Bag of Holding in a Bag of Holding [Archive] - Wizards Community

Bag of Holding in a Bag of Holding [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
nosfera2
06-08-06, 12:07 PM I know in old rules there was something that said you could not place a Bag of Holding within another Bag of Holding. Now however, I can only find reference to the inability to place a BoH in a Portable Hole and vice versa. There is nothing that says you can't put a BoH, Handy Haversack, Belt of Many Pockets, etc. within another BoH, Haversack, etc. Is this the case? Can I put a BoH within a BoH within a BoH and get a lot of storage? Did I miss something?
mvincent
06-08-06, 12:26 PM Take your pick:

From the 3.0 FAQ (still applicable since the wording for these items has not changed):
"Putting one bag of holding within another is just like putting the bag into a portable hole."

From the Rules of the Game (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20051101a) (which is more recent but less official than the FAQ):
"One bag of holding can be placed safely inside another"

Note that they contradict each other (even though they were both actually written by the same person).
shruggar
06-08-06, 12:54 PM BoH in BoH is fine. Otherwise they would have mentioned that it wasnt right next to where they mentioned the perils of Portable Holes.

Many DMs put restrictions on this, such as saying that a BoH has its True Weight when in another BoH (so no BoH IV inside a BoH I + recursion == 20lb infinite bag), or at least saying you can't open one bag while it's in another bag (so getting a bag within a bag within a bag would be three full round actions instead of one full round action)
Bulletproof_Condom
06-08-06, 12:59 PM In 3.5 (apparently), nested bags of holding are fine.

3.0 or 3.5, putting a bag of holding in a portable hole (or vice versa) rips up the fabric of reality something fierce, creating either a gate to the ethereal plane or a swirling vortex to the astral plane and destroying both objects.

I forget which goes to which.
mvincent
06-08-06, 01:02 PM Anyone know how BoH in BoH worked in AD&D?
mvincent
06-08-06, 01:09 PM In 3.5 (apparently), nested bags of holding are fine.Note that the Bag of Holding Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bag_of_holding) says:
"In the physics of Dungeons & Dragons, putting one bag of holding inside another, or into a portable hole will result in a catastrophic explosion"

I'm curious where this came from.
Bulletproof_Condom
06-08-06, 01:49 PM I forget. FAQ maybe?
utilitarian
06-08-06, 02:09 PM Well putting a Bag of Holding into a Portable Hole or vice versa has always resulted in either a temporal explosion and dimensional rupture, or a temporal gateway, respectively. In either case both items get destroyed.

I'm always assumed BoH in a BoH was roughly the same as BoH in PH, as we're still dealing with trying to put two extradimensional spaces inside eachother, but apparently The Sage has changed his mind on this one or something.
Jaeron Dalur
06-08-06, 02:18 PM Note that the Bag of Holding Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bag_of_holding) says:
"In the physics of Dungeons & Dragons, putting one bag of holding inside another, or into a portable hole will result in a catastrophic explosion"

I'm curious where this came from.
I am guessing someone pulled it from thin air. The references point to a thread on the subject of what happens in the case of one BoH inside another and why. Nothing in the thread (the last time I looked at it) made mention of any rules for 3.x D&D other than quoting the relevant BoH in a Portable Hole entrys. The other reference is an article in Dragon about bags of devouring (which may have infoabout bags of holding but since I don't have the money or inclination to go out and buy a backissue...).
Shinryouga
06-08-06, 02:19 PM One of the reasons why the "boom" seems limited to just Bag/Hole interbreeding is because of the "if it worked with x, it should also work with y" principle. Both of the aformentioned items are extradimensional containers.

How many extradimensional spaces/containers are there in the game? Bag of Holding, Portable Hole, Hewards Handy Haversack, Belt of Many Pockets, Familiar Pocket spell, Rope Trick spell, Mordenkaidens Magnificent Mansion spell, and so on.

I think its limited to just the bag/hole event so that low level parties who've scrounged up the gold to get a Bag Mark 1 at fourth level or so don't get royally screwed when they use rope trick spells to rest.

Just my two coppers.
goawayugh
06-08-06, 02:23 PM Ive always ruled in my games, no extradimensional spaces inside eachother. Unless your stupid enough to try it...

Doesn't the Rope Trick spell say something about not allowing extridimensional spaces inside each other?
DaMullet
06-08-06, 02:28 PM *Doh*
nosfera2
06-08-06, 02:38 PM Yeah, I just read that. It specifically says:

Note: It is hazardous to create an extradimensional space within an existing extradimensional space or to take an extradimensional space into an existing one.

That starts to support the idea of BoH+BoH being invalid, or any extradimensional for that matter.

Of course, on the other hand, it seems unreasonable to assume people with access to 7th level spells (such as Mordenkain's Magnificent Mansion) would not have extra dimensional space items. If no extradimensional can enter another, then this spell seems mighty useless, and dangerous for that matter if someone casually walks in with his Handy Haversack.
mvincent
06-08-06, 02:44 PM After some online research, it seems a lot of other people believe that BoH in BoH isn't safe. Nethack treats it similarly.

The rules for Rope trick (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/ropeTrick.htm) do say:
"It is hazardous to create an extradimensional space within an existing extradimensional space or to take an extradimensional space into an existing one."

But it's stated in the 3.0 FAQ that extra-dimensional spells (which actually include all the plane-hopping spells) are safe in this regard. It's just the items that have issues with each other (the RotG supports this). This makes the Familiar Pocket spell, Rope Trick spell, Mordenkainens Magnificent Mansion spell, etc. safe.

But it's also been ruled (in the FAQ and RotG) that a Hewards Handy Haversack reacts the same as a bag of holding.
nosfera2
06-08-06, 02:51 PM That makes a lot of since. Bringing a bag of holding into an extradimensional spell seems a lot more reasonable and common then putting a BoH into another to get limitless carrying capacity.
HermitIX
06-08-06, 03:15 PM I have very little first hand knowledge dealing with transdimensional physics in the DnD multiverse; But it seem to me that the issue could be simplified if it is assumed that the major problems stem from the portable hole not the bag of holding. The bag of holding is primarily self contained. And the portable hole… is well … a hole.
Erak
06-08-06, 04:24 PM Per RAW a Bag of Holding does not open an extradimensional space......it opens a nondimensional space:

The bag of holding opens into a nondimensional space: Its inside is larger than its outside dimensions.

Therefore taking one into an etradimensional space would have no effect.....and placing one Bag inside another would also have no effect.

Don't ask me what a "nondimensional space" is......I think it is holdover language from 1st edition.

Realistically the Rope Trick spell contains language it shouldn't contain and placing extradimensional spaces in other extradimensional spaces should have no effect at all.
mvincent
06-08-06, 04:31 PM Per RAW a Bag of Holding does not open an extradimensional space......it opens a nondimensional space.These terms are essentially the same thing in D&D (i.e. both terms are used to describe a portable hole).
Erak
06-08-06, 04:38 PM http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20051101a

Here's the issue......you can't just make exceptions for spells and still keep rules in place on items. You need a unified rule that works. So you really need to rule that either extradimensional spaces inside other extradimensional spaces cause problems......or they don't.

The "blow up" rule for containers is again back to "Gygaxian" D&D that penalized players. The simple way to rule it is that there are an infinate amount of frequencies to which each extradimensional space is attuned.....and you do not ever need to worry about one being on the same frequency as another.
claypigeons
06-08-06, 11:36 PM I have always played under (and now DM as such) the rule that one extradimensional bag can go into one other.

That is to say, that if you have a possum pouch and put a bag of holding into it, you are fine. But if you put a bag of holding into another bag of holding, and then put them into the pouch, you implode.

It may be the presence of mature players, or the lack of desire to exlpoit it (or both), but there has never been a problem with this rule for us.
FlameLover
06-09-06, 12:24 AM I'd rule that a bag of holding, protable hole, handy haversack, etc. cannot be placed within another such storage item - just to avoid situations where you get 10 levels of storage devices like bleeding russian dolls. If you try it, both items implode in on themselves cuasing you to lose anything in them (no harm to the character). There is no problem bringing such items into a Rope Trick, Mordenkainen's Magnificent Mansion, etc. as these are somehow different. If I had to explain it in game, i'd say the bags are "nondimensional" items while the spells create "extradimensional" things.

Up to the DM really.
utilitarian
06-09-06, 01:51 AM Now the further question is: which effect do you get?

The Bag of Holding/Portable Hole event is not simply "boom" is actually is very specific about which item is placed into the other.

Bag goes in hole, you get your "rift" in space destroying both items. This is the typical "boom" people think of.

HOWEVER

Hole goes in Bag, you get a stable gate to the Astral Plane which draws all creatures within 10 feet into it, and destroys the bag.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
nosfera2 06-08-06, 12:07 PM	I know in old rules there was something that said you could not place a Bag of Holding within another Bag of Holding. Now however, I can only find reference to the inability to place a BoH in a Portable Hole and vice versa. There is nothing that says you can't put a BoH, Handy Haversack, Belt of Many Pockets, etc. within another BoH, Haversack, etc. Is this the case? Can I put a BoH within a BoH within a BoH and get a lot of storage? Did I miss something?
mvincent 06-08-06, 12:26 PM	Take your pick: From the 3.0 FAQ (still applicable since the wording for these items has not changed): "Putting one bag of holding within another is just like putting the bag into a portable hole." From the Rules of the Game (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20051101a) (which is more recent but less official than the FAQ): "One bag of holding can be placed safely inside another" Note that they contradict each other (even though they were both actually written by the same person).
shruggar 06-08-06, 12:54 PM	BoH in BoH is fine. Otherwise they would have mentioned that it wasnt right next to where they mentioned the perils of Portable Holes. Many DMs put restrictions on this, such as saying that a BoH has its True Weight when in another BoH (so no BoH IV inside a BoH I + recursion == 20lb infinite bag), or at least saying you can't open one bag while it's in another bag (so getting a bag within a bag within a bag would be three full round actions instead of one full round action)
Bulletproof_Condom 06-08-06, 12:59 PM	In 3.5 (apparently), nested bags of holding are fine. 3.0 or 3.5, putting a bag of holding in a portable hole (or vice versa) rips up the fabric of reality something fierce, creating either a gate to the ethereal plane or a swirling vortex to the astral plane and destroying both objects. I forget which goes to which.
mvincent 06-08-06, 01:02 PM	Anyone know how BoH in BoH worked in AD&D?
mvincent 06-08-06, 01:09 PM	In 3.5 (apparently), nested bags of holding are fine.Note that the Bag of Holding Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bag_of_holding) says: "In the physics of Dungeons & Dragons, putting one bag of holding inside another, or into a portable hole will result in a catastrophic explosion" I'm curious where this came from.
Bulletproof_Condom 06-08-06, 01:49 PM	I forget. FAQ maybe?
utilitarian 06-08-06, 02:09 PM	Well putting a Bag of Holding into a Portable Hole or vice versa has always resulted in either a temporal explosion and dimensional rupture, or a temporal gateway, respectively. In either case both items get destroyed. I'm always assumed BoH in a BoH was roughly the same as BoH in PH, as we're still dealing with trying to put two extradimensional spaces inside eachother, but apparently The Sage has changed his mind on this one or something.
Jaeron Dalur 06-08-06, 02:18 PM	Note that the Bag of Holding Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bag_of_holding) says: "In the physics of Dungeons & Dragons, putting one bag of holding inside another, or into a portable hole will result in a catastrophic explosion" I'm curious where this came from. I am guessing someone pulled it from thin air. The references point to a thread on the subject of what happens in the case of one BoH inside another and why. Nothing in the thread (the last time I looked at it) made mention of any rules for 3.x D&D other than quoting the relevant BoH in a Portable Hole entrys. The other reference is an article in Dragon about bags of devouring (which may have infoabout bags of holding but since I don't have the money or inclination to go out and buy a backissue...).
Shinryouga 06-08-06, 02:19 PM	One of the reasons why the "boom" seems limited to just Bag/Hole interbreeding is because of the "if it worked with x, it should also work with y" principle. Both of the aformentioned items are extradimensional containers. How many extradimensional spaces/containers are there in the game? Bag of Holding, Portable Hole, Hewards Handy Haversack, Belt of Many Pockets, Familiar Pocket spell, Rope Trick spell, Mordenkaidens Magnificent Mansion spell, and so on. I think its limited to just the bag/hole event so that low level parties who've scrounged up the gold to get a Bag Mark 1 at fourth level or so don't get royally screwed when they use rope trick spells to rest. Just my two coppers.
goawayugh 06-08-06, 02:23 PM	Ive always ruled in my games, no extradimensional spaces inside eachother. Unless your stupid enough to try it... Doesn't the Rope Trick spell say something about not allowing extridimensional spaces inside each other?
DaMullet 06-08-06, 02:28 PM	Doh
nosfera2 06-08-06, 02:38 PM	Yeah, I just read that. It specifically says: Note: It is hazardous to create an extradimensional space within an existing extradimensional space or to take an extradimensional space into an existing one. That starts to support the idea of BoH+BoH being invalid, or any extradimensional for that matter. Of course, on the other hand, it seems unreasonable to assume people with access to 7th level spells (such as Mordenkain's Magnificent Mansion) would not have extra dimensional space items. If no extradimensional can enter another, then this spell seems mighty useless, and dangerous for that matter if someone casually walks in with his Handy Haversack.
mvincent 06-08-06, 02:44 PM	After some online research, it seems a lot of other people believe that BoH in BoH isn't safe. Nethack treats it similarly. The rules for Rope trick (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/ropeTrick.htm) do say: "It is hazardous to create an extradimensional space within an existing extradimensional space or to take an extradimensional space into an existing one." But it's stated in the 3.0 FAQ that extra-dimensional spells (which actually include all the plane-hopping spells) are safe in this regard. It's just the items that have issues with each other (the RotG supports this). This makes the Familiar Pocket spell, Rope Trick spell, Mordenkainens Magnificent Mansion spell, etc. safe. But it's also been ruled (in the FAQ and RotG) that a Hewards Handy Haversack reacts the same as a bag of holding.
nosfera2 06-08-06, 02:51 PM	That makes a lot of since. Bringing a bag of holding into an extradimensional spell seems a lot more reasonable and common then putting a BoH into another to get limitless carrying capacity.
HermitIX 06-08-06, 03:15 PM	I have very little first hand knowledge dealing with transdimensional physics in the DnD multiverse; But it seem to me that the issue could be simplified if it is assumed that the major problems stem from the portable hole not the bag of holding. The bag of holding is primarily self contained. And the portable hole… is well … a hole.
Erak 06-08-06, 04:24 PM	Per RAW a Bag of Holding does not open an extradimensional space......it opens a nondimensional space: The bag of holding opens into a nondimensional space: Its inside is larger than its outside dimensions. Therefore taking one into an etradimensional space would have no effect.....and placing one Bag inside another would also have no effect. Don't ask me what a "nondimensional space" is......I think it is holdover language from 1st edition. Realistically the Rope Trick spell contains language it shouldn't contain and placing extradimensional spaces in other extradimensional spaces should have no effect at all.
mvincent 06-08-06, 04:31 PM	Per RAW a Bag of Holding does not open an extradimensional space......it opens a nondimensional space.These terms are essentially the same thing in D&D (i.e. both terms are used to describe a portable hole).
Erak 06-08-06, 04:38 PM	http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20051101a Here's the issue......you can't just make exceptions for spells and still keep rules in place on items. You need a unified rule that works. So you really need to rule that either extradimensional spaces inside other extradimensional spaces cause problems......or they don't. The "blow up" rule for containers is again back to "Gygaxian" D&D that penalized players. The simple way to rule it is that there are an infinate amount of frequencies to which each extradimensional space is attuned.....and you do not ever need to worry about one being on the same frequency as another.
claypigeons 06-08-06, 11:36 PM	I have always played under (and now DM as such) the rule that one extradimensional bag can go into one other. That is to say, that if you have a possum pouch and put a bag of holding into it, you are fine. But if you put a bag of holding into another bag of holding, and then put them into the pouch, you implode. It may be the presence of mature players, or the lack of desire to exlpoit it (or both), but there has never been a problem with this rule for us.
FlameLover 06-09-06, 12:24 AM	I'd rule that a bag of holding, protable hole, handy haversack, etc. cannot be placed within another such storage item - just to avoid situations where you get 10 levels of storage devices like bleeding russian dolls. If you try it, both items implode in on themselves cuasing you to lose anything in them (no harm to the character). There is no problem bringing such items into a Rope Trick, Mordenkainen's Magnificent Mansion, etc. as these are somehow different. If I had to explain it in game, i'd say the bags are "nondimensional" items while the spells create "extradimensional" things. Up to the DM really.
utilitarian 06-09-06, 01:51 AM	Now the further question is: which effect do you get? The Bag of Holding/Portable Hole event is not simply "boom" is actually is very specific about which item is placed into the other. Bag goes in hole, you get your "rift" in space destroying both items. This is the typical "boom" people think of. HOWEVER Hole goes in Bag, you get a stable gate to the Astral Plane which draws all creatures within 10 feet into it, and destroys the bag.