Simple, (hopefully) balanced Vow of Poverty Houserules!

[StreamOfTheSky]

If I start from the idea of "He's trying to come up with an alternate system of making magical item effects without lugging all that junk around" then I can get my head around this.

This. It is a completely new thing, not a modification of the VoP feat. You do not gain bonus feats. Cause frankly...all but like 3-4 of them sucked anyway, and if you weren't one of the classes w/ exalted feats specifically made for you, you REALLY ran out of decent options fast. It's just a simple means of having a character be able to function in the ways the system expects him to at a given level, without being forced to adorn himself in expensive items.

So, you want a guy who looks like he's dressed simply, but simulates the effects of various magical items within certain parameters (no expendable items, only one item for each body slot, can apply enchantment effects to multiple mundane weapons and armors). All the money he gets he gives away, because he doesn't need it.

Am I getting this right?

Yes. I did want to keep the original VoP's flavor of giving away wealth because the character cares about helping the impoverished, I actually rather liked that and thought the tithe-like mechanics worked well.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

I don't think there's anything wrong with a VoP character using someone else's item for their benefit. It shouldn't require atonement.

And where do you draw the line between "using it for their benefit" and "abusing the allowances"? I'd rather not try to write rules defining that line, it would likely become rather lengthy and defeat the whole "simple" goal I had...

If you'd like to try and write text for when a VoP character could use a magic item and not break his vow, go for it. If holes can't be poked in it and it doesn't go on for paragraphs, I'd be happy to adapt my houserule. If it amounts to, "the DM decides if you break your vow or not"...that isn't good enough.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

And where do you draw the line between "using it for their benefit" and "abusing the allowances"? I'd rather not try to write rules defining that line, it would likely become rather lengthy and defeat the whole "simple" goal I had...

If you'd like to try and write text for when a VoP character could use a magic item and not break his vow, go for it. If holes can't be poked in it and it doesn't go on for paragraphs, I'd be happy to adapt my houserule. If it amounts to, "the DM decides if you break your vow or not"...that isn't good enough.

The VoP character can't be the target. Where's the abuse potential?