Ever taken VoP?

[danzibr]

We often hear on the forums about how bad VoP is (sometimes it's not quite so terrible, sometimes mediocre, and in rare circumstances it could even be a good choice, like The Right Class + Core-Only Except VoP + Low WBL).

But anyway, I like roleplaying and flavor points, and actually made a VoP character once. He was a Warforged Totemist, started at level 5, got to play 2 sessions with him. He was a lot of fun.

Anyone else play with VoP?

[Spore]

I have never taken VoP but it would have made my (Pathfinder) oracle pretty awesome since her job is basically just buffing and spellcasting. She HAS a metamagic rod but she hardly ever uses it. All other important items are pretty much replicated by the feat (Cloak of Resistance, Charisma Headband etc.) She is one of the more powerful characters anyway so I don't really need to micromanage equipment to stay even.

Problems are only provided by not being able to cast True Seeing and other spells with components due to their costs. Also not being able to cast from scolls somewhat impedes me but I still like the feat. The fluff is great and I've purposely underequipped my character to show her modesty anyway.

[StreamOfTheSky]

I have, for a Druid / Lion of Talisid. Druid is probably the best class for it and it has some genuinely nice exalted feat options (exalted wildshape, touch of golden ice, and exalted companion, plus sanctify natural attack is decent albeit a bit redundant at level 10+ and nymph's kiss is every VoP character's level 1 bonus feat) unlike other classes that might mesh decently with it. I still felt less powerful than a normal druid for the lack of customization and preparation you can have from expendable items and laying out your own gear. But it was still quite potent.

It should be obvious by now, but you NEED to do it as a caster or other sort of class (meldshaper, warlock, DFA, etc...) that can cover up for the problems VoP doesn't solve at all, like flight or teleporting (even just the swift 10 ft of anklets of translocation, to get out of jams) or dealing with ethereal foes. It's insane to take it with a build that can't provide its own solutions to these things.

The other big drawback is losing those 2 first level feats. That utterly crushes just about any feat progression you may want. Sure, you get back way more exalted feats over time. But there just aren't enough decent ones. Even druid, who has probably the largest selection of useful ones, runs out of decent options past level 10 (and why do so many for non-charisma characters require Cha 15? On the one person who CAN'T just grab a +charisma item!). I'd prefer if VoP didn't cost feats and was just a personal choice balanced against the benefit of having magic items, or just cost one feat. Even if it meant a lighter bonus feat progression...because there's not that many anyway.

If you play with a strict RAW DM....you'll have innumerable other problems as well. But one will also be how stupid VoP's restrictions on mundane items are. By strict RAW, you can't even have a FREE holly and mistletoe, let alone a 1 gp wooden holy symbol. A spellbook is obviously going to be too lavish, but those others are really silly. Especially when by strict RAW you can have as many heavy crossbows as you want, and possibly with special materials on all your weapons and armor (except for ones that make it masterwork).

[Yuki Akuma]

Yes. I took it on a Monk.

It wasn't very good. It was fun to roleplay at least.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

I took it once, on a Killoren Druid. I had Exalted Companion for a Celestial Fleshraker, which also had VoP. The primary plot was that something was causing all the magical creatures in the setting, such as fey (including Killorens), to gradually die out. My character was tasked with hiring adventurers to find the source and put a stop to it, so his selfless charitable cause was to hire the rest of the party to save his people. It was nothing short of shenanigans.

[StreamOfTheSky]

I took it once, on a Killoren Druid. I had Exalted Companion for a Celestial Fleshraker, which also had VoP. The primary plot was that something was causing all the magical creatures in the setting, such as fey (including Killorens), to gradually die out. My character was tasked with hiring adventurers to find the source and put a stop to it, so his selfless charitable cause was to hire the rest of the party to save his people. It was nothing short of shenanigans.

I had to argue with my DM for weeks to let my celestial tiger take VoP. He thought it was "unfair" that my pet who's by proxy forced to abide by my feat not also be able to spend his feats to benefit (keeping in mind the animal can't take flaws so it misses two exalted bonus feats and loses around 1/2 to 1/3 of its general feat choices until very high levels). I think he ended up capping its benefits to my HD, which was pointless since it never surpassed my HD anyway. But man, that was the most epic battle of that whole campaign for me.

(OP asked and I forgot to say, I played the VoP druid from around level 3 or 4 -- I forget what level I started at exactly, but it was before wild shape -- to level 11)

[Necroticplague]

Yeah, I've taken it before. The game was so low wealth that its boni were pretty much the only source of enhancement boni in existence. So I just played a VoP ghost to make the most of it.

[Telonius]

I have; as a Monk, in fact, way back in 2005-ish (I think). It worked out approximately as well as the boards suggest it would. I was able to provide some party face duties, and was really good at not dying. But for offense, I was mainly the flanking partner of our party Rogue, and that was about it. Didn't connect with a single Stunning Fist through 20 levels of play (and not for lack of trying). In-combat tactics were hard against flying enemies. Flurry of Misses were definitely a thing. I didn't mind, since I was contributing out of combat, but there are a lot of gamers who would have had their experience totally ruined.

On the plus side, my "can't kill me" stuff helped out a lot when we were running some rescue missions. (We were playing Shackled City). Pulling people out of burning buildings and other natural/unnatural catastrophes was a lot easier for me. My most meaningful offensive contribution was actually against the BBEG. I was able to disarm him of one of his super-awesome weapons (very lucky rolls). I spent the rest of the combat using my speed to stay six steps ahead of him, and saves and AC to not get hit by the rest of his attacks and spells. Probably saved a few kills that way.

But yeah, VoP nearly always hurts. Totemist is one of the classes that it hurts the least.

[Martimus Prime]

We often hear on the forums about how bad VoP is (sometimes it's not quite so terrible, sometimes mediocre, and in rare circumstances it could even be a good choice, like The Right Class + Core-Only Except VoP + Low WBL).


Data point of one here, but in all my years as a DM I've never had a player pick VoP where the result wasn't ridiculously strong. Then again, that could be the result of shameless min-maxing on other fronts.

[Afgncaap5]

I took it once, with a ranger. Didn't know what I was getting into.

For that same character in the same situation? I'd totally do it again. I may do it again in the future, as well, if I have the right character idea or get into a situation with low wealth in play.

[eggynack]

Data point of one here, but in all my years as a DM I've never had a player pick VoP where the result wasn't ridiculously strong. Then again, that could be the result of shameless min-maxing on other fronts.
Although I don't know surrounding information about your game, it is more likely to be the inverse. In particular, in games with low levels of optimization, vow of poverty gains a lot of power because the way the characters would otherwise choose items is mediocre. Considered in a certain way, vow just sets all of your item slots in a really particular way. For characters above a reasonable point on the spectrum of optimization, this is bad, because there are items that provide greater benefits than VoP, but for characters below that point, it's good, because there absolutely are items that provide lesser benefits.

[Martimus Prime]

Although I don't know surrounding information about your game, it is more likely to be the inverse. In particular, in games with low levels of optimization, vow of poverty gains a lot of power because the way the characters would otherwise choose items is mediocre. Considered in a certain way, vow just sets all of your item slots in a really particular way. For characters above a reasonable point on the spectrum of optimization, this is bad, because there are items that provide greater benefits than VoP, but for characters below that point, it's good, because there absolutely are items that provide lesser benefits.

In terms of item OP levels, you are correct; both instances involved character designs that precluded item min-maxing, either due to lack of item slots due to non-humanoid shapes or because there were multiple alternate forms involved, so they had to rely on other mechanics to do their jobs in the party.

[Malimar]

I played a VoP sorcerer/favored soul/mystic theurge once, because I was told there would be a kender in the party and I wanted to opt out of having anything to do with those shenanigans.

[RebelRogue]

I used it on a Soulbow/Mystic ranger gestalt character. I guess I was technically cheating with the divine focus for the ranger.

[Tvtyrant]

I played a VoP sorcerer/favored soul/mystic theurge once, because I was told there would be a kender in the party and I wanted to opt out of having anything to do with those shenanigans.

This is my favorite answer.

[Cruiser1]

The other big drawback is losing those 2 first level feats.
With optimization, VoP only requires one first level feat. :smallsmile: Initially you do have to spend two feats on Sacred Vow and Vow of Poverty, but just wait until Vow of Poverty starts giving you free bonus exalted feats. Retrain Sacred Vow to the feat you really want. That temporarily disables the benefits of Vow of Poverty since you no longer qualify for it, however you still have the feat in disabled form. Then retrain one of the bonus exalted feats to Sacred Vow, which reactivates Vow of Poverty. Yes, that means a Vow of Poverty bonus exalted feat is allowing you to qualify for Vow of Poverty itself, but that only becomes a problem if you delevel below the level that you spent on Sacred Vow. This is a great move, since it gives you an extra general feat, and gives you something useful to do with those numerous exalted feats.

[Afgncaap5]

With optimization, VoP only requires one first level feat. :smallsmile: Initially you do have to spend two feats on Sacred Vow and Vow of Poverty, but just wait until Vow of Poverty starts giving you free bonus exalted feats. Retrain Sacred Vow to the feat you really want. That temporarily disables the benefits of Vow of Poverty since you no longer qualify for it, however you still have the feat in disabled form. Then retrain one of the bonus exalted feats to Sacred Vow, which reactivates Vow of Poverty. Yes, that means a Vow of Poverty bonus exalted feat is allowing you to qualify for Vow of Poverty itself, but that only becomes a problem if you delevel below the level that you spent on Sacred Vow. This is a great move, since it gives you an extra general feat, and gives you something useful to do with those numerous exalted feats.

I like the thinking there, but don't think I'd allow it as a GM. I'm not sure about the mechanics, but it seems against the spirit of a series of exalted feats that are focused on self-sacrifice and adhering to new ways of life.

[jiriku]

I played a VoP exalted succubus monster class, using one of the homebrew hacks to VoP that somewhat improved the progression of bonuses. It worked quite well, although not in a traditional sense. The succubus used Mindsight and her natural flight to function as overwatch for the team, spotting hidden enemies and guiding the team around obstacles. Her only contributions in combat were using suggestion and charm monster against enemies. However, eventually gave me control of a couple of creatures that *weren't* bound by the vow, and they continued to use whatever gear they had owned when I charmed them. Combats were deadly enough that charmed minions never lasted more than a few fights, but I managed to contribute effectively, and flight + VoP benefits kept me alive.

[Hiro Quester]

I'm seriously considering taking VoP on a Druid in a core-ish (core plus the occasional feat or PrC from other books if DM thinks it fits with your character concept.

I'd like to hear not just how it worked, but what items you found it most frustrating to have to do without.

For a Druid, I imagine not having barding for animal companion limits the AC's tanking a bit. (Unless AC also takes VOP.) no metamagic rod of extend would hurt too. What else is it frustrating to not be allowed to buy or use?

[danzibr]

I played a VoP sorcerer/favored soul/mystic theurge once, because I was told there would be a kender in the party and I wanted to opt out of having anything to do with those shenanigans.

This is my favorite answer.
Same here.

[The Insanity]

I played a 12th level Monk/IoPS once. The game didn't last long, so I don't know how effective the character would be. I did have one solo encounter with a Horned Devil that another player Planar Binded (it was a PvP game) and I killed it, but it turned out the DM used 3 ed stats for it for some reason, so I'm not sure if it was a weaker version.
I also played a Bard/Druid, but again, the game didn't last long, so no idea how good it would be.

[maniacalmojo]

I actually had a lot of fun with it on my Swordsage. I based my charecter off Kenshin Himora and the DM let me use a katana for my charecter. I dipped cleric for a level and took some flaws and traits to make him really fast and would dash attack opponents. Not optimal but he was really fun and super flashy in combat.

[mabriss lethe]

I've built a VoP character, but never had the opportunity to use him. The build was Soulknife/Sonokineticist and functioned pretty well on paper.

[atemu1234]

I actually had a lot of fun with it on my Swordsage. I based my charecter off Kenshin Himora and the DM let me use a katana for my charecter. I dipped cleric for a level and took some flaws and traits to make him really fast and would dash attack opponents. Not optimal but he was really fun and super flashy in combat.

You are my hero.

[Rubik]

If you play with a strict RAW DM....you'll have innumerable other problems as well. But one will also be how stupid VoP's restrictions on mundane items are. By strict RAW, you can't even have a FREE holly and mistletoe, let alone a 1 gp wooden holy symbol. A spellbook is obviously going to be too lavish, but those others are really silly. Especially when by strict RAW you can have as many heavy crossbows as you want, and possibly with special materials on all your weapons and armor (except for ones that make it masterwork).Actually, it's worse than that. If you use a doorknob or stand on a rug or read a sign or admire a painting...

...guess what? You just lost your vow.

[StreamOfTheSky]

Same here.

The more entertaining counter pick would be a Forsaker that goes and destroys all the kender's ill-gotten gains.

Kender: Why'd you sunder my magical ring?!
Forsaker: Why'd you steal that magical ring?
Kender: Hey man, I'm just following my beliefs!
Forsaker: Same here. Deal with it.

[Spore]

Actually, it's worse than that. If you use a doorknob or stand on a rug or read a sign or admire a painting...

...guess what? You just lost your vow.

I advise you to not play with those kinds of people.

[Theomniadept]

Vow of Poverty is central to a build I've been working on I call the Unkillable Nudist.

[danzibr]

Vow of Poverty is central to a build I've been working on I call the Unkillable Nudist.
More details! Please :)

[j_spencer93]

Actually, it's worse than that. If you use a doorknob or stand on a rug or read a sign or admire a painting...

...guess what? You just lost your vow.

No you don't. How do you get that?

[eggynack]

No you don't. How do you get that?
You're not allowed to use anything outside of a certain set of objects, and "use" is a pretty broad term. So, is looking at a painting not using it? What about walking on a carpet? And so on and so forth.

[dextercorvia]

I've always wanted to take it on Sorcerer, with Eschew Materials houseruled to count as an Exalted feat, and have a follow up feat that allows you to cast spells with expensive foci. I've never found the campaign where I thought it was appropriate, though.

[Theomniadept]

More details! Please :)

Alright, this is a work in progress, mainly because I'm not terribly familiar with Tome of Battle.

Lesser Aasimar race, focus highest ability scores into WIS and CHA; Monk 2, into Paladin 2, into Swordsage 1, initial Initiator level of 3 (alright by some standards). Next, 1 level of Apostle of Peace, then 1 level of the Prestige Class pious Templar, then Ruby Knight Windicator all the way to the end.

At level 1 you need two flaws to get Vow of Poverty. Your other feats are going to be True Believer (gotta worship Wee Jas), and Weapon Focus [Dagger] (gotten from Swordsage). Vow of Poverty Bonus Exalted Feats will feed the feats for Apostle of Peace.

So, at Monk 1 and 2 you suck. Not something that can really be avoided but you can use your incredible WIS score to Stunning Fist things into uselessness for the rest of your party. Paladin 1 will give you...nothing. Note that Wee Jas is Lawful Neutral so despite being undead-oriented you can be a Paladin of her. Dunno how this works out because the Paladin code explicitly says 'murder undead' but Wee Jas has a vvvvveeeeeerrrrrryyyyyy strict church law and hierarchy that would be 100% okay with undead. Paladin 2 will give you Divine Grace. This is cool, WIS to AC, CHA to saves, both boosted by race.

Swordsage is gonna give you some actual usefulness though I have not fleshed out the stances/maneuvers that would work to keep Vow of Peace intact, so that could be significantly less useful than a normal Swordsage. Your Discipline Focus will give you -both- Weapon Focus with the Dagger (for Pious Templar) AND Unarmed Strikes if you choose Shadow Hand as your preferred style. This frees up a feat for Martial Study to gain a Devoted Spirit maneuver (probably Revitalizing Strike), then take a Devoted Spirit Stance from your Swordsage pool.

You now qualify for RKV, which means you can advance your accelerated AoP spellcasting while advancing your Initiator level. You can also cast Sanctified spells, which means things like a 3rd level Aspect of the Deva for 100 ft flight....and 1d3 strength damage. Not perfect but this is Vow of Poverty.

EDIT: Forgot to mention that Pious Templar 1 is for Mettle. You know, Hexblade's Fort/Will evasion?

This build can be altered too. You could probably dump the two levels of Paladin if you want a different race (though the Wisdom boost may be considered necessary) or if you want more initiator levels; just remember to keep a healthy supply of Diamond Mind concentration check save substitutes to combine with Mettle.

[Hiro Quester]

Actually, it's worse than that. If you use a doorknob or stand on a rug or read a sign or admire a painting...

...guess what? You just lost your vow.


You're not allowed to use anything outside of a certain set of objects, and "use" is a pretty broad term. So, is looking at a painting not using it? What about walking on a carpet? And so on and so forth.


No. Just no. That's way too strict. And goes against the details listed in the feat.


To fulfill your vow, you must not own or use any material possessions, with the following exceptions:

You have forsaken owning any possessions, and using any magical items. Objects you use can't be your own material possessions. So you can't own the doorknob or the painting. But as long as they are not your possessions, or magical items, then temporary use of a mundane object is fine.

You can pick up a stone and throw it to make a distracting noise. If the party needs to disguise themselves in the uniform of enemy soldiers, you can use someone else's (non-magical) uniform as a disguise.

The only exception to simply using an item is magical items. You can't use or "borrow" those. But even then you can benefit from items used on your behalf:


You may not use any magic item of any sort, though you can benefit from magic items used on your behalf—you can drink a potion of cure serious wounds a friend gives you, receive a spell cast from a wand, scroll, or staff, or ride on your companion's ebony fly.

Of course, anyone taking VoP should discuss in detail with their DM exactly what is and is not in the limits of the vow. But "you can't use a doorknob" is an excessively restrictive interpretation, that I hope no DM would insist a player sticks to.

[eggynack]

You have forsaken owning any possessions, and using any magical items. Objects you use can't be your own material possessions. So you can't own the doorknob or the painting. But as long as they are not your possessions, or magical items, then temporary use of a mundane object is fine.

That thing you quoted, it says the thing I said. It doesn't say, "You can't use any material possessions that you own." It says, "You can't own or use." They're completely separate restrictions. If a doorknob isn't a specific exception listed after that quote, and it's not, then you can't use it.


But even then you can benefit from items used on your behalf.
That is, indeed, a specific exception to a general rule.


Of course, anyone taking VoP should discuss in detail with their DM exactly what is and is not in the limits of the vow. But "you can't use a doorknob" is an excessively restrictive interpretation, that I hope no DM would insist a player sticks to.
I agree that it's excessively restrictive, and from context you may note that Ryu does as well, but it's still an accurate reading of the text. Per the exact RAW, you may not look at paintings, because that qualifies as using it.

[Pippin]

I think that VoP is bad because God can't take it.

I think its continuous true seeing makes VoP half worth it on its own. I'd try to find a friend willing to chaos shuffle the exalted feats to make it totally worth it.

I don't know why the game is so reluctant to granting continuous true seeing. Like, VoP is the only way to get it along with the Beguiler race, which your DM might not allow anyway Q_Q All hail shapechange!

[rrwoods]

Depends on what you think they mean by "possessions". If you believe that the context of the rule establishes that something you're using is only a possession if you own it, then looking at a painting is fine. It also renders the words "or use" redundant, but welcome to D&D. If you must believe that every word that is part of a rule must have a reason for existing, then sure, "possession" must refer to something owned by any individual (at least).

But, is a painting hanging in a museum a possession? Is a carpet someone gave to me but I don't give a damn about it, do I "possess" it? Is a doorknob on a government building a possession? All of these questions could have answers in specific instances; that's not the point. It's much more useful to assume the context defines "possession" as something owned by the Vow character themselves.

[danzibr]

<snip>
I love this idea :)

[eggynack]

Depends on what you think they mean by "possessions". If you believe that the context of the rule establishes that something you're using is only a possession if you own it, then looking at a painting is fine. It also renders the words "or use" redundant, but welcome to D&D. If you must believe that every word that is part of a rule must have a reason for existing, then sure, "possession" must refer to something owned by any individual (at least).

But, is a painting hanging in a museum a possession? Is a carpet someone gave to me but I don't give a damn about it, do I "possess" it? Is a doorknob on a government building a possession? All of these questions could have answers in specific instances; that's not the point. It's much more useful to assume the context defines "possession" as something owned by the Vow character themselves.
I don't think there's any definition of "possession" that demands that a specific subject be the possessor. Yes, if context specifies that it is some particular character's possession, then that context will define those parameters, but there is no such context. Possession just means, "a thing possessed," or, "property or wealth," or, "anything that is owned." You're pulling something that is not intrinsically part of the word into the definition. A painting is a material possession, because it is owned by the museum. A carpet someone gave you is a possession. Arguably, a carpet that the VoP character finds lying on the ground is free game, but that's about as good as it gets by a strict reading

[Soranar]

I played a Hengeyokai (sparrow) Psion with VoP. The sparrow form is surprisingly good with the VoP bonuses and the psion powers compensate for most of your weaknesses. Was also fun to be a litte birdy on the shoulder of a charmed npc , pretending to be familiar, whenever I felt like exploring a city.

[Roga]

I've also played a Hengeyokai (sparrow), though mine was Healer (base class) and Sorcerer Mystic Theurge. Took VoP, and role played a vow of non-violence but didn't actually take the feat. She made sure she didn't know a single spell that inflicted hit point damage, and focus on being a huge utility caster. It made her very popular with the group, and they were very willing to provide expensive material components for her to use when casting spells on them. Many of them took to carrying around a phylactery of diamond dust so she could run over and cast Revivify on them. Since then, she's been a recurring DMpc in future games whenever the party's make-up is lacking a dedicated healer.

For those interested in builds, the only non-straightforward parts are some feats from Dragonlance. Namely Reserves of Strength, so wring the most out of out-of-combat healing, and Dynamic Priest to make her entirely focused on Charisma, instead of splitting between Cha and Wis. Additionally, Surrogate Spellcasting from Savage Species so she could heal in Sparrow form. She spent many an encounter invisibly flying between allies healing them, or turning them invisible if desperate.

[j_spencer93]

You're not allowed to use anything outside of a certain set of objects, and "use" is a pretty broad term. So, is looking at a painting not using it? What about walking on a carpet? And so on and so forth.

that is literally trying to punish them for having a vow, and is said not to do in the Exalted book itself. Also that would just be being an ass to your players lol

[Snowbluff]

I had Exalted Companion for a Celestial Fleshraker, which also had VoP.

I did this, but I don't think I've taken it for my PC.

[eggynack]

that is literally trying to punish them for having a vow, and is said not to do in the Exalted book itself. Also that would just be being an ass to your players lol
It's not really trying to punish them for having the vow so much as it is just the vow causing very specific and punishing things to happen. I don't think that there's much in the way of a valid interpretation of the text that doesn't lead to this outcome. I agree though, that enforcing this particular completely existent rule is a jerk move, especially because that was the entire frigging premise of this whole thing. The rules for this are stupid, and people should be aware of what those stupid rules are so that they can make an informed decision about how to change them.

[j_spencer93]

It's not really trying to punish them for having the vow so much as it is just the vow causing very specific and punishing things to happen. I don't think that there's much in the way of a valid interpretation of the text that doesn't lead to this outcome. I agree though, that enforcing this particular completely existent rule is a jerk move, especially because that was the entire frigging premise of this whole thing. The rules for this are stupid, and people should be aware of what those stupid rules are so that they can make an informed decision about how to change them.

Even as someone that likes the Vow i will say there wording is way to restrictive or ill defined.

[StreamOfTheSky]

that is literally trying to punish them for having a vow, and is said not to do in the Exalted book itself. Also that would just be being an ass to your players lol

There is "strict RAW", which is problematic as all hell already.

And then there's "look at all the things the rules don't say my dead character can't do!" strict RAW.

I like when people show themselves to be adherents of the latter; gives me a heads up to never play in any game they run.

[Theomniadept]

There is "strict RAW", which is problematic as all hell already.

And then there's "look at all the things the rules don't say my dead character can't do!" strict RAW.

I like when people show themselves to be adherents of the latter; gives me a heads up to never play in any game they run.Why not? Just play a psion and you literally have no penalty for death - the others just wheel your dead body around while you manifest explosions and stuff.