PDA

View Full Version : Vow of Poverty



Josh the Aspie
2007-10-13, 04:03 PM
I was wondering how people feel vow of poverty stacks up as a feat, under the assumption that someone is taking it as a monk, rather than as a wizard or fighter or the like.

Yuki Akuma
2007-10-13, 04:04 PM
It's a rather weak feat. Never make the mistake that monks don't need magic items. They do. They need them just as much as the Fighter does.

What's a VoP monk going to do against, say, a Roc?

PlatinumJester
2007-10-13, 04:04 PM
I was wondering how people feel vow of poverty stacks up as a feat, under the assumption that someone is taking it as a monk, rather than as a wizard or fighter or the like.

It's better for a druid rather than a monk.

A monk needs magic items though nothing can stop the monk from sucking...ever.

Riffington
2007-10-13, 05:03 PM
In any campaign where it's a powerful feat, the DM will probably ban it.

Fax Celestis
2007-10-13, 05:08 PM
It's powerful for druids and for incarnum-based characters: the former because they don't need gear, the latter because they make gear with their class features.

ChaosDefender24
2007-10-13, 05:11 PM
Even with the monk, it's not so great, simply because you lose versatility. There are many items that monks can make good use of that supercede the VoP bonuses. As for most other classes, you can forget it. The VoP does a fairly good job of not completely hosing those who wish to do without, but it can't hold a candle to that many splatbooks of equipment.

Druids have wilding clasps.

Fax Celestis
2007-10-13, 05:18 PM
Druids have wilding clasps.

Certainly, druids are stronger with gear, but in all seriousness, they don't need it.

Gralamin
2007-10-13, 05:28 PM
Only things that can make themselves fly should ever seriously consider taking it.

Josh the Aspie
2007-10-13, 05:54 PM
Thanks for all the input guys. This actually really helps out a lot.

I do think it might be fun to play such a character, but I don't want to hose my group by doing so. I do like Incarnum, but I'm not sure that the two put together would be quite enough.

Fax Celestis
2007-10-13, 05:56 PM
Thanks for all the input guys. This actually really helps out a lot.

I do think it might be fun to play such a character, but I don't want to hose my group by doing so. I do like Incarnum, but I'm not sure that the two put together would be quite enough.

It works especially well with the Totemist or the Incarnate.

deadseashoals
2007-10-13, 05:59 PM
It should just be called "Druidic Vow".

Jarlax
2007-10-13, 06:02 PM
its a good feat if your roleplaying, it will keep you class more or less on par with the rest of the party while still allowing you to dedicate yourself to a life of simplicity.

as a feat to twink your PC it fails, the stuff you get from it can never compare with magical items at high levels.

Josh the Aspie
2007-10-13, 06:11 PM
I don't always care about Twinking my PC (though it's always a nice side effect) I just try to avoid nerfing my PCs, and with all of the character Ideas I have that can let me support my group more proficiently, I rarely feel like I'm missing out by not playing the ideas that don't let me do so as well.

And generally, if I'm going to do Incarnum, I'd rather dabble in it so that I can have the flavor of Incarnum (which is fun) without the relative Nerf that comes from dedicating your character to a dabbler's art.

Still, using incarnum on a monk or druid build that has taken vow of poverty (or a healer / priest who has) might be fun if I could find a game where that would fit the theme of the group.

Fax Celestis
2007-10-13, 06:16 PM
A VoP Azurin Incarnate/Cleric/Sapphire Hierarch would be pretty sweet, particularly if you take the Azurin Cleric sub levels.

Josh the Aspie
2007-10-13, 06:17 PM
Yaknow, I always get stuck playing the healer (as far as roles go), so I may as well add that to the list of concepts for healers I'm interested in playing.

triforcel
2007-10-13, 06:18 PM
Vow a poverty is a pretty good feet for classes that don't traditionally rely on equipment. For instance a rogue shouldn't take it because he won't have any tools to disable devices with. While most of the bonuses are things that are replicated by magic items, that's kind of the point. The bonuses are pretty much that 1) you don't have to keep track of buying, selling, and maintaining your equipment, 2) if your party should be relieved of their equipment, you're fine, 3) Most of your bonuses are Ex so you keep them in a antimagic field, 4) you get 11 bonus exalted feats if you start with it at level 1, and feats can't be replicated that easily.

Josh the Aspie
2007-10-13, 06:31 PM
And for people that can cover the problems of lacking certain utility abilities, such as a monk with an incarnum ability allowing them to fly, or an incarnum class, it might be a valid choice.

SilverClawShift
2007-10-13, 06:44 PM
Actually, wouldn't a vow of poverty be decent for a soulknife? All things considered. A soulknife is annoyingly weak of course, but they get a magic weapon that's really just a part of their mind, no fair interpretation would consider it a 'possession'. So you get some good stuff for free, including a customizeable magical weapon. All your share of the loot can go towards boosting the party, who can still toss you potions and buff you with magic (and can do so more freely because they have more resources).

Mind you, when i say "Would be good for a soulknife" I mean in the way amputation is good as an emergency medical proceedure, but it seems to be better than for a lot of other cases.

*edit*

Actually, numbers aside, I like that character concept. I might give it a try sometime. The soulknife who cares more about their mindblade than anything else in the world.

Edea
2007-10-13, 07:36 PM
Vow of Poverty seems to be absolutely awful, because from what little I understand of it, there is the very significant probability that you will lose its benefit irrevocably and be screwed out of two feat slots. You are one suggestion away from being forked in the ass.

martyboy74
2007-10-13, 07:41 PM
Not only do you lose the two feat slots and the bonuses, you also don't have any money at all. Sucks to be you, I guess.

Douglas
2007-10-13, 08:29 PM
All your share of the loot can go towards boosting the party
Nope. The vow specifically requires that you take your share of the loot and donate it to charity.

Josh the Aspie
2007-10-13, 08:49 PM
Hmmm. And it doesn't say anything about 'willingly' breaking the vow. Just... breaking the vow. Good point.

Starbuck_II
2007-10-13, 09:53 PM
Vow a poverty is a pretty good feet for classes that don't traditionally rely on equipment. For instance a rogue shouldn't take it because he won't have any tools to disable devices with. While most of the bonuses are things that are replicated by magic items, that's kind of the point. The bonuses are pretty much that 1) you don't have to keep track of buying, selling, and maintaining your equipment, 2) if your party should be relieved of their equipment, you're fine, 3) Most of your bonuses are Ex so you keep them in a antimagic field, 4) you get 11 bonus exalted feats if you start with it at level 1, and feats can't be replicated that easily.

Um, the Vow itelf is supernatural so you lose the benefits in antimagic fields. All exalted feats are.
Thus, you lose benefit of all the bonus feats as well.

triforcel
2007-10-13, 11:43 PM
Um, the Vow itelf is supernatural so you lose the benefits in antimagic fields. All exalted feats are.
Thus, you lose benefit of all the bonus feats as well.

Would you mind pointing out where it says that a feat is a supernatural ability? I've never seen anything like that and I just looked over the chapter on feats in the BoED too.

As for being suggested into breaking the vow, you would have to word it in a way that would sound reasonable to the character. And if you're really that worried you can take the Vow of Obedience feat to give you a +4 to the save on top of the resistance bonus you get starting at level 7.

triforcel
2007-10-13, 11:53 PM
Grrr. Messed up and posted twice by accident.

Jack Mann
2007-10-14, 12:20 AM
Page 39 of the Book of Exalted Deeds. "These feats are supernatural in nature (rather than extraordinary as most feats are)."

triforcel
2007-10-14, 12:41 AM
Well that is weird, and it doesn't make much sense either. Why would a feat be something granted by a higher power? And why would a supernatural trait grant you an extraordinary bonus?

Reel On, Love
2007-10-14, 12:57 AM
Actually, wouldn't a vow of poverty be decent for a soulknife? All things considered. A soulknife is annoyingly weak of course, but they get a magic weapon that's really just a part of their mind, no fair interpretation would consider it a 'possession'. So you get some good stuff for free, including a customizeable magical weapon. All your share of the loot can go towards boosting the party, who can still toss you potions and buff you with magic (and can do so more freely because they have more resources).

Mind you, when i say "Would be good for a soulknife" I mean in the way amputation is good as an emergency medical proceedure, but it seems to be better than for a lot of other cases.

*edit*

Actually, numbers aside, I like that character concept. I might give it a try sometime. The soulknife who cares more about their mindblade than anything else in the world.

That would be absolutely terrible. Essentially all the Soulknife gets to make up for his suckitude is a magic weapon.
And the Exalted enhancement bonus to attacks overlaps with half of that. So VoP is even worse than it usually is, and the Soulknife is even worse than he usually is.

enderrocksonall
2007-10-14, 01:57 AM
I once made a VoP ninja 1/warlock 2/ sorc 3. I even nerfed him a bit after the DM looked at him and was still able to essentially solo a Beholder. Not the 6HD baby beholder, one of the full grown big daddies. The DM actually told me that he was trying to kill my character because he thought it was still too powerful.

True, my character had a hell of a time doing anything useful offensively, but his saves were insanely high for his level, his AC was in the low 30's without breaking a sweat, and he had something like 10 DR/cold iron.

If you can tailor a build to use the abilities granted by the feat, you can be almost entirely unkillable.

Dont even try to go for a gestalt with VoP. Then you could be more powerful than some of the gods by level 12.

Reel On, Love
2007-10-14, 01:59 AM
That sounds like a pretty useless character, Ender. You can't *do* anything. A beholder could just look at you four times a round and in a few rounds you'd be dead.

enderrocksonall
2007-10-14, 02:09 AM
Um, the Vow itelf is supernatural so you lose the benefits in antimagic fields. All exalted feats are.
Thus, you lose benefit of all the bonus feats as well.


Why would you lose the Ex abilities from being in an antimagic field?

They are still Ex abilities, whether you got them through a Su source or not right?

So if I use a miracle spell to get a +1 enhancement bonus to my strength, permanently!!, it disapears when I go into an anti-magic zone?

Armads
2007-10-14, 02:18 AM
The benefits are an Su ability.

enderrocksonall
2007-10-14, 02:19 AM
That sounds like a pretty useless character, Ender. You can't *do* anything. A beholder could just look at you four times a round and in a few rounds you'd be dead.

The beholder looked at me 12 times in three rounds. As a matter of fact that was my big job in the group. The Target. The unspoken 5th necessary party member.

I was playing in a larger group and they had all the other roles filled like twice over, so I played the MOST annoying character I could. The group loved it, they were always cracking up at how I could live through the beholder, but when my buddy pushed me into a river I nearly died.

In all truthfulness, yah, I ended up being almost useless, but the plan was that when I finally caught up to the rest of the party's level, I would be able to fulfill a few different roles. Kind of the jack of all trades thing, but with abilities instead of skills. I was just having fun.

Hadrian_Emrys
2007-10-14, 02:25 AM
Gestalt Druid/Monk (plus whatever PrCs suit your fancy along those lines) in an underground game devoid of AMFs seems to be the only place where VoP is worth the while.

kamikasei
2007-10-14, 02:30 AM
The beholder looked at me 12 times in three rounds. As a matter of fact that was my big job in the group. The Target. The unspoken 5th necessary party member.

So when you say you "essentially solo[ed] a Beholder", what you mean is that a Beholder inexplicably focused all its attention on your high-save character while the other players murdered it?

All power to you if you were having fun with the character, but it's not a good argument for the power of VoP.

Yuki Akuma
2007-10-14, 06:17 AM
Why would you lose the Ex abilities from being in an antimagic field?

They are still Ex abilities, whether you got them through a Su source or not right?

So if I use a miracle spell to get a +1 enhancement bonus to my strength, permanently!!, it disapears when I go into an anti-magic zone?

The feat is a Supernatural ability. Even if it grants you Extraordinary abilities, if the feat doesn't work you don't have them. Exalted feats are not something you train to do; they're gifts from supernatural creatures.

And yes. If you step into an antimagic field with an Inherent bonus to an ability score, the bonus is supressed until you leave the antimagic zone. Because the bonus is magical.

Josh the Aspie
2007-10-14, 01:21 PM
It is my impression that an Inherent bonus is a bonus that is 'inherent' to what you now are, and is non-magical in nature, even if it was origonally granted by a magical source... similar to how your HP healed by the cure x wounds spell doesn't go away if you step into an anti-magic zone.

kamikasei
2007-10-14, 01:38 PM
From the description of Wish: "Inherent bonuses are instantaneous, so they cannot be dispelled." The description of Antimagic Field says "The spell has no effect on golems and other constructs that are imbued with magic during their creation process and are thereafter self-supporting." One would expect that the inherent bonus from a wish, tome or feat would be less magical and suppressible than the magics animating a golem.

Josh the Aspie
2007-10-14, 01:41 PM
I think anything granted by an instantaneous magical effect becomes an integral part of the character. Just because the inherent bonus makes him stronger doesn't mean there's magic continually hanging out in his muscles, he might just be more muscular, or his muscles might work with greater efficiency due to having their -inherent- nature changed.

Zincorium
2007-10-14, 01:42 PM
I remember making a fist of the forest/primeval/warshaper build that used VoP, shapechanging into a dire bat and then smashing things in the face with it's wings (unarmed strikes). It wasn't batman-wizard impressive, and used some admittedly overpowered prestige classes, but it avoided the majority of pitfalls.

enderrocksonall
2007-10-14, 06:54 PM
[QUOTE=kamikasei;3344647]So when you say you "essentially solo[ed] a Beholder", what you mean is that a Beholder inexplicably focused all its attention on your high-save character while the other players murdered it?
QUOTE]

I would consider someone to have practically solo'ed a creature if they took all the attacks of that creature for several rounds in a row.

Think of it as a fight between a guy with a sword and an unarmed man.
The guy with the sword swings wildly at the unarmed man several times, and each time the unarmed man twists and dodges the sword with great skill, landing blows of his own on the swordsman that do little real damage.

A constable comes up behind the swordsman and stabs him in the back while his attention is centered on the unarmed man.

If you look at the situation in that light, which is a pretty accurate analogy, then the unrmed man was clearly the victor in the duel, the constable merely expidited the matter.

Not saying that this is due to the feat, but it certainly helped. The anecdote was meant to show that, as always, a feat's general power is directly related to the build it is incorporated into.

kamikasei
2007-10-14, 07:04 PM
So when you say you "essentially solo[ed] a Beholder", what you mean is that a Beholder inexplicably focused all its attention on your high-save character while the other players murdered it?

I would consider someone to have practically solo'ed a creature if they took all the attacks of that creature for several rounds in a row.

Think of it as a fight between a guy with a sword and an unarmed man.
The guy with the sword swings wildly at the unarmed man several times, and each time the unarmed man twists and dodges the sword with great skill, landing blows of his own on the swordsman that do little real damage.

A constable comes up behind the swordsman and stabs him in the back while his attention is centered on the unarmed man.

If you look at the situation in that light, which is a pretty accurate analogy, then the unrmed man was clearly the victor in the duel, the constable merely expidited the matter.

I can't agree. If I'm understanding the scenario you described, your character was one of a party, and you personally couldn't actually hurt the beholder meaningfully. So your party as a group took it down, while your role was to draw its attacks and survive them. Aside from the fact that I see no good reason for the beholder to bother attacking you if a) you can't hurt it, while your friends can and are, and b) it can't meaningfully hurt you, while presumably it could have made mincemeat of the rest of the party if it tried - that does not add up to soloing. Your hypothetical swordfight might come closer to it, if you treat constables and such NPCs as part of the environment, like tricking an opponent who can't hit you into backing off the edge of a cliff, but if the constable is replaced with "your friend the rogue" it's, again, not soloing.

Anyway, my point is less about what constitutes soloing and more that, while VoP may have made you very hard for a higher-CR monster to kill, it didn't make you effectively capable of taking it on. For the beholder to have focused on you while your party were beating on it makes it some kind of stupid. That doesn't say much of anything about the value of the feat.

Arbitrarity
2007-10-14, 07:12 PM
[QUOTE=kamikasei;3344647]So when you say you "essentially solo[ed] a Beholder", what you mean is that a Beholder inexplicably focused all its attention on your high-save character while the other players murdered it?
QUOTE]

I would consider someone to have practically solo'ed a creature if they took all the attacks of that creature for several rounds in a row.

Think of it as a fight between a guy with a sword and an unarmed man.
The guy with the sword swings wildly at the unarmed man several times, and each time the unarmed man twists and dodges the sword with great skill, landing blows of his own on the swordsman that do little real damage.

A constable comes up behind the swordsman and stabs him in the back while his attention is centered on the unarmed man.

If you look at the situation in that light, which is a pretty accurate analogy, then the unrmed man was clearly the victor in the duel, the constable merely expidited the matter.

Not saying that this is due to the feat, but it certainly helped. The anecdote was meant to show that, as always, a feat's general power is directly related to the build it is incorporated into.

Better comparison: A guy with a sword swings it at an unarmed guy, who dodges, and for attacks, taps the sword guy. A constable comes up behind the sword guy, who, owing to the logic that the unarmed guy doesn't hurt him, and nothing is forcing him to attack the unarmed guy, slices the constable in two. And the next one. And the other 3. And that guy, too. Then, he turns his attention to the tapper, and after a while, slices off the guy's head.

Smart play of mobs is important. If you can't harm it, and it doesn't harm you, don't bother.

Laesin
2007-10-14, 09:01 PM
A pretty good build that requires a little house ruling. (Specifically removing an alignment restriction) is a gestalt Monk//Druid with shapeshifting variant. Equipment doesn't work in animal form but VoPs bonuses do. And I believe that a monks unarmed damage can still be used in animal form.

Josh the Aspie
2007-10-14, 11:26 PM
A pretty good build that requires a little house ruling. (Specifically removing an alignment restriction) is a gestalt Monk//Druid with shapeshifting variant. Equipment doesn't work in animal form but VoPs bonuses do. And I believe that a monks unarmed damage can still be used in animal form.

Can't you do the gestalt as an LN character without the ruling?

kamikasei
2007-10-14, 11:43 PM
Can't you do the gestalt as an LN character without the ruling?

An LN Exalted character?

Josh the Aspie
2007-10-14, 11:59 PM
An LN Exalted character?

*Twitch* Very good point. My Error. Sorry about that. :P

Indon
2007-10-15, 04:37 PM
As already noted, it's good with Incarnum. Take Incarnum feats to give yourself enough Essentia to bind all of your Chakra positions, and you're just plain _awesome_.

TimeWizard
2007-10-15, 05:50 PM
Hold up a second, VoP isn't that bad. People just don't realize the primary uses of it. A major use is for RP, which isn't something to scoff at in DnD. Another major use for it, that is sometimes over-looked, is that you get eleven exalted bonus feats. Eleven. The earlier you take Nymph's Kiss the better, bonus skill point every level. The third and arguably most powerful use of VoP is that it (and the 11 bonus feats) enable you to get some serious diplomancy bonuses. Vow of Peace (VoPc) is a whole new can of worms, but I for one support it. The last, and definetly most important thing to remember is this:

Vow of Poverty is about sacrifice. It is not a tool to powergame, but rather something for players who want characters that are touched by the divine, untainted by the material world. Anyone who tells you that you have a useless character and are a weight to the party should remember that Dungeons and Dragons is a game whose primary purpose is for people to get together and have fun. Any character is a valuable character, no exceptions.

CASTLEMIKE
2007-10-16, 12:59 AM
I was wondering how people feel vow of poverty stacks up as a feat, under the assumption that someone is taking it as a monk, rather than as a wizard or fighter or the like.


It should work okay as your Monk should be a part of a team regarding things like Flying as your VoP Monk can still drink a potion of Flying from a team mate or have the spell cast on him. Unless you are talking high levels most PCs can't fly.

The most common abuse I see is the party taking the VoP character's share of treasure with the VoP PC because he is not taking a "Share" and is just accompanying the other PCs for room and board.

It probably works best for Druids, Monks and Favored Souls with religious organization ties in campaign and PCs who pursue the Saint path.

P.S. Edit: Don'f forget the plain monk class can be improved quite a bit with a few level dips or PRCing. Things like the SRD Psionic Fist gives the PC some power options 71 PP and 10 Known powers of first to fifth level. The OE Tattooed Monk tattoos. Both PRCs grant specials that are basically unaffected by the VoP. There are a few others.

Jack Mann
2007-10-16, 01:25 AM
Hold up a second, VoP isn't that bad. People just don't realize the primary uses of it. A major use is for RP, which isn't something to scoff at in DnD. Another major use for it, that is sometimes over-looked, is that you get eleven exalted bonus feats. Eleven. The earlier you take Nymph's Kiss the better, bonus skill point every level. The third and arguably most powerful use of VoP is that it (and the 11 bonus feats) enable you to get some serious diplomancy bonuses. Vow of Peace (VoPc) is a whole new can of worms, but I for one support it. The last, and definetly most important thing to remember is this:

Vow of Poverty is about sacrifice. It is not a tool to powergame, but rather something for players who want characters that are touched by the divine, untainted by the material world. Anyone who tells you that you have a useless character and are a weight to the party should remember that Dungeons and Dragons is a game whose primary purpose is for people to get together and have fun. Any character is a valuable character, no exceptions.

Rule Number One of flavor: You shouldn't have to pay for it. This is why the inferiority of sword-and-board is a bad thing. Someone who wants to play a sword-and-board fighter shouldn't have to suck to play the character he wants. Similarly, someone who wants to play an ascetic shouldn't need to gimp himself to do so.

For the exalted feats, you have to look at which ones your monk can actually qualify for and which will actually help him. Seriously. The math has been run. For monk, at least, vow of poverty not only isn't useful, it actually hurts you.

Ultimately, most classes (such as monk) just plain do better with normal equipment than with the feat. Yes, the feat is about sacrifice, but you're already supposed to be sacrificing by playing an exalted character (and if you play strictly by the rules in BoED, this is more than hard enough). The feat is supposed to be the reward, the benefit of living the stringent life. Instead, it's effectively a punishment. "Not only do you need to keep to this arbitrarily harsh lifestyle, but you're also going to be weaker than your unrestricted brethren." It's also rather difficult to customize, since it puts you into such a narrow choice of abilities. This can make it difficult too work as part of the group.

And yes, just about any character can be useful. But that doesn't mean they're necessarily fun to have around. Someone playing a commoner, for example, can still carry items. But that doesn't change the fact that he can't do much to help in combat, and lowers the amount of XP for the other players without significantly helping them overcome challenges.

Not every character has to be ultra-optimized, but in most games, characters should be able to pull their weight. A fighter should be able to damage enemies. A wizard should be able to cast spells that aid the party. A cleric should be able to fight and use a wand of cure light wounds. A rogue should be able to find traps. A monk already has difficulty contributing to the party. He doesn't need to be self-nerfed.

the_tick_rules
2007-10-16, 01:29 AM
well the vow has uses in lower-magic campaigns and where your parties are cut off from economics being somewhere isolated as adventuring parties have a tendency to be.

Jack Mann
2007-10-16, 01:33 AM
well the vow has uses in lower-magic campaigns and where your parties are cut off from economics being somewhere isolated as adventuring parties have a tendency to be.

Yes, but in theory, Vow of Poverty is balanced for bog-standard campaigns following the treasure rules the game was designed around.

Telonius
2007-10-16, 10:39 AM
A big problem with Vow of Poverty is the bonus feats. Yes, you get eleven of them. But after you get the first few really decent ones, there's not much left, particularly if you go in as a Monk. When you get up to around level 12 or so, your choices are pretty limiting. Do I want to afflict anything I touch with Golden Ice (except by then they'll only fail on a 1), or do I want to glow in the dark? (No, really. There's seriously an exalted feat that makes you glow in the dark. Nimbus of Light). There are more, and more useful, feats available for an exalted caster.

Indon
2007-10-16, 10:48 AM
There are more, and more useful, feats available for an exalted caster.

That doesn't mean the caster won't still run out, though; just later.

There just aren't that many Exalted feats.

tainsouvra
2007-10-16, 12:34 PM
do I want to glow in the dark? (No, really. There's seriously an exalted feat that makes you glow in the dark. Nimbus of Light). So far, this is the only visible exalted feat I've had in a game. We added it into a character in a non-exalted campaign because I really couldn't find much harm in it, and it fit the character :smallsmile: