VoP: Worthless?

[Melamoto]

I am aware of the general consensus that Vow of Poverty sucks. And for the most part, I can see why. But why is it so bad that characters who take it, at the midlevels and later, are "unplayable"? How are they really all that crippled? I can understand against flying enemies there are major issues, but what about every other kind of enemy? You can still use weapons, you can still cast spells, and as far as I am aware there is nothing saying you need magic items to deal decent damage. Most optimization comes from builds, not items, so what is it that cripples them so horribly?

[dyslexicfaser]

Not worthless, just suboptimal. At the 15-20 range, the bonuses you get from VoP just don't measure up to the massive amounts of WBL you receive.

Someone proved it mathematically, though I don't have a link handy.

[Draken]

Well. As far as I know, VoP is not worthless or unplayable.

It is merely subpar, when compared to the option, which is the astonishing versatility of magic items.

Thing is, everything VoP does, magic items can do and can often do better. I also believe there have been calculations of the total "worth" of VoP in GP and that these turned out to show that if you took the benefits granted by it and got them through magic items, you would have spent less gold than the recomended wealth by level.

Edit: Ninja'd.

[Bayar]

I am aware of the general consensus that Vow of Poverty sucks. And for the most part, I can see why. But why is it so bad that characters who take it, at the midlevels and later, are "unplayable"? How are they really all that crippled? I can understand against flying enemies there are major issues, but what about every other kind of enemy? You can still use weapons, you can still cast spells, and as far as I am aware there is nothing saying you need magic items to deal decent damage. Most optimization comes from builds, not items, so what is it that cripples them so horribly?

That sword costs gold so you cant wield it, that spell component pouch costs gold so you cant use it, those spell components cost gold so you cant cast spells, those thieves tools cost gold and frankly a thief with no gold sucks...

[mostlyharmful]

if you're melee then being unable to fly makes you a mook. really nothing more, just a guy with a stick while actual builds bounce around doing things.

If you're a caster other than a Sorc you've gimped yourself on components, crafting, extra utility in backup items, focusses and such. Divine focusses have worth by the way so Clerics need to give up feat choices to get around that.

if you start being set against things that can planeshift, bind outsiders, recruit armies of minion/whatevers you're screwed.

really it's a subpar feat rather than a complete gimp so long as you've got the right build but it shuts down a huge range of options whatever you've got.

[Studoku]

VoP can be useful in games where players have significantly less wealth than the wealth-by-level guidlines.

Otherwise, spending money on magic items to get the same or more useful bonuses is better.

[Samb]

Actually, I don't agree with you. Items should come into play when it comes to optimization which is why VoP is just so blah.

Nothing in the rules of min/max'ing does it say you don't factor in items..... so not having them would clearly make you not that good.

[ZeroNumerous]

VoP, off the top of my head, gives you 100 gold of mundane items not including a component pouch. A fighter with VoP would not be able to wear heavy armor, forced into medium Scale if he didn't want a ranged weapon or hide if he did. A rogue with VoP would be wearing studded leather, fighting with two daggers and barely be able to afford a crossbow plus arrows. Not to mention that any two-weapon wielder has a greatclub or worse.

Comparatively: A sorcerer/wizard/cleric/druid/primary-spellcaster-yes-even-the-warmage will still tear your face off.

VoP actively harms melee types while doing nothing to close the gap between casters and melee.

[Mongoose87]

I guess you could say it's a "poor" choice.

[Yuki Akuma]

VoP, off the top of my head, gives you 100 gold of mundane items not including a component pouch.

No.

It gives a specific list of things you can own - a spell component pouch, a wooden holy symbol, a simple, mundane, nonmasterwork weapon, normal clothes (no armor) and enough food to last for one day. And a few cheap mundane items, like a bowl or something.

That's it. 100 gp is hardly 'poverty'.

(Note that it says nothing about a spellbook - a Wizard with VoP is screwed.)

Edit: No holy symbol?! Well that sucks. I guess VoP really is entirely for Druids.

[Signmaker]

No, but I highly advise that you look at what's commonly considered 'lacking' in VoP users and fix that through non-gear methods before you actually take it. Seeing the number of VoP threads out there, you'll have plenty of material to sift through.

[Draz74]

VoP, off the top of my head, gives you 100 gold of mundane items not including a component pouch. A fighter with VoP would not be able to wear heavy armor, forced into medium Scale if he didn't want a ranged weapon or hide if he did. A rogue with VoP would be wearing studded leather, fighting with two daggers and barely be able to afford a crossbow plus arrows. Not to mention that any two-weapon wielder has a greatclub or worse.

I don't know where this strange recurring notion of 100 gp comes from ... there is absolutely no such thing in Vow of Poverty.

Vow of Poverty precludes owning armor, at all. Though that's actually not a big problem considering the massive AC bonuses it gives you.

The Rogue can easily have as many daggers and crossbows and bolts as he wants. Simple weapons (nonmagical, nonmasterwork) are allowed regardless of cost.

No.

It gives a specific list of things you can own - a spell component pouch, a wooden holy symbol,

Edit: Yuki, you may have ninja'd me, but I can correct your inaccuracies! A holy symbol (wooden or otherwise) is sadly not one of VoP's allowed items. It should be, but it isn't. Clerics with VoP are kinda screwed that way (not as bad as a Wizard, but still ...)

[Kylarra]

That sword costs gold so you cant wield it, that spell component pouch costs gold so you cant use it, those spell components cost gold so you cant cast spells, those thieves tools cost gold and frankly a thief with no gold sucks...

Incorrect.

You may carry and use simple weapons (non magic/non mw) and you can use a spell component pouch (as well as substitute 1xp per 5gp of more expensive components).

[Jayabalard]

what is it that cripples them so horribly?

Generally it's people exaggerating for effect; for the people not exaggerating, I'm convinced that they generally play in games that are significantly higher than the average power level.

Edit: this is specifically the people who label it worthless rather than just sub-par.

if you're melee then being unable to fly makes you a mook. really nothing more, just a guy with a stick while actual builds bounce around doing things.

That's really rather game specific; it's only true if a good portion of your enemies can fly and the rest of the party cannot make it so that you fly, which may or may not be the case.

[DragoonWraith]

Vow of Poverty burns a feat to make you weaker than you were before. A "worthless" feat would waste a feat slot not giving you anything, but VoP doesn't even do that, making it worse than worthless.

"Suboptimal" means, to me, that it helps you, but not as much as another (the optimal) choice might. Saying VoP is suboptimal is like saying stabbing yourself in the face is suboptimal. Suboptimal is not the appropriate description, though, of course, it is true - it is very definitely less than optimal. But that doesn't begin to describe exactly where it stands.

[Yuki Akuma]

Vow of Poverty burns a feat to make you weaker than you were before. A "worthless" feat would waste a feat slot not giving you anything, but VoP doesn't even do that, making it worse than worthless.

To be fair it gives you bonus feats, so "it costs a feat" is a nonissue if you were planning on taking a ton of exalted feats anyway.

[Bayar]

Incorrect.

You may carry and use simple weapons (non magic/non mw) and you can use a spell component pouch (as well as substitute 1xp per 5gp of more expensive components).

Hmm....dont remember this rule.

[Kylarra]

Hmm....dont remember this rule.

p30, BoED under the heading "Other Ramifications of Poverty"

Alternatively, an ascetic spellcaster can sacrifice experience points in place of expensive components, with 1 XP equivalent to 5 gp value of components

[Pluto]

Spoiler

Show

If you're planning on roleplaying a character who follows similar bizarre restrictions anyway, it's certainly a step up from having nothing.

But if you want to optimize, yeah, it's [generally] rubbish. Real WBL can provide everything the Vow does (well, your primary stat might be 2 points behind) and much more. Remember that you're trading all your useful weapon effects (Wounding, Magebane, Holy, etc.) and all your miscellaneous boosts (Wings of Flying, Boots of Speed, Wands of Wraithstrike and Knight's Move, etc.) for effects you can usually get at very low cost elsewhere (a couple pearls of power gets you Superior Resistance, Magic Vestment and GMW/F, 16000 gp gets you a +4 stat enhancement).

This makes certain assumptions about the game: that Wealth By Level guidelines are followed or that one or more party members take to item crafting or that you can cast spells and provide the effects for yourself. VoP can be worthwhile if none of these are true (which is rarely the case: if you aren't getting magic items from your DM, it's clearly beneficial to craft them yourself and if you don't want to do that, it's clearly beneficial to be able to provide the effects yourself).

Of course, there are exceptions to the "VoP sucks" rule like taking VoP immediately after spending all your late-17th level wealth on grafts, sparring dummies, permanent stat increases, et cetera, but those are typically highly abusive and aren't usually the sorts of things people talk about when referring to the feat.

Also, VoP requires being Exalted. That's suboptimal enough to make me think twice before entering Fist of Raziel.

edit:
VoP isn't worthless.
It's just worth far less then WBL.

[Jayabalard]

Vow of Poverty burns a feat to make you weaker than you were before.

That's simply not true.

With vow of poverty you are a guy with no items and less bonuses than you would have if you had items.

Without vow of poverty you are a guy with no items and less bonuses than you would have if you had Vow of poverty.

[Aldizog]

I think it's a fine feat and the drawbacks are not as great as feared. D&D is not about PvP arenas. The flight drawback is the most commonly cited one; but in actual games, party members are normally quite happy to cast Fly or Air Walk on one another when it's needed. At least, that's been my experience.

The bonuses are also immune to Disjunction, Sunder, Chained Dispel, rust monsters, ethereal filchers, theft, and every other risk to which magic items are subject. The Exalted feats can be quite nice, although eventually you will run out of useful ones for your PC.

You certainly can keep and use a spell component pouch, and there is a special provision for dealing with particular components that have a GP cost.

The vow also offers a lot to players who have gotten sick of the time and attention required to optimize magic item loadout; searching splatbooks, finding magic shops, haggling with merchants, "advising" the DM about WBL, and so on. VoP is "Okay, I can just not worry about that in the least, and still have my numbers be basically where they're supposed to be."

[ZeroNumerous]

I don't know where this strange recurring notion of 100 gp comes from ... there is absolutely no such thing in Vow of Poverty.

..., off the top of my head, ...

Emphasis mine. I didn't care to look it up, since I already knew it did not help non-casters in any way and casters still have MAGIC! to fall back on.

That's it. 100 gp is hardly 'poverty'.

What constitutes poverty in the law of magic anyway? When Boccob, the guy who determines the laws, is dealing in the trading of souls, wishes and physical representations of concepts then I'd think utilizing gold of any sort would be considered poverty.

One of those: "Ew, you still use gold? What kind of Plane do you come from?"

Generally it's people exaggerating for effect; for the people not exaggerating, I'm convinced that they generally play in games that are significantly higher than the average power level.

Edit: this is specifically the people who label it worthless rather than just sub-par.

I'd suggest looking at the responses of the two people who bothered looking it up(Yuki and Draz). When your cleric is unable to prepare spells, your wizard lacks his spellbook and you actually used two of your feat slots to do it? It's certainly not helping you.

[mostlyharmful]

That's really rather game specific; it's only true if a good portion of your enemies can fly and the rest of the party cannot make it so that you fly, which may or may not be the case.

not in my experience, whether it's fly, burrow, swim, dimdoor, ethereal, invis, hide/MS boosting items, Phantom Steed, whatever there's ways and means of making movement important. VoP cuts you off from all kinds of ways of controlling who you can fight and whether they can just flat ignore you.#

Say you're a melee build with a single simple weapon, you're confrounted by a guy with WBL, what's the bet that he'll have SOMETHING up his sleeve to render you impotent?

[Kobold-Bard]

Hmm....dont remember this rule.

IIRC its a general rule that the VoP user can make use of, but I might be wrong.

VoP isn't terrible, just awkward for most characters.

[Jayabalard]

I'd suggest looking at the responses of the two people who bothered looking it up(Yuki and Draz). When your cleric is unable to prepare spells, your wizard lacks his spellbook and you actually used two of your feat slots to do it? It's certainly not helping you.

I'd suggest that you look up the definition of the word "generally" and realize that offering a particular counterexample doesn't actually show anything about the feat being "worthless" in general, just for that particular example.

I also don't see either of them actually referring to the feat as "worthless" just giving examples of classes that are screwed, which just means that those classes are an extremely poor fit for the feat. Yuki even offers a very minor defense of it when someone is exaggerating the problems with it.

not in my experience,

Yes, well, that's pretty much a textbook example of "That's really rather game specific" ... you only play in the games that you play in, so your experience doesn't really say anything about other people's games.

whether it's fly, burrow, swim, dimdoor, ethereal, invis, hide/MS boosting items, Phantom Steed, whatever there's ways and means of making movement important. VoP cuts you off from all kinds of ways of controlling who you can fight and whether they can just flat ignore you.

That's a very different statement from "If you're melee then being unable to fly makes you a mook."

Say you're a melee build with a single simple weapon, you're confrounted by a guy with WBL, what's the bet that he'll have SOMETHING up his sleeve to render you impotent?

it varies a lot, game by game, depending on what sort of items are available, how much your party helps you overcome those limitations. It's not really too different from a melee with standard WBL who doesn't have access to magic item shops, so they have an assortment of whatever random items they could find (rolled for or chosen by the DM) rather than some sort of optimal set of items.

[deuxhero]

Not worthless, just 80% or your worth that is permanently locked into what it can do.

[ZeroNumerous]

I'd suggest that you look up the definition of the word "generally" and realize that offering a particular counterexample doesn't actually show anything about the feat being "worthless" in general, just for that particular example.

So the feat isn't worthless, except for the fact that a fighter doesn't get armor, the rogue doesn't get thieves tools, the cleric can't revive anyone, the wizard can't cast spells, no one has a two-handed weapon that can overcome DR/slashing, the ranger doesn't even get a bow(crossbows only!) and the only classes unaffected are the druid and monk?

I'm sorry, I guess 'generally' means 'any example that upholds my opinion'. In the future, I'll try and remember my English classes.

[Yuki Akuma]

Not having a holy symbol isn't a huge loss to a cleric - he can still prepare spells. He just can't cast any spell that requires a divine focus.

The druid's fine, though. He can just use holly or mistletoe, or some other holy plant appropriate to his area, which he can pretty much pick right out of the ground most of the time.

[ZeroNumerous]

Not having a holy symbol isn't a huge loss to a cleric - he can still prepare spells. He just can't cast any spell that requires a divine focus.

He also cannot turn undead, but I suppose you're right. It would, however, make resurrection magic ridiculously expensive.

[Jayabalard]

Not having a holy symbol isn't a huge loss to a cleric - he can still prepare spells. He just can't cast any spell that requires a divine focus.

I seem to recall someone mentioning a way around that, something that costs additional feats.