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

[Oofta]

Yeah, this. If you say to a player “your character can’t wear that chain shirt because they’re a druid,” that’s a house rule because the “rule,” such as it is, says “will not,” not “can not.” To be consistent with what it says, you would have to say “your character won’t wear that chain shirt, because they’re a druid,” which is a clear violation of player agency. If you allow them to wear it but impose some sort of penalty for doing so, you preserve player agency, but you’re creating a house rule to do so (and to be clear, there’s nothing wrong with that).

There are only two valid conclusions we can draw from these premises: either “druids will not wear heavy armor” isn’t a rule, or the rules of D&D 5e violate player agency. I can’t imagine the latter is the intent, especially given that Sage Advice clarifies that it’s just meant as a flavorful thing. Therefore I must conclude that it is not intended to be a rule.

If you want to follow the rules and have your PC wear metal armor, don't play a druid. No player agency harmed.

 

[Chaosmancer]

So what you’re saying is … we need more awesome “rules” like this!

I’ll work on the lawful stupid paladin. You can have the “no-edged weapons” clerics. We need to deputize someone to write up a rule to keep the Monks out of the flaming oil! Oh, and no bards.

Brilliant!

I know you are being a bit tongue in cheek, but I want to make sure my position is clear.

Armor made out of beetle carapace or bulette plating? I find that cool. I've had rogues try and skin wyverns and displacer beasts because they think the hides would give them special abilities.

Forcing druids to be the only class that HAS to go on a quest and do this just for bog-standard armor that has no special properties? That is a bad rule, and it serves no purpose. Even people who are on about "the theme of the class" need to recognize that there are plenty of themes that metal armor serves for specific druids. The restriction is non-sensical as well, since it also includes metal shields for no reason that any one has ever addressed or explained.

 

[Chaosmancer]

The narrative lever is that it says a Druid will not wear metal armor. Wearing armor doesn't make them an ex-druid, but they have to stop being a druid before they can wear metal armor. It's crappy, and I'd sure as hell change it, but it's not unclear.

They also "will not" use a metal shield. So, if they want to pick up the cleric's shield to look at the symbol do they need to temporarily revoke their druidic ways?

Maybe it is fine as long as they aren't using it in combat, or strapping it to their arm? What if they were knocked out and in Spartan style the fighter used their massive shield to help carry the druid's body, would they have to repent? Can they carry armor and shields, as long as they don't wear them personally?

We don't know. We have a vague thing telling me that my star druid dwarf will never use meteoric iron from the stars to make shields and armor to wear. Fully fine with making crowns, axes, staves, bracelets, rings, pendants, face masks, gloves, hammers, ect ect ect. Just he will not wear armor or shields, because those are bad. Because they are made of metal. From the stars that he worships.... because that is theme that makes sense?

 

[TwoSix]

Druid armor is one of the main reasons I have a house rule that any character can trade in their armor proficiencies for Unarmored Defense.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Yes, the rules do. Verbatum. I don't understand the confusion here, it's literally in black and white.

Sage Advice isn't an official rule. It is exactly what it says in the title: advice. That said: there's nothing wrong with using Sage Advice at your table if you want, even if it's not "rules as written."

It was written by the guy who wrote the rule, who stated that they did not write the rule to be prohibitive. The person who wrote the rule said, directly, that they absolutely can wear metal armor, just that traditionally they choose not to.

You have taken that traditional view of a specific theme, and applied it to force a player to do something they otherwise had zero interest in doing. First by making up a narrative that makes no sense, then by stopping the game and pulling them aside, and while that worked and you prevented the player from using the magical armor they had put on, you also admitted you would have retconned that armor to have not been metal if they insisted.

Because the player's choice didn't matter. Keeping the theme you like and that is non-binding even by the rules of the game as stated by the designer of the game himself, directly, was what mattered.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Just as equal as equating armor restrictions as "straight jacket" and inhibiting "player agency". In both cases, there is a "restrictive fluff-rule" with no explicit adjudication and in both cases it could very by table - and be acceptable. But hyperbole seems to the funnest way to argue here.

I do believe that murderering and mutilating people is seen as a bit different than strapping 6 lbs of steel to your arm. Especially when you can wear and use far more than six pounds of steel, as long as it isn't a shield or armor.

There is no restriction on druid's wearing or using metal in any other way, except for armor and shields. And that "restriction" has been stated to just be a thematic holdover from older editions that is in no way binding.

 

[Oofta]

..."restriction" has been stated to just be a thematic holdover from older editions

Maybe. Just like much of D&D

that is in no way binding.

Only if you decide that the rules in the PHB do not apply to your game.

 

[Chaosmancer]

You can complain it doesn't make sense, but, does it really make any less sense than every druid in the multiverse having the same other class features in common?

They don't, unless you mean only the class features and not the subclass features.... and even then they still don't. Because the Archdruid from Volo's and the Druid from the MM do not share all the class features of a baseline druid.

Or the fact that every cleric has the same basic features in common?

And again, they don't. Volo's gives us the Kraken Priest and the War Priest, and they don't have turn undead. So, definitive evidence that not all clerics share the same basic features. Also, clerics pick their domain at level 1, meaning from the word go they are different.

I mean, yes, it surely rankles more, but, make less sense?

Yes.

One thing that constantly bugs me about this conversation is that people have put forth this idea "it is a religious taboo, it doesn't have to make sense". And, I'm sorry, but religious practices tend to be internally consistent. Things that may appear to make no sense, are logical when following that internal logic.

Druids not wearing metal armor and not using metal shields, but being fine to use metal in every single other circumstance is not consistent. Heck, with Tasha's I could have a druid with a metal prosthetic leg and that is breaking no rules. (Actually, kind of a cool idea for a circle of the forge druid. Noted) It carries no consistency at all.

 

[Chaosmancer]

True. The players can wear what they want. Rules however prevent druid characters from wearing metal armour.

No, they do not. And please, I get that pendantry can be funny, but can we not make a big deal over people mixing the term "player" and "character"? We all know what we mean.

You're massively misinterpreting the sage advice. Crawford at no point says it is not a rule, they merely explain why it is a rule.

Nope.

Sage Advice: Druids don’t lack the ability to wear metal armor. They choose not to wear it.

If it is a choice, then it is something that I can choose. If I can choose to change what I wear, then nothing prevents me from doing so.

As noted, alternate material is one of the minor quirk for magical items. So that at least is an existing rule.

So druids wearing non-metal armors are required to get magical armors? Or are you saying that because in the DMG they say magical gear can be made out of strange materials that the PHB contains breastplate made out of bones?

I would have no issue with a druid subclass lifting the no-metal restriction. What I have an issue with is druids becoming de facto metal half-plate wearers as a default.

Because that is somehow bad? It doesn't make druids any less druidic. I know. I've been playing where druids can wear metal armor if they want for years, people barely even notice. Because the druid is defined by their beliefs and actions, not by some random restriction that their shield must be made from the heartwood of a tree instead of from steel, because somehow that is better and more natural.

 

[Vaalingrade]

If a player has their PC put on metal armor, I know that PC is not a druid no matter what their character sheet says because druids will not wear metal armor.

Just a shapeshifting nature priest

Just like if the Hogfather is killed the sun will not rise the next morning, just a flaming ball of gas.