Vow of Poverty

[atomn]

Hi all,
what do you think of the Vow of Poverty?

Do you think a VoP character is overpowered, underpowered or on par with a character of the same class who can own items and magic items?

Does your answer to the above change if you consider different classes? (i.e., A VoP monk seems much better than a non-VoP monk. But where would a VoP cleric fall out when compared to a non-VoP cleric?)

Thanks!

 

[Artoomis]

I consider it roughly on par. Stricly from a power perspective, a character with Vow of Poverty is about equal to one without, but with considerably less flexibility.

Also, it's not for every character class. Some don't work very well with VoP at all.

I think it's a great concept that should be extended to non-exalted characters.

 

[atomn]

I think it's a great concept that should be extended to non-exalted characters.

What is the difference between an exalted and non-exalted character?

 

[Nonlethal Force]

An exalted character seeks good above all else. By a rules definition, an exalted character is any character that implements a feat, PrC, etc out of the Book of Exalted Deeds. If you have even one Exalted feat, you are an exalted character. In most games losing your exalted status through doing non-good acts makes you lose the exalted feats/PrCs until you atone - just like a paladin. This last bit isn't true for all games, though.

As far as the VoP, I consider it a bit weak. The ability bonuses you receive through the template are not on par with what a person of an equivalent level could receive through magic items. The extra feats are alright, but typically there aren't enough exalted feats to satisfy characters who take it from the beginning so after a few levels many players are taking feats that their character will likely hardly ever use.

The advantage, however, is that the bonuses gained by the class work in anti-magic fields and cannot be taken away unless the VoP is broken. So, I think it should be a bit underpowered to make up for the fact that it cannot be suppressed as easily.

All in all, I like the feature. It makes for a good character in the right group. If taken with the right class (druid or monk, for example) it can be fairly powerful. If taken with an odd class it can still work, but not as naturally.

As a DM, I would love to DM a game of all VoP players. It would all but eliminate the need to spend time coming up with treasure. Sure, I would still give treasure so that the party could spread the wealth to those who don't have it. But it is alot easier to generate a bunch of gemstones that items and stuff!

 

[javcs]

It'd also be really .. unusual - no wizard (no spellbooks allowed, unless it's recieved errata), non-masterwork simple weapons only, no armor, no divine foci (unless it's recieved errata), no thieve's tools, no rope, it goes on and on.
Monks and sorcerers take the least penalty, warlocks are screwed (they're magic item people) and not screwed at the same time, anybody who needs a divine focus or spellbook is shafted (without errata or houseruling), rogues have trouble picking locks and disabling traps, some PRCs are flat useless - anything that requires a masterwork and/or non-simple weapon, equipment heavy classes take extreme punishment, druids take reduced penalties as well, it goes on and on.

It'd be a weird, but fun, campaign.

 

[kayn99]

I think The power level of VoP varies depending on the campiagn that you are playing in. Right now, I am in a Very low powered Campaign in which the VoP would be huge advantage to almost any character. Over all it is important for the DM to fully understand it and see how it fits into his world and even change it up if needs to be.

Kayn

 

[irdeggman]

I think that VoP is fine as written.

The only problem is in the application. I have found that people tend to ignore the RP restrictions invoked by VoP and look for work arounds instead of embracing it as what it was meant to be - a RP driven restriction that grants benefits accordingly.

Too many "party's" tend to use it as means of gaining more "booty" for the other PCs (which is specifically forbidden).

IMO it requires a lot of dedication by the DM and player to make it work the way it was intended.

 

[atomn]

...no divine foci (unless it's recieved errata)...

The SRD describes a Divine Focus as: "The divine focus for a cleric or a paladin is a holy symbol appropriate to the character’s faith."

Could the character have a tattoo of the symbol as his divine focus?

 

[atomn]

I think that VoP is fine as written.

The only problem is in the application. I have found that people tend to ignore the RP restrictions invoked by VoP and look for work arounds instead of embracing it as what it was meant to be - a RP driven restriction that grants benefits accordingly.

Too many "party's" tend to use it as means of gaining more "booty" for the other PCs (which is specifically forbidden).

IMO it requires a lot of dedication by the DM and player to make it work the way it was intended.

Apart from the booty divvying, are there any other RP restrictions that spring to mind as being ignored/worked around?

 

[ThirdWizard]

I see it as slightly underpowered.

Most of it seems to be along the lines of adding pluses. That's fine, and it makes up for not having a lot of gear, but it doesn't make up for things like potions of fly or a cloak of the monteback, or slippers of climbing, or potions of cure, or the myriad of things that allow PCs at high levels to interact with more complex environments. The VoP PC will be heavily dependant on the party spellcasters for any of those miscellaneous things, and thus will be a drain where normally there would not be one. I see this as a very big drawback, though YMMV.