Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ohmyn" data-source="post: 7625751" data-attributes="member: 6999115">Not a frequent topic on message boards? Then I'm confused by the amount of &quot;great, this discussion again.&quot; That also raises the question as to why the Sage Advice felt the need to add it to the compendium if they didn't feel it needed further clarification. It's also likely less frequented by the fact that Druid is hands down the least played class in 5E, according to gaming statistics, even less so than the Ranger class with all of its problems. The Druid class is simply filled with too much ambiguity in their wording.Also, no, fluff and lore are not rules, at least not mechanical ones. Paladin oaths are now part of their fluff and lore, but they can ignore them, it just so happens the system puts in potential penalties for ignoring them. Deities are a part of a Clerics fluff and lore, but there is no system in place for punishing them if they don't want anything to do with that, so they don't need a deity unless the DM says otherwise. Warlocks form a pact with a greater being as part of their fluff and lore, but DMs almost universally ignore the fact that the Warlock has made a pact with anything, because there's no mechanical limitations in the system for if the character ignores the pact. Not wearing metal armor is part of the fluff and lore of the Druid class, but it is also one that comes with no mechanical limitations of penalties if the Druid chooses to ignore it. I don't see why the Druid is regarded so differently in this sense than every other class with lore.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ohmyn, post: 7625751, member: 6999115"] Not a frequent topic on message boards? Then I'm confused by the amount of "great, this discussion again." That also raises the question as to why the Sage Advice felt the need to add it to the compendium if they didn't feel it needed further clarification. It's also likely less frequented by the fact that Druid is hands down the least played class in 5E, according to gaming statistics, even less so than the Ranger class with all of its problems. The Druid class is simply filled with too much ambiguity in their wording. Also, no, fluff and lore are not rules, at least not mechanical ones. Paladin oaths are now part of their fluff and lore, but they can ignore them, it just so happens the system puts in potential penalties for ignoring them. Deities are a part of a Clerics fluff and lore, but there is no system in place for punishing them if they don't want anything to do with that, so they don't need a deity unless the DM says otherwise. Warlocks form a pact with a greater being as part of their fluff and lore, but DMs almost universally ignore the fact that the Warlock has made a pact with anything, because there's no mechanical limitations in the system for if the character ignores the pact. Not wearing metal armor is part of the fluff and lore of the Druid class, but it is also one that comes with no mechanical limitations of penalties if the Druid chooses to ignore it. I don't see why the Druid is regarded so differently in this sense than every other class with lore. [/QUOTE]

Verification