Results 1 to 30 of 31
-
2024-01-30, 10:07 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2011
- Location
- Texas
- Gender
Iron Chef E6 Appetizer Edition, Round XLVII
Hello, all, from your new Chair. Welcome back to the Iron Chef Optimization Challenge E6 Appetizer Edition! It's time for round forty seven: let's put our best foot forward for an enchanted evening.
The form of this challenge is to take a particular D&D 3.5 game element (our "secret ingredient," or SI) and turn it into a functional E6 build, which must feature the SI as heavily as possible. (The only hard rule about this is that you must take at least one level—where applicable—in the SI, though judges are encouraged to look favorably on builds that take as many levels as possible in said SI or that otherwise use it as heavily as possible.) Your final build submission should consist of your 6 regular levels and your first 10 epic bonus feats, though providing a snapshot at earlier points through the progression is heartily encouraged. Entries are to be PM'd to the Chair (that would be me!), and they will be posted anonymously; our volunteer judges will then grade each build on a 1-5 point scale in four categories: Originality, Power, Elegance, and Use of the Secret Ingredient. The builds with the highest three scores will be awarded medals, with the Honorable Mention award going to the non-medaling build that the Chair likes best and/or that receives the most votes for HM in this thread. (HM may not always be awarded, particularly if the number of builds is very small.) And then we all have cake!*
*Note: You must provide your own cake.
This is basically like the regular Iron Chef, and let's be brutally honest with ourselves here: this isn't a gargantuan community, and we basically all know what we're talking about at this point. Make the builds, send 'em in, post some scores, and have fun. If you've got questions, lemme know. Still, let's lay out a few rules!
- Cooking Time: Builds must be submitted via PM to the Chair by 4:59 PM GMT - 9 on Tuesday, February 20, 2024. The reveal shall be on the first evening the Chair has free following the cooking deadline, which is hoped to be that evening or the immediately subsequent one—I'll do my best, anyway. Judging is then encouraged to go as quickly as possible; if multiple judges volunteer, we'll set about a two-week window, but if we only get one judge, we'll try to wrap up as soon as possible after that judge presents scores. (I will admit that the deadline time may not be an exact science, but don't hide from me and we'll probably be cool.)
- Kitchen: Let's break this one down a bit.
Spoiler: Let's talk about sources
- ALLOWED: Almost all D&D 3.5 material published by WotC: Core, Completes, monster books, Races Of books, alternate power source books (Expanded Psionics Handbook, Magic of Incarnum, Tome of Battle, Tome of Magic, etc.), Spell Compendium, Book of Exalted Deeds, Book of Vile Darkness, Eberron material, Forgotten Realms material, and other WotC-published 3.5 material. (This list is NOT exhaustive and there are many other legal books that I did not mention by name!)
- ALLOWED: Material from the 3.5 archives of the Wizards of the Coast website (including, but not limited to, the Mind's Eye articles). If you use it, link it.
- ALLOWED: Official errata from WotC. If you're relying on this in a material fashion, it's a good idea to link it and to discuss it.
- NOT ALLOWED: Unofficial errata, including "class fixes" (regardless of the source, including from the original author if not published in a WotC book) or fan-created content.
- ALLOWED: Unupdated WotC-published 3.0 material (e.g., Sword and Fist, Masters of the Wild, etc.) except for 3.0 psionics. No 3.0 psionics allowed. If you are using 3.0 material, use the general-purpose skill updates (Wilderness Lore becomes Survival, Innuendo becomes Bluff, etc.) and the general-purpose rules updates (spells with a casting time of "1 action" become "1 standard action," etc.) when appropriate.
- NOT ALLOWED: 3.0 material for which a direct 3.5 update exists. Use the updated material instead.
- ALLOWED: Dragon Compendium and its errata.
- NOT ALLOWED: Content from Dragon Magazine and/or Dungeon Magazine unless said content appears in an otherwise allowed source.
- ALLOWED: Oriental Adventures, including the 3.5 update to Oriental Adventures from Dragon Magazine #318. This is a specific exception to the "no Dragon" rule!
- NOT ALLOWED: Pathfinder content, regardless of whether it is "D&D 3.5 OGL" or not. If it didn't come from WotC, we don't want it.
- ALLOWED: From Unearthed Arcana: racial paragon classes, alternate class features/variant classes, spelltouched feats, and variant races. (Traits and flaws are technically legal, but traits warrant a -0.5 point penalty in Elegance, and flaws warrant a -1 penalty in Elegance.)
- NOT ALLOWED: Other Unearthed Arcana content, including (but not limited to) bloodlines, LA buyoff, fractional BAB/saves, alternate casting systems, alternate skill systems, item familiars, prestigious character classes, generic classes, gestalt, etc. When you're wondering if UA content is allowed, err on the side of caution and don't mess around with it.
- NOT ALLOWED: Leadership, regardless of source. Game elements functionally equivalent to Leadership (including, but not limited to, Dragon Cohort, Undead Leadership, and Thrallherd) are similarly banned. (Familiars, Improved Familiar, animal companions, Wild Cohort, psicrystals, elemental envoys, and similar game elements are allowed, and they are not considered to be "Leadership." If the difference isn't obvious, feel free to contact the Chair with specific questions.)
- NOT ALLOWED: Third-party content, homebrew, or other non-WotC content.
- NOT ALLOWED: Epic feats from the Epic Level Handbook. Just because you're "epic" in E6 after 6th level doesn't mean that you're that kind of epic.
- NOT ALLOWED: Any race or template with a level adjustment other than +0. (Or any other source of LA other than a race or template, if any such things exist.) However, as a specific exception for round 26, see below.
- NOT ALLOWED: For our judges: penalizing solely based on legal sources used, regardless of whether those sources are plentiful, sparse, common, obscure, or something in between. If the material is legal, then it doesn't matter how many or how few books it came out of.
- ALLOWED: Also for our judges: penalizing for using a source (other than material in Core; don't be vindictive about genuinely obvious stuff) that isn't listed in the build writeup. The chef may choose to present the sources in-line with the text, in a consolidated source list, or somewhere else, but if the source is listed (and is otherwise legal), it counts. If the source is not listed, you may choose to penalize for that.
If you have questions about anything in this section (or hell, in this ruleset), feel free to ask the Chair.
- Character Creation: 32 point buy is assumed. For the purposes of this contest, Level Adjustment greater than +0 is banned. (This may be revised at a later point, but I don't feel that the E6 LA rules are conducive to fun in the context of this contest.) No more than two entries per chef per contest, please; if you submit two builds and somehow are so overcome with inspiration for a third that you can't help yourself, PM me and tell me which two you care about the most.
- Highlighted because of past issues: It is not enough for your build to end with a level adjustment of +0. You must be +0 from start to finish. No using ANY build elements with a level adjustment above +0, even if they then get mitigated or reduced somehow. However, note that a special exception is in place for round 26...
- Speculation: Please do not post any form of speculation before the reveal. Just don't do it, guys. It's not cool. This means NOT posting any of the following or anything substantially similar: what you think is going to be common, significant elements of your planned build or of other potential builds, or anything else that could directly influence someone else's build choices for good or for ill. (It's acceptable to ask for rules clarifications as appropriate, but try to avoid tipping your hand too much.) Speculation is bad because it can discourage people from posting builds and can also "taint the judging pool" when it comes to Originality, so please just try to be aware of how other people might react to your speculation.
- E6: Here's how E6 works for the purposes of this contest. Build your character normally for the first six levels. After you reach level 6, you stop gaining levels and start gaining bonus feats every time you would gain 5,000 XP. Since we aren't actually tracking XP, you'll basically list your first ten epic bonus feats in the order that you take them, and we think of them as being kind of like levels. We will not use the LA-equals-reduced-point-buy rules, instead preferring to just ban races with LA, at least for now. We will not use the "capstone feats"; all feats that you take must be normal legal 3.5 feats, not homebrew E6 ones. You may not use the Epic feats from the Epic Level Handbook, though if for some reason there are non-Epic feats from the ELH that you qualify for, you may take those. (I don't think there are any, but I'm sure someone will prove me wrong.) It is up to the discretion of each judge whether this is a "hard E6" (magic above 3rd level spells is simply beyond mortal reach, items that have a listed CL above 6th are just plain not available, etc.) or a "soft E6" (if you can somehow get the magic on your character, it's yours, regardless of level), though I honestly don't expect it to come up. Don't go crazy with making assumptions about items and we probably won't have to find out.
- Presentation: Please use the table found below in the spoiler. List your epic bonus feats (in clear order) after the table. If you find a clever way of formatting that that isn't annoying and that doesn't break anything, have fun; if it's portable, I may steal it for the next round. When sending your build or any disputes to the Chair, clearly include your build's name in the subject of the PM, and please present your build exactly as you want the Chair to copy and paste it into the thread.
If you're using a picture, cite the source and follow any relevant citation rules. Because we have had issues with this in the past, when listing your skills, please make it very clear how many ranks you have at each level. There are multiple ways to do this and we do not wish to cramp anyone's individual style by dictating exactly how this must look, but make sure that somewhere in your entry there's an explanation of how many actual skill ranks you have. It's still fine to list total skill bonuses, if that's your style, but don't only list bonuses; make sure that there is a clear listing somewhere of your ranks alone. You are allowed, but not required, to use this extremely spiffy tool that mattie_p cooked up (thanks, mattie_p!).SpoilerCode for the table:Level Class Base Attack Bonus Fort Save Ref Save Will Save Skills Feats Class Features 1st New Class Level +x +x +x +x Skills Feats New Class Abilities 2nd New Class Level +x +x +x +x Skills Feats New Class Abilities 3rd New Class Level +x +x +x +x Skills Feats New Class Abilities 4th New Class Level +x +x +x +x Skills Feats New Class Abilities 5th New Class Level +x +x +x +x Skills Feats New Class Abilities 6th New Class Level +x +x +x +x Skills Feats New Class Abilities Spoiler[TABLE="class: head alt1 alt2"]
[TR]
[TH][B]Level[/B][/TH]
[TH][B]Class[/B][/TH]
[TH][B]Base Attack Bonus[/B][/TH]
[TH][B]Fort Save[/B][/TH]
[TH][B]Ref Save[/B][/TH]
[TH][B]Will Save[/B][/TH]
[TH][B]Skills[/B][/TH]
[TH][B]Feats[/B][/TH]
[TH][B]Class Features[/B][/TH]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]1st[/TD]
[TD]New Class Level[/TD]
[TD]+x[/TD]
[TD]+x[/TD]
[TD]+x[/TD]
[TD]+x[/TD]
[TD]Skills[/TD]
[TD]Feats[/TD]
[TD]New Class Abilities[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2nd[/TD]
[TD]New Class Level[/TD]
[TD]+x[/TD]
[TD]+x[/TD]
[TD]+x[/TD]
[TD]+x[/TD]
[TD]Skills[/TD]
[TD]Feats[/TD]
[TD]New Class Abilities[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]3rd[/TD]
[TD]New Class Level[/TD]
[TD]+x[/TD]
[TD]+x[/TD]
[TD]+x[/TD]
[TD]+x[/TD]
[TD]Skills[/TD]
[TD]Feats[/TD]
[TD]New Class Abilities[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]4th[/TD]
[TD]New Class Level[/TD]
[TD]+x[/TD]
[TD]+x[/TD]
[TD]+x[/TD]
[TD]+x[/TD]
[TD]Skills[/TD]
[TD]Feats[/TD]
[TD]New Class Abilities[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]5th[/TD]
[TD]New Class Level[/TD]
[TD]+x[/TD]
[TD]+x[/TD]
[TD]+x[/TD]
[TD]+x[/TD]
[TD]Skills[/TD]
[TD]Feats[/TD]
[TD]New Class Abilities[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]6th[/TD]
[TD]New Class Level[/TD]
[TD]+x[/TD]
[TD]+x[/TD]
[TD]+x[/TD]
[TD]+x[/TD]
[TD]Skills[/TD]
[TD]Feats[/TD]
[TD]New Class Abilities[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE] - Contest houserules: Nearly the same as the main contest's rules here: all creatures are proficient with natural weapons they have or may acquire, bonus feats that are explicitly granted without meeting prereqs are usable even without those prereqs, and feats that affect which skills are class skills for you and/or how you spend your skill points (Able Learner, Martial Study, Truename Training, Apprentice, etc.) apply immediately at the level at which you take them (even though you normally spend skill points before taking a feat). When taking Open Minded as an epic feat, any skill that has ever been a class skill for you (including through your class, your race, your feats, or similar game elements, though please don't muck around with retroactively making something stop being a class skill for some stupid reason) is a class skill when determining how the 5 granted skill points may be spent. All usual rules about HD-related skill caps apply. When taking Open Minded as a non-epic feat, treat it as normal; the class skills of the class you took at the level you gained Open Minded (plus race, feats, etc.) are your class skills for those skill points, similar to if Open Minded's skill points came straight from your class.
- Judging guidelines: The minimum score in a category is 1, and the maximum is 5 (except in high-Originality rounds, wherein the maximum in Originality is 10). Judges are expected to be fair, consistent, and open-minded, and they are expected to make a good-faith effort to engage with any reasonable disputes that arise, especially when RAW is in question. That said, contestants are asked to not dispute more than necessary; let's do everything in good faith and really only dispute when a judge is being inconsistent, being unfair, or is otherwise grossly misinterpreting a build.
Judges may not penalize Originality solely because a build is a tribute or homage to an existing creative work (in or out of D&D canon; note that this is not the same thing as penalizing Originality for using well-known optimization tactics), nor may judges penalize based solely on sources used (whether those sources are plentiful, sparse, common, obscure, or something in between, you should judge the build elements and how they work together rather than what book or what books they came out of, as long as those books are legal for this contest and are cited in the entry).
As with the main contest, we will follow the "One Mistake, One Penalty" guideline, and it is very important that the judges adhere to it. I'm going to directly copy and paste this from the main thread, and hopefully the original author won't mind too much:
SpoilerJudges are only allowed to penalise once for a given mistake. If someone messes up their skills and doesn't qualify for a PrC, ding them as hard as you like. Once. In one category. You don't then get to declare that because they didn't qualify for that PrC, they don't get those levels, and thus don't qualify for anything else. If Ranger is a common ingredient, ding them for Originality. Once. Don't also take off points for Two-Weapon-Fighting being a common ingredient.
Non-exhaustive list of examples:
SkillsAllowed:
- Giving a penalty for miscalculating the number of skill points gained
- Giving a penalty for not having enough ranks to meet a prerequisite
- Increasing the harshness of a skill miscalculation penalty if it affects critical skills including prereqs
Not allowed:
- Giving separate penalties for miscalculating skill points and for non-qualification where the non-qualification is solely caused by the miscalculation
PrereqsAllowed:
- Giving a penalty for not meeting prereqs
- Scaling the penalty depending on how important the item that the build failed to qualify for is
- Giving minimum score in UotSI for not qualifying for the SI
- Not giving credit for (note: not the same as penalising for) tactics using feats or classes other than the SI that were not qualified for (but see below)
Not Allowed:
- "Cascading" failures to qualify - declaring that because a build doesn't qualify for a feat, for example, it also doesn't qualify for anything using that feat as a prereq
- Treating a build as having fewer levels than it does because of FtQ for classes
Other general things that are no longer allowed:
- Penalising because someone has chosen to build a tribute to an existing creative work
- Deciding that a backstory has not met a fluff prerequisite well enough, or because its method of meeting it is "unrealistic". You may penalise if a fluff prereq is not addressed at all, but not for how well it is addressed.
Note that these are protections, not licenses. Deliberately taking a feat that you know you don't qualify for hoping to just suck up the judging penalty for a feat that you couldn't normally take is not okay, and may lead to your build being disqualified. - Dispute guidelines (NEW, PLEASE PAY ATTENTION): Disputing is long, annoying, and emotional. It's also sometimes necessary, but it's often not actually something that makes everyone have more fun. Let's go into a little more detail here.
Spoiler- Do NOT dispute to make an argument that goes fundamentally beyond what's in your write-up. It is the responsibility of the chef to make sure that the write-up is complete and contains their best arguments for what the build does and why it's awesome. If you didn't explain your tactics well or didn't spell out something that a judge misses, just do better next time. Don't drag it out after the fact.
- Do NOT dispute just to be clever or witty or cheeky. Please. We're all adults here and so I assume you know what that means. Don't treat the build as a setup and your oh-so-clever dispute as the punchline. It's not as funny as it is in your head. Trust me. I've been down that road.
- Do NOT dispute just to say "oh yeah, my bad, I missed that" or some equivalent. If you're not directly challenging the judge, save the commentary until after the reveal. I 100% get that the urge to respond to commentary is very strong, but type it out and sit on it for a while if you've gotta.
- Do NOT dispute just to try to wheedle more points out of the judge. Note that this is different from saying that the judge is being truly unfair or is being truly wrong by black-and-white RAW. A dispute is NOT the place to try to scrape together a few last quarter-points. If you didn't put it in your write-up, that's on you. This also means that a dispute is really not the place to have long back-and-forth tit-for-tat arguments. That's a surefire way to get people grumpy. It's a contest on a D&D board, guys, not the results of a federal election.
- Do NOT dispute to tear down another build. That's just plain not cool. If you entered the contest, it's not on you to judge the other builds.
- DO dispute if the judge is being blatantly biased by giving you a substantially different ruling on a build element compared to another chef who used the same build element in nearly the same way. (Note that position in a build may affect if you're using that element in "nearly the same way" or not.) Please reserve this for the truly blatant examples. I mean it. Remember, it's the contestant's responsibility to make their best argument in the original write-up.
- DO dispute if the judge is actively going against the contest rules. Note that there are relatively few ways in which a judge can go against contest rules (we intentionally give very wide discretion to our judges), but examples include truly breaking One Mistake One Penalty, penalizing just because of number of sources of (legal) material, and so on.
- DO dispute if the judge is clearly ignoring unambiguous RAW. Note that this is for unambiguous RAW; if the RAW is shady and you're making an argument that isn't completely clear and that it wouldn't be strange for a GM to frown on, the judge has every right to frown on it as well. (You generally know when you're indulging in shady RAW. Be mature about this.) But if the judge is saying you didn't hit a prereq that you clearly did hit (and included in your write-up!), saying you can't do something that the plain text of the ability says you can do, or anything like that, by all means, call 'em out.
- Do NOT dispute if the judge doesn't agree with your interpretation of ambiguous RAW. Yes, this is a retread of the previous bullet point; this is that important. If you're relying on ambiguous RAW, it's on you to lay out clearly why it should work the way you want it to work. Again, be mature and act in good faith: you really know when you're pushing things like this. If they don't like it, they don't like it. Move on.
Disputing is a privilege, not a right. In the Chair's sole discretion, disputes that do not meet these guidelines and/or that do not seem to be offered in good faith may be suppressed. The Chair reserves the right to choose to post all, some, or none of a dispute if appropriate.
- Other bits and bobs: If there's something major and relevant I haven't mentioned, assume that the way I handle it will probably be the same as the main contest unless stated otherwise or unless doing so would be an obviously absurd result. If you've got questions, I'll give you answers.
This round's secret ingredient:
SOME ENCHANTED EVENING
I'd like to see what you can do with enchantments. Spells, powers, others slas, whatever moves you. You are not specifically required to be a wizard specializing in the school of enchantment, but this is of course allowed. Charm, ensorcel, and put spells on people. Show us why people might want to think twice before picking it as a banned school.
Allez Optimizer!
The Builds:
Coming soon!
Spoiler: Contest History
Round 4: Knight
Round 5: Ninja
Round 6: Racial Paragon Classes
Round 7: Hexblade
Round 8: Shugenja
Round 9: Swashbuckler
Round 10: Crusader
Round 11: Soulknife
Round 12: Factotum
Round 13: Prestige Classes
Round 14: Mountebank
Round 15: Sorcerer
Round 16: Dragon Shaman
Round 17: Lurk
Round 18: Paladin
Round 19: Scout
Round 20: Incarnate
Round 21: Shadowcaster
Round 22: Dragonmarks
Round 23: Fighter
Round 24: Pets
Round 25: Warlock
Round 26: Monsters
Round 27: Ardent (exhibition round)
Round 28: Rogue
Round 29: Signature Spells
Round 30: Any Prior Ingredient
Round 31: Ranger
Round 32: Tanking
Round 33: Psychic Warrior
Round 34: Flight
Round 35: Binder
Round 36: Skill tricks
Round 37: Barbarian
Round 38: Fire
Round 39: Bard
Round 40: Poison
Round 41: Light and Darkness
Round 42: Let's Move
Round 43: Plants
Round 44: Illusions
Round 45: Unusual Weapons
Round 46: Crafted Henchmen
Spoiler: Way Old Stuff (2012 and earlier; Amechra's run as Chair)I've got a new fantasy TTRPG about running your own fencing school in a 3 musketeers pastiche setting. Book coming soon.
Check out my NEW sci-fi TTRPG about first contact. Cool alien races, murderous AIs, and more. New expansion featuring rules for ships! New book here NOW!
Iron Chef Medals!
Amazing Princess Mononoke avatar by Dispozition
-
2024-01-30, 10:07 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2011
- Location
- Texas
- Gender
Re: Iron Chef E6 Appetizer Edition, Round XLVII
Here's a few gentle recommendations that are intended to improve scores and make things easier for the judges. As always, THE RECOMMENDATIONS IN THIS POST ARE NOT RULES. Judges and contestants are free to honor them or ignore them; my intent here is only to help, and NONE of what I'm saying here is required. (That said, did you see the new dispute guidelines? Those ARE rules, so please go read them. And I'm even going to be better about enforcing them this time.)
Recommendations:
- Double-check ALL of your prereqs. Every. Single. One. Feats, PrCs, whatever. You might even go so far as to spell out when you meet each one, but again, that's not a requirement. But one of the single biggest causes of point loss is failure to meet prereqs.
- Tell the judges what's cool about your build! You spent hours or days on this (y'know, probably) and know it inside and out, but the judges are getting a whole bunch of these dishes all at once and don't know the build history of each one. You're significantly more likely to score well if you spell out exactly what makes you awesome than if you try to just let it stand on its own.
- Make it easy to read! Skill tables are awful, though they're an incredibly necessary evil. Full Monster Manual-style statblocks are occasionally useful but are also insanely dense if not formatted well. Judges are very likely to miss something if you aren't careful with how you present your info. Remember that judging takes a lot of time, energy, and focus, so don't rely on the judge being willing/able to decode something in order to see what makes you interesting!
- Be memorable. Remember that we've all seen these ingredients used at least once before. What makes you different?
I've got a new fantasy TTRPG about running your own fencing school in a 3 musketeers pastiche setting. Book coming soon.
Check out my NEW sci-fi TTRPG about first contact. Cool alien races, murderous AIs, and more. New expansion featuring rules for ships! New book here NOW!
Iron Chef Medals!
Amazing Princess Mononoke avatar by Dispozition
-
2024-01-31, 03:38 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2014
- Location
- Arcadia
- Gender
Re: Iron Chef E6 Appetizer Edition, Round XLVII
I can see this bringing up trouble with the judges, so just to be clear: the definition of 'enchantment' here is not merely spells from the school of enchantment, right? Would you say that anything mind-affecting automatically counts, or are there further restrictions?
Creator of the LA-assignment thread.
Come join the new Junkyard Wars and build with SLAs and a breath weapon!
Interested in judging a build competition on the 3.5 forums but not sure where to begin? Check out the judging handbook!
Extended signature!
-
2024-02-03, 08:02 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2014
- Location
- Arcadia
- Gender
Re: Iron Chef E6 Appetizer Edition, Round XLVII
How's everyone doing? I've got a few ideas rolling around but nothing that makes me feel like it deserves to be a full build - and the ones that would make for full builds feel like they're pretty far removed from the enchantment concept. I might judge if I don't get good inspiration.
Creator of the LA-assignment thread.
Come join the new Junkyard Wars and build with SLAs and a breath weapon!
Interested in judging a build competition on the 3.5 forums but not sure where to begin? Check out the judging handbook!
Extended signature!
-
2024-02-03, 10:45 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2020
- Location
- Jerusalem
- Gender
Re: Iron Chef E6 Appetizer Edition, Round XLVII
I've got nothing concrete so far, but I've been busy.
Screaming defiance with the last breath
It would be strange indeed if so celestial an article as FREEDOM should not be highly rated.
My judgments and medals!
The Iron Chef Optimization spreadsheet!
Song, Sword, and Sorcery: my 5E homebrew half-caster bard (Version 2.0!)
-
2024-02-03, 12:30 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2020
- Location
- Moscow
- Gender
Re: Iron Chef E6 Appetizer Edition, Round XLVII
I'm busy on judging IC, even didn't look here for ideas for this round.
If you could make anything and everything welcome to the Zinc Saucier XLV: Figaro
My competition's medals.
Spoiler: For purposes of clarity1109 is September, 11 - my birthday.
-
2024-02-08, 05:55 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2014
- Location
- Arcadia
- Gender
Re: Iron Chef E6 Appetizer Edition, Round XLVII
Judging criteria, feel free to ask questions if anything's unclear.
SpoilerOriginality:
1 point for the classes being used, how expected are they given the enchantment theme, how expected are they in general?
0.5 points for race. I'm going to ease up on my 'bonus feat races are in a class of their own' rule: anything that's famously good in optimization circles, whether that's human or anthropomorphic bat, gets a 0, anything that I'd kinda see coming given the theme has 0.25, and the rest is 0.5.
1.5 points for your feats. In general, a quarter point for everything that truly wows me, though multiple 'huh neats' will add up to a bonus here too.
Lastly, for the overall originality of your concept and fluff, up to 1 point. Will this be a memorable character, or will it be Faceless Human Fighter #6?
Power:
Given what you want to do: how good are you at it? Can you hold your own in a combat encounter? I'll somewhat weigh the classes you're using: a tier 1 wizard will impress me less than a tier 3 soulknife, though obviously a wizard can still get a perfect score here. 1.5 points for overall power, which will also be a bit of a measure of versatility: can you deal with hordes of fodder and powerful foes with good saves and caster-type enemies?
Enchantments will fail against anything immune to mind-affecting effects. What are your plans against those foes? Can you overcome encounters with undead, plants, oozes, enchantment-immune fey? 1 point for covering your weaknesses here.
Ignoring the 'default' level of utility that charms and compulsions offer, how much do you have to contribute outside of combat? Up to 0.75 points for utility.
I care a lot about staying power: does your build have it? Big tricks that can only be used 1/day, harshly limited spell slots, short-duration buffs that you'd like to keep up all day, stuff like that hurts you here. You start with 0.75 points here if you can stay relevant for four encounters a day - each less than that incurs a 0.25 penalty.
Elegance:
Blatantly illegal builds get an automatic 1.
0.5 points for avoiding multiclass XP penalties at all time.
2 points as a generic catch-all category. Do you stick to the rules and avoid ambiguous interpretations? Do you egregiously mix settings? Do you rely on variant rules, like cityscape's social class? Are you reliant on alignment shifts, or do you particularly abuse flavor to make everything work?
1.5 points for a build that's efficient (multiple requirements satisfied with single build elements) and synergistic (various parts combine into an especially harmonious whole).
UoSI:
Some clarification on what I consider 'enchantment': any spell explicitly in the enchantment school (or SLA/power duplicating the same) is of course fair game, but most abilities that alter a creature's allegiance or compel behavior from it count, even if they're not explicitly called enchantment. Being mind-affecting isn't enough in and of itself (fear particularly is a category of mind-affecting effects not categorized under enchantment), but having the charm or compulsion tags helps a lot.
So with that out of the way: how impactful are your enchantments to what you're doing? In a typical fight, will the fact that you're an enchanter be front-and-center obvious? Are enchantments your focus, or a thing that you can pivot away from at minimal cost? 2 points depending on how well you execute this.
Does it take particularly long before enchantments are part of your strategy? 0.5 points for getting everything up before Epic feats come into play, and another 0.5 for being a capable enchanter as early as level 3.
How innovative is your use of enchantments? Are we sticking with the tried-and-true 'enemy makes a Will save and is inconvenienced on a failure' or do you weave them into a bit of a more impressive overall strategy? 1 point to be gained here.Last edited by Inevitability; 2024-02-11 at 05:51 PM.
Creator of the LA-assignment thread.
Come join the new Junkyard Wars and build with SLAs and a breath weapon!
Interested in judging a build competition on the 3.5 forums but not sure where to begin? Check out the judging handbook!
Extended signature!
-
2024-02-12, 05:19 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2023
- Gender
Re: Iron Chef E6 Appetizer Edition, Round XLVII
Inspiration has struck me, so I'm definitely in this round. Hopefully there are some others cooking. How is everyone else doing?
-
2024-02-19, 03:48 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2008
Re: Iron Chef E6 Appetizer Edition, Round XLVII
Just submitted my entry.
-
2024-02-20, 07:34 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2023
- Gender
Re: Iron Chef E6 Appetizer Edition, Round XLVII
Venger, your private message box is full, so I can't submit my entry. Hopefully that's a good sign for the number of entries we'll be getting.
-
2024-02-20, 02:34 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2011
- Location
- Texas
- Gender
Re: Iron Chef E6 Appetizer Edition, Round XLVII
A good problem to have! I've made more room, please feel free to resubmit. Sorry for the inconvenience.
Deadline is today. Is everyone ready for a reveal later this evening, or is anyone still brewing?Last edited by Venger; 2024-02-20 at 02:35 PM.
I've got a new fantasy TTRPG about running your own fencing school in a 3 musketeers pastiche setting. Book coming soon.
Check out my NEW sci-fi TTRPG about first contact. Cool alien races, murderous AIs, and more. New expansion featuring rules for ships! New book here NOW!
Iron Chef Medals!
Amazing Princess Mononoke avatar by Dispozition
-
2024-02-20, 02:50 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2023
- Gender
Re: Iron Chef E6 Appetizer Edition, Round XLVII
My entry is in. Thanks for making space!
I'm ready for the reveal now, though I'm happy to wait if anyone else is cooking.
-
2024-02-21, 05:03 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2011
- Location
- Texas
- Gender
Re: Iron Chef E6 Appetizer Edition, Round XLVII
Sure thing. Is anyone else still cooking? I'd be happy to leave it open a while longer in the interests of a full podium.
I've got a new fantasy TTRPG about running your own fencing school in a 3 musketeers pastiche setting. Book coming soon.
Check out my NEW sci-fi TTRPG about first contact. Cool alien races, murderous AIs, and more. New expansion featuring rules for ships! New book here NOW!
Iron Chef Medals!
Amazing Princess Mononoke avatar by Dispozition
-
2024-02-23, 10:57 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2008
Re: Iron Chef E6 Appetizer Edition, Round XLVII
Just my opinion, but if there are no extension requests, it seems better to post the builds now than to let interest dwindle.
-
2024-02-28, 01:02 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2014
- Location
- Arcadia
- Gender
Re: Iron Chef E6 Appetizer Edition, Round XLVII
I think it's about time for the reveal - it seems unlikely more entries will come in, and I'm eager to judge this round and move on to the next.
Creator of the LA-assignment thread.
Come join the new Junkyard Wars and build with SLAs and a breath weapon!
Interested in judging a build competition on the 3.5 forums but not sure where to begin? Check out the judging handbook!
Extended signature!
-
2024-03-01, 11:07 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2011
- Location
- Texas
- Gender
Re: Iron Chef E6 Appetizer Edition, Round XLVII
Apologies for the delay. Thank you for your feedback, that certainly makes sense and I agree. Without further ado, the reveal! Please refrain from posting until I give the all-clear.
I've got a new fantasy TTRPG about running your own fencing school in a 3 musketeers pastiche setting. Book coming soon.
Check out my NEW sci-fi TTRPG about first contact. Cool alien races, murderous AIs, and more. New expansion featuring rules for ships! New book here NOW!
Iron Chef Medals!
Amazing Princess Mononoke avatar by Dispozition
-
2024-03-01, 11:14 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2011
- Location
- Texas
- Gender
Re: Iron Chef E6 Appetizer Edition, Round XLVII
If you change your mind...
Originally Posted by Herman OstermanI've got a new fantasy TTRPG about running your own fencing school in a 3 musketeers pastiche setting. Book coming soon.
Check out my NEW sci-fi TTRPG about first contact. Cool alien races, murderous AIs, and more. New expansion featuring rules for ships! New book here NOW!
Iron Chef Medals!
Amazing Princess Mononoke avatar by Dispozition
-
2024-03-01, 11:15 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2011
- Location
- Texas
- Gender
Re: Iron Chef E6 Appetizer Edition, Round XLVII
The war may be over, but it casts a long shadow.
Originally Posted by Ferrimelk the Midnight ShadowI've got a new fantasy TTRPG about running your own fencing school in a 3 musketeers pastiche setting. Book coming soon.
Check out my NEW sci-fi TTRPG about first contact. Cool alien races, murderous AIs, and more. New expansion featuring rules for ships! New book here NOW!
Iron Chef Medals!
Amazing Princess Mononoke avatar by Dispozition
-
2024-03-01, 11:20 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2011
- Location
- Texas
- Gender
Re: Iron Chef E6 Appetizer Edition, Round XLVII
That's the round! Judge away.
I've got a new fantasy TTRPG about running your own fencing school in a 3 musketeers pastiche setting. Book coming soon.
Check out my NEW sci-fi TTRPG about first contact. Cool alien races, murderous AIs, and more. New expansion featuring rules for ships! New book here NOW!
Iron Chef Medals!
Amazing Princess Mononoke avatar by Dispozition
-
2024-03-01, 01:26 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2013
Re: Iron Chef E6 Appetizer Edition, Round XLVII
My idea was a Tibbit Vop warlock with the charm invocation, and following feats: flop, improved flop and interspecies grace. Who can refuse the little kitty?
-
2024-03-01, 07:03 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2014
- Location
- Arcadia
- Gender
Re: Iron Chef E6 Appetizer Edition, Round XLVII
While you're waiting for the judgement, how about I share some ideas I had for this round?
-A barkeep/salesman based around using charms and psionic minor creation to create Orc Kragg (nauseates non-orcs, no save) or mordain tea (1d10 constitution damage poison) and convince people to drink them, with Tormenting Thirst as a sort of ultimate in-combat save-or-lose. Possibly he'd use Price of Loyalty (PGtE) under the cover of returning people their change. Ranks in Perform (Tea Ceremony) are of course mandatory. Tormenting Thirst is even on the Sand Shaper list, so some unusual base caster choices could be made.
-A build based around the spurdism trick (Spurring a mount deals double damage every round, so cast Delay Death and Beastland Ferocity on a horse, cast Sadism on yourself, and you can rack up an enormous bonus to a skill check of your choice, 2/3 spells involved in the combo are enchantment so it seemed like a fitting enough build, but the fact that I hadn't come up with it myself soured the idea some)
-Enthralling Voice is an invocation available to dragonfire adepts that's mostly notable for being the equivalent of a 6th level spell, meaning it has the insane save DC of 16 + charisma before extra bonuses and items. No idea what I'd do with it, but that's a big number!
-Getting a bunch of animals somehow, using Bestow Curse to make them invisible to each other, and then casting Enrage Animals to make them go into a murderous frenzy targeting anyone nearby.
...okay that's enough now for the judgem- oh look there it is.
Spoiler: Herman (11.75)Huh, Herman isn't a common English name, is it? It leaves me wondering if this mystery builder is Dutch as well.
Originality (2.25):
Artificer isn't bard or wizard, but I'm not exactly blown away by the choice. Call it half points. 0.5/1
Boring ole human isn't good for originality - and I'm not even sure why you're a human? It's E6, you get a zillion feats, it doesn't look like you particularly needed to get this-or-that combo up early... it just feels like a very uninspired choice. 0/0.5
Well, your list of feats did manage to surprise me, so credit for that - but you're hardly the first person to think of going all-in on item creation and stacking a bunch of feats together. 0.5/1.5
Mechanically, are we seeing anything particularly innovative? I don't think so - everything you do is pretty well-established as far as crafting shenanigans go. What about fluff? Not too impressed either - a magical authority mind-controlling lawbreakers is quite common as a trope. 0.25/1
Elegance (1.5):
No multiclass XP penalties, great job. 0.5/0.5
So, build legality. Where to begin?
You apply Magical Artisian to Extraordinary Artisan. I don't think this is illegal: Extraordinary Artisan is very clearly an item creation feat. My question is: is it an item creation feat you can 'create items with'? And here, I think the answer is 'no' - Extraordinary Artisan modifies the process of item creation, but it is not used to create the item, in much the same sense my toolbox is not used to build a chair the way the hammer inside it is. Aka, your feat-stacking is perfectly legal but also perfectly pointless.
You seem to think Enhance Item reads 'add your intelligence modifier to the DC of all items you create'. This is not true. The rules for magic items say "For a saving throw against a spell or spell-like effect from a magic item, the DC is 10 + the level of the spell or effect + the ability modifier of the minimum ability score needed to cast that level of spell". The only thing that Enhance Item lets you do is allow you to use your own ability modifier instead of the minimum. This also torpedoes your hopes of it stacking with itself: it doesn't. Again, you legally pick it a bunch of times, but it doesn't actually do anything after the first.
You break the rules for magic item creation. Your custom armor grants a dodge bonus, but as per the rules magic items never grant dodge bonuses (knowing WotC's superb editing this is almost definitely false - but the rules separately also say that creating a magic item that grants a dodge bonus is impossible, so I'm comfortable slapping you down still). You also create items that give enhancement bonuses to ability scores in excess of +6, which is similarly not allowed.
Wondrous Rings is homebrew and illegal to take. The OP says very clearly 'We will not use the "capstone feats"; all feats that you take must be normal legal 3.5 feats, not homebrew E6 ones.' The 'E6 document' you quote is homebrew, and very little from it was actually transferred over to this competition.
As for the things that aren't strictly illegal but really inelegant: you rely heavily on custom magic items, you further abuse the custom magic item system by sticking on alignment restrictions and skill check requirements that do not functionally impact you, you just kind of assume you get to break WBL by the end of it all. Aging rules create a very uneven playing field for mentally biased characters, and I frown upon them for that reason. You show some restraint in what spells you choose to access (nothing above 3rd level, which is actually less than what an artificer could arguably do), and then proceed to grab from the list of classes that don't even exist in E6. Like, what's the logic between saying that it's fine to call on 3rd-level bard spells (minimum CL 7) or 3rd-level thayan slaver spells (minimum ECL 12), while conspicuously avoiding 4th-level wizard spells?
Also, if I'm not mistaken you casually want to stack ten different functions with the same command word onto one item, then activate them all with a single standard action? Which is not explicitly forbidden by the rules but, like, c'mon.
I won't be examining your adherence to body slot affinities (not like it would change anything at this point) - but I suspect you took some liberties there too. Final score for legality: 0/2
Well, the closest thing to synergy and efficiency would be your decision to key several item creation feats off of each other, except I don't think that actually works. Rather, I'm getting the impression you allot yourself a true bonanza of toys only for them to heavily compete for your limited actions. 0/1.5
Power (4.5):
Here's the thing: I don't know what your build can do. Everything you're presenting me with, from your save DCs to your item loadout, is based on assumptions I consider fundamentally mistaken - and that's a rough situation to be in if you're an artificer and you basically are your item loadout. At the end of the day, there's a clear floor on how low your power can sink: you're still a tier 1 class with all the good item creation feats and a willingness to milk the rules for all they're worth, but I have no idea what Legal Herman actually looks like.
It's the age-old issue with illegal builds that make bold claims: judging them is obviously not as simple as going along with the build in power and tearing it apart in elegance, but I don't want to run afoul of One Mistake One Penalty either. I'm going to strike a middle ground, where I judge your build based on your rough intent and what it can unambiguously do.
So to start right off: you've got a good understanding of artificer mechanics and bonus stacking, you want to recruit some meatshields and equip them with cheap but useful gear, you want to boost your own stats... I like the idea of using autohypnosis to let yourself keep tabs on your spell durations. We are still cooking with artificer here, I don't want to give too much credit, but you're unquestionably an incredibly powerful character even with some sanity checks in place. 1/1.5.
Your plan against mind-affecting immune targets is to blast them down with magic missiles, torch them with fireballs, or send in your well-equipped brute squad - you've got a plan, and you can plausibly do something with it even if the build is reworked. 1/1
Outside of combat you plan to stack skill boosts, craft items with fabricate, sneak around invisibly, craft some at-will healing items... sure, let's just say you'll be able to make yourself useful. 0.75/0.75
At-will item powers are clearly what you're going for, no issues with your reliability throughout the day. 0.75/0.75
UoSI (3.5):
Even if you end up with saner enchantments, I don't doubt you could make a Herman who's still spamming an enchantment every round and then buffing all his enchanted minions. That's pretty good! On the other hand, you could most definitely pivot away from any particular strategy if you had enough crafting time and resources. 1.5/2
You can start crafting enchantment items right from the get-go. 1/1
Your use of enchantments doesn't feel particularly groundbreaking to me. You're casting them in combat and you're using them to get servants: that's the expected use case. 0/1
Final Verdict:
There is such a thing as overdoing it.
You can approach the enchanter theme with artificer: that's a creative yet obviously workable angle! That can really work! Perhaps you can even mix spells from different lists together into a synergistic whole, or looked into ways to combine enchantment AoEs like Deep Slumber with construct minions! But instead we get the same custom item optimizations that people have been theorycrafting since the DMG came out. It's not even an enchanter, not really - you could swap out the hat for any other item of Underleveled Command Word Spells and submitted this to any other casting-based round.
And here's the thing: what did it get you? Lots of Power, sure, but power is only one of four categories. I promise you that I give power scores above 4 to builds that don't try to break the game to this extent. At some point, throwing more and more resources into the same thing isn't actually getting you anything more.
Please don't let me come across as too harsh here, don't think I'm telling you that you shouldn't have submitted a build: if anything, I'm driven by frustration for not getting to see what you could have made instead. Stick with the concept of Herman, sure, but expand on it in ways slightly more innovative, slightly less laser-focused on maximal power at the expense of everything else. Browse some sourcebooks, look for spells and feats you like, find a niche more resonant than generalist artifice - I promise you, the resulting build will score far better than one retreading 20-year-old optimization tactics.
Spoiler: Ferrimelk (14.5)Originality (4):
Telepath psion was definitely high on the list of expected builds - the fighter dip is noteworthy in the context of this round, but it's also still a fighter dip. I guess seeing them together is another surprise, so sure, have 0.5/1.
Kalashtar makes some sense for a round that psions fit well, and I'm not surprised to see one, but it's hardly a shoe-in. 0.25/0.5
Some real surprises in those feats! Intimidating Strike just makes sense on E6 builds that don't get to +6 BAB but it's still nice to see. Mind Mask I had to look up, same as Psychic Warfare, and the charging feats I did not see coming in this context at all. Your other choices are less notable but still rather innovative, though I'll say Animal Affinity just feels like an uninspired pick. 1.25/1.5
I like the fluff! It's always nice to see people do things with Eberron, and the idea of a Quori invasion is well-included. Similarly, the idea of a kalashtar evading detection through both mundane and supernatural misdirection is nothing if not interesting. 1/1
Elegance (3.25):
No multiclass XP penalties. 0.5/0.5
I didn't take away points for it, but it's a bit confusing to see you list 'Telepathy' as a 1st-level class feature. I know you just mean the discipline, but there exists an ACF for telepaths that grants them the actual Telepathy ability. Something to keep in mind in the future perhaps.
The wording of Bonus Essentia mentions that it only grants 2 points of essentia if you can shape soulmelds. I consider the plural to matter here, and unfortunately you don't meet that condition. You seem to think a lance deals 1d10 base damage: it doesn't, it deals 1d8. You take spirited charge before ride-by attack, despite the latter being a prerequisite for the former. The choice to give your psicrystal feats feels a bit awkward to me for sure but isn't outright illegal: but the choice to count the fighter level is. The monster entry clearly states "Its Hit Dice are equal to its master’s Hit Dice (counting only levels in psion or wilder)". You can't just assume the XP spent on crafting is basically free. All in all, a lot of little errors that add up to only half points in this category. 1/2
The martial and psionic parts of your build definitely feel a little ill-integrated. Sure, there's some fear synergy (though it forces you to use Intimidating Strike first and then follow up with Dream Lock specifically, meaning that you're only ever frightening people who were badly hurt anyway), and there's some Psychic Warfare maneuvers, but you'll often be forced to choose between charging and manifesting in a way that doesn't feel especially synergistic. The issue between wanting two-handed charges for maximum damage and wanting to go lance-and-shield for Block Arrow is awkward as well. I do like Psionic Weapon and your use of Deep Crystal and Sentira for blending the two sides of your character a bit more. All in all, a build that makes a valiant effort to bridge the gap between its two main themes but only partially succeeds. 0.75/1.5
Power (3.75):
Alright, so I like how your baseline is just a psion with slightly reduced PP in exchange for a massive AC boost and much improved mobility. The option to charge feels like icing, and there's definitely issues with the strategy (relatively low to-hit even with the charge boost, positioning issues, AoOs from anyone other than your target), but it's definitely something you'll want to be doing sometimes. Still, I can't shake the feeling that quite commonly you'll wish you'd been either a 6th-level psion (who'd have been able to get week-long charms on several creature types) or a more martially inclined fighter or psychic warrior.
Your defenses are a bit of an issue too: HP in the low thirties is alright but not great for a primary melee combatant, especially when your reflex is so lacking, fortitude is a mere +5 where most frontliners have something around +7 or +8 by now... I'd just have liked the numbers to be a little bit higher. Plus, your Ride isn't as high as I'd like it to be for a build that really wants to protect its horse with Mounted Combat. 0.75/1.5
Nearly everything you do is foiled by mind-affecting immunity, except hitting people with a lance - but that lance does hit pretty hard, and the odd bit of psionic weapon damage helps. Still, charging won't always be an option, and when it's not your attack routine drops to a pitiful +5 to-hit, 1d8+2 damage. (You might respond that you want to use deep crystal, I would in turn retort that you cannot create it out of thin air and so it'd introduce the exact sort of item dependency that you tried to avoid by adding an item creation feat) 0.5/1
A bit of bluff and intimidate and racial bonuses to the same, Read Thoughts, a horse that tracks by scent, clairtangent sense, a psicrystal, the ability to use Diplomacy in a pinch, an out-of-combat DC boost via Psychic Warfare... yeah, this looks like an okay face and scout. Item crafting adds a smidge of utility on top of that, and your ability to conceal your psionic nature so well pushes this into a full 0.75/0.75 for me.
No issues with staying power - spending at least one round per combat attacking means your PP lasts longer than an at-level psion's, despite the latter having more on paper. 0.75/0.75
UoSI (3.5):
If you're charging, you're not charming - at best you'll be using a swift on Primal Fear but even that's a bit redundant with all the other ways you have to make foes shaken. Like, I get that it's kind of the point that your character isn't an altogether obvious telepath, but when that forces you to purge charms from (a portion of) your combat routine, yeah, that's going to reflect poorly on UoSI. Still, 1/2 here.
You get Dream Lock at level 3, which as far as I'm concerned is good enough for early use of enchantments. 1/1
Is there innovative use of enchantments here? Psychic Warfare and comboing Dream Lock with Intimidating Strike earns you points here, and the decision to use Faint Memory to create a false impression of your capabilities pushes this to 0.5/1
Final Verdict:
I like the idea of a fully armored lance-charging guy who's secretly a psion, but making a character who's actually good at both of those things is a serious challenge, and making one who can seamlessly combine them is even harder. Ferrimelk is going to feel like an underwhelming lance charger at times, and like a psion at others, but will only rarely feel like both, which is a pity. Even so, a solid take on the enchantment theme, and a very memorable bit of fluff to tie it all together.Last edited by Inevitability; 2024-03-01 at 07:11 PM.
Creator of the LA-assignment thread.
Come join the new Junkyard Wars and build with SLAs and a breath weapon!
Interested in judging a build competition on the 3.5 forums but not sure where to begin? Check out the judging handbook!
Extended signature!
-
2024-03-01, 08:58 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2023
- Gender
Re: Iron Chef E6 Appetizer Edition, Round XLVII
Thank you for the incredibly swift judging. No disputes from me.
-
2024-03-02, 10:52 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2011
- Location
- Texas
- Gender
Re: Iron Chef E6 Appetizer Edition, Round XLVII
One dispute:
Originally Posted by Herman OstermanI've got a new fantasy TTRPG about running your own fencing school in a 3 musketeers pastiche setting. Book coming soon.
Check out my NEW sci-fi TTRPG about first contact. Cool alien races, murderous AIs, and more. New expansion featuring rules for ships! New book here NOW!
Iron Chef Medals!
Amazing Princess Mononoke avatar by Dispozition
-
2024-03-02, 06:25 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2014
- Location
- Arcadia
- Gender
Re: Iron Chef E6 Appetizer Edition, Round XLVII
Dispute response
Like all highly productive 3.5 rules debates (I could remove the entire -2 elegance penalty and give you max power and you would still be placed 2nd, why are we doing this again), we should examine some linguistic nuances to best decide which of those interpretations is correct.
Consider the following two sentences:
1. "He gave her the money with a smile."
2. "She escaped the atmosphere with a rocket."
In sentence 1, 'with' is used to provide additional information about an action. In sentence 2, it's used to identify the implement with which the action is enacted. We can tell the difference by checking which of those can be replaced by 'by means of' - in the first case, the sentence becomes gibberish, in the second it keeps more or less the same meaning.
Magical Artisan uses 'with' in the second sense, which the same replacement test can confirm easily.
Are you creating a magical item 'with' Legendary Artisan? Possibly, arguably, Legendary Artisan is certainly involved in the process somehow. But you aren't creating any magical item by means of Legendary Artisan. Legendary Artisan is not the primary tool here, it is not 'permitting' the item's creation in the way that a rocket permits you to escape the atmosphere.
Or if that's not convincing enough, consider what happens if you try and add another equivalent clause.
1. "He walked the earth with no destination and with nobody by his side."
2. "She killed the goblin with her sword and with her spear."
The first of these is perfectly understandable - the second of these suggests a very strange death indeed (or perhaps we're dealing with a resurrecting goblin?), and this is because with-as-in-by-means-of implies a degree of primacy, of the instrument being, well, instrumental. And given that your argument relies on you being able to create an item BY MEANS OF one feat while simultaneously creating it BY MEANS OF another feat, that all becomes very awkward: an awkwardness you can only paper over because the feat description used the ambiguous 'with'.
Conclusion: I do not buy the argument that the 'with' in Magical Artisan just implies vague involvement - I think there are strong reasons to assume it demands the feat you choose to be core to the process of item creation. Even if this is all not quite the 100% RAW confirmed reading, I think it makes sense to call it the more natural one. Either way, it's inelegant and deserving of the currently standing penalty. No score change.Creator of the LA-assignment thread.
Come join the new Junkyard Wars and build with SLAs and a breath weapon!
Interested in judging a build competition on the 3.5 forums but not sure where to begin? Check out the judging handbook!
Extended signature!
-
2024-03-03, 09:51 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2011
- Location
- Texas
- Gender
Re: Iron Chef E6 Appetizer Edition, Round XLVII
Thank you to everyone for your patience, the reveal is upon us!
# Name Alignment / Race Class Levels Chef Inevitability 1 Ferrimelk NG Kalashtar Telepath 5/Fighter 1 FactualArcher 14.5 2 Herman Osterman LN Old Human Artificer 6 Tohron 11.75
Congrats to all our medalists, thanks again to our judge! Go ahead and let me know if you've got any suggestions for themes for the next round and I'll have the new thread up later today.I've got a new fantasy TTRPG about running your own fencing school in a 3 musketeers pastiche setting. Book coming soon.
Check out my NEW sci-fi TTRPG about first contact. Cool alien races, murderous AIs, and more. New expansion featuring rules for ships! New book here NOW!
Iron Chef Medals!
Amazing Princess Mononoke avatar by Dispozition
-
2024-03-03, 04:36 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2008
Re: Iron Chef E6 Appetizer Edition, Round XLVII
Eh, it seems perfectly normal for a TWF Rogue to kill a goblin with their shortsword and dagger, but guess it didn't affect the score.
-
2024-03-04, 03:45 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2014
- Location
- Arcadia
- Gender
Re: Iron Chef E6 Appetizer Edition, Round XLVII
As for ideas for next round, how about another class? Psychic Rogue seems fun, and dragonfire adept is another quirky option.
Spoiler: Words and what they may or may not meanI still think sense in which you are creating items 'with' Extraordinary Artisan is not the right one.
Consider the sentence "I create the item with years of experience helping me along". The years of experience are relevant, they matter for the outcome of the creation process, but gramatically, the sentence is no different from "I create the item with some music playing in my workshop". The use of 'with' here serves to add information, but not to identify the instrument that brought about the action. You cannot write "I create the item by means of years of experience helping me along".
And similarly, Extraordinary Artisan is never your instrument, just a bit of background information that matters for the job but doesn't fundamentally permit it in the way that Create Wondrous Item does.Creator of the LA-assignment thread.
Come join the new Junkyard Wars and build with SLAs and a breath weapon!
Interested in judging a build competition on the 3.5 forums but not sure where to begin? Check out the judging handbook!
Extended signature!
-
2024-03-05, 10:39 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2014
Re: Iron Chef E6 Appetizer Edition, Round XLVII
That psychic bard variant from one of the designers maybe?
-
2024-03-05, 10:57 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2011
- Location
- Texas
- Gender
Re: Iron Chef E6 Appetizer Edition, Round XLVII
That's an interesting idea. Do you have a link? I'm not sure I'm familiar.
I've got a new fantasy TTRPG about running your own fencing school in a 3 musketeers pastiche setting. Book coming soon.
Check out my NEW sci-fi TTRPG about first contact. Cool alien races, murderous AIs, and more. New expansion featuring rules for ships! New book here NOW!
Iron Chef Medals!
Amazing Princess Mononoke avatar by Dispozition
-
2024-03-05, 11:31 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2014
Re: Iron Chef E6 Appetizer Edition, Round XLVII
http://www.bossythecow.com/TheThoughtsinger.pdf
by kieth baker