Idea ...breaking vow of poverty

[solooize]

My idea is taking vow of poverty then using
Psychic Reformation ...my idea is to be able to take normal feats instead of the Exalted Feats

Would this work?

Any other ways to break vow?

[Aquillion]

You mean, keeping Vow of Poverty, but reforming away the bonus Exalted feats? No, that won't work. Psychic Reformation says that the subject must abide by the standard rules for selecting skills and feats, so your VoP bonus feats must still be Exalted feats.

You could use the Dark Chaos Shuffle trick to accomplish what you want, though - using Embrace the Dark Chaos to replace the bonus feats with an Abyssal Heritage feat, then Shun the Dark Chaos to replace that feat with anything you want. If you wanted to try and get cheesy, you could shuffle away the bonus Exalted feats, then shuffle away Vow itself and argue that you get to keep the replacement feats without having to worry about Vow's restrictions anymore, but it's hard to picture any DM allowing that to work. (I would say that since Embrace and Shun both "replace" a feat, you're still putting the feat into the bonus feat slot that Vow of Poverty granted; if you lose or break Vow of Poverty, those slots go away and take whatever feat was in them at the time with them, regardless of whether it was the Exalted feat you originally picked or not.)

[solooize]

Would one with vow be able to have symbiotes in him? In ways there an item and others there not

[solooize]

So I couldn't replace vow but I could replace the feats with your way?

[Crake]

So I couldn't replace vow but I could replace the feats with your way?

This is all subject to DM approval. While it's strictly within the rules to do so, it's most certainly against the spirit of the rules.

[Jowgen]

Symbtionts and Grafts are explicitly not magic items, or items at all (arguable exception being the weapon graft). They are creatures or services with an associated cost meant to factor into your wealth-by-level.

Nothing in VoP forbids you from owning creatures or paying people to perform body modification services on you, so technically you're allowed to have them. The question is whether your DM lets you expend your WBL that way, rather than immediately donating it or whatever.

[FelineArchmage]

Symbtionts and Grafts are explicitly not magic items, or items at all (arguable exception being the weapon graft). They are creatures or services with an associated cost meant to factor into your wealth-by-level.

Nothing in VoP forbids you from owning creatures or paying people to perform body modification services on you, so technically you're allowed to have them. The question is whether your DM lets you expend your WBL that way, rather than immediately donating it or whatever.

By taking the VoP feat, you should not be able to take grafts (and maybe symbtionts? Is there a gp cost for getting them? Don't know much about them so I'm curious). The VoP feat states "The majority of her share of party treasure (or the profits from the sale thereof) should be donated to the needy, either directly (equipping rescued captives with gear taken from their fallen captors) or indirectly (making a large donation to a temple noted for its work among the poor). While taking upon herself the burden of poverty voluntarily." You can't pay people for grafts with money that you don't/can't have.

Essentially, any wealth/treasure you earn while taking VoP should not be used for selfish or self-serving reasons.

[ExLibrisMortis]

There are a few ways to get grafts without paying for them (for example, the sibriex), but I don't think they're particularly common.

DCFS will work on VoP, but it's rather a lot more work than doing the same on feats granted by Otyugh holes or spells. Given similar cheese levels of those options, I don't think VoP is worth bothering with just for the feats.

[Acanous]

VoP is almost never worth taking, even on an ezbake Druid. As stated above, dark chaos shuffle does what you want here, but the absolute kick in the junk that is not having WBL just makes it far too costly.

I mean, maybe a Druid dark chaos shuffling in metamagic and greenbound summoning?

[Deophaun]

By taking the VoP feat, you should not be able to take grafts (and maybe symbtionts? Is there a gp cost for getting them? Don't know much about them so I'm curious). The VoP feat states "The majority of her share of party treasure (or the profits from the sale thereof) should be donated to the needy, either directly (equipping rescued captives with gear taken from their fallen captors) or indirectly (making a large donation to a temple noted for its work among the poor). While taking upon herself the burden of poverty voluntarily." You can't pay people for grafts with money that you don't/can't have.
You can pay them with the 49.9% of wealth you have remaining, as long as that wealth is in crossbows.

[Keltest]

You can pay them with the 49.9% of wealth you have remaining, as long as that wealth is in crossbows.

Or you could get really crazy and just give the money to a party member who pays for it.

[Jowgen]

You can pay them with the 49.9% of wealth you have remaining, as long as that wealth is in crossbows.

Just as feasible to barter any kind of party treasure and instead of making gp profit to be donated, could have grafts applied in return. No profits made.

Symbtionts, as living creatures, are the same as owning a pet. Or really having a friend, as they are largely intelligent. They aren't really bought, it's just that the Eberron variety of them have associated GP values for WBL purposes, same as Magical Location abilities.

The point in both cases, however, is that unlike with other stuff, simply having them doesn't run foul of VoP restrictions. How you obtain them is a secondary issue (in the case of bartering with a siberex or using fiendish grafts an alignment-compounded one)

[Dimers]

Or you could get really crazy and just give the money to a party member who pays for it.

Explicitly can't do that :smallfrown:

But if your ally paid for grafts from their own share of the loot, out of the goodness of their heart, you'd be allowed to have them, since they're not items.


The point in both cases, however, is that unlike with other stuff, simply having them doesn't run foul of VoP restrictions.

Yeah, that. :smallsmile:

[Segev]

Explicitly can't do that :smallfrown:

But if your ally paid for grafts from their own share of the loot, out of the goodness of their heart, you'd be allowed to have them, since they're not items.

And, if you DCS'd away the Vow later, you could pay him back.

You could also pay him back in services rendered. Or, assuming "majority" can be rules lawyered to "1 cp less than half of my share," you could "generously gift" him that portion of your share for a while. (If the whole party chipped in, this gets a little easier. Accept a smaller share of loot out of gratitude for their kindness, by acknowledging that the not-quite-half of what you would have insisted was your fair share can go to the PCs so long as the rest that you really do accept goes to charity.)



Another way to break it would be to have a good but simple-minded Vow of Poverty character who utterly trusts a conniving manipulator in the party. The manipulator has agreed to handle charity distribution, after "proving" that the Vow-maker's choices were all corrupt and squandering it, and that he is good at finding worthy causes. In reality, he just steals the Vow-maker's share for himself (or splits it amongst the party to keep them quiet about it). This frees the party to actually occasionally buy things they "loan" to the Vow-maker for their own benefits. ("Carry this potion for me; if I ever go down, use it to get me back up. Here, have this wand of healing magic; it's for our sake, not yours. We're facing the fire dragon of the ice caves; you WILL use this +1 dragonbane frost-burst weapon, because we are counting on you to contribute to this fight! No, no, it's our gift to you; go get that graft implanted!")

[bean illus]

You can pay them with the 49.9% of wealth you have remaining ...

This is how to break VoP.

You still need the dm to say yes.

[Jowgen]

I double checked to be sure, and my argument does seem to hold. VoP does not take away your WBL, it only stipulates that you can "not own or use any material possessions".

Symbionts are living creatures, so as long as it's not a slavery kind of deal, you're good. Grafts are also distinct from your equipment i.e. explicitly not magic items and part of your body. Both count towards your creature treasure/WBL in the same manner as Magical Location benefits do. Even if the graft counts as a material possession before it's applied to you, it is explicitly permitted for others to use magic items/cast spells on your behalf, which is what the grafter is doing (and afterwards it can't be argued to be a possession anymore than any other body part).

The issue at hand is that acquiring Symbionts and Grafts by means of engaging in commerce when you are barred from owning anything that could be exchanged. Having a symbtiont released into your care or having a graft attached is a service rendered, same as someone casting a spell for you.

Easiest solution is to exchange one service rendered for another, e.g. have a quest giver make the relevant arrangements instead of regular pay for doing what you're hired to do. A simple example service on your part could also be to bring the quest giver some kind of treasure he has a legal claim to, i.e. you're not owning or using but simply retrieving and transporting something already owned by someone else.

So a VoP character made for play at higher levels should be able to freely use his WBL to stack up on a nice set of grafts and assortment of Symbtionts, plus magical location benefits and spell-casting services. Spell-casting services like Embrace/Shun the dark chaos.

From then onwards, it's a matter of arranging for any acquisition of wealth to instead be eshewed in favour of further such services.

[Khedrac]

One big problem with trying to 'game the system' with the sacred vows is that they are one of the areas where the "spirit of the law" matters. If you form the intention to use a trick to get out of the downside of your vows then you have almost certainly already broken the vows and lost the benefits.
So in this case, by deciding to accept the Dark Chaos Shuffle you lose your exalted status and all exalted feats and so cannot trade them away... (Since you have to take the dark feats to then trade away for useful feats, you have to accept a level of evil that is not compatible with exalted status; us lesser mortals can see the benefit of accepting temproary evil in order to do good, however it is a step too far for exalted beings.)

[Jowgen]

One big problem with trying to 'game the system' with the sacred vows is that they are one of the areas where the "spirit of the law" matters. If you form the intention to use a trick to get out of the downside of your vows then you have almost certainly already broken the vows and lost the benefits.
So in this case, by deciding to accept the Dark Chaos Shuffle you lose your exalted status and all exalted feats and so cannot trade them away... (Since you have to take the dark feats to then trade away for useful feats, you have to accept a level of evil that is not compatible with exalted status; us lesser mortals can see the benefit of accepting temproary evil in order to do good, however it is a step too far for exalted beings.)

I don't see this being an issue.

Augmenting your body to become stronger, whether it be by grafting on new parts or having magic cast to acquire new abilities, is something creatures of all alignments are allowed to do. And while "Embrace the Dark Chaos" and "Abyssal Heritor" might sound Evil-ish, the text explicitly states: "Unlike vile feats, Abyssal heritor feats are not inherently evil."

As for the spirit of the law, a dirt-poor guy who goes on a bunch of quests to have others upgrade his body and cast feat-switching spells (while his friends get paid for the same job) is still dirt-poor afterwards. I don't see doing stuff for other people so they'll make you more powerful to run contrary to the spirit of being poor.

[Malimar]

One big problem with trying to 'game the system' with the sacred vows is that they are one of the areas where the "spirit of the law" matters. If you form the intention to use a trick to get out of the downside of your vows then you have almost certainly already broken the vows and lost the benefits.
So in this case, by deciding to accept the Dark Chaos Shuffle you lose your exalted status and all exalted feats and so cannot trade them away... (Since you have to take the dark feats to then trade away for useful feats, you have to accept a level of evil that is not compatible with exalted status; us lesser mortals can see the benefit of accepting temproary evil in order to do good, however it is a step too far for exalted beings.)
Under any remotely reasonable DM: yes, this exactly.

But by RAW... DCFS is technically [chaotic], not at all [evil]. Despite being explicitly Abyssal. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Aquillion]

One big problem with trying to 'game the system' with the sacred vows is that they are one of the areas where the "spirit of the law" matters. If you form the intention to use a trick to get out of the downside of your vows then you have almost certainly already broken the vows and lost the benefits.
So in this case, by deciding to accept the Dark Chaos Shuffle you lose your exalted status and all exalted feats and so cannot trade them away... (Since you have to take the dark feats to then trade away for useful feats, you have to accept a level of evil that is not compatible with exalted status; us lesser mortals can see the benefit of accepting temproary evil in order to do good, however it is a step too far for exalted beings.)
That's true; it occurred to me on rereading my post. Even if your DM is going entirely by RAW and is willing to let you use Dark Chaos Shuffle to replace feats in a way that isn't intended, using Embrace the Dark Chaos seems pretty un-Exalted, so they'd be entirely justified in having you lose your Exalted status for accepting it.

(I mean technically it is a [chaotic] spell and not an evil one, yes, but come on, you are literally channeling power directly from the Abyss. The whole point of being Exalted is that you're the Good of the Good and not just someone who is "technically" good by meeting the bare minimum requirements.)

[Archaos]

Under any remotely reasonable DM: yes, this exactly.

The Vows are quite obviously a challenging RP choice, not an optimization choice.
Of course they're bad and suboptimal, you're not supposed to be just as powerful as if you had full items.
It's meant to challenge you, in both mechanics and RP.
The benefits Vow of Poverty gives you is supposed to make the challenge a bit more bearable.

Any sane DM that isn't a bot would just strip of your benefits if you tried In Character to weasel out of the drawbacks, even if you had asked someone else to do it for you.

Your character should have declined the "selfless help" from your other party members, therefore the gods are stripping you of the benefits.
"Well, technically" is such a silly excuse for an obviously RP/suboptimal choice. :smallsigh:

[Segev]

The Vows are quite obviously a challenging RP choice, not an optimization choice.
Of course they're bad and suboptimal, you're not supposed to be just as powerful as if you had full items.
It's meant to challenge you, in both mechanics and RP.
The benefits Vow of Poverty gives you is supposed to make the challenge a bit more bearable.

Any sane DM that isn't a bot would just strip of your benefits if you tried In Character to weasel out of the drawbacks, even if you had asked someone else to do it for you.

Your character should have declined the "selfless help" from your other party members, therefore the gods are stripping you of the benefits.
"Well, technically" is such a silly excuse for an obviously RP/suboptimal choice. :smallsigh:

This is fundamentally poor design. Expending a resource to make yourself weaker than if you did not is never attractive. Perfect balance is nigh impossible, but justifying a poor build option as "deliberately weaker than normal" is just admitting you did a bad job designing it.

[Calthropstu]

By taking the VoP feat, you should not be able to take grafts (and maybe symbtionts? Is there a gp cost for getting them? Don't know much about them so I'm curious). The VoP feat states "The majority of her share of party treasure (or the profits from the sale thereof) should be donated to the needy, either directly (equipping rescued captives with gear taken from their fallen captors) or indirectly (making a large donation to a temple noted for its work among the poor). While taking upon herself the burden of poverty voluntarily." You can't pay people for grafts with money that you don't/can't have.

Essentially, any wealth/treasure you earn while taking VoP should not be used for selfish or self-serving reasons.

Hmmm, well... nothing prohibits them from service exchange though. A monk with VoP in need of something could always exchange a favor for a favor. And, nothing prohibits his party members from paying for the service.

[daremetoidareyo]

How bad do you want to break vow of poverty?

Here is my go: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=21126817&postcount=38

Kender can't conceive of property rights. So you can optimize sleight of hand checks, so long as you don't wind up possessing the items.

Bags of devouring are creatures, not magic items. So if you take [creature type] trainer from the arms and equipment guide, you could, theoretically depending on the int score of a bag of devouring, carry them around.

Take those stolen goods and feed them to your bag of devouring. You can also use the spell, entice gift to do the same.

If you learn the spell quick potion, you can trade those potions for services, or offset spells you stole as a spellthief.

Ride a rust monster. You got VOP so make everyone as poor as you. Train your rust monster to ride a disenchanter and you are set.

[Calthropstu]

How bad do you want to break vow of poverty?

Here is my go: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=21126817&postcount=38

Kender can't conceive of property rights. So you can optimize sleight of hand checks, so long as you don't wind up possessing the items.

Bags of devouring are creatures, not magic items. So if you take [creature type] trainer from the arms and equipment guide, you could, theoretically depending on the int score of a bag of devouring, carry them around.

Take those stolen goods and feed them to your bag of devouring. You can also use the spell, entice gift to do the same.

If you learn the spell quick potion, you can trade those potions for services, or offset spells you stole as a spellthief.

Ride a rust monster. You got VOP so make everyone as poor as you. Train your rust monster to ride a disenchanter and you are set.

And when your character is murdered by the rest of the party, you can brag that they gained nothing from doing so.

[rel]

Given how underpowered and generally worthless the vow of poverty is I suggest house ruling it to make it easier to use and more effective. When I last encountered vow of poverty in game we stripped the alignment restrictions, allowed it to grant any bonus feat rather than just exalted feats and modified the special restrictions as follows:

'To fulfil the vow of poverty you may not own items. You can steal, borrow, pick up or use items as the situation demands but you cannot own them. The exact nature of ownership is left up to the GM who is encouraged to warn the practicer of the vow if their actions are endangering it.

As a guideline, items cannot be held if they are not immediately needed, worn, or used multiple times for the characters benefit. Further the generation of a consistent bonus for an extended period of time through the use of non consumable items is disallowed.

If the GM determines that the vow of poverty has been breached the character loses its benefits. To regain the vow of poverty the character must ritually destroy the item or items that caused them to stray and then spend a week in contemplative meditation to regain their balance.'

Despite all these changes concensus was that the improved, alignment unrestricted vow of poverty was not worth the loss of magic items.

[Mato]

The Book of Exalted Deeds is intended for mature players. And not because it picks a side and calls it good but because most children are unable to define their morality, understand that not all things are black and white, or accept that idea that someone else's can be different.

One example is "a familiar, special mount, or animal companion isn’t a material possession, and thus a character with Vow of Poverty isn’t restricted from gaining the benefits of such creatures.". Symbionts are characters and Magic of Eberron gave them a gold value to specifically avoid certain things. If they were free the powergamers would try to obtain them for free bonuses. And if they were pseudo-DM purview, like a minor artifact, then everyone would ignore them. Giving something a cost, like feat tax as seen from planar touchstone or gold as seen from magical locations, prevents you from giving away free bonuses while empowering players to be able to select owning another creature or having a cool story about their life experiences. Symbionts do not break a vow of poverty because they have a price tag on them any more than your character's kidney breaks a vow of poverty because kidneys have a price tag on them. They are simply two creatures living together.

Also I feel like it needs to be said that shunning your current obligations to Embrace The Dark Chaos that created a chaotic plane home to chaotic monsters just so you can later reneged that idealism is an act of harming others simply because there is a word association of "evil" in there somewhere then you are exactly the sort of person I spoke about before.

[Segev]

The Book of Exalted Deeds is intended for mature players. And not because it picks a side and calls it good but because most children are unable to define their morality, understand that not all things are black and white, or accept that idea that someone else's can be different.

The BoED is poorly written, but not as poorly written as its evil counterpart. It may be INTENDED for mature players, but the truth is, it wasn't written maturely. It attempts to create that black-and-white morality you're saying only children adhere to, and it does so ham-fistedly by simply declaring, "This is Good, and That is Evil." There is some rhyme and reason to it, but it is in the end arbitrary and prone to paradox. A fair bit is flat-out hypocritical if you attempt to peer beyond the overt labels. "Poison is evil, but ravages are good, because they only hurt evil people."

A huge amount of the BoED's self-proclaimed good, if examined at its core, boils down to, "It's okay because we did it, and we are Good."