Playable character without magic items: possible ?

[Jack Simth]

Actually, you can do some cool stuff with Vow of Poverty:

Illumian Sorceror 4/Paladin 2/Monk 1/Apostle of Peace 2/Mystic Theurge 10/Monk +1 (2) (take Ascetic Mage). You get all the power words, level 7 Arcane spells, leve 9 divinel spells (with a caster level of 19), cha to saves, cha to AC, and the ability to pacify anyone with a touch.

One thing about VoP - you need to be Good. And not just Good, but Exalted Good - can be a hassle, but I find the fact that it makes things less "I hit them they die, we take their stuff" very enjoyable.

There is a slight issue with the Apostle of Peace in D&D - Between Vow of Peace and Vow of Nonviolence, you basically have to take everyone prisoner... especially as your party can't kill anything (except Undead and Constructs), either.

If you tweak the build a bit so that you get 9th level Arcane spells as well (Sorcerer-9/Apostle of Peace-2/Mystic Theurge-9) you have the option of taking EVERYONE prisoner by way of Shades and Trap the Soul... but then you're not getting Charisma to AC and Charisma to saves by way of Ascetic Mage and Paladin levels (but you've got a 9th level Arcane Spell at caster level 18... that qualifies for the +4 DC from Vow of Nonviolence vs. Humanoids and Monstrous Humanoids when used in that manner).

 

[frankthedm]

Donation to charity is the suggested roleplaying method for dispensing of treasure given to the VoP character, but an ascetic could just as easily destroy or abandon treasure as donate it to charities.

That is a bit different from the way i read that part. Also IMHO the forsake is using the magic items as a consumable item. It may be unorthodox to use a magic sword as a pseudo-potion, but that what happens with the forsaker.

 

[Slapzilla]

Can such a character be playable ? Yes: ok / No: why ?

Because you make it happen. If you're relying on adamantine everything to protect you, your own strength to overcome DR and alchemy to do all those little things that you do then you'll just have to step it up. Will you receive spells like Bear's Endurance, Cure spells, etc or will you be hardcore and forgo them. Effects from Scrolls and Wands from others, or not? If you rely on a buddy's magic fang wand, you might as well have a magic item.

As you progress in levels you will need to be extremely clever just to keep up. You can't hurt DR 15 with a masterwork mighty (+4) composite longbow without a critical. Or with a longsword and less than a 26 Strength, without a critical. How will you cover that gap? My idea is go alchemical all the way. Tanglefoot bags to keep them still and alchemist's fire on the spellcasters can go a long way toward controlling the flow of the opponent's capabilities and the terrain. If you can't damage them, hinder them.

 

[EyeontheMountain]

Overall, I think you would have to see if you DM would cooperate. If not, you are toast

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

That is a bit different from the way i read that part. Also IMHO the forsake is using the magic items as a consumable item. It may be unorthodox to use a magic sword as a pseudo-potion, but that what happens with the forsaker.

The language in that section is salted with words like "should" and the last part of that paragraph is but one way to view voluntary poverty. An ascetic could have such an extremely negative view of material goods that he could view donating such items to charities as but a diverting of temptation to others. Better he should remove such temptation from existence than let those less capable of resisting the lure of material wealth be tested and fail.

I don't know the forsaker class, but if the class uses items as if they were potions, I'd allow it, since ascetics are allowed to use potions. That would mean, of course, his buddies would have to carry the items and give them to him to be destroyed (if that's how the class uses them).

 

[irdeggman]

The language in that section is salted with words like "should" and the last part of that paragraph is but one way to view voluntary poverty. An ascetic could have such an extremely negative view of material goods that he could view donating such items to charities as but a diverting of temptation to others. Better he should remove such temptation from existence than let those less capable of resisting the lure of material wealth be tested and fail.

Hmmm does this mean that a reading of the section that says
"Having a character in the party who has taken a vos of poverty should not mean that other party members get bigger shares of treasure!" actually means that they may or that it is acceptable for this to happen?

or does this contrast:

"An ascetic character must be as extreme in works of charity as she is in self-denial."

Or is it considered "charity" to give her share of items and treasure to the rest of the party?

I don't know the forsaker class, but if the class uses items as if they were potions, I'd allow it, since ascetics are allowed to use potions. That would mean, of course, his buddies would have to carry the items and give them to him to be destroyed (if that's how the class uses them).

Not quite the way it is written - it states that:

". . the forsaker must refuse any benefits from others' magic - including healing."

and

"The forsaker gains access to his damage reduction ability through the destruction of magic items. If he goes more than 24 hours without destroying magic items whose market prices total at least 100 gp per point of damage reduction, he loses that ability until he does so."

So since he can recieve beneift from others' magic items and his DR his most definitely a "benefit" (also he can't use potions, unlike a VoP character can).


Combining that with the restriction for a VoP character that he can't "borrow" a magic item from someone for even a single round with the Forsaker's restriction that he can't benefit from some else's magic items (or spells) then I have trouble seeing how these two things are compatable. That is I can't see how a Forsaker could take a VoP and still get his DR ability (if he choses to forgo that ability then it could work, but not with the rules as written, IMO).

 

[Darklone]

Druid or wizard do fine without most magic items

 

[irdeggman]

Druid or wizard do fine without most magic items

A wizard without scrolls? Something just doesn't seem right about that picture to me.

Druids can do fine, at least until higher levels.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

"Having a character in the party who has taken a vos of poverty should not mean that other party members get bigger shares of treasure!" actually means that they may or that it is acceptable for this to happen?

No, because of his vow, the ascetic would be:

1) forced to either take his share, keeping only that which he needs for sustinence and donating the rest

or

2) allowed to abandon or even destroy his share, assuming that he doesn't allow the other PCs to take it.

Or is it considered "charity" to give her share of items and treasure to the rest of the party?

Nope, see above.

Combining that with the restriction for a VoP character that he can't "borrow" a magic item from someone for even a single round with the Forsaker's restriction that he can't benefit from some else's magic items (or spells) then I have trouble seeing how these two things are compatable.

The ascetic can benefit from another's potion of healing- the text explicitly says that. However, it is also clear from that quote that the forsaker can't use the magic of others to power his abilities- only his own will do.

Thus, the mix fails, not because the ascetic cannot benefit from others' donations, but because the forsaker can't.

 

[Aleolus]

Would an Incarnum using class (Incarnate or Totemist) be able to use his soulmelds normally, I wonder? I would think so, because they are not magic items. And do they still gain the bonuses of both? That would be wicked awesome!