Feats & Abilities That Actively Make You Worse?

[MaxiDuRaritry]

I was looking over the Favored In House feat, from the Eberron Campaign Setting, and I noticed that instead of allowing you to call in favors (which you could already do, via both social skills and roleplay), it restricts the numbers and types of favors you can call in.

What other feats, race/class abilities, spells, etc actively make you worse for having taken them?

I'd say cantrips, as well. Prestidigitation can pull off any 0-level effect not covered by other cantrips. Unfortunately, that means that the more cantrips you have access to, the worse prestidigitation gets.

I'm sure there are plenty of other such things. What are they?

[Venger]

Famously, blessed by tem-et-nu which is unique amongst feats in that it can actually kill you. If you're low on hp and piss off tem-et-nu, you take damage as if bitten by a hippopotamus.

The master inquisitive prestige class costs feats and class levels in exchange for letting you roleplay knowing people and then heavily restricting how often you can call on them for assistance.

Ronin's infamy disability making people's attitude toward you worse when you're not in disguise.

[Saintheart]

Craven: makes sneak attack not suck, but nerfs your Will save against fear effects by 2.

[Tohron]

Fairly well-known, but using Mage's Disjunction destroys your own potential loot.

Also, Forsakers give up on all magic items and buff spells, and have to regularly destroy magic items to keep their own (limited) abilities working.

[Thurbane]

Corrupt Arcane Studies from Ghostwalk is an interesting one. +1 DC and +1 CL to all Sorc/Wizard spells seems great at a glance, but 1. you take a -2 hit to Wis, and 2. unless you can somehow get immunity to dreams or the need to sleep, you need to make an increasing Wis check every day or be unable to cast spells for 24 hours (the errata made it clear this is not only for prepared casters).

Also, shout-out to all feats that change the ability score that a check or DC is based ion, if that ability score is worse than the default.

[Doctor Despair]

Constant Guardian lets you tank your to-hit to give someone +2 to AC. I'm sure there's others along that vein.

[Thurbane]

Constant Guardian lets you tank your to-hit to give someone +2 to AC. I'm sure there's others along that vein.

Ooh, that reminds me: Reckless Offense: take a -4 to AC for a +2 to hit (i.e kinda the inverse of fighting defensively).

To be fair, though, can be moderately handy in the right build (like a Jack B Nimble / Robilar's Gambit build).

[AvatarVecna]

IMO basically every feat in this thread. (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?649079-3-5-Feats-That-Change-Or-Add-Skill-Uses)

Not every single feat in that thread, but most of them? Most of them are feats that gave you the ability to do [thing] with [obvious skill you would use for that]. Except before the feat existed, the question "can I do [thing] with [skill]" would be answered with "sure, roll it", and once the feat came into existence, now the answer is "no, you don't have the feat tax necessary to use [skill] to do [thing]". Those feats don't just make you worse when you take them - the very act of them coming to exist in the game space actively made the connect skill worse for everybody in the universe, regardless of if they took the feat or not.

Because god forbid you swing from vines like tarzan if you didn't pay your feat tax. Heaven forbid you be good enough at appraisal to identify magic items. How ****in dare you try to make a sunrod that has double the duration for quintuple the cost, without also paying an EPIC FEAT FOR THE PRIVILEGE OF WASTING YOUR OWN MONEY.

[Particle_Man]

The madness domain gives a bonus to spellcaster dc and bonus spells but also a penalty to wisdom skill checks and will saving throws.

It usually does not matter since casters usually won’t take the feat but Mage Slayer (and the two feats it is prerequisite for) reduce your caster level.

I suppose there would be some feats that cannot be used at the same time (spring attack and heavy armour proficiency) but that is not the same as making one actively worse.

Some feats alter your appearance for the worse (some in the illithid heritage line or tomb-tainted soul line, for example) but whether that is a problem or not depends on the setting and campaign.

That said, tomb-tainted soul makes it harder for you to be healed most of the time, since positive energy healing is more commonly available than negative energy. Again, this usually won’t matter as in settings and campaigns where it would be a problem a pc would not take the feat.

[Biggus]

Two-weapon Fighting, unless you're a Rogue or similar.

[Kurald Galain]

Vow of Poverty, in any campaign with average-to-high WBL.

Green Star Adept!

I think there's a feat out there that makes you blow yourself up when at zero HP, which is of course meant for overzealous cultists but is hilariously bad to take for any PC.

[pabelfly]

I think there's a feat out there that makes you blow yourself up when at zero HP, which is of course meant for overzealous cultists but is hilariously bad to take for any PC.

Lol I need to know this feat for the purposes of building a character.

[AvatarVecna]

Lol I need to know this feat for the purposes of building a character.

Final Strike is the feat, it's in Savage Species. It comes up occasionally in the Villainous Competition, where it's more valuable.

[Saintheart]

Final Strike is the feat, it's in Savage Species. It comes up occasionally in the Villainous Competition, where it's more valuable.

It's great DM fun installed on the bigger red dragons, since they qualify on subtype and usually have high HD which scales the damage of the post-death nuke, which in turn is essentially untyped damage. Very satisfying if the party smugly hit your poor scaly boi with a Shivering Touch and then coup de grace'd it.

[Eldan]

Vow of Poverty, in any campaign with average-to-high WBL.

Green Star Adept!

I think there's a feat out there that makes you blow yourself up when at zero HP, which is of course meant for overzealous cultists but is hilariously bad to take for any PC.

Along the lines of Green Star Adept, arguably any class capstone that turns you into an outsider. Useful if you have racial HD, probably (better base attack and saves) and you no longer eat or sleep, but suddenly opens you up to all manners of weird magic.

[Metastachydium]

but suddenly opens you up to all manners of weird magic.

I don't know, like what? I'd deem alignment subtypes and especially the extraplanar subtype more problematic.


♣

Anyhow, if we're talking about bad capstones, that of the mountebankDComp (congratulations, sub par PC, as a reward for sticking with this bad class, you get to be a subpar NPC from now on!) is really hard to beat.

[Jack_Simth]

I don't know, like what? I'd deem alignment subtypes and especially the extraplanar subtype more problematic.

The Planar Binding line comes to mind. If the caster happens to be on a private demiplane, every outsider is (relative to the caster) extraplanar.



♣

Anyhow, if we're talking about bad capstones, that of the mountebankDComp (congratulations, sub par PC, as a reward for sticking with this bad class, you get to be a subpar NPC from now on!) is really hard to beat.
Check out the Risen Martyr, Book of Exalted Deeds. The capstone is that you die forever.

[Jervis]

It's great DM fun installed on the bigger red dragons, since they qualify on subtype and usually have high HD which scales the damage of the post-death nuke, which in turn is essentially untyped damage. Very satisfying if the party smugly hit your poor scaly boi with a Shivering Touch and then coup de grace'd it.

FYI casting that savage species druid spell that adds the earth subtype and manifesting psychic reformation on a chicken is cheaper than a scroll of earthquake IIRC. Also lets you trigger a lot of earthquakes by putting them in a barrel and teleporting them a lethal fall distance over a city.

[AvatarVecna]

Do highly circumstantial downsides count? If so, literally anything that boosts your knowledge (history) bonus past +29, since it puts you at risk of being enthralled to a dead god's genocidal goals.

[Telonius]

Taint mechanics from Heroes of Horror (unless you have a way of negating or mitigating them). For a living character - especially something like a Tainted Scholar - it's powerful, but you're one casting closer to dying outright, or spending the rest of your life mumbling, "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn."

[Metastachydium]

The Planar Binding line comes to mind. If the caster happens to be on a private demiplane, every outsider is (relative to the caster) extraplanar.

Yes, but not quite. The extraplanar subtype is only applied when the creature that gets it wanders off its native plane. Now, since the language for Planar Binding doesn't make any explicit reference to the subtype, it still works by RAW, but it's very clearly not RAI.


Check out the Risen Martyr, Book of Exalted Deeds. The capstone is that you die forever.

Okay, you win. That one's just pure gold.

[loky1109]

Okay, you win. That one's just pure gold.
Even better. You can't avoid taking this.

About feats. Did anybody mention Deformity madness? And all abyssal heritor feats

[Particle_Man]

Do highly circumstantial downsides count? If so, literally anything that boosts your knowledge (history) bonus past +29, since it puts you at risk of being enthralled to a dead god's genocidal goals.

Wait, what?

[AvatarVecna]

Wait, what?

Direct book quote:


Lore: A few forgotten fragments of lore hold descriptions of the Killing Frost of Ghulurak and its effects. Learning the details of the Killing Frost requires a DC 40 Knowledge (history) check. Some lore is so precise, though, that it causes the image of Ghulurak to fester in the reader’s mind, and drives her to madness. Any creature that rolls a 50 or higher on an attempt to learn of the Killing Frost is exposed to a description so precise that she must succeed on a DC 25 Will save or fall under the effect of a geas spell that directs the reader to create the statue and complete the ritual that brings the Killing Frost into existence.

If you're exposed to knowledge of Ghulurak, and your K (history) bonus is too high, you can get geas'd.

There was an Iron Chef build several rounds back that abused the secret ingredient: the Rage Mage PrC gives you a rage where you can cast spells, along with the usual "you cant succeed at Int checks" issue most rages have. They made a casting-focused bard Rage Mage, and their combat strategy past lvl 15 was going into a spell rage, buffing their enemy's K (history) check through the roof, and then asking them if they've heard the good word of Ghulurak over and over until all enemies buffed and in earshot get geas'd. It was a hilarious build.

[Jack_Simth]

Even better. You can't avoid taking this.
You're only forced to keep going if you take level 0 in the PrC.

[Greg_S]

Vow of Poverty, in any campaign with average-to-high WBL.

Green Star Adept!

I think there's a feat out there that makes you blow yourself up when at zero HP, which is of course meant for overzealous cultists but is hilariously bad to take for any PC.

Pathfinder's Troth of the Forgotten Pharaoh (https://aonprd.com/FeatDisplay.aspx?ItemName=Troth%20of%20the%20Forgo tten%20Pharaoh), perhaps? Not only do you explode at death, you can't be resurrected and permanently lose 3 HP. But you do get a self-destruct button, so that's a thing.

[Particle_Man]

Direct book quote:



If you're exposed to knowledge of Ghulurak, and your K (history) bonus is too high, you can get geas'd.

Huh. Now I am curious as to the Venn Diagram intersection of "classes with bad will saves and not much reason to boost Wisdom" and "classes with know (history) as a class skill and some reason to boost/max it and Intelligence".

[AvatarVecna]

Huh. Now I am curious as to the Venn Diagram intersection of "classes with bad will saves and not much reason to boost Wisdom" and "classes with know (history) as a class skill and some reason to boost/max it and Intelligence".

There's not too many classes that care all that much about Intelligence, at least not enough to boost it with HD increases. The obvious culprits are mostly caster types - Artificer, Archivist, Psion, Wizard, Wu Jen - who will all have good will saves, and separately might have other ways to avoid a geas in the first place by the time they can make the check. Our best bet, I think, will be Factotum. Factotum has poor Will save, good reason to boost Int high while not necessarily scaling Wisdom similarly. They have K (History) as a class skill, as well as a class feature they can use to boost a check 1/day. This means among other things that a Factotum can reach DC 50 faster than the others can (at least without them spending spell slots on it).

...theoretically, Venerable Grey Elf Factotum 3 (18+2+3=23=+6 mod). 6 ranks, +6 from item familiar (which is also a +5 competence item?), +2 circumstance from a MW tool (likely a history book), +3 from Skill Focus, +6 from Intelligence modifier, +2 from factotum class feature. +30 without digging into more esoteric feats or getting cheeky with bonus types on items. Didn't even need flaws. You're looking at a +1 base will save, modified by wisdom, which is 3 points higher than normal from age, but almost certainly not 20. If it's even 18, you're looking at +5 Will save, meaning even a 19 on the die isn't good enough to save them. They need a nat 20 to avoid the effect. I don't think you can push it earlier than lvl 3 without serious cheese since that's the earliest you can pick up Item Familiar.

EDIT: The main issue, I think, is "some reason to boost/max knowledge (history)". It's not a monster knowledge skill, so even among lore whores it's got a line to wait in before it gets maxed out. The above example Factotum could have 12 skills maxed out - that could be all ten core knowledge skills and a couple others, but if I were building an actual character, I'd probably go full ranks in the monster knowledge skills, 1 rank in the other four core knowledges, and then spread the rest of my ranks among generally useful skills - Listen, Spot, Use Magic Device. Would probably pick different feats as well.

The factotum does also have a small issue in the save department: technically, they can spend a point of inspiration for +Int to their Will save, which gives them a much better chance of avoiding the geas. It doesn't help them all day, but for a few saves a day, they've (probably) got better Will saves than an equal-level cleric.

[Wildstag]

Vow of Poverty, in any campaign with average-to-high WBL.

Technically speaking, Vow of Poverty tracks with WBL pretty closely, it's just that they calculate as if the armor bonus was equivalent to bracers of armor instead of actual armor. Since it gets to +10, it'd be the equivalent of a 100,000 gp item. Similarly, the ability enhancement options equate to a 120,000 gp investment. Freedom of Movement permanent is the same as a 40,000 gp investment. Just those three abilities account for a third of WBL. Exalted Strike +5 should count as an Amulet of Mighty Fists (rather than just a +5 weapon)... another 150,000 gp. Admittedly an argument could be made for counting it as two +5 weapons, which would make it 100,000 gp. Energy Resistance would reasonably be another 100,000 gp if we keep it pace with Rings of Energy Resistance (20,000 splits the difference between the ER 10 and ER 20 rings). Ring of Protection +3 and Amulet of Natural Armor +2 comes out to 26,000 gp. Ring of Regeneration is 90,000 gp. Somehow I forgot about Cloak of Resistance +3 until now, but it adds another 9,000 gp to the mix.

Assuming all of this tracks, that's 585,000 - 635,000 gp. Still brings you to around 3/4 - 4/5 WBL.

Pair that info with the fact that several of its abilities are not replicated by items within 3.5's framework (true seeing but all day every day (which to my knowledge isn't an item)), and the effective cost of the abilities approaches WBL but still falls behind a bit. The bonus feats should also be factored in, but I couldn't be bothered to calculate what a wondrous item of a constant feat should cost. Nymph's Kiss is a great addition to any build.

I think the issue is that it's just a very specific and general set of abilities that don't fit for every campaign.

[Kurald Galain]

Technically speaking, Vow of Poverty tracks with WBL pretty closely
True. The issue is not that it gives you less (virtual) wealth, but that it spends this wealth rather poorly.

[Tohron]

Another spell that makes you worse: Tenser's Transformation, which lets you go from being a powerful Wizard to a Fighter with no bonus feats or combat equipment.

[Luccan]

Dunno if it's been mentioned but starting as a Barbarian, Totemist, or the Savage Bard ACF all make you illiterate. While not a huge penalty, it means you either have to pay a skill tax or take a level in another class to do something that the game rules otherwise allow anyone else with an Intelligence score above 2 to do. And you don't actually get anything for the trade-off either, because illiteracy is entirely a roleplay choice that got turned into a mechanic

[Telonius]

Half-drow (Forgotten Realms). Half-elf is bad enough, though at least they got something. Half-drow replaces elf with a race that's objectively stronger, and ends up with something worse than half-elf (or pretty much any other LA +0 race that I can think of).

Racial traits: Darkvision, count as Drow for abilities, and the scorn or pity of the entire world. That's it. No goodies, no bonus feats. Just medium size, 30 feet of movement, darkvision, and drow blood. (Okay, a couple of automatic languages and bonus language: any. Don't die of excitement).

[Particle_Man]

I guess if you like darkvision but don’t like the standard options that penalize charisma like dwarf or half-orc?

[Gnaeus]

Truenames. Aside from the fact that you are a Truenamer to use them, using a truename makes the truespeach DC harder.

[Biggus]

Pair that info with the fact that several of its abilities are not replicated by items within 3.5's framework (true seeing but all day every day (which to my knowledge isn't an item))


Hathran Mask of True Seeing, 75,000GP, UE p.57.

[Jervis]

Another spell that makes you worse: Tenser's Transformation, which lets you go from being a powerful Wizard to a Fighter with no bonus feats or combat equipment.

Tnser's Tableflip is potentially the worst spell in every edition it appears in

[Jack_Simth]

Another spell that makes you worse: Tenser's Transformation, which lets you go from being a powerful Wizard to a Fighter with no bonus feats or combat equipment.
The trick is casting other buffs that would normally not be available to the fighter first.
...
...
OK, I couldn't hold back the laughter. Yeah, it's not a spell a Wizard should cast.

[Thurbane]

Anyhow, if we're talking about bad capstones, that of the mountebankDComp (congratulations, sub par PC, as a reward for sticking with this bad class, you get to be a subpar NPC from now on!) is really hard to beat.

I think most reasonable DMs would let it work similarly to Dread Necromancer or Walker in the Waste: you get the template (and most likely the LA that goes with it), but the whole "you become an NPC" part is completely unnecessary. If you are already getting saddled with LA, no need to further punish you by forcefully retiring the character.

[Jervis]

I think most reasonable DMs would let it work similarly to Dread Necromancer or Walker in the Waste: you get the template (and most likely the LA that goes with it), but the whole "you become an NPC" part is completely unnecessary. If you are already getting saddled with LA, no need to further punish you by forcefully retiring the character.

Man sometimes I forget how bad mountebank is. I think dragon disciple is a good example of a bad capstone just because you disqualify yourself and loose all DD class features, including the half dragon template.

Also I know its dragon mag but Athar is a divine casting prestige class who’s first level feature makes you loose all divine spellcasting abilities. You get them back three levels of dead progression later but still.

[Wildstag]

Hathran Mask of True Seeing, 75,000GP, UE p.57.

Yeah, I said 3.5 for a reason. That one predates the PHB by a month, which makes it questionable, since the book also refers to "Wilderness Lore" as a skill.

Just going by the DMG, as a continuous spell effect, with a spell level of 5, a caster level of 9, multiplied by 2,000 and then by 2 (since the spell's duration is 1 minute/level), it should be 180,000 using the framework from the DMG. Now, logically, you could go with "specific beats general", but within the .5 system, the 75,000 gp value is a steal and kinda unreasonable.

[Biggus]

Yeah, I said 3.5 for a reason. That one predates the PHB by a month, which makes it questionable, since the book also refers to "Wilderness Lore" as a skill.


I thought 3.0 material which hasn't been updated is still valid in 3.5?

[loky1109]

I think dragon disciple is a good example of a bad capstone just because you disqualify yourself and loose all DD class features, including the half dragon template.
It isn't bad capstone, it's bad design. Capstone is ok.


You're only forced to keep going if you take level 0 in the PrC.
I'm out of BoED right now, but I'm sure it isn't only about taking 1st level, but about all levels.

[Saintheart]

Yeah, I said 3.5 for a reason. That one predates the PHB by a month, which makes it questionable, since the book also refers to "Wilderness Lore" as a skill.

Just going by the DMG, as a continuous spell effect, with a spell level of 5, a caster level of 9, multiplied by 2,000 and then by 2 (since the spell's duration is 1 minute/level), it should be 180,000 using the framework from the DMG. Now, logically, you could go with "specific beats general", but within the .5 system, the 75,000 gp value is a steal and kinda unreasonable.


I thought 3.0 material which hasn't been updated is still valid in 3.5?

In passing, the (okay, 3.0, but unupdated) Arms & Equipment Guide does have some guidance around what a feat-in-an-item should cost. Page 128: they start out by saying pricing feats for magic items is a very fuzzy area. But ultimately their guidance is to push it back to what the DMG would say a magic item providing an increase of the same type says it would cost ... although, in a frequently out-of-context section, the guidelines also say that if it isn't a feat that offers a simple mechanical bonus and it's not a metamagic feat in an item, then feats cost 10,000 gp plus another 5-10,000 gp per prerequisite.

[Particle_Man]

Yeah it is hidden away under “final ascension” but once you rise you are on the risen martyr train track - no multiclassing out of it, and once you have both reached the last level and then gained enough xp to get one more level on top of that, you are out of options.

I suppose one could take a craft magic item feat to delay the inevitable as much as possible, or just stop adventuring (reminds me of the Will Ferrell fictional character that tried to do nothing all day in order to see if he could avoid the attention of his author) or only adventure against low level opponents that don’t grant xp. But then you are not really having a fun game, are you?

I suppose if one was playing in a game that the DM said would end at a certain character level, then one could try to time it such that one would ascend one level after the level the DM ends the game at. Tricky though as well-times martyrdoms might be hard to arrange on one’s preferred schedule. But if the DM said “make a 10th level character and we stop at level 20” one could be a 10th monk/0th Risen Martyr and play though until a 10th monk/10th Risen Martyr.

That said, the code of conduct is super-strict. Wilfully commit even a single evil act and you immediately die and face judgement for it. Even paladins don’t have it so strict.

[Kurald Galain]

I think dragon disciple is a good example of a bad capstone just because you disqualify yourself and loose all DD class features, including the half dragon template.
But once you lose all DD class features you also lose the capstone, meaning you qualify again and regain all the abilites! Cue infinite loop.

(I'd call this "specific trumps general" as it's pretty obvious the capstone isn't meant to remove the rest of the prestige class abilities)

[Wildstag]

I thought 3.0 material which hasn't been updated is still valid in 3.5?

Ostensibly, yes. But honestly the price looks like it was pulled out of the writer's butt to make it that cheap. But then again, the Ring of Freedom of Movement is valued at 40k market price despite the table guide advising at least a value of 56k. Further, neither the Ring of Freedom of Movement NOR the Lantern of Revealing follows the footnote rule of multiplying the cost by 2 or 1.5 respectively. Per DMG Table 7-33 their values should be 74k and 60k respectively. Maybe they were all intoxicated when proofreading their own book, I dunno.

It would still bring the effective wealth of VoP to the range of 655k - 710k before counting bonus feats, the sustenances, regeneration, mind shielding, and DR. And yes, they're not the greatest abilities and most of what it gives are just numbers to another stat, but it's also technically more valuable than wbl. But strictly speaking, the benefits of VoP outweigh the standard WBL by a fair bit.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

Ostensibly, yes. But honestly the price looks like it was pulled out of the writer's butt to make it that cheap. But then again, the Ring of Freedom of Movement is valued at 40k market price despite the table guide advising at least a value of 56k. Further, neither the Ring of Freedom of Movement NOR the Lantern of Revealing follows the footnote rule of multiplying the cost by 2 or 1.5 respectively. Per DMG Table 7-33 their values should be 74k and 60k respectively. Maybe they were all intoxicated when proofreading their own book, I dunno.

It would still bring the effective wealth of VoP to the range of 655k - 710k before counting bonus feats, the sustenances, regeneration, mind shielding, and DR. And yes, they're not the greatest abilities and most of what it gives are just numbers to another stat, but it's also technically more valuable than wbl. But strictly speaking, the benefits of VoP outweigh the standard WBL by a fair bit.You'd better not use a doorknob, though. Oh, and no walking into a building. Or on a road. Or in a cave that something has taken for its lair. Or looking at a painting or a statue. Those things are owned, and some of them even cost money! No reading, either! Those books aren't allowed!

[Jack_Simth]

It isn't bad capstone, it's bad design. Capstone is ok.


I'm out of BoED right now, but I'm sure it isn't only about taking 1st level, but about all levels.

Heh. You misunderstood my intent. Yes, if you have level 1 in the PrC, you're required to take level 2. And then 3, and 4, and so on. But Risen Martyr actually has a level 0. If you take level 0, you're doomed to take the other ten levels (if the game goes that long, of course). But it comes with a free res (sort of).

[Venger]

Man sometimes I forget how bad mountebank is. I think dragon disciple is a good example of a bad capstone just because you disqualify yourself and loose all DD class features, including the half dragon template.

Also I know its dragon mag but Athar is a divine casting prestige class who’s first level feature makes you loose all divine spellcasting abilities. You get them back three levels of dead progression later but still.

Dragon disciple doesn't disqualify itself. No class autodisqualifies itself. Ur-priest, which forbids divine casting, doesn't flip off its own divine casting, for example.

Athar was for some unfathomable reason actually reprinted in planar handbook and is called "defiant."


I thought 3.0 material which hasn't been updated is still valid in 3.5?

It is.

[Jervis]

Dragon disciple doesn't disqualify itself. No class autodisqualifies itself. Ur-priest, which forbids divine casting, doesn't flip off its own divine casting, for example.

Athar was for some unfathomable reason actually reprinted in planar handbook and is called "defiant."



It is.

Man it somehow got WORSE in the planar handbook. Also



Being a defiant means believing in and practicing a strict policy of nonworship. A true defiant will never do any of the following:

Use the name of any deity as part of an oath or curse. (The Athar do sometimes use the term "Great Unknown" in this manner.)

Use a holy symbol or holy water for any purpose. (This includes symbols of any deity or water of any alignment.)

Read or quote from any holy books.

Be the willing subject of a spell cast by a cleric, paladin, or other divine spellcaster who claims to draw her power from any specific deity.

Performing these actions, or other similar activities, causes the defiant to lose all special abilities granted by this prestige class. He cannot thereafter gain levels as a defiant until he atones (see the atonement spell description, page 201 of the Player's Handbook,

That makes me laugh way more than it should

[MaxiDuRaritry]

Thing is, you can be a cleric or druid/defiant if you worship a cause, but you still need a holy symbol to cast cleric or druid spells...

Also, how are you supposed to "know thy enemy" and exploit their beliefs, or infiltrate and destroy, if you can't familiarize yourself with their dogmatic teachings?

That whole prestige class is just garbage. Very poorly thought-out garbage.

[Wildstag]

You'd better not use a doorknob, though. Oh, and no walking into a building. Or on a road. Or in a cave that something has taken for its lair. Or looking at a painting or a statue. Those things are owned, and some of them even cost money! No reading, either! Those books aren't allowed!

If you’re going to use that extremist argument, you might as well also argue that male Paladins can’t get any benefits from abilities that use a female pronoun in the PHB to describe the actual mechanics of said ability.


Special Mount (Sp): Upon reaching 5th level, a paladin gains the service of an unusually intelligent, strong, and loyal steed to serve her in her crusade against evil (see the sidebar). This mount is usually a heavy warhorse (for a Medium paladin) or a warpony (for a Small paladin).

[MaxiDuRaritry]

VoP very explicitly only allows you to use a small list of objects, and nothing else. Whereas the example you brought up says nothing about preventing non-females from using those abilities.

[Telonius]

Yeah it is hidden away under “final ascension” but once you rise you are on the risen martyr train track - no multiclassing out of it, and once you have both reached the last level and then gained enough xp to get one more level on top of that, you are out of options.

I suppose one could take a craft magic item feat to delay the inevitable as much as possible, or just stop adventuring (reminds me of the Will Ferrell fictional character that tried to do nothing all day in order to see if he could avoid the attention of his author) or only adventure against low level opponents that don’t grant xp. But then you are not really having a fun game, are you?

I suppose if one was playing in a game that the DM said would end at a certain character level, then one could try to time it such that one would ascend one level after the level the DM ends the game at. Tricky though as well-times martyrdoms might be hard to arrange on one’s preferred schedule. But if the DM said “make a 10th level character and we stop at level 20” one could be a 10th monk/0th Risen Martyr and play though until a 10th monk/10th Risen Martyr.

That said, the code of conduct is super-strict. Wilfully commit even a single evil act and you immediately die and face judgement for it. Even paladins don’t have it so strict.

Githyanki have a similar problem:


The githyanki have no deity but instead pay homage to a lich-queen. A jealous and paranoid overlord, she devours the essence of any githyanki that rises above 16th level. In addition to eliminating a potential rival, the lich-queen enhances her power with the stolen life essence.

My headcanon is that all of the random Tridents of Fish Command (and other semi-useless magic items you find in randomly-generated treasure) were created by 15th-level Giths that caught on to the situation.

[Wildstag]

VoP very explicitly only allows you to use a small list of objects, and nothing else. Whereas the example you brought up says nothing about preventing non-females from using those abilities.

Yes, and the general class descriptions very specifically use one pronoun or the other and nothing else. If you’re going be be literal about one thing and not the other, we get into pretty bizarre linguistic territory. Who gets to be final arbiter of which we take ONLY as written?

For example, the Scout uses a very specific list of bonus feats and ends the ability description with “She must meet all the prerequisites for the feat.” It doesn’t say anything about non-females needing to meet all the prerequisites for the feat.

Besides, that stringent VoP reading requires you to ignore the “Other Ramifications of Poverty” section, since technically you wouldn’t be able to donate wealth because that is a form of using material possessions. And you can’t even say “that’s just flavor text” because it modifies the previous sentence which is itself a game ruling.

[Twurps]

Yes, and the general class descriptions very specifically use one pronoun or the other and nothing else. If you’re going be be literal about one thing and not the other, we get into pretty bizarre linguistic territory. Who gets to be final arbiter of which we take ONLY as written?

For example, the Scout uses a very specific list of bonus feats and ends the ability description with “She must meet all the prerequisites for the feat.” It doesn’t say anything about non-females needing to meet all the prerequisites for the feat.

Besides, that stringent VoP reading requires you to ignore the “Other Ramifications of Poverty” section, since technically you wouldn’t be able to donate wealth because that is a form of using material possessions. And you can’t even say “that’s just flavor text” because it modifies the previous sentence which is itself a game ruling.

For some reason, VOP always triggers a level of non-interpretation (disguised as RAW, but I wouldn't call i that) that no other feat ever gets. I've tried to make sense of the whole doorhandle thing (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?634368-VoP-and-doorhandles) and by the strictest reading it might be correct, but only if you apply your power attack boni and mali to everybody in the fight as well (https://forums.giantitp.com/showsinglepost.php?p=25137164&postcount=55).

Back on topic: Even without the whole doorhandle issue, VOP makes you actively worse because even if it's on par with WBL in what it offers, it takes away choice, and that choice also has a value. it might be difficult to quantify, but it's certainly worth something.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

Fun fact: VoP's Exalted Strike ability makes you unable to wield a weapon (including natural weapons) without losing your vow, since Exalted Strike turns any weapon you wield into a magic weapon. And guess what? You can't use magic weapons. So I guess that's a bit of inception on the "VoP hurts you" subject:

At 4th level, VoP prevents you from ever making physical attacks again without losing your vow.

[Particle_Man]

I think we can slag VoP enough without getting into extremist interpretations that DMs would not actually use in play. Of course they can open doors!.

Similarly, of course dragon disciples do not lose their dragon disciple abilities upon reaching class level 10.

I swear some of these feats and classes have some kind of inverse of TO applied to them on message boards that would never fly in a real campaign (to do so would have players throw their books at the DM).

[MaxiDuRaritry]

I think we can slag VoP enough without getting into extremist interpretations that DMs would not actually use in play. Of course they can open doors!.

Similarly, of course dragon disciples do not lose their dragon disciple abilities upon reaching class level 10.

I swear some of these feats and classes have some kind of inverse of TO applied to them on message boards that would never fly in a real campaign (to do so would have players throw their books at the DM).Um, doors (and buildings) are possessions. And they're not on the (stupidly restrictive) list of things VoP characters can use.

Best to just homebrew a better version, because canon VoP is broken all to hell.

[Wildstag]

Back on topic: Even without the whole doorhandle issue, VOP makes you actively worse because even if it's on par with WBL in what it offers, it takes away choice, and that choice also has a value. it might be difficult to quantify, but it's certainly worth something.

I think it's hard to argue "it takes away choice" when taking the feat is itself an active choice you make as a player for your character. It's not like Vow of Nonviolence that restricts other player's choices.

On a related note... Vow of Nonviolence actively makes the player AND their party worse!

P.S. Nonviolence, not Peace.

[Particle_Man]

Um, doors (and buildings) are possessions. And they're not on the (stupidly restrictive) list of things VoP characters can use.

Best to just homebrew a better version, because canon VoP is broken all to hell.

This is what I am talking about. No. I reject this as RAW.

[pabelfly]

I think it's hard to argue "it takes away choice" when taking the feat is itself an active choice you make as a player for your character. It's not like Vow of Peace that restricts other player's choices.

On a related note... Vow of Peace actively makes the player AND their party worse!

It takes away choice in that you don't get to choose what abilities you get by spending money, you instead get set abilities as defined by Vow of Poverty. Like, by level 3 I always have a Healing Belt. VOP says no, you have to have the abilities listed in VOP instead.

Vow of Peace means you either get to play buffer or deal non-lethal damage in combat, and you're kinda forcing your players to play Paladin. How bad the latter is really depends on the party.

[Beni-Kujaku]

VoP very explicitly only allows you to use a small list of objects, and nothing else. Whereas the example you brought up says nothing about preventing non-females from using those abilities.

Yeah. If only VoP didn't restrict you to simple weapons you could say that every mundane object is an improvised weapon and use it, but RAW you can't even do that.

[Wildstag]

It takes away choice in that you don't get to choose what abilities you get by spending money, you instead get set abilities as defined by VOP. Like, by level 3 I always have a Healing Belt. VOP says no, you have to have the abilities listed in VOP. instead.

Yeah, and I'm saying that it doesn't make sense as an argument. Noone is forcing Vow of Poverty on you, so if you choose to go Vow of Poverty, you're making a conscious choice moving forward. That would only make sense if your GM forced Vow of Poverty on you. If you don't like it, don't choose it, but also don't act like you didn't make that specific choice in the first place.

It's not like we complain about "well I picked Red Dragon for Dragon Disciple because the scales are cooler, but it restricts breath weapon type, so it's a bad PrC. What if I'm fighting a bunch of fire-resistant foes?"

[pabelfly]

This is what I am talking about. No. I reject this as RAW.

Going to second this. The feat is badly-worded, sure, but it's also clear what WOTC intended to do with Vow of Poverty. Did they want to create a character that is crippled by a doorknob or a flight of stairs? I don't think so.

[Twurps]

I think it's hard to argue "it takes away choice" when taking the feat is itself an active choice you make as a player for your character. It's not like Vow of Nonviolence that restricts other player's choices.

Interesting point. However, even if it seems like a good idea at the time of taking it, circumstances might change, and then you don't have the flexibility to adjust (atleast gear/wbl-wise). For the very limited percentage of cases where VOP actually grants you exactly what you were going to get anyway though, it might still be a good choice, and even has some slight upsides to compensate for the minor nuisance of living in poverty. (not needing to find a shop, can't have your armor stolen, etc)



On a related note... Vow of Nonviolence actively makes the player AND their party worse!

P.S. Nonviolence, not Peace.

now that thing is a pain! funny enough though, I've always wanted to play a character with that feat! Haven't had any good inspiration for a build though.

[pabelfly]

Yeah, and I'm saying that it doesn't make sense as an argument. Noone is forcing Vow of Poverty on you, so if you choose to go Vow of Poverty, you're making a conscious choice moving forward. That would only make sense if your GM forced Vow of Poverty on you. If you don't like it, don't choose it, but also don't act like you didn't make that specific choice in the first place.

A player spends money and gets to choose what problems they want to solve for their character. In contrast, VOP is handing you a pretty strict set of solutions regardless of class choice, campaign, setting or DM style.


It's not like we complain about "well I picked Red Dragon for Dragon Disciple because the scales are cooler, but it restricts breath weapon type, so it's a bad PrC. What if I'm fighting a bunch of fire-resistant foes?"

I'd certainly point thus out as an issue for the class and I'm far from the only one that would do this.

[Particle_Man]

There is at least one place where Vow of Povery shines and that is “stingy DM” campaigns where WBL is ignored. Similarly it becomes an even worse choice in “Monty Haul DM” campaigns where WBL is ignored in the other direction.

[pabelfly]

now that thing is a pain! funny enough though, I've always wanted to play a character with that feat! Haven't had any good inspiration for a build though.

Unarmed attacks let you do non-lethal damage. So maybe a Monk-style build, or an initiator build with unarmed attacks could work.

[loky1109]

Best to just homebrew a better version, because canon VoP is broken all to hell.

This isn't homebrew, this is non-dysfunctional reading, i.e. normal reading. Your "RAW" interpretations, while are technically correct, are incorrect if we talk about any real game. It's poor TO reading in the worst possible way.

[Wildstag]

A player spends money and gets to choose what problems they want to solve for their character. In contrast, VOP is handing you a pretty strict set of solutions regardless of class choice, campaign, setting or DM style.

When you use this kind of argument, we can turn it around and say "why even play fighter in a game with high-magic?" The context of the option should be taken fully into account for whether it makes you worse. Arguments that "well it doesn't fit for an evil campaign" should just be responded with "If you are stubborn enough with your DM to take that feat in a campaign where the benefit and restrictions directly clash with the setting, you have noone to blame but yourself". And again, I'm not saying VoP doesn't actively make you worse, just that the standard arguments for why it does hinge on ignoring context or are just flat out wrong. Arguments that it doesn't keep up with WBL are factually incorrect, as I've clearly proven.

A better argument for it being actively worse is that it tacks on the line "If you break your vow, you immediately and irrevocably lose the benefit of this feat. You may not take another feat to replace it.", thus circumventing the Atonement clause inherent to Exalted feats. Without that second line, you could even retrain out of it if circumstances change your character's perspective on life.

[AvatarVecna]

It's not poor reading of RAW, it's just that the Rules As Written is pretty mind-numbingly stupid. But also even if we assume reasonable fluff restrictions on actions, it's still a bad method of wealth distribution in all but the most impoverished of games. We do not need to make this yet another thread rehashing the technical legality of doorknobs, we've already got a thousand threads about that.

That being said, even if we assume somebody with a vow of poverty is allowed to interact with most stuff the way normal characters do, it's still generally a downgrade. Even if you're the kind of character who's getting more technical value from the feat than from WBL, the ability to spend it as desired is bigger than people give it credit for. It's overly defense-focused in a game that tends towards rocket-tag, which is bad even for the kind of character who would spend their money like this. And it doesn't allow for potions. I would personally be pretty nervous if I made a mid-level monk who didn't have any potions on hand, even if just healing potions. This is without even touching on UMDers getting wands (partially charged or otherwise).

[Kurald Galain]

Looks like VOP is actively making this thread worse :smallamused:

[pabelfly]

When you use this kind of argument, we can turn it around and say "why even play fighter in a game with high-magic?" The context of the option should be taken fully into account for whether it makes you worse. Arguments that "well it doesn't fit for an evil campaign" should just be responded with "If you are stubborn enough with your DM to take that feat in a campaign where the benefit and restrictions directly clash with the setting, you have noone to blame but yourself". And again, I'm not saying VoP doesn't actively make you worse, just that the standard arguments for why it does hinge on ignoring context or are just flat out wrong. Arguments that it doesn't keep up with WBL are factually incorrect, as I've clearly proven.

I'll try rephrasing my argument.

Let's say we're playing a level 3 game. One character gets 2700 gold, or the base WBL, to spend any way they choose. Another character trades that 2700 gold to get the Vow of Poverty bonuses for third level: AC +5, Endure Elements and two exalted bonus feats.

Let's also say that we don't care about the RP requirements of Vow of Poverty. We want to play an Exalted Good character.

Lastly, let's say that I agree with you that the package of what Vow of Poverty gives you is worth 2700 gold all up.

My argument is that having 2700 gold to spend in any way I choose, to solve any problems that my character has, is far more useful than the strict set of benefits that Vow of Poverty gives you, even if they are the same amount of value in money. The player with money can choose if he wants a masterwork weapon, a wide choice of armor types, healing potions, an animal to ride, rations, whatever. Completely their choice.

Meanwhile, a Vow of Poverty Player takes exactly AC +5, Endure Elements and the two bonus Exalted feats. Want some potions for an emergency? Better hope another player bought them. Want a masterwork weapon to increase your chance of hitting with an attack? Sorry, that's not yet in the list of benefits. Want a mount to ride? Better hope it's in your class benefits because you can't pay money for an animal.

Hope this makes my argument more clear.


A better argument for it being actively worse is that it tacks on the line "If you break your vow, you immediately and irrevocably lose the benefit of this feat. You may not take another feat to replace it.", thus circumventing the Atonement clause inherent to Exalted feats. Without that second line, you could even retrain out of it if circumstances change your character's perspective on life.

I'd just point out that it costs two feats to get. It's not as if there aren't a whole slew of other feats that you'd prefer at level 1.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

This is what I am talking about. No. I reject this as RAW.


Going to second this. The feat is badly-worded, sure, but it's also clear what WOTC intended to do with Vow of Poverty. Did they want to create a character that is crippled by a doorknob or a flight of stairs? I don't think so.Then you're houseruling. Which is fine! But that runs 180 degrees counter to RAW.

[Jervis]

Vow of Peace and Non-violence are pretty debilitating. Calm Emotions your party members from attacking and turns off several good buffs. It’s one of the few things I outright ban for that reason.

[stack]

Pathfinder has a feat, think it is for gnomes only, that was probably supposed to be a taunt effect. Basically, you give a creature power attack when it attacks you.

It can choose not to attack. Or to attack someone else. All you do is give a creature the option to use a solid mattial feat if it attacks you.

[Kurald Galain]

Pathfinder has a feat, think it is for gnomes only, that was probably supposed to be a taunt effect. Basically, you give a creature power attack when it attacks you.
You mean Broken Wing Gambit?

Because that does what you say it does, except that if that enemy chooses to power attack you, your allies get a free AOO on him.

[stack]

You mean Broken Wing Gambit?

Because that does what you say it does, except that if that enemy chooses to power attack you, your allies get a free AOO on him.

No, Broken Wing Gambit has real uses. I found the one I was thinking of: Caustic Slur. (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/general-feats/caustic-slur-general/) the fact that it makes you worse is only mitigated by it being hard to use.

It's so bad, I had to copy the whole thing.
Caustic Slur

You know exactly how to insult your favored enemies in order to make them lose their heads.

Prerequisites: Bluff 1 rank, favored enemy class feature, gnome.

Benefit: As a standard action, you can make a Bluff check against one sort of favored enemy. Any creature of that type within 60 feet of you must make a Will saving throw or become angered. If an affected creature attacks you, it’s treated as if it were using Power Attack (taking a penalty on attack rolls but gaining a bonus on damage rolls). If the creature already has the power attack feat, the attack penalty increases by 1 and the damage bonus increases by 2. These modifiers end when combat ends. This ability does not work on creatures that cannot understand you, though sometimes a simple gesture is sufficient for an intelligent opponent to catch your gist regardless of any language barrier.

Its locked to gnomes with favored enemy.
It takes a standard action.
Only works in favored enemies that can understand you.
Will save allowed.
Gives or improves power attack, effectively.
DOES NOT MAKE THEM ATTACK YOU.

So if an enemy was attacking you anyway, they will take a penalty on the roll but boost damage. I guess if you fight a lot of favored enemies that are Dex-based melee, its effect isn't negative, but even then...

I have to assume whatever was written got nerfed after it was turned in. I don't want to think that someone wrote this and thought it was good.

[Troacctid]

Half-drow (Forgotten Realms). Half-elf is bad enough, though at least they got something. Half-drow replaces elf with a race that's objectively stronger, and ends up with something worse than half-elf (or pretty much any other LA +0 race that I can think of).

Racial traits: Darkvision, count as Drow for abilities, and the scorn or pity of the entire world. That's it. No goodies, no bonus feats. Just medium size, 30 feet of movement, darkvision, and drow blood. (Okay, a couple of automatic languages and bonus language: any. Don't die of excitement).
Actually, in the 3.5 update, they lost the darkvision and the scorn and pity.

[Seward]

Technically speaking, Vow of Poverty tracks with WBL pretty closely

It breaks down with the nat armor bonus, deflection bonus, armor bonus and resistance bonus by the mid teens (When normal WBL gives a +5 in all of these, plus at least +4 from chain shirt and +1 from ioun stone). Losing 2 resistance bonus and not getting even to +3 is a big deal for anybody who can't cast superiour resistance.

The statbumps hold up fairly ok if you are not too MAD until you can start to afford the book statbumps in the late teens, then they fall hopelessly behind for any VoP dude who can't cast Wish.

VoP works ok to about level 12, then the gaps become quite noticable. You are still a bit behind in the 8-11 range, but not enough to matter much until then, unless you are a physical attacker, then you also suck every time you hit DR that isn't covered by your one simple weapon or unarmed strike and magic doesn't penetrate. Monks with versatile unarmed strike have an easier time, but silver, cold iron and adamantium will be a PITA.

[Particle_Man]

Then you're houseruling. Which is fine! But that runs 180 degrees counter to RAW.

I think on reflection I will meet you halfway and split RAW into two types:

a) Theorectical-RAW (TRAW): The impractical rulings that say that VoP people cannot open doors.

b) Practical-RAW (PRAW): How everyone who uses VoP will actually play and DM it, without going for house rules.

It is a misnomer to call PRAW a house rule if TRAW will be rejected in every house that plays with the feat. In actual games, people with VoP can open doors. Tournament games, if they still existed for 3.5, would allow VoP characters to open doors. A person that tried a TRAW argument to say "actually they can't open doors" would be flat out rejected in an actual game.

This is not like "In my games, halflings have darkvision" as a house rule, which some tables might go for (perhaps for setting based reasons, perhaps because the DM thinks halflings should be able to see in the dark because reasons).

At best, it edges close to "We don't use racial favoured classes" only moreso, since I have actually encountered the favoured class rule used in the wild, and could see tournament games using that. The rule might be disliked, but games can be played using it.

"Can't open doors" is a non-starter. It is not real thing. It is at best TRAW, but not PRAW.

"Can open doors" is PRAW and is not a house rule, because games have doors and characters open them.

Similarly, games with dragon disciples allow characters to get to level 10 in the class without losing their dragon disciple class abilities. There are no actual games where a DM and players have it otherwise. Thus PRAW they keep their abilities even if TRAW they do not.

The TRAW/PRAW distinction should not be too foreign, as it is closely aligned to the distinction between TO and PO ideas about optimization.

[Particle_Man]

Unarmed attacks let you do non-lethal damage. So maybe a Monk-style build, or an initiator build with unarmed attacks could work.

I am now envisioning an all-monk all-Vow of Non-Violence party.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

I think on reflection I will meet you halfway and split RAW into two types:

a) Theorectical-RAW (TRAW): The impractical rulings that say that VoP people cannot open doors.

b) Practical-RAW (PRAW): How everyone who uses VoP will actually play and DM it, without going for house rules.

It is a misnomer to call PRAW a house rule if TRAW will be rejected in every house that plays with the feat. In actual games, people with VoP can open doors. Tournament games, if they still existed for 3.5, would allow VoP characters to open doors. A person that tried a TRAW argument to say "actually they can't open doors" would be flat out rejected in an actual game.

This is not like "In my games, halflings have darkvision" as a house rule, which some tables might go for (perhaps for setting based reasons, perhaps because the DM thinks halflings should be able to see in the dark because reasons).

At best, it edges close to "We don't use racial favoured classes" only moreso, since I have actually encountered the favoured class rule used in the wild, and could see tournament games using that. The rule might be disliked, but games can be played using it.

"Can't open doors" is a non-starter. It is not real thing. It is at best TRAW, but not PRAW.

"Can open doors" is PRAW and is not a house rule, because games have doors and characters open them.

The TRAW/PRAW distinction should not be too foreign, as it is closely aligned to the distinction between TO and PO ideas about optimization."PRAW" is houseruling. There's no RAW there, because you cannot use any item that isn't on that very tiny list. It's not "PRAW." It's houseruling. Which, as I said, is fine. Necessary, even, to make the stupidity of the feat work. But it's breaking the printed rules.


I am now envisioning an all-monk all-Vow of Non-Violence party.I think that vow is pretty much necessary (and/or Vow of Peace) after level 3 for a VoP character, given that making physical attacks from that point on will break your vow.

[Particle_Man]

It is not houseruling if it is necessary for every house. Then it is PRAW.

[pabelfly]

I am now envisioning an all-monk all-Vow of Non-Violence party.

Lol, that gave me a bit of a laugh. There's also Nonlethal Substitution metamagic, which lets you deal nonlethal damage with one type of elemental spell. If you can somehow cram Sacred Vow, Vow of Poverty, Nonlethal Substitution and one other metamagic feat into a mailman build so it's less effective than a caster who hasn't spent any feats.

If you read through the fine print of vow of Non-Violence, the penalty it gives is for allies attacking helpless or defenseless enemies - there's nothing stopping your allies doing lethal damage to opponents, or even killing enemies trying to kill them. So I get why it's something you'd want to discuss with your group before you take the feat, but I don't think it's nearly as bad as people make it out to be.

[loky1109]

"PRAW" is houseruling. There's no RAW there, because you cannot use any item that isn't on that very tiny list.

Well. There is list of items in D&D 3.5. You can find it in PHB in several tables. Plus Magical items in several books. All outside that list isn't items and VoP can use it. Or we can say BoED is item, too, and VoP becomes unusable on new level.
Is this RAW you wanted?

[Particle_Man]

I started a thread on TRAW vs PRAW.

https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?649205-TRAW-vs-PRAW-a-new-distinction

[Troacctid]

There's no reason to invent new dysfunctions that aren't in the RAW when there are so many of them that actually are in the RAW. VoP does not prevent you from using a door. Even if a random architectural feature counted as a possession in the first place, which is not indicated by anything in the RAW that I'm aware of, the text contains multiple examples that explicitly allow the VoP character to hold or use other people's items or have items used on their behalf—in direct contradiction to the hard-line reading. Yes, there are restrictions when doing this, but it is definitely allowed.

I guess you could houserule it to be forbidden, if you like. Which is fine! But that's not the RAW.

[AvatarVecna]

If houses aren't material possessions, there's nothing stopping a VoPer from owning one.

[loky1109]

If houses aren't material possessions, there's nothing stopping a VoPer from owning one.

VoP anyway doesn't forbidden owning. Or your enemy can just draw up a donation or a bequeathing for you and completely ruin your abilities.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

There's no reason to invent new dysfunctions that aren't in the RAW when there are so many of them that actually are in the RAW. VoP does not prevent you from using a door. Even if a random architectural feature counted as a possession in the first place, which is not indicated by anything in the RAW that I'm aware of, the text contains multiple examples that explicitly allow the VoP character to hold or use other people's items or have items used on their behalf—in direct contradiction to the hard-line reading. Yes, there are restrictions when doing this, but it is definitely allowed.

I guess you could houserule it to be forbidden, if you like. Which is fine! But that's not the RAW.I genuinely have no idea how you can get from, "You can only ever use this list of things" to "You can use anything that's not on this list of things." It's not 1984, you know.

[AvatarVecna]

VoP anyway doesn't forbidden owning. Or your enemy can just draw up a donation or a bequeathing for you and completely ruin your abilities.

??????????


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

EDIT: Like, I'm not trying to be a ****. But any argument of "X doesn't count as a material possession, therefore a VoP character is allowed to use one" is also, in a very straightforward unambiguous manner, "X doesn't count as a material possession, therefore a VoP character is allowed to own one". They're only forbidden from owning/using material possessions (outside the exceptions). If it's not a material possession, it's 100% fair game.

[loky1109]

My bad. Well, notarized bequeathing or donation +1 longsword should work.

[Kurald Galain]

...so if an enemy rogue uses sleight of hand to plant (reverse-pickpocket) a small gemstone on the VOP user, would the VOP lose all power?

[AvatarVecna]

My bad. Well, notarized bequeathing or donation +1 longsword should work.

Once again, the optimal choice for every VoP character is to live in an anarcho-communist society that doesn't believe in possessions.

(Also you could probably ruin a VoP by bequeathing a single copper piece, no need to break out the magic items.)

(Counterargument: a VoP character could set it up so that legally speaking, anything that would normally be bequeathed/donated to them is immediate bequeathed/donated to someone else? And like, all of this is mostly theorycrafting - as is the trend for this thread, it's not like the gods are going to take away your special boon just because some minor villain on the other side of the planet gifted you 30 pieces of silver in their will.)

[AvatarVecna]

...so if an enemy rogue uses sleight of hand to plant (reverse-pickpocket) a small gemstone on the VOP user, would the VOP lose all power?

On the one hand, it's hard to say that putting something in somebody else's pocket means they "own" it, legally speaking. This isn't skyrim after all. On the other hand, possession is nine tenths of the law?

[Kurald Galain]

On the one hand, it's hard to say that putting something in somebody else's pocket means they "own" it, legally speaking. This isn't skyrim after all. On the other hand, possession is nine tenths of the law?

Fair enough, so they'd lose nine tenths of their VOP abilities.

[Metastachydium]

Hm. The restriction only applies to material possessions (whatever that means, mechanically speaking). But how about immaterial possessions? Be a ghost! Possess people! Make them own and use stuff for you!

[AvatarVecna]

Hm. The restriction only applies to material possessions (whatever that means, mechanically speaking). But how about immaterial possessions? Be a ghost! Possess people! Make them own and use stuff for you!

I recall an iron chef build that used VoP on a...it wasn't shadowcraft mage, it was some kind of shadow-mancy class that could make items out of shadow stuff? Which didn't technically count as material possessions because they were temporary, and couldn't be sold, but were otherwise totally functional?

EDIT: The Build (https://forums.giantitp.com/showsinglepost.php?p=22192864&postcount=76)

[Jervis]

Once again, the optimal choice for every VoP character is to live in an anarcho-communist society that doesn't believe in possessions.

(Also you could probably ruin a VoP by bequeathing a single copper piece, no need to break out the magic items.)

(Counterargument: a VoP character could set it up so that legally speaking, anything that would normally be bequeathed/donated to them is immediate bequeathed/donated to someone else? And like, all of this is mostly theorycrafting - as is the trend for this thread, it's not like the gods are going to take away your special boon just because some minor villain on the other side of the planet gifted you 30 pieces of silver in their will.)

Flashback to 2e where a Paladin could fall for accidentally picking up a 6th magic item, even if they didn’t know it was magical

[Metastachydium]

I recall an iron chef build that used VoP on a...it wasn't shadowcraft mage, it was some kind of shadow-mancy class that could make items out of shadow stuff? Which didn't technically count as material possessions because they were temporary, and couldn't be sold, but were otherwise totally functional?

EDIT: The Build (https://forums.giantitp.com/showsinglepost.php?p=22192864&postcount=76)

Heh. Clever, I've got to say. In the same vein, a shaedlingMM5 (4 RHD, LA +3, but officially playable) with its Shadow Gossamer (i.e. the ability to swift action create any item weighing 15 lb. or less (including exotic weapons (with which it automatically gains proficiency)) for as long as it holds the item in its hand) should likewise work. (Also, it flies. Privately owned roads, eat your heart out!)

[Troacctid]

I genuinely have no idea how you can get from, "You can only ever use this list of things" to "You can use anything that's not on this list of things." It's not 1984, you know.
Well, I have no idea how you can look at the various examples of VoP characters explicitly being allowed to borrow, touch, use, and transport items that they do not own, and conclude that it's not allowed. So I guess we're even.

[Darg]

Well, I have no idea how you can look at the various examples of VoP characters explicitly being allowed to borrow, touch, use, and transport items that they do not own, and conclude that it's not allowed. So I guess we're even.


adjective

1. denoting or consisting of physical objects rather than the mind or spirit.
"the material world"
synonyms: physical, corporeal, tangible, nonspiritual, mundane, worldly, earthly, temporal, concrete, real, solid, substantial, secular, lay, sublunary

2. important; essential; relevant.
"the insects did not do any material damage to the crop"
synonyms: significant, major, important, of consequence, consequential, momentous, weighty, vital, essential, key, meaningful

It's obvious which meaning WotC used. It can be understood both ways and both ways are right, but only one is RAI.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

Well, I have no idea how you can look at the various examples of VoP characters explicitly being allowed to borrow, touch, use, and transport items that they do not own, and conclude that it's not allowed. So I guess we're even.Not even close. The feat very specifically says that the items on the list are the only ones you're allowed to own or utilize. (Also, no magic items.) Anything beyond that breaks your vow, very specifically. Doors, knobs, roads, books, scrolls, houses, puzzle pieces, holy items, thieves' tools, etc are not on that list. (And no weapons of any kind after level 3.)

[Batcathat]

On the one hand, it's hard to say that putting something in somebody else's pocket means they "own" it, legally speaking. This isn't skyrim after all. On the other hand, possession is nine tenths of the law?

Doing it legally might be even easier, just get a lawyer to draw something up that says you're formally giving them something they're not allowed to own. You could depower someone from two kingdoms over.

[loky1109]

Doors, knobs, roads, books, scrolls, houses, puzzle pieces, holy items, thieves' tools, etc are not on that list. (And no weapons of any kind after level 3.)

Doors, knobs, houses, roads, puzzle pieces, etc aren't items.

In effect, any weapon the character wields becomes a +1 magic weapon, and can overcome the damage reduction of a creature as though it were a magic weapon.
I underlined important parts.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

Doors, knobs, houses, roads, puzzle pieces, etc aren't items. Are they not material possessions? Because I'd say anything that one can possess is considered a possession, and all of them are corporeal, material items. So if an item is both material and a possession, it counts as a material possession.


In effect, any weapon the character wields becomes a +1 magic weapon, and can overcome the damage reduction of a creature as though it were a magic weapon.And you underlined the wrong things.

[loky1109]

I don't know what is "material possessions", this term isn't exist in RAW.

"And you underlined the wrong things."
Clearly taken out of context. You should read all sentence.

[Thurbane]

Ugh, I hate when a massive derail ruins an interesting thread.

The whole "can't use a doorknob" with VoP has been discussed to death in the past, does it really deserve three more pages here?

[pabelfly]

I'm going to nominate Servant of the Fallen. It lets a Cleric, who was worshipping a regular God and getting spells normally, worship a dead God that doesn't give them spells, but now they do get spells of the dead God, getting them back to normal. Oh, and they get a +1 on one roll once per day.

[ciopo]

Would the third level of emancipated spawn count?

[Darg]

Ugh, I hate when a massive derail ruins an interesting thread.

The whole "can't use a doorknob" with VoP has been discussed to death in the past, does it really deserve three more pages here?

Apparently. Can't even have a discussion when one side can't even see that words can have different meanings. At this point no one is arguing WHAT is RAW, just the meaning of words which is easily said that both sides are correct.

That said I'll contribute to this thread by mentioning the Dual Strike feat is quite useless for the most part. As written you suffer a minimum -6 and up to -12 to your attack roll just to add your off-hand damage that doesn't include your precision damage to a standard action attack.

[pabelfly]

Two more suggestions :

Improved Sunder - destroying your loot is not a winning strategy and there are many enemies immune to this or will do nearly as well without that magic loot.

Combat Casting - unfortunately a prereq for some prestige classes but a +4 to a very specific set of circumstances is not nearly as good as Skill Focus: Concentration which is a +3 that applies to every single Concentration check.

[Jervis]

Two more suggestions :

Improved Sunder - destroying your loot is not a winning strategy and there are many enemies immune to this or will do nearly as well without that magic loot.

Combat Casting - unfortunately a prereq for some prestige classes but a +4 to a very specific set of circumstances is not nearly as good as Skill Focus: Concentration which is a +3 that applies to every single Concentration check.

I wouldn’t say CC makes you worse. Sure the opportunity cost might but CC is a feat that has a positive effect, and not a bad one either.

[pabelfly]

I wouldn’t say CC makes you worse. Sure the opportunity cost might but CC is a feat that has a positive effect, and not a bad one either.

Fair enough argument.

[ShurikVch]

I am now envisioning an all-monk all-Vow of Non-Violence party.

Lol, that gave me a bit of a laugh. There's also Nonlethal Substitution metamagic, which lets you deal nonlethal damage with one type of elemental spell.
Also - Whip, Truncheon, Sap, and Blunt Arrow...


Speaking of "Make You Worse"...

Feats:
Far Look (Dragon #330): you got a spell slot to any of levels available to you (can even change that level later - say, if leveled up and able to cast spells of higher level now), and - unlike the Extra Slot - it applicable even to the highest of your spell levels. Problem? If you ever, by whatever reason, would drop to Wis 0 - you would suffer the effect of Finger of Expulsion spell, which push you to the Far Realm (The save for the spell is Will. And the feat itself gives you -2 Wis penalty)
Focused Lexicon (Tome of Magic): Increases DCs for utterances by 1 - not save DC - thus making your truenaming more difficult
Classes:
Alienist (Complete Arcane variant): this summoning-focused PrC makes you worse in summoning, gives crippling social penalties, and in the end of your life - you would be taken to the Far Realm
Blighter (Complete Divine): worse than the entry class, and the spell-recovery mechanics is just horrible...
Cipher Adept (Planar Handbook): waste of levels. Even Iron Chef couldn't really make anything of it
Disciple of the Word (Tome of Magic): it's Monk/Truenamer "theurge" which advances neither of its "halves"
Invisible Blade (Complete Warrior): wasted feats - Far Shot and Point Blank Shot as prerequisites for this melee-focused PrC
Master Inquisitive (Eberron Campaign Setting): Investigate feat as prerequisite; medium BAB, weak saves, crappy class features (True Seeing is nice - but it's the capstone!)
Mountebank (Dragon Compendium): makes you an NPC at capstone (20th level)
Order of the Bow Initiate (Complete Warrior): wasted feat - Rapid Shot is a prerequisite, but useless for the class
Reaping Mauler (Complete Warrior): prerequisite feat locks you in a suboptimal size category; one class feature give bonus on grapple - which is still below than if you was just bigger; another CF allow to try escape grapple - rather than being actually good in grappling; and capstone grants you something which you already able to do easier one level earlier
Risen Martyr (Book of Exalted Deeds): at the capstone you're dead, and don't want to come back. (No, to "not take the last level" isn't an option)
Shining Blade of Heironeous (Complete Divine): is good only on NPC base classes
Witchborn Binder (Magic of Incarnum): Many of its abilities are based on meldshaper level, but its progression is only 6/10; don't advance melds or binds, and just barely advances essentia; the unique abilities it gets are limited in range, easily resisted, and often not that effective even when they work perfectly. Oh, and of course they're supposed to fight against full casters...

[pabelfly]

Disciple of the Word (Tome of Magic): it's Monk/Truenamer "theurge" which advances neither of its "halves"

I think you have the wrong read on Disciple of the Word. While you need ranks in Truespeak, you can enter without a single level of Truenamer - the Truespeak Training feat or a class like Factotum is enough. You do get some advancement of Monk features from the class and it comes with a few interesting abilities that are hard to find elsewhere. I'd say it's an upgrade from default Monk, although not as much an upgrade as other options.

[Harrow]

Fist of the Forest doesn't technically make you worse, but you lose your cool PrC powers if you sleep in a building or buy food. It's mentioned how some even give up "speech, the use of fire and tools, and all possessions" but such extremes are not required.

[Wildstag]

Fist of the Forest doesn't technically make you worse, but you lose your cool PrC powers if you sleep in a building or buy food. It's mentioned how some even give up "speech, the use of fire and tools, and all possessions" but such extremes are not required.

Honestly, it's not hard to just not sleep in a building or buy food. Plus, you can get atonement or get the powers back from a month of wild living. It, like so many other PrCs and options, isn't fit for every campaign, setting, or DM style, but when it is relevant, it's not a bad choice.

[ShurikVch]

Ectopic Adept PrC (Complete Psionic): nothing wrong with the PrC by itself, but Complete Psionic nerfed Astral Construct - thus, if you using the PrC, you're also supposed to use the nerf for Astral Construct

[Metastachydium]

Looks like some notable gems from UA haven't come up yet, so I may as well mention the Bear Totem Barbarian (lose (Improved) Uncanny Dodge and Fast movement to gain Toughness, Great Fortitude and Improved Grapple), the Monk of the Undying Way (which replaces the standard bonus feats of levels 1&2 with Endurance, Toughness and a +2 bonus to Concentration, of all things) and the mighty Combat Wizard (trading its actually useful bonus feats for fighter bonus feats on a half-BAB d4 HD chassis).

[Jervis]

Looks like some notable gems from UA haven't come up yet, so I may as well mention the Bear Totem Barbarian (lose (Improved) Uncanny Dodge and Fast movement to gain Toughness, Great Fortitude and Improved Grapple), the Monk of the Undying Way (which replaces the standard bonus feats of levels 1&2 with Endurance, Toughness and a +2 bonus to Concentration, of all things) and the mighty Combat Wizard (trading its actually useful bonus feats for fighter bonus feats on a half-BAB d4 HD chassis).

Combat wizard is actually good though. Why yes I would like to trade the scribe scroll feat I'm never gonna use for Improved Initiative.

[Kurald Galain]

the mighty Combat Wizard (trading its actually useful bonus feats for fighter bonus feats on a half-BAB d4 HD chassis).
It's a pretty good dip though; and I can see the case for taking e.g. Precise Shot on a ray- or orb-based blaster.

[loky1109]

Looks like some notable gems from UA haven't come up yet, so I may as well mention the Bear Totem Barbarian (lose (Improved) Uncanny Dodge and Fast movement to gain Toughness, Great Fortitude and Improved Grapple)

Bear Totem? Look at the Eagle Totem! Trade fast movement for +2 Spot and trap sense for Lightning Reflexes! Or Serpent Totem. +2 bonus on Fortitude saves against poison
and +2 bonus on Move Silently checks on first two levels instead of fast movement and uncanny dodge.
Toughness at least can be preq.

[Eldan]

I've taken bear totem before, but only if I made a really janky min-maxed grappler build and really couldn't spare any feats.

[Wildstag]

If we're considering Unearthed Arcana, I'd suggest that Dirty Fighter is strictly worse than Straight fighter for anything more than a one-level dip.

[Metastachydium]

Combat wizard is actually good though. Why yes I would like to trade the scribe scroll feat I'm never gonna use for Improved Initiative.

Fair. Is it worth all the way into the teens, though? (It may as well be, but I'm not sure.)


It's a pretty good dip though; and I can see the case for taking e.g. Precise Shot on a ray- or orb-based blaster.

I don't think one can dip class variants. Do you mean "decent basis before prestiging out"?


Bear Totem? Look at the Eagle Totem! Trade fast movement for +2 Spot and trap sense for Lightning Reflexes! Or Serpent Totem. +2 bonus on Fortitude saves against poison
and +2 bonus on Move Silently checks on first two levels instead of fast movement and uncanny dodge.
Toughness at least can be preq.

Yup. Most of the UA totem variants are hot garbage.


I've taken bear totem before, but only if I made a really janky min-maxed grappler build and really couldn't spare any feats.

Sure, it's 3.5. Much anything has some niche use for some niche stuff (even commoner dips), but it's still, like, bad.


If we're considering Unearthed Arcana, I'd suggest that Dirty Fighter is strictly worse than Straight fighter for anything more than a one-level dip.

But as a dip on a marrulurk rogue or somesuch it can sure be nice (but yeah, it's otherwise basically the retarded younger sibling of martial rogue).

[Wildstag]

It's a pretty good dip though; and I can see the case for taking e.g. Precise Shot on a ray- or orb-based blaster.

Alternatively it could help with qualifying for PrCs. For example, you can use it to gain a martial weapon proficiency for easier Swiftblade entry (without sacrificing 9th level spells). Or Abjurant Champion.

[ShurikVch]

Toughness, Great Fortitude
Well, Toughness is a prerequisite for some number of things: notably - Cancer Mage and Troll Blooded
But would you really want to burn a regular feat choice on it?

Great Fortitude is a prerequisite for some things too (say, for aforementioned Cancer Mage, Drunken Master, or Poison Healer)

[Metastachydium]

Well, Toughness is a prerequisite for some number of things: notably - Cancer Mage and Troll Blooded
But would you really want to burn a regular feat choice on it?

Great Fortitude is a prerequisite for some things too (say, for aforementioned Cancer Mage, Drunken Master, or Poison Healer)

Counterpoint: Cancer Mage is stupid and its face is stupid. Bear Totem Barbarian 6 doesn't even qualify for it anyway, and taking the first three levels leaves you with Toughness, illiteracy, Improved Grapple (useless for the Cancer Mage) and Great Fortitude, besides a 1/day rage. Sounds like levels well spent!

As for Drunken Master, those same levels don't help you at all, since it requires Flurry of Blows, so you need to spend a regular feat on Ordered Chaos or something to even qualify several levels later than normal, since barbarians don't get Tumble as a class skill.

[tyckspoon]

Fair. Is it worth all the way into the teens, though? (It may as well be, but I'm not sure.)

I don't think one can dip class variants. Do you mean "decent basis before prestiging out"?


I don't think I'd do Combat Wizard into the teens, but yeah, this would be on the assumption that you are probably prestiging out no later than after level 5 or taking Wizard for the spellcasting component of a mixed class build (going into a gish, theurge, one of the various magic rogue prestiges, etc), where a couple of fighter bonus feats can be very helpful and you weren't planning to focus on item creation or metamagic at all anyways - it's just a straight positive trade for a lot of build plans.

[Oddstar]

Craven: makes sneak attack not suck, but nerfs your Will save against fear effects by 2. Craven's a great feat. If anything, it's overpowered. It gives a huge bonus to damage at the cost of a minor penalty to a saving throw against a very particular threat.


About feats. Did anybody mention Deformity madness? And all abyssal heritor feats Abyssal Heritor feats do all come with downsides, true, but those downsides are constant, while the benefits get larger as you take more Abyssal Heritor. So if you are willing to build your whole character around being an Abyssal Heritor, you get a lot of really powerful feats that all have relatively minor downsides. So AH feats only make you worse if you only take one or two of them. Take enough of them, and they make you better.

[MornShine]

Sacred Fist forbids the usage or carrying of weapons on pain of losing all class features and spells (?) until atonement.

And anything with an alignment restriction, e.g. Paladin, could be seen as making one actively worse by mechanically limiting their actions to follow said alignment on pain of falling, depending on the DM.

[Vaern]

Assume Supernatural Ability can allow you to use a dryad's Tree Dependent ability, which may be seen as a bad choice by some.

[ShurikVch]

Counterpoint: Cancer Mage is stupid and its face is stupid.
Just because you dislike it - doesn't mean nobody else want to play it.


Bear Totem Barbarian 6 doesn't even qualify for it anyway
And why?
Skills? Alternative ways to get new Class skills (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?491181-Alternative-ways-to-get-new-Class-skills) - make your choice...


As for Drunken Master, those same levels don't help you at all, since it requires Flurry of Blows, so you need to spend a regular feat on Ordered Chaos or something to even qualify several levels later than normal, since barbarians don't get Tumble as a class skill.
Well, firstly - Flurry of Blows? You mean - the Complete Warrior version? Sword and Fist asked only for Evasion (and for less ranks in Tumble)
Still, even Flurry of Blows can be acquired via dip in Disciple of the Eye, Martial Artist (base class), Brewmaster (1 feat tax), or Runemaster (base class) - none of them required Lawful alignment (And almost all of them - except Runemaster - also got Tumble as a class skill)

[Telonius]

Very surprised - five pages and no mention of Monkey Grip.

[icefractal]

TBF, Monkey Grip does eventually become a good trade if you're boosting your weapon size enough (-2 to go from 16d6 to 24d6, for example), but yeah, in its basic use it's a trap.

VoP, writing errors aside, isn't a good implementation but does serve a purpose if you want to play truly non-mercenary characters and the GM won't fudge anything. By "fudge things" I mean provide fortunate coincidences like "oh, that giant scorpion happened to have a +3 Speed Greatsword stuck in its chitin from a past fight" or "after being near the planar breach, your ancestral gear becomes more powerful" or the like. Nothing wrong with those, but if the GM's just sticking to a "neutral" stance where defending a poor village from summoned creatures yields nothing more than a serving of stew or (if you really pressed them) a paltry amount of silver? And where buying a 50K magic item means you had several chests of gold that you choose not to help anyone else with? Then VoP at least allows you to be entirely charitable IC without being too crap mechanically.

Incidentally, if you want a much better implementation of VoP, check out the Oaths section in Spheres of Power/Might.

[Metastachydium]

Just because you dislike it - doesn't mean nobody else want to play it.

Sure (I wouldn't have worded that sentence there the way I did were this not the case). But that's true for a lot of things. Heck, a lot of things in this thread, even.


And why?
Skills? Alternative ways to get new Class skills (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?491181-Alternative-ways-to-get-new-Class-skills) - make your choice...

Yup. Skills. Incidentally, the list offers no easy way to gain both Hide and Move Silently on a Barbarian, so you'd probably need a few levels in something else anyway.


Well, firstly - Flurry of Blows? You mean - the Complete Warrior version? Sword and Fist asked only for Evasion (and for less ranks in Tumble)

Yes? SaF is 3.0 and the CW thing is basically the same class. Strictly speaking, the SaF version is not an officially viable option in 3.5, whence I ignored it.

Still, even Flurry of Blows can be acquired via dip in Disciple of the Eye, Martial Artist (base class), Brewmaster (1 feat tax), or Runemaster (base class) - none of them required Lawful alignment (And almost all of them - except Runemaster - also got Tumble as a class skill)[/QUOTE]

So, let me get this straight: if you dip around in PrCs spending feats, you can take levels in a garbage class that doesn't give you anything you'll ever need except garbage feats and still qualify, with some difficulty, for a niche PrC and that's a good thing?

(Also, where's Runemaster and Martial Artist from? I'm afraid I'm not familiar with either.)

[ShurikVch]

Yup. Skills. Incidentally, the list offers no easy way to gain both Hide and Move Silently on a Barbarian, so you'd probably need a few levels in something else anyway.
Memelith template gives you all skills - for the lowish price of LA +1


So, let me get this straight: if you dip around in PrCs spending feats
The only feat you need for Disciple of the Eye is Improved Unarmed Strike - which you would also need for Drunken Master
Brewmaster required Skill Focus (Profession (brewer)) - but you can get it for free by just being of Aelfborn race - they get bonus Skill Focus at every 5 levels


(Also, where's Runemaster and Martial Artist from? I'm afraid I'm not familiar with either.)
Martial Artist is from Polyhedron #149 (which was published with Dungeon #90)
Runemaster is from the Magic & Mayhem

[Thurbane]

Speaking of skills, anyone mentioned War Hulk?

It has some good features, but also does not progress BAB, and makes any ranks you have in any Int, Wis or Cha based skills (except Intimidate) be considered as 0 ranks.

If you build towards the PrC, then presumably you will avoid these skills, but still, seems like an unnecessary and stupid drawback to put on a class...

[Metastachydium]

Memelith template gives you all skills - for the lowish price of LA +1

CR +1. LA's +2 and I'm really not sure it's a commonly allowed template in actual play anyhow.



The only feat you need for Disciple of the Eye is Improved Unarmed Strike - which you would also need for Drunken Master

It also requires Lawful alignment and 8 ranks in two skills Barbarian doesn't have.


Martial Artist is from Polyhedron #149 (which was published with Dungeon #90)

Ah, the weird pulp fiction supplement with modern firearms, a different skill list and reputation mechanics! I remain unmoved.


Runemaster is from the Magic & Mayhem

Isn't that 3rd party or something?

[Wildstag]

Martial Artist is from Polyhedron #149 (which was published with Dungeon #90)

Martial Artist is also a class designed for D20 Modern (or its early stages of development), not for 3.5. It uses the d20 ruleset and sticks closely to 3.5, but is also pretty explicitly stated to be something different. It's a bizarre mix of second and third party at best.

[ShurikVch]

Martial Artist is also a class designed for D20 Modern (or its early stages of development), not for 3.5. It uses the d20 ruleset and sticks closely to 3.5, but is also pretty explicitly stated to be something different. It's a bizarre mix of second and third party at best.
Hey, even WotC themselves weren't shy to use d20 Modern stuff in D&D when they wanted so - look at Half-Fraal Gelatinous Cube (https://web.archive.org/web/20080607084940/http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/eo/20060922a)!
Also, I'm pretty sure there was some big monster (IIRR, dragon or tarrasque) with the Apocalypse Demon template (d20 Apocalypse)

[Dr_Dinosaur]

Vow of Poverty, in any campaign with average-to-high WBL.

Green Star Adept!

I think there's a feat out there that makes you blow yourself up when at zero HP, which is of course meant for overzealous cultists but is hilariously bad to take for any PC.

You're probably thinking of Troth of the Forgotten Pharaoh from Pathfinder 1e, which also reduces your max HP! The only use I've ever found for it on a PC is taking it as a Reincarnated Druid. They get free auto-resurrection with some conditions, one of which is that death effects kill them for good. Luckily, TotFP is an immediate action so they can dodge those

[loky1109]

I see nobody said anything about weapons of legacy.

[Condé]

You're probably thinking of Troth of the Forgotten Pharaoh from Pathfinder 1e, which also reduces your max HP! The only use I've ever found for it on a PC is taking it as a Reincarnated Druid. They get free auto-resurrection with some conditions, one of which is that death effects kill them for good. Luckily, TotFP is an immediate action so they can dodge those

I think he was talking about Final Strike from Savages Species. Bascially, when you reach -10hp, your body explodes and deal elemental damage in a big area. It is page 34 if you are interested. Really fun feat.

In the same book we have Detach. It requires Regeneration but you can throw your arm or any appendice you can make melee attack with. The problem? Yeah you take ONE QUARTER of your normal hit points by doing so. It is subdual damage but still... It is a pretty huge amount.

[Vaern]

I think he was talking about Final Strike from Savages Species. Bascially, when you reach -10hp, your body explodes and deal elemental damage in a big area. It is page 34 if you are interested. Really fun feat.

Pair it with Death Throes from Spell Compendium to make breaking your Staff of Power or Staff of the Magi three times as fun!

[InvisibleBison]

I think the spell ability rip merits mentioning here. It lets you temporarily transfer a supernatural ability from one creature to another. The reason it merits mentioning is that the creature receiving the ability permanently loses a supernatural ability of its own, or two class levels if it doesn't have any.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

I think the spell ability rip merits mentioning here. It lets you temporarily transfer a supernatural ability from one creature to another. The reason it merits mentioning is that the creature receiving the ability permanently loses a supernatural ability of its own, or two class levels if it doesn't have any.It's a terrible spell, but it's also abusable. Either use it to get rid of a (Su) you don't want, force another creature to get rid of a (Su) you don't want, or give yourself a temp (Su) ability via another spell and get rid of that.

It's doable, but you have to think outside the box a bit.

[Vaern]

It's a terrible spell, but it's also abusable. Either use it to get rid of a (Su) you don't want, force another creature to get rid of a (Su) you don't want, or give yourself a temp (Su) ability via another spell and get rid of that.

It's doable, but you have to think outside the box a bit.
As a possible example of a practical application, having previously mentioned that it would be a terrible idea to take a dryad's tree dependent "ability," this spell would actually be a decent way for a dryad to get rid of it permanently.

[Venger]

The spell's duration is 1 hour/level. How do you make it permanent? Astral seed, or something else?

[icefractal]

The gained ability is temporary, but the one the recipient loses is permanent. Not sure why they'd write it that way, but it seems intentional rather than badly worded.

It makes me wonder if the granted ability was originally supposed to be permanent too, because mechanically it's too high a price unless you're evading it, and thematically it's weird that the true victim isn't the creature having its ability temporarily ripped away, but rather the hapless "beneficiary".

[MaxiDuRaritry]

The spell's duration is 1 hour/level. How do you make it permanent? Astral seed, or something else?"In exchange for this new ability, the recipient permanently loses a supernatural ability it already possesses."

[Darg]

As a possible example of a practical application, having previously mentioned that it would be a terrible idea to take a dryad's tree dependent "ability," this spell would actually be a decent way for a dryad to get rid of it permanently.

Permanent is just another way to say "until dispelled."

[Thurbane]

The Knight base class has code of conduct that, while not as severe as the Paladin's, is still a bit annoying: no bonus from flanking, can't strike a flat-footed enemy, and can't deal lethal damage against a helpless enemy.

You lose daily uses of your Knight's Challenge ability if you break the code, so I guess it's not the end of the world.

[Vaern]

Permanent is just another way to say "until dispelled."

That applies to spells with a listed duration of permanent, which this spell's is not. Once the spell expires there is no longer anything to dispel, but the permanent portion of the effect persists.

[Thurbane]

"In exchange for this new ability, the recipient permanently loses a supernatural ability it already possesses."

Permanent is just another way to say "until dispelled."

Yeah, gotta agree with Maxi here - can't see any other way that could be read.

[AsuraKyoko]

I've always wanted to use Ability Rip to remove troublesome abilities from a character, but I've never really found a good opportunity to. There's a number of negative abilities out there, but the majority of them aren't really the kinds of things a PC would get.

[Tohron]

I've always wanted to use Ability Rip to remove troublesome abilities from a character, but I've never really found a good opportunity to. There's a number of negative abilities out there, but the majority of them aren't really the kinds of things a PC would get.

Sorry if it's off-topic, but could Ability Rip be used to remove Mindless from a creature, and what actually would that do?

[Troacctid]

Sorry if it's off-topic, but could Ability Rip be used to remove Mindless from a creature, and what actually would that do?
It only works on abilities tagged as (Su). I don't think you'll find any creatures with Mindless as a (Su) ability.

[ShurikVch]

Sorry if it's off-topic, but could Ability Rip be used to remove Mindless from a creature, and what actually would that do?
Ability Rip works only on supernatural abilities - but Trait Removal, actually, can remove extraordinary abilities from living creatures which are not immune to Fort-save effects, and are neither Ooze nor Living Construct

[Darg]

That applies to spells with a listed duration of permanent, which this spell's is not. Once the spell expires there is no longer anything to dispel, but the permanent portion of the effect persists.

Not true. The exception is in the spell description of dispel magic which states you can't dispel spells with instantaneous duration. Ability Rip does not provide an exception to being dispelled. It can be house ruled to be like instantaneous duration, but it doesn't say that.

[AvatarVecna]

Ability Rip works only on supernatural abilities - but Trait Removal, actually, can remove extraordinary abilities from living creatures which are not immune to Fort-save effects, and are neither Ooze nor Living Construct

Bad news, I'm afraid. I did a quick search through the monster manuals, and most instances of Mindlessness are from creature type directly, rather than a noted ability in the creature description. They are, very generally, not Su or Sp or even Ex, they're just a function of having "Int -" that is so unremarkable that calling it "extraordinary" is an exaggeration.

...most instances, that is. I did find one exception (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/devil.htm#lemure). Given what that particular example is, I'm inclined to think that the answer to "what even happens" is "nothing good".

[ShurikVch]

Bad news, I'm afraid. I did a quick search through the monster manuals, and most instances of Mindlessness are from creature type directly, rather than a noted ability in the creature description. They are, very generally, not Su or Sp or even Ex, they're just a function of having "Int -" that is so unremarkable that calling it "extraordinary" is an exaggeration.

...most instances, that is. I did find one exception (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/devil.htm#lemure). Given what that particular example is, I'm inclined to think that the answer to "what even happens" is "nothing good".
But what's wrong with removing a Type-granted Mindlessness?
Sure, Oozes are out - but what about Vermins?

[Venger]

Type-granted mindlessness is not ex, su, or sp, so cannot be targeted by trait removal. Vermin are living and are not constructs, oozes, or undead, so are a legal target for the spell, but cannot have their mindlessness removed for the aforementioned reason.

[ShurikVch]

Type-granted mindlessness is not ex, su, or sp, so cannot be targeted by trait removal. Vermin are living and are not constructs, oozes, or undead, so are a legal target for the spell, but cannot have their mindlessness removed for the aforementioned reason.
Special Abilities (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm):

A special ability is either extraordinary, spell-like, or supernatural in nature.
The "not ex, su, or sp" is literally impossible by the RAW

[Jervis]

Special Abilities (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm):

The "not ex, su, or sp" is literally impossible by the RAW

To be fair the haste spell is also impossible by raw since dodge bonuses are never granted by spells

[Particle_Man]

But is mindlessness a special ability at all? It seems more likely to be classed a nonability.

[InvisibleBison]

Special Abilities (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm):

The "not ex, su, or sp" is literally impossible by the RAW

No, it's not. Right above the section you quote the rules define natural abilities, which are a separate category from extraordinary, supernatural and spell-like abilities and which clearly encompass type-based mindlessness.

[ShurikVch]

To be fair the haste spell is also impossible by raw since dodge bonuses are never granted by spells
What's you saying is unupdated 3.0 rule - in the actual 3.5 books there is no such rule


No, it's not. Right above the section you quote the rules define natural abilities, which are a separate category from extraordinary, supernatural and spell-like abilities and which clearly encompass type-based mindlessness.
Nu-huh!
The text allow for natural abilities - but not for natural Special Abilities

[Venger]

Of course not, (not that anyone said otherwise), because as the text on natural abilities specifies, the two categories are mutually exclusive:



This category includes abilities a creature has because of its physical nature. Natural abilities are those not otherwise designated as extraordinary, supernatural, or spell-like.
A vermin's mindlessness is not ex, su, or sp, so it's a natural ability. As mentioned, since it's not ex, su, or sp, it's not a legal target for trait removal, even if a vermin could have other things (that are ex, su, or sp) targeted by the spell.

Sort of stupid a spell called "trait removal" can't remove traits, but that's serpent kingdoms for you.

[Wildstag]

If you were to remove the Alternate Form supernatural ability from a Lycanthrope in animal form, does it revert to base form or remain in its current form permanently?

[ShurikVch]

Of course not, (not that anyone said otherwise), because as the text on natural abilities specifies, the two categories are mutually exclusive:


A vermin's mindlessness is not ex, su, or sp, so it's a natural ability. As mentioned, since it's not ex, su, or sp, it's not a legal target for trait removal, even if a vermin could have other things (that are ex, su, or sp) targeted by the spell.

Sort of stupid a spell called "trait removal" can't remove traits, but that's serpent kingdoms for you.
Natural abilities are stuff such as Natural Armor, Natural Attacks, fly speed, etc
Traits are extraordinary

[Venger]

If you were to remove the Alternate Form supernatural ability from a Lycanthrope in animal form, does it revert to base form or remain in its current form permanently?

Remains in its current form.


Natural abilities are stuff such as Natural Armor, Natural Attacks, fly speed, etc
Traits are extraordinary

Source?

[Twurps]

Sorry if it's off-topic, but could Ability Rip be used to remove Mindless from a creature, and what actually would that do?

I'll leave the whole rules debate to others, but just wanted to say how it amuses me that one can get a thing just by removing the absence of it.

[AvatarVecna]

Natural abilities are stuff such as Natural Armor, Natural Attacks, fly speed, etc
Traits are extraordinary

You can argue until you're blue in the face that Mindlessness should be Ex if you want to. Nobody can stop you from making that argument. Just like nobody can make that argument correct.

Trait Removal removes Ex and Su abilities. Things are only Ex or Su if they're specifically listed as such. If a thing a creature has isn't listed as Ex, Su, or Sp, then it's a natural ability/trait., and is outside the purview of Ability Rip and Trait Removal. For the most part, creatures that are mindless do not have Kindless (Ex) or Mindless (Su), and thus it's not removable via those mechanics. I searched through the five monster manuals, both fiendish codexs, the fiend folio, BoVD, and BoED. I found one (1) monster with Mindless (Ex), and that one was the lemurs. Every single other monster that's Mindless mentions it in the text as a consequence of having "Int -", but it is not Ex or Su.

You can argue that it should be, if you like. But wanting it to be so doesn't make it so.

Ed9t: The fact that it's happened once means it's theoretically possible it'll happen elsewhere in the edition. Is it a coincidence that tye one Mindless creature whose m9ndlessness can he removed happens to be tye soul of a previously-thinking creature whose personality is being suppressed to mold them into being a proper devil? Maybe.aybe you can find another Mindless creature out there whose mindlessness is removeable even though they do not and have never had a mind. It's possible. But you're gonna have to cast a wider net than I did if you wanna find a counterexample.

[ShurikVch]

Source?
Well, firstly:

Natural Abilities: This category includes abilities a creature has because of its physical nature, such as a bird’s ability to fly. Natural abilities are those not otherwise designated as extraordinary, supernatural, or spell-like.
Now, show me a single bird which have the "ability to fly" SA(/SQ)
No such examples!
It means - when Natural Abilities are in play, they aren't listed as SA or SQ: say, Nightmare (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/nightmare.htm) is able to fly (despite the blatant absence of any wings!) - but lacking any listed Special Ability to do so
Natural Armor and Natural Weapons are the most obvious examples of Natural Abilities (Would you say they aren't Natural Abilities?)

Now - since "vermin traits" are actually listed as SQ for all the Vermins (AFAIK) - it should be extraordinary

Moreover - since the all other monsters in the game (including even a couple of templates) have "Mindless" as "Ex" - why Vermin should be different?

EDIT:

Ed9t: The fact that it's happened once means it's theoretically possible it'll happen elsewhere in the edition. Is it a coincidence that tye one Mindless creature whose m9ndlessness can he removed happens to be tye soul of a previously-thinking creature whose personality is being suppressed to mold them into being a proper devil? Maybe.aybe you can find another Mindless creature out there whose mindlessness is removeable even though they do not and have never had a mind. It's possible. But you're gonna have to cast a wider net than I did if you wanna find a counterexample.
I would make you even better - the creatures which aren't, actually, mindless (i. e. have Int score) - but still "Mindless":
Cauldron Spawn (Dragon #340)
Hell Louse (Fiendish Codex II)
(Sure, Cauldron Spawn - being Undead - is not a valid target to the spell, but as example of creature is notable)

[AvatarVecna]

Well, firstly:

Now, show me a single bird which have the "ability to fly" SA(/SQ)
No such examples!
It means - when Natural Abilities are in play, they aren't listed as SA or SQ:

Firstly, this is such a silly argument I can't believe you're making it in good faith. "The stat block doesn't list speeds in the special qualities section, therefore everything in the special qualities section must be Ex, Su, or Sp". Many creatures have things in their SQ section that are not marked as being Ex/Su/Sp, that doesn't mean you get to arbitrarily declare they're suddenly Ex. Damage Reduction is always noted in the SQ section, but it's rarely marked in the text beneath the statblock as being Ex. Are you going to declare that damage reduction - the inherent durability some monsters have - is extraordinary and therefore removeable?


Now - since "vermin traits" are actually listed as SQ for all the Vermins (AFAIK) - it should be extraordinary

Secondly: being a special attack or special quality does not make something Ex/Su/Sp. There's literally no rule stating that. You are blatantly making **** up.


Moreover - since the all other monsters in the game (including even a couple of templates) have "Mindless" as "Ex" - why Vermin should be different?

Thirdly: this is objectively wrong. I'm going to say it again, in case you didn't hear the first couple times I said it:

I searched ten books chock-full of monsters. With a single solitary exception (the Lemure), every single time a monster was mindless, it was NOT listed as Ex or Su or Sp.


I would make you even better - the creatures which aren't, actually, mindless (i. e. have Int score) - but still "Mindless":
Cauldron Spawn (Dragon #340)
Hell Louse (Fiendish Codex II)
(Sure, Cauldron Spawn - being Undead - is not a valid target to the spell, but as example of creature is notable)

"The creatures, which aren't actually mindless (i.e. have Int score) - but still "Mindless""

You're saying this as if the word "Mindless" appears in their stat blocks. Which it does not, at least not for the monster that actually made it into a book:


Large Vermin (Extraplanar and Fiendish)
Alignment: Lawful Evil
Initiative: +2(Dex); Senses: darkvision 60 ft, low-light vision, and Spot +5

AC: 15 (-1 size, +2 Dex, +4 natural), touch 11, flat-footed 13
Hit Dice: 6d8+9 (36 hp); DR: 5/magic
Fort +6, Ref +4, Will +2
Speed: 30 ft. and Climb 30 ft.
Space: 10 ft./10 ft.
Base Attack +4; Grapple +11
Attack: Melee: bite +7
Damage: Bite 2d6+4 plus poison
Special Attacks/Actions:
Attack Options: poison (injury, Fortitude DC 14, 1d6 Dex/1d6 Dex), smite good 1/day (+6 damage)
Abilities: Str 17, Dex 15, Con 12, Int 3, Wis 10, Cha 2
Special Qualities: Immune to mind-affecting spells and abilities; Resist fire 5, cold 5; Vermin traits
Feats: Improved Natural Attack (bite), Toughness, Weapon Focus (bite),
Skills: Move Silently +6 and Spot +5
Advancement: -
Climate/Terrain: Malbolge (6th layer of Baator)
Organization: Solitary
Treasure/Possessions: -
Source: Fiendish Codex II

Smite Good (Su): Once per day, can make a normal melee attack to deal +6 damage against a good foe.


Traits: Vermin possess the following traits (unless otherwise noted in a creature's entry).

Mindless: No Intelligence score, and immunity to all mind-affecting spells and abilities (charms, compulsions, phantasms, patterns, and morale effects).
Darkvision out to 60 feet.
Proficient with their natural weapons only.
Proficient with no armor.
Vermin breathe, eat, and sleep.

Since Hell Louse have Int 3, they are definitionally not Mindless - that's why they have to have "immune to mind-affecting spells and abilities" in their entry. Because if they didn't, they could be affected by those things. This is why the word "mindless" literally does not appear in their statblock or description. Cauldron Spawn has Int 10, and is explicitly called Mindless, but this is just another in a giant pile of reasons why nobody takes Dragon Magazine material all that seriously.

[AvatarVecna]

Moreover - since the all other monsters in the game (including even a couple of templates) have "Mindless" as "Ex" - why Vermin should be different?

"All other monsters" is objectively incorrect.

No more dodging. No more "claiming the rules don't say you're wrong and therefore you're right". You say "all other monsters"? Quote 5 statblocks from actual books that have "Mindless (Ex)". Explicitly "Mindless (Ex)", the way lemures are. Quote the part of the rules that says "SQ are Ex by default". Quote the part of the rules that says "Natural abilities are never listed in the SQ section".

You don't get to hypothesize about unwritten rules that might exist when providing support for your claims. You need actual rules quotations.

[AvatarVecna]

Also, like...as far as rules text goes about Natural Abilities...


Natural Abilities
This category includes abilities a creature has because of its physical nature. Natural abilities are those not otherwise designated as extraordinary, supernatural, or spell-like.

The literal definition of "Natural Abilities" is "anything not otherwise designated as extraordinary, supernatural, or spell-like". If it's not explicitly listed as Ex/Su/Sp...it's natural. Cry about it all you like - that's the RAW of it.

[Jervis]

To move away from this Tom foolery, Mage Slayer can make you situationally worse by giving you a -4 CL. It’s obviously not meant for casters or gishes but I suppose it’s worth mentioning.

As for feats that are just bad, Elf from dragon mag literally kills you.

[ShurikVch]

Firstly, this is such a silly argument I can't believe you're making it in good faith. "The stat block doesn't list speeds in the special qualities section, therefore everything in the special qualities section must be Ex, Su, or Sp". Many creatures have things in their SQ section that are not marked as being Ex/Su/Sp, that doesn't mean you get to arbitrarily declare they're suddenly Ex.
I don't need to declare anything - it was already done for me:

A special ability is either extraordinary, spell-like, or supernatural in nature.
There are literally no provision for Special Abilities which are neither Ex, nor Sp or Su


Damage Reduction is always noted in the SQ section, but it's rarely marked in the text beneath the statblock as being Ex. Are you going to declare that damage reduction - the inherent durability some monsters have - is extraordinary and therefore removeable?
Well, sometimes DR is Su - but, otherwise, yes - it's extraordinary
And, IIRR, there are even some means of removal (at least, in the specific cases) :smallwink:


Secondly: being a special attack or special quality does not make something Ex/Su/Sp. There's literally no rule stating that. You are blatantly making **** up.
Look the Table 8–1: Special Ability Types - do you see there any other kind of Special Ability?



Thirdly: this is objectively wrong. I'm going to say it again, in case you didn't hear the first couple times I said it:

I searched ten books chock-full of monsters. With a single solitary exception (the Lemure), every single time a monster was mindless, it was NOT listed as Ex or Su or Sp.
Libris Mortis - Hulking Corpse and Raiment: Mindless (Ex)
Try to use Google in the future - it took me under 3 minutes to locate it (along with certain canceled template (https://web.archive.org/web/20121023170722/http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dd/20061208a))



"The creatures, which aren't actually mindless (i.e. have Int score) - but still "Mindless""

You're saying this as if the word "Mindless" appears in their stat blocks.
Cauldron Spawn is actually have the "Mindless (Ex)"
Hell Louse haven't - but it's Vermin, and thus, have the usual Vermin Traits (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/typesSubtypes.htm#verminType):

Mindless: No Intelligence score, and immunity to all mind-affecting effects (charms, compulsions, phantasms, patterns, and morale effects).
And, before you say: "Have Int - not Mindless!" - take the look at the immunities line:

Immune mind-affecting spells and abilities
Being living sapient creature - why is it immune to "mind-affecting spells and abilities" - if not for the "Mindless" trait?..

EDIT:

Also, like...as far as rules text goes about Natural Abilities...

The literal definition of "Natural Abilities" is "anything not otherwise designated as extraordinary, supernatural, or spell-like". If it's not explicitly listed as Ex/Su/Sp...it's natural. Cry about it all you like - that's the RAW of it.
They're Abilities - just not Special Abilities...

[AvatarVecna]

They're Abilities - just not Special Abilities...

I'm literally quoting the same rules text you quoted about birds.


Well, firstly:


Natural Abilities: This category includes abilities a creature has because of its physical nature, such as a bird’s ability to fly. Natural abilities are those not otherwise designated as extraordinary, supernatural, or spell-like.

"Natural abilities are those not otherwise designated as extraordinary, supernatural, or spell-like".

Your whole dumb argument was that, because fly speeds are not listed in the special qualities section, anything listed in the Special Qualities section is definitionally not a Natural Ability. But, by your own rules quotation, that's not how natural abilities are defined.


Natural abilities are those not otherwise designated as extraordinary, supernatural, or spell-like.

If it's not marked as Ex, Su, or SP, it isn't Ex, Su, or Sp. Defitinionally.

And until you can actually quote rules to the contrary, I'm done with this discussion. You've quoted zero statblocks with explicit "Mindless (Ex)". Until you've proven your unsupported statement that most creatures that are mindless are explicitly Mindless (Ex) - not "inferred", "explicit", to use your own words - then there's nothing more to be discussed.

[Condé]

To move away from this Tom foolery, Mage Slayer can make you situationally worse by giving you a -4 CL. It’s obviously not meant for casters or gishes but I suppose it’s worth mentioning.

As for feats that are just bad, Elf from dragon mag literally kills you.

It is even worse than that. If you happen to be invisible AND to have the mage killer feat, any spellcaster you threaten know you are threatening them. They don't you know where you are, but they know someone with the feat is threatening them.


Spellcasters you threaten cannot cast defensively (they automatically fail their Concentrattion checks if the attempt to do so), but are aware that they cannot cast defensively while being threatened by you.

[ShurikVch]

I'm literally quoting the same rules text you quoted about birds.

Natural Abilities: This category includes abilities a creature has because of its physical nature, such as a bird’s ability to fly. Natural abilities are those not otherwise designated as extraordinary, supernatural, or spell-like.

Yes, so what?
Do you see the word "special" in there?

Get the quote from Monster Manual:

Special Attacks and Special Qualities
Many creatures have unusual abilities, which can include special attack forms, resistance or vulnerability to certain types of damage, and enhanced senses, among others. A monster entry breaks these abilities into special attacks and special qualities. The latter category includes defenses, vulnerabilities, and other special abilities that are not modes of attack. A special ability is either extraordinary (Ex), spell-like (Sp), or supernatural (Su). See the Glossary for definitions of special abilities. Additional information (when needed) is provided in the creature’s descriptive text.
And once again - it says there no such thing as "non-Ex, non-Sp, and non-Su" Special Abilities
It's 2vs1 - your quote is beaten!
On the more serious note - without claiming it's dysfunction, there is only one reasonable resolution: while Natural Abilities are, indeed, exist - they're not Special Abilities in any shape or form. All of "unmarked" Special Abilities are extraordinary by default, and province of Natural Abilities are those capabilities which are neither in the SA/SQ lines, nor have additional information in the descriptive text

Finally, Fang of Lolth PrC got vermin type at its capstone as Ex - thus, vermin traits are Ex

[Saintheart]

I'm going to say it again, in case you didn't hear the first couple times I said it:

I searched ten books chock-full of monsters. With a single solitary exception (the Lemure), every single time a monster was mindless, it was NOT listed as Ex or Su or Sp.

I'm not actually quoting anything here, it's just loud enough to generate echoes on subsequent pages. :D

[Jervis]

It is even worse than that. If you happen to be invisible AND to have the mage killer feat, any spellcaster you threaten know you are threatening them. They don't you know where you are, but they know someone with the feat is threatening them.

That sounds like it could have hilarious consequences if you find some way to threaten from a long way away. I just imagine one guy with mage slayer making a entire wizard school nervous for reasons they don’t understand

[Vaern]

Bad news, I'm afraid. I did a quick search through the monster manuals, and most instances of Mindlessness are from creature type directly, rather than a noted ability in the creature description. They are, very generally, not Su or Sp or even Ex, they're just a function of having "Int -" that is so unremarkable that calling it "extraordinary" is an exaggeration.

...most instances, that is. I did find one exception (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/devil.htm#lemure). Given what that particular example is, I'm inclined to think that the answer to "what even happens" is "nothing good".

I wouldn't necessarily say mindless is granted directly by creature type. Rather, being mindless is a consequence of those creature types commonly having no intelligence score.

If you were to remove Mindless (Ex) from a lemure as listed in its description, it would still be mindless due to the nonability rules associated with having no intelligence score. Having Mindless (Ex) in its description just makes it double-mindless. You would have to remove the extraodinary ability and give it an intelligence score to create a lemure capable of thinking.


Cauldron Spawn is actually have the "Mindless (Ex)"
Hell Louse haven't - but it's Vermin, and thus, have the usual Vermin Traits (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/typesSubtypes.htm#verminType):

And, before you say: "Have Int - not Mindless!" - take the look at the immunities line:

Being living sapient creature - why is it immune to "mind-affecting spells and abilities" - if not for the "Mindless" trait?..

Cauldron Spawn, if what I can find about it online is accurate, calls itself out as a unique case of being treated as mindless for the purpose of spells and effects, despire having an intelligence score. It's worth noting, of course, that its ability treats it as mindless for the purpose of effects that care about that kind of thing - it's not truly a mindless creature.

Hell Louse isn't listed as being mindless, and its immunity to mind-affecting spells and abilities isn't listed as being granted by the mindless trait. It has its immunities for the same reason anything else has immunities not directly derived from its creature type or ability scores: Because its creator decided they wanted the creature to have those immunities. Mindless equals immunities, but immunities do not equal mindless.

[Metastachydium]

Being living sapient creature - why is it immune to "mind-affecting spells and abilities" - if not for the "Mindless" trait?

Just how many threads do I have to yell PLANTS at people in? (And it's not even just plants. There are fey (e.g. the feytouchedFF) and (I think) outsiders as well who have that.)


That sounds like it could have hilarious consequences if you find some way to threaten from a long way away. I just imagine one guy with mage slayer making a entire wizard school nervous for reasons they don’t understand

Hm. Can you animate a wizard school and give it aberrant and deformity feats?

[ShurikVch]

Just how many threads do I have to yell PLANTS at people in?
I know about this particular example (if nothing, I Ctrl+F Types & Subtypes (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/typesSubtypes.htm#verminType) just today), and baffled by it - since sapient Plant creatures are mostly a norm - unlike for sapient Vermins or even Oozes - then why the immunity in the first place?..
Still, Hell Louse is not a Plant, thus - Plant trait isn't applicable there


(And it's not even just plants. There are fey (e.g. the feytouchedFF) and (I think) outsiders as well who have that.)
Yes, I know about them too (although I thought it was only charm immunity for Half-Fey - nope, apparently, it's total immunity: no Good Hope, Rage, etc)
Still, Hell Louse is neither Outsider nor Half-Fey; and while for latter two examples answer for the question "Why the immunity?" is looks like "No particular reason", for Hell Louse it's: "Because Vermin!"

[Metastachydium]

I know about this particular example (if nothing, I Ctrl+F Types & Subtypes (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/typesSubtypes.htm#verminType) just today), and baffled by it - since sapient Plant creatures are mostly a norm - unlike for sapient Vermins or even Oozes - then why the immunity in the first place?..
Still, Hell Louse is not a Plant, thus - Plant trait isn't applicable there


Yes, I know about them too (although I thought it was only charm immunity for Half-Fey - nope, apparently, it's total immunity: no Good Hope, Rage, etc)
Still, Hell Louse is neither Outsider nor Half-Fey; and while for latter two examples answer for the question "Why the immunity?" is looks like "No particular reason", for Hell Louse it's: "Because Vermin!"

I'm not saying your hell louse is a plant or fey or even outsider (though it would, in fact, make more sense than vermin). What I'm saying is that you're pretending that immunity to mind-affecting stuff is inherently tied to being mindless when it quite clearly isn't. In other words, you have it backwards: mindless creatures are always immune, but immune creatures are not always (and perhaps more often than not, even) mindless. And if the feytouched can be immune because it just is, the same can go for the hell louse just as easily. It would make more sense as well, in fact, since a creature being mindless despite not being mindless is, simply put, a contradiction.

[Darg]

Nu-huh!
The text allow for natural abilities - but not for natural Special Abilities

Uh, the PHB says natural abilities are special abilities.


Characters using magic wands, rods, and other enchanted items, as well as certain class features, can also create magical effects. These effects come in two types: spell-like and supernatural. Additionally, members of certain classes and certain creatures can use special abilities that aren’t magical. These abilities are called extraordinary or natural.

The SRD should be for reference, not for actual rules lawyering because of missing rules text.

[loky1109]

Uh, the PHB says natural abilities are special abilities.

These abilities are called extraordinary or natural.
The SRD should be for reference, not for actual rules lawyering because of missing rules text.

I could read that as Extraordinary and Natural are two names of the same.

[Darg]

I could read that as Extraordinary and Natural are two names of the same.

Sure, but the context doesn't let you when just below it it separates the 4 types of special abilities. Of course, context doesn't stop some people from advocating for what the rules blatantly do not.

[ShurikVch]

I'm not saying your hell louse is a plant or fey or even outsider (though it would, in fact, make more sense than vermin).
True.
But authors decided to leave it as Vermin (for some reason)
And, considering it's almost a singular example of Vermin with Int - I don't think it was unintentional (another example is Fang of Lolth capstone)


What I'm saying is that you're pretending that immunity to mind-affecting stuff is inherently tied to being mindless when it quite clearly isn't. In other words, you have it backwards: mindless creatures are always immune, but immune creatures are not always (and perhaps more often than not, even) mindless.
I don't pretending this: just pointing the fact the immune creature in question is also Vermin - creature type which is always immune


And if the feytouched can be immune because it just is, the same can go for the hell louse just as easily. It would make more sense as well, in fact, since a creature being mindless despite not being mindless is, simply put, a contradiction.
Cauldron Spawn and Fang of Lolth 10 are Mindless without being mindless - it's rare, but not unheard of



Uh, the PHB says natural abilities are special abilities.

The SRD should be for reference, not for actual rules lawyering because of missing rules text.
According to the Glossary (https://web.archive.org/web/20150910182845/http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/glossary&term=Glossary_dnd_naturalability&alpha=):

natural ability

A nonmagical capability, such as walking, swimming (for aquatic creatures), and flight (for winged creatures).
Source:Â PHB
It's from the Player's Handbook
As you can see, this is rather restrictive, but it's the RAW: only movement modes (and only - most of the time) are natural abilities
Even my statement Natural Armor and Natural Attacks/Weapons are Natural Abilities is actually, a guess - rather than "hard RAW"
And, of course, such things as "Mindless" (or "Spells" :smallamused:) are well well beyond the RAW for Natural Abilities; but, because one of two definitions of Natural Abilities is rather loose, some people insisting anything which printed without parentheses before the colon is a "Natural Ability" :smallsigh: [/FACEPALM]

[Darg]

According to the Glossary (https://web.archive.org/web/20150910182845/http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/glossary&term=Glossary_dnd_naturalability&alpha=):

It's from the Player's Handbook
As you can see, this is rather restrictive, but it's the RAW: only movement modes (and only - most of the time) are natural abilities
Even my statement Natural Armor and Natural Attacks/Weapons are Natural Abilities is actually, a guess - rather than "hard RAW"
And, of course, such things as "Mindless" (or "Spells" :smallamused:) are well well beyond the RAW for Natural Abilities; but, because one of two definitions of Natural Abilities is rather loose, some people insisting anything which printed without parentheses before the colon is a "Natural Ability" :smallsigh: [/FACEPALM]

Taking the glossary definition is all fine and dandy, but "such as" is not the same thing as "limited to."


SPECIAL ABILITIES
Medusas, dryads, harpies, and other magical creatures can create magical effects without being spellcasters. Characters using magic wands, rods, and other enchanted items, as well as certain class features, can also create magical effects. These effects come in two types: spell-like and supernatural. Additionally, members of certain classes and certain creatures can use special abilities that aren’t magical. These abilities are called extraordinary or natural.

Spell-Like Abilities: A dryad’s charm person effect and the greater teleport ability of many devils are spell-like abilities Usually, a spell-like ability works just like the spell of that name. A few spell-like abilities are unique; these are explained in the text where they are described.
A spell-like ability has no verbal, somatic, or material component, nor does it require a focus or have an XP cost. The user activates it mentally. Armor never affects a spell-like ability’s use, even if the ability resembles an arcane spell with a somatic component. A spell-like ability has a casting time of 1 standard action unless noted otherwise in the ability or spell description. In all other ways, a spell-like ability functions just like a spell.
Spell-like abilities are subject to spell resistance and to being dispelled by dispel magic. They do not function in areas where magic is suppressed or negated, such as an antimagic field. Spell-like abilities cannot be used to counterspell, nor can they be counterspelled. Some creatures are actually sorcerers of a sort. They cast arcane spells as sorcerers do, using components when required. In fact, an individual creature (such as some dragons) could have some spell-like abilities and also cast other spells as a sorcerer.

Supernatural Abilities: A dragon’s fiery breath, a medusa’s petrifying gaze, a spectre’s energy drain, and a cleric’s use of positive or negative energy to turn or rebuke undead are supernatural abilities. These abilities cannot be disrupted in combat, as spells can, and they generally do not provoke attacks of opportunity. Supernatural abilities are not subject to spell resistance, counterspells, or to being dispelled by dispel magic, and do not function in areas where magic is suppressed or negated (such as an antimagic field).

Extraordinary Abilities: A rogue’s evasion ability and a troll’s ability to regenerate are extraordinary abilities. These abilities cannot be disrupted in combat, as spells can, and they generally do not provoke attacks of opportunity. Effects or areas that negate or disrupt magic have no effect on extraordinary abilities. They are not subject to dispelling, and they function normally in an antimagic field. Indeed, extraordinary abilities do not qualify as magical, though they may break the laws of physics.

Natural Abilities: This category includes abilities a creature has because of its physical nature, such as a bird’s ability to fly. Natural abilities are those not otherwise designated as extraordinary, supernatural, or spell-like.

Natural abilities are special abilities and are abilities not otherwise designated as something else. That is the RAW. It is written. You can say it doesn't exist but that would be false.

Your spellcasting ability is a natural ability. Not everyone has the ability to cast spells. Just as a bird still needs to learn how to fly even though it is a natural ability, a character needs to learn to cast spells even though they have the natural ability.

[Tohron]

I am truly sorry for instigating this derail.

[Metastachydium]

True.
But authors decided to leave it as Vermin (for some reason)
And, considering it's almost a singular example of Vermin with Int - I don't think it was unintentional (another example is Fang of Lolth capstone)


I don't pretending this: just pointing the fact the immune creature in question is also Vermin - creature type which is always immune

Wait a second. Your entire argument rests on the premise that vermin are always mindless, then? That simplifies things, and greatly, because they aren't. Take a closer look:


Vermin (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/typesSubtypes.htm#verminType) possess the following traits (unless otherwise noted in a creature’s entry).

Mindless: No Intelligence score, and immunity to all mind-affecting effects (charms, compulsions, phantasms, patterns, and morale effects).

Emphases mine. That's a logical conjunction. A creature only has this vermin trait if both propositions are true. BUT the hell louse does have an INT score, so it cannot possess this trait, which thankfully isn't an issue: that it has an INT score and mindless is replaced by the immunity clause is noted in the creature's entry. Subsequently, it is a vermin, it has all vermin traits, except mindless, but its removal is done by-the-book. End of story, so far as I'm concerned.



but, because one of two definitions of Natural Abilities is rather loose, some people insisting anything which printed without parentheses before the colon is a "Natural Ability" :smallsigh: [/FACEPALM]

Both definitions are equally loose. What you're saying is tantamount to stating that any natural attack not explicitly listed as an example in the relevant entry is not a natural attack.

[ShurikVch]

Taking the glossary definition is all fine and dandy, but "such as" is not the same thing as "limited to."
But the thing there: we have no other examples of truly RAW-proof Natural Abilities...
Try to search Glossary in Monster Manual for "natural" word - you would get "natural armor", "natural attack(s)", "natural healing", "natural weapon(s)", and ever-present "supernatural"
The only of entries where it kinda mentioned is

Movement Modes: Creatures may have modes of movement other than walking and running. These are natural, not magical, unless specifically noted in a monster description.
Which, actually, fits the definition from Glossary of Player's Handbook to a T

If you have some other equally RAW-proof examples - regardless if from a book, magazine, or online article - I would be interested to learn about it...


EDIT:

Wait a second. Your entire argument rests on the premise that vermin are always mindless, then? That simplifies things, and greatly, because they aren't. Take a closer look:



Emphases mine. That's a logical conjunction. A creature only has this vermin trait if both propositions are true. BUT the hell louse does have an INT score, so it cannot possess this trait, which thankfully isn't an issue: that it has an INT score and mindless is replaced by the immunity clause is noted in the creature's entry. Subsequently, it is a vermin, it has all vermin traits, except mindless, but its removal is done by-the-book. End of story, so far as I'm concerned.
I saying Vermin are always Mindless, but not always mindless

[Metastachydium]

The only of entries where it kinda mentioned is


[Quick reminder that Ex abilities are not magical either and Magical Ability is not a rules term I'm aware of.]


I saying Vermin are always Mindless, but not always mindless

Which, again, is incorrect, since they are Mindless unless otherwise noted. The hell louse is noted to have an INT score and an immunity clause it wouldn't need if it were Mindless, so it's not Mindless, as simple as that.

[Darg]

But the thing there: we have no other examples of truly RAW-proof Natural Abilities...
Try to search Glossary in Monster Manual for "natural" word - you would get "natural armor", "natural attack(s)", "natural healing", "natural weapon(s)", and ever-present "supernatural"
The only of entries where it kinda mentioned is

Which, actually, fits the definition from Glossary of Player's Handbook to a T

If you have some other equally RAW-proof examples - regardless if from a book, magazine, or online article - I would be interested to learn about it...


EDIT:

I saying Vermin are always Mindless, but not always mindless

It doesn't need to be said anywhere else. The PHB is book 1, ground zero. The PHB is the only source for what natural abilities are and therefore is the primary source for what a natural ability is. The glossary defines natural ability, but it doesn't tell you how to use it within the rules. Which is where the "Special Abilities" section of the "Magic" chapter comes into play.

[ShurikVch]

[Quick reminder that Ex abilities are not magical either and Magical Ability is not a rules term I'm aware of.]
Extraordinary abilities were mentioned in no less then five different entries of the Glossary. If they intended for movement to be extraordinary - they would say so, ne?
And magical abilities are those which AMF suppresses


Which, again, is incorrect, since they are Mindless unless otherwise noted. The hell louse is noted to have an INT score and an immunity clause it wouldn't need if it were Mindless, so it's not Mindless, as simple as that.
Yes - unless otherwise noted
No - it wasn't "noted": if they said something like "Unlike the majority of Vermin type, Hell Louse don't have the Mindless trait" - then it would be "otherwise noted".
"As is" - it's near the same "place" as the Fang of Lolth capstone

EDIT:

It doesn't need to be said anywhere else. The PHB is book 1, ground zero. The PHB is the only source for what natural abilities are and therefore is the primary source for what a natural ability is. The glossary defines natural ability, but it doesn't tell you how to use it within the rules. Which is where the "Special Abilities" section of the "Magic" chapter comes into play.
Then
how
to
use
it
?

[Metastachydium]

Extraordinary abilities were mentioned in no less then five different entries of the Glossary. If they intended for movement to be extraordinary - they would say so, ne?
And magical abilities are those which AMF suppresses

I'm not saying movement modes are intended to be Ex. What I'm saying is, the text you cited is irrelevant, since it is either non-comprehensive (omitting the possibility of such an ability being Ex) or it doesn't use rules terms (yes, we know Su and Sp are magical, but "magical ability" is still not a rules term.)



Yes - unless otherwise noted
No - it wasn't "noted": if they said something like "Unlike the majority of Vermin type, Hell Louse don't have the Mindless trait" - then it would be "otherwise noted".
"As is" - it's near the same "place" as the Fang of Lolth capstone

You mean this?

Vermin Type (Ex): At 10th level, the fang of Lolth's creature type changes to vermin, though she retains her previous Intelligence score, Hit Die type, and abilities. As a vermin, she becomes immune to mind-influencing effects (charms, compulsions, phantasms, patterns, and morale effects).

It is indeed exactly the same deal as we have with the hell louse. It is noted to be non-Mindless (INT is retained, which is impossible for a creature that is truly Mindless (rather than treated as Mindless)) and noted to have the immunities other vermin derive from being Mindless nothwithstanding that. It's pretty clear-cut if you ask me.

[Jervis]

{Scrubbed}

To go somewhat back on the rails though Arcane Hirophant and anything else that forces you to dismiss your familiar is devastating to a Sha’ir. Means you can no longer retrieve spells. Also a RAW issue with Sha’ir in general is that if they are on any plane but the material or the elementals then you can’t retrieve spells at all because your familiar is limited to shifting to those.

[MornShine]

Alienist.

Nasty social penalties and some ability score loss. Also limits Summon Monster list.

EDIT:

To move away from this Tom foolery, Mage Slayer can make you situationally worse by giving you a -4 CL. It’s obviously not meant for casters or gishes but I suppose it’s worth mentioning.

This can be annoying for reducing racial SLAs, but in some circumstances Mage Slayer can actually cause an integer overflow error and set CL extremely high.

[InvisibleBison]

This can be annoying for reducing racial SLAs, but in some circumstances Mage Slayer can actually cause an integer overflow error and set CL extremely high.

What circumstances would those be?