Vow of Poverty and one-use items

[Artoomis]

A character with the Vow of Poverty is specifically prohibited form even "borrowing" magic items, but specifically allowed to be use potions of curing that he is given.

Would that mean he could use a book that gave inherent stat bonuses if the party gave it to him? It's a one-use item, but I am not sure.

I think it's okay. It would have to be only a one-use item that the party would otherwise use, so that it is something given to the character that he does not "own" as would be the case with any sort of multi-use item.

It does not affect my character, but I suppose it could way out in the future sometime.

 

[Ottergame]

I'd say NO. The exception for the potions is that anyone can benefit from them, and that the person who bought it wasn't buying it for the person with the Vow. I would say letting a person read a tome would mean they violate their Vow.

 

[Scion]

Of course, if you could find someone to make the book you could instead just have them cast the spells on the character directly and get the same net result.

In other words, I dont see much problem with useing the book.

(oh, and just a stupid, off-rules comment. inherant bonuses should stack and max out at +5. Since they each cost exactly the same, rather than the quadratic curve for other types of bonuses, this would make much more logical sense)

 

[James McMurray]

I would not allow it. PErmanently using up any item worth over 25,000gp for your own personal gain is a violation of a Vow of Poverty in my book.

 

[Scion]

But would they also violate the vow in your campaign if they had wishes cast on them for some reason?

It is the same either way.

 

[clark411]

It takes hours to read a Manual of ________, and unless I'm mistaken, possessing a magic item for that much time, even if it's split up into teeny "let me see that book for a moment, I swear I won't hold it" moments, violates the Vow of Poverty. All magic items save artifacts are pretty transient in DnD (what with the presense of M's Disjunction and ninjas) and so the argument that "it's going away" hardly seems to hold up.

Except the exception- Cure potions... and the VoP chap has to use those pretty much the moment he's given them.

The benefit of a wish and the use of a Manual aren't basically the same, as for some period of time you have to actually own the Manual to use it. If arguments about the meaning of ownership start flaring up at the table, it's pretty apparent that VoP probably shouldn't be used. You don't benefit from magic doohicks, yah? A Manual is a magic doohick. A wish spell is not a magic doohick.. it's a spell. Unless VoP guys can't have barkskin cast upon them, or gain any bonuses from magic in the long term as stated explicitly by the feat, I'd think Wish passes (as it passes the possession rules.. you don't own _____ gp of Wish spell exactly when it's cast on you).

 

[James McMurray]

Scion: No, but its pretty unlikely you'll ever find anyone capable and willing that can cast wishes in rapid succession. One is a possessio, the other a spell. The Vow specifically prohibits possessions.

We have a VoP monk in my epic campaign, and I am almost certain that if someone offered to spend 250,000xp in order to cast 5 wishes and make him much stronger, he'd turn them down. He roleplays the exalted character traits well, incuding selflessness.

Note: I say 250,000 because we just recently switched to the alternate XP system given in UA. It seems to be working well for us so far (albeit only one session has gone by).

 

[Endur]

No it is not the same.

If a poor monk's fairy godmother casts a wish that makes the monk stronger, that is ok.

If the monk does anything with gold other than giving it to the poor, that is not ok.

It is a clear role-playing distinction. Even if the game effect of the wish and a magic item is the same.

But would they also violate the vow in your campaign if they had wishes cast on them for some reason?

It is the same either way.

 

[Scion]

No it is not the same.

If a poor monk's fairy godmother casts a wish that makes the monk stronger, that is ok.

If the monk does anything with gold other than giving it to the poor, that is not ok.

It is a clear role-playing distinction. Even if the game effect of the wish and a magic item is the same.

It is exactly the same. Who said anything about needing to spend gold on it? If you find a ring of three wishes then someone can get a +3 to a stat, it is rapid use so the VoP guy could get it somehow. If they find the book in a pile of old musty tombs then no money was spent, and it is a single use item. If your fairy godmother comes down and will grant you the wishes it is exactly the same.

Either he can do them all, or none. That is the choice. All of the paths are exactly the same.

 

[Scion]

Scion: No, but its pretty unlikely you'll ever find anyone capable and willing that can cast wishes in rapid succession. One is a possessio, the other a spell. The Vow specifically prohibits possessions.

We have a VoP monk in my epic campaign, and I am almost certain that if someone offered to spend 250,000xp

Wishes were overpriced before, making them more overpriced seems like a pretty huge mistake to me. But that doesnt matter at all to this topic.

The books are single use items for an effect, potions are the same, the amount of time needed to do so may or may not be material. However, the end result is the same and the paths are equal in opportunity cost at some point.

If the book could be made then someone made it. That means that someone has the ability to grant the wishes, and at less cost for that matter.

Can the VoP guy borrow a book to read from someone? He does not possess it, he is merely reading it.

There is no difference between someone buying him the book to read and someone paying for him to get wishes on him or someone giving him wishes for whatever reason or any number of other things that will result in the same effect.

Either he can have the inherant bonus from some source such as those, or he cannot. It is as simple as that.

If he turns them down it is a character choice, good roleplaying or bad depends on the character. It sounds like he believes that exalted should not gain inherant bonuses. Fine then, it is a psuedo possession and shouldnt be allowed for him. But for other exalted, if they see it not as a possesion but something else then they can have it. If they can have it then it can come from any number of sources for any number of reasons. Without breaking the vow.

Edit: along another line though, as I am interested in how your character would react what if the caster volunteered to use the spells on the monk increasing his personal abilities (more or less the same as that gained through levels, or feats or whatever) but the monk himself had to pay the exp cost. Effectively using his own essence in order to further power his body. This would seem to be perfectly fine, even prefered, for such a character. It would be a way to further his cause through selfsacrifice in order to make himself better at helping others. Sounds like a great way to go for such a one