Can you place living creatures in a bag of holding

[Kae'Yoss]

Don't get me wrong. I'm both against DM's who are trying to kill the players by playing to much by the rule (or are ignorant of the party's needs and play a module just as it is written) and against punishing players to be smart.

But there's a difference between smart and smart-ass: there's a line between acting smart and trying to abuse the letter of the rules to get rather more advantages that you are due. Sometimes smart players approach that line, and maybe even cross it for a couple of inches, and the DM should tell them. But sometimes charakters start several leagues beyond that line, and won't listen to the DM because it's in the rules, and then you should teach them a more practical lesson by doing the same as them. I've seen that and I know what I'm talking about, believe me that! (and on the forums we also have sometimes people like that, like the one who wanted to play the gold halfdragon troll with the ring of acid resistance, so noone could kill him)

Of course, the DM shouldn't make it to obvious and absurd: Just letting some beasts attack only because they didn't set watches is stupid, but If they're bandits who watched them for some time and saw that they don't guard themselves properly is logical. He should remind them about setting up guards "normally", though.

In the case of the "travelling bag" (and I think that it can really piss off the DM if he needed the party to travel by foot to find something, being sure they can't use magic travel yet because of party size, and they are putting someeone into their back of holding!): If adventurers advance in level, they tend to achieve greater goals. If they operate in the same area most of the time, they are due to become heroes (or, in the case of evil parties, the bounty for them rises to five-digit-numbers). And the very definition of hero is that they step on some big time villain's toes for a living.
So it is only sensible that he sets an assassin (or a group of assassins) on their heels, which doesn't have to confront them on the city square, but much rather shadow them and learn about their habits, doings and plans. And if you happen to know that the party wizard tends to put his friends into a bag before he teleports, you know that a) he is to weak to teleport them properly and b) he will be alone when he arrives at his destination. So you only have to know where there are going (you could even assure that you know by telling them - posing as a noble or something, sending them somewhere and even providing them with descriptions for his teleportation.....


Usually, those lessons shouldn't be fatal, but they should put the players on edge and make them clear that they have to behave sensible (would YOU travel in a luggage to save the ticket?).

 

[rushlight]

"I fail to see the connection between sleeping in a forest without a watch posted (something moronically unwise) and having someone jump in a bag of holding to reduce the weight for an instantaneous journey (teleportation) (a very ingenuitive use of items and spells)."

Both are dangerous. Both are simple ways to handle potentially complicated situations.

"Rather than taking the philosophy of punishing the characters for sleeping on watch simply respond as if that did not matter - i.e. don't change any of your random encounters - just have them occur while the party sleeps."

I never advocted that... I just suggested that when the party acts in potentially reckless ways, occationially you should remind them that their actions are in fact dangerous.

I don't think that a DM should try and kill the players intenionally. It's a DMs job to provide fun for the players. This is usually accomplished by providing a good story to involve your players along with appropriate challenges for them to overcome. If you constantly let your players take the shortcut with no challenges they will eventually get bored and quit playing. If you kill them with glee everytime they try to get creative they will get mad and quit playing.

There is however, a middle ground. Let your players get creative. That's fine, let them teleport with the party in the bag several times. Then give them a close call to remind them that the actions they are taking have repurcussions. Let them be worried that the next time they are going to teleport into a dungeon something worse might happen.

It's good for them to stress about it a bit. Face it, would YOU jump into a bag from which you cannot leave and are at the mercy of someone else? Even knowing that that person is leaping into an unknown situation? I can tell you I sure wouldn't. Your player's characters probably wouldn't either, if not for the fact that the players figure you won't ambush them like that. Then they can forgo doing any real investigation into the situation they are leaping into, since they figure you won't do anything to them. So they have used metagame knowledge to make in game decisions, based on your previous history of letting them get away with stuff without ever shaking them up.

So you SHOULD occationally shake them up. It keeps them on their toes, and makes them think. They will consider their actions more carefully from their character's point of view. Unless your players are strict Hack 'n Slash rules laywers, they will probably appreciate the challenge of outthinking the dangerous situations you have presented them. And in the end, I can assure you the players get more satisfaction from defeating a difficult challenge than just letting them walk all over whatever situation is at hand.

 

[Saeviomagy]

Rushlight - do you hitch a lift with your mate in his car?

I agree that if the players are teleporting into a potential hostile situation without scoping it out first, they're in for trouble, but most of the time, that's not what it's used for.

 

[Corwin]

Rushlight - do you hitch a lift with your mate in his car?

I'm not Rushlight (obviously), but I have a question for you, Saeviomagy:

When your buddy gives you a ride in his car, do you climb in the trunk?

 

[Numion]

Re: logic and the bag of holding (even in DnD)

Hey good idea lets abuse the players for thinking and acting smart.

Well, if you consider storing party members inside an extradimensional sack smart, then yes. Of course, if the enemy is intelligent, he'll realize that the party is at their most vulnerable during their bag of holding teleport.

Why shouldn't he strike then? Some great voice booms from the sky "That's not fair, the puny humans are smart for being in the sack!"?

whatever.

 

[laiyna]

hmmmmmm....

there is 10 minutes of air for 1 creature
that makes 5 minuts of air for 2
that makes 2.5 minutes for 4

this could easly go wrong

 

[Caliber]

If a friend asked me to get in his car to go the gaming store and pick up Big Scary Monsters (tm) I would do it without thinking otherwise (well, okay, maybe I would wonder about what shows I would miss on tv.)

If my same friend happened to be a Wizard and he said that he had a magic bag that he could put me in and take me out of that would let him teleport both of us, and oh, you only have enough air for 10 minutes, but I am sure I will let you out, let me tell you I wouldn't touch that bag with a 10' pole.

Would you get into your friends car if you knew it was going to explode in 10 minutes and the doors could only be opened with your friend's key?

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

It is not that big a deal. If you feel yourself starting to lose consciousness, just slash the side of the bad with your sword. That will spill the contents into the Prime.

 

[Caliber]

Actually, you are wrong Ridley's Cohort. If you pierce the bag from the inside the bag is ruined and all contents inside are lost forever.

Not a good idea for someone who is inside ...

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Actually, you are wrong Ridley's Cohort. If you pierce the bag from the inside the bag is ruined and all contents inside are lost forever.

Not a good idea for someone who is inside ...

Heyyyy!!! I am going to have to have a word with Ridley about that.