VoP+Grafts

[Xenogears]

Since you can take VoP at higher levels assume that you had some grafts before taking it. Would you have to rip out your eyes in order to take the feat or could you keep them (since once they are applied they are impossible to salvage as treasure.

Alternatively if someone were to forcibly apply said grafts to a person who already had VoP (Say a mad-scientist bent on recreating humanity in a new image) would the character then lose VoP?

[Xefas]

I don't think body parts count as possessions. Otherwise, when anyone takes Vow of Poverty, they immediately lose it for owning their own legs (or similar).

Still, going with the intention of the feat, and not simply the wording, I think that purposefully applying a graft to yourself after getting the feat would be against the spirit of voluntary poverty.

Whereas, I think I'd rule if you already had grafts before taking the feat, they're already a part of you and no more valuable than your other limbs.

But that's just me.

[BobVosh]

RAI: No
RAW: Rip em out if you want that vow. No magic items

[Starscream]

By RAW grafts count as magic items, so you can't have them even though they are attached to you.

However, because VoP is pretty underpowered, and grafts come with their own drawbacks (many are not worth the sacrifice), I would probably allow this.

I think it would help make up for the deficiencies of VoP without being a game-breaker, since having normal magic items is still preferable. And fluff-wise it works because, as stated, it doesn't seem right for someone to have to cut off their limbs in order to count as poor.

[Xenogears]

Well atleast in the Fiend Folio it specifically says grafts are NOT magic items. Like three times. So by Raw they are NOT magic items in fact. They do count against your treasure value however so that is where my questions concerning VoP lie.

[hamishspence]

Given that VoP is a "if its not on the list, its not available" feat, and given that the list of items you can have is short, and doesn't include grafts, then no grafts.

[Fixer]

Given that VoP is a "if its not on the list, its not available" feat, and given that the list of items you can have is short, and doesn't include grafts, then no grafts.

You are so exclusive. :P For a badly written feat you cannot expect it to encompass everything. That is why games have GMs, to interpret things.

It is a matter of intention. Part of VoP is that they divest themselves of all possessions. If it is possible to remove a graft and give it away to someone, it must be done. If it is not possible to remove a graft, then it cannot be done. The VoP character should refuse the benefit of the graft (if it grants some unusual bonus or ability) and using that benefit would constitute a violation of the VoP.

[Indon]

Aren't grafts generally, y'know, evil?

I would suspect that removing them would be a vital step along the way to the Exalted state that you'd attain to get VoP.

Having a graft forced upon you, I imagine, would cause you to lose the benefits of the feat until you removed the graft and performed Atonement.

[hamishspence]

Not really- there are a wide range, not just fiendish.

Though yes, in practice it does make sense to interpret the feat more generously.

[Heliomance]

You are so exclusive. :P For a badly written feat you cannot expect it to encompass everything. That is why games have GMs, to interpret things.

It is a matter of intention. Part of VoP is that they divest themselves of all possessions. If it is possible to remove a graft and give it away to someone, it must be done. If it is not possible to remove a graft, then it cannot be done. The VoP character should refuse the benefit of the graft (if it grants some unusual bonus or ability) and using that benefit would constitute a violation of the VoP.

Huh?

"I have forsaken all material possessions. Therefore, I will not use this tentacle in any way that I could not use a normal arm."

Once again: huh?

[Xenogears]

Aren't grafts generally, y'know, evil?

Fiendish grafts are evil. Undead Grafts are creepy but nothing says they are evil. I fail to see how getting your blood replaced with new regenerating blood is evil in any way.

[Indon]

Frankly, it seems questionable at the best of interpretations.

If I encountered a player hellbent on the idea, I would probably allow them to take graft-equivalent effects as Exalted feats (when viable) - the regenerating blood one would probably make a good Exalted feat, just make the blood shiny instead or something, y'know.

[Xenogears]

Well I'm not saying that a person with VoP should be able to go out and get NEW grafts. That'd be like saying they can go pay for a tome of gainful exercise or something. Im just wondering if they should be able to keep grafts they already had before taking the Vow. I can see it either way really. On one hand the grafts cannot be salvaged as treasure and therefor you can't donate them but on the other hand they did cost some money to get to begin with.

[Lamech]

If it isn't a magic item then you can sell it for half its value which happens to be nothing. Which means... the graft isn't valuable. And I'm assuming you don't lose your vow for say having a piece of dirt (also worthless) stuck to you. Even if it somehow helps you.
So the graft is like a piece of dirt, which doesn't strip you of the vow.

Clearly you can buy grafts ahead of time, and put them on you. Of course, RAI your not supposed to sell all your worldly possessions and buy tomes and grafts. I really think they should have put a line about DM interpertation in trying to violate the spirt of the vows. Vow of non-voilence/peace gets really innane going by just the letter.

Note: You could argue that the worthless things sticking on you strip you of the vow. Of course, then the vow would be gone after the first dirt road. And of course, a ungrafted graft is valuable so they couldn't get one, unless the party conspired behind said person's back and forced it on them.

[Fixer]

This is why the book says, "For Mature Audiences". If you are trying to get away with something, you shouldn't be taking the Vow. The Vows are about being challenged, not about mechanical benefits.

[Xenogears]

So you are saying that If I conceive of a character that spent the first 1/2 of his life adventuring and spending his gold on modifieing his body before deciding that its better to give all his gold to charity it makes me not mature?

[Jack_Simth]

So you are saying that If I conceive of a character that spent the first 1/2 of his life adventuring and spending his gold on modifieing his body before deciding that its better to give all his gold to charity it makes me not mature?

Depends on why you're doing so. Fixer phrased it as "If you are trying to get away with something" as a preface to the sentence.

If you've got an established character who's been using grafts, and your character is getting to the point where turning everything over to charity seems like something the character would do? That's fine.

If you're planning a character to take a bunch of grafts, then pick up Vow of Poverty to keep the grafts while gaining a lot of mechanical benefits? That's not.

Do note, though, that at least some grafts can be removable - Races of The Dragon, page 127, specifies that "A character with the Wyrmgrafter feat can remove a graft safely from a living creature" - so theoretically Draconic grafts can be donated to someone else. The undead grafts in Libris Mortis, on the other hand, don't include that wording.

[Doc Roc]

You are so exclusive. :P For a badly written feat you cannot expect it to encompass everything. That is why games have GMs, to interpret things.

God forbid that someone might take a conservative interpretation of a feat in order to keep it from going from playable to hideously broken. ::snicker::

If you need a trick, depending on your transparency levels, psionic items might not count, and are often worthless except to a psion, consisting basically of some quartz crystals and brick-a-brack.

[Xenogears]

Do note, though, that at least some grafts can be removable - Races of The Dragon, page 127, specifies that "A character with the Wyrmgrafter feat can remove a graft safely from a living creature" - so theoretically Draconic grafts can be donated to someone else. The undead grafts in Libris Mortis, on the other hand, don't include that wording.

From what I understand there are two systems for grafts. One is in..... Ebberron setting I think? That system limits the amount you can have and costs you permanent HP or other costs for each graft. The grafts in Fiend Folio, Lords of Madness, and Libris Mortis use a different system. These ones cost nothing to the graftee beyond the cost of purchasing them (and technically on occassion the loss of a limb.....) and are not limited to how many you can have. Assuming I had enough money I could get a million beholder eye stalks grafted onto my head.

[VestigeArcanist]

Since you can take VoP at higher levels assume that you had some grafts before taking it. Would you have to rip out your eyes in order to take the feat or could you keep them (since once they are applied they are impossible to salvage as treasure.

Alternatively if someone were to forcibly apply said grafts to a person who already had VoP (Say a mad-scientist bent on recreating humanity in a new image) would the character then lose VoP?

forgive me, but i cant think of any reason why VoP would interfere with grafts, even if its your eyes... Why would this be a probablem?

[Xenogears]

forgive me, but i cant think of any reason why VoP would interfere with grafts, even if its your eyes... Why would this be a probablem?

Because they cost money? Some of them cost boatloads of money. Like half the beholder grafts cost 195k. So you definately can't get any AFTER taking VoP but I was unsure about the effects of having grafts BEFORE VoP. As in: Would you be required to remove the grafts (since they were valuable when you got them even though they aren't anymore)?

[koldstare]

Well since it was mentioned what about the books? The +5 ones are ridiculously expensive (rightfully so) and permanent. Whats stopping the high level character from getting inherent bonuses to all relevant stats the taking VOP. I'm not saying its overpowered just it violates the VOP rules too.
As for the grafts, Dragon grafts can be removed and I would rule that undead grafts are evil even though they aren't listed as such. So it wouldn't be much of an issue.

If I were to allow it, there would have to be one hell of a backstory, and I would never allow someone to start a character with VOP and grafts already. It would have to be heavily role played.

[Gaiyamato]

Because they cost money? Some of them cost boatloads of money. Like half the beholder grafts cost 195k. So you definately can't get any AFTER taking VoP but I was unsure about the effects of having grafts BEFORE VoP. As in: Would you be required to remove the grafts (since they were valuable when you got them even though they aren't anymore)?

Actually someone else could pay for you to have them grafted onto you.
I looked through all of the resources for them and they are definately NOT magic items, every referance refers to them as a special type of item that functions similar to a magic item, but they all explicitly state that they are not magic items.
If someone else pays another third party to add a graft onto you then that works fine and dandy. If you already had a bunch then that is fine and dandy also.

[Callista]

Fiendish grafts are evil. Undead Grafts are creepy but nothing says they are evil. I fail to see how getting your blood replaced with new regenerating blood is evil in any way.

It still doesn't sound like something an exalted person would want to keep. If your Dm allows it you really have to go character-by-character on this one. A fiendish graft--I really doubt the character would want to keep it. Probably tried to get rid of it long before he even hit exalted status. I mean, wouldn't you try to get rid of it? It's a freaking fiendish body part! Undead is similar--they're made of negative energy, they kill things for fun, they're Always Evil (even if you say TN for mindless, who gets a zombie or skeleton graft anyway?)... It simply does not sound like something you would want to keep around, no matter the benefits.

Are you the DM in this situation? If so, you may get the player into an adventure where, before he ever takes that Vow, a powerful caster of some sort offers him a Wish to change the grafts back to normal body parts. (You're allowed to receive spells cast on you, so the Wish should be kosher even afterward.) It all depends on whether you consider it unbalanced and whether the character wants to keep the grafts, but I personally would say no.

[tyckspoon]

It still doesn't sound like something an exalted person would want to keep. If your Dm allows it you really have to go character-by-character on this one. A fiendish graft--I really doubt the character would want to keep it. Probably tried to get rid of it long before he even hit exalted status. I mean, wouldn't you try to get rid of it? It's a freaking fiendish body part! Undead is similar--they're made of negative energy, they kill things for fun, they're Always Evil (even if you say TN for mindless, who gets a zombie or skeleton graft anyway?)... It simply does not sound like something you would want to keep around, no matter the benefits.

There are also plant, elemental, and robot grafts, although the robot ones are also a little skeevy.

[Gaiyamato]

A VoP Druid with Plant grafts and plant themed PRCs.
Plant Defence and Plant Defiance.

Why would that not work. ;)

But yes. Only the listed evil grafts are not allowed under RAW to anyone with Exalted feats, else it would void the feats.
Undead grafts are not evil because not all undead are evil.
But it would be very borderline, and most DMs will probably so no fluff wise. :P

But plants and elemental grafts work really well.

[Xenogears]

There are also plant, elemental, and robot grafts, although the robot ones are also a little skeevy.

Don't forget beholder, Aboleth, Ilithid, and Silithar i think they're called?

Either way. Fiendish grafts actually drive good characters insane and force nuetral characters to commit evil. So those are obviously not a good idea unless your evil to begin with. Most of the undead grafts ARE from either zombies or skelatons actually since they are things like Bone Plating or Thickened Skin. So atleast half are from non-evil undead. Besides those two the rest (despite being mostly from evil creatures) are not from creatures that are inherently evil.

So I don't see it as evil. The concept of body modification as being evil is common in the lots of countries but that doesn't mean it IS evil or that it is in DnD. Since it says it isn't evil I'd say that it isn't considered evil in DnD.
Maybe creepy, maybe some cultures/gods would but not everyone.

Also there is no situation per se. It was a theoretical character idea.

[The Rose Dragon]

So atleast half are from non-evil undead.

In 3.5, Skeletons and Zombies are always Neutral Evil.

[Xenogears]

In 3.5, Skeletons and Zombies are always Neutral Evil.

Well I never bothered to update my books to 3.5 and haven't bothered to reread everything in the SRD. So I was just going with the person who posted that Mindless Undead are TN.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

Well I never bothered to update my books to 3.5 and haven't bothered to reread everything in the SRD. So I was just going with the person who posted that Mindless Undead are TN.

Things without an Int score should be TN. All animals are TN, golems are, but for some reason most undead are NE.