D&D 5E (2014) Can your Druids wear metal armor?

[CleverNickName]

That... is kinda brilliant, actually. Yoinked!
Thanks!

I think Backgrounds are severely under-utilized in the 5th Edition game. I'm always on the lookout for ways to make them more interesting.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I answered this earlier.

I saw as I was catching up, you really didn't say yes or no, you said it was something you didn't feel strongly about and got "into world-building territory"

Which, personally, I find hilarious. Because somehow constantly saying that all druids share the same religious taboo wasn't already getting into world-building territory, but I digress.

Since you don't feel strongly about it, then you would allow a Mountain Dwarf Druid to wear metal armor, then, yes?

 

[Oofta]

Can we just pause for a second and take note ...

We are well over 1,000 comments in.

And this thread was started on Saturday night. That's right- in less than four days, we've passed 1,000.

How'd we do that? I'm not even mad ... that's amazing!

In all fairness, pretty much everyone can just copy/paste previous responses at this point.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I agree. Both having druids that cannot wear metal armor and having druids use part of their class power budget devoted to shapeshifting are elements that remain in D&D for the sake of tradition.

In my opinion, having druids that cannot wildshape (but get a different special ability instead) opens the doors to more stories than saying that all druids can wear metal armor. (There could be a wildshaping druid subclass for those who want it).

Yeah, I really hope we get more like the Spores Druid that works with the wildshape resource in a different manner

 

[Northern Phoenix]

I saw as I was catching up, you really didn't say yes or no, you said it was something you didn't feel strongly about and got "into world-building territory"

Which, personally, I find hilarious. Because somehow constantly saying that all druids share the same religious taboo wasn't already getting into world-building territory, but I digress.

Since you don't feel strongly about it, then you would allow a Mountain Dwarf Druid to wear metal armor, then, yes?

I can't speak for Crimson Longinus, but i personally don't actually view it through the lense of specific world-building. Rather, i view it at the meta level. Conceptually, to me, the "Druid" represents a fantasy archetype which, among other things, isn't represented in theme by using metal armor. That's not the look they embody. If the end result of an either or discussion about a rule becomes that all Druids will wear metal armor if given the choice, naturally i will lean against that, since i don't find it to be appropriate to the kind of game i want to run.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

In all fairness, pretty much everyone can just copy/paste previous responses at this point.

I think we need to up the challenge level.

We need to all switch sides!

That's right. Whatever side of the debate you were on, do a 180 and argue the other way.

For my part, I will .... um ... let's see .... I know! I will make positive and serious contributions to advance the thread instead of just amusing myself!

 

[Vaalingrade]

And having them all wear metal armour doesn't make thematic sense either. Because that's the end result if you lift the limitation.

Then give them Unarmored Defense and lean into the shapeshifting nightmare that is what I'm pretty sure the only reason most people want to play a druid anyway.

Or just Proficiency: all light armor and hide armor. Then they have to spend a feat for the rest of Medium.

Anything but defacto brainwashing every druid in the world to fit some aesthetic.

And before someone asks something like 'well would you let a barbarian not get angry to rage', YES. How else do you play RDJ's version of Sherlock Holmes and his Analysis Beatings fighting style? Bar-bar rage, replace STR with INT.

 

[Chaosmancer]

And having them all wear metal armour doesn't make thematic sense either. Because that's the end result if you lift the limitation.

And not every single druid will wear metal armor. Maybe the players, but it is such a minor thing you probably won't even notice it.

Heck, I've had more people forget they are wearing armor period when describing their characters than I could easily count. If the armor is important, they will will mention it. If they don't care, then they don't care. But let it be a player's choice to engage in that.

 

[Umbran]

Except that I'm pretty darn sure the actual Celtic Druids that the class was modeled after had nothing to do with any sort of element in the classical sense and that Gygax just added that in because he felt like it, because "elements are natural."

The historic Celtic Druids aren't really relevant to the discussion. The current Druid construction isn't historical, but it more or less holds together, thematically, because it is at least drawing from traditions that fed into each other a great deal over time. The five-element bases not part of that theme.

You could construct a nature-oriented spellcasting class that leans into five elements, but to do so you'd do well to reach into the collected traditions of the cultures related to that five-element scheme, and the result would similarly hang together, thematically, but probably won't look much like the current druid.

This is class design by way of cooking philosophy - ingredients that grow together go together.

 

[Faolyn]

I would argue the politeness bit.

I wouldn't. Maybe you aren't aware of how much need some people have to keep the peace, especially if they've been raised to be good guests or to not make a fuss.

There are people who have plant based diets and there are vegetarians which are different.

Since the definition of vegetarian is "a person who does not eat meat : someone whose diet consists wholly of vegetables, fruits, grains, nuts, and sometimes eggs or dairy products" I would think you're being unnecessarily pedantic here. You don't have to swear an oath to be a vegetarian, or even vegan.

If a Druid somehow accidentally put on metal armour nothing would happen. People are then going to take that and turn it into some gotcha that lets them wear it. And that isn't playing in good faith.

A lot of the "issues" that get brought up by various rules that I see online I've never seen in play because I've never played with someone who is trying to break the game.

Not everyone in this thread has done that. Some don't like the rule and that's fine.

For the record it is non-negotiable at a table I'm playing at. If that is a red flag so be it. Play a Nature Cleric. I want the classes to mean something.

"Playing in good faith" isn't a game rule, though. It is by definition meta-game. There are plenty of people who game for other reasons, including power game-y ones. And while I would prefer gaming with people who don't do this, who game according to the spirit of the class and not the letter, "you can't do this because I think it means you're a bad gamer" isn't a good enough reason to ban something.

Either have official game rules or make definitive homebrew rules that you are willing to say are homebrew and not just "of course it's like this".

Also, druids are part of nature while nature clerics control nature. There's a difference there--and why nobody blinks an eye if you say that druids gain their powers from the earth itself rather than from a god--and and metal is part of nature. You can decide that "nature clerics can't wear metal armor because the nature god says so" and that's perfectly fine. But the earth itself isn't talking and sending down divine edict in the form of holy writ, so there's no real reason why this proscription was invented in the first place.