Iron Chef Optimization Challenge: E6 Appetizer Edition (Round XIX)

[Zaq]

Welcome back to the Iron Chef Optimization Challenge E6 Appetizer Edition! This round's ingredient is a personal favorite of mine (especially, but not only, in E6), so I've got very high hopes indeed for what you come up with.

The form of this challenge is to take a particular D&D 3.5 base class (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 in the SI, though judges are encouraged to look favorably on builds that take as many levels as possible in said SI.) 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 Friday, August 30, 2019 (1:59 AM GMT on Saturday, August 31). 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

  Show

  
  

  • 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.)
  • 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.
• 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.
  Spoiler

  Show

  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

  Code for the table:

  Spoiler

  Show

  [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. 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:
  
  Spoiler

  Show

  Judges 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:
  
  Skills

  Allowed:
  

  • 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

  
  Prereqs

  Allowed:
  

  • 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.
• 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:
the SCOUT, from Complete Adventurer!
Allez Optimizer!

The Builds:

Namel	Race/Alignment	Stub	Level at which improved skirmish was taken	Jdizzlean judgment	Position	Chef
The Exiled	NE Desert Kobold	Scout 5 / Hunter Barbarian 1	Epic 10	17	First	Quentinas
Hit Me	?? Whisper gnome	Scout 6	-	16.5	Second	Quentinas
Octopus Man	LG Amphibious Strongheart Halfling	Monk 1/Scout 5	5	15.25	Third	PoeticallyPsyco
Amira	CG Whisper Gnome	Scout 3/ rogue 2/ Fighter 1	Epic 1	15	Fourth	DEMON
Mahleiza	(?? Some Chaotic or Evil) Human	Scout 5/Warlock 1	6	15	Fourth, Honorable Mention	MinimanMidget
The Kraken	LE Amphibious Strongheart Halfling	Monk 1 /Scout 3 /Totemist 2	6	14.75	Sixth	PoeticallyPsyco
Watcher	TN Dragonborn Warforged Scout	Scout 4 /Ranger 1/ Scorpion Wraith 1	Epic 2	12.5	Seventh	Gauntlet
A Moon Elf from Silverymoon who worships Sehanine Moonbow	(?? within 1 step of CG) Moon Elf	Cloistered Cleric 1 /Scout 5	6	7	Eighth	Maat Mons

Spoiler: Contest History

Show

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

Spoiler: Way Old Stuff (2012 and earlier; Amechra's run as Chair)

Show

Round 1: Divine Mind
Round 2: Monk
Round 3: Marshal

[Zaq]

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.

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're all using the same ingredient here. What makes you different?

A few things to keep in mind: First, remember that Complete Adventurer has errata. This both applies a nerf to skirmish (boo, but it's RAW) and adds Disable Device as a class skill (potentially useful!).

Second, remember that you're in an E6 environment, but so is everyone else! Scouts kind of shine in E6 because a lot of their baked-in problems don't really crop up until a bit later, but the fact remains that if you're using that as justification for something, it's still on you to differentiate yourself somehow, because everyone gets that same benefit.

Third, I hope that no one treats this as me pushing anything on anyone (I'll be happy if these are used, and I'll also be happy if they're ignored), but scout actually does have a handful of ACFs scattered hither and yon. What you see isn't always what you get. No pressure, though! Just taking what's in CAdv might also be a perfectly viable option.

Fourth, scout has a ton of skill points (not enough, never ever enough, but still a ton). This is really cool in actual play and really annoying when making skill tables, so you're very, very likely to end up with a big old mess on your hands if your tables aren't formatted nicely. I imagine that anyone judging your build will be happier the cleaner your table is, so do yourself a favor and make it easy for judges to read your skills!

Finally, as usual, I feel like your tactics are going to be where you live and die. Sure, everyone's got skills and everyone's got a pretty similar batch of class features. What do you do that not every other scout does? Again, this is a suggestion and not a rule, but if I were judging (note: I am not judging) and comparing two similar-looking builds, I'd give the edge to the one that gives me a more interesting or more clever description of what they actually do.

I love the scout perhaps more than is actually warranted by its mechanical features, so I'm really looking forward to your wild and wonderful ideas. What are you waiting for? Get in there and build for me!

[MinimanMidget]

Oooooooh. I've had some ideas floating around for this for a while, I'm definitely going to try building.

[Maat Mons]

Ideas? Plural? I'm can only think of one way to build an e6 Scout.

[Zaq]

Ideas? Plural? I'm can only think of one way to build an e6 Scout.

That’s enough for an entry! Also you might be surprised.

We also always need judges!

[thorr-kan]

I can think of...three discrete ideas for scouts. Huh. Never really looked the class too closely before.

[Empyreal Dragon]

I have something in mind.

[PoeticallyPsyco]

I have a quite cool idea, but I wasn't actually its original progenitor. I think I need to track down that thread again...

[MisterKaws]

I can see a couple builds, but none of them are really unique or showcase the class.

Completely swamped till at least mid-September though, so I'm not likely to join.

[Zaq]

I've been asked to ponder something interesting. Thanks to [REDACTED] for bringing this interesting edge case to my attention!

Basically, the feat Open Minded falls into a rules hole when taken as an E6 epic feat, since it's not clear what should be treated as your class skills for the purposes of spending the 5 skill points it grants. It requires a ruling, and so that's my job!

Incoming ruling: 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.

Note for judges: since it's necessary for me to make this ruling publicly ahead of time, please do not consider the presence or absence of Open Minded in a build when assessing Originality. You may, of course, rate it in any other category if you see fit to do so.

[DEMON]

Okay, gotta dug out my old E6 Scout build... Hopefully it's up to snuff.

[Quentinas]

Maybe i will join , but i'm in a place without internet for another week so i don't know if i will be able to do a build ( i have an idea for now)

[PoeticallyPsyco]

I find myself struggling with the fact that the best way to make use of my build's cool, unique trick also makes them capable of a different, far less unique, but pretty much objectively more powerful trick.

[tterreb]

I've come up with 4 separate ideas so far, and all of them have ended up requiring at least 5 bab...

[Inevitability]

It's been a long while since I last participated in one of those, but who knows? I might just have something in mind.

[Zaq]

Roughly one week left, so keep cooking and get me some builds!

Anyone committed to judging yet?

[Quentinas]

Now i have returned and i have an idea with all feats , but i have to write tactics , fluff, and other things so i don't know if i will have enough time to submit

[Zaq]

Roughly 72ish hours remain, ladies/gents/others! How’s the cooking going?

[daremetoidareyo]

Roughly 72ish hours remain, ladies/gents/others! How’s the cooking going?

Vizzini gots me. All my ideas seem so obvious

[PoeticallyPsyco]

I've got two builds in the works. Should be able to polish them into submissible shape over the next few days.

[Quentinas]

I have one build missing fluff , and another one thinked but which need so much work that maybe i will not finish that

[Vrock Bait]

I just want to note that I’m secretly cooking in the background.

[Zaq]

Roughly 24 hours remain! Keep ‘em coming!

[PoeticallyPsyco]

I think I need to beg for an extension. My builds are done, but I need to finish the breakdowns and fluff.

[Zaq]

How long do ya need?

[PoeticallyPsyco]

Hopefully just one day. I might even be able to get them done tonight.

[Zaq]

I'd really like to post them tonight. See how swift you can be, sir!

[PoeticallyPsyco]

Okay, crunch time.

[Zaq]

I’m going to bed. You’ve all got until I get up tomorrow.

I don’t know when that will be. It’s been a long week, which might mean I sleep in. It also might mean I’m tired enough to actually fall asleep, meaning I wake up at a decent hour. No promises.

Make me proud, folks. Make me proud.

[PoeticallyPsyco]

Both in. Booyah.