BOED Vow of Poverty: Keep it or Trash it?

[Calico_Jack73]

In perusing some of the discussion on this board it seems that the Vow of Poverty from the Book of Exalted Deeds has become something of a controversy. Personally I've seen people ask for permission to use it as players and then turn around and forbid it as DMs. Just out of curiosity I want to know where different people stand on the issue... hence this poll. Feel free to write up the reasoning behind your choice.

 

[CyberSpyder]

Keep it. It provides a somewhat interesting alternative to the "Load up with lots of magical gear" characters at the higher levels, and if you just use common sense as a GM (Riding an elderly donkey is probably fine. Strutting around in noble clothing probably isn't.) it isn't terribly difficult to arbitrate.

 

[Crothian]

Allow it.

It is abusible there is no question about that, but I trust my players and they have proved to me time and time again they don't want to abuse the system. So, things loike this I actually like for them to use to see how they deal with it. Personally, as a Player I really like the idea of having a character with this as well. THere are some great role playing ideas that this fits very well into.

 

[Calico_Jack73]

Allow it.

It is abusible there is no question about that, but I trust my players and they have proved to me time and time again they don't want to abuse the system. So, things loike this I actually like for them to use to see how they deal with it. Personally, as a Player I really like the idea of having a character with this as well. THere are some great role playing ideas that this fits very well into.

I voted for the "DM-Hate" choice. I think playing a character with a Vow of Poverty is fine and dandy but how quick would people be to choose that Vow if there weren't all the nifty advantages that it gives? I refuse to believe that most people would take it for "Role Playing Opportunities" if it didn't give all the neat abilities. I see it as more of a munchkin ability than anything else. What Monk wouldn't take it? Most magical items are redundant to a Monk anyway so boosting his/her abilities is the thing that makes most sense. Add to that the fact that the abilites can't be taken away like magic items can. Personally I'd love to have a player who showed up to the game after taking the Vow of Poverty only to find that I won't allow the abilities that go along with it and NOT change their mind but instead play their character as planned for the role-playing opportunity.

 

[sellars]

I'm playing a 10th lvl human monk who took the vow on his 1st level.

I must say, I LOVE the concept, really do! It leads to a lot of interesting situations.

In the group I play with I haven't noticed that I'm under or over powered, so for now it works out. I'm not really a min/max kind of guy (for instance, my monk has Str 10, so it isn't a mean damage machine), so I am definately not the one to playtest this feat . Other people probably get far *more* from it.

 

[sparxmith]

I'd vote yes on both counts.

I've played it as a player, and DM'ed it as DM. I love it. It is one of the most original ideas in gaming. I do NOT find it at all broken. Generally, the PC is more tough to kill, but is less effective in melee combat (and useless in ranged comabt). Furthermore, as a roleplaying tool, the VoP is phenomenal. It allows a character to be something more than just an average adventurer.

For those who say it's overpowered, I'd say check how much treasure you're handing out. If you're handing out less than the appropriate amount of magical gear, then yes the character would be overpowered vs. the rest of the group. IMC, I've had to supplement the vow because I hand out more treasure than standard (I actually use the Monty Cook idea of halving magic costs above level 6). I've increased the character's spell resistance by +10, because everyone else in the party just purchased Cloaks of Epic Spell Resistance (grants spell resistance 40). Even at epic levels, I think the vow is a wonderful thing.

Just my two sparx,

Sparxmith

 

[reanjr]

In perusing some of the discussion on this board it seems that the Vow of Poverty from the Book of Exalted Deeds has become something of a controversy. Personally I've seen people ask for permission to use it as players and then turn around and forbid it as DMs. Just out of curiosity I want to know where different people stand on the issue... hence this poll. Feel free to write up the reasoning behind your choice.

I voted for DM - Hate, but the only reason I really hate it is that I don't play with the standard level of magic in my campaign. The Vow of Poverty would be overpowering in the extreme if the rest of the party wasn't equipped to specs. I think there should be a suggested way of scaling the abilities to low-magic/high-magic, etc.

 

[CyberSpyder]

Personally I'd love to have a player who showed up to the game after taking the Vow of Poverty only to find that I won't allow the abilities that go along with it and NOT change their mind but instead play their character as planned for the role-playing opportunity.

And swiftly die? The reason those abilities exist is because the presence of high-powered magic items is implicit in the mechanics of the game. Without the magic items, and without something that would compensate for their lack, a character will be severely underpowered with respect to their level.

Not so much at first level, of course, but it becomes more and more severe the higher you go.

 

[CyberSpyder]

Huh. I just noticed the poll doesn't have an choice for liking it as both DM and player.

 

[sparxmith]

I voted for the "DM-Hate" choice. I think playing a character with a Vow of Poverty is fine and dandy but how quick would people be to choose that Vow if there weren't all the nifty advantages that it gives? I refuse to believe that most people would take it for "Role Playing Opportunities" if it didn't give all the neat abilities. I see it as more of a munchkin ability than anything else. What Monk wouldn't take it? Most magical items are redundant to a Monk anyway so boosting his/her abilities is the thing that makes most sense. Add to that the fact that the abilites can't be taken away like magic items can. Personally I'd love to have a player who showed up to the game after taking the Vow of Poverty only to find that I won't allow the abilities that go along with it and NOT change their mind but instead play their character as planned for the role-playing opportunity.

But why would an adventurer do this? A monk, for instance, would know that he's far behind in combat ability and would likely die because of that lack. I'm not saying that no one in the D&D universe wouldn't take a vow of poverty(triple negative = a single negative, sorry I couldn't write it better), but none of those would easily take to the life of adventurer. It's kinda like the village priest. He's not a Cleric in the D&D sense even though he's a priest of his religion. Because of this, he might aid the village in the event of a raid, but he's probably not going to go out and attempt to destroy the Hand of Vecna, or kill the Demi-lich who has the Staff of the Magi.

In my opinion, the vow is meaningless without the benefits. If I didn't allow something, say for instance the Frenzied berserker, and a character showed up with the class and he didn't change it but didn't use the class abilities, I'd pull him aside and say he's making a mistake. I simply wouldn't allow the character to exist under those circumstances because he wouldn't have survived to the level that the group's at.

I'm not a fan of RBDM'ing.

Just my two sparx that'll probably start a flame,

Sparxmith