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

[Oofta]

There are exceptions to every rule. No druid is going to allow all the nature in the world to be destroyed if he could prevent it by donning metal plate mail.

I would never put my players in a catch-22 situation, so it's not an issue.

 

[J.Quondam]

Resonance cascade, followed by the druid exploding obviously.

I honestly and wholeheartedly believe that Sage Advice back in 197-whatever should have left that as the official answer. Think of what D&D could have become in the intervening decades!

 

[Maxperson]

I would never put my players in a catch-22 situation, so it's not an issue.

That avoids the issue for your game, sure. The point though remains. There exists circumstances under which druids would don metal armor in 5e. Just because you don't use them doesn't mean that they don't exist as exceptions to that "rule."

 

[abirdcall]

The thing is that in this particular case there are no limitations or consequences indicated. It's fine to impart some, obviously, but that moves it into non-RAW.

A fighter can't cast fireball because they don't have that ability. Cool.
A PC can't multiclass because GM says no multiclassing. Cool.
A PC can't be a baker, because that's not what the group is into. Cool.
A druid puts on metal armor... but no they don't! Because they won't! But what if if they do...? Well, they just won't!

It's just nonsensical as a rule, because it not only has no justification (of ability or oath or whatever); nor does it have a consequence (lose their powers, get sick or whatever.)

(For the record, btw, I tend to play by the "no metal" rule, mainly for the sake of "tradition." But I also acknowledge that 5e RAW on this is either bad, or incomplete, or just dumb.)

The consequence is that they don't get to play the game which is the same consequence as not following other rules.

It doesn't have an in game drawback for the character because it is not allowed to be done. That would be nonsensical.

 

[ECMO3]

That is a completely absurd claim.

First, Bladesingers won’t reliably have Bladesong up in any campaign I’ve been in, until around 11th level, when most campaigns are done or ending. At low level, they have it 2/day.

If you follow the guidance for 6 fights a day (and few do IME) they will be in bladesong fully half of the battles they are in at 5th level and more than that at high level.

At levels 2-4 ONLY they have it twice a day. That is one sixth of the possible bladesinger levels. If you cap it at level 12 like many campaigns it is still only one third of the levels they will play as a bladesinger. During most of the game they will have it more than twice a day

Secondly, Shield costs a spell slot and lasts at most 1 full round. So no, their AC isn’t reliably that high. And I don’t know how you figure attacks against them will reliably be at disadvantage. You’re gonna need to back that one up.

Protection from good and evil or blur will give opponents disadvantage (PGE certain types of opponents only) and every bladesinger I have seen played by both me and every other player had these spells and they were the most common leveled spells cast other than shield. At levels 2-5 it is some battles, but by 6th level it is just about every battle they are in.

Shield is only used when their already high AC is hit (typically at disadvantage) and they rarely run out.

Third, they still have garbage HP, lower attack bonus than the Druid, and no particular defense against things like Call Lightning except mitigation via more spell slots, which Druid also has, and the BS has no self healing.

Call lighting is not "melee" combat. I said a bladesinger would beat a Druid in MELEE at any level.

Since you brought it up though, the math does not support this statement.

A 6th-level Druid with an 18 W who casts call lightning on a bladesinger with an 18 Dex is going to typically do 6 DPR (8 DPR with no save or or 4 with one an an 11 needed to save). When the bladesinger hits him the next turn, the druid himself is going to take an additional 3.5 lightning damage or up to 10.5 if she chooses to use a higher level slot to absorb it. This in addition to the 20+ in weapon and thunder damage he is going to take with 2 hits.

And the Druid doesn’t need to go MAD as badly as the Bladesinger does, so the Druid is going to resist things like Hold Person more easily.

Again Hold Person is not MELEE. That said counterspell is more effective against hold person than a 20 wisdom is.

Any Druid subclass could gank a Bladesinger, unless the BS hides behind some summons and acts like a normal Wizard, in which case they’d be better off as an Abjuration Wizard. The only subclasses BS can stand up to reliably are the melee subclasses, and the Druid is still gonna win 7 or more times out of 10.

The discussion was about MELEE but even a Druid who resorts to spells is going to typically be on the short end of the stick because the wizard has better spells.

The BS if fun. It’s not in the top tier of any category but AC, though, and even that is situational.

In melee AC is extremely important. That said, due to their unique extra attack they are pretty darn high in damage as well and above 10th level they can take more damage over the course of a battle the vast majority of classes. Now there are a lot of caveats there, but that is the math.

Now, MC builds using Bladesinger can’t be really powerful in melee, as long as you don’t mind losing out on greater magical power overall, (and I wouldn’t. I signed up to play a gish, not a mage), but then so can Druid MCs like taking Beastmaster Ranger (with Tasha’s options) or Monk (all your monk stuff works in wild shape RAW) or War Cleric, or nearly any Fighter.

Bladesinger is going to be better in melee if he does not MC at all because of the bladesinger extra attack, song of defense and at very high levels song of victory. These three abilities are a strong disincentive to multiclass at any phase of a bladesinger's career, even if he wants to play a pure melee style. I guess if you are playing at very high levels you could multiclass to fighter (for AS and maneuvers) after 14th level but you lose access to those very high level spells if you do that. That said this would bump your melee a little bit if that was what you were after.

In terms of damage, Bladesinger extra attack is close to 3 attacks at 6th level and because the cantrip portion it scales and stays ahead of other classes that are limited to 2 attacks with extra attacks. The extra attack gets comparatively weaker for other classes as levels progress because their attacks do not scale as well as the bladesinger extra attack (except for Fighters). Also a substantial portion of the bladesinger damage is magical, overcoming resistances. A bladesinger at 6th level can reliably deal 20.5 DPR, with no hit penalty, limited use abilities or special circumstances to land that damage. With certain stipulations met he can regularly boost that to 27-30 without tapping limited use abilities and it goes up from there at higher levels.

But single class? Druid wins.

Not in melee he doesn't

 

[Swarmkeeper]

Alrighty.
So say a player tries it anyway, and says their druid decides to put on metal armor. (Just assume, for example, the player is one of those like some in this thread who interpret the rule differently than you.)
What does the GM do?

This, as an example.

It would be great if things like this got covered at the time of character generation and/or session 0 - but we know that not every case is covered - or even can be covered - during such times.

Therefore, when something like this does come up during play, I would hope the GM would make a ruling (whether the same ruling as, or a different ruling than, in the linked post) and game play would continue without any fuss one way or another. If there is a need to discuss further, it would happen between sessions.

 

[Maxperson]

This, as an example.

It would be great if things like this got covered at the time of character generation and/or session 0 - but we know that not every case is covered - or even can be covered - during such times.

Therefore, when something like this does come up during play, I would hope the GM would make a ruling (whether the same ruling as, or a different ruling than, in the linked post) and game play would continue without any fuss one way or another. If there is a need to discuss further, it would happen between sessions.

Okay, but that post really doesn't answer the question. You can wear armor when non-proficient.

 

[Wolfram stout]

The consequence is that they don't get to play the game which is the same consequence as not following other rules.

It doesn't have an in game drawback for the character because it is not allowed to be done. That would be nonsensical.

But, the rule is character facing. If I misread my dice on purpose that is player cheating and is correctly dealt with by kicking me out the door. This rule is that druids, all and every one, will never wear metal armor. Rather than a Pc, what happens if an NPC is tricked or bespelled into wearing it?

I admit my interest is only due to the silliness of the missing in world consequence. Exploding druids is a fine answer in my book, I just want something to happen in world when it happens.

Maybe the druid gets violently sick?

 

[J.Quondam]

The consequence is that they don't get to play the game which is the same consequence as not following other rules.

It doesn't have an in game drawback for the character because it is not allowed to be done. That would be nonsensical.

(Please forgive me, because it sounds like I'm trolling, but I'm not. I'm genuinely interested.)

So it's "not allowed" by... who? Presumably by some authority, perhaps the Circles or the Nature Goddess or whatever? How exactly are they preventing this thing from happening? Why doesn't the rule explain (or even hint at) this? And why not just have the rule more completely explain what happens in the event a druid does choose to use metal? Can the druid never be tricked? (eg, "Here, my freshly charmed friend, why not use this metal shield so as to better defend me, a helpless dryad!") Is the druid never allowed a moment of doubt? (eg, "That sweet metal armor sure would help against this terrible foe!")

This is what I mean when I say it's a nonsensical "half rule" that doesn't justify itself or offer consequences. Yes, it's arguably clear, and yes there are meta-game ways to handle it (eg, eject the player*, yikes!). But wow! what a frightfully unsatisfying outcome. Just bend a clearly bad rule and run with the more interesting outcome.

* Although... YES, if the player is just being contrary, then boot 'em. I've got no issue with that.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

Okay, but that post really doesn't answer the question.

Doesn't it?

You can wear armor when non-proficient.

Yes - and then what happens? (hint: PHB pg 144)