Bag of Holding is an uncommon item that can hold 65 cubic feet/500 pounds. Handy Haversack is a rare item that can hold 12 cubic feet/120 pounds spread over 3 pockets (so no large items). In previous editions items could be retrieved from the haversack more quickly, but in 5e despite saying that the item you are looking for is always on top, it still takes an action to retrieve, the same as the bag of holding. Otherwise they are virtually identical except that the haversack is only 5 pounds versus 15. So why is the worse item of higher rarity?
Good question, I am guessing it just wasn't really thought out well. Although if your team doesn't have any organization in their bag a DM could always make them roll to see if they pull out the correct item. Either that or stick their head in the bag to look around, I wonder if you would need a torch haha.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
This is a common question, and the answer hinges on the way the Bag of Holding once worked: that is, it used to take a substantial amount of time to retrieve an item from the bag, because it was essentially an unorganized mess inside. Thus, the Handy Haversack was smaller but, well, handier.
In the current form, the Haversack is strictly worse than the Bag and the rarities should probably be swapped accordingly if a house rule were to be applied.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in awhile.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Bag of Holding is an uncommon item that can hold 65 cubic feet/500 pounds. Handy Haversack is a rare item that can hold 12 cubic feet/120 pounds spread over 3 pockets (so no large items). In previous editions items could be retrieved from the haversack more quickly, but in 5e despite saying that the item you are looking for is always on top, it still takes an action to retrieve, the same as the bag of holding. Otherwise they are virtually identical except that the haversack is only 5 pounds versus 15. So why is the worse item of higher rarity?
Good question, I am guessing it just wasn't really thought out well. Although if your team doesn't have any organization in their bag a DM could always make them roll to see if they pull out the correct item. Either that or stick their head in the bag to look around, I wonder if you would need a torch haha.
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
This is a common question, and the answer hinges on the way the Bag of Holding once worked: that is, it used to take a substantial amount of time to retrieve an item from the bag, because it was essentially an unorganized mess inside. Thus, the Handy Haversack was smaller but, well, handier.
In the current form, the Haversack is strictly worse than the Bag and the rarities should probably be swapped accordingly if a house rule were to be applied.
Even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in awhile.