Iron Chef Optimization Challenge In the Playground XLIII

[Piggy Knowles]

Which is generally viewed more poorly, LA buyoff, or flaws? I'm trying to squeeze in a feat, and I can't do it without one of those two things (at least, not without resorting to a class that grants bonus feats).

Flaws are a flat -1 penalty to elegance per flaw, according to the rules. LA buyoff varies in how it's penalized from judge to judge - some don't see it as a very big deal, while others could give you a pretty sizable elegance hit. But in my experience, flaws will get you hit harder. (Which makes sense to me personally - I allow LA buyoff in most games I run, but I rarely if ever allow flaws.)

[Norin]

I just love the rich history and fluff around this PrC, but damn i hate how poorly it works crunch wise.

I always wanted to see an official improvement on this PrC but all we got was Duskblade, Abjurant Champion, etc as "real" and effective options.

Oh well, in for keeping an eye on the builds that pop in and the fluff around them. Fun!

[Amphetryon]

I just love the rich history and fluff around this PrC, but damn i hate how poorly it works crunch wise.

I always wanted to see an official improvement on this PrC but all we got was Duskblade, Abjurant Champion, etc as "real" and effective options.

Oh well, in for keeping an eye on the builds that pop in and the fluff around them. Fun!

As I recall, there were a couple different 3.0 PrCs called "Bladesinger" or "Elvish/Elven Bladesinger;" while I'm not advocating them specifically for this contest, they may be worth your while to check out.

[Norin]

As I recall, there were a couple different 3.0 PrCs called "Bladesinger" or "Elvish/Elven Bladesinger;" while I'm not advocating them specifically for this contest, they may be worth your while to check out.

Yeah, Tome and Blood (3.0) had a Bladesinger prc. It's not very good, but it's interesting in it's own way. 10 levels with full bab, good ref\will saves, d8 hd, some bonus feats, bladesong style (int to ac with light armour) and it's own 1st to 4th spell level casting progression with it's own limited spell list.

It's quite odd though, because the text does not say what manner of casting (prepared or spontaneous) or what stat the casting is keyed to as far as i can see... Strange 3.0 splatbooks.

[Amphetryon]

Yeah, Tome and Blood (3.0) had a Bladesinger prc. It's not very good, but it's interesting in it's own way. 10 levels with full bab, good ref\will saves, d8 hd, some bonus feats, bladesong style (int to ac with light armour) and it's own 1st to 4th spell level casting progression with it's own limited spell list.

It's quite odd though, because the text does not say what manner of casting (prepared or spontaneous) or what stat the casting is keyed to as far as i can see... Strange 3.0 splatbooks.

There's another in one of the Faerun books.

[Divayth Fyr]

It's quite odd though, because the text does not say what manner of casting (prepared or spontaneous) or what stat the casting is keyed to as far as i can see... Strange 3.0 splatbooks.

The web enhancement for TaB had a fixed version.

[Norin]

Races of Faerûn, yes.

It's a similar version of the Tome and Blood one, just with some more features (lesser\greater spellsong, song of celerity and song of fury) and an actual description of how the Bladesinger spellcasting works.

Anyways, this was a bit of a digression while still being a bit on topic.

[Norin]

The web enhancement for TaB had a fixed version.

Thanks, i checked it out. I found this a bit funny:

It seems there is an imposter lurking on pages 49 and
50. It’s a bladesinger alright, but there are a few pieces
missing. Here’s the complete version.

edit: seems this fix is more or less resulting in the same PrC as the one in RoF.

[Divayth Fyr]

Races of Faerûn, yes.

It's a similar version of the Tome and Blood one, just with some more features (lesser\greater spellsong, song of celerity and song of fury) and an actual description of how the Bladesinger spellcasting works.

So, basically the version I mentioned (TaB WE)? It has all these features.

Thanks, i checked it out. I found this a bit funny:

Yes, it's the best part of the class ;)

[Deadline]

Flaws are a flat -1 penalty to elegance per flaw, according to the rules. LA buyoff varies in how it's penalized from judge to judge - some don't see it as a very big deal, while others could give you a pretty sizable elegance hit. But in my experience, flaws will get you hit harder. (Which makes sense to me personally - I allow LA buyoff in most games I run, but I rarely if ever allow flaws.)

Thanks for the info, but I've found a way to do it differently. It won't have LA buyoff or flaws, but I am less pleased with the result. We can enter multiple entries, yes? Because I might as well make my first time in the kitchen a busy one.

[Piggy Knowles]

Thanks for the info, but I've found a way to do it differently. It won't have LA buyoff or flaws, but I am less pleased with the result. We can enter multiple entries, yes? Because I might as well make my first time in the kitchen a busy one.

Yup! I've had a few contests where I've entered twice, and once (during the Death Delver competition) we had someone enter three times.

[MidgetMarine]

My oven is a-cooking, and I am proud of my creation.

It is a strange, quirky little souffle. But I love it nonetheless.

[MidgetMarine]

Question.

Must all 10 levels of the secret ingredient be taken?

[Venger]

Question.

Must all 10 levels of the secret ingredient be taken?

the "use of the secret ingredient" section is based on this (among other things) so if you don't finish the secret ingredient, you will lose points from this section

but if you don't want to (and with this SI who could blame you? snap kick as a capstone? whee!) then you're not required to

[Piggy Knowles]

The only two times I submitted a build that did NOT take all ten levels of the SI, I got a medal - the gold in the Initiate of Pistis Sophia, and the silver in Shadowdancer. Judges docked me for it in both instances, but I made up enough points in other areas to make up for it.

In other words... yes, you'll get penalized for it, but don't be afraid to take risks! Some of the best IC builds come that way.

[MidgetMarine]

The only two times I submitted a build that did NOT take all ten levels of the SI, I got a medal - the gold in the Initiate of Pistis Sophia, and the silver in Shadowdancer. Judges docked me for it in both instances, but I made up enough points in other areas to make up for it.

In other words... yes, you'll get penalized for it, but don't be afraid to take risks! Some of the best IC builds come that way.

Sweet.

I'm taking a huge risk.

NOT. TAKING. {Removed}

I know, it's shocking.

I really am so brave.

Thank you for your applause.

[Amphetryon]

So, we'll all have a headstart guessing which one is your entry. . . .

[Vaz]

Why take level 9, then? Surely there's some other front loaded 1/1 Prestige Arcane Caster class you can take that you fit?

[Gotterdammerung]

So, we'll all have a headstart guessing which one is your entry. . . .

He is new. New chefs are always forget about anonymity. At least, I think he is new... *he has that new chef smell*

[OMG PONIES]

you'll get penalized for it, but don't be afraid to take risks!

Can I vote for this to be our motto?

[MidgetMarine]

You'd instantly know which one was mine anyways. But, once again, not set on anything.

It'd be the one with a cumulative score of 0 and the comment of "What were you thinking?....."

[MidgetMarine]

He is new. New chefs are always forget about anonymity. At least, I think he is new... *he has that new chef smell*

It's the Nouveau Chef number 1, a beautiful aroma of Bad ideas and Tier 6 dishes.

[Venger]

It's the Nouveau Chef number 1, a beautiful aroma of Bad ideas and Tier 6 dishes.

hey, don't knock tier 6. samurai got me gold back in hand of the winged masters.

[Kazyan]

hey, don't knock tier 6. samurai got me gold back in hand of the winged masters.

Difficult ingredients are difficult, but there's a difference between a zero-star dish and a zero-star ingredient. It's the same for every rating. Ever had a Sorcerer or Cleric that were nearly unpalatable? Ever experienced a Barbarian with a stronger kick than anything else at the table? I have. But I have no idea how to prepare a Bladesinger.

So, I'll be judging again this round. I understand that half of the entries had issues with my judging last time, so if you guys have any suggestions for revised criteria, go ahead and tell me.

[Kuulvheysoon]

I have to say, I'm glad that everyone is taking my first ICO so well. With an ingredient like Bladesinger...

[Venger]

Difficult ingredients are difficult, but there's a difference between a zero-star dish and a zero-star ingredient. It's the same for every rating. Ever had a Sorcerer or Cleric that were nearly unpalatable? Ever experienced a Barbarian with a stronger kick than anything else at the table? I have. But I have no idea how to prepare a Bladesinger.

So, I'll be judging again this round. I understand that half of the entries had issues with my judging last time, so if you guys have any suggestions for revised criteria, go ahead and tell me.

I see what you mean.

could you please post your criteria in this thread so new chefs can give their spin on them?

[MirddinEmris]

I think i'll join this competition, though i'm a potato-baker. so don't expect real originality from my meal. But i could say i specialize in "exotic" (read: not really tasty and weird) ingredients, so this may be my call))

[Gotterdammerung]

So, I'll be judging again this round. I understand that half of the entries had issues with my judging last time, so if you guys have any suggestions for revised criteria, go ahead and tell me.

When the contestants respond to a judges comments, don't think of it as "having issues". Everyone wants a chance to make sure their build is properly understood. It is a great privilege that we get that brief window to correspond with you. I wouldn't take it as a personal attack. I think you were a good judge. Think of the player feedback as a blessing. It allows you to focus more on staying fair and true to yourself, knowing full well that you have a safety net to catch any mistakes you might have possibly made.

[Darkcouch]

So, I'll be judging again this round. I understand that half of the entries had issues with my judging last time, so if you guys have any suggestions for revised criteria, go ahead and tell me.

I'm sure there were less issues in your judging last round then my bout with Geomancer. As long as criteria are applied consistently, that's all we can ask.

However, I'm a mechanics guy more so than a fluff guy, so if I had to critique your criteria, I would ask why leaving out a piece of fluff garners more of a penalty than using rules variants and are typos and puncuation really deduction worthy when English may not be the first language for some of the participants?

*just noticed that the rules variant category was per instance while rest were max, nothing to see here.

[Kazyan]

However, I'm a mechanics guy more so than a fluff guy, so if I had to critique your criteria, I would ask why leaving out a piece of fluff garners more of a penalty than using rules variants and are typos and puncuation really deduction worthy when English may not be the first language for some of the participants?

*just noticed that the rules variant category was per instance while rest were max, nothing to see here.

You know, the typos thing is a good point. I didn't consider the ESL participants in the forums when I made mention; it's getting removed now.

With regards to rules variants--I'm not opposed to them, per se. It's the ones that are so friggin' exploitable and/or awkward.

I deduct points for not paying attention to fluff, because a character is more than the delicious chewy center of class levels. I'm fine with refluffing, and encourage it--Tome of Battle, for all its mechanical improvements to melee, has some of the worst fluff in 3.5. If not the worst, it's at least thrown out the most, but Xefas has a better rant on that than I do and it's off-topic. Anyway, in the best RPGs, the mechanics and fluff support each other instead of being estranged. I want to see that. Pounce usually comes from big cats, and Barbarians get it from worshiping big cats. Makes sense. Or maybe you say the extra sword swings come from panic or an adrenaline spike, which comes to the surface when you're suddenly up in someone's grill. Cool. But if you don't give an in-game way of explaining why you have certain unique mechanics? You lose points.

When the contestants respond to a judges comments, don't think of it as "having issues". Everyone wants a chance to make sure their build is properly understood. It is a great privilege that we get that brief window to correspond with you. I wouldn't take it as a personal attack. I think you were a good judge. Think of the player feedback as a blessing. It allows you to focus more on staying fair and true to yourself, knowing full well that you have a safety net to catch any mistakes you might have possibly made.

Ehehe. Thank you. I try to be fair, but once one starts to develop an opinion about a build, the consistency in how I apply the numbers can sway without my conscious awareness. This is why we have the correspondance, after all.

could you please post your criteria in this thread so new chefs can give their spin on them?

Criteria:

Spoiler

Show

While I'm providing numbers, judging is subjective. Where there's something in the build I'd be remiss not to note, I'll take it into account and tweak the scoring.

*dig dig*

*edit edit*

Originality
1: Build is cookie-cutter of the optimization staples.
2: Build isn't quite cookie-cutter, but the devations from the "gish" template are nothing new.
3: Build contains quirky selections and/or optimization staples that I wouldn't have otherwise seen fitting with this party role.
4: Build challenges, not necessarily defies, the "gish" party role.
5: Completely off-the-wall.

Power
1: Build is helpless even at its job.
2: Build cannot fill the roles of a mildly-optimized Eldritch Knight--fightan' and magic.
3: Build fills one party role of a mildly-optimized Eldritch Knight.
4: Build fills both roles of a midly-optimized Eldritch Knight. Approximately a mildly-optimized Swiftblade.
5: You've made the Bladesinger better than a good Swiftblade.

Elegance
All builds will start at Elegance 4, and then given the following deductions and benefits:
-0.5: Difficult to follow or figure out what it does
-1: Choppy power growth so that the build is unacceptably weak for
many levels: waiting for it to "come online", as the other judges put it.
-1: Overreliance on items or other WBL-based options, such as paying NPCs for expensive spells.
-0.5 per use: May-contain-dairy-products rule variants. LA buyoff, magical locations for feats, lesser planetouched, and bloodlines count, but the list is not exhaustive.
-1: Dismissing/handwaving fluff.
Up to -2: Rules violations. Nitpicks that don't affect anything? -0.25. Things that negate one of your tricks or require selective rebuilding? -1. Pulling athread that basically unravels your entire build? -2. Any build that recieves -1 or worse in rules violations is eligible for a 0.
+0.5: Class progression is particularly natural, such as X 5/SI 10/Y 5. Because this is the WORST INGREDIENT, I'll be relaxing standard for this one.
+0.5: Does not require multiclassing penalties to be ignored.
Up to +1: Build seems like it would appear natural, not abominably min-maxed, to a fairly new player. Max score is 5.

Use of the Secret Ingredient
1: Bladesinger is seriously detrimental to your build, as opposed to taking more of a base class.
2: Bladesinger is used, but a categorically better no-brainer option exists. Most of the SI's abilities are ignored.
3: Bladesinger contributes meaningfully to the build. Most of the SI's abilities are used.
4: All of the SI's abilities are used meaningfully. The build is a lot better with the SI then it would be without.
5: The SI is the shining star of the build. There's no impression that the SI has been crowbarred into a more standard build, and it's a Bladesinger showcase. In other words, you justify the existence of this piece of junk.

Don't expect to be able to average all of the Originality scores and wind up with 3, by the way. You'd...you'd have to pick Fochlucan Lyrist for the prereqs to be more enginuity-crushing.

Have I mentioned that I don't particularly like this PrC? I don't.