D&D 5E Simple Magic Item Comparison

[DND_Reborn]

A Bag of Holding is an uncommon item, weighs 15 lbs and can hold up to 500 lbs, limited by 64 cubic feet.

Heward's Handy Haversack is a rare item, weights 5 lbs, but can only hold 120 lbs total, limited by 12 cubic feet.

The BoH is superior in every way except weighing 10 lbs more. Now, you might have a backpack that you put the BoH in, so that would increase the total weight to 20 lbs, but for over three times the carrying capacity, that seems reasonable to me anyway.

Any explanation why the BoH is just uncommon while HHH is rare?

Have you seen any other magic items, of a similar nature to each other, where the rarity of one seems reversed compared to the other?

 

[Salthorae]

It's a legacy issue from previous editions that is retained in the fluff but not the mechanics.

In 3.5 the Bag of Holding (if it held more than a backpack) required a full-round action to retrieve a specific action. Whereas the Haversack required only a move action.

The 5e fluff retains that, talking about getting a specific item being on the top of the haversack when you go to get it, but the mechanics for both bags are copy/paste, each takes an action to retrieve something.

I have to think that is a design error/oversight that they either haven't noticed or don't care to correct at this point in the edition.

At my tables, a Haversack just requires a Bonus action to retrieve a specific item. That maintains the differentiation between the two and explains why a haversack is rare vs. uncommon for the bag of holding.

 

[DND_Reborn]

It's a legacy issue from previous editions that is retained in the fluff but not the mechanics.

In 3.5 the Bag of Holding (if it held more than a backpack) required a full-round action to retrieve a specific action. Whereas the Haversack required only a move action.

The 5e fluff retains that, talking about getting a specific item being on the top of the haversack when you go to get it, but the mechanics for both bags are copy/paste, each takes an action to retrieve something.

I have to think that is a design error/oversight that they either haven't noticed or don't care to correct at this point in the edition.

At my tables, a Haversack just requires a Bonus action to retrieve a specific item. That maintains the differentiation between the two and explains why a haversack is rare vs. uncommon for the bag of holding.

I figured that was the things since it does mention whatever you want from the haversack is on top. I thought making it a bonus action might be a good idea, so I am happy to hear that is what your table does. It would definitely work in making HHH more valuable.

I also thought of something along those lines. If you put the BoH inside a backpack or folded it up to fit into a pouch, you would have to interact with the item to pull out the BoH and also use an action to use the BoH itself.

In that since, it makes HHH more useful because most people aren't going to waste a hand carrying around a 15-lbs sack.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

I treat retrieving something from a haversack as your free item interaction--its as easy as drawing a weapon or picking something up.

For a bag of holding it's going to at least take an action in combat.

 

[aco175]

Can I break some from the OP and ask why even have a weight limit and not only a size limit of say 5 ft cubed, or 10ft for the backpack. Not sure how many people even track the gear and weight but I'm sure some do. My game mostly treats it for personal items and some extra food and gold but rarely does the weight come into play unless it is something extreme.

 

[Nebulous]

It's a legacy issue from previous editions that is retained in the fluff but not the mechanics.

In 3.5 the Bag of Holding (if it held more than a backpack) required a full-round action to retrieve a specific action. Whereas the Haversack required only a move action.

The 5e fluff retains that, talking about getting a specific item being on the top of the haversack when you go to get it, but the mechanics for both bags are copy/paste, each takes an action to retrieve something.

I have to think that is a design error/oversight that they either haven't noticed or don't care to correct at this point in the edition.

At my tables, a Haversack just requires a Bonus action to retrieve a specific item. That maintains the differentiation between the two and explains why a haversack is rare vs. uncommon for the bag of holding.

Good call. I would not have noticed any of that and forgot the 3e difference.