Is Vow of Poverty broken?

[Dannyalcatraz]

He can't use a large number of his spells now (foci or material components)

I don't know exactly what you mean by foci, but VoP doesn't prevent using or carrying material components, even expensive ones- it just prevents the PC from BUYING them. He can exchange his labor for them. They can be given to him. He could even harvest them himself.

Certainly, a VoP PC would feel uncomfortable carrying certain material components, like the diamond for Stoneskin. A VoP PC might 1) carry the stone until used, or 2) until he encounters someone in need of some money, or 3) might eschew even learning such a spell.

The last guy I discussed this with seemed to think that a spellcaster couldn't have a spellbook, since it, too, has great value. However, since the only value of a spellbook is the spells contained within, its "valuable" only if the PC writes something in it. Its a little tortured to think that a VoP spellcaster couldn't keep a spell he wrote down for reference because he has (essentially) just created a magic item.

Besides, as I pointed out to him, a super-tight, 100% literal reading of VoP would also keep a Bard from owning any instrument or art supplies, or a cleric from carrying his Holy Symbol- neither of which was intended, IMHO.

 

[Rystil Arden]

I don't know exactly what you mean by foci, but VoP doesn't prevent using or carrying material components, even expensive ones- it just prevents the PC from BUYING them. He can exchange his labor for them. They can be given to him. He could even harvest them himself.

Certainly, a VoP PC would feel uncomfortable carrying certain material components, like the diamond for Stoneskin. A VoP PC might 1) carry the stone until used, or 2) until he encounters someone in need of some money, or 3) might eschew even learning such a spell.

The last guy I discussed this with seemed to think that a spellcaster couldn't have a spellbook, since it, too, has great value. However, since the only value of a spellbook is the spells contained within, its "valuable" only if the PC writes something in it. Its a little tortured to think that a VoP spellcaster couldn't keep a spell he wrote down for reference because he has (essentially) just created a magic item.

Besides, as I pointed out to him, a super-tight, 100% literal reading of VoP would also keep a Bard from owning any instrument or art supplies, or a cleric from carrying his Holy Symbol- neither of which was intended, IMHO.

According to strict wording, you can't have either the expensive components or the spellbook. The component thing is asserted even more strongly by the section that suggests allowing them to cast for XP.

 

[Jack Simth]

No, not at all. A sorceror or wizard with VoP is too powerful.

A Wizard with VoP is.... kinda crippled for later development. Wizard: No spellbook -> Can only have spells garnered from the Spell Mastery feat (possibly Extra Spell, as well). Up a level... and there's nowhere for those two new spells to go. Find a scroll... and the Wizard can't scribe it. Has to be donated to charity. Even if the issue of not having a spellbook gets house-ruled, there's still the matter of scribing costs.....

A Sorceror, on the other hand, doesn't suffer that issue, due to the lack of a spellbook.

Edit: A bard can't get a real instrument, that is true... but the lowly 0th level Summon Instrument can get around the need to own one, and you can usually get Perform(Oratory) or Perform(Vocal) or Perform(Sing) or some such, and use the bard's own throat as the instrument.

 

[Bront]

According to strict wording, you can't have either the expensive components or the spellbook. The component thing is asserted even more strongly by the section that suggests allowing them to cast for XP.

Rystil is correct. While a wizard can use an expensive component, the component needs to be given to him and he then casts the spell instantly. It can't be carried around, nor would he accept someone purchasing it for him and carrying it till he needed it (That's technicaly legal, but not realy right).

As for spellbooks and holy symbols, that's debatable, but a simple spellbook or wooden holy symbol shouldn't be too unwieldly.

 

[Particle_Man]

I don't know exactly what you mean by foci, but VoP doesn't prevent using or carrying material components, even expensive ones- it just prevents the PC from BUYING them. He can exchange his labor for them. They can be given to him. He could even harvest them himself.

Yes, it prevents the character from using or carrying material components that are at all expensive (i.e. that which would not be in the "Standard" spell component pouch). He cannot exchange labour for them. And he cannot harvest them for himself. If he somehow pulls a diamond out of his butt, he must give it away, and cannot use it himself.

You may beg for a material component for a spell that will be used immediately, but you cannot carry a diamond around that you previously begged.

And wizards cannot use spellbooks if they have VoP.

Read the feat description. Then read pp. 30-1 for info. on expensive material components

 

[melkorspawn]

I've been looking at VoP for a while now and I like what I see... not because it's overpowered, but it:

a) Provides a solid base for roleplaying
b) Takes away any worry of deciding what magic items to put in what slots for your ideal character build
c) If your character is kidnapped and stripped of all their belongings... you don't much care.

Depending on the makeup of my next party I was either going to:
VoP Monk it... straight up
Vop Swashbuckler/Duelist it
or Vop Sorcerer/Dragon Disciple it

The last option being just scary... magic, natural attacks, natural armor and insane ability bonuses. yeesh.

 

[Mistwell]

He can't use a large number of his spells now (foci or material components), and the wizard could've been crafting far better items for himself (now he can't use item creation and he has to focus on metamagic with those bonus feats, which isn't so great for wizards). He's become significantly weakened now.

Re-read the feat. You can keep and use most spell componants. Nor have I ever heard of a DM not allowing the spellbook.

Metamagic not good for Wizards? On what planet?!?

I really think you are overestimating the power of crafting items. Not to mention, he still can craft items, he just can't keep them for himself.

A VoP sorceror or wizard is overpowered. If you don't believe me, go to the character optimization board over at WOTC and ask for some threads on the subject. It gets ugly real quick.

 

[Rystil Arden]

Re-read the feat. You can keep and use spell componants.

Nope. They can have the pouch of simple components. But no expensive components. Re-read other ramifications of poverty on 30-31.

Metamagic not good for Wizards? On what planet?!?

I said not so good. It's not so good for Wizards as it is for Sorcerers.

A VoP sorceror or wizard is overpowered.

Give me standard wealth and I can easily buy my non-VoP wizard better stuff than the VoP wizard has.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

The exact wording of VoP simply states:

You may carry and use a spell component pouch.

Without further modification, this would presumably allow the use of that pouch for any spell component. There is no further modification on what may be in the pouch listed.

The section on "Other Ramifications of Poverty" says:

A character who has forsaken material posessions may find himself at a marked disadvantage when it comes to certain neccessary expenses, such as expensive material components. One option is for ascetic characters to beg components from other party members...

and goes on to mention the XP casting system.

"Other Ramifications of Poverty" means that they are contemplating what other (mundane) consequences follow from giving up money. The section here is not barring the PC from possessing spell components, just stating that if he has no money, he can't buy things, like food, clothing, and as we have been discussing, spell components.

And, like I said, I agree that a strict RAW analysis of VoP means that a Bard may not have an instrument or art supplies, a Wizard may not have a spellbook, and a Cleric may not have a Holy Symbol. It would further prevent anyspellcaster from using a spell with a focus or divine focus power. While incovenient for the bard (who may still be a poet or singer), its crippling to the Wizard (who would be unable to rememorize spells) and deadly to the Cleric (who couldn't turn a damn thing), and would rob lesser spellcasters of almost all of their spellcasting ability. Seriously-the logic against that reading is strongest with the Cleric- why would a divine being annoint a PC as an exalted being, and then rob him of some of his abilities that would most effectively show the favor the divine being has showered on the PC...Spells and Turning abilities. It would definitely make the Exalted Turning Feat completely useless.

Hence, I feel that that was in no way the intent of the feat, and so would permit the ownership of such items, even under VoP.

 

[Mistwell]

Nope. They can have the pouch of simple components. But no expensive components. Re-read other ramifications of poverty on 30-31.

I did. It's not saying you cannot have expensive componants. The implication is it's difficult to buy them. However, you can keep and use a spell componant pouch (and by implications it's normal contents). There is no "simple-componant-only" restriction.



I said not so good. It's not so good for Wizards as it is for Sorcerers.

Give me standard wealth and I can easily buy my non-VoP wizard better stuff than the VoP wizard has.

You still get some benefits from your share of the treasure. It's just not in the normal form. I do not think the benefits of keeping and holding treasure outweigh the benefits of the feat for a Wizard or Sorceror. And I say again, go check out the character optimization board if you actually have doubts about this. They work it all out for you. They would be happy to entertain your "easily...better stuff" claim.