Iron Chef Optimization Challenge in the Playground LVIII

[Kuulvheysoon]

Welcome, contestants, judges, and guests to Iron Chef LVIII. 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 or Generic Classes 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 23:59 GMT on Tuesday, July 1st, 2014 to create their builds and PM them to the Chairman, Kuulvheysoon. Builds will then be posted simultaneously, to avoid copying. Judges will have until 23:59 GMT on Tuesday, July 15th, 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


Level
Class
Base Attack Bonus
Fort Save
Ref Save
Will Save
Skills
Feats
Class Features


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


20th
New Class Level
+x
+x
+x
+x
Skills
Feats
New Class Abilities



Code immediately below (spoiler).

Level
Class
Base Attack Bonus
Fort Save
Ref Save
Will Save
Skills
Feats
Class Features


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


20th
New Class Level
+x
+x
+x
+x
Skills
Feats
New Class Abilities



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
Spells per Day/Spells Known


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
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-


Code immediately below (spoiler)Spells per Day/Spells Known
Spells per Day/Spells Known


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
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-



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:
Complete Warrior's Spellsword!
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)
Iron Chef LII: Anointed Knight (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=317934)
Iron Chef LIII: Zerth Cenobite (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=325164)
Iron Chef LIV: Osteomancer (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=330890)
Iron Chef LV: Mountebank (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?336373-Iron-Chef-Optimization-Challenge-in-the-Playground-LV)
Iron Chef LVI: Dwarven Defender (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?342807-Iron-Chef-Optimization-Challenge-in-the-Playground-LVI)
Iron Chef LVII: Darkrunner (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?349040-Iron-Chef-Optimization-Challenge-in-the-Playground-LVII)

[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.

Ruling on Generic Classes? It's now tucked away in the OP -
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 or Generic Classes 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.

Channel Spell - is it cast or not? Despite the strange wording, yes, you do cast the spell (or, at least, that's my interpretation on it, and so we'll treat it as such). So you do use up any expensive material components, optional components and XP costs.

[Tim Proctor]

INB4Trolls... oh wait I'm already here.

[Piggy Knowles]

I have what I think is a pretty good idea already...

[Irk]

Well, I haven't done so well in previous competitions, but I really like this one, so we'll see, I may enter.

[Amphetryon]

That's unexpected. I'll consider whether I'd rather enter, or judge, this round.

[OMG PONIES]

Spellsword, eh? I'll need to review the source. Also, fun fact: if we get 16 contestants this round, we'll be at 700 entries through all the rounds of Iron Chef here on GitP!

[dantiesilva]

This one is so good I am not even touching it, really there are so many possibilities that are all amazing that I know I wont make it even in the top ten. Good luck everyone.

[Irk]

If I have at least two abilities that give the capacity to use a second level spell at will, would that met the class's prerequisite?

[Tim Proctor]

If I have at least two abilities that give the capacity to use a second level spell at will, would that met the class's prerequisite?

No, Complete Arcane pg 72 gives a good explanation as to why.

[WhamBamSam]

Why must the channel spell uses be limited to 5/day? Why?

I have some ideas, but they aren't really lasting throughout the day. Maybe I'll judge this one. I'll take some time to think on it.

[Sian]

allready got 2 prehaps 3 protentials ... one of them is very interesting since i'm fairly certain its not intended to work but does

[DeAnno]

I had a pretty interesting idea, but then I realized that Fractional BaB was just a semi-houserule I'd been used to forever and not an actual rule that I could use.

[KrimsonNekros]

I've got a stub figured out. Should work fairly well I think.

[Secret Bard]

Hello everyone, I'm sort of new here. I think I would like to compete in this one. I don't expect to win or even place; but who knows, maybe I'll learn something. The SI seems like a good one with plenty of possibilities, should be fun.

[OMG PONIES]

Kicking some ideas around, but I have some rules questions along the way:


The SI only calls out gaining "spells per day" at odd levels...should we take that to increase "spells known" as well for applicable classes or not?
Assuming the bonus feat @ level 2 is a fighter feat, would an entry be restricted to fighter feats from the PHB alone? It mentions the PHB list but doesn't seem to do so in a restrictive manner.
Does the required ability to cast 2nd-level spells mean that the entry must:
Know/memorize/be able to select more than one unique 2nd level spell?
Be able to cast more than one 2nd level spell per day (Even if it's the same spell twice)? Or...
Be able to cast at least one 2nd level spell per day (thus casting second level spells over the course of two or more days)?


Hello everyone, I'm sort of new here. I think I would like to compete in this one. I don't expect to win or even place; but who knows, maybe I'll learn something. The SI seems like a good one with plenty of possibilities, should be fun.

Welcome! Warning: bad puns, all levels of optimization, and good fun await. Abandon all hope of productivity, ye who enter here.

[dysprosium]

Spellsword!

But I have my Shiba Protector build all ready to go! Though in all seriousness, as much as I love Oriental Adventures, the inevitable question would have to be addressed--do we accept the Dragon 319 3.5 updates or not?

I should have guessed this ingredient with the hints, especially since we had a few in the Duskblade round of Zinc Saucier.

I will definitely be in one way or the other as per usual.

[Deadline]

But ... but ... isn't this ingredient a reasonably potent one by itself? I ... I don't even know what to do with good ingredients anymore. :smalltongue:

[Amphetryon]

But ... but ... isn't this ingredient a reasonably potent one by itself? I ... I don't even know what to do with good ingredients anymore. :smalltongue:

Combine them with Commoner and Truenamer levels.

[Darrin]

The SI only calls out gaining "spells per day" at odd levels...should we take that to increase "spells known" as well for applicable classes or not?



I'm not sure how to parse this one. I can make an argument that "spells known" should be included as part of an "increased effective level of spellcasting", but there are a few different ways that additional "spells known" are granted. I'm not sure if there's a sufficient rationale that includes them all while still satisfying both RAW and RAI.

My inclination is to lean towards RAI on this one, and chalk it up to sloppy wording on the part of the designer/editor.




Assuming the bonus feat @ level 2 is a fighter feat, would an entry be restricted to fighter feats from the PHB alone? It mentions the PHB list but doesn't seem to do so in a restrictive manner.



Table 5-1 is not an exclusive list. Additional fighter bonus feats can be added to it via subsequent supplements. Also, "Text trumps table", so if the text of a feat says it can be added to the list of Fighter Bonus feats, then it is on the list, even if it is not on table 5-1.




Does the required ability to cast 2nd-level spells mean that the entry must:
Know/memorize/be able to select more than one unique 2nd level spell?
Be able to cast more than one 2nd level spell per day (Even if it's the same spell twice)? Or...
Be able to cast at least one 2nd level spell per day (thus casting second level spells over the course of two or more days)?



I am not a proponent of the "plural" semantic pedantry argument against using Precocious Apprentice. I believe if you have a single 2nd level spell slot, and you can cast at least one 2nd level spell from it, then this counts as casting "2nd level spells" because there is no time limit specified on the requirement. I would prefer to use a Monday/Tuesday criteria for this: if your character can cast a 2nd level spell on Monday and a 2nd level spell on Tuesday (without recourse to scrolls/wands/SLAs/etc.) then you can cast 2nd level spells plural.

I think the real question you're asking here is "What early entry tricks are allowed?" And while my first inclination might be to say "That's for each judge to determine," I think a blanket ruling by the chairman would be better for both contestants and judges (while hopefully cutting down some lengthy disputes at the end of the round).

[Vaz]

Got my build stub. Pretty happy with this one =D. More than last one. -

[Sian]

got three stubs i'm all reasonbly happy with (been trying my darnest to dodge the obvious ways), now to choose ... the tricky thing is that I think the most interesting one is the one i'm going to have to hammer the most to get to fit the shape of the slot

[relytdan]

Welcome Back chairman : Spellsword - interesting.. thinking

[Secret Bard]

All right, I have the concept figured out, now to crunch some numbers.



Welcome! Warning: bad puns, all levels of optimization, and good fun await. Abandon all hope of productivity, ye who enter here.


Thanks, I saw the last Iron Chef; but was too late to enter. Although, I couldn't ask for a better SI for my first entry than the Spellsword.

[Zaq]

Wait, I thought Spellsword had only one level. Now you're telling me there's ten times as much Spellsword as I thought there was? Now I just don't know what to believe.

[OMG PONIES]

I think the real question you're asking here is "What early entry tricks are allowed?" And while my first inclination might be to say "That's for each judge to determine," I think a blanket ruling by the chairman would be better for both contestants and judges (while hopefully cutting down some lengthy disputes at the end of the round).

While the question usually comes up re: early entry, I was just asking for normal entry. Particularly, if a character only knows one 2nd-level spell, does casting it once on Monday and once on Tuesday qualify as casting 2nd level spells, or does it not qualify since he's casting the same 2nd level spell two times? To avoid confusion and heightened disputes regarding qualification for the Secret Ingredient, I'd like our Chairman to weigh in with an official verdict. As always, I appreciate your insights. And not just because I agree with all of them!


Thanks, I saw the last Iron Chef; but was too late to enter. Although, I couldn't ask for a better SI for my first entry than the Spellsword.

Iron Chef always confuses me; do you mean "better" in the traditional sense or "better" in the "it's pretty darn awful" sense? :smalltongue:

Also, unrelated: if you tell people you're a secret bard, it's not a secret anymore. Then you're just a regular bard.

[Tim Proctor]

I will be judging...

Originality: I judge compared to entrants (beware the Vizzini effect), with bonuses for really original stuff.

Power: I judge compared to the offense, defense, and versatility of the SI. This round has high expectations.

Elegance: I am looking to award for tenure in a class, qualifying for everything, no questionable rules, etc.

Use of the SI: I have determined 7 factors of the SI which I am looking to award bonuses on and penalize for not using.

If there are any questions please let me know.

EDIT:

While the question usually comes up re: early entry, I was just asking for normal entry. Particularly, if a character only knows one 2nd-level spell, does casting it once on Monday and once on Tuesday qualify as casting 2nd level spells, or does it not qualify since he's casting the same 2nd level spell two times? To avoid confusion and heightened disputes regarding qualification for the Secret Ingredient, I'd like our Chairman to weigh in with an official verdict.

The Chairman has ruled on this subject before, I'd expect the same verdict, that
I'd rule that it applies to slots, not the number of spells that you can access. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=16362214&postcount=51) Meaning:

No, more of a grammatical issue. If you can cast more than 1 2nd level spell (be it the same day or not), you're fine. So you cannot enter if you've been imbued with a divine spell (as the Imbue with Spell Ability spell) that has only a single usage. If you can naturally cast 2nd level spell(s), you're good to go.

[Kuulvheysoon]

Why must the channel spell uses be limited to 5/day? Why?

I have some ideas, but they aren't really lasting throughout the day. Maybe I'll judge this one. I'll take some time to think on it.More like, why does double channel take up 2 uses?


But ... but ... isn't this ingredient a reasonably potent one by itself? I ... I don't even know what to do with good ingredients anymore. :smalltongue:Hey, I figured that you guys deserved a little break after that harsh duo of Dwarven Defender/Darkrunner.


Kicking some ideas around, but I have some rules questions along the way:


The SI only calls out gaining "spells per day" at odd levels...should we take that to increase "spells known" as well for applicable classes or not?
Assuming the bonus feat @ level 2 is a fighter feat, would an entry be restricted to fighter feats from the PHB alone? It mentions the PHB list but doesn't seem to do so in a restrictive manner.
Does the required ability to cast 2nd-level spells mean that the entry must:
Know/memorize/be able to select more than one unique 2nd level spell?
Be able to cast more than one 2nd level spell per day (Even if it's the same spell twice)? Or...
Be able to cast at least one 2nd level spell per day (thus casting second level spells over the course of two or more days)?
I'll nab this for you now -
Yes, you should assume that it advances it as normal, no matter how oddly it's worded.
Any feat that a Fighter can pick off of it's bonus list is kosher (so long as you meet the prerequisites, that is).
Tim nabbed this one for me above.


Wait, I thought Spellsword had only one level. Now you're telling me there's ten times as much Spellsword as I thought there was? Now I just don't know what to believe.Now you see why I picked this ingredient.:smallamused: I needed to remind people that Iron Chef isn't (only) about terrible PrCs, it's (theoretically) as much about little-used or only ever dipped classes (like this, or say, Dragonslayer).

[OMG PONIES]

I will be judging...

Since we've got a volunteer to judge I may just have to jump back into the competitor's seat! :smallbiggrin: That being said, a few quick questions for you:


Originality: I judge compared to entrants (beware the Vizzini effect), with bonuses for really original stuff.

When you say you're judging compared to other entrants, are you just using that as a guide or will you be awarding a 1 to the least original build, a 5 for the most original build, and stops in between for the rest? I ask out of judgely curiosity since I was thinking of experimenting with that idea myself.


Power: I judge compared to the offense, defense, and versatility of the SI. This round has high expectations.

When you say "high expectations," can you provide a baseline of what you're looking for? Again, asking more out of curiosity than trying to garner ALL THE POINTZ! People are talking about the power of this ingredient, but I fear I'm missing something. It feels kinda...lackluster (which makes it a perfect Secret Ingredient...like kale).


Elegance: I am looking to award for tenure in a class, qualifying for everything, no questionable rules, etc.

When you say "tenure in a class," am I correct in reading that a Base Class 10/Spellsword 10 will automatically score higher in Elegance than a Base Class 6/Other PrC 4/Spellsword 10 (assuming no other Elegance issues in either)? Just asking for clarification.


Use of the SI: I have determined 7 factors of the SI which I am looking to award bonuses on.

Are you planning on sharing the 7 factors you'll be evaluating when you present your scores? Again, a question of curiosity.

[Amphetryon]

I will be judging...

Originality: I judge compared to entrants (beware the Vizzini effect), with bonuses for really original stuff.

Power: I judge compared to the offense, defense, and versatility of the SI. This round has high expectations.

Elegance: I am looking to award for tenure in a class, qualifying for everything, no questionable rules, etc.

Use of the SI: I have determined 7 factors of the SI which I am looking to award bonuses on and penalize for not using.

If there are any questions please let me know.

I'll bite. Consider these general questions for judges, not specifically aimed at you:

Folks have weighed in on Partial Casting Classes like Spellsword as an SI before, often indicating that using the SI to progress a base Class's casting would warrant a deduction while also indicating that using the SI to progress a Prestige Class's independent casting (as a random example of independent casting, round XVIII's Dark Hunter) would warrant a deduction. Is it likely to be the case that folks will have to choose which of these deductions they wish to receive, or are full marks possible?

[OMG PONIES]

I'll nab this for you now -
Yes, you should assume that it advances it as normal, no matter how oddly it's worded.
Any feat that a Fighter can pick off of it's bonus list is kosher (so long as you meet the prerequisites, that is).
Tim nabbed this one for me above.

Cool. Cool. Cool.


To confirm, if I only know, say, Glitterdust... A glitterdust on Monday followed by another glitterdust on Tuesday is sufficient to meet the prerequisite, correct?

[Tim Proctor]

If you look back to the Cenobite one that I judged (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=16899330&postcount=240) you'll get an idea on all of these.


When you say you're judging compared to other entrants, are you just using that as a guide or will you be awarding a 1 to the least original build, a 5 for the most original build, and stops in between for the rest? I ask out of judgely curiosity since I was thinking of experimenting with that idea myself.
It is not a bell curve, but a rewards/penalty ratio for how an entrant is using race, template, classes, feats, and skills (not required by the SI) compared to other entrants, the most I've had is a 4.95. A bell curve does seem interesting but overly harsh.


When you say "high expectations," can you provide a baseline of what you're looking for? Again, asking more out of curiosity than trying to garner ALL THE POINTZ! People are talking about the power of this ingredient, but I fear I'm missing something. It feels kinda...lackluster (which makes it a perfect Secret Ingredient...like kale).
I've identified two ways to get 4 attacks, and level 8 spells with 10 levels of this SI. Meaning that unlike the last few, the power level of this SI is significantly higher (also less utility based), and would suffer a decent versatility bonus. Now you don't need to overkill it and be an ubercharger 9/9/9 to get a 5, I have a pre-determined amount of damage needed in a round, a pre-determined HP/AC/Saves ratio, and a pre-determined versatility segment that if met will afford a 5. I have had 5's in power before.


When you say "tenure in a class," am I correct in reading that a Base Class 10/Spellsword 10 will automatically score higher in Elegance than a Base Class 6/Other PrC 4/Spellsword 10 (assuming no other Elegance issues in either)? Just asking for clarification.
Correct, basically if you qualified for everything didn't squint when you read the rules and went 10/10 or 5/10/5 you'll end up with a 5 elegance.


Are you planning on sharing the 7 factors you'll be evaluating when you present your scores? Again, a question of curiosity.
No, I share these only after the builds are revealed. I have had 5s in UotSI before.


I'll bite. Consider these general questions for judges, not specifically aimed at you:

Folks have weighed in on Partial Casting Classes like Spellsword as an SI before, often indicating that using the SI to progress a base Class's casting would warrant a deduction while also indicating that using the SI to progress a Prestige Class's independent casting (as a random example of independent casting, round XVIII's Dark Hunter) would warrant a deduction. Is it likely to be the case that folks will have to choose which of these deductions they wish to receive, or are full marks possible?
I think full marks are possible, I'd have to crunch some numbers but where the spells come from (so long as they are legal) aren't much of a concern of mine. In the BFZ we had people with level 8 spells and 20+ d6 of sneak attack damage, I think the person that won power in that was a Skarn floating thing that did 150d6 or some crazy amount. Whether someone can cast Miracle vs. 150d6 vs. charge for 1,500 damage vs. etc. is IMO mostly overkill I'm more interested if you can beat a Balor or like in a 1v1.

[Rama]

I'll likely be available to judge as well.


I'll bite. Consider these general questions for judges, not specifically aimed at you:

Folks have weighed in on Partial Casting Classes like Spellsword as an SI before, often indicating that using the SI to progress a base Class's casting would warrant a deduction while also indicating that using the SI to progress a Prestige Class's independent casting (as a random example of independent casting, round XVIII's Dark Hunter) would warrant a deduction. Is it likely to be the case that folks will have to choose which of these deductions they wish to receive, or are full marks possible?

Full marks would be possible under either of those scenarios imo. Depends how it all comes together.

[OMG PONIES]

A bell curve does seem interesting but overly harsh.

Yeah, that's been my general impression without running the numbers. I thought it might simplify my scoring to rank the builds in each category from best to worst. One 5 would be given to the best, one 1 would be assigned to the worst, and then I'd do an even distribution in between. However, I think the harshness of the 1s would outweight the glory of the 5s; that, and the idea of directly comparing the builds to one another instead of a concrete rubric seems like a recipe for disaster with a dispute garnish.


Correct, basically if you qualified for everything didn't squint when you read the rules and went 10/10 or 5/10/5 you'll end up with a 5 elegance.

Would a 5/10/5 build receive the same Elegance score as a 6/10/4 or a 7/10/3? Awarding 10/10 for simplicity makes sense, but I'm confused by the inclusion of 5/10/5 as a perfect specimen since it has half the tenure in two classes that a 10/10 has in one.


No, I share these only after the builds are revealed.

Right, that's what I was asking. I just didn't know if your 7 areas of focus would be presented alongside your scores to make the rationale clear to the entrants and avoid possible debates caused by lack of detail.

[Tim Proctor]

Would a 5/10/5 build receive the same Elegance score as a 6/10/4 or a 7/10/3? Awarding 10/10 for simplicity makes sense, but I'm confused by the inclusion of 5/10/5 as a perfect specimen since it has half the tenure in two classes that a 10/10 has in one.
The mechanical tenure is -.5 for a 1 level dip, -.25 for a 2 level dip, +.1 per level if 5 or more taken. I have it built this way to accommodate harder to get into SIs, where you'll need more than 1 class ability to enter, while 10/10 is more elegant, 5/10/5 is good enough for me.

[Secret Bard]

Iron Chef always confuses me; do you mean "better" in the traditional sense or "better" in the "it's pretty darn awful" sense? :smalltongue:

Also, unrelated: if you tell people you're a secret bard, it's not a secret anymore. Then you're just a regular bard.

Oh no you figured out my ruse :smalleek:

I mean that there is a lot of potential in this class and a lot of ways to go about using it. I'm really interested to see what everyone else makes.

[Vaz]

Cool. Cool. Cool.


To confirm, if I only know, say, Glitterdust... A glitterdust on Monday followed by another glitterdust on Tuesday is sufficient to meet the prerequisite, correct?

That is how I read it.

(And if you were making love to Glitterdust by Wednesday, do you do it on Thursday, Friday, Saturday, but chill on Sunday?)

Essentially, if you have access to 1 or more 2nd level spell which you can renew by your own abilities (in Kuulv's example, not reliant on the party cleric providing the additional spell) then you qualify.

[Irk]

Does a channeled spell become part of the spell-like ability or is the spell-like ability the actual capability to channel?
Could I qualify by getting spells from supernatural abilities?

[Tim Proctor]

Does a channeled spell become part of the spell-like ability or is the spell-like ability the actual capability to channel?
Could I qualify by getting spells from supernatural abilities?
You're getting way too close to speculation on builds, anymore detailed and you'd probably want to PM the Chairman.

[weckar]

*nevermind*

[Vaz]

This is what the Simple Q+A at the top of the forum is for. Please stop asking questions regarding builds which is essentially speculation in this thread, something which as long as I have been doing, has been considered verboten.

[Sian]

the hardest part about building a Spellsword is IMHO to avoid walking into Vizinni territory, yet avoid stopping from going into what looks like such without being it :smallbiggrin:

[sideswipe]

i have never taken part and i have a very funny idea, i don't expect to do well but i love the class so i'm joining in this one :smallsmile:

[WhamBamSam]

More like, why does double channel take up 2 uses?Also yes. Novel uses of Multiple Channel Spell are liable to make the build overly reliant on nova powers. It's a conundrum.

I think I've got the rumblings of a good idea though.

[Amechra]

I have 4 distinct build stubs.

I know which one I'm going to build first, though. Because it will be hilarious.

[Silva Stormrage]

Okay I think I will actually try to make a build for this once. Two questions though.

One: Is there someone I could forward my finished draft to to make sure I have the formatting right? I would hate to get marked down for something like that.

Secondly: If I happened to start at a build that starts at ECL 6+ would I still need to do the 5th level character description? Or would I just do a write up for whatever level he started at?

[dantiesilva]

You know now I realize why this was a hard one, it is easy per say to enter. The kicker is the special requirement as well as the armor, I am not seeing a large selection of things that can do this amazingly that wont be copying each other, good luck. *Shakes head* I still can't believe this one turned me on my head.

[DeAnno]

The kicker is the special requirement as well as the armor

I see the first (Must have defeated a foe through the force of arms alone, without recourse to spellcasting) as more of a flavor issue, myself. If the judges are going to interpret it as something you can't really do with flavor, that would probably be important to know about.

[Vaz]

As a heads up, fluff requirements were penalized if not included.

Out of interest, when it says "Must have defeated a foe through force of arms alone, without recourse to spellcasting." does this include buff spells?

[sideswipe]

As a heads up, fluff requirements were penalized if not included.

Out of interest, when it says "Must have defeated a foe through force of arms alone, without recourse to spellcasting." does this include buff spells?

i would personally say yes. buff spells means you were assisted by spells. not just arms.

[OMG PONIES]

As a heads up, fluff requirements were penalized if not included.

Out of interest, when it says "Must have defeated a foe through force of arms alone, without recourse to spellcasting." does this include buff spells?


i would personally say yes. buff spells means you were assisted by spells. not just arms.

I agree. Plus, going by RAW you can't even use your hands, feet, or other body parts...just your arms. As usual, I'll see myself out.

[Vaz]

By RAW, you can't even attack with your arms, even monks only have hands, elbows, knees, feet and head as explicitly allowed unarmed strike.

Let's not even joke, the special requirement is hard enough...

[sideswipe]

i am draxor! i had both may hands cut off but now i kill with my forearms! :smallbiggrin:

[OMG PONIES]

Let's not even joke, the special requirement is hard enough...

Step 1: Stab.
Step 2: Repeat step 1 as needed.

[Vaz]

FFS, why is [X] not a [X], :smallfurious:

Just completely undone my entire build.

[Deadline]

Secondly: If I happened to start at a build that starts at ECL 6+ would I still need to do the 5th level character description? Or would I just do a write up for whatever level he started at?

You can start the build at a later ECL, and the rules technically only state that you have to include a breakdown for one level, though most chefs include writeups for multiple interesting points in the build (and I've looked favorably on such a thing in the past as a judge - more information is generally always better).


I see the first (Must have defeated a foe through the force of arms alone, without recourse to spellcasting) as more of a flavor issue, myself. If the judges are going to interpret it as something you can't really do with flavor, that would probably be important to know about.

If it is a prerequisite, you need to account for it. Failure to account for it means you don't qualify for the Secret Ingredient. If you don't qualify for the Secret Ingredient, your score suffers ...

Seriously, how hard is it to say, "at the start of his/her/its adventuring career, he took out a kobold with a lucky swing of his quarterstaff"?

Also, I have no idea what to do with this ingredient. It's just too good. :smallamused:

[dantiesilva]

..Seriously, how hard is it to say, "at the start of his/her/its adventuring career, he took out a kobold with a lucky swing of his quarterstaff"?

Well lets just leave it at Redirceted may have a harder time doing this at any level then Redirected would. So it is something important to consider. Sure you can say you beat it without magic thanks to a lucky crit, however now your simply saying had it not been for luck you would have never made it into the SI. I like to over think things when it comes to our judges because while they are fair, sometimes it feels like nitpicking lol.

And to all the judges of the last round I hope you know that I only did a dispute to add amusement while we waited. No hard feelings I hope. By the way who ate the ettin:smalltongue:

[Kazudo]

So that I don't wuss out on judging, I'll refrain from posting my criteria and will actually attempt to build something incredibly mediocre for this competition.

Gotta have a baseline entry, right? :smallbiggrin:

[AvatarVecna]

I can't find any text indicating how tough an opponent I have to defeat for the special requirement. Can I stab a rat and qualify? Step on a cockroach?

[Deadline]

I can't find any text indicating how tough an opponent I have to defeat for the special requirement. Can I stab a rat and qualify? Step on a cockroach?

It would probably be safe to assume a CR appropriate encounter. That said, if you feel that fulfilling requirements only by the merest technicalities should warrant full marks, you might be disappointed with how a judge decides to score. Then again, depending on how it was done, the humor of the situation could be fantastic.

[OMG PONIES]

Seriously, how hard is it to say, "at the start of his/her/its adventuring career, he took out a kobold with a lucky swing of his quarterstaff"?

:smallfurious: Razzinfrazzin speculation, there goes my whole build for Quarterstaff Quincy!


Also, I have no idea what to do with this ingredient. It's just too good. :smallamused:

I, on the other hand, just got hit by the Inspiration Stick. I think I've got something simmering :smallamused:.


I like to over think things when it comes to our judges because while they are fair, sometimes it feels like nitpicking lol.

As someone who provided the textbook definition of overthinking by reading and creating a spreadsheet to track every judge's score over all 57 previous rounds we've had, here is the scholarly conclusion of all my work:

Opinions and scores will vary by judge. Just have fun building something you're proud of.

That's my patented recipe for Iron Chef Success™. Of course, with a little dash of nutmeg. Oh no, now they know the secret to my madness brilliance!


And to all the judges of the last round I hope you know that I only did a dispute to add amusement while we waited. No hard feelings I hope. By the way who ate the ettin:smalltongue:

I'm glad it was amusing, but you may want to preface something like that with "This is not a dispute" in the future. Otherwise, the judges may take it in a more serious light than you intended. Also, I now realize where you got the inspiration to call me an ettin. I'm just glad it was Playground-based and not body-odor-based. *sniff* Right?

[dysprosium]

:smallfurious: Razzinfrazzin speculation, there goes my whole build for Quarterstaff Quincy!

Wait. You too?


Opinions and scores will vary by judge. Just have fun building something you're proud of.

Exactly this. There is no way to satisfy every possible judges' criteria. What one judge likes, another could despise.

[Kuulvheysoon]

Okay I think I will actually try to make a build for this once. Two questions though.

One: Is there someone I could forward my finished draft to to make sure I have the formatting right? I would hate to get marked down for something like that.

Toss it my way and I can check it out for you.

[AvatarVecna]

It would probably be safe to assume a CR appropriate encounter. That said, if you feel that fulfilling requirements only by the merest technicalities should warrant full marks, you might be disappointed with how a judge decides to score. Then again, depending on how it was done, the humor of the situation could be fantastic.

So...I should save the cockroach crusher for a joke entry. Got it!

[Tim Proctor]

One thing I learned during my time in Kitchen Stadium is that if you have an ingredient and there is a part to it, you're better off building on it rather than checking a box.

If you go through Ponies' sheets you'll see I had some horrible builds that scored super low, and then I decided that I was going to judge and I decided that I was going to judge the UotSI by aspects of the SI. When I did that when I was building, trying to expand on everything the SI does, I scored a lot higher almost universally. If you can take a SI and break it down thematically and mechanically and build on it, you'll be better off than going with a power build and throwing the SI in.

[sideswipe]

One thing I learned during my time in Kitchen Stadium is that if you have an ingredient and there is a part to it, you're better off building on it rather than checking a box.

If you go through Ponies' sheets you'll see I had some horrible builds that scored super low, and then I decided that I was going to judge and I decided that I was going to judge the UotSI by aspects of the SI. When I did that when I was building, trying to expand on everything the SI does, I scored a lot higher almost universally. If you can take a SI and break it down thematically and mechanically and build on it, you'll be better off than going with a power build and throwing the SI in.

thanks for the tip. i was going along those lines anyway, i have classes, feats and race... now just the easy part of spells and items :smallsigh:

[Kazudo]

Well I got an idea figured out. It's not amazing, it's probably not even good, but I'll submit it to have my name in the hat.

[dantiesilva]

thanks for the tip. i was going along those lines anyway, i have classes, feats and race... now just the easy part of spells and items :smallsigh:

Word of advice, do not go all out on items, you will lose points if it seems you rely on them. How I lost many points in this stadium before.

[sideswipe]

question about how we present it. do we need to spend the wealth by level each level and show it? or just pick a few levels (for example every 5) to show what equipment you have?

same with spells, do we need to show them breakdown level by level or just at the picked levels? i know that if we use a spontaneous caster with set spells known we have to show how many we have at each level but not for wizards and things. but what about the actual spells?


Word of advice, do not go all out on items, you will lose points if it seems you rely on them. How I lost many points in this stadium before.

thanks, i will most probably for the build i have only be using items to boost stats and other passive things, not for a ton of activated abilities.

[WhamBamSam]

One thing I learned during my time in Kitchen Stadium is that if you have an ingredient and there is a part to it, you're better off building on it rather than checking a box.

If you go through Ponies' sheets you'll see I had some horrible builds that scored super low, and then I decided that I was going to judge and I decided that I was going to judge the UotSI by aspects of the SI. When I did that when I was building, trying to expand on everything the SI does, I scored a lot higher almost universally. If you can take a SI and break it down thematically and mechanically and build on it, you'll be better off than going with a power build and throwing the SI in.Yeah. Both of my medaling entries used every part of the buffalo.

On a tangentially related note, I'm finding that various ideas that I had for this SI's abilities are diverging into different builds. I may have to double submit this round.

EDIT: You should only have a small list of items if you list any at all. I haven't been burned for item reliance the way others have, but I've seen it happen. Don't list out your whole WBL in gory detail.

[Amphetryon]

question about how we present it. do we need to spend the wealth by level each level and show it? or just pick a few levels (for example every 5) to show what equipment you have?

same with spells, do we need to show them breakdown level by level or just at the picked levels? i know that if we use a spontaneous caster with set spells known we have to show how many we have at each level but not for wizards and things. but what about the actual spells?

Emphasis on items is generally to your detriment, as it gives the impression that the items are the thing that makes your build go, rather than the SI, Skills, Feats, and other features less dependent upon the largess of a particular DM.

As evidenced by scores in the last round, indication of your chosen spells is often useful, giving the judges a better idea of how your build uses that particular Class feature to perform the role(s) you've envisioned.

[Deadline]

question about how we present it. do we need to spend the wealth by level each level and show it? or just pick a few levels (for example every 5) to show what equipment you have?

Actually, unless the equipment is somehow part of a new and groundbreaking trick, you're better off not including equipment at all.


same with spells, do we need to show them breakdown level by level or just at the picked levels? i know that if we use a spontaneous caster with set spells known we have to show how many we have at each level but not for wizards and things. but what about the actual spells?

Yes, spells known are going to be important. Specifically, showing what spells you have and why they enhance your build will be important.

[sideswipe]

just looked through a few of the last rounds entries and none have any items. so i can skip that :smallbiggrin: that just saved me 2+ hours of searching books lol

well just skills and spells then. and what type of way are we meant to calculate hit points? the min max method?

[Tim Proctor]

just looked through a few of the last rounds entries and none have any items. so i can skip that :smallbiggrin: that just saved me 2+ hours of searching books lol

well just skills and spells then. and what type of way are we meant to calculate hit points? the min max method?
Don't, just use the HD + Con bonus and leave it as a formula, or say max then average, lots of options and never seen anyone complain about any of them.

[Kazudo]

Don't, just use the HD + Con bonus and leave it as a formula, or say max then average, lots of options and never seen anyone complain about any of them.

Ah yes. Round LVIII. When the main sticking point was actually HP.

[DeAnno]

I wasn't able to find if this Iron Chef uses the "middle of level 20" or "bottom of level 20" setup with regards to XP. Do builds have any slush XP theoretically available for LA Buyoff, Necropolitan, crafting, XP Cost-ing spells, and so on?

[Kazudo]

THAT is actually a pretty major sticking point with some judges. Your BEST ABSOLUTE BET to avoid Elegance penalties is NOT to vary from the 190k EXP or so that you get for attaining 20th level. Including things like Necropolitan, LA Buyoff, Item Crafting, multiclass penalties, and XP spells.

Then, if they're still important to the build but not critical enough to cause it to fall apart, mention them in some kind of adaptations section. "If LA buyoff is allowed" "If you DO end up getting to 20th even after losing a level for necropolitan..." "Once you've filled in the XP gap for these spells and magic items should your DM allow..." etc.

[Deadline]

I wasn't able to find if this Iron Chef uses the "middle of level 20" or "bottom of level 20" setup with regards to XP. Do builds have any slush XP theoretically available for LA Buyoff, Necropolitan, crafting, XP Cost-ing spells, and so on?

As I understand it, you have just enough XP to get to level 20, and no more. So things like multiclass xp penalties can be a problem. And LA Buyoff is likely to get you a deduction in elegance. So you'll see builds that will simply eat the LA if that's what they want to take (and most of them will include a small section stating that if LA buyoff is allowed, they would take x, y, and z).

It certainly keeps things interesting.

[Secret Bard]

Oh wow, I had forgotten all about the multiclass xp penalty (my group just ignores that rule). I might have to change a few things.

[KrimsonNekros]

Build is coming along nicely for my main entry. Also got a rather humorous Idea involving a [redacted] that [redacted] and [redacted].

[Ikeren]

A fair number of judges only give a minor elegance penalty for multiclass exp penalty, since it's a pretty rarely used rule. On the other hand, I have seen a judge eviscerate builds for it, too, so...ymmv.

I think I'll be judging this, as all my builds come up too classic. I've got a couple sketches, but I don't like them.

Originality: 5 points: Of these 5 points, approximately half will be in relation to other builds in the competition, and approximately half will be in relation to the canon of optimization.

But a challenge here is that sometimes original things will be less powerful; sometimes the best known options are best known because they are powerful. Look for balance here, or a way to put in a particularly clever or original twist on a traditional option.

Power: 5 points, of which, half the score is raw power and half the score is versatility. Raw power more or less follows tiers, with 2.5 = Tier 1, 2.0 = Tier 2, 1.5 = Tier 3, 1.0 = Tier 4, and 0.5 = Tier 5 or lower, with exceptions for things that can clearly remove enemy NPC's at a rate of 1+/round. Versatility applies to in combat options (melee, ranged, casting, defense, offenses) and out of combat (skills, social encounter spells, crafting, transport, movement minigames). A character with a lot of power in one trick (an uber-charger, say) would score high for raw power (2.0) but lower for versatility (0.5 or 1) for a score of 2.5 or 3.0/5.

This competition will have the power scores shifted slightly lower; it will be slightly harder to get maximum scores on power, as the default "good" power option involves 7+ level arcane spells and 15+ BAB. (See my judging of the Mystic Theurge + Dragons Junkyard wars for similar "base power shifting")

Elegance: Mostly I'm looking for debated rulings, excessive dipping (2 or 3 dips is expected. 4+, less so), dropping casting progressions part of the way through, dropping prestige classes or base classes at atypical points, using variant rules or systems together (impulse boots to qualify for evasion), and exceptionally common cheese. Expect me to be more lenient in this category than the average judge

Use of Secret Ingredient: 5 points: Do you maximize use of the prestige class in question? Do you take advantage of each and every ability and the chasis, and find ways to augment those abilities to the max? Or is the prestige class tacked on, or just used for chasis augments and not special abilities?

[Gemini476]

Do note that multiclass XP penalty (-20% XP per offending class) is offset once you get down a level below the APL. You'll stabilize somewhere around one level lower than the rest of the party, I think. You might jump up and down a bit, but you won't really lose more than one level when compared to straight-classed characters past level five.

I'm currently working on a table, but it seems like you're only an encounter or two behind the rest of the party. It's almost like you had LA+1, in a way.

[AvatarVecna]

Do note that multiclass XP penalty (-20% XP per offending class) is offset once you get down a level below the APL. You'll stabilize somewhere around one level lower than the rest of the party, I think. You might jump up and down a bit, but you won't really lose more than one level when compared to straight-classed characters past level five.

I'm currently working on a table, but it seems like you're only an encounter or two behind the rest of the party. It's almost like you had LA+1, in a way.

The problem with multiclass penalty is that either the player whose character has it is going to be less effective (and will probably have less fun due to not shining as bright as everone else), or the DM has to build the encounters to make them more effective than normal; that means more work for the DM, and all that work is to ensure that the less impressive party member is consistently getting more time to shine than the rest.

[Vaz]

A Wizard 7 is better than Fighter 8. Effective is malleable. LA hurts melee more than CharOP would have you believe. You're a bruiser. Losing out on 2d12+10 HP is basically making you more susceptible to death one full attack earlier against basic mooks.

When a Caster can't reach 9th level spells due to LA it's like hearing a Premiership footballer whinge that they don't get paid enough to afford the latest model of Lamborghini.

[AvatarVecna]

A Wizard 7 is better than Fighter 8. Effective is malleable. LA hurts melee more than CharOP would have you believe. You're a bruiser. Losing out on 2d12+10 HP is basically making you more susceptible to death one full attack earlier against basic mooks.

When a Caster can't reach 9th level spells due to LA it's like hearing a Premiership footballer whinge that they don't get paid enough to afford the latest model of Lamborghini.

Is this about the multiclass penalty thing? If so, you're right, Wizard 7 is better than Fighter 8, but that's not what would happen.

If you were playing a Wizard 6, would you multiclass, or keep going Wizard? You'd only take another class if it was a wizard PrC you'd been aiming for, and multiclass penalty doesn't come up for you.

On the other hand, if you're a Fighter 6, you'd probably dip something to become more effective: Paladin for the Cha to saves, Barbarian for the rage, Rogue for Sneak Attack, etc. But then, in exchange for trying to make your brute more effective, you've gained a multiclass penalty.

Multiclass penalty is more likely to come up when someone tries to make a solid combat build, not a solid caster build, and that's because a straight caster is solid enough to not need a PrC or a dip. And as you mentioned, a warrior losing a level is a more significant hit to power than a caster losing a level.

[Amphetryon]

Is this about the multiclass penalty thing? If so, you're right, Wizard 7 is better than Fighter 8, but that's not what would happen.

If you were playing a Wizard 6, would you multiclass, or keep going Wizard? You'd only take another class if it was a wizard PrC you'd been aiming for, and multiclass penalty doesn't come up for you.

On the other hand, if you're a Fighter 6, you'd probably dip something to become more effective: Paladin for the Cha to saves, Barbarian for the rage, Rogue for Sneak Attack, etc. But then, in exchange for trying to make your brute more effective, you've gained a multiclass penalty.

Multiclass penalty is more likely to come up when someone tries to make a solid combat build, not a solid caster build, and that's because a straight caster is solid enough to not need a PrC or a dip. And as you mentioned, a warrior losing a level is a more significant hit to power than a caster losing a level.

There are plenty of Arcane Casting PrCs in 3.5 that are easiest to get into via a small dip into a different Base Class; in some of those cases, multiclass penalties would apply unless your FC came in to play or you chose your build order very carefully.

[Vaz]

Okay, Wizard 7/Fighter 1 versus Fighter 10/Barbarian 6/Paladin 4 etc. The point was raised it was similar to LA - which it is. You're a level behind where everyone else is. But whereas a Wizard can still make their Battlefield Controls, Summons, Polymorphs or whatnot. A Fighter not progressing their attack output being the only thing they can do seriously limits their power when monsters otherwise still scale.

Edit - I have a feeling that now Multiclass penalties will be very heavily checked over, if not penalised now.

[AvatarVecna]

Okay, Wizard 7/Fighter 1 versus Fighter 10/Barbarian 6/Paladin 4 etc. The point was raised it was similar to LA - which it is. You're a level behind where everyone else is. But whereas a Wizard can still make their Battlefield Controls, Summons, Polymorphs or whatnot. A Fighter not progressing their attack output being the only thing they can do seriously limits their power when monsters otherwise still scale.

Edit - I have a feeling that now Multiclass penalties will be very heavily checked over, if not penalised now.

Your point was that casters lose less from multiclassing than warriors. I'm not disagreeing with your point, because you're right. I'm saying it's worse than casters losing less. My point was that casters have less reason to multiclass than warriors.

[Tim Proctor]

Okay, Wizard 7/Fighter 1 versus Fighter 10/Barbarian 6/Paladin 4 etc. The point was raised it was similar to LA - which it is. You're a level behind where everyone else is. But whereas a Wizard can still make their Battlefield Controls, Summons, Polymorphs or whatnot. A Fighter not progressing their attack output being the only thing they can do seriously limits their power when monsters otherwise still scale.

Edit - I have a feeling that now Multiclass penalties will be very heavily checked over, if not penalised now.
We had this conversation last round, and it takes some math but if you break down the encounters and exp you can calculate how it effects builds and the level 4 penalty example (a 3/1 split) only costs a few fights in fact 2 more on most levels, if the penalty is resolved (3/2) then it only means for an additional fight per level for a few levels, but 5 fights and it's as if it never happened.

[AvatarVecna]

We had this conversation last round, and it takes some math but if you break down the encounters and exp you can calculate how it effects builds and the level 4 penalty example (a 3/1 split) only costs a few fights in fact 2 more on most levels, if the penalty is resolved (3/2) then it only means for an additional fight per level for a few levels, but 5 fights and it's as if it never happened.

That's only if it gets solved, and that's only if it's the easiest example to solve. The 8th level character who dips is in for a long slog to 15th level. The 3/1 who becomes a 4/1 and never fixes it still has to deal with the penalty. These examples, which are more common than the "3/1 to 3/2 and forever after solved" character you're holding up as the norm, still cause issues for whatever group they play in, unless the DM caves and says there's no multiclass penalties.

[Tim Proctor]

That's only if it gets solved, and that's only if it's the easiest example to solve. The 8th level character who dips is in for a long slog to 15th level. The 3/1 who becomes a 4/1 and never fixes it still has to deal with the penalty. These examples, which are more common than the "3/1 to 3/2 and forever after solved" character you're holding up as the norm, still cause issues for whatever group they play in, unless the DM caves and says there's no multiclass penalties.
I did say IF, but you still need to calculate the levels per encounter in order to understand how it effects the builed. It is also more complicated than that, which one is harder to kill a Vrock or an Erineyes? Isn't the CR system pretty much messed up as it is? To assume that once in a blue moon when a character fights a Vrock instead can't do much is horse hockey. A single CR generally doesn't make a big difference, furthermore when facing a ton of little ****s instead of a big creature 10 dire spiders instead of 8, the difference in power is fairly null.

I use the 3/x example because people do use it Skitters, Orion, and Delhdas, all went the 3/x route... I assume people do this because at 3 levels they usually wont get pinged for dipping, and the gain for power from another dip sometimes isn't enough to warrant points generally. But honestly regardless of motivations and example is hardly wrong when it illustrates the point.

[AvatarVecna]

I did say IF, but you still need to calculate the levels per encounter in order to understand how it effects the builed. It is also more complicated than that, which one is harder to kill a Vrock or an Erineyes? Isn't the CR system pretty much messed up as it is? To assume that once in a blue moon when a character fights a Vrock instead can't do much is horse hockey. A single CR generally doesn't make a big difference, furthermore when facing a ton of little ****s instead of a big creature 10 dire spiders instead of 8, the difference in power is fairly null.

I use the 3/x example because people do use it Skitters, Orion, and Delhdas, all went the 3/x route... I assume people do this because at 3 levels they usually wont get pinged for dipping, and the gain for power from another dip sometimes isn't enough to warrant points generally. But honestly regardless of motivations and example is hardly wrong when it illustrates the point.

You make a good point; the CR system is screwed, and a single CR doesn't make much difference. My issue is that the penalty either makes the DM work harder to work with the screwed up system, or work harder to work around it. It's not an issue for the players: they just see slightly tougher, but still manageable fights, or fights where their character is slightly more effective than they'd otherwise be. But it makes the DM's job harder; the xp system in 4e is one of the things that was done better than in 3.5 IMHO; it made it easier for the DM to build combat encounters. Of course, I also think 4e was too combat-focused, but that's getting awway fom the issue at hand.

Also (small nitpick) Orion didn't solve his issue: he was Factotum 8/Savant 1 and never solved it. The bigger issue was Steven: the 1/1/3 guy who never dealt with his 40% xp penalty.

[Amphetryon]

A fair number of judges only give a minor elegance penalty for multiclass exp penalty, since it's a pretty rarely used rule. On the other hand, I have seen a judge eviscerate builds for it, too, so...ymmv.

I think I'll be judging this, as all my builds come up too classic. I've got a couple sketches, but I don't like them.

Originality: 5 points: Of these 5 points, approximately half will be in relation to other builds in the competition, and approximately half will be in relation to the canon of optimization.

But a challenge here is that sometimes original things will be less powerful; sometimes the best known options are best known because they are powerful. Look for balance here, or a way to put in a particularly clever or original twist on a traditional option.

Power: 5 points, of which, half the score is raw power and half the score is versatility. Raw power more or less follows tiers, with 2.5 = Tier 1, 2.0 = Tier 2, 1.5 = Tier 3, 1.0 = Tier 4, and 0.5 = Tier 5 or lower, with exceptions for things that can clearly remove enemy NPC's at a rate of 1+/round. Versatility applies to in combat options (melee, ranged, casting, defense, offenses) and out of combat (skills, social encounter spells, crafting, transport, movement minigames). A character with a lot of power in one trick (an uber-charger, say) would score high for raw power (2.0) but lower for versatility (0.5 or 1) for a score of 2.5 or 3.0/5.

This competition will have the power scores shifted slightly lower; it will be slightly harder to get maximum scores on power, as the default "good" power option involves 7+ level arcane spells and 15+ BAB. (See my judging of the Mystic Theurge + Dragons Junkyard wars for similar "base power shifting")

Elegance: Mostly I'm looking for debated rulings, excessive dipping (2 or 3 dips is expected. 4+, less so), dropping casting progressions part of the way through, dropping prestige classes or base classes at atypical points, using variant rules or systems together (impulse boots to qualify for evasion), and exceptionally common cheese. Expect me to be more lenient in this category than the average judge

Use of Secret Ingredient: 5 points: Do you maximize use of the prestige class in question? Do you take advantage of each and every ability and the chasis, and find ways to augment those abilities to the max? Or is the prestige class tacked on, or just used for chasis augments and not special abilities?

As I asked the other judges who have come forward, I'll ask you, as well: Do you think that full marks will be possible within your scoring rubric, or will contestants need to choose which deductions they should expect to receive (for example, a given judge might perceive Originality and Elegance to be somewhat antithetical), based on adhering as closely as possible to your criteria?

[Ikeren]

In Zinc Saucier I said I wasn't sure.

For this competition, the answer is "Yes, but it would be to a build that is really perfect." If you go through previous competitions, judges very rarely give out perfect scores, and I'm no different. Is it hypothetically possible? Yes.

[Tim Proctor]

I believe the closest to a perfect build in this game was an average of 4.75 The Dark Fiddler's The Sacred Demon, followed closely by 4.625 w/ The Viscount's Bjorn Ioreksen and Venger's The Rag and Bone Man. All of those were with a single judge, the highest average with multiple judges is rockdeworld's Aelquis Kethten w/ an average of 4.46875. So perfection may not be an obtainable thing when multiple judges are involved, or even a single judge but it looks like it might be, I don't know if we'll ever see it but lets keep trying.

[Amphetryon]

I believe the closest to a perfect build in this game was an average of 4.75 The Dark Fiddler's The Sacred Demon, followed closely by 4.625 w/ The Viscount's Bjorn Ioreksen and Venger's The Rag and Bone Man. All of those were with a single judge, the highest average with multiple judges is rockdeworld's Aelquis Kethten w/ an average of 4.46875. So perfection may not be an obtainable thing when multiple judges are involved, or even a single judge but it looks like it might be, I don't know if we'll ever see it but lets keep trying.

I think there's probably some value in letting contestants - particularly newer contestants - know whether scoring 20 out of 20 (even with a single judge) is as likely as scoring 100% on a school exam, or as unlikely as beating Usain Bolt in a 100m dash.

[Tim Proctor]

I think there's probably some value in letting contestants - particularly newer contestants - know whether scoring 20 out of 20 (even with a single judge) is as likely as scoring 100% on a school exam, or as unlikely as beating Usain Bolt in a 100m dash.
Getting a 20 out of 20 is like having the perfect sound track on a road trip with a Priest, a Rabbi, and a Monk. You can make almost everyone happy most of the time, but it probably wont be perfect. If it's one person you can increase your odds, and for each person above 1 the odds get exponentially more difficult.

[Amphetryon]

Getting a 20 out of 20 is like having the perfect sound track on a road trip with a Priest, a Rabbi, and a Monk. You can make almost everyone happy most of the time, but it probably wont be perfect. If it's one person you can increase your odds, and for each person above 1 the odds get exponentially more difficult.

Given a general 'nerd culture' to D&D, which carries with it more than its fair share of (former) students who were taught to think of 95% as a failure, that's a valuable insight to carry into the competition.

[DeAnno]

Using too many sources may be an Elegance deduction at the judges' discretion, but a book's relative obscurity may not.

With a heavy spellcasting SI, it might be nice if the judges elaborated if they would rather see suggested spell lists dipping over all sorts of sources to pick up the exact optimal configurations, or if trying to keep spell sourcing under tighter control (at slight expense of power) is more advisable.

Basically, are elegance hits for using tons of sources going to happen, or should we go hog wild with spell lists?

[Tim Proctor]

Basically, are elegance hits for using tons of sources going to happen, or should we go hog wild with spell lists?
Elegance hits will happen almost no matter what, just build what you think is a good fun build, if you can keep from book jumping too much you should be fine. Your best bet is to look at previous rounds and how they were judged.

The better question is how many sources are too many. My cutoff is when a source list looks like Stephen King's bibliography, or another unannounced number.

[Piggy Knowles]

I believe the closest to a perfect build in this game was an average of 4.75 The Dark Fiddler's The Sacred Demon, followed closely by 4.625 w/ The Viscount's Bjorn Ioreksen and Venger's The Rag and Bone Man. All of those were with a single judge, the highest average with multiple judges is rockdeworld's Aelquis Kethten w/ an average of 4.46875. So perfection may not be an obtainable thing when multiple judges are involved, or even a single judge but it looks like it might be, I don't know if we'll ever see it but lets keep trying.

If you're counting scores by a single judge, then there are a few others that have hit the 4.75 mark, and there are even a couple of perfect 20s, including TheGildedDuke's Spoons McGee (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=9940342&postcount=171) and my own Parsifal the Fool (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=13633110&postcount=140).

That said, it has been almost two years since we've seen a perfect 20, and I'd be curious to know how either build would fare score-wise under more current judging rubrics.

(Don't get me wrong - I think perfect 20s should be rare. But I do think that, as the contest has evolved, judging styles have changed considerably, and I'd like to know how some of the classic IC builds would hold up these days.)

[WhamBamSam]

The prereqs for this are tougher than you'd think. Still, I've got both my build ideas down to a decision between two stubs (so four stubs that I'm deciding between total). I'll go over the feats sometime tonight and come to my final decisions. I've got a good feeling about this round.

[Kazudo]

I have begun to Vizzini myself too hard. I'm just gonna write it up and send it in. After all, I did say I'd be submitting the mediocre build this round.

It's a tough job, but someone has to do it.

[Virdish]

I've got a build in mind that I don't think anyone will see coming but the problem is going to come up with those 5 uses of arcane channel per day. I could always use redacted but that might shift the focus away from the si.

Short version; hoping to enter.

[Tim Proctor]

If you're counting scores by a single judge, then there are a few others that have hit the 4.75 mark, and there are even a couple of perfect 20s, including TheGildedDuke's Spoons McGee (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=9940342&postcount=171) and my own Parsifal the Fool (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=13633110&postcount=140).

That said, it has been almost two years since we've seen a perfect 20, and I'd be curious to know how either build would fare score-wise under more current judging rubrics.

(Don't get me wrong - I think perfect 20s should be rare. But I do think that, as the contest has evolved, judging styles have changed considerably, and I'd like to know how some of the classic IC builds would hold up these days.)
Yeah, that's why I mentioned them. I only went down the Overall Order section, and those rounds only had a single judge, that's why I wanted to list the best build with more than one judge. Looking at the build with the best and three judges would be cool, but it's hard for me to search on the google doc.


I have begun to Vizzini myself too hard. I'm just gonna write it up and send it in. After all, I did say I'd be submitting the mediocre build this round.

It's a tough job, but someone has to do it.
Last round I assumed Adlib would be an expected build, but I figured everyone would Vizzini themselves and I'd be in the clear. I was partially right.

[WhamBamSam]

I have begun to Vizzini myself too hard. I'm just gonna write it up and send it in. After all, I did say I'd be submitting the mediocre build this round.

It's a tough job, but someone has to do it.One of my builds involves things which are bringing out the Vizzini in me, but I'll submit it anyway. Even if other people use it, that build will just drive down their Originality scores so my other build can place higher.:smalltongue:

[Kazudo]

Competitive Vizzini-ing. I like your style, WhamBamSam.

[Ikeren]

Since agreeing to judge, I've come up with builds who's originality I actually like and power I'm actually fine with. Oh well. Hopefully others go the same route.

[Tim Proctor]

Since agreeing to judge, I've come up with builds who's originality I actually like and power I'm actually fine with. Oh well. Hopefully others go the same route.
There isn't a shortage of judges this round, if you want to compete I say go for it, do what is most fun.

[Piggy Knowles]

Oddly enough, I have two builds that do more or less the exact same trick, and hit the exact same benchmarks, but which do it in very different ways. Have to give some thought to which one is best.

[KrimsonNekros]

I have begun to Vizzini myself too hard. I'm just gonna write it up and send it in. After all, I did say I'd be submitting the mediocre build this round.

It's a tough job, but someone has to do it.

Am I the only one who says frell it and just builds to the first idea that come into their head?

[AvatarVecna]

Am I the only one who says frell it and just builds to the first idea that come into their head?

I can't speak for everyone, but in the rounds I've played (and the past rounds I've tried to think of what I would've done), due to the anonymity of the contest, the only person I can really compete with is myself. And that's not my saying I'm so awesome, no one else can really compete with me; I'm saying I can't look at my competitor's dishes and think "how can I outdo that?", but I can do that to my own builds. And it can be maddening to fall short of my own standards over and over. I'd never submit the first idea I had, because it was incredibly boring (by my standards) and was weak sauce to boot.

[Ikeren]

There isn't a shortage of judges this round, if you want to compete I say go for it, do what is most fun.

I'll probably just chart a build and submit it with my judging like I sometimes do.

[Kazudo]

I typically do this, however as a perfectionist who's been hit for being inattentive I'm trying to make sure the build is long enough to be tasteful but short enough to be comfortable and just the right color to attract attention while not being flashy enough to upstage anyone of importance.

You know, like an old fashioned men's kimono. :smalltongue:

[sakuuya]

The Spellsword's spell list includes "Knowledge (Int)." Should we take that to mean "Knowledge (all skills, taken individually)" like a Wizard has, or in some other way?

[Silva Stormrage]

Am I the only one who says frell it and just builds to the first idea that come into their head?

Well this is my first Iron Chef but thats what I did. I thought of a (Hopefully) unique way of using the SI and just went with it :smalltongue:

[WhamBamSam]

Well, one of my builds doesn't work on a closer reading of Spellsword, but it led me to another idea which might still work out. My first idea is plotted out more or less to my satisfaction.

[sideswipe]

hmmmm.... i originally had a perfectly elegant build. literally nothing i could think of would have been able to deduct from it. but its power was extremely low.

now i look at my build and it looks nothing like it.

[Vaz]

That is why I am not a fan of scoring charts going up. I'd like to say "ever", but I'll stick with "before the reveal". It encourages people to build to the judges idea of a build.

Just build what you want.

[WhamBamSam]

That is why I am not a fan of scoring charts going up. I'd like to say "ever", but I'll stick with "before the reveal". It encourages people to build to the judges idea of a build.

Just build what you want.I do it as a courtesy when I'm planning on judging, because some people like to see it, but I personally don't really look at judging criteria until after the reveal.

EDIT: Scrubbed possible speculation.

[Piggy Knowles]

WhamBamSam: Might be a good question to PM the chair, since some builds may have aspects of them that rely on the answer...

[WhamBamSam]

WhamBamSam: Might be a good question to PM the chair, since some builds may have aspects of them that rely on the answer...I PMed him at least part of the question last night, but haven't heard back from him yet, but I'll scrub it and send another PM to cut down on speculation.

[Piggy Knowles]

Blargh, this is my first time building since the forum change. Just when I had the old format down by heart, I get to learn a whole new kind. Ah, well, c'est la vie...

[The Viscount]

Am I the only one who says frell it and just builds to the first idea that come into their head?

I do often build with my gut reaction, but my gut reaction is usually another PrC idea, which makes Vizzini'ing less likely unless it is very well known or stacks very obviously. I then usually build from there so the base class fullfills both requirements. Then again, there are sometimes rounds when nothing jumps out and you have to force something to work (like in Cipher Adept).

[Kuulvheysoon]

WhamBamSam, going through my inbox now with my copy of Complete Warrior beside me.

And to those who've asked me in PMs - yes, the tables look funny. It was a forum update (that was apparently necessary), and they hope to have it fixed soon. The code is correct, so you don't need to worry about that.

EDIT: Look to the FAQs: I added a new question onto there, as there's been questions from multiple competitors concerning it.

[Biotroll]

Finaly having free time and checking on IC.
Already had few ideas and one that was very much "yes, yes, YES"! It turned to be "wait, this won't work" with a bit of "well, but if I do this then..." and ended up as "so, why am I picking levels in SI again?". :smallsigh: Hopefuly I will get some other idea that actualy works before I ran out of time.

[Silva Stormrage]

Huh, question. If some of the build requires a particular item does that get the build knocked down? Even if the character can in fact craft the item? I just don't see any of the previous builds mentioning items anywhere.

[Amphetryon]

Huh, question. If some of the build requires a particular item does that get the build knocked down? Even if the character can in fact craft the item? I just don't see any of the previous builds mentioning items anywhere.

As I believe was mentioned earlier in this thread, reliance on items is generally, but not universally, frowned upon by Iron Chef judges.

[OMG PONIES]

Awful quiet around these parts...which obviously means everyone is building the same thing as me! Quick, panic!

EDIT: Did we ever determine whether or not the Kingdoms of Kalamar Campaign Setting is fair game for this competition? It's got the "Licensed Product" stamp, but I didn't know if that was enough.

[FireJustice]

from the FAQ
"Materials from Ravenloft, Planescape, Dark Sun, and Kingdoms of Kalamar are considered 3rd party for purposes of this contest, and are therefore not allowed."

Anyway, trying to whip a build and make my first submit, but this SI is a hard one

[Tim Proctor]

from the FAQ
"Materials from Ravenloft, Planescape, Dark Sun, and Kingdoms of Kalamar are considered 3rd party for purposes of this contest, and are therefore not allowed."

Anyway, trying to whip a build and make my first submit, but this SI is a hard one
Yeah, we know what the FAQs say, but we had a conversation a while back that yielded different results. Expedition to Castle Ravenloft is certainly a prime example, because it bears thw Wizards logo and has Habro copyright info. The last conversation IIRC ended up that if it bore the logo and had Wizards/Hasbro copyright info it would be allowed.

[Vincent Dragon]

Yeah, we know what the FAQs say, but we had a conversation a while back that yielded different results. Expedition to Castle Ravenloft is certainly a prime example, because it bears thw Wizards logo and has Habro copyright info. The last conversation IIRC ended up that if it bore the logo and had Wizards/Hasbro copyright info it would be allowed.

What about Dragon Magazines?

I know they aren't current available, but would DMs fit into such rules of possible allowance in the future?

[Deadline]

What about Dragon Magazines?

I know they aren't current available, but would DMs fit into such rules of possible allowance in the future?

The ruling on those was pretty clear - no. However, the Dragon Magazine Compendium is fair game.

[OMG PONIES]

The ruling on those was pretty clear - no. However, the Dragon Magazine Compendium is fair game.

That's the part that stymies me, thought--KoK has just as much licensing clout as the DMC, but one's not allowed and the other is. If that's how we're decided, I'm happy to stick with it, though.

[Piggy Knowles]

Eh, I'd rather not see KoK. There is a lot of insanely broken content, even by 3.5 standards. A fourth level spell that is basically a short duration Ice Assassin with no XP or expensive components? Yeah, ok, great idea. A +4 metamagic feat that removes a spell's saving throw? Great idea, guys. How about a first level spell that produces an AMF? And that's just the tip of the iceberg, in just the main book alone. Isn't one of the Kalamar books responsible for the travesty that is the anti-feat?

Third party books just weren't given even the limited scrutiny that first party books received, even if they did get the official stamp from WotC.

Then again, I'm also curmudgeonly and would have preferred to not see the Dragon Compendium allowed, so please feel free to take this all with a grain of salt.

[Tim Proctor]

Eh, I'd rather not see KoK. There is a lot of insanely broken content, even by 3.5 standards. A fourth level spell that is basically a short duration Ice Assassin with no XP or expensive components? Yeah, ok, great idea. A +4 metamagic feat that removes a spell's saving throw? Great idea, guys. How about a first level spell that produces an AMF? And that's just the tip of the iceberg, in just the main book alone. Isn't one of the Kalamar books responsible for the travesty that is the anti-feat?

Third party books just weren't given even the limited scrutiny that first party books received, even if they did get the official stamp from WotC.

Then again, I'm also curmudgeonly and would have preferred to not see the Dragon Compendium allowed, so please feel free to take this all with a grain of salt.
Are you saying you don't love the KoK, cause I'm a serious KoK fiend.

[Piggy Knowles]

I own two KoK books and enjoy the fluff, but I think a lot of the crunch is really poorly written.

[WhamBamSam]

That's the part that stymies me, thought--KoK has just as much licensing clout as the DMC, but one's not allowed and the other is. If that's how we're decided, I'm happy to stick with it, though.According to someone in the fey summoning thread, KoK's licencing came from a legal struggle with WotC, rather than being licensed willingly like DMC and Dragon Magazine. That's something, if it's in fact true. (EDIT: That someone was apparently dysprosium. I was reading the other thread on my phone earlier and didn't have the avatar to go by.)

Anyhow, both of my builds are more or less good to go. Now I've just got to get around to writing them up.

[Vaz]

As ever, I am in favour of more stuff to use (although I'd prefer Rokugan- or even both, then I can attempt to Rok out with my KoK out).

The presence of broken stuff tends to be self regulating. We don't see abuse of things like UrPriest or other CharOp tricks.

[Ikeren]

Yeah, even someone as staunchly pro-power optimization as me isn't going to give bonus points for a druid build that tags on "Oh yeah, since KoK is now allowed (if it was), Venomfire on a magebred fleshraker."

[Piggy Knowles]

As ever, I am in favour of more stuff to use (although I'd prefer Rokugan- or even both, then I can attempt to Rok out with my KoK out).

The presence of broken stuff tends to be self regulating. We don't see abuse of things like UrPriest or other CharOp tricks.

Eh, the cynical part of me expects that KoK would feel "new" enough that people will want to flex a bit by showing them off - despite the fact that they're not actually new, just largely ignored because of the dubiousness of the source material. And as for broken stuff self-regulating, there have been at least 8 Ur-Priests in Iron Chef, and we've seen everything from infinite stacking of Incarnate/Dustform templates to unfinished ghost savage progressions to Shadowcraft Mage shenanigans to simulacrum abuse, plus a lot more I'm forgetting. I'm not sure we're quite as immune to CharOp tricks as you think.

Not that I'm opposed to CharOp tricks, mind. But the sloppiness of much of KoK's crunch bothers me. For all that I dig on Wizards for sloppy editing or failing to think things through, their stuff is miles ahead of even the best third party options.

[Vaz]

I can count two of those that I have done XD.

Infinite strength from incarnate/dustform template stacking was from my second entry, I think, and a build that was rightly tanked for lack of uosi, elegance and, funnily enough, power (all i could so was throw force javelins hard), and originality by some (precisely because they did not expect such Shenanigans for that entry), and i believe one quote was that it 'was everything that IC wasn't', possibly paraphrased.

The Simulacrum abuse, if it was what i'm thinking of was gained from mirror mephit SLA. Being fair, i used Simulacrum to make spies of ordinary commoners rather than getting componentless efreeti under my control).

I like to think I'm a bit less open for cheese - as well as the majority of Ur Priest from what I recall being fairly early on in the Entropomancer, and current judging trends, wouldbsee heavy penalising.

At the end of the day, it is a charop comp, but it doesn't actively do so well with known charop tricks.

I mean look at Old lob. Fantastic as it is, despite the weresnow spider entomanothrope and its theme, its power and elegance would struggle in todays judging.

[Piggy Knowles]

You're not the only guilty party on any of those, Vaz - I wasn't trying to call you out in particular. There have been at least two Incarnate/Dustform abusers that I know of, and three or four Simulacrum abusers. Heck, I've got a few offenders in there myself, including Ur-Priest, Fiend of Possession and a nasty little artificer build in the Geomancer competition.

Like I said, I'm not necessarily opposed to cheese in a dish, but it has to be appropriate to the dish itself. To keep the cooking analogy, if I'm making an orecchiette con cime di rapa, some freshly grated romano can help bind the sauce and add an extra savory note to the dish, while throwing a bunch of cheddar on top with nothing to tie it to the dish in question will be kind of gross despite the fact that I happen to like cheddar.

[Darrin]

According to someone in the fey summoning thread, KoK's licencing came from a legal struggle with WotC, rather than being licensed willingly like DMC and Dragon Magazine. That's something, if it's in fact true. (EDIT: That someone was apparently dysprosium. I was reading the other thread on my phone earlier and didn't have the avatar to go by.)

It was part of a legal settlement, so WotC was willing to settle with Kenzer & Co. David Kenzer actually had them dead to rights and was doing them a favor by letting them off so easy. As far as I am aware, both parties were very amicable about the settlement, and Kenzer was able to turn Hackmaster from a running gag into an actual full-blown RPG.

The problem with Kalamar is that although they have the 1st party logo and the legal rights to it, the actual book was printed by Kenzer & Co. and WotC had very little (if any) editorial control over the content. If your IC criteria is 1) must have 1st party logo and 2) must be printed by WotC, then Dragon Compendium satisfies both, while Kalamar falls short on #2.

[Amphetryon]

I mean look at Old lob. Fantastic as it is, despite the weresnow spider entomanothrope and its theme, its power and elegance would struggle in todays judging.

The observation that previously celebrated builds would do poorly within current scoring rubrics was made (by me) a couple of years ago, as I recall.

[AvatarVecna]

I'm gonna have to drop out of this one. I've only found a few interesting mechanical exploits, Spellsword doesn't easily lend itself to a particular mindset (which is how I figure out what kind of character would take it), the stubs I've come up with are boring and predictable, and the Spellsword is a terrible gish class with one redeeming feature (Channel Spell) that's too limited in uses/day to be killer.

Gah! I don't like the Spellsword. I hope someone else found something enjoyable to do with it, at least.

[WhamBamSam]

Yeah, even someone as staunchly pro-power optimization as me isn't going to give bonus points for a druid build that tags on "Oh yeah, since KoK is now allowed (if it was), Venomfire on a magebred fleshraker."Venomfire is in Serpent Kingdoms. It could totally appear in any given IC round. Or did you mean there's something in KoK that lets you use templated animal companions?


It was part of a legal settlement, so WotC was willing to settle with Kenzer & Co. David Kenzer actually had them dead to rights and was doing them a favor by letting them off so easy. As far as I am aware, both parties were very amicable about the settlement, and Kenzer was able to turn Hackmaster from a running gag into an actual full-blown RPG.

The problem with Kalamar is that although they have the 1st party logo and the legal rights to it, the actual book was printed by Kenzer & Co. and WotC had very little (if any) editorial control over the content. If your IC criteria is 1) must have 1st party logo and 2) must be printed by WotC, then Dragon Compendium satisfies both, while Kalamar falls short on #2.Ah. That's an informative explanation, and a pretty reasonable one. Thank you.

[Wacky89]

I just pmed a character for this challenge.

Reliance of special sites to get feats. Is that frowned upon aswell? Because then I'm gonna change the character abit so it doesnt rely on it.

[Piggy Knowles]

I just pmed a character for this challenge.

Reliance of special sites to get feats. Is that frowned upon aswell? Because then I'm gonna change the character abit so it doesnt rely on it.

Depends on the judge. Some have penalized it, under the justification that they're not available in all campaigns. Others don't mind, as long as you're not doing something cheesy like jumping in an Otyugh Hole, chaos shuffling the feat away, and repeating the process indefinitely.

[Wacky89]

Depends on the judge. Some have penalized it, under the justification that they're not available in all campaigns. Others don't mind, as long as you're not doing something cheesy like jumping in an Otyugh Hole, chaos shuffling the feat away, and repeating the process indefinitely.

alright then I should be okay.

[Vaz]

Might want to edit that out - The competition has been based around anonymity, and we're so awesome/sad that we are pretty much capable of guessing which build yours is just from that.

[OMG PONIES]

It was part of a legal settlement, so WotC was willing to settle with Kenzer & Co. David Kenzer actually had them dead to rights and was doing them a favor by letting them off so easy. As far as I am aware, both parties were very amicable about the settlement, and Kenzer was able to turn Hackmaster from a running gag into an actual full-blown RPG.

Very interesting. Thanks for the background!


The problem with Kalamar is that although they have the 1st party logo and the legal rights to it, the actual book was printed by Kenzer & Co. and WotC had very little (if any) editorial control over the content. If your IC criteria is 1) must have 1st party logo and 2) must be printed by WotC, then Dragon Compendium satisfies both, while Kalamar falls short on #2.

I'm confused; wasn't DMC printed by Paizo? Or is it some weird situation where Wizards printed it and Paizo just published it? :smallconfused:

[Darrin]

I'm confused; wasn't DMC printed by Paizo? Or is it some weird situation where Wizards printed it and Paizo just published it? :smallconfused:

You may have a point there, but I'm AFB at the moment. Amazon says Paizo is the publisher, but I don't know if they were printing any other hardbacks at that point. I don't recall the specifics on the copyright page.

[Ikeren]

Venomfire is in Serpent Kingdoms. It could totally appear in any given IC round. Or did you mean there's something in KoK that lets you use templated animal companions?

And I thought Serpent Kingdoms was part of the KOK series. It seems I am wrong.

[Vaz]

Yup. SK (or that Pun-Pun book) is one of the reasons that Faerun is considered to be the most broken setting.

[Hand_of_Vecna]

I'm gonna have to drop out of this one. I've only found a few interesting mechanical exploits, Spellsword doesn't easily lend itself to a particular mindset (which is how I figure out what kind of character would take it), the stubs I've come up with are boring and predictable, and the Spellsword is a terrible gish class with one redeeming feature (Channel Spell) that's too limited in uses/day to be killer.

Gah! I don't like the Spellsword. I hope someone else found something enjoyable to do with it, at least.

I'm considering an entry, but have similar feelings. Basically I don't want to just toss an awesome backstory on something that would be fine if it had just been a Duskblade instead.

For me it comes down to wether I can find a few spells to channel that synergize with a mundane combat style that would make my build better at that style than a duskblade could dream of being.

[Vincent Dragon]

The problem with Kalamar is that although they have the 1st party logo and the legal rights to it, the actual book was printed by Kenzer & Co. and WotC had very little (if any) editorial control over the content. If your IC criteria is 1) must have 1st party logo and 2) must be printed by WotC, then Dragon Compendium satisfies both, while Kalamar falls short on #2.

Doesn't Dragon Magazine satisfies both criterias too? If it is that so why DM aren't allowed on Iron Chef?

[AvatarVecna]

I've worked through a few backstories so far, and I keep coming back to one point of my personal criteria that I can't fit: why is Spellsword the best option for this character, given their mindset? This wasn't an issue in Dwarven Defender: sure, it sucks, but there's a mindset to the fighting style that's easy to understand and write, as shown with the 21 entries that contest dealt with. This? This is a primary caster who decided that the most efficient path to power was to cripple their spellcasting in exchange for increasing their pathetic martial prowess.

[Amphetryon]

Doesn't Dragon Magazine satisfies both criterias too? If it is that so why DM aren't allowed on Iron Chef?

Dragon Magazine was published by Paizo, for WotC. This is a significant factor in how Pathfinder became a thing.

[Muggins]

I've worked through a few backstories so far, and I keep coming back to one point of my personal criteria that I can't fit: why is Spellsword the best option for this character, given their mindset? This wasn't an issue in Dwarven Defender: sure, it sucks, but there's a mindset to the fighting style that's easy to understand and write, as shown with the 21 entries that contest dealt with. This? This is a primary caster who decided that the most efficient path to power was to cripple their spellcasting in exchange for increasing their pathetic martial prowess.
Obviously you just need to ignore the fact that Duskblade exists. I find that the easiest way to do so is to chain Time Regressions back to April, 2006. :smallwink:

[Hand_of_Vecna]

Obviously you just need to ignore the fact that Duskblade exists. I find that the easiest way to do so is to chain Time Regressions back to April, 2006. :smallwink:

You're welcome to do that, somebody may very well win this competition with a build that "should" have Duskblade levels. However it just doesn't sit well with some people.

[Tim Proctor]

I am sure that I share this opinion with the Chair, most the Judges, and most the Contestants... 'screw other people, and what does or doesn't sit with them'. Build something that you like and think is fun, don't build something simply because you think other people will want it.

[Tim Proctor]

I am sure that I share this opinion with the Chair, most the Judges, and most the Contestants... 'screw other people, and what does or doesn't sit with them'. Build something that you like and think is fun, don't build something simply because you think other people will want it.

[dysprosium]

I did bring up the Kingdoms of Kalamar settlement issue in another thread but Darrin was able to expand on it there as well as here with all of the specific information that I did not know.

From what I understand, the Dragon Magazine Compendium had WotC editing which is why it is allowed versus individual issues. The classic articles section in the Compendium is almost completely drawn from Dragon Magazines from 1st edition and when TSR published Dragon.

Expedition to Castle Ravenloft is perfectly legal for Iron Chef as it is a WotC printed adventure. I think we have had Knights of the Raven entries in Iron Chef. Outside of this one adventure, Ravenloft had not been part of the officially licensed WotC settings. Thus the Ravenloft Campaign Setting is not legal; it was printed by Sword and Sorcery.

The Dragonlance Campaign Setting is considered first party and legal for Iron Chef. None of the subsequent books are allowed as they are third party.

[Deadline]

You're welcome to do that, somebody may very well win this competition with a build that "should" have Duskblade levels. However it just doesn't sit well with some people.

My general rule of thumb for these competitions has been "If it would be better to just keep taking more levels of X, then I shouldn't take ANY levels of X, and should find another way." That way I restrict myself to finding niche uses of the SI that are reasonable and potent.

At this point in my build, I'm stuck with using [Redacted] for a penalty, or not using every part of the buffalo for a penalty. Now it's just time to figure out which one feels more appropriate.

[Amphetryon]

You're welcome to do that, somebody may very well win this competition with a build that "should" have Duskblade levels. However it just doesn't sit well with some people.

Given the number of Base Classes & PrCs from which we can draw in 3.5, the number of actually unique features presented among those Classes, and the general emphasis in Iron Chef on picking sub-par PrCs as the main course, applying "why didn't you use [X] instead?" could ultimately justify penalizing every IC build ever submitted. Thankfully, we've thus far avoided that level of armchair-quarterbacking from the judges.

[Deadline]

Given the number of Base Classes & PrCs from which we can draw in 3.5, the number of actually unique features presented among those Classes, and the general emphasis in Iron Chef on picking sub-par PrCs as the main course, applying "why didn't you use [X] instead?" could ultimately justify penalizing every IC build ever submitted. Thankfully, we've thus far avoided that level of armchair-quarterbacking from the judges.

Right, there's no need to penalize someone for, say, not taking any levels of Duskblade in this round. However, if you were to take Duskblade levels, THAT would prompt me to ask, "why didn't you just take more Duskblade?" Essentially, if you include it in your build, you include it in my consideration.

I'm not judging this round though, I'm definitely cooking.

[dysprosium]

I am having way more trouble putting a build together than I thought I would.

Two ideas. Two different approaches. But I'm not loving either one.

[OMG PONIES]

screw other people

Hey now, this is a family show! :smalltongue:

[Kazudo]

Hey now, this is a family show! :smalltongue:

Well, scratch that build then. :smalleek:

[Vaz]

I'm considering an entry, but have similar feelings. Basically I don't want to just toss an awesome backstory on something that would be fine if it had just been a Duskblade instead.

For me it comes down to wether I can find a few spells to channel that synergize with a mundane combat style that would make my build better at that style than a duskblade could dream of being.

Don't want to give the game away too much, but have a read through Spell Channel. It's a bit different than duskblade.

[sideswipe]

Don't want to give the game away too much, but have a read through Spell Channel. It's a bit different than duskblade.

yes it is, and that difference when read can be important rules wise.

[FireJustice]

Not enought feats...
Trying my harders to stay away from one flaw.

But the build is almost done

[Tim Proctor]

Not enought feats...
Trying my harders to stay away from one flaw.

But the build is almost donehttp://fciwypsc.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/its-a-trap.jpg

[Southern Cross]

Level
Class
Base Attack Bonus
Fort Save
Ref Save
Will Save
Skills
Feats
Class Features


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


20th
New Class Level
+x
+x
+x
+x
Skills
Feats
New Class Abilities

[Piggy Knowles]

Build is submitted. I feel like it has been ages since I've competed! Mr. Chairman, I sent you two PMs - can you confirm that you received both when you get the chance?

[Irk]

I said I would compete and I had my build laid out by the first day, but I neglected to type anything :smalleek:. We'll see if I can enter something, I've still got time.

[Piggy Knowles]

I actually put together a second build stub that I'm pretty amused by, but I don't think I'll put it together into a real entry. I just don't have the heart to work out another full write-up, figure out fluff, et al. I'll post the idea after the reveal.

[Irk]

I actually put together a second build stub that I'm pretty amused by, but I don't think I'll put it together into a real entry. I just don't have the heart to work out another full write-up, figure out fluff, et al. I'll post the idea after the reveal.
Awesome, can't wait to see it. This is actually a really neat ingredient, I think.

[Irk]

Sorry for the double post, but I was wondering what the current judges thought about LA buyoff? Will it be frowned upon? Should it be included as a variant? Should I not ask questions like this and just make my build?

[Tim Proctor]

I am not answering specific questions about scores, I wouldn't suggest that you build around anything that you think it isn't super cool.

[Irk]

I wouldn't suggest that you build around anything that you think it is super cool.
Heh, good advice.

[Kreuz]

I usually juggle ideas until the last day, rush to write, and end up never completing the table and missing the deadline.

Now that the forum code for tables has changed, I came up with a code generator, based in the post Southern Cross made with the new table.

The generation program is less than optimized, but it's been years since I programmed anything. I made sure to pretty it up a little, though :smallwink:

I couldn't find a way to upload files here, so here's the mediafire link:

Iron Chef Class Table Format Generator (http://www.mediafire.com/download/vtmdmy0fglo0jda/Iron+Chef+Class+Table+Format.html)

It is a standalone HTML file; at first I wanted to make an executable, but I always end up with library problems with those. Hope it is useful for the Chefs.

[Irk]

I usually juggle ideas until the last day, rush to write, and end up never completing the table and missing the deadline.

Now that the forum code for tables has changed, I came up with a code generator, based in the post Southern Cross made with the new table.

The generation program is less than optimized, but it's been years since I programmed anything. I made sure to pretty it up a little, though :smallwink:

I couldn't find a way to upload files here, so here's the mediafire link:

Iron Chef Class Table Format Generator (http://www.mediafire.com/download/vtmdmy0fglo0jda/Iron+Chef+Class+Table+Format.html)

It is a standalone HTML file; at first I wanted to make an executable, but I always end up with library problems with those. Hope it is useful for the Chefs.
You are literally a god. this ought to be included in every competition.

[OMG PONIES]

You are literally a god.

Literally? :smallconfused: Which domains does he grant? :smalltongue:

[sideswipe]

Literally? :smallconfused: Which domains does he grant? :smalltongue:

Community Domain
Competition Domain
Creation Domain

:smallwink:

[Kreuz]

I don't know... is there a domain that encompasses lazyness, productivity and procrastination?

[sideswipe]

I don't know... is there a domain that encompasses lazyness, productivity and procrastination?

that is the sideswipe domain. granted power - 0/day you have infinite power and drive to do something great. but you know exactly how to do it! this may not be enchanced by any means.

spells .... meh

[The Viscount]

Sloth Domain, which has the domain power of negating penalty to AC for melee while prone. Honest truth.

[Irk]

Literally? :smallconfused: Which domains does he grant? :smalltongue:
Not sure, all of my ranks are in Craft (basketweaving), I neglected Knowledge(religion).:smalltongue:

[Kazudo]

The general consensus is that LA Buyoff is somewhat unfair due to granting you additional XP (if you look at it that way). Your best bet is to craft your build as though it weren't an option, then include a version in an "adaptations" section in your build which remarks on what should change if LA Buyoff is allowed at a given scenario.

[Vaz]

I think I've possibly got one of my best fluff ideas for a build so far. I'm really enjoying writing this one up. I have a few other ideas, unlikely I'll get further than stub phase.

[Deadline]

I figured out a way to make my initial idea work (albeit slightly less neatly), so now I just need to hurry up.

[Kazudo]

Mine's somewhat done but I can't seem to get it written up all the way. For some reason my give-a-crapometer is registering about a 4 craps/hour these days. I used to be able to pull off 20-30 cph.

*sigh* maybe I need my crapurator replaced.

[sideswipe]

Mine's somewhat done but I can't seem to get it written up all the way. For some reason my give-a-crapometer is registering about a 4 craps/hour these days. I used to be able to pull off 20-30 cph.

*sigh* maybe I need my crapurator replaced.

yeh i know how you feel.

though since this is my first time cooking i am taking a very long time doing everything.


just to double check we have another 31 hours right?

[Deadline]

Mine's somewhat done but I can't seem to get it written up all the way. For some reason my give-a-crapometer is registering about a 4 craps/hour these days. I used to be able to pull off 20-30 cph.

*sigh* maybe I need my crapurator replaced.

Do what you love man, don't force it. Also, they fewer people who enter this round, the better my chances of scoring well. :smallbiggrin:

[dysprosium]

I can relate about crapometers. A terrible weekend has done plenty of damage to my psyche.

Maybe I will get it done in time--if not I'll post the idea after the reveal. If I don't get an entry submitted in time, I hope I can find the time to judge.

[Kazudo]

Do what you love man, don't force it. Also, they fewer people who enter this round, the better my chances of scoring 4th. :smallbiggrin:

fixed that for you. :smalltongue:

[Sian]

yeah ... while i had a fair few ideas about how to build it there is two big issues i have with the SI this time around ... its hard to make something that aren't plausible to be Vizzini worthy ... its hard to find enough inspirational motivation to push through ...

[Kreuz]

I am done thinking my 2 ideas different enough to not affect each other. The result... is beautiful.

Now I have to write...

[sakuuya]

Welp, I have a build and I was hoping to work on fluffing it out over the weekend, but instead I got induced into labor a month early. :smallsigh: I'm fine, and the baby's fine, but I don't think either of us have time to enter this round. Good luck to everybody who's entering!

[Amphetryon]

Welp, I have a build and I was hoping to work on fluffing it out over the weekend, but instead I got induced into labor a month early. :smallsigh: I'm fine, and the baby's fine, but I don't think either of us have time to enter this round. Good luck to everybody who's entering!

So you're saying motherhood is more important than an internet game for no money?

Congratulations.

[Piggy Knowles]

Welp, I have a build and I was hoping to work on fluffing it out over the weekend, but instead I got induced into labor a month early. :smallsigh: I'm fine, and the baby's fine, but I don't think either of us have time to enter this round. Good luck to everybody who's entering!

Congratulations! I'd say that's a pretty good reason to sit out this round :smalltongue: My wife is due with our first in a month, so I suspect I'll be sitting out if next round myself...

[Macabaret]

Welp, I have a build and I was hoping to work on fluffing it out over the weekend, but instead I got induced into labor a month early. :smallsigh: I'm fine, and the baby's fine, but I don't think either of us have time to enter this round. Good luck to everybody who's entering!

Oooohhh.... New prize!! Whoever wins this round gets a baby named after his/her character entry!!
Or...perhaps not.

Congratulations!

[DeAnno]

I managed to actually submit something! Now I'll probably get to see it crash into 5 or so other similar builds :P

[sideswipe]

Welp, I have a build and I was hoping to work on fluffing it out over the weekend, but instead I got induced into labor a month early. :smallsigh: I'm fine, and the baby's fine, but I don't think either of us have time to enter this round. Good luck to everybody who's entering!

congratulations

[Deadline]

Welp, I have a build and I was hoping to work on fluffing it out over the weekend, but instead I got induced into labor a month early. :smallsigh: I'm fine, and the baby's fine, but I don't think either of us have time to enter this round. Good luck to everybody who's entering!

Congratulations sakuuya!

[Tim Proctor]

Congrats!

On a complete side note, what's better +2 AC deflection static or +50 Temp HP a day, at level 10?

[OMG PONIES]

Welp, I have a build and I was hoping to work on fluffing it out over the weekend, but instead I got induced into labor a month early. :smallsigh: I'm fine, and the baby's fine, but I don't think either of us have time to enter this round. Good luck to everybody who's entering!

So you rolled up a level 1 character instead, eh? :smallamused: Congrats!


Congrats!

On a complete side note, what's better +2 AC deflection static or +50 Temp HP a day, at level 10?

The generic phrasing makes your question difficult for me to answer intelligently. Care to share any other specifics?

[Tim Proctor]

The generic phrasing makes your question difficult for me to answer intelligently. Care to share any other specifics?
I was debating between a Ring of Protection +2 vs the Greater Iron Ward Armor Crystal... but decided that a +2 Large Steel Shield, a +1 Ring of Protection, and a +1 Amulet of Natural armor was better. The problem is that he's a monk in full-plate and a shield looks stupid (It's a non-optimization campaign you can see the sheet here (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArwzEhoOzHkodGlOMzNQd2psbU1pNmNOM0dYYWdMd FE&usp=sharing)), and last session I got ROFL stomped by a Barbed Devil when level 9 because the fighter/tank couldn't make a will save and sat there under hold person for 7 rounds.

[OMG PONIES]

Build submitted (and with time to spare this time)! It's been a while, so we'll see how it goes this time around.

[Deadline]

Got mine in too. Looks like we'll see fewer entries this time around.

[WhamBamSam]

Got my first entry in. We'll see if I have time to put my second one together tomorrow. If not, I'll post the stub after the reveal.

[Ingus]

Has been a while, ain't it?

But first things first


Welp, I have a build and I was hoping to work on fluffing it out over the weekend, but instead I got induced into labor a month early. :smallsigh: I'm fine, and the baby's fine, but I don't think either of us have time to enter this round. Good luck to everybody who's entering!

Congratulations! Now you have to optimize that other build first. I'm sure (s)he will show some wonderful feat :smallsmile:

To all the others...
My last entry was 40-something competitions ago...
Nice to see Amp and Ponies still around :smallbiggrin:
By the way, mine is in

[Vaz]

Got mine in too. Looks like we'll see fewer entries this time around.

My plan of making everyone pregnant worked!

Talking of which, congratulations sakuuya!

I should have mine finished by tonight. Scratch that, I WILL have mine finished by tonight.

[DeAnno]

My plan of making everyone pregnant worked!

That is certainly a liberal interpretation of Channel spell!

[sideswipe]

finished! but i am now to busy to format and send.... it will be a last minute job tonight.....

[sideswipe]

That is certainly a liberal interpretation of Channel spell!

well you could channel a disease.
pregnancy is arguably a disease a according to a few sources. including the book of erotic fantasy.
so... if you could argue that you could then channel a disease through a spell...... and BOOM! pregnant!.

if i can argue this.... its my next character i play :smallbiggrin:

[Macabaret]

And I'm in.
So now for the waiting!!

[OMG PONIES]

And I'm in.
So now for the waiting!!

They say that's the hardest part.

[Tim Proctor]

They say that's the hardest part.
Yeah... and with 4 hours left I am waiting to rip all these builds apart and insult the entrants and other judges... do I really need blue text on that?

I think I got a really good spectrum on the scoring segments, and I think I should be able to deliver a really good in-depth judgement for contestants, I just hope I don't mess up the math. ;)

[Piggy Knowles]

Ha, just got a very funny idea that I kind of wish I'd thought of a few days ago. Let's see, I've got about thirty-two minutes left of internet time before I have to move my car out of a tow zone, after which point I'll probably be working solidly until the reveal... can I put together the world's fastest entry? Stay tuned! (Spoiler alert: probably not...)

[Tim Proctor]

Ha, just got a very funny idea that I kind of wish I'd thought of a few days ago. Let's see, I've got about thirty-two minutes left of internet time before I have to move my car out of a tow zone, after which point I'll probably be working solidly until the reveal... can I put together the world's fastest entry? Stay tuned! (Spoiler alert: probably not...)
I feel like the President when I say, "Yes you can".

[Vaz]

I feel like the President when I say, "Yes you can".

And look where that got him XD. Please, please, piggy, post the idea even if you don't manage to finish it (after reveal, naturally!).

Edit - Macabaret, everytime you post, a Liza Minelli voice in my head sings "Life is a macabaret old chum". Can't help it, don't know why.

[Deadline]

Ha, just got a very funny idea that I kind of wish I'd thought of a few days ago. Let's see, I've got about thirty-two minutes left of internet time before I have to move my car out of a tow zone, after which point I'll probably be working solidly until the reveal... can I put together the world's fastest entry? Stay tuned! (Spoiler alert: probably not...)

I just had a pun, with no build behind it. I'm curious if it's the same inspiration as your idea, but I'll just have to wait until the reveal so you can post your idea.


I just hope I don't mess up the math. ;)

Well ... math is hard, right? :smalltongue:

[Irk]

I'm out. Bad things came up.

[Sian]

Ah balls ... misremembered the submission date as thursday

heres for rapid finish of my build

ehh ... looking at what I've actually writen down (or more critically, what i'm lacking), i'm most likely not going to be satisfied with what i can rush out so i'm tossing the towel on it, and fiddles with the idea of judging

[Deadline]

I'm out. Bad things came up.

Hopefully not too bad. I have a red phone here, I can call Batman if you need him.

[sideswipe]

does anyone have code for spells per day table? old code doesn't work does it.

[Amphetryon]

does anyone have code for spells per day table? old code doesn't work does it.

The code in the OP works just fine, honest. It's the same as it was the last couple of rounds, when the table showed up without difficulty when implemented as the OP shows.

[WhamBamSam]

Bah. My second build isn't going to get written up. The table is mostly done, but I have to head out in 20 minutes and won't be back in time. I'll post the idea after the reveal if no one else does something similar.

[Southern Cross]

Spells per Day/Spells Known
Spells per Day/Spells Known


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
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

[sideswipe]

ah ****. i thought it didnt work..... so i submitted without it..... its at least clear.

[DeAnno]

You still have 80 minutes to remake your table and submit a corrected version of your entry I think.

[Vaz]

Make that 3 minutes.

I've had some trouble with my internet tonight, but I appear to have sent my PM(s?) off without problems. It's a bit late I guess if they've not been delivered. But that was a nightmare. Didn't get to finish the backstory as much as I'd like to, but hey ho. Last Minute entries ftw.

[DeAnno]

Make that 3 minutes.

GMT Time now is 11PM, Daylight savings alters the difference.

[Tim Proctor]

Make that 3 minutes.

I've had some trouble with my internet tonight, but I appear to have sent my PM(s?) off without problems. It's a bit late I guess if they've not been delivered. But that was a nightmare. Didn't get to finish the backstory as much as I'd like to, but hey ho. Last Minute entries ftw.
Where Da F Is Da Chairman telling us not to post???

He's camping with his GF again and we wont get a reveal for another week. :(
Highlight the text above and it's magically in blue, in case you needed to know about sarcasm...

[Amphetryon]

Make that 3 minutes.

I've had some trouble with my internet tonight, but I appear to have sent my PM(s?) off without problems. It's a bit late I guess if they've not been delivered. But that was a nightmare. Didn't get to finish the backstory as much as I'd like to, but hey ho. Last Minute entries ftw.

While I was chair, one regular contributor (you know who you are) would usually send in the entry while I was posting the entries I'd received before the deadline.

[Piggy Knowles]

I'm waving the white flag on my fun idea... I'm not 100% thrilled with the final build, certainly not enough to try to rush together a build stub.

Can't wait for the reveal!

[Tim Proctor]

I'm waving the white flag on my fun idea... I'm not 100% thrilled with the final build, certainly not enough to try to rush together a build stub.


And look where that got him XD.

Oh snap, like ISIS in Iraq (I feel qualified to make this joke cause I fought these bastards in 03-05). In all seriousness I hope the bad stuff isn't as bad as what I see watching the news and it's a #firstworldproblem, and hopefully next time you can jump in.:smallsmile:

[Vaz]

Derp. Always confuse BST with GMT. Ah well. Not going to alter now, at the end of the day, the fluff etc won't really change overmuch'

[FireJustice]

I learned something today
never wait the last minute to submit or you risk losing the deadline

It's okay... wasn't a really good idea anyways

[OMG PONIES]

Today on Iron Chef Theater: the cast of "Order of the Stick" re-enacts our conversation every round!

:thog: Time up! Thog learned how to tell it yesterday!

Man, how long until the Reveal? It's been at least 60 seconds with no word from the Chair. :roy:
:thog: Thog did it! Thog entered contest!

Which one is yours? :roy:

:mitd: Mine was [REDACTED]
:thog: Thog's is the one with spelsord levels!

If only being able to spell "spellsword" was a prerequisite for entry. :roy:
:thog: Hey, watch it! Thog can sord gooder than he can spel!


:vaarsuvius:So, what does everyone think next round's Ingredient will be?

:belkar: Everyogne kgnows it's gogngna be Gnome Giant Slayer! Hell yeah! Gn gn!

Slime Lord? :haley:

:durkon: Cannae it be Oozemaster?

Slime Lord? :haley:
:durkon: Cannae it be Oozemaster?

Slime Lord? :haley:
:durkon: Cannae it be Oozemaster?


:elan: "I know! It'll be...a prestige class!
:haley::vaarsuvius::durkon::thog::belkar::roy:...[insert various puns]

:xykon: Hey everyone, I'm back now! Sorry for the delay; it's time for the Reveal.

In other words, I'm excited to see what everyone cooked and I have too much time on my hands.

[Muggins]

Well, now that that's out of the way, we can finally get to what's important around here: optimisation! Isn't that right, guys?

My build is the one with Spellsword levels.

[Ingus]

I have a great advantage.
I have no less than 40 previous contest to check while waiting :smallbiggrin:

By the way, I had another couple ideas that didn't make it, I'm interested to know if someone else have found a way to work around some major issues on the matter.

[Vaz]

I'f be interested to read them once the reveals gone in - might be able to crowd source a way around it.

[OMG PONIES]

I have a great advantage.
I have no less than 40 previous contest to check while waiting :smallbiggrin:

By the way, I had another couple ideas that didn't make it, I'm interested to know if someone else have found a way to work around some major issues on the matter.


I'f be interested to read them once the reveals gone in - might be able to crowd source a way around it.

If only someone had already combed through every previous round, organized all of the scores, and compiled them into a spreadsheet with hyperlinks to every build submitted and judge's results...

*looks at my signature*

Oh, wait... :smalltongue:

[Tim Proctor]

Any word from Herr Chairman or did the Fists of the Forest capture him again?

Since entry time has expired I am going to share my scoring metrics with everyone.
http://www.katiephd.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Dow_GiantChalkboard11.jpg
Well it's not quite that, but the 7 criteria for Use of the Secret Ingredient are:

Base Attack Bonus, I'm looking for actual use of the BAB mechanism broken into scoring bands which correlate to number of attacks a character has.
Knowledge (arcana), I'm looking to see if it's carried through and maxed at each level, if it stops, how many feats or other classes require it. Is the skill sitting there or is it built into an important part of the build.
Spell Level Availability, the SI required the ability to cast 2nd level spells, I'm interested to see how high people got it to. I'm not looking for 9s but I am rewarding for getting it certain levels.
Defeating a foe through force of arms alone, I'm going to compare the build at the level mentioned to a CR appropriate monster to see if the build could 1v1 w/o spells on average. The more likely the chance of success, the better off the score.
Ignore Spell Failure, I'm looking to see how much armor/shields you can put on without any chance of spell failure.
Channel Spell, I'm looking for cool interactions, deadly interactions, etc. with this ability.
Bonus Feats, I'm looking to see what other fighter/metamagic feats you too, if it's part of a chain, if it's just sitting there alone, etc.

[Vaz]

Does Fighter X count as an equivalent CR? XD. Any late entries up against an Adamantine Horror?

[Tim Proctor]

Does Fighter X count as an equivalent CR? XD. Any late entries up against an Adamantine Horror?
It wouldn't be a Fighter but a Warrior the NPC class, and maybe. I plan to pick an adversary appropriate to the story of the character, however I plan to limit my personal input into the decision as much as possible so I wont be making any characters and would use a published version of an NPC or Monster (probably monster). The CR system is rather messed up so I'm going to try and have an appropriate balance between the choice, the CR, and the characters. I'm not going to try an screw anyone, well maybe one person :smallwink:.