How much does a backpack hold?

[Pariah]

One cubic foot? That's it in 3E?

Being a hiker, I'll have to disagree with those figures if you're going for what an "adventuring" pack would hold, assuming the D&D version would be designed about the same way modern backpacks are.

I have two Jansport backpacks and love them, neither of which are as low as 1 cubic foot. (12" x 12" x 12" = 1728 cu in)

The Jansport Rockies backpack (my RL "adventuring" backpack) has a capacity of 7000 cu in, which is almost exactly 4 cu. ft of space, and the pack weighs about 50-60 pounds fully loaded (including entrenching tool, tent stakes AND the tent, goose down sleeping bag, sleeping pad, Coleman stove, water filteration system, etc).

My Jansport _bookbag_ (which I use for D&D rulebooks) has more capacity than what the PHB lists for their backpack, at 2200 cu in. Maybe the designers aren't that into hiking, or perhaps their concept of an D&D adventurers pack is different from a fully stocked backpack, with everything you need to survive contained therein. Not sure exactly if fantasy packs would go with an internal or external frame, but internal frame sure balances a lot better on your body when you're hopping across a mountain stream on moss covered stones

 

[Aaron2]

Being a hiker, I'll have to disagree with those figures if you're going for what an "adventuring" pack would hold, assuming the D&D version would be designed about the same way modern backpacks are.

I tried to research when backpacks were actually invented but didn't have much luck. The earliest references I could find were from the 1800s. In medieval times, I have seen wicker baskets strapped to the back and used to haul dirt around but nothing like a modern backpack. The Romans didn't use them, instead the used a carrying pole (like a hobo). Anyone know when backpacks with frames were invented. Modern ones use aluminum which wasn't available; iron would be too heavy (they couldn't make tubing) so it would have been wooden.

Up until recently, a man was expected to have a horse or a cart around so a backpack wasn't really needed. No one was preparing for a dungeon delve.


Aaron

 

[CRGreathouse]

My Jansport _bookbag_ (which I use for D&D rulebooks) has more capacity than what the PHB lists for their backpack, at 2200 cu in. Maybe the designers aren't that into hiking, or perhaps their concept of an D&D adventurers pack is different from a fully stocked backpack, with everything you need to survive contained therein. Not sure exactly if fantasy packs would go with an internal or external frame, but internal frame sure balances a lot better on your body when you're hopping across a mountain stream on moss covered stones

I'm a hiker too, but I have no problem with 1 cubic foot capacity. It's certainly better than 2E's capacity of 6 cubic feet.

The backpack assumed in (3E) D&D is pretty small compared to what I'd hike with. Look at the size of Lidda's backpack (proportional to herself, that is) -- it's tiny! It probably holds 200 cubic inches... scaled up for her small size, that's about one cubic foot.

Sure, there could easily be a 'hiker's backpack' holding four times the standard pack, but most adventurers would do just fine without -- in my D&D experience, extra rations and water go on the pack animal anyway.

 

[John Q. Mayhem]

You have to consider that D&D's weights are way off. Example: D&D bastard swords are 15 lbs., while RL ones are 2-3 lbs. (Source: Museum Replicas Limited) I'm not sure what else is off, but that's a pretty big difference.

 

[CalrinAlshaw]

You have to consider that D&D's weights are way off. Example: D&D bastard swords are 15 lbs., while RL ones are 2-3 lbs. (Source: Museum Replicas Limited) I'm not sure what else is off, but that's a pretty big difference.

Very true, I think one of the biggest discrepencies all D&D games have, are the weights of weapons. Some of the heaviest bladed weapons were probobly no more than 7-8 pounds.

As for bashing weapons, I could see maybe a 10 pound object after the counter-balance to the metal ball. Otherwise you'd have to hold that thing right next to the ball and you'd have no leverage, unless you WANT to be flung off balance.

Now, big battleaxes are a different story, anyone seen Dragonheart? In the end when the knight is swinging the double bladed battle axe and he almost never switches it's path, thats realistic, it's heavy, and the exertion of stopping something THAT heavy would be a pain.

Calrin Alshaw

 

[CalrinAlshaw]

You have to consider that D&D's weights are way off. Example: D&D bastard swords are 15 lbs., while RL ones are 2-3 lbs. (Source: Museum Replicas Limited) I'm not sure what else is off, but that's a pretty big difference.

Very true, I think one of the biggest discrepencies all D&D games have, are the weights of weapons. Some of the heaviest bladed weapons were probobly no more than 7-8 pounds.

As for bashing weapons, I could see maybe a 10 pound object after the counter-balance to the metal ball. Otherwise you'd have to hold that thing right next to the ball and you'd have no leverage, unless you WANT to be flung off balance.

Now, big battleaxes are a different story, anyone seen Dragonheart? In the end when the knight is swinging the double bladed battle axe and he almost never switches it's path, thats realistic, it's heavy, and the exertion of stopping something THAT heavy would be a pain.

Calrin Alshaw

 

[CalrinAlshaw]

You have to consider that D&D's weights are way off. Example: D&D bastard swords are 15 lbs., while RL ones are 2-3 lbs. (Source: Museum Replicas Limited) I'm not sure what else is off, but that's a pretty big difference.

Very true, I think one of the biggest discrepencies all D&D games have, are the weights of weapons. Some of the heaviest bladed weapons were probobly no more than 7-8 pounds.

As for bashing weapons, I could see maybe a 10 pound object after the counter-balance to the metal ball. Otherwise you'd have to hold that thing right next to the ball and you'd have no leverage, unless you WANT to be flung off balance.

Now, big battleaxes are a different story, anyone seen Dragonheart? In the end when the knight is swinging the double bladed battle axe and he almost never switches it's path, thats realistic, it's heavy, and the exertion of stopping something THAT heavy would be a pain.

Calrin Alshaw

 

[Tessarael]

Actually, 3.5E PHB has Bastardsword listed as weighing 6lb. Probably still a little on the heavy side, but I'd have to go and re-read the books on historical weapons to double-check.

Traditionally, D&D has significantly overweighted weapons.

---

Sidenote for those not familiar with the gp weight system of earlier editions, 10gp = 1lb.

 

[AeroDm]

I think that D&D backpacks are not as large as present day backpacks. I know that when people 'envision' their characters they are not weighed down with klunky backpacks, but at most have a small 'stylish' backpack like lidda. On the meta side, people want to declare that their backpack can hold a canoe because in real life they once saw just that!

I'm all about small backpacks with small carrying capacities. It fits in with the flavor people envision, limits eq, and forces responsibility/limiting oneself.

 

[Xeriar]

Meaning :
• light backpack : 40 lbs max load, more likely 25-30 lbs.
• heavy (regular adventurer) backpack : 100 lbs max load, more likely 60-75 lbs
+ some stuff strapped on/hanging around the backpack.

The fabric probably won't stand much more anyway.

Hope this helps.

There was a radio guy in WWII who, weighing 135 libs, carried 180 pounds of gear. While a pack is only going to take so much wear period, I imagine 130 pounds of water is not out of the question.