| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Goldforge |
Posted - 01 Sep 2005 : 17:49:00
Alright, I'm not sure where to post this question, so I'll drop it down here.
I'm playing a game based on the 3e rules and I've recently got into a heated debate concerning Druids and why every Druid other than Mielikki Druids can't wear metal armour. My arguement was that Druids of Talos, because they venerate storms and natural disasters should not be subject to his rule. Talos himself hates nature(The plant and animal kind of Nature, i'm guessing) so why would he sanction his Druids from using Metal if it is considered an affront to Nature? Why would Talos not allow his Druids to use a material that other, more goodly and nice, Deities of Nature label as an affront.
We debated for a while, and we couldn't even come up with half a reason why Druids of Mielikki are allowed to use Metal. It's especially odd that Talassan Druids can't when they have more of a reason to wear Metal then their Mielikki Druid counterparts.
Were certain Nature Dieties such as Auril and Talos left forgotten when it came to listing diety specific class rule exceptions? Could someone tell me, with facts or an authoritive voice, why Talassan Druids can't wear Metal armour? |
| 19 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 03 Sep 2005 : 18:00:55
quote:
Originally posted by Goldforge
Wooly, that's a good point you made, but why would Talos then let his Clerics use metal if he forbids it for his Druids? Remmember, Talos himself wears a Breastplate, so why would he wear something that he was preaching to his Druids as 'unnatural'?
Because the druids are in tune with his natural aspect. The clerics are more in tune with the destructive aspect -- and metal has a lot of uses for destroying stuff.
I don't know, really, it's all a guess.  |
| Goldforge |
Posted - 03 Sep 2005 : 10:31:39
quote:
Nothing special about talassan druid, but druids in general would see metal armour as unnatural. In a way, I see it sort of like vegetarians: A vegetarian sees why its wrong to eat meat, but I (a meat lover) don't necessarily see the reasoning behind it. To eat meat goes against their oath.
Yes but each vegetarian has a reason, maybe a differant one, to not eat meat. One could of had a traumatic experiance, one could just not like the taste of meat.
Wooly, that's a good point you made, but why would Talos then let his Clerics use metal if he forbids it for his Druids? Remmember, Talos himself wears a Breastplate, so why would he wear something that he was preaching to his Druids as 'unnatural'? |
| Sir Luther Cromwell |
Posted - 03 Sep 2005 : 00:43:39
quote:
That's the question. What is 'unnatural' to a Talassan? Certainly not a bit of Armour. Unnatural to a Talassan would be something that is very hard, if not impossible to destroy. Why would Talos stop his Druids from using Metal Armour when he himself wears a Breastplate of it. His Clerics can use it too. What's so special about Druids that he makes them swear an oath not to use it?
Nothing special about talassan druid, but druids in general would see metal armour as unnatural. In a way, I see it sort of like vegetarians: A vegetarian sees why its wrong to eat meat, but I (a meat lover) don't necessarily see the reasoning behind it. To eat meat goes against their oath. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 02 Sep 2005 : 21:57:51
Talos is all about destruction, right? Metal armor has to be worked -- hence, it is something that can be destroyed. It is also more permanent than other types of armor -- and permanence, again, is not something Talos is cool with.
At least, that's a possible reason. |
| Goldforge |
Posted - 02 Sep 2005 : 20:01:59
quote:
Originally posted by warlockco
Where in the rules does it say that Druids of Mielikki can wear metal armor? I don't recall ever seeing that rule.
Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting handbook, page 23. |
| warlockco |
Posted - 02 Sep 2005 : 19:18:59
Where in the rules does it say that Druids of Mielikki can wear metal armor? I don't recall ever seeing that rule. |
| Talanfir Swiftfeet |
Posted - 02 Sep 2005 : 18:36:05
Yeah I know what you mean. Itīs just that I usually get annoyed when someone Comes along and says "he/she shouldnīt do that. That is against the personality of the (place name here). Talos is chatoic so maybe he felt like that one day and decreed to all of his druids that it is so. |
| Goldforge |
Posted - 02 Sep 2005 : 18:28:21
quote:
because the allpowerfull Ed of the Greenwood says so (or hasnīt said otherwise  ).
Yes, I know -that-. I'm just trying to find a viable IC reason I can use. I understand the game mechanics reasons, but I need an IC one to justify the rule, especially as now it is being questioned. |
| Talanfir Swiftfeet |
Posted - 02 Sep 2005 : 18:26:18
quote:
Originally posted by Goldforge
That's the question. What is 'unnatural' to a Talassan? Certainly not a bit of Armour. Unnatural to a Talassan would be something that is very hard, if not impossible to destroy. Why would Talos stop his Druids from using Metal Armour when he himself wears a Breastplate of it. His Clerics can use it too. What's so special about Druids that he makes them swear an oath not to use it?
because the allpowerfull Ed of the Greenwood says so (or hasnīt said otherwise ). |
| Goldforge |
Posted - 02 Sep 2005 : 18:21:18
quote:
That, and, in many regards the use of metal armour in itself is seen as very unnatural by druids. The use of a scimitar is allowed because the scimitar is seen as a weapon that is less 'civilized' than the long sword or bastard sword. Not to mention, curved blades just seem to have a druidic feel to them. Armour is civilized, as well as straight swords.
On the issues of talos and thunder storms in nature. People think nature and they often think: happy trees, fairies, unicorns and fey that dance around and grow flowers everywhere. When really, yes this is an aspect of nature, but nature is to be both respected AND feared. Lighting storms, forest fires, volcanos, sand storms, earth quakes, heck even meterors, are all natural disasters, and part of nature itself. NE druids represent the nasty sides of nature, and CN druids represent its ever changing atmosphere. Catastrophies happen in nature ever day, and the tallassan druids are representatives of nature's destructive forces. However, never ever are the destructive forces more powerful than the constructive ones, hence Talos can never totally over power Silvanus.
That's the question. What is 'unnatural' to a Talassan? Certainly not a bit of Armour. Unnatural to a Talassan would be something that is very hard, if not impossible to destroy. Why would Talos stop his Druids from using Metal Armour when he himself wears a Breastplate of it. His Clerics can use it too. What's so special about Druids that he makes them swear an oath not to use it? |
| Talanfir Swiftfeet |
Posted - 02 Sep 2005 : 16:37:50
quote:
Originally posted by Sir Luther Cromwell
quote:
I think if we're honest with ourselves, the real issue is simply game mechanics. Opening up metal weapons and armor would push druids way over on the point scale for class creation. They get an average BAB, D8 hit die, spells, medium armor and shields, a powerful animal companion, several cool class abilities, etc. To offset that, there is an alignment restriction, armor restriction, and the druidic weapons restrictions.
That, and, in many regards the use of metal armour in itself is seen as very unnatural by druids. The use of a scimitar is allowed because the scimitar is seen as a weapon that is less 'civilized' than the long sword or bastard sword. Not to mention, curved blades just seem to have a druidic feel to them. Armour is civilized, as well as straight swords.
On the issues of talos and thunder storms in nature. People think nature and they often think: happy trees, fairies, unicorns and fey that dance around and grow flowers everywhere. When really, yes this is an aspect of nature, but nature is to be both respected AND feared. Lighting storms, forest fires, volcanos, sand storms, earth quakes, heck even meterors, are all natural disasters, and part of nature itself. NE druids represent the nasty sides of nature, and CN druids represent its ever changing atmosphere. Catastrophies happen in nature ever day, and the tallassan druids are representatives of nature's destructive forces. However, never ever are the destructive forces more powerful than the constructive ones, hence Talos can never totally over power Silvanus.
and Talassan druids seem to consentrate their storms and other destructive forces towards cities rather than towards places of nature (maybe not but I get the feeling of this kind of behaviour from them). |
| Sir Luther Cromwell |
Posted - 02 Sep 2005 : 16:20:32
quote:
I think if we're honest with ourselves, the real issue is simply game mechanics. Opening up metal weapons and armor would push druids way over on the point scale for class creation. They get an average BAB, D8 hit die, spells, medium armor and shields, a powerful animal companion, several cool class abilities, etc. To offset that, there is an alignment restriction, armor restriction, and the druidic weapons restrictions.
That, and, in many regards the use of metal armour in itself is seen as very unnatural by druids. The use of a scimitar is allowed because the scimitar is seen as a weapon that is less 'civilized' than the long sword or bastard sword. Not to mention, curved blades just seem to have a druidic feel to them. Armour is civilized, as well as straight swords.
On the issues of talos and thunder storms in nature. People think nature and they often think: happy trees, fairies, unicorns and fey that dance around and grow flowers everywhere. When really, yes this is an aspect of nature, but nature is to be both respected AND feared. Lighting storms, forest fires, volcanos, sand storms, earth quakes, heck even meterors, are all natural disasters, and part of nature itself. NE druids represent the nasty sides of nature, and CN druids represent its ever changing atmosphere. Catastrophies happen in nature ever day, and the tallassan druids are representatives of nature's destructive forces. However, never ever are the destructive forces more powerful than the constructive ones, hence Talos can never totally over power Silvanus. |
| Xysma |
Posted - 02 Sep 2005 : 16:01:46
quote:
Originally posted by Goldforge
There's no one single concept of Nature. Talos himself doesn't likely think of his powers as the forces of Nature at all. We can say that it is Nature as we are a third and neutral party and can look at the bigger picture. Talos can only see things from his crazed and maniacal perspective.
However, my question still stands. Why can't they wear metal?
I don't think it would be wise for a druid of Talos to wear metal armor, think about it, metal armor + thunderstorm = electrocution.
When it comes to non-Talassan druids, why can they weild a scimitar and not wear metal? Aside from that, like the Druidic language, there are Druidic traditions that are followed regardless of your patron deity (unless of course you are a Talontar) and that's just the way it is.
I think if we're honest with ourselves, the real issue is simply game mechanics. Opening up metal weapons and armor would push druids way over on the point scale for class creation. They get an average BAB, D8 hit die, spells, medium armor and shields, a powerful animal companion, several cool class abilities, etc. To offset that, there is an alignment restriction, armor restriction, and the druidic weapons restrictions. |
| Goldforge |
Posted - 02 Sep 2005 : 13:44:22
There's no one single concept of Nature. Talos himself doesn't likely think of his powers as the forces of Nature at all. We can say that it is Nature as we are a third and neutral party and can look at the bigger picture. Talos can only see things from his crazed and maniacal perspective.
However, my question still stands. Why can't they wear metal? |
| Faramicos |
Posted - 02 Sep 2005 : 13:04:39
OK... But arent the fact that they have their love for the more destructive forces of nature rather than hate the general concept of nature... A true hatred to nature in general cant coexist with the druid concept in a single character. |
| DDH_101 |
Posted - 02 Sep 2005 : 04:47:52
Goldforge is right. Tehre's evil druids, such as the druids of Talona. They are a blight to nature, but still a part of nature nevertheless. |
| Goldforge |
Posted - 01 Sep 2005 : 20:24:52
There are differant parts of Nature. Talassan Druids only care for the violent storms and floods and hurricane. Aurilites only care for the frozen tundras, etc... So that's how you can have a Druid that hates Nature, Talassans will destroy it if they could. |
| Faramicos |
Posted - 01 Sep 2005 : 19:33:50
Please enlighten me... How is it possible to play a druid that hates nature? Isnt it the core of the class that they are the guardsmen of nature and love it and holds it sacred... Just wondering. Sounds like an odd paradox to me. |
| Sir Luther Cromwell |
Posted - 01 Sep 2005 : 18:13:45
I agree that druids of mieliki shouldn't be able to wear metal either. The druid class has been balanced in a way that it isn't meant to wear metal.
One variant rule I use if stone armour. For instance, a druid of Tymora (if there was one) might use studded leather armor which had orphase studds, since orphase is Tymora's favored stone. The equivalent for Talos might be a stone associated with thunder or destruction (topaz, maybe?). Obsidian might be allowed as well. |
|
|
