Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Syro_ wrote:
@Togusa: I haven't read any of the "Ghosts of Saltmarsh" stuff, so I apologize if this advice isn't helpful.
-For starters, how important is it for them to quickly get back on track? Would it be feasible to work a one-shot adventure into the story line where they are going? With the completion of the one-shot introduce a hook back to the main adventure?
-How dependent is this campaign on the map and geography? Is it possible to just move the place that they are supposed to be going to, and place it where they are heading?
-I agree with Da Boss, it's no big deal to replace or merge NPCs as long as you can keep track of it. I made a mistake running "Lost Mines of Phandelver" and had the players deliver the goods on the wagon they were protecting to the wrong NPC and wrongs store. I was kicking myself, but they couldn't tell the difference, still had fun, and don't even know that I made that mistake and wrote a store out of the game.
Good luck

Thanks! It has worked out, have an 11 hour session yesterday and they're quite on track now.

One thing I have noticed, my group is painfully not good at role playing sometimes. I follow the adventure, but they typically ignore half of the stuff I give them. For example, they found a room in this old house they were searching. In the room, there was a scroll case. One player picked it up and said "I'll put it in my pack." Turns out they needed to look inside it to progress, and because this player didn't, it took them an extra hour to figure out what to do next. Things like this happened several times during that session, and it seemed to me as though the players were super nervous and terrified. They were treating everything as if it was a trap intended to kill them. I didn't understand what was up with that.

I had another PC who seemed to be lost and unsure of what to do, so he kept passing on all his turns just having his character keep watch. When I asked him if he wanted to do anything, he just said no every time. I get that you cannot force someone to do something, but, seriously?

On a side note. The Sinister Secret of Saltmarsh is billed as an adventure for 1st level players. My players are all third level, and they struggled hard during the combat in that section later on. Two party members were nearly killed and a third was paralyzed for over an hour. I was quite shocked!

 Togusa wrote:


Thanks! It has worked out, have an 11 hour session yesterday and they're quite on track now.

One thing I have noticed, my group is painfully not good at role playing sometimes. I follow the adventure, but they typically ignore half of the stuff I give them. For example, they found a room in this old house they were searching. In the room, there was a scroll case. One player picked it up and said "I'll put it in my pack." Turns out they needed to look inside it to progress, and because this player didn't, it took them an extra hour to figure out what to do next. Things like this happened several times during that session, and it seemed to me as though the players were super nervous and terrified. They were treating everything as if it was a trap intended to kill them. I didn't understand what was up with that.

I had another PC who seemed to be lost and unsure of what to do, so he kept passing on all his turns just having his character keep watch. When I asked him if he wanted to do anything, he just said no every time. I get that you cannot force someone to do something, but, seriously?

On a side note. The Sinister Secret of Saltmarsh is billed as an adventure for 1st level players. My players are all third level, and they struggled hard during the combat in that section later on. Two party members were nearly killed and a third was paralyzed for over an hour. I was quite shocked!

It sounds like you are having some issues with the level of railroading that many pre-written require to function properly. I suggest prompting your players more often. For example, when the player picked up the scroll case and put it in his pack. just ask "Did you open or read it first?" this gives you an idea of their headspace if he responds "No I'm going to wait til we camp." then start thinking of how you are going to force them to set up camp for the night.

Don't be concerned with the lethality of the encounters at level 1. That's just what level 1 is like. It's why DM's roll dice behind a screen. For mind games, and so we can turn that lethal hit into a non-lethal hit.

My wife is like your player who doesn't know what to do. Just let him not do things for now. As long as it seems like he having fun. If there are organic ways to draw him into the story, then go for it. But if he is content just watching, then let him watch.

@Togusa: I'm glad to hear things worked out

 Syro_ wrote:
@Togusa: I'm glad to hear things worked out

Most definitely. These pre-written adventures are amazing, I'm really impressed with the quality and effort that the WoTC RPG team put into them. I've been asked by my group to incorporate more of them into our future game sessions, so if anyone has any recommendations, please let me know!

I currently own;

Tales from the Yawning Portal
Ghosts of Saltmarsh
Tomb of Annihilation
Waterdeep Dragon Heist
Dungeon of the Mad Mage

Always looking for more fun!

balmong7 wrote:

 Togusa wrote:


Thanks! It has worked out, have an 11 hour session yesterday and they're quite on track now.

One thing I have noticed, my group is painfully not good at role playing sometimes. I follow the adventure, but they typically ignore half of the stuff I give them. For example, they found a room in this old house they were searching. In the room, there was a scroll case. One player picked it up and said "I'll put it in my pack." Turns out they needed to look inside it to progress, and because this player didn't, it took them an extra hour to figure out what to do next. Things like this happened several times during that session, and it seemed to me as though the players were super nervous and terrified. They were treating everything as if it was a trap intended to kill them. I didn't understand what was up with that.

I had another PC who seemed to be lost and unsure of what to do, so he kept passing on all his turns just having his character keep watch. When I asked him if he wanted to do anything, he just said no every time. I get that you cannot force someone to do something, but, seriously?

On a side note. The Sinister Secret of Saltmarsh is billed as an adventure for 1st level players. My players are all third level, and they struggled hard during the combat in that section later on. Two party members were nearly killed and a third was paralyzed for over an hour. I was quite shocked!

It sounds like you are having some issues with the level of railroading that many pre-written require to function properly. I suggest prompting your players more often. For example, when the player picked up the scroll case and put it in his pack. just ask "Did you open or read it first?" this gives you an idea of their headspace if he responds "No I'm going to wait til we camp." then start thinking of how you are going to force them to set up camp for the night.

Don't be concerned with the lethality of the encounters at level 1. That's just what level 1 is like. It's why DM's roll dice behind a screen. For mind games, and so we can turn that lethal hit into a non-lethal hit.

My wife is like your player who doesn't know what to do. Just let him not do things for now. As long as it seems like he having fun. If there are organic ways to draw him into the story, then go for it. But if he is content just watching, then let him watch.

Another alternative could be that as the player picks up the case, describe the lid slipping off and the scroll falling out. Draws the attention to the scroll, rather than the case and means the players have to interact with the scroll directly, whether that be to put it back or to read it etc. Curiosity would usually mean that the players will want to see what is on it if the GM has gone to theeffort of having it fall out. Usually

Might also worth considering adding an NPC to the party.

That way they can help..... prod..... the characters at times/in certain directions.

unrelated to the above

read this

Thats a great story. Bitter sweet.

Thanks for the story Red, that made me well up a bit reading it.

Another look into the history of D&D, with a focus on Rob Kuntz.

 Ahtman wrote:
Another look into the history of D&D, with a focus on Rob Kuntz.

This story makes the whole lot of them sound like petulant children fighting over who gets credit for what tiny idea. If anything, I'm sad that they all seem so bitter over each other after creating something so great. That said, this version of events makes Gary Gynax sound like an absolute ass.

The author of this story has a long standing history of animosity to Gary Gygax, and to D&D, at least the original game. I would not trust a word she wrote. She very much has an agenda.

She's also not much for fact checking. Kuntz published his book already, late last year, IIRC. He has a tell-all book planned too. I'd bet there are plenty of other errors in this article. It makes for an amusing read, if nothing else.

She wrote a strange piece on Gail Gygax, Gary's widow not long ago. here. https://kotaku.com/fantasys-widow-the-fight-over-the-legacy-of-dungeons-1833127876

Her dislike of Gygax, a relevant screenshot

I had heard about that, the widow article. I decided to stay out of it all because I do not need drama in my hobby. I am sure Gygax was like a lot of us, an ass some of the time, a nice guy some of the rest of the time.

The way I hear it, there was "TSR Gary" who was a jerk, and "Gamer Gary" who was a pleasant fellow, and fun to game with. Success can have a corrosive effect on some people.

Has anyone else seen the sidekicks rules in the D&D Essentials box? They seem incomplete to me. I was hoping for something akin to Henchmen from OD&D and AD&D. Overall, it's not a bad offering.

I haven't picked up the Essentials Box yet. I don't really need it, but I definitely want it. Hm, I should check if it's no longer a target exclusive.


fake edit: it's not! sweet

actual edit: it still is until the 3rd

There is some useful material in it. The DM screen is useful, as are the dice. Dice are always useful. There are fair amounts of punch out cards for conditions, initiative order, magic items, and the sidekicks. The only thing not so useful is the Essentials rulebook.

I got it because I was curious about how WotC puts together 5e adventures, and for the dice. And the cards.

It would have been nice if there had been a very large map included, one of the nice fold out kind like TSR used to do, way back in the day, instead of the small map which is included. I'm thinking of the awesome Greyhawk map.

So, I'm curious how others look at this.

The story;

My Adventurer's League group just completed Sunless Citadel, and the Staff of the Woodlands dropped from one of the enemies. No one in the group is a Druid, so our initial thought was to sell it for gold. One player however suggested I take it. My character is a Lizardfolk, who have Druidic traditions in the lore. But my Lizard is a Forge Cleric with a base AC of 21, and as I understood it Druids don't wear metal armor.

The DM then jumps in, saying "the rules never say Druids can't wear metal armor, just that they 'will not.' Since your character started as a Forge Cleric, he's clearly on board with wearing hard steel for protection. He is also clearly able by the rules to Multi-class to Druid if he wants, and he already has Heavy Armor proficiency. If you want, you can think up a reason why your Cleric would suddenly be interested in Druidic arts, and multiclass Druid and still wear your heavy armor."

And that's how Qru the Lizardman ended up a Cleric 3/Druid 1 with a base AC of 21 and a Staff of the Woodlands as a heavy weapon and an ardent desire to achieve a balance between civilization and nature.

I'm on board with it cause I never would have thought of it, and it seems like a full on RP opportunity that'll rarely, if ever, come up again.

But I'm wondering what others think about that, cause the proficiencies do say "will not" but I have a gut feeling most people would say "no" to that interpretation of the rule.

Story trumps rules.

If it makes sense for the story being told, then go for it.

Yeah, that makes perfect sense to me, and frankly sounds awesome. I also think that in terms of storytelling like that, it's more than possible that Class isn't really a thing that's recognised in-world a lot of the time, so having a suitable cultural background would be all that'd be necessary to prompt the shift into Druid. It's not like they wake up one morning and hand in their Cleric resignation then apply for Druid 101 classes.

I've always been a bit iffy on the Druid armour thing... if they wanted to enforce it as an actual rule rather than flavour text then they should just limit the Proficiency to Leather/Hide armour rather than just Light/Medium. As such, I've always taken it as a potential RP hook and a bit of flavour text, but would never actively disallow a Druid I was running for to use armour they're otherwise proficient in. It might be distasteful to them, but that's for them to decide as a character.

Case in point, in a previous campaign I ran, one of the PCs played a druid who was essentially a Dumbledore type to a Druid Hogwarts, and was setting off into a kingdom of undead and vampires and all sorts to rescue some missing students. The player asked if he could have half-plate as this character was smart enough to take any protection they could get their hands on for this very dangerous solo mission, and that seems entirely fair to me.

First, I think if your DM is fine with it and you are fine with it, and it fits your idea of your character in their game, go for it, it is fine.

In my game, I would not allow you to keep wearing metal armour and get the benefits of druidic abilities. I might restrict it to ONLY Iron based armour, since I have ideas about how Iron interacts with fey and nature spirits in my world's background.

I have three reasons for saying no:
1. I think restrictions make things interesting and maintain some of the integrity of the classes.
2. I think the restriction is "story" based and I try to make my world broadly fit with the standard "story" of Dungeons and Dragons, and then I like to have consistency within my world as far as possible or it is not satisfying for me, as dungeon master. My fun is equally important to anyone elses.
3. I think giving people stuff that makes them more powerful than the basic rules is fine, but you need to think about it carefully and make sure you are not letting one player outshine others for whom mechanical power is important. This will vary from group to group but I think it is easy to end up with one or two butthurt players because of a choice like that and I know the general advice would be ignore the butthurt, but I think it can be somewhat valid if you enjoy mechanical power as a goal in the game and work hard to achieve it and see someone else being rewarded outside the rules for something you "worked" for. It would not bother me, personally, but I think keeping everyone in mind is a good idea.

YMMV, all tables are different and it is not a big deal, but my personal approach to these things is to take the world seriously and therefore I take the proscription on metal armour as meaning something about how Druidic magic works, and that links in my head to folklore about Iron protecting you from fairies which is also something that I make a big deal about in my world. If the player went through effort and expense to get some bronze armour, or Dragonscale, I might allow it.

We’re definitely in a magic item heavy group. The characters who have been in the game since we started are all at three attuned items already and some of them are pretty nasty.

Out Ranger has giant gauntlets for example and a plus 2 longbow, and our arcane trickster, I’m actually not sure what he has. His character might just be heavily optimized. His got some +6s and +8s and he’s only level 5.

Our Grave Cleric has a mountain of utility items.

And then I showed up and started upgrading armor and weapons with my channel divinity and lizard man habits. The GM has been having fun with my RP accurate “what can I make out of this corpse” at the end of most fights.

I am thinking of taking up “let’s make a set of bone plate” as a personal quest fitting for my character. Gonna have to find some biggies to kill

I do not know about your group, but since I have been playing D&D with our actual group, I think the limitation to non-metal armor for druids is fair.
I am DM for a group of dwarves, all LVL 6 on the brink of LVL 7 in 3.5 ruleset. The group consist of a fighter, a mage, a ranger, a rogue and a druid.

Of all these characters, the druid is the one who seems to me the most versatile. He has almost as many hit points as the fighter, has an animal companion useful to flank or trip (Wolf),
and has a wider range of spells than the mage, (I know the mage has the potential to acquire a way vaster selection of spells, but so far he has made a better cut with the spells up to Level 3 they can legally use), which are almost as powerful. He can also work as a healer, if he chooses to memorize healing spells. In addition, he can switch these healing spells for conjuration spells.
Over all, this character outshines the other characters sometimes. The disadvantages in "not fitting into social structures" so much are totally made up by the rest of the group. So, taking away this disadvantage would make the situation even more un-even in our group. But it seems it is not in yours, and if everybody gets along with it well, do so.

I think 3.5 does have a hard rule on it though. 5e has ambiguous wording, and no stated consequence for wearing metal armor anyway. Apparently an FAQ from Wizards says it’s a character choice and it’s up to the DM and the group your with (this stikes me as similar to older editions having a rule against Clerics using sharp weapons, which was completely dropped in 5e though some of the players and DMs I've played with still adhere to it).

I can see it in 3.5. They had a lot more going for them, not that they’re bad in 5e but for a lot of things, Druids seem like worse Clerics (a side effect of clerics being so damn good). They don’t have animal companions anymore. I can’t remember the number of times I’ve heard multiclassing into Druid to get Goodberry thrown out as a joke because their spell list isn't as immediately awesome as a Wizard, Cleric, or Warlock.

Clerics are undoubtedly more versatile, and one of my favourite classes as a result, but I'd put Druid fairly high up the list and certainly no worse off than Clerics in general utility. They might lack hitting power in some cases compared to, say, a War or Forge Cleric, but they get some amazing spells at pretty much all levels* and some of their subclasses are straight-up amazing. Circle of Dreams gives you some of the most potent Bonus Action healing in the game, and without using Spell Slots to boot, while from experience of playing with one Moon Druids can be insanely tanky (Earth Elemental Wildshape is crazy for that).


*Incidentally, I'd say Goodberry is pretty great for non-combat healing. Basically you want to burn any remaining spell slots on it before a Long Rest (especially if you're safe over that rest so won't need the spells during the night) and for the next day you can easily have 30+ points of basically free healing on hand, which could save a Short Rest for a character or two in a pinch at early-mid levels. As for other early Druid spells, Moonbeam is a great hard-to-escape damage dealer, Flaming Sphere likewise, Spike Growth can just be a meatgrinder under certain circumstances and once you've got the 3rd Levels coming in, you've got stuff like Call Lightning, Tidal Wave, and plenty of great utility stuff. They're not going to match Rogues, Warlocks or Paladins damage-wise, they can throw round some amazing AoE and have great non-combat options that can otherwise be pretty hard to come by.

The explanation for druids is that they won't wear metal armor, even though they can. Just like Vegans won't eat meat, even though they can.

If a PC choses druid as a class or multi-class, then no metal armor, which is the ruling I would make. Other DMs may make other rulings.

Yep. in 3.5., if they wear metal armor at any time, they lose their magical abilities for a day.

@LordOfHats: This is mostly just repeating what has already been said, but my opinion follows three of the things that have been said about: fun, the DM, and and your vision for the character.
We ultimately play to have fun, if multi-classing to druid and having the staff is a fun direction for you to go & it would not stop the game from being fun for anyone else then why not do it. A challenge is usually a lot more fun to overcome than a cake walk, but your whole party sounds pretty buffed so would the staff be that out of place paired with your sweet AC? It will be up to your DM to make sure the adventure is scaled to an appropriate level of difficulty. While mentioning DMs, I think most of us agree it's ultimately the DM's choice. If I read correctly your DM suggested this in the first place, so no worries there. My only worry is, since it's adventure league, will you be shuffled around between different groups and DMs?

That has been a concern. Our league has 6 active groups, each with 6-8 regular players so they're always looking for new DMs to shift people too.

I think though my plan is to talk with my DM about making a quest of my character building a set of bone plate or something. That way if he ever gets shuffled I can legit say his armor isn't "metal" but some other kind of plate mail. I think it'll work out well cause one of the hardest things to do in AL is get good RP going (so many people involved and groups are formed ad hoc) and this gives us a reason to have some RP in the group as my character works towards his goal and the party helps out while we go through adventures.

Bone plate will make people think the PC is a necromancer of some sort. What you want is Dragon Scale Mail. You make the armor from the scales of whatever dragon you kill. It should have the same base AC as plate.

 Red Harvest wrote:
Bone plate will make people think the PC is a necromancer of some sort. What you want is Dragon Scale Mail. You make the armor from the scales of whatever dragon you kill. It should have the same base AC as plate.

For a human or something, I'd agree.

But the character is Lizardfolk. The motif works for them since it's just what they do. They have a racial skill for making gear out of their enemy's corpses, I'm just going to need to find some big corpses XD

 LordofHats wrote:

 Red Harvest wrote:
Bone plate will make people think the PC is a necromancer of some sort. What you want is Dragon Scale Mail. You make the armor from the scales of whatever dragon you kill. It should have the same base AC as plate.

For a human or something, I'd agree.

But the character is Lizardfolk. The motif works for them since it's just what they do. They have a racial skill for making gear out of their enemy's corpses, I'm just going to need to find some big corpses XD

NPCs mistaking you for a necromancer would be an interesting angle though. especially since you are a paladin/druid. ( Am I remembering that right?)