While you live, the armor incorporated into your body can’t be removed against your will.
It is incorporated.. into.. their body.
Integrated Protection. Integrated.
Integrate
verb
combine (one thing) with another so that they become a whole.
Incorporated into their body. Incorporate.
Incorporate
verb
take in something as part of the whole; include
...The armor becomes part of their body.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
But it's still "armor." And the types of armor are defined game system items which are objects. Your Breastplate does not cease being a breastplate, and a breastplate is an object.
The issue seems to me to boil down to the word “into” and if the DM wants to ignore it based on w/e notion of balance they have regarding this usually insignificant portion of feature.
While you live, the armor incorporated into your body can’t be removed against your will.
much different than:
While you live, the armor incorporated on to your body can’t be removed against your will.
an incredibly minor change in wording that can have a dramatic effect in a game where, surprisingly enough, vision is required for so many things.
But it's still "armor." And the types of armor are defined game system items which are objects. Your Breastplate does not cease being a breastplate, and a breastplate is an object.
It isn't an object if it is part of a creature. D&D makes a distinction between creatures and objects.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Except that further down in the comments section, Keith Baker posts this:
"How does the new armor system work with Heat Metal? A warforged is considered to be wearing whatever armor it currently has attached for all mechanical purposes: feats, spells, class features. If the warforged has metal armor attached, it’s vulnerable to heat metal. The only difference between an armored human and a warforged in this case is that it takes the warforged longer to remove the plating; but given that it takes a human 5 minutes to remove heavy armor and the duration of Heat Metal is only 1 minute, it’s not like “Quick! Strip out of your heavy armor!” has ever been a logical strategy. I’ll also point out that warforged have ALWAYS been vulnerable to Heat Metal; it’s called out in the 3.5 rules.
If a Warforged absorbs full plate can we see that or does it look like other Warforged but just built like tank?
In my opinion, it doesn’t look exactly like a human wearing full plate, but you would certainly recognize that it’s a warforged with heavy armor plating. Ultimately, it’s up to the DM to decide how much detail to provide."
So in fact, the short answer, from the creator of eberron, is that Yes, heat metal does affect armor incorporated by Warforged.
And although it isn't explicitly stated by Keith later on, I believe that Heat Metal, in 5e, does not affect warforged themselves as it did in 3.5, because of the same reason pointed out by multiple posts in this thread, that warforged are creatures (not constructs, nor objects) and therefore cannot be targeted by Heat Metal. Again, though, would have been nice to have stated it directly. Instead of a further ambiguous statement that warforged have ALWAYS been vulnerable to Heat metal.
I don't understand how this is still being debated when the creator directly addressed the issue itself. Yes, Heat Metal works by design as quoted by "Arlyquino". Anything going against this is house ruling, regardless of how much sense it does or doesn't make.
Barring an erratum or a SAC entry, I think we have two established positions, neither of which can be explicitly refuted by RAW--only the application of other general rules to this particular situation.
Integrated armor is a valid target for heat metal because it is still a discrete piece of manufactured metal with its own characteristics.
Integrated armor is not a valid target for heat metal because the act of integrating it makes the armor part of the warforged creature.
Barring an erratum or a SAC entry, I think we have two established positions, neither of which can be explicitly refuted by RAW--only the application of other general rules to this particular situation.
Integrated armor is a valid target for heat metal because it is still a discrete piece of manufactured metal with its own characteristics.
Integrated armor is not a valid target for heat metal because the act of integrating it makes the armor part of the warforged creature.
Does the creator's answer not count as RAW? Scroll down to the comments.
Here it is copy pasted for those not wanting to check the link themselves.
Robert Barkoo on November 20, 2019 at 11:27 pm said:
Really miss the flavor of the subraces a lot, not a fan of us have one base model now.
How does the new armor system work with Heat Metal? If a Warforged absorbs full plate can we see that or does it look like other Warforged but just built like tank?
Keith Bakeron November 21, 2019 at 12:43 am said:
How does the new armor system work with Heat Metal? A warforged is considered to be wearing whatever armor it currently has attached for all mechanical purposes: feats, spells, class features. If the warforged has metal armor attached, it’s vulnerable to heat metal. The only difference between an armored human and a warforged in this case is that it takes the warforged longer to remove the plating; but given that it takes a human 5 minutes to remove heavy armor and the duration of Heat Metal is only 1 minute, it’s not like “Quick! Strip out of your heavy armor!” has ever been a logical strategy. I’ll also point out that warforged have ALWAYS been vulnerable to Heat Metal; it’s called out in the 3.5 rules.
If a Warforged absorbs full plate can we see that or does it look like other Warforged but just built like tank?
In my opinion, it doesn’t look exactly like a human wearing full plate, but you would certainly recognize that it’s a warforged with heavy armor plating. Ultimately, it’s up to the DM to decide how much detail to provide.
No, the creator’s comments do not count as RAW. They count as RAI.
That said, rules do what they say they do and they don’t do what they don’t say they do. Nothing about Integrated Protection says the armor ceases to be a manufactured object, so that position IS pretty well refuted. Asking for rules to say what they DON’T do is an unclearable bar.
Warforged are manufactured creatures. " The warforged are a relatively new race being created by House Cannith during the Last War in 965 YK for the purposes of warfare. The Warforged are sentient constructs and have free will, which earned them the same rights as human citizens in each of their homelands in 996 YK under the Treaty of Thronehold."
Until they gain sentience they are just objects. Once they gain sentience, the collection of metal (and wood, and stone) objects that is their body ceases to be a collection of objects and becomes a creature. If you detach a warforged arm... it's just a collection of metal, wood, and stone objects in the shape of an arm.
Which is where the question, if a warforged incorporates metal armor into it (effectively becoming new skin for the warforged) does it stop being an "object" and start being "part of a creature".
If you see a steel defender, which is literally made of metal, can you cast heat metal on it? No, it's a creature not an object.
If you see a naked warforged, can you cast heat metal on its visible metal parts? No, it's a creature not an object. So if the armor becomes the warforged skin when it is incorporated why would you be able to target the CREATURES SKIN.
Heat metal doesn't say it targets "manufactured" metal objects, so your argument that it doesn't cease to be a manufactured metal object is garbage.
If you go in a working mine, and pick up a peice of ore (unrefined metal object) and someone casts heat metal on it you either drop it or continue to take damage.
Warforged are manufactured creatures. " The warforged are a relatively new race being created by House Cannith during the Last War in 965 YK for the purposes of warfare. The Warforged are sentient constructs and have free will, which earned them the same rights as human citizens in each of their homelands in 996 YK under the Treaty of Thronehold."
Until they gain sentience they are just objects. Once they gain sentience, the collection of metal (and wood, and stone) objects that is their body ceases to be a collection of objects and becomes a creature. If you detach a warforged arm... it's just a collection of metal, wood, and stone objects in the shape of an arm.
None of this is even remotely relevant to anything I said.
Which is where the question, if a warforged incorporates metal armor into it (effectively becoming new skin for the warforged) does it stop being an "object" and start being "part of a creature".
The answer to that question is extremely clear: no, because the text of Integrated Protection doesn't say anything about it doing so.
If you see a steel defender, which is literally made of metal, can you cast heat metal on it? No, it's a creature not an object.
If you see a naked warforged, can you cast heat metal on its visible metal parts? No, it's a creature not an object. So if the armor becomes the warforged skin when it is incorporated why would you be able to target the CREATURES SKIN.
The armor doesn't become the warforged's skin, because the rules don't say it does. It's still armor.
Heat metal doesn't say it targets "manufactured" metal objects, so your argument that it doesn't cease to be a manufactured metal object is garbage.
If you go in a working mine, and pick up a peice of ore (unrefined metal object) and someone casts heat metal on it you either drop it or continue to take damage.
The very first clause of heat metal is "Choose a manufactured metal object." Please do your due diligence and actually read the spell before tossing around words like "garbage."
Rules are clear and don't make the armor invisible or immune to spells. If it was the case, it would be written. Everything else to make it logical is a house rule.
Integrated Protection. Your body has built-in defensive layers, which can be enhanced with armor.
You gain a +1 bonus to Armor Class.
You can don only armor with which you have proficiency. To don armor, you must incorporate it into your body over the course of 1 hour, during which you must remain in contact with the armor. To doff armor, you must spend 1 hour removing it. You can rest while donning or doffing armor in this way.
While you live, your armor can't be removed from your body against your will.
Rules are clear and don't make the armor invisible or immune to spells. If it was the case, it would be written. Everything else to make it logical is a house rule.
Integrated Protection. Your body has built-in defensive layers, which can be enhanced with armor.
You gain a +1 bonus to Armor Class.
You can don only armor with which you have proficiency. To don armor, you must incorporate it into your body over the course of 1 hour, during which you must remain in contact with the armor. To doff armor, you must spend 1 hour removing it. You can rest while donning or doffing armor in this way.
While you live, your armor can't be removed from your body against your will.
No one is saying the feature grants spell immunity or invisibility.
You're right, been a while since I read heat metal and forgot they specified manufactured. Its weird when they choose specific words... like into instead of onto
you must incorporate it into your body over the course of 1 hour,
If they had said "onto" I would agree it was still a separate thing that was perhaps "bolted on" like another comment or suggested.
But like when they specified manufactured for heat metal, they specified INTO for integrated protection... but I guess the actual text only matters to you when it supports your argument.
Making the armor now part of their body, and like all the other manufactured parts that make up their body non-targetable. Weird you said they actual official description of a warforged being crafted (manufactured) isn't relevant to your argument that armor is manufactured and thus targetable... the warforged is manufactured as well, the fact its sentient and therefore all its parts are not targetable is the point of the whole discussion.
Its sad the writers didn't bother considering the implications when they came up with RAW and claim they INTENDED something else RAI...
Sorry im a necromancer, digging this thread up lol. BUT i have to disagree with this.
Example. Everyone knows that a living breathing creature isn't considered an object. BUT kill that creature, and now its corpse becomes an object. Same thing applies to if you, say, cut off that creatures arm. The arm becomes an object.
For the warforged, it is the same concept. They are living, not-breathing creatures made of wood and metal. Armor to them is just skin. When they incorporate the armor into themselves, they are just adding skin to their bodies. The armor is still visible, but it is now a part of their body, thus making it part of a creatures body. THUS making the armor no longer targetable by the Heat Metal spell.
For the warforged, it is the same concept. They are living, not-breathing creatures made of wood and metal.
Some of them are, yes. Not all of them. A warforged's muscles are made of "root-like cords" (there is no evidence these are made from metal) "infused with alchemical fluids" (again, no evidence of metals) "wrapped around a framework of steel, darkwood, or stone" (steel is a metal, but darkwood and stone are not). There is no reason to assume any given warforged is made of any metal at all. The only other material all warforged are constructed from is that their eyes are made of "crystal", and there is no evidence this crystal is a metal.
A better example of a creature you can safely assume is made of metal is an iron golem, which is an elemental of some sort crammed into the equivalent of a puppet made from iron or steel. The absolute best examples are a metal object animated via Animate Objects or a construct that's fundamentally similar, like a flying sword. Note that heat metal will not work on an iron golem, flying sword, or, say, a ball bearing animated via animate objects.
Armor to them is just skin.
When they incorporate the armor into themselves, they are just adding skin to their bodies. The armor is still visible, but it is now a part of their body, thus making it part of a creatures body. THUS making the armor no longer targetable by the Heat Metal spell.
And yet, the claim you are making is simply not supported by their rules text and has far-reaching consequences, because if your claim were true, a warforged in full plate would count as not wearing armor for the purposes of Barbarian or Monk unarmored defense, as well as other rules that check to see if you are wearing armor. Warforged wearing armor count as wearing armor count as wearing armor for all rules purposes, and ruling otherwise would make them incredibly overpowered in ways far beyond this one spell in scope.
a warforged in full plate would count as not wearing armor for the purposes of Barbarian or Monk unarmored defense
That would appear to be an issue with the Unarmored Defense rule, not the Integrated Protection rule.
Either the Integrated Protection rule shouldn't have used "incorporate" or should have specified "is considered worn", or the Unarmored Defense rule should have specified "wearing or integrated with"
I would also point out that all of the NPC stat blocks for Warforged have "natural armor" listed for their armor type, with ACs ranging from 16 to 23. 'Natural armor' cannot be targeted by heat metal.
So NPCs have an inherent buff by incorporating metal armor that PCs do not is you RAI that integrated armor can be targeted.
This may sound silly but hypothetically, how would you treat a target with a lot of peircings? Is an earring when pierced into you now part of you? What about something implanted? Is that part of you, or an object?
I know some people who'd mightily offended if you ponted at parts of their body and called them objects.
The conundrum were dealing with here is that of identity. And for me the answer is simple. If the item has become part of you, it is part of you. Thus, part of a creature, in dnd terms, and not an object.
Now, should it be removed from the creature, then it become an object again. Much like if you removed basically any other part of the creature. A severed hand isn't a creature, after all.
Warforged integrate armor into themselves. That means the armor become part of them. Thus isnt an object anymore and is now part of a creature. If you removed it from them, it'd become an object again.
This isn't nearly as complex as some people here seem to want it to be.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Why do you say that?
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
It is incorporated.. into.. their body.
Integrated Protection. Integrated.
Incorporated into their body. Incorporate.
...The armor becomes part of their body.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
But it's still "armor." And the types of armor are defined game system items which are objects. Your Breastplate does not cease being a breastplate, and a breastplate is an object.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
The issue seems to me to boil down to the word “into” and if the DM wants to ignore it based on w/e notion of balance they have regarding this usually insignificant portion of feature.
much different than:
an incredibly minor change in wording that can have a dramatic effect in a game where, surprisingly enough, vision is required for so many things.
It isn't an object if it is part of a creature. D&D makes a distinction between creatures and objects.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
I don't understand how this is still being debated when the creator directly addressed the issue itself. Yes, Heat Metal works by design as quoted by "Arlyquino". Anything going against this is house ruling, regardless of how much sense it does or doesn't make.
Barring an erratum or a SAC entry, I think we have two established positions, neither of which can be explicitly refuted by RAW--only the application of other general rules to this particular situation.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Rising From The Last War: The Warforged | (keith-baker.com)
Does the creator's answer not count as RAW? Scroll down to the comments.
Here it is copy pasted for those not wanting to check the link themselves.
Robert Barkoo on November 20, 2019 at 11:27 pm said:
Really miss the flavor of the subraces a lot, not a fan of us have one base model now.
How does the new armor system work with Heat Metal? If a Warforged absorbs full plate can we see that or does it look like other Warforged but just built like tank?
Keith Bakeron November 21, 2019 at 12:43 am said:
How does the new armor system work with Heat Metal?
A warforged is considered to be wearing whatever armor it currently has attached for all mechanical purposes: feats, spells, class features. If the warforged has metal armor attached, it’s vulnerable to heat metal. The only difference between an armored human and a warforged in this case is that it takes the warforged longer to remove the plating; but given that it takes a human 5 minutes to remove heavy armor and the duration of Heat Metal is only 1 minute, it’s not like “Quick! Strip out of your heavy armor!” has ever been a logical strategy. I’ll also point out that warforged have ALWAYS been vulnerable to Heat Metal; it’s called out in the 3.5 rules.
If a Warforged absorbs full plate can we see that or does it look like other Warforged but just built like tank?
In my opinion, it doesn’t look exactly like a human wearing full plate, but you would certainly recognize that it’s a warforged with heavy armor plating. Ultimately, it’s up to the DM to decide how much detail to provide.
No, the creator’s comments do not count as RAW. They count as RAI.
That said, rules do what they say they do and they don’t do what they don’t say they do. Nothing about Integrated Protection says the armor ceases to be a manufactured object, so that position IS pretty well refuted. Asking for rules to say what they DON’T do is an unclearable bar.
Warforged are manufactured creatures. " The warforged are a relatively new race being created by House Cannith during the Last War in 965 YK for the purposes of warfare. The Warforged are sentient constructs and have free will, which earned them the same rights as human citizens in each of their homelands in 996 YK under the Treaty of Thronehold."
Until they gain sentience they are just objects. Once they gain sentience, the collection of metal (and wood, and stone) objects that is their body ceases to be a collection of objects and becomes a creature. If you detach a warforged arm... it's just a collection of metal, wood, and stone objects in the shape of an arm.
Which is where the question, if a warforged incorporates metal armor into it (effectively becoming new skin for the warforged) does it stop being an "object" and start being "part of a creature".
If you see a steel defender, which is literally made of metal, can you cast heat metal on it? No, it's a creature not an object.
If you see a naked warforged, can you cast heat metal on its visible metal parts? No, it's a creature not an object. So if the armor becomes the warforged skin when it is incorporated why would you be able to target the CREATURES SKIN.
Heat metal doesn't say it targets "manufactured" metal objects, so your argument that it doesn't cease to be a manufactured metal object is garbage.
If you go in a working mine, and pick up a peice of ore (unrefined metal object) and someone casts heat metal on it you either drop it or continue to take damage.
None of this is even remotely relevant to anything I said.
The answer to that question is extremely clear: no, because the text of Integrated Protection doesn't say anything about it doing so.
The armor doesn't become the warforged's skin, because the rules don't say it does. It's still armor.
The very first clause of heat metal is "Choose a manufactured metal object." Please do your due diligence and actually read the spell before tossing around words like "garbage."
That's kind of an unfriendly response to a position you disagree with, wouldn't you say? Welcome to the D&D Beyond forums, by the way.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Rules are clear and don't make the armor invisible or immune to spells. If it was the case, it would be written. Everything else to make it logical is a house rule.
No one is saying the feature grants spell immunity or invisibility.
It’s what “into” your body means.
You're right, been a while since I read heat metal and forgot they specified manufactured. Its weird when they choose specific words... like into instead of onto
you must incorporate it into your body over the course of 1 hour,
If they had said "onto" I would agree it was still a separate thing that was perhaps "bolted on" like another comment or suggested.
But like when they specified manufactured for heat metal, they specified INTO for integrated protection... but I guess the actual text only matters to you when it supports your argument.
Making the armor now part of their body, and like all the other manufactured parts that make up their body non-targetable. Weird you said they actual official description of a warforged being crafted (manufactured) isn't relevant to your argument that armor is manufactured and thus targetable... the warforged is manufactured as well, the fact its sentient and therefore all its parts are not targetable is the point of the whole discussion.
Its sad the writers didn't bother considering the implications when they came up with RAW and claim they INTENDED something else RAI...
Using 3.5 rules for 5e?
So.... thaco is still in effect then right, because its an older edition rule.
Sorry im a necromancer, digging this thread up lol. BUT i have to disagree with this.
Example. Everyone knows that a living breathing creature isn't considered an object. BUT kill that creature, and now its corpse becomes an object. Same thing applies to if you, say, cut off that creatures arm. The arm becomes an object.
For the warforged, it is the same concept. They are living, not-breathing creatures made of wood and metal. Armor to them is just skin. When they incorporate the armor into themselves, they are just adding skin to their bodies. The armor is still visible, but it is now a part of their body, thus making it part of a creatures body. THUS making the armor no longer targetable by the Heat Metal spell.
Some of them are, yes. Not all of them. A warforged's muscles are made of "root-like cords" (there is no evidence these are made from metal) "infused with alchemical fluids" (again, no evidence of metals) "wrapped around a framework of steel, darkwood, or stone" (steel is a metal, but darkwood and stone are not). There is no reason to assume any given warforged is made of any metal at all. The only other material all warforged are constructed from is that their eyes are made of "crystal", and there is no evidence this crystal is a metal.
A better example of a creature you can safely assume is made of metal is an iron golem, which is an elemental of some sort crammed into the equivalent of a puppet made from iron or steel. The absolute best examples are a metal object animated via Animate Objects or a construct that's fundamentally similar, like a flying sword. Note that heat metal will not work on an iron golem, flying sword, or, say, a ball bearing animated via animate objects.
And yet, the claim you are making is simply not supported by their rules text and has far-reaching consequences, because if your claim were true, a warforged in full plate would count as not wearing armor for the purposes of Barbarian or Monk unarmored defense, as well as other rules that check to see if you are wearing armor. Warforged wearing armor count as wearing armor count as wearing armor for all rules purposes, and ruling otherwise would make them incredibly overpowered in ways far beyond this one spell in scope.
That would appear to be an issue with the Unarmored Defense rule, not the Integrated Protection rule.
Either the Integrated Protection rule shouldn't have used "incorporate" or should have specified "is considered worn", or the Unarmored Defense rule should have specified "wearing or integrated with"
I would also point out that all of the NPC stat blocks for Warforged have "natural armor" listed for their armor type, with ACs ranging from 16 to 23. 'Natural armor' cannot be targeted by heat metal.
So NPCs have an inherent buff by incorporating metal armor that PCs do not is you RAI that integrated armor can be targeted.
This may sound silly but hypothetically, how would you treat a target with a lot of peircings? Is an earring when pierced into you now part of you? What about something implanted? Is that part of you, or an object?
I know some people who'd mightily offended if you ponted at parts of their body and called them objects.
The conundrum were dealing with here is that of identity. And for me the answer is simple. If the item has become part of you, it is part of you. Thus, part of a creature, in dnd terms, and not an object.
Now, should it be removed from the creature, then it become an object again. Much like if you removed basically any other part of the creature. A severed hand isn't a creature, after all.
Warforged integrate armor into themselves. That means the armor become part of them. Thus isnt an object anymore and is now part of a creature. If you removed it from them, it'd become an object again.
This isn't nearly as complex as some people here seem to want it to be.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.