Iron Chef Optimization Challenge in the Playground CXXVII

[AvatarVecna]

They're usually too bland to do anything fun with imo.

Yeah. They also tend to be bad in a "why did you make a caster/monk when you could've just made a caster" way, and any round spent on them would revolve around "well let's see if the next contestant found a fun an interesting way to make their slightly nerfed magical capabilities carry the whole build...well they did it but it wasn't fun or interesting just like all the rest, oh well let's see if our next contestant..."

[H_H_F_F]

Yeah. They also tend to be bad in a "why did you make a caster/monk when you could've just made a caster" way, and any round spent on them would revolve around "well let's see if the next contestant found a fun an interesting way to make their slightly nerfed magical capabilities carry the whole build...well they did it but it wasn't fun or interesting just like all the rest, oh well let's see if our next contestant..."

I think they're way too limited for the competition, but I think in actual play they can be worth it if you're only a level behind. A psion with a wizard (precocious apprentice) dip can take 10 levels of cerebremancer while only giving up on 1 psion level. 6th level wizard casting is def worth it.

If we want to feature the stronger side of the equation as the main focus, it can still work. Wizard/archivist (both tier 1) can also work with wizard 6ths through mystic theurge, and one of my favorite build concepts (that I'll never play, because it's tier 1) is cloistered cleric 2 / ardent 1 (practiced manifester), cleric +1, psychic theurge 6/ contemplative 1/ psychic theurge +4/ X (full casting prc) 5.

Sure, ardent 8ths are nowhere near wizard 6ths, especially with only 2 mantles - but they can still round out a cleric quite a lot, and in actual play, they're definitely worth being one level behind and spending one feat.

In conclusion, I think dual progression can be fun and powerful in actual play, but would make for a terrible ingredient.

[Gruftzwerg]

I get the point. And I kinda feel that I already had the same discussion.. sorry for that.

But maybe everybody gets to pick a dual progression class (k, wouldn't fit Iron Chef, but could be a single special contest if there is an interest?).

[The Viscount]

In conclusion, I think dual progression can be fun and powerful in actual play, but would make for a terrible ingredient.

And yet we get people asking after Yathrinshee.

[Paragon]

And yet we get people asking after Yathrinshee.

I could do Yathrinshee.

Are you done with the votes ? Do we know what the next one is ? :p

[The Viscount]

By my tally the current winner is the number don't lie. I don't want to spoil the surprise for what that will be just yet.

[AvatarVecna]

I think they're way too limited for the competition, but I think in actual play they can be worth it if you're only a level behind. A psion with a wizard (precocious apprentice) dip can take 10 levels of cerebremancer while only giving up on 1 psion level. 6th level wizard casting is def worth it.

If we want to feature the stronger side of the equation as the main focus, it can still work. Wizard/archivist (both tier 1) can also work with wizard 6ths through mystic theurge, and one of my favorite build concepts (that I'll never play, because it's tier 1) is cloistered cleric 2 / ardent 1 (practiced manifester), cleric +1, psychic theurge 6/ contemplative 1/ psychic theurge +4/ X (full casting prc) 5.

Sure, ardent 8ths are nowhere near wizard 6ths, especially with only 2 mantles - but they can still round out a cleric quite a lot, and in actual play, they're definitely worth being one level behind and spending one feat.

In conclusion, I think dual progression can be fun and powerful in actual play, but would make for a terrible ingredient.

That's kinda the exact point I was making? Like, this is a contest for weak PrCs, and when people think of "weak PrCs", the dual progression classes are one of the things at the forefront of their mind. Everybody "knows" that Mystic Theurge is "weak", but the objective truth of the matter is that a MT isn't bad. It's just worse than what you could've been doing. Any ingredient focused around a monk/sorcerer PrC, or a monk/cleric PrC, or a rogue/wizard PrC is something that's weak on paper, but isn't the kind of "weak" that this contest usually focuses on. It's just a T1 caster slumming it, a little bit. And because this is an optimization contest, it's always gonna end up with people leaning on the spellcasting, and all the usual casting stuff you've seen a million times.

EDIT: "In this contest, we will see if our contestants can successfully make a Dwarven Defender that's actually useful in a fight! And in this contest, we will see if a wizard who wasted two levels on monk has actually ruined his adventuring career or not! Oh wow, turns out he didn't, because wizard is OP, what a worthless question to have ever wasted time asking".

[Paragon]

Hey there H_H_F_F

I hope you manage with everything that's going on in your country.

Are you confident you can finish the judgement or should we try and find another judge ?

Good luck

[H_H_F_F]

Hi
I'm confident I could finish, the question is onviously when. If we can find another judge, that'd be awesome regardless.

[H_H_F_F]

Judgement within 48 hours.

[The Viscount]

Thank you for keeping us in the loop!

[Condé]

I'm hoping, one day, to see the very unknown Sun Soul Monk from City of Splendors who achieved the feat of being bad in 3.5 and probably even worse in 5e.
It reminds me of the stonelord quite a bit. A bunch of random spell-like equivalent once a day spread over 10 levels...

I have always wanted to participate the Iron Chef and missed the prc I was the most interested in... Being the beastheart adept.

Curious to see what the next one will be tho.

[H_H_F_F]

Curious to see what the next one will be tho.

It'll be shining blade again. Just Shining Blade. Just Shining Blade. Just Shining Blade.

[Inevitability]

I'm hoping, one day, to see the very unknown Sun Soul Monk from City of Splendors who achieved the feat of being bad in 3.5 and probably even worse in 5e.

Oh, that's horrendous, I love it.

Another good ingredient would (in my opinion) be Ebonmar Infiltrator. It's an assassin with a worse spell list, two useless prerequisite feats, reduced sneak attack progression, no poison use, no in-class UMD, and no death attack... but at least you can read books fast!

Maybe not for the next contest (we've had enough stealth ingredients for now), but in a couple rounds?

[H_H_F_F]

Lost too much precious time to dealing with an injury worsening, but I'll finish judging by Sunday come hell or high water. That's not an estimate, that's a promise.

[Gruftzwerg]

Lost too much precious time to dealing with an injury worsening, but I'll finish judging by Sunday come hell or high water. That's not an estimate, that's a promise.

Pls don't push yourself to much. Health should always have priority.
I hope that you get well soon and then we can enjoy the judging. ;)

[Inevitability]

Another fun future casting ingredient: Demonologist. Oh, you're a full caster? Well, would you like to abandon that entire casting progression and start a new one, at the low low cost of three feats? I know it sounds bad, but if you stick with the class then at level 14 you'll be able to cast... Summon Monster VIII! One whole level ahead of when a wizard gets it!

Lost too much precious time to dealing with an injury worsening, but I'll finish judging by Sunday come hell or high water. That's not an estimate, that's a promise.

Take care, health comes first!

[loky1109]

Lost too much precious time to dealing with an injury worsening, but I'll finish judging by Sunday come hell or high water. That's not an estimate, that's a promise.

RL goes first. Stay happy and healthy!

[The Viscount]

Another fun future casting ingredient: Demonologist. Oh, you're a full caster? Well, would you like to abandon that entire casting progression and start a new one, at the low low cost of three feats? I know it sounds bad, but if you stick with the class then at level 14 you'll be able to cast... Summon Monster VIII! One whole level ahead of when a wizard gets it!

Oh demonologist is absolutely on the long list of potential ingredients. It's so weird. I'm fascinated by the decision to say "if you had a familiar, the quasit eats it and you take the penalties."
Made all the funnier if you have a familiar that is Large or incorporeal.



I'd like to echo the sentiments others have posted. If you need to take more time to deal with important things, we will understand.

[H_H_F_F]

So

Editing got kind of weird on me, and I didn't really uniform the stye like I usually do. I don't want to delay any longer for that. If you see one build getting credit for something you do too, feel free to table a dispute – but it's possible it was accounted for, and just didn't get mentioned because of a lack of editing. Then again, it's more probable than usual that I may have committed many errors. I shall also carry with me the hope that my fellow forum-dwellers will view them with indulgence, and that after 3 years of my life dedicated to its service…

Seriously, let me know if you catch any obvious mistakes.

It's technically Monday Morning, but I stayed up all night to do this so I'd say for me it's still Sunday night. It's also still Sunday in the USA. With these factors in mind, I consider it a promise kept.

Spoiler: Broderick

Show

Originality:

Monk (including replace-everything-monk), and especially decisive strike, is very much something I toyed with, and very much the expected method of entry IMO. Dvati are always fun, but they stopped surprising me long ago. Also, I find it to be inherently a little problematic, which I'll talk about more in elegance. Still – better than human.

These two choices mean your place to shine here, mechanically, is mostly through tactics shaped by your feats. Do you manage to do so? I'd say so, yeah. Going for a full martial art is definitely ballsy, and the heavy focus on stunning fist of all things is interesting. You have a couple of very obvious/common picks here, but there's definitely a lot of originality on display.

Overall, a lot of interesting details on top of an uninspiring chassis.

Score: 2.25 points.


Power:

I feel like your choice to start the breakdown at level 7 is not completely coincidental. Dvati monk makes for some very rough early career. At ECL 2, you play a melee character with 5 hitpoints and AC 15. You go down fast. Your early career pretty much looks like this:

• Step one: hide.

Having listen makes that a helpful choice some of the time, but overall I'd say you're much more of a burden than an asset for your party earlier on.

In your later career, you slowly trudge your way out of that difficulty. You're a monk doing monk stuff, so you'll never be able to compete with an intrinsically more optimized approach here, and you suffer from the common pitfalls (MAD as hell, issues with immunities, low to-hit, etc) but you manage to do fine. Darkstalker from the get-go is good to have, though listen falling off later in your career means you can't reliably play the scout. Damage can be decent by your later career, especially against humanoids. You don't manage to be a true knowledge monkey (your numbers at the end seem one point off, I think – and they also assume collector of stories is in play, which isn't helpful for most Knowledge checks) but you can be of help in that role from time to time.

Overall, weak category – but by your later career, perhaps not quite as weak as one would expect it to be at a glance.

Score: 1.75 points.


Elegance:

Dvati require a lot of leg work to function. The rules aren't very clear at all on how their action economy works, and you have to make a lot of assumptions. These assumptions often conflict, or are at least uncomfortable with, the RAW of the race – the references to move actions, specifically, though the way the spellcasting restriction is phrased can be easily inferred to conflict with these views as well.

In your particular case, aside from the general concerns for full attacking with both bodies and the like, are mainly with Power Attack. There's certainly an argument to be made that if you PA, you PA – all your attacks that turn will take the penalty. That'll impact both of your bodies, and make the whole "one body Power Attacks with a staff, the other applies stunning fist" far less effective, at least until you get sudden willow. And, of course, decisive strike weirdness. Dvati, man.

As for other aspects of the build: I've often said that simplicity does not equal elegance, and while "Monk 9/ SI 10" helps a little bit, it's not really what I'm looking for in this category. Lucky for you, though, it's not all there is here.

Going for self-flanking PA + Stunning Attack as your chassis hurt you in power, but it pays off here for how well executed it is (aside for the aforementioned Dvati issue, which, Dvati will Dvati). Meditation of War Mastery + Sudden Willow strike is just a great way to achieve that goal, and getting the mastery through 3 bonus feats from monk while using the bonus feat from the mastery itself to get willow is just great. Every single feat in your build is about that tactic, except staggering strike (which is meant to help you keep flanking while staying safe) and K. devotion. And that's before I start talking about how satisfyingly perfect everything lines up for you: 3 of your feats (Staggering Strike, Falling Star Strike, and Freezing the Lifeblood) come on precisely when you meet their prerequisites. This is the sort of precise and thoughtful utilization of build resources that I like to see. Very nice stuff.

Overall, your build suffers from Dvati being a mess, but other than that manages to be a very pleasant surprise in this category. Efficient, clever, and synergistic. Well done.

As a very minor note, you've mixed up the BaB increase between level 6 and 7. Watch out for that.

Score: 4.25 points.


UoSI:

If you had a way of transporting one body to the other, the whole "one body is in the citadel" trick is great. It doesn't really work with Dvati fluff description, I don't think, but it would've been great. As is though, it's a risk you're extremely unlikely to take in actual play.

You get the ever-useful staggering strike, and you have an intrinsic flanking body, which is cute. You get the expected utility out of embrace of shadow, and you manage to pump some juice into soulchilling strike through your decisiveness. I also like sight of the eyeless covering more ground. Spot would've been nice on top of it, but not being able to deal with other darkstalkers doesn't seem like a huge loss. Uberflanking with simultaneous kiss of shadow is cute, even if a bit overkill.

You don't have the essentia to make use if everything all at once, which means a lot of the options you note don't really work together. That's an issue here.

Overall though, you manage to pull a fine amount of utility out of most class features.

Score: 3.5 points.


Total Score: 11.75 points. This was a cool build, but I'll admit to feeling like it didn't really need to be the SI. Lucky for you, it's not like more monk would've made it better (good thing about building monks) but what you seem to care about most is the martial art and the stunning-flanking-staggering PA. Sure, the SI is very helpful to your build, but it doesn't feel like it's about umbral disciple.

Spoiler: Treirin Reitlin

Show

Originality:

While simplicity isn't elegance, it can help – and base class + 2 completed prcs is cute.

High-con wildshape ranger is a nice way to approach the class. It's not an unheard-of chassis, of course, but it makes a lot of sense here without being the "obvious" pick, IMO. The whole mouther approach is cute, and fairly synergizes with some things you do – we'll go into further details later, because it does present some issues.

No penalty, but I'm weirded out by your TN alignment. "A tortured lone wolf on an eternal crusade against evil that defines his entire being" doesn't sound TN at all.

Overall, a common but unexpected approach to the SI without too many surprises on top.

Score: 3.25 points.


Power:

Wild shape gives nice utility, and gibbering mouther makes for a fun combat form once some investment comes in. However, I have a few qualms.

Your damage starts out great, and it is maintained with dread carpace, but it just starts falling off at some point – and even moderate amounts of DR that isn't /magic can end you straight up.

I heavily disagree with your attribute allocation. You're permanently wild shaped from level 5 onward, pretty much. Why do you invest a quarter of your 32 points in Strength and Dex, especially when these choices lead you to investing in Charisma out of all things. Like, I get that 14 Str is a whole lot better than 8 for your first four levels, and maybe that's enough of a reason not to go for 18 con – but giving up on 23 skill ranks so your dex could start at 10 and not 8? For four levels? Baffling. I mean, Dex clearly isn't that important, or you would've had it at 12 instead of increasing charisma to 6. Which, I don't get anyway, as I said previously. This aspect of the build is just a mess, and you pay for it.

You throw away skills that need developing, because you're not willing to invest cross-class or shuffle some levels. If Kuthric claws is worth a feat slot and essentia investment, then leaving 3 points of each sneak skill on the table is just plain wrong. Even going for purely cross class, without swapping out a single level, is the equivalent of 1 more essentia in your claws. Swapping a level or two would've meant many of your other core skills could've seen more investment as well, instead of throwing your ranks after skill tricks that are barely relevant to what you're doing.

Speaking of sneaking, darkstalker comes in way too late. Should've been swapped with claws, at the very least.

Overall, this build suffers from a lot of issues in this category, but it is nevertheless a good scout and a decent combatant, at least until your later career.

Score: 2.75 points.


Elegance:

You don't note wildling in your class features. It's a super important ability – you go from once per day at level 5 to three at level 7.

I like having running totals for skill ranks. Having no totals at all, even at 20, is annoying. I have to look all over to make sure you qualify for stuff, and I can't even see at a glance what your build looks like at its peak. Also, no penalty obviously, but I'd say don't bother sourcing stuff that's only in your fluff.

You can't take more than one skill trick at the same level. This mistake is even more annoying because it's such an unforced error – as you recall from the previous section, I dislike your late-level skill approach anyway, even if it was legal.

Overall, nothing here is too atrocious – but with a few negatives and no interesting tricks or synergies to note, I'm having a hard time being generous here.

Score: 2.15 points.


UoSI:

You make a serious investment in wild shape, 10 levels in wild shaping classes in all. This sort of leaves you at the uncomfortable space of "could've just been a MoMF build". So, what do you get out of the SI?

Well, I don't buy your claims on step of the bodiless, lol. However, you do have a couple of ways to allow for sneak attack (and 6 attacks to capitalize on it!), you're a very decent spy for a character usually stuck with 13 dex, and with gibbering mouther movement, you've got reason to want reach.

However, you don't do anything interesting with sight of the eyeless and soulchilling strike, and you have interesting counter-synergy for your DCs: gibbering mouther has an exclllent con-score, which is good for you obviously, but it's way harder to push than base con, and your base con is straight up better by the time you have soulchilling strike.

Overall, I feel like aside from sneak attack optimization, you're having a hard time justifying the relationship between the SI and the rest of the build.

Score: 2.5 points.


Total Score: 10.65 points. This felt like a gibbering mouther build first and foremost, and while it wasn't a bad fit for the SI, I feel that it still lacked focus.

Spoiler: Draconis and Seraphina

Show

Originality:

Unseelie fey almost always gets an eyeroll from me. For so many builds, it's cheap, easy power for almost nothing. The only reason we don't see it way more is that it's a little bit of a RAW nightmare, something I'll address in elegance.

I've talked about my thoughts on Dvati already, but feinting certainly isn't where my mind went. I did think of Greater Flyby because of an E6 comp build I really liked, but I was just thinking in Kiss of Shadow terms, not soulchilling strike terms. Tripping is common, but Incarnum-Tripping is cute, when being so condusive to feinting as well.

Overall, well done!

Score: 4 points.


Power:

Rough early game, for sure – but flight from level one can atone for many sins. That's an upside of me rejecting dragonborn – you're going to pay for this later though, don't you worry.

Later in life, you excel at fighting groups, but dive attacks mean you can also pack a strength-damaging punch against single oponents. Outside of that, though, I feel that you're lacking as a skill monkey, and that your tripping is subpar.

Not much to say on this entry. For such convulted tactics, it's pretty self-explanatory, and you seem generally aware of the downsides.

Score: 3 points.


Elegance:

Oh boy, that racial choice. I refer you to Broderick's elegance section for a discussion on why I find the Dvati race inherently inelegant, but combining it with dragonborn… Nope. Absolutely not. It's excellent that you gave me an alternative, because that'd be an auto-0 here from me, for sure. You're going to be an unseelie fey, and you're going to get the expected penalty for how shaky it is to take it, and you're going to get smaller penalties for relying on getting the random wings, and another one for not telling me what you pick of the options that are under your control (seasonal effect), and that's going to be that. It's not great, but it's better than "your build is completely illegal, bye."

As for the aforementioned fey issue: you know the deal. Unseelie fey only lists its LA in the gnome example statblock, blah blah blah. Penalty. There's also a penalty for relying on randomly generated aspects of the template – half unseelie fey don't have wings – and another for not telling me what your season power is (the part that you do get to pick).

See, I have a hard time with the "alternative build" approach in general, though I don't penalize it. But I'll be damned – if you ask me to judge you as an alternate version, at least fully flesh out that alternate.

I like cobalt expertise being long-term useful, and I like how dvati-informed so many of your picks are. Is that enough to make up for all the issues? Not quite, but it's not a 1.

Score: 2 points.


UoSI:

Reassignment of essentia is an excellent thought for Dvati, and means both soulchilling strike and kiss of shadows can be highlighted without giving up on defenses. Both of those are obviously phenomenally used, but the rest (aside from sneak attack) doesn't get any love: did you really need moment of perfect mind more than darkstalker?

Still, very well done.

Score: 4.25 points.


Total Score: 13.25 points. Cool build.

Spoiler: Antigone

Show

Originality:

A human? What a wild choice!

(I always play this joke, even though it's patently unfunny. My apologies.)

Other than that, Urban Ranger is a welcome surprise. It's clever, it fits, it works. Binder is cute, would've been cuter if it felt more necessary. Swordsage and Mo9 aren't better than monk here, to me at least – and as far as your tactics go, I can't say I was wowed by anything.

Overall, the unique choices have a hard time rising above the obvious.

Score: 1.5 points.


Power:

Decently powerful initiator, and a lot on the side to serve this base. I think as far as actual combat prowess goes, you're not as impressive as we'd want you to be early on, but due to well-planned staggered leveling you manage to keep up well from level 5 to 20, pretty much. I do wish you were more highly skilled, as I feel that you're lacking in that field when compared to the competition.

Still, an effective combatant, relying on well-known means.

Score: 3.9 points.


Elegance:

I like midnight dodge pulling double duty.

You manage to finish two PRCs, which is cute and earns you a little boost here. You have some good combos between SA and initiation, and some binding – nothing groundbreaking that'd have made a difference in originality, but it does get a nod here.

One of these "combos", however, deserves some scrutiny. Paimon + reach is great for Whirlwinds, but I'm not sure I buy it for Dance of Death. The "movement, position, and distance" portion of the SRD uses the phrase "moving past [someone]" in a pretty exclusive way, in my view. I don't think Kiss of Shadows language is ironclad here – but you do have a case, I guess.

Generally, though, I don't have that much to say here positively – if only because so many elements of the build just start playing second fiddle to the maneuvers, at some point.

Score: 3.75 points.


UoSI:

I have a couple of harsher pointers in this category, but I'll start by complementing you on Urban Tracking and gather info investment. From an actual play perspective, it's the sort of thing that's highly likely to initiate in your sept headquarters. Well done. You're also decent at sneak attacking. Paimon + reach is a nice combo, of course.

No darkstalker alternative (or even move silently) means you're below the expected utility for HiPS. You don't do anything interesting with sight of the eyeless – and of course, you don't do anything interesting with soulchilling strike. "I already have a (DC 12) means of doing the exact same Strength damage" isn't really what I think of as supporting the ability, and your attempts to justify it with Paimon doesn't work. Neither dance of death no whirlwind attack are one attack roll, so neither do anything for you with soulchilling strike. Valliant attempt.

Overall, I feel this build did a decent job at enhancing a couple of the class features, but not much more than that.

Score: 2.25 points.


Total Score: 11.4 points. What's with the name, though? I don't see the connection. Explain yourself after the reveal.

Spoiler: Irthan Malark

Show

Originality:

Azurin is "Incarnum Human", so it's not great for you here, especially in an incarnum round. I've made it clear that unarmed swordsaged will always be expected in monk-themed rounds. Dragonfire adept, however, is very cute, and shadow sun ninja is… shadow sun ninja, and you do fun stuff with it.

Darkness tricks are quite common, but very on theme for this ingredient without being an obvious fit, mechanically, so I'm not frowning on them here.

Score: 2.5 points.


Power:

Good scout, meh combatant. We have a lot of those this round, but you're not too meh, which is good.

I feel like you're overselling how often you can use Blend into shadows. It requires you to be near a darkness effect. Unless we're going to go on another "my underwear have darkness on them" rabbit hole (please don't), I'm assuming you utilize instinctive darkness for that – but that's an immediate action, which means no blend into shadows the round after that. You take a while to fully turn on in combat.

Other than that small note though, you pretty much work like you say you do, I think. The SI half of the build causes some serious stagnation, as I'm sure you've noticed. Some staggering of initiator levels (harder to really pull off with SSN, granted) would've probably done you a lot of good for overall career prowess.

Score: 3 points.


Elegance:

You put weapon finesse at the wrong level. You don't have a listed alignment. You suffer from multiclass penalties. You don't give me your full skill points anywhere.

I also feel like you ran put of juice at some point. Nothing much happens in like, the last 5 levels of the build, and your last feat feels tired. On the other hand, Darkness feats at will on top of Shadow Sun ninja are very synergistic and fun.

Score: 2.75 points.


UoSI:

Tough category. Irthan makes the SI look redundant. You sabotage the SI's most useful feature by already having easy access to semi-HiPS and full concealment. Sight of the eyeless counter-synergizes with darkness within light. Your con is terrible, so no soulchilling for you, and you feature no impressive uses of Kiss of Shadows, except for the (minor, IMO) Gloom synergy.

The feeling that this build got everything it could before it "had to" succumb to the SI doesn't help either. Sure, you're a knowledge monkey, so sept knowledge is helpful, and it's not like HiPS is suddenly useless just because you already have the nerfed version.

But overall, other than thematically, I don’t think this build is a good fit with the SI at all.

Score: 1.75 points.


Total Score: 10 points. I'm sorry if I seemed harsh on this entry – but I feel that it put much more thought into cool things to do with shadow than cool things to do with the SI. I probably would've been far more partial to such a thematic approach a few years ago, and there are plenty of judges that'd appreciate it more than I did here.

Spoiler: Gronk

Show

Originality:

Rogue? Sure. The rest? Not so much. Well done. I liked your fluff, too.

Doing "just ability damage" and then pumping it is something I'm a fan of, and you did it creatively and in a very fun and flavorful way. The way there also has quite a few fun tricks.

Overall, this is a very creative build.

Score: 4.5 points.


Power:

Criss-cross leveling means you get to be pretty close to a good old rogue. Your skills don't manage to fully keep up, of course, and you don't have rapid shot, twf, etc to capitalize on your sneak attack not sucking, and your bab is stagnated. You have an excellent one-hit-KO, but it only comes up at ECL 20, and is target-limited.

I always have a hard time dealing with cases such as these (I'll acknowledge that I do this a lot as a contestant, too). On the one hand, I don't want to act like the entire freaking campaign doesn't matter. On the other, I don't want to ignore the power of a build just because it requires more build resources to turn on. Really wish you'd have given up on the savvy rogue angle, or something. Then again, that'd be an entirely different build.

Overall… room for improvement.

Score: 3.5 points.


Elegance:

Here's the thing, Gronk. I wanted to tell you that precision damage just becomes negative energy damage when applied to an attack that only does ability damage, as per the rules compendium. However, upon closer inspection, it turned out that this limitation only applies to spells, and soulchilling strike isn't a spell.

Does that mean your RAW abusive read is ironclad?

Well, almost.

See, if you hit an attack that explicitly deals no damage, and that attack delivers a spell, and that spell deals damage, you're dandy. However, soulchilling strike, as previously mentioned, isn't a spell. It says "your attack deals 1 point of Strength damage to the target". But as previously discussed – tongue attack says "this attack deals no damage". These rules could be read as being in conflict.

Am I saying you're in RAW limbo? Well, no. There's a very sensible reading that "this attack deals no damage" describes the damage of the unmodified attack, and isn't a rule. Just like "a longsword deals 1d8", or whatever. Still, you're not completely in the clean. This level of pedantry would never be directed at someone making a normal build, but you know how it is – live by the RAW, die by the RAW.

I'm also not buying the argument that you can do damage to enemies immune to strength damage. I'd totally be on board if Complete Scoundrel said "You can deal Str damage to a target that is immune to extra damage from sneak attacks". But that isn't what the feat says, does it? It says even, and that word does a lot of heavy lifting.

Other than these concerns, the build is clean, simple, and focused, etching out its stated goal in exactly 20 ECL, with only one base class and no other prcs. Chameleon does 3 things at once for the SI, which I really appreciate.

Score: 4 points.


UoSI:

I've mentioned my appreciation of Urban Tracking as a use for sept knowledge, and it's true here as well. You also make exceptional use of HiPS, backing it up with plenty of fun options. Climb speed is a good excuse to use step of the bodiless, and the math holds up.

The big-ticket item, obviously, is the KO. As I said, I don't think your attempt to universalize it with savvy rogue succeeded, but it's still obviously above and beyond the expected utility for soulchilling strike – and for me, that's more than enough reason to give up on the capstone.

Score: 4.5 points.


Total Score: 16.5 points. It's not my favorite build here or anything, but it's an instant classic. Well done.

Spoiler: Shank

Show

Originality:

First ever spinemeld warrior outside of the dedicated round ought to make me pleased here, and it does. It certainly helps with the ranger/monk base we've got here, which is less of a surprise.

The angle you chose to focus on is delightfully weird, but most of the build resources go towards what I think of as a pretty classic spinemeld warrior, if there even is such a thing. Then again, maybe I'm just thinking that because of the parallels to my own entry from that round.

No penalty, but I feel like you could've done more to represent the lore of the spinemeld warriors. Skarn have pretty fun lore, and spinemeld warrior bothers telling you the poetic name for your rank at every level.

Overall, I'm surprised.

Score: 4.25 points.


Power:

Wild talent is such a weird choice when hidden talent is a thing. If you've never seen it, look it up. It's the strictly superior version, meant for campaigns with actual psionic representation.

You start out decent, but at some point, the big pile of nothing that is the SI and spinemeld warrior catches up with you. You also don't have the Strength score to drag that strong start for a few more levels. You're an alright scout, but your damage is just too subpar. Again, higher strength would've let you lean into rending a bit more, but as is, you're not presenting the sort of powerful combatant I'd expect from someone with five levels in a full-bab prc.

Then again, maybe that's because said prc is spinemeld warrior.

Score: 2.25 points.


Elegance:

The build flows alright. Ranger-two weapon pounce – spine rend is a nice combo. Getting to utilize both incarnum classes for one purpose is nice.

You didn't source spiritual connection. You also didn't note skarn monk clearly enough, which could be very confusing.

There's also definitely some money left on the ground with this build. Psionic meditation? Really?

Score: 3 points.


UoSI:

I mean, listen. The fact that you're mainly here for a piddly +5 to gather information is pretty hysterical to me. You did manage to put it to good use for a very particular style of game, but it's not like you capitalized on that to pull off some other trick that required some highly specific items.

Of course, with darkstalker and high scouting skills you're on par on the embrace of shadow front, and you have reasons to want reach as much as anyone else, but other than that… I'm not seeing too much here.

Score: 2.25 points.


Total Score: 11.75 points. Such a weird build. Not sure if you're trolling me, but I like it.

Spoiler: Junbao

Show

Originality:

Monk isn't surprising to me here, of course. Nor is totemist, or cloistered cleric. Not is human. Dragonfire adept is nice, as previously mentioned.

While Greater flyby is always on my mind when I see reach due to https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?635332-Iron-Chef-Optimization-Challenge-E6-Appetizer-Round-XXXIV&p=25197294&viewfull=1#post25197294]this guy[/url], It's nevertheless a clever and fun way to approach the ingredient – and you went for it because of Soulchilling, not kiss of shadow. A non-essentia flight mode would've done both.

When the rest of the resources are devoted to more casting and to numbers going slightly up, it's hard to have much more to say about your tactics.

Score: 2.25 points.


Power:

I think your argument stemming from the full attack line in the monster stat block is super shaky, but it's not crucial enough to be an elegance penalty. I'm just noting here that it doesn't work, IMO.

You've got good utility, you have one very potent trick against lots of enemies. Other than that… you're not doing too good in single combat, though you can harass with entangling breath later on.

I feel like you kind of went autopilot in the last 5 levels. You could've tried to build around your core concept. Instead, you just went for casting, and took dragonfire strike out of all things.

Score: 3.75 points.


Elegance:

As a minor note, lack of stub is annoying. I had to infer your race. Just let me know up top. Also, who's your deity bro. I'm treating you as an ideal cleric, which is a penalty from me.

I'm going to say you have the same order of operations issue I had with Queequeg: taking a feat at level three that needed the cloak bound to a chakra you didn't have available before leveling. Problematic.

Not much to say other than that. I don't see a lot of synergy here (aside from main trick, discussed next section), but not a lot of bad stuff either. Slap on the wrist for the build being kind of a contrives mess.

Score: 1.9 points.


UoSI:

Excellent uses of the last two abilities, if only they weren't exclusive due to essentia limitations. Everything else gets used about as well as one would think, with sneak attack getting some options a bit above the threshold. I'll note that investment in hiding falls off too early for my tastes, and that step of the bodiless is bad on a flier – but that's balanced by semi-reliably wanting it for slicking early on.

But overall? Not bad, honestly.

Score: 4 points.


Total Score: 11.9 points. See next build

Spoiler: Tienbo

Show

Originality:

**** CRAVEN, ALL MY HOMIES HATE CRAVEN

Same regards as last entry as far as the main trick is concerned. Human incarnum monk is the expected base, necrocarmate is fun and can make for a good way to make up for essentia problems. It all shakes up pretty similar to Junbao, except…

Oh, yeah

CRAVEN

Score: 1.75 points.


Power:

Better scout than the rival, and a better combatant due to increased essentia capacity. However, significantally less versatility and maneuverability.

Score: 3.5 points.


Elegance:

Similar complaints about lack of stub and order of operations issue, but somewhat less messy, and more accessibly opens itself up to the totemist base through necrocarnate. It's weird to judge 2 builds that are so alike one after the other, especially if I didn't have too much to say in a category about the last one.

Score: 2.25 points.


UoSI:

While it still has issues, this version is certainly better in this category than the LG version. Necrocarnate means that at least sometimes, you'll be attacking for (potentially big) strength damage at maximal capacity. I'd have liked to see better maneuverability and movement, but we certainly have an improvement.

Sept knowledge really fell by the sidelines here, but that's made up for with better sneakiness.

Score: 4.5 points.


Total Score: 12 points. These builds had an excellent idea, but I feel like you struggled to commit to the bit. We're doing great flyby? Great – let's go all the way. Stop meandering and focus. This is how you feature the SI, you shouldn't be wasting time on nonsense. Maximize fly movement, DC – even strength damage itself, if you can. Get this party moving.

Spoiler: Catoichi

Show

Originality:

Okay, catfolk soulknife isn't anything close to the more obvious approach you took with the last entry. This also is far from the more "obvious" uses for unseelie fey – "I took it to be blind" is one hell of a reason.

Tactical focus on Whirlwind common this round, but still good, and you came at it in a very interesting way. Some weird feats on top to round it all off – overall, very well done!

Score: 4.75 points.


Power:

You knew this was going to be a thrashing. You know I'm not a fan of soulknives in this category, and you're blind, and have LA. You've done an admirable job at dealing with it, but you suck. And youi keep sucking, and you never really shine.

Sure, you can basically function at 13, at least in short range, and you have a trick up your sleave at like, ECL 20, but come on – we both know this build is trash.

Score: 1 point.


Elegance:

You know the unseelie fey spiel, and look up at the second pair of twins if you don't. You also take a penalty here for choosing a randomly generated aspect of the template – and a 5% one, at that. You also also take a penalty for not telling me what your season power is – that one was really avoidable, and could've been useful, too.

Bonus feat soulknife is badly written, and I feel like knowledge devotion is stretching it. I'm glad you're not leaning too hard into handle humanoid: having it but not relying on it is kind of best of all worlds with this 4th of July article.

Iaijutsu and mindblade: hard pill to swallow. You could make an argument for it, but you could far more easily argue against it.

Catfolk doing all sorts of things simultaneously is fun, love synthete as a way to overcome blindness, and as usual, there's something to be said for simplicity. The build is focused, for sure, though I also felt like you kind of ran out of things to do with your feats after level 15, which is shame.

Overall, lots of issues on a pretty elegant chassis.

Score: 2.5 points.


UoSI:

LOVE mechanically imposed blindness as a manufactured reason to want blindsight. That's some Li'l Brudder level **** right there. God I miss Zaq.

I have, and will, mention Whirlwind attack and kiss of shadows. It's a good combo, and you do the superior pounce version of it.

Expected level of utility from everything else, save soulchilling strike which I feel is underperforming here, like in many other builds.

Overall, I can't give you a five just for shooting your own foot, but I wish I could.

Score: 4 points.


Total Score: 12.25 points. New soulknife handbook when?

Spoiler: Shae Dee

Show

Originality:

Azurin, yawn. SoH, yawn. Whirling Frenzy spirit lion totem? YAWN. The only surprising thing here is taking fighter 2 rather than Barb 2 with UA wolf totem, and that's "surprising" only in the sense that what you did is worse in every sense.

Tactically, your chassis is a spiked chain trip-pouncer, which is booooring. However – there's certainly a lot of jank on top of that. I mean, genuine full-investment whirlwind attack? Death attack focus? That's fun!

Overall, this build is a mixture of pleasant surprises and eyeroll inducing choices.

Score: 2.25 points.


Power:

Out of combat, you're a very good scout, I'll give you that.

Your to-hit is TRASH. You know this, you acknowledge this, but you also try to minimize it. Dude, it's TRASH.

Aside from that, your worst enemy is stagnation. Your damage barely increases over the levels, whirlwind attack is going to get real situational real soon, and your DC (the usefulness of which you overestimate even early on) is really bad by the end of your career.

You'll get a lucky failed save here and there, especially early on, and you're great at dispatching goons – but other than that, I'm not too impressed with Shae here.

Score: 2.5 points.


Elegance:

Multiple-target death attack doesn’t work. They wrote the rules specifically to make sure of that, I think – you have to focus on your target, singular, and then you have to execute within three rounds. If you start focusing on another target, first target goes bunk by the time you finish. You can't focus on everyone at once, because you study a victim. You mention at the last section the blindsight makes it easier to argue for. I disagree – my hearing is a non visual sense, and I'll be damned if I can "study" multiple compositions at once. Also, this is the first time you even acknowledge there's a problem – it doesn't make it "easier to argue", you didn't even bother to argue before. You just took it as a given.

Kiss of shadows tendrils aren't helpful for stealing, they explicitly only refer to attacks.

Midnight dodge isn't quite pulling double duty, given you already qualify with Azurin. Worse, it's messing up your last feat, because you don't have a dodge target by RAW – and generally, I think you've read the feat wrong. It applies once per round, when you're fighting defensively. Since when are you fighting defensively? This feat is a dud.

I may not like whirlwind attack, but I really like precise swing on big-reach whirlwind attack. Solid thinking.

Overall though, this build is kind of a mess.

Score: 1.75 points.


UoSI:

I've mentioned a couple of things that don't work here in elegance, but I'll mention the fact that you say you have blindsight, for obscuring mist whirlwinds, but you don't have the essentia to back up everything at once. Something has to give.

I like darkstalker HiPS on an assassin, and I once again like whirlwind attack (especially the pouncing version, which is much easier to use) on Kiss of Shadows. You also get valiant attempt credit on reach-pickpocketingk, which seemed to be in good faith.

Overall, though, this still isn't enough for a good score here.

Score: 2.5 points.


Total Score: 9 points. There are fun things in this build, but they're overshadowed by taking way too much as granted.

HM goes to the cat. I'm going to sleep.

[The Viscount]

Absolutely a promise kept. Rest well.

[loky1109]

Thank you, H_H_F_F!

Updated table!

Name	Alignment / Race	Class Levels	Chef	H_H_F_F	Total	Place
Broderick	LE Dvati	Decisive Strike Martial Arts Prayerful Meditation Wall Walker Unholy Strike Monk 9/Umbral Disciple 10		11.75	11.75	6th
Treirin Reitlin	TN Mongrelfolk	Distracting Attack Arcane Hunter Wildshape Ranger 5/Nature’s Warrior 5/Umbral Disciple 10		10.65	10.65	8th
Draconis and Seraphina	CN Dragonborn Dvati	Bonus Feat Poison Use Rogue 2/Incarnate 1/Arcane Stunt Swashbuckler 1/Hit and Run Fighter 2/Umbral Disciple 10/Scarlet Corsair 3		13.25	13.25	2nd
Antigone	CN Human	Arcane Hunter Urban Ranger 1/Binder 3/Unarmed Swordsage 1/Umbral Disciple 10/Master of Nine 5		11.40	11.40	7th
Irthan Malark	?? Azurin	Dragonfire Adept 3/Swashbuckler 1/ Unarmed Swordsage 1/Shadow Sun Ninja 5/Umbral Disciple 10		10.00	10.00	9th
Gronk Tongle	NE Chameleon Wild Dwarf	Spell Sense Disruptive Attack Rogue 10/Umbral Disciple 9		16.50	16.50	1st
Shank Garbin	LE Skarn	Decisive Strike Soulwarp Strike Skarn Monk 2/Arcane Hunter Spiritual Connection Ranger 3/Umbral Disciple 10/Spinemeld Warrior 5		11.75	11.75	6th
Junbao	LG Human	Sleeping Tiger Monk 1/Totemist 2/Dragonfire Adept 1/Cloistered Cleric 3/Umbral Disciple 10/Sapphire Hierarch 3		11.90	11.90	5th
Tienbo	LE Human	Sleeping Tiger Monk 1/Totemist 5/Umbral Disciple 10/Necrocarnate 4		12.00	12.00	4th
Catōichi	TN Unseelie Fey Catfolk	Hidden Talent Bonus Feats Soulknife 9/Umbral Disciple 10		12.25	12.25	3rd
Shae Dee	NE Azurin	Bonus Feat Rogue 2/Fighter 2/Whirling Frenzy Lion Totem Barbarian 1/Assassin 5/Umbral Disciple 10		9.00	9.00	10th
The Blot	NE Crab Hengeyokai	Beguiler 6/Oozemaster 4/Umbral Disciple 10	The Viscount	N/A	N/A	N/A

[Inevitability]

H_H_F_F, thank you so much for judging, go get some well-deserved rest.

No disputes: my HM goes to the cat as well, or Tienbo if that first pick ends up on the podium.

[FactualArcher]

Thanks for judging H_H_F_F. No disputes from me.

[The Viscount]

Thank you again for judging, H_H_F_F.
I've got one non-dispute missive from a chef below.

Hello H_H_F_F, thanks again for judging.

No dispute from me, but have some color commentary! Which I am pestering the host with now as I've read the judging, for if I wait for after the reveal I will have forgotten about it

"did you really need moment of perfect mind more than darkstalker?"

I find it funny it's under UotSI, I took a martial study(concentration) to give a nod to the fact that umbral disciple has in class concentration, and require concentration entering. it's double funny to me because martial study makes that rendundant/irrelevant! I even considered going for one of the "concentration blades" strikes, but those are at no-sinergy with great flyby and dive, so bleh

template BLEHness: i know! my preference would have been wing grafts, but 20k mo is pretty significant investment, so it was "some" penalty to elegance all the same. fair points on at least defining the unseelie choices.

I quite like the triple duty cobalt expertise pulls, I'm glad it got appreciated

[H_H_F_F]

Thanks to D&S's chef for their comments.

I've updated the spreadsheet with all your entries. There's also a round of the Villanous Competition currently accepting entries in my signature, if anyone's interested. And version 2.0 of my 5E half-caster bard, if I'm plugging stuff from my sig.

***

I've also been thinking about variant builds. I've done it before myself (Flaw / Item), but I feel like recently it's been increasing - variant races, variant templates.

I think maybe we should consider adopting a new policy for those, as they create an unfair advantage. Not only in the sense of "throwing multiple things at the wall and seeing what sticks" - we can live with that, I think. More significantly, they're creating a real unfair advantage in rounds with multiple judges, which I hope we'll see more of in the coming years.

Take the example of my build, getting a feat either through a flaw or through an item. Let's say judge 1 takes half a point for alertness through an Ioun Stone, and judge 2 takes 1.5 points off.

If I had to commit to a solution, I'm 2 points off whether I take a flaw or take the stone. By presenting a variant, I've nullified the effect of judges balancing each other out. Judge 1 takes half a point off (stone), judge 2 takes 1 point off (flaw). In essence, two different builds of mine got judged, and I'm enjoying their aggregate score. This issue will only grow more severe the more we use it: variants that don't use certain cheese, variant class levels for higher originality, etcetera. I could easily win a round that either of my variants wouldn't have, because each of them works for a different judge. That's way more unfair than cheesing out the 2 build limit, in my view.

So, I'm suggesting we adopt a "commit to the bit" policy. We can include variants all we want for actual play, but have just one "canonical build" for the judges to judge.

What do y'all think?

[Inevitability]

Thanks to D&S's chef for their comments.

I've updated the spreadsheet with all your entries. There's also a round of the Villanous Competition currently accepting entries in my signature, if anyone's interested. And version 2.0 of my 5E half-caster bard, if I'm plugging stuff from my sig.

***

I've also been thinking about variant builds. I've done it before myself (Flaw / Item), but I feel like recently it's been increasing - variant races, variant templates.

I think maybe we should consider adopting a new policy for those, as they create an unfair advantage. Not only in the sense of "throwing multiple things at the wall and seeing what sticks" - we can live with that, I think. More significantly, they're creating a real unfair advantage in rounds with multiple judges, which I hope we'll see more of in the coming years.

Take the example of my build, getting a feat either through a flaw or through an item. Let's say judge 1 takes half a point for alertness through an Ioun Stone, and judge 2 takes 1.5 points off.

If I had to commit to a solution, I'm 2 points off whether I take a flaw or take the stone. By presenting a variant, I've nullified the effect of judges balancing each other out. Judge 1 takes half a point off (stone), judge 2 takes 1 point off (flaw). In essence, two different builds of mine got judged, and I'm enjoying their aggregate score. This issue will only grow more severe the more we use it: variants that don't use certain cheese, variant class levels for higher originality, etcetera. I could easily win a round that either of my variants wouldn't have, because each of them works for a different judge. That's way more unfair than cheesing out the 2 build limit, in my view.

So, I'm suggesting we adopt a "commit to the bit" policy. We can include variants all we want for actual play, but have just one "canonical build" for the judges to judge.

What do y'all think?

Strongly agreed - I've noticed the trend you are describing as well, and I don't care much for it. Include variants in a separate header, if you must, but explicitly tell me what I should be judging.

[Paragon]

Strongly agreed - I've noticed the trend you are describing as well, and I don't care much for it. Include variants in a separate header, if you must, but explicitly tell me what I should be judging.

Yeah, I'm usually keeping them in a spoiler that isn't part of the build or what it can do. Maybe we should normalize a type of spoiler for variant build ? That way the judges can open it or not or simply after judging is done ?

[AvatarVecna]

Thanks to D&S's chef for their comments.

I've updated the spreadsheet with all your entries. There's also a round of the Villanous Competition currently accepting entries in my signature, if anyone's interested. And version 2.0 of my 5E half-caster bard, if I'm plugging stuff from my sig.

***

I've also been thinking about variant builds. I've done it before myself (Flaw / Item), but I feel like recently it's been increasing - variant races, variant templates.

I think maybe we should consider adopting a new policy for those, as they create an unfair advantage. Not only in the sense of "throwing multiple things at the wall and seeing what sticks" - we can live with that, I think. More significantly, they're creating a real unfair advantage in rounds with multiple judges, which I hope we'll see more of in the coming years.

Take the example of my build, getting a feat either through a flaw or through an item. Let's say judge 1 takes half a point for alertness through an Ioun Stone, and judge 2 takes 1.5 points off.

If I had to commit to a solution, I'm 2 points off whether I take a flaw or take the stone. By presenting a variant, I've nullified the effect of judges balancing each other out. Judge 1 takes half a point off (stone), judge 2 takes 1 point off (flaw). In essence, two different builds of mine got judged, and I'm enjoying their aggregate score. This issue will only grow more severe the more we use it: variants that don't use certain cheese, variant class levels for higher originality, etcetera. I could easily win a round that either of my variants wouldn't have, because each of them works for a different judge. That's way more unfair than cheesing out the 2 build limit, in my view.

So, I'm suggesting we adopt a "commit to the bit" policy. We can include variants all we want for actual play, but have just one "canonical build" for the judges to judge.

What do y'all think?

Broadly, I agree. A submission should be a particular creative vision. We all get indecisive during the creative process, every build goes through that phase of trying to find a way to make the puzzle pieces work together and ending up having to swap some out and later maybe you have buyer's remorse and wish you had settled for a different build because it includes an element you ditched. I don't think that kind of thing warrants a variant. My thought tends to be, the presence of variance should be more about Adaption Notes, where for some reason or another, a given build just wouldn't be acceptable at a table. Frequently, this can be a matter of interpretation, where one reading of a mechanic (usually, the reading the build pushes) is extremely powerful, where another reading of the same mechanic is generally more reasonable and weak but less defensible as RAW. In that instance, I think if your build is leaning on cheese, some kind of "what to do with this build if your DM shoots down the cheese" section is a very good inclusion.

[The Viscount]

That's a good point. We can say that any variant options in a build should be presented in a separate section, and bring it up as a thing judges can penalize in elegance. I can write something to that effect in the rules for next round.