No its an an extraordinary ability. Metal only applys to spell,spell like abilities, and supernatural abilities.
Not the domain just the associated powers if they fall within the previous described list. Nice try
|
Ex-Druids
A druid who ceases to revere nature, changes to a prohibited
alignment, or teaches the Druidic language to a nondruid
loses all spells and druid abilities (including her animal
companion, but not including weapon, armor, and shield
proficiencies). She cannot thereafter gain levels as a druid
until she atones (see the atonement spell description).
pg. 51
Wearing metal would in fact cause you to lose your animal companion. Maybe not at the first day...or after the first time but repeated abuse would surely. I knew I'd find that excerpt.
Wearing metal armour doesn't do any of the things in that excerpt.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wearing metal isn't reverent towards nature. Its blatantly disregarding the rules of the druidic right for your own benefit...the druid way is to NOT wear metal.
Wearing metal armour is clearly an evil act, I might add.
A druid who wears prohibited armor or uses a prohibited shield is unable to cast druid spells or use any of her supernatural or spell-like class abilities while doing so and for 24 hours thereafter.
The druid does not lose the animal companion when wearing metal armor. Furthermore the only things lost are: ALL Spells, Wild Shape, and A Thousand Faces. And remain lost for 24hrs after the armor is removed.
Since the rest are Extraordinary, the druid keeps everything else.The druid is not considered and EX-Druid for wearing metal armor once, however repeated use of prohibited items could reasonably put your status as a druid in jeopardy.
And I really dont see how wearing metal is evil but using weapon with a metal blade is no problem. Never made sense to me.
Ah.... so the question is if wearing metal is the same as "ceasing to revere nature."
I wouldn't think that's the same thing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's not the same thing otherwise it would not be called out specifically with COMPLETELY different consequences.
It's not the same thing otherwise it would not be called out specifically with COMPLETELY different consequences.
Donning metal armour is clearly a chaotic and evil act. And doing more than one of those will make you chaotic evil.
This means you will loose all class benefits and will become a Ex-Druid plus this character will be banned from PFS.
It's not the same thing otherwise it would not be called out specifically with COMPLETELY different consequences.Donning metal armour is clearly a chaotic and evil act. And doing more than one of those will make you chaotic evil.
This means you will loose all class benefits and will become a Ex-Druid plus this character will be banned from PFS.
*GASP* Wait! Doesn't that mean that the majority of paladins are evil?!?! Those vile fiends! They've been hiding under our noses this whole time!
|
|
Since Paladins are brought up then lets look at their class.
In the description for Paladins what happens if they do an evil act? Not multiple evil acts. Not a weeks worth of being evil. One. Simple. Evil. Act.
Boom. Stripped of Paladin status. Even if its an unlawful act the same results. So how is not following the simple code of conduct laid out for druids not the same thing?
Since Paladins are brought up then lets look at their class.
In the description for Paladins what happens if they do an evil act? Not multiple evil acts. Not a weeks worth of being evil. One. Simple. Evil. Act.
Boom. Stripped of Paladin status. Even if its an unlawful act the same results. So how is not following the simple code of conduct laid out for druids not the same thing?
My head hurts.
Since Paladins are brought up then lets look at their class.
In the description for Paladins what happens if they do an evil act? Not multiple evil acts. Not a weeks worth of being evil. One. Simple. Evil. Act.
Boom. Stripped of Paladin status. Even if its an unlawful act the same results. So how is not following the simple code of conduct laid out for druids not the same thing?
I think I'll go with "because druids aren't paladins" here.
|
Since Paladins are brought up then lets look at their class.
In the description for Paladins what happens if they do an evil act? Not multiple evil acts. Not a weeks worth of being evil. One. Simple. Evil. Act.
Boom. Stripped of Paladin status. Even if its an unlawful act the same results. So how is not following the simple code of conduct laid out for druids not the same thing?
Actually, the "stripped of Paladin status" (and more importantly powers, it seems) is for a willfully commited evil act.
And there is nothing prohibiting a single unlawful act (even a willfull one) as long as it does not violate the code of conduct. Unless of course you consider that a single act is enough to change the Paladin's alignment.
That said, I agree that GMs seem to be usually more lenient with Druids than with Paladins. I believe that is because "ceasing to revere nature" does not have the same reality as "committing a willfull evil act" for most people.
I know that a Druid who would make a habit of using his Animal Companion as a trap-trigger would soon find himself losing all his powers in my game.
Wearing metal is breaking the code you swore to when you became a Druid. Simple as that.
It is chaotic and evil. Thus you turn chaotic evil which is a forbidden alignment and then you are an Ex Druid and out of PFS. I already told you that...
Wearing metal is breaking the code you swore to when you became a Druid. Simple as that.It is chaotic and evil. Thus you turn chaotic evil which is a forbidden alignment and then you are an Ex Druid and out of PFS. I already told you that...
Yes 3 times actually. The first time it was mildly funny, now it's just silly.
|
|
Wearing metal is breaking the code you swore to when you became a Druid. Simple as that.
I do not think so (since it does not automatically make you an ex-druid).
I believe it has something to do with the idea that the metal armor interferes with your natural energies, hence the loss of the magical abilities for 24 hours (= a cycle of the sun, which allows for replenishing/cleaning your natural energies).
Prohibited would then mean to be avoided, but not completely forbidden by a code or somesuch.
Wearing metal is breaking the code you swore to when you became a Druid. Simple as that.It is chaotic and evil. Thus you turn chaotic evil which is a forbidden alignment and then you are an Ex Druid and out of PFS. I already told you that...Yes 3 times actually. The first time it was mildly funny, now it's just silly.
Are you SURE?
Donning Metal Armour is a Chaotic and Evil act and doing this once makes you chaotic and evil and thus you are disqualified for using this character in PFS.
I don't see how wearing metal armor has anything to do with ceasing to revere nature. Ceasing to revere nature is casting fire spells in dry forests, charming animals to trigger traps, polluting water, and things like that. The way I look at it, metal armor simply makes puts a barrier between you and the source of your power...nature...making it such that you can't use your magic.
There were 3.5 prestige classes that allowed druids to wear metal armor, such as the Fochlucan Lyrist.
I personally do find it a bit...uncohesive...that druids carry manufactured metal weapons but not manufactured metal armor. Or, for that matter, manufactured anything wood, but not manufactured metal armor. Metal is as much a natural substance as wood or leather. In fact, one could make the argument that druids should be like the PETA freaks and not use consume or use any animal products, such as leather armor. It would make more sense to me that a druid would be against wearing an animal's skin than against wearing a bit of mail.
Wearing metal does not break any druid code. Metal is just as natural as leather, all the materials come naturally from the earth. The problem is that it blocks your attunement with the earth itself because of the strength of the material. Therefore you lose your spells, spelllike abilities, and supernatural abilities granted to you by nature itself, not extraordinary abilities granted by the class alone. The end!
Fine. Then wearing metal just makes your animal a regular old animal. No special bond with it. Nothing. It would act on its own accord just as an animal of that kind would...you know since you aren't "attuned" to it.
It seems like you really want the animal companion to go away for some reason. Yet as others have posted above, it doesn't actually work in that way. The Ani-Com doesn't suddenly de-power itself either.
|
|
My problem is with multiclassing into a druid after having so many levels of ranger and ignoring a penalty. Under the ex-druids section it specifically lists the animal companion as a druid ability. And under wearing metal it says you lose your supernatural abilities. Being able to communicate magically with your animal companion fits that mold.
At 1st level, a druid forms a bond with nature.
There it is in black and white. As stated by SOOOO many people up above me "metal blocks your bond with nature", so therefore wearing metal would sever that bond you have with nature required to maintain your relationship with your animal companion.
|
|
My main issue is the arguing in the other thread in regards to a second companion.
IF you were to go with the Druid archtype Packmaster and get 1 or possibly 2 companions this would leave it open for 3 companions at levels 6, 3 and 3. First of all that is annoying as hell and second of all I am opposed to just ignoring basic rules set in place for classes. If you break that rule you should lose all but armor and weapon proficiencies until an attonement spell is used.
WAAAY back when, the Metal Armor and the Druid Weapons where a matter of being in the Druidic order ALL druids were a part of. Even if Elves got extra weapon profs. they couldn't use them because it was against the vows they took.
If you want to rule that it was the vows taken to become a druid, or it interrupts your bond with nature, have at it, I don't think anyone will tell you you're wrong.
|
|
But there is no clear definition under the druid class on what you lose.
A druid who wears prohibited armor or uses a prohibited shield is unable to cast druid spells or use any of her supernatural or spell-like class abilities while doing so and for 24 hours thereafter.
Is the ability to communicate and grant an animal companion special powers a super-natural class ability?
Prohibited would then mean to be avoided, but not completely forbidden by a code or somesuch.
The Law prohibits you from killing people you don't like. It doesn't stop you, but you pay the consequences if you do it.
Wearing metal does not break any druid code. Metal is just as natural as leather, all the materials come naturally from the earth.
Here's a challenge for you then: Go find me steel mine.
Ironically there are like 10 posts above yours that are doing just that.
Yeah but who listens to them? :)
I think the reason this isn't spelled out is because the whole "abandoning nature" is really a GM's call. I mean what if they only way for a Druid to stop a forest fire is to strap on the +4 Breastplate of Fire Dowsing? Wouldn't, and shouldn't, that have different consequences than the Druid that out on the +5 Full Plate of Animal Bane to kill a pack of wild calico kittens?
|
|
But there is no clear definition under the druid class on what you lose.
A druid who wears prohibited armor or uses a prohibited shield is unable to cast druid spells or use any of her supernatural or spell-like class abilities while doing so and for 24 hours thereafter.Is the ability to communicate and grant an animal companion special powers a super-natural class ability?There is a clear definition of what the druid does and does not loose. She looses her spells and her supernatural abilities. That's all.
Does the druid's animal companion vanish if it walks into an anti-magic field? If so, the druid looses it for wearing metal armor. If not, he doesn't. (Hint: The "EX:" at the beginning tells you, no the druid doesn't loose it.) Also, note a druid doesn't gain the ability to communicate with an animal companion beyond handle animal / wild empathy.
What the druid does loose is the obviously magical abilities of his or her class. Wildshape, Mask of a thousand faces.
Think of it like this, some of the druid's class abilities come from her mystic connection to the world. Others come from knowing nature and living a healthy life style. The first are lost, the second are not.
But it specifically says this is a bond with nature. If the druid in question were to show up for a druidic meeting or hearing always wearing metal would the order of druids kick them out of the order?
|
|
I'm not sure how any of you think its just fine and not in violation of being a druid to just run around with metal armor on...but I guess I am GM calling on this, because there is not a level 5 wolf in the game that is quite as powerful as an animal companion thanks to the bond of the druid and the powers it grants.
I'm not sure how any of you think its just fine and not in violation of being a druid to just run around with metal armor on...but I guess I am GM calling on this, because there is not a level 5 wolf in the game that is quite as powerful as an animal companion thanks to the bond of the druid and the powers it grants.
No one is saying it is fine. The rules are simply being pointed out that wearing metal armor doesn't make you lose your animal companion. Metal armor places a great penalty on the druid. While they still have their animal companion (because it is an Extraordinary Ability), they cannot cast spells or Wild Shape or their domain spells. Remember, the rule for wearing armor says:
A druid who wears prohibited armor or uses a prohibited shield is unable to cast druid spells or use any of her supernatural or spell-like class abilities while doing so and for 24 hours thereafter.
So, as long as the druid wears his armor, he is being penalized severely. Furthermore, on Extraordinary abilities:
These abilities cannot be disrupted in combat, as spells can, and they generally do not provoke attacks of opportunity. Effects or areas that negate or disrupt magic have no effect on extraordinary abilities. They are not subject to dispelling, and they function normally in an antimagic field. Indeed, extraordinary abilities do not qualify as magical, though they may break the laws of physics.
So at this point, the druid is now just a mediocre summoner. Sure, he has his animal companion. But at this point, he's becoming dead weight to the team as a druid. He isn't an ex-druid since he hasn't stopped revering nature, but he may as well be one with all of the utility he has lost just to get extra armor.
With this, these are as far as the repercussions go for wearing metal in the Core Rulebook. If you want there to be role playing consequences to the druid, that is entirely up to you. I would suggest, though, talking to the player in question. This sounds to me like much more of a player problem. Let him know that wearing metal armor doesn't really jive with other druidic circles. Punishing a player won't work and will only exacerbate the issue. Give him other ways to have better AC, such as barkskin spells or Ironwood armor.
|
|
I look at it this way. You are wearing metal armor so you don't get spells. If you don't get spells then you don't spend te time each morning reflecting on the wonders of nature. If you don't spend time reflecting on nature then you aren't being a druid. If you aren't a druid then you are a ranger. And the ex-druid classification should be put in place. I'm not saying a ONE time thing...I am talking about just completely disregarding the metal armor rule and wearing it every day.