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

[Charlaquin]

Well, usually you cant just choose to get rid of fobia

The character obviously can’t but the player can, that’s the point.

and you certainly can't just choose to be rid of supernatural compulsion.

True, though starting with a supernatural compulsion is something you’d need to work out with the DM before the start of play anyway.

A religious belief you can certainly choose to certain extent, but if that is integral part of the character concept, then the character stops being that concept.

Yes, but if the player wants to change their character concept, they should have that option.

Like sure, a wizard can in theory choose to throw away all their books, refuse to ever read any more and become a farmer. But are they still a wizard? I don't think so.

You’d have to work that out between the player and the DM, since it isn’t covered by the rules. Which in my interpretation is also how the druid armor restriction works. But if you treat it as a rule, that’s a different story. What happens is coveted by the rules. Specifically, it doesn’t happen, because the rules say your character won’t do that. That’s precisely my problem with the druid armor restriction as a rule.

Or if Batman chose to stop fighting crime whilst wearing spandex and just became a normal businessman they would no longer be Batman, and probably not a protagonist of a superhero comic.

Batman is not a character being played by players in an RPG, so this is not creating an issue of player agency.

D&D simply is built with the assumption that the players stick to the character concept informed by their class(es), and there really are no rules for them not doing so.

Unless you treat the druid armor restriction as a rule, in which case there is one (and only one) rule for them not doing so, and it’s that they just “won’t,” which takes that choice out of the player’s control.

 

[abirdcall]

This debate about vegetarians or vegans also doesn't apply here.

The intent of the Sage Advice is clear. It was used as an example of a type of people who are defined by what they will or will not do, not what they can or cannot do.

One thing this thread has shown me is the extent of the rules lawyering people will go to.

Arguing the definition of metal, that rules aren't rules, and that vegetarians eat meat is all beyond what I had previously believed people would go.

We see the same sort of thing with other rules. Assassinate, stealth, etc. People say they're confusing and poorly written when really they're just trying to gain an advantage and it's all part of the argument to that end.

When people play in good faith all of that is clear. I've played with many people now both new to TTRPGs and hobby gaming in general who fully grasp all this stuff right off the bat.

 

[abirdcall]

Again, policing food is inappropriate (also very harmful), so let's not.

It's not policing food. I agree that doing so is harmful.

I said it doesn't make someone a worse person.

Words have meaning.

If someone said they were 6 feet tall and they were actually 5 feet tall, pointing that out is not saying that taller people are better. It's also not policing their height. It's just pointing out the meaning of words.

 

[Chaosmancer]

In my campaign world there is no stricture denying them access to metal armour.

However, as a DM I like my druids to be "one with nature" and forged metal is definitely a sign of "civilization" and all its ills. Most of my worlds druids are like hermits and hide away in the forests and hills far way from the towns and cities so there is definitely an access to metal armour consideration.

Personally, I was always enamoured with the laminated armour of the invaders from Kelewan which featured in Raymond E Feists Maggician Trilogy (Awesome books) and how alien it appeared to the Midkemians. I believe this was inspired by Japanese Samurai armour which was made from laquered leather. I also remember the mythbuster testing laminated paper armour based on a 600BC Chinese design.

As others have mentioned above there are so many natural alternatives to metal armour that the question is not so much would you allow it rather why does it make sense for a druid to wear it.

I am fully behind druids who are living as hermits to have limited access to metal. 100% makes sense.

PCs are adventurers and embedded in civilization. They clearly have that access. I also like the idea of laminated paper armor... but how is chemically treated paper any less a sign of civilization than shaped metal? Paper and writing are newer than shaping metal with fire.

Again, the logic of the belief just... doesn't make sense.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Same thing really, they will mostly resort to flint rather than steel and use their spells for most of their attacks.

They know that there are possibly functionally better alternatives out there, but they eschew these in favour of natural alternatives. One of my players wanted to be a lizardman druid so we worked together to come up with a range of weapons which made sense for his race and background. His favourite being the frog poison blowdart gun and he also had a shark tooth jawbone for a knife which was quite cool.

In essence, a rock attached to a stick is still a mace.

That is cool. I like it.

I'll also note, that was the player's choice. And I feel that is important too. If a player cares about the taboo and follows it, that is way better than trying to force them to follow it via a rule.

 

[mrpopstar]

This debate about vegetarians or vegans also doesn't apply here.

The intent of the Sage Advice is clear. It was used as an example of a type of people who are defined by what they will or will not do, not what they can or cannot do.

One thing this thread has shown me is the extent of the rules lawyering people will go to.

Arguing the definition of metal, that rules aren't rules, and that vegetarians eat meat is all beyond what I had previously believed people would go.

We see the same sort of thing with other rules. Assassinate, stealth, etc. People say they're confusing and poorly written when really they're just trying to gain an advantage and it's all part of the argument to that end.

When people play in good faith all of that is clear. I've played with many people now both new to TTRPGs and hobby gaming in general who fully grasp all this stuff right off the bat.

Yes! Sometimes I feel like the natural language in which the rules are written is easier for people new to Dungeons & Dragons to comprehend than it is for us bitter veterans who are coming at it with an understanding that's distorted by the baggage of presumption and previous understanding.

 

[Chaosmancer]

It dictates your character's will to about the same degree as alignment and personality characteristics. Just play along!

Alignment and personality characteristics are 100% under player control. Unless you have found reason to tell people that they aren't allowed to play a gruff character.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Well, no. Clerics actually do receive their powers from gods and wizards actually receive their powers from magic books. These things are not optional either and they do have implications

Wrong. Clerics can recieve their powers from cosmic forces that have no will or agency, which are not gods.

Wizards can learn magic from anything that conveys knowledge. They could learn via oral traditions. Dark Sun has wizards using lengths of knotted string. I once encountered a character whose magic was written onto stone tablets. They do not require having a "book".

 

[Faolyn]

Then analogous solution to 'what happen if druid wears metal armour' would the Gm just treat their AC to be whatever it would be without that metal armour.

With a rogue using non finesse/light weapon, it's very easy to see how such a weapon wouldn't inflict a sneak attack. The rogue is clearly used to attacking in one particular way (as evidenced by their weapon proficiencies and the conditions that must be met for making a sneak attack), and a greatsword isn't conducive for that. I could possibly even allow sneak attack damage for something like a fighter/rogue, especially if the PC showed prowess in using the greatsword. It's not that much different from when my professional duelist (swashbuckler rogue who uses a rapier) character took a level in fighter in order to get the dueling fighting style.

For a druid wearing metal armor (that they're proficient in) but not getting the AC bonus... what's preventing that? Do they have some sort of DM-fiat anti-metal field on that mysteriously nullifies metallic AC and allows weapons to pass through, while at the same time not effecting the metallic weapons themselves? Can the PCs exploit this in some way?

Unlike the rogue, the reasoning behind the druid and armor is not good reasoning.

'Will not' is the rule.

Then, as I've said, it's one of the most badly-written rules in the game, as evidenced by the fact that we're in page 80 of this thread and this isn't the first thread that's been written on the topic.

Why has nothing to do it being a rule. Why would be fluff, 'will not' is the rule.

IMO, any prohibitive rule that has no in-game purpose ("tradition" isn't a purpose) and doesn't explain what happens if you break it isn't a rule worth keeping.

 

[Maxperson]

Yeah. Mechanically material based proficiencies would work just fine, but it certainly is pretty hard to rationalise what's actually going on in the fiction. How it requires different sort of training to use a similarly shaped object depending on it's material? Then again, the flat restriction also invites similar questions about what's actually going on.

There is no difference based on material. A wooden shield functions identically to a metal one. Chain wrought from the hide of a Bullete is going to require exactly the same proficiency as chain wrought from steel.

Druids have proficiency in all medium metal armors and metal shields simply by virtue of having proficiency in medium armor and shields. There's nothing in the Sage Advice and only the erroneous page 45 to say otherwise. The full proficiency rules state very clearly that they have proficiency with medium armors and shields with no set restrictions. The only restriction they have is one set by druids in the fiction that says that druids choose not to wear metal armor.