Support the GITP forums on Patreon
Help support GITP's forums (and ongoing server maintenance) via Patreon
Page 8 of 21 FirstFirst 123456789101112131415161718 ... LastLast
Results 211 to 240 of 609
  1. - Top - End - #211
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    MonkGirl

    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    NW USA
    Gender
    Female

    Default Re: Land Druid and it's AC problems

    At the end of the day, my assumption as GM is this: there are rules to this game. Most are are good rules, a small handful are bad enough that I might need to step in and change them, and a few walk the line of maybe being stupid for various reasons but we are all playing the same game so until it breaks something we are just going to stick with it. Druid armor is that latter category. This isn't me being a bad GM, this isn't me worshiping RAW, this is just a stance that everyone at the table have some assumptions about what is going to go on in regard to the rules before we sit down.

    Can there be exceptions? Sure, talk to me about it... but don't assume I'll say yes before we begin. There are billions of character concepts in the world, if armored druid doesn't work try another... no matter how much you have played you haven't burned through them all... and if the only way you can possibly have fun is to play a concept that I have decided I won't adjust the existing rules for, then hey maybe I'll see you next campaign; I'd love to play with you again someday.

    I've turned away a character someone wanted to bring from another table because of their ridiculous magic item collection, I told them they could play if we 'set aside' some of the items they had because they didn't fit with what my campaign expectations were. He chose not to play with me in that game. We were still friends, we gamed together other times and will still do so. While there was discussion going on, even perhaps debate, no one accused anyone of power mongering and we were all adults about the results in the end.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tetrasodium View Post
    Your wizard engraves it on a special slate tablet instead of a book?.. sure
    Your monk draws hid ki through his ancestral grateaxe & needs to keep it strapped to his back in order to do so?... sure
    Your sorcerer went to a university where he learned how to use his powers?... sure, idgaf
    Your cleric of war was sent out by his church of the dark six to do pr by providing blessings from the mockery/traveler/etc to the soldiers but doesn't believe in the gods so much as the ideals & concepts we use them to represent?... um, ok.
    Wizard, Monk, Sorcerer... all examples of characters mechanically weaker or neutral in regards to their RP choices; all immediately approved without investigation. I play a sorcerer (in an AL game) that hates their own magic but can't stop it, I take no spells with material components, I function just fine despite the self-imposed limitation.

    The Cleric: depends on the setting. In Forgotten Realms, this wouldn't fly, in Eberron it would be fine. How specifics of magic works, particularly divine magic, in a setting are the domain of the DM and the setting writers. It isn't anyone powertripping, it is an assumption of the setting that both GM and player are sharing to create a story in.
    Last edited by Naanomi; 2017-03-06 at 09:26 AM.

  2. - Top - End - #212
    Banned
     
    WolfInSheepsClothing

    Join Date
    Aug 2010

    Default Re: Land Druid and it's AC problems

    Quote Originally Posted by Naanomi View Post
    Wizard, Monk, Sorcerer... all examples[see above] of characters mechanically weaker or neutral in regards to their RP choices; all immediately approved without investigation.
    Wearing of the remaining 4 of the 5 medium armor options in metal variants is likewise mechanically neutral unless you as the gm insist on punishing the 5th edition druid for the fact that 3.5 druids could be built in excessively powerful ways by making those 4 medium armor variants weaker if made from bone/ironwood/whatever as many people on the "it says they won't wear metal armor" side have suggested... in some cases they suggested things that were substantially weaker with lower ac, significantly reduced durability to require regular replacement based on how much damage the druid takes while wearing it, increased cost, crafting checks, and time spent to hunt the components regularly all in one single example.

    You can't say that it's fine & mechanically neutral when any other class does it and then not admit to simply being unable to refuse the urge to punish the druid if the druid does it. If you insist on punishing the druid, be honest with yourself & the players at your table.
    Last edited by Tetrasodium; 2017-03-06 at 09:44 AM.

  3. - Top - End - #213
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    MonkGirl

    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    NW USA
    Gender
    Female

    Default Re: Land Druid and it's AC problems

    My setting assumptions are built of 1e and 2e restrictions on Druid armor; when most of the details of my home campaign setting were created. 3.Xs tier system has nothing to do with it

  4. - Top - End - #214
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    FinnS's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Great White North
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Land Druid and it's AC problems

    Quote Originally Posted by Tetrasodium View Post
    Your wizard engraves it on a special slate tablet instead of a book?.. sure
    Your monk draws hid ki through his ancestral grateaxe & needs to keep it strapped to his back in order to do so?... sure
    Your sorcerer went to a university where he learned how to use his powers?... sure, idgaf
    Your cleric of war was sent out by his church of the dark six to do pr by providing blessings from the mockery/traveler/etc to the soldiers but doesn't believe in the gods so much as the ideals & cpncepts we use them to represent?... um, ok.




    Like all the peta folks in coal country with coal miner relatives who aren't going to like in the dark without electricity even if they consider electrical efficiency to be important? The celtic people certainly did not have any problems with metal as evidenced by nauda silverhand & what remains we have since dug up any more than the germanic barbarians. The only difference is that there is a reason why a barbarian won't wear armor (ie it's worse than UAD) while even the designers of 5e admit that the metal armor thing is just a sacred cow that skipped the slaughter.

    With that said, while a person raised in a place where trees/wood are an exotic & bizarre import from some far off unnatural place (i.e. above ground) because they are a dwarf/kobold/drow/from underdark/etc, they are going to have a different viewpoint on what is natural than one who worships the oak & yew trees they feel as bizarre.

    Why are they bizarre?... because by raw (since some people's entire argument is "no justification matters because raw says they wont & it's unreasonable to expect any decent gm to justify it in any way shape or form") the rp fluff actually supports them having a tie to a different part of nature


    but when the almost immediately defenders started with forcefully dismissing things like those with "raw says they won't, you picked your class now live with it" while acting like justifying why one bit of raw trumps another bit of raw with even the thinnest veneer of fluff was the gold standard mark of a great gm who shall not be coached by the unwashed masses of experienced & practicing gm's who aren't really interested in either playing d&d or playing a role playing game as opposed to running a daycare.
    Why are you continuing with this meta bull**** tirade about sacred cows and such when everyone in this thread has already said that they would be willing to work with the player on this in any homebrew campaign?

    At this point, it simply seems like you don't feel you need to ask permission of your DM in order to ignore a rule/restriction and that makes you steaming mad for some reason.

    You have said repeatedly that you wouldn't want me as your DM and even implied that I'm a bad one despite the fact that I have repeatedly said I would 100% work with the player on this.

    I'll tell ya one thing though, if you were at my table and acted like you have in this thread, I wouldn't have to do a damned thing about it as the other players at the table would tell you to stfu long before I ever had to.
    Last edited by FinnS; 2017-03-06 at 09:48 AM.

  5. - Top - End - #215
    Banned
     
    WolfInSheepsClothing

    Join Date
    Aug 2010

    Default Re: Land Druid and it's AC problems

    just
    Quote Originally Posted by Naanomi View Post
    My setting assumptions are built of 1e and 2e restrictions on Druid armor; when most of the details of my home campaign setting were created. 3.Xs tier system has nothing to do with it
    That's even worse because you are punishing the 5th edition druid for refluffing an irrelevant sacred cow by saying nonmetal options are not available and or must be worse in quality unless you are forcing wizards to spend days/weeks(?) preparing their spels like in 1st & second, placing level caps on all sorts of nonhuman races like elves & dwarves, placing Arcane spell failure rolls on any arcane/divine caster who wants to wear armor while casting, so on & so forth.

    If bone/ironwood/etc equivalents are just as good & readily available as the metal variants, it is as mechanically neutral as all the other stuff you admitted to be.... otherwise you are punishing the 5th edition druid alone for sins of the past

  6. - Top - End - #216
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    GnomeWizardGuy

    Join Date
    May 2015

    Default Re: Land Druid and it's AC problems

    Quote Originally Posted by Tetrasodium View Post
    punishing
    punishing
    punishing
    punishing
    punishing
    punishing
    punishing
    punishing
    punishing
    punishing
    Choosing to not allow players to ignore rules that are included in the game, regardless of you how personally feel about those rules (rules which, I might add, are right there for the player to see when they choose to play that class), is not punishing anyone.
    Please stop claiming that it is.
    Last edited by DivisibleByZero; 2017-03-06 at 09:59 AM.
    If you quote me and ask me questions,
    and I continue to not respond,
    it's probably because I have
    you on my Ignore list.
    Congratulations.

  7. - Top - End - #217
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    MonkGirl

    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    NW USA
    Gender
    Female

    Default Re: Land Druid and it's AC problems

    Quote Originally Posted by Tetrasodium View Post
    just

    That's even worse because you are punishing the 5th edition druid for refluffing an irrelevant sacred cow by saying nonmetal options are not available and or must be worse in quality unless you are forcing wizards to spend days/weeks(?) preparing their spels like in 1st & second, placing level caps on all sorts of nonhuman races like elves & dwarves, placing Arcane spell failure rolls on any arcane/divine caster who wants to wear armor while casting, so on & so forth.

    If bone/ironwood/etc equivalents are just as good & readily available as the metal variants, it is as mechanically neutral as all the other stuff you admitted to be.... otherwise you are punishing the 5th edition druid alone for sins of the past
    Except that the rules maintained the Druid armor restrictions where it dropped the rest. If the rule had been dropped I would have changed things to fit, fine... as I'm sure I'll do to make adjustments to my setting's treatment of psionics when those rules are finalized.

    For what it matters, nonmetal medium and heavy armors exist in my campaign just fine; but in most places are not as accessible and most (but not all) magic versions would be metal as a default.

    You seem to be operating under the assumption that Druids need medium armor options to be 'fairly balanced', and denying it is nerfing them. I disagree. I think they are fine as is, and giving them more armor options is buffing them (though not to unacceptable levels if people go that route with house rules). Just like I think it isn't unfair to wizards that warlocks wear light armor, I don't think a Druids armor restriction is 'punishing' anyone mechanically

  8. - Top - End - #218
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Land Druid and it's AC problems

    This thread is funny. You have purists claiming that Druids WON'T wear metal armor. Sure, sure, I get it. It's what the books says. It's definitely not fluff, no not at all /s


    But then I'd have to ask are you against lawful half-elves too? After all, the book very clearly says "Alignment. Half-elves share the chaotic bent of their elven heritage. They value both personal freedom and creative expression, demonstrating neither love of leaders nor desire for followers. They chafe at rules, resent others' demands, and sometimes prove unreliable, or at least unpredictable."


    Well... ****. Apparently my lawful good Half-Elf Paladin wasn't RAW.
    Last edited by dejarnjc; 2017-03-06 at 10:09 AM.

  9. - Top - End - #219
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Tanarii's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2015

    Default Re: Land Druid and it's AC problems

    Quote Originally Posted by Citan View Post
    I'm really baffled to see how some people here are defending the rule as "always 100% apply go f*** yourself" when the game creator themselves explicitely tell it can be waived.
    (told in another way, they put -good- character concept above world fluff tradition. Which is imo the most sensible choice).
    Sad, sad example of "thinking dictatorship" XD
    The Sage Advice ruling in no way says that this choice is the players and the players alone. In fact, it specifically says talk to your DM. It also goes to great length to explain why the rule is there so that any DM that is considering house-ruling it knows exactly why they might want to do so, or not do so. For example ...

    Quote Originally Posted by FinnS View Post
    Why are you continuing with this meta bull**** tirade about sacred cows and such when everyone in this thread has already said that they would be willing to work with the player on this in any homebrew campaign?
    I know it's throwing fuel on the fire, but I wouldn't in my current home brew campaign, which will hopefully run the lifespan of 5e. (I might in a one shot.)

    A) I have a lot of players rotating in and out of multiple sessions, and it's open table, similar to AL. So I prefer overarching rules that apply to everyone, not homebrew exceptions.

    B) I've intentionally chosen to set up this campaign with a certain grognard flavor, and that includes strong class archetypes without major refluffing.

    When (not if) a player comes asking if they could make this or that or the other a specific character exception, I say no and explain why. I point out it's in the campaign rules they read, including why. You did read those, right? Most commonly this happens with players asking for an exception to the no-multiclassing or no-feats rule, for "character concept" reasons, and using the argument "but it's not any more powerful mechanically". I haven't had anyone ask for an exception to the Druids won't wear Metal Amror rule yet, so I have no idea what argument they'd use, since the not mechanically more powerful argument doesn't apply in this case.
    Last edited by Tanarii; 2017-03-06 at 10:24 AM.

  10. - Top - End - #220
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    PirateWench

    Join Date
    Oct 2015

    Default Re: Land Druid and it's AC problems

    Quote Originally Posted by Tanarii View Post
    The Sage Advice ruling in no way says that this choice is the players and the players alone. In fact, it specifically says talk to your DM. It also goes to great length to explain why the rule is there so that any DM that is considering house-ruling it knows exactly why they might want to do so, or not do so. For example ...


    I know it's throwing fuel on the fire, but I wouldn't in my current home brew campaign, which will hopefully run the lifespan of 5e. (I might in a one shot.)

    A) I have a lot of players rotating in and out of multiple sessions, and it's open table, similar to AL. So I prefer overarching rules that apply to everyone, not homebrew exceptions.

    B) I've intentionally chosen to set up this campaign with a certain grognard flavor, and that includes strong class archetypes without major refluffing.

    When (not if) a player comes asking if they could make this or that or the other a specific character exception, I say no and explain why. I point out it's in the campaign rules they read, including why. You did read those, right? Most commonly this happens with players asking for an exception to the no-multiclassing or no-feats rule, for "character concept" reasons, and using the argument "but it's not any more powerful mechanically". I haven't had anyone ask for an exception to the Druids won't wear Metal Amror rule yet, so I have no idea what argument they'd use, since the not mechanically more powerful argument doesn't apply in this case.
    Just like with Naanomi, specific setting rules can fundamentally change classes to fit a certain expectation. Infernal Warlocks may be required to be Evil in a setting because the Devils there would refuse to give their power to someone without their goals aligning. A Paladin may have to follow specific variations of the tenets because only select orders possess the knowledge to become Paladins and so those not of the orders can't become them (and presumably there is either a needed ritual to take an oath or they hunt down Paladins who fall). Druids may have a fundamental belief that wearing metal armor or shields (but not apparently anything else...) is wrong and so mentally are bound to organic armor else they physically no longer are Druids.

    Setting rules frame the world. While a player can request to break the norms (a fallen Paladin who is being hunted by his forme friends, a warlock whose devil patron gifted the powers out of gratitude for aid, a Druid who was taught by spirits of the mountain the ways of the Druid and so has fundamental beliefs that are equally rigid, but different, etc.), the DM knows whether it would even be a possible character in the world.
    Quote Originally Posted by krugaan
    All it takes is once:

    "Grandpa, tells us that story about the Ricalison the Great again!"

    Hours later...

    "... and that, kids, is how he conquered the world with dancing lights."

  11. - Top - End - #221
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    FinnS's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Great White North
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Land Druid and it's AC problems

    Quote Originally Posted by Tanarii View Post

    I know it's throwing fuel on the fire, but I wouldn't in my current home brew campaign, which will hopefully run the lifespan of 5e. (I might in a one shot.)

    A) I have a lot of players rotating in and out of multiple sessions, and it's open table, similar to AL. So I prefer overarching rules that apply to everyone, not homebrew exceptions.

    B) I've intentionally chosen to set up this campaign with a certain grognard flavor, and that includes strong class archetypes without major refluffing.

    When (not if) a player comes asking if they could make this or that or the other a specific character exception, I say no and explain why. I point out it's in the campaign rules they read, including why. You did read those, right? Most commonly this happens with players asking for an exception to the no-multiclassing or no-feats rule, for "character concept" reasons, and using the argument "but it's not any more powerful mechanically". I haven't had anyone ask for an exception to the Druids won't wear Metal Amror rule yet, so I have no idea what argument they'd use, since the not mechanically more powerful argument doesn't apply in this case.
    Naw, I understand and that's fair.
    The players know exactly what they will be sitting down for so it shouldn't be an issue.

  12. - Top - End - #222
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Imp

    Join Date
    Feb 2017

    Default Re: Land Druid and it's AC problems

    Quote Originally Posted by Tetrasodium View Post
    Your wizard engraves it on a special slate tablet instead of a book?.. sure
    Your monk draws hid ki through his ancestral grateaxe & needs to keep it strapped to his back in order to do so?... sure
    Your sorcerer went to a university where he learned how to use his powers?... sure, idgaf
    And it's fine to agree to this. But don't act like Druid is the only class that has RAW RP restriction, or that it's just some guy worshiping a sacred cow.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tetrasodium View Post
    Your cleric of war was sent out by his church of the dark six to do pr by providing blessings from the mockery/traveler/etc to the soldiers but doesn't believe in the gods so much as the ideals & cpncepts we use them to represent?... um, ok.
    You ignored the part where my exemple talked about "no god nor concept".

    Quote Originally Posted by dejarnjc View Post
    This thread is funny. You have purists claiming that Druids WON'T wear metal armor. Sure, sure, I get it. It's what the books says. It's definitely not fluff, no not at all /s


    But then I'd have to ask are you against lawful half-elves too? After all, the book very clearly says "Alignment. Half-elves share the chaotic bent of their elven heritage. They value both personal freedom and creative expression, demonstrating neither love of leaders nor desire for followers. They chafe at rules, resent others' demands, and sometimes prove unreliable, or at least unpredictable."


    Well... ****. Apparently my lawful good Half-Elf Paladin wasn't RAW.

    Except the books clearly say that alignments tendencies aren't absolute.
    Last edited by Unoriginal; 2017-03-06 at 11:33 AM.

  13. - Top - End - #223
    Orc in the Playground
     
    tkuremento's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Land Druid and it's AC problems

    Quote Originally Posted by dejarnjc View Post
    This thread is funny. You have purists claiming that Druids WON'T wear metal armor. Sure, sure, I get it. It's what the books says. It's definitely not fluff, no not at all /s


    But then I'd have to ask are you against lawful half-elves too? After all, the book very clearly says "Alignment. Half-elves share the chaotic bent of their elven heritage. They value both personal freedom and creative expression, demonstrating neither love of leaders nor desire for followers. They chafe at rules, resent others' demands, and sometimes prove unreliable, or at least unpredictable."


    Well... ****. Apparently my lawful good Half-Elf Paladin wasn't RAW.

    Spoiler: PHB page 17
    Show
    Alignment
    Most races have tendencies toward certain alignments, described in this entry. These are not binding for player characters, but considering why your dwarf is chaotic. for example, in defiance of lawful dwarf society can help you better define your character.


    As you can see, not exactly the same. This is of course assuming there isn't a similar statement in the book about druid's nonmetal-ness.

  14. - Top - End - #224
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Flumph

    Join Date
    Dec 2014

    Default Re: Land Druid and it's AC problems

    Quote Originally Posted by Tanarii View Post
    When (not if) a player comes asking if they could make this or that or the other a specific character exception, I say no and explain why. I point out it's in the campaign rules they read, including why. You did read those, right? Most commonly this happens with players asking for an exception to the no-multiclassing or no-feats rule, for "character concept" reasons, and using the argument "but it's not any more powerful mechanically". I haven't had anyone ask for an exception to the Druids won't wear Metal Amror rule yet, so I have no idea what argument they'd use, since the not mechanically more powerful argument doesn't apply in this case.
    This is also why I don't allow it.

    I like D&D the way it is. I like that there are classes and that those classes have restrictions.

    It would be like if you are playing improv games and ignore the parameters of the game you are playing because that's just what you want to do and no one can tell you otherwise.

    Well, the whole point is to come up with something within those parameters. That's the fun.

    If your character won't wear metal armour, then they won't and saying otherwise is breaking the contract of the game.

  15. - Top - End - #225
    Troll in the Playground
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Below sea level
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Land Druid and it's AC problems

    Quote Originally Posted by georgie_leech View Post
    So if I'm following this right, DM's that won't let their Druids wear Metal Armor are wannabe tyrants who to crush all free will and player choice and are just the worst, and Players with Druids that want to wear Metal Armor are whiny special snowflakes who throw tantrums if they don't get their way.

    The War on Straw certainly seems to be progressing nicely.
    You know, I used to have a fairly dependable Zippo lighter laying about somewhere amidst my stuff....
    Warlock Poetry?
    Or ways to use me in game?
    Better grab a drink...

    Currently ruining Strahd's day - Avatar by the Outstanding Smuchsmuch

    First Ordained Jr. Tormlet by LoyalPaladin

  16. - Top - End - #226
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    LordVonDerp's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2013

    Default Re: Land Druid and it's AC problems

    Quote Originally Posted by FinnS View Post
    At this point, it simply seems like you don't feel you need to ask permission of your DM in order to ignore a rule/restriction and that makes you steaming mad for some reason.
    Except that there is no rule or restriction preventing a druid from wearing metal armor unless the DM creates one.

  17. - Top - End - #227
    Banned
     
    WolfInSheepsClothing

    Join Date
    Aug 2010

    Default Re: Land Druid and it's AC problems

    Quote Originally Posted by tkuremento View Post
    Spoiler: PHB page 17
    Show
    Alignment
    Most races have tendencies toward certain alignments, described in this entry. These are not binding for player characters, but considering why your dwarf is chaotic. for example, in defiance of lawful dwarf society can help you better define your character.


    As you can see, not exactly the same. This is of course assuming there isn't a similar statement in the book about druid's nonmetal-ness.
    I'd say multiple statement in the DMG easily covering it is more than close enough to the phb
    Spoiler: dmg26
    Show
    [/b]Listen to the players' ideas, and say yes if you can. [/b]
    Even if you want all the characters to have grown up in
    the starting town, consider allowing a recent arrival or
    a transplant if the player's story is convincing enough.
    Suggest alterations to a character's story so it better fits
    your world, or weave the first threads of your campaign
    into that story.

    Spoiler: dmg263
    Show
    • Will the rule improve the game?
    • Will my players like it?
    If you're confident that the answer to both questions is
    yes, then you have nothing to lose by giving it a try.
    Urge
    your players to provide feedback. If the rule or game
    element isn't functioning as intended or isn't adding
    much to your game, you can refine it or ditch it. No
    matter what a rule's source, a rule serves you, not the
    other way around.
    Beware of adding anything to your game that allows
    a character to concentrate on more than one effect at
    a time, use more than one reaction or bonus action
    per round, or attune to more than three magic items
    at a time. Rules and game elements that override the
    rules for concentration, reactions, bonus actions, and
    magic item attunement can seriously unbalance or
    overcomplicate your game.


    Spoiler: dmg287
    Show
    [quote]For example, you might decide that bards, sorcerers,
    warlocks, and wizards represent the magical traditions
    of four different races or cultures. The bardic colleges
    might be closed to everyone except elves, dragonborn
    might be the only creatures capable of becoming
    sorcerers, and all warlocks in your world might be
    human. You could break that down still further: bards
    of the College of Lore could be high elves, and bards
    of the College of War could be wood elves. Gnomes
    discovered the school of illusion, so all wizards who
    specialize in that school are gnomes. Different human
    cultures produce warlocks with different pacts, and
    so on. Similarly, different cleric domains might reflect
    entirely separate religions associated with different
    races or cultures.
    You decide how flexible you want to be in allowing
    a player character to break these restrictions. Can a
    half-elf live among the elves and study their bardic
    traditions? Can a dwarf stumble into a warlock pact
    despite having no connection to a culture that normally
    produces warlocks? As always, it's better to say yes and
    use the player's desire as an opportunity to develop the
    character's story and that of your world, rather than
    shutting down possibilities
    . [quote]


    The folks with settings time locked in the restrictions of previous editions better get to implementing ASF, restricting uncanny dodge/evasion to light armor, setting the number of hours/days/weeks it takes wizards to prepare spells of given levels, racial level caps, always x alignment restrictions, define the % of wealth a cleric(paladin too?) needs to "donate" to their church, so on and so forth.... That... or admit that it's not about preserving tradition & all about punishing druids for sins of the past to maintain this particular bit of fluff alone in absence of all the other bits fluff shot dead through the versions
    Last edited by Tetrasodium; 2017-03-06 at 12:08 PM.

  18. - Top - End - #228
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Imp

    Join Date
    Feb 2017

    Default Re: Land Druid and it's AC problems

    Quote Originally Posted by LordVonDerp View Post
    Except that there is no rule or restriction preventing a druid from wearing metal armor unless the DM creates one.
    "PROFICIENCIES Armor: Light armor, medium armor, shields (druids will not wear armor or use shields made of metal) " PHB p.65

    "SACRED PLANTS AND WOOD A druid holds certain plants to be sacred, particularl yalder, ash, birch,elder, hazel, holly, juniper, mistletoe, oak,r owan, willow, and yew. Druids often use such plants as part of a spellcastíng focus, incorporating lengths of oak or yew or sprigs of mistletoe. Similarly, a druid uses such woods to make other objects, such as weapons and shields. Yew is assocíated wíth death and rebirth,so weapon handles for scimitars or sickles might be fashioned from it. Ash is associated with life and oak with strength. These woods make excellent hafts or whole weapons, such as clubs or quarterstaffs,as well as shields. Alder is assocíated wíth air,and it might be used for thrown weapons, such as darts or javelins. Druids from regions that lack the plants described here have chosen other plants to take on similar uses. For instance,a druid of a desert region might value the yucca tree and cactus plants." PHB p.66

    "Multiclassing Proficiencies: Druid: Light armor, medium armor, shields (druids will not wear armor use shields made of metal)" PHB p.164


    And that's all what the game says about Druids and armor.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tetrasodium View Post
    The folks with settings time locked in the restrictions of previous editions
    Or you could be polite and consider that they choose to follow the restriction of this edition.
    Last edited by Unoriginal; 2017-03-06 at 12:07 PM.

  19. - Top - End - #229
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Tanarii's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2015

    Default Re: Land Druid and it's AC problems

    Quote Originally Posted by Tetrasodium View Post
    The folks with settings time locked in the restrictions of previous editions better get to implementing ASF, restricting uncanny dodge/evasion to light armor, setting the number of hours/days/weeks it takes wizards to prepare spells of given levels, define the % of wealth a cleric(paladin too?) needs to "donate" to their church, so on and so forth.... That... or admit that it's not about preserving tradition & all about punishing druids for sins of the past to maintain this particular bit of fluff alone in absence of all the other bits fluff shot dead through the versions
    First of all, I'm locked in wanting something like the feel of BECMI, but with a looser version of 3e's skill system tacked on. Luckily for me, 5e provides something that approximates (roughly) that feeling in it's base rules, without the optional Feats and Multiclassing rules. So ... not really 3e at all, which didn't feel anything like BECMI. (edit: Running 5e ToTM really helps btw.)

    Second of all, luckily for me, I can do it using 5e straight out of the book when it comes to Druids not wearing Metal armor. Because that's the rule in 5e. Let's be clear here. There is a 5e rule for this, and it is that Druids will not wear Metal armor. That's RAW. Done and done. I don't have to add any rules into the game to accomplish it. I'd have to remove a rule out of the game if I wanted to stop "preserving tradition & all about punishing druids for sins of the past".

    Edit2:
    Quote Originally Posted by FinnS View Post
    Naw, I understand and that's fair.
    The players know exactly what they will be sitting down for so it shouldn't be an issue.
    For sure. I was jumping off your point to make it clear that technically, there's at least one person that in his current campaign wasn't willing to remove the rule for Druids to be allowed to (make the choice to) wear metal armor. But that is in no way an indictment of anyone that would be willing to do so. It's standing up to refute anyone trying to claim doing so is badwrongfun or Bad DM.
    Last edited by Tanarii; 2017-03-06 at 12:21 PM.

  20. - Top - End - #230
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    GnomeWizardGuy

    Join Date
    May 2015

    Default Re: Land Druid and it's AC problems

    Quote Originally Posted by LordVonDerp View Post
    Except that the restriction which states that a druid won't don metal armor is mentioned multiple times throughout the PHB.
    Fixed it for you.
    If you quote me and ask me questions,
    and I continue to not respond,
    it's probably because I have
    you on my Ignore list.
    Congratulations.

  21. - Top - End - #231
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Mar 2006

    Default Re: Land Druid and it's AC problems

    Quote Originally Posted by FinnS View Post
    Naw, I understand and that's fair.
    The players know exactly what they will be sitting down for so it shouldn't be an issue.
    even if they don't know when they're sitting down, the proper interaction when your request is rejected is:
    "hey can I do this thing the books say my class never does"
    "No"
    "oh okay"

  22. - Top - End - #232
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Imp

    Join Date
    Feb 2017

    Default Re: Land Druid and it's AC problems

    Do people complain that by RAW, only a Rogue understand Thief Can't and only a Druid understand Druidic?

  23. - Top - End - #233
    Orc in the Playground
     
    tkuremento's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Land Druid and it's AC problems

    [QUOTE=Tetrasodium;21777905]I'd say multiple statement in the DMG easily covering it is more than close enough to the phb



    Spoiler: dmg287
    Show
    [quote]For example, you might decide that bards, sorcerers,
    warlocks, and wizards represent the magical traditions
    of four different races or cultures. The bardic colleges
    might be closed to everyone except elves, dragonborn
    might be the only creatures capable of becoming
    sorcerers, and all warlocks in your world might be
    human. You could break that down still further: bards
    of the College of Lore could be high elves, and bards
    of the College of War could be wood elves. Gnomes
    discovered the school of illusion, so all wizards who
    specialize in that school are gnomes. Different human
    cultures produce warlocks with different pacts, and
    so on. Similarly, different cleric domains might reflect
    entirely separate religions associated with different
    races or cultures.
    You decide how flexible you want to be in allowing
    a player character to break these restrictions. Can a
    half-elf live among the elves and study their bardic
    traditions? Can a dwarf stumble into a warlock pact
    despite having no connection to a culture that normally
    produces warlocks? As always, it's better to say yes and
    use the player's desire as an opportunity to develop the
    character's story and that of your world, rather than
    shutting down possibilities
    .

    The folks with settings time locked in the restrictions of previous editions better get to implementing ASF, restricting uncanny dodge/evasion to light armor, setting the number of hours/days/weeks it takes wizards to prepare spells of given levels, racial level caps, always x alignment restrictions, define the % of wealth a cleric(paladin too?) needs to "donate" to their church, so on and so forth.... That... or admit that it's not about preserving tradition & all about punishing druids for sins of the past to maintain this particular bit of fluff alone in absence of all the other bits fluff shot dead through the versions
    26 and 287 are referring to story if you look within context. Whilst 263 does say changing rules, that still falls under technical houserule. I'm not against homebrew, houserules, etc. However, that is what it is. Without that it simply states they will not wear metal armor, end statement.

    Edit: I have no idea why this post looks so broken, it is simply what I got from clicking reply.
    Last edited by tkuremento; 2017-03-06 at 12:34 PM.

  24. - Top - End - #234
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    GnomeWizardGuy

    Join Date
    May 2015

    Default Re: Land Druid and it's AC problems

    Quote Originally Posted by tkuremento View Post
    Whilst 263 does say changing rules, that still falls under technical houserule. I'm not against homebrew, houserules, etc. However, that is what it is. Without that it simply states they will not wear metal armor, end statement.
    Yeah, I find it hilarious that someone is using that particular blurb here.
    DMG: Hey, if you want to be super restrictive in your game and only allow certain races to take certain classes/subclasses, you can totally do that, but you should be willing to have a little wiggle room.
    Players: THAT MEANS MY DRUID CAN WEAR METAL ARMOR, BECAUSE THE DMG TELLS THE DM TO SAY YES!!!!!!!
    If you quote me and ask me questions,
    and I continue to not respond,
    it's probably because I have
    you on my Ignore list.
    Congratulations.

  25. - Top - End - #235
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Tanarii's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2015

    Default Re: Land Druid and it's AC problems

    Quote Originally Posted by Unoriginal View Post
    Do people complain that by RAW, only a Rogue understand Thief Can't and only a Druid understand Druidic?
    In my experience ... yes. Lots of people think it's stupid that no other class can learn it. And in campaigns that allow multiclassing, some players that want to think of class levels as a bundle of abilities with no explicit fluff attached don't like that their character must learn these languages.

  26. - Top - End - #236
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    LordVonDerp's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2013

    Default Re: Land Druid and it's AC problems

    Quote Originally Posted by ad_hoc View Post
    I like D&D the way it is. I like that there are classes and that those classes have restrictions..
    Well "the way it is" in 5th edition includes some druids who wear metal armor.

    Quote Originally Posted by ad_hoc View Post
    If your character won't wear metal armour, then they won't and saying otherwise is breaking the contract of the game.
    Which means you can also be someone who will wear metal armor, and since character and class are completely independent from each other, said character can still be a druid.

  27. - Top - End - #237
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Flumph

    Join Date
    Dec 2014

    Default Re: Land Druid and it's AC problems

    Quote Originally Posted by LordVonDerp View Post
    Well "the way it is" in 5th edition includes some druids who wear metal armor.


    Which means you can also be someone who will wear metal armor, and since character and class are completely independent from each other, said character can still be a druid.
    This simply isn't true.

    I'm at a loss for anything else to say because the rules are crystal clear.

  28. - Top - End - #238
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Imp

    Join Date
    Feb 2017

    Default Re: Land Druid and it's AC problems

    Quote Originally Posted by LordVonDerp View Post
    Well "the way it is" in 5th edition includes some druids who wear metal armor.
    Which Druids?

    Quote Originally Posted by LordVonDerp View Post
    Which means you can also be someone who will wear metal armor, and since character and class are completely independent from each other, said character can still be a druid.
    Characters and classes aren't completely independent from each others.

  29. - Top - End - #239
    Orc in the Playground
     
    tkuremento's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Land Druid and it's AC problems

    Quote Originally Posted by Unoriginal View Post
    Characters and classes aren't completely independent from each others.
    Agreed, unless they meant Character Level and Class Level, But that is just levels for determining certain abilities and has nothing to do with the restrictions put in place.
    Last edited by tkuremento; 2017-03-06 at 01:02 PM.

  30. - Top - End - #240
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Tanarii's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2015

    Default Re: Land Druid and it's AC problems

    Quote Originally Posted by Unoriginal View Post
    Characters and classes aren't completely independent from each others.
    It depends if you're talking about the Class name, or an in-game label. For example, any character with the Acolyte background, or who is otherwise a priest in a religious order, might reasonable be called a cleric in-game. Or possibly only members of religious militaristic holy orders might. And priest of the old faith might be considered a Druid in a given campaign, be they Bard, Druid or Nature Cleric

    Of course, given the (side issue) topic of discussion on Metal Armors is clearly about the Druid class, not an in-game label, the latter is irrelevant. Edit: Of course, someone who believes that character fluff is completely independent of mechanical package might think this is relevant.
    Last edited by Tanarii; 2017-03-06 at 01:08 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •