Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Greenfield" data-source="post: 6224812" data-attributes="member: 6669384">Ah, so the explicit limit on the volume of air grants an implied limit on the volume of other things, like water?I'd ask where that comes from, but you've already spelled it out:  It's there because the rules never say it isn't  Or in other words, paisley dragons.If every magic item had to list all the things it doesn't do, they'd need to fell a forest of trees to make the paper to print a single copy of the rules, and they'd still be short.I'm going to stop for a moment.  I realized that I'm being something of an ass, and I'm sorry.  I get very sharp tongued when I get frustrated.  I'll try to control myself.The argument seems to be that water entering the bag will behave irrationally and/or unpredictably because there are specific rules for air that touch peripherally on the cubic footage, and thus implicitly say that the bag won't inflate and burst due to air pressure.I know I said I'd try to be nice, and I am, but I honestly can't think of  way to sum up that argument that doesn't look like mockery.  Ignoring the "10 minutes of air" rule, and the subsequent calculations on volume and weight for a moment, why would air be a problem.  The plane the bag bursts into (Astral) isn't an airless void.  So the bag isn't a stopper between us and absolute vacuum, and won't inflate from air pressure any more than any other bag would.In short, the bag behaving as it does, with regard to air pressure, is entirely rational and predictable, even without the hard and fast rule limiting the air space inside.Equally, water pouring into an unsealed container when it's immersed is also completely rational and predictable.  So is the idea of  bag tearing if overstuffed or overloaded.What's not rational (though at this point very predictable) is the argument that "The rules don't say it doesn't have an automatic safeguard against a condition that the authors probably never considered, so there must be one."Thats the rational equivalent of, "But the rules never say it doesn't turn you into a paisley dragon, so..."And to be clear, I'm not saying that the participants in this discussion aren't rational.  If anyone deserves that label, I'm afraid that it's been me.  I really am going to make an effort to be more polite.I doubt, however, that I'll buy into the air pressure argument in any of its permutations.</blockquote>

Verification