Vow of Poverty and one-use items

[DreamChaser]

Anyone trying to twist the idea of an exalted feat may want to play from another book.

The means is what is important not the end. So there is a huge difference between casting a spell or having it cast and using an item. The character has to take different roads to get there. The potion exception was included to make it possible for the characters to stay alive (3.x is pretty lethal without them). No where does it state (or even imply) that this applies to other one shot (or limited shot) items. In fact, it specifies that the character cannot borrow an item to use it.

I don't really understand why this is confusing. As though the benefits gained by VoP weren't worth the sacrifice. Then again, if you don't think they're worth the sacrifice, don't take the feat.

DC

 

[James McMurray]

Could he, for example, accept some sort of pill of inherent stat bonus? "Here - take this and swallow it, you'll be better force for Good when you are wiser."

Is the pill the eqivilent of a potion? If so, then he can take it and use it. If not, then he can't. Of course, a pill of +5 inherent bonus to a sta would have to be quite a bit more expensive then a tome of the same.

At some point the character turns into little more than an untrained commoner who hopes for good things to happen.

You do realize that its possible to train in some things without ever owning a training tool right? Martial arts, most skills (not open locks, craft, or UMD of course), sorcerous spellcasting, and even divine spellcasting can all be trained in without the need for any sort of elaborate training gear. Oddly enough, these are the classes which will most benefit from a VoP.

Or, at worst, an immoble object who cannot breathe for fear that taking in air would constitute owning something more than he should.

Only if you wantt o throw logic and common sense both out the window.

Mine is that since single use items are allowed, then single use items are allowed.

And as long as that works for you and your group, iots all good.

 

[Scion]

You do realize that its possible to train in some things without ever owning a training tool right?

But not all, which means a line has to be drawn somewhere. Each group will have a different line, as do most people Which is fine by me, but I still feel that it had to be said. I may not have expressed it as well as I would have liked, but the idea is still there somewhere.

Only if you wantt o throw logic and common sense both out the window.

Actually I think, 'vow of becoming an inanimate object' with all of the other vows as prereq's would follow pretty well

And as long as that works for you and your group, iots all good.

Hopefully it will Either way is fine of course!

 

[BigFreekinGoblinoid]

I don't think a properly roleplayed VoP character would WANT to benefit from the books magical properties, if he/she even thought there was a chance it might be vow violation

I thought I would just add a little bit here now that I have a little more time.

I am playing a monk in an FR campaign. ( We are currently going through the Banewarrens now ) I saw the VoP, and really liked the concept. I talked to the DM about it, and he agreed to allow it as long as I stuck to the true spirit behind the rules, and made sure I understood that if I screwed around in any grey areas, I would be in danger of losing benefits from both of these prerequisite feats ( remember, you need to take Sacred vow - which basically gives you nothing! - to qualify for VoP ).

Spoiler alert for the Banewarrens ahead: We had three seperate incidents in the early part of the Banewarrens that almost killed us due to not using enough caution with magic items we located. The "bottle of storms" that we uncorked probably should have killed at least 2 of us, but I think the DM was being kind.

After that, it was a great opportunity to state my in game intentions to be self-reliant. It was hard parting with my +2 Ki Strike Nunchukkas, but hey - I had seen first hand the dangers of dealing with strange magic and putting faith in something other than my own innnate abilities.

My monk is hesitant to even accept healing spells from the party cleric. The only circumstances in which he does, is when he is truly in dire straits, and he feels like he will let the party down unless he is closer to full strength. And he only allows the cleric to use magic on him AT ALL because he trusts the divine source that is close to his own faith ( Ilmater ) in philiosophy.

Now, I go around occasionaly preaching caution to my fellow party members:

"Are you sure you wanna touch that?- You remember what happened with that huge gem you just had to have that ended up ceaselessly replicating undead"

"Does your greed know no bounds?"

"You know, Ilmater will provide for you all that you need!"

"The children of Ptolus need this money more than you do, Barbarian!"

I don't think I RP my vow to the point of excess, but enough to make the VoP a powerful force in my characters personna - not just a rule from a book.

Long term benefits from even temporary contact/remote source of magic items would definitely be a breach of intent with my PC's particular vow. Perhaps the answer to this question might be different on a case by case basis due to the specifics of the Vow ( which should be roleplayed IMO ), but I think these types of benefits really goes against the spirit of the rules.

 

[Coredump]

Then I think the question is.... why is the VoP allow for potions and other one shot items? You definitely 'own' it, it is given to you, and you will 'destroy' it during use. That one potion could be sold and feed many families for many months.

If my character owns a potion, I can hold it for weeks with the express intent of using it if the VoP needs it, but I can't have him carry it for me. Hmmm?? I can even spend my money on a collection of potions so I can give them to the VoP in the appropriate situation. But I can't spend money on a book for him to read?


Now, I can understand the VoP not wanting to use the book (expense, self reliance, etc.) But why is it alright to accept and use the expensive magic potions?

.

 

[frankthedm]

If a party member pays money to have a wish boost something on the VOP monk, the monk better try and make his will save.

 

[Scion]

If a party member pays money to have a wish boost something on the VOP monk, the monk better try and make his will save.

Same with every other spell right?

'you want to haste me! resist!! resist!!!!'

'heal spell? I know I am at 0hp, but really.. resist!!! resist!!!'

The party member is giving you a boon, just like if you were getting a boon from your god or whatever. It isnt something you can carry around and hold. Having them waste their money while trying to help you seems intentionally cruel, no more exalted status for you.

In that case it is just like getting a Title. It isnt 'worth' anything directly, but it has 'value'. Just like gratitude of those who you have helped, it has 'value' as well.

Remember the, 'vow of being an inanimate object'? Coming back to that again. If you can have nothing of value then you had better not help anyone, they might thank you for it somehow. Better not breathe, someone in the world doesnt have enough air so air is valueable to them. You are blocking the sun from the plants over there, you callous oppressor of the weak!!

 

[Artoomis]

If a party member pays money to have a wish boost something on the VOP monk, the monk better try and make his will save.

That's getting ludicrous.

The problem with one-use items is exactly that cure potions are allowed. The real question is why?

Because they are cures - so only cures are valid as the exception? Could be, but that 's kind of weak. The Vow is only good until you need cures? Oh, please, give me a break.

Because they are low-value. I think not. That argument does not hold up at all - no exceptions to VoP based upon value

Because they are single use and are used up when given? At least that logically fits in with the VoP. Reading books for stat boosts may or may not be allowed under this ruling, as they are "used up" when you start reading them, but you need to use them for a while before the effect takes place. This, it seems to me, is the only way that makes sense. This way the Vow has no exceptions, which seems right for an Exalted vow.

The problem stems from the fact that you must use it for at least six days. I guess you could say that you "own" it during that time, especially since nothing in the description says that it is "used up" once the reading starts - only once the reading is complete. This implies you could start using it and change you mind and give it to someone else, which sounds like ownership.

I think a VoP character can use any gifted one-time use item, provided it is used immediately. It's a DM call as to whether one of these stat-improveing books fits into that category or not.

If anyone reads this book, which takes a total of 48 hours over a minimum of six days, he gains an inherent bonus of from +1 to +5 (depending on the type of manual) to his ... score. Once the book is read, the magic disappears from the pages and it becomes a normal book.

 

[clark411]

Then I think the question is.... why is the VoP allow for potions and other one shot items? You definitely 'own' it, it is given to you, and you will 'destroy' it during use. That one potion could be sold and feed many families for many months.

If my character owns a potion, I can hold it for weeks with the express intent of using it if the VoP needs it, but I can't have him carry it for me. Hmmm?? I can even spend my money on a collection of potions so I can give them to the VoP in the appropriate situation. But I can't spend money on a book for him to read?


Now, I can understand the VoP not wanting to use the book (expense, self reliance, etc.) But why is it alright to accept and use the expensive magic potions?

.

Although I'm reading into this, I'm of the opinion that cure potions are specifically allowed to maintain the DND gameplay quality of "I get hurt, I get healed, I continue playing."

Without that single allowance, the VoP guys Needs a guy to heal him magically, and with this, the burden of the VoP shifts from the PC with the feat, to the friendly PC or NPC who doesn't want him to die... at least the VoP-Leadership feat combination is a valid one, but the game won't directly support a situation where there's no other option but player-player dependency, where the guy without the benefit gets screwed for it. DnD doesn't exactly support this idea, with the idea of rather plentiful, cheap, easy to make magical healing potions.

As an aside, "Owning Air?" Come on.

 

[Artoomis]

Although I'm reading into this, I'm of the opinion that cure potions are specifically allowed to maintain the DND gameplay quality of "I get hurt, I get healed, I continue playing."

Without that single allowance, the VoP guys Needs a guy to heal him magically, and with this, the burden of the VoP shifts from the PC with the feat, to the friendly PC or NPC who doesn't want him to die... at least the VoP-Leadership feat combination is a valid one, but the game won't directly support a situation where there's no other option but player-player dependency, where the guy without the benefit gets screwed for it. DnD doesn't exactly support this idea, with the idea of rather plentiful, cheap, easy to make magical healing potions.

As an aside, "Owning Air?" Come on.

You still have that self-same dependency. A VoP character cannot own potions, only use them if given to him. Someone must be right there to give him the potion - that's basically the same dependency.

The only VoP logic that really works is to say that the vow does not mean you cannot use items given to you - but you must use them right away. Once again, that leaves open the question of magic books - can you take them if you use it right away?

Maybe not - since you can't really use it right away. In most cases someone would be holding it for you, which sounds like an oath violation to me, assuming you know about it. In the rare case where, between adventures, you are gifted with a book, well, maybe then. Maybe.

If the item were somehow modified so that you used right away but the effects were delayed for a week or more (while you did the exercises, or whatever), then I think it would be okay for sure.

IIRC, the BoED uses odd language when it says it's okay to use a potion of curing, leaving the reasoning as to why they are allowed to be open to interpretation.