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

[mrpopstar]

I knew I was going to get it wrong however I did it. Thanks.

And that is an important point... different words applying differently in different contexts.

It's one of those things you forever have to clarify with your Protestant friends who are deeply confused by what appears to be Catholic idolatry. LOL

 

[Maxperson]

I 100%, no, I 100,000% agree with this. But here is the thing.

If a player doesn't care about the Druid metal taboo... then they aren't going to care. No matter how many rules and restrictions you put on them, they aren't going to care. At best, you just annoy them.

So, why not make it a choice? Why not limit this to a choice made by specific druidic orders? There is a reason the term "orthodox" exists. Different people emphasize their beliefs in different manners. If your druid wants to emphasize the importance of not using metal to defend yourself, that's fine. If your druid wants to emphasize a disgust for metal in general really work to remove all of it from their life, that's fine too.

The druid taboo is too set for me to get rid of. It has been around too long and is too strong of a taboo to just drop. That said, I'm never going to tell a player no he can't wear metal armor if he's a druid. He can make the personal choice of how important it is to him. There will absolutely be in-fiction consequences, though. Druids will be very bothered by the sacrilege, and while he may find some that will endure him, most will treat him as an outcast. If he talks to nature spirits, fey, etc., they will have negative perception of him, perhaps causing him to have disadvantage socially when dealing with them. And so on.

I haven't yet decided if I'm going to put back in the metal cancels magical abilities from 1e, but if I do it won't be in the campaign that I just started. I have a druid in the game and I'm not going to make that change after a character has already started without it. And if I do put it back in, players will know about it before choosing to play a druid.

 

[Maxperson]

Because it isn't my personal houserule. Mystery solved.



So, why is there a rule forcing and enforcing a Druid to make a personal choice? Why are rules that enforce personaly religious choices even rules?



Nope. He was talking about "typically". And frankly, Crawford isn't an idiot. He knows full and well what happened in 3.X and 4e. He knows that druids would be given armors made out of alternative materials. They designed the class to explicitly allow that to happen, why wouldn't they include that in the balance?

Druids getting alternate armor types happened from 1e on. The DMs I played with didn't make it easy, but a druid could get them if he really tried.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

What would you say if the DM responded:

“I can buy that. But traditionally, druids are restricted by a strong taboo that operates to reduce their otherwise considerable power (full spellcasting, shapechanging and decent martial skills). What restriction does your druid operate under that is equally limiting to not wearing metal armor?”

I can't speak for anyone else, but I'd raise an eyebrow, and tell them that the perception that Druids need such a restriction is entirely false, as supported by the Sage Advice clarification that lifting the restrcition has no balance issues, so no, I'm not cool with finding some other untested restriction to arbitrarily add to my understanding of this order of Druids and of my character to accommodate a fluff statement that exists to make the game slightly more familiar to older gamers.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

They didn't They designed it around the rules, which include half plate.

And druid prohibition against wearing it.

There is literally nothing in any book to "enforce" the choice. It would require some sort of mechanic to do that.

Yes there is. That you're unable to follow rules of the game doesn't change that.

I've already shown you the math. It's literally impossible for druids not to be balanced for half plate. 19=19. And the rules allow druids to wear metal half plate. The rule is that medium armor proficiency gives proficiency with all armors in that category.

I mean if you assume that druids have dex 20. I wouldn't.

Druids lacking any sort of qualifier to remove proficiency are allowed by RAW to wear metal half plate. It's only the taboo of "will not wear metal armor," which is a personal in-fiction druid choice that "prevents" them. Nothing actually enforces that choice, though, so it can be broken if the druid feels that it's important enough.

I No it can't. Not without GM permission. It is a rule in the game, you can't just ignore rules. But we've been over this for countless of pages, you don't believe in rules so it is pointless to continue discussion about rules.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Because it isn't my personal houserule. Mystery solved.

Of course it is. Under actual rules druids do not wear metal armour and there is a limited amount of non-metal armours. That's the RAW, anything else is houserules.

So, why is there a rule forcing and enforcing a Druid to make a personal choice? Why are rules that enforce personaly religious choices even rules?

I am not discussing 'why' with you, as we both know you're not gonna get it. But it is a rule, and rule which the designers put there intentionally, knowing what it means.

Nope. He was talking about "typically". And frankly, Crawford isn't an idiot. He knows full and well what happened in 3.X and 4e. He knows that druids would be given armors made out of alternative materials. They designed the class to explicitly allow that to happen, why wouldn't they include that in the balance?

Sure. They totally intentionally put rules in the game that they assumed no one to follow and then instead of balancing the game based on the actual rules, they balanced it on potential houserules that people might come up with!

 

[Faolyn]

And druid prohibition against wearing it.

So the real question is, why wasn't that taboo brought up anywhere in the druid's actual description? One or two sentences would be sufficient.

 

[J.Quondam]

I 100%, no, I 100,000% agree with this. But here is the thing.

If a player doesn't care about the Druid metal taboo... then they aren't going to care. No matter how many rules and restrictions you put on them, they aren't going to care. At best, you just annoy them.

So, why not make it a choice? Why not limit this to a choice made by specific druidic orders? There is a reason the term "orthodox" exists. Different people emphasize their beliefs in different manners. If your druid wants to emphasize the importance of not using metal to defend yourself, that's fine. If your druid wants to emphasize a disgust for metal in general really work to remove all of it from their life, that's fine too.

But it should also be fine that my druid cares more for other aspects, and doesn't consider the metal defense issue to be as important. My druid should have that choice. And if that means that a bunch of other druids turn their noses up at them... sure, whatever. But I don't agree with removing that choice from all druids, across all time and space. Not when it is so easy to see how this taboo wouldn't apply to many, many different druids.

Yeah, I personally broadly agree with that, depending upon the campaign.

Ultimately, I think it just boils down to GM/table choice, since that's really getting into the undefined lore or religion of druids. Assuming it's not uncomfortable for anyone at the table, it's a great chance to flesh out Druidic faith(s), aka worldbuilding.

And I'm always down for worldbuilding! Jiggity!

 

[Crimson Longinus]

So the real question is, why wasn't that taboo brought up anywhere in the druid's actual description? One or two sentences would be sufficient.

That certainly would have been a good idea!

 

[Maxperson]

And druid prohibition against wearing it.

Yep. A prohibition like alcohol was prohibited in the 20's and 30's. Prohibitions don't actually stop things from being done.

Yes there is. That you're unable to follow rules of the game doesn't change that.

I follow every game rule that applies to druids. They get proficiency with all light and medium armors. Limited to the druid spell list. Shapechange a limited number of times per day. Revert back when they hit 0 hit points. And so on.

I also have the druid in-fiction taboo against wearing metal armors in my game. There's literally nothing stopping a druid from breaking that in-fiction prohibition.

I mean if you assume that druids have dex 20. I wouldn't.

Rolling for stats is the default. If you roll an 18 for dex and have an elven druid, you'll have a 20 at level 1. The last time I played I made a Bladesinger. I rolled 15 for int and 18 for dex. With racial bonuses I started with 16 and 20. With my studded leather I was rocking a 17 base AC, 20 when in Bladesong, and 25 with the Shield spell.

They aren't going to assume that everyone uses point buy or arrays and have balanced the game around the default stat generation method of rolling stats. The means they anticipate that a druid can start with a 20 dex at level 1. They balanced the druid with the assumption that a druid can in fact hit a 19 AC in light armor. 19=19. That means that the game is balanced for druids to wear half-plate.

I No it can't. Not without GM permission. It is a rule in the game, you can't just ignore rules. But we've been over this for countless of pages, you don't believe in rules so it is pointless to continue discussion about rules.

There is nothing in the PHB, DMG or Sage Advice that says that. If you want to house rule that for your game, that's fine. It's not RAW, though. And it's not Sage Advice. Your assumption that it is a game rule when it doesn't say it's a rule or act like a rule is just that, an assumption.

The only thing requiring permission is a change to the druid story, which doesn't include exceptions. Exceptions retain the taboo story.