Why the heck are bags of holding so heavy?

[RigaMortus2]

Actually, this did get me thinking, and I've come up with (what I think anyway) is a fair and equitable rule.

A Bag of Holding is negligible by itself, and weighs either the weight of the amount of stuff crammed in it or it's maximum DMG weight, whichever is less.

So, using the Type IV, if you put 6 lbs of loot in it, the bag weighs 6 lbs. 30 lbs of loot, it weighs 30 lbs. 60 lbs of loot, it weighs 60 lbs. 600 lbs of loot, it weighs 60 lbs.

That keeps the flavor of the bag (letting you carry a lot of goods for a 'set' weight), but when it's empty or not exceeding the 'set' weight, it's lighter.

Probably not the houserule you want, but I think it's a very fair one.

How much if the bag is empty? 0lbs of weight? 60lbs of weight? What happens if you enter a plane that makes things weighless? Does it implode?

 

[Jhulae]

How much if the bag is empty? 0lbs of weight? 60lbs of weight? What happens if you enter a plane that makes things weighless? Does it implode?

I said 'Negligible weight' when empty*, which means it'd be like a Wooden Holy symbol (or any other equipment with a weight of - ). It weighs a couple of ounces or whatever other 'negligible' items weigh, but not enough to add to encumbrance.

*My exact words were 'negligible when empty', which, I figured would make the point clear as there are other items one can purchase from the standard tables that obviously have some weight but yet don't count towards encumbrance. I even believe it's called 'negligible' in the book, but that's from memory, so I could be mistaken.

 

[Darklone]

I still do want bags back where I can put a castle inside. With tavern.

 

[Jhulae]

I still do want bags back where I can put a castle inside. With tavern.

Oh, go play HM, what with their bags of hefty capacity and some such.... Didn't the largest one have the capacity of 15,000,000 lbs or something? with a square mile of space inside?

 

[Darklone]

Yupp. That was prolly the one where we had our castle inside... like KoDT IIRC.

 

[Notmousse]

Well why stop there? If magic is involved, why not say that the bag is in fact weightless or invisible or can't be punctured or any other myriad of "magic" things? You have to draw the line somewhere. I see this as an example of an item that is in all (but one) ways similiar to any other items of it's type (weight, size, volume, material it is made of), except of course having extradimensional space.

You can make them invisible easily, make them harder to puncture as well. My issue is that given it's sole purpose is to make things easier to move it isn't easy to move around itself.

Given it's a sack, why doesn't it weigh as much as a sack when empty?

 

[KarinsDad]

My issue is that given it's sole purpose is to make things easier to move it isn't easy to move around itself.

It is easy to move around. A single person is carrying around the contents of a home on his back.

Given it's a sack, why doesn't it weigh as much as a sack when empty?

Because it isn't.

In real life, if you created a product that allowed a person to carry 1500 pounds and 250 cubic feat, and it weighed only 60 pounds, you'd be a billionaire. The military applications alone would ensure that.

That's a hugely worthwhile set of functionality, but for some reason, it bothers you. I don't get it.

 

[Jhulae]

You can make them invisible easily, make them harder to puncture as well. My issue is that given it's sole purpose is to make things easier to move it isn't easy to move around itself.

Given it's a sack, why doesn't it weigh as much as a sack when empty?

See my houserule here.

 

[Aaron L]

It's a big Santa Claus bag.

I guess.

 

[Jhulae]

So, even though I posted a houserule that would completely correct the problem of the 'empty bag weight', no comment on it?