D&D 5E What armor can druids wear? Is there a way to get a decent AC?

[DEFCON 1]

Good luck with your houserule, Defcon!

And you with yours, Capn!

 

[77IM]

There's no house ruling going on here; the text of barkskin is just unclear.

Pro tip: if some text seems clear to you, but it is not clear to a lot of other people, then it is unclear.

 

[Skyscraper]

So your position is that Barkskin should be superior to chain mail? Why?

Chain mail is heavy armor and does NOT allow for a Dex bonus. So if you feel it should be treated the same as chain mail, why should it not be treated the same as chain mail?

"It seems to me like setting a mininum AC value to barkskin, to replace the armor's numeric AC value in the armor table, also nullifying Dex as per that same armor, is also reasonable."

To this end, it should probably also give you disadvantage with Stealth, require a Str of 13, and increase your weight by 55 pounds. Because ALL of that comes with chain mail.

I do not advocate that barkskin is similar to chainmail. There is nothing in the text that says so. The only similarity between the two is that barkskin provides the same minimum AC value than the AC value that chainmail provides, 16.

 

[mcbobbo]

I do not advocate that barkskin is similar to chainmail. There is nothing in the text that says so. The only similarity between the two is that barkskin provides the same minimum AC value than the AC value that chainmail provides, 16.

Did I mix up the quotes? I thought it was you who brought up the AC chart for armor?

 

[Skyscraper]

Did I mix up the quotes? I thought it was you who brought up the AC chart for armor?

I brought up the AC chart for armor to illustrate that all armors provide a numeric AC value (e.g. 11 for leather) to which the DEX modifier is added.

I was saying that, likewise, barkskin could be interpreted as written, to provide a minimum AC value that replaces the armor's AC value. The final AC would then be modified by DEX bonuses, shields and other modifiers.

To me, the barkskin spell is unclear. There are however, contrarily to what is being conveyed by most people here, two ways to reasonably interpret the text. One makes little sense (everybody agrees on that), and the other makes sense.

To rephrase what I was saying, people that support the "AC = 16 minimun including all modifiers" position take the position that the "AC" in the barkskin spell descripition, means "AC including all modifiers". What I'm saying is that:

1) in the armor chart, there is a numerica value for AC than will later be modified by DEX modifiers, shields and other modifiers such as cover.
2) the text of the barkskin spell specifically mentions that the mimimum AC value will be 16 regardless of what type of armor the target is wearing. The text makes no reference to "regardless of shields, DEX mods, cover or other modifiers".

To me, the specific including of armor only in (2) and the exclusion of all other bonuses, then points towards interpretating the AC in the barkskin spell description in the way I mention in (1).

This is what I mean when I say that there is a reasonable interpretation for barkskin to provide a bonus like armor would.

However, since barkskin is not armor, and nothing in the spell says it is, there is no reason to provide any penalty (speed or ability checks) to barkskin.

 

[Skyscraper]

On a side note, the "feel free to houserule" way of saying "I'm right because I follow the Rules as Written and you're wrong because you're not" is annoying. Everyone here is trying to simply have a discussion about an unclear spell description - at least I am. Please be open-minded enough to consider everyone's opinion in the light of a discussion, instead of assuming that you own the Truth of the Rules as Written and those that disagree, dont.

See, I believe that there are two reasonable litteral interpretations for this spell; however one makes little sense when applied to the context of the game. But I recognize that the two litteral interpretations seem valid.

 

[mcbobbo]

Can you name any armor with an AC as high as 16 that permits a Dex bonus?

Do you not find it a balance issue to introduce an alternative that does permit this?

 

[Tony Semana]

I find it pretty straight forward personally: You're not suddenly wearing chain mail, you're suddenly Colossus (a wood version)!

Barkskin affects your skin. Your skin has an effective AC of 16. It is what gets hit after other defences have been breached.

So, calculate your AC as normal (Dex mod, armour with/without shield, cover) for the circumstance of the attack - if the attack hits (gets through your calculated AC) it lands on your skin BUT it may still be stopped by the skin's effective AC of 16.

eg. For all my moving, dodging, shield wielding and diving into cover, an attack still hits me (gets past my AC) and makes contact with my 'unprotected' neck, without barkskin I would immediately take the damage. With barkskin, if the attack value is less than 16 it glances off taking a few chips of wood but leaves me unharmed, if the attack value is more than 16 it bites true and I take damage.

 

[TwoSix]

That doesn't mean WotC might have intended for something along the lines of your houserule. And it does not mean that your houserule isn't better and cleaner.

To be honest, as a community, we shouldn't be worried about determining RAW at all. Our concern should be determining and promoting the proper RAI.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Can you name any armor with an AC as high as 16 that permits a Dex bonus?

Do you not find it a balance issue to introduce an alternative that does permit this?

Well, that'll be up to Skyscraper to decide. However, I will say that for me personally... even though I am one of the strongest proponents of "Barkskin is like chainmail from a spell"... I can say that while the spell doesn't specify DEX mod should or shouldn't be calculated in it... I agree with you that for balance reasons I am choosing to run the spell a la standard issue Medium or Heavy Armor that gives an AC 16-- whether that be Scale Mail (which allows a +2 for DEX max to reach AC 16), or Chain Mail (which gives an AC 16 and no DEX bonus).

I figure if a druid could ordinarily start with an AC of 16 from armor at 1st level if it wasn't for that pesky "no metal" rule (before then adding in shields, cover, etc.)... getting that AC through the Barkskin spell is a worthwhile replacement.