Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="aboyd" data-source="post: 4475962" data-attributes="member: 44797">Sure, that's fine, but this isn't &quot;usual circumstance.&quot;&nbsp; It's a Haversack.&nbsp; The question is, when the authors wrote that it works better than a normal backpack as far as retrievals are concerned, were they improving the action or imposing the action?&nbsp; In other words, if a Haversack has a move action limitation because it's running a &quot;sort to top&quot; algorithm on your command, then pretty much there isn't any way to get around the move action limitation.&nbsp; It's imposed.&nbsp; This makes a magical Haversack worse than many non-magical containers such as a bandolier.&nbsp; That's fine if you rule that way.&nbsp; I'm just thinking that I won't in my campaigns.&nbsp; I'm leaning to the other side -- that the Haversack mentions there is no AOO because it's functioning better than a normal backpack.&nbsp; If that's the case, optimzing with a Quick Draw is a very reasonable use of the feat, especially considering that some DMs would probably rule that way even with a nonmagical backpack.&nbsp; The writing on the Quick Draw description simply lends itself to this kind of tribulation.&nbsp; It boils down to what overrides what.&nbsp; Quick Draw clearly overrides the normal, described draw time for melee weapons.&nbsp; It also says that this means throwing at full BAB speed is allowed.&nbsp; Does that mean it overrides the retrieval time?&nbsp; It doesn't say yes or no.&nbsp; At that point, every DM has to make a ruling.&nbsp; I go one way, you go another.&nbsp; I'm sure you think your way is sensible.&nbsp; I think making sure a magical item is not upstaged by a nonmagical item is also valid, so I think my way is sensible.&nbsp; There we have it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="aboyd, post: 4475962, member: 44797"] Sure, that's fine, but this isn't "usual circumstance." It's a Haversack. The question is, when the authors wrote that it works better than a normal backpack as far as retrievals are concerned, were they improving the action or imposing the action? In other words, if a Haversack has a move action limitation because it's running a "sort to top" algorithm on your command, then pretty much there isn't any way to get around the move action limitation. It's imposed. This makes a magical Haversack [i]worse[/i] than many non-magical containers such as a bandolier. That's fine if you rule that way. I'm just thinking that I won't in my campaigns. I'm leaning to the other side -- that the Haversack mentions there is no AOO because it's functioning [i]better[/i] than a normal backpack. If that's the case, optimzing with a Quick Draw is a very reasonable use of the feat, [i]especially[/i] considering that some DMs would probably rule that way even with a [i]nonmagical[/i] backpack. The writing on the Quick Draw description simply lends itself to this kind of tribulation. It boils down to what overrides what. Quick Draw clearly overrides the normal, described draw time for melee weapons. It also says that this means throwing at full BAB speed is allowed. Does that mean it overrides the retrieval time? It doesn't say yes or no. At that point, [i]every[/i] DM has to make a ruling. I go one way, you go another. I'm sure you think your way is sensible. I think making sure a magical item is not upstaged by a nonmagical item is also valid, so I think my way is sensible. There we have it. [/QUOTE]

Verification