New pixie model

[Cobblewobble]

I'm sincerely not trying to add to a larger negative sentiment about the change.

I wanted to make a pixie for a very long time because I was attracted to the small character model that could flutter around.

However, I knew that the model change was impending so I decided not to just in case. I can only say that I'm really glad that I didn't waste an award on it. I have a friend who deleted their character because of this and I'm certain I would have as well.

This obviously isn't the end of the world and it's entirely purely personal preference.

However,

I strongly feel that the previous model was far superior in terms of what type of fantasy it allowed us to explore. It was visually unique and interesting.

There's no other roleplay environment that I'm aware where you could play anything like it.

Arelith has lost something lovely, unique and interesting in exchange for a blocky backpack with wings attached. I think the better option would have been to simply delete them as an available race for character creation entirely.

I rarely want to express my criticism like this in feedback threads because I understand that there were good reasons why this was adjustment needed to be made. It just wasn't worth what was atmospherically lost.

[stoneheart-]

I too think that deleting them would have been better. I thought Arelith for a time was moving away from making NPC races playable on Arelith. Now we have a new model for this totally inhuman race, and are talking about adding even more types of fey under the Pixie/Sprite umbrella. I think this is totally unnecessary; there doesn't need to be more types of "funny little guy with wings" and the amount of players who can do fey creatures justice is pretty slim as they are inhuman creatures with alien ways of thinking (I am not @ing anyone here btw as there have been some great pixies it's just an outlandish concept to play that I would struggle with playing faithfully too). Expanding fey is a dangerous road to go down, adding Half-fey or Feytouched and/or Hagspawn as an option for all races would have been way better imo.

I don't have a pixie and never played one, I just think they should not exist as a selectable race.

[Fenran]

I personally like having the non-pixie model. I'm excited to see what other possibilities it opens up for Fey. I was always hesitant to make one because I disliked the pixie model and now I'm definitely considering using my award for one.

While the pixie model had a niche for a certain look/RP, I feel it shoehorned a lot of the vibe for Fey into that niche. This feels like a step forward to me.

Good job to the team and I'm looking forward to see what else happens for them!

[DM Starfish]

Most of the above is doable. We can't really do grigs just yet and of course, because we use tiny elves, we can't fully support red caps or spriggans. But they are certainly possible once we get around to it. Korreds should become possible quite soon. Quicklings and other wingless fey \*could possibly have their wings removed by a DM\*. Although they will still count as being able to fly feat wise so it won't be a true representation. Winterlings can use the horned head models and appropriate wing colours to get close enough.

Also, we know that the wings are getting in the way and are investigating ways to fix the issues. It's not too easy though.

*
Edit: We will not be removing wings at this time.

[TroubledWaters]

I really don't like this forced change as there isn't really any IC justification as to why this happened, it's just "I guess I'm big now".

This wrecks the character concepts that myself and, from what it sounds like, a lot of other people had in mind.

An opt-in system for this new model would have been a much better way to go. If we don't want to see pixies anymore, it would likely have been a more fair option to just make all new fey use the same model and leave the old ones be.

Changes like this show a lack of acknowledgment of the RP and characters that were active, which is incredibly frustrating to play through.

[DM Starfish]

There does not need to be in character justification for OOC changes. When things change visually they should be regarded as having always been that way unless specifically stated otherwise (city updates etc where construction has actively happened).

For example; it shouldn't have to be mentioned that if an area, for instance, is expanded upon or more areas are added between two previously connected areas that it is not a new place. You've always walked through those places before this IC.

The same applies to this visual update. Please exercise some suspension of disbelief.

[TroubledWaters]

Sure, it's easy to do that when it's a change to the world.

When a change tells you that you can't play the character that you have been playing for unexplained OOC reasons, it stings a bit. Losing the award is a double whammy.

[DM Starfish]

Perhaps I do not understand why you feel that you can no longer play your character due to this visual change. However, I'm sorry that you are in this situation. This goes for everyone else that has said similar. I personally don't get it and I'm sorry that it sucks for you. Hopefully inspiration strikes and you are able to come up with and or transition into a concept that does work with the new look.

In the meanwhile, we'll be trying to add new appearance options and also we'll be trying to sort out the current wing issues. (Too flappy, too hitboxy etc)

[Xerah]

They have the easiest IC explanation (even if they shouldn’t acknowledge it). It’s fae magic. Stuff’s weird.

For example, my fae Briar, is a noble fey who literally takes form of a briar to guard the Queen when she returns to the fae realm. When she needs to move, she takes form of the old pixie or the new one. That’s just a silly example. If you’re playing a fey, you should be able to make something up.

Fae magic is weird.

[DM Starfish]

Adding on to Xerah's comment.

Fey use glamour (their magic) to appear in different ways. The visual form that we see is usually not their true form but a representation of it. They can even go so far as to age or de-age themselves over several days to assume a new guise.

Check out this forum post for some seriously interesting stuff: viewtopic.php?f=14&t=11156

[chris a gogo]

It gets mentioned alot and my reply is always "look just don't ask"
On the plus side you can buy potions of mutation for 342 gold and be able to fly and look like all the rest of the pixies in the game world.

[Fain]

Adding on to Xerah's comment.

Fey use glamour (their magic) to appear in different ways. The visual form that we see is usually not their true form but a representation of it. They can even go so far as to age or de-age themselves over several days to assume a new guise.

Check out this forum post for some seriously interesting stuff: viewtopic.php?f=14&t=11156

I like a lot of the inspiration for some of the articles here, but I notice it's sourcing several books (Complete guide to the fey, Faeries by Bastion Press, etc) which are unofficial 3rd party source books that aren't necessarily canon to the setting (Bastion Press' "Faeries" had official Forgotten Realms writers though so I guess it's kind of canon adjacent).

Should we regard these as being official lore sources for Arelith's take of things on fey, or more just sources of inspiration and ideas?

[Xerah]

Fairy lore is both not canon and cannon, no matter where you find it. Make up whatever you want. Use books like that (D&D source books and the like), or use books you found in your Gramdma's library (fairytales, historical stuff, etc.).

The best part of Fey lore is that there isn't really anything to point to and go "use this". No one will question whatever interpretation you wish to use (unless it's really wrong; i.e. the four courts are no more and everyone is just having a teddy bear picnic[though you might say this and OOCly know it's not true]). Goat's post is a great resource to base things on as a general framework, but it is not canon any more than it can be. Changeling the Lost books are also great sources.

One of the things I like about Keith Baker (Eberron creator) is he has this "in my Eberron" view on things where people use the framework he's written but change things however they like. Similar applies to the fey "In my fae realm this and that..."

[Eyeliner]

I don’t play a fey and don’t plan to so this is just asking… what if they could switch back and forth to a pixie model, like yuan ti and their snakes or hags and the old woman?

[DM Starfish]

I don’t play a fey and don’t plan to so this is just asking… what if they could switch back and forth to a pixie model, like yuan ti and their snakes or hags and the old woman?

(੭ˊᵕˋ)੭* ੈ✩‧₊˚ Soon™

[DM Starfish]

Adding on to Xerah's comment.

Fey use glamour (their magic) to appear in different ways. The visual form that we see is usually not their true form but a representation of it. They can even go so far as to age or de-age themselves over several days to assume a new guise.

Check out this forum post for some seriously interesting stuff: viewtopic.php?f=14&t=11156

I like a lot of the inspiration for some of the articles here, but I notice it's sourcing several books (Complete guide to the fey, Faeries by Bastion Press, etc) which are unofficial 3rd party source books that aren't necessarily canon to the setting (Bastion Press' "Faeries" had official Forgotten Realms writers though so I guess it's kind of canon adjacent).

Should we regard these as being official lore sources for Arelith's take of things on fey, or more just sources of inspiration and ideas?

I maybe should have clarified that I use it as a source of inspiration. Fey are complicated and as Xerah said, you can go with almost anything.

[chris a gogo]

Block of wood is gone and the wings are static when not moving and flap alot less.

Much better thankyou.

[AskRyze]

Thank you for making pixie PCs big enough to click on. The underdark sends its regards.