Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Marcia_S 09-28-06, 02:53 PM	Is there any reason why a druid's animal companion could not/should not wear metal armor? The description of the druid no longer says that they "shun" metal. As a matter of fact, several of their weapons, e.g. scimitar and scythe, are made at least partly of metal. I don't even see any "flavor text" that makes mention of a druid's attitude towards metal, just that they are not allowed to use their class abilities while wearing it. Does that translate to their animals, whether companion or bought, also? thanks Marcia
Howie23 09-28-06, 03:14 PM	Is there any reason why a druid's animal companion could not/should not wear metal armor? Other than non-proficiency penalties to attack, there is no class-based reason to prevent an animal companion from wearing metal armor. Druids are prohibited; unless the animal has classes in druid (which is unlikely in LG), the animal doesn't share that prohibition. David
Marcia_S 09-28-06, 03:44 PM	I'm actually more concerned about RP reasons than rules ones. I had a GM tell me that, as a druid, I would be penalized for poor RP if I purchased metal armor for my animals. I haven't seen anything about druid's shunning metal since 2nd Ed and so was confused by this somewhat arbitrary ruling.
kenobi65 09-28-06, 03:55 PM	I'm actually more concerned about RP reasons than rules ones. I had a GM tell me that, as a druid, I would be penalized for poor RP if I purchased metal armor for my animals. I haven't seen anything about druid's shunning metal since 2nd Ed and so was confused by this somewhat arbitrary ruling. I think you've run into an arbitrary DM there. Obviously, there is still some sort of reason why druids are limited to non-metallic armor in 3.5 -- but, note, that the "lose abilities" issue is only on armor now (back in 3E, you'd lose your abilities if you used prohibited armor or weapons). And, as you note, they don't shun metal in total (and never really have); the scimitar, for example, has been a druid weapon since 1E days. The question is more: do your companions need to follow your armor restrictions? While I generally agree with Howie23's take on it, I wouldn't be surprised if you run into the whole "expect table variation" thang here. (Wondering if Ed Gibson (Seylienna) will weigh in; I know he plays / played a druid, and he's talked about the topic in the past.)
Howie23 09-28-06, 05:08 PM	I'm actually more concerned about RP reasons than rules ones. I had a GM tell me that, as a druid, I would be penalized for poor RP if I purchased metal armor for my animals. I haven't seen anything about druid's shunning metal since 2nd Ed and so was confused by this somewhat arbitrary ruling. I think many of us have our own little pockets of irrationality. We carry over points of view from prior editions and our own play experience. A very large number of players carry over rules knowledge from 3.0, particularly when new to LG or if infrequent and/or non-rules oriented players. As judges, it's important for us to recognize our biases and to evaluate if they are reasonable to impose on others. From an RP perspective, I could see someone choosing not to give an animal companion metal armor; I would respect that decision. As a judge, I can't see enforcing it and use it as justification for a lack of RP award. I see RP awards as being associated with the actions at the table in response to the conditions at hand, not to choices about character builds. There tends to be a cultural expectation that they will be awarded 100%, so even slight dings tend to be viewed quite negatively. David
kjenks 09-28-06, 06:42 PM	I'd recommend against spending a huge amount of cash on items for a specific animal companion. When you reach higher levels, you'll probably want to trade up to a different animal, so you'll have to sell that armor for half the market price.
Namarus 09-28-06, 07:26 PM	Well I think that a druid not using metal armour on his animal companion is doing a poor job roleplaying-wise. After all your being too cheap to buy decent armour for your friend and companion. If metal armour is good enough for tanks, and your animal companion fights for you, why an earth wouldn't you protect it? From a rules point of view, your GM does not have a leg to stand on for trying to penalise you for this "poor roleplaying" you should raise this up with your senior GM.
clannagh 09-29-06, 02:16 AM	From a role play point of view its just as likely that a Druid would want to equip his animal companion with the best armor possible. The local GM's that make a fuss about such things have traditionally been of the "druids are overpowered school" and there opposition to the metal armor is more of a political attempt to nobble druids than anything else. Bear in mind that nowhere does it say an animal companion (or a warhorse, or paladins mount for that matter) is proficient with armor so unless a feat is invested in the relevant armor proficiency a GM could argue they should be taking armor check penalty to attack rolls and to all skill checks that involve moving. NOTE .. to be consistent this penalty would also have to apply to non-metal barding.
Sieylianna 09-29-06, 07:42 AM	I've never had a problem with a judge over my animal companion's mithral chain shirt. I've had a couple of judges who were surprised at how high my tiger's AC was, but five points of +1 mithral makes a big difference. The mithral chain shirt has 0 armor check penalty, so no proficiency worries. I didn't buy the armor until I had a tiger and I expect to stick to similar forms (tiger, dire lion, dire tiger) through the rest of the PCs career, so adapting to other animals is not a problem. The only issue I've run into was looking at losing 5,400 gp worth of armor in one module where it looked like we were going to have to flee or suffer a TPK (a VTF meta-regional, of course). Ed
Namarus 09-29-06, 06:03 PM	Bear in mind that nowhere does it say an animal companion (or a warhorse, or paladins mount for that matter) is proficient with armor so unless a feat is invested in the relevant armor proficiency a GM could argue they should be taking armor check penalty to attack rolls and to all skill checks that involve moving. Actually to correct you. It does state that war trained animals are proficient with armour. Paladin mounts (war horse, and war pony) are definately allowed to wear armour with no penalties. With regards to druid companions, most druids including myself just stick with using armour that has no ACP, and thus you have no problems. Just be aware that according to the LGCS animals can only wear a cloak, armour, and neck slot piece. As was pointed out by my triad, if the LGCS says they can use it, then they can use it. As was pointed out above though, you can lose a lot of cash if your companion dies, and it's body (armour is unretreivable).
Cynric 10-01-06, 07:22 AM	I've never had a problem with a judge over my animal companion's mithral chain shirt. I've had a couple of judges who were surprised at how high my tiger's AC was, but five points of +1 mithral makes a big difference. The mithral chain shirt has 0 armor check penalty, so no proficiency worries. I didn't buy the armor until I had a tiger and I expect to stick to similar forms (tiger, dire lion, dire tiger) through the rest of the PCs career, so adapting to other animals is not a problem. The only issue I've run into was looking at losing 5,400 gp worth of armor in one module where it looked like we were going to have to flee or suffer a TPK (a VTF meta-regional, of course). Ed That is pretty much what I did with my druid although I did make my companion proficient. Local con organiser has been known to refer to it as the tiger from hell, players call it Battle Cat.
Iswald 10-01-06, 09:37 AM	Well I think that a druid not using metal armour on his animal companion is doing a poor job roleplaying-wise. After all you're being too cheap to buy decent armour for your friend and companion. If metal armour is good enough for tanks, and your animal companion fights for you, why an earth wouldn't you protect it? From a rules point of view, your GM does not have a leg to stand on for trying to penalise you for this "poor roleplaying" you should raise this up with your senior GM. Well, actually, if nonmetal armor is good enough for the druid, shouldn't it also be good enough for their companion? Not to mention that it wouldn't cause an apparent conflict with the druid's beliefs or oaths? I can see this going either way.
clannagh 10-01-06, 11:14 PM	Well, actually, if nonmetal armor is good enough for the druid, shouldn't it also be good enough for their companion? Not to mention that it wouldn't cause an apparent conflict with the druid's beliefs or oaths? I can see this going either way. Possibly ... The problem is (home game house rules aside, if its home campaign the GM rules all) its pretty much up to the player to decide exactly how her druid sees matters .. however some (generally non-druid playing) players and gm's take it upon themselves to bully any player who has a PC that buys metal barding.
Hand_OF_Mystra 10-02-06, 09:11 AM	Actually to correct you. It does state that war trained animals are proficient with armour. Paladin mounts (war horse, and war pony) are definately allowed to wear armour with no penalties. Canyou give me a reference for this, it os not under Handle Animal or Riding Dog entry in the MM?
Namarus 10-02-06, 02:20 PM	Canyou give me a reference for this, it os not under Handle Animal or Riding Dog entry in the MM? Look up the Animal Type. Animal Type An animal is a living, nonhuman creature, usually a vertebrate with no magical abilities and no innate capacity for language or culture. Features An animal has the following features (unless otherwise noted in a creature’s entry). * 8-sided Hit Dice. * Base attack bonus equal to ¾ total Hit Dice (as cleric). * Good Fortitude and Reflex saves (certain animals have different good saves, for instance dire animals have good Fortitude, Reflex, and Will saves). * Skill points equal to (2 + Int modifier, minimum 1) per Hit Die, with quadruple skill points for the first Hit Die. Traits An animal possesses the following traits (unless otherwise noted in a creature’s entry). * Intelligence score of 1 or 2 (no creature with an Intelligence score of 3 or higher can be an animal). * Low-light vision. * Alignment: Always neutral. * Treasure: None. * Proficient with its natural weapons only. A noncombative herbivore uses its natural weapons as a secondary attack. Such attacks are made with a -5 penalty on the creature’s attack rolls, and the animal receives only ½ its Strength modifier as a damage adjustment. * Proficient with no armor unless trained for war. * Animals eat, sleep, and breathe.
kenobi65 10-02-06, 02:42 PM	* Proficient with no armor unless trained for war. The issue becomes that "trained for war" isn't clearly defined, as far as I can tell. I've heard that it only covers animals with "war" in their names (warhorse, war pony). I've also heard that an animal is "trained for war" if you give it the Attack trick twice (which will allow it to attack any creature), or if it has been trained for the Combat Riding or Fighting purposes.
kjenks 10-02-06, 06:04 PM	The phrase "trained for war" is not defined. I tried to get the Circle to define it for the campaign, but they did nothing. http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=579431
kenobi65 10-03-06, 12:00 AM	The phrase "trained for war" is not defined. I tried to get the Circle to define it for the campaign, but they did nothing. Yeah, I asked my Triad POC the same thing. Really, it sounds like it's up to WotC to clean up its own mess on this one. :p
timerino 10-10-06, 06:24 PM	So eloquently put :-) I have also noticed that the cultural ding is very much frawned upon: I had a judge ding the table because the human ranger on the table took favored enemies human because of mechanical reasons (and not RP). As far as my druid's dog's concerned, I got my dog dragonhide breast plate and a feat to use it (and another feat to sleep in it) proficiently! It was expensive, but it was worth it ... for RP purposes. You see, the dog thinks of itself as a green dragon. tim I think many of us have our own little pockets of irrationality. We carry over points of view from prior editions and our own play experience. A very large number of players carry over rules knowledge from 3.0, particularly when new to LG or if infrequent and/or non-rules oriented players. As judges, it's important for us to recognize our biases and to evaluate if they are reasonable to impose on others. From an RP perspective, I could see someone choosing not to give an animal companion metal armor; I would respect that decision. As a judge, I can't see enforcing it and use it as justification for a lack of RP award. I see RP awards as being associated with the actions at the table in response to the conditions at hand, not to choices about character builds. There tends to be a cultural expectation that they will be awarded 100%, so even slight dings tend to be viewed quite negatively. David