Post/Author/DateTime	Post
3nigma 04-02-05, 12:23 PM	NOTE: I double-posted this thread also in "What's a DM to do?" Please pardon me for doing so, I'm just trying to reach a wide range of responses. ************** I'm about to start a campaign, and I have a player who is going to be an Elven Druid. However, he read on some random post someone talk about a Druid taking a Vow of Poverty (from Book of Exalted Deeds), and it peaked his interest. He looked it up, and decided he wanted to do it. However, after I investigated, I found that Druids don't have the option of taking the exalted feat of Vow of Poverty (pre-req. Sacred Vow, non-Druid). Instead of saying "Shoot, oh well," he decides after some thought that he will start at level 1 as a HUMAN MONK. With his two feats, he says he'll take "Sacred Vow" and then "Vow of Poverty," then at level two start taking levels in Druid (and then for the rest of his career, since all he wants to play is a Druid anyway). My question is this. This situation is metagaming to the extreme. It is taking purely the game mechanics of Dungeons and Dragons and manipulating them to create a character that "has what I want." But really, he's just a druid. He never had any intent on being a monk, and moreover, he is reknown for his hatred of monks. (Seriously). He is literally picking a race and class (bread and butter of your char) purely on picking these two feats for his later Druid. So, what's a DM to do? Do I allow this metagaming even though he has a magnificent character biography twisted to make it viable, or do I disallow it because it is such an extreme case of BS? Also, he wasn't even gonna pick human, he even picked his RACE as a metagame to get both feats at level one. What's a DM to do? If you're a DM, give me your DM perspective. If you're a PLAYER, then give me your input not as if it was YOUR character, but if it was that annoying guy in your group that exploits every crevasse in teh game. THanks for the help guys =).
DarkWarriorKarg 04-02-05, 12:36 PM	NOTE: I double-posted this thread also in "What's a DM to do?" Please pardon me for doing so, I'm just trying to reach a wide range of responses. ************** I'm about to start a campaign, and I have a player who is going to be an Elven Druid. However, he read on some random post someone talk about a Druid taking a Vow of Poverty (from Book of Exalted Deeds), and it peaked his interest. He looked it up, and decided he wanted to do it. However, after I investigated, I found that Druids don't have the option of taking the exalted feat of Vow of Poverty (pre-req. Sacred Vow, non-Druid). Instead of saying "Shoot, oh well," he decides after some thought that he will start at level 1 as a HUMAN MONK. With his two feats, he says he'll take "Sacred Vow" and then "Vow of Poverty," then at level two start taking levels in Druid (and then for the rest of his career, since all he wants to play is a Druid anyway). My question is this. This situation is metagaming to the extreme. It is taking purely the game mechanics of Dungeons and Dragons and manipulating them to create a character that "has what I want." But really, he's just a druid. He never had any intent on being a monk, and moreover, he is reknown for his hatred of monks. (Seriously). He is literally picking a race and class (bread and butter of your char) purely on picking these two feats for his later Druid. So, what's a DM to do? Do I allow this metagaming even though he has a magnificent character biography twisted to make it viable, or do I disallow it because it is such an extreme case of BS? Also, he wasn't even gonna pick human, he even picked his RACE as a metagame to get both feats at level one. What's a DM to do? If you're a DM, give me your DM perspective. If you're a PLAYER, then give me your input not as if it was YOUR character, but if it was that annoying guy in your group that exploits every crevasse in teh game. THanks for the help guys =). Step 1: Breathe I've highlighted the relevant parts. 1) Your player seems to lack maturity. 2) Mechanical answer: The character has to be a non-druid to take Vow of Poverty. The answer should be NO. It's a requirement. Therefore, as his character becomes a druid, he loses all benefits of the vow. 3) You might want to look into a replacement player.
3nigma 04-02-05, 12:46 PM	LoL, thanks for the great reply. I especially like the part about when becoming Druid, he loses his vow, since it's not allowed for Druids- I hadn't thought of that. But come to think of it, he would probably argue that point. However, it's funny the other comments you made. He is probably the most mature of all my players, and it's his really high ingenuity that comes up with stuff like this. He even came up with a biography that could seriously squeeze all of this stuff in, really well, not seeming to stretch it a lot. But you're absolutely right, it's just good to hear other people who hear my case and understand what I'm saying. When he and I are talking, he admits that he's metagaming, but he justifies it. Anyway, good enough. I won't allow it, hehe. Thanks :)
3nigma 04-02-05, 01:01 PM	Shoot, I just thought of what it was that stuck out to me about the mechanical answer. It's not that you have to be a "non-Druid" to have the vow, it's just that you have to be a class that does in fact have the option (monk, fighter, wiz, sor, or cleric). So in that technical respect, he still has the ups. However, I'm just not gonna allow it. But thanks again for the input, it helps a lot. :)
Pinky's brain 04-02-05, 01:26 PM	It's not that you have to be a "non-Druid" to have the vow, it's just that you have to be a class that does in fact have the option (monk, fighter, wiz, sor, or cleric).Where does it say that? If you allow wilding clasps and give out treasure at the standard rate then VoP isnt really all that powerfull IMO.
Setherial 04-02-05, 01:29 PM	Ok, I looked up this feat and read about Voluntary Poverty in chapter 2 but I didn't see anything about it being disallowed for druids (I guess I missed that somehow). Anyway in my opinion it's a total ******** feat, if a player wants to be poor out of religeous or personal convictions then that is great, should prove to be very intersting roleplaying and as a DM you should scale your encounters a bit to make this person enjoy his character as much as the other do theirs. BUT to reward him in some totally insane way and shower him with benefits because he's poor just doesn't make sense, it's ******** (then I like Southparks 'kenny' better, he must die because he is poor, it's ******** too but at least its hilarious). Ban this feat and tell your player to roleplay an individual whoms cause does not involve money and be done with it. cheers Seth
Pallis 04-02-05, 01:44 PM	I'm mainly a DM, and I've got to say that, if your player's worked out a great character history, and this is what he wants to play, then go for it. The rules are there to be adapted to your game, and if you feel comfortable in altering them (or a part of them) to suit your game and the needs of the players then I'm sure you'll have a great time. It sounds like this player's put a lot of consideration into the type of character he wants to play, and surely it'd be remiss to deny him the opportunity. Have fun, enjoy gaming: that's my motto. :)
Gurv 04-02-05, 02:13 PM	Uh. There is absolutely no reason to take a level of monk. Vow of Poverty and its prerequisite, Sacred Vow, do not have any kind of class restriction. The issue here is that an elf does not have two feats at 1st level and therefore cannot get the VoP at that time. A couple of mechanic-driven possibilities... 1) play a human and get two feats at 1st level (class is irrelevant) 2) play an elf and take Vow of Poverty at 3rd level. Nothing says you have to have the VoP at 1st level. Good roleplaying might involve following the VoP even before getting the feat and benefits, but this not needed, as he can simply stop using possessions when he make the Vow. The only part of the VoP that is not retroactive is a couple bonus exalted feats. 3) Make use of the Flaw rules from Unearthed Arcana. This allows one to gain a bonus feat at 1st level in exchange for a drawback. A couple notes about VoP and exalted feats in general... 1) Vow of Poverty is often debated as over-powered. There is one balancing factor for it. One is the inability to use equipment, and magical equipment is a major part of a normal character's power. This includes expensive material components, focus items, etc. There are no exceptions: a character with VoP must really get along without such items. If the DM is unwilling to enforce the drawbacks, or the player is going to seek ways around them, then the feat should lost, or not be allowed in the first place. 2) Exalted feats require the character to maintain an unblemished level of good that would make the average paladin ashamed of himself. Unlike even a paladin's code, atoning for misdeeds is not generally allowed. A character who breaks a Vow loses the benefits of the feat irrevocably, and in the case of VoP that includes the bonus exalted feats too. They cannot be regained in any manner. Even if saving Heaven itself calls for a minor violation of the Vow, doing so causes the benefits of the feat to be lost. 3) Exalted (and Vile) rules are for mature players. If a player (or worse, a PC) is seeking the benefits of exalted material because of the power, then they are missing the point. Exalted characters gain benefits because the choices they make ultimately means that they sacrifice more than they gain. Any, and I mean any, attempt to make up for the sacrifice involved in a Vow feat should result in the loss of the feat and likely all exalted status. The question you need to ask is whether to punish the character for choices made by the player; there is nothing wrong with playing a human because you want to start with VoP...but the character itself should not be making choices in order to gain super-powers. Exalted Rules and Eberron... Although it is not impossible to use exalted material with the Eberron setting, Eberron's focus on grey alignments and the Book of Exalted Deed's focus on the importance between good and evil are opposing concepts. An exalted character in Eberron cannot point to the exceptions made for other good characters in order to redeem himself. There are no exceptions for exalted characters, even in Eberron. Such a character will have serious difficulty in a world where good clerics and paladins can sometimes stretch the rules, because they cannot do so. That is the only thing that makes the exalted/vile rules anywhere near balanced. Exalted Rules and the Message Boards This post has little or nothing to do with Eberron, other than the fact that the game is in the setting. It properly belongs in the Mature Boards.
3nigma 04-02-05, 02:21 PM	Here's the thing... THere's a lot of posts saying that nowhere does it say that druids are restricted from this feat. However, in the Book of Exalted Deeds, there is a section about "Exalted CHaracters" where it describes an exalted version of all the different classes. After the short description, it gives a list of "Exalted Feat Choices." In the druid's section, he doesn't have the choice of "Sacred Vow" or the following "Vow of Poverty." THis makes him want to be a monk, but it's completely contrary to everything he really is and wants to be. I don't think I'm going to allow it, for a number of reasons. For more insights on this situation, here's my thread on the "What's a DM to do?" boards: http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=406191 I hope that link works, I'm new to the boards and I don't know how it all works =).
Isran_Imrador 04-02-05, 02:21 PM	As we say in the Aundairian Scroll: everything for a Good story! And why cant a CG druid be poor? didnt find anything that sayed not..... After the short description, it gives a list of "Exalted Feat Choices." In the druid's section, he doesn't have the choice of "Sacred Vow" or the following "Vow of Poverty." Well thats just suggestions! i woould let him play straigh druid form lvl 1! Isran :) (DM and Player) (Star-Elf paladin with VoP) (Now gone home to him master. somewere in FR)
talion09 04-02-05, 02:26 PM	Damn it, I spent too long typing up a really long post looking at it from both sides, and Gurv pretty much summed up most of what I was saying. Just read his post, its shorter, lol --------- From a player's perspective... 1A.Is anything else from the Book of Exalted Deeds allowed in your campaign? 1B. Did you specify which books were legal? Core-only? Is it a case of taking anything non-core and then running it by the DM? 2. Has anyone else now or in past campaigns used this feat? How did it work out? 3. Is anyone else at the table min-maxing characters, including the DM? To what degree? If its a case of... "Well, bob used that feat last campaign and the consensus was that it is really overpowered" or "Nope, sorry, we aren't using the Exalted Deeds or Vile Darkness books in this campaign because they don't fit very well into the shades of grey feel of alignments in Eberron." Then I don't think you'd get much argument from me, if I was the one proposing the character. However, if other stuff from those books were allowed, or someone else at the table had run such a character without an issue earlier, etc, I'd be pretty cheesed off. About other people min-maxing (#3), I'll talk about that in the DM perspective section... ---- From a DM's perspective... 1. Well, I don't think the wording of the feat is such that you lose the benefits of it if you multiclass from a monk into a druid. I could be wrong, since I don't have that book at my house at the moment, but I don't remember that part of it. 2. IMHO, Vow of Poverty isn't really that overpowering. I've played and DM'd in a co-op campaign alongside a monk who took a bunch of exalted feats, including Vow of Poverty. He was a good character in a fight because of it, but not really signifigantly better overall than the other combat oriented characters. 3. You mentioned that he switched the race of the character just to get the human bonus feat, and other people picked up on that as well, and labelled it as blatant min-maxing (with the usual negative connotations). And it could very well be, but what was more important in his original character pitch, the poverty concept or the elf concept? 4. Vow of Poverty is an Exalted feat, and it has other exalted feats as pre-reqs, correct? That is going to seriously hamper a character in standard eberron game (at least my interpretation of it). It isn't just a case of being "gooder than good" in a fairly straightfoward, black and white campaign. Eberron is a world where clerics can be corrupt and diametrically opposed to the diety's alignment. The gods, if they even exist, aren't there to enlighten you as to what is the proper way to act. The guards are corrupt, and organized crime is given a blind eye. Good nations waged a century long civil war and dealt atrocities to one another, while monsterous nations have risen and been acknowledged. All these "shades of grey" would make it even harder to play an exalted character, since the moral questions are harder, and there are fewer "safe" choices for your character to act and still keep his exalted status. Any benefit he would gain from vow of poverty could fairly easily be twisted against him overall, as his exalted status make him a target for manipulation by shadowy organizations, and a beacon to the oppressed, who constantly seek him out for help, regardless of what he is doing at the time. 5. Back to the "other people min-maxing at the table" concept from the player's persective above... is he the only guy min-maxing at the table? Will his character be signifigantly better than everyone else? If other people are making characters that are going to be on par with his proposed character, than I personally don't think it is an issue. 6. You could always enforce the training rules. You want to switch from monk to druid at level 2? Fine, your character will be off training in the woods, after he finds a suitable teacher, for at least a couple of months. Meanwhile, you can run an NPC for this next adventure, and then when the newborn druid comes back, all happy with his poverty-stricken and tree hugging ways, everyone else is now level 3. This would cancel out the advantages of poverty fairly easily. However, if you do this to one character, you better do it to anyone else who wants to multi-class. And be sure to tell him this before the campaign starts, not when he hits level 2 and wants to change. 7. If you didn't before, I'd start having a strict policy about what is allowed in the game, and make sure everyone knows it beforehand. In my campaign, only the core books + Eberron offical stuff + complete series are allowed as viable options. And I also told the players that I will be enforcing the training rules and making the players seek out organizations and mentors for almost every PRC. (Ie. you want to be a jedi? Go seek out yoda in the swamp, prove your worthiness, and then be prepared to spend a few months training) And the most important part of my campaign policy? I told the players that if the difficulty will be scaled to their power level, taking everything into account. So if they want to start seriously min-maxing (and taking VoP as a monk and then becoming a druid is really something fairly basic), then the opponents will be min-maxed too. My players wanted to go with the high power point buy option for character creation, and I said okay, but I let them know that I'll be using the exact same stats for any major NPCs, so it stays on the same level. The characters are high powered for their level because of their high stats, so they routinely fight encounters a CR above their level. It keeps things balanced and the players happy. --- Q. If it was my player asking this? (And Exalted Deeds was a viable book, which it isn't for my campaign, but anyways...) A. I'd let him, but I'd be sure to let him know that exalted status is pretty hard to keep up in a pulp style world like eberron. And I'd be sure to moniter his choices to make sure he stayed "exalted". If his power level started getting over the top compared to the other players*, I'd start to make his choices and situations more complex and harder in regards to his exalted status. *Assuming of course that the other players were making reasonably competent decisions for character creation.
Talon Blackhart 04-02-05, 06:51 PM	(Disclaimer: I don't know the requirements for the VoP, or much of anything in the BoED The book isn't in my possession, and I haven't used it in any of my games as yet.) I wouldn't allow him to take a level of monk and then multiclass to druid just because he wanted something like that. Good backstory or no, I don't let my players take 1 level in a class just to get class features and then move on to the class they really want. This strikes me as similar to the people who want to take a level in fighter so they can have more hit points when they start picking up levels in wizard at 2nd or 3rd level, or the people who take rogue at first level to get the skill points.....
Gurv 04-02-05, 07:20 PM	(Disclaimer: I don't know the requirements for the VoP, or much of anything in the BoED The book isn't in my possession, and I haven't used it in any of my games as yet.) I wouldn't allow him to take a level of monk and then multiclass to druid just because he wanted something like that. Good backstory or no, I don't let my players take 1 level in a class just to get class features and then move on to the class they really want. This strikes me as similar to the people who want to take a level in fighter so they can have more hit points when they start picking up levels in wizard at 2nd or 3rd level, or the people who take rogue at first level to get the skill points..... I agree with this for the most part. I don't allow obvious ploys like this, although I appreciate a good character build. I have seen character designs where a single class level made sense though. One player did exactly what the OP mentioned: took a single level of monk and then progressed as a druid. In his case, it was acceptable, as his backstory was that of a monk who turned away from the monastic lifestyle and turned to the wilds to give true meaning to his life; the character concept was that he used many of the druidic buffs to make his unarmed attack better. What the OP is talking about is entirely different: taking a level in one thing to qualify for something entirely different (ironically, when he doesn't need to) without logical reasons behind it. His backstory doesn't adequetely explain his monk level, nor does his concept have anything to do with it. Talon: The "Vow of Poverty" feat grants a large assortment of special powers and abilities in exchange for the inability to use most possessions (simple clothes, a non-masterwork weapon, and such basics are the only exceptions). These benefits are very impressive, with the logic behind them being that a PC who cannot use magical items will be falling several ECL behind the norm; therefore the feat is powerful enough that the benefits are likely worth serious LA without the drawbacks. The "Sacred Vow" feat is a prerequisite for the several Vow feats, of which Vow of Poverty is one of the more impressive; it grants some minor bonus that escape my mind, but essentially exists as a prereq for the Vow feats.
the.eberron.traveler 04-02-05, 08:02 PM	I admit I hadn't taken that good of a look at the feat, yet this thread sparked my interest. To see how extreme it may be, I thought I'd make a character taking a couple of things into account. - What class would be less affected by poverty? - What class gains similar benefits, and therefore the VoP abilities may fit it well? The answer to both seems to be the monk. Here's a 14th-level monk, with starting scores of Str 10, Dex 16, Con 10, Int 14, Wis 18, Cha 14. At 42 points, his scores are definetely high powered, but not unreasonably so. Overall though he does seem more powerful than a lot of 14th-level characters I can think of. Basically, he seems ideal for his designed role; a powerful NPC guardian of the Labyrinth, who may knock some sense into PCs messing with the Maruk Ghaash'kala. But he's probably a bit too much as a PC. Of course, as mentioned already a couple of times, the exalted aspire to a level of purity that's practically sainthood. If a PC wants to play a character that's so constrained, and that risks losing all his abilities irrevocably should he screw up at some point, and you think he can take it like a grown up, let him. It's not that tough to be an ascetic saint in the Labyrinth, but it should be pretty tough when dealing with intrigue in Sharn. Vaen Having heard the calling of the binding flame early in his childhood, Vaen left his native Aundair to journey to the Demon Wastes. He lives in the Labyrinth, making sure nothing exits, and judging whether anything should enter. Though he does not consider himself part of the tribe, and lives on his own away from them, he respects and protects the Maruk Ghaash’kala should they be in need. Note: A lot of Vaen’s feats are from the Book of Exalted Deeds. For an explanation of the exalted abilities they confer to him, look at his skills and feats section. Vaen. Human male monk 14; CR 14; Medium humanoid; HD 14d8; hp 70; Init +4; Spd 70 ft.; AC 34, touch 25, flat-footed 30; Base Atk +10; Grp +17; Atk +20 melee (2d6+3, Ki strike); Full Atk +20/+15 melee (2d6+3, Ki strike); Flurry of Blows +20/+20/+20/+15 melee (2d6+3, Ki strike); SA Ki strike (good, holy, lawful, magic); SQ abundant step, exalted abilities, immunity to poisons and natural disease, improved evasion, +2 save against enchantments, slow fall 70 ft., wholeness of body; SR 24; DR 5/magic; AL LG; AP 3; SV Fort +11, Ref +15, Will +18; Str 10, Dex 18, Con 10, Int 14, Wis 24, Cha 15. Skills and Feats. Climb +10, Diplomacy +21, Hide +21, Jump +7, Listen +24, Move Silently +21, Sense Motive +24, Spot +14, Tumble +11; Combat Reflexes, Deflect Arrows, Exalted Spell Resistance (+4 to SR against spells and spell-like abilities used by evil outsiders), Gift of Faith (+2 save against fear effect, despair effect, or similar mind-affecting condition), Heroic Spirit, Holy Ki Strike (2d6 extra holy damage to evil creatures, considered holy for bypassing DR), Holy Radiance (at will increase Nimbus of Light to brilliant light in a 10 ft. radius, shadowy illumination at 20 ft., undead within 10 ft. take 1d4 damage per round), Improved Disarm, Intuitive Attack (use Wis instead of Str modifier for attacks with light or natural weapons), Nimbus of Light (immediately identifiable as a champion of good, +2 circumstance bonus on diplomacy and sense motive checks when interacting with good creatures, bright light at 5 ft. and shadowy illumination at 10 ft. extinguishable at will), Run, Sacred Vow (+2 perfection bonus on diplomacy checks), Sanctify Ki Strike (Ki strike consider good for bypassing DR), Stunning Fist, Vow of Chastity (+4 perfection bonus on Will saves against charm and phantasms), Vow of Poverty (+8 exalted bonus to AC, +2 deflection bonus to AC, +1 to natural armor, eight bonus exalted feats, can exist comfortably in temperatures between -40 and 140 Fahrenheit without need for Fort saves, +3 enhancement bonus to attack and damage rolls, doesn’t need to eat or drink, +2 resistance bonus to all saving throws, +4 to one score +2 to another, immune to detect thoughts, discern lies, and any attempt to discern his alignment, damage reduction 5/magic, doesn’t need to breathe, resistance 5 to acid, cold, electricity, fire and sonic energy, continually under the effect of freedom of movement), Vow of Purity (+4 perfection bonus on Fort saves against disease and death effects). Languages. Common, Infernal, Orc. Possessions. wooden walking stick, worn robe.
Chiba_Monkey 04-03-05, 12:50 AM	I don't have the BoED either, namely b.c I considered most of it (like the VoP) broken crap. BUT I have seen some people make some great characters using those rules. Now, my question is, does the VoP feat require a good alignment (it should, I thought all Exalted feats required a good aligment). If so, how does he justify his alignment change? A monk MUST be lawful, a druid MUST be partially Neutral, so the only alignment that fits a druid/monk is LN, in which case he can no longer benefit from the feat, right? Any time you no longer meet the prerequisites of a feat or ability, you lose the ability to use it. Example: A Ftr w/Power Attack gets hit by a shadow and his Str falls to 12. He can no longer use Power Attack b/c his Str has fallen below the required score of 13 that allowed him to take the feat. Once his Str recovers and is at least 13 again, he may again use the feat. However, once you violate an Exalted feat, you lose it for good, right? So, did your player start as a LG monk to get the feat and switch to NG to get the druid level? MAKE HIM JUSTIFY THIS!! Especially the way alignemnts are defined in Eberron, "relative gauges of a character or creature's viewpoint, and not absolute barometers of affiliation and action"(from the ECS, pg 8) ANY kind of shift in alignment would have to reflect some kind of MAJOR change in behavior. Has he explained this?
Eberik 04-03-05, 01:16 AM	Okay, say the player is allowed the class/race combo, and he takes the 2 feats at lvl 1 to say he can get it at lvl 3..... doesn't he still need the Monastic Training feat also to multi-class as a monk? I didn't see it posted he took that feat as well..... but then again it's just my 2 cents. (Having just really qwickly reread the post in question) No you didn't post he took the feat Monastic Training so he cannot multi-class at 2nd level into a Druid and his whole point is now mute.
zerotkatama 04-03-05, 04:41 AM	I think this argument is pretty much moot, as Druids can take Vow of Poverty. You have to look at the actual feat description, see? Not to be snide, but if it doesn't have Non-Druid in the prerequisites/special restrictions, then a druid can take it.
Chiba_Monkey 04-03-05, 05:53 AM	Okay, say the player is allowed the class/race combo, and he takes the 2 feats at lvl 1 to say he can get it at lvl 3..... doesn't he still need the Monastic Training feat also to multi-class as a monk? I didn't see it posted he took that feat as well..... but then again it's just my 2 cents. (Having just really qwickly reread the post in question) No you didn't post he took the feat Monastic Training so he cannot multi-class at 2nd level into a Druid and his whole point is now mute. No...you need Monastic Training to take a level of monk after you';ve already multiclassed out. Read the description in the PHB. You can multiclass as a monk, but once you do, you can never take monk again, unless you have that feat.
Isran_Imrador 04-03-05, 08:43 AM	Your player can be a human druid from level 1 with VoP. And you sayed he didnt like monk anyway....A druid with Vow of peace would be cool to... ;) As a side note, VoP Monks became very popular a while here.... What do you decide 3nigma?
Urko 04-03-05, 04:18 PM	RE: Who can and cannot take particular exalted feats. Looking over the section that 3nigma cites in Chapter 2, I read the feat selections for exalted class descriptions as recommendations, not requirements*. As zerotkatama points out, if the feats were restricted, it would say so in the feat description. As a DM, I am of two minds about this. If the player came up with a good backstory, I would almost certainly allow it. On the other hand, you're the boss and you should never allow an option into your game that you don't feel comfortable with. *edit: found this passage, which clinches it in my mind: The following section describes some (my emphasis) of those ways, including exalted feat choices and class options for characters of each basic class.
Losdeago 04-03-05, 05:10 PM	Okay, From a players veiw I think you shouldn't because, Well Metagamers make life diffault, because What if they suddenly want to make that druid Psionic, Now that Would pose a more diffualt threat because you'd have a psionic monk poser druid on your hands, Now say, that poser druid wants the feat that allows the you to imbue weapons, If you let this metagamer get away with it, he'll want more and stuff, and he'll turn into a power player, making a urber spiecal mega unbeatable charater...(My addvise is, if things get to uncontralable we reserve our right to use th SFE (Sublimable Fire Effect, Instant Sets fire to the Player and kills them instantly...My favorite SE effect...)
the.eberron.traveler 04-03-05, 06:44 PM	Okay, From a players veiw I think you shouldn't because, Well Metagamers make life diffault, because What if they suddenly want to make that druid Psionic, Now that Would pose a more diffualt threat because you'd have a psionic monk poser druid on your hands, Now say, that poser druid wants the feat that allows the you to imbue weapons, If you let this metagamer get away with it, he'll want more and stuff, and he'll turn into a power player, making a urber spiecal mega unbeatable charater...(My addvise is, if things get to uncontralable we reserve our right to use th SFE (Sublimable Fire Effect, Instant Sets fire to the Player and kills them instantly...My favorite SE effect...) You can be more subtle than that. Or not, I don't know if it's exactly subtle. The DM's most powerful ability, save direct intervention such as the SFE, is his Dice Result Choice ability. I had a power player recently who made a fighter that'd trip people. He took the exotic weapon proficiency spiked chain. He asked innocently enough, I took a look at it, and let him have it. Before I knew it, here was this guy with Improved Trip, trying to trip everyone, all the time. It worked, but it got on my nerves. Imagine Indiana Jones using his whip not once or twice or thrice in every movie, but all the time, triping enemies only for them to get up for him to trip them again. Well, before he knew it, no one graduated the Emerald Claw Academy without Improved Trip. Not to mention that the bad guys seemed to get lucky quite often with their dice rolls. We came to an understanding that as long as he didn't abuse it, he'd be ok. If he did... well there's no reason that 3 there wasn't a 19.
Gnome_Dragon_Disciple 04-03-05, 08:13 PM	I had a very bad experience with a metagaming powergamer who took the Vow of Poverty. He kept complaining that he was held to a higher standard than Paladins (and he repeatedly violated it), complaining that with his character's backstory the only way for him to improve is to level up and get more feats, complaining that other party members are getting more treasure than him (WTH?!?!), and so on and so forth, ad infinitum. If your druid wants to play someone with a vow of poverty but doesn't want a self-imposed drawback like not being able to take part in the treasure gathering, then he shouldn't be allowed to take the feat. If I were in a highly abnormal good mood, I would let him take the sacred vow feat at first level, but make him roleplay the Vow of Poverty for three levels before he could take the feat. However, for almost any roleplayer I know, this would quickly degenerate into rules-lawyering, moral debates about the nature of "good", and things of the like... The problem with players is they have a tendency to forget what they can and cannot do whenever they play something with a strict code of conduct. I have yet to meet a player capable of playing a paladin through more than a couple sessions without getting bored. So unless I'm feeling incredibly generous, my answer to any sort of "can I do this for cool abilities?" question is NO, regardless of backstory. You can justify ANYTHING with backstory... But if you HAVE to justify it, chances are it shouldn't be justified.
Pinky's brain 04-03-05, 09:02 PM	Well he should get his share of the treasure, to give away :)
Sorbeth 04-03-05, 10:17 PM	The two biggest restraints on the VoP are that the character has to donate, or such, their share of all treasure and not have any 'nifty' items and they have to be 'Good' enough to make a paladin look like dirt. That's going to be hard. If the play can handle that and the group can handle that, *and* the lost share of treasure, *and* possible ramifications of situations where the enemy surrenders or such then go for it. Just make sure you clearly enforce the requirements of the feat. (I don't mean doing things to make the player regret ever looking at the feat, just even handed enforcement of the feat requirements.) To The Eberron Traveler Spiked chain is a massively nasty weapon . That’s *why* it takes a feat to use it. Disarm and Trip can dramatically alter combat, that's *why* it takes two feats to do either without risking the normal consequences (and with the extra attack on a trip). While I do not know your player, this is not a 'Munchkin' build it just isn't the standard hack-a-lot build. Also, it sounds like you lost the opportunity for the RP question of what do you do with an enemy who is defenseless? (Kill them and be done with ethics/honor/lawfulness, or do you drag them off and try to keep them prisoner?) A group I'm in spent a while trying to deal with this when we got a 'hold person' spell on a villain. She ended up escaping, but it was fun dealing with the dilemma. Have fun :)
3nigma 04-03-05, 10:38 PM	Hi guys, First off, thank you so much for all of the insane feedback. This is the most feedback I've gotten on any single post, and it's extremely helpful! I only wish I got this much attention on my campaign introduction post, http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=406387 Since there has been so much interest, I just want to let you guys all know how I ruled on the situation. In a short summary, I did not allow my player to take this route for his character. My reasons are as follows... 1) The VoP, I hadn't known, was questionable in its balance from the very beginning. I've always taken the stand that anything outside of the CORE is completely up to the discretion of the DM, and I've never thusfar allowed anything outside of the core rulebooks. It seems that any supplement is slightly unbalanced, as it has less playtesting and is just pushing a product out the door, in my opinion. 2) The player never intended on ever being a monk, and actually hates monks. Our entire gaming group has always kind of consider monks as a pretty strong class in its own right, enough to make everyone bitter against them ;) 3) The player never intended on being a human. He did this to get the extra feat. 4) The player had no interest in roleplaying aspects of what it would be like to take a life of poverty, he was just interested in the benefits that came from it. He then, in turn, decided to roleplay it as a side-effect of the benefits. 5) The VoP benefits are just irrational. A person decides to be poor, and they all of a sudden have all these powers attributed to them. Where do they come from? Gods in Eberron are opaque and obscure, which leads to probably my final point... 6) VoP and Exalted material doesn't fit in Eberron as a whole. The ideas are that of streamlined, concrete values of GOOD. However, in Eberron, "good" is in the eyes of the beholder, and sometimes "good" can be just the lesser of two evils. Gods also do not interact in the world to grant powers such as these, etc. I talked to the player, and he figured it was eventually coming and didn't argue about the point. He retweaked his bio, and loves his character still and will enjoy it thoroughly. He can be found as the Half-Elf Druid in the link above. Once again, I just want to thank everyone for the replies! It has been great to hear so much community feedback. If you all don't mind, because I absolutely love your ideas so much, and love hearing from you guys so much, would you mind giving me your thoughts on my new campaign thread? I really want to start this new campaign and would love some more fresh ideas and insight! The link to the thread is http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=406387 Thanks again for everything! -3nigma :)
the.eberron.traveler 04-03-05, 10:45 PM	To The Eberron Traveler Spiked chain is a massively nasty weapon . That’s *why* it takes a feat to use it. Disarm and Trip can dramatically alter combat, that's *why* it takes two feats to do either without risking the normal consequences (and with the extra attack on a trip). While I do not know your player, this is not a 'Munchkin' build it just isn't the standard hack-a-lot build. Also, it sounds like you lost the opportunity for the RP question of what do you do with an enemy who is defenseless? (Kill them and be done with ethics/honor/lawfulness, or do you drag them off and try to keep them prisoner?) A group I'm in spent a while trying to deal with this when we got a 'hold person' spell on a villain. She ended up escaping, but it was fun dealing with the dilemma. Trust me, he wasn't trying to explore any RP possibilities. Also, to be honest, I don't really like the trip and disarm rules as they are. With the feats, it's actually a bit too easy to pull off, and usually, if your opponents don't have the feat themselves, you don't really have to worry about consequences. Also, it's not like when you trip someone, they're helpless. They haven't lost their weapon, and they just need to get up, causing an attack of opportunity. Basically by tripping them, you buy yourself an extra attack, while they lose their turn getting up. And then you can trip them again, ad nauseum. That's what he did, anyways. Like I said, I wouldn't mind him building a character that prefers tripping their enemies and telling them something along the lines of "stay down if you want to live," and then dealing with the situation. That'd be pretty cool. But I do mind a player that drops their enemies just so they can pound them on the floor, again, and again, and again, and again. So that's why I ended up telling him to essentially use it in an interesting way, or use it two or three times per battle. IMHO, with the number of feats fighters get, Combat Expertise is a must have. And then, again with the number of feats fighters get, the trip mechanic as it stands seems a bit overpowered to me, particularly with that chain (which I shouldn't have allowed him to have). If used the way this guy was using it at least. I guess the tripping mechanic would be more interesting if, even if you have the feat, after you fail your attempt, and if the other person fails their counter on you, they get an attack of opportunity. Unless I haven't understood some part of the existing rules correctly.
Gurv 04-03-05, 10:55 PM	5) The VoP benefits are just irrational. A person decides to be poor, and they all of a sudden have all these powers attributed to them. Where do they come from? Gods in Eberron are opaque and obscure, which leads to probably my final point... Well, you are right. They don't fit Eberron very well. In another setting, one that is designed for such things, there would absolute values of good and evil. Exalted feats only work in a game where good and evil are as clear as black and white. The VoP feat basically represents divine forces, looking down on a truely charitable being, and granting him favors and divine grace because he is just that :censored: pure. IMO, any character with VoP should be willing to remain true to the Vow regardless of whether he gets the benefits of the feat or not. It doesn't happen the other way, like making a deal with the gods. It is a reward, not something the good character expects. Taking the powers away and having the character go though a time without them, just to test his faith and see if he remains true, would be the hallmark of many a good god. It doesn't make much sense in a setting where divine power comes mostly from personal belief. If you all don't mind, because I absolutely love your ideas so much, and love hearing from you guys so much, would you mind giving me your thoughts on my new campaign thread? I really want to start this new campaign and would love some more fresh ideas and insight! Hey, I did post there! But if you really want some input on something, the best thing is to start an alignment debate. No one can resist those for some reason. :devil:
Makabriel 04-05-05, 01:50 PM	5) The VoP benefits are just irrational. A person decides to be poor, and they all of a sudden have all these powers attributed to them. Where do they come from? Gods in Eberron are opaque and obscure, which leads to probably my final point... 6) VoP and Exalted material doesn't fit in Eberron as a whole. The ideas are that of streamlined, concrete values of GOOD. However, in Eberron, "good" is in the eyes of the beholder, and sometimes "good" can be just the lesser of two evils. Gods also do not interact in the world to grant powers such as these, etc. Well.. Daca, the Pillar of the Community in High Hope (Sharn) has a handfull of vows, Including VoP. So someone decided it fits in Eberron..
Beleriphon 04-05-05, 02:25 PM	Well.. Daca, the Pillar of the Community in High Hope (Sharn) has a handfull of vows, Including VoP. So someone decided it fits in Eberron.. She is also one of two fully stated characters for Eberron. And can likely beat the living hell out of a low to mid level party with ease.
the.eberron.traveler 04-05-05, 05:59 PM	She is also one of two fully stated characters for Eberron. And can likely beat the living hell out of a low to mid level party with ease.Well she also has the vow of peace and vow of nonviolence. No, I think she's a good example of how to use the exalted stuff in Eberron. Namely, NPCs with their own private niche. She's an advisor, someone who hasn't moved from a pillar in ages. She's not about to start using her weird feats to chase Evil out of Khorvaire, or beat the living hell out of nobody (in fact, if she does, she loses everything irrevocably). In that sense, the NPC I suggested above also makes sense I think. He's basically chosen to be stuck in the Labyrinth. He's insanely powerful, but he's not about to help the PCs or the world for that matter if whatever trouble is happening is not happening in the Labyrinth. That is his place in the world. He has a purpose, he's serving it, and he's unlikely to mess up Eberron alignment greyishness or its balance of power.
elvenwizard 04-05-05, 06:17 PM	As someone who has spent time on both sides of the DM's screen, I can appreciate both your frustration and that of the other players towards this metagaming son-of-a-trog. My suggestion would be to quietly take the player aside and explain to him that metagaming and the explotation of the rules is WRONG and can seriously destroy the flavor of both the character and the campaign itself. If the player does not concede to your wisdom, then it is perfectly within your rights to have that character experience an "accident." (stray arrow, bandit ambush, Gate to Xoriat spontaneously opening beneath his feat,). Its spiteful and immature, yes, but ultimately satisfiying. :devil:
gibbie99 04-05-05, 06:27 PM	Trust me, he wasn't trying to explore any RP possibilities. Also, to be honest, I don't really like the trip and disarm rules as they are. With the feats, it's actually a bit too easy to pull off, and usually, if your opponents don't have the feat themselves, you don't really have to worry about consequences. Also, it's not like when you trip someone, they're helpless. They haven't lost their weapon, and they just need to get up, causing an attack of opportunity. Basically by tripping them, you buy yourself an extra attack, while they lose their turn getting up. And then you can trip them again, ad nauseum. That's what he did, anyways. Totally agree with poster. On my last (first) campaign, I allowed a large ogre monk, with spiked chain and imp trip. It was a freaking disaster. There was nothing he couldn't trip, including an ancient dragon. Spiked chain is hidiously overpowered. Imp trip isn't that bad, unless it's combined with spiked chain. All the combat decended to: "okay, monk trips bad guys 1 2 and 3, and kills 1 2 and 3 (on the same turn)". Oh, he also had some sort of feat that allowed an extra attack if the opp was tripped. Learned my lesson, I did. Feats that are metagamed to death I take a dismal view of.
Gnome_Dragon_Disciple 04-06-05, 03:18 AM	I thought you could only trip something one size category larger than you or smaller... and as for the Dragon, odds are the thign WEIGHED more than the ogre could drag three inches, let alone yank to the ground... And monster races in general tend to be a disaster. I tend to rule no LA's higher than +1, nothing with racial hit dice, and nothing that would be lynched upon entering a town without damn good diplomacy checks all around (with the only exception being Warforged). As for tripping with the spike chain, it's not that bad. There's feats that allow people to get up as a free action that does not provoke attacks of opportunity and other feats which allow attacks made from a prone position without any penalty. Beyond that, things with immense bulk like huge or gargantuan players should have their weight kept track of... even a really strong ogre would have a hard time budging a huge earth elemental, let alone tripping it. Also, ripping an ogre is a different thing entirely from tripping a clydesdale, in spite of their comperable size and strength. It's not that great of a leap to house rule the fix for this, too. After all, quadrupeds multiply their various loads by four to determine capacity. This reflects their better footing and leverage, and therefore their ability to exert force on the ground and the general stability that an extra pair of legs grants. Therefore, a quadruped should multiply their strength modifier by 4 when opposing trip attempts as well.