NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Shadowdweller00" data-source="post: 6799948" data-attributes="member: 6778479">The second sentence is -how- you described my claims not making sense.  No, that is a presumption you are making without any sort of rules or flavor support.There is not a single passage anywhere within the rules that states or even remotely implies that extradimensional spaces are somehow invulnerable; nor, in this case, that they should somehow be separate from, unattached to, and/or unbounded by the bag itself.  The fact that rupture of the bag causes loss of the contents NECESSITATES that this is not, in fact, true. The paragraph describes SEVERAL methods of destruction, such as overloading, that MUST take place inside the bag (i.e. within the extradimensional space).  And there are clear (if general) rules for how magic items react to damage.  It was stated EXPLICITLY in previous editions that bags of holding could be pierced and/or destroyed from the inside.  The descriptions are virtually unchanged:There is nothing whatsoever to suggest that is no longer the case.  That extradimensional space IS the bag...outside normal dimensions.  The (5e) description repeatedly refers to contents, items CONTAINED within something else. In contrast - the ONLY relevance the possible capacity of the sword to draw itself has with this FACT is that sentient weapons often have ill-defined means of interacting with their environment.  And dropping an irate sentient magical weapon with ill-defined abilities into another VULNERABLE and valuable magic item is a recipe for sorrow.(EDIT: Clarity, to remove some superfluous snark)</blockquote>

Verification