BoED -- Vow of Poverty

[CalrinAlshaw]

Hey Pen, if people aren't allowed to take handouts, why, when it discusses expensive material components, is the Ascetic allowed to beg for it when the only benefit is to the party, yet he couldn't ride a boat when a party member paid for his travel if the world depended on it? I think your logic is a bit broken.

Calrin Alshaw

 

[Lord Pendragon]

Hey Pen, if people aren't allowed to take handouts, why, when it discusses expensive material components, is the Ascetic allowed to beg for it when the only benefit is to the party, yet he couldn't ride a boat when a party member paid for his travel if the world depended on it? I think your logic is a bit broken.

Calrin Alshaw

You're welcome to feel that way.

Pax, you've decided to become abrasive and unfriendly, so I've decided not to continue discussing this with you. I disagree with you, and I'm leaving it at that.

 

[DM_Matt]

BTW, the text does list riding on your companion's ebony fly as allowed, so I guess this extents to riding on someone else's horse, too, as long as there is a need for it, and it is not only done out of convenience, because that would be violating the spirit of the vow.

Bye
Thanee

You are also overlooking the fact that it says that VoP spellcasters can beg expensive spell component from the party, since the party will usually benefit collectively from the casting of his spells to accomplish their goal. It certainly seems that VoP is not meant to be overly restrictive about others providing for you. Tf you can get someone else to get you material components worth hundreds or even thousands of gp for the convenience of the group, surely you can let someone pay your toll/boat fare/inn etc.

 

[Pax]

DM Matt, precisely. I'd require "exchange of value for value" for long-term "standing arrangements" (for example, "look after my warhorse, my mount and two remounts, and both packhorses - see to it they're watered, fed, and in good health - and you can ride one of the remounts while we travel, plus have some space in my tent or inn room to sleep in" - owning character gets a free "stableboy"-esque benefit, ascetic works for his riding priveleges).

For once-off or infrequent assistance, heck, the principle of the Vow is to encourage unhesitating, unrestrained, as-constant-as-possible generousity ... not to discourage it!

Pax, you've decided to become abrasive and unfriendly, so I've decided not to continue discussing this with you. I disagree with you, and I'm leaving it at that.

Translation: I've run out of ways to cloak my spurious arguments in the semblance of logic, so I quit.

Of course I've become abrasive and unfriendly; you as much as called me a cheating bastard whose desire is to circumvent the restrictions of hte Vow ... and you expected aught else from me?! FFS.

And there's also Thanee's pointing out the ebony fly issue; CalrinAlshaw's and DM Matt's reminder of the begging for expensive material components bit.

Just because you take the Vow of Poverty, does not and should not mean youmust refuse the unstinting charity of others - if someone gives you a bag of coin, accept it ... and as you walk down the street in the next city, buy bread and cheese for the beggars as you go; as you pass that aging widow's rundown farmhouse along the country road, leave her enough coin to get her roof repaired, or even use it to arrange for a good apprenticeship for her only son; IOW, doogood works with it, with no expectation of benefit for yourself except the simple pleasure of knowing you've done good things for people who needed the help.

Barring all else, stop by a temple or soup kitchen or whatever, and hand the bag of coin over to them.

Meanwhile, if adventuring - delving into dusty, alread-defiled tombs to root out the evil undead creatures that have infested them ... dispersing bandit camps ... slaying terrible, maiden-devouring evil dragons ... storming the remote strongholds of foul wizards and demons - if adventuring, with a group, gives you MORE ability to demonstrate GREATER charity by giving away MORE valuable treasures, goods, and such ... to do MORE good in teh world by giving ever more "treasure" away, and that group insists you ride one of their horses when travelling, because they count you as a friend ... or bevcause they want to make better time ... or simply because they dislike craning their necks down to TALK to you while travelling ...

... get on the damned horse, already. After all, you took a vow of POVERTY, not a vow of SORE FEET. Feh.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

Translation: I've run out of ways to cloak my spurious arguments in the semblance of logic, so I quit.

Pax, if I'd meant that, I would have said it. Don't make this personal.

 

[Pax]

Hey, you're the one that insisted that I (among others) were:

[...] trying to get around a restriction [...]

What people feel they can get away with without technically breaking the Vow.

[...] trying to get around his vow [...]

If they keep trying to find ways to circumvent it, then they're looking for loopholes.

... and also giving a hearty "well said" to Coredump's:

Using a technicality to 'get away' with something [...]

And all that basically amounts to accusing those arguing the other side of the issue (including, of course,myself) as cheaters, whose goal is to break the rules by circumventing, with ill intent, a restriction of the Vow of Poverty.

Mind you, where I'm from, "them's fighting words" among gamers, Pendragon ...

I mean, god forbid someone might be simply trying to find out where the line is, without intending to subsequently cheat their way across it. FFS.

 

[Particle_Man]

For what it is worth, my DM is being generous, and letting my monk, who is devoted to Pelor and has VoP, get a wooden holy symbol when he takes a level of Cleric (Going for Sacred Fist). I thought that was awfully nice of him, since I was prepared to do without turning undead/divine feats that use positive energy, as well as those spells that require holy symbols as divine focuses. Although against the letter of the rules, I think it would fit the spirit of exalted characters to let them have a holy symbol of the very god they swore their VoP in the name of.

Anyhow, a lot of these issues don't come up for higher level VoP guys. They can sleep outdoors (Endure Elements is on all the time) they don't need to buy or beg for food (they don't need food or water, eventually).

As to the horse deal, why can't the VoP just ride on the same horse as someone else (like 2 people on a motorcycle)?

Another qu. If a VoP with Leadership has a Cohort, can the Cohort keep stuff? Or is the Cohort bound by the same VoP? What if the Cohort is a mount (solving 2 problems there)..

 

[DonaldRumsfeldsTofu]

Excuse the crass nature of this statement, but it's just a ing mule.

The party member has a close bond with the mule. It's a mule. He's ridden the mule all his life. It's a mule. Befriending a mule doesn't conflict with the ethics of voulentary destitution. It's a mule. It gives the character depth, especially if it's roleplayed well. (as an insane begger who's only friend is a mule) And did I mention that it's just a mule?

That's why I hate using rules to handle something that should be role-playing based.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

You know, in spite of the fact that I believe your attitude was uncalled for, I must admit that the idea that you might feel I was calling you a cheater did not occur to me. It was my understanding that we were, as DMs, discussing how we'd rule on the matter of the VoP. And I asserted, and still believe, that if a player were to continue to debate the subject along certain lines, he'd be trying to find a loophole.

But when I say "get around the spirit of the VoP" or "trying to find a loophole" my inference is meant to indicate that I believe such logic falls into the realm of ruleslawyering. Searching for a technicality, as it were. There was no mention of cheating, because I don't consider ruleslawyering to be cheating.

If you felt that I was calling you a cheater for disagreeing with me, I apologize. I would never stand for someone calling me a cheater, and never meant to do so to you.

And with that said, despite misunderstandings, our interpretations of the VoP are decidedly different, so I think we've exhausted the topic between the two of us.

 

[chris7476]

That's why I hate using rules to handle something that should be role-playing based.

I agree. You know something's wrong when there is a two-page discussion on whether or not a character could still have a mule. Please. If this took up this much time in my game, it would be dropped in a second. VoP is lame.