Apostale of Peace & Vow of poverty?

[j_spencer93]

I am a little confused by this class, it is specifically created for the vow feats obviously, and even says as a prerequisite it needs vow of poverty and then it gets this:

As part of their sacred vows, apostles of peace forswear the use of armor, though they may wear magic items that protect them (such as a ring of protection or bracers of armor). An apostle of peace who wears any armor is unable to cast apostle of peace spells or use any of his supernatural class abilities while doing so and for 24 hours thereafter.

So does this class allows those using the vow of poverty to wear magical items? That seems to have been the intent to me however it never says it does not break the vow of poverty.

[eggynack]

Yeah, that's what it apparently does. Specific trumps general, after all. After that, you just have to figure out the scope of items you can wear. Some argue that you just need to stick basic AC bonuses on everything and you're free to equip yourself as you please, but I'm personally fond of the interpretation that literally any item can be considered an item that protects you, if you think about it.

[j_spencer93]

Awesome. I just found this class today or i would have added it to my discussion about a vow of poverty monk before. Anyways, I can see this being used to make that vow suck alot less

[j_spencer93]

I never even took it as meaning AC only...I took ti as magic items in general but now i wonder if it has to be a magical item that protects in some way like resist elements, or feather fall while falling. Both of those are protecting you and i would take it to mean any protecting item.

[eggynack]

I never even took it as meaning AC only...I took ti as magic items in general but now i wonder if it has to be a magical item that protects in some way like resist elements, or feather fall while falling. Both of those are protecting you and i would take it to mean any protecting item.
Well, as I said, literally any item can be said to be an item that protects you. A sword protects you from approaching goblins, a bag of holding protects you from having to carry stuff that's too heavy, and an apparatus of the crab protects you from not getting to be in an apparatus of the crab.

[Phelix-Mu]

I never even took it as meaning AC only...I took ti as magic items in general but now i wonder if it has to be a magical item that protects in some way like resist elements, or feather fall while falling. Both of those are protecting you and i would take it to mean any protecting item.

Unfortunately, this is a real slippery slope. If the resist elements protects you from the fireball and is thus protective, then maybe the boots that grant flying are protective. And if the boots count, how about the flying carpet? How about the flying construct? How about the construct army?

Taken to it's extreme, even the magical sword is protective, because the magical sword protects you from dangerous people by allowing you to kill them.

Clearly, there is supposed to be a line, or they would have just said "you are allowed to use magic items." Just where that line falls is almost impossible without DM input. Frankly, I am opposed to any use of BoED without DM input; the book pretty much assumes as much, since muddling out the implications of virtue as power is highly complicated (and the book bungles most of it).

Vow of Peace is not the solution you are looking for. While Apostle of Peace is good, the main problem is that it represents a paradigm shift in one of the basic game assumptions. Most games are about ferreting out the problem/evil and saving the world through liberal application of violence. AoP does the same thing, but no violence. That's a big deal, and definitely can't work without DM input (and is thus irrelevant for any real discussion about game functionality at a mechanical level).

[j_spencer93]

As DM i would have to say protective as in giving an AC bonus, reducing damage, or an effect activating to protect against a specific circumstance.
Also, this is for a NPC character that can help the PCs or teach them things. He is meant to be a gentle monk who will knock you unconscious without killing you...unless you try again then his monastery will.
EDIT: Also this will help my PC healer

[eggynack]

As DM i would have to say protective as in giving an AC bonus, reducing damage, or an effect activating to protect against a specific circumstance.
In that case, you'd still be capable of going with the only marginally less borked first path to victory. After all, with the MIC common item effects rules, and more generally the DMG adding new abilities rules, you can give just about every item in the game one of those qualities, and it's not massively expensive either.

[j_spencer93]

Thought it would keep it closer to the idea of the feat itself also. Since honestly using magic items along with that feats seems to be a little over power.

[Chronos]

Another interpretation is that the inclusion of Vow of Poverty in the class's prerequisites was a mistake. In this case, a non-VoP apostle could have whatever items they wanted, just like anyone else, except for armor, but an apostle who chose to take VoP would still be restricted from all items.

[j_spencer93]

there is that possibility but I am going by how the class is written. And since the feat is mentioned in the written text and prerequisites, I would assume it is not a mistake and an intentional (however somewhat dumb and broken) idea of the class.

[Divide by Zero]

By a strict reading, you only lose the benefit of Vow of Poverty if you use magic items. You still have the feat itself, so you can still qualify for Apostle of Peace while using magic items, and I don't see anything in the class description that contradicts that reading.

Though I doubt that was what the designers intended when they wrote the class, so we're back to "what the hell were they thinking?"

[eggynack]

By a strict reading, you only lose the benefit of Vow of Poverty if you use magic items. You still have the feat itself, so you can still qualify for Apostle of Peace while using magic items, and I don't see anything in the class description that contradicts that reading.
Seems plausible, though as a counter-argument, could one not consider qualifying for apostle of peace a part of the benefit of vow of poverty?

[j_spencer93]

Well i took the wording above, combined with the prerequisite of the feat to mean they meant them to be combined (as i think is the logically conclusion) BUT since it is not specified either way I really find it up to the DM. It never says it breaks the vow, however after rereading it, it never actually states it DOES NOT break it either...
However, i do feel fairly confident that was their, rather moronic and illogical, idea.

[Ratatoskir]

I originally took it as an over sight, as in, they forgot VoP was a prerequisite. But I could also see letting an Apostle of Peace use items that are solely defensive in nature ie - +AC, +saves, dr, mr, energy resistance, ect. No items that protect via offensive power, and no items that protect you via utility, such as flying, speed, ect. But I also realize that that is just how I'd interpret the RAI

[j_spencer93]

No i took it that way too. It wasnt until after i read it twice i realized the vow of poverty thing. I think it is meant to allow defensive only (As it defending your from harm and incapable of inflicting harm) items should be allowed.
Edit: Wait, if you void the prerequisite for a class you can not progress that class right? If so, then AoP would have to allow you to use defensive items (as it seems to imply) or it would be impossible to advance the class using a written feature of the class itself.