• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

Vow of Poverty Clarification

Drowbane said:
IMC (yes, I'm aware you didn't ask :P), I change the things allowed so that your weapon(s) can't excede a certain coinage value... rather than having to be Simple. I think 10gp max. As written a VoP charactor could be sporting a Heavy X-bow (50gp) and a Heavy Mace (12gp) but not a Kama (exotic / monk - 2gp) or a Whip (exotic - 1gp), or a Sap (martial - 1gp). What does poverty have to do with your weapon training.

I think it is a matter of 'nothing fancy'. An exotic weapon is, well, exotic, and therefore fancy, and could lead one to take pride in one's material possessions. A martial weapon, the same thing, to a lesser extent.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

VoPov: Exotic vs. Martial Weapons

Particle_Man said:
I think it is a matter of 'nothing fancy'. An exotic weapon is, well, exotic, and therefore fancy, and could lead one to take pride in one's material possessions. A martial weapon, the same thing, to a lesser extent.

Hey, all, new member chiming in here! (Loooong-time, lurker, though)

The reason exotic weapons are different than martial weapons or simple weapons is the requirement to take a feat to gain any actual skill with them, rather than any inherent aesthetic worth. Many exotic weapons, especially the ones on the monk list, are actually quite simple, even crude. The nunchaku is nothing more than a modified grain thresher, and the kama is a peasant's sickle. The sugliin and tigerskull club (both from Frostbite) are just nasty animal parts lashed to sticks! Neither of them have any inherent worth other than being difficult to use and nasty-looking.

Contrast either of those weapons with a short or longsword, and the difference in labels becomes more important. Anyone can learn the shortsword (a martial weapon, frequently adorned with precious metals) by training in a martial class (or even a semi-martial class like the rogue). It requires no special feats, no extra effort on the part of the instructor, who is likely also teaching the basics of knives, longswords, scimitars, and every other one-handed medium slashing or piercing weapon lying around the practice yard. The kama and nunchaku are far harder to wield, and therefore more time-intensive to learn, despite the fact that they are basically made from found objects (farm implements). They're literally improvised weapons that people took the time (read: EWP) to work with for practical self-defense.

However, this still doesn't mean that the VoPov monk can walk around with a nunchaku or kama on his belt, because the vow specifically states that the character can own only ordinary simple weapons, not exotic ones. Granted, by the time he's 8th level or so, the question of weapons is moot, as he does more damage with his bare hands anyway. It might matter for a campaign where a good-aligned barbarian, armed only with the ceremonial weapon of his tribe (like the sugliin) takes the Vow of Poverty as a rejection of the corrupt city-dwellers' ways. Does he get to use his character-central exotic weapon, or does he have to ditch it and just use a club?
 

Okay ... so barring erratta, an Apostle of Peace, according to written rules, may use magic items for protection as stated in the PrC.

Holy Symbols have been expressly eliminated from the list of allowed items thus by the RAW no Divine Focuses.

It is still doable ... healing doesn't require the Divine Focus, most of the Divine Focus spells are most likely things that bypass the Poverty restrictions.

Okay so that answers my question ... if I want to avoid house rulings (the why of this is not up for debate) ... I would be within the rules by forbidding holy symbols, but allowing the Apostle his magic protections.

Erratta had better be coming out for this.

D
 

A cleric can use some spells without the divine focus... a Bard may sing or dance instead of Playing. But how about the wizard? How can one of them work properly without a grimoire?

Does the feat was developed to be used by just some of the classes?
 

Technically, the Wizard could take the "Spell Mastery" feat multiple times, but I would agree that some classes benefit more than others. Monks benefit greatly from VoP with very little cost, for example.
 

My general rulings on VoP:
Clerics can use "rough" holy symbols. Ideally self-made (say at least 1 rank in craft woodworking, maybe 2 or 3 if the symbol is really complex)

Wizards just don't work. I'd allow a wizard who really wanted VoP to change into a sorc. Probably via some divine intervention.

I tend to be more flexible on VoP in most ways. When an act *requires* the use of an item (say dieing NPC and the VoP character picks up and uses a wand of CLW to save them having no other option) I'd allow for attonement. I have no problem with VoP characters transporting large amounts of goods if the purpose is to donate them. Nor do I mind a very limited amount of "donation gets you some minor benifit" games being played as long as the benifits don't drive the target of the donation. Further, having a small amount (< 1 GP) of money to buy things is okay by me. Heck, owning a mule or the like is fine.

VoP is huge in low magic worlds (obviously). But is is actually pretty weak in worlds where you can fairly easily buy magic items. The lack of flexiblilty can really hurt.

Finally, Monks and Druids see the largest benifit. Which seems reasonable to me... The limited change I do like is reducing the armor bonus by 2 unless you are willing to be treated as wearing light armor. Also reducing it by 2 when not in your natural form. Makes druids, Sorcs, and monks a bit more reasonable.
 

dvvega said:
Okay ... so barring erratta, an Apostle of Peace, according to written rules, may use magic items for protection as stated in the PrC.

Yes. However, doing so will violate that character's Vow of Poverty. :D
 

Particle_Man said:
Technically, the Wizard could take the "Spell Mastery" feat multiple times, but I would agree that some classes benefit more than others. Monks benefit greatly from VoP with very little cost, for example.

Nope! You need a spellbook first or it only applies to the two spells you get, when you take the feat. But CompArc has the solution: just tatto the spell formulas on your skin.

a holy symbol made from the modest materials shouldn't be too much of a problem.

By the way:
I'd rather stay with the spirit of a rule than with the exact/anal/literal content of it, cause the over-codified approach to representing game-world actions D&D (as written) takes in some cases is far too rigid for my taste. Even our revered game-designers have their weak moments when it comes to wording a rule (resulting in much confusion in some or headless number-crunching in others, because the eternaly infallible rules of the universe as provided by WOTC demand it until revised in the next edition) and it pays to keep that in mind.
Call it house-ruling. I call it the two cents everyone should be able to spare.

Mal "akh" kovic
___________________________________________________________________________
reality tends to bitch'about when it comes to reproducing it. that's why man has come up with versimilitude (the "seemingness" of reality)
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top