Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Million Dollar TTRPG Crowdfunders
Most Anticipated Tabletop RPGs Of The Year
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Cons to break the Vow feats
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Aus_Snow" data-source="post: 4996383" data-attributes="member: 29112"><p>Well, holy symbols are omitted in the original text, one way or another.</p><p></p><p>Spell component pouches are apparently acceptable. <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/ponder.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":hmm:" title="Hmmm :hmm:" data-shortname=":hmm:" /> Likewise, any number of simple weapons. . .</p><p></p><p>I'd be asking the following: a) Does the feat give any impression (other than via omission) whatsoever that it's meant to (or that it for any reason should) exclude Clerics - and to a fair extent, Paladins?; b) Is there any good reason why this should be so, using common sense and logic?; and c) If not 'a' and/or not 'b', would it in any way improve the game to have a feat like this be exclusive in that particular way?</p><p></p><p>Vow of Poverty + Wizard, fine. Vow of Poverty + Fighter, fine. Vow of Poverty + Rogue, fine. Vow of Poverty + Cleric, not fine. . . wait, <em>what?!</em> <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f615.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":confused:" title="Confused :confused:" data-smilie="5"data-shortname=":confused:" /></p><p></p><p><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> Um yeah, <em>to me</em>, something really doesn't scan there. To put it mildly. <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/erm.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":erm:" title="Erm :erm:" data-shortname=":erm:" /></p><p></p><p>Servants of the divine, upon taking a sacred vow, can suddenly no longer channel their deity's power - on top of the rest of the limitations, etc. And on the other hand, <em>everyone else</em> gets to keep basically all or most of their abilities. . . Riiiiight.</p><p></p><p>Someone stuffed up, big time, and it wasn't fixed, or admitted to, it seems. Unfortunately.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Aus_Snow, post: 4996383, member: 29112"] Well, holy symbols are omitted in the original text, one way or another. Spell component pouches are apparently acceptable. :hmm: Likewise, any number of simple weapons. . . I'd be asking the following: a) Does the feat give any impression (other than via omission) whatsoever that it's meant to (or that it for any reason should) exclude Clerics - and to a fair extent, Paladins?; b) Is there any good reason why this should be so, using common sense and logic?; and c) If not 'a' and/or not 'b', would it in any way improve the game to have a feat like this be exclusive in that particular way? Vow of Poverty + Wizard, fine. Vow of Poverty + Fighter, fine. Vow of Poverty + Rogue, fine. Vow of Poverty + Cleric, not fine. . . wait, [I]what?![/I] :confused: :) Um yeah, [I]to me[/I], something really doesn't scan there. To put it mildly. :erm: Servants of the divine, upon taking a sacred vow, can suddenly no longer channel their deity's power - on top of the rest of the limitations, etc. And on the other hand, [I]everyone else[/I] gets to keep basically all or most of their abilities. . . Riiiiight. Someone stuffed up, big time, and it wasn't fixed, or admitted to, it seems. Unfortunately. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Cons to break the Vow feats
Top
