+1 (hehe - we're just passing the ball back and forth ain't we? ;)
A lot of complaints I've seen on the boards for the VoP is that although a good GM will accommodate the character, there is complaint that there is nothing forcing the GM to accommodate the character. I think that is a pretty empty complaint - but there you go.
I doubt the vow can see realistic Society play, other than playing a character without items.
There shouldn't be anything that forces the GM to ensure the players have fun. I know in some cases it's required but that's the sad and unfortunate reality of playing the game. Some GMs are crazy-strict and others are just plain dicks. But that's another topic altogether.
It makes the game harder and it gives you a minor benefit for an interesting Asian fantasy archetype. It kind of gives me pause for the amount of HATE that this and Antagonize (please don't derail OMG) have generated. I'm sure there's another option or two from UM floating around the boards that are currently burning in flames (gunslinger/ninjas I think are in there too) but... WOW!
It still wouldn't matter. Even if you could enchant a dirty moth eaten rag... the gold expense that would go into doing so makes it an inherently valuable item, which by itself makes it a fail on the poverty vow.
Nice try. but by definition simple items are not "masterwork" thus not enchant-able.Maybe I missed it somewhere, but I see that weapons and armor must be masterwork quality to be enchanted, but I have not seen anywhere that wondrous items need to be. (and at least in 3.5 a staff had to be masterwork and any rod that could be used as a weapon)
I totally agree with that, I was questioning that you had to have masterwork items to make wondrous items, as far as I know you do not.
well i like your interpretation and thats how im gonna use it +1
Sean K Reynolds
ProfessorCirno wrote:
Given how much you lose from this, mechanically speaking, why should someone take the Vow of Poverty ability?
Roleplaying?
I think they spent a lot of money and time writing and releasing what was supposed to be a major release to simply put out a bunch of stuff simply for role-playing reasons. Isn't that what "<Race>s of <this world>" was for before they decided no one wanted to buy flavor books?
How about everyone agree to a new rule of thumb? All character options released in any future books must be usable to create a character that is capable of surviving any future Paizo adventure path.
Sean K Reynolds
ProfessorCirno wrote:
Given how much you lose from this, mechanically speaking, why should someone take the Vow of Poverty ability?
Roleplaying?
I think they spent a lot of money and time writing and releasing what was supposed to be a major release to simply put out a bunch of stuff simply for role-playing reasons. Isn't that what "<Race>s of <this world>" was for before they decided no one wanted to buy flavor books?
How about everyone agree to a new rule of thumb? All character options released in any future books must be usable to create a character that is capable of surviving any future Paizo adventure path.
Hey, the VoP monk can still survive an AP... he still gets Fast Movement. Now if you want one to contribute and survive... that's another matter.
How about everyone agree to a new rule of thumb? All character options released in any future books must be usable to create a character that is capable of surviving any future Paizo adventure path.
You'd have to define that a whole lot better. I'm pretty sure a given VoP monk would have reasonable odds of surviving a Paizo adventure path. Less than most standard characters, but still okay.
To compare: an optimized Vow of Poverty monk probably has better odds of surviving a Paizo adventure path than the pre-built characters that used to be at the back of each adventure path part.
You'd have to define that a whole lot better. I'm pretty sure a given VoP monk would have reasonable odds of surviving a Paizo adventure path. Less than most standard characters, but still okay.
Surviving in such a way that they do something besides run away. You know, overcome CR appropriate challenges and stuff.
To compare: an optimized Vow of Poverty monk probably has better odds of surviving a Paizo adventure path than the pre-built characters that used to be at the back of each adventure path part.
If that was supposed to boost my faith in Paizo, you failed.
Didn't they stop making flavor books because people actually buying books wanted more concrete and less fluff?I think Pathfinder 2.0 should be Savage Worlds or anything but d20.
I just want to say that I am absolutely at peace with the idea of the OP running or playing a monk who gains all the mechanical benefits of a Vow of Poverty while still owning equipment whose combined resale value equals hundreds of thousands of gp. I am pleased with the idea of him allowing this in games that he DMs, and I am pleased with the idea of him begging -- even demanding -- that his DM allow the concept in games that he plays. I hope it makes his game fun, and I wish him the best of luck in his endeavors.
|
I just want to say that I am absolutely at peace with the idea of the OP running or playing a monk who gains all the mechanical benefits of a Vow of Poverty while still owning equipment whose combined resale value equals hundreds of thousands of gp. I am pleased with the idea of him allowing this in games that he DMs, and I am pleased with the idea of him begging -- even demanding -- that his DM allow the concept in games that he plays. I hope it makes his game fun, and I wish him the best of luck in his endeavors.
Dunno, if a player would come to me and go "I don't care what RAW or RAI is, I demand this feat to work like this!" the next thing that would happen would be me hitting him on the head with Core Rulebook (it's pretty excellent for that).
Dunno, if a player would come to me and go "I don't care what RAW or RAI is, I demand this feat to work like this!" the next thing that would happen would be me hitting him on the head with Core Rulebook (it's pretty excellent for that).
Well, obviously! But that is not the scenario that I said I was perfectly at peace with.
.
..
...
....
.....
It makes the game harder and it gives you a minor benefit for an interesting Asian fantasy archetype..[/i]
Let us not be suggesting that some may enjoy challenges.
Or that we can change things to suit our styles/preferences of play.
..and
Pfft. Like any caster's going to be strong enough to carry around the 1300 pounds of gold needed to pay for it!Any caster with Detect Magic ?
Whose going to buy my bracers for 64,000gp when they look like rustic junk?
Portable Fighter. Duh.
As much as I would like to see VoP re-written, or rather, all the vows improved, and separate mechanics added that allow for less dependance on equipment, I don't think this is the way to do it.
Not everything in this game needs to be defined in legalise. If you don't like a rule or whatever, just CHANGE IT. Don't twist and mis-interpret it and pretend that words don't have meaning. I want a more enjoyable interesting and balanced game, not one that is half glossary to prevent abuse. [NOTE: If you want to see how over-obsessing on words can destroy a book, look at "Twist of the wrist 2" by Wayne Rainy. I want to slam my head in a car door just thinking about it!]
PS, VoP above all else should make you POOR!!! None of this single item worth 500,000 gp BS. There is enough real-world info on such vows and folks who follow them that we can get this right without stupid loopholes or bazzaro interpretations. "I don't have a million GP, I just have a bank note that says they are holding it in my name, but it is only a simple piece of paper."
I am not sure what the devlopers are talking about. Is this "Vow of Poverty" some sort vow that grants a mechanical effect if adherred to or what?
That asside, it strikes me that every character is breaking his vow of poverty, regardless of his single item. The total wealth of a monk's item could feed and care for thousands of destitute, orphans, and cripples for years. His one item makes him in the top 1% wealthiest individuals in world. Where is the poverty?
Fixed that for you.
Again, it's not a problem with my interpretation. It's a problem with the ability as written.
Nice try. but by definition simple items are not "masterwork" thus not enchant-able.Maybe I missed it somewhere, but I see that weapons and armor must be masterwork quality to be enchanted, but I have not seen anywhere that wondrous items need to be. (and at least in 3.5 a staff had to be masterwork and any rod that could be used as a weapon)
Quite right.
well i like your interpretation and thats how im gonna use it +1
Thanks!
Hey, the VoP monk can still survive an AP... he still gets Fast Movement. Now if you want one to contribute and survive... that's another matter.
LOL. So true.
|
As much as I would like to see VoP re-written, or rather, all the vows improved, and separate mechanics added that allow for less dependance on equipment, I don't think this is the way to do it.
Not everything in this game needs to be defined in legalise. If you don't like a rule or whatever, just CHANGE IT. Don't twist and mis-interpret it and pretend that words don't have meaning. I want a more enjoyable interesting and balanced game, not one that is half glossary to prevent abuse. [NOTE: If you want to see how over-obsessing on words can destroy a book, look at "Twist of the wrist 2" by Wayne Rainy. I want to slam my head in a car door just thinking about it!]
PS, VoP above all else should make you POOR!!! None of this single item worth 500,000 gp BS. There is enough real-world info on such vows and folks who follow them that we can get this right without stupid loopholes or bazzaro interpretations. "I don't have a million GP, I just have a bank note that says they are holding it in my name, but it is only a simple piece of paper."
It really should have been thought out better. It's just too weak overall to make it useful in most situations. Relative balance is important. Vow of poverty doesn't have to wow the world of it's brokenness, but it shouldn't be laughed at how weak it is. Once again, we do not need hard rules for RP. This being a "RP" tool is just a poor excuse. Not to mention, the poverty part of the fluff allows 1 single insanely expensive item. How is that helping RP at all?
I wonder why these vows were not setup as archetypes instead. Monks can take multiple vows, but they only lose Still Mind. By allowing the vows to replace different class features, it helps balance out immensely.
.
..
...
....
.....It makes the game harder and it gives you a minor benefit for an interesting Asian fantasy archetype..[/i]Let us not be suggesting that some may enjoy challenges.
Or that we can change things to suit our styles/preferences of play.
..and
Pfft. Fist shaking will not save the vow of poverty monk!
...
Nix that. I believe it shall...
My 'one item of value':
Robes of the Archmage with built in headband of wisdom +6, amulet of natural armor +5, amulet of the mighty fist +5, wings of flying (all at price x 3 total for mismatched slot and combined item).
"A week ago one of my friends gave me this really cool book to read man -- like blew my mind wide open to the greater possibilities of the universe... I really feel like I'm a part of it all now you know man?"
Has anyone actually played a VoP monk? Concerning the book came out 2 days ago (longer for subscribers), I doubt it. Shouldn't you try it before all this?
Has anyone actually played a VoP monk? Concerning the book came out 2 days ago (longer for subscribers), I doubt it. Shouldn't you try it before all this?
BTW, Bulmahn murdered my monk character in yesterday's Weekly Grind session, so monk fans no longer have a "man on the inside," as it were.
It was beautiful while it lasted...
See, Ultimate Magic is out for like a day, and already we have one dead monk... Where will the madness stop?
While I generally agree that playtesting is important before judging, the amount a character gives up by only having one item of value is fairly specific, and at higher levels hugely significant. VoP as written seems a very large penalty to take, (plus the beating you get for breaking the vow...) and I feel the reward is minor.
With that said, there should be a separate concept entirely for replacing the normal items. It would have to mesh with the campaign world, not just the characterand allow options to keep plots and stories going while not allowing cheese.
Has anyone actually played a VoP monk? Concerning the book came out 2 days ago (longer for subscribers), I doubt it. Shouldn't you try it before all this?
Once he heard just how absolutely terrible they were, one of my players has since become determined to take ALL the vows on his next character.
If he really does so, I shall likely keep you informed as antics/hilarity will surely occur soon after (that, or pain...lots of pain).
|
|
What about us gamers who play RPGs for a good story and don't optimize? Those of us who have characters that we don't mind allowing to die to further a goal?
Did not read the whole thread, just btw.
What about those of us that don't optimize and would like to play RPGs for a good story with a genuine vow of poverty monk through an entire campaign?
The origianl VoP enabled those. The current one locks them out.
What about us gamers who...don't optimize?
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
There's no such thing as a gamer that doesn't optimize. It's an urban myth.
|
What about those of us that don't optimize...What about us gamers who play RPGs for a good story and don't optimize? Those of us who have characters that we don't mind allowing to die to further a goal?
Did not read the whole thread, just btw.
I think you stumbled into the wrong thread. RD illustrates fairly clearly one of the problems with the original VoP. Regardless of what you do people are going to abuse it.
|
|
I think you stumbled into the wrong thread. RD illustrates fairly clearly one of the problems with the original VoP. Regardless of what you do people are going to abuse it.What about those of us that don't optimize...What about us gamers who play RPGs for a good story and don't optimize? Those of us who have characters that we don't mind allowing to die to further a goal?
Did not read the whole thread, just btw.
Baby and bathwater.
All it really needed was more explicitly restrictive language, not a complete wash.
The original enabled play a monk with an actual vow of poverty and a reasonably functional one.
The current one, at most, only does one or the other.
|
|
Baby and bathwater.
All it really needed was more explicitly restrictive language, not a complete wash.
The original enabled play a monk with an actual vow of poverty and a reasonably functional one.
The current one, at most, only does one or the other.
And the original one was one of the most abused feats in 3.5. The more power a feat has the more tempting it is to game it and milk the most they can out of it.
|
|
And the original one was one of the most abused feats in 3.5. The more power a feat has the more tempting it is to game it and milk the most they can out of it.
Again, baby and bathwater. ALL that has to be done is to tighten the language. Those that were abusing it were blatantly going against the spirit of the vow to begin with.
The current vow breaks the spirit before those players even open the book. The only people that are really screwed here are those that want to follow the spirit of the theme.
Hell, I'd feel more comfortable with the BoED VoP, problems and all, being in instead of Antagonize.
Please stop lying.
There's no such thing as a gamer that doesn't optimize. It's an urban myth.
Oh come on!
If you play a fighter and you choose a longsword over a dagger, if you don't put all your feats into skill feats, OR if you put any of your three highest ability scores into Str, Dex, or Con...
Guess what?
YOU'RE OPTIMIZING!
Unless you are deliberately picking ALL of the worst choices in some weird attempt to make a point on the web, you will ALWAYS optimize your character in some way, even if you don't realize it.
I simply CAN'T STAND people who claim to not be optimizers and then get all holier than thou because they are "real ROLEplayers."
*rolls eyes and spits in disgust*
I don't play with THOSE people.* This game is about having fun, not looking down upon your fellow players.
* Not that this applies to any of the people here, I'm just raving in the most general of terms.
|
|
Six items? Five of which must be very plain and of simple make and one of which that can be of some value?
Well, my bracers of armor +8 are rather rustic I must say. My amulet of mighty fists +5 is practically made of tin. My monk's robe and cloak of resistance +5 are but tatters. I got my plastic ring of protection +5 out of a Cracker Jack box.
But this here masterwork sai of "some value?" That was given to me by my master before I began this here quest to find his killer.
The only item that is limited by value, according to the rules, is the sixth item. The rest just have to be plain.
I. HAVE. NOT. BROKEN. A. SINGLE. RULE.
In any case, I'm surprised that no one has even considered that maybe it wasn't ever meant to limit your wealth of items, but rather the number of items you carry. Only being able to carry six items, rather than the 14 that magic item slots normally allowed IS a fairly big limiting factor and would be about on par with what you get in return, as well as with the other vows and optional rules.
You get to keep the BIG SIX while giving up everything else.
You get six items. You need the BIG SIX to stay afloat in the game. Nobody noticed this correlation? Really?
If your first five items are of cheap make (wood, bone, tin, whatever), then you have indeed followed the rules of the Vow. You still can't carry anything not your own worth more than 50gp and you still can't carry more than enough money needed to support yourself (modestly).
Considering all this, and the fact that it's now about in line with all the other vows, I'm astounded I'm the first to think of this particular interpretation.
Everyone agrees: the current "common interpretation" not only sucks, it doesn't even make much sense as written.
Mine, however, neither sucks nor is senseless. For all we know, it was the developer's intent all along.
FAQ this post if you agree, or even if you simply "want" to believe it's true. Maybe we can get a developer...
Thank you for this post. Vow of Poverty will get banned from my game.
|
Please stop lying.
There's no such thing as a gamer that doesn't optimize. It's an urban myth.
Have you ever had your character take Weapon Focus for the weapon he favors? That's optimizing.
Any time you make a choice that increases your characters effectiveness, you're optimizing him. Be it taking Weapon Finesse for a Dex-based character, or making sure you have a high enough stat to cast your spells. That's optimizing.
So he is not lying. You are, unless you have never done anything to improve your character's chances for survival.
Thank you for this post. Vow of Poverty will get banned from my game.
Wait. What? It's getting banned BECAUSE of my post? *confused*
I seriously wish that people would stop complaining about this. I thought people here were roleplayers? You have a ton of options for this.
1) Have your monk come from a monestary that practices the art of magic tattoos. Tattoo your monk with "Legacy Tattos" that improve as you level and require you to have Vow of Poverty and maintain it to have them work.
2) Same as 1 but with standard tattoos that need to be "touched up" as you level up and attempt to get more equipment. Means a trek back to your place of teaching.
3) Pick up Vow of Poverty as is. Get extra Stunning Fists and build an exceptional character through feats alone. Donate money to your party or to a cause and gain a following through the Leadership feat or through other means. Have powerful followers that cater to you out of a sense of moral debt.
4) Play your Vow of Poverty monk in a low level campaign setting where there won't be a "huge" difference in power levels.
5) Play a Monk that has "Holy Relics" from his Monestary/Travels that have been gifted to him and look like tattered rags but are powerful magic items activated by his devotion to his Vow of Poverty. While playing this monk uphold the Vow of Poverty to the best of your abilities. Donate all the gold you get to these places of worship and work it out with your GM to get improvements on your gear. Do this, and DO NOT TAKE THE VOW OF POVERTY varient from the UM Book. This way, you have magic items, you are playing a "gear-less monk who can keep up with the party" be happy with your roleplaying choice and don't benefit from the extra 1 Ki you get from every 2 levels.
... The list goes on and on and is garnered from years of roleplay and story writing experience.
Please.
Stop complaining that they didn't mirror old content from a book that they didn't print. It's not their job to put stuff into the system that doesn't "flow" with their concept.
As was said by one of the developers; I completely agree, Poverty sucks.
I seriously wish that people would stop complaining about this. I thought people here were roleplayers? You have a ton of options for this.
1) Have your monk come from a monestary that practices the art of magic tattoos. Tattoo your monk with "Legacy Tattos" that improve as you level and require you to have Vow of Poverty and maintain it to have them work.
2) Same as 1 but with standard tattoos that need to be "touched up" as you level up and attempt to get more equipment. Means a trek back to your place of teaching.
3) Pick up Vow of Poverty as is. Get extra Stunning Fists and build an exceptional character through feats alone. Donate money to your party or to a cause and gain a following through the Leadership feat or through other means. Have powerful followers that cater to you out of a sense of moral debt.
4) Play your Vow of Poverty monk in a low level campaign setting where there won't be a "huge" difference in power levels.
5) Play a Monk that has "Holy Relics" from his Monestary/Travels that have been gifted to him and look like tattered rags but are powerful magic items activated by his devotion to his Vow of Poverty. While playing this monk uphold the Vow of Poverty to the best of your abilities. Donate all the gold you get to these places of worship and work it out with your GM to get improvements on your gear. Do this, and DO NOT TAKE THE VOW OF POVERTY varient from the UM Book. This way, you have magic items, you are playing a "gear-less monk who can keep up with the party" be happy with your roleplaying choice and don't benefit from the extra 1 Ki you get from every 2 levels.
... The list goes on and on and is garnered from years of roleplay and story writing experience.
Please.
Stop complaining that they didn't mirror old content from a book that they didn't print. It's not their job to put stuff into the system that doesn't "flow" with their concept.
As was said by one of the developers; I completely agree, Poverty sucks.
Couldn't we have done this (some of us already did) before the book came out? thats all house rules, which is fine and dandy because unlike this vow you dont have to spend money on them.
What about us gamers who play RPGs for a good story and don't optimize? Those of us who have characters that we don't mind allowing to die to further a goal?
Did not read the whole thread, just btw.
Even in a non-optimized game where everyone is good enough to survive, but not overwhelm, the VoP monk is in dire straights.
A GM could always fudge dice(insert other fix), but if he has to do that then you know an issue is present.
The original enabled play a monk with an actual vow of poverty and a reasonably functional one.
The current one, at most, only does one or the other.
I have seen them(3.5 VoP) fail twice. My next game with be another step down in power level though, and I am sure he will try it again. I might get a pleasant surprise, but I doubt it, not without some serious min-maxing anyway.
Yup. Again, 'ppreciate the head's up.Thank you for this post. Vow of Poverty will get banned from my game.Wait. What? It's getting banned BECAUSE of my post? *confused*
I am confused.
What about us gamers who play RPGs for a good story and don't optimize? Those of us who have characters that we don't mind allowing to die to further a goal?
Did not read the whole thread, just btw.
Even in a non-optimized game where everyone is good enough to survive, but not overwhelm, the VoP monk is in dire straights.
A GM could always fudge dice(insert other fix), but if he has to do that then you know an issue is present.
A GM does not "Have" to do it, it's based on what play style they're going for. If you want to take a Vow of Poverty and decide that you cannot keep up with the party you have several options sticking by the core rules in Ultimate Magic.
1) Break your Vow of Poverty
2) Take a Vow with a time limit on it (It is possible to do)
3) Retire the character.
The Vow of Poverty was not mean as a solution to allow you to play your character without any items and still be "On Par" with the party. It is not designed as such, it will not be used as such. This is not in error.
If your GM does want you to be able to do those things, then yes House Rules are possible. Or if you want to play a character that just has the "flavor" of a monk with Vow of Poverty, as I said you could just as easily play it as if you had it, and not actually take it. Just obtain your items in ways that portray the vow. By doing that, it's roleplaying. Not a house rule.
I seriously wish that people would stop complaining about this. I thought people here were roleplayers?
Starting off this way never ends well. I will see what else you have to say though.
1) Have your monk come from a monestary that practices the art of magic tattoos. Tattoo your monk with "Legacy Tattos" that improve as you level and require you to have Vow of Poverty and maintain it to have them work.
Any GM can houserule a fix. We are talking about the ability as it is. The issue is not that we can't change it for our games. There are quite a few level headed people here such as ToZ and Ogre. The issue is that it sucks as written, and there are many GM's who can't or won't change things to work for the player.
3) Pick up Vow of Poverty as is. Get extra Stunning Fists and build an exceptional character through feats alone. Donate money to your party or to a cause and gain a following through the Leadership feat or through other means. Have powerful followers that cater to you out of a sense of moral debt.
Leadership is based on charisma. Monk already have enough stats to try to improve. I don't see that follower lasting long. Stunning fist is trivially easy to save against past level 10, and sometimes even before that. I am not saying it never works, but it is not something to build on.
4) Play your Vow of Poverty monk in a low level campaign setting where there won't be a "huge" difference in power levels.
You have to find a GM willing and able to run one well. I do think it may work in this case, but that is about it.
5) Play a Monk that has "Holy Relics" from his Monestary/Travels that have been gifted to him and look like tattered rags but are powerful magic items activated by his devotion to his Vow of Poverty. While playing this monk uphold the Vow of Poverty to the best of your abilities. Donate all the gold you get to these places of worship and work it out with your GM to get improvements on your gear. Do this, and DO NOT TAKE THE VOW OF POVERTY varient from the UM Book. This way, you have magic items, you are playing a "gear-less monk who can keep up with the party" be happy with your roleplaying choice and don't benefit from the extra 1 Ki you get from every 2 levels.
If you have magic items it kills the concept though. I think this idea would work with your magic tattoo idea.
Stop complaining that they didn't mirror old content from a book that they didn't print. It's not their job to put stuff into the system that doesn't "flow" with their concept.
As was said by one of the developers; I completely agree, Poverty sucks.
It is their job to make stuff that for the most part, works out of the box.
As a player and GM I pay other developers to make stuff so I don't have to do as much work. When I had more free time I never would have purchased an AP. With my increasing decrease in time. I can also make my own flavor. I need someone to take care of the mechanics.
As an example I don't care for the ninja or assassin, but I want to play one. I will use the ranger and change the names of his abilities so I get the "assassin" or "ninja" I want.
I also thought about a character that thinks he is a paladin and is so delusional that he will not believe he can't smite. I will use the inquisitor for that. His judgements are "smites". He also will not be able to be convinced that is not lawful good either. I have yet to decide on his actual alignment though.
What's the confusion? I'm banning VoP from my campaign based on Ravingdork's post.I am confused.Yup. Again, 'ppreciate the head's up.Thank you for this post. Vow of Poverty will get banned from my game.Wait. What? It's getting banned BECAUSE of my post? *confused*
The post where we provided evidence that the vow sucks and he can't have a lot of magic items or the post where RD says you can have magic items, but was inaccurate?
Darn I worded that badly.
Is it because you did not catch the part where we show the monk will suck, and you did not like the idea of a monk with magic items or is it because the monk will suck and you don't want a player at the table that far behind the curve.
Matthew, perhaps there's a regular meeting-spot for poor monks.
Brother Gerat of the Leaping Stag order comes to the meeting-spot with the +2 frost kama and hands it to Rinalda, acolyte of the enlightened way, who is on her pilgrimmage to challenge the Gorilla Kings of Sargova. As he leaves, he takes with him the +2 flaming burst amulet of mighty fists that Cousin P'takka, troglodyte padawan of the Swampfang order, no longer needs. P'takka humbly thanks Gerat for relieving him of the burden of the amulet, and goes in serch of a fellow poor monk who might have something to help him with his people's pesky lillend problem.
I think this was supposed to be a joke, but it's got my creative gears whirring. A sacred meeting spot where monks of all faiths and schools can place one or more items each, to be shared among all the other monks for the greater good, and take one item each, to better achieve their goals and attain enlightenment. If a monk dies, his stuff is sold and tithed.
I seriously wish that people would stop complaining about this. I thought people here were roleplayers?Starting off this way never ends well. I will see what else you have to say though.
I apologize if it came off as insulting, I just read through three pages of people complaining that this was not "Awesome Feat X" from "Random Book Y" in "System Z" just because it has the same name. I saw what they were attempting to do in this system with the Vow's, and I actually really like what they did, even though it flows more for the new monk variant then for a traditional monk or for any other class.
The thing that I think pushed me over the edge is this is probably the second or third thread that I've read regarding this.
There are a ton of various options you have, granted.. yes most of them are story and roleplay based, and some of them are house rule based if you actually want an effect from it.. but if it's to play a character concept that you love then why not go through with it?
I remember the old Vow of Poverty and every time I read it, I thought.. Wow, That's powerful. I didn't know being poor could be so awesome.
If anything there are a few things I'd like to see with some of the Vow's. I'd like to see an option for the various Cleric and Paladin faiths. Perhaps an extra channel every now and then, or some small perk for taking it. The fact that they only allowed it for monk was the only off-putting thing about it.
I apologize if it came off as insulting, I just read through three pages of people complaining that this was not "Awesome Feat X" from "Random Book Y" in "System Z" just because it has the same name. I saw what they were attempting to do in this system with the Vow's, and I actually really like what they did, even though it flows more for the new monk variant then for a traditional monk or for any other class.
The thing that I think pushed me over the edge is this is probably the second or third thread that I've read regarding this.
There are a ton of various options you have, granted.. yes most of them are story and roleplay based, and some of them are house rule based if you actually want an effect from it.. but if it's to play a character concept that you love then why not go through with it?
I remember the old Vow of Poverty and every time I read it, I thought.. Wow, That's powerful. I didn't know being poor could be so awesome.
If anything there are a few things I'd like to see with some of the Vow's. I'd like to see an option for the various Cleric and Paladin faiths. Perhaps an extra channel every now and then, or some small perk for taking it. The fact that they only allowed it for monk was the only off-putting thing about it.
It is not that anyone is expecting every feat to be awesome. We do expect for abilities to be decent though.
I think you can have an RP based feat/ability that is mechanically sound so the "this is an RP ability" does not cut it for me.I do wish something similar could be done for clerics and paladins also. The old Vow was not that great in game either, but there is a thread here where posters were working as a group on idea for a better VoW that kept the flavor, but was also safe for a player to take.
|
|
What's the confusion? I'm banning VoP from my campaign based on Ravingdork's post.I am confused.Yup. Again, 'ppreciate the head's up.Thank you for this post. Vow of Poverty will get banned from my game.Wait. What? It's getting banned BECAUSE of my post? *confused*The post where we provided evidence that the vow sucks and he can't have a lot of magic items or the post where RD says you can have magic items, but was inaccurate?
Darn I worded that badly.
Is it because you did not catch the part where we show the monk will suck, and you did not like the idea of a monk with magic items or is it because the monk will suck and you don't want a player at the table that far behind the curve.
None of these. Monks don't suck, from my experience especially with powergamers. Ravingdork's analysis neatly sidesteps the "balance" that VoP was suppose to provide (again, thanks) and thus my decision.
|
|
I have seen them(3.5 VoP) fail twice. My next game with be another step down in power level though, and I am sure he will try it again. I might get a pleasant surprise, but I doubt it, not without some serious min-maxing anyway.
The original enabled play a monk with an actual vow of poverty and a reasonably functional one.
The current one, at most, only does one or the other.
Damn shame one has to minmax to make the concept work. Best of luck to him, he's going to need it. :(