At what % of reduced WBL does Vow of Poverty become worth?

[SangoProduction]

Sure, VoP gives none of the utility of magic items, but when most of your WBL goes to the bare essentials...well, it's still not worth, because you still have *some* for utility, and flexibility in deciding what you actually need. So clearly, it's only when you are only barely making more than the bare essentials that VoP becomes viable. Except you still have no concealment, which is much more powerful than AC.

What % would you say, then, is the point where you'd go "yeah, this just isn't working out, I'm picking up VoP and kicking back."

I admit I started thinking about this partially because I was looking to play Dvati, and realized that I'd basically have 50% WBL, even if I got 100% from adventuring, because I have to "share" equipment with my other self. A reasonable DM would say "Hey, I'll let the items' effects be shared between both twins." Then you just have to deal with the Dual Wielding weapon cost problem, but that's much better than needing to buy two Cloaks of Resistances and so on.

[JNAProductions]

One hundred percent.

[nettle3305]

If you are so inclined, a naive approach would be to price the effects of VoP with equivalent magic items and subtract the gp-equivalent cost of one feat. This is how much you would be willing to pay for VoP in magic item form, and hence with less gold than this amount, taking VoP is almost surely optimal.

Extenuating circumstances include the fact that VoP is in a more useful 'form', in that you can't be disarmed of VoP benefits. Other circumstances include VoP benefits that could not be attained in conjunction otherwise due to overlapping slots, or classes that are very reliant on the feat VoP takes away. Also, the +8 bonus to ability scores is strictly speaking an epic bonus where magic items are concerned. This will obviously inflate the actual worth of VoP. You could simulate this bonus by considering the cost of purchasing two casts of wish (for the purpose of improving ability scores) and considering the price of a +6 item.

It occurs to me that lots of fun could be had with a dvati VoP druid. Zero effort pain train, assuming both forms can wildshape.

[SangoProduction]

If you are so inclined, a naive approach would be to price the effects of VoP with equivalent magic items and subtract the gp-equivalent cost of one feat. This is how much you would be willing to pay for VoP in magic item form, and hence with less gold than this amount, taking VoP is almost surely optimal.

Extenuating circumstances include the fact that VoP is in a more useful 'form', in that you can't be disarmed of VoP benefits. Other circumstances include VoP benefits that could not be attained in conjunction otherwise due to overlapping slots, or classes that are very reliant on the feat VoP takes away. Also, the +8 bonus to ability scores is strictly speaking an epic bonus where magic items are concerned. This will obviously inflate the actual worth of VoP. You could simulate this bonus by considering the cost of purchasing two casts of wish (for the purpose of improving ability scores) and considering the price of a +6 item.

It occurs to me that lots of fun could be had with a dvati VoP druid. Zero effort pain train, assuming both forms can wildshape.

Yeah, I mean like, at what point do you start to think "we really aren't getting anywhere near enough access to magic items", and would consider it as possibility? I tend to gravitate towards it anytime I hear "low magic" and "D&D" in the same description...If I join at all. I'm not for 5e. But sometimes the setting is interesting enough.

Spell casters tend to have enough utility already in their kits that losing miniscule number of trinkets isn't much of a loss, and when martials are restricted from their necessary items, it also seems like going VoP is going to be a win for them.

[OldTrees1]

Depends on the level range of the campaign and how much of the necessary utility I can fit in via features rather than items.

6th: I want Flight and limited See Invisibility
11th: I want Planar Travel and limited True Seeing
16th: I want Freedom of Movement, True Seeing, Mind Blank, and Death Ward

1st-10th: The feat cost of Vow of Poverty is not worth the benefits.
11th-15th I would have racial flight and thus only take Vow of Poverty if I could not afford even a Scout's Headband(3.4Kgp)
16th+ I would become a caster and take Vow of Poverty if I was beneath 260Kgp*.

*(@16th I would not have all of these but I would have 3 of the 4)
Third Eye Conceal(Mic, 120Kgp)(Mind Blank)
Hathran Mask of True Seeing(UE, 75Kgp)(True Seeing)
Soulfire(BoED, +4Armor/25Kgp Bracers)(Immunity to Death Effects, Energy Drain, and Negative Levels)
Ring of Freedom of Movement(DMG, 40Kgp)(Freedom of Movement)


I remember playing a Dvati character. I essentially made 2 sets of equipment but did not try to make the sets identical. One was the warrior set(2/3-3/4 WBL) and the other was the support set(1/4-1/3 WBL). They could trade sets as needed between encounters.

[SangoProduction]

Depends on the level range of the campaign and how much of the necessary utility I can fit in via features rather than items.

6th: I want Flight and limited See Invisibility
11th: I want Planar Travel and limited True Seeing
16th: I want Freedom of Movement, True Seeing, Mind Blank, and Death Ward

1st-10th: The feat cost of Vow of Poverty is not worth the benefits.
11th-15th I would have racial flight and thus only take Vow of Poverty if I could not afford even a Scout's Headband(3.4Kgp)
16th+ I would become a caster and take Vow of Poverty if I was beneath 260Kgp*.

*(@16th I would not have all of these but I would have 3 of the 4)
Third Eye Conceal(Mic, 120Kgp)(Mind Blank)
Hathran Mask of True Seeing(UE, 75Kgp)(True Seeing)
Soulfire(BoED, +4Armor/25Kgp Bracers)(Immunity to Death Effects, Energy Drain, and Negative Levels)
Ring of Freedom of Movement(DMG, 40Kgp)(Freedom of Movement)


I remember playing a Dvati character. I essentially made 2 sets of equipment but did not try to make the sets identical. One was the warrior set(2/3-3/4 WBL) and the other was the support set(1/4-1/3 WBL). They could trade sets as needed between encounters.

cool. That's a nice answer.

[bean illus]

I consider VoP to be a role character. Most important is that the group is ok with the VoPer.

With that said, it is RAW that VoP posess only listed items, but it ALSO says RAW that an acetic must give "a majority" of the loot away to 'needy'. Where's the 49 percent go?

It seems clear to me that the DM can role play that 49 percent boost to VoP power to fit the tier (wish from an organization?, etc).

[emeraldstreak]

In a normal world, VoP is never worth its penalty, unless you have teammates and they gain all your gold.

In a world where the DM isn't allowing any magicmarts, spellcasting services, anything worth buying really, VoP is slightly less terribad.

[Cosi]

Vow of Poverty is worth it under two conditions:

1. There are no items your character needs to function.
2. You can avoid the cost of Vow of Poverty by giving a party member or cohort your wealth.

In practice, 1 is only true if you're playing a Druid, so Vow of Poverty is a niche option for Druids who are willing to take a slight hit to their personal power to make the rest of the party better.

If you make Vow of Poverty cost a percentage of your wealth, it's just an item that scales and has a weird cost structure. It becomes worth it if the money you spend on things it replaces (mostly raw bonus items) is less than whatever percentage of your wealth it asks you to give up plus whatever value you place on a feat.

[Necroticplague]

I consider VoP to be a role character. Most important is that the group is ok with the VoPer.

With that said, it is RAW that VoP posess only listed items, but it ALSO says RAW that an acetic must give "a majority" of the loot away to 'needy'. Where's the 49 percent go?

It seems clear to me that the DM can role play that 49 percent boost to VoP power to fit the tier (wish from an organization?, etc).
Actually, that's also a misconception. They must be charitable, but the 'giving away a majority' is only a should, not a 'has to'. This is all the text of what breaks the vows.

To fulfill your vow, you must not own or use any material possessions, with the following exceptions:......If you break your vow, you immediately and irrevocably lose the benefit of this feat. You may not take another feat to replace it.
Nothing outside of that breaks the vow. No strict requirements to give to charity. Even in the completely different section of the book about other ramifications of poverty, it says this:

The majority of her share of party treasure (or the profits from the sale thereof) shouldbe donated to the needy, Should, not has to be. Her party members are free to use her share. Even the part that mentions others not getting more only uses "should not", not "doesn't". So no actual hard rule against others spending on their behalf (which is actually fairly useful).

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

"The charitable cause that I'm donating my share of the wealth to is hiring these capable adventurers *gestures to party* to help me end [insert unspeakable evil that drives the plot]."

I'd say it's worth using if the party won't have reliable access to purchase specific items or to have certain items commissioned, or otherwise won't be able to obtain the necessary magic items that provide the needed utility to succeed. In that case, VoP is worthwhile on a character whose race/class provide that needed utility, especially if you can also put VoP on your (Exalted/Celestial) animal companion or similar.

[VisitingDaGulag]

50% isn't enough. I'll say 20%. GP is power because crafting is powerful. Losing GP hurts

[Kelb_Panthera]

Actually, that's also a misconception. They must be charitable, but the 'giving away a majority' is only a should, not a 'has to'. This is all the text of what breaks the vows.

Nothing outside of that breaks the vow. No strict requirements to give to charity. Even in the completely different section of the book about other ramifications of poverty, it says this:
Should, not has to be. Her party members are free to use her share. Even the part that mentions others not getting more only uses "should not", not "doesn't". So no actual hard rule against others spending on their behalf (which is actually fairly useful).

This is pure rules lawyery nonsense. The passage is very clear. Not only -should- a VoP character give away their share of the treasure, the first sentence of the paragraph explicitly says that the party should -not- necessarily get a larger share of treasure. Some leeway was left for catching up if the party is behind on WBL but the intent is quite clear.

If you insist on pulling this (breaking the spirit of both the rules and the vow, if not the letter) don't be at all surprised if treasure drops start looking like 3/4 of their normal, expected value.




On-topic: I'm quite comfortable playing a VoP at 100% but for its value percentage vs WBL worth of normal equipment, I'd hazard it's worth around 60% unless you really go dumpster diving and/or item crafting to eke every ounce of power out of every shiny copper.

[dhasenan]

1. There are no items your character needs to function.

No magic items, specifically. Vow of Poverty lets you own as many non-magic items as you want. You merely "should" give away the majority of your share of your treasure.

Spellbooks and spell component pouches are not listed with magic items, for instance, so an ascetic wizard can still cast spells just like any other wizard.

An ascetic is also not forbidden from creating magic items. However, normally, if you create an item, you at least temporarily own it. But if you make a construct with sufficiently high Int, it can own itself. You would need Leadership to give it commands.

[eggynack]

1. There are no items your character needs to function.

In practice, 1 is only true if you're playing a Druid.
Clerics can function without items too, assuming you allow for the focus thing, and so can a buncha different casters. Druids just happen to have two completely separate qualities from this one, which are above average gains from the stuff VoP gives you (with their high quality exalted feats being perhaps the biggest), and an incentive to not use items (cause wilding clasps are expensive.

On that note, the answer is inevitably that it depends. Druids are the best with VoP, so the feat becomes optimal for them at the highest WBL percentage of any class, clerics and such are reasonable with VoP, so the feat becomes optimal for them at like the second highest WBL percentage, totemists and incarnates are reasonable with it as well, so probably land around where a cleric does, maybe somewhat higher or lower, and a fighter or monk really needs items to operate, so WBL has to be cut really hard to make VoP optimal. I don't think it's zero for any class, because while you do really want flight or whatever, at some point WBL isn't going to cover that stuff anyway. It also depends on how much the player is optimizing (because VoP's ceiling is pretty close to its floor, given how few exalted feat options you have), and it depends on how broad the environment's item access is (for what is optimization without the optimal stuff to select?) So, lotsa stuff moves the needle on the value of VoP and the value of items.

[OldTrees1]

On-topic: I'm quite comfortable playing a VoP at 100% but for its value percentage vs WBL worth of normal equipment, I'd hazard it's worth around 60% unless you really go dumpster diving and/or item crafting to eke every ounce of power out of every shiny copper.

Is that 60% estimate for any class? Or is there a different point if you were playing a Fighter, Warblade, Rogue, vs Full Caster

[Necroticplague]

This is pure rules lawyery nonsense. The passage is very clear. Not only -should- a VoP character give away their share of the treasure, the first sentence of the paragraph explicitly says that the party should -not- necessarily get a larger share of treasure.

'should not necessarily' is not an absolute prohibition in any sense.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Is that 60% estimate for any class? Or is there a different point if you were playing a Fighter, Warblade, Rogue, vs Full Caster

That's the approximate value of grabbing those abilities with the most obvious, core items and a rough estimate. I'd have to run the numbers to get an exact figure.


'should not necessarily' is not an absolute prohibition in any sense.

Yeah, it's an inch. You're trying to take a mile.

If the party "should not recieve" and you "should give," then giving it to them is in direct contravention of the clear intent of the passage. As would be any other way of phrasing the idea that they all get an extra 1/3 of a normal share of treasure.

[Malroth]

A normal character is probably better off with Wealth when at 40% or more of their expected WBL, which is about enough to get the second highest tier avalible of gear for your essentials with a bit left over for consumables thanks to quadratic scaling of bonuses.

If you're willing to spend a couple feats on craft magic arms and armor and Craft wondrous item you can probably drop that margin down to 10% of expected WBL.

If you're at less than 10% of WBL your best bet is to dip artificer on a feat level, grab practiced spellcaster and a free scribe scroll and make a scroll of wall of salt.

[Particle_Man]

Different classes will give different answers, I imagine. An incarnate or totemist can perhaps do better with VoP since they are giving up some magic items in order to bind soulmelds (barring the split chakra feat per chakra).

NPC's would do better too since they get less wealth per level, IIRC.

[OldTrees1]

That's the approximate value of grabbing those abilities with the most obvious, core items and a rough estimate. I'd have to run the numbers to get an exact figure.

The price of the items that replicate VoP does not include the opportunity cost of the abilities it prohibits (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?187851-3-5-Lists-of-Necessary-Magic-Items) without providing a replacement.

PS: No need to run the numbers for the exact figure. We can presume that 60% WBL is representative of the replacement cost of VoP.

[Blu]

Depends... if you can pick the Saint template you have some synergies.
For example, a Cleric with VoP and the Saint template can get:
Wis to AC (Saint)
Wis to attack (Intuitive strike)
RD, fast healing, and other goodies.
With LA buyoff you can become a very scary character. But even so, just plain WBL + Saint template are better...

[Serafina]

When you can make it a non-reduction. So, 0%.
However, this strictly applies to classes that don't need the wealth. So basically, no spellcasting with expensive material components, and a ton of classes don't qualify either. Druid is the archetypical example here.

You then make it a non-reduction by making good use of the wealth in other ways.
You're expected to donate to a charitable cause. So you go and do that. You donate to a cause that is aligned with your own.

So, say you're a Druid, and your charitable cause is, say, protecting a forest from a demonic invasion.
Great. That means you still have a ton of uses for money. Because money can be used to bargain with summoned creatures that then protect the forest. It can be used to equip and train followers that then do the same. You can hire people to take care of the forest, re-plant trees and all that. You can even build fortifications, equip them with expensive traps, and all that.
All that is a charitable cause. The only issue is that you're not allowed to "own" any of that - but that's actually pretty easy, since you let people who are more competent with money handle all that, and it's not owned by you personally. Sure, those people take orders from you - but that doesn't mean you own them, or anything.

This also works with a Cleric helping their church, or similar divine classes.

But it can also work for, say, a Wizard.
Your charitable cause could be advancing the peaceful use of magic in the world. Well, what better way to do that than to raise orphans with magical aptitudes, and fund academies of magic? Where you can even work as a teacher - just make sure that your own quarters are as inexpensive as possible, for you don't need such comfort. Of course, you're of Good alignment, so you don't impose your views on others and your students and the other teachers have comfortable quarters.
Any magic items you find, you simply hand over to the school for study, safekeeping and use if needed. That doesn't mean you own or use them yourself too.

And you can then apply this to basically a ton of characters. The point is that donating your money to a charitable cause can still give your character quite a ton of extra power - in the form of influence, if not personal power. If you're clever about it, you can get a ton of extra capabilities out of this - and while it doesn't directly apply to dungeon crawling, having a safe retreat you can teleport to and get healed up, and where they're even capable of resurrecting your fallen comrades (they just so happen to have powdered diamond, you donated it last month, and this is for a good cause after all). If your campaign focuses less on dungeon crawling, this only gets more useful.

[Particle_Man]

Of course, you're of Good alignment, so you don't impose your views on others and your students and the other teachers have comfortable quarters.

What kind of Good are you talking about? Many Good characters believe in educating other people to be good, and the lawful good types especially are less likely to say "oh let them choose their own path" and more likely to say "they must be trained to be good through these lawful means". There are philosophers, teachers and religious figures whose whole deal is imposing their views on others, and many of them are good (unless you are simply defining good as "not imposing beliefs on others" in which case I think your definition is wrong).