VoP vs. Call Weapon

[brehobit]

So I would go along with the stance that as long as it is used to summon only a simple weapon then it doesn't bypass the VoP restriction.

I agree. It seems the weapon is non-magic at its base, but then enchanted by the ability. So a long sword is right out, but a (spell-enchanted) dagger would be fine.

Now I'd say a DM might be right in saying it is stealing. But that's something I'd hope the player and DM would talk about ahead of time.

Mark

 

[irdeggman]

Now I'd say a DM might be right in saying it is stealing. But that's something I'd hope the player and DM would talk about ahead of time.

Mark

Yup that is something the DM and player need to work out ahead of time. It could go either way.

 

[frankthedm]

Why is it that you are considered the owner for the few rounds that you have possession of the weapon? I just don't see how it violates the Vow of Poverty?

Your own words prove the violation. The act of possession is the violation.My bad, metal lock on possesion.

Using it is the violation.

I came short of taking that position because a VoP character can use a simple weapon that has had spells like magic weapon cast on it

No, they can’t. The Feat is very clear. No magic weapons.

 

[Musrum]

Actually it is completely fine.

The weapon is called from the past (another time) and depreciation has reduced the weapon's value to 0 gp...

 

[Artoomis]

"You may own or use[/i] material possessions...you may carry and use ordinary ... simple weapons"

That's pretty straightforward, If Call Weapon gives you a non-simple weapon you cannot carry or use it, nor can you, of course, use it if you spend more than 1pp to get one that is magic.

The "they are considered magiuc weapons" may or may not actually be a VoP issue, but it seems like that would hardly matter as you should be carrying your own simple weapons anyway.

Basically, for VoP, if you have to ask if it's okay, the answer is usually "No."

 

[Sejs]

Very much so, does this violate VoP.

Does a VoP cleric violate their vow by casting Greater Magic Weapon on their quarterstaff?

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

IM(not so)HO, there is a difference between a "magical weapon" and a weapon that has temporarily gained certain magical (or magic-like) properties by virtue of the effects of spells or other powers/abilities.

So a simple weapon summoned via this power (at its base level) would not be a magic weapon, nor would a quarterstaff that has had Magic Weapon cast upon it.

 

[Artoomis]

Does a VoP cleric violate their vow by casting Greater Magic Weapon on their quarterstaff?

No. Also note that this weapon, when summoned at 1pp, is NOT magic, it is only teated as magic for damage reduction.

Again I ask, "why on earth anyone (with VoP) would use this power anyway?" I ask since you can only get what you could normally carry anyway for a VoP charcter. There is basically no benefit to the character.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Why would a VoP PC use Call Weapon?

1) Encumberance issues

2) Right tool for the job (you need a ranged weapon and have none, you need a blunt weapon and have none)

3) Getting a weapon into a place where they are otherwise barred (say, into the throne room of an evil ruler).

4) Calling a dagger to cut the ropes that bind you in a captivity situation.

possibly others...

But I agree- its utility to a VoP PC is less than high, so its not the best power to choose in the first place.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Also note that this weapon, when summoned at 1pp, is NOT magic, it is only teated as magic for damage reduction.

Well, no; there's a difference between "They are considered magic weapons for the purpose of damage reduction that requires a magic weapon to overcome" and "They are considered magic weapons and thus are effective against damage reduction that requires a magic weapon to overcome".

The second - the text from Call Weapon - states that they are considered magic weapons. It goes on to explain what effect this consideration has upon DR X/Magic. Being effective against the DR is a result of being considered a magic weapon, but that consideration is not limited to DR by the text.

-Hyp.