Is Vow of Poverty broken?
- Thread starter reveal
- Start date
Rystil Arden
First Post
Although if an enemy has the opportunity to do this, he probably also would have had the opportunity to take away the items from a non-VoP character. There will always be ways to screw over a character if you are mean enough.Hawkeye said:
Ridley's Cohort
First Post
Hawkeye said:
Under the spirit of the rules as I would interpret them, the PC in question has a duty under his oath to make a good faith effort to rid himself of all wealth, and if that proves impossible for some bizarre reason he should avoid gaining any benefit from that wealth.
If my friend the Wizard sneakily figures out how to give me a +2 Str boost that I feel is morally inappropriate under the obligations of my oath, I would attempt to not use all my available physical Str until the time comes I can rid myself of the enchantment. And I would probably Atone for the sake of roleplaying the Vow, even though I am unsure it would be required by the rules.
Ridley's Cohort
First Post
Most cursed items do not have an effect on you unless you attempt to use them. In general, cursed items look attractively magical; being attractive and worthless looking is a bizarre combination.
As Rystil Arden says this could be harsh but it is nearly impossible to occur unless the character is extremely sloppy or the DM is out to get him. When the DM is out to get you, nothing can really help you anyway.
The only reasonable scenario I can think of where this is likely to catch a VoP PC is if he is betrayed by another PC. Again, if that is in the cards, what can you do?
As Rystil Arden says this could be harsh but it is nearly impossible to occur unless the character is extremely sloppy or the DM is out to get him. When the DM is out to get you, nothing can really help you anyway.
The only reasonable scenario I can think of where this is likely to catch a VoP PC is if he is betrayed by another PC. Again, if that is in the cards, what can you do?
The divine focus is the holy symbol of your faith, right? I am not so familiar with eastern religions but western monastic orders who took vows of poverty were allowed to wear a cross.
No St.Franciscus, you may not carry around this wooden cross amulet because of your vow.
Yeah I know D&D is not reality but that´s just mindboggingly stupid.
No St.Franciscus, you may not carry around this wooden cross amulet because of your vow.
Yeah I know D&D is not reality but that´s just mindboggingly stupid.
Nyeshet
First Post
The VoP has been argued ad nauseum on the WotC BoED board. I think about a quarter to a third of all posts on that board are actually about this particular feat . . . .
Most there seem to agree that the vow is poorly worded, and several have openly wondered if the descriptive text and the mechanics text were perhaps written by different people - perhaps even at different times and without any communication between them prior to publishing the book.
The lack of allowance for a divine focus, for instance, seems to be minor oversight (they included a spell pouch, after all). And while allowing for simple weapons seems like a good idea, consider the crossbows - each more expensive than most martial weapons. Technically a VoP N/PC can own and use a heavy crossbow, regularly buy numerous bolts for it (there isn't a gp limit stated anywhere, after all - just a limit on having masterwork or magical items).
And I won't even go into the confrontations / arguments that have been made regarding using another's wand of cure wounds upon a dying companion unable to ask for it - or an item that neutralizes poison or disease, etc. I've seen so many - by RAW - lose / lose situations described there that I've finally accepted that any use of the VoP by any PC requires house rules to make up for the ambiguities, uncertainties, and loopholes in the RAW.
- - - - -
A Monk / Soulknife is a valid and interesting choice for the VoP. The vow is not broken so long as normal wealth guidelines are being used.
An understanding and realistic DM should allow some minor alterations to the vows pre-reqs in regards to classes with special considerations - Divine Focus, for instance, should be allowed so long as simply constructed from inexpensive material. I myself would also allow the two spells gained each level by the wizard to effectively be learned as via Spell Mastery. He would still have fewer spells known per level than the sorcerer, but at least he might be playable - for a minor NPC, anyway.
Despite what some are saying, however, not all the classes - nor even most of them - are significantly hurt or rendered nearly unplayable through use of the VoP.
Bards still have their voice. Barbarians are reduced to clubs rather than greatclubs (which is odd - greatclubs being martial, I mean), but otherwise are as effective as ever. Clerics need a divine focus houserule and then they're fine. A VoP cloistered cleric allowed a divine focus actually sounds rather fun to play. Druids - once houseruled for allowance of a divine focus - are similarly playable. Most of the time they'll be using their wild shape's natural armor and natural attack methods anyway. Fighters can make use of their numerous feats with simple weapons as readily as martial. Granted, their lack of armor / martial weapons decreases their AC / dmg, but then they gain some compensation from the vow itself.
Monks are obviously what they had in mind for the vow, so there is no problem there. Paladins - allowed use of a divine focus - are as playable as ever. With this vow they come across as saint-like figures, actually. Rangers can use quarterstaffs or slings to get by as normal with their combat styles. Rogues may have a little trouble due to lack of tools, but if they really want to focus upon opening locks and disarming traps, I believe there is a dual skill feat that grants +2 to each (negating the penalty for lacking tools). Their weapon choice is a little more limited, but otherwise they are the same as ever. Sorcerers work well with it - better even than the wizard, actually, and unless a means is gained for scribing spells they will actually have more spells known than the wizard (suggesting that the PC may wish to reconsider their class, actually, if they wish to play a pure arcane casting VoP character).
Wizards are the only core class that is significantly adversely affected. They can replace expensive components with xp costs, but the lack of a spellbook combined with a lack of automatic spellmastery of the two spells gained each level results in a caster with fewer spells known than the typical sorcerer. Even with auto-spell mastery for those two spells gained each level they still have fewer spells known than the sorcerer. Unless you create a houserule means of gaining more spells they are simply not viable. Perhaps allowing the learning of new spells (as if with spell mastery) if an xp cost is paid equal to what is normally used to scribe the spells into the spell book? That would equal about 500 XP per spell level, if I recall correctly (2k gp per page - one page per spell level) - a large cost, granted, but it would make the class viable (if two are auto-learned per level and xp replaces expensive components).
Hmm, I haven't much thought about the non-core base classes (hexblade, ninja, spirit shaman, warlock, etc), but except for those that scribe spells (with an attendent cost to the scribing; the new Arcanist from HoH may or may not actually have a cost for scribing) I can't see any overt problems to playing one with the VoP. As stated, any class specials with gp costs can be paid instead with xp.
Hmm, the Samurai (with ancestral relic) may have a problem, as they are required to sacrifice a rather large quantity of gp every now and again to further empower their weapon, but I can't see why an XP cost could not be used instead. On the other hand, the weapon effectively becomes a magic weapon - expressly forbidden by the vow, so perhaps Samurai is as crippled as the Wizard.
Most there seem to agree that the vow is poorly worded, and several have openly wondered if the descriptive text and the mechanics text were perhaps written by different people - perhaps even at different times and without any communication between them prior to publishing the book.
The lack of allowance for a divine focus, for instance, seems to be minor oversight (they included a spell pouch, after all). And while allowing for simple weapons seems like a good idea, consider the crossbows - each more expensive than most martial weapons. Technically a VoP N/PC can own and use a heavy crossbow, regularly buy numerous bolts for it (there isn't a gp limit stated anywhere, after all - just a limit on having masterwork or magical items).
And I won't even go into the confrontations / arguments that have been made regarding using another's wand of cure wounds upon a dying companion unable to ask for it - or an item that neutralizes poison or disease, etc. I've seen so many - by RAW - lose / lose situations described there that I've finally accepted that any use of the VoP by any PC requires house rules to make up for the ambiguities, uncertainties, and loopholes in the RAW.
- - - - -
A Monk / Soulknife is a valid and interesting choice for the VoP. The vow is not broken so long as normal wealth guidelines are being used.
An understanding and realistic DM should allow some minor alterations to the vows pre-reqs in regards to classes with special considerations - Divine Focus, for instance, should be allowed so long as simply constructed from inexpensive material. I myself would also allow the two spells gained each level by the wizard to effectively be learned as via Spell Mastery. He would still have fewer spells known per level than the sorcerer, but at least he might be playable - for a minor NPC, anyway.
Despite what some are saying, however, not all the classes - nor even most of them - are significantly hurt or rendered nearly unplayable through use of the VoP.
Bards still have their voice. Barbarians are reduced to clubs rather than greatclubs (which is odd - greatclubs being martial, I mean), but otherwise are as effective as ever. Clerics need a divine focus houserule and then they're fine. A VoP cloistered cleric allowed a divine focus actually sounds rather fun to play. Druids - once houseruled for allowance of a divine focus - are similarly playable. Most of the time they'll be using their wild shape's natural armor and natural attack methods anyway. Fighters can make use of their numerous feats with simple weapons as readily as martial. Granted, their lack of armor / martial weapons decreases their AC / dmg, but then they gain some compensation from the vow itself.
Monks are obviously what they had in mind for the vow, so there is no problem there. Paladins - allowed use of a divine focus - are as playable as ever. With this vow they come across as saint-like figures, actually. Rangers can use quarterstaffs or slings to get by as normal with their combat styles. Rogues may have a little trouble due to lack of tools, but if they really want to focus upon opening locks and disarming traps, I believe there is a dual skill feat that grants +2 to each (negating the penalty for lacking tools). Their weapon choice is a little more limited, but otherwise they are the same as ever. Sorcerers work well with it - better even than the wizard, actually, and unless a means is gained for scribing spells they will actually have more spells known than the wizard (suggesting that the PC may wish to reconsider their class, actually, if they wish to play a pure arcane casting VoP character).
Wizards are the only core class that is significantly adversely affected. They can replace expensive components with xp costs, but the lack of a spellbook combined with a lack of automatic spellmastery of the two spells gained each level results in a caster with fewer spells known than the typical sorcerer. Even with auto-spell mastery for those two spells gained each level they still have fewer spells known than the sorcerer. Unless you create a houserule means of gaining more spells they are simply not viable. Perhaps allowing the learning of new spells (as if with spell mastery) if an xp cost is paid equal to what is normally used to scribe the spells into the spell book? That would equal about 500 XP per spell level, if I recall correctly (2k gp per page - one page per spell level) - a large cost, granted, but it would make the class viable (if two are auto-learned per level and xp replaces expensive components).
Hmm, I haven't much thought about the non-core base classes (hexblade, ninja, spirit shaman, warlock, etc), but except for those that scribe spells (with an attendent cost to the scribing; the new Arcanist from HoH may or may not actually have a cost for scribing) I can't see any overt problems to playing one with the VoP. As stated, any class specials with gp costs can be paid instead with xp.
Hmm, the Samurai (with ancestral relic) may have a problem, as they are required to sacrifice a rather large quantity of gp every now and again to further empower their weapon, but I can't see why an XP cost could not be used instead. On the other hand, the weapon effectively becomes a magic weapon - expressly forbidden by the vow, so perhaps Samurai is as crippled as the Wizard.
Last edited:
Geoff Watson
First Post
Druids gain the most (or any character that can Polymorph).
The main disadvantage of Wildshape or Polymorph is that your magic items don't work; but the VoP bonuses still do.
Geoff.
The main disadvantage of Wildshape or Polymorph is that your magic items don't work; but the VoP bonuses still do.
Geoff.
No, because there is a specific limit listed for how much food a VoP PC can carry- one day's worth.
Absolutely not. I'm not contending that VoP is a good choice for every PC class. However, I think that it is poorly worded, and that the best evidence thereof is how it affects Paladins and Clerics.
My contention is that VoP, alongside the other vows, is meant to help simulate a "saintly" PC by allowing the PC to make certain commitments to his deity. In exchange for these vows, their deity grants them, for lack of a better word, "Holy powers."
Thus, VoP should be ideal for PCs who are already intensely devoted to the divine- Clerics, Druids, Monks and Paladins. Yet the VoP RAW guts 2 of those classes.
Unlike a RW saint, a VoP PC actually loses powers and abilities normally attributed to saints. Saintly beings could do things like detect evil (they would know if someone was posessed, or were sent by evil persons) and create barriers against it, cast out demons, and alleviate the sorrows of supplicants. VoP PCs cannot do ANY of that- they cannot cast Detect Evil (or Undead), Protection from Evil or Magic Circle against Evil. They cannot help "sinners" cleanse themselves with Atonement. They cannot Bless or use Prayer to aid their allies.
Instead of becoming the best living evidence of a deity's power by acting as his agent on earth, he is weakened.
Essentially, were a RW saint converted into a D&D PC with VoP, he could not do many of the things he was supposed to be able to do (as evidence of his divine favor). Despite taking vows of poverty, chastity, and celibacy (like every other priest), Padre Pio didn't lose the ability to absolve sinners of their sins- he was still a priest- yet as a VoP PC, he couldn't perform the rite of absolution.
Or look at it this way: Examine the Domains:
Assume a cleric with VoP has the Good domain- excellent choice? Nope- because of the divine focus requirement, he can only use the 4th, 6-8th level domain spells. Law is much the same- only the 4th, 7th and 8th level spells are available. Death is a much better choice, with viable Domain spells of 1st, 4th, 5th, 7th, and 9th level being available! Destruction is best of all- 1-6th and the 9th level spell are all available.
The saintly VoP Cleric should chose Death & Destruction over Good & Law? Does that sound right to you?
Except raising the dead is a miracle attributed not only to Jesus, but to other holy personages through history (in many different faiths, not just Christianity). Ditto to being beset by devils and demons.
And if a regular priest can Turn Undead, why would a deity strip this power from those he most favors? Is he trying to get his saints killed?
"You are my blessed one, Father Ted...but you'd better run from those skeletons!"
I mean...an average believer in the faith could present a holy symbol and keep a Vampire at bay for a short time, but a VoP Cleric or Paladin is just a big squeezy bottle of blood to Count Dracula! (That 1d4 damage from Holy Radiance is just going to make that blood "spicy" like a Bloody Mary with Tabasco.)
If he lost control voluntarily, he'd lose his VoP abilities until he Atoned. If he didn't, he'd keep his powers, but he wouldn't go anywhere or do anything before going someplace to have the tattoo removed or at least disenchanted. If he delayed disenchanting that tattoo for anything but the legitimate reason of doing the deity's will, he'd lose his VoP abilities until he Atoned.
Agreed.
Perhaps y'all aren't thinking evil enough for VoP. I've seen a friend of mine play 2 variants on the VoP.
A Monk, and a fighter. His plan, be completely free from item dependency. He'd work to get high enough level to become a Forsaker. All of that combined meant he'd simply go adventuring, take his share of the loot, destroy it, and reap the rewards. His biggest limitation was that he couldn't get his damage levels significantly higher, than if he'd been a normal character. His advantage, he'd get all sorts of crazy benefits and never worry about the DM taking his items away (unlike other characters in the party).
From what I could tell, he kicked some serious butt. VoP was simply a step on the path, the Forsaker class is what the ultimate goal was. The guy played 2 Forsakers in a row (hasn't had to make a new PC yet, nor has either PC died), that tells me there is something along that plan that is a bit over powering, if he'd continue to choose it as his favorite combo.
Janx
A Monk, and a fighter. His plan, be completely free from item dependency. He'd work to get high enough level to become a Forsaker. All of that combined meant he'd simply go adventuring, take his share of the loot, destroy it, and reap the rewards. His biggest limitation was that he couldn't get his damage levels significantly higher, than if he'd been a normal character. His advantage, he'd get all sorts of crazy benefits and never worry about the DM taking his items away (unlike other characters in the party).
From what I could tell, he kicked some serious butt. VoP was simply a step on the path, the Forsaker class is what the ultimate goal was. The guy played 2 Forsakers in a row (hasn't had to make a new PC yet, nor has either PC died), that tells me there is something along that plan that is a bit over powering, if he'd continue to choose it as his favorite combo.
Janx
Similar Threads
Recent & Upcoming Releases
-
June 16 2026 -
June 16 2026 -
September 16 2026 
Arcana Unleashed(Dungeons & Dragons)
Rulebook featuring "high magic" options, including a host of new spells.
Replies (181) -
September 16 2026 -
October 1 2026 -
October 6 2026 -
January 1 2027
