Vow of Poverty questions

[Stallion]

So, I recently had a bit of a spat with a DM involving the Vow of Poverty and grafts. A character of mine just hit 12th level and happens to have a Weakening Arm graft. He wants to take a homebrewed Vile variant of the Vow of Poverty, but the DM is telling me that because he has the graft, he can't take the feat, as he's counting it as a possession. If I were willing to chop the arm off and maybe find a cleric to regenerate the original arm, he would allow me to take the feat. Quite naturally, I think this is absolute bull, as a graft becomes one with the body once it's attached. This brought up several interesting questions, including that of a warforged taking the vow of poverty. Would the plating cause the Vow to be violated, particularly if it had been previously enchanted? You can't get rid of it, as the Unarmored Body feat is only available at 1st level. Is an entire race just not able to take this feat, or is my DM simply being an a**?

[cupkeyk]

The DM is being an a**. Gimping a low-mediocre option any further is plain a**hattery.

[Forum Explorer]

this is a tough choice for a DM. I don't blame him for his ruling but perhaps remind him that you don't get all of the bonuses from previous levels of VoP. That could change his mind. Still not taking VoP at first level causes you to lose out on a lot and makes the feat much weaker.

[Kaww]

You have to describe the fluff of the homebrew vile VoP. Fluff as is doesn't allow you to have a graft and VoP. As for warforged, why would they be made unable to use magical weapons? It sounds improbable that a rich house making mechanical soldiers made them altruistic...

[Stallion]

Well, seeing as they are their own sentient race once built and happen to have several religions strictly of their own, is it really THAT unheard of that one of them happens to turn to good and altruism, almost regardless of whatever they were created to do?

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

From the DM's perspective, it looks like you're trying to have your cake and eat it too. That said, in this case, the cake is a lie. Why do you want VoP, anyway?

And how does a vile VoP make sense? Do you donate your proceeds to Asmodeus?

[Cruiser1]

So, I recently had a bit of a spat with a DM involving the Vow of Poverty and grafts. This brought up several interesting questions, including that of a warforged taking the vow of poverty. Would the plating cause the Vow to be violated, particularly if it had been previously enchanted?Grafts are basically equipment, or something you can buy with gold to improve your abilities. Therefore you shouldn't be able to have such wealth while having the benfits of Vow of Poverty.

A Warforged with Adamantine Body should be able to take Vow of Poverty. Their armor bonus isn't equipment that they're wearing, i.e. is not wealth they obtained with coins. Rather they obtained it via a feat, which is no different from a Barbarian improving their AC by taking Dodge or their damage reduction from a related feat. (If however you speld gold enchanting inherent armor further, then that's a different story.)

In summary Vow of Poverty means no wealth. Inherent bonuses also go against the spirit of VoP. For example, one could try selling all their equipment, buy a bunch of Tomes of inherhent bonuses to stats and read them, and only then take VoP. A DM may rule that taking VoP negates any such bonuses.

[Douglas]

this is a tough choice for a DM. I don't blame him for his ruling but perhaps remind him that you don't get all of the bonuses from previous levels of VoP. That could change his mind. Still not taking VoP at first level causes you to lose out on a lot and makes the feat much weaker.
Actually, you do. Vow of Poverty bonuses are all fully retroactive, with the single exception of the bonus Exalted feats. They have to be to even pretend to properly compensate for giving up all your magic equipment, which you have to do completely regardless of what level you take the feat at.

[Baconated]

Grafts are basically equipment, or something you can buy with gold to improve your abilities. Therefore you shouldn't be able to have such wealth while having the benfits of Vow of Poverty.

A Warforged with Adamantine Body should be able to take Vow of Poverty. Their armor bonus isn't equipment that they're wearing, i.e. is not wealth they obtained with coins. Rather they obtained it via a feat, which is no different from a Barbarian improving their AC by taking Dodge or their damage reduction from a related feat. (If however you speld gold enchanting inherent armor further, then that's a different story.)

In summary Vow of Poverty means no wealth. Inherent bonuses also go against the spirit of VoP. For example, one could try selling all their equipment, buy a bunch of Tomes of inherhent bonuses to stats and read them, and only then take VoP. A DM may rule that taking VoP negates any such bonuses.

I disagree.

VoP means that you give up your earthly posessions at the time you take the feat, and never desire material goods again. VoP doesnt mean that you become as normal as a level 1 commoner. There's even a feat or Trait (i cant recall it atm) that allows you to raise an ability score every level instead of every 4th level, but you cant use magical items that give stat bonuses.

Both this feat/trait and VoP would work with each other, as they should. But any DM that allows it without serious munchkin consideration is asking for trouble.

But VoP is so underpowered, theres no reason to not allow a homebrew graft variant - esp since grafts become part of your body. What if your character lost a leg to a crit chart, and got a leg magically grafted on, and while he was convalescing, started studying martial arts and meditation from the monks healing him, and started taking monk levels, with VoP. Would you make him give up the leg? Why?



And, "buying" a full set of times is laughable - if your DM gives you the gold to buy a full set of tomes AND allows you to buy it, VoP is the least of his worries - its the +5 Vorpal Shocking Burst Khopesh Holy Avenger being wielded by the level 15 Paladin who's about 9 kills away from becoming a demigod.

[Stallion]

Grafts are basically equipment, or something you can buy with gold to improve your abilities. Therefore you shouldn't be able to have such wealth while having the benfits of Vow of Poverty.

A Warforged with Adamantine Body should be able to take Vow of Poverty. Their armor bonus isn't equipment that they're wearing, i.e. is not wealth they obtained with coins. Rather they obtained it via a feat, which is no different from a Barbarian improving their AC by taking Dodge or their damage reduction from a related feat. (If however you speld gold enchanting inherent armor further, then that's a different story.)

In summary Vow of Poverty means no wealth. Inherent bonuses also go against the spirit of VoP. For example, one could try selling all their equipment, buy a bunch of Tomes of inherhent bonuses to stats and read them, and only then take VoP. A DM may rule that taking VoP negates any such bonuses.

Except once the Vow is taken, that graft is just as much of the characters body as the warforged's plate. You can't unequip an arm. It isn't something you can sell. Therefore, it isn't wealth. It's just as much of a part of you as a warforged's plate, or an afflicted lycanthrope's lycanthropy. You can sell neither of these, any more than you could a wizards spellcasting strictly as a good rather than a service, yet none of them come into question when you take the feat. All of them are just as much part of said character, and ALL of them would lead to much more munchkin-ing than this would.


As for the questions of what precisely the character is, he's a fist of the forest/primeval based around a guarding of the shore. The sea and the wild pretty much gives him anything he needs and he pretty much worships the sea as a type of deity. The only reason he's evil, per se, is because he will do ANYTHING to protect the sea, including killing people for slights as small as littering.

[Asheram]

Not exactly as it happens here, but a player in my group did one of the dirtiest things I've ever seen in a roleplaying game.
A cleric who tells the DM that she wants to take the VoP feat, then sweettalks the DM into letting her sell every one of her possessions and buy manuals of wisdom for it before taking said feat.

Didn't hear of it until a bunch of levels later, but Daaamn was I pissed.

Now, this isn't exactly the same, but to the OP. Did you Plan to take the VoP feat while you gained your graft?

[Stallion]

Not exactly as it happens here, but a player in my group did one of the dirtiest things I've ever seen in a roleplaying game.
A cleric who tells the DM that she wants to take the VoP feat, then sweettalks the DM into letting her sell every one of her possessions and buy manuals of wisdom for it before taking said feat.

Didn't hear of it until a bunch of levels later, but Daaamn was I pissed.

Now, this isn't exactly the same, but to the OP. Did you Plan to take the VoP feat while you gained your graft?

I've had the graft since level 10. The character just hit level 12 and was planning on taking it when the DM entered the..... conversation.

[Asheram]

I've had the graft since level 10. The character just hit level 12 and was planning on taking it when the DM entered the..... conversation.

Well... As I personally see things, it's not up to the DM as the whole of your roleplaying group.
In this case of most homebrews I, as a DM, would probably allow it as long as it took a lap round the group and there was a consensus upon allowing it.

The DM can always adjust things accordingly, it's the players who will be having grudges it the DM allows something cheap.

Edit:
And though I personally doubt the concept of Vile VoP, I can imagine there being some evil people out there, living in the slums on water and bread in order to toughen their bodies and be an embodiment of hate.

[Zaranthan]

Play it for drama. Propose that if you take the feat, you can keep the arm, but you're not allowed to use it. Have your character occasionally angst about how the arm would be useful, but you swore not to use it.

[Daftendirekt]

Play it for drama. Propose that if you take the feat, you can keep the arm, but you're not allowed to use it. Have your character occasionally angst about how the arm would be useful, but you swore not to use it.

I find that a bit ridiculous. I think the DM is being a **** for making a grafted arm count against VoP. This kind of brings up the whole Warforged thing again. It's part of your goddamn body. Would a warforged who had an adamantine body be unable to take VoP purely because of that? Seems rather stupid. (Granted, adamantine body WF with VoP would have AC through the roof, rather cheap, but still...)

[Zaranthan]

I find that a bit ridiculous. I think the DM is being a **** for making a grafted arm count against VoP. This kind of brings up the whole Warforged thing again. It's part of your goddamn body. Would a warforged who had an adamantine body be unable to take VoP purely because of that? Seems rather stupid. (Granted, adamantine body WF with VoP would have AC through the roof, rather cheap, but still...)

Hey, now. It was just a compromise. I don't see how calling the DM all sorts of names that need to be censored helps the situation at all.

[Douglas]

(Granted, adamantine body WF with VoP would have AC through the roof, rather cheap, but still...)
Not really. The Exalted AC bonus doesn't stack with armor bonuses.

[Daftendirekt]

Not really. The Exalted AC bonus doesn't stack with armor bonuses.
Deflection bonuses for free.

It's tiny, I forgot the feat details. Anyway, my argument stands. Body parts are not legitimate grounds for banning VoP, to me.

[Gnaeus]

RAW I don't think it works. I think a graft is equivalent to a magic item.

RAI I'm pretty sure it doesn't work. But then, RAI, I don't think that your character would qualify for vile feats. A vile character has to be truly devotedly evil, like an exalted character must be a step above ordinary good. Just saying that your character is willing to do anything to protect the ocean is somewhere pretty close to the neutral/evil line. He doesn't sound like vile material to me. His motives are actually wholesome.

It sets a bad precedent. There are lots of grafts & inherent bonuses. It seems like it could very easily be abused.

The only thing in its favor is that VoP is so weak that balance-wise, in this case, it would probably help. For me, that wouldn't be enough. I think your DM's ruling is quite correct. You are one Regeneration away from VoP.

[Telonius]

From the DM's perspective, it looks like you're trying to have your cake and eat it too. That said, in this case, the cake is a lie. Why do you want VoP, anyway?

And how does a vile VoP make sense? Do you donate your proceeds to Asmodeus?

Honestly, VoP as an Evil character actually makes some amount of fluff sense. So, you get this guy to not only give you all of his material wealth from now until forever, but in return you give him something that actually makes him worse off than he was before. Sounds like the epitome of every "deal with the devil" I've ever heard of - Asmodeus himself would be proud of that kind of swindle.

[hamishspence]

RAI I'm pretty sure it doesn't work. But then, RAI, I don't think that your character would qualify for vile feats. A vile character has to be truly devotedly evil, like an exalted character must be a step above ordinary good. Just saying that your character is willing to do anything to protect the ocean is somewhere pretty close to the neutral/evil line. He doesn't sound like vile material to me. His motives are actually wholesome.

Actually, BoVD doesn't say that. There is no "vile characters lose the benefits of their Vile feats if they ever commit a Good act" statement.

They are Supernatural though- and implied to be granted by various entities (fiends, evil gods, etc)

So one could take Vile feats- and all one would have to be, is evil aligned (and have an appropriate patron).

There's quite a few sea-based fiends and evil deities who could grant the character Vile feats.

[Stallion]

RAW I don't think it works. I think a graft is equivalent to a magic item.



A graft is only a magical item until it's part of you. Then it's just that: part of you, rather than a possession.

[Jayabalard]

RAW I don't think it works. I think a graft is equivalent to a magic item.RAW for a homebrew feat?

[Keld Denar]

It still goes that you are trying to subvert the intent of the feat. The feat replaces your WBL with a fixed set of goodies. The graft, even after it's attached, is still considered to be a part of your WBL for determining your relative power. Don't think of it as a magic item, think of it as a measure of power, which is really what WBL is.

That said, VoP is incredibly weak. I wouldn't touch that with a 10' pole, even if VoP allowed me to own such an item...

In conclusion, I think your DM is following the letter and intent of the rules, whether thats for the better or worse. I don't think he's doing anything to warrent the title you've heaped on him. If you have a problem with that, you are always free to disagree, but in the end, the decision is his.

[randomhero00]

I don't particularly agree with the DM, however, I think its still his call. Grafts give/are very similar to items in many aspects.

[ThunderCat]

VoP means you give up the benefits that money can buy in order to achieve spiritual strength instead. Using your money on permanent improvements (grafts, tomes/manuals) and then take VoP, to gain both the benefits of poverty and the benefits of wealth..... that's fishy by RAW and downright wrong by RAI.

That being said, VoP is weak as it is, especially when taken too late to get most of the free feats, so it shouldn't an issue. But for a DM who considers VoP balanced by itself, I can certainly see why it wouldn't be allowed.

[Callista]

Yeah, it's a bit munchkiny. Against the spirit of the Vow, too. It's not that you're really looking at an extremely overpowered option; it's more that you will be opening the way for others to really abuse the graft/VoP connection, and you don't want to do that.

How about you ask your DM to find a way to get rid of the graft, in-game, before you take the vow? There should be a way to get the arm back--healing magic can usually do it--so you won't end up with less than you ought to have either.

[Vangor]

Grafts should qualify, and the weakness of VoP does not warrant this being an issue. Considering this is meant to be a Vile rewrite of VoP, I would say attempts to circumvent the requirements of the vow should be assumed or part of the requirements, though this may depend on the source of the benefits.

[JaronK]

VoP means you have to give away everything you can now and not get new stuff... but if you happen to have a permanent bonus (such as an inherent bonus from a tome, or a graft) that you can't give away, you still have it. You don't get the bonus feats you would have gotten, and this ends up being one of few ways to make VoP even remotely viable (adding in Kensai levels helps, as does having a racial flight ability). I don't see the problem. He got the graft before he had the vow.

I'd love to see where this stat gain every level feat thing is. I've never heard of it but it would really help.

JaronK

[Stallion]

Only thing that gives a stat gain EVERY level that you get a choice in where the increase goes is the forsaker, as far as I know, and that's a class that in some ways is more restrictive than VoP.

[Baconated]

Only thing that gives a stat gain EVERY level that you get a choice in where the increase goes is the forsaker, as far as I know, and that's a class that in some ways is more restrictive than VoP.

Its a trait, like I said.

http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Magically-Superior_Body_%283.5e_Trait%29

Yes its homebrew, but it works well with VoP, and its actually horribly underpowered (at level 20, youd have the equal of +5 in 4 stats and nothing else, whereas with magic items, you could have a +6 str +6 dex +6 con +6 Wis, etc etc.

It says you cant use it in conjunction with VoP, but meh.. giving up ALOT of power in exchange for a little bit of power, id allow it as a DM.

[Chuckthedwarf]

I think looking at a graft - or a peg leg, or anything similar - in this case, as a piece of equipment that must be given away is silly.

Anything can be assigned monetary value. There are quite a few things on your body that could be removed and sold without killing you. A kidney, for example, might have monetary worth and not necessarily kill you if removed carefully. Shouldn't mean that you have to give it away when you take the Vow of Poverty.

Although, really, it all comes down to the GM.

[JaronK]

Actually, that trait isn't bad for characters who don't need stat boosts too badly. Consider the fact that you don't lose any money to it, so now you can spend that money on other things. A Druid who normally only cares about Wis and Con can now have +12 Wis and +8 Con, which is a LOT better than what he otherwise might have had... and he still gets his items.

Shame it doesn't work with VoP of course. If it works with Necropolitan (it might, it seems to imply it doesn't work with things that deny you magic items) then by turning into one with a UA varient Necromancer or a Dread Necromancer you'd also get +4 Enhancement to Dex and Str anyway, which would stack with this if you wanted. I could see a Necropolitan Factotum rocking out with his +4 Str, +4 Dex, - Con, and +20 Int (note the Int boost WOULD help with skillpoints).

JaronK

[Callista]

Anything can be assigned monetary value. There are quite a few things on your body that could be removed and sold without killing you. A kidney, for example, might have monetary worth and not necessarily kill you if removed carefully. Shouldn't mean that you have to give it away when you take the Vow of Poverty.If you're talking about a normal VoP character, though, it'd still take him about two seconds to give away the kidney anyway. The regular VoP is Exalted-only, and that's just the kind of thing they do. "Oh, you need a kidney? Here you go." Seriously.

Now I'm wondering about the rationale behind a Vile vow of poverty, though. It really doesn't seem to make much sense to me. Why would somebody who's evil give up all his equipment? Unlike the Good guy, he can't depend on his deity to take care of him, because his deity is just as nasty as he is, and he knows it.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

Now I'm wondering about the rationale behind a Vile vow of poverty, though. It really doesn't seem to make much sense to me. Why would somebody who's evil give up all his equipment? Unlike the Good guy, he can't depend on his deity to take care of him, because his deity is just as nasty as he is, and he knows it.I could see someone like Graz'zt offering some sort of VoP-ish transformation for the lulz.

"Right, and you'll get all these abilities in exchange for that measly gold *snicker*. You'll be so powerful! *snort*"

[CIDE]

Would it be the same opinion if the VoP was attempted to be grabbed by someone that (willingly or unwillingly) has the Half-Golem template added to themselves?

If it does NOT work then why would it be different then a Warforged taking it?

I think it's a similar enough concept to the grafts for discussion

[maximus25]

I disagree.

VoP means that you give up your earthly posessions at the time you take the feat, and never desire material goods again. VoP doesnt mean that you become as normal as a level 1 commoner. There's even a feat or Trait (i cant recall it atm) that allows you to raise an ability score every level instead of every 4th level, but you cant use magical items that give stat bonuses.

Both this feat/trait and VoP would work with each other, as they should. But any DM that allows it without serious munchkin consideration is asking for trouble.

But VoP is so underpowered, theres no reason to not allow a homebrew graft variant - esp since grafts become part of your body. What if your character lost a leg to a crit chart, and got a leg magically grafted on, and while he was convalescing, started studying martial arts and meditation from the monks healing him, and started taking monk levels, with VoP. Would you make him give up the leg? Why?



And, "buying" a full set of times is laughable - if your DM gives you the gold to buy a full set of tomes AND allows you to buy it, VoP is the least of his worries - its the +5 Vorpal Shocking Burst Khopesh Holy Avenger being wielded by the level 15 Paladin who's about 9 kills away from becoming a demigod.

Where is this feat/trait? I must know!

[sonofzeal]

I could see someone like Graz'zt offering some sort of VoP-ish transformation for the lulz.

"Right, and you'll get all these abilities in exchange for that measly goldandyoursoul *snicker*. You'll be so powerful! *snort*"
Fixed that for you. ;)

[Gotterdammerung]

Assuming the home brew version mirrors the rules of the original, by raw the graft is not treated as a possession. The vow checks "POSSESSIONS". And it has some very reasonable exceptions (spell component pouch, food, clothes, one simple weapon.)
The graft becomes part of your body once the grafting process is complete.
While a body can existentially be considered a possession, it is not considered a possession for this feat. IF IT WAS, no one would be illegible for the vow of poverty, because everything possesses either a body or soul and these are things of quantifiable value in D&D.

There are MANY cases where a vow of poverty character can benefit from WBL. Examples:

A trainer build can collect and train monsters of various types. These monsters have an inherent WBL value. There eggs alone are worth money in many markets. However as long as the character views his monster friends as companions and allies instead of pets and possessions, he is free to amass a small fortune in exotic beasties. If someone tried to rationalize these monsters as possessions he need merely make these arguments. My adventuring companions would fetch me quite a pretty penny at the thayan slave markets. Perhaps since their company is preventing me from upholding my vow, I should sell Hrothgar at Skullport. A big strong barbarian like him should cover the cost of some lavish living for a year or so, with enough left over for an atonement afterwards. Or perhaps I should sell Jerglin Windswoon's little elvan heart. I hear those elvan hearts are really sought after spell components for evil spellcasters.


Example 2:

For saving the realm, a king wishes to perform a service for the characters. He will not refuse and he will not give the gift to anyone else. If the hero chooses for the king to apply a graft to his arm or some other "non-possession" reward, then he has not violated his vow in the slightest.
At no point did he possess anything. Yes this favor had VALUE, but it was never a possession. The funny part is, he actually would break his vow if he kept his dead arm... unless he planned on using it as a simple weapon or a spell component.




Another issue is player versus character. As a player, the decisions I make for my character do not have to strictly follow any roleplay limitations. Once they reach my character they must adhere to roleplay restrictions. This means, it is entirely possible for me to make the decision to spend my money on a wisdom tome and then take the vow of poverty afterward. AS LONG AS it is justified once it reaches my character motivation. Example, the combination of spending all my wealth on 1 thing and the extra wisdom I received granting me new heights of philosophical thinking, has led me to the conclusion that money is a curse on the world and the world would have been a better place if I had spent that money on something more charitable and long lasting instead of on something as insignificant as my own feeble insight. Taaa-daaaa~~~~ It isn't the most noble example of roleplay, but it isn't against the rules.

[ShriekingDrake]

It's worth remembering that VoP is role-play centric and is designed for mature players and DMs. It requires a lot of nuanced interaction between the DM and the players who takes it. At times, there is not going to be harmony.

I almost always have my characters take "Gift of Discernment" as an early exalted feat to facilitate the infelicities between DM interpretation and my own. This way, the DM can tell me whether I'm crossing the line. If I don't like the way the DM is interpreting the feat, then I don't take the feat again.

Given all the homebrew involved here, I can't tell you whether I think this is a good call on the DM's part. Generally, I think DMs should try to make the game fun. But if they think BoED and BoVD need to be handled with care, that's just how it is.

Good luck.

[Rubik]

As far as fluff goes, I can see a Vow of Wastefulness, or some such. You vow to spend your money in the most frivolous ways possible, and flaunt the fact in front of those who are poor and suffering.

Spending 3,000 gp on an insanely expensive bauble for that stable boy that caught your eye, and later bragging about it in front of the beggar asking for a copper piece (which, of course, you snub)? Totally within the idea of Evil VoP.

[Chess435]

(Un)Holy thread necromancy, Batman! I thought this thread looked familiar.