A Luckstone gives a +1 to ability checks and saves, a Pact of the Tome warlock's Book of Shadows grants them extra access to cantrips, and a Rod of the Pact Keeper (DMG p. 197) gives bonuses to warlocks' spell attacks and spell save DC and recovers 1 spell slot per long rest. These items require that it be "on your person" using it to grant their benefits.

Does it still count as "on your person" if it is placed in an extra-dimensional container like a Bag of Holding or Glove of Storing?

  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ The Rod of the Pact Keeper says you have to be holding it to gain the benefits, not just have it on your person. Also, there's no official magic item known as the "Glove of Storing", though there are other extradimensional items such as Heward's Handy Haversack or a Portable Hole. \$\endgroup\$ – V2Blast Jul 23 '18 at 4:16
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ What's a glove of storing exactly? \$\endgroup\$ – Nemenia Jul 23 '18 at 7:16
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Glove of Storing is pathfinder, not 5e, OP \$\endgroup\$ – Pyritie Jul 23 '18 at 10:43

Unclear, but probably not.

A Bag of Holding is said to create an "extradimensional space". This is not stated directly in its own description, but is made explicit when cross-referenced with a portable hole or Heward's Handy Haversack, each of which attributes this property to the others.

Within D&D, an extradimensional space is not normally accessible without special means. The three items above describe how to access these spaces. Further, an item placed within a bag will suffocate. There is no mention made that the bag mush be closed. This indicates that the interior itself is extradimensional.

Given these restrictions, a strong case can be made that an item in an extradimensional space is not "on your person". The description of wearing and wielding magic items (DMG, p. 140) says:

Using a magic item's properties might mean wearing or wielding it. A magic item meant to be worn must be donned in the intended fashion: boots go on the feet, gloves on the hands, hats and helmets on the head, and rings on the finger. Magic armor must be donned, a shield strapped to the arm, a cloak fastened about the shoulders. A weapon must be held in hand.

This heavily implies that an item "on your person" must be physically present "on your person". But these are all extrapolations of D&D rulings and principles. It is not explicitly stated, and so a DM's ruling is required. That is why we have DMs.

| improve this answer | |
  • \$\begingroup\$ @V2Blast Thanks, but I rolled back your edit. I originally put in a DMG link and did not want a dndbeyond link. \$\endgroup\$ – keithcurtis Jul 23 '18 at 13:46
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Why not allow the DnDB link (in addition to the book reference) for those without access to the books? I really don't see the harm here. In fact, I can only see positives. This method has also been affirmed as the best way to handle things by the community: Stance on using D&D Beyond for references? \$\endgroup\$ – Rubiksmoose Jul 23 '18 at 16:29
  • \$\begingroup\$ Well, it's the accepted and most upvoted answer, not a binding policy. If you look at my answer there, you'll see my reasoning. Also, there is another current question Re: the policy of adding references to other people's answers still under discussion. However, I didn't realize that V2Blast had kept the DMG page ref. ( edit language isn't always easy to parse.) I have no objection to the DND Beyond reference being added so long as the paper reference (which has much more permanence) is retained, and the link is not behind a paywall. Since the paper reference was not removed, I can roll back. \$\endgroup\$ – keithcurtis Jul 23 '18 at 23:59
  • \$\begingroup\$ ...Aaand it's behind a paywall. I'm torn. I have a deep dislike of links that go behind paywalls, but the stack (rpg, or otherwise) doesn't seem to have a policy against it. I'll just silently gnash my teeth and let it go. \$\endgroup\$ – keithcurtis Jul 24 '18 at 0:10
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ As pointed out in the meta thread, a paywalled DNDBeyond link isn't really any less of a "paywall" than a page number in a book (that's not the basic rules)... \$\endgroup\$ – V2Blast Jul 24 '18 at 3:16

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.