Vop vs spell casting materials

[Dimwhit]

So, then, what about the 15gp it costs to buy a blank spellbook?

Or is that also "not intrinsic value"?

What about the 1sp for the peasant's outfit? Or the 2gp for the dagger? Or the 5gp for the spell component pouch? Nothing says a VoP character can't have anything of any value whatsoever.


I don't think it's unreasonable to allow a VoP Wizard to have a simple spellbook so that he/she can perform the basic function of the class. As a DM, I would allow that. I never said it was anything other than my call as a DM. Makes perfect sense, it seems to fall within my perception of the spirit of the concept, and I don't think it would cause any problems.

 

[fafhrd]

I don't think it's unreasonable to allow a VoP Wizard to have a simple spellbook so that he/she can perform the basic function of the class. As a DM, I would allow that. I never said it was anything other than my call as a DM. Makes perfect sense, it seems to fall within my perception of the spirit of the concept, and I don't think it would cause any problems.

Would you allow a fighter with VoP to have heavy armor or even a greatsword for that matter?

 

[Dimwhit]

Would you allow a fighter with VoP to have heavy armor or even a greatsword for that matter?

No. And it's not even close to the same thing, to answer the follow-up.

 

[Infiniti2000]

No. And it's not even close to the same thing, to answer the follow-up.

Yeah, 'cause fighters have a lot of combat prowess without any weapons.

 

[Dimwhit]

Yeah, 'cause fighters have a lot of combat prowess without any weapons.

Hey, no being funny here. We're trying to have an arguement. (Though I have no idea why.)

A VoP fighter could be fun. I might try that. Make him a brawler. No weapons at all. Could be fun in a city campaign.

 

[Moon-Lancer]

I think a spell book for a wizard is ok. WHY? because its a class feature. Its the essence of the caster. They start with the spell book. A warrior doesn’t start with a sword. A wizard gets 2 free spells every level.

What wouldn’t be ok is if a wizard tried to scribe spells into his spell book that were not the 2 spells a level given by the class.

If a wizard lost his spell book that he got at level 1, he couldn’t fork up the gold to get a new one because that’s not apart of what the wizard was granted because of his class level.

The wizard is an exception because he starts with the spell book. he never bought it, he just has it.

Now the question of value comes into play

If vop was just about monetary value, how come they can use a crossbow? (that said, i don’t think cross bows should be allowed by a vop character)

If vop was just about intrinsic value, how come a druid’s holy symbol (holly 0g) is not ok? or a clerics wooden holy symbol? (that said I think they are ok, even though they are not listed)

What type of value is ok? What type of value not ok?

Its really up to the dm

Quite frankly vop comes out of the box with the requirement that house rules are added to it. But that is the way of mature games and exaltedness.

raw dosent apply well to boed and thus people think its a broken book. I like the book, and I play with it just fine. I don’t think raw is the end all and be all of d&d. Raw can break the rules just as easily as not reading the rules.

 

[melkorspawn]

Not trying to instigate, but I'm actually curious... does a VoP Paladin lose his horse?

 

[Dimwhit]

Not trying to instigate, but I'm actually curious... does a VoP Paladin lose his horse?

Another one not in the RAW (that I remember seeing). I'd allow it. For one, it's a class feature. For another, it's not really a possession. By the same token, would a Druid/Ranger lose an animal companion? Could a character with the leadership feat lose a cohort?

I'd allow it all. I agree with Moon-Lancer--VoP almost requires house-rules. It's not detailed enough, and I think that's on purpose. Many things are left for the group to decide.

 

[fafhrd]

I think a spell book for a wizard is ok. WHY? because its a class feature.

Heavy armor proficiency is a class feature for the fighter and yet its use would seem to be proscribed. Does a kensai keep his signature weapon regardless of what form it takes? Should a wizard be allowed to craft scrolls?

Its the essence of the caster. They start with the spell book. A warrior doesn’t start with a sword. A wizard gets 2 free spells every level.

What happens to those two free spells if a non-vowed wizard levels at a time when he doesn't have access to his spellbook? If it's so essential, should it then be impossible for any wizard to lose his spellbook?

If a wizard lost his spell book that he got at level 1, he couldn’t fork up the gold to get a new one because that’s not apart of what the wizard was granted because of his class level.

Ah, so then the spellbook isn't essential. The trials of adventuring are sufficient to deprive the mendicant wizard of that privilege but not so suboptimal feat selection.

 

[HeapThaumaturgist]

I just like to use the good ole "Let's Have Fun" rule.

Given all the crud you get with VoP, a fighter is still going to be able to do his job with a stick and a white robe.

It'd be utterly impossible for a wizard to function without a spell book. Heck, I'd go so far as to say it would be pretty crap to play a wizard if he couldn't scribe scrolls into his book and had to rely on the 2 per. I'd just role-play out his doing some "My name is Kane, I will help you." schtick and being offered knowledge and spells as freely given thanks in return for being unbelievably holy and giving. It might be fuzzy and I'm sure people will say: "What if he's offered a +5 Vorpal Sword as thanks!?!?!" but the darn thing is so open my interpretation is as valid as anything else.

It might make for a total mindbender for some folks, but I guess that's me. The game should be fun. If a player is going to use VoP to powergame my table until my eyes bleed, a spell-book isn't going to be my personal line of defense.

--fje