The Book of Exalted Deeds - It's Here! (merged - full ToC posted)
- Thread starter Isida Kep'Tukari
- Start date
Endur
First Post
I very much like the idea of a vow of poverty. I'm just a wee bit worried that it is out of balance. Currently, I can only see playing two character classes with a vow of poverty, Monk and Sorceror. And those two character classes don't lose anything.
Other character classes, Fighter, Paladin, etc. lose a ton if they take the vow of poverty. Would you want to play a Paladin who could only wield a quarter staff and couldn't wear armor and couldn't even buy armor for his steed?
I would have preferred half a dozen different vow versions. A version for monks, a version for sorcerors, a version for Paladins, etc.
So that a Paladin could have armor and a horse even though he takes a Vow of Charity and gives all excess wealth to a religious cause.
Other character classes, Fighter, Paladin, etc. lose a ton if they take the vow of poverty. Would you want to play a Paladin who could only wield a quarter staff and couldn't wear armor and couldn't even buy armor for his steed?
I would have preferred half a dozen different vow versions. A version for monks, a version for sorcerors, a version for Paladins, etc.
So that a Paladin could have armor and a horse even though he takes a Vow of Charity and gives all excess wealth to a religious cause.
Joshua Randall said:
Endur said:
Now, I haven't seen this, but how are they getting something for free? They are giving up the use of all magic items for 10 extra feats.
And while a sorcerer might not give up as much in taking a Vow of Poverty, they aren't really gaining much either if my reading of the feat list gives any accurate impression. Martial exalted feats will not see much use by a dedicated spellcaster...
Gez
First Post
Less sure for Paladins. Especially those that I use (from Monte's Book of Hallowed Might), as they get a free sacred sword, just like they get a free sacred mount. Granted, it's not much, but with horse and weapon, they have their primary tools. (They'll lack armor, though, but this may be made up for.)
Joshua Randall
Hero
Also note that you do not have to take Vow of Poverty at character creation. You can take it at a later level and get the lower-level benefits retroactively (except the 1st level bonus exalted feat, per the description). So you could create a character with normal equipment at the lower levels when it's more essential to survival, and then take a Vow of Poverty at mid levels when you are more robust.
I am intrigued by the idea of a staff-wielding paladin with no material possessions. He may look innocuous, but if you mess with him he'll smite you silly with his walking stick, or call his mount to trample you. Booyah!
I am intrigued by the idea of a staff-wielding paladin with no material possessions. He may look innocuous, but if you mess with him he'll smite you silly with his walking stick, or call his mount to trample you. Booyah!
Last edited:
Mouseferatu
Hero
Yes.
One of the very first characters I ever created, playing around with the character creator that came with the PHB, was a paladin who lived as a monk (in the historical, Western European religious sense, like Brother Cadfael, not in the martial artist sense). He still owned his old armor and sword from his warrior days, but he only ever carried/used/wore a quarterstaff and leather armor beneath his robes. And I didn't even want to give him the armor, but I was trying to balance between character concept and character playability.
When I read the Vow of Poverty feat, my very first thought was "Cool! Now I can actually play Brother Darryn!
Coik
First Post
I honestly don't know what WotC hopes to accomplish with these alignment books. The system is so poorly defined as to be almost useless, and in essence is really just an archaic holdover from previous editions of the game, which I have to presume was kept mostly so they wouldn't have to bother with retooling the magic system. If nothing else, Monte Cook's excellent Arcana Unearthed proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that the system is no longer necessary.
I mean, honestly, half the things they define as quote unquote "good" or "evil" don't pass their own test for it. Look at animate dead, one of the classic "evil" spells. According to their own definition, evil is "hurting, oppressing, and killing others" (PHB p. 104). How does animate dead do any of those? You obviously don't kill the body. There's nothing to hurt. And you can't oppress the spirit, because as we know from speak with dead it departs as soon as the body dies. So, in essence, the quintessential "evil" spell isn't even evil by the games' own standards!
Hopefully, when 4e comes along, this grevious error will finally be corrected.
I mean, honestly, half the things they define as quote unquote "good" or "evil" don't pass their own test for it. Look at animate dead, one of the classic "evil" spells. According to their own definition, evil is "hurting, oppressing, and killing others" (PHB p. 104). How does animate dead do any of those? You obviously don't kill the body. There's nothing to hurt. And you can't oppress the spirit, because as we know from speak with dead it departs as soon as the body dies. So, in essence, the quintessential "evil" spell isn't even evil by the games' own standards!
Hopefully, when 4e comes along, this grevious error will finally be corrected.
Gez
First Post
Well, it's been often theorized that souls are harmed when animating undead from their former body, maybe entrapped or used as fuel to create the negative energy that powers the undead.
After all, even true resurrection can't work on someone who's been turned into an undead, as long as said undead hasn't been destroyed. (Lesser spells can't even work on destroyed undead, as the soul has been too tainted with negative energy, just like for people killed by death effects.)
But yes, the alignment system is clunky. They could easily give it up, at least for mortals (retaining it for outsiders would be OK IMHO).
After all, even true resurrection can't work on someone who's been turned into an undead, as long as said undead hasn't been destroyed. (Lesser spells can't even work on destroyed undead, as the soul has been too tainted with negative energy, just like for people killed by death effects.)
But yes, the alignment system is clunky. They could easily give it up, at least for mortals (retaining it for outsiders would be OK IMHO).
Olive
Explorer
Coik said:
Cool crunch? That's why I buy them. And given they were Monte's idea, I'm not sure that his other work proves that the alignment system is uusable, even if it isn't strictly necessary.
Regardless, evil has a wider definition than the ione you gave, and animate dead falls into the using evil power (in the evil as a actual force sense) for ones own gain. Creating undead without asking the owner of the body is just wrong.
jdavis
First Post
Just wanted to chime in that so far I love the book, I loved the BoVD and I have absolutely no problem whatsoever with alignment in my game, it's not a issue, we can figure out what is good and what is evil. I like the ideas presented and if I want to make a truely vile evil or a extremely exalted hero these books do help a lot. The big thing I have gotten from both these books is a lot of really good ways to dress my setting up and a lot of ideas for adding flavor to my game. The BoVD has added flavor to many of my adventures and the BoED answered some pressing questions my characters had in the last session, my next adventure will be based around information in the book (the characters found some truly evil weapons, some of them intelligent and very powerful and they were unsure how to dispose of them, the BoED gave me some very good ideas). The books are very good companions to each other and I am very impressed with the Book of Exalted Deeds. Somebody mentioned a book for Neutral stuff and I think that is a good idea too (you listening Darrin ).
).
Gez
First Post
Rather than neutral as in neutrality, one for chaos and law. These two alignments are much harder to assess than good and evil.
What are law and chaos? Rigidity and flexibility? Conservatism and progressism? Civilization and anarchy? Community and individualism? Crystalline stasis and unstable mutations? Fascism and social darwinism?
None of these seem to fit.
Besides, that would make a fine echo for Planescape's books Planes of Law, Chaos, and between both, Conflict.
What are law and chaos? Rigidity and flexibility? Conservatism and progressism? Civilization and anarchy? Community and individualism? Crystalline stasis and unstable mutations? Fascism and social darwinism?
None of these seem to fit.
Besides, that would make a fine echo for Planescape's books Planes of Law, Chaos, and between both, Conflict.
Kobold Avenger
Legend
So the vow of poverty gives off the trade off of not being able to own any magic items or much at all (I guess using my hybrid D&D/D20M system wealth would be capped at +1). And I wouldn't even allow such a character to take Prestige Races (and lose them all if they had any before) not to mention any types of alterations spread through out the different D20 books, should they take that feat.
Trainz
Explorer
You haven't indeed seen it.jasamcarl said:
You give up use of ALL ITEMS, not just magic (you're allowed some rags and a staff, more or less, and food for ONE DAY).
Your fellow PC's can buy you food and support you however, but must never give you something, even temporarily i.e. they can cure you with a wand of cure, but they cannot lend you a cloak of resistance for a few rounds. They can pay for your lodging, your food, and cast all the spells they want on you.
In exchange you gain 10 exalted feats (many of which are very super-nifty) AND a S-Load of powers that more or less put you on par with the other PCs. You get all sorts of enhancements on AC, saves, ability scores, your weapon functions just like a magical plushthree-whatever, and much more, all improving with character level.
The two best classes for the Vow of Poverty IMO are sorceror and monk.
A poor monk would K.I.C.K. A.R.S.E.
frankthedm
First Post
Brian Chalian said:
Don't forget giving Orcus mercy
Anabstercorian
First Post
Well, the food isn't much of a problem, given that you don't have to EAT OR DRINK.
frankthedm
First Post
Gez said:
Taken to thier final extreams that is more or less what you get.
With the unstable mutations applying to phyics, matter, energy, space and time.
