# Thread: Junkyard Wars in the Playground I

1. ## Re: Junkyard Wars in the Playground I

Given that IC: Zenth Cenobyte had 8 builds and 5 jugdes and wasn't averaging towards similar scores, i'm not sure how realistic that concern is

2. ## Re: Junkyard Wars in the Playground I

Originally Posted by Kazudo
I actually really, really like the notion of a slimmer number of entrants and a larger number of judges. The thing that would be most afraid of is that given a significantly differing ratio of judging and builds (benefiting judging) with all builds being ideally different, the average of scores for the builds would approach the same number.
I think this is something to worry about only if it starts to become an issue. Right now we've got 4 builds and 3 judges, and the scores aren't really converging. Plus, next round you're going to make Build Stability a 10-point category, right? Having more possible points seems like it'd make score convergence less likely.

Since I had to do this math anyway to write this post, here's a continuation of Ikeren's aggregations from page 5, updated to include Deadline's scores:

Build 1: 12/15, 13/15, 10/15 = 35/45
Build 2: 10.5/15, 9/15, 10.75/15 = 30.25/45
Build 3: 10.5/15, 8.5/15, 8.75/15 = 27.75/45
Build 4: 12/15, 9.75/15, 11.5/15 = 33.25/45

Overall, these seem less similar than when there were only two scores per build. There's less of an obvious front-runner, but more space, on average, between each score.

If scores DO start to get really similar, either in this challenge or future ones, then it might be worth restricting the judge-to-contestant ratio, but I agree with Sian that it doesn't seem likely enough to warrant preemptive action.

3. ## Re: Junkyard Wars in the Playground I

I'm more concerned about the Iron Chef where nobody has judged at all :P

4. ## Re: Junkyard Wars in the Playground I

When is the deadline for judging? Just curious how long before this is over, and can't seem to find that information.

Edit: nevermind, the OP clearly says 11:59pm April 17th, so another 36 hours give or take.

5. ## Re: Junkyard Wars in the Playground I

GMT, eh? I think that means judging is closed.

6. ## Re: Junkyard Wars in the Playground I

Alright! The polls are closed, and here are your winners!

In 1st place, we have Sakuuya's Ayesha taking home the Gold!
In 2nd place, we have Seerow's Blaine Night the Six-Fingered taking home the Silver!
In 3rd place, we have Ikeren's unnamed but lovingly titled Unrogue taking home the Bronze!
And garnering the Honorable Mention this round is Telonius' Kelia!

The next competition will be up in a few hours once I've figured out 100% what I'm going to make of it!

Edit: New Competition is up!

7. ## Re: Junkyard Wars in the Playground I

...

Thanks a bunch, and congrats to everybody else!

8. ## Re: Junkyard Wars in the Playground I

Now that this is finished, some brief commentary on judging:
@Dys:
he story may write itself but I would like a little more of it. You have a lot of non specific references to different things without solidly placing them anywhere. I think your intent was to allow someone to take your idea and insert it into their own campaign seamlessly but comes across as “I didn’t feel like fleshing out everything.”
It was mostly a product of being new to these competitions. I didn't realize the degree of fluff was as mandatory as it was (indeed, my iron chef entry lost a full point for lack of fluff).

That makes nearly the entire Shadowdancer part of the build “tacked on” especially since this component does not increase sneak attack and that was what your first ten levels were devoted to.
This part confuses me, because if the ingredients are sneak attack + shadowdancer, isn't it inevitable that some portion of levels will maximize one, and some portion of levels will maximize the other? You just didn't like how they were divided first 10/last 10? Would you have preferred Sneak attack 7/Shadowdancer 10/Sneak attack +3?

I also think it's odd the degree to which using the SI didn't matter in your scoring: a person with 1d6 sneak attack and 1 level shadowdancer ended up only a half point behind me. I guess I expected the required part of the competition to matter a fair bit more in the scoring.

But you are 100% that the Big Dipper (or little dipper? since most of the dips are small) would have been a better name --- I actually forgot to name this entry . You can clearly see the degree I care about the fluff part of the competition in that...

Dat base attack bonus. You use an alternate system for calculating it, and that's bad. But it comes with sneak attack sprinkles, which is good. But you get redipulous, and that's bad. The worst part about this is that you could just take Shadowdancer levels earlier and get Justicar of Taiia and Ronin later when you meet the BAB, which would save you the slight ding for using an alternate system for BAB calculation.
I seriously considered putting Justicar and Ronin at the end, but I actually thought the build looked cleaner with the sneak attack all at the front. Also, without using fractional BAB, this would have finished at +11/+6/+1, which I guess could be fine and I would have just talked about the Skillful Weapon Enhancement.

Anyways, that was loads of fun and super interesting and entertaining! Thank you very much for the judging and feedback, and the 3rd place. I'll start working on the second one (once I finish my Zinc Saucier entry).

9. ## Re: Junkyard Wars in the Playground I

Originally Posted by Ikeren

I seriously considered putting Justicar and Ronin at the end, but I actually thought the build looked cleaner with the sneak attack all at the front. Also, without using fractional BAB, this would have finished at +11/+6/+1, which I guess could be fine and I would have just talked about the Skillful Weapon Enhancement.

Anyways, that was loads of fun and super interesting and entertaining! Thank you very much for the judging and feedback, and the 3rd place. I'll start working on the second one (once I finish my Zinc Saucier entry).
Your BAB would still have been in the toilet, not much to be done about that with all that dipping. I'd like to point out that your build was one of the most powerful (Blaine edged you out in that category with the ability to make multiple full attacks per round - action economy manipulation is potent).

I can't speak to fluff "requirements" here in Junkyard Wars, but over in Iron Chef it is essentially your way to tie all the various bits and bobs together into a cohesive build (it is a way to enhance your presentation). Without it, you could have some really potent combos, but it might just feel thrown together. So it isn't required, but not taking advantage of the opportunity to polish your presentation is tantamount to just throwing food slapdash onto a plate in the real Iron Chef competition. It might taste absolutely delicious and be incredibly healthy for you, but if it looks like dogfood, no one will eat it.

10. ## Re: Junkyard Wars in the Playground I

The Skillful Weapon Enhancement is +1 and increases BAB to 3/4ths.

Also, relevant:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...040401721.html

Joshua Bell, a prodigy violinist, played in the (New York, I think? I saw this article years ago, don't quite have time to reread) Metro on a 3.5 million dollar violin, playing some difficult and beautiful Bach pieces...and no one noticed.

11. ## Re: Junkyard Wars in the Playground I

So a question for you judgy types:

Assuming: Monk 5/Assassin x/Shadowdancer x, Sun School feat, idea being you hide in plain sight observing them for three rounds, then shadow step up to them and death attack them with sun school. I believe it satisfies the various preconditions of the contest.

How does this score as a generic kind of overview? I'm aware it uses a low power class/es and an ability (death attack) that most people don't rate for optimisation, but does it gain points back for simplicity, and the fact that noone else would use the monk? Do you award bonus points because this build would only use Core + Complete Warrior?

So next sub-question, assume I go and jam all the stuff on it to max out death attack. Save reducers, ambush feats, etc. That uses a lot more books, but increases the power. Would this be a zero sum for scoring? Or does one win out?

I'm aware judging uses a lot of fiat (and has to), but I'm curious to see how people would have approached the scoring.

12. ## Re: Junkyard Wars in the Playground I

I'm not a judge and am a bit new here, but if you went Assassin 5/Shadowdancer 10:

Originality: Yep, seems reasonably original. Above average but not high
Power: DC 15+int death attack, 3/4th's BAB, a single 3rd level spell and 3d6 sneak attack --- I guess it would depend on feats a bit, but probably below average
Build Stability (which in the next version is Elegance and Use of Secret Ingredient): seems stable enough (lawful evil, minimal classes). The core trick probably doesn't work ("After using this spell, you can’t take any other actions until your next turn." on Dimension door) because teleporting next to someone is pretty much the definition of threatening (unless you're invisible + they can't see invis, but that still limits it substantially). But you've only 3d6 sneak attack, which I guess I'd call barely enough.

Probably 9-12/15 or 13-15/20

So next sub-question, assume I go and jam all the stuff on it to max out death attack. Save reducers, ambush feats, etc. That uses a lot more books, but increases the power. Would this be a zero sum for scoring? Or does one win out?
Selecting good feats from Complete adventurer, PHB2, etcetera; normal, expected books, that increased power, would produce a higher score. I doubt it'd be zero-sum. People seem to only take off points for using settings books (conflicting) or really obscure stuff, and sometimes not even that.

13. ## Re: Junkyard Wars in the Playground I

Originally Posted by Ikeren
The core trick probably doesn't work ("After using this spell, you can’t take any other actions until your next turn." on Dimension door) because teleporting next to someone is pretty much the definition of threatening (unless you're invisible + they can't see invis, but that still limits it substantially)
I'd have thought the Sun School feat would have covered this:

"Flash of Sunset: To use this maneuver, you must move adjacent to a foe instantaneously, as with a dimension door spell or the monk's abundant step class feature. If you do so, you can immediately make a single attack at your highest attack bonus against that foe."

"At 4th level, a shadowdancer gains the ability to travel between shadows as if by means of a dimension door spell"

Assuming there's any light at all, you can shadow step into their shadow from your shadow, then death attack them in the same round?

14. ## Re: Junkyard Wars in the Playground I

Ah, sorry, didn't look up the feat.

Alright, that seems valid. Going to need to put some serious work into boosting the save DC from 15+int, or going to need to drop Shadowdancer levels, at which point you're looking at a pretty standard power-versus-SI trade off, but seems like a decent build. Should have submitted it

15. ## Re: Junkyard Wars in the Playground I

Originally Posted by Ikeren
Now that this is finished, some brief commentary on judging:
@Dys:

It was mostly a product of being new to these competitions. I didn't realize the degree of fluff was as mandatory as it was (indeed, my iron chef entry lost a full point for lack of fluff).

This part confuses me, because if the ingredients are sneak attack + shadowdancer, isn't it inevitable that some portion of levels will maximize one, and some portion of levels will maximize the other? You just didn't like how they were divided first 10/last 10? Would you have preferred Sneak attack 7/Shadowdancer 10/Sneak attack +3?

I also think it's odd the degree to which using the SI didn't matter in your scoring: a person with 1d6 sneak attack and 1 level shadowdancer ended up only a half point behind me. I guess I expected the required part of the competition to matter a fair bit more in the scoring.

But you are 100% that the Big Dipper (or little dipper? since most of the dips are small) would have been a better name --- I actually forgot to name this entry . You can clearly see the degree I care about the fluff part of the competition in that...
Sorry I did not respond sooner, Easter weekend with the kids means no Playground for me!

Fluff isn't even mandatory for IC just like here but I guess I just like to see a good story. My first IC entry (back in Bladesinger) got dinged for not having enough story too. In your case I just wanted "more" for lack of a better term. I think the best fluffs are the ones that really tie the whole thing together. I hope that makes sense.

For the judging of the Build Stability: I will admit that I am more used to judging competitions with four categories and since BUild Stability was billed as combining Elegance and Use of Ingredient together, my approach was to make each half of the category worth 2.5 to add up to 5. Your score gave you higher points for the Ingredient side for massive use of sneak attack and Shadowdancer but was dinged for the Elegance parts. In a similar vein the other build scored better in the Elegance side and was dinged for the Use of Ingredient side.

Did you have a name planned for your build? For me the names can be the hardest part of making a character. I have plenty of builds that I have made but still have no idea what to name them . . .

16. ## Re: Junkyard Wars in the Playground I

Yep, fair enough on all that.

Did you have a name planned for your build? For me the names can be the hardest part of making a character. I have plenty of builds that I have made but still have no idea what to name them . . .
Nope! I didn't even think about it. My next bunch are named and fluffed appropriately, but some of them might be terrible.

That being said, I heard you guys like non-sequitor puns.

17. ## Re: Junkyard Wars in the Playground I

Should have submitted it
Heh, yeah. But unfortunately due to the forum downtime I ran out of time to do a proper job of the submission when the forums came back up and I realised I had 18 hours left to submit on a work day.

Thanks for responding on the judging questions.