pixie sorcerer op?

10 posts / 0 new
Last post
my D&D group is playing 3.5e and we have fallen into an argument. there are three of us not including the DM. I am a goliath barbarian with greataxe and my associates are a pixie sorcerer with a bow and an elf rogue with rapier. Myself and the rogue are new to this game and this is our first campaign during a battle we acquired some loot and decided to not share with the pixie who did not help at all during the fight. said pixie now plans to kill us for it. if we are forced into battle with him how would we go about defeating the overpowered midget? yes our dm is aware of this plot and actually approves.
1) Fighting between the characters is almost always a bad idea. If you're having problems it's much better to have the players talk it out. It sounds like the players are having problems with each other. trying to settle that in the game usually creates a bad mood and only makes the problems worse.

2) Why didn't the pixie help? That sounds like the origin of the problem.

3) Why do you think the pixie is overpowered? With a Level Adjustment of +4 or even +6, it should be much much weaker than the Barbarian and the Rogue. The ability to fly and turn invisible could be a problem, but one hit and the pixie should be dead. Getting some weapons to attack flying enemies and items to see invisible ones would be a good idea anyway. The regular monsters can fly and turn invisible as well. Especially for characters like a Barbarian and Rogue that should be a priority, as except for the Use Magic Device skill, you're limited in what magic you can use to counter invisibility.

3a) At high level a sorcerer can be a more powerful class than a barbarian or rogue, especially if played by an experienced player. But I don't think you're very high level yet, or your description would probably have included more about what powerful magical items you possess.

4) You sound like very inexperienced players. It's likely that you are just misinterpreting the rules and that this is causing whatever problems you're having.

5) If the pixie player is just someone you don't like to play with, tell him, don't go around murdering each others characters. It will usually just sour things further.

My general advice is to talk whatever issues your having over with the players, not try to solve things in game. Besides that I can't give you much advice as you're not providing much detail, like what level you are, what the situation is, what items you and the rogue have, what abilities the pixie has, etc.

I also want to say that the specific tactics are about D&D 3.5 and would probably need to go to the "Previous Editions" forum. But I think this is a player and DM issue, and should be solved as such, not by going into details about tactics.

5e should strongly stay away from "I don't like it, so you can't have it either."

 

I once asked the question (in D&D 3.5) "Does a Druid4/Wizard3/ArcaneHierophant1 have Wildshape?". Jesse Decker and Andy Collins: Yes and the text is clear and can't be interpreted differently. Rich Redman and Ed Stark: No and the text is clear and can't be interpreted differently. Skip Williams: Lol, it's worded ambiguously and entirely not how I intended it. (Cust. Serv. Reference# 050815-000323)



3) Why do you think the pixie is overpowered? With a Level Adjustment of +4 or even +6, it should be much much weaker than the Barbarian and the Rogue. 

Maybe they aren't using LA properly?


If the Pixie is a level 10 character, he should have +6LA and 4 levels in sorcerer. 


To be in the same party with your elven rogue should have 10 levels in rogue and you should have 9 in barbarian (With your LA of 1). 

"In a way, you are worse than Krusk"                               " As usual, Krusk comments with assuredness, but lacks the clarity and awareness of what he's talking about"

"Can't say enough how much I agree with Krusk"        "Wow, thank you very much"

"Your advice is the worst"                                                  "I'd recommend no one listed to Krusk's opinions about what games to play"



3) Why do you think the pixie is overpowered? With a Level Adjustment of +4 or even +6, it should be much much weaker than the Barbarian and the Rogue. 

Maybe they aren't using LA properly?


If the Pixie is a level 10 character, he should have +6LA and 4 levels in sorcerer. 


To be in the same party with your elven rogue should have 10 levels in rogue and you should have 9 in barbarian (With your LA of 1



Which is my point 4. They are likely not using the rules correctly. But unfortunately the OP never replied any more.

It could be that the Barbarian and Rogue are so unoptimized that anything with invisibility, spells and range just outsines them.

5e should strongly stay away from "I don't like it, so you can't have it either."

 

I once asked the question (in D&D 3.5) "Does a Druid4/Wizard3/ArcaneHierophant1 have Wildshape?". Jesse Decker and Andy Collins: Yes and the text is clear and can't be interpreted differently. Rich Redman and Ed Stark: No and the text is clear and can't be interpreted differently. Skip Williams: Lol, it's worded ambiguously and entirely not how I intended it. (Cust. Serv. Reference# 050815-000323)

It could be that the Barbarian and Rogue are so unoptimized that anything with invisibility, spells and range just outsines them.

I don't play 3.5 anymore, but I remember some of it and I don't recall any ways a Barbarian or Rogue could optimize to deal with invisibility, spells and range. As long as one of those spells is windwall, and there's enough room to move, the spellcaster is probably fine.

If I have to ask the GM for it, then I don't want it.

The barbarian doesn't have a lot he can do. Maybe buy magic items, or beg the party for buffs?


The rogue can max use magic device and at least blast wands. Rogues also tend to be able to do stuff with thrown weapons so they aren't totally hosed if its visable at range.

"In a way, you are worse than Krusk"                               " As usual, Krusk comments with assuredness, but lacks the clarity and awareness of what he's talking about"

"Can't say enough how much I agree with Krusk"        "Wow, thank you very much"

"Your advice is the worst"                                                  "I'd recommend no one listed to Krusk's opinions about what games to play"

It could be that the Barbarian and Rogue are so unoptimized that anything with invisibility, spells and range just outsines them.

I don't play 3.5 anymore, but I remember some of it and I don't recall any ways a Barbarian or Rogue could optimize to deal with invisibility, spells and range. As long as one of those spells is windwall, and there's enough room to move, the spellcaster is probably fine.


Items that give Fly, See Invis, True Seeing, Blindsense, Dimension Door, ranged weapons, Use Magic Device and wands, good Hide and sneak attack, etc. etc.

3.5 has many many options especially if wealth goes up at higher level. The Dragonborn Barbarian in my party would make mincemeat out of any pixie of the same ECL if he won initiative and otherwise might still have a decent chance unless the pixie is very well built as well. There would only be pixiedust left.

LA+4 or +6 is a huge disadvantage in 3.5, it's likely they are playing without it or haven't looked much beyond the basics yet.

5e should strongly stay away from "I don't like it, so you can't have it either."

 

I once asked the question (in D&D 3.5) "Does a Druid4/Wizard3/ArcaneHierophant1 have Wildshape?". Jesse Decker and Andy Collins: Yes and the text is clear and can't be interpreted differently. Rich Redman and Ed Stark: No and the text is clear and can't be interpreted differently. Skip Williams: Lol, it's worded ambiguously and entirely not how I intended it. (Cust. Serv. Reference# 050815-000323)

It could be that the Barbarian and Rogue are so unoptimized that anything with invisibility, spells and range just outsines them.

I don't play 3.5 anymore, but I remember some of it and I don't recall any ways a Barbarian or Rogue could optimize to deal with invisibility, spells and range. As long as one of those spells is windwall, and there's enough room to move, the spellcaster is probably fine.

Items that give Fly, See Invis, True Seeing, Blindsense, Dimension Door, ranged weapons, Use Magic Device and wands, good Hide and sneak attack, etc. etc.

3.5 has many many options especially if wealth goes up at higher level. The Dragonborn Barbarian in my party would make mincemeat out of any pixie of the same ECL if he won initiative and otherwise might still have a decent chance unless the pixie is very well built as well. There would only be pixiedust left.

But wouldn't the spellcaster have counters for one of those? Windwall, dispel magic, grease, etc. etc. And tremendous range with their attack spells.

If I have to ask the GM for it, then I don't want it.

It could be that the Barbarian and Rogue are so unoptimized that anything with invisibility, spells and range just outsines them.

I don't play 3.5 anymore, but I remember some of it and I don't recall any ways a Barbarian or Rogue could optimize to deal with invisibility, spells and range. As long as one of those spells is windwall, and there's enough room to move, the spellcaster is probably fine.

Items that give Fly, See Invis, True Seeing, Blindsense, Dimension Door, ranged weapons, Use Magic Device and wands, good Hide and sneak attack, etc. etc.

3.5 has many many options especially if wealth goes up at higher level. The Dragonborn Barbarian in my party would make mincemeat out of any pixie of the same ECL if he won initiative and otherwise might still have a decent chance unless the pixie is very well built as well. There would only be pixiedust left.

But wouldn't the spellcaster have counters for one of those? Windwall, dispel magic, grease, etc. etc. And tremendous range with their attack spells.


The Barbarian and the Rogue should have 6 levels on the Sorcerer so either the Sorcerer isn't going to have many of those options, or the Barbarian and Rogue are going to be high level and are going to have enough options that the Sorcerer might be able to counter one of them, but not likely both.

The Barbarian and Rogue don't need to go for the expensive items, only things that will function long enough to get one decent attack off.

1-vs-1 I might give the Sorcerer a chance if they are well above level 10, otherwise the action economy should make the Barbarian and Rogue win. With two initiative rolls and at least one high Dex, they are likely to go before any defences are up, unless the Sorcerer ambushes them, but that seems to be the scenario they want to avoid.

Unless you let the Sorcerer have a spell selection and full preparation specificly to counter these two enemies.

Some items like Scout's Headband (See invis for 10 min, 3400g), Cape of the Mounteback (1/d dimension door 10800g), Belt of battle (12000g, various effects, but mostly another full round action once a day). Celestial Armor (Fly 1/d 22000g)

Depending on what level they are some or all of those are possibilities. By the time the Sorcerer gets 3rd level spells, the WBL is 49000-88000 gp. Before that the Scout's Headband alone should be enough.

There are lot's of other items below 5000g that could help in various other ways. A wand with a few charges of Fireball and some ranks in Use Magic Device might be enough. As long as you negate the invisibility there are plenty of ways to kill a Sorcerer with very few hitpoints.

5e should strongly stay away from "I don't like it, so you can't have it either."

 

I once asked the question (in D&D 3.5) "Does a Druid4/Wizard3/ArcaneHierophant1 have Wildshape?". Jesse Decker and Andy Collins: Yes and the text is clear and can't be interpreted differently. Rich Redman and Ed Stark: No and the text is clear and can't be interpreted differently. Skip Williams: Lol, it's worded ambiguously and entirely not how I intended it. (Cust. Serv. Reference# 050815-000323)

But unfortunately the OP never replied any more.



Oh no, the pixie got him!

Sign In to post comments