Following the rules printed in the book is "absolutely morally abhorrent"?
Don't like the rule? Change it when you're running a game.
It's clearly spelled out under proficiencies.
Armor: Light armor, medium armor, shields (druids will not wear armor or use shields made of metal)
There does not need to be a mechanical penalty, they will not do it. Ipso facto, if your character is wearing metal armor they are not a druid.
Don't like it, change the rules. Playing at my table and don't like it? Discuss how to get alternative non-metal armor (i.e. dragonscale armor), don't wear metal armor or find a different table.
my list of grievances to present to all of my future DMs.
I'll admit I had not thought much about the druids and metal thing. It probably should be an all or nothing type thing. I'm still a little peeved they let clerics have edged weapons!
However, I have to ask, do you really present lists of grievances to your DMs?
I am not sure how I would react to that. It amuses me greatly to think of a new player coming to my table and saying "Here are my list of grievances."
Actually... my recollection is this was not the case in early editions. I don't have my books handy so I can't say for certain, but I'm pretty sure that there was at least one of those early editions which simply said "Wizards can't wear armor." No consequences for wearing armor were spelled out. If you tried to put on armor, it fell off because wizard.Wizards in every edition of the game have been able to don any armor they wish, there'd just be penalties if they didn't otherwise have the training to do so.
It's clearly spelled out under proficiencies.
Armor: Light armor, medium armor, shields (druids will not wear armor or use shields made of metal)
There does not need to be a mechanical penalty, they will not do it. Ipso facto, if your character is wearing metal armor they are not a druid.
Don't like it, change the rules. Playing at my table and don't like it? Discuss how to get alternative non-metal armor (i.e. dragonscale armor), don't wear metal armor or find a different table.
there you see. that is the reason. Druids are old fashion and primitive. The rule was good enough back in AD&D it is good enough today. Now shut up! Put Lawerence Welk on. Feed my prunes and change my depends.Actually... my recollection is this was not the case in early editions. I don't have my books handy so I can't say for certain, but I'm pretty sure that there was at least one of those early editions which simply said "Wizards can't wear armor." No consequences for wearing armor were spelled out. If you tried to put on armor, it fell off because wizard.
I suppose it's appropriate that druids would be the one class continuing to use a silly, primitive rule that every other class moved on from several editions ago.
It is quite easily possible to deceive without lying or cheating. Consider, for example, the concept of the feint. I don't recall any historical or fictional circumstance where feinting would be considered dishonorable.Sure, and it's clearly spelled out under the Paladin of Devotion's tenants that they don't lie or cheat, but they can learn or use the Deception skill and they're still a Paladin.
It is quite easily possible to deceive without lying or cheating. Consider, for example, the concept of the feint. I don't recall any historical or fictional circumstance where feinting would be considered dishonorable.