things in a handy haversack is both reckless and unnecessary - the inside lining of magical storage devices are still able to be damaged like the inside of a regular bag, and doing so destroys the container and forever loses all the contents.

Furthermore, in PF2 even a Str 10 alchemist can wear studded leather (1), carry a dagger (L), a light mace (L), their formulae book (1), various gear (8 x L) and 20 alchemical bombs before getting slowed. That's... not bad. Adding a little Str every so often or snagging the general feat to raise it by 2 would largely fix most encumbrance issues.


Matthew Downie wrote:
WatersLethe wrote:
But wouldn't it be a hoot to make camp and realize all your water was in the bag and you had no resonance? What a delightful addition to the game.
That's probably sarcasm, but I think it would be a pretty entertaining moment in a game if the party had a ton of water but no way to access it, so had to go thirsty for a day.

This is why you can attempt to overspend resonance.


Maybe as a way to tweek it is that, you can get anything out for free but it takes time. Alternatively, you can activate it and whatever you want is right there, only taking an action to pull out whatever you want at the cost of resonance. And the handy haversack, which is oddly missing making me think that the pf2 bag of holding absorbed it's instant pull out, instead has lower capacity but is invested so you can pull out whatever you need quickly all the live long day at no further resonance cost.


I think if I gave you exactly what you wanted when you spend a resonance and reach inside then that's a bit more fair.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Raynulf wrote:

I find it interesting that there is such a volatile reaction to the restrictions on using/owning a bag of holding, and in particular that so many are drawing conclusions from how it and carrying capacity function in Pathfinder 1, rather than Pathfinder 2.

Perhaps it is time... for more numbers!

Thank you for your numbers.

These are really interesting and helpful!

I hope that people reading them do understand that (like you said):

Raynulf wrote:
In PF2 weak characters can carry up to triple what they could in PF1, making magical storage less mandatory, while the upper limits for carrying capacity are toned right back, making magical storage also more powerful.

This is why I think, that spending one resonance point is not imbalanced or gamebreaking and even adds a little to the feeling of a powerful magic item.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

As a late-night addendum that is something of a tangent...

It's important to point out that the encumbrance rules are a lot neater and generally more user friendly - a low Strength character can carry their gear without either being in medium load or micromanaging their inventory with relative ease, unlike in PF1. This is a significant improvement.

Example: Rogue:

In Pathfinder 1 a Str 10 rogue would have a carrying capacity of 33 lbs. Lets put some gear on them:
(20 lbs) masterwork studded leather
(2 lbs) shortsword
(2 lbs) shortsword
(2 lbs) shortbow
(1 lbs) 20 arrows
(1 lbs) dagger (backup)
(1 lbs) dagger (backup)
(1 lbs) everburning torch
(3 lbs) bedroll
(5 lbs) 5 days rations
(2 lbs) masterwork thieves' tools
(2 lbs) backpack
(5 lbs) silk rope (50ft)

The above isn't entirely unreasonable, but is 47 lbs, and doesn't include any magic items, alchemical items, potions, soap, or even just money - which is 1 lb per 50 coins. Not being in medium load without magical assistance is hard for this poor PF1 rogue.

In Pathfinder 2 our rogue has a limit of 5 bulk before they're slowed. Let's give them the same gear again:
(1) studded leather
(L) shortsword
(L) shortsword
(1) shortbow
(2xL) 20 arrows
(L) dagger (backup)
(L) dagger (backup)
(L) everburning torch
(L) bedroll
(5xL) 5 days rations
(L) expert thieves' tools
(-) backpack
(L) silk rope (50ft)

Now the above is 3.5 Bulk. Well within the rogue's limit, and with 1.5 bulk to spare for potions (0.1 each), money (1 = 1000 coins) and even hygiene.

In terms of being player-friendly, what Paizo have done with the encumbrance rules is amazing.

1 to 50 of 123 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Playtest / Game Master Rules / Magic Items / Bag of Holding All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.