Heward's Haversack

[Shawn_Kehoe]

Hey,

I just looked at the DMG and noticed that this item doesn't have the same destruction clause that occurs if a portable hole is placed into a Bag of Holding or vice-versa. Has this been issued errata, or is it simply safer to use than its big brothers?

Thanks,
Shawn

 

[Bayushi Seikuro]

I don't know. I know in other regards, it's better than the bags of holding; if I remember right, in regards to removing items in combat, so maybe it was intended to be a better item in some ways?

 

[Nail]

Has this been issued errata,

No

or is it simply safer to use than its big brothers?

yes

 

[mvincent]

I just looked at the DMG and noticed that this item doesn't have the same destruction clause that occurs if a portable hole is placed into a Bag of Holding or vice-versa. Has this been issued errata, or is it simply safer to use than its big brothers?

Check with your DM.

From the Handy haversack description in the core rules:
"has two side pouches... each is like a bag of holding"

From the Rules of the Game (if desired):
"treat a Heward's handy haversack as a bag of holding when it interacts with a portable hole."

From the 3.0 FAQ (if desired):
“Items that function like bags of holding, such as Heward’s handy haversacks, cause the same mishaps when mishandled. "

For earlier reference (if desired): from the 2ed guide to High-level campaigns, section on magic items:
"Extradimensional Spaces: These items tend to produce spectacular effects when one is placed within another. The following items contain extradimensional spaces: bag of holding, bag of transmuting, flatbox, girdle of many pouches, Heward’s handy haversack, portable hole, and pouch of accessibility."