Paladin/Monk

[cignus_pfaccari]

VoP states exactly the items you are allowed to have and a holy symbol is not on the list.

Holy symbol, wooden 1 gp
Holy symbol, silver 25 gp

This are the costs of holy symbols from the SRD.

When you follow the VoP, you cannot have a holy symbol. Your GM may allow it, but most GM´s I know don´t.

I'm pretty sure that's an oversight on the part of the writers.

Seriously, eliminating cleric and paladin spellcasting entirely with VoP is rather silly.

(I also suspect this has been done to death)

Brad

 

[the Jester]

I have a homebrewed prc for multiclassed paladin/monks imc... I believe that I posted it here. Lemme see if I can find a link.

EDIT: Here you go.

 

[squee]

It might be overloading you on classes bit and I'm not 100% it works (I'm sure someone will let me know if I'm wrong) but Kensai seems like a good prestige class for a build like this...

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

1) A strong seconding of the suggestion of the Kensai PrCl.

2) Consider using a Spear: you're probably going to have a high dex, which means you'll have the option of having many AoOs if you take Combat Reflexes. You needn't worry about those who get within your reach since you have IUC with your monk levels.

If you use DCv1, you can couple that Longspear and Combat Reflexes with Weapon Focus and the feat Pole Fighter, which lets you treat a polearm as a monk weapon. All of a sudden, you'll be Flurrying with that spear.

3) Again, if you use the DCv1, you'll have access to 2 other potentially good monk feats: Unorthodox Flurry and Ring the Golden Bell. UF does what Pole Fighter does, but for any 1 handed or smaller weapon. RtGB has the highest KEWL factor, though- it lets you use your unarmed attacks at a range!

4) As for VoP, I'm one of the GMs who see the RAW interpretation of the feat as excluding a Holy Symbol as violating the feat's internal logic. What divine being would ask its most devoted servants to give up even a simple symbol of that being, one that costs less than most of the weapons an Ascetic PC can use, and especially since it potentially neuters the PC? (That's all I'll say on it unless someone else starts up a new VoP thread.)

 

[Kavok]

Just going to point out again that not all divine spells need a divine focus, just most of them.

 

[Sitara]

What in the blue blazes is DCv1??

 

[Darklone]

Snap Kick and the Feat that improves your unarmed damage (both Bo9S) are a good idea for this build. You might take a longsword twohanded for charges and standard actions and use it with flurry and Snap kick for many many attacks if you can use full attack actions.

 

[Aus_Snow]

What in the blue blazes is DCv1??

Dragon Compendium, Volume 1. It's a hardcover published by Paizo, basically a collection of rules from Dragon magazine (R.I.P.), for 3e.

 

[irdeggman]

I'm pretty sure that's an oversight on the part of the writers.

Seriously, eliminating cleric and paladin spellcasting entirely with VoP is rather silly.

(I also suspect this has been done to death)

Brad

Well it has been pointed out in Rules of the Game and Sage Advice that the rules specifically do not allow a divine focus, nor do they allow a spell book.

So I think regardless of whether or not it is an oversight (note that it has not been erratad, so it would appear that it is not as glaring as you might insist) it is still against the rules as written.

 

[szilard]

So I think regardless of whether or not it is an oversight (note that it has not been erratad, so it would appear that it is not as glaring as you might insist) it is still against the rules as written.

...and is commonly enough house-ruled that talking about both options is justified.

-Stuart