D&D 5E Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented

lingual · Jun 25, 2019

Cant believe some ppl here would actually quit a game if there druid weren't allowed to prance about the woods in full plate armor. Rules lawyering players are so annoying. Good riddance then!

cbwjm · Jun 25, 2019

lingual said:
Cant believe some ppl here would actually quit a game if there druid weren't allowed to prance about the woods in full plate armor. Rules lawyering players are so annoying. Good riddance then!

I also think a lot of people can't believe that there are DMs that would kick out a player who wants their druid to use metal armour.

5ekyu · Jun 25, 2019

Maxperson said:
Um, so that's not even a rule. It's just one line of fluff on choices druids make. If you're going to claim that a rule was made that makes it impossible for a druid to so much as don metal armor, at least use the ones from 1st to 3rd edition. Those are at least rules.

Sure. This is clear, too. If my dad had said to me when I was a kid, "You will not go outside." and I was feeling rebellious, I would go outside anyway. It's just a choice and I can CHOOSE to go against it. See how that works?[/FONT][/COLOR]

First it us a rule. Not sure how it can be seen otherwise.

As for you disobeying your Dad, absolutely, I get that.

It's just like how in DnD a GM can choose for their game to not use the druid armor rule, or the cleric armor rules or the multi-class restrictions.

But, at most tables, that's a far different kind of choice than a player at that table deciding to not play by the rules that are agreed to order by the GM by declaring it in play, as opposed to discussing it in a context of rules change.

A player can declare that his halfling flies across the chasm, even tho they have no actual way to do so at that moment. The GM can then describe the results.

See how that works?

Maxperson · Jun 25, 2019

Sacrosanct said:
Druids won’t wear armor, and it was explained why. Because of their ethos. That’s literally the same thing as a principal. Good lord...

Never seen someone go against their beliefs before? I have. It's really common.

And yes, a DM can tell you that you can’t, because it’s the DMs world and game.

Tyrants don't keep players long.

There’s no explicit rule saying I can’t physically move a battleship 4 zones in Axis and Allies, but that doesn’t mean I can.

This False Equivalence again? Those ships cannot move that far. It's not possible. Druids are capable of putting on metal armor. It is possible.

5ekyu · Jun 25, 2019

cbwjm said:
I also think a lot of people can't believe that there are DMs that would kick out a player who wants their druid to use metal armour.

While obviously there can be most any type of behavior, I dont know of any GM eho would kick a player out for *wanting* their druid to wear metal armor.

I can see it as more likely to occur to players who *insist* and get argumentative or insulting about it if told no.

Me? I am a "say yes unless there is a compelling reason to say no" guy do in my games I added special "banded armor" (lacquered and treated wood originally elven), shell and chitin based armors and so on. If a player specifically wanted metal, my response would be that it was OK if and only if they gave me background and story driven basis for their charscter that was, in fact, compelling, integral to their charscter and defining. (Basically it adds more to the game and adds to the world in consistent story spawning ways.)

But a position paper on "smithing vs tanning - which is more natural?" would not make the cut.

Maxperson · Jun 25, 2019

5ekyu said:
First it us a rule. Not sure how it can be seen otherwise.

Because it's not an instruction. It's a choice. If it was a rule, they would say "can't." They don't, because it's not a rule.

It's just like how in DnD a GM can choose for their game to not use the druid armor rule, or the cleric armor rules or the multi-class restrictions.

And just like my druid can decide to put on a set of metal armor to sneak into a castle. It's my PC's choice, not the DM's.

A player can declare that his halfling flies across the chasm, even tho they have no actual way to do so at that moment. The GM can then describe the results.

See how that works?

Yep! It works completely unlike druids putting on metal armor. You see, halflings are physically incapable of flying across the chasm on their own, but druids are 100% capable of just putting on metal armor. False Equivalences are false.

Maxperson · Jun 25, 2019

lingual said:
Cant believe some ppl here would actually quit a game if there druid weren't allowed to prance about the woods in full plate armor. Rules lawyering players are so annoying. Good riddance then!

Why would you play under a tyrant? And you reeaaaally need to look up Rules Lawyering. The only people here engaging in that are the ones claiming that it's physically impossible for druids to put on metal armor.

Maxperson · Jun 25, 2019

cbwjm said:
I also think a lot of people can't believe that there are DMs that would kick out a player who wants their druid to use metal armour.

Heh! Not even that much. I'm proposing just donning it long enough to sneak into a castle. That's apparently enough to give these guys fits.

5ekyu · Jun 25, 2019

Maxperson said:
Because it's not an instruction. It's a choice. If it was a rule, they would say "can't." They don't, because it's not a rule.

And just like my druid can decide to put on a set of metal armor to sneak into a castle. It's my PC's choice, not the DM's.

Yep! It works completely unlike druids putting on metal armor. You see, halflings are physically incapable of flying across the chasm on their own, but druids are 100% capable of just putting on metal armor. False Equivalences are false.

Why is that halfling incapable of flying across the chasm? Is it perhaps that there is a rule to that effect the players all play by?

Why epnt that druid put on armor? Is it that there is a rule the players agreed to to that effect?

See how that works?

As for you personally deciding that including the word "wont" (or "will not") disqualifies something as being a rule, you certainly can choose that for your table play. But for the 5e PHB there does not seem to be such a definition made.

Maxperson · Jun 25, 2019

5ekyu said:
Why is that halfling incapable of flying across the chasm? Is it perhaps that there is a rule to that effect the players all play by?

Why epnt that druid put on armor? Is it that there is a rule the players agreed to to that effect?

See how that works?

Yep. The halfling rule still works completely differently from the druid "rule." One says halflings only have a walking speed and shows them built like small humans, physically incapable of flight. The other fails to say anything about druids physically being unable to put on metal armor. There is no explanation in 1e, 2e, 3e or 5e that says why druids don't wear metal armor, except for how it affects their magical abilities(1e and 3e). If you can point me to something that says that druids are physically incapable of putting on metal armor, your equivalence will cease to be false. Can you show that to me?

As for you personally deciding that including the word "wont" (or "will not") disqualifies something as being a rule, you certainly can choose that for your table play. But for the 5e PHB there does not seem to be such a definition made.

You do understand that "won't wear" means it's a choice they make, right?