A Monster for Every Season: Summer 2
You can get A Monster for Every Season: Summer 2 now at Gumroad
Page 15 of 18 FirstFirst ... 56789101112131415161718 LastLast
Results 421 to 450 of 519
  1. - Top - End - #421
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Dec 2006

    Default Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge in the Playground L

    Thank you for trying, Socratov, as well as for letting us know when you found it necessary to throw in the towel. This was a tough round to judge (so are most rounds, come to that).
    Iron Chef in the Playground veteran since Round IV. Play as me!


    Spoiler
    Show

  2. - Top - End - #422
    Troll in the Playground
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Below sea level
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge in the Playground L

    Well, I'll be back some other time when it's *ahem* more convenient *ahem*. Anyway, I did have fun for as long as it lasted
    Warlock Poetry?
    Or ways to use me in game?
    Better grab a drink...

    Currently ruining Strahd's day - Avatar by the Outstanding Smuchsmuch

    First Ordained Jr. Tormlet by LoyalPaladin

  3. - Top - End - #423
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Gender
    Female

    Default Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge in the Playground L

    split hairs - hardly but maybe you should wear the dunce cap for a bit

    Braxton adjusted was 16.5 and then stated that Braxton - disputes answered - score stands

    seems clear as day to me.

    Braxton 16.5

  4. - Top - End - #424
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Tim Proctor's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Richland, WA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge in the Playground L

    Quote Originally Posted by relytdan View Post
    split hairs - hardly but maybe you should wear the dunce cap for a bit

    Braxton adjusted was 16.5 and then stated that Braxton - disputes answered - score stands

    seems clear as day to me.

    Braxton 16.5
    Dude you are just rude, made many judgements contrary to the chairman's rulings, etc.

    Can we strike his scores and ban him from the competition? Never seen someone so toxic in this competition.
    I am what lurks under your bridge, I am the troll...

    Not sure about what I said, go back highlight it with your mouse and wham it's magically blue for sarcasm, so like everything on the internet take it with a grain of salt.

    Spoiler: IC Trophies
    Show
    LIV Silver Auric Goldbones
    LVII Bronze Adlib

  5. - Top - End - #425
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Deadline's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Necro-equestrian Pugilism
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge in the Playground L

    Quote Originally Posted by relytdan View Post
    fist off it is "SHE" but what the heck you didn't ask so go figure-
    There is a gender indicator you can check, if you want to avoid such easy misunderstandings in the future.
    Last edited by Deadline; 2013-11-01 at 10:09 AM.
    Awesome avatar by Iron Penguin!

    Signature of Holding

  6. - Top - End - #426
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Gender
    Female

    Default Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge in the Playground L

    Quote Originally Posted by Deadline View Post
    There is a gender indicator you can check, if you want to avoid such easy misunderstandings in the future.
    thanks for that info deadline- I did not play much with the user CP stuff and did not see the indicator.

  7. - Top - End - #427
    Troll in the Playground
     
    thethird's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2013

    Default Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge in the Playground L

    Socratov I can totally understand, sometimes I try to sneak judge for practice but eventually everything is too much for me too handle, that is why I really respect the people that take time to judge (and I feel a bad taste in my mouth anytime we press any judge)

    EDIT: Chairman did you see my last pm?
    Last edited by thethird; 2013-11-01 at 12:10 PM.
    Thanks a lot Gengy for the awesome... just a sec... avatar. :)

  8. - Top - End - #428
    Troll in the Playground
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    The Great White North

    Default Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge in the Playground L

    Quote Originally Posted by Socratov View Post
    Guys, I gotta admit I'm out of my depth. I throw my judging hat in the ring. it seems my judging fu (especially when it comes to judging power) is too weak for this iteration of IC. That and the fact that these weeks I have exams for which I need to devote some time means I don't have enough time to judge the builds and increase my system mastery (mostly becuase of usage of savage species and incarnum) to perform a rating of builds within the quality as is expected of me. For those of you wanting to know my general impressions I've spoilered them to not influence judges how are still compiling their scores. Oh, and I will certainly vote for the horourable mention.

    Spoiler: general impressions of a beginner
    Show

    So, first of the bat, great fluff everyone! Just reading the stories had me absorbed into the competition and secret ingredient. I especially loved the pop culture references (though admittantly some flew over my head by miles).

    Things I liked about the entires is a relative powercurve. In almost every build the SI actually added to the character's potential, even though some people focused on the skill and social aspect of it (skillbonuses against sworn foes) while other's used the SI to full combat potential.

    In some builds I missed a clear description of the taint and how it's flavour would interact with the character. And even though fmechanicaly some builds did not have any taint effects by raw, I at least woudl have liked the mention of "By Raw blabla is immune to taint, but if the DM would want to handwaive it, or for story purposes I'd imagine blabla to have the follwoing taint effects playing them out so and so.

    And in short, some of the builds I wanted to play desperately, others I had some sort of reluctance to. All in all I'd better study up for a next time on incarnum sinc ethe system still confuses the bejeebus out of me (yes I read the handbooks, still raising questionmarks when I encounter it).
    Judging is a harder job than competing. Thanks for giving it the effort - I know that we all appreciate it.

    Guys, can we please keep this civil? There's only (about) 3 more days to this competition, and then the slate gets wiped clean. I don't think that I need to mention any names, do I?

    Dispute:
    Quote Originally Posted by Eillyassa

    Relytdan,

    The only reason I feel this needs to be disputed is because you're saying something explicitly stated in RAW is a rules interpretation. Familiar rules state my Familiar will have 20HD for all factors effecting HD, and despite Air Mephit not being on the familiar list in PHB, it is on the IMPROVED FAMILIAR list in Cscoundrel. This isn't a subjective issue, it is pulled straight from the text.

    Korahir,

    I see what you mean about entering the SI late, but its required to keep the Steal Spell progession, dropping out of Spellthief earlier would have delayed Steal Spell(5th) and possibly Steal Spell(6th). Also, since Spellthief is 3/4 BAB she only qualifies for the SI at 8, but the extra die of SA and advanced Steal Spell is what makes her push entry into the PRC back so far.

  9. - Top - End - #429
    Firbolg in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge in the Playground L

    Quote Originally Posted by relytdan View Post
    split hairs - hardly but maybe you should wear the dunce cap for a bit

    Braxton adjusted was 16.5 and then stated that Braxton - disputes answered - score stands

    seems clear as day to me.

    Braxton 16.5
    Thank you for clarifying that you have adjusted Braxton's score to 16.5. My main question is where that adjustment should be added, as I keep a spreadsheet that tracks scores for each category every round. While it may seem clear as day to you, others including myself may not know what caused that final +0.25 adjustment. Looking back over the thread, here are the comments and scores I see from you about Braxton:

    Quote Originally Posted by relytdan View Post
    Braxton

    {table=head]
    Name
    |
    Score
    |
    Deduction 1
    |
    Deduction 2
    |
    Deduction 3
    |
    Deduction 4

    Score 16|Originality|race/template|classes|interesting|Fluff

    -|-1.75|-.5|-.5|-.25|-.5

    -|Power|versitile|how well it does|any help|items/equipment

    -|-1|-.25|-.25|-.25|-.25

    -|Elegance|basic build|multiclass|rules interpretation|fail to qualify non-si

    -|-1|-.25|-5|-.25|0

    -|UsotSI|abilities not used|max min si|fail feel of si|fail to qualify si

    -|-.25|0|-.25|0|0
    [/table]
    Quote Originally Posted by relytdan View Post
    Final Amended Scores

    Braxton

    {table=head]
    Name
    |
    Score
    |
    Deduction 1
    |
    Deduction 2
    |
    Deduction 3
    |
    Deduction 4

    Score 16.25|Originality|race/template|classes|interesting|Fluff

    -|-1.75|-.5|-.5|-.25|-.5

    -|Power|versitile|how well it does|any help|items/equipment

    -|-1|-.25|-.25|-.25|-.25

    -|Elegance|basic build|multiclass|rules interpretation|fail to qualify non-si

    -|-.75|0|-5|-.25|0

    -|UsotSI|abilities not used|max min si|fail feel of si|fail to qualify si

    -|-.25|0|-.25|0|0[/table]
    Quote Originally Posted by relytdan View Post
    Braxton: add a decimal point to make it read-.5
    Quote Originally Posted by relytdan View Post
    Braxton adjusted total score is 16.5

    Braxton - disputes answered - score stands
    Now, I see how the score went from 16 to 16.25 because of the removal of the "basic build" penalty under Elegance. However, I'm still struggling to see where the additional +.25 comes from to render a total score of 16.5. Can you please let me know where it should go?
    Last edited by OMG PONIES; 2013-11-01 at 12:31 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Vaz View Post
    Ponies, the Kim Karsdashian of GITP.
    This is what happens when they let me DM:
    Beyond the Horizon IC / OOC
    A Time to Die: Alpha IC / Bravo IC / OOC

  10. - Top - End - #430
    Orc in the Playground
    Join Date
    Mar 2013

    Default Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge in the Playground L

    Unnamed.. no, I'm Braxton. However, I will admit I took serious references from Conan (Check the quote right above my background, straight conan reference), and thought.. (What if Conan turned corrupt?) I tried to bring this out, and I like to feel that I did pretty well.
    I did get the Conan reference. Maybe i just DMed too many barbarians who all roleplayed Arnold Schwarzenegger. I didn't get the feel of a corrupted Conan.
    On the warblade, warblade 6 would've gotten me less than barbarian 2 did, I felt. The character was built originally as full barbarian, and kept slowly changing the more I thought about it. Iron Heart Surge is just too strong. However, I only use it to get rid of nauseated and sickened, as well as fatigued after a rage. I went with the extra two levels of ragemage to grab a final rage per day (4/day). I felt that was stronger than trying to glue in JPM, which I did consider but thought it not fitting the theme I was going with. (Felt it would be a blatant power grab I'd get penalized in Elegance for) Con over Str was to grab extra corruption, so that I would be able to cast more spells. Also, my damage is pretty considerable even without more Str, so I went to up my HP as well. Felt it was the better choice.
    You got a penalty in Power and none in Elegance. Might have been the other way if you added JPM. So my suggestion may not have been the best. I still feel though, that the last few levels could have been used better, but I also feel that the penalty imposed is too high. Scoring adjustement: Power +0,25
    Yes, I don't mention my taint, I read over the heroes of horror and saw the different parts about how where if you fight evil, you gain taint. I used that as my basis, doing odd jobs, fighting any evil I could fight, slowly becoming more like the evil I fought without knowing.
    Pretty much every party is fighting evil and some adventures even add mechanics to represent the corruption you describe (i.e.: sin mechanics in RotR). I was missing the why and how of you are so much more tainted than others and also some mechanical use of the taint.
    On casting while raging- I can also use maneuvers at the same time, as I checked- none of the maneuvers I grabbed require concentration, so I can use any of them I want.

    Finally, I noticed no one really commented on the Instantaneous rage, which I am the only person to have picked up. It is really quite powerful, having the ability to completely demoralize my opponents during their turn using the rest of my abilities.
    Both things you mention here I was aware of but I felt that neither add to your versatiliy which would have been the key to an increase in power.
    Thank all of the judges for judging this round, may the best Chef win.
    Thanks, I hope we judges managed to award the best Chef.

    I see what you mean about entering the SI late, but its required to keep the Steal Spell progession, dropping out of Spellthief earlier would have delayed Steal Spell(5th) and possibly Steal Spell(6th). Also, since Spellthief is 3/4 BAB she only qualifies for the SI at 8, but the extra die of SA and advanced Steal Spell is what makes her push entry into the PRC back so far.
    All you mention are the exact reasons why I was so surprised about all the spellthiefs. Doing everything right mechanically still doesn't change the fact that it would have been possible to enter the SI earlier.

  11. - Top - End - #431
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Gender
    Female

    Default Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge in the Playground L

    Quote Originally Posted by Korahir View Post
    I hope we judges managed to award the best Chef.
    I will second this statement.
    Last edited by relytdan; 2013-11-01 at 12:59 PM.

  12. - Top - End - #432
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    GreenSerpent's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2011

    Default Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge in the Playground L

    Just my two cents as a sometime-IC chef contestant, but I personally am not impressed with retdalyn's judging. It looks sloppily done, plus the reasons that I saw for dropping marks seem rather harsh. Dropping marks for not having the right number of sentences in a paragraph? Or for having too long a backstory?

    Please note that GITP is lagging horribly for me, so there will be spelling mistakes.
    Illumian Dread Necromancer Lich avatar by Tinymushroom.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bloodgruve View Post
    Really though, how effin scary would the beach be if an octopus could launch itself outta the water at a 200' move speed every 6 seconds. I'd never go to the beach again... I thought flying sharks were scary...

    Blood~

  13. - Top - End - #433
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Gender
    Female

    Default Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge in the Playground L

    GreenSerpent - I welcome your comment
    I will address this
    It looks sloppily done - tabled format is quite neat and uniform.

    Fluff
    - as is subjective to each judge- has no bearing on the right number of sentences.

    -I have seen several past contests where long fluff was penalized ; and frankly I do not care to read a short story - just what the character is doing and how they got what they got.- this can be done in around 2 paragraphs.

    - the deductions had absolutely nothing to do with the correct number of sentences in a paragraph.

    GreenSerpent - have a wonderful day.

    RE: Ponies-
    sorry on the miscommunication and confusion RE: Braxton
    rules interpretation = 0 that is where the score was adjusted.
    score is 16.5
    Last edited by relytdan; 2013-11-01 at 02:45 PM.

  14. - Top - End - #434
    Firbolg in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge in the Playground L

    Tallies Somewhere During Disputes But Who Can Really Keep Track Any More All I Know is that We've Had Three Judges 2: Electric Boogaloo
    {table=head]Entry|Medal|Total|Average
    Rand Turimbar|Gold|48.75|4.0625
    Sir Driscoll Conia|Silver|44.75|3.72916666666667
    Brooswayn Scourgesoul|Bronze|43.75| 3.64583333333333
    The Lost Crab|Bronze|43.75| 3.64583333333333
    Angelique A'lanale|Fifth|43|3.583333333
    Designation MDCCCLXXXVI|Fifth|43|3.583333333
    Eillyassa Miltal|Seventh|42.75|3.5625
    Braxton|Eighth|42.25|3.5208333333
    Magralyx|Eighth|41.75|3.479166667
    Leilani|Tenth|41.25|3.4375
    The Damned of the Crab|Eleventh|40.25|3.354166667
    Shane MacLaughlan|Twelfth|39.5|3.291666667
    Bug|Thirteenth|38.25|3.1875
    Giorgio|Fourteenth|36|3
    Smeagol|Fifteenth|34.5|2.875
    Pantaleon Dalence|Sixteenth|33|2.75[/table]

    The above table includes Korahir's +0.25 to Braxton's Power score from the most recent dispute.

    @relytdan

    Quote Originally Posted by relytdan View Post
    RE: Ponies-
    sorry on the miscommunication and confusion RE: Braxton
    rules interpretation = 0 that is where the score was adjusted.
    score is 16.5
    Thank you for clarifying. Adjustments have been made in the table above. The following questions of arithmetic are still open:

    Quote Originally Posted by OMG PONIES View Post
    Are Giorgio and Pantaleon are being penalized for an addition error on the part of the judge, or were there additional deductions not accounted for in your table that made it into the final score?
    I saw your first response, as follows:

    Quote Originally Posted by relytdan View Post
    Giorgio and Pantaleon - quite honestly the score listed was the final score the table information is slightly off - sorry for the confussion. - you can thank the chairman for it.
    I then responded with additional questions and fear that post might have gotten missed due to volume. I've reposted it below:

    Quote Originally Posted by OMG PONIES View Post
    The addition error in Giorgio's score was present from your intial scoring post; I fail to see how that's the Chairman's fault. You listed -1.5 points of individual deductions, but then stated the total deductions from the category were -2. I'm trying to determine if there was another -.5 individual deduction somewhere that wasn't listed or if it was just a math error in arriving at -2.

    When it comes to Pantaleon's score, I see that a deduction for "basic build" was removed from the table but never made it to the total score. Since other builds saw their total score updated at the Chairman's request, updating Pantaleon's total score as well is merely a matter of consistency.
    Can you please provide clarification on their scores, whether there were additional deductions not listed in your tables or whether a correction to their total scores is in order?

    @Korahir

    I don't know if the below also got lost in the shuffle. Would you please be able to address?

    Quote Originally Posted by OMG PONIES View Post
    Speaking of addition errors on the part of judges, a few quick arithmetic questions for Korahir:
    • Braxton: UoSI score reads 3.25, but tally is 2.75. Total seems to be based on 2.75. Which is correct?
    • Eillyassa: Based on the category scores given, I'm getting a total of 12.25 rather than 11.75.
    • Angelique: Power score reads 3.25, but tally is 3.75. Total should be 14.
    • Bug: Elegance score reads 3.5, but tally is 4. Total should be 11.25.
    Quote Originally Posted by Vaz View Post
    Ponies, the Kim Karsdashian of GITP.
    This is what happens when they let me DM:
    Beyond the Horizon IC / OOC
    A Time to Die: Alpha IC / Bravo IC / OOC

  15. - Top - End - #435
    Orc in the Playground
    Join Date
    Mar 2013

    Default Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge in the Playground L

    Here i thought english would be the problem, turns out my math is flawed ;P

    Braxton: UoSI score: 2,75 Total: 11,5 (unchanged)
    Eillyassa: total of 12.25
    Angelique: Power score: 3.75. Total: 14.
    Bug: Elegance score: 4. Total: 11.25.


    Sorry for making such obvious mistakes. Thanks ponies for pointing them out.

  16. - Top - End - #436
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    Keynub's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Caen, France
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge in the Playground L

    I'm sorry to say that I'm in way over my head.

    I'm only halfway through, so no judgings from me this round. My apologies.

    Overall, I'm impressed by Angelique A'lanale and Designation MDCCCLXXXVI, and Angelique gets my vote for Honorable Mention.

    I did finish rating Originality for all entries. Here are my thoughts, for those who wish to read them.

    Spoiler: Originality
    Show


    Spoiler: Criteria
    Show

    This is the most subjective category, so there will probably be disagreements. A similarity between two entries is not penalized.

    Everyone starts with a score of 3. Points are added or substracted for the following reasons :

    + Use of a race / class / ACF I did not expect, or a race / class / ACF that rarely sees play in IC competitions, to my experience.
    + The build's combat and out-of-combat roles are unexpected.
    + Original and / or compelling backstory and / or presentation. Bonus if it makes me laugh or if, after reading, I genuinely care about the character. I like being entertained.
    - Use of a very popular race / subrace / dip / ACF / template. No deductions are made for popular classes if you take them for more than 2 levels.
    - The build fills an expected role or uses expected strategies / tricks.
    - I didn't find the backstory or the character interesting.


    Smeagol, the Furious Avenger

    Spoiler
    Show

    + Your backstory made me smile. I'm not an expert on Lord of the Rings, so can you (or someone else) explain the references to the hooded white robes and the two snakes facing each other in front of the sun ? (+0.5)
    - I expected Half-Orcs. In addition, Desert Half-Orc is the most popular Half-Orc subrace, though it is rare to see Half-Orcs in IC. (+0)
    - I did expect Barbarian, and it is used fairly often as a dip. (-0.5)
    - Lion Totem, on top of that. Well, here goes. (-0.25)
    - Because of the similarities between Sworn Foe and Favored Enemy, I expected Ranger ; however, it doesn't see much play in IC from my experience. (+0)
    -Wait, I did not expect that Ranger ACF ! Actually, I have never heard of it before, so you get cookie points. (+0.25)
    + I expected both Avenging Executioner and Half-Orc Paragon. However, as explained in my criteria, I do not penalize classes unless they are dips, and although Avenging Executioner is sometimes used, Half-Orc Paragon is not. (+0.25)
    - I very much expected an Intimidate-focused melee build, and since you didn't explicitly write down Smeagol's tactics, I can only assume that he focuses on this. (-1)
    - Out-of-combat, you seem to focus on... err... climbing and jumping ? No obvious focus, so in order to stay on an equal foot with those who do have one, I must give you the standard penalty. (-0.25)

    Score = 2
    An Intimidate + Charge build was what I pictured when I first saw the SI. Maybe you should have Vizzini'd harder.

    Sir Driscoll Conia, the Diamond Knight

    Spoiler
    Show

    + I like the backstory, and I like the character. (+0.5)
    - Lesser Aasimar. Who doesn't know the Lesser Planetouched at this point ? (-0.25)
    - Corrupt Avenger has an explicit synergy with Paladin, so it was expected. (+0)
    + Swordsage, however, was the one martial adept I didn't expect, mostly because of the medium BAB. Quite present in IC contests though. (+0.5)
    - I thought about Bone Knight quite a bit, and it is very popular. (-0.5)
    - I expected an Intimidate-focused melee build. (-1)
    - No obvious out-of-combat role, so you get a minor deduction in order to stay on par with those who have one. (-0.25)

    Score = 2
    Your run-of-the-mill fallen Paladin. Swordsage is a nice touch, though.

    The Lost Crab
    Spoiler
    Show

    + The backstory didn't do anything for me, but the haikus are a nice touch, and it is impressive that you succeeded in finding a picture so appropriate. (+0.5)
    - Human. 'Nuff said. (-0.5)
    + I didn't expect Human Paragon, but it has seen a fair amount of use in past IC competitions. (+0.25)
    + In retrospect, I should have expected Maho-bujin, but since I didn't before I saw your build, for the sake of integrity, you get points. (+0.5)
    - Intimidation focus, again. (-1)
    - A scouting focus was also expected. (-0.25)

    Score = 2.5
    I really should have seen Maho-bujin coming, but hey, I didn't.

    Designation MDCCCLXXXVI

    Spoiler
    Show

    + Brrr. Delicious chills. You are close to maximal backstory score. (+0.75)
    + I didn't expect Warforged, though it is used often. (+0.25)
    - I expected Ranger ; however, it doesn't see much play in IC from my experience. (+0)
    + Didn't see that ACF coming though, mostly because I didn't know about it. (+0.25)
    + Incarnate ? Well well, now you're talking ! (+0.5)
    - Crusader was expected, but you took three levels, so it's not a dip as I defined them. No penalty. (+0)
    + Soulcaster was definitely not expected. No big bonus for only two levels of it, though. (+0.25)
    - Intimidate Focus was exp... wait, no Intimidate Focus ? How am I supposed to take points away from you now ? (+0)
    - Maneuver-fueled Melee combatant was expected because of the full BAB. (-0.5)
    - I was expecting a scouting focus as the main out-of-combat role, so you get a penalty here. (-0.25)

    Score = 4.25
    Your roles were expected, but the way you went about it was most definitely not.


    Magralyx the Kinslayer

    Spoiler
    Show

    + Did I just see a succubus ? (+0.25)
    + Yep. Seems I did. (+0.25)
    + Really, that's... wow. (+0.25)
    + And it counts as both a race and a class, so... (+0.25)
    + LA +6 ? 6 hit dice ? (+0.25)
    + Did I mention succubus ? (+0.25)

    Okay, so more seriously.
    + Nice backstory. (+0.25)
    + Succubus, as a race. Did not see that coming, no I didn't. And it's uncommon in IC too. (+0.75)
    + Succubus, as a class : idem. More levels in it equals more points.(+0.75)
    + I did not expect Battle Dancer, and I rarely see it used. (+0.5)
    You aren't focused on any specific combat role, so I'll split :
    - A little bit of ranged combat at low levels. Neither surprising nor expected. (+0)
    - A little bit of melee. That was expected. (-0.25)
    - A little bit of intimidation. No real emphasis, but it's there, and expected. (-0.25)
    - Party face and scout were two expected out-of-combat roles. (-0.25)

    Score : 4.5
    You're a succubus. You might be a typical one (except for the LG thing), but even the most bland succubus will have an original feel, so there you go.

    Braxton the Destroyer, Sworn Enemy of Evil, Unstoppable Force of Destruction, The Rock Against Which all Evil is Crushed, Slayer of Those Who Deserve Slaying, Warrior of the Unyielding Sword

    Spoiler
    Show

    + Okay backstory, though I don't understand why you put those references there. Conan ? A Knight's Tale ? What does it have to do with Braxton ? (+0)
    - Humans, humans everywhere ! (-0.5)
    - Warblade was expected, and sees regular play. (+0)
    - Barbarian, however, is an expected and often seen dip. (-0.5)
    - Lion Totem ACF. (-0.25)
    +Wait, Rage Mage ? Now that's unexpected, and not something we see in every contest. (+0.5)
    - Melee combatant with Intimidate focus. The obvious route, same penalty as everyone.(-1)
    - No focus out of combat, which should be at least as penalized as an expected focus. (-0.25)

    Score : 1
    Standard race, standard classes, standard everything. Even Rage Mage can't save you. That's a shame, I like Rage Mage.

    Eillyassa Miltal

    Spoiler
    Show

    + Okay backstory. (+0.25)
    + Strongheart halflings see a lot of play, but not Lightfoot halflings, so you get a bonus. (+0.25)
    + Spellthief I did not expect at all. (+0.75)
    + Melee combatant was expected, but not two-weaponers or sneak-attack focused builds. (+0)
    - I see no particular focus out of combat. Maybe party face with Bluff. Either way, that's the same penalty. (-0.25)

    Score : 4
    Nothing exceptional, but a collection of both uncommon and unexpected choices.

    Giorgio, the Lich's Bane

    Spoiler
    Show

    + I enjoyed the backstory. (+0.5)
    - Humans, both expected and oft-used. Standard penalty. (-0.5)
    + Spellthief was unexpected, so you get a small bonus for that dip. (+0.25)
    + Rogue was unexpected as well. (+0.25)
    + Sorcerer was unexpected, and while it regularly features in IC, its Battle variant does not. (+0.5)
    + It's hard to determine what your role is supposed to be, so I'll assume half sneak attacker, half BC / debuffer caster. Anyway, those are two unexpected roles, so you get (+0.5).
    - Out-of-combat, you've only got Spot going for you. The closest role you can borrow is that of the scout, so that's a (-0.25).

    Score : 4.25
    An odd collection of classes, and an unusual combat focus for a Corrupt Avenger. No entry in there looks like yours.

    Brooswayn « Knight From the Dark » Scourgesoul

    Spoiler
    Show

    + I laughed. Hard. The picture, the caption, the name, everything. Of course, that was before I read the last paragraph. And, good sir or madam, you get maximal backstory points.(+1)
    + Hellbred was unexpected, but it regularly appears in IC. (+0.25)
    - Warblade was expected and a common occurrence. (+0)
    + I expected someone to grab Mettle, and so Hellreaver was on my list of expected classes. I don't think Hellreaver is seen often in Iron Chef, though. (+0.25)
    - Intimidatefocusmeleecharacter and no play makes Keynub a dull boy. (-1)
    - No obvious out-of-combat role. (-0.25)

    Score : 3.25
    Your character is pretty much run-of-the-mill, and that's where the backstory (among other things) separates him from the others.

    Angelique A'lanale

    Spoiler
    Show

    + Superb backstory, masterfully written. As I read the final paragraph, I found myself cheering. (+1)
    - Azurin often appears in IC, and is nearly on the same level as Human in terms of expectation. (-0.25)
    - Duskblade was expected and is common. (+0)
    + Soulborn. I didn't think I would be surprised by a full BAB base class this round. Well done. (+0.5)
    + Hellreaver was expected for this round, though rare in IC. (+0.25)
    - Frontline fighter was an expected role, but no Intimidate focus, so good on you. In-combat healing is rare, and I especially didn't expect it for this SI. (+0)
    + Out of combat, you are focused on healing, which was highly unexpected. (+0.25)

    Score : 4.75
    Nonstandard combat role, unique way of achieving it, a way with words, but the beauty of the entry lies in the fact that Angelique is not only a build, but a great character.

    Shane McLaughlan

    Spoiler
    Show

    + The origin story doesn't do anything for me, but I have to give you some points for your presentation, particularly the use of different colors for the spells of your different classes, and the use of bold for new skills / skill tricks, as it greatly facilitated my work. (+0.25)
    - Human, again. (-0.5)
    + Spellthief was unexpected, so you get a small bonus for that dip.(+0.25)
    - Duskblade is popular and was expected. (+0)
    + I did not see Unseen Seer coming (see what I did there ? Oh look, I did it again), but it's a popular PrC. (+0.25)
    + Mage of the Arcane Order is another popular PrC that I didn't expect for this contest. (+0.25)
    + Melee was expected, sneak attack was not. In addition, you are able to fulfill an arbitrary number of roles to a limited extent thanks to your brand new trick. (+0.25)
    + Scouting was expected, but trapfinding was most definitely not. These two cancel each other out. (+0)

    Score : 3.75
    Your class combination is surprising, although the individual ingredients are not unheard of in IC.

    Bug, a.k.a. Twinkling Guide, a.k.a. Mr. T

    Spoiler
    Show

    + I laughed. Good job. (+0.5)
    + I don't think I have ever seen a Diopsid before in IC. And I've read the Dervish builds. If it isn't in there, I don't know where it could be.(+0.5)
    - Barbarian was expected, and is popular. Not a dip, so no penalty. (+0)
    - Lion Spirit Totem is only second to Imperious Command on the list of things I never want to see again. It's good, but too much of a good thing... (-0.25)
    - Skilled City-Dweller is another popular ACF, because Tumble. (-0.25)
    + Now, I didn't see Trapkiller coming. (+0.25)
    + Hellreaver was expected for this round, though rare in IC. (+0.25)
    - Intimidate focus, charger build, nothing to see here, move along.(-1)
    + Out of combat, your main activity is trapfinding, which was unexpected. (+0.25)

    Score : 3.25
    The unusual choices you make more than outweigh the Intimidate focus. But still, Intimidate focus was the obvious route.

    The Damned of the Crab

    Spoiler
    Show

    + Nice backstory. (+0.25)
    - Azurin gets a small penalty. Popular for the same reason as Human, but a whole lot less common. (-0.25)
    - Paladin was expected. Not a dip, so no penalty. (+0)
    + I didn't expect Totemist, but it is a popular class in IC. (+0)
    + Everyone knows about Telflammar Shadowlord, but I didn't see it coming here. (+0.25)
    + Melee was expected, sneak attack was not. Shadowpouncers were unforeseen, but this doesn't affect your score because you cannot use it before level 20, that is 5 % of a non-epic campaign, assuming it even attains this level.(+0)
    - Out-of combat, you are focused on scouting, at least I presume so. (-0.25)

    Score : 3
    Telflammar Shadowlord was the key here. It's a shame you get it so late.

    Rand Turimbar
    Spoiler
    Show

    + Backstory is okay. (+0.25)
    + Due to the Constitution penalty, and the reliance of Corruption mechanics on Constitution, I didn't expect any Elf subrace this round. (+0.25)
    - Crusader was expected and is popular. (+0)
    + Jade Phoenix Mage wasn't expected. (+0.25)
    - Maneuver-fueled Melee attacker was expected. (-0.5)
    - Out of combat, for most of your career, Intimidate and Hide do the job ; that's either scout or party face, and both were expected. You do make some use of your Knowledges, though. (+0)

    Score : 3.25
    Not the obvious choice, not a mind-blowing one either.

    Pantaleon Dalence, the Blurred Visage

    Spoiler
    Show

    - No backstory. You provided a build where I (and I assume I'm not the only one) would have liked a character.(-0.5)
    - Illumian is a very common sight in IC. (-0.25)
    - Fighter was expected this round, and has been known to appear in IC. (+0)
    - Ranger, though expected, isn't very popular in IC, according to my experience. (+0)
    + Now that's something ! I didn't even know about Soldier of Light. Only a dip won't grant you much, though. (+0.25)
    + Will you believe that I didn't even think about Swiftblade ? It's popular, though. For 9 levels, you still gain some points. (+0.5)
    - You're a melee combatant first and foremost. This was expected. (-0.5)
    - Tracking focus out of combat was expected. (-0.25)

    Score : 2.25
    Swiftblade was a nice touch, but your other choices were standard. What I most regret is the absence of a backstory, but you know that already.

    Leilani

    Spoiler
    Show

    + You cover the bases in your backstory, but it's very little. (+0)
    + Akutsuwhatnow ? I don't think I've ever heard of this. But it's a template, and according to my criteria, templates don't give bonuses, only penalties. (+0)
    - Human again. (-0.5)
    + Spellthief was very unexpected, as stated before. (+0.5)
    - Swordsage might have been unexpected, but its popularity offsets the bonus. (+0)
    + Maho-Tsukai, on the other hand, wasn't expected. (+0.25)
    + You're a melee sneak attacker. I don't include your primary spellcaster abilities in your Originality rating, since you can do this only at level 20. (+0)
    + Out-of-combat, you've got a nice little portfolio. Appraise, all the Knowledge skills, Sense Motive were unexpected ; you've got some social and some scouting, but all in all, it is mostly surprising. (+0.25)

    Score : 3.5
    I'll admit, overall, it's far from the build I imagined upon seeing the SI. On the other hand, human.


    So that's that. Sorry again, and congratulations to everyone.
    Last edited by Keynub; 2013-11-01 at 04:12 PM.

  17. - Top - End - #437
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Gender
    Female

    Default Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge in the Playground L

    Quote Originally Posted by OMG PONIES View Post
    I then responded with additional questions and fear that post might have gotten missed due to volume.
    Giorgio
    power - math error
    Score should be 13.25

    Pantaleon
    basic build = 0
    Score should be 14.5

  18. - Top - End - #438
    Banned
     
    Devil

    Join Date
    Nov 2012

    Default Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge in the Playground L

    Thanks Socratov and Keynub for letting us know, it is appreciated.

    In regards to System Mastery, I became hooked on [redacted] after seeing how to properly utilise it in a build that achieved the same thing I had tried to lever in, but done much more cleanly. There can always be some application of it somewhere im a build.

  19. - Top - End - #439
    Firbolg in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge in the Playground L

    Quote Originally Posted by relytdan View Post
    Pantaleon
    basic build = 0
    Score should be 14.5
    Thank you for updating.

    Quote Originally Posted by relytdan View Post
    Giorgio
    power - math error
    Score should be 13.25
    Sorry to drag this out, but just to confirm: even though the individual Power deductions only list -1.5 in deductions for a total score of 13.75, you're holding to -2 in Power deductions for a total score of 13.25, thus penalizing the build for no other reason than an addition error on the part of the judge?
    Quote Originally Posted by Vaz View Post
    Ponies, the Kim Karsdashian of GITP.
    This is what happens when they let me DM:
    Beyond the Horizon IC / OOC
    A Time to Die: Alpha IC / Bravo IC / OOC

  20. - Top - End - #440
    Troll in the Playground
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    The Great White North

    Default Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge in the Playground L

    Sorry, Ponies, but there's no rest for the wicked. Another dispute -
    Quote Originally Posted by Giorgio
    For Giorgio, and possibly the other spellthief dips, I looked at the RAW, and I may be reading this wrong, but is seems that I can hold the spell for one round regardless of the level.

    After stealing a spell, a spellthief can cast the spell
    himself on a subsequent turn.
    As a result I should be steal the spell, and then pump it into my Arcane Strike/Razing strike, depending on the target, next turn. Again I may be misreading this, but it seems that i can hold the spell for the one round it would take to make my next attack.
    Quote Originally Posted by MDCCCLXXXVI
    I would like to thank all of the judges for judging—and those who could not for attempting.

    OMG Ponies:
    Page 8 of the Tome of Battle says that Crusaders can be any alignment EXCEPT True Neutral—so MDCCCLXXXVI is ok there. Higher level Crusader maneuvers do have alignment descriptors and I thought the Crusader levels fit more with MDCCCLXXXVI’s systematic thinking.
    It was supposed to be the Mournlands itself corrupting our warforged here. I should have made that more clear in the story itself. The idea was that the devastation brought about by the Day of Mourning was so great, that the area itself became Tainted. Since Taint itself is an alternate rule system that requires DM approval I figured at least some of the Mournlands would be Tainted.
    The name MDCCCLXXXVI does have a significance but for anonymity reasons, I cannot say until the reveal. I will note that it does not have anything to do with the Modern Warfare franchise.

    Korahir:
    I wouldn’t consider Level 10 to be “very” late for entry into the SI, but it was as soon as he could with the Incarnate levels granting poor BAB advancement. Also while he does have few skill points to play with, MDCCCLXXXVI is more interested in tracking and finding them (Survival and Spot). Skill ranks at Level 20 for him are 13 each and +8 bonus helps in this regard. True Bluff, Listen, and Sense Motive are not as highly invested skillwise but then again he is not interested in using subtlety when he finds his human foes. The idea here was the bonus was offsetting the non-maxed out skills.
    Further, I thought my explanation for not completing the SI would negate any penalties for not completing the SI. In comparison Magralyx who enters the SI even later (at ECL 14) was complimented for not completing the SI, noting how the eighth level of the SI is a dead level for class abilities. MDCCCLXXXVI was able to pick up the ninth level and the last unique class ability.

    For both OMG Ponies and Korahir:
    About the incarnum spellcasting—here was what I had interpreted. Incarnum Spellshaping is the feat needed in order to even cast spells with the Incarnum descriptor as described on p 98 of Magic of Incarnum. The feat further describes that the spells are cast “as appropriate for your class’ spellcasting ability,” in this case the Corrupt Avenger, as MDCCCLXXXVI has no other spellcasting capability. The Corrupt Avenger prepares spells as a wizard does with a spellbook. The SI in the spellcasting section notes that MDCCCLXXXVI can learn spells from wizards or wu jen as long as those spells are on my class list. Thanks to Incarnum Spellshaping, these incarnum spells are on my class list and are legal for me to learn. The incarnum spells are not normally on a wizard’s spell list either—unless he has the Incarnum Spellshaping feat. And those are “typical” spells prepared, not absolutes, so even if the judges disagree with my interpretation, MDCCCLXXXVI still has the ability to cast from the “standard” spell list including being able to pump essentia to increase the spell level.
    Quote Originally Posted by Angelique
    OMG_PONIES
    Spoiler
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by OMG_PONIES
    Ability that deals stat damage+Strongheart Vest is an old reliable combo by now, and one that isn't really needed as Heroic Sacrifice + Tainted Fury would have been a cool new way to offset the CON damage. It's the only offender here, though (0).

    Sorry if this feels like a double-dip on Strongheart Vest, but above I deducted for Originality since it's a suggestion that flies all over charop boards. Here, I'm deducting because some will say it doesn't work. As you reduce the ability damage taken rather than healing it, you never actually "voluntarily take 2 points of CON damage." Therefore, you're not making a heroic sacrifice (-0.5).
    I agree. Old combo + not truly needed. I have no objects to the originality score. It does feel a little bit of a double dip on elegance. The character was designed to have alternate means to heal ability damage, in the event that a DM ruled strong heart vest unable to absorb the damage. Mitigate suffering offsets the ability damage temporarily, rod of bodily restoration to heal any she did end up taking and a lessor restoration spell prepared for a last resort.

    The character does fear her powers failing, as mentioned in her backstory, though it was brief (cursed character limit!). I am, in no way, disputing your score. I found it rather fair, all around. Just thought you could take a second look, see if the explanation helps.

    Assuming "Cobalt Attack" is actually "Cobalt Power," you qualify for that. However, with 3 ranks in Knowledge Religion at 9th level, you don't qualify for Arcane Disciple. Also, your table says you're snagging the Healing domain but your write-up mentions the Life domain. Which is correct? Without 1 rank in Heal, you don't qualify for Healing Soul (-0.5).
    Yes, Cobalt Power.

    I blame oversight on all the listed issues. The character had the ability to acquire all feats, skill requirements and have it accurately reflected on her sheet long before actually taking them. The arcane disciple life was the intended feat, as it grants lesser restoration as a 2nd lvl domain spell, needed for both mitigate suffering and touch of healing.

    Heh, it is my first character submission after all. Bound to make some mistakes.

    The build fails to qualify for the Secret Ingredient. As presented, you gain your feat for moderate corruption only after entering the prestige class (-0.5).
    As presented, yes. If we move the moderate taint acquisition to level 8 (DM controls that right?), we will fulfill the requirements. I think your score should stand, it was my oversight.


    Korahir
    Spoiler
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Korahir
    You enter very late and don't complete the SI [2]. Worse: you don't qualify for the SI, because you get the bonus feat and therefor moderate taint at level 9, you would need it at 8 (-0,5). Grim resolve is used nicely with mettle (+0,5).
    Affirmative. My lack of oversight. The build is capable of meeting the SI requirement if we acquire moderate taint at level 8. I fully intended to, as it plays a role in her story of becoming barren and internalizing the taint.

    Gaining moderate taint to enter CA means your alignment shifts to neutral. You would lose all Soulborn class features (-0,5).
    This is the only real dispute I have. While a character is more prone to violent acts and registers as evil under a detect evil spell, any actual alignment change is up to the DM. The book says "a rule of thumb characters with moderate taint are Neutral at best." There is no real hard/fast rule for alignment change due to taint.

    However, should a DM rule this way, the character still maintains most of her effectiveness. I took strong heart vest with a feat just in case this might come up, so no loss there. Merely paralysis and disease immunity are lost.


    Keynub
    Spoiler
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Keynub
    Angelique gets my vote for Honorable Mention.

    Superb backstory, masterfully written. As I read the final paragraph, I found myself cheering
    Thank you for that. You made my night. ^_^

  21. - Top - End - #441
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Thurbane's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Terra Australis
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge in the Playground L

    My honorable mention goes to Magralyx.

    Entering a +6 LA race is a fairly bold decision, and I quite enjoyed the back-story.

  22. - Top - End - #442
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    PaladinGuy

    Join Date
    Feb 2010

    Default Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge in the Playground L

    wow. Judging is serious business. My hat off to you all.

  23. - Top - End - #443
    Orc in the Playground
    Join Date
    Mar 2013

    Default Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge in the Playground L

    MDCCCLXXXVI
    Korahir:
    I wouldn’t consider Level 10 to be “very” late for entry into the SI, but it was as soon as he could with the Incarnate levels granting poor BAB advancement.
    Further, I thought my explanation for not completing the SI would negate any penalties for not completing the SI.
    True, very late would have been level 15+. I awarded 3 points for entering around 8-9 and finishing the SI. You got a 0,25 penalty for entering a little later and not finishing. I think this is justified as it is a minor penalty.

    In comparison Magralyx who enters the SI even later (at ECL 14) was complimented for not completing the SI, noting how the eighth level of the SI is a dead level for class abilities. MDCCCLXXXVI was able to pick up the ninth level and the last unique class ability.
    While judging I thought about this a lot: Is it right to treat Magralyx different than anyone else for that bold move? I came up with the answer that I want to treat that entry different, because it would only be possible to pick up 8 levels.


    Also while he does have few skill points to play with, MDCCCLXXXVI is more interested in tracking and finding them (Survival and Spot). Skill ranks at Level 20 for him are 13 each and +8 bonus helps in this regard. True Bluff, Listen, and Sense Motive are not as highly invested skillwise but then again he is not interested in using subtlety when he finds his human foes. The idea here was the bonus was offsetting the non-maxed out skills.
    This is why I got the feeling that soulcaster would help you more than CA.

    Looking over your judging I realized i didn't award your use of tainted fury and therefor use of taint. Scoring adjustement: +0,5 UotSi

    About the incarnum spellcasting—here was what I had interpreted. Incarnum Spellshaping is the feat needed in order to even cast spells with the Incarnum descriptor as described on p 98 of Magic of Incarnum. The feat further describes that the spells are cast “as appropriate for your class’ spellcasting ability,” in this case the Corrupt Avenger, as MDCCCLXXXVI has no other spellcasting capability. The Corrupt Avenger prepares spells as a wizard does with a spellbook. The SI in the spellcasting section notes that MDCCCLXXXVI can learn spells from wizards or wu jen as long as those spells are on my class list. Thanks to Incarnum Spellshaping, these incarnum spells are on my class list and are legal for me to learn. The incarnum spells are not normally on a wizard’s spell list either—unless he has the Incarnum Spellshaping feat.
    My interpretation: You need a wizard or Wu Jen with the Incarnum Spellshaping feat who knows your listed spells so you can learn them. Your write up didn't mention that.
    And those are “typical” spells prepared, not absolutes, so even if the judges disagree with my interpretation, MDCCCLXXXVI still has the ability to cast from the “standard” spell list including being able to pump essentia to increase the spell level.
    I mention I disagree with your choice but don't penalize because it's easy to change the spells.

    Angelique
    Affirmative. My lack of oversight. The build is capable of meeting the SI requirement if we acquire moderate taint at level 8. I fully intended to, as it plays a role in her story of becoming barren and internalizing the taint.
    I read it and felt bad because I thought this is such a little thing that could have happened when putting the write up together and still has some serious effect.

    This is the only real dispute I have. While a character is more prone to violent acts and registers as evil under a detect evil spell, any actual alignment change is up to the DM. The book says "a rule of thumb characters with moderate taint are Neutral at best." There is no real hard/fast rule for alignment change due to taint.
    True, but the DM has the last word on this and it could be one way or antoher.
    However, should a DM rule this way, the character still maintains most of her effectiveness. I took strong heart vest with a feat just in case this might come up, so no loss there. Merely paralysis and disease immunity are lost.
    Still you could lose some of your abilities and therefor your dish loses some taste (or elegance in that case).
    Last edited by Korahir; 2013-11-02 at 06:16 AM.

  24. - Top - End - #444
    Firbolg in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge in the Playground L

    Quote Originally Posted by Giorgio
    For Giorgio, and possibly the other spellthief dips, I looked at the RAW, and I may be reading this wrong, but is seems that I can hold the spell for one round regardless of the level.
    After stealing a spell, a spellthief can cast the spell
    himself on a subsequent turn.
    As a result I should be steal the spell, and then pump it into my Arcane Strike/Razing strike, depending on the target, next turn. Again I may be misreading this, but it seems that i can hold the spell for the one round it would take to make my next attack.
    I believe that the quoted text introduces the rules for spellthieves using spells they've stolen, but I believe that a few specific rules follows that general one. Of importance to this discussion is one of the specific rules found in the second column of the same page:
    Quote Originally Posted by CAdv, pg 16
    At any one time, a spellthief can possess a maximum number of stolen spell levels equal to his class level (treat 0-level spells as 1/2 level for this purpose). For instance, a 4th-level spellthief can have two stolen 2nd-level spells, or one 2nd-level spell and two 1st-level spells, or any other combination of 0-level, 1st-level, and 2nd-level spells totaling four levels. If he steals a spell that would cause him to exceed this limit, he must choose to lose stolen spells sufficient to reduce his total number of stolen spell levels to no more than his maximum.
    Given the use of the language "at any one time," as well as the lack of any kind of stated exception like "except the first round after stealing a spell," I read that you must be able to hold the spell you've stolen, even if for one round. Otherwise, you can steal it but can't use/convert it. If you can find a reason for the contrary, I'll take another look. Even with that, though, Giorgio's power suffers because he gives up sorcerer casting for the more limited Corrupt Avenger casting. Scoring stands.

    Quote Originally Posted by MDCCCLXXXVI
    I would like to thank all of the judges for judging—and those who could not for attempting.
    Thanks! I also want to thank those who couldn't finish for attempting. I know it can be a daunting task, but the only way to do it is to try. Thanks for the efforts, folks!

    Quote Originally Posted by MDCCCLXXXVI
    Page 8 of the Tome of Battle says that Crusaders can be any alignment EXCEPT True Neutral—so MDCCCLXXXVI is ok there. Higher level Crusader maneuvers do have alignment descriptors and I thought the Crusader levels fit more with MDCCCLXXXVI’s systematic thinking.
    Sorry I didn't think to do this before; I went back to the PHB section on alignments. There, True Neutral is referred to as "Neutral." Also, the page mentioned says that crusaders can stand for chaos, evil, good, or law...I guess you can stand for Law and remain neutral on the good/evil front. +0.5 in Elegance

    Quote Originally Posted by MDCCCLXXXVI
    It was supposed to be the Mournlands itself corrupting our warforged here. I should have made that more clear in the story itself. The idea was that the devastation brought about by the Day of Mourning was so great, that the area itself became Tainted. Since Taint itself is an alternate rule system that requires DM approval I figured at least some of the Mournlands would be Tainted.
    Gotcha--this probably would have received full points if it was more clear in the story. I had a similar idea for a Cyran Avenger roaming the Mournlands and counting them as a tainted area, but I wouldn't have held that against you. As presented, though, it's not clear enough to receive full points. Scoring stands.

    Quote Originally Posted by MDCCCLXXXVI
    The name MDCCCLXXXVI does have a significance but for anonymity reasons, I cannot say until the reveal. I will note that it does not have anything to do with the Modern Warfare franchise.
    Ooh, secrets! Will you tell us after the reveal?

    Quote Originally Posted by MDCCCLXXXVI
    About the incarnum spellcasting—here was what I had interpreted. Incarnum Spellshaping is the feat needed in order to even cast spells with the Incarnum descriptor as described on p 98 of Magic of Incarnum. The feat further describes that the spells are cast “as appropriate for your class’ spellcasting ability,” in this case the Corrupt Avenger, as MDCCCLXXXVI has no other spellcasting capability. The Corrupt Avenger prepares spells as a wizard does with a spellbook. The SI in the spellcasting section notes that MDCCCLXXXVI can learn spells from wizards or wu jen as long as those spells are on my class list. Thanks to Incarnum Spellshaping, these incarnum spells are on my class list and are legal for me to learn. The incarnum spells are not normally on a wizard’s spell list either—unless he has the Incarnum Spellshaping feat. And those are “typical” spells prepared, not absolutes, so even if the judges disagree with my interpretation, MDCCCLXXXVI still has the ability to cast from the “standard” spell list including being able to pump essentia to increase the spell level.
    Incarnum spells appear on particular class spell lists. For example, if a bard took Incarnum Spellshaping, he'd only gain access to the two incarnum spells that list an entry for where on the bard spell list they appear. The language about learning spells from the books of others stipulates that the spell has to be on your class spell list, thus referring back to the Corrupt Avenger's fixed list of spells. Since no Incarnum spell provides a listing for what level it would be in a Corrupt Avenger's spell list, you cannot add them. Their appearance on the sorc/wiz spell list only satisfies one of the two conditions of learning spells from the spellbooks of other casting classes. Scoring stands.


    Quote Originally Posted by Angelique
    Quote Originally Posted by OMG_PONIES
    Ability that deals stat damage+Strongheart Vest is an old reliable combo by now, and one that isn't really needed as Heroic Sacrifice + Tainted Fury would have been a cool new way to offset the CON damage. It's the only offender here, though (0).

    Sorry if this feels like a double-dip on Strongheart Vest, but above I deducted for Originality since it's a suggestion that flies all over charop boards. Here, I'm deducting because some will say it doesn't work. As you reduce the ability damage taken rather than healing it, you never actually "voluntarily take 2 points of CON damage." Therefore, you're not making a heroic sacrifice (-0.5).
    I agree. Old combo + not truly needed. I have no objects to the originality score. It does feel a little bit of a double dip on elegance. The character was designed to have alternate means to heal ability damage, in the event that a DM ruled strong heart vest unable to absorb the damage. Mitigate suffering offsets the ability damage temporarily, rod of bodily restoration to heal any she did end up taking and a lessor restoration spell prepared for a last resort.
    I appreciate the alternative means for healing ability damage, and they were more reasons that Strongheart Vest didn't even need to make an appearance. The Originality deduction was because of it being commonplace. The Elegance deduction was for the interpretation that it would still allow you to fuel Heroic Sacrifice. Some abilities function, then deal ability damage as a side effect after the fact. Strongheart Vest is great for those, since you've already used your ability and can now ignore the consequence. But for abilities like Heroic Sacrifice that require you to take the ability damage in order to trigger the desired effect, Strongheart Vest prevents it from working in the first place. Since that's a separate issue than whether or not it's overly used, I felt it merited a separate deduction. Scoring stands.

    Quote Originally Posted by Angelique
    The character does fear her powers failing, as mentioned in her backstory, though it was brief (cursed character limit!). I am, in no way, disputing your score. I found it rather fair, all around. Just thought you could take a second look, see if the explanation helps.
    I always appreciate hearing more explanation from the chefs, but I often wish that the additional explanation had been in the original entry. Also, a friendly tip about character limits: the character limit of a post is actually twice that of a PM. When in doubt, send it to the Chairman in multiple parts. Granted, it might then be helpful to label them "Part 1, Part 2," and so on.

    Quote Originally Posted by Angelique
    Quote Originally Posted by OMG PONIES
    Assuming "Cobalt Attack" is actually "Cobalt Power," you qualify for that. However, with 3 ranks in Knowledge Religion at 9th level, you don't qualify for Arcane Disciple. Also, your table says you're snagging the Healing domain but your write-up mentions the Life domain. Which is correct? Without 1 rank in Heal, you don't qualify for Healing Soul (-0.5).
    Yes, Cobalt Power.

    I blame oversight on all the listed issues. The character had the ability to acquire all feats, skill requirements and have it accurately reflected on her sheet long before actually taking them. The arcane disciple life was the intended feat, as it grants lesser restoration as a 2nd lvl domain spell, needed for both mitigate suffering and touch of healing.

    Heh, it is my first character submission after all. Bound to make some mistakes.
    Don't worry about it; I've been submitting entries since Round IX. I think Amphetryon was in it even before I came around. I won't speak for him, but I still wind up kicking myself sometimes about tiny mistakes. Remember, poof reeding is impotent!

    Quote Originally Posted by Angelique
    Quote Originally Posted by OMG PONIES
    The build fails to qualify for the Secret Ingredient. As presented, you gain your feat for moderate corruption only after entering the prestige class (-0.5).
    As presented, yes. If we move the moderate taint acquisition to level 8 (DM controls that right?), we will fulfill the requirements. I think your score should stand, it was my oversight.
    Yep, this is one of those unfortunate times where I score what was given to me...even if fixing it is simple. As requested, scoring stands.

    Tallies, Wherever we Are!
    {table=head]Entry|Medal|Total|Average
    Rand Turimbar|Gold|48.75|4.0625
    Sir Driscoll Conia|Silver|44.75|3.72916666666667
    Designation MDCCCLXXXVI|Bronze|44|3.66666666666666667
    Brooswayn Scourgesoul|Fourth|43.75|3.64583333333333
    The Lost Crab|Fourth|43.75|3.64583333333333
    Angelique A'lanale|Sixth|43|3.583333333
    Eillyassa Miltal|Seventh|42.75|3.5625
    Braxton|Eighth|42.25|3.5208333333
    Magralyx|Eighth|41.75|3.479166667
    Leilani|Tenth|41.25|3.4375
    The Damned of the Crab|Eleventh|40.25|3.354166667
    Shane MacLaughlan|Twelfth|39.5|3.291666667
    Bug|Thirteenth|38.25|3.1875
    Giorgio|Fourteenth|36|3
    Smeagol|Fifteenth|34.5|2.875
    Pantaleon Dalence|Sixteenth|33.25|2.77083333333333333[/table]

    And just like that, we have a medal upset! Also, lest I forget: my Honorable Mention vote goes to Magralyx. She came out of left field with the "go big or go home" selection of Succubus, and I appreciate her various CHA synergies and awesome background.
    Last edited by OMG PONIES; 2013-11-02 at 07:11 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Vaz View Post
    Ponies, the Kim Karsdashian of GITP.
    This is what happens when they let me DM:
    Beyond the Horizon IC / OOC
    A Time to Die: Alpha IC / Bravo IC / OOC

  25. - Top - End - #445
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    yougi's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Canada
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge in the Playground L

    I believe these disputes were never answered. Sorry if it seems overly pushy relytdan, I would have dropped it if not for the fact that it could have an impact on the medals, given the latest disputes.
    Last edited by yougi; 2013-11-02 at 09:19 AM. Reason: I can't spell
    Spoiler: ICitP Participations
    Show

    L - Corrupt Avenger - Brooswayn Scourgesoul (4th)
    LI - Black Flame Zealot - Anubis (SILVER)


    Blackguard Avatar from Cealocanth

  26. - Top - End - #446
    Troll in the Playground
     
    WhamBamSam's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Michigan
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge in the Playground L

    Quote Originally Posted by yougi View Post
    I believe these disputes were never answered. Sorry if it seems overly pushy relytdan, I would have dropped it if not for the fact that it could have an impact on the medals, given the latest disputes.
    She did say that their scores stand a few pages back, though as with most of her scoring, she didn't offer any explanation.

  27. - Top - End - #447
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Dec 2006

    Default Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge in the Playground L

    Quote Originally Posted by WhamBamSam View Post
    She did say that their scores stand a few pages back, though as with most of her scoring, she didn't offer any explanation.
    This is true.

    Are there any outstanding disputes the judges have not yet addressed, or declared judges yet to deliver scores?
    Iron Chef in the Playground veteran since Round IV. Play as me!


    Spoiler
    Show

  28. - Top - End - #448
    Troll in the Playground
     
    thethird's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2013

    Default Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge in the Playground L

    50% of this were not addressed not even acknowledged, specially considering there is a comment from the chairman I think they should.

    My HM also goes to a succubus
    Last edited by thethird; 2013-11-02 at 12:02 PM.
    Thanks a lot Gengy for the awesome... just a sec... avatar. :)

  29. - Top - End - #449
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Gender
    Female

    Default Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge in the Playground L

    It appears that I forgot to change the 12 to 13...
    Score 13.75
    total penalties: 6.25
    Originality -2
    Power -1.5
    Elegance -1
    UsotSI -1.75

  30. - Top - End - #450
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Thurbane's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Terra Australis
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge in the Playground L

    Korahir:
    I wouldn’t consider Level 10 to be “very” late for entry into the SI, but it was as soon as he could with the Incarnate levels granting poor BAB advancement.
    Further, I thought my explanation for not completing the SI would negate any penalties for not completing the SI.
    Not to comment on any other person's judging, but I just have to say if/when I ever judge again, I would always give a penalty for not taking all levels of the SI (and this would be listed in my criteria), no matter how well justified in the write-up.

    If it was only short by 1 or 2 levels, the penalty would be light, but it would still be there.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •