That interaction isn't a thing in PF2 RAW. So you're fine. Lots of players who played older editions might EXPECT it to be a thing because it was for so long, though. I know we initially cringed when someone suggested it just out of habit.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ah! That's nice to know! They DID thought of that. But what exactly 'ceases to function' mean? Items are thrown out? Vanish?This effect or item creates an extradimensional space. An extradimensional effect placed inside another extradimensional space ceases to function until it is removed.So you could, for example, store empty bags of holding inside of a bag of holding, and then pass them out afterward, but you couldn't put full bags of holding inside of a bag of holding and be sure you'd still have the stuff in those bags once they were pulled out.
If you dive inside a bag and open your own, my take is that the link to the pocket dimension is suppressed, and it appears empty.
Basically any destructive / energetic result would cause huuuuuge issues.
Have your players ever walked inside a Magnificent Mansion? Well, if you use any sort of ejection/explosion, most of those PCs are in trouble.
Same goes for reaching inside a Bag when wearing Gloves of Storing. Don't want that to be an "Oops" with serious consequences.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Few thoughts:
Bag of holding was renamed as spacious pouch and BoH no longer exists after the fallout with Hasbro/WoTC licensing. So the interaction with Portable Holes (which haven't been reprinted) is dead and gone (for the better).
On the "ceases to function until removed" part of extra dimensional spaces, my interpretation is simply that you cannot access the extra dimensional space while it is inside another. So a spacious pouch is a mundane pouch while inside another extra dimensional space, but that other spaces doesn't disappear, the contents don't break through it, nor are they yeeted any place.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, you are right in that the rule says 'until it is removed', so it looks not irreversible or catastrophic. But then the silliness I wrote about remains: you can put unlimited number of things inside one extradimentional space because you can stack them inside each other.... Basically any destructive / energetic result would cause huuuuuge issues. ...Ah! That's nice to know! They DID thought of that. But what exactly 'ceases to function' mean? Items are thrown out? Vanish?This effect or item creates an extradimensional space. An extradimensional effect placed inside another extradimensional space ceases to function until it is removed.So you could, for example, store empty bags of holding inside of a bag of holding, and then pass them out afterward, but you couldn't put full bags of holding inside of a bag of holding and be sure you'd still have the stuff in those bags once they were pulled out.
Is it really such a problem? Silly maybe, but not a problem.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I mean, "cheating on bulk limits"... let's not get carried away.
If accessing an item takes multiple actions to pull a bag out of a bag and then pull and item out of the second bag (or however many layers you want to go deep...) - at that point we're not really balancing combat.
So then, is the game really becoming un-fun unbalanced because people can achieve O(n log n) bulk efficiency out of combat?
"That time we literally carried away the entire dungeon brick by brick in nested bags of holding" sounds more like a cool war story than a tragic campaign failure to me.
Cease to function does not mandate an ejection reading.
And yes, item ejection would be a huge problem / headache.
The whole point of a SP/BoH is to carry a huge amount of stuff in a weightless environment.
Like, many, many time's a PC body weight.
Just my Librarian Staves suddenly erupting into an avalanche of books and scrolls would be a "disaster" for that PC due to potential damage.
IMO, "cease to function" means the item can no longer be used to access that extradimensional space. Not that there is some adverse magical reaction. When stored inside a BoH, the items are already sort of in the ethereal plane(?), there's no reason they need to be shunted back into the material realm.
It's honestly still a problem to say that PCs need to leave the Manor to open such bags, but at least that problem is a lesser one than unexpected ejections.
The difference btwn "valid" pocket dimension were stuff still works fine, like Harrowheart, or extradimensional space like a Manor seems rather arbitrary.
Call me crazy, but you could all just use the trick that I use. Spacious Pouches are unique investments. As in you can only ever use one. If you try and use another (outside of special feats) then it just acts as a normal pouch. Then you can't have a hundred pouches all inside one bag. This also preserves the value of the higher level variants.
As a side note I wouldn't let them conflict with other items of this nature, such as the wig, ancestory feat versions, etc. it's just meant to avoid the "must carry everything" mindset, but won't invalidate other items and feats this way.
Just my 2 cents.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Cease to function does mean it's no longer a spacious pouch.
So where does all the stuff, now inside a mundane bag, go?
If it was just "unable to access" they would have said that, or said unable to activate, or said unable to open, or any other way that points to the space still being there just iaccesible.
As for potential inconveniences, none of which being drastic, then... be more careful?
I should have said this more directly, but the contents of your BoH are not on your hip/back. When the BoH is working normally, those items are not spatially anywhere from your PoV.
Your stuff does not "go" anywhere in the "looks empty" ruling version. Your stuff already was in the Ethereal Plane (or some artificial piece of it), where it remains if you walk into a Manor.
.
2 main bits of evidence that your stuff in not spatially next to you:
.
First, is the "if broken" clause that causes all contents to be lost forever. (IMO this is not a good rule, but that's the RaW)
If broken while functioning normally, the items do NOT end up in the material realm next to the bag. They are instead lost who knows where in another plane of existence.
.
Second, "... can't be detected by magic that detects only things on the same plane"
Soooo, yeah. This is just outright stating it RaW. Your stuff is not "in the bag." Divination magic that can see through walls could peek inside, and see none of your items.
Items inside a BoH/SP (and presumably all extradimensional storage) are actually inside a different container that exists in another plane.
The actual magic item is really just a pocket portal to that other bag.
That's what "extradimensional" means in english. "extra" as a prefix meaning outside or beyond, and dimensional as in the normal dimension. Things w/ that trait all presumably function by linking to (or possibly creating) another dimension. It's not some kind of shrink magic.
This is why the inside is weightless, because you're literally not on the material plane anymore.
.
The reason I used the Librarian Staff example is because it's the most tame/harmless in the "ejection" ruling.
If the PCs enter a Manor, basically every BoH is going to instantly be broken, because they will be secured shut and then rupture.
There's even an AP extradimensional-trait item in the Gourd Home that I almost guarantee had that had the "ceases to function" rule hand-waived by accident because it's kinda a stupid rule for a trait to carry.
.
A small tweak to Kilraq's suggestion would have been sufficient, that items of the same name cannot function when inside each other.
Because there's no "design danger" for PCs to be able to use their BoH inside a Manor, which has a separate primary function from storage items anyways. And worrying about carry limit abuse is a rather moot point anyways.
BoH/SP are 1 bulk each. And they are not Invested items. A PC can already have 4 different BoH inside a vanilla Backpack, and carry *many* more if they wish.
.
Future-proofing the item against dimensional layering problems should not have come at the expense of PCs being able to walk through invisible thresholds that suddenly cause a big headache at minimum, or more than likely initiate a dumb side quest where the PCs need to pause the adventure to get all their now-floor items back to base (because all their storage containers just ripped).
When the party caster gets to finally show off their fancy new Manor spell, it's not a fun wrinkle that the PCs will need to spend an extra 2 days on selecting storage spells so they can keep progressing as they were before.
If any GM actually hits the PCs with that rule, all it's going to do is torpedo the caster's fun while they apologize and revert back to using Cozy Cabin. Because that spell doesn't have the trait, while Manor does.
I'm of the mind that a bag within a bag simply becomes inaccessible until removed.
No need to overthink it.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I mean, "cheating on bulk limits"... let's not get carried away.
If accessing an item takes multiple actions to pull a bag out of a bag and then pull and item out of the second bag (or however many layers you want to go deep...) - at that point we're not really balancing combat.
I never talked about combat, don't try to derail my posts with putting words into my mouth.
Either way, spacious pouches were never about combat? There are smaller dimensional containers to use in combat which are much faster.
I'm not putting words into your mouth. I'm the one who brought combat into the conversation because I don't think every kind of balance is equally important.
Having characters be reasonably balanced with each other in combat is important.
Whether all ways to manage out of combat bulk are balanced with each other, is something I don't think is nearly as important.
The way Paizo prices grades of bags of holding seems a bit dumb to me. The power of the pouches increases far slower than the cost, which is a design pattern they use for a lot of things. For some of those things it makes sense: a moderate healing potion is roughly 2x the healing of a lesser healing potion, at roughly 4x the cost. But if you need a moderate amount of healing, not having to spend two extra actions to draw a second lesser potion is really valuable.
For the pouches though, since those are already not where you put your high-urgency items, this value isn't there. It's just a habit of their pricing pattern.
I never said anything about the items being next to you.
There's no need for an essay, the simplest answer is the one closer to the truth:
You literally have a bag with an extra dimensional space inside it one moment, and the next moment an ordinary bag.
The extradimensional space straight up ceases to exist.
By default, everything inside NEEDS to begin somewhere now.
2 options:
Ejected to astral plane
Ejected from where the space used to be.At no point does the extradimensional space exists at all while the bag is inside another one. That's the RAW.
I honestly didn't expect for that tiny of a quibble to be your stance, hence me being thorough.
.
There is no mechanical way to justify the items ejecting into the material plane from that PoV.
If you really think that a temporary suppression of the magic item's function fully unmakes the magic, then the only real outcome that's consistent logically is to say that all the items are lost forever in that other plane of existence.
Because that's where the items *are.*
.
.
I do not think it is a common reading to think that the extradimensional space ceases to exist outright. Nor that such a temporary suppression is at all equivalent to a full unmaking of the magic.
I personally think the portal/link to said space is disrupted by the Bag/etc being inside another Ex-space. That the linked Ex-space is still there, and still has your stuff. The magic item is not broken nor destroyed, just temporarily non-functional (as in, you cannot use its function).
.
If you really need a story to justify it, consider the "looks empty" version to be a magical safeguard added to prevent such an instant destruction event.
That if a BoH were to *actually* have it's Ex-D link opened while inside another Ex-D space, *that* act would cause a bad time.
Instead, such magical items are designed so that the portal/link is instead suppressed and unable to trigger such a reaction.
Oh, look at that Portable Hole. An Ex-D item that could be said to explicitly lack this safeguard, and could slot perfectly into that insta-fanon story.
Edit: Just now noticed this wording in Portable Hole, which is a weight in the "looks empty" ruling imo.
...Rather than deactivating either, if one is placed inside the other, as typical for extradimensional spaces...
Not sure how you can get to complete collapse of Ex-D space from "deactivating." A rather passive word there.
I'm of the mind that a bag within a bag simply becomes inaccessible until removed.
No need to overthink it.
But that's the overthinking it.
The simplest solution is if a magic item ceases to be a magic item, its effects stop. There's no longer a space for the things to be in it.
Dude, you are way over-reading the extradimensional trait
This effect or item creates an extradimensional space. An extradimensional effect placed inside another extradimensional space ceases to function until it is removed.
It does not say that it is no longer a magic item, nor anything like that.
Ceases to function does not have to mean "is unmade."
"Cannot be used" is another one.
A car that rolls into a magic field that then "cases to function until it is removed" does not have to explode into scrap. Nor does it mean that anything is actually broken.
Nowadays, cars can be remotely disabled via things like On Star. That car may both be "perfectly functional" as in not being broken, while also "ceasing to function" as in being unable to be driven around due to the software lock.
It straight up means that it no longer creates said extradimensional space.
You're free to houserule as you wish, but ceasing to function cannot be read "ceases to function for some things yet works completely fine for others".
No, no it does not. There's multiple meanings for words and phrases.
It never says anything more than "...ceases to function until it is removed."
We also have text from Portable Hole referencing the same rule / phenomena with "Rather than deactivating either, ..."
.
If you put a trigger lock on a gun, it ceases to function until it is removed.
This gun is "deactivated," but fully operational. If one could pull the trigger, it would still fire.
Again, the context of that wording, the additional mention and contrasting result in Portable Hole, plus the logical consequence of the resulting loss of items into the void,
means that very very few will read the extradimensional trait and conclude with the "no longer creates said extradimensional space," ruling.
It absolutely is valid RaW to use the "appears empty" temporarily suppressed ruling.
You are presuming a whole hecking lot of how magical bags function under the hood to make that assertion.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm of the mind that a bag within a bag simply becomes inaccessible until removed.
No need to overthink it.
My only issue with this is that historically that bag-in-bag weirdness existed to prevent stacking of extradimensional spaces, and having no additional consequences beyond the bag not working when it's in a bag effectively means there's no penalty for stacking extradimensional storage.
The statement doesn't even really mean anything in that case either either, given that you can't use items when they're in storage in the first place.
That's not necessarily a problem, and the RAW doesn't outline any additional penalties, but I think that historical context is at least worth noting, considering that it means the relationship is somewhat notably changed here.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm of the mind that a bag within a bag simply becomes inaccessible until removed.
No need to overthink it.
My only issue with this is that historically that bag-in-bag weirdness existed to prevent stacking of extradimensional spaces, and having no additional consequences beyond the bag not working when it's in a bag effectively means there's no penalty for stacking extradimensional storage.
The statement doesn't even really mean anything in that case either either, given that you can't use items when they're in storage in the first place.
That's not necessarily a problem, and the RAW doesn't outline any additional penalties, but I think that historical context is at least worth noting, considering that it means the relationship is somewhat notably changed here.
If that's a big concern at your table, maybe just rule that bag 2's contents count against bag 1's bulk limits.
In short, bag 2's bulk saving effect ceases to function while so stored.
I'd recommend giving the players a heads up about it prior to overloading their bag/pouch.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm of the mind that a bag within a bag simply becomes inaccessible until removed.
No need to overthink it.
But that's the overthinking it.
The simplest solution is if a magic item ceases to be a magic item, its effects stop. There's no longer a space for the things to be in it.
Personally, I think you are overthinking it, not the rest of us.
You claim the the correct interpretation of "An extradimensional effect placed inside another extradimensional space ceases to function until it is removed" can only be that forecefully ejecting it's contents. In effect you are claiming that it ceases to be a magic item (that's literally in the quote above) although that's obviously not true "it ceases to function".
What would be nice is if the rules explain what "ceases to function" entails, but they don't. The simplest interpretation (as in there are multiple layers of consequences and if-then statements happening) is that it is inaccessible. Otherwise you can get yourself into crazy scenarios.
Like creating "bombs" out Spacious Pouches. If you have a character willing to sacrifice themselves, they can just walk around with a bag of holding full of rocks (a Spacious Bouch type 4 can hold 150 bulk) and when they desire they just pop that into another Spacious pouch. Not sure how or where exactly all that material comes out or how much damage it causes, have fun making up those rules. That's why it's not the simplest interpretation.
If you want to create a limit or a rule to stop people from just nesting lots of Spacious Pouches, just rule that it has the Invested trait. Why wouldn't you just buy multiple Spacious Pouches? You wouldn't want to waste your limited investment slots on that.
|
It straight up means that it no longer creates said extradimensional space.
While the Extradimensional trait states that "This effect or item creates an extradimensional space[,]" the Spacious Pouch states that it "opens into a magical space larger than its outside dimensions" and includes nothing about "creating" the space.
Perhaps the specific (spacious pouch) is overriding the general (extradimensional trait), and so rather than creating the extradimensional space, it simply provides access.
In that case, when a spacious pouch is placed in another extradimensional space, it "ceases to function" by not "open[ing] into a magical space larger than its outside dimensions" "until it is removed."
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you want to create a limit or a rule to stop people from just nesting lots of Spacious Pouches, just rule that it has the Invested trait. Why wouldn't you just buy multiple Spacious Pouches? You wouldn't want to waste your limited investment slots on that.
Yeah, that would be the clean and simple approach.
Investment works really well for those items to discourage picking up dozens of cheap ones, and instead focuses you on picking a few more powerful (and expensive) ones.
For things like potions, action economy pushes you to go for the bigger ones.
It's the not-invested, not-action-economy-sensitive items like the pouch that don't really have good incentives to get the expensive version instead of multiple of the cheap version.
I think that high level parties need to be able to enter the Mansion w/o their bags gushing up contents. Being cut off from them is almost a penalty already, and perhaps worse if they need to do extended work or are hiding in hostile territory and forgot.
But also I dislike the economics that favors lots of small bags, making larger ones useless outside of unusually sized items seldom stored.
So yeah, Investing seems like a solution, but maybe we shouldn't care so much? Maybe it's all good being as wonky as it is because Bulk's so tertiary to actual gameplay, hardly an issue outside of the lowest levels and perhaps left behind. Toss some valuable statues (et al) that can't fit in the smaller bags at the party, and grin. Many old modules had different values for items if kept intact, being worth about 10x as much as if they had to be broken down. Hmm.
(I'm reminded of a high level adventure with a construct that emitted an anti-magic aura that plunged the party into darkness. Ever prepared, many had stocked non-magical sources of light (most were remnants from their earliest levels). Except they couldn't access them since the items were in extradimensional spaces they couldn't access. Party had to retreat in the dark and blockade a door just to retrieve mundane light so they could return to fight.)
I think that high level parties need to be able to enter the Mansion w/o their bags gushing up contents. Being cut off from them is almost a penalty already, and perhaps worse if they need to do extended work or are hiding in hostile territory and forgot.
But also I dislike the economics that favors lots of small bags, making larger ones useless outside of unusually sized items seldom stored.
So yeah, Investing seems like a solution, but maybe we shouldn't care so much? Maybe it's all good being as wonky as it is because Bulk's so tertiary to actual gameplay, hardly an issue outside of the lowest levels and perhaps left behind. Toss some valuable statues (et al) that can't fit in the smaller bags at the party, and grin. Many old modules had different values for items if kept intact, being worth about 10x as much as if they had to be broken down. Hmm.(I'm reminded of a high level adventure with a construct that emitted an anti-magic aura that plunged the party into darkness. Ever prepared, many had stocked non-magical sources of light (most were remnants from their earliest levels). Except they couldn't access them since the items were in extradimensional spaces they couldn't access. Party had to retreat in the dark and blockade a door just to retrieve mundane light so they could return to fight.)
Won't lie, that last little story bit is the things I love most about tabletop games like Pathfinder and DnD. I love the stories it creates, even if at the time they were like frustrating.
You claim the the correct interpretation of "An extradimensional effect placed inside another extradimensional space ceases to function until it is removed" can only be that forecefully ejecting it's contents. In effect you are claiming that it ceases to be a magic item (that's literally in the quote above) although that's obviously not true "it ceases to function".What I'm just claiming is that when something ceases to function, all of its effects cease, not just some of them.
Which does mean that the extradimensional space simply ceases to exist.
What happens with the contents, it's up-for debate.
For me, the easiest solution is the ejection, but since indeed we have no guidance on that part, it could be anything. Scattered in the Astral, destroyed, ejected from the bag, ejected in random places, etc.
The one thing I cannot agree is that the items exist in a space that no longer exists.
I can't say the rules explicitly don't say your interpretation is valid, but I reiterate we have no guidance on what "ceases to function" means. It doesn't necessarily mean that the extradimensional space ceases to exist, that's purely your interpretation. And your interpretation creates a lot more issues than it solves.
I get it, you're annoyed by the idea of stacking multiple Spacious Pouch Type 1 and so you feel the need to create this penalty to players to prevent them from doing so.
If these were in fact the correct rules, then from in an game perspective characters wouldn't ever put a pouch inside of another (unless trying to use the resulting "bomb" effect).
It's all so inelegant and requires making up way more stuff.
And for that reason I simply can't agree with your interpretation.
|
|
we have no guidance on what "ceases to function" means. It doesn't necessarily mean that the extradimensional space ceases to exist
If every effect with the Extradimensional trait “creates an extradimensional space” then there’s a reasonable argument that “ceases to function” necessarily means the extradimensional space ceases to exist because “creates an extradimensional space” is the function.
But in the case of the spacious pouch, the rules text reads that the item “opens into a magical space,” so that is the spacious pouch’s function.
And your interpretation creates a lot more issues than it solves.
This I agree with. So I’d just go with “lose access” even if that’s not technically right.
I think the easiest solution to the nested spacious pouch problem, (other than just not worrying about it), would be to rule that the total contents of all bags apply against the capacity of the every bag “higher” in the chain.
I handwaved away all the complications about Bags of Holding/Spacious Pouchesin my game, except I retained that some spells had trouble teleporting extra-dimensional spaces.
Nature's Pathway formerly known as Tree Stride Spell 5
Uncommon Concentrate Manipulate Mental Plant Teleportation
Traditions primal
Deities Elven Pantheon, Erastil, Gendowyn, Yuelral
Cast 1 minute
You step into a living tree with a trunk big enough for you to fit inside it and instantly teleport to any tree within 5 miles that also has a sufficiently large trunk. Once you enter the first tree, you instantly know the rough locations of other sufficiently large trees within range and can exit from the original tree, if you prefer. You can't carry extradimensional spaces with you; if you attempt to do so, the spell fails.
Heightened (6th) The tree you exit can be up to 50 miles away.
Heightened (8th) The tree you exit can be up to 500 miles away.
Heightened (9th) The tree you exit can be anywhere on the same planet.
The druid who used Tree Stride/Nature's Pathway happened to not carry any extra-dimensional storage.
My first PF2 campaign was the Ironfang Invasion adventure path, which I was converting to PF2 rules. The PCs spent most of the 1st module, Trail of the Hunted, hiding refugee from Phaendar villager in the deadly Fangwood Forest to protect them from the Ironfang Legion.
I had worried about how the party would acquire new gear, especially arrows for the archers, since all nearby villages had been conquered by the Ironfang Legion. The legion also patrolled the roads out of the area. Fortunately, the PCs could defeat a single regular Ironfang patrol, so they looted fresh arrows from dead Ironfang soldiers. The other enemy gear, such as swords, armor, and rations, they carried back to the villagers for their use. That must have been awkward, but it happened during exploration mode, so we did not pay attention to the details. Calculating encumbrance would have been no fun.
Encounter H1, Mutilated Body, found the body of a local hunter by the road.
Treasure: The body is that of trapper Gilida Dravonich, a part-time resident of Phaendar (and recognizable to any town residents). Gilida still carries her handy haversack, which contains a bear trapUE, a climber’s kit, 4 days’ worth of rations, two waterskins, and animal skins worth 150 gp.
Handy Haversack had not been ported to PF2, so I substituted a Type I Bag of Holding. That made more sense, too, because the Ironfang soldiers who killed Gilida Dravonich would have looted a haversack themselves, but could overlook a decorated sack that appeared empty.
Finally, the party could carry loot and supplies without fudging their tight encumberance limits.
More players joined the game when we switched to playing online due to the Covid-19 pandemic. Each new player, forewarned about the situation, included a Type 1 Bag of Holding in their character's initial gear. And one batch of loot included Sleeves of Storage. That was four Bags of Holding and one robe with Sleeves for 110 bulk of extra-dimensional storage. A different character carried each extra-dimensional storage item. And that was all the storage they needed up to 20th level.
I recall once the party was fighting 3 trolls. The three spellcasters in the party were having trouble hitting every troll with a fire spell every turn to prevent regeneration. Tactically, they should have left one troll out of the rotation, but they would have hated to see a troll regenerate back up to full hit points. Therefore, the champion took time to dig into her Bag of Holding for flasks of Alchemist's Fire.
I don't see the point in nesting Type I Bags of Holding inside each other. That would add an extra two interact actions to pull out a stowed bag before pulling out the items stowed in that bag. Thus, I don't see the point in bothering with rules that extra-dimensional storage does not work inside other extra-dimensional spaces. No-one in the party could cast Rope Trick/Liminal Doorway or Magnificent Mansion/Planar Palace, so they never took their Bags of Holding into such extra-dimensional spaces, but if they had, we would have not remembered the rule.
In my PF1 Iron Gods campaign, the PCs were not worried about carrying their gear, but they were worried about hiding their high-tech gear from confiscation by the Technic League when they entered the city of Starfall in [i]Palace of Fallen Stars.[/url] So they left most of their tech behind at their home base, but some potentially essential items where stored in a Portable Hole. Then the hole was rolled up and hidden in a secret pocket in a coat.
My Dungeons & Dragons 3rd Edition parties did use the trick of stuffing a PC into a Bag of Holding to get around the number-of-persons limit on the Teleportation spell. That had a balancing risk that if the party teleported into a combat situation, one PC would have to rescue the bagged PC at the beginning of combat, reducing their combat power for the first round. But such tricks bend the rules, so I inderstand the PF2 rules that explicitly call out bagged people as counting against the teleportation limits or forbid teleporting extra-dimensional spaces.
We GMs need to balance ease of gameplay versus abuse of magic items for excess power. Nevertheless, Bags of Holding inside extra-dimensional spaces are not worthy of anti-abuse rules that make gameplay more annoying. So I go for the most convenient interpretations. I would say that a Spacious Pouch inside a Liminal Doorway or a Planar Palace would still hold items. I would fudge the rules to say that items could still be removed from such bags, to prevent the inconvenience of having to step outside to fetch an item, but that no more items could be added into the bag while inside the extra-dimensional housing. The bag temporarily loses its ability to stretch toward higher capacity. And the contents of a Spacious Pouch inside another Spacious Pouch count against the outer Spacious Pouch's capacity.
|
|
I'm of the camp that the bag of holding is effectively letting them access a storage space per its description(I'd probably go as far that if a bag was destroyed with something critical inside we could do a quest to figure out where that dimensional space was so they could plane shift to it to retrieve it, even though that goes against the 'lost forever' section).
However, it also feels like a lot of this argument falls into a very similar level as arguing the physics in a game. How the bag does it is pretty much just fluff beyond that its magic and it needs to access another plane(so if an effect stopped planar access it wouldn't work). But the actual function of what it does is let you ignore up to 25 bulk of items. If it stops working, the bag is suddenly however many bulk it had inside of it harder to handle. Its a backpack that doesn't like anti-magic fields.
The problem being, that nothing in that sentence invalidates the Trait that says that said space is created by the pouch.The text states what the specific magic item does, which is good enough for me. Your position isn't indefensible, I just don't share it.
I'm in the same spot, but even more reason is because shroudb's position creates more problems than it solves.
Like I can't and won't say the position is without reason, it's not an unreasonable interpretation. It's just a problematic interpretation when the Dev team has leaned toward KISS as often as possible.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Nesting bags is a pretty easy problem to solve.
Are your players nesting bags?
No? Then it's not a problem. Just ignore it.
Yes? Tell them not to do that.
Easypeasy.
I'm in the same spot, but even more reason is because shroudb's position creates more problems than it solves.
Like I can't and won't say the position is without reason, it's not an unreasonable interpretation. It's just a problematic interpretation when the Dev team has leaned toward KISS as often as possible.
IMO, this is exactly what the too bad to be true ~rule is there for.
To catch situations like this, where it *is* a valid RaW interpretation to say the magic bags instantly loose their contents into the Astral realm.
To be clear, the "instant ejection of now-floor items" ruling itself is an attempt to make the on-paper consequence less harsh. We already have explicit text explaining what happens when a BoH is destroyed (and the magic catastrophically fails), and the items are "lost forever," not ejected.
.
Especially thanks to Hole using the word "deactivating," IMO that TBtbT ~rule applies to the extradimensional trait to instead pick a different english interpretation for "cannot be used" instead of "completely nonfunctional."
For one more metaphor, a power plant can be "nonfunctional" without the whole thing exploding. In that context, we understand that a "thing" has a specific function, and as soon as that function (the generation of power) is disrupted for any reason, we say that it "ceases to function."