Is Vow of Poverty broken?
- Thread starter reveal
- Start date
billd91
Not your screen monkey (he/him) 🇺🇦🇵🇸🏳️⚧️
Particle_Man said:
The difference is that the VoP character is on a quest for his church, presumably the earthly representatives of the very god he swore his oath to. That should mean something in the final accounting.
And if that is the only way to get the item, the DM has some explaining to do to his players.
Artoomis
First Post
billd91 said:
Well, it's the player who chose to use VoP knowing it's limitations. The DM really should put his players in position that cause real dilemmas for things like VoP.
The DM also should modify VoP enough to allow at least some way of atoning for failing to live up to the vow.
However, the end does NOT justify the means whatsoever for an Exalted character. If VoP is the divine source of your power and you fail to live up to it - too bad for you! Remember that VoP Exalted characters really do believe they are better than everyone else and have their own standards of conduct that other may simply not understand.
A "no-win" situation for a VoP character should be coinsidered a divine test. I see three possible outcomes:
1. The character stays true to the vow and somehow find a way to complete the mission.
2. There is no possible way to complete the mission without violating the vow. The gods set this up, and, if the character does give up the vow for the mission, the gods reward this decision by doing something really cool to the character. Perhaps the lesson learned is that poverty is NOT the correct path for this characte and the gods (aka DM) retrofit the character to remove the vow and replace it with something else.
3. The character fails to complete the mission as he sees his vow as being more important. In such a case Bad Things may happen because of the failure of the mission, as well as, no doubt, falling out of favor with the church hierarchy.
billd91
Not your screen monkey (he/him) 🇺🇦🇵🇸🏳️⚧️
Artoomis said:
or
4. The quest item desired by the church is such an exalted item that it is an honor for the faithful to use it, overriding any other vows or considerations and allowing them to bask in the glory of their god's radiance through his relics on earth.
If a VoP paladin of St. Cuthbert was sent to retrieve the actual floppy hat or cudgel of St. Cuthbert, two very holy artifacts, then I should hope that it wouldn't break their vows, of any sort, to actually use it them appropriate situations.
Particle_Man
Explorer
billd91 said:
Allow me to rephrase:
Would it be equally silly to expect a paladin (on an exactly similar quest for his church) to refrain from torturing people to get information on where that item is, assuming that that is the "only" way to get the item?
Nifft
Penguin Herder
billd91 said:
"I sent you clowns to rescue the princess, not use her in an appropriate situation!"
(Okay, low blow.)
Seriously: you have sworn a vow of poverty. You had better not ever touch a holy relic with intent to use it like an owner would. The only reason for you to be bringing back a holy relic would be for someone else's glory.
This is part of why the Feat is annoying: it forces players out of certain spolight situations.
-- N
Cheiromancer, thanks for the nice quotes...saves me some time!
As we can see, Atonement is essentially the D&D version of the sacrament of confession and reconciliation, and if you compare the texts further, you'd find that the requirements of Divine foci and prayer beads closely mirror the practice in not only the Roman rite, but the simliar practices in the Anglican church and Eastern Orthodoxy (which requires the sacrement be performed in the presence of an Icon of Jesus).
Look at it from the deity's standpoint: Clerics and Paladins are his representatives on earth. What good deity in his right mind would reward an expressed and avowed devotion to the deity that is beyond most of his clergy and other faithful by stripping away his powers by denying him the use of a Divine Focus? The denial of the game mechanic of the Divine Focus removes the ability of the Cleric (and to a certain, lesser extent, the Paladin) to perform many of the basic and core duties of being within a church heirarchy.
The VoP is a Sacred Vow to the deity the PC serves. It is evidence of the extreme devotion the PC feels for his deity...essentially "I give up everything to follow you, O Shining One." The benefits are a 2 way street- the ascetic gains abilities to compensate him for his sacrifice, and the deity gains an exemplar on earth to whom people can point and say..."Man, I want to be like that...", drawing others to belive.
Presumably, the Shining One is not interested in having demons overrun the world. He sends the Ascetic Paladin on a quest to recover Evilsbane (for whatever reason, the Ascetic is the only representative of the faith who can be called upon for this duty). Presumably, Evilsbane is to be used by one of the Shining One's Paladins, of which the Ascetic is one. However, the Ascetic feels it is not his place to use the weapon, except as a last resort. Thus, the Ascetic will not use Evilsbane until he is given no other choice- be it the death of all other Paladins of his faith in the area, or having the demons change their plan and actually launch a preemptive strike on the Ascetic and his party- and he may even try to keep his vow until he is the last man standing...
But in the end, the deity (in the form of the DM) should not put the Ascetic in the position of keeping his vow and dooming the world or saving the world by breaking his vow, since defeating the demons and keeping the vow are both duties to the same master. In other words, while use of Evilsbane may technically violate the VoP, the one who adjudicates the Vow and his Paladinly powers would most likely give him a pass on this one.
To which we could add Saint PrCL!=RW saint, but my point is what were the various Sacred Vows and the Saint PrCl emulating- what were their primary inspirations and models- if not the saints and other holy personages of various real world religions?
As we can see, Atonement is essentially the D&D version of the sacrament of confession and reconciliation, and if you compare the texts further, you'd find that the requirements of Divine foci and prayer beads closely mirror the practice in not only the Roman rite, but the simliar practices in the Anglican church and Eastern Orthodoxy (which requires the sacrement be performed in the presence of an Icon of Jesus).
Look at it from the deity's standpoint: Clerics and Paladins are his representatives on earth. What good deity in his right mind would reward an expressed and avowed devotion to the deity that is beyond most of his clergy and other faithful by stripping away his powers by denying him the use of a Divine Focus? The denial of the game mechanic of the Divine Focus removes the ability of the Cleric (and to a certain, lesser extent, the Paladin) to perform many of the basic and core duties of being within a church heirarchy.
The VoP is a Sacred Vow to the deity the PC serves. It is evidence of the extreme devotion the PC feels for his deity...essentially "I give up everything to follow you, O Shining One." The benefits are a 2 way street- the ascetic gains abilities to compensate him for his sacrifice, and the deity gains an exemplar on earth to whom people can point and say..."Man, I want to be like that...", drawing others to belive.
Presumably, the Shining One is not interested in having demons overrun the world. He sends the Ascetic Paladin on a quest to recover Evilsbane (for whatever reason, the Ascetic is the only representative of the faith who can be called upon for this duty). Presumably, Evilsbane is to be used by one of the Shining One's Paladins, of which the Ascetic is one. However, the Ascetic feels it is not his place to use the weapon, except as a last resort. Thus, the Ascetic will not use Evilsbane until he is given no other choice- be it the death of all other Paladins of his faith in the area, or having the demons change their plan and actually launch a preemptive strike on the Ascetic and his party- and he may even try to keep his vow until he is the last man standing...
But in the end, the deity (in the form of the DM) should not put the Ascetic in the position of keeping his vow and dooming the world or saving the world by breaking his vow, since defeating the demons and keeping the vow are both duties to the same master. In other words, while use of Evilsbane may technically violate the VoP, the one who adjudicates the Vow and his Paladinly powers would most likely give him a pass on this one.
To which we could add Saint PrCL!=RW saint, but my point is what were the various Sacred Vows and the Saint PrCl emulating- what were their primary inspirations and models- if not the saints and other holy personages of various real world religions?
Last edited:
Cheiromancer
Adventurer
You have to be careful not to get so carried away with flavor (and real world parallels or inspirations count as flavor) that you forget how the feat was balanced.
If the feat was balanced on the consideration that you could never, ever use magic items, then allowing a VoP character to use a magic item (let alone an artifact) is not balanced. It's like giving a character an item whose value is way over the recommended treasure per level. A 1st level character with 15th level gear or something while the other PCs make do with their starting gp. This is unbalanced, but sometimes you might want to do it; the story might even demand it. As the DM you could do it, but you shouldn't say that it is balanced.
So it is, imho, with the vow of poverty. The recommended treasure per level for a VoP character is virtually zero. Any exceptions should be as watched as vigilantly as letting a first level halfling have a cursed ring of improved invisibility as a plot device.
If the feat was balanced on the consideration that you could never, ever use magic items, then allowing a VoP character to use a magic item (let alone an artifact) is not balanced. It's like giving a character an item whose value is way over the recommended treasure per level. A 1st level character with 15th level gear or something while the other PCs make do with their starting gp. This is unbalanced, but sometimes you might want to do it; the story might even demand it. As the DM you could do it, but you shouldn't say that it is balanced.
So it is, imho, with the vow of poverty. The recommended treasure per level for a VoP character is virtually zero. Any exceptions should be as watched as vigilantly as letting a first level halfling have a cursed ring of improved invisibility as a plot device.
I agree, Cheiromancer. A VoP PC using a magic item should be as rare an occurence as...C'thulhu being invited over for Kung Pao Squid at a Bar Mitzvah.
However, if the DM places the VoP PC into a Kobiashi Maru situation, where the only way out is for THAT PC to use a magic item, then the DM has no justification for stripping the Ascetic of his abilities...unless he's actually looking for a TPK.
To me, that would smack of a DM realizing he somehow erred in letting a PC take VoP in the first place, so now he has to remove the offending feat and screwing the player be damned.
However, if the DM places the VoP PC into a Kobiashi Maru situation, where the only way out is for THAT PC to use a magic item, then the DM has no justification for stripping the Ascetic of his abilities...unless he's actually looking for a TPK.
To me, that would smack of a DM realizing he somehow erred in letting a PC take VoP in the first place, so now he has to remove the offending feat and screwing the player be damned.
