Clerics and Vow of Poverty [Archive] - Wizards Community

Clerics and Vow of Poverty [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Chris24601
10-24-03, 10:26 AM This is as much an observation as a question, but I noticed that on the list of allowed gear for the Vow of Poverty feat, there is no mention of the character being allowed to carry a holy symbol. Is this intentional or just an oversight? Arcane spellcasters are allowed to keep a spell component pouch so they can still cast the majority of their spells, but if a cleric or druid can not have a holy symbol many of their spells become unavailable to them.

My personal take is that this was an oversight and I will let clerics and other divine spellcasters have a wooden holy symbol in place of a spell component pouch.

That said, an official answer would be nice.
MightyMightyThundarr
10-24-03, 11:16 AM I'm pretty sure they didn't intend for divine casters to be left without holy symbols due to Vow of Poverty. You probably can't get away with having a fancy silver-inlaid holy symbol worth hundreds of gold, though.
GoodTeletubby
10-24-03, 07:58 PM wooden holy symbol should be fine

druid shouldn't matter, as their holy symbol is a sprig of holly
ikki
10-24-03, 09:14 PM ..or then you paint it on your forehead with mud/blood.. :)
Pagan priest
10-25-03, 03:39 PM Not paint, tattoo!
Navonod Semaj
10-26-03, 12:27 AM Sounds reasonable. A simple piece of wood carved into the holy image of one's faith shouldn't be an affront to the vow. At most, a wood symbol is 1gp, chump change in the adventuring world. To play it safe, perhaps the bearer of the symbol should carve it himself?

Of course, one must not fall down the path of materialism. It is materialism which one forsakes when taking up a life of poverty. Keep true to the spirit of the vow, and forsake material posessions, eschewing anything with "frills". You must remain humble, and remain free of any material wealth. One small slip-up on the straight and narrow leads to bigger wrongs, each one further and further "justified" by increasingly contrived rationale. Remain true to the purpose, and through it, yours will be the light.
Pagan priest
10-26-03, 02:27 AM Okay, what about the poor cleric who spends many days carving on a tree branch. After many days, even though it is still a plain looking piece of wood, he has balanced it and carved it into a masterwork staff. Cost? None, he found the branch, and had the knife already.

Can he keep it?

Let's say he carves a holy symbol into it. Now can he keep it? What if he covers it from end to end in motifs of his Deity, turns it into a masterpiece of religious art?
Count Arioch the 28th
10-26-03, 02:37 AM He would lose his vows for carrying more than he's allowed.

A knife is a weapon. (1d4 piercing, 19-20 threat, etc.)

If he makes a second weapon, i.e., a quarterstaff, he breaks his vows.
gleep
10-26-03, 02:40 AM Then he's obviously found his spiritual calling. He should immediately donate that staff to his church and start work on another.

--gleep
Count Arioch the 28th
10-26-03, 02:53 AM Alright, Gleep's answer was better than mine. :D
grober2
10-26-03, 11:52 PM He should probably stop carving on his branch and start helping others, like his vow of poverty is ment to. Give up earthly possessions so that others in real poverty can have more. Just like the white man, oh oh, others are forced to be in poverty so I think I will, does this mean I get special AC bonus because I willingly chose what many have no choice about?

Btw, I am white, so don't flame my racist attitude. I like to think of myself as an equal opportunity hater.
Count Arioch the 28th
10-27-03, 08:45 AM Yeah, white people suck.

So does everyone else.:smirk:
Lago AM3P
10-27-03, 12:41 PM Except for the Venusians.

Tee hee. That Kairo and Green Lantern kills me.
Pagan priest
10-27-03, 02:25 PM Originally posted by grober2
He should probably stop carving on his branch and start helping others, like his vow of poverty is ment to. Give up earthly possessions so that others in real poverty can have more.

But is that the intention of a vow of poverty, or is it to permit the vow-maker the chance to focus on important things, like enlightenment or whatever without the distraction of persuing material goods?

What if that poor cleric was a hermit, that he had no church he could sell that MW staff to? Could he plant a gardin outside his cave? Could he store food for the winter?

As written, it works well for someone like a Buddist monk, living in a city where he can beg for food every day. It would be suicide for a hermit alone in the wilderness in the winter. I think it becomes important to look at the intention and spirit of the rules, rather than a strict letter of the rules.

Let's look at an extreme example. Consider a VoP person who finds themself on a plane where the air is poison. The only way to continue breathing is to use a magic item for the duration of the visit. Let us also assume that, due to religious beliefs, suicide is a major sin. Can the VoP compell suicide, or can the person wear the magic item until such time as it can safely be removed (and donated to a worthy charity)?
Pauper
10-27-03, 03:21 PM Originally posted by Pagan priest
Let's look at an extreme example.

What if, what if, what if....

Gaahhh!!

Guys, it's not that hard. Coming up with labored examples that would only be employed by DMs looking to punish their players for their choices doesn't invalidate the basic premise of the feat.

But just to humor you, here's the solution to your false dilemma, Pagan:

The VoP character dies, his party mates lug his body around for a while, and then once the adventure is over and the group has left the 'poison plane', the VoP character is raised. The VoP character can then perform an atonement (see the BoED, p.20 on sin and atonement, as well as p.39 in the introduction to exalted feats) to regain the benefit of her exalted feats.

Unless the character specifically travelled with the party with the intent of killing herself in the poison plane (or the DM is feeling especially vicious), the atonement would likely not even be all that difficult to achieve - it seems more likely that the characters simply didn't know the nature of the place, and that the VoP character's death, far from a sin, occurred because of her preference to die rather than violate the strictures of her vow (see pp.27-28 on Heroic Sacrifice and Martyrdom), which is perfectly in keeping with the mindset of the exalted good. If a significant number of adventures were to take place in the poison plane, a DM could even decide that such devotion to the cause of good would qualify the character to return as a Risen Martyr (BoED, pp.68-69), which, being a deathless creature, would be immune to the effects of the poison plane, so that the player doesn't have to miss out on campaign time while her companions adventure and gain levels.

Again, it's not that hard. All the tools you need are in the BoED. Just remember that not every exalted character has to be Job. ;)

--
Pauper
GoodTeletubby
10-27-03, 04:28 PM well if the VoP charachter is high enough level to be planejumping, he shouldn't need to breathe anyways, so the point is moot, but if you are tossing lvl 11 or less charachters onto a poison air plane, i would say that the best thing for the VoP char would be to get a breath from another charachter's bottle of air every few minutes

and if you're strict enough to say that violates their oath, i'd say that's borderline bad DMing
Cymric
10-27-03, 08:38 PM the holy symbol IS a spell casting component so it is allowed
Hope
10-27-03, 09:03 PM Originally posted by Pagan priest
Let's look at an extreme example. Consider a VoP person who finds themself on a plane where the air is poison. The only way to continue breathing is to use a magic item for the duration of the visit. Let us also assume that, due to religious beliefs, suicide is a major sin. Can the VoP compell suicide, or can the person wear the magic item until such time as it can safely be removed (and donated to a worthy charity)?

I'd say that the ascetic in question can, indeed, wear the item until either (a) he doesn't need it anymore, or (b) he comes across somebody who needs it more than he does.
RiotGearEpsilon
10-27-03, 09:57 PM Unless he's exceptionally high in level, in which case he simply holds his breath. :smirk:
Willie the Duck
10-27-03, 10:34 PM Originally posted by Count Arioch the 28th
He would lose his vows for carrying more than he's allowed.

A knife is a weapon. (1d4 piercing, 19-20 threat, etc.)

If he makes a second weapon, i.e., a quarterstaff, he breaks his vows.

I think you are mistaking a vow of poverty for a vow of non weapon weilding (which isn't in the book, but might be interesting...)

It specifically states that a vower of poverty can have simple weapons so long as they aren't masterwork or magic.
Pagan priest
10-27-03, 11:41 PM Ooops. I was thinking of a non-weapons grade knife... a little pocket knife kind of thing...
Chris24601
10-28-03, 09:00 AM Let's look at an extreme example. Consider a VoP person who finds themself on a plane where the air is poison. The only way to continue breathing is to use a magic item for the duration of the visit. Let us also assume that, due to religious beliefs, suicide is a major sin. Can the VoP compell suicide, or can the person wear the magic item until such time as it can safely be removed (and donated to a worthy charity)?

The person under the vow has a few choices that will not cause him to lose his vow. First, he can wait to travel to other planes until he's 12th level and gains greater sustanence (which means he no longer needs to breathe). Second, he can cast a spell upon himself to allow him to survive or have one of his party members cast a spell upon him (avoid planar effects or similar should do the trick). Finally, he can have someone else use a magic item upon him.

He can NOT use a magic himself for even a single round without losing the benefits of his vow forever. So if the only choice is use the magic item or die... the person with the vow must choose between their vow and their life.

Taking a vow that offers benefits is supposed to not be easy... if it was then easy everyone would do it. I have a character who gives almost everything away to the poor, but I'd never consider giving them the vow of poverty because of the sentimental value they attach to their grandmother's magic ring (the only magic item the character holds on to).

Sometimes a vow requires you to make tough choices. In the extreme example listed above, it is the vow or their life. If they choose to keep their vow and die, it really means they have chosen the benefits of the vow over losing a level, since unless you are dealing with an evil party that will leave your body behind, you can always be raised once you're out of that place.
Count Arioch the 28th
10-28-03, 08:02 PM Originally posted by Willie the Duck
I think you are mistaking a vow of poverty for a vow of non weapon weilding (which isn't in the book, but might be interesting...)

It specifically states that a vower of poverty can have simple weapons so long as they aren't masterwork or magic.

I'm not misreading.

It says a SINGLE sinple weapon. As in one simple weapon.

A knife is oe simple weapon, and a quarterstaff is a second one. That's two weapons.
Hope
10-28-03, 10:47 PM Originally posted by Count Arioch the 28th
I'm not misreading.

It says a SINGLE sinple weapon. As in one simple weapon.

A knife is oe simple weapon, and a quarterstaff is a second one. That's two weapons.

Where does it say that? My copy says: "You may carry and use ordinary (neither magic nor masterwork) simple weapons, usually just a quarterstaff that serves as a walking stick." I see no limitation on the number of simple weapons carried.
Xeviat-DM
10-29-03, 01:43 AM Originally posted by Hope
Where does it say that? My copy says: "You may carry and use ordinary (neither magic nor masterwork) simple weapons, usually just a quarterstaff that serves as a walking stick." I see no limitation on the number of simple weapons carried.

Hope appears to be right, it says simple weapons. So your escetic human fighter (who has 6+11fighter+11exalted feats not counting the two vows) could walk around with a longspear, a spear, a heavy mace, a sling, and a sack of bullets and have no problem.

I personally don't think that carrying a magic item or valuable item with the intent of taking it to a place or person where it was needed would be against theri vow. I do think using an opponent's weapon against them via improved disarm would be, but taking it and holding onto it while you continue to kick and headbutt the evil doer doesn't seem out of place. Or better yet, disarm them and give the weapon to your material loving fighter, who needs the weapon to kill the evil doer.
radioactiveman
10-29-03, 08:20 AM the querstion becomes.....

can a cleric with a vow of poverty cast the appropriate spells on himself?

eg.... he is not allowed to carry any weapons or items that are masterowkr or magfical.... he is only allowed to waear his cloths (which are dirt cheap if costed anythign to begin with)

so can your cleric
a) magic vestment himself? (making his cloths magical)
b) magic weapon himself (making his stick magical)

the same goes for the druids with their staff spells

or does such characters depends on others to cast spells for them? (and lets face it, if you are the cleric, there arent no one going to cast magic vestment on you)
Count Arioch the 28th
10-29-03, 08:30 AM First off, I guess I was wrong about the one weapon thing. It does make sense to me though.

As for the magic vestment/whatever question, I would say that you can cast that and not lose your vow, because your weapons aren't really magical, they are just non magical weapons enhanced through temporary magic effects, so you're still good.
James Moriarty
10-29-03, 12:39 PM Originally posted by Cymric
the holy symbol IS a spell casting component so it is allowed

Nice :) There are enough Spells that require diamonds or gold as component. There we have a very rich Mage, of course without breaking his Vow of Poverty
Chris24601
10-30-03, 10:03 AM I personally don't think that carrying a magic item or valuable item with the intent of taking it to a place or person where it was needed would be against theri vow. I do think using an opponent's weapon against them via improved disarm would be, but taking it and holding onto it while you continue to kick and headbutt the evil doer doesn't seem out of place. Or better yet, disarm them and give the weapon to your material loving fighter, who needs the weapon to kill the evil doer.
I believe that also to the case you are allowed to carry gold, jewels, magic items, etc... even taking your fair share of the treasure from an adventure. You just aren't allowed to use it or keep any of it. (i.e. you recover 1000 gp and a magic sword from an evil temple... you can carry it with you back to town. Once there though you must try to sell the sword and distribute all of the wealth to various charities as soon as is practical.)

can a cleric with a vow of poverty cast the appropriate spells on himself?
so can your cleric cast:
a) magic vestment himself? (making his cloths magical)
b) magic weapon himself (making his stick magical)
Yes he can... their weapons and clothes are still non-magical, they just have a temporary magical effect cast upon them.

the holy symbol IS a spell casting component so it is allowed
Nice :) There are enough Spells that require diamonds or gold as component. There we have a very rich Mage, of course without breaking his Vow of Poverty
Except that the feat doesn't say you can carry all needed spell components, it says you can carry a spell component pouch (which is assumed to have all spell components that don't have a specific cost in it). A holy symbol is not included in a spell component, nor are such items as the 50 gp of ruby dust needed for an everburning torch. As written you must rely upon others for those material components (so if your friends supply the diamonds you can cast raise dead, but you can't carry the diamonds yourself).

Which is why my original question was whether leaving out a wooden holy symbol from the list of equipment a person with the vow could carry was an oversight or deliberate (and why my houserule is that a wooden holy symbol may also be carried by someone with the vow).
foxylady
10-31-03, 02:47 AM Originally posted by Chris24601
He can NOT use a magic himself for even a single round without losing the benefits of his vow forever. So if the only choice is use the magic item or die... the person with the vow must choose between their vow and their life.

Personally, I think that's a misworded paragraph in BoED. By a strict reading, a cleric with a VoP cannot use a cure light wounds wand to save his dying friend, since he cannot use any magic items. Allowing somebody to die when you could have saved them is hardly exalted behavior. Or use the CLW wand and lose all your VoP abilities. What a great choice. IMO the proper spirit is that you don't *own* magic items, and can use them sparingly only when the greater good is followed. Otherwise you get absurd ethical quandaries like these.
Chris24601
10-31-03, 10:44 AM IMO the proper spirit is that you don't *own* magic items, and can use them sparingly only when the greater good is followed. Otherwise you get absurd ethical quandaries like these.

Vows should lead to absurd ethical quandries. Most are promises made to higher powers to avoid certain actions in exchange for benefits from those higher powers. Sometimes it will lead to some ridiculous situations... such as having to choose between your vow and your life (or that of another). The question then becomes which do you value more highly, the vow or your life (or the life of the other person)? If the answer is your life or that of someone else, then you shouldn't have taken the vow in the first place.

One does not take a vow of non-violence with the exception of "only if they're not trying to kill me." A vow of non-violence is a vow of non-violence, regardless of the situation. If not, then the vow is meaningless.

One should also make a distinction between the feat and a simple vow. My character has taken a vow of poverty. Not the feat, but a simple oath to donate all that I can to those in need. However, I feel that keeping a few magic items for myself to help others does not violate the spirit of my personal vow of poverty... but then my vow doesn't offer me massive bonuses either.

Besides, the situation you describe doesn't quite work anyway... one can make a Heal check to stabilize someone without using a magic item. They can likewise use one to help stop poison damage and damage from diseases (using your check in place of the character's saving throw). In 3.5 such attempts don't even require a healer's kit so they would in no way violate the vow of poverty.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Chris24601 10-24-03, 10:26 AM	This is as much an observation as a question, but I noticed that on the list of allowed gear for the Vow of Poverty feat, there is no mention of the character being allowed to carry a holy symbol. Is this intentional or just an oversight? Arcane spellcasters are allowed to keep a spell component pouch so they can still cast the majority of their spells, but if a cleric or druid can not have a holy symbol many of their spells become unavailable to them. My personal take is that this was an oversight and I will let clerics and other divine spellcasters have a wooden holy symbol in place of a spell component pouch. That said, an official answer would be nice.
MightyMightyThundarr 10-24-03, 11:16 AM	I'm pretty sure they didn't intend for divine casters to be left without holy symbols due to Vow of Poverty. You probably can't get away with having a fancy silver-inlaid holy symbol worth hundreds of gold, though.
GoodTeletubby 10-24-03, 07:58 PM	wooden holy symbol should be fine druid shouldn't matter, as their holy symbol is a sprig of holly
ikki 10-24-03, 09:14 PM	..or then you paint it on your forehead with mud/blood.. :)
Pagan priest 10-25-03, 03:39 PM	Not paint, tattoo!
Navonod Semaj 10-26-03, 12:27 AM	Sounds reasonable. A simple piece of wood carved into the holy image of one's faith shouldn't be an affront to the vow. At most, a wood symbol is 1gp, chump change in the adventuring world. To play it safe, perhaps the bearer of the symbol should carve it himself? Of course, one must not fall down the path of materialism. It is materialism which one forsakes when taking up a life of poverty. Keep true to the spirit of the vow, and forsake material posessions, eschewing anything with "frills". You must remain humble, and remain free of any material wealth. One small slip-up on the straight and narrow leads to bigger wrongs, each one further and further "justified" by increasingly contrived rationale. Remain true to the purpose, and through it, yours will be the light.
Pagan priest 10-26-03, 02:27 AM	Okay, what about the poor cleric who spends many days carving on a tree branch. After many days, even though it is still a plain looking piece of wood, he has balanced it and carved it into a masterwork staff. Cost? None, he found the branch, and had the knife already. Can he keep it? Let's say he carves a holy symbol into it. Now can he keep it? What if he covers it from end to end in motifs of his Deity, turns it into a masterpiece of religious art?
Count Arioch the 28th 10-26-03, 02:37 AM	He would lose his vows for carrying more than he's allowed. A knife is a weapon. (1d4 piercing, 19-20 threat, etc.) If he makes a second weapon, i.e., a quarterstaff, he breaks his vows.
gleep 10-26-03, 02:40 AM	Then he's obviously found his spiritual calling. He should immediately donate that staff to his church and start work on another. --gleep
Count Arioch the 28th 10-26-03, 02:53 AM	Alright, Gleep's answer was better than mine. :D
grober2 10-26-03, 11:52 PM	He should probably stop carving on his branch and start helping others, like his vow of poverty is ment to. Give up earthly possessions so that others in real poverty can have more. Just like the white man, oh oh, others are forced to be in poverty so I think I will, does this mean I get special AC bonus because I willingly chose what many have no choice about? Btw, I am white, so don't flame my racist attitude. I like to think of myself as an equal opportunity hater.
Count Arioch the 28th 10-27-03, 08:45 AM	Yeah, white people suck. So does everyone else.:smirk:
Lago AM3P 10-27-03, 12:41 PM	Except for the Venusians. Tee hee. That Kairo and Green Lantern kills me.
Pagan priest 10-27-03, 02:25 PM	Originally posted by grober2 He should probably stop carving on his branch and start helping others, like his vow of poverty is ment to. Give up earthly possessions so that others in real poverty can have more. But is that the intention of a vow of poverty, or is it to permit the vow-maker the chance to focus on important things, like enlightenment or whatever without the distraction of persuing material goods? What if that poor cleric was a hermit, that he had no church he could sell that MW staff to? Could he plant a gardin outside his cave? Could he store food for the winter? As written, it works well for someone like a Buddist monk, living in a city where he can beg for food every day. It would be suicide for a hermit alone in the wilderness in the winter. I think it becomes important to look at the intention and spirit of the rules, rather than a strict letter of the rules. Let's look at an extreme example. Consider a VoP person who finds themself on a plane where the air is poison. The only way to continue breathing is to use a magic item for the duration of the visit. Let us also assume that, due to religious beliefs, suicide is a major sin. Can the VoP compell suicide, or can the person wear the magic item until such time as it can safely be removed (and donated to a worthy charity)?
Pauper 10-27-03, 03:21 PM	Originally posted by Pagan priest Let's look at an extreme example. What if, what if, what if.... Gaahhh!! Guys, it's not that hard. Coming up with labored examples that would only be employed by DMs looking to punish their players for their choices doesn't invalidate the basic premise of the feat. But just to humor you, here's the solution to your false dilemma, Pagan: The VoP character dies, his party mates lug his body around for a while, and then once the adventure is over and the group has left the 'poison plane', the VoP character is raised. The VoP character can then perform an atonement (see the BoED, p.20 on sin and atonement, as well as p.39 in the introduction to exalted feats) to regain the benefit of her exalted feats. Unless the character specifically travelled with the party with the intent of killing herself in the poison plane (or the DM is feeling especially vicious), the atonement would likely not even be all that difficult to achieve - it seems more likely that the characters simply didn't know the nature of the place, and that the VoP character's death, far from a sin, occurred because of her preference to die rather than violate the strictures of her vow (see pp.27-28 on Heroic Sacrifice and Martyrdom), which is perfectly in keeping with the mindset of the exalted good. If a significant number of adventures were to take place in the poison plane, a DM could even decide that such devotion to the cause of good would qualify the character to return as a Risen Martyr (BoED, pp.68-69), which, being a deathless creature, would be immune to the effects of the poison plane, so that the player doesn't have to miss out on campaign time while her companions adventure and gain levels. Again, it's not that hard. All the tools you need are in the BoED. Just remember that not every exalted character has to be Job. ;) -- Pauper
GoodTeletubby 10-27-03, 04:28 PM	well if the VoP charachter is high enough level to be planejumping, he shouldn't need to breathe anyways, so the point is moot, but if you are tossing lvl 11 or less charachters onto a poison air plane, i would say that the best thing for the VoP char would be to get a breath from another charachter's bottle of air every few minutes and if you're strict enough to say that violates their oath, i'd say that's borderline bad DMing
Cymric 10-27-03, 08:38 PM	the holy symbol IS a spell casting component so it is allowed
Hope 10-27-03, 09:03 PM	Originally posted by Pagan priest Let's look at an extreme example. Consider a VoP person who finds themself on a plane where the air is poison. The only way to continue breathing is to use a magic item for the duration of the visit. Let us also assume that, due to religious beliefs, suicide is a major sin. Can the VoP compell suicide, or can the person wear the magic item until such time as it can safely be removed (and donated to a worthy charity)? I'd say that the ascetic in question can, indeed, wear the item until either (a) he doesn't need it anymore, or (b) he comes across somebody who needs it more than he does.
RiotGearEpsilon 10-27-03, 09:57 PM	Unless he's exceptionally high in level, in which case he simply holds his breath. :smirk:
Willie the Duck 10-27-03, 10:34 PM	Originally posted by Count Arioch the 28th He would lose his vows for carrying more than he's allowed. A knife is a weapon. (1d4 piercing, 19-20 threat, etc.) If he makes a second weapon, i.e., a quarterstaff, he breaks his vows. I think you are mistaking a vow of poverty for a vow of non weapon weilding (which isn't in the book, but might be interesting...) It specifically states that a vower of poverty can have simple weapons so long as they aren't masterwork or magic.
Pagan priest 10-27-03, 11:41 PM	Ooops. I was thinking of a non-weapons grade knife... a little pocket knife kind of thing...
Chris24601 10-28-03, 09:00 AM	Let's look at an extreme example. Consider a VoP person who finds themself on a plane where the air is poison. The only way to continue breathing is to use a magic item for the duration of the visit. Let us also assume that, due to religious beliefs, suicide is a major sin. Can the VoP compell suicide, or can the person wear the magic item until such time as it can safely be removed (and donated to a worthy charity)? The person under the vow has a few choices that will not cause him to lose his vow. First, he can wait to travel to other planes until he's 12th level and gains greater sustanence (which means he no longer needs to breathe). Second, he can cast a spell upon himself to allow him to survive or have one of his party members cast a spell upon him (avoid planar effects or similar should do the trick). Finally, he can have someone else use a magic item upon him. He can NOT use a magic himself for even a single round without losing the benefits of his vow forever. So if the only choice is use the magic item or die... the person with the vow must choose between their vow and their life. Taking a vow that offers benefits is supposed to not be easy... if it was then easy everyone would do it. I have a character who gives almost everything away to the poor, but I'd never consider giving them the vow of poverty because of the sentimental value they attach to their grandmother's magic ring (the only magic item the character holds on to). Sometimes a vow requires you to make tough choices. In the extreme example listed above, it is the vow or their life. If they choose to keep their vow and die, it really means they have chosen the benefits of the vow over losing a level, since unless you are dealing with an evil party that will leave your body behind, you can always be raised once you're out of that place.
Count Arioch the 28th 10-28-03, 08:02 PM	Originally posted by Willie the Duck I think you are mistaking a vow of poverty for a vow of non weapon weilding (which isn't in the book, but might be interesting...) It specifically states that a vower of poverty can have simple weapons so long as they aren't masterwork or magic. I'm not misreading. It says a SINGLE sinple weapon. As in one simple weapon. A knife is oe simple weapon, and a quarterstaff is a second one. That's two weapons.
Hope 10-28-03, 10:47 PM	Originally posted by Count Arioch the 28th I'm not misreading. It says a SINGLE sinple weapon. As in one simple weapon. A knife is oe simple weapon, and a quarterstaff is a second one. That's two weapons. Where does it say that? My copy says: "You may carry and use ordinary (neither magic nor masterwork) simple weapons, usually just a quarterstaff that serves as a walking stick." I see no limitation on the number of simple weapons carried.
Xeviat-DM 10-29-03, 01:43 AM	Originally posted by Hope Where does it say that? My copy says: "You may carry and use ordinary (neither magic nor masterwork) simple weapons, usually just a quarterstaff that serves as a walking stick." I see no limitation on the number of simple weapons carried. Hope appears to be right, it says simple weapons. So your escetic human fighter (who has 6+11fighter+11exalted feats not counting the two vows) could walk around with a longspear, a spear, a heavy mace, a sling, and a sack of bullets and have no problem. I personally don't think that carrying a magic item or valuable item with the intent of taking it to a place or person where it was needed would be against theri vow. I do think using an opponent's weapon against them via improved disarm would be, but taking it and holding onto it while you continue to kick and headbutt the evil doer doesn't seem out of place. Or better yet, disarm them and give the weapon to your material loving fighter, who needs the weapon to kill the evil doer.
radioactiveman 10-29-03, 08:20 AM	the querstion becomes..... can a cleric with a vow of poverty cast the appropriate spells on himself? eg.... he is not allowed to carry any weapons or items that are masterowkr or magfical.... he is only allowed to waear his cloths (which are dirt cheap if costed anythign to begin with) so can your cleric a) magic vestment himself? (making his cloths magical) b) magic weapon himself (making his stick magical) the same goes for the druids with their staff spells or does such characters depends on others to cast spells for them? (and lets face it, if you are the cleric, there arent no one going to cast magic vestment on you)
Count Arioch the 28th 10-29-03, 08:30 AM	First off, I guess I was wrong about the one weapon thing. It does make sense to me though. As for the magic vestment/whatever question, I would say that you can cast that and not lose your vow, because your weapons aren't really magical, they are just non magical weapons enhanced through temporary magic effects, so you're still good.
James Moriarty 10-29-03, 12:39 PM	Originally posted by Cymric the holy symbol IS a spell casting component so it is allowed Nice :) There are enough Spells that require diamonds or gold as component. There we have a very rich Mage, of course without breaking his Vow of Poverty
Chris24601 10-30-03, 10:03 AM	I personally don't think that carrying a magic item or valuable item with the intent of taking it to a place or person where it was needed would be against theri vow. I do think using an opponent's weapon against them via improved disarm would be, but taking it and holding onto it while you continue to kick and headbutt the evil doer doesn't seem out of place. Or better yet, disarm them and give the weapon to your material loving fighter, who needs the weapon to kill the evil doer. I believe that also to the case you are allowed to carry gold, jewels, magic items, etc... even taking your fair share of the treasure from an adventure. You just aren't allowed to use it or keep any of it. (i.e. you recover 1000 gp and a magic sword from an evil temple... you can carry it with you back to town. Once there though you must try to sell the sword and distribute all of the wealth to various charities as soon as is practical.) can a cleric with a vow of poverty cast the appropriate spells on himself? so can your cleric cast: a) magic vestment himself? (making his cloths magical) b) magic weapon himself (making his stick magical) Yes he can... their weapons and clothes are still non-magical, they just have a temporary magical effect cast upon them. the holy symbol IS a spell casting component so it is allowed Nice :) There are enough Spells that require diamonds or gold as component. There we have a very rich Mage, of course without breaking his Vow of Poverty Except that the feat doesn't say you can carry all needed spell components, it says you can carry a spell component pouch (which is assumed to have all spell components that don't have a specific cost in it). A holy symbol is not included in a spell component, nor are such items as the 50 gp of ruby dust needed for an everburning torch. As written you must rely upon others for those material components (so if your friends supply the diamonds you can cast raise dead, but you can't carry the diamonds yourself). Which is why my original question was whether leaving out a wooden holy symbol from the list of equipment a person with the vow could carry was an oversight or deliberate (and why my houserule is that a wooden holy symbol may also be carried by someone with the vow).
foxylady 10-31-03, 02:47 AM	Originally posted by Chris24601 He can NOT use a magic himself for even a single round without losing the benefits of his vow forever. So if the only choice is use the magic item or die... the person with the vow must choose between their vow and their life. Personally, I think that's a misworded paragraph in BoED. By a strict reading, a cleric with a VoP cannot use a cure light wounds wand to save his dying friend, since he cannot use any magic items. Allowing somebody to die when you could have saved them is hardly exalted behavior. Or use the CLW wand and lose all your VoP abilities. What a great choice. IMO the proper spirit is that you don't own magic items, and can use them sparingly only when the greater good is followed. Otherwise you get absurd ethical quandaries like these.
Chris24601 10-31-03, 10:44 AM	IMO the proper spirit is that you don't own magic items, and can use them sparingly only when the greater good is followed. Otherwise you get absurd ethical quandaries like these. Vows should lead to absurd ethical quandries. Most are promises made to higher powers to avoid certain actions in exchange for benefits from those higher powers. Sometimes it will lead to some ridiculous situations... such as having to choose between your vow and your life (or that of another). The question then becomes which do you value more highly, the vow or your life (or the life of the other person)? If the answer is your life or that of someone else, then you shouldn't have taken the vow in the first place. One does not take a vow of non-violence with the exception of "only if they're not trying to kill me." A vow of non-violence is a vow of non-violence, regardless of the situation. If not, then the vow is meaningless. One should also make a distinction between the feat and a simple vow. My character has taken a vow of poverty. Not the feat, but a simple oath to donate all that I can to those in need. However, I feel that keeping a few magic items for myself to help others does not violate the spirit of my personal vow of poverty... but then my vow doesn't offer me massive bonuses either. Besides, the situation you describe doesn't quite work anyway... one can make a Heal check to stabilize someone without using a magic item. They can likewise use one to help stop poison damage and damage from diseases (using your check in place of the character's saving throw). In 3.5 such attempts don't even require a healer's kit so they would in no way violate the vow of poverty.