So you'd have to learn each one, multiple times. So 2 instances of Replicate Item Bag of Holding would be necessary our would it be you can only learn it once and thus would need a real other bag of holding (or similar) item to perform the suggested act?
Or is learning only possible once and therefore use is only once? So I couldn't even give 2 headbands of intelligence to two party members if I learn it twice? This also raises the question of Resistant Armor. I would only be able to use that once, even if I use a different element, correct?
Other than Replicate Magic Item, you can only learn each infusion once. And since each infusion can only be used on one item at a time, you only get one use of Resistant Armor too, regardless of the element you pick.
The question about Replicate Magic Item is one that doesn't have a definitive answer that I can see, it is open to interpretation. It has been discussed here before, and I think the general consensus is that you can learn Replicate Magic Item multiple times, but each time has to be a different item. This is also how DDB has implemented it in the Character Builder for what that's worth. Ultimately it falls under DM's discretion, until WotC errata it or make a Sage Advice ruling, but generally a DM is not going to want their players derailing their campaign by causing a rift and getting sent to the Astral Plane...
Additionally it isn't LEARNING multiple times. You only have to learn it once. Then you can use it up to the number of Infusions you have. (2 at level 2) There seems to be a misunderstanding in this. Once you learn an infusion you can use it as much as you want, as long as you only sufficient Infusions. Also Infusions still count if you hand it to someone else. I.e. you can give everyone in your party a BoH (level 10, so 4). Similarly you can learn Enhance Weapon and infuse 3 items with +1 (+2) defense. You can't learn it twice but the infusions appear similar to Spell Slots, You have a known spell and you can cast it the number of times equal to your spell slot. So you can know a single Infusion and use it up to your total infusion number (2-8). For example, I don't believe you need to learn Enhance Defense multiple times to apply it to Armor, Boots and Gloves. (Armorer) It just takes up 3 "slots" of Infused items (from a limit of 6/8) when you do it.
You've missed the part of the infusion rules that say:
You must touch each of the objects, and each of your infusions can be in only one object at a time. Moreover, no object can bear more than one of your infusions at a time.
So you can only have one Enhanced Weapon and one Enhanced Defense item.
So you'd have to learn each one, multiple times. So 2 instances of Replicate Item Bag of Holding would be necessary our would it be you can only learn it once and thus would need a real other bag of holding (or similar) item to perform the suggested act?
Or is learning only possible once and therefore use is only once? So I couldn't even give 2 headbands of intelligence to two party members if I learn it twice? This also raises the question of Resistant Armor. I would only be able to use that once, even if I use a different element, correct?
Yes, and if the item you replicate is destroyed yes you could make another you just cannot have the same infusion in more then one thing. But none of this means your artificer cannot make an actual permanent thing.
So you'd have to learn each one, multiple times. So 2 instances of Replicate Item Bag of Holding would be necessary our would it be you can only learn it once and thus would need a real other bag of holding (or similar) item to perform the suggested act?
Or is learning only possible once and therefore use is only once? So I couldn't even give 2 headbands of intelligence to two party members if I learn it twice? This also raises the question of Resistant Armor. I would only be able to use that once, even if I use a different element, correct?
Other than Replicate Magic Item, you can only learn each infusion once. And since each infusion can only be used on one item at a time, you only get one use of Resistant Armor too, regardless of the element you pick.
The question about Replicate Magic Item is one that doesn't have a definitive answer that I can see, it is open to interpretation. It has been discussed here before, and I think the general consensus is that you can learn Replicate Magic Item multiple times, but each time has to be a different item. This is also how DDB has implemented it in the Character Builder for what that's worth. Ultimately it falls under DM's discretion, until WotC errata it or make a Sage Advice ruling, but generally a DM is not going to want their players derailing their campaign by causing a rift and getting sent to the Astral Plane...
That does seem like a decent way to halt the ability for abuse without ruining the class. The awkward thing is when such rules aren't made clear in advance so a person could build a class around this design and when he goes to use it the DM says 'no that isn't allowed" The 1 use of replicate at a time and only 1 can be learned would help protect and make sense, as an overall rule it would be more clear up front as well.
I think it is looking more critical, especially with this class to make clear what it can or can't do at the very start. Unlike others the DM can't fully control the items that the players receive since Artificer can make anything. i.e. DM doesn't want to deal with allies having ease of flying he can not reward boots of flying, but artificer could still get them. So in advance just tell the artificer at creation, this item won't be an option.
With this limitation the DM could just not reward any items that could conflict with the bag of holding, although personally I'd would just get rid of the whole mutual annihilation thing. I find the very existence of such a factor ridiculous. Especially because the logic behind it is so inconsistent, i.e. spells don't trigger the same effect, even though they have their own pocket dimensions.
@Kotah I don't think you understand when I said "hammer" I'm referring to the "hammer" in the Olympic sport "Hammer Throw" Its 100% similar to that. It has some type of cord, string, etc. (if not back straps) that would be used to hold it, spin to gain greater angular momentum, then release. I've literally done this with a book bag. I feel like you have not seen the Hammer Throw competition before.....
As for "how to get them to go inside each other" open the bag slightly, press the other up against the opening but it isn't large enough to go inside. Then when released the bag tie can be released, further loosing opening the hole larger and when they land the force of the impact pushes one into the other. I can also put other strategies into play. Have a bag open sitting on the ground like a trap. have another dangling above it from a rope. cut the rope and it falls into the other. As a trap.
"Enemy is conveniently close enough...yet ignoring all of this. " I'm not sure what you're referring to? Wouldn't that apply to ANY combat where something is thrown. It seems you suggest the enemy would avoid any thrown object. By that logic any spell that has an enchantment. So what, they see something and will 100% respond effectively? seems like your battles if you DM would be impossible. What would they be ignoring? at attack? the way you phrase it you act like any ranged attack can be negated because the enemy is aware of it.
There is one SIGNIFICANT FLAW you are making with your argument, suggesting the bag couldn't be properly thrown iRL. Considering there is a literal Olympic sport centered on such an action (near identical weight) it is 100% possible to throw this.
You also don't seem to understand the complexity that can be added to a game and are acting like the idea I'm putting forth just isn't possible because.. "reasons". This is basically a thrown version of the Arrow of Ultimate Destruction just using two bags instead of a portable hole and a bag.
Using Hammer Throw technique (real world) you can easily throw that bad 20+ meters (world record is 87 meters) That's 65 feet. If you want to use standard ranged mechanics of 20/60 for thrown items it fits well in that range.
And your book bag landed completely open? Pardon if I simply do not believe you.
You have two soft objects and your design requires them acting like rigid objects.
More to the point, if the 2nd bag is 'almost in the first' before you throw it, what happens if you simply get jostled before throwing? Why doesn't the 2nd bag get pulled inside the first as you spin them round to build up velocity?
And again, an Olympic throwing hammer is not a bag. If a bag, even a weighted bag was as effective, then the sport would use that since it is cheaper to measure and toss some rocks in a sack than to forge a specialized projectile.
A trap can be spotted and avoided or remotely triggered. It could be disarmed and captured.
As for how an enemy would react, if this is as easy as you state, every 2nd level artificer could use this technique. It would become a common military strategy. It would be fair game for a DM to use it against the party.
(By the way, this whole mess is a good example of why the 'bag in a bag explosion' rule is almost always house-ruled away in my campaigns.)
1. Yes, if was open before I threw it 100% of the time. If it was closed when I threw it 50% of the time. 2. I don't know what you're suggesting here. a Medicine Ball is "soft" in a technical sense, but it will act like something rigid. That is being thrown has form and mass, it isn't some punched up piece of paper. 3. "jostled before throwing" so you're countering my point of "preparing it in advance" with suggesting it isn't prepared to do that. Do you know how machinery works? (look up the full definition of the term before you come at met saying they aren't made of metal, so it wouldn't be machinery) 4. There is no logic to this point WHAT SO EVER. 4a. The origin of the sport uses metal because it was easier to make metal than a solid leather sphere. 4b. Olympics would not pick something "because it is cheaper" this isn't some mass produced product going on here. Plastic is cheaper 100% and just as rigid but they don't use it. Many major competitions use inefficient devices (FYI efficiency is not limited to function, don't jump on that either) for their competitions. Strongman for example. Some things are used as "tradition" and Hammer Throw comes from the 1400s thus it is likely attempting to retain its origins as best as possible. 4c. "toss rock rocks in a sack" would be less efficient since the arrangement, size, etc of the rocks would still vary, including after each landing of the object. This has NO value as an argument against use of the Bag of Holding, since its contents are not connected to the mass or shape of the bag at all. 5. And a sword attack can as well, so I guess you are arguing attacking with swords in DnD is pointless since they can be avoided. WTF logic is this. 6. Massive leap of logic there. Taking a single instance and suddenly blowing it into a standard military doctrine. Again. Every army knows the enemies use bows so they just won't ever be susceptible to arrows right? I mean they know the enemy uses bows. So I guess Rope Trick isn't allowed in your campaigns, since if it exists, everyone knows it, everyone uses it and so everyone is 100% prepared for it. Dude. Seriously... Grenades exist in our world yet somehow people use them successfully.
Here's the issue, YOU don't like this idea, but you HAVE NO actual reasoning that makes it not possible so YOU MAKE UP these reasons BEREFT OF LOGIC. You don't understand a single thing you're talking about. You don't understand physics, you don't understand sports, you don't understand military tactics, you don't understand world building. Simply understand this, YOU DON'T LIKE this idea, and move on. Your comments have ZERO value to the topic. You're attempting to use flawed real world logic to disprove the possibility of something in a fictional universe. Ironically attempting to disprove the one area that supports its possibility, since a contraption could be created to get a bag into another bag when thrown. 100%.
As a military tactic, it would act like a big explosion - similar to throwing grenades. Far more useful as a battlefield tactic than using the rope trick spell or holding a shield up against the rain of arrows.
I don't think anybody would try the tactic of "open the bag slightly, press the other up against the opening but it isn't large enough to go inside", because one slip and you cause the explosion centred on yourself.
@Kotah I don't think you understand when I said "hammer" I'm referring to the "hammer" in the Olympic sport "Hammer Throw" Its 100% similar to that. It has some type of cord, string, etc. (if not back straps) that would be used to hold it, spin to gain greater angular momentum, then release. I've literally done this with a book bag. I feel like you have not seen the Hammer Throw competition before.....
As for "how to get them to go inside each other" open the bag slightly, press the other up against the opening but it isn't large enough to go inside. Then when released the bag tie can be released, further loosing opening the hole larger and when they land the force of the impact pushes one into the other. I can also put other strategies into play. Have a bag open sitting on the ground like a trap. have another dangling above it from a rope. cut the rope and it falls into the other. As a trap.
"Enemy is conveniently close enough...yet ignoring all of this. " I'm not sure what you're referring to? Wouldn't that apply to ANY combat where something is thrown. It seems you suggest the enemy would avoid any thrown object. By that logic any spell that has an enchantment. So what, they see something and will 100% respond effectively? seems like your battles if you DM would be impossible. What would they be ignoring? at attack? the way you phrase it you act like any ranged attack can be negated because the enemy is aware of it.
There is one SIGNIFICANT FLAW you are making with your argument, suggesting the bag couldn't be properly thrown iRL. Considering there is a literal Olympic sport centered on such an action (near identical weight) it is 100% possible to throw this.
You also don't seem to understand the complexity that can be added to a game and are acting like the idea I'm putting forth just isn't possible because.. "reasons". This is basically a thrown version of the Arrow of Ultimate Destruction just using two bags instead of a portable hole and a bag.
Using Hammer Throw technique (real world) you can easily throw that bad 20+ meters (world record is 87 meters) That's 65 feet. If you want to use standard ranged mechanics of 20/60 for thrown items it fits well in that range.
And your book bag landed completely open? Pardon if I simply do not believe you.
You have two soft objects and your design requires them acting like rigid objects.
More to the point, if the 2nd bag is 'almost in the first' before you throw it, what happens if you simply get jostled before throwing? Why doesn't the 2nd bag get pulled inside the first as you spin them round to build up velocity?
And again, an Olympic throwing hammer is not a bag. If a bag, even a weighted bag was as effective, then the sport would use that since it is cheaper to measure and toss some rocks in a sack than to forge a specialized projectile.
A trap can be spotted and avoided or remotely triggered. It could be disarmed and captured.
As for how an enemy would react, if this is as easy as you state, every 2nd level artificer could use this technique. It would become a common military strategy. It would be fair game for a DM to use it against the party.
(By the way, this whole mess is a good example of why the 'bag in a bag explosion' rule is almost always house-ruled away in my campaigns.)
1. Yes, if was open before I threw it 100% of the time. If it was closed when I threw it 50% of the time. 2. I don't know what you're suggesting here. a Medicine Ball is "soft" in a technical sense, but it will act like something rigid. That is being thrown has form and mass, it isn't some punched up piece of paper. 3. "jostled before throwing" so you're countering my point of "preparing it in advance" with suggesting it isn't prepared to do that. Do you know how machinery works? (look up the full definition of the term before you come at met saying they aren't made of metal, so it wouldn't be machinery) 4. There is no logic to this point WHAT SO EVER. 4a. The origin of the sport uses metal because it was easier to make metal than a solid leather sphere. 4b. Olympics would not pick something "because it is cheaper" this isn't some mass produced product going on here. Plastic is cheaper 100% and just as rigid but they don't use it. Many major competitions use inefficient devices (FYI efficiency is not limited to function, don't jump on that either) for their competitions. Strongman for example. Some things are used as "tradition" and Hammer Throw comes from the 1400s thus it is likely attempting to retain its origins as best as possible. 4c. "toss rock rocks in a sack" would be less efficient since the arrangement, size, etc of the rocks would still vary, including after each landing of the object. This has NO value as an argument against use of the Bag of Holding, since its contents are not connected to the mass or shape of the bag at all. 5. And a sword attack can as well, so I guess you are arguing attacking with swords in DnD is pointless since they can be avoided. WTF logic is this. 6. Massive leap of logic there. Taking a single instance and suddenly blowing it into a standard military doctrine. Again. Every army knows the enemies use bows so they just won't ever be susceptible to arrows right? I mean they know the enemy uses bows. So I guess Rope Trick isn't allowed in your campaigns, since if it exists, everyone knows it, everyone uses it and so everyone is 100% prepared for it. Dude. Seriously... Grenades exist in our world yet somehow people use them successfully.
Here's the issue, YOU don't like this idea, but you HAVE NO actual reasoning that makes it not possible so YOU MAKE UP these reasons BEREFT OF LOGIC. You don't understand a single thing you're talking about. You don't understand physics, you don't understand sports, you don't understand military tactics, you don't understand world building. Simply understand this, YOU DON'T LIKE this idea, and move on. Your comments have ZERO value to the topic. You're attempting to use flawed real world logic to disprove the possibility of something in a fictional universe. Ironically attempting to disprove the one area that supports its possibility, since a contraption could be created to get a bag into another bag when thrown. 100%.
Please move on.
1) Sorry, I simply do not believe you.
2) You are equating a medicine ball with a bag?
3) Now you have some sort of mechanism that is throwable 'like an Olympic hammer' that has some sort of safety to keep the bags in place until impact with one of them wide open and in such a way that guarantees the 2nd will end up in the 1st. 'It's Machinery' is no universal explanation regardless of what the machine is made out of.
4) Easier to work metal than leather? What has leather got to do with anything? You are talking about a cloth bag with a weight in it. And you do know they can actually weigh rocks, right? Heck, fill it with sand. Or dirt.
5) Sword attacks do not cost the same as two bags of holding. If it is possible to replace every swordsman with a 2nd level Artificer, you would likely have either world peace through MAD theory or the utter breaking of reality from too many rifts opening into the Astral.
6) Two bags of holding is similarly different from arming non-casters with bows. Curious how you would use rope trick to similar effectiveness in a battle between standing armies.
Caps are not arguments.
1. Not my problem.
2. Yes. A solid semi hard object of fixed mass. You don't seem to understand here. This isn't a bag that can change mass. Its always 15 pounds. The internal contents doesn't shift, the closest example would be a medicine ball.
3. I always mentioned a mechanism. Quindraco point out a mechanism designed by players and referenced numerous times. If such a thing can be worked into a game a simple barrier between the two bags could be possible. Hell a Mage Hand could be in between. Although the weight of the bag is 15 so a Mage Hand couldn't pick it up, the differential force when throwing would be like 1 pound maximum. So the Mage Hand would need to just act as the barrier in case the one bag was going to go inside the other. When it eventually lands the force would be greater than 10 pounds so the hand would no longer be able to hold it. Mage Hand is concentration but throwing would just be an action so all you have to do is have it there.
4. It is easier to work metal into a consistent solid object. Yes. Leather is tight enough stitching to maintain a seal in all directions is not an easy task. I mean... I don't understand what you're arguing. Your ignored the point that putting rocks in would not be reliable in terms of consistent movement between like items. ALSO, there is no statement in the item description that the sack is cloth, it could just as possibly be leather in dnd 5e. Whether its cloth or leather, doesn't change the premise of the argument. 5. You missed the point. You stated that if my suggestion were possible then everyone would be prepared for it thus making it useless to use. Such logic would need to extend to everything else since the premise is "everyone knows it so everyone is prepared for it" I was pointing out how that isn't logical since it isn't consistent with other "known" actions like shooting an arrow or attacking with a sword. Being aware of the existence of a tactics is different than being able to always negate it. ALSO, you don't understand the mechanics, since the rifts close immediately, so your suggestion of breaking reality isn't in line with the errata. Anything you may suggest like "long term damage to reality" would be your own personal story. Your idea of MAD is nonsense. this is a 10 foot radius. So even immediate destructive actions it wouldn't even warrant a MAD situation, since a grenade has a fatality radius of 15 feet. That would mean a grenade would be MAD territory to you. 6. you missed the point entirely, I was pointing out the massive flaw in your reasoning of "if it is possible then everyone would be prepared for it" as it doesn't translate to anything else in the game.
Caps are for emphasis on words, points you should really focus on because you are missing things completely.
What are you even arguing anymore? I mean you're saying the Hammer Throw couldn't be non metal because if they could they would. When given modern technology still hasn't replaced it and modern technology could easily replicate the item with synthetics at a lower cost. The ultimate reasoning of "they don't make it so it isn't possible" is flawed. since it doesn't address the fact that Metal may be superior for that object's purpose, but doesn't mean the alternative isn't feasible.
Lets simplify this, In REALITY, since that is what you want to argue can you: 1. Throw a 15-30 pound bag 10 feet. 2. guaranteed to be closed when thrown?
The answer is Yes to the first and no the second. By that reason alone what I propose is possible. So kindly move on. At least others have put forth actual answers of value, like, "may want to add a DC check" i.e. not always lands open etc. You're just going on and on about it not being impossible when it absolutely IS possible. I feel like you lack imagination to such a degree the only way to convince you is to make a literal video of this. which I have no interest in doing.
Serious, move on, you're out of your element here. The game topic is not a new one, and has been discussed by people for years. The real world situation is also outside of your capability since you lack basic understanding of physics. I'm not saying you're dumb, but you're not suited for this topic.
You're so fixed on this mental image you've formed of it working and aren't thinking of the actual mechanism / idea of it. Just suspend one with a magical rope above the other out of sight of the enemy, when they walk within 10 feet end the magical rope and the bag will fall into the other. You don't have to suspend them high either, so a literal millimeter above each other so there is no chance it misses. Alternatively, just use suggestion or Charm to have an enemy pick up a bag then drop it over the other. Since it isn't a direct "kill yourself" command it could be possible. Perhaps a saving throw so the enemy would need to understand the full function of the bag of holding. Insight check or something, but still possible.
Requires the DM to allow bags and holes small enough to roll up and fit in arrowheads.
Makes far more sense to simply enchant the arrowhead with the two relevant enchantments to fire sequentially, so it simply opens one such space inside the other.
Again, though, good luck convincing your DM to allow it. Some campaigns might though, high enough magic setting at high enough level. Some 1e campaigns had all sorts of shenanigans.
Yeah, I mean in that style, that's what gave me the idea of using the two. Technically you don't need a special smaller bag but it would need to be fired by like a balistica so it'd be more like a city defense weapon.
Honestly if the DM allows for smaller bags they're just asking for trouble. I haven't played much before 5e so I can't say for certain, perhaps the AoTD was from a time when the Hag of Holding didn't have a fixed size / weight? back in BG2 I remember it and always though it looked more like a pouch, not sure.
You could use the plan with the Heward's Handy Haversack since it is only 5 pounds. Still to large for a regular arrow. It would be more reasonable for the Arrow if 2 Portable Holes were used. There doesn't appear to be a weight listed for that item
I think I'd rule that, no, infused bags of holding and other infused forms of extra-dimensional spaces can't be solely used to create bombs. I might allow a bomb to be created if a genuine bag of holding or similar had an infused bag of holding put into it but, even in this case, I might decrease something like the area of effect.
The creation of such powerful bombs via just part of the daily efforts of two potentially low-level artificers at negligible material costs just seems horrendously out of balance.
RAW, I'd think that it would take two artificers as I think it's stretching things to say you can duplicate effects by knowing the same type of thing twice.
Having said that I might still drop the rule that "each of your infusions can be in only one object at a time" and might even remove the time limitation that you can only infuse an item "Whenever you finish a long rest". In this case, I might say that if any spare capacity remains after a long rest, remaining infusions could be used after a short rest. Something like this would allow an artificer to create a batch of infusions for their party according to needs at the time.
I would totally let this work, but it's crazy to think there'd be no consequences.
Maybe the rifts are tearing the fabric of the material plane
Maybe the inhabitants of the Astral Plane get upset that you keep dropping monsters on their doorstep
Maybe the BBEG has been locked out of the Astral Plane and you just sent them exactly where they wanted to go through a backdoor
Maybe whatever you sent away comes back with enhanced powers from its travels
And of course as mentioned, it will be used on you at some point
Ultimately, there are plenty of ways to make this more trouble than it's worth. It's not a nuke, it's a zany, sure-to-backfire, mad scientist plot device.
I would totally let this work, but it's crazy to think there'd be no consequences.
Maybe the rifts are tearing the fabric of the material plane
Maybe the inhabitants of the Astral Plane get upset that you keep dropping monsters on their doorstep
Maybe the BBEG has been locked out of the Astral Plane and you just sent them exactly where they wanted to go through a backdoor
Maybe whatever you sent away comes back with enhanced powers from its travels
And of course as mentioned, it will be used on you at some point
Ultimately, there are plenty of ways to make this more trouble than it's worth. It's not a nuke, it's a zany, sure-to-backfire, mad scientist plot device.
All the stuff gets dumped in the same place that contains the arena in Thor Ragnarok.
We aren't in the Rules section, so I can quite safely point out that it is entirely game/world balance.
If it was this simple, then all armies across the world would use this tactic - the world would be a wasteland.
Perhaps that was a common tactic on Athas (the world from the Dark Sun campaign setting).
I think you're misunderstanding the scope here. Its a 10 foot radius, and disappears instantly... its less damage than a real world grenade (fatal range of 15 feet) Grenades are pretty prevalent and the world isn't a wasteland. If magic didn't create a wasteland I don't see how this would.
I would totally let this work, but it's crazy to think there'd be no consequences.
Maybe the rifts are tearing the fabric of the material plane
Maybe the inhabitants of the Astral Plane get upset that you keep dropping monsters on their doorstep
Maybe the BBEG has been locked out of the Astral Plane and you just sent them exactly where they wanted to go through a backdoor
Maybe whatever you sent away comes back with enhanced powers from its travels
And of course as mentioned, it will be used on you at some point
Ultimately, there are plenty of ways to make this more trouble than it's worth. It's not a nuke, it's a zany, sure-to-backfire, mad scientist plot device.
I'd say a more relavent plot point to come from it would be some law that abuse of such a tactic is like a war crime and using it too often (or in the wrong situation) gets you a bounty on your head from the kingdom or something.
I have to keep reiterating this tho. Even if its was 100% always to work, it wouldn't be a nuke. Its 10 feet, and gone in an instant. It isn't world breaking. At most is game breaking since you could take out a tarrasque at level 2 with it. CR 30 enemy gone like it was never there.
From a game perspective you can make it useless indirectly by having any enemy defeated by it give no experience and no loot, since it was simply pulled into the astral plane.
I would totally let this work, but it's crazy to think there'd be no consequences.
Maybe the rifts are tearing the fabric of the material plane
Maybe the inhabitants of the Astral Plane get upset that you keep dropping monsters on their doorstep
Maybe the BBEG has been locked out of the Astral Plane and you just sent them exactly where they wanted to go through a backdoor
Maybe whatever you sent away comes back with enhanced powers from its travels
And of course as mentioned, it will be used on you at some point
Ultimately, there are plenty of ways to make this more trouble than it's worth. It's not a nuke, it's a zany, sure-to-backfire, mad scientist plot device.
All the stuff gets dumped in the same place that contains the arena in Thor Ragnarok.
That'd be a cool setting regardless. Like just the dumping plane for all the trash that ends up in the astral plane. Probably not a whole world but like a city sized place of just junk. Perhaps balance it so most of what there is useless, decayed in some fashion, etc. But perhaps there are some strong items that end up there and the quest goes through the plane to monsters pulled into the plane and other beings looking for forgotten treasure
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Other than Replicate Magic Item, you can only learn each infusion once. And since each infusion can only be used on one item at a time, you only get one use of Resistant Armor too, regardless of the element you pick.
The question about Replicate Magic Item is one that doesn't have a definitive answer that I can see, it is open to interpretation. It has been discussed here before, and I think the general consensus is that you can learn Replicate Magic Item multiple times, but each time has to be a different item. This is also how DDB has implemented it in the Character Builder for what that's worth. Ultimately it falls under DM's discretion, until WotC errata it or make a Sage Advice ruling, but generally a DM is not going to want their players derailing their campaign by causing a rift and getting sent to the Astral Plane...
Yes, and if the item you replicate is destroyed yes you could make another you just cannot have the same infusion in more then one thing. But none of this means your artificer cannot make an actual permanent thing.
That does seem like a decent way to halt the ability for abuse without ruining the class.
The awkward thing is when such rules aren't made clear in advance so a person could build a class around this design and when he goes to use it the DM says 'no that isn't allowed"
The 1 use of replicate at a time and only 1 can be learned would help protect and make sense, as an overall rule it would be more clear up front as well.
I think it is looking more critical, especially with this class to make clear what it can or can't do at the very start. Unlike others the DM can't fully control the items that the players receive since Artificer can make anything. i.e. DM doesn't want to deal with allies having ease of flying he can not reward boots of flying, but artificer could still get them. So in advance just tell the artificer at creation, this item won't be an option.
With this limitation the DM could just not reward any items that could conflict with the bag of holding, although personally I'd would just get rid of the whole mutual annihilation thing. I find the very existence of such a factor ridiculous. Especially because the logic behind it is so inconsistent, i.e. spells don't trigger the same effect, even though they have their own pocket dimensions.
1. Yes, if was open before I threw it 100% of the time. If it was closed when I threw it 50% of the time.
2. I don't know what you're suggesting here. a Medicine Ball is "soft" in a technical sense, but it will act like something rigid. That is being thrown has form and mass, it isn't some punched up piece of paper.
3. "jostled before throwing" so you're countering my point of "preparing it in advance" with suggesting it isn't prepared to do that. Do you know how machinery works? (look up the full definition of the term before you come at met saying they aren't made of metal, so it wouldn't be machinery)
4. There is no logic to this point WHAT SO EVER.
4a. The origin of the sport uses metal because it was easier to make metal than a solid leather sphere.
4b. Olympics would not pick something "because it is cheaper" this isn't some mass produced product going on here. Plastic is cheaper 100% and just as rigid but they don't use it. Many major competitions use inefficient devices (FYI efficiency is not limited to function, don't jump on that either) for their competitions. Strongman for example. Some things are used as "tradition" and Hammer Throw comes from the 1400s thus it is likely attempting to retain its origins as best as possible.
4c. "toss rock rocks in a sack" would be less efficient since the arrangement, size, etc of the rocks would still vary, including after each landing of the object. This has NO value as an argument against use of the Bag of Holding, since its contents are not connected to the mass or shape of the bag at all.
5. And a sword attack can as well, so I guess you are arguing attacking with swords in DnD is pointless since they can be avoided. WTF logic is this.
6. Massive leap of logic there. Taking a single instance and suddenly blowing it into a standard military doctrine. Again. Every army knows the enemies use bows so they just won't ever be susceptible to arrows right? I mean they know the enemy uses bows. So I guess Rope Trick isn't allowed in your campaigns, since if it exists, everyone knows it, everyone uses it and so everyone is 100% prepared for it. Dude. Seriously... Grenades exist in our world yet somehow people use them successfully.
Here's the issue, YOU don't like this idea, but you HAVE NO actual reasoning that makes it not possible so YOU MAKE UP these reasons BEREFT OF LOGIC. You don't understand a single thing you're talking about. You don't understand physics, you don't understand sports, you don't understand military tactics, you don't understand world building. Simply understand this, YOU DON'T LIKE this idea, and move on. Your comments have ZERO value to the topic. You're attempting to use flawed real world logic to disprove the possibility of something in a fictional universe. Ironically attempting to disprove the one area that supports its possibility, since a contraption could be created to get a bag into another bag when thrown. 100%.
Please move on.
As a military tactic, it would act like a big explosion - similar to throwing grenades. Far more useful as a battlefield tactic than using the rope trick spell or holding a shield up against the rain of arrows.
I don't think anybody would try the tactic of "open the bag slightly, press the other up against the opening but it isn't large enough to go inside", because one slip and you cause the explosion centred on yourself.
This is all a solved problem, you know.
1. Not my problem.
2. Yes. A solid semi hard object of fixed mass. You don't seem to understand here. This isn't a bag that can change mass. Its always 15 pounds. The internal contents doesn't shift, the closest example would be a medicine ball.
3. I always mentioned a mechanism. Quindraco point out a mechanism designed by players and referenced numerous times. If such a thing can be worked into a game a simple barrier between the two bags could be possible. Hell a Mage Hand could be in between. Although the weight of the bag is 15 so a Mage Hand couldn't pick it up, the differential force when throwing would be like 1 pound maximum. So the Mage Hand would need to just act as the barrier in case the one bag was going to go inside the other. When it eventually lands the force would be greater than 10 pounds so the hand would no longer be able to hold it. Mage Hand is concentration but throwing would just be an action so all you have to do is have it there.
4. It is easier to work metal into a consistent solid object. Yes. Leather is tight enough stitching to maintain a seal in all directions is not an easy task. I mean... I don't understand what you're arguing. Your ignored the point that putting rocks in would not be reliable in terms of consistent movement between like items.
ALSO, there is no statement in the item description that the sack is cloth, it could just as possibly be leather in dnd 5e. Whether its cloth or leather, doesn't change the premise of the argument.
5. You missed the point. You stated that if my suggestion were possible then everyone would be prepared for it thus making it useless to use. Such logic would need to extend to everything else since the premise is "everyone knows it so everyone is prepared for it" I was pointing out how that isn't logical since it isn't consistent with other "known" actions like shooting an arrow or attacking with a sword. Being aware of the existence of a tactics is different than being able to always negate it.
ALSO, you don't understand the mechanics, since the rifts close immediately, so your suggestion of breaking reality isn't in line with the errata. Anything you may suggest like "long term damage to reality" would be your own personal story. Your idea of MAD is nonsense. this is a 10 foot radius. So even immediate destructive actions it wouldn't even warrant a MAD situation, since a grenade has a fatality radius of 15 feet. That would mean a grenade would be MAD territory to you.
6. you missed the point entirely, I was pointing out the massive flaw in your reasoning of "if it is possible then everyone would be prepared for it" as it doesn't translate to anything else in the game.
Caps are for emphasis on words, points you should really focus on because you are missing things completely.
What are you even arguing anymore? I mean you're saying the Hammer Throw couldn't be non metal because if they could they would. When given modern technology still hasn't replaced it and modern technology could easily replicate the item with synthetics at a lower cost. The ultimate reasoning of "they don't make it so it isn't possible" is flawed. since it doesn't address the fact that Metal may be superior for that object's purpose, but doesn't mean the alternative isn't feasible.
Lets simplify this,
In REALITY, since that is what you want to argue can you:
1. Throw a 15-30 pound bag 10 feet.
2. guaranteed to be closed when thrown?
The answer is Yes to the first and no the second. By that reason alone what I propose is possible. So kindly move on. At least others have put forth actual answers of value, like, "may want to add a DC check" i.e. not always lands open etc. You're just going on and on about it not being impossible when it absolutely IS possible. I feel like you lack imagination to such a degree the only way to convince you is to make a literal video of this. which I have no interest in doing.
Serious, move on, you're out of your element here. The game topic is not a new one, and has been discussed by people for years. The real world situation is also outside of your capability since you lack basic understanding of physics. I'm not saying you're dumb, but you're not suited for this topic.
You're so fixed on this mental image you've formed of it working and aren't thinking of the actual mechanism / idea of it.
Just suspend one with a magical rope above the other out of sight of the enemy, when they walk within 10 feet end the magical rope and the bag will fall into the other. You don't have to suspend them high either, so a literal millimeter above each other so there is no chance it misses.
Alternatively, just use suggestion or Charm to have an enemy pick up a bag then drop it over the other. Since it isn't a direct "kill yourself" command it could be possible. Perhaps a saving throw so the enemy would need to understand the full function of the bag of holding. Insight check or something, but still possible.
Yeah, I mean in that style, that's what gave me the idea of using the two. Technically you don't need a special smaller bag but it would need to be fired by like a balistica so it'd be more like a city defense weapon.
Honestly if the DM allows for smaller bags they're just asking for trouble. I haven't played much before 5e so I can't say for certain, perhaps the AoTD was from a time when the Hag of Holding didn't have a fixed size / weight? back in BG2 I remember it and always though it looked more like a pouch, not sure.
You could use the plan with the Heward's Handy Haversack since it is only 5 pounds. Still to large for a regular arrow. It would be more reasonable for the Arrow if 2 Portable Holes were used. There doesn't appear to be a weight listed for that item
I think I'd rule that, no, infused bags of holding and other infused forms of extra-dimensional spaces can't be solely used to create bombs. I might allow a bomb to be created if a genuine bag of holding or similar had an infused bag of holding put into it but, even in this case, I might decrease something like the area of effect.
The creation of such powerful bombs via just part of the daily efforts of two potentially low-level artificers at negligible material costs just seems horrendously out of balance.
RAW, I'd think that it would take two artificers as I think it's stretching things to say you can duplicate effects by knowing the same type of thing twice.
Having said that I might still drop the rule that "each of your infusions can be in only one object at a time" and might even remove the time limitation that you can only infuse an item "Whenever you finish a long rest". In this case, I might say that if any spare capacity remains after a long rest, remaining infusions could be used after a short rest. Something like this would allow an artificer to create a batch of infusions for their party according to needs at the time.
We aren't in the Rules section, so I can quite safely point out that it is entirely game/world balance.
If it was this simple, then all armies across the world would use this tactic - the world would be a wasteland.
Perhaps that was a common tactic on Athas (the world from the Dark Sun campaign setting).
I would totally let this work, but it's crazy to think there'd be no consequences.
Ultimately, there are plenty of ways to make this more trouble than it's worth. It's not a nuke, it's a zany, sure-to-backfire, mad scientist plot device.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
All the stuff gets dumped in the same place that contains the arena in Thor Ragnarok.
I think you're misunderstanding the scope here.
Its a 10 foot radius, and disappears instantly... its less damage than a real world grenade (fatal range of 15 feet)
Grenades are pretty prevalent and the world isn't a wasteland. If magic didn't create a wasteland I don't see how this would.
I'd say a more relavent plot point to come from it would be some law that abuse of such a tactic is like a war crime and using it too often (or in the wrong situation) gets you a bounty on your head from the kingdom or something.
I have to keep reiterating this tho. Even if its was 100% always to work, it wouldn't be a nuke. Its 10 feet, and gone in an instant. It isn't world breaking. At most is game breaking since you could take out a tarrasque at level 2 with it. CR 30 enemy gone like it was never there.
From a game perspective you can make it useless indirectly by having any enemy defeated by it give no experience and no loot, since it was simply pulled into the astral plane.
That'd be a cool setting regardless. Like just the dumping plane for all the trash that ends up in the astral plane. Probably not a whole world but like a city sized place of just junk. Perhaps balance it so most of what there is useless, decayed in some fashion, etc. But perhaps there are some strong items that end up there and the quest goes through the plane to monsters pulled into the plane and other beings looking for forgotten treasure