Search results

The point I was making is that the PHB specifies that belief and worship vary between the Druids, so Druids are inherently already not all in agreement. There is no taboo or faith system that remains uncontested indefinitely, and when the idea is full of holes, that is when it is at highest risk...

I'd still argue the possibility that the dryad thinks the Druid is possibly doing something right, as opposed to something wrong. Something like "These people all claim to be defenders of nature, but I sense a strong proclivity in this one." If the Druid does not present himself as a Druid, and...

I'm totally fine with someone having that interpretation, but I'm sort of just pointing at the fact that each Druid is an individual, so it would be silly for "no metal" to be a universal concept in a world where it has no penalties. "No metal" means no gold or silver armor, even though you can...

The themes have drastically changed between editions. Clerics used to only use blunt weapons whereas Druid had a wider selection of weapons. Druids are now limited, Clerics now have all simple weapons, and through domains can get all martial weapons as well. Dwarves used to be completely...

This reminded me of a point that's always bugged me about the explanation of Druids not liking metal because they prefer more "natural" options. Gold forms in nature without any human intervention. So does silver, copper, and platinum. You'll never find leather in nature. It has to be created...

I'd say the fact that there is a section that explains penalties for non-class-like behavior further shows that characters can act outside the behavior designated for their class. It says it right in common sense. What happens if they put on metal armor? What happens if someone else knocks...

I wasn't trying to be hostile, and I apologize if it seemed that way. I was simply adding further points that I felt appropriate to add. For example, I wasn't certain of what was being implied with the parenthesis. I thought maybe the bracket was because there is more than one way to interpret...

To be a bit more accurate, it's not just "apparently" about their beliefs, but RAW it's 100% about their beliefs. That is clarified in the Sage Advice. It is inaccurate to interpret it any other way because the developer confirmed it so. While true, I would like to add a note for all the...

"The more powerful druidic spells, as well as their wider range of weaponry, make up for the fact that druids are unable to use any armor or shields other than leather armor and wooden shields (metallic armor spoils their magical powers)." You're omitting the important part where it specifies...

That's fair. I never assume campaign conditions, and in general discussion only go based on what the rules say as written unless given further context. On that note, I go by the options listed for players in the PHB, which for Druids says: "Druids revere nature above all, gaining their spells...

The point is that the player characters are the exception, not the rule. While the typical elf is remaining isolated in their little grove, the player character has ventured out into the world to seek adventure, to ward off the evils of the world, or perform whatever other task it is they set...

I was more going off of the typical core mechanics in 5E. Sure, I know Elves aren't actual Fey, but that's why I said they had a natural proclivity for the Feywild and not that they were Fey themselves. Elvish and Sylvan share an alphabet, and almost every non-evil Fey in the Monster Manual...

The issue I have here is what exactly could be the possible role play ramifications of that outside of pissing off other Druids? It's pretty darn rare that I see a campaign where players encounter other Druids at all, let alone regularly, and they're literally the only people that give a darn if...

Touching on this, in original AD&D, the Druid was a subclass of Cleric, and just like the Cleric, was a front-line melee combatant, both second only to the Fighter in terms of melee prowess. The Cleric had access to metal armors, but the Druid had access to more weapons, and intentionally more...

The issue I personally have with this kind of thinking is that player characters are typically exceptions, and not cookie-cutter paragons of their class/race. Most humans don't act like Marvel's Captain America, but that's what makes him stand out. The players are usually the heroes that...

Glad to hear it. Hearing that makes me feel slightly less like I'm wasting my time. Argue rules at a table? Definitely not. Argue rules online? Most definitely. You should never "fight" over rules at a table, because DM gets final say regardless; however, players should not be afraid to...

But they didn't do this. They actually did the opposite of this, which says a lot about what you're saying versus what they have stated. The original wording in the PHB was flimsy because it said they will not wear metal armor, and people wanted clarification as to what that means. This is why...

No, RAI = Rules as Intended. RAW = Rules as Written. Intention != Interpretation. That's not even just semantics, they are literally definitively different. Rules as Interpreted would be synonymous to Rules as Written. Rules As Intended means bypassing the Rules As Written in favor of enforcing...

Sage Advice is official documentation that goes alongside the errata. Errata changes rules, Sage Advice further clarifies them. The official documentation from WotC says this: "Official rulings on how to interpret rules are made here in the Sage Advice Compendium by the game’s lead rules...

Clerics? Valor Bards? Any other caster that puts in the effort to get a shield and light or medium armor? Heck, it's just as easy, and often easier, for full casters to get AC of their tank, than it is for martial classes like the Monk or the Rogue to do the same. And that rule has been...