D&D 5E Why the Druid Metal Restriction is Poorly Implemented

[Ohmyn]

A Paladruid, though, is usually known by a more common name- the Evangelizing Vegan.

Nah, the scientific term is Evangetarian.

 

[generic]

Tortle druids have the equivalent of built in plate armour, and, although not a bad choice for a melee druid who isn't a Moon druid, are a long way short of "monstrously powerful", even if they manage to pick up Booming Blade and/or GFB.

This is not a valid argument. Tortles are a poorly-balanced joke of a race that was released in conjunction with Tomb of Annihilation. Furthermore, I would argue that they are, in fact, very powerful. However, I could be wrong. I would appreciate a mathematical proof for your answer, if you could provide one.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Parmandur]

I think you're missing the joke?

The first 25 years was OD&D, AD&D, B/X, BECMI, and 2e.

I think your opinion of those editions ... is probably a little different than those of just about everyone else. If you are stating that there was never any removal of player agency (MAN, THAT TERM IS THE GOOD STUFF!), then I have some a Gygaxian Ethereal Mummy to sell you, cheap.

I'm using them definitively. A character only "won't" do something until they do it. There's been mechanical penalties for certain actions, but never a removal of player agency to perform said actions. Wizards in every edition of the game have been able to don any armor they wish, there'd just be penalties if they didn't otherwise have the training to do so. Even if they wanted to be an immobile chunk of metal for a bit, that was their choice. Monks have always been allowed to wear armor, they'd simply suffer mechanical penalties. Paladins have always been able to break their oaths, and there have been plenty of classes representing fallen Paladins. Heck, even the Sacred Vows of 3.5's Book of Exalted Deeds could be disavowed, it just had a heavy penalty for doing so.

Druids and metal armor in 5E? Nothing's defined, neither mechanically nor in narrative. It only says they won't, not that they can't, which simply becomes incorrect as soon as one does.



But now you're the one making a house rule. There's no such mechanical limitation placed in the book, nor in the Sage Advice. I repeat, a character only "won't" do something until they do it. There's no rule that says the X levels of Druid on the character sheet magically go away because they disagree with one of the flimsy, undefined story elements of the class.

The PHB adds for the Monk: "As a rule, monks care little for material wealth and are driven by a desire to accomplish a greater mission than merely slaying monsters and plundering their treasure."

Is every murder hobo Monk PC not a Monk? Would you rule if they ever become greedy, or act as a standard murder hobo alongside their Fighter PCs, that they're "no longer a Monk"? What would be the mechanical basis for that, if not a house rule? Do you take their Monk levels and powers away? Because they're obviously not a Monk, as per the class's story.

There is no mechanical effect, because mechanically there is no problem with a Druid wearing Scale Mail or any other Medium armor. The "Vegetarian won't eat meat" example from Sage Advise is perfect to illustrate what is going on here.

 

[Sacrosanct]

I think the sage advice rules are plenty sound enough. If someone disagrees (and it seems at least a few do), then change it at your table.

Easy solution

Oh, and as an aside, tanning leather isn’t as detailed as the OP describes. That’s a modern process. The process is basically stretch and scrape the fat off the leather, then use a solution created by cooking the brains of the animal with water to a mild temp and soak it. That’s it. Smelting and working iron is much more complex and very much is associated with civilization, where leather isn’t, which is the point of that Druidic ethos. Not how many steps are involved, but how we think of each item as it is associated with a modern society of the time.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Satyrn]

With a real druid, you're lucky if they even wear clothes.

"Radagast! Put the sack back on. We don't need to see your shillelagh and goodberries."

"So you admit my berries are good!"

 

[Oofta]

But now you're the one making a house rule. There's no such mechanical limitation placed in the book, nor in the Sage Advice. I repeat, a character only "won't" do something until they do it. There's no rule that says the X levels of Druid on the character sheet magically go away because they disagree with one of the flimsy, undefined story elements of the class.

It's clearly spelled out under proficiencies.
Armor: Light armor, medium armor, shields (druids will not wear armor or use shields made of metal)

There does not need to be a mechanical penalty, they will not do it. Ipso facto, if your character is wearing metal armor they are not a druid.

Don't like it, change the rules. Playing at my table and don't like it? Discuss how to get alternative non-metal armor (i.e. dragonscale armor), don't wear metal armor or find a different table.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*