D&D 5E Can your Druids wear metal armor?

[Yaarel]

There is Dragon Scale Mail from the DMG.

I doublechecked − made from actual dragons! So, nonmetal. It is ambiguous whether the +1 AC is magical or not. Probably yes?

Dragons shed their skin like snakes do. The armor need not kill a dragon to make one. A Druid could be a friend of a dragon, and acquire the valuable dragonskin.

 

[J.Quondam]

I doublechecked − made from actual dragons! So, nonmetal. It is ambiguous whether the +1 AC is magical or not. Probably yes?

Dragons shed their skin like snakes do. The armor need not kill a dragon to make one. A Druid could be a friend of a dragon, and acquire the valuable dragonskin.

That's actually specifically mentioned in the description of dragonscale mail....

"Sometimes dragons collect their cast-off scales and gift them to humanoids."​

 

[Oofta]

I agree with this: the Druids are proficient with ALL medium armor types, but not ones made of metal. I agree, it is pretty obvious distinction.

Where we perhaps disagree is, what happens if the Druid gains metal armor proficiency from an other source, like multiclassing, race, feat, or so on. This more customized Druid character can learn to cast Druid spells while wearing a proficient metal armor.

Which is what I'm saying. A druid will not wear metal armor even if they gain proficiency in all armors from some other source.

 

[Oofta]

It's different because in the book they spell out specific mechanical detriments to doing the thing that the rule prohibits. The publishers of the book have instead said specifically that there really is no reason not to allow druids to use metal armor.

They could very easily have said that druids are proficient with all light armor and medium that is not made of metal. They could have said that druids are proficient with light and medium armor AND that if they wear armor made of metal or wield a metal shield, they suffer penalties as described for a character that uses armor with which they are not proficient. Either wording would have been fine and impossible to argue with. It even includes the penalty that a lot of the strict no metal contingent would like to impose (no spellcasting) That's not what they chose to do.

True. They decided to explicitly state that they will not wear metal armor, even though they are proficient with shields and medium armor. Almost as if getting half plate that's not made of medal is a perfectly legitimate option.

It's not about proficiency, it's about religious taboos. There's no need to have penalties for wearing metal armor because they will not wear metal armor. And round and round it goes.

 

[Yaarel]

That's actually specifically mentioned in the description of dragonscale mail....

Because the nonmetal requirement has nothing to do with mechanical gaming balance, it seems safe to for the DM to give a more common simpler version of this magic item.

For example, perhaps a wyrmling sheds skin that can be worked to be mechanically equivalent to regular metal scale armor. This normalish armor can be available at low level, if befriending a dragon or killing a hostile dragon. I would make the character work for it, but be happy to award it.

Meanwhile an ancient wyrm might have skin that produces a highly magical item − even an artifact for the highest levels.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Clearly, wotc hasn't been incredibly strict with this sort of thing this edition. This whole armor thing is them having the courage to include the tiniest of tiny nudges. To me, the details of specific scenarios are not as important as the general theme. I don't allow people to "gatcha" me with "RAW" arguments, because i don't see that as in the spirit of the game.

I'd say it isn't a nudge at all. Because it doesn't make sense. If it was in the text that "druids typically loathe the use of metal tools and weapons" then it would be a nudge, because then it would be consistent.

As it stands, we have people declaring it is a rule that no druid can wear metal armor, to the point that wearing metal armor means you are not a druid, while druids are not even questioned in using metal in literally every other circumstance.

Take this for an example. A metal shield weighs 6 lbs. A Druid WILL NOT use a metal shield, despite having proficiency. A druid with access to pike's has no issue using 18 lbs of metal as a weapon. What is the practical difference here?

 

[Oofta]

Funny enough, the most powerful healing spells in the game, like Regeneration, Clone, Wish, etcetera, are all Wizard spells.

Regenerate is not a wizard spell. Clone has nothing to do with healing and if you want to claim that a 9th level spell that can mimic an 8th level spell or lower makes them powerful healers ... okay. We'll just have to disagree on that.

 

[abirdcall]

Because the nonmetal requirement has nothing to do with mechanical gaming balance, it seems safe to for the DM to give a more common simpler version of this magic item.

For example, perhaps a wyrmling sheds skin that can be worked to be mechanically equivalent to regular metal scale armor. This normalish armor can be available at low level, if befriending a dragon or killing a hostile dragon. I would make the character work for it, but be happy to award it.

Meanwhile an ancient wyrm might have skin that produces a highly magical item − even an artifact for the highest levels.

All magic items exist outside of "game balance".

Items can let characters do and have anything.

It is perfectly within the rules for example for the whole party to find mithral full plate +3 that can be used without proficiency.

 

[Oofta]

I'd say it isn't a nudge at all. Because it doesn't make sense. If it was in the text that "druids typically loathe the use of metal tools and weapons" then it would be a nudge, because then it would be consistent.

As it stands, we have people declaring it is a rule that no druid can wear metal armor, to the point that wearing metal armor means you are not a druid, while druids are not even questioned in using metal in literally every other circumstance.

Take this for an example. A metal shield weighs 6 lbs. A Druid WILL NOT use a metal shield, despite having proficiency. A druid with access to pike's has no issue using 18 lbs of metal as a weapon. What is the practical difference here?

One is armor that you're encasing your body with that you will not use if you're a druid and the other is a weapon which you have no problem using.

 

[Northern Phoenix]

I'd say it isn't a nudge at all. Because it doesn't make sense. If it was in the text that "druids typically loathe the use of metal tools and weapons" then it would be a nudge, because then it would be consistent.

As it stands, we have people declaring it is a rule that no druid can wear metal armor, to the point that wearing metal armor means you are not a druid, while druids are not even questioned in using metal in literally every other circumstance.

Take this for an example. A metal shield weighs 6 lbs. A Druid WILL NOT use a metal shield, despite having proficiency. A druid with access to pike's has no issue using 18 lbs of metal as a weapon. What is the practical difference here?

It's all about the look and feel bro.