Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Pax" data-source="post: 1671361" data-attributes="member: 6875">Not true; you're assuming ill intent on people's part, without considering that INSTEAD of seeing "how much can I get away with", the question might be "how restricted am I, REALLY?".  IOW, you might just be looking at this from the opposite direction from everyone else.  There's nothing cheating about asking "can I do this, despite X", or even "how can I do this, despite X".  Legally and morally, there is precious little difference between a road, and one of the road's owner's horses.  If you couldn't accept the offer of a ride on one of the horses, then you definitely shouldn't accept the "open offer" to walk on that road.  Of course, the land to either side of the road is ALSO owned, likely by the same person.  I guess the Ascetic can't walk anywhere.  Let's hope he can fly.  And never needs to land.  Or relieve himself in any way.  Feh.  And why, exactly, not?  If you don't own it, and have no say in wether or not the offer to ride is ever withdrawn, renewed, or anything else; if you know that, if and when you and the horse's owner ever part ways, you're back to using your own two legs; if you know that, should the horse's owner die, someone ELSE will be claiming their rightful inheritance - including said horse - and youwill similarly be back to relying on your own two (or more, given D&D) feet ...  ... where in there is there ANY sense that the ascetic owns anything?  I mean, FFS.  I can cast Mount, and if the ascetic rides one of the conjured (very much real and alive, but conjured rather than owned) horses ... it's okay.  I can cast Phantom Steed and name you as the allowed rider, and that's okay.  But if I offer you a ride on the spavined old nag I actually own, suddenly your Vow of Poverty is endangered ... ?!?  HOW does that possibly make even the remotest possible sense?!?  What's this "we" sh*t, kemosabe?  We are discussing nothing of the sort.  We are discussing, at this moment, if-and-how an ascetic can travel by means other than his or her own born-with-em feet.  And, simultaneously, staring in slack-jawed amazement at your "asinine-autocratic GM" attitude about the Vow of Poverty.  Seriously; you've gone PAST "way too far", and apparently you're still going ...  Earlier you implied - heck, no, you stated outright, that an ascetic could work to earn passage aboard a ship, and not void their vow.  I ask you again, why could he not work to earn passage aboard a horse ...?  And ... who (other than you) said the friend technically owns the horse?  It is owned by said friend, in both the spirit AND letter of the word "owned".  The last knightly sort I played owned - and took with him on adventures - no less than five hourses.  A heavy warhorse, two packhorses, and two riding horses.  The warhorse was only ridden in the event of a planned-for battle; the "riding horses" were actually LIGHT warhorses, and he'd alternate, day by day, which one he rode - unless one was injured in an unexpected combat, or threw a shoe, or pulled up lame - all of which were the reasons why he owned two of 'em.  The packhorses were weighted down under relative mountains of supplies, of course; feed/grain for five horses, and food for my knight and his page, along with tents, a bit of camp furniture, and sundry other travellign supplies ... well, let's just say, I didn't envy those packhorses.  So.  Why couldn't I offer that nice, friendly ascetic friar I just met, the opportunity to ride my remount for as far as our paths were the same?  Or even ride pillion, behind me or my page (probably the page, actually, as he was a DARNED sight lighter than the knight).  More importantly, why couldn't the friar accept ...?!  And you can ride a horse without owning it, too.  I know: for three years I got to ride various of SEVERAL horses, and I didn't own one fingerlength of a single one!  Further, some of the volunteer instructors did show up every single day, rode one or another of the horses, and didn't own them.  In as many words?  Of course not.  But look at what you're insisting - accepting the generous offer of a friend to ride his spare horse, gets you a voided Vow of Poverty.  That's exactly what you're repeatedly insisting!  What makes the rope and grappling hook (of which "not every party member owns one") any different from a horse  (of which "not every party member owns one" - of course, since one is an ascetic!) ... ?  BZZZZZZZT, wrong answer, thank you for playing.  I never said the horse was bought expressly for the ascetic to ride - in fact, I said as long as that was not the case, there should be no problem.  And I've repeatedly given examples of cases where someone with a spare animal, which they own without considering the ascetic's needs, offers the ride - and you've still said it'd void the Vow.  Plenty.  One, if you already own it, then you didn't buy it to "get around the vow".  Two, if you, the extra horse, and the ascetic are all travelling in the same direction, what is the big deal if the ascetic gets there while sitting on the horse's back?  Nope.  It means that, if you discovered a need for ANOTHER horse because the ascetic is riding your spare, the ascetic shoud THEN leap down from the horse, and INSIST that you use it for it's originally-bought-for purpose ... while he walks.  But until that time, there's no reason the ascetic should be barred form riding an otherwise-unused spare animal.  BZZZZZZZZZT, again.  Stop assuming the hypothetical "I" happens to be a cheating bastard.  That's a surefire way to p*ss me off, in fact.  In case you somehow hadn't noticed. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f621.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=">:(" title="Mad    >:("  data-smilie="4"data-shortname=">:(" />  Nope.  Owner dies, heir shows up - no more free ride.  Owner decides to go west, while you want to go east - time to get used to walking again.  Owner meets an old friend, who needs a horse to ride on?  Time to get off, profusely thank your friend for letting you use his spare mount, and humbly suggest that his other friend has an obvious and greater need of a mount than you do.  Horsetrader offers you a ludicrous five hundred gp for the horse you're sitting on?  Smile graciously and direct him to the actual owner of said horse.  Farmer asks if the horse you've been riding can help plow his fields while the party rests in his house or barn the next day?  Same answer as with the horse trader.  ...  Are we beginning to get the picture?  Riding != owning.</blockquote>

Verification