Shintao Monk code of conduct

[TheJoker116]

I'm in a pretty tricky situation with a tenth-level character for a 3.5 campaign. I'm joining a group with 10-12th level characters so I being at level 10 (DM's decision) and I start with 49 000 gold, the wealth of a tenth level character.

BUT ... in Oriental Adventures, it says that a Shintao Monk cannot accumulate wealth, I assume it means my monk has to absolutely spend or give away whatever gold he gets and I'm pretty sure magic items like the Monk's Belt or Bracers of Armors count as wealth. Since my character is beginning play, I assume I could justify the few magic items he has as being items found or given to him before he joined the current group.

So, here's the thing: The fact that the Shintao Monk cannot accumulate means he can't have too many magic items and cannot hoard gold and gems. Would that mean he couldn't buy any magic items, only find them? And even then, he couldn't keep too many of those.

I'd like some input from other players on this, I'm thinking of asking the DM if we could put some less-restrictive rules, for example, my monk would be allowed to save up gold for magic items but only if they are relevant to his skills and survival, avoiding any purchase for the sole purpose of vanity (He would break his code if he saved up for an expensive silk robe with no purpose instead of something actually useful, like a Monk's Belt).

Any thoughts?

[Gruftzwerg]

I'm in a pretty tricky situation with a tenth-level character for a 3.5 campaign. I'm joining a group with 10-12th level characters so I being at level 10 (DM's decision) and I start with 49 000 gold, the wealth of a tenth level character.

BUT ... in Oriental Adventures, it says that a Shintao Monk cannot accumulate wealth, I assume it means my monk has to absolutely spend or give away whatever gold he gets and I'm pretty sure magic items like the Monk's Belt or Bracers of Armors count as wealth. Since my character is beginning play, I assume I could justify the few magic items he has as being items found or given to him before he joined the current group.

So, here's the thing: The fact that the Shintao Monk cannot accumulate means he can't have too many magic items and cannot hoard gold and gems. Would that mean he couldn't buy any magic items, only find them? And even then, he couldn't keep too many of those.

I'd like some input from other players on this, I'm thinking of asking the DM if we could put some less-restrictive rules, for example, my monk would be allowed to save up gold for magic items but only if they are relevant to his skills and survival, avoiding any purchase for the sole purpose of vanity (He would break his code if he saved up for an expensive silk robe with no purpose instead of something actually useful, like a Monk's Belt).

Any thoughts?

Imho they talk about wealth as spending/saving money for luxury or other pure egoistic desires.
Having proper equip to travel safe and fulfill your duties (quest or whatsoever) ain't the same as wealth imho.
Instead of spending money on your ego(istic desires), you should spend some money at the church/shrine or buy something to eat for the poor people in the town.


If your DM should still insist on that (no gold, no items), than go for the Vow of Poverty (exalted) feat line to at least have a trade off for that heavy investment.

[BWR]

This is the problem of trying to convert mechanics from one system to another.
The Shintao monks, better known as Brotherhood [of Shinsei] monks are from L5R and are monastic (duh) and generally ascetic. L5R has nowhere near as many magic items as D&D and mechanically they are in no way necessary nor are characters expected to receive any. Accumulating wealth in general is not something L5R characters do by killing monsters or looting the corpses of the fallen (unless you are ronin). If you are one of the rare Brotherhood monks who adventures you can expect to have pious people along the way house and feed you. Any real money or gifts you receive will likely be given to help those less fortunate than yourself. Mechanically in R&K you could still be quite good at what you want to do, be it combat or social stuff.

However, you are trying to play a class with this design philosophy in a more traditional D&D setting, where adventurers loot corpses and wear expensive magic items.
I see three solutions.
1: you can ask your GM if you can refluff it and drop the no wealth restriction.
2: You could just not play it instead of trying to make it something it isn't.
3: The official AEG solution to the magic item problem of trying to run L5R on D&D assumptions: spontaneous awakening. Magic items in Rokugan are normal items who have had their spirits awakened, giving them power. Rather than having traditional magic items with casters and market value, your items could be these sorts. They will technically be of no worth apart from sentimental and base item cost, so selling the old will bring virtually no money. They will likely be unusable by anyone but you or anyone else the GM decides the items like, and you will not be able to accumulate wealth to buy new stuff, but with a nice GM, this option seems like a good compromise.

[TheJoker116]

I was unaware the Shintao Monk belonged to a different game, since I found it in Oriental Adventures.

@BWR: That last solution is pretty interesting, though in the long run, it might be a problem, unless the DM is pretty generous with magic item drops.

I'll talk to my DM about these solutions and see what happens. Worst case, I'll just go core monk all the way or re-think my build.

[Thurbane]

Here's the exact quote:


Shintao monks cannot accumulate wealth or become involved in politics.

As with a lot of things in 3.0, it's very vaguely/poorly defined. In contrast to, say, Vow of Poverty, which is very specific about what is and isn't allowed.

Best option, speak to your DM and see what his ruling is.

My 2 coppers: enforcing what is essentially VoP on a prestige class that isn't exactly powerful to begin with would be grossly unfair. I would probably rule that the character not accumulate an excessive amount of monetary wealth (i.e. coins, gems, etc.) except to purchase gear or services which would help advance the Monk's cause. Owning non-functional items with a high value (jewellery, art objects) should be strongly discouraged or outright banned.

[BWR]

Here's the exact quote:



As with a lot of things in 3.0, it's very vaguely/poorly defined. In contrast to, say, Vow of Poverty, which is very specific about what is and isn't allowed.

Best option, speak to your DM and see what his ruling is.

My 2 coppers: enforcing what is essentially VoP on a prestige class that isn't exactly powerful to begin with would be grossly unfair. I would probably rule that the character not accumulate an excessive amount of monetary wealth (i.e. coins, gems, etc.) except to purchase gear or services which would help advance the Monk's cause. Owning non-functional items with a high value (jewellery, art objects) should be strongly discouraged or outright banned.


Um,to reiterate, they are almost entirely ascetic, or at the least very modest in the way of possession. The temples and shrines they are attached to may be wealthy but the monks themselves are not. A set of simple clothing, a spare set, religious texts, a medicine kit, some minor things like a sewing kit, writing utensils, some coins to give to beggars, etc. are acceptable. Anything resembling traditional magic items is pretty much straight out, no matter how useful they would be.

The only way around that is what I already listed above.

[Thurbane]

Um,to reiterate, they are almost entirely ascetic, or at the least very modest in the way of possession. The temples and shrines they are attached to may be wealthy but the monks themselves are not. A set of simple clothing, a spare set, religious texts, a medicine kit, some minor things like a sewing kit, writing utensils, some coins to give to beggars, etc. are acceptable. Anything resembling traditional magic items is pretty much straight out, no matter how useful they would be.

The only way around that is what I already listed above.

I'm only going from the very brief description given in OA for the prestige class, I didn't check any additional fluff from extra 3rd party sources. I don't believe using OA in your 3E games needs to involve consulting the entire L5R backstory of lore - OA was intended as a standalone 3.0 supplement.

Also, I'm speaking from a mechanical perspective. If the PrC stops you owning gear, it seems basically unplayable in any kind of standard 3.5 game. Seriously, to tack a PrC on to a Monk chassis that doesn't really give anything great to the character (even straight Monk looks pretty good by comparison), and imposes VoP without even the benefits that feat grants?

Again I say speak to your DM for his interpretation of the printed OA Code of Conduct. Or simply don't bother with the class, as it's laughably nerfed.

[Thurbane]

Um,to reiterate, they are almost entirely ascetic, or at the least very modest in the way of possession. The temples and shrines they are attached to may be wealthy but the monks themselves are not. A set of simple clothing, a spare set, religious texts, a medicine kit, some minor things like a sewing kit, writing utensils, some coins to give to beggars, etc. are acceptable. Anything resembling traditional magic items is pretty much straight out, no matter how useful they would be.

The only way around that is what I already listed above.

I'm only going from the very brief description given in OA for the prestige class, I didn't check any additional fluff from extra 3rd party sources. I don't believe using OA in your 3E games needs to involve consulting the entire L5R backstory of lore - OA was intended as a standalone 3.0 supplement.

Also, I'm speaking from a mechanical perspective. If the PrC stops you owning gear, it seems basically unplayable in any kind of standard 3.5 game. Seriously, to tack a PrC on to a Monk chassis that doesn't really give anything great to the character (even straight Monk looks pretty good by comparison), and imposes VoP without even the benefits that feat grants?

Again I say speak to your DM for his interpretation of the printed OA Code of Conduct. Or simply don't bother with the class, as it's laughably nerfed.

[Florian]

@Thrubane:

In that particular case, OA is actually the 3rd party to D20 Rokugan. Note that some parts in OA are flagged as special?

[BWR]

The Shintao monk is explicitly the d20 conversion of an L5R, well, 'class', in interests of brevity.
Explaining the origin tells you what the conversion was intended to portray, including the bit about 'no wealth'. OA conversions are explicitly based on the R&K originals, if lacking in certain respects. If you want to understand why the class is as it is you have to look at where it came from. You stated that the meaning of the restriction was vague and made some incorrect assumptions about it. I gave you the correct interpretation and the reason for it. If you want to ignore this in whatever games you run, that's up to you, but the facts of the matter remain as I have put them.

More generally, if people want to alter/ignore specific fluff and/or mechanics in their games, fine, but they should have a proper understanding of exactly what it is they are altering before they make a decision. People should also not discount the history and intentions of something because they are only familiar with one specific aspect of it.

[Thurbane]

Not necessarily disagreeing with either of you, but most people integrate OA into their 3E games as a standalone product. As such, the fluff contained therein is enough to use it in the game.

If you want to be a purist about the source material, that's fine. Just saying that it isn't required, and no fluff in any other official WotC D&D product presents any additional expansion on the PrC in question that I am aware of.

[TheJoker116]

All things considered, it feels like the Shintao Monk was poorly thought when they made Oriental Adventures. I usually skip Vow of Poverty despite the great bonuses and the Shintao has the same restrictions without the benefits.

Sooo ... my DM agreed that my Monk could only use magic items he finds and are useful and isn't allowed to accumulate money for extravagant purchases. In the end, I just ended up taking ten levels of core Monk. Thanks for your input, guys, really appreciate it. :)

[Gruftzwerg]

In the end, I just ended up taking ten levels of core Monk. Thanks for your input, guys, really appreciate it. :)

I would suggest Shou Disciple as alternative to regular monk lvls. Downside is that it's 3.0 and need to be adjusted to 3.5
The prc is assumed to progress flurry, cause in 3.0 flurry was a 1st lvl ability that did progress with BAB. Further the PRC makes use of flurry and enhances its weapon list, which implies that is should progress flurry. A few bonus feats makes it a good prc for heavy monk themed builds.

[Florian]

Not necessarily disagreeing with either of you, but most people integrate OA into their 3E games as a standalone product. As such, the fluff contained therein is enough to use it in the game.

If you want to be a purist about the source material, that's fine. Just saying that it isn't required, and no fluff in any other official WotC D&D product presents any additional expansion on the PrC in question that I am aware of.

I sometimes get the feeling that a lot of people just read the "technical side of things", so feats, PrC and all that, but skip the explanation/handbook chapter on how to use it. OA is pretty clear about L5R/Rokugan being the source and very strict in marking L5R-centered material with a small logo, going so far to uncharacteristically call out the fluff to be fixed when using OA for D20 Rokugan.

So you´ve got a PrC marked as L5R and some conditions of code that lack explanation. Now you either google what it could mean or you drop the code. (You´d find out that 1 Koku = enough money to feed and shelter a person for one year. Having a new Katana or O-Yoroi forged costs the equivalent to house and feed an entire village. So D20 pretty much butchered it by translating 1 Koku = 1gp instead of using the appropriate scale.)

[BWR]

I sometimes get the feeling that a lot of people just read the "technical side of things", so feats, PrC and all that, but skip the explanation/handbook chapter on how to use it. OA is pretty clear about L5R/Rokugan being the source and very strict in marking L5R-centered material with a small logo, going so far to uncharacteristically call out the fluff to be fixed when using OA for D20 Rokugan.

THANK YOU!

This, along with excessive and tortured reading of RAW/ignoring RAI, is my biggest gripe with how so many people seem to build characters. Not just OA, but feats, PrCs and items from other sources as well.


So you´ve got a PrC marked as L5R and some conditions of code that lack explanation. Now you either google what it could mean or you drop the code. (You´d find out that 1 Koku = enough money to feed and shelter a person for one year. Having a new Katana or O-Yoroi forged costs the equivalent to house and feed an entire village. So D20 pretty much butchered it by translating 1 Koku = 1gp instead of using the appropriate scale.)

To make things even more interesting, the exact value of 1 koku has changed over time. Good or bad harvest years make the value of 1 koku vary wildly. Worse, with wealth being based off rice, land is valued in how much rice it can produce, even the land that doesn't produce rice, so you can imagine the conversion headaches. Almost all land has had its value set more than 1000 years ago. Since the ancestors were never wrong, any fluctuations in production are officially written off as someone (usually peasants) getting it wrong.
Worse still, the later editions of the game messed up the value of bu and zeni, making listed costs almost entirely meaningless.

Just don't start on the maps of the place.

[Thurbane]

So you´ve got a PrC marked as L5R and some conditions of code that lack explanation.

Option 3: the DM reads his own interpretation of the code as published in OA, as the OPs DM seems to have done. Honestly, there are a far less well defined things than this code published within 3E where the DM has to flesh out or make his own call.

I get where you are coming from, I really do. But expecting someone to have to go and buy (or research) non-WotC material to use a WotC book in a game seems a bit wrong to me.

If you want to go the extra mile to do so, that's fine too. :smallsmile:

Personally, I think the whole mess could have been avoided if OA was simply a 3.0 sourcebook for Kara Tur instead of a half-baked attempt to port another company's intellectual property into D&D.

[Florian]

Hm. WotC actually held the license at that time, same as with Ars Magicka....

[Thurbane]

Hm. WotC actually held the license at that time, same as with Ars Magicka....

Well, trying to port something with an existing backstory and setting into D&D then, if you prefer.

Regardless of who held the rights, it could have been done better. Or, like I said, not at all.