Vow of Peace Build

[Ortesk]

So we have seen all the movies where the guy never touches a foe in violence and yet they beat each other for him. As witnessed in karate kid where jacky beat 6 black belts by letting them do the hitting for him. My question, can dnd support such a build or concept? I dont mean him to be pure defense, more like his defense is his offense. So far all i have seen is a passive monk UA alternate class, But how exactly would one go about this? Feats and classes and features

[Red Fel]

So we have seen all the movies where the guy never touches a foe in violence and yet they beat each other for him. As witnessed in karate kid where jacky beat 6 black belts by letting them do the hitting for him. My question, can dnd support such a build or concept? I dont mean him to be pure defense, more like his defense is his offense. So far all i have seen is a passive monk UA alternate class, But how exactly would one go about this? Feats and classes and features

The Setting Sun discipline in ToB is basically built around this. It contains some powerful counterattacks, most of which do not involve you damaging an opponent, but either avoiding or redirecting his attacks. For instance, Fool's Strike allows you to turn an opponent's attack against himself; Scorpion Parry allows you to direct it at an adjacent creature. Baffling Defense lets you replace your AC with a Sense Motive check. And so forth.

That said, you'd probably need to combine it with something else. Just sitting, waiting to be attacked is not a terribly effective strategy in D&D. Enemies could choose to ignore you, or could fire spells or projectiles from a distance. There are a lot of ways around a counterattack-oriented character.

[Ortesk]

The Setting Sun discipline in ToB is basically built around this. It contains some powerful counterattacks, most of which do not involve you damaging an opponent, but either avoiding or redirecting his attacks. For instance, Fool's Strike allows you to turn an opponent's attack against himself; Scorpion Parry allows you to direct it at an adjacent creature. Baffling Defense lets you replace your AC with a Sense Motive check. And so forth.

That said, you'd probably need to combine it with something else. Just sitting, waiting to be attacked is not a terribly effective strategy in D&D. Enemies could choose to ignore you, or could fire spells or projectiles from a distance. There are a lot of ways around a counterattack-oriented character.

The goad feat could draw the enemy in, So unarmed sworsage would be my best bet?

[Starmage21]

The default assumption for Vow of Peace is that you're a healer/buffer during combat. Maybe you could justify battlefield control and debuffing as part of that.

[HalfQuart]

The goad feat could draw the enemy in, So unarmed sworsage would be my best bet?
Goad is a rather problematic feat... it's mind effecting, requires 3+ Int, requires a Will save, only restricts melee attacks, and requires a move action -- so no full attacking without tricks.

I think you'd want to be able to do something else too: buffing, debuffing, or control.

[Red Fel]

The goad feat could draw the enemy in, So unarmed sworsage would be my best bet?

I never said best, or even only bet. Although, if you wanted to ensure that enemies wouldn't get past you, and would attack you first, I'd advise two things:
Combat Reflexes + Stand Still. Two great feats that feat great together. Get plenty of AoOs, stop things dead in their tracks.
Martial Maneuver (any Devoted Spirit) + Martial Stance (Iron Guard's Glare) or Martial Stance (Thicket of Blades). Alternatively, a one-level dip in Crusader. As a Swordsage, you don't get Devoted Spirit maneuvers, but Iron Guard's Glare and Thicket of Blades are great options if you want to force somebody to attack you. IGG will force anyone you threaten to take a penalty unless they attack you - and the language of the stance states that they know it. Thicket of Blades, when combined with Combat Reflexes and Stand Still, basically completely locks threatened enemies down. You can more or less walk directly into the middle of a melee, and loudly announce "Nobody move!" And they won't, or you'll AoO + Stand Still them.
Again, what you're asking to do is tough to pull off. An enemy with teleportation or ranged attacks will be able to ignore or annihilate you.

Nor are martial maneuvers the only answer. (I just don't know of many others.) But they offer a possibility.

As Starmage points out, though, your real ability - and how you can provoke enemies into attacking you - is being useful. Alas, Swordsage doesn't have access to White Raven, but White Raven Tactics allows you to break the action economy over one knee. Slinging spells is also an excellent option.

You could also take a dip into Incarnate for some really useful abilities which don't require combat.

[Ortesk]

Great advice guys, so go with a lock down build who when in direct combat can somehow negate enemy fire. And i admit problem with vow of peace is your really in just the healer route, since a shrewd dm can penalize you for buffs since your helping your party kill enemies in a better way. But a guy who is like a buddhist monk, and weapons break against his skin as he redirects attacks, is a very cool thought. Also, would you be breaking your vow by directing your enemies sword into his comrades stomach. On one hand, you didnt swing the weapon, on the other you have caused harm where it normally wouldnt have been

[Arc_knight25]

Go Knight. Knight's Challenge is what your looking for as a means to instigate attacks. Much better then Goad.

All that is needed from the target is a Int of 5, a language and a CR equal to or greater then your level -2.

Your aiming for Test of Mettle. Creatures that fail the save attack you with ranged and or melee attacks.

Elusive target is another feat to mitigate damage. You just need to be flanked and have the creature attacking be the target of your dodge bonus.

[HalfQuart]

And i admit problem with vow of peace is your really in just the healer route, since a shrewd dm can penalize you for buffs since your helping your party kill enemies in a better way. <snip>
Also, would you be breaking your vow by directing your enemies sword into his comrades stomach. On one hand, you didnt swing the weapon, on the other you have caused harm where it normally wouldnt have been
I don't really see buffs as a violation of Vow of Peace.. it doesn't say anything in the feat description on p.48 anyway. It does elude to debuffs being a problem, if it then allows your party to kill them.

And I do think redirecting an enemy's attack to hit someone else would violate the vow, but the language is a little vague so you're DM might let it work.

[Red Fel]

Also, would you be breaking your vow by directing your enemies sword into his comrades stomach. On one hand, you didnt swing the weapon, on the other you have caused harm where it normally wouldnt have been

Well, let's look at the specific requirements of Vow of Peace. According to the language of the feat, you cannot:
Cause harm to any living creature. Constructs and undead are fair game.
Deal real damage or ability damage to living creatures through spells or weapons. Nonlethal damage is fair game.
Target living creatures with death effects, disintegrate, or spells that can cause death or great harm.
Use nondamaging spells to soften living creatures up so your allies can kill them.
So, things we know:
Using a Monk's unarmed attacks (or those of anyone using Improved Unarmed Strike) may deal nonlethal damage without penalty. (Unless I'm forgetting a rule somewhere.) That means if you limit yourself to nonlethal strikes, you can still technically fight.
You can kick the crap out of constructs and undead. VoP doesn't give a crap about them.
You cannot use spells to soften up your enemies. This implies that you should not be using buffs specifically to enable your allies to kill them. However, nothing precludes you from healing your allies, even in combat.
With regard to your question (redirecting an enemy attack), it depends on whether you believe that actions matter or that results matter.

The former view, that actions matter, imposes limitations on your actions, specifically - you shall not directly harm another. But here, you did not harm another - your attacker did. So you're clear.

The latter view says that the outcome is all that matters. Here, your actions, your specific choice, caused the outcome of something being harmed. As a result, you got the bad outcome and broke your vow; you are naughty.

I would rule that, under the provisions of VoP, you have broken your vow by redirecting any attack that deals lethal damage. Nonlethal is fine.

And, unfortunately, that puts you back at square one, doesn't it?

[Arc_knight25]

The Merciful enchantment changes the damage to all non-lethal plus an additional 1d6. So you shouldn't be weaponless or restrained to Monk unarmed attacks.

Also Justicar and Bloodhound Prc's can use weapons to deal non-lethal damage without the -4 to attack.

[HalfQuart]

3. You cannot use spells to soften up your enemies. This implies that you should not be using buffs specifically to enable your allies to kill them. However, nothing precludes you from healing your allies, even in combat.
I think defensive buffs on allies that protect them while they kill enemies would be acceptable.

[Red Fel]

I think defensive buffs on allies that protect them while they kill enemies would be acceptable.

Possible. But subject to interpretation. If the purpose of buffing is to defend your allies from hostility, I think it flies. If the purpose is to better enable them to inflict harm, I think it fails. It the purpose is both... Subject to interpretation.

And we know how Good Deities are awesome at interpretation. Pelor, the Burning Hate...

[Ruethgar]

I believe there was also some sort of spell reflecting ACF for rogues to assist on that front.

[Ortesk]

Well, let's look at the specific requirements of Vow of Peace. According to the language of the feat, you cannot:
Cause harm to any living creature. Constructs and undead are fair game.
Deal real damage or ability damage to living creatures through spells or weapons. Nonlethal damage is fair game.
Target living creatures with death effects, disintegrate, or spells that can cause death or great harm.
Use nondamaging spells to soften living creatures up so your allies can kill them.
So, things we know:
Using a Monk's unarmed attacks (or those of anyone using Improved Unarmed Strike) may deal nonlethal damage without penalty. (Unless I'm forgetting a rule somewhere.) That means if you limit yourself to nonlethal strikes, you can still technically fight.
You can kick the crap out of constructs and undead. VoP doesn't give a crap about them.
You cannot use spells to soften up your enemies. This implies that you should not be using buffs specifically to enable your allies to kill them. However, nothing precludes you from healing your allies, even in combat.
With regard to your question (redirecting an enemy attack), it depends on whether you believe that actions matter or that results matter.

The former view, that actions matter, imposes limitations on your actions, specifically - you shall not directly harm another. But here, you did not harm another - your attacker did. So you're clear.

The latter view says that the outcome is all that matters. Here, your actions, your specific choice, caused the outcome of something being harmed. As a result, you got the bad outcome and broke your vow; you are naughty.

I would rule that, under the provisions of VoP, you have broken your vow by redirecting any attack that deals lethal damage. Nonlethal is fine.

And, unfortunately, that puts you back at square one, doesn't it?

Thanks for the insight, I may well just roleplay the peace side of him because VoPeace is so.......vague and open to dm interpretation, you open yourself to be penalized at a moments notice. If one session you use alot of cool pizazz on mooks and dm is going for it, you can be fine. Next your tricks work on GGEG and hes pissed, you can well lose the feats which didnt come cheap

[Red Fel]

Thanks for the insight, I may well just roleplay the peace side of him because VoPeace is so.......vague and open to dm interpretation, you open yourself to be penalized at a moments notice. If one session you use alot of cool pizazz on mooks and dm is going for it, you can be fine. Next your tricks work on GGEG and hes pissed, you can well lose the feats which didnt come cheap

And that's a pretty major point. It's entirely possible - indeed, I would recommend it - to add flavor like this to a character without the feat tax. Taking an informal Vow of Peace, with no mechanical function (i.e. no mechanical benefit) is a great character concept, and would give you a lot to work with. You could modify it in a number of ways, and still keep it functional; in fact, a smart DM might actually reward you for playing it right.

Here's an example. Say that your character has taken the "Vow of the Gentle Path." He vows never to use manufactured weapons, and never to deliberately deal serious harm (read: lethal or ability damage) to a living thing (read: constructs and undead a-okay). He is permitted to act in self-defense, and can redirect his enemies blows, but must never be an aggressor and may not deal lethal damage even in self defense. He gains no benefit from this apart from reputation ("Say, I've heard of you! You're the Monk of the Gentle Path!"), and perhaps any discretionary extras the DM decides to offer you. In exchange, however, you have to be willing to play the fluff. That is, if someone hands you a knife, you drop it in disgust. If you accidentally deal lethal damage or - heavens forbid - kill something, you have to have a freak-out episode, maybe seek an atonement spell.

There are ways to play these things without the heavily-taxed feat, is what I'm saying.

[Ortesk]

And that's a pretty major point. It's entirely possible - indeed, I would recommend it - to add flavor like this to a character without the feat tax. Taking an informal Vow of Peace, with no mechanical function (i.e. no mechanical benefit) is a great character concept, and would give you a lot to work with. You could modify it in a number of ways, and still keep it functional; in fact, a smart DM might actually reward you for playing it right.

Here's an example. Say that your character has taken the "Vow of the Gentle Path." He vows never to use manufactured weapons, and never to deliberately deal serious harm (read: lethal or ability damage) to a living thing (read: constructs and undead a-okay). He is permitted to act in self-defense, and can redirect his enemies blows, but must never be an aggressor and may not deal lethal damage even in self defense. He gains no benefit from this apart from reputation ("Say, I've heard of you! You're the Monk of the Gentle Path!"), and perhaps any discretionary extras the DM decides to offer you. In exchange, however, you have to be willing to play the fluff. That is, if someone hands you a knife, you drop it in disgust. If you accidentally deal lethal damage or - heavens forbid - kill something, you have to have a freak-out episode, maybe seek an atonement spell.

There are ways to play these things without the heavily-taxed feat, is what I'm saying.

Thanks for the help, I used to be a fan of vow feats but im seeing how vague they are and realizing some dm's may not be as kind as i personally have ben to players. I think roleplaying will be better, due to the fact most players dont want to be penalized for the fact that you killed a downed foe, now take a penalty because joe picked a feat that can neuter you as well

[DR27]

+1 for the swordsage advice, also recommend Elusive Target as a feat for this concept - cause your enemies to hit each other, negate their power attack against you, or make them fall down for missing you.