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

[Yaarel]

I don’t think anyone is claiming that it isn’t perfectly fine to allow it or to disallow it. If there’s one thing we all agree on, it’s that however you want to rule it at your own table is perfectly fine. The disagreement we’re having is about what the rule actually says, what it means and whether or not it’s constructed in a way that makes sense as a rule and/or steps on players’ agency.

Yup.

 

[Yaarel]

Only by your house rule.

I view this dispute as follows.

• Page 45 clearly says, the Druid is proficient with nonmetal armor. Only.
• You invented a houserule to explain an awkwardly abbreviated phrasing on page 65.
• Your invention contradicts page 45.
• Rather than admit your invention is incorrect or is a houserule, you say page 45 is wrong.
• You reject the rules in the Players Handbook and ignore them.
• I accept the rule on page 45, and read the ambiguous page 65 as agreeing with page 45.

In my eyes, you invented a houserule.

I am following the rules-as-written carefully and consistently.



The thing is, I already interpreted page 65 this way for other reasons, long before someone noticed that page 45 says my interpretation plainly.

My understanding of the rules-as-written is rigorous and consistent with many rules elsewhere.

 

[theCourier]

To answer the original question:

No, if I were to run 5e I wouldn't allow Druids to wear metal armor. Instead, there will be Monster Hunter-esque quests to craft amazing monster armors with special powers, because Questing For It is awesome.

 

[Maxperson]

Yes.

Also, there seems to be things that are magical in origin, but that are nonmagical now.

When trying to get a sense of these (recent) considerations about what is or isnt magic, I found dragonbreath to be illustrative.

Presumably, the dragon "evolved" into a firebreather, by means of magic, whether shapeshifting or elemental, or whatever. But now, both its ability to produce fire and the fire itself is effectively nonmagic. Probably the same goes for dragon flight. It is possible to use reallife science (biology, aerodynamics, etcetera) to explain why a gigantic dragon can fly (like bladders with buoyant gas). But D&D can handwaive it, and say, sure it came from magic, but is effectively nonmagical in itself. A dragon can continue to firebreathe and fly while in antimagic.

If I recall correctly some undead frightening effects, seem quasimagic, but are effectively nonmagical.


There are other blurry lines. The psionic power source can cast spells. The ability of a mind to do these things is natural and innate, but the spells that manifest are magical.

Anyway, I am still trying to get a feel for what is and isnt magic.

In the case of the Druid, the class will continue remain proficient with nonmetal armor, no matter where this knowledge came from.

Magic in 5e is not blurry. The list of what is magical has been quoted to you. Things may SEEM magical or quasi-magical, but if they don't say, "This is magic," it isn't unless you house rule it to be. Dragon breath and dragon flight are no exceptions. In 5e those are magical.

"Dragons are also magical creatures whose innate power fuels their dreaded breath weapons and other preternatural abilities."

 

[Maxperson]

Again, I find it telling that no one has said why my Dwarven Star Druid would find it unacceptable to wear armor they made from a fallen star, using it to gird themselves against the evils of the world they must face. It is a perfectly coherent concept, a druid who worships stars, wearing what is the closet thing to a star itself from their perspective. But, that isn't allowed, because the rules say that I must reject that metal as unnatural. Well, unless I make it into literally anything except armor or a shield. Then it is perfectly fine.

I would allow it. It doesn't even change the druid story, since it's an exception. Lose that armor and you are not going to run to the store and buy another set, because taboo.

 

[Charlaquin]

Magic in 5e is not blurry. The list of what is magical has been quoted to you. Things may SEEM magical or quasi-magical, but if they don't say, "This is magic," it isn't unless you house rule it to be. Dragon breath and dragon flight are no exceptions. In 5e those are magical.

"Dragons are also magical creatures whose innate power fuels their dreaded breath weapons and other preternatural abilities."

Err… The same Sage Advice I was quoting actually lists dragon breath and dragon flight as examples of things that aren’t magical…

 

[Maxperson]

I view this dispute as follows.

• Page 45 clearly says, the Druid is proficient with nonmetal armor. Only.

Yes, the erroneous page does.

• You invented a houserule to explain an awkwardly abbreviated phrasing on page 65.

Nope. Only you are making up house rules dealing with proficiency there. The parentheses at the end doesn't say one word about limiting proficiency. Not one word. It doesn't even imply it. Not even a little.

• Your invention contradicts page 45.

No. RAW contradicts page 45.

• Rather than admit your invention is incorrect or is a houserule, you say page 45 is wrong.

Because it is.

• You reject the rules in the Players Handbook and ignore them.

Nope. I'm just not fictionalizing new rules like limited proficiency and then claiming that the book says it when it doesn't.

In my eyes, you invented a houserule.

I get that.

I am following the rules-as-written carefully and consistently.

Well, no. You're following your invention carefully and consistently.

 

[Maxperson]

Err… The same Sage Advice I was quoting actually lists dragon breath and dragon flight as examples of things that aren’t magical…

Then it's inconsistent, because the MM says that their innate magic is what fuels those. I provided the quote.

 

[Charlaquin]

Then it's inconsistent, because the MM says that their innate magic is what fuels those. I provided the quote.

The SA actually addresses the fact that the description of dragons says they’re magical. The intent seems to be that a specific feature is magic if that specific feature’s description says it’s magical. They probably aren’t as intentional with the use of the word “magic” outside of that context. Here’s the full SA answer if you want to check it out.

Is the breath weapon of a dragon magical? If you cast antimagic field, don armor of invulnerability, or use another feature of the game that protects against magical or nonmagical effects, you might ask yourself, “Will this protect me against a dragon’s breath?” The breath weapon of a typical dragon isn’t considered magical, so antimagic field won’t help you but armor of invulnerability will.

You might be thinking, “Dragons seem pretty magical to me.” And yes, they are extraordinary! Their description even says they’re magical. But our game makes a distinction between two types of magic:

• the background magic that is part of the D&D multiverse’s physics and the physiology of many D&D creatures
• the concentrated magical energy that is contained in a magic item or channeled to create a spell or other focused magical effect

In D&D, the first type of magic is part of nature. It is no more dispellable than the wind. A monster like a dragon exists because of that magic-enhanced nature. The second type of magic is what the rules are concerned about. When a rule refers to something being magical, it’s referring to that second type. Determining whether a game feature is magical is straightforward. Ask yourself these questions about the feature:

• Is it a magic item?
• Is it a spell? Or does it let you create the effects of a spell that’s mentioned in its description?
• Is it a spell attack?
• Is it fueled by the use of spell slots?
• Does its description say it’s magical?

If your answer to any of those questions is yes, the feature is magical.

Let’s look at a white dragon’s Cold Breath and ask ourselves those questions. First, Cold Breath isn’t a magic item. Second, its description mentions no spell. Third, it’s not a spell attack. Fourth, the word “magical” appears nowhere in its description. Our conclusion: Cold Breath is not considered a magical game effect, even though we know that dragons are amazing, supernatural beings.

 

[Maxperson]

I believe what he was saying was that a feature is magical if that specific feature’s description says it’s magical. They probably aren’t as intentional with the use of the word “magic” outside of that context. Here’s the full SA answer if you want to check it out.

Is the breath weapon of a dragon magical? If you cast antimagic field, don armor of invulnerability, or use another feature of the game that protects against magical or nonmagical effects, you might ask yourself, “Will this protect me against a dragon’s breath?” The breath weapon of a typical dragon isn’t considered magical, so antimagic field won’t help you but armor of invulnerability will.

You might be thinking, “Dragons seem pretty magical to me.” And yes, they are extraordinary! Their description even says they’re magical. But our game makes a distinction between two types of magic:

• the background magic that is part of the D&D multiverse’s physics and the physiology of many D&D creatures
• the concentrated magical energy that is contained in a magic item or channeled to create a spell or other focused magical effect

In D&D, the first type of magic is part of nature. It is no more dispellable than the wind. A monster like a dragon exists because of that magic-enhanced nature. The second type of magic is what the rules are concerned about. When a rule refers to something being magical, it’s referring to that second type. Determining whether a game feature is magical is straightforward. Ask yourself these questions about the feature:

• Is it a magic item?
• Is it a spell? Or does it let you create the effects of a spell that’s mentioned in its description?
• Is it a spell attack?
• Is it fueled by the use of spell slots?
• Does its description say it’s magical?

If your answer to any of those questions is yes, the feature is magical.

Let’s look at a white dragon’s Cold Breath and ask ourselves those questions. First, Cold Breath isn’t a magic item. Second, its description mentions no spell. Third, it’s not a spell attack. Fourth, the word “magical” appears nowhere in its description. Our conclusion: Cold Breath is not considered a magical game effect, even though we know that dragons are amazing, supernatural beings.

Fair enough. Then it's not magical. Still no ambiguity.