Iron Chef Optimization Challenge in the Playground LII

[Kuulvheysoon]

Welcome, contestants, judges, and guests to Iron Chef LII. Here in Optimization Colosseum, contestants will endeavor to create an optimized and flavorful character using a specified D&D3.5 prestige class as a "Secret Ingredient".

Contestants: You will need to present a write-up of your build at at least one of the following points: 5th level, 10th level, 15th, 20th, and a "sweet spot" that you feel is the high point of the build, as well as presenting a fully-fleshed out 20-level build in the table below. Feel free to present as many of these as you like, and please give a rundown of the build's abilities and playability at all of the levels you didn't show. The rules are as follows:

Menu: For most challenges, the "special ingredient" will be drawn from Core plus Completes. There will, from time to time, be special challenges that showcase secret ingredients from other books--for example, the XPH.

32 point-buy is the presumed creation method, but we have generally allowed other levels of point-buy.
If you do use a different point-buy, please make your case for its necessity in your entry. Keep in mind that for using exceptionally large or small point-buys may warrant deductions in elegance and/or power.

Kitchen: Competitors will be free to use any official 3.5 rulebook in constructing their builds. Dragon magazine is disallowed, and Unearthed Arcana is allowed; but see Elegance below. Web-exclusive 3.0 or 3.5 materials by WotC are expressly allowed, but take care to verify that an updated version did not appear in print elsewhere, as this may cause an Elegance deduction at the judges' discretion. Alternate rule systems from UA such as gestalt are not allowed, as they create a different playing field. Also, item familiars are forbidden because I hate 'em. Please refrain from using Taint unless it's necessary for the Secret Ingredient.

Cooking Time: Contestants will have until 11:59PM GMT on Sunday, December 29th, 2013 to create their builds and PM them to the Chairman, Kuulvheysoon. Builds will then be posted simultaneously, to avoid copying. Judges will have until 11:59PM GMT on Sunday, January 12th, 2014 to judge the builds and submit their scores. If no judges have scored by that point, only the scores of the first judge to submit will be counted.

Judging: Judging will be based on the following criteria, with each build rated from 1 (very poor) to 5 (exemplary) in each area: Originality, Power, Elegance, Use of Secret Ingredient.

Power level is up to you. Cheese is acceptable, but should be kept to a sane level unless you're showcasing a new TO build you've discovered. In the words of one of my predecessors, a little cheddar can be nice, but avoid the mature Gruyere unless you're making a cheese fondue.
Elegance could bear a little elaboration. It basically measures how skillfully you put your build together, and whether you sacrificed flavor for power. We're cooking here - if your dish doesn't taste good, it doesn't matter how well-presented it is. Use of flaws is an automatic loss of one point per flaw in this category. Other things that will cause lost points here are excessive multiclassing, and classes that don't fit the concept - using Cloistered Cleric in a front-line melee fighter, for example, will lose you points. Please note the following change: a legal source's relative obscurity should not be considered as penalizing Elegance, excepting the aforementioned issues with Unearthed Arcana. Using too many sources may be an Elegance deduction at the judges' discretion, but a book's relative obscurity may not. In that same vein, drawing solely from the Core 3 (and the d20 SRD) should not be punished for lacking Originality.
Presentation: Builds will be posted anonymously, in order to avoid the potential of bias towards a particular competitor. For this reason, please don't put your name in the build, as I'm likely to miss it when reviewing the entries!

Due to concerns about standardizing entry format, I'd like everyone to try to use the following table for their entry.NAME OF ENTRY
{table=head]Level|Class|Base Attack Bonus|Fort Save|Ref Save|Will Save|Skills|Feats|Class Features

1st|New Class Level|
+x|
+x|
+x|
+x|Skills|New Feats|New Class Abilities

2nd|New Class Level|
+x|
+x|
+x|
+x|Skills|New Feats|New Class Abilities

3rd|New Class Level|
+x|
+x|
+x|
+x|Skills|New Feats|New Class Abilities

4th|New Class Level|
+x|
+x|
+x|
+x|Skills|New Feats|New Class Abilities

5th|New Class Level|
+x|
+x|
+x|
+x|Skills|New Feats|New Class Abilities

6th|New Class Level|
+x|
+x|
+x|
+x|Skills|New Feats|New Class Abilities

7th|New Class Level|
+x|
+x|
+x|
+x|Skills|New Feats|New Class Abilities

8th|New Class Level|
+x|
+x|
+x|
+x|Skills|New Feats|New Class Abilities

9th|New Class Level|
+x|
+x|
+x|
+x|Skills|New Feats|New Class Abilities

10th|New Class Level|
+x|
+x|
+x|
+x|Skills|New Feats|New Class Abilities

11th|New Class Level|
+x|
+x|
+x|
+x|Skills|New Feats|New Class Abilities

12th|New Class Level|
+x|
+x|
+x|
+x|Skills|New Feats|New Class Abilities

13th|New Class Level|
+x|
+x|
+x|
+x|Skills|New Feats|New Class Abilities

14th|New Class Level|
+x|
+x|
+x|
+x|Skills|New Feats|New Class Abilities

15th|New Class Level|
+x|
+x|
+x|
+x|Skills|New Feats|New Class Abilities

16th|New Class Level|
+x|
+x|
+x|
+x|Skills|New Feats|New Class Abilities

17th|New Class Level|
+x|
+x|
+x|
+x|Skills|New Feats|New Class Abilities

18th|New Class Level|
+x|
+x|
+x|
+x|Skills|New Feats|New Class Abilities

19th|New Class Level|
+x|
+x|
+x|
+x|Skills|New Feats|New Class Abilities

20th|New Class Level|
+x|
+x|
+x|
+x|Skills|New Feats|New Class Abilities[/table]

CodeNAME OF ENTRY
{table=head]Level|Class|Base Attack Bonus|Fort Save|Ref Save|Will Save|Skills|Feats|Class Features

1st|New Class Level|
+x|
+x|
+x|
+x|Skills|New Feats|New Class Abilities

2nd|New Class Level|
+x|
+x|
+x|
+x|Skills|New Feats|New Class Abilities

3rd|New Class Level|
+x|
+x|
+x|
+x|Skills|New Feats|New Class Abilities

4th|New Class Level|
+x|
+x|
+x|
+x|Skills|New Feats|New Class Abilities

5th|New Class Level|
+x|
+x|
+x|
+x|Skills|New Feats|New Class Abilities

6th|New Class Level|
+x|
+x|
+x|
+x|Skills|New Feats|New Class Abilities

7th|New Class Level|
+x|
+x|
+x|
+x|Skills|New Feats|New Class Abilities

8th|New Class Level|
+x|
+x|
+x|
+x|Skills|New Feats|New Class Abilities

9th|New Class Level|
+x|
+x|
+x|
+x|Skills|New Feats|New Class Abilities

10th|New Class Level|
+x|
+x|
+x|
+x|Skills|New Feats|New Class Abilities

11th|New Class Level|
+x|
+x|
+x|
+x|Skills|New Feats|New Class Abilities

12th|New Class Level|
+x|
+x|
+x|
+x|Skills|New Feats|New Class Abilities

13th|New Class Level|
+x|
+x|
+x|
+x|Skills|New Feats|New Class Abilities

14th|New Class Level|
+x|
+x|
+x|
+x|Skills|New Feats|New Class Abilities

15th|New Class Level|
+x|
+x|
+x|
+x|Skills|New Feats|New Class Abilities

16th|New Class Level|
+x|
+x|
+x|
+x|Skills|New Feats|New Class Abilities

17th|New Class Level|
+x|
+x|
+x|
+x|Skills|New Feats|New Class Abilities

18th|New Class Level|
+x|
+x|
+x|
+x|Skills|New Feats|New Class Abilities

19th|New Class Level|
+x|
+x|
+x|
+x|Skills|New Feats|New Class Abilities

20th|New Class Level|
+x|
+x|
+x|
+x|Skills|New Feats|New Class Abilities[/table]

For entries with spellcasting, use the following table for Spells per day and Spells Known. (Spells Known only if necessary, i.e. Sorcerer or Bard, but not Wizard or Warmage)Spells per day/Spells Known
{table=head]Level|0lvl|1st|2nd|3rd|4th|5th|6th|7th|8th|9th

1st|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-

2nd|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-

3rd|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-

4th|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-

5th|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-

6th|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-

7th|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-

8th|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-

9th|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-

10th|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-

11th|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-

12th|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-

13th|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-

14th|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-

15th|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-

16th|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-

17th|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-

18th|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-

19th|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-

20th|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-[/table]

CodeSpells per day/Spells Known
{table=head]Level|0lvl|1st|2nd|3rd|4th|5th|6th|7th|8th|9th

1st|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-

2nd|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-

3rd|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-

4th|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-

5th|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-

6th|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-

7th|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-

8th|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-

9th|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-

10th|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-

11th|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-

12th|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-

13th|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-

14th|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-

15th|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-

16th|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-

17th|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-

18th|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-

19th|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-

20th|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-|-[/table]

For other systems (Psionics, ToB, Incarnum, etc.) keep track of PP/maneuvers/essentia separately, preferably in a nice neat list.
Speculation: Please don't post or speculate on possible builds until the "reveal," in order to avoid spoiling the surprise if a particular competitor is producing a build along those lines.

Leadership is banned; we're producing a meal, not a seven-course banquet for a hundred diners. If your entry includes a prestige class or ACF that grants Leadership or a Leadership-like ability as a bonus feat, the feat should be ignored and is not eligible to be traded away for another feat or ACF through any means.

So! Who wants to sign up as a contestant, and who wants to sign up as a judge? Looking for as many contestants and judges as feel like playing!

This week's special ingredient is:
Book of Exalted Deed's Anointed Knight!
We will award 1st through 3rd places, as well as a shout-out for honorable mention. The honorable mention prize is given to the most daring or unexpected build. Judges, contestants and guests alike are invited to vote for honorable mention via PM.

Allez, optimiser!

Contestants

Judges

The Builds

Past Competitions

Iron Chef I: Entropomancer (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=142470)
Iron Chef II: Psibond Agent (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=146583)
Iron Chef III: Cancer Mage (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=148584)
Iron Chef IV: Stonelord (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=150595)
Iron Chef V: War Chanter (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=152543)
Iron Chef VI: Master of Masks (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=156876)
Iron Chef VII: Green Star Adept (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=158633)
Iron Chef VIII: Pyrokineticist (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=160266)
Iron Chef IX: Animal Lord (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=162702)
Iron Chef X: Mythic Exemplar (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=164381)
Iron Chef XI: Blade Bravo (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=166539)
Iron Chef XII: War Mind (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=9426386)
Iron Chef XIII: Vigilante (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=172233)
Iron Chef XIV: Seeker of the Song (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=174434)
Iron Chef XV: Drunken Master (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=176049)
Iron Chef XVI: Assassin (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=178202)
Iron Chef XVII: Ardent Dilettante (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=182492)
Iron Chef XVIII: Unseelie Dark Hunter (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=186097)
Iron Chef XIX: Dread Pirate (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=190607)
Iron Chef XX: Incandescent Champion (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=10976416)
Iron Chef XXI: Ghostwalker (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=198921)
Iron Chef XXII: Dervish (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=206576)
Iron Chef XXIII: Divine Crusader (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=210071)
Iron Chef XXIV: Tactical Soldier (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=214198)
Iron Chef XXV: Scion of Tem-Et-Nu (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=217441)
Iron Chef XXVI: Shadowdancer (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=220956)
Iron Chef XXVII: Mindbender (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=224008)
Iron Chef XXVIII: Cryokineticist (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=227304)
Iron Chef XXIX: Consecrated Harrier (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=229688)
Iron Chef XXX: Initiate of Pistis Sophia (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=233346)
Iron Chef XXXI: Shadow Sentinel (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=236908)
Iron Chef XXXII: Temple Raider of Olidammara (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=239786)
Iron Chef XXXIII: Drow Judicator (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=243052)
Iron Chef XXXIV: Dragon Disciple (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=246072)
Iron Chef XXXV: Death Delver (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=249542)
Iron Chef XXXVI: Acolyte of the Skin (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=252923)
Iron Chef XXXVII: Justiciar (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=13865473)
Iron Chef XXXVIII: Hand of the Winged Master (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=255215)
Iron Chef XXXIX: Renegade Mastermaker (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=260333)
Iron Chef XL: Nightsong Infiltrator (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=263173)
Iron Chef XLI: Geomancer (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=266709)
Iron Chef XLII: Shadowblade (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=270196)
Iron Chef XLIII: Bladesinger (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=274122)
Iron Chef XLIV: Urban Soul (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=279116)
Iron Chef XLV: Talon of Tiamat (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=15216595)
Iron Chef XLVI: Cipher Adept (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=287314)
Iron Chef XLVII: Cold Iron Warrior (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=291294)
Iron Chef XLVIII: Shadow Sun Ninja (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=297327)
Iron Chef XLIX: Thrall to Orcus (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=302487)
Iron Chef L: Corrupt Avenger (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=307823)
Iron Chef LI: Black Flame Zealot (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=312773)

[Kuulvheysoon]

FAQ:
What's this even about? I'm glad you asked, actually... (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=15415117&postcount=1)

Is Dragon Compendium Allowed? Yes (as well as its Errata), but individual issues of Dragon Magazine are not.

What about 3.0 materials? 3.0 materials, whether online or in printed form, are allowed unless they've been officially updated to a 3.5 edition.

Are Dragonlance, Ravenloft, Planescape, Dark Sun, or Kingdoms of Kalamar allowable sources? The Dragonlance Campaign Setting is allowed, but the subsequent books for Dragonlance are considered 3rd party, and are therefore not eligible, despite the "WotC approved" status of those books. The same holds for Oriental Adventures (1st party) and the subsequent Rokugan books (3rd party). Materials from Ravenloft, Planescape, Dark Sun, and Kingdoms of Kalamar are considered 3rd party for purposes of this contest, and are therefore not allowed.

What about online sources in general? If the online source is a) published by WotC, and b) not replaced by an updated version at a later time, it is eligible. Use it, link it.

Where's the line drawn with "acceptable/unacceptable" for Unearthed Arcana? This will likely vary a bit from Chairman to Chairman. Item Familiars and Gestalt have always been verboten, since before IC migrated to GitP; don't expect that to change. Flaws have similarly always been noted as warranting a deduction; while I am Chairman, I'm extending that to Traits, though they warrant 1/2 the penalty in Elegance that a Flaw would because they're roughly 1/2 as useful. Alternate spell systems, alternate skill systems and alternate crafting rules all create an uneven playing field, and as such, will be disallowed for as long as I am Chairman. Bloodlines and the Retraining options presented in the PHB2 are ripe for abuse, and will be strongly discouraged as long as I am Chairman. Note that judges are allowed to look askance at any use of Unearthed Arcana not specifically mentioned above, at their discretion, and otherwise penalize Elegance according to their preference.

What, exactly, does the ban on Leadership mean? As folks have started to try to work around the edges of this one, I'm forced to spell it out more plainly. No Leadership, Draconic Cohort, or Feats that grant a similar ability are allowed EXCEPT Wild Cohort while Kuulvheysoon is chairman. Any PrC you choose with Leadership or a Leadership-analog has that ability entirely ignored for this contest, as it may neither be used nor traded away via any means whatsoever.

What's the minimum score in a category? Assuming an entry is legal, the minimum score in any category is 1. If a judge is convinced that an entry is mechanically illegal by the RAW, the judge may give the build a score of 0 in Elegance, and proceed to judge the entry as if the offending material was not included. Failing to meet a special requirements for a prestige class does not merit a 0, but may qualify for a penalty, at the judge's discretion. Because this contest focuses on Player Characters, an entry that is not technically allowed for a PC, but is viable as an NPC, counts as a legal entry, but may receive a minimum score at the judges' discretion.

Anoint Ancestral Weapon: Sentient Weapon? If you do decide to use this specific ability/oil, you choose which mentals go where, but let me know and I'll roll you a pair of lesser powers.

Anoint Self: Celestial Strategy? For the purposes of this specific competition, treat it as you would a monk bonus feat (that is, to say, that you receive and may use it regardless of whether or not you should qualify for it. Note that if your Dexterity is not high enough to allow additional Attacks of Opportunity, you can take only 1 per round regardless.

Anoint Ancestral Weapon: Unicorn's Blood? Since there's no Unicorn, assume that the weapon is the donor for the Ravage (because somebody is going to start on about it).

Anoint Self: Divine Clairity? Can be taken once, for a bonus to a single ability score.

Armor/Shield Proficiencies? Yes, it is awesome and true. Since it says 'all' without any sort of limiting factor, it means all, much like the Factotum's class skill list.

Anoint Weapon/Ancestral Relic interaction? Your Ancestral Relic must qualify as a weapon in order to benefit from this class feature.

Ritual Oil costs? No, they are not counted as part of the base value of your Ancestral Relic.

Class level or Character Level? The 'level' referred to in the Anoint Self and Anoint Ancestral Weapon tables is your (Anointed Knight) Class level, not your Character level.

Relic Value and Base Weapon cost? They aren't related at all. Text trumps Table, so the Relic Value presented in the Book of Exalted Deeds table in the Ancestral Relic feat is only the cost of the enhancement. Mind that the weapon must still abide by the normal weapon enhancement rules, and is limited to the +10 equivalent value ceiling.

What does 120' sight and hearing mean? It means that the weapon can only visually/audibly sense things within 120'.

[Venger]

Called it.

Well, I thought it was gonna be warrior of darkness, but that's the same.

I'm in to cook.

[Temotei]

Sweet. Let's see what I can do with my meager skills. I shall cook.

[KrimsonNekros]

*Cracks open the relevant pdf and gets cracking.* This time I'm doing my skill points right!

[Temotei]

Oh, and the link to the BFZ challenge is outside of the spoiler.

[Tim Proctor]

I am in to judge, and here is my metric.

Note: I started each category at a 3, with players the ability to earn up to a 5.

Note: the term ‘feature’ is used in many of the calculations below and a feature is defined as an aspect of the secret ingredient that is a requirement for entry, or gained through the levels. In the case of Black Flame Zealot the following features are:

Stealth (hide, move silently), Religion (knowledge (religion), Zealous Heart), Weapon use (weapon prof (kukri)), Mental resilience (iron will), Spell Casting (divine casting), Fire (sacred flame, unholy immolation), Assassination (sneak attack, death attack, poison use). There are seven total.

Originality
-(i/x), i = each iteration of a race, class, feat, or maxed skill set (maximum ranks available) being used by another player, x total amount of players.
+.25, if a race, class, feat, or maxed skill set that was not used by another player.

Note: features of the secret ingredient are excluded from the above calculation.

Note: features that are separate from each other regardless how similar are treated separately. Knowledge (religion) is as separate from Knowledge (nature) as a Desert Half-Orc is from a Half-Orc.

Power
+.25, for each feature of the secret ingredient that has been reinforced.
-0.5, for each feature of the secret ingredient missing reinforcement.
+/- x, (offense) x=((average damage output at level 20)*(initiative/10))/100.
+/- x, (defense) x=((HP max 1st average the remainder)*(AC/40))/100.
+/-.25, for each of the following that are not SI features: Spell casting level >= 8, AC (with max mundane available) >= 35, Social modifiers (2 of diplomacy, bluff, sense motive) >= 40, Stealth modifiers (hide and move silently) >= 40, Scouting modifiers (listen and spot) >= 40, Knowledge modifiers (2 or more knowledge) >=40, Crowd Control (3 or more mass CC effects).

Note: max damage output is capped at 500 offering a maximum of +2, there is no need for an orbital charger.

Note: AC is calculated using 4 if limited to wearing light, 6 if limited to wearing medium, and 8 if allowed to wear heavy. AC will be given an addition 2 if allowed to use a shield (meaning not 2 handed).

Note: reinforced can mean a number of things generally maxed skill ranks where appropriate, a feat that is related, racial and class bonuses and/or synergies, etc.

Elegance
-1 per flaw, failure to qualify for a feat, class, etc.
+x, per class 5 or more levels, where X= levels*0.1 (if a 5 level class 0.5 points, if a 10 level class 1 point).
-1 for a 1 level splash, -0.5 for a 2 level splash.
+/-x, discretionary use for alignment issues, cheese, rules interpretations, etc.

Note: failures to qualify will be a cascading cumulative effect, meaning that if failure to qualify for X means that you also would then fail to qualify for Y then you would fail to qualify for both.

Use of Secret Ingredient
+0.5, if the SI class feature is reinforced in a superb manner the combination of three or more reinforcement factors.
+.25, if the SI class feature is reinforced in an good manner the combination of two reinforcement factors.
-.25, if the SI class feature is not reinforced in any manner.
-0.5, if the SI class feature is not reinforced and receives a negative penalty due to something else in the build such as a poor ability score, armor penalties, etc.

Note: see the reinforcement definition above in the power section.

If anyone have any comments, questions, or concerns about it or my judging style please feel free to let me know.

[Tim Proctor]

Oh, and the link to the BFZ challenge is outside of the spoiler.
That's because BFZ was 51, and the spoiler was for the 1st 50.

[Kuulvheysoon]

Oh, and the link to the BFZ challenge is outside of the spoiler.

I am well aware - it's the First of the Second Fifty. I just didn't want the post to stretch halfway to Perdition. I'm going to keep posting them outside so people can easily reference the last few contests.

[Venger]

Chair, I have a question.

I know we cannot pick the same ability from the self or weapon chart.

However, with regards to our "Divine Clarity" ability, since it can improve our wis/int/or cha, is picking it once to say, bump wis, and once again to bump int allowed, or is that also "picking it twice?"

[relytdan]

undecided as of this moment but looks interesting

[Venger]

undecided as of this moment but looks interesting

it's no warrior of darkness, but it'll do.

[Temotei]

That's because BFZ was 51, and the spoiler was for the 1st 50.


I am well aware - it's the First of the Second Fifty. I just didn't want the post to stretch halfway to Perdition. I'm going to keep posting them outside so people can easily reference the last few contests.

Ah. Good call.

[Kuulvheysoon]

Chair, I have a question.

I know we cannot pick the same ability from the self or weapon chart.

However, with regards to our "Divine Clarity" ability, since it can improve our wis/int/or cha, is picking it once to say, bump wis, and once again to bump int allowed, or is that also "picking it twice?"

I would read it as Divine Clarity is a single ability that can only be chosen a single time for a boost to Int/Wis/Cha once.

[WhamBamSam]

Huh. Neat. Not sure I'll actually have time to participate, but I'm damn sure going to try to get a build in.

[Fates]

I've been watching these threads for a good long while now. I figure it's high time I take up the pot and ladle myself. I'm in.

[Dumbledore lives]

I will probably be participating but I have a question. The PrC says it is proficient with all armor and shields. Does this include exotic ones? By RAW it seems it does but I'm unaware if there were any at the time of publication, so I wanted to ask.

[Temotei]

I've got a question about formatting.

Typically in a class table, features after the first character aren't capitalized or italicized unless they're proper nouns or whatever.

In our tables, do you judges prefer to see capitalized text throughout or as in class tables? Some examples:

{table=head]Special
Anoint self (blah)[/table]

{table=head]Special
Anoint Self (Blah)[/table]

[Sian]

okay, appearently i rolled a 1 on book-fu ... where is the rules for point buy placed?

rolled Google-fu and found it ... DMG p169

[Macabaret]

Time to be a fly in the (anointed) oil.

The Anointed Knight PrC has a requirement of the feat Ancestral Relic which states:


Choose an item you own. The item must be of masterwork quality, and it must be an item that once belonged....


The Anointed Knight then gains the ability Anoint Ancestral Weapon which states:


An anointed knight concocts a magic oil with which to coat her ancestral weapon, at a cost of.... If the oil is applied to a weapon other than the anointed knight's ancestral weapon, nothing happens and the oil is wasted...


(All bolding of text above is my own addition for emphasis.)

So, my questions:

Does an Anointed Knight gain an ancestral weapon that is separate from her ancestral relic? (Though they could be the same item.)
Does the Anoint Ancestral Weapon ability only work on an anointed relic, even if that relic isn't a weapon?
Does the Anoint Ancestral Weapon ability only work on an anointed relic that is a weapon?

[OMG PONIES]

Book of Exalted Deed's Annointed Knight!


Annoit Ancestral Weapon: Sentient Weapon?


Annoint Self: Celestial Strategy??


Annoit Ancestral Weapon: Unicorn's Blood?

Sorry to be a stickler for spelling, but can we correct those to "Anoint" and "Anointed" as appropriate?


So, my questions:

Does an Anointed Knight gain an ancestral weapon that is separate from her ancestral relic? (Though they could be the same item.)
Does the Anoint Ancestral Weapon ability only work on an anointed relic, even if that relic isn't a weapon?
Does the Anoint Ancestral Weapon ability only work on an anointed relic that is a weapon?


Let it begin :smallamused:.

[Amphetryon]

My final class of the semester is today; I'll compete.

[Sian]

is Retraining (as per PHB II ) allowed as long as the build, at any time, is legal?

[dysprosium]

Really?

That's a class that was not on my radar.

I'm in of course.

[Thurbane]

Ooh, an Exalted PrC. I can see this getting fun and messy. :smallbiggrin:

Ah, not Exalted as such. Still, should provide some interesting entries. A crafting-esque based PrC - I take it back, this will get fun and messy. :smalltongue:

If I get time and motivation, might try and finally get an entry in.

[Rama]

Assuming y'all are willing to suffer my sophomore attempt, I'll happily judge again. I'm reworking my judging methodology after the first go-through (with no offense intended to Ponies who I stole it from) and will follow up with it later.

[Sian]

Yet another question

the Bonus feat that Anointed Knight picks from seem to be nearly all the Fighter bonus feats in PHB (quick overview says only Improved critical and the Mounted line aren't on the list of the PHB fighter feats) ... its it allowed to use it to pick bonus fighter feats from PHB2 (or other books)?

[Tim Proctor]

Yet another question

the Bonus feat that Anointed Knight picks from seem to be nearly all the Fighter bonus feats in PHB (quick overview says only Improved critical and the Mounted line aren't on the list of the PHB fighter feats) ... its it allowed to use it to pick bonus fighter feats from PHB2 (or other books)?

Generally, its RAW so unless its one of the feats listed on BoED pg 51 in the Bonus Feats section its not a legal choice.


is Retraining (as per PHB II ) allowed as long as the build, at any time, is legal?

I haven't seen any real problems from the judges in past competitions, as a judge this round I can say I don't have a problem with it. I can't speak for all judges though.

[Rama]

I haven't seen any real problems from the judges in past competitions, as a judge this round I can say I don't have a problem with it. I can't speak for all judges though.

Same here.

[OMG PONIES]

Assuming y'all are willing to suffer my sophomore attempt, I'll happily judge again. I'm reworking my judging methodology after the first go-through (with no offense intended to Ponies who I stole it from) and will follow up with it later.

Offended? I'm flattered. :smallbiggrin: Also, unless inspiration strikes I may judge this round. The class just feels so...vanilla.

[Sian]

Generally, its RAW so unless its one of the feats listed on BoED pg 51 in the Bonus Feats section its not a legal choice.

fair enough ... just thought i would ask since it was a question between something crappish and well ... :P

[Rama]

Ok, here's what I'm looking at as a revised scoring formula. Some tweaks may be made, but it should hold up pretty well:

My Criteria

This time, I'm going with a strictly additions/no subtractions approach. Each entry will start at a base score of 4 (1 in each category), with points added based on the following considerations (NOTE: the points allocation within each category are a guideline only. I reserve the right to adjust as deemed necessary/deserving based on the circumstances of a particular submission, although any departures will be explained in detail):

Originality:

Does the entry present a compelling backstory/concept? – up to 1.00 points
Does the entry make use of any unique mechanical tricks/feat chains? – up to 1.00 points
Does the entry enter the Secret Ingredient through use of race and/or class combinations both unexpected and unique relative to the other entries? – up to 1.50 points
Does the entry avoid known cheese and overused optimization suggestions? – up to .50 points

Note that for bullet points 2 and 3 I will be placing special emphasis on how these unique items play a part in the build as a whole, and particularly in relation to the SI. As an example, throwing in one level of barbarian in a caster themed SI isn’t going to net any originality points even if it is unexpected/no one else does it…unless the submission is tying that one level of barbarian in a way that it means something to the build as a whole and the SI in particular. I’m looking for seasonings that enhance flavor, not a tasteless garnish.

Note 2: for the third bullet point, I will be compiling a list of what I consider ‘expected’ race/class usages, and will post them after the submissions are revealed but before judging anything. That way y’all will be able to see what I’m not awarding for in that category when you consider my scores of a submission and can make a case accordingly if arguing for adjustment.


Power:

Does the entry contribute significantly in terms of offense, defense, and/or utility? – up to 3.00 points
Does the entry function at the same power level throughout an entire adventuring day, rather than relying on "nova" powers? - up to.50 points
Does the entry thrive without an undue emphasis on items, templates, or other "add-ons" for its power? - up to.50 points

I will be evaluating the entry separately for its power/contributions at various stages, and considering the contribution both (a) as a member of a mid OP party of base PHB characters, (b) in comparison to the other builds submitted to the competition at each of those stages, and (c) as impacted by the addition of the SI, the SI's mechanical qualities, and the SI's pre-reqs. As an example, if the entry is a killer after level 10 but can’t really function before then, expect the scoring to acknowledge the late power but also take the early deficiency into account.



Elegance:



Does the entry qualify for all classes taken outside the Secret Ingredient? – up to 1.00 points

Does the entry qualify for all feats taken? – up to .50 points

Does the entry avoid reliance on any questionable rules interpretations, cross-setting material, or material specifically disallowed from this competition? – up to 2.00 points

Does the entry avoid multi-class penalties and/or excessive class dipping? – up to .50 points

Note that questionable rules interpretations are the most significant part of this category by far. While one relatively insignificant questionable rules interpretation will still earn points in that category, if the entry's entire build is based around something that has a strained rules interpretation it will have a harder time earning points there.

I don’t mean (or want) to scare anyone off being bold for fear of losing out on elegance though; so unless it’s completely unsupportable by a logical explanation the entry can reasonably expect to get some points here.

Also note, meeting fluff requirements for classes/feats is expected. If it is not specifically addressed, the entry won’t get full points.



Use of the Secret Ingredient:



Does the entry qualify for the Secret Ingredient? – 1.50 points

Does the entry use the Secret Ingredient at an early stage of the build and complete the Secret Ingredient (or present a compelling reason why not doing so is actually a better use of the Secret Ingredient)? – up to .50 points

Does the entry utilize all mechanical abilities provided by the SI (and its prerequisites) as key components of the build, synergize the unique mechanical abilities of the Secret Ingredient with the rest of the build, and/or present a novel use of said mechanical abilities? – up to 2.00 points

Note that the first bullet is pretty much a straight yes/no question. If the build does not qualify for the SI, it will receive a score of 1 with no increases allowed from the other questions. Conversely, a build that qualifies will score no worse than a 2.50 in this category.

Additionally, note that I consider both mechanical and fluff requirements as part of qualification. For example, if a SI requires worship of a good god but the submission worships Hextor, it will be considered unqualified and scored accordingly (although unforeseen creative shenanigans will be taken into consideration).

The one exception to the above statement involves omitted fluff requirements rather than ‘incorrect’ ones; explicit fulfillment of those requirements is expected, but if required fluff is missing the submission won’t be scored as a disqualification. If a requirement is not specifically addressed, the entry won't get full points but likely won’t be subject to the automatic ‘1’.

Further, note that if qualification for the SI rests on a questionable rules interpretation, I will not penalize both here and in Elegance. As long as a logical justification for the submission's interpretation can be provided (whether or not I would allow it as DM personally), I will limit deductions to Elegance and not disqualify the submission's use of the SI. Points might fail to be received in both categories only if the rules interpretations are so egregious as to be unsupportable, and said rules are integral to qualifying for the SI.

[OMG PONIES]

Speaking of judging, I know Herr Chairman was looking to brush up the judging criteria in some way. Should I hold off on posting my [revised] criteria until that time?

[Rama]

Speaking of judging, I know Herr Chairman was looking to brush up the judging criteria in some way. Should I hold off on posting my [revised] criteria until that time?

My assumption is that any changes the Chairman adds will be related to disqualification; but it's easy enough to tweak if the changes are more expansive than that.

[Heliomance]

Potentially entering as a contestant, I have a few ideas.

Question: If we spend XP during the build, should it still go to 20?

[Tim Proctor]

Potentially entering as a contestant, I have a few ideas.

Question: If we spend XP during the build, should it still go to 20?

Yes, however there may be elegance deductions depending on what exactly is going on. And judges may just stop judging at lvl 19 if its severe but I say still make the build.

I would say that depends on a reasonability test. Are you spending 29,000 exp or more? When is it spent? There are a lot of variables to the situation and without getting into speculation and giving people ideas here is what I would say.

If your experience spent is less than 10% of the difference to the next level, then it shouldn't be a problem. So at level 15, I'd say 1,500 exp is not a significant amount, as you'll generally catch back up with the party with bonus exp from a level difference. I would ask that you notate how much you spent per level in a notes section of the build.

[Gwachitallemall]

Will item values be ignored for this one? Because of the ancestral relic calling for a sacrifice of gold or item value.

[Deadline]

Potentially entering as a contestant, I have a few ideas.

Question: If we spend XP during the build, should it still go to 20?

Generally speaking, assuming that your dish gets more xp than others usually results in an elegance penalty.

[Rama]

Will item values be ignored for this one? Because of the ancestral relic calling for a sacrifice of gold or item value.

*edit* misread something, disregard previous. I'd say yes; since it has maximum values, I wouldn't worry too much about imputing the sacrifice cost. Just making sure you're staying within the maximums for bonuses on the item would be more important imo.

[Vaz]

Yes, however there may be elegance deductions depending on what exactly is going on. And judges may just stop judging at lvl 19 if its severe but I say still make the build.

I would say that depends on a reasonability test. Are you spending 29,000 exp or more? When is it spent? There are a lot of variables to the situation and without getting into speculation and giving people ideas here is what I would say.

If your experience spent is less than 10% of the difference to the next level, then it shouldn't be a problem. So at level 15, I'd say 1,500 exp is not a significant amount, as you'll generally catch back up with the party with bonus exp from a level difference. I would ask that you notate how much you spent per level in a notes section of the build.

Not been doing it too long (last... Dozen?) but I think i've yet ti see a judge discount the characters builds based on going over in XP; eg Crafting etc. However penalties abound for assuming LA buy off or ignoring it; the assumation being that if all were taking the same campaign and were awarded equal XP, some wouldn't even reach Level 18.

Edit; forgot to say Definately competing. Had an idea for this one for ages.

[The Viscount]

Will item values be ignored for this one? Because of the ancestral relic calling for a sacrifice of gold or item value.

It's not really an issue, since we don't generally talk about wealth or gear in our dishes. They're at most something small that is suggested, but I would think you can assume you have the money to enhance your ancestral relic since you do have to take the feat.

[OMG PONIES]

Potentially entering as a contestant, I have a few ideas.

Question: If we spend XP during the build, should it still go to 20?

Hmm, I may be thinking what you're thinking...:smallamused:


Will item values be ignored for this one? Because of the ancestral relic calling for a sacrifice of gold or item value.


My gut reaction is to tie it to WBL. IE, if the sacrifice value you're applying to your ancestral relic when you get it is more than ~30% of the character's WBL at the level you're taking it, it's an elegance concern - and the more you exceed that value, the greater the concern.

Please keep in mind that the feat required for the Ingredient specifically sets the maximum value for an ancestral relic on page 41 of Book of Exalted Deeds. At any given level, your relic can have a maximum value of 50% of your WBL. By RAW, if you go from a value of 0 gp to max value in one fell swoop, you could sacrifice the following percentage of your WBL (not including Masterwork weapon cost, already needed for Ancestral Relic):

{table=head]Level|Max Sacrificed|% of WBL sacrificed
3rd|2400|89%
4th|5100|94%
5th|8700|97%
6th|12700|98%
7th|18700|98%
8th|26700|99%
9th|35700|99%
10th|48700|99%
11th|65700|100%
12th|87700|100%
13th|109700|100%
14th|149700|100%
15th|199700|100%
16th|259700|100%
17th|339700|100%
18th|439700|100%
19th|579700|100%
20th|759700|100%[/table]

Granted, judges may view this as inelegant, but it's allowed by RAW. What will probably be more typical (and forgive me for speculating) is that entries will continue to enhance their relic as they level. Assuming we enchant it to the max value at every level, we'd be sacrificing items as follows to "top off" the value of our relics:

{table=head]Level|% of WBL sacrificed
3rd|56%
4th|50%
5th|40%
6th|31%
7th|32%
8th|30%
9th|25%
10th|27%
11th|26%
12th|25%
13th|20%
14th|27%
15th|25%
16th|23%
17th|24%
18th|23%
19th|24%
20th|24%[/table]

All this talk about relic values leads me to a rules question of my own:

Does the maximum relic value stated on page 41 include the total cost of the oils used to anoint the weapon (100 gp @ level 2, 200 gp @ level 3, and 300 gp @ level 8)? Or is the oil considered a consumable item of its own that does not affect the total value of the relic?

[Rama]

Please keep in mind that the feat required for the Ingredient specifically sets the maximum value for an ancestral relic on page 41 of Book of Exalted Deeds...which leads me to a rules question of my own:

Yeah I realized my mis-read and changed that previously. Away from books atm, internet formatting and quick scanning ftw :p.


Does the maximum relic value stated on page 41 include the total cost of the oils used to anoint the weapon (100 gp @ level 2, 200 gp @ level 3, and 300 gp @ level 8)? Or is the oil considered a consumable item of its own that does not affect the total value of the relic?

(again with gut reaction/internet rather than book) I would tend to think the second interpretation is the more accurate.

[Amphetryon]

Rama, in regard to your second bullet point under Power, does that mean that an Anointed Knight who gains much of her power from the weapon she is spending the Feats and PrC abilities to Anoint is "overly" reliant on an item, or is she reliant on a Class Feature of the SI?

[Tim Proctor]

Not been doing it too long (last... Dozen?) but I think i've yet ti see a judge discount the characters builds based on going over in XP; eg Crafting etc. However penalties abound for assuming LA buy off or ignoring it; the assumation being that if all were taking the same campaign and were awarded equal XP, some wouldn't even reach Level 18.
Like I said it depends on many issues, and I can't narrow them down without speculating. I don't think it'll be an issue, but there could be issues where it would.


Hmm, I may be thinking what you're thinking...:smallamused:
I'm 90% that I know what it is, but I think everyone thinks like me anyways.



Does the maximum relic value stated on page 41 include the total cost of the oils used to anoint the weapon (100 gp @ level 2, 200 gp @ level 3, and 300 gp @ level 8)? Or is the oil considered a consumable item of its own that does not affect the total value of the relic?
They are separate, as there are some corner case circumstances where you can make the oil but not apply it to the item.

[Rama]

Rama, in regard to your second bullet point under Power, does that mean that an Anointed Knight who gains much of her power from the weapon she is spending the Feats and PrC abilities to Anoint is "overly" reliant on an item, or is she reliant on a Class Feature of the SI?

I would consider this a class feature of the SI that happens to be in item form, rather than an over-reliance on an item; and therefore not subject to that bullet point. If you need a bunch of specific supporting items to make use of your relic effectively, that's what would suffer there imo.

[Heliomance]

Hmm, I may be thinking what you're thinking...:smallamused:

I hope not, tough I wouldn't be at all surprised >_>

I think I've come up with a fairly unique rationale and backstory for it all though, assuming I can make it hang together.

...I have so many rulebooks open right now. I may be doing silly things.

[Venger]

I will probably be participating but I have a question. The PrC says it is proficient with all armor and shields. Does this include exotic ones? By RAW it seems it does but I'm unaware if there were any at the time of publication, so I wanted to ask.

Yes. "All" means exotic as well. So enjoy getting weird. The time of publication is irrelevant. If it says "all," then new stuff published later under the subset of "all"


is Retraining (as per PHB II ) allowed as long as the build, at any time, is legal?

No. Retraining is not allowed. It is a variant rules system like spell points or fractional base attack. While it's a popular houserule, you will see a hefty deduction if not outright disqualification from a number of judges since it creates an unequal playing field.

[OMG PONIES]

I will probably be participating but I have a question. The PrC says it is proficient with all armor and shields. Does this include exotic ones? By RAW it seems it does but I'm unaware if there were any at the time of publication, so I wanted to ask.


Yes. "All" means exotic as well. So enjoy getting weird. The time of publication is irrelevant. If it says "all," then new stuff published later under the subset of "all"

Good find. I'd tinkered with the idea a few times, but couldn't find any explicit RAW one way or the other, so I didn't want to hang my hat on the word "all."


Retraining is not allowed. It is a variant rules system like spell points or fractional base attack. While it's a popular houserule, you will see a hefty deduction if not outright disqualification from a number of judges since it creates an unequal playing field.

Can you please elaborate on:
Where retraining is listed as a variant (a la spell points or fractional BAB) rather than an addition to the standard rules (a la swift and immediate actions)? It's not a houserule, since it's stated outright in a rules text.
How retraining creates an unequal playing field? You can only retrain one option per level, and must retrain it to something that was legal at the time of the initial selection. Is there something ripe for optimization that I'm missing?

[Sian]

You will need to present a write-up of your build at at least one of the following points: 5th level, 10th level, 15th, 20th, and a "sweet spot" that you feel is the high point of the build, as well as presenting a fully-fleshed out 20-level build in the table below.

How important is it to do more than one of these points?

My creativity is limited to creating the builds, but practially non-existent when it comes to start and writing prose about the builds

[OMG PONIES]

How important is it to do more than one of these points?

My creativity is limited to creating the builds, but practially non-existent when it comes to start and writing prose about the builds

Though it's not important in the contest rules as presented, it's been traditional to provide a 20-level build and writeup. One entry that provided a 10- or 15- level build in the past was refused judging. If you present the full build but limited write-up, your mileage may vary between judges.

[Sian]

Yes. "All" means exotic as well. So enjoy getting weird. The time of publication is irrelevant. If it says "all," then new stuff published later under the subset of "all"

Personally when i'm running stuff, I'm going to plant this in the same box where i threw Rainbow servant's spell progression, 'cute and prehaps RaW, but not RaI'

[Sian]

Though it's not important in the contest rules as presented, it's been traditional to provide a 20-level build and writeup. One entry that provided a 10- or 15- level build in the past was refused judging. If you present the full build but limited write-up, your mileage may vary between judges.

badly sentenced question (see?) ... what i meant is if its important to have a closer look on both 5'th, 10'th, and 15'th level beyond the obvious full 20-level build

[OMG PONIES]

badly sentenced question (see?) ... what i meant is if its important to have a closer look on both 5'th, 10'th, and 15'th level beyond the obvious full 20-level build

My response stands :smallbiggrin:.


If you present the full build but limited write-up, your mileage may vary between judges.

Some judges just care about seeing the table; they can figure out what you're doing with the build. Me? I'm a bit dense, and I'm afraid if you don't tell me "here's the awesome and unique shenanigans I'm pulling with that level 18 feat I mentioned above," I may not think of it myself. Therefore, my score for your build may be impacted.

[Venger]

Personally when i'm running stuff, I'm going to plant this in the same box where i threw Rainbow servant's spell progression, 'cute and prehaps RaW, but not RaI'

Well, we can argue RAI all day, but RAW is something we can all agree on, which is why it's what we use. Not exactly any wiggle room on what "all" means, or on whether text trumps table.

Ponies, while I don't see it called out as an optional mechanic like the called shots or massive damage rules, it is something that you know, as the IC archivist, most dishes did not use, like, say, free LA buyoff. Some dishes now and again will assume it's allowed, and will be resoundingly penalized by the judges as a result.

As far as how it provides an unfair advantage, this is primarily in qualification for things. Being able to change things around makes it much easier to maneuver yourself into different feats/prcs in a way that the rest of us are not privy to.

Chair, can you give us a ruling on how allowed retraining is? If it's secretly been okay the whole time and I've been playing on hard mode for no reason, my jimmies will be a bit rustled.

[Heliomance]

The text governing which abilities can be taken with Anoint Self and Anoint Ancestral Weapon refers to "level", not "class level". Do we take that as class level or character level?

[Venger]

The text governing which abilities can be taken with Anoint Self and Anoint Ancestral Weapon refers to "level", not "class level". Do we take that as class level or character level?

That's a very good question. Better hold off on cooking till I see what the answer is, it'll tell me when the optimal time to enter is.

[Muggins]

This looks good, and I've been cooking a dish for the last couple of hours. As in, I can't stop. Someone send help. :smalleek:

[Venger]

This looks good, and I've been cooking a dish for the last couple of hours. As in, I can't stop. Someone send help. :smalleek:

Way to get in the christmas sprit.

[Tim Proctor]

No. Retraining is not allowed. It is a variant rules system like spell points or fractional base attack. While it's a popular houserule, you will see a hefty deduction if not outright disqualification from a number of judges since it creates an unequal playing field.
I completely disagree. Retraining from PHB II pg 191, does not denote variant nor optional but an actual part of the game. The variant would be to disallow it. In fact the term 'variant' doesn't exist in PHB II at all.

Also I don't see how it creates an unequal playing field. I think it was designed to accommodate for players getting additional books while on a campaign. The only time I've seen it done was for fluff.


The text governing which abilities can be taken with Anoint Self and Anoint Ancestral Weapon refers to "level", not "class level". Do we take that as class level or character level?
It states 'level', while on the very next page for Apostle of Peace it states 'class level' leaving me to believe that its not an editing error. Nor is it mentioned in the official errata. Both RAW and RAI is to have it for character level or 'level' not class level.

My general opinion is to allow players the most options and abilities.

[Kesnit]

I love BoED (and BoVD). In to judge...

Criteria

All scores start with a base of 3, and will be adjusted up or down as necessary.

Originality
I tend to look at each entry based on their own merit, rather than compare each to another. If two entries use the same class, but go about them differently, they won't lose Originality points from me. However, if the entries are similar, they will. Multiple builds that all use the same "trick" will be marked down.

Power
I stole this from a previous judge, but it sums up my point of view. "Power comes down to, quite simply, how the build would fare in a mid-power campaign." I am not an min-maxer, and I do not play with min-maxers. I'm used to thinking of PCs as they are seen in many of the D&D books - where characters of different types of classes work together to get the job done.

As a heads-up, an extremely powerful PC will be marked down if, in my view, it would not work well as a member of a mixed party. (Mixed party defined as "not all PCs are pure casters.") That is not to say any Tier 1 PC will lose points, as they can be built in a way to help (rather than replace) the rest of the party.

Deductions will be taken if a build uses a level+CHA mod ability that the build does not qualify for without using +CHA items. The greater the difference, the greater the penalty.

Elegance
I REALLY dislike dipping, which I define as taking 1-2 levels of a base class. I am a little more open to taking 1-2 levels of a PrC, especially in a competition like this where it is expected 10 levels of the SI will be taken. However, excessive "dipping" of PrCs will also lose Elegance points.

On the flip side, I like a good story. A lot of "strange" class changes and combos can be "overlooked" if the contestant can provide a logical reason for them. Also, I am aware English is not everyone's first language, and if a contestant feels they were marked down because they could not adequately explain their concept, I am willing to reevaluate my analysis of their Elegance. (Note I did not say I will automatically increase their score, but if informed, I will give it a second look.)

To me, Elegance is how well everything fits together, and how each individual "ingredient" adds to the overall dish.

A build that uses banned material will receive a 0 in this category.

Use of Secret Ingredient
The point of this competition is the Special Ingredient, so obviously it should be the focus. Competitors will lose points if they use less than 9 levels of the SI. (I'd prefer to see all 10, but sometimes, things just cannot be helped.)

Beyond that, how well the entire build fits in with the SI. If I feel the SI is tacked on only because it is the SI, I will mark down.

A build that fails to qualify for the SI in a way that is not easily fixable will receive a 1.0 in this category.



The text governing which abilities can be taken with Anoint Self and Anoint Ancestral Weapon refers to "level", not "class level". Do we take that as class level or character level?

I was reading it as "class level." (Because WotC never makes editing mistakes...) It makes more sense as "class level," since there are options for "5-6," "3-4" and "2 or lower." Since 5 (probably more, but I'm not laying out builds to do it) character levels would be needed to qualify for the SI, there would be no point in separating them out since any character would automatically qualify.

I'm going to add another question to that... How will CHA bonus be determined? In a game, it would likely be base CHA + items. However, items are not taken into account for this competition.

[Amphetryon]

I'm going to add another question to that... How will CHA bonus be determined? In a game, it would likely be base CHA + items. However, items are not taken into account for this competition.
Items can be taken into account in this competition; however, most judges have traditionally scored a build that needs an item that boost, for example, CHA in order to use its abilities fairly poorly. Note that this references the ability to use an ability, not the ability to maximize it.

[Sian]

Just set up my first Dish on the table ... off to make a second one i got an idea for ... going in a different direction :D

[Kuulvheysoon]

Whoa, thread-spolsion. Let's see what we can answer here right away...
So, my questions:

Does an Anointed Knight gain an ancestral weapon that is separate from her ancestral relic? (Though they could be the same item.)
Does the Anoint Ancestral Weapon ability only work on an anointed relic, even if that relic isn't a weapon?
Does the Anoint Ancestral Weapon ability only work on an anointed relic that is a weapon?
For simplicity's sake, I'd rule the third option.


Sorry to be a stickler for spelling, but can we correct those to "Anoint" and "Anointed" as appropriate?
These aren't the spelling mistakes that you're looking for.


Speaking of judging, I know Herr Chairman was looking to brush up the judging criteria in some way. Should I hold off on posting my [revised] criteria until that time?I'll leave the other thread open for now (in defiance of the usual unwritten rule to let it die) and discuss my opinions on the matter in about... 4 hours?


All this talk about relic values leads me to a rules question of my own:

Does the maximum relic value stated on page 41 include the total cost of the oils used to anoint the weapon (100 gp @ level 2, 200 gp @ level 3, and 300 gp @ level 8)? Or is the oil considered a consumable item of its own that does not affect the total value of the relic?The cost for the annoiting oils is considered part of the class features of the annointed Knight, and so is not counted along the progression. Now I'm just doing it to annoy you.


The text governing which abilities can be taken with Anoint Self and Anoint Ancestral Weapon refers to "level", not "class level". Do we take that as class level or character level?

Class level unless otherwise specified (by something saying Character level, for instance).

[Venger]

What is your ruling on retraining, chairman?

[Temotei]

This looks good, and I've been cooking a dish for the last couple of hours. As in, I can't stop. Someone send help. :smalleek:

I'm pretty sure I finished last night. I just have some tweaks on legality to figure out and then I have to write the fluff (got it in my head mostly, though). :smalltongue:

Kiss the cook.

[Kesnit]

Items can be taken into account in this competition; however, most judges have traditionally scored a build that needs an item that boost, for example, CHA in order to use its abilities fairly poorly. Note that this references the ability to use an ability, not the ability to maximize it.

Ah, OK...

In that case, I am adding a line to my judging criteria under Power.

"Deductions will be taken if a build uses a level+CHA mod ability that the build does not qualify for without using +CHA items. The greater the difference, the greater the penalty."

For example...

Build A with 2 levels of Anointed Knight and a CHA of 14(+2) takes an ability which requires level+mod of 5.

Build B with 2 levels of Anointed Knight and a CHA of 14(+2) takes an ability which requires level+mod of 9.

Both will get a deduction, but Build B will get a higher deduction.

[The Viscount]

Can you please elaborate on:
Where retraining is listed as a variant (a la spell points or fractional BAB) rather than an addition to the standard rules (a la swift and immediate actions)? It's not a houserule, since it's stated outright in a rules text.
How retraining creates an unequal playing field? You can only retrain one option per level, and must retrain it to something that was legal at the time of the initial selection. Is there something ripe for optimization that I'm missing?

Retraining creates an unequal playing field very easily if one is allowed to retrain bonus feats, such as the several that the SI provides. If one chef retrains them all and another chef keeps all the originals the first chef is at a considerable advantage. The section on feat retraining is very brief and a little vague, and there is nothing saying you can't trade a bonus feat.

Even if retraining is not explicitly called out as a variant rule, it is presented in a cautious and rather optional manner, in addition to being presented alongside the far more radical rebuilding, so they aren't exactly the most rock solid of rules.

[Deadline]

This ... this ... well, this is unexpected.

I'm not sure what to do with this. I'm going to need to think about it. I'm tentatively in to cook.

[thethird]

Though it's not important in the contest rules as presented, it's been traditional to provide a 20-level build and writeup. One entry that provided a 10- or 15- level build in the past was refused judging. If you present the full build but limited write-up, your mileage may vary between judges.

Note that going to the other extreme also can have a different mileage (i.e. you explain every level of your build).

I might compete if a my procrastination hits impressively during my finals weeks b the crazy idea I just had works.

[Eldonauran]

:smallamused:

I have inspiration. Mine muse doth sing such a lovely tune.

[Tim Proctor]

Retraining creates an unequal playing field very easily if one is allowed to retrain bonus feats, such as the several that the SI provides. If one chef retrains them all and another chef keeps all the originals the first chef is at a considerable advantage. The section on feat retraining is very brief and a little vague, and there is nothing saying you can't trade a bonus feat.
That's because bonus feats are covered in the previous section Class Feature Retraining. A class feature of a bonus feat can only be traded out for another class feature of a bonus feat. You can't change a class feature bonus feat to a general feat that you would gain through levels.

[Tim Proctor]

Even if retraining is not explicitly called out as a variant rule, it is presented in a cautious and rather optional manner, in addition to being presented alongside the far more radical rebuilding, so they aren't exactly the most rock solid of rules.

I read no cautionary statements nor optional tone in the entire section. Furthermore, the PHB II is quick to note the difference between retraining and rebuilding:


Retraining involves small-scale changes to your character, such as reallocation of feat slots and skill ranks. Such changes are relatively simple to apply, and they don’t usually lead to dramatic changes in the character’s capabilities or party role.

Rebuilding, on the other hand, encompasses much broader alterations to your character’s identity—up to and including such cornerstones of identity as class and race. For that reason, rebuilding can be achieved only by completing specific DM-chosen quests. Since such missions typically center on visiting some legendary location or overcoming a tremendous challenge, they should always be completed in cooperation with your DM so that they can be woven into the storyline of the campaign.

However, if we are looking for 'optional' and 'cautionary' statements I reserve the statement from DMg p 196 regarding prestige classes as a statement regard optional and cautionary.


Prestige classes are purely optional and always under the purview of the DM. We encourage you, as the DM, to tightly limit the prestige classes available in your campaign.

I can't find anything similar in the PHB II section regarding retraining, and honestly other than a fluff reason can't see how it would come across in a build segment.

[Heliomance]

I'm going to add another question to that... How will CHA bonus be determined? In a game, it would likely be base CHA + items. However, items are not taken into account for this competition.

Items can be taken into account, it depends on whether or not the chef decides to present them. I will be presenting items, to a certain extent, as they're going to be quite important to my build conceptually.


Class level unless otherwise specified (by something saying Character level, for instance).

Damn, I was REALLY hoping you'd say character level.

[OMG PONIES]

Ponies, while I don't see it called out as an optional mechanic like the called shots or massive damage rules, it is something that you know, as the IC archivist, most dishes did not use, like, say, free LA buyoff. Some dishes now and again will assume it's allowed, and will be resoundingly penalized by the judges as a result.

As far as how it provides an unfair advantage, this is primarily in qualification for things. Being able to change things around makes it much easier to maneuver yourself into different feats/prcs in a way that the rest of us are not privy to.

Chair, can you give us a ruling on how allowed retraining is? If it's secretly been okay the whole time and I've been playing on hard mode for no reason, my jimmies will be a bit rustled.


If we want to get technical about variants, all prestige classes are variants as per the sidebar on page 171 of the DMG :smalltongue:. Seriously, though: called shots aren't a variant but a houserule (since I don't know of any official sources that list called shots rules aside from sundering a hydra's heads). Massive damage isn't a variant--it's listed on page 145 of the PHB as a core rule. Massive damage DCs varying by size is a variant presented in the DMG, sure, and there are also some variants to the rule listed in Unearthed Arcana, but they're particularly called out as such while the core massive damage rules are not.

Level adjustment buyoff is specifically highlighted as a variant in Unearthed Arcana, so we'll go with that as our closest comparison. However, comparing it to PHBII retraining would be an apples-to-oranges comparison, since retraining is not explicitly stated as a variant. Therefore, it should be allowed unless explicitly disallowed by the chairman. Just because something's not used frequently doesn't mean it's a variant or disallowed--Truespeak isn't used frequently, for instance... but that's for other reasons.


The text governing which abilities can be taken with Anoint Self and Anoint Ancestral Weapon refers to "level", not "class level". Do we take that as class level or character level?


It states 'level', while on the very next page for Apostle of Peace it states 'class level' leaving me to believe that its not an editing error. Nor is it mentioned in the official errata. Both RAW and RAI is to have it for character level or 'level' not class level.

Let's not get cute. Though I've been swordsaged by Herr Chairman on the ends, allow me to provide the means. From the PHB glossary:


level: A measure of advancement or power applied to several areas of the game. See caster level, character level, class level, and spell level.


character level: A character's total level. For a character with levels in only one class, class level and character level are the same thing.


class level: A character's level in a single class. Class features generally depend on class level rather than character level.

Since specific trumps general, the final sentence in the "class level" defintion is only trumped if an entry specifices "character level." Otherwise, it falls under that general rule.


Retraining creates an unequal playing field very easily if one is allowed to retrain bonus feats, such as the several that the SI provides. If one chef retrains them all and another chef keeps all the originals the first chef is at a considerable advantage. The section on feat retraining is very brief and a little vague, and there is nothing saying you can't trade a bonus feat.


That's because bonus feats are covered in the previous section Class Feature Retraining. A class feature of a bonus feat can only be traded out for another class feature of a bonus feat. You can't change a class feature bonus feat to a general feat that you would gain through levels.

Swordsaged by Tim. The rules make it quite clear that, under the limits of retraining, you could use class feature retraining to swap one of the available bonus feats of the Anointed Knight for another. You could also use feat retraining to swap one general feat acquired for another. However, you could not swap a bonus feat for a general feat, nor could you do both of the above at the same level. From my perspective, the playing field remains level. I don't know if this is something that requires Chairmain perspective or not, since I don't want the OP and Q&A to expand to three pages of edicts.

[Irk]

Again, I'll try to get my dish in on time, but I do have a lot of work to do these coming weeks so I dunno...

[dysprosium]

However, if we are looking for 'optional' and 'cautionary' statements I reserve the statement from DMg p 196 regarding prestige classes as a statement regard optional and cautionary.

Prestige classes are purely optional and always under the purview of the DM. We encourage you, as the DM, to tightly limit the prestige classes available in your campaign.


Well heck.

Since the SI is a prestige class we should probably cancel the entire competition since all the possible variants and combinations that could occur would be too mind boggling for us to handle.

[Venger]

Well heck.

Since the SI is a prestige class we should probably cancel the entire competition since all the possible variants and combinations that could occur would be too mind boggling for us to handle.

Because core is entirely devoid of balance issues. Prestige classes totally ruined the game with all their choices and stuff.

[Piggy Knowles]

My one reason for personally recommending against retraining:

It's messy.

Not in game. In game, retraining is great - I always allow it in games I run, although I often tweak the rules regarding it. But in a competition like this? It's difficult to display it cleanly, in a way that won't bog down an entry or require two tables.

I, um, spend more time than I probably should worrying about things like that.

[Tim Proctor]

Well heck.

Since the SI is a prestige class we should probably cancel the entire competition since all the possible variants and combinations that could occur would be too mind boggling for us to handle.

Well apparently (Prestige Classes) they are a variant according to the side bar on 171 as Ponies mentioned above. My statement as about what I consider a statement regarding the 'optional and cautionary' nature of using a variant. I find nothing to mimic the tone nor nature regarding retraining. That was my point, not that we need to stop everything cause we're already doing something that's iffy.

Other than covering for some early game weakness I don't think it's too big an issue. I personally like to start level 1 fighters with endurance and diehard, to prevent the whole dying part. But after level 3 or 4 those are fairly crappy so I would retrain them. Or trading out Toughness at level to Improved Toughness once the benefits make sense.

So other than fluffing out that you were a Marine (traditional naval sense) thus the swashbuckler levels and put (profession sailor) down and retrained it to (profession solider) to have a mechanical representation for you being a member of a land based mercenary group, I can't see it being an issue here.

Since most judges aren't looking at level 1-4 in power sense to see how the build scales I don't think it will be a big issue. Formatting wise, they can add a notes section as you see on some builds or just a notation below the table that mentions at what levels something was retrained and what it was retrained into.

[Kuulvheysoon]

What is your ruling on retraining, chairman?

The Current Chair has only this to say on retraining - consider it akin to Bloodline usage. Heavily discouraged, but technically legal (and the judges may feel free to inflict penalties upon it as they wish).

[The Viscount]

I agree with Piggy here. Take it from a guy who just finished a build that had to represent paladin falling and trading for blackguard levels. Retraining is hard to do well.

On another note, the table for retraining class features only discusses bonus feats as they are class features of the base classes. What about bonus feats derived from race or special locations? These are not so easily addressed, and I fear that some might see retraining as a free DCFS. We shouldn't really have a need for retraining in IC, either since we have the benefit of knowing where our build is going and what it is building to at all times. I don't see a reason that retraining would be used short of shenanigans.

EDIT: Rendered moot by the chairman. Good to know.

[KrimsonNekros]

Are racial hit die included in the LA when we're figuring how many class levels to take?

[Tim Proctor]

Are racial hit die included in the LA when we're figuring how many class levels to take?
Yes you add your LA and the racial HD and that is the ECL.

[Heliomance]

Oh, HeroForge. I do love you so. Even if I do have to add in a new class from scratch. And track half a dozen #VALUE errors through your computation sheets. Even with all that, you still make chargen so much easier.

[Venger]

My one reason for personally recommending against retraining:

It's messy.

Not in game. In game, retraining is great - I always allow it in games I run, although I often tweak the rules regarding it. But in a competition like this? It's difficult to display it cleanly, in a way that won't bog down an entry or require two tables.

I, um, spend more time than I probably should worrying about things like that.

^this.


I agree with Piggy here. Take it from a guy who just finished a build that had to represent paladin falling and trading for blackguard levels. Retraining is hard to do well.

On another note, the table for retraining class features only discusses bonus feats as they are class features of the base classes. What about bonus feats derived from race or special locations? These are not so easily addressed, and I fear that some might see retraining as a free DCFS. We shouldn't really have a need for retraining in IC, either since we have the benefit of knowing where our build is going and what it is building to at all times. I don't see a reason that retraining would be used short of shenanigans.

EDIT: Rendered moot by the chairman. Good to know.

Does retraining work on feats like this?


Are racial hit die included in the LA when we're figuring how many class levels to take?

Yes. Say you are a kaorti, with 2 RHD of outsider and an LA of 2. this means that when you take your first class level, you are an ECL 5 character. by the time you're at 20 (when this contest ends), you will have 16 class levels.

[Piggy Knowles]

Yikes, I've come up with a few decent stubs, but I have yet to find one that wouldn't be better served by replacing the Secret Ingredient with ten levels of fighter.

I do have one idea that might have legs, so I'll explore that for a bit, but if not I might judge. I'll probably put together some new judging criteria if I do the latter.

[Venger]

Yikes, I've come up with a few decent stubs, but I have yet to find one that wouldn't be better served by replacing the Secret Ingredient with ten levels of fighter.

I do have one idea that might have legs, so I'll explore that for a bit, but if not I might judge. I'll probably put together some new judging criteria if I do the latter.

You know an SI is awful when it's worse than 10 levels of fighter.

I don't even think they make sub lvls that high.

[KrimsonNekros]

Yes you add your LA and the racial HD and that is the ECL.



Yes. Say you are a kaorti, with 2 RHD of outsider and an LA of 2. this means that when you take your first class level, you are an ECL 5 character. by the time you're at 20 (when this contest ends), you will have 16 class levels.

Not what I was asking, but still answers the question thanks.

[Venger]

Not what I was asking, but still answers the question thanks.

Wait what.

What were you asking, then?

If you're building a monster PC, I highly suggest ur-priest's monster handbook (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=207928) for all the ins and outs.

[Amphetryon]

Oh, HeroForge. I do love you so. Even if I do have to add in a new class from scratch. And track half a dozen #VALUE errors through your computation sheets. Even with all that, you still make chargen so much easier.

I am vaguely ashamed to say that this amount of information by itself is possibly sufficient for me to guess which entry is yours at the reveal. Food for thought.

[Venger]

I am vaguely ashamed to say that this amount of information by itself is possibly sufficient for me to guess which entry is yours at the reveal. Food for thought.

Amph, are you a bibliomancer?

[Heliomance]

I am vaguely ashamed to say that this amount of information by itself is possibly sufficient for me to guess which entry is yours at the reveal. Food for thought.

What, by which entry has a class not listed in HeroForge? :P

[Amphetryon]

Amph, are you a bibliomancer?

I, uh, play around on Heroforge rather a lot. I'm pretty sure I could eyeball an entry and know if the Class/PrC in question is on the latest version of it without having to open the program, and could pretty quickly compile a short list of combos that I know produce "#VALUE" errors.

[KrimsonNekros]

Wait what.

What were you asking, then?

If you're building a monster PC, I highly suggest ur-priest's monster handbook (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=207928) for all the ins and outs.

I was asking if it was included, or already counted. You both answered as if I was asking if they're added. Still got the answer I need though so it works out :)

(Edited from an incorrect swype entry)

[Heliomance]

...I may have just discovered a very silly piece of badly written rules that allows you to potentially have a touch AC higher than your normal AC.

Don't worry, I'm not going to actually use this silliness, I just wanted to boggle. I'll post details after the reveal.

[OMG PONIES]

On another note, the table for retraining class features only discusses bonus feats as they are class features of the base classes. What about bonus feats derived from race or special locations? These are not so easily addressed, and I fear that some might see retraining as a free DCFS. We shouldn't really have a need for retraining in IC, either since we have the benefit of knowing where our build is going and what it is building to at all times. I don't see a reason that retraining would be used short of shenanigans.


Does retraining work on feats like this?

Nope.


You can exchange one of the feats you previously selected for another feat.

Emphasis mine. AFAIK, you don't select racial bonus feats [or weapon proficiency feats gained via race, etc.]. In Soviet Russia, racial bonus feats select you! Also, the same goes for feats gained from special locations--they grant you the feat, you don't select it.


...I may have just discovered a very silly piece of badly written rules that allows you to potentially have a touch AC higher than your normal AC.

Don't worry, I'm not going to actually use this silliness, I just wanted to boggle. I'll post details after the reveal.

Ooh, interesting. I can't wait!

[Kreuz]

Hm, looks like I found something interesting. Let's do this.

[Tim Proctor]

...I may have just discovered a very silly piece of badly written rules that allows you to potentially have a touch AC higher than your normal AC.

Don't worry, I'm not going to actually use this silliness, I just wanted to boggle. I'll post details after the reveal.

Please don't speculate and reveal your build, someone might actually be trying to build a Boggle (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/mm2_gallery/88268_620_8.jpg)(MM II p 33). :smallconfused:

I think this will be a fun round, it looks vanilla-ish so I think people are gonna do some fun stuff with it.

[atnorman]

I might submit a build. I have a few ideas kicking around.

Edit: Had questions, sent them to the chairman instead.

[Piggy Knowles]

I might recommend PMing the chairman with those questions, just so you don't tip your hand.

[atnorman]

Good idea.

[Kazyan]

It took some fiddling, but I found a way to make this idea work. It's a big gamble, but it's not like I'm putting a regular streak of medals on the line or anything.

[Akal Saris]

My final class of the semester is today; I'll compete.

Congratulations!

[123456789blaaa]

Kuulv. This SI. Why did you pick it?


Potentially entering as a contestant, I have a few ideas.

Question: If we spend XP during the build, should it still go to 20?

Am I misremembering or have you not posted in Iron Chef for a loooong time?

[kennysmith1234]

{{scrubbed}}

[Vaz]

{{scrubbed}}

[Heliomance]

Am I misremembering or have you not posted in Iron Chef for a loooong time?

Indeed I haven't. I chaired the first five, and I participated (and crashed and burned) in the fifteenth thread, Drunken Master. Haven't posted since.

[relytdan]

Just because I can, .

mr chairmain can you delete or edit mr. smiths post?

[Amphetryon]

mr chairmain can you delete or edit mr. smiths post?

Only if he's become a mod. So far as I know, the mods and admins are the only ones able to edit posts they didn't make.

[Temotei]

Only if he's become a mod. So far as I know, the mods and admins are the only ones able to edit posts they didn't make.

You're correct.

Anyway, so I became dissatisfied with my build idea from before and I've changed it entirely. I like it much better now. Now for the fluff, though. That always takes me the longest. I've got December. Let's hope I can make it. :smalltongue:

[KrimsonNekros]

I'm almost done with the mechanical layout of my first build I've got three different ideas for this, and I want to get them all in!

[Deadline]

I'm almost done with the mechanical layout of my first build I've got three different ideas for this, and I want to get them all in!

Good gravy! Where do you folks find this kind of time? I'm still muddling around with a handful of ideas trying to find one that will work, be reasonably unique, and not use base classes or prestige classes that are better than the SI.

As was pointed out, Fighter looks like a better class than the SI. It's Bladesinger all over again! :smalltongue:

[Eldonauran]

Good gravy! Where do you folks find this kind of time? I'm still muddling around with a handful of ideas trying to find one that will work, be reasonably unique, and not use base classes or prestige classes that are better than the SI.
I'm in the same boat with you. Sure, I have several idea that are floating around but I'm still settling on one that lights that certain fire in my gut and gets my creative juices flowing. Also, having 72 hours a week invested in other areas (work one of them), limits my prep time.


As was pointed out, Fighter looks like a better class than the SI. It's Bladesinger all over again! :smalltongue:

Wait, what? :smallconfused:

Nah, I'm sure we'll figure out something.

[dysprosium]

Good gravy! Where do you folks find this kind of time? I'm still muddling around with a handful of ideas trying to find one that will work, be reasonably unique, and not use base classes or prestige classes that are better than the SI.

I'm blessed with enough free time to at least think about the hobby I love so much. That said I have at least two solid ideas that need fleshing out.


As was pointed out, Fighter looks like a better class than the SI. It's Bladesinger all over again! :smalltongue:

But haven't we all learned so much since Bladesinger? :smallwink:

[Deadline]

Wait, what? :smallconfused:

Nah, I'm sure we'll figure out something.

What I mean by that is that it was difficult to put together something for Bladesinger that wouldn't have been better on it's own.

So that meant not using Wizard (because why wouldn't you just keep taking levels of wizard?) And Duskblade was straight out, because it was just flat better than Bladesinger, etc. I wound up mixing Fighter, Swashbuckler, and Suel Arcanamach for one of my dishes, and it scored quite well because of that consideration.

[KrimsonNekros]

Good gravy! Where do you folks find this kind of time? I'm still muddling around with a handful of ideas trying to find one that will work, be reasonably unique, and not use base classes or prestige classes that are better than the SI.



I get ideas like rabbits, the tricky part for me is trying to get them to work by RAW.

[Deadline]

I get ideas like rabbits, the tricky part for me is trying to get them to work by RAW.

I believe one of the pieces of advice that was tossed my way when I first started cooking for IC was that I should probably take my first couple of ideas and throw them out, because they have likely been thought of by someone else. It has certainly led me to come up with some interesting dishes. :smallbiggrin:

[KrimsonNekros]

I believe one of the pieces of advice that was tossed my way when I first started cooking for IC was that I should probably take my first couple of ideas and throw them out, because they have likely been thought of by someone else. It has certainly led me to come up with some interesting dishes. :smallbiggrin:

That's some pretty good advice. I ended up discrading my intitial idea after some confirmation on RAW with the chair, but I may still submit it for fun. Second idea, probably was thought of, but I'm pretty sure my third idea is definitely unique it's a (Redacted)who (Redacted) and (Redacted) becoming an Anointed Knight!

[OMG PONIES]

Indeed I haven't. I chaired the first five, and I participated (and crashed and burned) in the fifteenth thread, Drunken Master. Haven't posted since.

Wait a minute, didn't you post in the last round after the reveal? I'm onto your trickery!


I get ideas like rabbits, the tricky part for me is trying to get them to work by RAW.

You purchase your ideas at a pet store? :smallconfused:

[Divayth Fyr]

You purchase your ideas at a pet store? :smallconfused:
The local butcher is also a possibility. :smallwink:

[KrimsonNekros]

You purchase your ideas at a pet store? :smallconfused:

Nope I'm rather like Steinbeck. I'll start with one or two good ones, and pretty soon I've got a dozen because they breed so fast!

[Heliomance]

I doubt anointed Knight is the best mechanical choice for my build, but it at least fits thematically, and I'm making good use of ancestral relic.

Seriously, the class features are a whole lot of nothing. I mean, giving the relic hardness? Hit points? How often do sunder rules come up?

[Amphetryon]

Seriously, the class features are a whole lot of nothing. I mean, giving the relic hardness? Hit points? How often do sunset rules come up?
Sunset rules are pretty rare.

[KrimsonNekros]

I doubt anointed Knight is the best mechanical choice for my build, but it at least fits thematically, and I'm making good use of ancestral relic.

Seriously, the class features are a whole lot of nothing. I mean, giving the relic hardness? Hit points? How often do sunset rules come up?

What are sunset rules?

[Sian]

I get ideas like rabbits, the tricky part for me is trying to get them to work by RAW.

For me its similar but not quite ...

get tons of ideas and have a easy time to get them to work by RAW ... just have big issues with getting them fluffed beyond the very basic stuff

[Heliomance]

What are sunset rules?

The product of an over-zealous autocorrect ¬_¬

[Amphetryon]

The product of an over-zealous autocorrect ¬_¬

Relevant: http://www.funnyjunk.com/funny_pictures/1897064/Nasal/

[Kuulvheysoon]

I doubt anointed Knight is the best mechanical choice for my build, but it at least fits thematically, and I'm making good use of ancestral relic.

Seriously, the class features are a whole lot of nothing. I mean, giving the relic hardness? Hit points? How often do sunder rules come up?

Heh. No, this isn't me being evil. You weren't here for it, but go back and check out Cipher Adept. That was a fun class to pick.

[KrimsonNekros]

The product of an over-zealous autocorrect ¬_¬

I take it you meant sunder then :P Don't think I've ever seen it used.

[OMG PONIES]

I doubt anointed Knight is the best mechanical choice for my build, but it at least fits thematically, and I'm making good use of ancestral relic.

Seriously, the class features are a whole lot of nothing. I mean, giving the relic hardness? Hit points? How often do sunder rules come up?

I...I think you just gave me an idea!


Heh. No, this isn't me being evil. You weren't here for it, but go back and check out Cipher Adept. That was a fun class to pick.

Hey! I made disarming as relevant as possible, which still isn't that great!

[The Viscount]

Cipher Adept also gave me an opportunity to actually use sundering rules, as did at least one other build.

[Heliomance]

Heh. No, this isn't me being evil. You weren't here for it, but go back and check out Cipher Adept. That was a fun class to pick.

I was thinking much the same for Stonelord. People went ahead and made fantastic builds anyway.

Can I assume that the Maximum Relic Value entry on the table for the Ancestral Relic feat refers only to the value of the enchantments, and not the base value of the item? If it includes the base value, I'm in trouble...

[Kazyan]

That other idea I worked the issues out of is getting shelved for now, since I'm not quite happy with it, but I know how to fix it. For now, I'll just finish this other idea. It's going much more smoothly, despite the probable dings in [REDACTED, BUT YOU CAN PROBABLY GUESS]

[Irk]

I was looking at the different intelligent item abilities and I noticed that some of them replicate spells, and I was curious as to the caster level of those abilities.

[KrimsonNekros]

(Redacted and posting elsewhere)

[Vaz]

That might give away your build mate. I've already got in trouble for "vigilante modding" so I've got to phrase what I say ultra-carefully, but please, the point of the competition is that it's a) anonymous and b) removes potential plagiarism complaints.

If someone was going for what you were asking about, they are going to keep it to themselves anyway as that then gives them an edge. Feel free to ask in the Q+A threads at the top of the forum, it's got less chance of being seen by the rest of the competitors.

[Piggy Knowles]

I have a build.

It... it is a silly thing.

[Amphetryon]

I have a build.

It... it is a silly thing.

Oh, no! Mine is also quite silly! That can only mean we had the same idea! PANIC!

[Heliomance]

Oh, no! Mine is also quite silly! That can only mean we had the same idea! PANIC!

Mine does several silly things, but I don't think it is a silly thing. Though it probably would be if I'd managed to find a way to stick CHA to AC. You don't count an anthropomorphic fleshraker as a silly thing, right? Right?

[relytdan]

I have decided to toss my hat in the judges ring - good luck all.

My judging criteria:


Useage of any materials banned or disallowed, will result in a Refused to be Judged, no exceptions.
Plagiarism of another build online, the severity of this will result in a Refused to be Judged; & depending on if you are proven the author, deductions will occur in various segments, no exceptions.


Originality
Start from a baseline score of 5.
1: Up to 1 point of penalty based on whether the race or templates used were things I expected, and whether anyone else thought to use them. Cheese may see a deduction here.
2: Up to 1 point of penalty based on whether the classes or Prc used were things I expected, and whether anyone else thought to use them. Cheese may see a deduction here.
3: Up to 1 point of penalty to a build doing something interesting or something we've all seen it before respectively.
4: Up to 1 point of penalty to Fluff *
*note*4: "will be judged subjectivly on the basis of how easy it is to determine what your character does"


Power
Start from a baseline score of 5.
1: Up to 1 point of penalty for versatility. Do you have a variety of options or are you a one trick pony that can easily be shut down?
2: Up to 1 points of penalty for How good is your build at its intended role
3: Up to 1 points of penalty for If the build needs help in any form
4: Up to 1 point of penalty for each flaw or item used *
*note*4: "unless listed as munchkin or optional, it will be presumed used <<Exception for this SI is the Ancestral Relic>>"


Elegance
Start from a baseline score of 5.
1: Up to 1 point of penalty for excessive sources <3+>; ( the DMG, PHB 1, MM 1 and SI source do not count )
2: Up to 1 point of penalty for Any 1-3 level class dips, Multiclass Penalties, change alignment, ect.
3: Up to 1 point of penalty for all questionable rules interpretations or cross-setting material *
4: Up to 1 point of penalty for Each failure to qualify for non-secret ingredient things *
*note*3,4: "these will also include things like Classes/PRC's, feats, skill ranks, using most up to date source information, ect.. and can result in a 0 in this segment"


Use of the Secret Ingredient
Start from a baseline score of 5.
1: Up to 1 point of penalty for Does the entry complete the Secret Ingredient
2: Up to 1 point of penalty for is the secret ingredient taken at the earliest level it can be taken
3: Up to 1 point of penalty for does the build really captures the feel of the SI
4: Up to 1 point of penalty for does the build make use of all the SI abilities and entry requirements *
*note*4: "failure to qualify for the secret ingredient - lack of skills, feats, bab & any other requirements will result in a 0 in this segment"

[KrimsonNekros]

Mine does several silly things, but I don't think it is a silly thing. Though it probably would be if I'd managed to find a way to stick CHA to AC. You don't count an anthropomorphic fleshraker as a silly thing, right? Right?
I think there is a way to, but not sure what it is right off the top of my head

[Heliomance]

I have decided to toss my hat in the judges ring - good luck all.

My judging criteria:


Useage of any materials banned or disallowed, will result in a Refused to be Judged, no exceptions.
Plagiarism of another build online, the severity of this will result in a Refused to be Judged; & depending on if you are proven the author, deductions will occur in various segments, no exceptions.


Originality
Start from a baseline score of 5.
1: Up to 1 point of penalty based on whether the race or templates used were things I expected, and whether anyone else thought to use them. Cheese may see a deduction here.
2: Up to 1 point of penalty based on whether the classes or Prc used were things I expected, and whether anyone else thought to use them. Cheese may see a deduction here.
3: Up to 1 point of penalty to a build doing something interesting or something we've all seen it before respectively.
4: Up to 1 point of penalty to Fluff *
*note*4: "will be judged subjectivly on the basis of how easy it is to determine what your character does"


Power
Start from a baseline score of 5.
1: Up to 1 point of penalty for versatility. Do you have a variety of options or are you a one trick pony that can easily be shut down?
2: Up to 1 points of penalty for How good is your build at its intended role
3: Up to 1 points of penalty for If the build needs help in any form
4: Up to 1 point of penalty for each flaw or item used *
*note*4: "unless listed as munchkin or optional, it will be presumed used <<Exception for this SI is the Ancestral Relic>>"


Elegance
Start from a baseline score of 5.
1: Up to 1 point of penalty for excessive sources <3+>; ( the DMG, PHB 1, MM 1 and SI source do not count )
2: Up to 1 point of penalty for Any 1-3 level class dips, Multiclass Penalties, change alignment, ect.
3: Up to 1 point of penalty for all questionable rules interpretations or cross-setting material *
4: Up to 1 point of penalty for Each failure to qualify for non-secret ingredient things *
*note*3,4: "these will also include things like Classes/PRC's, feats, skill ranks, using most up to date source information, ect.. and can result in a 0 in this segment"


Use of the Secret Ingredient
Start from a baseline score of 5.
1: Up to 1 point of penalty for Does the entry complete the Secret Ingredient
2: Up to 1 point of penalty for is the secret ingredient taken at the earliest level it can be taken
3: Up to 1 point of penalty for does the build really captures the feel of the SI
4: Up to 1 point of penalty for does the build make use of all the SI abilities and entry requirements *
*note*4: "failure to qualify for the secret ingredient - lack of skills, feats, bab & any other requirements will result in a 0 in this segment"


I would note your judging criteria are not actually compatible with the rules as laid out by the Chairman.
Firstly, there are now explicit rules for the appropriate penalties for illegal builds or banned material, and they do not include Refusal to Judge.
Secondly, flaws are penalised in Elegance, not Power.
Thirdly, knocking off a point from Power for every item used is not only incredibly harsh, it penalises non-casters more than casters, and it penalises those who went to the effort of putting thought into itemisation over those who didn't. D&D is an item dependent game. You need items to be useful, and the only exceptions are full casters.


I think there is a way to, but not sure what it is right off the top of my head

There are a few ways, but none I could fit into my build.

[Tim Proctor]

I second Heliomance's statements, and suggest that all the judges this round review the new criteria as set forth by the Chairman.

Having said that since we're at 4 1/2 judges, I'm going to pull my name from the judging ring and throw it in the contenders. So there are 3 judges in and maybe Piggy Knowles.

[Kuulvheysoon]

Thanks, guys, I was about to mention that. Way to steal my thunder.

It pretty much boils down to (as discussed in the 'old' ICOC thread) there is no more Limbo category. If you volunteer to judge, it's a Commitment. You'll do all of the entries.

But don't worry - if a build fails to qualify by RAW or uses banned material, feel free to award a 0 in the Elegance category. Other categories will also likely be impacted, as Judges are asked to ignore the banned material when considering scores. For example, if one of the high points of your build is a +16 BAB for a gish, but you used Fractional BAB, then they could choose to treat your BAB for what it actually should be (AKA likely less than +16), loosing out on the 4th iterative attack with a commensurate loss in Power alongside the 0 in Elegance.

There's a specific exception, however, with a Special requirement, such as last competition's choice of deity or Death Delver's near-death experience. Failing to meet one of those is not grounds for a 0 in Elegance; however, a judge may still choose to penalise you for missing it (to the minimum score of 1, which remains unchanged).

...Actually, this ended up reading better than the updated rules (which are found in the FAQs, under the minimum score heading). Well, damn.

[atnorman]

4: Up to 1 point of penalty to Fluff *
*note*4: "will be judged subjectivly [sic] on the basis of how easy it is to determine what your character does"

You've looked at this SI, right? As was already said, it is fairly vanilla. I'm sure most builds will fall pray to this objection.


1: Up to 1 point of penalty for versatility. Do you have a variety of options or are you a one trick pony that can easily be shut down?

Again, while I'd agree with this for other SIs, this criteria will pretty much get everyone points off.


1: Up to 1 point of penalty for excessive sources <3+>; ( the DMG, PHB 1, MM 1 and SI source do not count )

EDIT: (That's just outright odd. Does anyone know if this has precedence somewhere?) REDACTED, though 3 seems harsh.


3: Up to 1 point of penalty for all questionable rules interpretations or cross-setting material *

Does this mean we shouldn't use artificer in Forgotten Realms, for example? Though, I'd like to note, with a few exceptions due to deities and such, everything in Dungeons and Dragons has been stated to exist in Eberron, so everyone can just set their character there.


2: Up to 1 point of penalty for is the secret ingredient taken at the earliest level it can be taken

EDIT: (I personally find this just silly, but I'd like to here some feedback from others.) REDACTED


4: Up to 1 point of penalty for does the build make use of all the SI abilities and entry requirements *

This again feels just silly to me.

Feedback from other contestants? Am I being too harsh/whiny? These criterion do feel a bit odd to me.

EDIT: To clarify, the build I'm thinking about won't fall pray to any of these issues as far as I can tell. I just think these are unreasonable.

[Venger]

(objections)

Agree on all counts. Penalizing for obscurity/number of sources is specifically disallowed in the OP. Penalization for entering the secret ingredient on time is not against the rules of the contest but is indeed bizarre, since other judges will penalize you for not entering the SI ASAP, forcing a triage-type scenario, but not actually against the rules, per se.

[Heliomance]

Agree on all counts. Penalizing for obscurity/number of sources is specifically disallowed in the OP. Penalization for entering the secret ingredient on time is not against the rules of the contest but is indeed bizarre, since other judges will penalize you for not entering the SI ASAP, forcing a triage-type scenario, but not actually against the rules, per se.

I think that's actually intended to convey that she'll penalise you if you don't enter it at level 6.

[atnorman]

Penalization for entering the secret ingredient on time is not against the rules of the contest but is indeed bizarre, since other judges will penalize you for not entering the SI ASAP, forcing a triage-type scenario, but not actually against the rules, per se.

I think this is what he meant actually. I'm not necessarily saying it's a bad thing, I just find it odd.

And in case the chairman has been busy, I'd like to remind him that I sent him a PM yesterday.

[Gwachitallemall]

You've looked at this SI, right? As was already said, it is fairly vanilla. I'm sure most builds will fall pray to this objection.



Again, while I'd agree with this for other SIs, this criteria will pretty much get everyone points off.



That's just outright odd. Does anyone know if this has precedence somewhere?



Does this mean we shouldn't use artificer in Forgotten Realms, for example? Though, I'd like to note, with a few exceptions due to deities and such, everything in Dungeons and Dragons has been stated to exist in Eberron, so everyone can just set their character there.



I personally find this just silly, but I'd like to here some feedback from others.



This again feels just silly to me.

Feedback from other contestants? Am I being too harsh/whiny? These criterion do feel a bit odd to me.

EDIT: To clarify, the build I'm thinking about won't fall pray to any of these issues as far as I can tell. I just think these are unreasonable.

On the sources part, it's actually in the chairman's first post- However, when I did this, I did not penalize for sources, but gave bonus points for having fewer than 8 sources. I would imagine that the book of exalted deeds, where the SI comes out of, does not count as well.

[Venger]

I think that's actually intended to convey that she'll penalise you if you don't enter it at level 6.

Oh. Maybe it was a formatting issue?


2: Up to 1 point of penalty for "is the secret ingredient taken at the earliest level it can be taken ?"

relydtan, is this what you meant? that you will penalize for entering late, as is the norm? that would make more sense.

[atnorman]

On the sources part, it's actually in the chairman's first post- However, when I did this, I did not penalize for sources, but gave bonus points for having fewer than 8 sources. I would imagine that the book of exalted deeds, where the SI comes out of, does not count as well.

Going back over it, you're correct. While I find 3 sources a bit harsh, I will withdraw my statement that this is silly.

And yes,


and SI source do not count

[Tim Proctor]

@atnorman, I think people should be more vocal in critiquing the judging guides.

[Akal Saris]

Please don't speculate and reveal your build, someone might actually be trying to build a Boggle (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/mm2_gallery/88268_620_8.jpg)(MM II p 33). :smallconfused:

I think this will be a fun round, it looks vanilla-ish so I think people are gonna do some fun stuff with it.

Please, boggles are pretty unoptimized until you add the Phrenic template, and then they become mind-bogglingly good :smalltongue:

[Tim Proctor]

Please, boggles are pretty unoptimized until you add the Phrenic template, and then they become mind-bogglingly good :smalltongue:
I have been ((np)(fd)(c/v)(rt))^2.

[Venger]

Please, boggles are pretty unoptimized until you add the Phrenic template, and then they become mind-bogglingly good :smalltongue:

When that happens, you need to be quite wary of them due to their sneaking abilities.

you might say that you must mind the boggles. :smalltongue:


Going back over it, you're correct. While I find 3 sources a bit harsh, I will withdraw my statement that this is silly.

And yes,

I too am unsure as to how exactly a character would comply with this in order to get full marks. Even with core also not counting, as is tradition, it seems as though no one will be able to avoid a penalty.

[Heliomance]

I have been ((np)(fd)(c/v)(rt))^2.

Nope, no matter how I rearrange that I can't make it come out as anything intelligible.

[Venger]

Nope, no matter how I rearrange that I can't make it come out as anything intelligible.

Plot twist: Tim is cooking a truenamer.

[Kuulvheysoon]

Nope, no matter how I rearrange that I can't make it come out as anything intelligible.

It's all greekmath to me.

[Tim Proctor]

Nope, no matter how I rearrange that I can't make it come out as anything intelligible.

np =P
fd =W
c/v=N
rt =D

PWND^2

Squared so not only was my mind blown it was boggled.

[atnorman]

@Kuulvheysoon

I agree that most of this is RAW legal. I just think it's odd. Am I asking the chairman to intervene? No. At best I'm hoping that the criterion are re-evaluated by the judge in question.

[Heliomance]

np =P

If you have proof of that, you'll make a lot of cryptographers very unhappy.

[Venger]

@Kuulvheysoon

I agree that most of this is RAW legal. I just think it's odd. Am I asking the chairman to intervene? No. At best I'm hoping that the criterion are re-evaluated by the judge in question.

I for one appreciate your nonconfrontational spirit. You will do well here in iron chef. It's nice when we can talk things out like this.

Same for me, chairman, our intention was not to question your authority.

@atnorman, I hate to be that guy (life as an english teacher) but criterion is singular and criteria is plural.

[atnorman]

@Heliomance Especially since the general train of thought in the field is the opposite.

@Venger I always get that mixed up.

[Heliomance]

@atnorman, I hate to be that guy (life as an english teacher) but criterion is singular and criteria is plural.

Criteria are plural.

*flees*

[Tim Proctor]

If you have proof of that, you'll make a lot of cryptographers very unhappy.
Its the first thing that pops up with Google auto-fill when you put P= into the search bar, its not meant to make people actually do math and to be easily solvable.

[Venger]

Criteria are plural.

*flees*

*laughs for nineteen weeks straight*

[Heliomance]

Its the first thing that pops up with Google auto-fill when you put P= into the search bar, its not meant to make people actually do math and to be easily solvable.

P=NP is a famously unsolved problem in operations research. We can't prove either way whether it's the case or not, and there's a large reward out there for anyone who comes up with a proof. Most thinking, however, is that it's very unlikely that P=NP, and in fact for most purposes we'd really rather it wasn't as it would render the majority of our current encryption useless.

[Temotei]

I too am unsure as to how exactly a character would comply with this in order to get full marks. Even with core also not counting, as is tradition, it seems as though no one will be able to avoid a penalty.

I barely make it right now, assuming BoED and core aren't counted toward the three. So it's possible. :smalltongue:


Criteria are plural.

*flees*

Haha. :smallbiggrin:

[Thurbane]

I personally see nothing wrong with judges having set criteria, and not having to tailor them to each SI.

Is the SI a bit vanilla and only do one thing? OK, but if a judge will be penalizing for not having "more than one trick" or whatever, you potentially have ten other levels to gain some versatility and OOC usefulness.

And even if it only does one thing, certain builds are going to do that one thing much better than others.

[Venger]

I barely make it right now, assuming BoED and core aren't counted toward the three.

>implying

Well, if you do, congratulations, you'll have a significant advantage over the rest of us.

But even if relydtan does stick with the limit of 3, she couldn't possibly be counting the book the SI is in and core as sources.unless (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_eZmEiyTo0)


I personally see nothing wrong with judges having set criteria, and not having to tailor them to each SI.

Is the SI a bit vanilla and only do one thing? OK, but if a judge will be penalizing for not having "more than one trick" or whatever, you potentially have ten other levels to gain some versatility and OOC usefulness.

And even if it only does one thing, certain builds are going to do that one thing much better than others.

we were not saying "3 is too few for this ingredient" but more "3 is too few for any ingredient." again, not a plea for divine intervention, just our respective thoughts as chefs (and judging in my past)

are you in this round, thurbane?

[Heliomance]

I'm currently using... hrm... at least 8 or 9 sources, including BoED, and another one in my backstory.

[Venger]

I'm currently using... hrm... at least 8 or 9 sources, including BoED, and another one in my backstory.

Yikes. I've never seen a judge count a source mentioned in a backstory against a dish, even if they were using a max number of sources as a ding.

Looking forward to reading yours, I'm drawing something of a blank for warrior of darkness whoops, anointed knight.

[Heliomance]

Can I assume that the Maximum Relic Value entry on the table for the Ancestral Relic feat refers only to the value of the enchantments, and not the base value of the item? If it includes the base value, I'm in trouble...

Could I have a ruling on this please?

[Temotei]

>implying

Implying I'm not well-versed enough to truly optimize imaginatively or something. :smalltongue:

[Venger]

Implying I'm not well-versed enough to truly optimize imaginatively or something. :smalltongue:

My apologies, friend, that wasn't what I was implying at all.

My intention was to say "implying anyone would be so draconian as to count the book the SI appeared in and core as 2 separate sources, leaving chefs only one other book to choose from in order to avoid getting heavily penalized in the UotSI section"

[Kuulvheysoon]

Could I have a ruling on this please?

Reading through the feat, it seems to contradict itself. On the one hand, the table gives a Maximum Relic Value. On the other hand, there's this gem in the feat description:
For example, a 4th-level paladin has a masterwork bastard sword she inherited from her grandfather. She makes sacrifices worth 2,000 gp and spends two days in prayer and fasting in the temple of Heironeous. When she emerges, her devotion has awakened the magic inherent in the blade, making it a +1 bastard sword.In which the character pays only the cost to enchant the weapon, not the base cost of the weapon itself.

In time-honoured RAW tradition, I believe the correct answer would be "Text trumps Table", so my answer would be that the Relic value applies only to the enchantments that you use the feat to place on your weapon. The weapon's base value is not counted.

But remember - you need to be able to 'afford' the weapon when you take the feat. So no riverine blades at third level, alright?

Okay, you're not actually 'buying' the weapon so much as inheriting it, but it'll still count against your WBL (the base weapon, not the Relic Enhancements).

[Venger]

Okay, you're not actually 'buying' the weapon so much as inheriting it, but it'll still count against your WBL (the base weapon, not the Relic Enhancements).

It was just lying around in your mom's attic until you hit third level or something.

[relytdan]

I would note your judging criteria are not actually compatible with the rules as laid out by the Chairman.
Firstly, there are now explicit rules for the appropriate penalties for illegal builds or banned material, and they do not include Refusal to Judge.
Secondly, flaws are penalised in Elegance, not Power.
Thirdly, knocking off a point from Power for every item used is not only incredibly harsh, it penalises non-casters more than casters, and it penalises those who went to the effort of putting thought into itemisation over those who didn't. D&D is an item dependent game. You need items to be useful, and the only exceptions are full casters.



There are a few ways, but none I could fit into my build.


I am in to judge, and here is my metric.

Note: I started each category at a 3, with players the ability to earn up to a 5.

Note: the term ‘feature’ is used in many of the calculations below and a feature is defined as an aspect of the secret ingredient that is a requirement for entry, or gained through the levels. In the case of Black Flame Zealot the following features are:

Stealth (hide, move silently), Religion (knowledge (religion), Zealous Heart), Weapon use (weapon prof (kukri)), Mental resilience (iron will), Spell Casting (divine casting), Fire (sacred flame, unholy immolation), Assassination (sneak attack, death attack, poison use). There are seven total.

Originality
-(i/x), i = each iteration of a race, class, feat, or maxed skill set (maximum ranks available) being used by another player, x total amount of players.
+.25, if a race, class, feat, or maxed skill set that was not used by another player.

Note: features of the secret ingredient are excluded from the above calculation.

Note: features that are separate from each other regardless how similar are treated separately. Knowledge (religion) is as separate from Knowledge (nature) as a Desert Half-Orc is from a Half-Orc.

Power
+.25, for each feature of the secret ingredient that has been reinforced.
-0.5, for each feature of the secret ingredient missing reinforcement.
+/- x, (offense) x=((average damage output at level 20)*(initiative/10))/100.
+/- x, (defense) x=((HP max 1st average the remainder)*(AC/40))/100.
+/-.25, for each of the following that are not SI features: Spell casting level >= 8, AC (with max mundane available) >= 35, Social modifiers (2 of diplomacy, bluff, sense motive) >= 40, Stealth modifiers (hide and move silently) >= 40, Scouting modifiers (listen and spot) >= 40, Knowledge modifiers (2 or more knowledge) >=40, Crowd Control (3 or more mass CC effects).

Note: max damage output is capped at 500 offering a maximum of +2, there is no need for an orbital charger.

Note: AC is calculated using 4 if limited to wearing light, 6 if limited to wearing medium, and 8 if allowed to wear heavy. AC will be given an addition 2 if allowed to use a shield (meaning not 2 handed).

Note: reinforced can mean a number of things generally maxed skill ranks where appropriate, a feat that is related, racial and class bonuses and/or synergies, etc.

Elegance
-1 per flaw, failure to qualify for a feat, class, etc.
+x, per class 5 or more levels, where X= levels*0.1 (if a 5 level class 0.5 points, if a 10 level class 1 point).
-1 for a 1 level splash, -0.5 for a 2 level splash.
+/-x, discretionary use for alignment issues, cheese, rules interpretations, etc.

Note: failures to qualify will be a cascading cumulative effect, meaning that if failure to qualify for X means that you also would then fail to qualify for Y then you would fail to qualify for both.

Use of Secret Ingredient
+0.5, if the SI class feature is reinforced in a superb manner the combination of three or more reinforcement factors.
+.25, if the SI class feature is reinforced in an good manner the combination of two reinforcement factors.
-.25, if the SI class feature is not reinforced in any manner.
-0.5, if the SI class feature is not reinforced and receives a negative penalty due to something else in the build such as a poor ability score, armor penalties, etc.

Note: see the reinforcement definition above in the power section.

If anyone have any comments, questions, or concerns about it or my judging style please feel free to let me know.


Ok, here's what I'm looking at as a revised scoring formula. Some tweaks may be made, but it should hold up pretty well:

My Criteria

This time, I'm going with a strictly additions/no subtractions approach. Each entry will start at a base score of 4 (1 in each category), with points added based on the following considerations (NOTE: the points allocation within each category are a guideline only. I reserve the right to adjust as deemed necessary/deserving based on the circumstances of a particular submission, although any departures will be explained in detail):

Originality:

Does the entry present a compelling backstory/concept? – up to 1.00 points
Does the entry make use of any unique mechanical tricks/feat chains? – up to 1.00 points
Does the entry enter the Secret Ingredient through use of race and/or class combinations both unexpected and unique relative to the other entries? – up to 1.50 points
Does the entry avoid known cheese and overused optimization suggestions? – up to .50 points

Note that for bullet points 2 and 3 I will be placing special emphasis on how these unique items play a part in the build as a whole, and particularly in relation to the SI. As an example, throwing in one level of barbarian in a caster themed SI isn’t going to net any originality points even if it is unexpected/no one else does it…unless the submission is tying that one level of barbarian in a way that it means something to the build as a whole and the SI in particular. I’m looking for seasonings that enhance flavor, not a tasteless garnish.

Note 2: for the third bullet point, I will be compiling a list of what I consider ‘expected’ race/class usages, and will post them after the submissions are revealed but before judging anything. That way y’all will be able to see what I’m not awarding for in that category when you consider my scores of a submission and can make a case accordingly if arguing for adjustment.


Power:

Does the entry contribute significantly in terms of offense, defense, and/or utility? – up to 3.00 points
Does the entry function at the same power level throughout an entire adventuring day, rather than relying on "nova" powers? - up to.50 points
Does the entry thrive without an undue emphasis on items, templates, or other "add-ons" for its power? - up to.50 points

I will be evaluating the entry separately for its power/contributions at various stages, and considering the contribution both (a) as a member of a mid OP party of base PHB characters, (b) in comparison to the other builds submitted to the competition at each of those stages, and (c) as impacted by the addition of the SI, the SI's mechanical qualities, and the SI's pre-reqs. As an example, if the entry is a killer after level 10 but can’t really function before then, expect the scoring to acknowledge the late power but also take the early deficiency into account.



Elegance:



Does the entry qualify for all classes taken outside the Secret Ingredient? – up to 1.00 points

Does the entry qualify for all feats taken? – up to .50 points

Does the entry avoid reliance on any questionable rules interpretations, cross-setting material, or material specifically disallowed from this competition? – up to 2.00 points

Does the entry avoid multi-class penalties and/or excessive class dipping? – up to .50 points

Note that questionable rules interpretations are the most significant part of this category by far. While one relatively insignificant questionable rules interpretation will still earn points in that category, if the entry's entire build is based around something that has a strained rules interpretation it will have a harder time earning points there.

I don’t mean (or want) to scare anyone off being bold for fear of losing out on elegance though; so unless it’s completely unsupportable by a logical explanation the entry can reasonably expect to get some points here.

Also note, meeting fluff requirements for classes/feats is expected. If it is not specifically addressed, the entry won’t get full points.



Use of the Secret Ingredient:



Does the entry qualify for the Secret Ingredient? – 1.50 points

Does the entry use the Secret Ingredient at an early stage of the build and complete the Secret Ingredient (or present a compelling reason why not doing so is actually a better use of the Secret Ingredient)? – up to .50 points

Does the entry utilize all mechanical abilities provided by the SI (and its prerequisites) as key components of the build, synergize the unique mechanical abilities of the Secret Ingredient with the rest of the build, and/or present a novel use of said mechanical abilities? – up to 2.00 points

Note that the first bullet is pretty much a straight yes/no question. If the build does not qualify for the SI, it will receive a score of 1 with no increases allowed from the other questions. Conversely, a build that qualifies will score no worse than a 2.50 in this category.

Additionally, note that I consider both mechanical and fluff requirements as part of qualification. For example, if a SI requires worship of a good god but the submission worships Hextor, it will be considered unqualified and scored accordingly (although unforeseen creative shenanigans will be taken into consideration).

The one exception to the above statement involves omitted fluff requirements rather than ‘incorrect’ ones; explicit fulfillment of those requirements is expected, but if required fluff is missing the submission won’t be scored as a disqualification. If a requirement is not specifically addressed, the entry won't get full points but likely won’t be subject to the automatic ‘1’.

Further, note that if qualification for the SI rests on a questionable rules interpretation, I will not penalize both here and in Elegance. As long as a logical justification for the submission's interpretation can be provided (whether or not I would allow it as DM personally), I will limit deductions to Elegance and not disqualify the submission's use of the SI. Points might fail to be received in both categories only if the rules interpretations are so egregious as to be unsupportable, and said rules are integral to qualifying for the SI.




I love BoED (and BoVD). In to judge...

Criteria

All scores start with a base of 3, and will be adjusted up or down as necessary.

Originality
I tend to look at each entry based on their own merit, rather than compare each to another. If two entries use the same class, but go about them differently, they won't lose Originality points from me. However, if the entries are similar, they will. Multiple builds that all use the same "trick" will be marked down.

Power
I stole this from a previous judge, but it sums up my point of view. "Power comes down to, quite simply, how the build would fare in a mid-power campaign." I am not an min-maxer, and I do not play with min-maxers. I'm used to thinking of PCs as they are seen in many of the D&D books - where characters of different types of classes work together to get the job done.

As a heads-up, an extremely powerful PC will be marked down if, in my view, it would not work well as a member of a mixed party. (Mixed party defined as "not all PCs are pure casters.") That is not to say any Tier 1 PC will lose points, as they can be built in a way to help (rather than replace) the rest of the party.

Deductions will be taken if a build uses a level+CHA mod ability that the build does not qualify for without using +CHA items. The greater the difference, the greater the penalty.

Elegance
I REALLY dislike dipping, which I define as taking 1-2 levels of a base class. I am a little more open to taking 1-2 levels of a PrC, especially in a competition like this where it is expected 10 levels of the SI will be taken. However, excessive "dipping" of PrCs will also lose Elegance points.

On the flip side, I like a good story. A lot of "strange" class changes and combos can be "overlooked" if the contestant can provide a logical reason for them. Also, I am aware English is not everyone's first language, and if a contestant feels they were marked down because they could not adequately explain their concept, I am willing to reevaluate my analysis of their Elegance. (Note I did not say I will automatically increase their score, but if informed, I will give it a second look.)

To me, Elegance is how well everything fits together, and how each individual "ingredient" adds to the overall dish.

A build that uses banned material will receive a 0 in this category.

Use of Secret Ingredient
The point of this competition is the Special Ingredient, so obviously it should be the focus. Competitors will lose points if they use less than 9 levels of the SI. (I'd prefer to see all 10, but sometimes, things just cannot be helped.)

Beyond that, how well the entire build fits in with the SI. If I feel the SI is tacked on only because it is the SI, I will mark down.

A build that fails to qualify for the SI in a way that is not easily fixable will receive a 1.0 in this category.




I was reading it as "class level." (Because WotC never makes editing mistakes...) It makes more sense as "class level," since there are options for "5-6," "3-4" and "2 or lower." Since 5 (probably more, but I'm not laying out builds to do it) character levels would be needed to qualify for the SI, there would be no point in separating them out since any character would automatically qualify.

I'm going to add another question to that... How will CHA bonus be determined? In a game, it would likely be base CHA + items. However, items are not taken into account for this competition.

*************


knocking off a point from Power for every item used is not only incredibly harsh, it penalises non-casters more than casters, and it penalises those who went to the effort of putting thought into itemisation over those who didn't. D&D is an item dependent game. You need items to be useful, and the only exceptions are full casters.


I am certain that you failed to read the part that states UPTO 1 point.
in past competitions other judges have stated every point that is listed within the criteria listed as things they judge things on...
this said I don't care for the criticism that some folk give when other judges in this vary same use similar criteria and just go about it differently.

*************
My judging criteria: -Revised

Useage of any materials banned or disallowed, will result in a 0 for segments where it applies , no exceptions.
Plagiarism of another build online, the severity of this can result in a 0 no exceptions.

Originality
Start from a baseline score of 5.
1: Up to 1 point of penalty based on whether the race or templates used were things I expected, and whether anyone else thought to use them. Cheese may see a deduction here.
2: Up to 1 point of penalty based on whether the classes or Prc used were things I expected, and whether anyone else thought to use them. Cheese may see a deduction here.
3: Up to 1 point of penalty to a build doing something interesting or something we've all seen it before respectively.
4: Up to 1 point of penalty to Fluff *
*note*4: "will be judged subjectivly on the basis of how easy it is to determine what your character does"


Power
Start from a baseline score of 5.
1: Up to 1 point of penalty for versatility. Do you have a variety of options or are you a one trick pony that can easily be shut down?
2: Up to 1 points of penalty for How good is your build at its intended role
3: Up to 1 points of penalty for If the build needs help in any form
4: Up to 1 point of penalty for each flaw or excessive items used *
*note*4: "unless listed as munchkin or optional, it will be presumed used <<Exception for this SI is the Ancestral Relic>>"


Elegance
Start from a baseline score of 4.
1: Up to 1 point of penalty for Any 1-3 level class dips, Multiclass Penalties, change alignment, ect.
2: Up to 1 point of penalty for all questionable rules interpretations or cross-setting material *
3: Up to 1 point of penalty for Each failure to qualify for non-secret ingredient things *
*note*2,3: "these will also include things like Classes/PRC's, feats, skill ranks, using most up to date source information, ect.. and can result in a 0 in this segment"

Use of the Secret Ingredient
Start from a baseline score of 5.
1: Up to 1 point of penalty for Does the entry complete the Secret Ingredient
2: Up to 1 point of penalty for is the secret ingredient taken at the earliest level it can be taken
3: Up to 1 point of penalty for does the build really captures the feel of the SI
4: Up to 1 point of penalty for does the build make use of all the SI abilities and entry requirements *
*note*4: "failure to qualify for the secret ingredient - lack of skills, feats, bab & any other requirements will result in a 0 in this segment"

[Temotei]

My apologies, friend, that wasn't what I was implying at all.

My intention was to say "implying anyone would be so draconian as to count the book the SI appeared in and core as 2 separate sources, leaving chefs only one other book to choose from in order to avoid getting heavily penalized in the UotSI section"

Ah. I thought you were asking what I was implying. Which is pretty close to what I said. :smalltongue: I'll do my best, though. That's what counts, right? :smallsmile:

[Venger]

Ah. I thought you were asking what I was implying. Which is pretty close to what I said. :smalltongue: I'll do my best, though. That's what counts, right? :smallsmile:
No problem.
Yep. Sometimes, I forget how my idiosyncrasies must come across on message boards. Indeed it is. Best of luck to you.

[Heliomance]

I am certain that you failed to read the part that states UPTO 1 point.


I didn't fail do do so. I continued to read the part that says up to 1 point FOR EACH item used. This is ridiculous. This means that if someone lists five items on their character sheet (Say, armour, cloak of resistance, belt of strength, shield, boots of flying), you would potentially give them a 0 in power.

Also your revised criteria are still penalising flaws in Power, not Elegance, and you seem to be eliminating the possibility of granting a 5 in Elegance.

[Vaz]

Oh, not again =(. Got a sinking feeling.

[atnorman]

And may I also note that I feel that my criticisms of UoSI 4 & E3 are still relevant.

[relytdan]

I didn't fail do do so. I continued to read the part that says up to 1 point FOR EACH item used. This is ridiculous. This means that if someone lists five items on their character sheet (Say, armour, cloak of resistance, belt of strength, shield, boots of flying), you would potentially give them a 0 in power.

Also your revised criteria are still penalising flaws in Power, not Elegance, and you seem to be eliminating the possibility of granting a 5 in Elegance.


Point here being that if the build relies on gear to make their build work then a penalty is deserved but I have decided to flip this on its head just because of you

My judging criteria: (thanks to Heliomance for pointing out a wording issue)

Useage of any materials banned or disallowed, will result in a 0 for segments where it applies , no exceptions.
Plagiarism of another build online, the severity of this can result in a 0 no exceptions.

Originality
Start from a baseline score of 1.
1: Up to 1 point of bonus based on whether the race or templates used were things I expected, and whether anyone else thought to use them. Cheese may see a deduction here.
2: Up to 1 point of bonus based on whether the classes or Prc used were things I expected, and whether anyone else thought to use them. Cheese may see a deduction here.
3: Up to 1 point of bonus to a build doing something interesting or something we've all seen it before respectively.
4: Up to 1 point of bonus to Fluff *
*note*4: "will be judged subjectivly on the basis of how easy it is to determine what your character does"


Power
Start from a baseline score of 1.
1: Up to 1 point of bonus for versatility. Do you have a variety of options or are you a one trick pony that can easily be shut down?
2: Up to 1 points of bonus for How good is your build at its intended role
3: Up to 1 points of bonus for If the build needs help in any form
4: Up to 1 point of bonus for if excessive items are not used *
*Note* flaws will see deductions here, ITEM Ancestral Relic is not Counted as it is required by the SI


Elegance
Start from a baseline score of 1.
1: Up to 1 point of bonus for avoiding any class/prc dips
2: Up to 1 point of bonus for all NON-questionable rules interpretations or cross-setting material *
3: Up to 1 point of bonus for non-secret ingredient things *
4: Up to 1 point of bonus for avoiding Multiclass Penalties, change alignment, ect.
*note*1,2,3: "(a dip is 1-3 levels) failure to qualify for these will also include things like Classes/PRC's, feats, skill ranks, using most up to date source information, ect..

Use of the Secret Ingredient
Start from a baseline score of 1.
1: Up to 1 point of bonus for Does the entry complete the Secret Ingredient
2: Up to 1 point of bonus for is the secret ingredient taken at the earliest level it can be taken
3: Up to 1 point of bonus for does the build really captures the feel of the SI
4: Up to 1 point of bonus for does the build make use of all the SI abilities and entry requirements *
*note*4: "failure to qualify for the secret ingredient - lack of skills, feats, bab & any other requirements will result in a 0 in this segment"

[Temotei]

this said I don't care for the criticism that some folk give when other judges in this vary same use similar criteria and just go about it differently.

I think they're meant more as helpful critiques. Most of the judges that penalize for items, for example, will penalize one point for reliance. EDIT: It was just a wording issue, turns out. Cool beans.

In other words, they're not saying it's a bad thing that you have that criterion. I think it's meant to say that it's just a bit limiting for what seem like arbitrary reasons. There could very well be reasons, but we're not sure what they are.

No one is trying to pick on you. I certainly respect that you're judging (and appreciate it), and I'm sure others do, as well. We're just trying to get a handle on why some of the criteria are the way they are and maybe try to streamline them with other judges' criteria for more flexibility in our entries.

That's what I'm getting out of it, anyway.

Also, quick question: In Elegance, you mention changing alignment as one of the things that could drop it. What about well-written and explained reasons for alignment change? Some entries may have such reasons and ideas.

[Venger]

While normally, the item issue is fairly self-explanatory (and I don't really disagree with your decision to say "xyz build is too item dependent) I am unsure of how this will work in tandem with this particular class due to us all having ancestral relic and as a result, probably investing in it to get our money's worth (in addition to half our class features directly focused on doing nothing but improving our one piece of equipment) lest we lose points from UotSI for not making use of it.

Could you explain how this will play a factor in your judging?

[Ifni]

relytdan did say in her previous posts that for this SI the Ancestral Relic didn't count towards item dependence.

[Amphetryon]

We're getting an awful lot of angst in the thread, considering no builds or judgments have been posted yet. Is it really that serious?

[Venger]

relytdan did say in her previous posts that for this SI the Ancestral Relic didn't count towards item dependence.

Thanks. I did not see that in judging criteria, I must have missed it earlier on.

[relytdan]

indeed I did state that just failed to copy it over it is now there ITEM Ancestral Relic is not Counted as it is required by the SI

[Venger]

indeed I did state that just failed to copy it over it is now there ITEM Ancestral Relic is not Counted as it is required by the SI

thanks for the clarification.

[WhamBamSam]

indeed I did state that just failed to copy it over it is now there ITEM Ancestral Relic is not Counted as it is required by the SIAs was pointed out by a few people earlier in the thread, and confirmed by the chairman's ruling, the SI gives proficiency in Exotic Shields and Armor by RAW. It's one of the things about the class that's potentially unique and interesting. Would someone making use of an exotic shield or exotic armor be penalized for item reliance in Power under your rubric? That seems like it is also just using the abilities that the class gives you.

[Vaz]

At the same time, by RAW, you gain Climb as a class feature. If you don't use that skill and maximise it, can you expect a penalty.

Seriously, this is getting a little daft. I can understand not wanting to be penalized for something that's a little edgy on the rules, but basically checking off your build with a judge prior to it even being posted is poor form, IMHO.

Let there be some suspense.

This is why I'm not a fan of posted rubrics until after the reveal.

[Kuulvheysoon]

As was pointed out by a few people earlier in the thread, and confirmed by the chairman's ruling, the SI gives proficiency in Exotic Shields and Armor by RAW. It's one of the things about the class that's potentially unique and interesting. Would someone making use of an exotic shield or exotic armor be penalized for item reliance in Power under your rubric? That seems like it is also just using the abilities that the class gives you.

Wait, where did I do this?

[Venger]

At the same time, by RAW, you gain Climb as a class feature. If you don't use that skill and maximise it, can you expect a penalty.

With you so far


This is why I'm not a fan of posted rubrics until after the reveal.

you lost me. the advantage of doing it now is that it won't slow down our judging time (which is already going to take forever this time), and chefs can save themselves a lot of grief by understanding what exactly everyone means. it saves arguments later on with a chef saying "why did you take points off for not taking SF basket weaving?" and the judge saying "I just penalize all skill-oriented builds for not taking SF basket weaving. I don't have to make that part of my criteria"

it protects chefs from being penalized for unusual things and it protects judges from being dissected too harshly later on. win/win.

[Thurbane]

are you in this round, thurbane?
Thinking about it, although honestly I doubt it at this point.

[Venger]

Thinking about it, although honestly I doubt it at this point.

At this point, I don't blame you.

[Thurbane]

we were not saying "3 is too few for this ingredient" but more "3 is too few for any ingredient." again, not a plea for divine intervention, just our respective thoughts as chefs (and judging in my past)
Um, I might have been indirectly referring to an earlier point, are we talking about 3 sources, or three "tricks" that the character is good at? I wasn't referring to sources at all, sorry for any confusion.

[Venger]

Um, I might have been indirectly referring to an earlier point, are we talking about 3 sources, or three "tricks" that the character is good at? I wasn't referring to sources at all, sorry for any confusion.

I was referring to atnorman and me talking about sources. I don't recall mentioning "tricks" at any point.

[Tim Proctor]

I'm just gonna submit 5 versions of the same build, one using 3 sources, one using 4 and one using 5. One of them has to be right.

[Piggy Knowles]

We're getting an awful lot of angst in the thread, considering no builds or judgments have been posted yet. Is it really that serious?

Yeah, seriously, folks. It seems like we're getting pretty extreme with the judging rubric critique.

relytdan has given us her scoring rubric in advance. Even if you don't agree with it, as long as she's not going against the rules of the competition - well, it's her scoring rubric. I'm kind of surprised people are getting so worked up about it, considering that at least personally, I have never once altered any of my builds because of a scoring rubric. If you're building to the judges instead of building something you're really excited by, what is even the point?

Also, I'm probably entering instead of judging, but when I judge I do many of the things people are complaining about here. I often penalize for late entry into the SI. I don't grade on a curve for any particular ingredient - if it's a weak ingredient, I still penalize builds that can't effectively contribute to a party. I've given at least one elegance bonus for a build that used only a minimum of sources.

I'd like to think that all of the above is my prerogative as a judge, and as long as I grade things consistently, there shouldn't be a problem. I may not agree with some of relytdan's scoring rubric - certainly some of it is contrary to how I tend to build - but what's the worst case scenario? She gives me a lower score because what she values and what I value are two different things?

[relytdan]

As was pointed out by a few people earlier in the thread, and confirmed by the chairman's ruling, the SI gives proficiency in Exotic Shields and Armor by RAW. It's one of the things about the class that's potentially unique and interesting. Would someone making use of an exotic shield or exotic armor be penalized for item reliance in Power under your rubric? That seems like it is also just using the abilities that the class gives you.

Would you be referring to the following:

Anointed Knight; CLASS FEATURES: All of the following are class features of the anointed knight prestige class Weapon and Armor Proficiency: An anointed knight is proficient with all simple and martial weapons, all types of armor, and shields.

pretty certain that a proficiency in weapon, armor or shields will have little to do with actual scoring in itself but physically listing that your build might have something like "a +4 redacted or +5 redactedor a +3 redacted" unless one was the ancestral relic, the implication that a proficiency stretches to say a build can list it's use, then this would in fact be items, having the proficiency does not grant the build the ability in this instance to list it's use, just because it is a proficiency of a class or prc.
hense the option to list things under optional or munchin to emphasis what your build could do and that goes along way

[WhamBamSam]

Wait, where did I do this?You didn't, apparently. It was Ponies and Venger discussing it. My mistake. I should really check back on these things, since I've made several mistakes in the past few rounds on what the final word was for one ruling or another.

EDIT:


Would you be referring to the following:

Anointed Knight; CLASS FEATURES: All of the following are class features of the anointed knight prestige class Weapon and Armor Proficiency: An anointed knight is proficient with all simple and martial weapons, all types of armor, and shields.

pretty certain that a proficiency in weapon, armor or shields will have little to do with actual scoring in itself but physically listing that your build might have something like "a +4 keen dagger or +5 mithril armor of mobility or a +3 steel flaming shield" unless one was the ancestral relic, the implication that a proficiency stretches to say a build can list it's use, then this would in fact be items, having the proficiency does not grant the build the ability in this instance to list it's use, just because it is a proficiency of a class or prc.
hense the option to list things under optional or munchin to emphasis what your build could do and that goes along wayYes, that's what I was referring to. I'm not saying I'd specify a "+x [redacted] shield" or whatever as a piece of equipment the build mus have, but I might refer to a specific type of armor or shield which the build has access to thanks to the SI, and is useful for what it does.

[Venger]

You didn't, apparently. It was Ponies and Venger discussing it. My mistake. I should really check back on these things, since I've made several mistakes in the past few rounds on what the final word was for one ruling or another.

While that may be the case, you still aren't wrong. All armor/shields means you're proficient with exotic, so feel free to make use of that, I'm sure we all will.

[Heliomance]

Would you be referring to the following:

Anointed Knight; CLASS FEATURES: All of the following are class features of the anointed knight prestige class Weapon and Armor Proficiency: An anointed knight is proficient with all simple and martial weapons, all types of armor, and shields.

pretty certain that a proficiency in weapon, armor or shields will have little to do with actual scoring in itself but physically listing that your build might have something like "a +4 keen dagger or +5 mithril armor of mobility or a +3 steel flaming shield" unless one was the ancestral relic, the implication that a proficiency stretches to say a build can list it's use, then this would in fact be items, having the proficiency does not grant the build the ability in this instance to list it's use, just because it is a proficiency of a class or prc.
hense the option to list things under optional or munchin to emphasis what your build could do and that goes along way

The thing is, it says proficient in all armour and shields. This, RAW, includes exotic armour and shields, and is an unusual and interesting ability that some people will probably use.

Wow, maxing out the Ancestral Relic cost is really quite hard. To max it at 20th level you need to find 180,000 GP worth of flat cost abilities, assuming the normal limits of +10 effective enhancement bonus apply.

[Venger]

The thing is, it says proficient in all armour and shields. This, RAW, includes exotic armour and shields, and is an unusual and interesting ability that some people will probably use.
Yep. One of the few bones thrown to us by AN.


Wow, maxing out the Ancestral Relic cost is really quite hard. To max it at 20th level you need to find 180,000 GP worth of flat cost abilities, assuming the normal limits of +10 effective enhancement bonus apply.
are you serious? that's hilarious. what a terrible way to spend WBL. looks like we're going book-diving for some flat-cost enchantments.

[Rama]

As was pointed out by a few people earlier in the thread, and confirmed by the chairman's ruling, the SI gives proficiency in Exotic Shields and Armor by RAW. It's one of the things about the class that's potentially unique and interesting. Would someone making use of an exotic shield or exotic armor be penalized for item reliance in Power under your rubric? That seems like it is also just using the abilities that the class gives you.

FWIW, I'd say there's a difference between having/listing equipment options and 'relying' on equipment to make a build work; if that makes sense.

[Heliomance]

are you serious? that's hilarious. what a terrible way to spend WBL. looks like we're going book-diving for some flat-cost enchantments.

I've found 21000 GP worth of useful flat cost enchantments so far, and I'm cheating. I've also apparently messed up my sums somewhere...

[Kuulvheysoon]

You didn't, apparently. It was Ponies and Venger discussing it. My mistake. I should really check back on these things, since I've made several mistakes in the past few rounds on what the final word was for one ruling or another.

I do agree. Point is, you're crediting me for things I didn't do. All credit to Ponies/Venger for the trick.:smallwink:


The thing is, it says proficient in all armour and shields. This, RAW, includes exotic armour and shields, and is an unusual and interesting ability that some people will probably use.

Wow, maxing out the Ancestral Relic cost is really quite hard. To max it at 20th level you need to find 180,000 GP worth of flat cost abilities, assuming the normal limits of +10 effective enhancement bonus apply.

They do indeed. There's nothing specific saying it can override them, so we abide by the normal rules.

[Heliomance]

/me totally doesn't have 16 different splatbooks open right now.

[Venger]

I do agree. Point is, you're crediting me for things I didn't do. All credit to Ponies/Venger for the trick.:smallwink:
You flatter us. It's the least we can do to help our fellow chefs wrangle something out of this... gem of an SI. :smallwink:




[They do indeed. There's nothing specific saying it can override them, so we abide by the normal rules.

things will be... difficult with this in mind. it's only barely shy of an epic item at that point. hope you don't lose it!

[OMG PONIES]

Please, boggles are pretty unoptimized until you add the Phrenic template, and then they become mind-bogglingly good :smalltongue:

Pun level: acceptable.


When that happens, you need to be quite wary of them due to their sneaking abilities.

you might say that you must mind the boggles. :smalltongue:

Pun level: overload.


I do agree. Point is, you're crediting me for things I didn't do. All credit to Ponies/Venger for the trick.:smallwink:

Now you're crediting me for things I didn't do. All credit to Venger for actually pointing out the trick. All I was doing was silently musing about it while sitting on my porch, sipping iced tea, and yelling at these damned kids to get off my lawn.

[Venger]

Pun level: overload.

Now you're crediting me for things I didn't do. All credit to Venger for actually pointing out the trick. All I was doing was silently musing about it while sitting on my porch, sipping iced tea, and yelling at these damned kids to get off my lawn.

Thank you, ponies, you are a gentleman and a scholar.

Wish it was iced tea weather here. Ice all over the roads means I'm staying home tomorrow.

To cook!

[Temotei]

Thank you, ponies, you are a gentleman and a scholar.

Wish it was iced tea weather here. Ice all over the roads means I'm staying home tomorrow.

To cook!

I'm'a play in the snow! :smallsmile:

[Deadline]

It looks like it has settled down now, but I wanted to mention that I too mark down for entering the SI late in the build when judging. The reason being is that your dish should showcase the SI, and entering early lets you do that through most of the build.

At any rate, your judging criteria look solid relytdan, thanks for posting them! :smallsmile:

[Thurbane]

I was referring to atnorman and me talking about sources. I don't recall mentioning "tricks" at any point.
No, you didn't - even though my post was right under something relating to sources, it wasn't actually a reply to that post, or anything to do with number of sources allowed.

I was responding to something from the previous page by a different poster - my bad, I should have quoted the original text.

We're getting an awful lot of angst in the thread, considering no builds or judgments have been posted yet. Is it really that serious?
I'm getting that feeling too. This is supposed to be a fun, community run comp, and some people seem to be taking it all a tad too seriously.

I think people are getting a little too judgmental of judges, no pun intended, going by the last few rounds. I have only judged once previously, and it was extremely time consuming and not an easy thing to do. Judges deserve a little leeway, IMHO, and not to have their criteria and metrics aggressively dissected.

As far as I recall, a judge even posting his criteria/metric in advance is a courtesy, and not an actual requirement, of judging.

I'm not saying that criteria are beyond question, but the vigor with which they are being questioned is getting a little strong, almost to the point of attack IMHO.

[Eldonauran]

I'm getting that feeling too. This is supposed to be a fun, community run comp, and some people seem to be taking it all a tad too seriously.

I'm with you on this. It's is a competition but we don't have to be so ... competitive about it.

On another note, I can't help but feel excited for the builds this time around. I finally settled on a concept and its coming together nicely. I even have spare feats left over ...



/me totally doesn't have 16 different splatbooks open right now.

:smalleek:

I'm using ... Five, including the SI.

[Venger]

I have a concept.

For Anointed Knight of all things.

Never thought I'd say that.

[Kuulvheysoon]

I figured that this ingredient would grow on people. Good to see that my intuition paid off.

[Sian]

I figured that this ingredient would grow on people. Good to see that my intuition paid off.

Its just if its mutating into a Arm or a wart :D

[dantiesilva]

IT kills me when I see such a beautiful SI and I do not have the time to compete. I will try to get a build in however, though it will not be as great as the one I had in mind for the simple fact one thing is not in allowed sources. Good luck to everyone, and has been said have fun. Judges thank you for all your time that you put into this.

[Gwachitallemall]

I'm having a hard time with [redacted] fitting into the build.. Hmm. Back to the drawing boards?

[Tim Proctor]

I'm having a hard time with Anointed Knight fitting into the build.. Hmm. Back to the drawing boards?
FTFY, and I think everyone is in the same boat.

[dysprosium]

Stupid internet being out at my house last night . . .

I hope I am not ripping off the bandage that seems to have been put on from the judging critiques but I wanted to chime in.

Judges are going to judge how they want to no matter what. That's the point of judging. Some builds will click with certain judges while others will not. That's personal taste (and not the real complaint for this round).

Per the rules, judges are not obligated to even give their criteria beforehand. It is a courtesy. And I'll be honest here, I don't really even read the criteria of the ones that do. Why? Because we are building a character here and not building a judge's perfect child. To quote a certain movie: "I didn't make him for you!"

As long as the judge (any judge) is consistent with his or her judging the whole way through it really doesn't matter what the rubric is. The build he/she likes the best will be at the top and the build he/she likes the least will be at the bottom. But the point is--it is what judge likes when compared to all of the rest. Which is why we always hope for multiple judges in a round as a build that is disliked by one could be praised by others.

And if I remember correctly, relytdan was pretty consistent with her judging in Corrupt Avenger, even if other judges/contestants/lurkers would have judged the entries differently. The same could be said for the three judges from last round too. Actually I can't think of a round since I have been personally involved that has had a judge been overly inconsistent to the point of madness. I started with Bladesinger.


In other news, I have two solid ideas right now. And both use Anointed Knight! Take that to mean what you will. :smallwink:

[Heliomance]

Stupid internet being out at my house last night . . .

I hope I am not ripping off the bandage that seems to have been put on from the judging critiques but I wanted to chime in.

Judges are going to judge how they want to no matter what. That's the point of judging. Some builds will click with certain judges while others will not. That's personal taste (and not the real complaint for this round).

Per the rules, judges are not obligated to even give their criteria beforehand. It is a courtesy. And I'll be honest here, I don't really even read the criteria of the ones that do. Why? Because we are building a character here and not building a judge's perfect child. To quote a certain movie: "I didn't make him for you!"

As long as the judge (any judge) is consistent with his or her judging the whole way through it really doesn't matter what the rubric is. The build he/she likes the best will be at the top and the build he/she likes the least will be at the bottom. But the point is--it is what judge likes when compared to all of the rest. Which is why we always hope for multiple judges in a round as a build that is disliked by one could be praised by others.

And if I remember correctly, relytdan was pretty consistent with her judging in Corrupt Avenger, even if other judges/contestants/lurkers would have judged the entries differently. The same could be said for the three judges from last round too. Actually I can't think of a round since I have been personally involved that has had a judge been overly inconsistent to the point of madness. I started with Bladesinger.

Apart from my issue about items, which was revealed to simply be a wording error and has been fixed, my objections were only to the parts where the judging criteria did not fit the rules of the contest.

...so, if my character ever loses their relic, they are utterly screwed. If item familiars weren't banned, I'd probably make it one of those, just for even more eggs in one basket.

[KrimsonNekros]

FTFY, and I think everyone is in the same boat.

I had to step back and look at this particular choice and consider if i was being asked to use a staple, or a garnish for the build when i began. It's the difference between being asked to do something with potatoes, or being asked to do something with cloves. They'd both be used to enhance the dish, but in completely different ways probably.

[Gwachitallemall]

FTFY, and I think everyone is in the same boat.

Actually.. that wasn't the issue. :P But I got it figured out now.

[Heliomance]

Dammit, I still have 58000 GP to spend on this relic, and I've run out of ideas!

[Zeb]

I had to step back and look at this particular choice and consider if i was being asked to use a staple, or a garnish for the build when i began. It's the difference between being asked to do something with potatoes, or being asked to do something with cloves. They'd both be used to enhance the dish, but in completely different ways probably.

Yea it's those 10 non SI levels that keep tripping me up :smallannoyed:

[Vaz]

Erm, yeah, think I might be falling foul of the sources allowance unless I can turn things around...

[Heliomance]

...damn, I have more to spend. I messed up my numbers and accidentally made it +11 effective. Welp, time to pull something out.

[Tim Proctor]

Erm, yeah, think I might be falling foul of the sources allowance unless I can turn things around...

Does MIC count as a source, since its 'kinda' required for the SI?

I got down to 4, besides PHB/DMG/BoED.

Oh, BTW Heliomance I hates you like you are a hobbitses. I was going through possibilities for my build and saw the (3) touch AC increasess to make it higher than regular. I fear we are doing the same thing. I hope you can stay on your side as I only took one of those.

[Heliomance]

3? I only spotted 2. And didn't actually end up taking any of them in the end due to not being able to fit them in. Though one's going to turn up in an adaptation section.

...82000 GP to spend. Joy.

[Tim Proctor]

3? I only spotted 2. And didn't actually end up taking any of them in the end due to not being able to fit them in. Though one's going to turn up in an adaptation section.

...82000 GP to spend. Joy.
Well I'm glad, maybe we're doing other things... I'll post after the reveal.

[Heliomance]

Right! I think I'm actually done with my build! Now I just need to finish writing the fluff and type it all up in the right format.

EDIT: Build submitted! Holy crap, I ended up with MANY different sources in there. Plus a few more in adaptations. I am so getting dinged for that. I also had 12 tabs open relevant to the build.

[Zeb]

EDIT: Build submitted! Holy crap, I ended up with lots of different sources in there. I am so getting dinged for that. I also had 12 tabs open relevant to the build.

Might want to use that fix to avoid revealing your build

On a separate note my second idea for a build fails to be up to iron chef standards, it will be cool but not with the IC restrictions. Lets see if I can get that first idea actually working... stupid bonus feat list... grumble grumble*

[Kazyan]

Sources: "All of them."

[Venger]

Sources: "All of them."

Sources: Yes.

[Heliomance]

Dammit, now I've finished my build, I have to wait 22 days to see them all :(

[Vaz]

Heh, didn't even check that date I've got. Still, probably going to be playing with my early Xmas present; but Heliomance; you can feel free to enter more than one.

Frequently we see people enter 2, I believe Deadline (and a couple of others) have entered 3, and I think Relytdan blew it all out of the water with 4 entries last round.

If you fancy wasting a few more hours or want to explore some options you've come across (In book mining for stuff, I found a ton of gems that I thought gelled together with it) but weren't able to fit in.

[Heliomance]

I don't have any more ideas, though. I got one straight away, I'm not sure what I could do different.

[Eldonauran]

I don't have any more ideas, though. I got one straight away, I'm not sure what I could do different.

You'll probably run across another idea soon enough.

As for me ... I am having more fun with this prestige class than I did with the previous two builds that I've participated in. At first, it was just a 'meh' kind of prestige class. Now ... the character (for it is a character and not just a build) is creating itself.

I've pretty much got the build outline completed. All feats picked, general idea on what kind of items will make it more useful, way too many unspent skill points and a backstory to write.

[Piggy Knowles]

I actually do have another build idea, but I don't know that I'm going to put it together.

I have my build table all finished and some notes on the build and fluff, but for some reason the idea of actually fulling statting out an ancestral relic feels exhausting to me right now.

[Venger]

Chairman, what exactly does "120 foot vision and hearing" actually mean regarding our weapons?

[Kuulvheysoon]

Chairman, what exactly does "120 foot vision and hearing" actually mean regarding our weapons?

...What do you mean? As far as I see, there's only one way to read it - it can only detect things (visually and audibly) within 120ft.

Unless someone can give me a compelling reason to believe otherwise, treat it as so.

I'm now going back through the thread and looking for other questions answered, and I'll toss them in the FAQs, so keep an eye out there before you ask a question.

EDIT: Done. Also,
Kuulv. This SI. Why did you pick it?

Couple of reasons, actually. First was because you guys hadn't had a Primary Combatant for a while. Secondly, it's pseudo-holiday themed. I mean, it requires you to be Good (or else Santa won't bring you your presents:smallbiggrin:) and you get presents (Anoint Self and Weapon).

And, you know, I like the class, as terrible as it is.

[Tim Proctor]

Sorry for this shameless plug, but in another competition we're in terrible need of judges. Can anyone please stop by and help, only 4 entries so it should be not too complex.

Heroic IC II (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=314391)

BTW, I submitted my 2 builds for this competition. For those that missed my previous remark I pulled out of judging because we've got plenty already.

[Heliomance]

You'll probably run across another idea soon enough.

Ehh... I could do basically the same thing again on a different chassis, is all. It's such a bland class, it doesn't exactly offer many options on how to play it.

[GameSpawn]

I guess I'm going to try to do this too. First time trying Iron Chef, we'll see how it goes.

[Kesnit]

I guess I'm going to try to do this too. First time trying Iron Chef, we'll see how it goes.

Don't let yourself get discouraged. IIRC, first-time chefs have won in the past.