| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Wrigs13 |
Posted - 18 Feb 2009 : 18:30:00
Hi everyone, yes its that time of the week again 
Before I get into the specifics of the question, I don't want this discussion to be a metaphysical debate on religion, morals and belief systems. 
I know it is impossible to discuss this topic without touching on religion and gods, but I really want to concentrate on the game mechanics of Ascetic characters. 
OK to the actual questions:
I have a player who has asked me about an ascetic character using the vow of poverty feat. Has anyone successfully used a VoP character in their game?
Having read several forums the discussions descend into bickering over minor rules issues very quickly and so I come back here hoping for considered opinions.
Some of the main questions seem to be:
Is the VoP actually balanced in a long term game against the standard treasure progression for pc's?
How best to balance the inequality between different classes as monks and druids clearly get the best deal, but paladins ironically get totally shafted? 
What is the actual reason for the limitation to simple weapons? Does this mean the simple weapon classification? Or does the description imply that it means mundane weapons, ie no Mwk, Magical or superior materials used? If it means the weapon classification why is a mace ok but not a short sword? This means an ascetic can have a 50gp heavy crossbow but not a much cheaper martial weapon.
How poor do you have to be? If you go to the pub after a long adventure can you buy a round of drinks? I know at higher levels you don't need to eat but thats not the same as not wanting to eat. The vow of abstinance is a seperate feat.
It says that you should have enough money, food and equipment to survive for the next 24 hours, but what if you know you are going to be in the wilderness for weeks?
How good is ascetic good? Its not as if you suddenly have to be LG as its fine to be CG, so how do you define what roleplay is acceptable? (Yes this question goes beyond pure game mechanics, sorry)
A lot of various questions, maybe I should have started several threads instead. |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 02 Mar 2009 : 23:49:40
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
That would be Abraham Simpson -- "Treehouse of Horror V."
Okay, so what am I going to have to delve into to stump you? Manga, perhaps?  |
| The Sage |
Posted - 02 Mar 2009 : 23:15:26
That would be Abraham Simpson -- "Treehouse of Horror V." |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 02 Mar 2009 : 17:55:01
quote:
Originally posted by ErskineF
Well, I dunno. My mama always taught me never to talk to pit fiends.
I'll never forget, one time she asked me, "Son, how do you tell if a pit fiend is lying?" I said, "I dunno, Ma, how do you tell if a pit fiend is lying?" And she said, "WHO CARES IF IT'S LYING, YOU IDIOT! KILL IT!!!"
So yeah, I'm just amazed that the pit fiend was able to explain all that while the ascetic was trying to send it back to Hell in a body bag.
Well, I guess that's better advice than when my dad told me, on my wedding night, not to kill anything if I went back in time...
Points to whoever gets that reference. |
| ErskineF |
Posted - 02 Mar 2009 : 17:12:25
Well, I dunno. My mama always taught me never to talk to pit fiends.
I'll never forget, one time she asked me, "Son, how do you tell if a pit fiend is lying?" I said, "I dunno, Ma, how do you tell if a pit fiend is lying?" And she said, "WHO CARES IF IT'S LYING, YOU IDIOT! KILL IT!!!"
So yeah, I'm just amazed that the pit fiend was able to explain all that while the ascetic was trying to send it back to Hell in a body bag.
|
| ranger_of_the_unicorn_run |
Posted - 02 Mar 2009 : 16:57:14
quote:
Originally posted by Wrigs13
Much of Ascetic roleplay is to do with morals and moral choices. The central tenet that the ends do not justify the means leads to many questions.
Consider this scenario:
An ascetic character finds a portal to hell just as a pit fiend comes through. The pit fiend is disorientated and explains that it is on a mission to recover a captain of the legions of the damned who has fled to faerun and started building an empire of undead. The pit fiend has one goal, capture and return his captain before other fiends find out about it and attack him for his perceived weakness. The captain is causing chaos, slaughtering the innocent and raising their bodies to fill the ranks of his army.
In this scenario can an ascetic character team up with a pit fiend to track down and stop the inferal captain?
In that scenario, the ascetic can only team up if they can prevent the pit fiend from committing atrocities while they are teamed up. It is a slippery slope in another way because, the ascetic would want to destroy the pit fiend, but once they have teamed up, it would be highly immoral to betray the pit fiend. Probably the best case scenario for the ascetic is to send the pit fiend back to hell, and find the captain on his own. |
| Wrigs13 |
Posted - 02 Mar 2009 : 15:38:18
Much of Ascetic roleplay is to do with morals and moral choices. The central tenet that the ends do not justify the means leads to many questions.
Consider this scenario:
An ascetic character finds a portal to hell just as a pit fiend comes through. The pit fiend is disorientated and explains that it is on a mission to recover a captain of the legions of the damned who has fled to faerun and started building an empire of undead. The pit fiend has one goal, capture and return his captain before other fiends find out about it and attack him for his perceived weakness. The captain is causing chaos, slaughtering the innocent and raising their bodies to fill the ranks of his army.
In this scenario can an ascetic character team up with a pit fiend to track down and stop the inferal captain? |
| ErskineF |
Posted - 28 Feb 2009 : 17:31:21
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
You could divide the treasure up and the other three players each get a third, and then agree that they should buy and give you whatever you need when you need it, but thats a clear violation of intent, as far as I'm concerned. The ascetic character NEEDS to take his share, and then donate it ASAP.
I don't know how the rule is worded, but a vow of poverty and a vow of charity suggest two different things to me. The Franciscan ideal was that the monk only accepted what was necessary to feed him for the moment. He didn't walk around with money to hand out; on the contrary he was himself a beggar. That's why they called it a mendicant order.
So I would say that the ascetic has no share in the treasure for any purpose, even charity or the building of temples. I think it's perfectly reasonable, though, for him to accept charity from the group. What he can't do is say, "You guys need to buy me potions x, y and z, and carry them for me so that I'll have them when needed;" and any notion that he's entitled to material help from the group should be squashed.
|
| Markustay |
Posted - 28 Feb 2009 : 16:47:41
I'm not at all familiar with the exalted rules, nor this particular feat, however, I'd stll like to chime in as best I can...quote:
Originally posted by Wrigs13
I think that it is against the spirit of the game to blatantly buy magical supplies and then let someone else take responsibility for them. 
However if 4 pc's find 100,000 gp of treasure then thats 25,000 each. If the ascetic gives his 25,000 to charity then he is upholding his vow.
This is what you are supposed to be doing. As a long-time DM, I would make sure the character was following the spirit of the vow, and not just the letter of it.
You could divide the treasure up and the other three players each get a third, and then agree that they should buy and give you whatever you need when you need it, but thats a clear violation of intent, as far as I'm concerned. The ascetic character NEEDS to take his share, and then donate it ASAP.
A Feat this good needs to be monitored at all times. If the Ascetic takes his 'windfall' and builds a temple dedicated to his beliefs, then a DM must look at the real reasons behind it. Doing this is following the vow, but he/she could have alterior motives. In the case of those Franciscans - the Monk could own whatever he wanted, and just say it's 'property of the church', and "I'm just authorized to use their property for the greater good".
The PC could be setting up the temple as a 'dump-site' for his fat lewts, claim it all belongs to the temple, and then go there whenever he needs to 'borrow' temple property.
However, if the DM specifically gives him a holy item dedicated to his beliefs, then that should break the 'no magic items' rule - the 'Rule Zero' rule applies, and the item was obviously granted him for use in service to the church (and the DM can VERY EASILY take it back at any time - usually after it has served some purpose).
As for the 'mace but no sword' thing, that may be a hold-over from when clerics could only use items that didn't shed blood (non bladed or piercing, which is a Catholic thing and really never belonged in a fantasy game). I could also be WAY OFF base with that one, not being familiar with any of these particular rules. |
| Brimstone |
Posted - 28 Feb 2009 : 07:13:14
-I always use the Elite Array when I DM.
BRIMSTONE |
| ErskineF |
Posted - 28 Feb 2009 : 05:15:51
quote:
Originally posted by Wrigs13
What level do you pitch your point buy system at? I always have the problem that no one wants to be average so buying 14's just doen't happen. One player will, no matter how many or few the points available, will buy the highest strength possible and ignore all the mental stats, hence becoming a total retard. Then they start moaning that just because they have bought Str 18 they can't afford decent Dex and Con. Without using Epic stat points how do you avoid complaints?
I don't. I just make it so that everyone feels equally put out.
Seriously, the folks in my regular group don't have a problem with point buy. When I DM'd we used 32 pts, but our regular DM lowered that to 30. In our current campaign, he allowed people to roll stats, but he adjusted them so that everyone still ended up on a fairly level playing field.
I've had two players who had a problem with point-buy. They were the two whingers I mentioned in a previous thread. They didn't like our other DM, so they left the group. They talked me into running a game for them on the side. Both of them were used to second edition, and they just couldn't wrap their brains around the idea that in 3e a 16 is a damned good ability score. As far as they were concerned, a character without at least one 18 and two other scores in the 16-18 range was considered unplayable.
That campaign lasted maybe two months. I was running Sunless Citadel for them, and I became bored with watching them wade through my puny little goblins with their god-like characters. Published adventures assume that characters are in the 25-28 pt range, and they were nearly twice that. It wasn't worth the trouble to boost all the creature stats just to make it more challenging.
|
| Rabiesbunny |
Posted - 27 Feb 2009 : 15:33:58
quote:
Originally posted by Wrigs13
What level do you pitch your point buy system at? I always have the problem that no one wants to be average so buying 14's just doen't happen. One player will, no matter how many or few the points available, will buy the highest strength possible and ignore all the mental stats, hence becoming a total retard. Then they start moaning that just because they have bought Str 18 they can't afford decent Dex and Con. Without using Epic stat points how do you avoid complaints?
You should make them roll stats; that way, they won't dump 'unimportant' stats to make drooling fighters that hit like a train. :o |
| Wrigs13 |
Posted - 27 Feb 2009 : 10:00:43
What level do you pitch your point buy system at? I always have the problem that no one wants to be average so buying 14's just doen't happen. One player will, no matter how many or few the points available, will buy the highest strength possible and ignore all the mental stats, hence becoming a total retard. Then they start moaning that just because they have bought Str 18 they can't afford decent Dex and Con. Without using Epic stat points how do you avoid complaints? |
| ErskineF |
Posted - 24 Feb 2009 : 00:14:07
quote:
Originally posted by Wrigs13
What you or I may know to be true does not mean he has to accept it. 
That really sucks. I would seriously consider limiting the entire group to PHB races and classes, and having them do point buy for stats.
I tend to do that anyway. I hate trying to keep up with all the scattered rule sets for the variant classes. I was so happy when I sold off all those 2e kit books. And point buy is the fairest way to assign stats. It's boring, but if people are going to be upset about getting shorted, it's the best way to go. They can all be equally upset.
|
| Wrigs13 |
Posted - 23 Feb 2009 : 22:25:53
EskineF I agree with you, I would rather have players who make characters that fit the feel of the game, and do try to encourage it. Also I think that the Vow of Poverty is as much a sacrifice for the player as for the character. No magic items ever, no hunting through dragon treasure for exciting new booty. It is a very hard choice to make.
The problem I face is more to do with preception. If one player perceives that another is better or receices favoritism then he will be unhappy. It does not matter that he could have made the same character, or that his actual character is more of a munchkin, it is just how he percieves reality. What you or I may know to be true does not mean he has to accept it. |
| ErskineF |
Posted - 23 Feb 2009 : 21:12:06
quote:
Originally posted by Wrigs13
If someone makes a character that doesn't quite fit then you have the real world choice of telling someone their carefully crafted character is no good or just ignoring the fact their character is odd and carry on. Not much of a choice with friends really.
When it comes to things like personality and ethos, a lot is determined by how the player runs the character. Encourage him not to make the character obnoxious or disruptive. If a player of mine tried to take the character in that direction, I would have to veto it. The game is supposed to be fun for everybody.
quote:
I try to guide players before sessions to avoid obvious problems before the game starts.
That's a very good idea, because you can head off a lot of problems that way. I'm not quite sure, though, what problem you anticipate from the ascetic. I had thought it was because of their vows, and the impact that those would have on the other players. I think the key there is that the ascetic try to lead by example rather than being preachy and attempting to impose his ethos on the others.
quote:
The only concern is that one of the players may be unhappy that one of the other players is better than his once he finds out.
That's a whole other problem. Is the ascetic really going to be that much more powerful than the other character? AC 38 sounds very good, but it has to be weighed against having zero magic items. It sounds to me like its balanced out by some heavy restrictions. I think that as long as you enforce the restrictions on the ascetic, the other player will probably be happy not to be in his shoes. If, however, you let the ascetic have all that power, but you turn a blind eye to the restrictions, then yeah, the other players might feel cheated.
|
| Faraer |
Posted - 23 Feb 2009 : 20:54:45
For me it's like this: If the player is trying to powergame or exploit the rules then get rid of them, let them know you won't put up with that, disallow the combination or enforce the restrictions strictly. Anything is exploitable by someone with that mindset, and all the rules-balancing in the world is trying to patch up a wound with sellotape. Rules cannot be balanced or unbalanced in isolation, only in the context of a specific campaign played by specific people. If they aren't that kind of player, the very same combination could be perfectly fine, and you don't have to pre-legislate for it in all detail unless complications come up. |
| Wrigs13 |
Posted - 23 Feb 2009 : 20:00:13
Well generally it is a case of enforced acceptance.
If someone makes a character that doesn't quite fit then you have the real world choice of telling someone their carefully crafted character is no good or just ignoring the fact their character is odd and carry on. Not much of a choice with friends really.
I try to guide players before sessions to avoid obvious problems before the game starts.
The only concern is that one of the players may be unhappy that one of the other players is better than his once he finds out.
the choice is tell him now and take the flak, or keep it secret and hope the issue is not as important later once magic items are distributed. However there is the risk that with time the sense of betrayal may increase exponentially. |
| ErskineF |
Posted - 23 Feb 2009 : 19:53:17
quote:
Originally posted by Wrigs13
Ok since the general opinion is that ascetic characters are both playable and game balanced the next question is:
Should they be discussed with the whole group before introduction?
Or is it fair to keep it a bit of a mystery from the other players?
I wouldn't do anything special for the character. If you don't require new characters to be vetted by the group, then I don't see any reason why the Ascetic should have to be vetted.
I assume that the group can walk away from a character if they decide he isn't fitting in well. How do you usually handle that?
|
| Wrigs13 |
Posted - 23 Feb 2009 : 19:30:39
Ok since the general opinion is that ascetic characters are both playable and game balanced the next question is:
Should they be discussed with the whole group before introduction?
Or is it fair to keep it a bit of a mystery from the other players? |
| Ardashir |
Posted - 20 Feb 2009 : 17:53:32
OT, but for some reason I've logn wanted to play or just write up a half-orc cleric/monk of Ilamter who takes a VoP. It seems like a good fit for some reason. |
| Kilvan |
Posted - 20 Feb 2009 : 12:39:00
quote:
Originally posted by Wrigs13
Doesn't taking Vow of Peace make the character very hard to play?
I think that I would probably enjoy more a character with Vow of Peace than with Vow of poverty, but in the end, I agree that it would be a pain for the DM, and probably for me as well at some point.
Vow of non-violence is another story, since is allows you to use any non-damaging/killing spell and non-lethal damage. It also let you fight undeads and constructs as you wish. The reward for the feat though is not very satisfying IMO (+4 DC on spells that applies).
So, I'd probably just play a pacifist character, give a lot to charity, use non-lethal damage as much as I can, but I'd take no vows forcing me to never shift from those morals. A follower of Illmater springs to mind, monk or cleric. |
| Alisttair |
Posted - 20 Feb 2009 : 12:04:11
To me it seems like a great role-playing opportunity. I haven't had the chance to experience it in game yet thogh. I had a player who was thinking about it, but we didn't get to game often enough to get to that :( |
| Wrigs13 |
Posted - 20 Feb 2009 : 09:09:22
I think that it is against the spirit of the game to blatantly buy magical supplies and then let someone else take responsibility for them.
However if 4 pc's find 100,000 gp of treasure then thats 25,000 each. If the ascetic gives his 25,000 to charity then he is upholding his vow. 
He may want to roleplay trying to convince the other pc's to give some of their money to charity but that's a different story.
If one of the other pc's decides that the ascetic dropping dead is bad for business and buys twice as many potions as he would ever need so he can supply the ascetic in times of need, then thats his choice.
If the ascetic knows this is going on is he ok with it? |
| Wrigs13 |
Posted - 20 Feb 2009 : 09:01:00
Doesn't taking Vow of Peace make the character very hard to play? |
| Rabiesbunny |
Posted - 20 Feb 2009 : 06:20:14
quote:
Originally posted by Wrigs13
AC 38? Really? How did you manage that? Is it a stacking of the various AC bonuses? On another matter which of these bonuses count for touch attacks and when your flat footed?
Well, a 9th level character has +7 to normal AC from Vow of Poverty, as well as + 1 to deflection and +1 to NA. Then, if you have Vow of Peace you gain +2 Exalted AC Bonus, as well as +2 NA and +2 Deflection. On top of that, if you have VoPoverty and VoPeace, you gain an additional stacking +2 to AC, Na and Deflection. The total +4 Exalted AC Bonus doesn't apply to touch attacks, though.
:P Finally, she has a +5 from her WIS Bonus for her monk levels and a +1 to DEX.
quote:
A PC who has taken a vow of poverty, yet has his friends purchasing and carrying magic items for his use, is very much like the latter sort of Franciscan, and no doubt the public would have the same cynical view of him. So I guess the question I would ask as a DM is whether the VoP is being taken seriously, or whether the player is trying to gain benefits without accepting the associated penalties.
Yeah, that sounds like a blatant kind of abuse of VoP. It's a powerful feat, but needs to be regulated VERY carefully. |
| ErskineF |
Posted - 20 Feb 2009 : 02:29:42
quote:
Originally posted by Wrigs13
Also on the point of magic potions, you can't own any but you can drink as many as you like as long as you sent you mate to the shop to buy them, and you con someone else into carrying them.
Doesn't quite seem the right sort of attitude. 
It violates the spirit of the rule, but there's precedent for it in the history of the Catholic Church, particularly the Franciscan friars. Francis of Assisi, being pressured to bring his followers under the governance of the church by establishing them as a monastic order, gave them one rule to follow: they had to give away all they possessed to the poor.
quote:
We call them mendicant friars because they lived mostly by begging, but in fact Francis expected his companions to work at any menial task they could before they asked for alms. He did not condemn property itself; he regarded it as a bond from which apostles should be free. [...]
The vast enterprise had to have a home office, a permanent staff, constitution, and bylaws. Administrators took the place of saints. The demon of property threatened Lady Poverty. The citizens of Assisi built a residence for the friars. Francis climbed to the roof and threw down the tiles. A few years later, when a church was being built to honor Francis, one of his followers, Brother Leo, smashed the offertory box. For this offence he was publicly whipped.
Francis became desolate and heartsick at seeing his holy anarchy made businesslike. He retreated to the mountains and spent his time in communion with God and nature. [...]
Francis died in 1226. In two years the giant basilica of Assisi was begun to house the bones of the man who in his life abandoned a hovel because he heard someone call it "his". Because the Franciscan Order was growing at epidemic speed, the church was obliged to provide headquarters for the friars. To circumvent Francis' prohibition of ownership, the church found an argument. In a bull of 1230 the pope declared: "No one is considered to own what he merely possesses, so long as he does not in conscience consider himself as owner." The brothers could then possess without owning [...]
The order broke apart. The Spiritual Franciscans, the fundamentalists who remembered Francis, held to the original ideals. The great majority accepted the necessity for regularization, for learning and scholarship, for obedience to the pope. They remained mendicants, though a friar who might not touch money was often followed by a servant rattling a money box. It was said that people feared to meet a friar as they feared to meet a robber. (The Middle Ages, Morris Bishop (pp. 166-168)
A PC who has taken a vow of poverty, yet has his friends purchasing and carrying magic items for his use, is very much like the latter sort of Franciscan, and no doubt the public would have the same cynical view of him. So I guess the question I would ask as a DM is whether the VoP is being taken seriously, or whether the player is trying to gain benefits without accepting the associated penalties.
|
| Wrigs13 |
Posted - 19 Feb 2009 : 22:16:35
Also on the point of magic potions, you can't own any but you can drink as many as you like as long as you sent you mate to the shop to buy them, and you con someone else into carrying them.
Doesn't quite seem the right sort of attitude. |
| Wrigs13 |
Posted - 19 Feb 2009 : 22:14:08
quote:
Originally posted by HawkinstheDM
Here are the specifics of what you can and cannot own (as per the Book of Exalted Deeds, pg 48):
- You may carry and use ordinary (neither magic or masterwork) simple weapons, usually just a quarterstaff that serves as a walking stick.
- You may wear simple clothes (usually just a homespun robe, possibly also including a hat and sandals) with no magical properties.
- You may carry enough food to sustain you for one day in a simple (nonmagic) sack or bag.
- You may carry and use a spell component pouch.
- You may not use any magic item of any sort, though you can benefit from magical items used on your behalf--you can drink a potion of cure serious wounds a friend gives you, receive a spell cast from a wand scroll or staff, or ride on your companion's ebony fly.
- You may not, however, "borrow" a cloak of resistance or any other magic item from a companion for even one round, nor may you yourself cast a spell from a scroll, wand or staff.
It seems rather straightforward to me.
Well yes I know that but the discusion was about what is a simple weapon? and at its most literal, why are simple weapons ok and martial weapons not ok? If there is an element of relative value then as previously stated does a priceless item have no value for the purposes of VoP? |
| Hawkins |
Posted - 19 Feb 2009 : 22:04:22
Here are the specifics of what you can and cannot own (as per the Book of Exalted Deeds, pg 48):
- You may carry and use ordinary (neither magic or masterwork) simple weapons, usually just a quarterstaff that serves as a walking stick.
- You may wear simple clothes (usually just a homespun robe, possibly also including a hat and sandals) with no magical properties.
- You may carry enough food to sustain you for one day in a simple (nonmagic) sack or bag.
- You may carry and use a spell component pouch.
- You may not use any magic item of any sort, though you can benefit from magical items used on your behalf--you can drink a potion of cure serious wounds a friend gives you, receive a spell cast from a wand scroll or staff, or ride on your companion's ebony fly.
- You may not, however, "borrow" a cloak of resistance or any other magic item from a companion for even one round, nor may you yourself cast a spell from a scroll, wand or staff.
It seems rather straightforward to me. |
| Wrigs13 |
Posted - 19 Feb 2009 : 21:29:58
Well given a logical arguement for artifacts I think it is time for some Pokemon style got to get them all antics. |
|
|
