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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Nyeshet" data-source="post: 2703911" data-attributes="member: 18363">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.</blockquote>

Verification