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

[Chaosmancer]

Are they? Always?

Maybe not always, but let's say they aren't. Then no one is able to upgrade their gear. Unless they steal it, loot it from enemies. You know it is also possible to loot enemies and sell their gear, or maybe the DM doesn't allow looting and selling, or provide gold, or just hand out the items in question. At that point it is still possible that they work for a powerful organization that can provide better equipment.

And whatever the paladin is doing to get their gear, it is fair for the druid to do the exact same. If the paladin needs to go on a quest to an ancient tomb to fight undead horrors to get platemail, then it is fair to have the druid go out hunting in the wilderness to destroy a pack of bulletes to get half-plate. If the paladin can just walk to the nearest city and buy platemail, then the druid should be able to just go somewhere and buy bullete half-plate.

And I can imagine a wilderness focused adventure where you fight a bunch of beasts that carry no gold.

So can I. I find those don't happen so much past level 3, and usually people are fighting intelligent enemies by level 5. Also, they are usually given a quest in exchange for a gold reward.

Again, it is possible for that not to happen. But if you are in a situation where there is no gold, and you are no where near civilization, and you are just fighting mindless beasts that are trying to kill you... then either everyone is making bullete armor, or no one is upgrading their gear at all. Either way.

Right. And the paladin might not have so much use for all the dead animal bits they come across.

Unless they aren't getting gold, then they might try making some armor. Heck, the paladin player might think making monster hunter armor is cool anyways and do it in either case. Are you going to stop them and tell them that that is only for the druid and not them?

Once paladin gets efreeti chain, the druid should be getting a magical non-metal armour, so the issue is moot.

And which magical non-metal armor is that? The only one in the book is Dragonscale.

I guess you could give them +2 crystal half-plate that conveys lightning resistance... but that's a homebrew item. And even then, you'd have to be pretty careful, because someone else might take that item instead.

Also, if you stop thinking that druids are entitled to have unconditional medium armour usage, it is no burden at all. It is an possibility of getting something extra. Paladins do not have a possibility to go on quest to gain access to superheavy non-magical armour that is better than heavy armour they normally use.

Not sure what "superheavy non-magical armor" is, but that sounds like another homebrew item. And to be clear, I've got no problems homebrewing stuff. Do it all the time. The point is clarifying the lines. If I can expect my paladin to be able to quest for something better than plate, just because, then why is my druid having to go on a similiar quest just to use their given proficiency?

Because, yeah, they were given medium armor proficiency. That wasn't a typo. They have proficiency in medium armors. I don't think it is too unreasonable to expect they get the chance to use it.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Perhaps some people indeed would choose inferior options for the sake of theme. I might. Still, it is terrible game design to force people to make that choice. Rules should reward sticking to themes, not the opposite.

And if they rewarded them instead of just folding their arms like a child and going 'nuh-uh' or even dumber, punishing going against, they'd be good design. People should always be able to break theme if they want.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I mean if you're trying to convince me that there should be more restrictions on druids you might be making some headway. Guns definitely are completely optional to begin with, so no one is able to use them without GMs permission and one cannot expect basic rules to take them into account. But no, I wouldn't let druids use them.

And there is nothing in the rules to support you beyond the fact that DMs can make up whatever rules they want. A gun is certaintly no different than a heavy crossbow, which a druid could also gain proficiency in. Or what about a spyglass, can Druid's use those?

You can try and restrict "everything" but I just find it far less of a hassle to let a player decide what they care about for their own character's religious beliefs

Ok. Let's just say this makes it clear that we're not going to agree on what is balanced, so I shall disregard your arguments regarding that issue.

Why? Because I have actual play experience of the class not being unbalanced? I get why people think it is unbalanced, but those Temp HP are no worse than a Wizard casting Force Wall to end a fight, or a cleric using Banishment to end a fight. Heck, an Artillerist can provide more raw temp hp than a twilight cleric at the cost of a single 1st level spell slot. No one is rushing to ban them for being broken.

It is powerful. I can even agree it is top tier powerful. Break the game and need to be banned forever powerful? No.

Lifting an equipment restriction to allow using better gear than otherwise is obviously a buff and it is bizarre to argue otherwise.

It is only a buff if they otherwise couldn't wear medium armor. They can. Even if you force them to go on a monster hunting quest to do it, you are still letting them wear medium armor. At worst I'm just advocating for skipping a side quest.

I offered my take on how better non-metal armours should work.

By making them weaker than metal armor, that way paladins and fighters and rangers and warlocks and bards and clerics and barbarians aren't tempted to wear non-metal armors and disrupt the ability for you to "instantly" kill them with a spell. (Heat Metal). Or so that they still keep their aesthetic, which ever argument you preferred.

Yeah, can't say I was impressed by that option.

Perhaps some people indeed would choose inferior options for the sake of theme. I might. Still, it is terrible game design to force people to make that choice. Rules should reward sticking to themes, not the opposite.

See, what is interesting, is I agree with you. Where you don't seem to see the irony is that this rule isn't rewarding anyone. What reward does a druid get for wearing hide armor? Nothing. What new abilities do they have to make a wooden shield more effective? None.

All this does is prevent them from taking a superior option, unless they go on a side-quest to gain access to it. That isn't rewarding them in any way, shape or form. It is just not punishing them.

Ultimately you don't like the themes of the D&D druid so you want to change it to be something else. Why not just play a class you like as it is?

I like 90% of the themes of the druid. I like nature worshippers. I like shamans. I like shapeshifters. I like elementalists. I like a lot of the druid. I don't agree that "I refuse to use a metal shield, that is 'civilized'" is a theme of the druid, and if you want to insist it is, then it is a stupid theme that makes no sense.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Does it? The description doesn't say that. And examples of creatures that are naturally occurring, but aren't natural to the setting that I have seen are usually aberrations, celestials, fiends, etc. I will admit, though, that I generally don't look closely at creature types, so I could easily have missed examples.

Things like Rhemoraz's and Purple Worms. They aren't unnaturally made by ancient wizards or anything like that. They are naturally born and occuring creatures of the worlds of DnD. They just don't exist in this world. I think Gricks are the same way. Freaky looking, but they are naturally born in the world according to older lore.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

And whatever the paladin is doing to get their gear, it is fair for the druid to do the exact same.

Why? Why everything must work the same? Because, guess what, in a class based game it doesn't! Some classes need to choose very limited amount of spells they know, some classes just automatically know all spells for their class on spell levels they have, some classes can buy more spells with money. Because wizards can buy spells, should bards be able too? Or should all classes just know all the spells because druids and clerics do?

So can I. I find those don't happen so much past level 3, and usually people are fighting intelligent enemies by level 5. Also, they are usually given a quest in exchange for a gold reward.

So how many sets of armour one druid needs?

Again, it is possible for that not to happen. But if you are in a situation where there is no gold, and you are no where near civilization, and you are just fighting mindless beasts that are trying to kill you... then either everyone is making bullete armor, or no one is upgrading their gear at all. Either way.

But could it perhaps be possible, that in typical course of adventuring the characters come across enemies that have gold and enemies that can be harvested for parts? So everyone can get what they need?

Unless they aren't getting gold, then they might try making some armor. Heck, the paladin player might think making monster hunter armor is cool anyways and do it in either case. Are you going to stop them and tell them that that is only for the druid and not them?

No.

And which magical non-metal armor is that? The only one in the book is Dragonscale.

That. Or you know, just any magical armour with the appropriate quality from the chart right in the DMG.

Not sure what "superheavy non-magical armor" is, but that sounds like another homebrew item.

It doesn't exist. That's the point. Druids are effectively light armour wearers that have a rule that lets them use some medium armours. Paladins do not have rule that allows them provisionally use armours a tier better than normal.

Because, yeah, they were given medium armor proficiency. That wasn't a typo. They have proficiency in medium armors. I don't think it is too unreasonable to expect they get the chance to use it.

And the limitation was not a typo either. They do not have unconditional access to medium armour.

 

[mrpopstar]

And if they rewarded them instead of just folding their arms like a child and going 'nuh-uh' or even dumber, punishing going against, they'd be good design. People should always be able to break theme if they want.

Why, though? By what measure is it more correct for the game to support themes other than the themes core to the Dungeons & Dragons experience? What obligation or duty does the game have in that regard?

 

[tetrasodium]

I notice you often post screenshots of what looks to be a digitized core rulebook. Where did you find that available for purchase?

Buy a book, send it to a scanning service for (non)destructive scan. I'm not associated with them, but I've used these folks a couple times with great OCR & hyperlinked results . You can save some money by buying the cheapest used copy you can find & having them do a destructive scan where they slice the binding off & scan each page flat then trash it instead of chrging you to ship the book back.

I want to pop in here for a second.

Monstrosities is a TERRIBLE category. It covers naturally occuring creatures that just aren't naturally occuring in our real world. It covers people cursed into new forms. It covers magical experiments. Basically, if it isn't a a bog standard animal, and doesn't fit easily into a different category (or they want to deny things like charm person or wildshape) then they call it a monstrosity.

It alo largely consumes the vast majority of what should be cr3 & up wildshape forms & more than a few lower cr ones where a variety of beasts still exist

 

[Crimson Longinus]

And there is nothing in the rules to support you beyond the fact that DMs can make up whatever rules they want. A gun is certaintly no different than a heavy crossbow, which a druid could also gain proficiency in. Or what about a spyglass, can Druid's use those?

You can try and restrict "everything" but I just find it far less of a hassle to let a player decide what they care about for their own character's religious beliefs

Guns do not normally exist in the game. No one is even proficient with them. It is up to GM to decide how to implement them if they want to. But this is just the similar sort of strawman than your metal staves or whatever it was earlier. Point out that the rules do not deal with an uncommon thing that usually doesn't come up and conclude based on that they shouldn't deal with an incredibly common thing that is certain to come up in every game either.

Furthermore, the class based game that relies on archetypes must actually commit to the themes of the class. If the idea is just 'do whatever' then it is better to make a classless game to begin with so that the players can truly build whatever sort of characters they want. And D&D classes are so full of (sometimes weirdly) specific things that is strange to get hung up on this one.

Why? Because I have actual play experience of the class not being unbalanced? I get why people think it is unbalanced, but those Temp HP are no worse than a Wizard casting Force Wall to end a fight, or a cleric using Banishment to end a fight. Heck, an Artillerist can provide more raw temp hp than a twilight cleric at the cost of a single 1st level spell slot. No one is rushing to ban them for being broken.

It is powerful. I can even agree it is top tier powerful. Break the game and need to be banned forever powerful? No.

It doesn't need to be gamae breaking to be blatantly unbalanced. It is clearly far more powerful than most other options. In any case, pointless to continue this here, there is a whole separate thread for the twilight cleric issue.

It is only a buff if they otherwise couldn't wear medium armor. They can. Even if you force them to go on a monster hunting quest to do it, you are still letting them wear medium armor. At worst I'm just advocating for skipping a side quest.

They have access to some medium armour. You want give them access to more gear than they currently have and the kind that is more powerful than most of the stuff they've access to. That's a buff.

By making them weaker than metal armor, that way paladins and fighters and rangers and warlocks and bards and clerics and barbarians aren't tempted to wear non-metal armors and disrupt the ability for you to "instantly" kill them with a spell. (Heat Metal). Or so that they still keep their aesthetic, which ever argument you preferred.

Yeah, can't say I was impressed by that option.

Because there is actually a trade off? Because you just can't get the best of both worlds?

See, what is interesting, is I agree with you. Where you don't seem to see the irony is that this rule isn't rewarding anyone. What reward does a druid get for wearing hide armor? Nothing. What new abilities do they have to make a wooden shield more effective? None.

All this does is prevent them from taking a superior option, unless they go on a side-quest to gain access to it. That isn't rewarding them in any way, shape or form. It is just not punishing them.

That's just your class half empty thinking. The rule is just easy way to write a light armour class with an awesome extra option to use some thematically appropriate medium armours.

I like 90% of the themes of the druid. I like nature worshippers. I like shamans. I like shapeshifters. I like elementalists. I like a lot of the druid. I don't agree that "I refuse to use a metal shield, that is 'civilized'" is a theme of the druid, and if you want to insist it is, then it is a stupid theme that makes no sense.

It definitely is part of their theme. I obviously don't agree with it being stupid. This is like the halfling thread.

 

[mrpopstar]

Buy a book, send it to a scanning service for (non)destructive scan. I'm not associated with them, but I've used these folks a couple times with great OCR & hyperlinked results . You can save some money by buying the cheapest used copy you can find & having them do a destructive scan where they slice the binding off & scan each page flat then trash it instead of chrging you to ship the book back.

Ah, yes, my library contracts with one of these services.

And you like engaging with the material digitally? I'm struggling with my decision to make the jump and go full digital. I love the pen & paper/analog nature of the hobby, both because it's nostalgic and because it gets me away from a screen for 4hrs every other week. LOL

Edit: *my library​

 

[Shadowdweller00]

Sure it could be those things.

Why can't it be metal? The character is a dwarf, they have blacksmithing proficiency, not ice sculpture profiecncy or magically congealed light forging proficiency. I mean, would you really let a level 1 character start with armor made from magically congealed light? It appearing simple is also part of the appeal.

Because it's against the rules for druids to wear metal armor. And the restriction has been part of Druid lore and flavor since 1e. And because introducing a plot element sacred to one of your players' character but not letting them make use of it is about as dickish as....

...creating a whole campaign that revolves around elemental cults and involves numerous monk-like factions and enemy types; but not providing any goodies for a certain monk subtype that is focused on using elemental powers.

But a DM is free to change things as they see fit.