I did not mean that it is okay for druids to use any metals. But according to the current lore the Druid society is aware of that metal is needed because it is superior in some ways for combat.
What town? Llast? Haven? Is either town known as an enemy of nature? I have not heard of it so my druid cannot act as being aware of it. As far as in game is concerned, whether the weapons go to help a town who tries to have a balance with nature or a town that is a complete enemy of nature it is all speculation on my part.Unless I have a list to check against I am going to assume that towns are generally not complete exploiters of nature.
I was trying to say that taking away people's metal would be like kicking them back to the stone ages.
You also misunderstand the quote. I differentiate between "conservative" and "conservative like that". In this case, "Conservative like your druid is about metal and weapons".
Change is a big part of nature. Nature changes all the time without the involvement of sentient beings. Is it wrong for my druid to have accepted this? Accepting change is the opposite of being conservative.
Civilization needs the metal weapons and tools. Nature needs part of civilization to help fend off the other parts of civilization who wants to exploit nature to the extremes or even burn it to the ground. I do not find it "utterly ridiculous" to help out allies or at least the enemy of my enemy.
I handle coins on a daily basis and ICly buy and sell things using coins. I assumed carrying metal weapons for a few minutes would not matter that much. You have to breath to live, but you can hold your breath for a minute or two if you want to dive under water.
Now this leads to loot, are no druids looting metal things to sell/trade or carry for companions?
A druid would have little use for coins. Aside from the 'metal' aspect, a druid doesn't need anything a coin can buy. Nature provides everything a druid needs. Druids have no use for looting because they don't need loot. They don't need (or want, for that matter) houses, fancy gear, or lots of money. I don't know why a druid would even bother with a bank account.
I don't know what reason bows would even remotely be an issue. A stick with a silk string is NOT metal or processed in any form. If We're going according to the dogma and reasoning given for the restrictions then the only reason to disallow bows is because D&D Pen and Paper didn't see fit to give it to them as a weapon proficiency.
If there is a druid player here who follows all that I really would like you to chime in here.
Seeing as I have met druids with fancy gear and coin I can say that has been broken for a long while.
Is this your personal opinion or is this how it is? "If you play a druid do this or don't play druid at all.".
It is not this team's fault that they are in conflict with your interpretation of the druid class. In my opinion, stretching druidic concepts to encompass mechanical issues really doesn't help anyone.
splitting semantic and mechanical hairs about coins and loot and things will not help this discussion.
Could you point me to that lore posting? I did a quick search on the places I was aware of druid lore existing and I did not find such a statement. This is important because if it is stated the way you are interpreting it, it's a false statement about druid society.
5.In part of keeping the balance of nature the hierarchy realizes that a druid may need to fight creatures that are resistant to their normal blunt style weapons. As such the hierarchy has determined that the use of a scimitar should be allowed for the protection of a druid. This is the only processed and refined weapon that is allowed to be used by a druid.
*chimes in*
A druid can gain "fancy gear" via other means besides coin, of course. And there are in fact druids that have managed to collect a large quantity of coins, only to turn around and donate the coin to nature/conservation-related ends. I did say druids would have 'little use' for coins, rather than 'no use.' I also said druids don't need coins, though it may prove useful to use them now and again (as suggested by lonnarin).
There is one main thing to keep in mind when playing a druid: Do your actions do more to support the increase of nature and the decrease of civilization, or do they do more to support the civilization you seek to minimize?Bringing all creatures back to a more natural way of living, decreasing the size and impact of civilization, and avoiding as much as possible those things that represent civilization (such as refined metal and unnatural structures) are 'how it is' for druids. That is not my personal opinion; that is how druids are defined in Layonara.
We (as representatives of Layonara) make concessions due to game mechanics, old DnD conventions, and also to allow varied RP and interpretation to a degree. But if your druid isn't working hard toward those things mentioned above, a druid he is not.
What is "civilisation"? What is "a more natural way of living"? I'm not adressing you alone, milton, but the others, too. What are these things you talk about? All humanoid and playable races in this game are social animals, and quite good at building civilisations. Just because you have a pool of techniques that helps your group of people survive does not imply you consume the things around you mindlessly and don't care about the fallout. Civilisation is the house build on the four cornerstones: Science (Gathering and refining of knowledge - you can have the scientific method without spoiling a whole river), Culture (History, Tales, Social classes, Music, Myths/Spirituality, Ehtics, Philosophy), Economy (Resource distribution system, nothing more and nothing less), and Politics (Leadership, Morale, Law/Social order). TL;DR version: civilisation != ruthless exploitationDruids does not have to be asocial and anit-knowledge(knowledgegathering). I would suspect that quite the opposite is the case with most of them, given how they organize themselves.
Just a suggestion, as I'm sympathetic to the gear discussion: if you want gear and to develop your character's place in the world, consider a quest development series. You can grow your connection to nature with gm guidance and maybe earn something analogous to the man-made gear coin buys in the process.
Your assessment of civilization is a very abstract one that ignores some of the practical realities associated with urban living. For example, the resource distribution system often follows this path: a way of gaining wealth through resources is identified, resources are pulled from the earth by industry, they are processed by manufacturers, they are sold to consumers, they are discarded. Very often in urban life, and this is readily evident by not only modern life but also by a cursory inspection of the history of cities, the impact on ecological balance is completely ignored.
I agree that it is very abstract. I am quite sure I worded my argument wrongly and in a confusing manner. I will try to explain, if I fail, I blame it on the language barrier. The expression of "civilisation" as it was used was very unelegant and sloppy in terms that it was a try to describe a phenomenon diametrical opposed to "nature". As far as I understand it, you told me that my abstract statement about was wrong, because an existing expression of the abstractum was opposed to what I concluded: that civilisation is something a druid would not be opposed to. She or he can be opposed to a certain expression of civilisation, but never be opposed to the abstractum of civilisation as such. If you add natural numbers, the result is always a natural number. That doesn't mean 2 = 5.
I just tried to establish a better definition to avoid that statements are made in this thread that would be just plain wrong. I meant the same as you, just expressed myself differently and hopefully, more accurately. My main concern was, that if this distinction would not be made (between abstractum and expression), many druids might slide down the evil axis in the end.
Your own view point is likely similar to some of the ones that might be represented in game world but it still clashes with the held beliefs of the druids (as a collective). And let's not forget the Dark Druids who believe all civilization (what it represents) is evil and will crush it if given a chance.
Bringing all creatures back to a more natural way of living, decreasing the size and impact of civilization, and avoiding as much as possible those things that represent civilization (such as refined metal and unnatural structures) are 'how it is' for druids. That is not my personal opinion; that is how druids are defined in Layonara.
What is "civilisation"? What is "a more natural way of living"? I'm not adressing you alone, milton, but the others, too. What are these things you talk about?
Since every society is part of a civilisation