The Pixie is up!

[Incenjucar]

...or kind of like using a double weapon and smacking someone with an axe head and expecting it to be treated as a spear (which it is.)

I can buy something like Brutal not carrying over (maybe.) I can see the reasoning as to why it wouldn't; however -to my knowledge- there's nothing which prevents a weapon in the Improvised Weapon Group from having the brutal property. Still, I lean toward Brutal probably not carrying over.

However, the change in size and change to being improvised would -as best I can tell- not have any effect on the magical enchantment which is already on the item.

Improvised weapons have very specific statistics. You follow those statistics and no others.

I'm not sure, but I think that you only get to use magic item properties when using an item in a normal fashion.

 

[Klaus]

I like that (i.e. pixie flight's being due to pixie dust, not to air pressure) because it directly addresses the issue of the altitude limit: the flight is effected by the pixie dust instead of by the air pressure, so we can view a pixie's flight ability as being a result of magical rejection of mundanity as embodied by the ground. (The strength of the rejection effect might be proportional to the inverse square of distance from the ground, but that's an insignificant detail.)

This way, a pixie can exceed the altitude limit briefly; but that is a simple matter of momentum, which is always used up in one turn.

See, I'd have the pixie's flight be based off the magic of the land (ley lines), so they can fly pretty well within a given distance, but if they try to fly higher, their magic goes poof and the come down crashing. Kinda like a maglev train.

 

[Obryn]

Well, it depends upon the person. Some people want to play a pixie because it can fly, thus making the 1-square altitude limit missing the point. Some people play a pixie because they can turn invisible, making the whole "no invisibility as a racial power at level 1" thing missing the point. Some people play a pixie because they want to be a fey trickster, and those people don't even need a pixie now because they have re-fluffed halflings, gnomes, and eladrin.

I don't think we can say "Everyone who plays X plays it for reason Y!" There's a lot of things that, say, Dragonborn have going for them. It's not just one thing. Pixies are (I imagine) the same way.

Yes, people have different priorities and different reasons for picking a race, class, whatever. But that's a separate issue. It'd be like having a Wizard who can't cast spells, or a Knight who can't use a shield. Or a halfling who's not small, a dwarf who's not hardy, etc.

I'd say that - if you're thinking Pixie - the first things that should come to mind are (1) tiny, and (2) flying. Those are pretty much the core; everything else is nice, but not essential. While I personally don't want either of those things in a PC, I think WotC made some decent workarounds to allow both of them.

-O

 

[Tequila Sunrise]

So I've been thinking about this Shrink power...

Pixies probably have a high metabolism, and probably enjoy eating lots of fruits. If my Tinker were to get into a bushel of apples, she could shrink them down to bite size and polish off that bushel in no time. And no problems with digestion, seeing as how all those applies are on her person once eaten. (Well, 'in her person' is more apt.) But about eight hours later, when those apples have exited her posterior end, well, that's a lot of...

Ewww

You could shrink a vorpal blade so that it becomes an improvised weapon. Rolling max damage on 1d4 is fairly easy to do; you could increase your odds even more by wearing items which don't allow you to roll 1s for damage. Brutal 2 on improvised weapon means you can only roll 3s or 4s; you have a 50/50 chance of rolling max damage and rolling again.

Yes, I believe that would work. Though you'd be doing less damage with that Tiny weapon than in its normal size, so you wouldn't be scoring any power player points. It would, however, qualify you for Nation's Most Annoying Die Roller. I'll vote for you!

 

[I'm A Banana]

Yes, people have different priorities and different reasons for picking a race, class, whatever. But that's a separate issue. It'd be like having a Wizard who can't cast spells, or a Knight who can't use a shield. Or a halfling who's not small, a dwarf who's not hardy, etc.

There's a pretty big difference between playing "against type" and having different expectations. I'm only really talking about the latter.

I'd say that - if you're thinking Pixie - the first things that should come to mind are (1) tiny, and (2) flying. Those are pretty much the core; everything else is nice, but not essential. While I personally don't want either of those things in a PC, I think WotC made some decent workarounds to allow both of them.

You'd say that. Others would say other things. I'm just mentioning that we shouldn't really tell other people why they might want to play a pixie. The way WotC implemented Tiny and Flying and the other features might not be good enough for people to play the pixies they want to play. It's OK if the pixie isn't perfect for everyone.

 

[Incenjucar]

The disappearing fey is more or less already covered with the gnome, so it's a useful gap to go for.

 

[Unwise]

I'm happy to see the Pixies in game and this looks like an OK representation to me. I think a lot will depend on the feats available and what each person thinks a fairie 'must' be able to do.

...I wrote more, but it failed the "If someone else wrote this would I think they were a douchebag" test...

Now comes the hardest part of deciding what class best suits a Nac Mac Feegle.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Now comes the hardest part of deciding what class best suits a Nac Mac Feegle.

Barbarian?

 

[Tony Vargas]

I've also pointed out why I think many of the restrictions are, in fact, unnecessary and at least partly fail to address the issue that they are trying to address (game balance).
...Clearly the limitation is there ONLY because of game balance and equally clearly the only in world justification for the limitation is either "Its magic" or "Its for game balance".

I can agree, to an extent. Though, my conclusion is more along the lines of 'the pixie isn't an apropriate PC race, period.'

I could see a flying, turning-invisible, tiny PCs, though - at Paragon. Maybe 'Pixie' could've been a Gnome Paragon Path, where the gnome goes deeper into it's feyness and shrinks & grows wings. Hey, Dragonborn 'Scions of Arkhosia' grow wings, so why not?

 

[Walking Dad]

Tiny -> not having my book in front of me, but how big was the rat the one neverwinter theme could transform into at will?

Flying -> altitude limit and if the character manages to put something of with it, he will have to let the rest of the group behind.

Invisible -> the October preview doesn't mention an invisibility racial trait.