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

[Vaalingrade]

changing/ignoring them on the fly without consulting the other players first might not be it.

It is a skill far too few train up.

Tabletop games are just full of garbage rules apparently there either because the designers are flawed humans who also make mistakes, or to test the DM/GM/ST's resolve to change the rules on the fly as dumb stuff springs out of the weeds to latch onto the campaign's face and lay eggs in its gut.

 

[Undrave]

What I'm trying to say is that there is a proper way to change the rules...and changing/ignoring them on the fly without consulting the other players first might not be it.

Sometimes you might have to. Especially something as minor and consequence free as this one. It's way better to make a judgement call NOW and revise it later than to grind the game to a halt and destroy all momentum.

It's fine to say later "I made up that call about X earlier, what did you guys think and what can we do going forward?"

Just because a DM rules one way doesn't mean they're not contractually obligated to always rule the same situation that way forever. It's perfectly fine to walk back your rulings so long as you explain yourself and you don't do it at a moment where it'll be an issue.

It is a skill far too few train up.

Tabletop games are just full of garbage rules apparently there either because the designers are flawed humans who also make mistakes, or to test the DM/GM/ST's resolve to change the rules on the fly as dumb stuff springs out of the weeds to latch onto the campaign's face and lay eggs in its guts

Yeah, not all improvised rulings need to be a BIG DEAL. They can just happen. DMs are supposed to make judgement calls all the time.

 

[CleverNickName]

Just because a DM rules one way doesn't mean they're not contractually obligated to always rule the same situation that way forever. It's perfectly fine to walk back your rulings so long as you explain yourself and you don't do it at a moment where it'll be an issue.

Of course not. But consistency is a good thing, if only so the players know what to expect from you, and understand how to play the game you're running. That's what rules are for.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Then provide easily accessible, non-metal armors that are just as good mechanically. Poof. Problem gone.

Well, new problem because those armors are mechanically superior to their metal counterparts, but I'm sure you don't have an issue with the fighter and the paladin wearing non-metal armor, right?

I don't have issue with them wearing non-metal armours, but yes, for consistent world building reasons non-metal armours that offer equal protection than metal armours cannot be particularly common if you want classic medieval fantasy setting where metal armour is widely used. So such high-tier non-metal medium armour must be somewhat rare, perhaps even magical. And that's is perfectly fine. Seriously, many classes don't get any armour at all, the druids are not unfairly punished.

 

[Undrave]

Of course not. But consistency is a good thing, if only so the players know what to expect from you, and understand how to play the game you're running. That's what rules are for.

And sometimes the rules are no help at all. In those case, a snap decision is generally better so you don't stop mid-action to have a condensed version of this thread. Wait until the session is over to talk it over. Maybe the players were fine with your snap judgement, maybe not, but you'll know what to do next time it comes up.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Proficiencies are fairly binary. IF you have it, but aren't allowed to use it... that is identical to them being removed.

Effectively yes. But such limitations may exist. You have an issue with monks too?

 

[Vaalingrade]

Seriously, many classes don't get any armour at all, the druids are not unfairly punished.

Sure. They're just being forced to have a mindset without player input.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Thinking more on this in terms of people wanting to preserve the tradition, but also making this more palatable (as well as thinking about space concerns) I wonder if people would find this change acceptable.

Armor: Light armor, medium armor, shields (druids traditionally will not wear armor or use shields made of metal)

I think this A) highlights it being a choice and B) still gives hooks for those people who want to follow tradition. And it is a single word, which shouldn't ruin space concerns.

No this is terrible if it is not meant to be binding. If it is just a choice, it literally mechanically rewards you for going against the theme. You can either be a traditional druid... or not and get better AC. It's like if monk martial arts worked with all weapons and all armours, gave them proficiency with such, and then just in parenthesis noted what the traditional monk weapons are and that monks traditionally wear no armour.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Well, yes. It's kind of the DM's job to uphold the rules. Even the stupid ones.

That is most emphatically not the DM's job. Not even the good rules. The DM's job is to facilitate satisfying play. The rules are explicitly there to serve the DM in that endeavor.

 

[ECMO3]

So the more I think about it; the "rule" says specifically "metal". Steel and Bronze are both alloys, technically neither of these is a metal. So steel half plate and bronze half plate should be fine and relatively common..

I think Druids can comply with the letter of the law, and appease mother nature and others in their order by ensuring they select armor made of alloys off the rack instead of those made of pure iron or pure tin or any other pure metal element. I would imagine most armors fall into this category already.

I don't know where mithril or adamantine armor would fall in this as neither of these is actually on the periodic table IRL. If they are actual elements and are in the metal portion of the table then they would logically be banned, but if they are alloys like steel and not elements they would presumably be allowed.