Monk's Tattoo and Vow of Poverty

[Gruftzwerg]

I'm trying to solve this this situation.

What happens when a character who has a Monk's Tattoo takes later VoP?

VoP demands you to give up all possession that you have, but a tattoo ain't an item that you can give away (even if it "counts" as magic item for some purposes).

Further VoP restricts you from the "use" of magic items. Do I use the tattoo? I assume I would need to willingly active it in some way to actually "use" it, otherwise I merely "benefit from its passive effect".

Is my logic correct or flawed (raw)?

[Psyren]

It's a slotless magic item; as written you'd have to give it up (somehow) or fall your vow. Even if passively benefiting from an item somehow didn't count as "use", the vow also forbids ownership. (And we know passive benefits count as "use" due to the "borrowed cloak of resistance" example in the feat's text.)

[Gruftzwerg]

I think it's better to post the VoP restrictions for a more clear discussion:


To fulfill your vow, you must not own or use any material possessions, with the following exceptions: You may carry and use ordinary (neither magic nor masterwork) simple weapons, usually just a quarterstaff that serves as a walking stick. You may wear simple clothes (usually just a homespun robe, possibly also including a hat and sandals) with no magical properties. You may carry enough food to sustain you for one day in a simple (nonmagic) sack or bag. You may carry and use a spell component pouch. 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. You may not, however, "borrow" a cloak of resistance or any other magic item from a companion for even a single round, nor may you yourself cast a spell from a scroll, wand, or staff. If you break your vow, you immediately and irrevocably lose the benefit of this feat. You may not take another feat to replace it.

On second thought..

1) I would argue that a Monk's Tattoo doesn't count as "material possession", since it is a part of your body.

2) I didn't borrow the magic item, so the cloak of resistance example doesn't fit here

3) imho it is more "benefit from magic items used on your behalf". Even if that "using person" is the "former self before taking VoP". The tattoo is an ongoing effect since the moment you get it first. Even if someone argues that you must use it once, the use action was long before VoP was taken and now you only benefit from its ongoing effect.

[Silly Name]

Short answer: there's no real rules about how those two things interact, so it's pretty much a DM's call.

Long answer: Obviously, a tattoo isn't an item - you don't "own" it any more than you own the hair on your body. Furthermore, VoP doesn't forbid you from receiving magical benefits at all - simply that you can't own valuable items, nor "borrow" them - and that clauses serves to avoid loopholes about what exactly constitutes "ownership" of an item, but the line before is very explicit in allowing you to be subject to the benefits of a magic item, as long as you aren't the owner/user.

Let's suppose a character used one of the stat-boosting books, such as a Tome of Understanding, and then some time later took VoP: would this character have to give up the inherent bonus? How would they even "give up" something that is part of themselves?

[ThanatosZero]

Let's suppose a character used one of the stat-boosting books, such as a Tome of Understanding, and then some time later took VoP: would this character have to give up the inherent bonus? How would they even "give up" something that is part of themselves?
You can't.
It defaults to asking your DM.

The most reasonable way to handle VoP, is allowing the inherent bonus as the bonus is not the material item by itself.
You could even say, that "reading" from a manual/tome is not rule breaking for the PC with VoP, for as long they believe/are tricked/ignorant about the book about erasing itself once it has been read completely.

One could RP it in the manner to convince the Vower, that the tomes/manuals are teleported back to the "library on mount celestia" for the next reader to pick up. This allows the PC to read all tomes and manuals as they believe in good faith, that they are simple educating themselves further.

If they find out the truth, the consequences may be temporally losing them the vow's benefits, due feelings of guilt and require the atonement spell to regain the vow's gifts. It is similiar towards a paladin, which performed a evil deed without knowing.
From there on, they will avoid any of the tomes.



Alternatively a VoP Sorcerer 20 with Wish can boost their stats without the need of those items.

[Gruftzwerg]

Short answer: there's no real rules about how those two things interact, so it's pretty much a DM's call.

Long answer: Obviously, a tattoo isn't an item - you don't "own" it any more than you own the hair on your body. Furthermore, VoP doesn't forbid you from receiving magical benefits at all - simply that you can't own valuable items, nor "borrow" them - and that clauses serves to avoid loopholes about what exactly constitutes "ownership" of an item, but the line before is very explicit in allowing you to be subject to the benefits of a magic item, as long as you aren't the owner/user.

Let's suppose a character used one of the stat-boosting books, such as a Tome of Understanding, and then some time later took VoP: would this character have to give up the inherent bonus? How would they even "give up" something that is part of themselves?
I agree with your argumentation that you don't "own" a Monk's Tattoo more than you own your hair, hands or your normal skin, since they are all parts of your body.

When it comes to Tomes see below..


You can't.
It defaults to asking your DM.

The most reasonable way to handle VoP, is allowing the inherent bonus as the bonus is not the material item by itself.
You could even say, that "reading" from a manual/tome is not rule breaking for the PC with VoP, for as long they believe/are tricked/ignorant about the book about erasing itself once it has been read completely.

One could RP it in the manner to convince the Vower, that the tomes/manuals are teleported back to the "library on mount celestia" for the next reader to pick up. This allows the PC to read all tomes and manuals as they believe in good faith, that they are simple educating themselves further.

If they find out the truth, the consequences may be temporally losing them the vow's benefits, due feelings of guilt and require the atonement spell to regain the vow's gifts. It is similiar towards a paladin, which performed a evil deed without knowing.
From there on, they will avoid any of the tomes.



Alternatively a VoP Sorcerer 20 with Wish can boost their stats without the need of those items.

Imho Tomes & Wishes for inherit bonuses work fine if you have used em before getting VoP due to the same reason as Monk's Tattoo. But once you have taken VoP, it has to be a free willing Wish caster, who can gift you the bonuses.

[Vaern]

The monk's tattoo is a slotless "worn" item that only grants its bonus for as long as you have it. Realistically, you could get rid of it if you really wanted to. It just takes a bit more work than more traditional items by nature of being etched into your skin. For example, you could find someone to hit you with a disjunction and willfully forego your saving throw in order to accept its effect, stripping the tattoo of its magical properties and leaving a mundane tattoo on your skin.
Tomes are consumables that have an instantaneous effect upon completion. Disjunction could destroy a tome, but it can't rid someone of the inherent bonus granted by one. Barring someone from taking VoP for having read a tome would be akin to barring them from taking VoP for having consumed a potion of CLW at some point throughout the campaign.

I mean, if I'm being honest, I probably wouldn't expect someone to bother trying to get rid of a tattoo that they already had unless they got it right before taking VoP figuring they can use the fact that it's literally attached to them as a loophole to get around the feat's restrictions and sneak a rather expensive magic item in. In that case, I might make go so far as to make disjunction unavailable to them, opting for the more dramatic route of forcing them to have someone cut off the flesh that the tattoo is inked onto. They could easily heal themselves up with wholeness of body, sure, but it would set a much more unpleasant example than simply letting them dispel the thing.