Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ohmyn" data-source="post: 7625206" data-attributes="member: 6999115">Being able to read the books as a whole instead of focusing on one sentence indicates that the Druid just performed an action not appropriate for the class once they used a non-Druid weapon. They also of course won't gain the appropriate benefits of being proficient with the weapon, and may suffer any appropriate penalties. The DMG has a table for penalties to impose on players who perform non-class appropriate actions. Any other penalty on them for doing so would be a house rule, as it's purely at DM discretion due to no further listed mechanical penalties. Anyone who thinks &quot;forbidden&quot; means &quot;physically impossible under scientific law&quot; falls into my earlier category of either not being able to read, or not being able to use common sense.The Cleric also had the limit of &quot;All are likewise forbidden to use edged and/orpointed weapons which shed blood.&quot; What happened if they used one? There was no penalty given, so the only penalty as per the RAW would be the penalties listed in the DMG for doing something inappropriate for your class. A Cleric still had the physical capacity to pick up a dagger and use it to cut a rope, and could still wave it around like a wand in combat if they so wished. As per the rules, it was simply up to the DM to decide if the action they had performed was against the tenets of their class, and then choose the punishment from the provided table based on the severity of their offenses.In the case of Druids, it already said &quot;druids are unable to use anyarmor or shields other than leather armor and wooden shields (metallicarmor spoils their magical powers)&quot;. The penalty for doing so was already explained; it spoils their magical powers. They could still opt to strap on a metal shield, but bye-bye magical powers. This means it's less explicit to be automatically considered a &quot;non-class like behavior&quot;, since it was not stated as a taboo, and there could be times where it's appropriate to wear metal temporarily if it achieved their goal without need for their magic. The non-class behavior rules were heavily up to DM discretion, but they still very much existed as the rule to enforce for when characters acted outside of their designated feature blocks.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ohmyn, post: 7625206, member: 6999115"] Being able to read the books as a whole instead of focusing on one sentence indicates that the Druid just performed an action not appropriate for the class once they used a non-Druid weapon. They also of course won't gain the appropriate benefits of being proficient with the weapon, and may suffer any appropriate penalties. The DMG has a table for penalties to impose on players who perform non-class appropriate actions. Any other penalty on them for doing so would be a house rule, as it's purely at DM discretion due to no further listed mechanical penalties. Anyone who thinks "forbidden" means "physically impossible under scientific law" falls into my earlier category of either not being able to read, or not being able to use common sense. The Cleric also had the limit of "[I]All are likewise forbidden to use edged and/orpointed weapons which shed blood.[/I]" What happened if they used one? There was no penalty given, so the only penalty as per the RAW would be the penalties listed in the DMG for doing something inappropriate for your class. A Cleric still had the physical capacity to pick up a dagger and use it to cut a rope, and could still wave it around like a wand in combat if they so wished. As per the rules, it was simply up to the DM to decide if the action they had performed was against the tenets of their class, and then choose the punishment from the provided table based on the severity of their offenses. In the case of Druids, it already said "[I]druids are unable to use anyarmor or shields other than leather armor and wooden shields (metallicarmor spoils their magical powers)[/I]". The penalty for doing so was already explained; it spoils their magical powers. They could still opt to strap on a metal shield, but bye-bye magical powers. This means it's less explicit to be automatically considered a "non-class like behavior", since it was not stated as a taboo, and there could be times where it's appropriate to wear metal temporarily if it achieved their goal without need for their magic. The non-class behavior rules were heavily up to DM discretion, but they still very much existed as the rule to enforce for when characters acted outside of their designated feature blocks. [/QUOTE]

Verification