VoP vs. Call Weapon

[irdeggman]

An ascetic may have certainly a Holy Symbol. It could be inscribed upon (or actually be the top of) the allowed quarterstaff/walking stick or upon the allowed food sack. Since it is relatively easy to do anyway, it seems silly not to allow a simple (no cost) Holy Symbol made by the ascetic him/herself.

Divine focus is specifically not allowed by the feat. Foci are as long as they can fit into the spell component pouch and not divine foci:


BoED
Pg 48
“You may wear simple clothes (usually just a homespun robe, possibly also a hat and sandals) with no magical properties. You may carry enough food to sustain you for one day in a simple (nonmagic) sack or bag. You may carry and use a spell component pouch. You may not use any magic item of any sort, although you can benefit from magic items used on your behalf – you can drink a potion of cure serious wounds a friend gives you, receive a spell cast from a wand, scroll, or staff or ride on your companion’s ebony fly. You may not, however, “borrow” a cloak of resistance or any other magic item from a companion for even a single round, nor may you yourself cast a spell from a scroll, wand, or staff.”

And here is what is in a spell component pouch.

Spell Component Pouch: A spellcaster with a spell component pouch is assumed to have all the material components and focuses needed for spellcasting, except for those components that have a specific cost, divine focuses, and focuses that wouldn’t fit in a pouch.

 

[irdeggman]

Save My Game Article on Vow of Poverty:
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/sg/20060616a


Excerpt:

Perfect Fit: Druid, Monk, Sorcerer. These classes allow you to fight well without weapons and don't rely much on armor for protection. Not too many druid spells have divine focus requirements (a divine focus is not a spell component), and for some of those, the focus is something natural like a pool of water. A sorcerer can just avoid choosing spells that require expensive components or a divine focus.
Some Problems, but Still a Pretty Good Fit: Bard, Ranger, Rogue. These classes have abilities that work well with no armor, and the characters can get by with simple weapons. They're not the optimal choices, but it doesn't hurt too badly. Bardic music can be done with singing and bards can choose non-focus-requiring spells.
You Can Make It Work, But It's a Big Handicap: Barbarian, Cleric, Fighter, Paladin. These classes rely substantially on versatility in weapons and armor. Clerics have a lot of spells with divine foci, so it's hard to avoid them. Paladins and clerics cannot turn undead without a holy symbol.
Not in a Million Years: Wizard. Two words: no spellbook. 'Nuff said

This is not too dissimilar from the situation characters might find themselves in if they somehow get separated from their equipment -- marooned in a shipwreck, captured and sent to the dungeons, or chained on a slave ship, etc. The monk really needs nothing to be effective. Sure she can be more effective with all of her stuff, but she can get by without it. A druid or sorcerer (especially with the Eschew Materials feat) is likewise fine. Other classes are at graduated levels of being pooched, up to the wizard, who is useless without his spellbook. Even Spell Mastery is like a life preserver in the ocean for a wizard. You can hold on and maybe survive for a while, but it's tough.

I do like the suggestion at the end of the article to work out the details of an individual's VoP up front and have it tweaked on a "personal" level.

 

[wildstarsreach]

No, the greatsword with bless cast on it is a mundane object with a spell currently operating on it, and a holy avenger is a magic object.

Dispel the greatsword and the spell goes away never to return. Dispel the avenger and it's suppresed for 1d4 rounds.

You can Shatter the greatsword, you cannot Shatter the avenger. Etc, etc.

And you can dispel the call weapon with magic/psionic transparancy and you can dispel psionics without it.

 

[wildstarsreach]

Quick question:

how does VoP respond to flameblade? Will a VoPer break their vow by casting a spell that creates a bladelike energy weapon?

If not, what's really the difference between an energy blade of mystical force that is only present for a short period of time and a called blade that is only present for a short period of time, given that neither can be bought, sold, or even given to anyone else? Since dispel magic will banish the called weapon, is there a real difference between the two beyond pedanticisim?

I've stated similar in that all spells are weapons as well.

 

[Sejs]

equipment item with a gp cost.

Wooden Holy Symbol: 1gp.

Spell Component Pouch: 5gp.

Most cleric spells require a divine focus, comparably few require material components. Where's the problem? The holy symbol costs one-fifth what the pouch does, and it's easily more thematically appropriate. Pouch of bugs, poop balls, scales, wire, and vials of strange powders is okay, but a carved token of faith to let the holy man channel their devotion isn't?

C'mon.

 

[frankthedm]

Wooden Holy Symbol: 1gp.

Spell Component Pouch: 5gp.

Most cleric spells require a divine focus, comparably few require material components. Where's the problem? The holy symbol costs one-fifth what the pouch does, and it's easily more thematically appropriate. Pouch of bugs, poop balls, scales, wire, and vials of strange powders is okay, but a carved token of faith to let the holy man channel their devotion isn't?

C'mon.

Even wotc agrees No Divine foci. http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/sg/20060616a

 

[Hypersmurf]

Pouch of bugs, poop balls, scales, wire, and vials of strange powders is okay...

On the list!

... but a carved token of faith to let the holy man channel their devotion isn't?

Not on the list!

-Hyp.

 

[wildstarsreach]

Well,
Here's my final opinion on this matter. If it isn't permanant, and this is cast/manifest/summoned or created temporarily by the VoPer, it should not violate the VoP. Class features should be exceptioned. However, the limitation of weapons should be kept, simple weapons generally means a d6/d4 damage with few exceptions. The characters who benefit the most are the Sorcerer, Druid, Psion and of course the Monk. This is stated in the VoP article listed above. I'm interested in playing one of these and wouldn't have a problem. The alternative, a Soulknife or a wizard is unplayable because their class features make it that they are breaking the VoP. I could have a minimum spellbook with a wizard but because that has value, it would have to be donated to the poor. Or almost all of you feats would be spell mastery. A soulknife is screwed that he cannot use his mindblade which is the only reason for taking this class.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Divine focus is specifically not allowed by the feat. Foci are as long as they can fit into the spell component pouch and not divine foci:

Spell Component Pouch: A spellcaster with a spell component pouch is assumed to have all the material components and focuses needed for spellcasting, except for those components that have a specific cost, divine focuses, and focuses that wouldn’t fit in a pouch.

While it is true that WotC agrees that a Divine Focus is barred by a the strictest reading of VoP, I personally believe that it is:

1) Based on an incorrect interpretation of the text of Spell Component pouches.

The text says that a spell component pouch is assumed to contain all compontents except for those components that have a specific cost, divine focuses, and focuses that wouldn’t fit in a pouch.

The reasoning for this is that a divine focus is a component that has a specific cost, not that it wouldn't fit...and they have a specific cost since the game mechanic of the spell component pouch is like a bag of holding- any insignificant component is simply assumed to be in there and readily available.

That mechanic, as applied to the divine focus and other foci removes the ability to do a specific kind of plot development, namely, the restriction of access to those foci by means of loss, theft, confiscation, destruction, etc.

AND

2) Is counter to the intent of the VoP.


What do I mean?

As I posted in that other thread I mentioned above, VoP guts the spellcasting power of any divine caster, prevents them from performing the basic duties of clergy, and furthermore would prevent the ability of a divine caster to turn undead...which makes absolutely no sense for someone who has sworn a special vow of devotion to a higher power.

It makes no sense that higher power, upon acknowledging the special vow of devotion from its most faithful followers then strip those followers of the core abilities common to their lesser faithful? What kind of deity rewards its most faithful with debilitation?

It makes no sense that a god would make someone a shining beacon of the rewards of extreme faith by removing the abilities that make that person most capable of defending others of the same faith. Why would an exalted ascetic be unable to defend the flock from zombies when mere acolytes be able to do that duty?

For that matter, what god would bar his most faithful followers from bearing his symbol? A mere devotee may carry the symbol of St. Cuthbert, but the one who is following his path the best- the living paragon of the faith- can't? Simply illogical.

The VoP is meant to simulate the power awarded to those strong in the faith of one's god/philosophy- running it RAW does exactly the opposite.

 

[Artoomis]

1. A Soulknife's manifested blade is allowed. It is manifested energy, not an actual weapon - even though treated as one for virtually all other reasons.

2. A Holy Symbol should be allowed. The mere fact that it is possible to buy one does not necessarily mean you cannot include one into your allowed staff, for instance, if you carve it yourself. One could reasonbly apply a circumstance penalty to turning and maybe even apply a small spell failure chance for such a crude symbol, I suppose, but I wouldn't.

To me, these seem to be this seems to be the most reasonable approach.

The WotC article is interesting, but is presented in a good article that carries no weight as far as rules interpretation is concerned. It is not even as weighty as Rules of the Game, which we all know contains many errors when it is supposed to be hleping with, well... the rules of the game. It seems to be just one person's opinion and not necessarily representative of WotC's opinion.