Gaseous Form, Bags of Holding, and Teleport

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Tonight, my PCs tried to find a loophole around the restrictions the
Teleport spell puts on how many people can be brought along with the
caster. What they wanted to try was this:

1. Turn three people gaseous
2. Put them in a Type I Bag of Holding (we reasoned a human body took up
about 8 cubic feet, even while gaseous).
3. Since they're gaseous, they don't breathe and won't suffocate
4. Teleport normally, caster takes full allotment of passengers PLUS the
three people in the bag.

The reasoning was that since the bag was an "extra-dimensional space",
the people in the bag could come out of it wherever it appeared.

I ruled against it because the Teleport spell says you have to be in
contact with the caster somehow, and it was dropped, but not until I
wondered what would happen if the caster just reached one arm into the bag.

What do you think?

- Ron ^*^
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Werebat wrote:
>
> Tonight, my PCs tried to find a loophole around the restrictions the
> Teleport spell puts on how many people can be brought along with the
> caster. What they wanted to try was this:
>
> 1. Turn three people gaseous
> 2. Put them in a Type I Bag of Holding (we reasoned a human body took up
> about 8 cubic feet, even while gaseous).
> 3. Since they're gaseous, they don't breathe and won't suffocate
> 4. Teleport normally, caster takes full allotment of passengers PLUS the
> three people in the bag.
>
> The reasoning was that since the bag was an "extra-dimensional space",
> the people in the bag could come out of it wherever it appeared.
>
> I ruled against it because the Teleport spell says you have to be in
> contact with the caster somehow, and it was dropped, but not until I
> wondered what would happen if the caster just reached one arm into the bag.
>
> What do you think?

Actually, they don't even need to be gaseous if they aren't going to be
in the bag longer than they can hold their breath. This technique, also
known as the "Go ahead and put all your eggs in one basket, but then you
damn well better watch that basket" technique, is completely legal and
is mentioned in the Epic Level Handbook. Along, of course, with ways to
"challenge" someone who uses it. I leave it to you to extrapolate
similar situations.
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Werebat wrote:
>1. Turn three people gaseous
>I ruled against it because the Teleport spell says you have to be in
>contact with the caster somehow, and it was dropped, but not until I
>wondered what would happen if the caster just reached one arm into the bag.
>What do you think?

Those three are still creatures, and teleport can transport a set number of
creatures. So the gaseous forms are irrelevant.

A bag of holding or a portable hole, on the other hand, is part of someone's
gear. Why, and how would some of the contents be left behind when
teleporting?

--
Niilo Paasivirta E-mail: np@iki.fi URL: http://www.iki.fi/%7Enp/
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Niilo Paasivirta wrote:

> Werebat wrote:
>
>>1. Turn three people gaseous
>>I ruled against it because the Teleport spell says you have to be in
>>contact with the caster somehow, and it was dropped, but not until I
>>wondered what would happen if the caster just reached one arm into the bag.
>>What do you think?
>
>
> Those three are still creatures, and teleport can transport a set number of
> creatures. So the gaseous forms are irrelevant.

Ordinarily, yes, absolutely.


> A bag of holding or a portable hole, on the other hand, is part of someone's
> gear. Why, and how would some of the contents be left behind when
> teleporting?

I think this is whe hole they were trying to loop.

- Ron ^*^
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Werebat wrote:
> Tonight, my PCs tried to find a loophole around the restrictions the
> Teleport spell puts on how many people can be brought along with the
> caster. What they wanted to try was this:
>
> 1. Turn three people gaseous
> 2. Put them in a Type I Bag of Holding (we reasoned a human body took up
> about 8 cubic feet, even while gaseous).

2-3 cubic feet, (I just looked this up recently) It's 1 cubic foot per
64 lbs of human aproximately (so a half-orc is going to be 4). Of
course there's gear too, I couldn't see it going over 6 with gear
though.

> 3. Since they're gaseous, they don't breathe and won't suffocate
> 4. Teleport normally, caster takes full allotment of passengers PLUS the
> three people in the bag.
>
> The reasoning was that since the bag was an "extra-dimensional space",
> the people in the bag could come out of it wherever it appeared.
>
> I ruled against it because the Teleport spell says you have to be in
> contact with the caster somehow, and it was dropped, but not until I
> wondered what would happen if the caster just reached one arm into the bag.
>
> What do you think?
>

If they are gear at the time, I'd say they don't count. Do you make
the wizard take 1 person off for his familiar?

- Justisaur
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 00:22:39 -0400, Werebat <ranpoirier@cox.net>
wrote:

>
>Tonight, my PCs tried to find a loophole around the restrictions the
>Teleport spell puts on how many people can be brought along with the
>caster. What they wanted to try was this:
>
>1. Turn three people gaseous
>2. Put them in a Type I Bag of Holding (we reasoned a human body took up
>about 8 cubic feet, even while gaseous).
>3. Since they're gaseous, they don't breathe and won't suffocate
>4. Teleport normally, caster takes full allotment of passengers PLUS the
>three people in the bag.
>
>The reasoning was that since the bag was an "extra-dimensional space",
>the people in the bag could come out of it wherever it appeared.
>
>I ruled against it because the Teleport spell says you have to be in
>contact with the caster somehow, and it was dropped, but not until I
>wondered what would happen if the caster just reached one arm into the bag.
>
>What do you think?

I would have allowed it no problem. They brought the bag along, the
bag brought the passengers.
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Justisaur wrote:

> Werebat wrote:
>
>>Tonight, my PCs tried to find a loophole around the restrictions the
>>Teleport spell puts on how many people can be brought along with the
>>caster. What they wanted to try was this:
>>
>>1. Turn three people gaseous
>>2. Put them in a Type I Bag of Holding (we reasoned a human body took up
>>about 8 cubic feet, even while gaseous).
>
>
> 2-3 cubic feet, (I just looked this up recently) It's 1 cubic foot per
> 64 lbs of human aproximately (so a half-orc is going to be 4). Of
> course there's gear too, I couldn't see it going over 6 with gear
> though.

That seems much too low. Are they not counting inner gasses?


>>3. Since they're gaseous, they don't breathe and won't suffocate
>>4. Teleport normally, caster takes full allotment of passengers PLUS the
>>three people in the bag.
>>
>>The reasoning was that since the bag was an "extra-dimensional space",
>>the people in the bag could come out of it wherever it appeared.
>>
>>I ruled against it because the Teleport spell says you have to be in
>>contact with the caster somehow, and it was dropped, but not until I
>>wondered what would happen if the caster just reached one arm into the bag.
>>
>>What do you think?
>>
>
>
> If they are gear at the time, I'd say they don't count. Do you make
> the wizard take 1 person off for his familiar?

Familiars are a special case and can be taken along "for free", as per
the familiar rules on spell sharing.

I don't think gaseous = gear, as petrified would.

- Ron ^*^
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Loren Pechtel wrote:

> On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 00:22:39 -0400, Werebat <ranpoirier@cox.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Tonight, my PCs tried to find a loophole around the restrictions the
>>Teleport spell puts on how many people can be brought along with the
>>caster. What they wanted to try was this:
>>
>>1. Turn three people gaseous
>>2. Put them in a Type I Bag of Holding (we reasoned a human body took up
>>about 8 cubic feet, even while gaseous).
>>3. Since they're gaseous, they don't breathe and won't suffocate
>>4. Teleport normally, caster takes full allotment of passengers PLUS the
>>three people in the bag.
>>
>>The reasoning was that since the bag was an "extra-dimensional space",
>>the people in the bag could come out of it wherever it appeared.
>>
>>I ruled against it because the Teleport spell says you have to be in
>>contact with the caster somehow, and it was dropped, but not until I
>>wondered what would happen if the caster just reached one arm into the bag.
>>
>>What do you think?
>
>
> I would have allowed it no problem. They brought the bag along, the
> bag brought the passengers.

So what if you make a gigantic sack full of 1000 people?

- Ron ^*^
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Loren Pechtel" <lorenpechtel@remove.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:rfc0j1pgpb6sqhifeido7ohs16q0cv7cnv@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 00:22:39 -0400, Werebat <ranpoirier@cox.net>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >Tonight, my PCs tried to find a loophole around the restrictions the
> >Teleport spell puts on how many people can be brought along with the
> >caster. What they wanted to try was this:
> >
> >1. Turn three people gaseous
> >2. Put them in a Type I Bag of Holding (we reasoned a human body took up
> >about 8 cubic feet, even while gaseous).
> >3. Since they're gaseous, they don't breathe and won't suffocate
> >4. Teleport normally, caster takes full allotment of passengers PLUS the
> >three people in the bag.
> >
> >The reasoning was that since the bag was an "extra-dimensional space",
> >the people in the bag could come out of it wherever it appeared.
> >
> >I ruled against it because the Teleport spell says you have to be in
> >contact with the caster somehow, and it was dropped, but not until I
> >wondered what would happen if the caster just reached one arm into the
bag.
> >
> >What do you think?
>
> I would have allowed it no problem. They brought the bag along, the
> bag brought the passengers.

Well, speaking out of game, one thing I don't much enjoy is telling players
their characters spend X months on the road to Some Distant Location,
especially when under a time crunch, like most adventures seem to operate
under. So I would probably allow them to teleport to their location using
whatever rules chicanery that they wanted to employ. While our current
method usually involves "we go to the wizard's guild, and pay them to
teleport us", if my players tried this bag of holding trick, I would let it
work, mainly because it's *fairly* useless in combat as a tactic, and it
doesn't really pose many problems for me the DM, and in fact, solves one
problem that I don't like dealing with.

--
Jeff Goslin - MCSD - www.goslin.info
It's not a god complex when you're always right
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Justisaur <justisaur@gmail.com> wrote:
> If they are gear at the time, I'd say they don't count. Do you make
> the wizard take 1 person off for his familiar?

People aren't gear! Not even when they're in a bag of holding. As for
the familiar, yes, it counts as another creature unless you have the
spell-sharing ability.
--
Bradd W. Szonye
http://www.szonye.com/bradd
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 00:22:39 -0400, Werebat <ranpoirier@cox.net>
wrote:

>
>Tonight, my PCs tried to find a loophole around the restrictions the
>Teleport spell puts on how many people can be brought along with the
>caster. What they wanted to try was this:
>
>1. Turn three people gaseous
>2. Put them in a Type I Bag of Holding (we reasoned a human body took up
>about 8 cubic feet, even while gaseous).
>3. Since they're gaseous, they don't breathe and won't suffocate
>4. Teleport normally, caster takes full allotment of passengers PLUS the
>three people in the bag.
>
>The reasoning was that since the bag was an "extra-dimensional space",
>the people in the bag could come out of it wherever it appeared.
>
>I ruled against it because the Teleport spell says you have to be in
>contact with the caster somehow, and it was dropped, but not until I
>wondered what would happen if the caster just reached one arm into the bag.
>
>What do you think?

My first impulse would be to allow it - the players are expending
additional resources to improve the teleport load, so it isn't a
munchkinite "getting something for nothing" scenario.

OTOH, the analogy I thought of was of shrinking passengers so as to
take along more - and when I checked the spell description, I saw that
while Large or bigger passengers mean you can't take as many, Small or
smaller passengers doesn't mean you can take more.

So if going by the RAW I'd disallow it.


--
Erol K. Bayburt
ErolB1@aol.com
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 13:04:45 -0400, Werebat <ranpoirier@cox.net> scribed
into the ether:

>
>
>Loren Pechtel wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 00:22:39 -0400, Werebat <ranpoirier@cox.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Tonight, my PCs tried to find a loophole around the restrictions the
>>>Teleport spell puts on how many people can be brought along with the
>>>caster. What they wanted to try was this:
>>>
>>>1. Turn three people gaseous
>>>2. Put them in a Type I Bag of Holding (we reasoned a human body took up
>>>about 8 cubic feet, even while gaseous).
>>>3. Since they're gaseous, they don't breathe and won't suffocate
>>>4. Teleport normally, caster takes full allotment of passengers PLUS the
>>>three people in the bag.
>>>
>>>The reasoning was that since the bag was an "extra-dimensional space",
>>>the people in the bag could come out of it wherever it appeared.
>>>
>>>I ruled against it because the Teleport spell says you have to be in
>>>contact with the caster somehow, and it was dropped, but not until I
>>>wondered what would happen if the caster just reached one arm into the bag.
>>>
>>>What do you think?
>>
>>
>> I would have allowed it no problem. They brought the bag along, the
>> bag brought the passengers.
>
>So what if you make a gigantic sack full of 1000 people?

Then you better screen them carefully and make sure that none of them has
another bag of holding or a portable hole...cause then it becomes
mass-murder.
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Werebat wrote:
> Justisaur wrote:
>
> > Werebat wrote:
> >
> >>Tonight, my PCs tried to find a loophole around the restrictions the
> >>Teleport spell puts on how many people can be brought along with the
> >>caster. What they wanted to try was this:
> >>
> >>1. Turn three people gaseous
> >>2. Put them in a Type I Bag of Holding (we reasoned a human body took up
> >>about 8 cubic feet, even while gaseous).
> >
> >
> > 2-3 cubic feet, (I just looked this up recently) It's 1 cubic foot per
> > 64 lbs of human aproximately (so a half-orc is going to be 4). Of
> > course there's gear too, I couldn't see it going over 6 with gear
> > though.
>
> That seems much too low. Are they not counting inner gasses?
>

You can always do an experiment to (dis)prove it if you want.

Make or find something that can hold water that is approximately 1
cubic foot internally (or something else you can measure fairly large
volume with. Then you need a wood chipper and a cadaver. After
liquefying the cadaver you can measure it's volume.

If you don't have those resources, find a bathtub, fill it up just
enough to cover you, mark water levels with and without you (crayon
will probably work), fill up to high mark, bail water into your cube
until it's back to the low mark. If they are correct you should end up
with about 1 cube per 64lbs you weigh.

It sounds reasonable to me. Humans are made up of mostly long thin
cylinders. If you even just think about the bathtub experiment, you'll
see you don't really displace anything like 8 cubic feet of water.

> > If they are gear at the time, I'd say they don't count. Do you make
> > the wizard take 1 person off for his familiar?
>
> Familiars are a special case and can be taken along "for free", as per
> the familiar rules on spell sharing.
>
> I don't think gaseous = gear, as petrified would.
>

No, I'm not saying gaseous = gear, I'm saying carried = gear. If you
stuff someone in a bag, and carry them around they count as gear. It
doesn't matter if they are gaseous or not. although if they need to
breath they'll be real gear pretty soon anyway.

- Justisaur
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Werebat wrote:
> Loren Pechtel wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 00:22:39 -0400, Werebat <ranpoirier@cox.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Tonight, my PCs tried to find a loophole around the restrictions the
> >>Teleport spell puts on how many people can be brought along with the
> >>caster. What they wanted to try was this:
> >>
> >>1. Turn three people gaseous
> >>2. Put them in a Type I Bag of Holding (we reasoned a human body took up
> >>about 8 cubic feet, even while gaseous).
> >>3. Since they're gaseous, they don't breathe and won't suffocate
> >>4. Teleport normally, caster takes full allotment of passengers PLUS the
> >>three people in the bag.
> >>
> >>The reasoning was that since the bag was an "extra-dimensional space",
> >>the people in the bag could come out of it wherever it appeared.
> >>
> >>I ruled against it because the Teleport spell says you have to be in
> >>contact with the caster somehow, and it was dropped, but not until I
> >>wondered what would happen if the caster just reached one arm into the bag.
> >>
> >>What do you think?
> >
> >
> > I would have allowed it no problem. They brought the bag along, the
> > bag brought the passengers.
>
> So what if you make a gigantic sack full of 1000 people?
>

It'd have to be able to be carried. You'd have a bit of a problem
lifting something that big, let alone carrying it.

> - Ron ^*^
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Justisaur wrote:

> Werebat wrote:
>
>>Justisaur wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Werebat wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Tonight, my PCs tried to find a loophole around the restrictions the
>>>>Teleport spell puts on how many people can be brought along with the
>>>>caster. What they wanted to try was this:
>>>>
>>>>1. Turn three people gaseous
>>>>2. Put them in a Type I Bag of Holding (we reasoned a human body took up
>>>>about 8 cubic feet, even while gaseous).
>>>
>>>
>>>2-3 cubic feet, (I just looked this up recently) It's 1 cubic foot per
>>>64 lbs of human aproximately (so a half-orc is going to be 4). Of
>>>course there's gear too, I couldn't see it going over 6 with gear
>>>though.
>>
>>That seems much too low. Are they not counting inner gasses?
>>
>
>
> You can always do an experiment to (dis)prove it if you want.
>
> Make or find something that can hold water that is approximately 1
> cubic foot internally (or something else you can measure fairly large
> volume with. Then you need a wood chipper and a cadaver. After
> liquefying the cadaver you can measure it's volume.

And this will eliminate the inner gasses from the body, thereby making
the volume smaller.


> If you don't have those resources, find a bathtub, fill it up just
> enough to cover you, mark water levels with and without you (crayon
> will probably work), fill up to high mark, bail water into your cube
> until it's back to the low mark. If they are correct you should end up
> with about 1 cube per 64lbs you weigh.
>
> It sounds reasonable to me. Humans are made up of mostly long thin
> cylinders. If you even just think about the bathtub experiment, you'll
> see you don't really displace anything like 8 cubic feet of water.

It's possible, it just seems low to me. A cubic foot of packed flesh
and bone weighing 64 pounds...?


>>>If they are gear at the time, I'd say they don't count. Do you make
>>>the wizard take 1 person off for his familiar?
>>
>>Familiars are a special case and can be taken along "for free", as per
>>the familiar rules on spell sharing.
>>
>>I don't think gaseous = gear, as petrified would.
>>
>
>
> No, I'm not saying gaseous = gear, I'm saying carried = gear. If you
> stuff someone in a bag, and carry them around they count as gear. It
> doesn't matter if they are gaseous or not. although if they need to
> breath they'll be real gear pretty soon anyway.

No, you're wrong. Living things do not count as gear. If they did,
this whole silly exercise gets much, much easier.

- Ron ^*^
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Justisaur wrote:

> Werebat wrote:
>
>>Loren Pechtel wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 00:22:39 -0400, Werebat <ranpoirier@cox.net>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Tonight, my PCs tried to find a loophole around the restrictions the
>>>>Teleport spell puts on how many people can be brought along with the
>>>>caster. What they wanted to try was this:
>>>>
>>>>1. Turn three people gaseous
>>>>2. Put them in a Type I Bag of Holding (we reasoned a human body took up
>>>>about 8 cubic feet, even while gaseous).
>>>>3. Since they're gaseous, they don't breathe and won't suffocate
>>>>4. Teleport normally, caster takes full allotment of passengers PLUS the
>>>>three people in the bag.
>>>>
>>>>The reasoning was that since the bag was an "extra-dimensional space",
>>>>the people in the bag could come out of it wherever it appeared.
>>>>
>>>>I ruled against it because the Teleport spell says you have to be in
>>>>contact with the caster somehow, and it was dropped, but not until I
>>>>wondered what would happen if the caster just reached one arm into the bag.
>>>>
>>>>What do you think?
>>>
>>>
>>>I would have allowed it no problem. They brought the bag along, the
>>>bag brought the passengers.
>>
>>So what if you make a gigantic sack full of 1000 people?
>>
>
>
> It'd have to be able to be carried. You'd have a bit of a problem
> lifting something that big, let alone carrying it.

Shrink Object on the bag. It's munchkin, but the way you're thinking,
it just might work.

- Ron ^*^
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 13:04:45 -0400, Werebat <ranpoirier@cox.net>
wrote:

>> I would have allowed it no problem. They brought the bag along, the
>> bag brought the passengers.
>
>So what if you make a gigantic sack full of 1000 people?

I have no problem with it so long as it's magical storage of some
kind. The people aren't really coming along, they are elsewhere. It's
just their connection to the rest of the world moved.
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Loren Pechtel wrote:

> On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 13:04:45 -0400, Werebat <ranpoirier@cox.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>>>I would have allowed it no problem. They brought the bag along, the
>>>bag brought the passengers.
>>
>>So what if you make a gigantic sack full of 1000 people?
>
>
> I have no problem with it so long as it's magical storage of some
> kind. The people aren't really coming along, they are elsewhere. It's
> just their connection to the rest of the world moved.

You view bags of holding as gateways to alternate dimensions, then.

I can understand this, if your view is the correct one. If I have a
portable portal to another world, send 1000 people through it, and then
teleport away with the portable portal, I should be able to have those
1000 people come back through the portal (assuming it is 2-way) when I
get to where I teleport to.

But is a bag of holding in fact a gateway to another dimension?

Or is it just a bag whose inside is bigger than its outside?

What does the term "non-dimensional space" MEAN?

- Ron ^*^
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Werebat" <ranpoirier@cox.net> wrote in message
news:FrlYe.49642$Cc5.25736@lakeread06...
>
>
> Loren Pechtel wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 13:04:45 -0400, Werebat <ranpoirier@cox.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>>I would have allowed it no problem. They brought the bag along, the
> >>>bag brought the passengers.
> >>
> >>So what if you make a gigantic sack full of 1000 people?
> >
> >
> > I have no problem with it so long as it's magical storage of some
> > kind. The people aren't really coming along, they are elsewhere. It's
> > just their connection to the rest of the world moved.
>
> You view bags of holding as gateways to alternate dimensions, then.
>
> I can understand this, if your view is the correct one. If I have a
> portable portal to another world, send 1000 people through it, and then
> teleport away with the portable portal, I should be able to have those
> 1000 people come back through the portal (assuming it is 2-way) when I
> get to where I teleport to.
>
> But is a bag of holding in fact a gateway to another dimension?
>
> Or is it just a bag whose inside is bigger than its outside?
>
> What does the term "non-dimensional space" MEAN?
>
> - Ron ^*^
>

Err... why bother even debating it? Does the tactic really buy the PC's
anything? Well, no, not really. Our guys teleport like once in a blue
moon, regardless of price, so it's not like they need to save the money.
Why not allow them to teleport everything at once?

One thing you MIGHT want to remind them of, though, if they teleport, and
the teleport fails catastrophically, it *WILL* be a TPK. The guy gets
teleported into solid rock, the bag of holding ain't coming back out. Dead
teleportee, irretrievable other characters in a dimensional vortex. Nice
was to bookend a campaign, eh? 😉

--
Jeff Goslin - MCSD - www.goslin.info
It's not a god complex when you're always right
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Jeff Goslin wrote:
> I kind of wish the penalty for using haste was higher. Age 1 year for every
> haste cast? That means, what, like hundreds of hastes before an elf even
> has to start THINKING about his age? Nice.

In 3.0/3.5 you don't age.
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 18:49:08 -0400, Werebat <ranpoirier@cox.net>
wrote:

>
>
>Loren Pechtel wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 13:04:45 -0400, Werebat <ranpoirier@cox.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>I would have allowed it no problem. They brought the bag along, the
>>>>bag brought the passengers.
>>>
>>>So what if you make a gigantic sack full of 1000 people?
>>
>>
>> I have no problem with it so long as it's magical storage of some
>> kind. The people aren't really coming along, they are elsewhere. It's
>> just their connection to the rest of the world moved.
>
>You view bags of holding as gateways to alternate dimensions, then.
>
>I can understand this, if your view is the correct one. If I have a
>portable portal to another world, send 1000 people through it, and then
>teleport away with the portable portal, I should be able to have those
>1000 people come back through the portal (assuming it is 2-way) when I
>get to where I teleport to.
>
>But is a bag of holding in fact a gateway to another dimension?
>
>Or is it just a bag whose inside is bigger than its outside?
>
>What does the term "non-dimensional space" MEAN?

Yeah, the rules aren't clear about it. I've always pictured it as
being elsewhere. With bags of holding it's not perfectly elsewhere,
some of the weight bleeds through. With portable holes it's perfectly
elsewhere, no weight bleeds through.
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Repent Justisaur!" said the Ticktockman. "Get Stuffed!" Justisaur
replied. Then he added:

> No, I'm not saying gaseous = gear, I'm saying carried = gear. If you
> stuff someone in a bag, and carry them around they count as gear. It
> doesn't matter if they are gaseous or not. although if they need to
> breath they'll be real gear pretty soon anyway.
>

I don't think that's right, since Teleport looks at the mental state of
someone you want to bring along. If you want to pack your friends as gear,
reduce them and petrify them.

--
Billy Yank

Quinn: "I'm saying it's us, or them."
Murphy: "Well I choose them."
Q: "That's NOT an option!"
M: "Then you shouldn't have framed it as one."
-Sealab 2021

Billy Yank's Baldur's Gate Photo Portraits
http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze2xvw6/
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"WDS" <Bill@seurer.net> wrote in message
news:1127399795.057939.44910@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> Jeff Goslin wrote:
> > I kind of wish the penalty for using haste was higher. Age 1 year for
every
> > haste cast? That means, what, like hundreds of hastes before an elf
even
> > has to start THINKING about his age? Nice.
>
> In 3.0/3.5 you don't age.

*hangs head*... so... what's to prevent someone from hasting themselves
every combat? Wait, don't tell me, "nothing", right? Well, that figures, I
suppose. 3E is a combat monkey's wet dream, this would fall right in line
with that.

--
Jeff Goslin - MCSD - www.goslin.info
It's not a god complex when you're always right
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Jeff Goslin" <autockr@comcast.net> wrote in
news:2-qdnSMI4Mcmk67eRVn-vg@comcast.com:

> "WDS" <Bill@seurer.net> wrote in message
> news:1127399795.057939.44910@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> Jeff Goslin wrote:
>> > I kind of wish the penalty for using haste was higher. Age 1 year
>> > for
> every
>> > haste cast? That means, what, like hundreds of hastes before an
>> > elf
> even
>> > has to start THINKING about his age? Nice.
>>
>> In 3.0/3.5 you don't age.
>
> *hangs head*... so... what's to prevent someone from hasting
> themselves every combat? Wait, don't tell me, "nothing", right?
> Well, that figures, I suppose. 3E is a combat monkey's wet dream,
> this would fall right in line with that.
>

They balanced it by making it no longer overpowered in the first place.
Honestly, there's no harm in being ignorant, but spouting out malformed
opinions on subjects you're knowingly ignorant is jackassery of the first
order.
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Thu, 22 Sep 2005 16:04:48 -0400, "Jeff Goslin" <autockr@comcast.net>
scribed into the ether:

>"WDS" <Bill@seurer.net> wrote in message
>news:1127399795.057939.44910@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> Jeff Goslin wrote:
>> > I kind of wish the penalty for using haste was higher. Age 1 year for
>every
>> > haste cast? That means, what, like hundreds of hastes before an elf
>even
>> > has to start THINKING about his age? Nice.
>>
>> In 3.0/3.5 you don't age.
>
>*hangs head*... so... what's to prevent someone from hasting themselves
>every combat? Wait, don't tell me, "nothing", right?

Spellcasters are limited by those pesky "per day" spell limits. Haste is
also a single target spell in 3.x where in 1E (and I presume 2E) it could
hit the entire party in one casting.

> Well, that figures, I
>suppose. 3E is a combat monkey's wet dream, this would fall right in line
>with that.

Except for how you are wrong, especially in 3.5, where Haste severely
weakened.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom