Iron Chef Optimization Challenge in the Playground L

[Deadline]

Looking forward to seeing what the various judges have to say!

[dysprosium]

Agreed.

I'd love to know where I sit so far - top, bottom, or in the middle.

After reading the other entires, I would put myself in the middle.

That said, I would not mind being wrong towards the upside!

[OMG PONIES]

Agreed.

I'd love to know where I sit so far - top, bottom, or in the middle.

After reading the other entires, I would put myself in the middle.

That said, I would not mind being wrong towards the upside!

I can tell you this--you're going to do better than 17th place. In other news, I'm only done judging three builds fully, with preliminary comments re: originality & elegance done on all builds.

[dysprosium]

I can tell you this--you're going to do better than 17th place.

YES! I'm going to start doing my victory dance now!

[Socratov]

I can tell you this--you're going to do better than 17th place. In other news, I'm only done judging three builds fully, with preliminary comments re: originality & elegance done on all builds.

well, it seems I have matched my speed to yours, without even knowing

[Dusk Eclipse]

Odds on getting more than 1 set of scores at the same time? I think that would be a first for IC.

[Amphetryon]

Odds on getting more than 1 set of scores at the same time? I think that would be a first for IC.

Both of them split their judging into 2 different posts, and each alternates posting.

I can think of no way in which someone might find this confusing.

[OMG PONIES]

Judging update: half of the builds now have completed scoring. The other 8 have basic comments done.

EDIT: 75% done.

[Feilith]

Coming round the corner with 2 judges in the definite mix (sorry if i didnt see someone else who is judging), getting exciting

[Socratov]

Coming round the corner with 2 judges in the definite mix (sorry if i didnt see someone else who is judging), getting exciting

Well, wouldn't it be nice to have a repository of all teh judges currently judging and their criteria

You know what, I'll just go ahead and do it:

Ladies, gentlemen, and other forms of intelligent life (that means int>3),

I present you the judges of this round (in chronological order of calling a judge seat in this thread), including (if apliccable) standards of judging:

Standard judging guidelines (by Kuulvheysoon):



Korahir

Spoiler

Show

General things
Please cite your sources. I don't wanna google fu things i don't know if you can simply write down the books used.
I won't judge dishes that don't follow the Rules of the Iron Chef Challenge as well as dishes breaking the rules of the forum.
I'll give some examples for the specific scores for Power and Originality. Since Elegance and UotSI are more tricky, I will write down what i expect.


Originality
Originality comes in two forms: the build and the character as presented in your write up. Please keep in mind that expectation is a big part of originality. If I exptected certain classes, tricks or characteristics used, this might differ from the expectations of other judges.

5 points: You blew my mind. The presented dish is an original build idea merged with an interesting character concept.
4 points: Either your build or your character concept are original. Either or both are above Iron Chef standards (as perceived by me).
3 points: Your build is known, but you used it in a surprising way OR Your build is well known, the presented character makes up for it by being particularly interesting. Your dish is what I expect when reading an Iron Chef entry.
2 points: Your dish is an interesting build, but not a character OR Your build is a well known stub with something sprinkled over it.
1 point: Your dish is a well known build and is only a build, not a character.

Power
I'm judging dishes regarding power asking myself two questions: Are you consistently powerful from level 1-20? What role(s) are you trying to excel at?

5 points: You have more than one trick. You are excellent at what you do from level 1-20.
4 points: You excel at multiple roles but need some time to get there.
3 points: You are a well rounded addition to any party at any level OR You fulfill multiple roles and are more than decent at them OR You have some dead levels before starting to shine.
2 points: You have one trick and you a really good at it, but only at certains level.
1 point: You have one trick and are not even good at that one.


Elegance
What I'd like to see:
Clean builds, where you qualify for everything without using questionable stuff. I won't penalize dips, but a 5/10/5 or similar will probably score higher. A high score means your build flows nicely. Feats, Classes and Class abilities work nicely together. Nothing seems to have been added just to get power or originality. You are welcome at any table.

What I don't like:
If you depend on Wishloops, Shapechange shenanigans, Chaos shuffle, etc. expect heavy deductions. If I can't figure out what some of your tricks are due to a poor write up, expect a deduction. A low score means your build is hard to read or seems to be consisting of different parts glued together or is using questionable mechanics. Certain groups or GMs might refuse to allow you to sit down at their table.


UotSI
When do you enter the SI?
What use do make of the class abilities, BAB, saves, skills?
Would another Prestige Class be better for your build?
Does your build "feel" like a Corrupt Avenger?

Socratov

Spoiler

Show

Originality: I'll judge this in the light of 2 parts:

• among peers. If you have a completely different set of classes then other contestants you'll score higher
• backstory. If you have a creative way of creating the need for your character storywise to enter the sectret ingredient this will definitely score you points. s

Power: Judged in terms of what a character can contribute in various situations: in combat and out of combat. bonus points for clever use of spells, utilizing action economy and skill challenges or social situations. Bonus is possible for turning non obvious weaknesses into strengths.

Elegance: a bit vague to define, but I'll do my best to give a slight quantification here. Bonus points for creating a logical and smooth flow. If the build works towards the secret ingreadient gradually and logically follows into the secret ingredient you get more points thne a build which enters the class non sequitur or ad hoc. Another factor in deciding elegance is the number of hoops the build jumps through to qualify. Lots of obscure feats, ACF's and dipping could cost you points if those feats and dips are not really contributing to the character other then power and early entry.

Use of Secret Ingredient: simple. Do you finish the class or drop out early? do you use only a part of the arsenal the class brings or use every trick in the book (literally)? those are questions I use to determine the score of a build on use of secret ingredient.

Keynub

[Top secret. Who knows? Keynub, that's who!]

OMGPonies

Spoiler

Show

My Criteria

Each entry will start at a base score of 12 (3 in each category), with deductions or bonuses awarded based on the following questions:

Spoiler

Show

Originality:

• Does the entry present a compelling backstory/concept?
• Does the entry enter the Secret Ingredient through a method unique from the sample character in the source as well as other entries in this round?
• Does the entry make use of any unique mechanical tricks/feat chains?
• Does the entry avoid known cheese and overused optimization suggestions?

Power:

• Does the entry surpass a hypothetical build that continues in the base class used for qualification?
• Does the entry function at the same power level throughout an entire adventuring day, rather than relying on "nova" powers?
• Does the entry thrive without an undue emphasis on items, templates, or other "add-ons" for its power?
• Does the entry contribute significantly in terms of offense, defense, and utility?

Elegance:

• Does the entry qualify for all classes taken outside the Secret Ingredient?
• Does the entry qualify for all feats taken?
• Does the entry avoid reliance on any questionable rules interpretations, cross-setting material, or material specifically disallowed from this competition?
• Does the entry avoid multi-class penalties and dipping* more than once?

UoSI:

• Does the entry qualify for the Secret Ingredient and make use of all entry requirements?
• Does the entry complete the Secret Ingredient or present a compelling reason why not doing so is actually a better use of the Secret Ingredient?
• Does the entry synergize the unique mechanical abilities of the Secret Ingredient with the rest of the build and/or present a novel use of said mechanical abilities?
• Does the entry complement the concept of its chassis through use of the Secret Ingredient?

*Where "dipping" is defined as taking two or fewer levels in a base class or prestige class.

Each of the questions above can be answered in one of three ways. A straight "yes" will earn a +0.5 bonus to the category in question. A straight "no" will suffer a -0.5 penalty to the category, and an ambivalent "yes and no" will wash out with no adjustment to the category. Other scoring rules (like a flat -1 penalty per Flaw used, for instance) will be followed as requested by the Chairman in the thread. If there are any questions about the clarity of my criteria in general, please post them openly so I can address. If there are any disagreements with particular scores, please PM the chairman as part of the regular dispute process.

relytdan

Spoiler

Show

All Builds are equal and start with a perfect 5 in all areas.

Useage of any materials banned or disallowed, will result in an automatic 0 score in all areas, no exceptions.

Plagiarism of another build online, the severity of this can cause major deductions & possibly resulting in a 0 score, depending on if you are the author.

All scoring will be done based on deductions from 5 to 0 in .25 fractions In the following areas.

Originality:

Spoiler

Show

Start from a baseline score of 5

Up to 1 points of penalty based on whether the race or templates used were things I expected, and whether anyone else thought to use them. cheese may see dedutions.

Up to 1 points of penalty based on whether the classes or Prc used were things I expected, and whether anyone else thought to use them. cheese may see dedutions.

Up to 1 points of penalty to a build not doing something interesting or something I have seen before respectively.

Up to 1 points of penalty to a build, if I find your fluff to be particularly long.

Power:

Spoiler

Show

Start from a baseline score of 5

Up to 1.5 points of penalty for lack of versatility.

Up to 1 points of penalty for how well you do the things that you do.

Up to 1 point of penalty for if your build appears it needs help from others

Up to .5 point of penalty for each piece of specific equipment the build relies on.

Elegance:

Spoiler

Show

Start from a baseline score of 5

Up to 1.5 points of penalty for if the build is basic.

Up to 1.25 points of penalty If you incur multiclass penalties, change alignment mid-build, class level dip, or the like

Up to .75 point of penalty for any rules interpretation - depending on severity.

Up to .5 point of penalty for each failure to qualify for a non-secret ingredient thing

Use of the SI:

Spoiler

Show

Start from a baseline score of 5
Up to .75 point of penalty for class abilities not used in some way.

Up to .75 point of penalty for not maximizing the particular strengths or minimizing the particular weaknesses of the SI

Up to .75 point of penalty for If I feel the build really failes to capture the feel of the SI.

Up to 1.75 point of penalty for each failure to qualify for the secret ingredient- lack of skill, feat, bab & other requirements

Piggy Knowles

Spoiler

Show

In each category, I'm adding what I consider a "baseline build" - a build that, by my rubric, should get a 3.

Originality

Spoiler

Show

Let me preface this section by saying that I don't think originality is wholly contingent upon choice of class. Two builds can have the exact same class levels, and yet end up going in completely different directions. Choice of class DOES matter, but I'm more interested in what your build actually does.

I also will not penalize you just because someone else has chosen the same class as you. If you submit something that I find unexpected, I'll score it high even if the next person has the exact same build. But if you submit an entry that I consider standard or expected, don't expect a lot of points even if no one else went that direction.

So what will gain you points? Use the abilities you have in fresh and interesting ways. Surprise me. Show me new combinations that I've never seen before. Meanwhile, using well-known builds will cause you to lose points.

BASELINE BUILD: A build that steers clear of known cheese and standard build elements, but doesn't necessarily make me sit up and go "wow." Builds that involve new combinations or focus on unexpected elements will score higher here, while builds that utilize known cheese or that are pretty much stock builds will score lower.

Power

Spoiler

Show

There are two questions that will define how I rate a build's power. They are...

(1) How good is your build at its intended role?
(2) Will you stay relevant if your main "trick" does not work?

I don't expect every build to have 9th-level casting or manifesting, or to be able to bring the universe to its knees. However, if your build has a specific role or function, I expect you to be at least adequate at it. And if your build is a one-trick pony, it had better be a pretty good trick. I will deduct points if you can't function outside of a very limited set of parameters.

I'll also be looking for obvious ways your build could be improved (other than the most obvious "take fewer levels of the Secret Ingredient"). There's nothing wrong with sacrificing a little power for flavor, but if a choice makes you worse at your role, I will penalize for it. Just hope you make up the points in elegance or originality, I guess...

Finally, I don't plan to grade on a curve. Even if this is a weak ingredient, don't expect full points in Power if you've managed to just barely become adequate. Everyone's got the same ingredient to work with, after all.

BASELINE BUILD: A build that can meaningfully contribute to a party in most CR-appropriate encounters. Builds that can't, either because their overall power is too low or because they only function in very specific situations, will score lower here. Builds that are particularly proficient or useful, or that can meaningfully contribute even in over-CR'd encounters, will score higher.

Elegance

Spoiler

Show

Obscurity or using multitude of sources doesn't bother me, but for the love of Pelor, please cite your work! I am very familiar with the system, but I like to have the books in front of me when I'm reviewing a build. I also don't like too much mixing of setting-specific material. (Note that just because a class or feat appears in a setting book doesn't mean that I will consider it setting-specific; I'm referring to things like regional feats, feats and classes that involve certain setting-specific orders, etc.)

Now that that's out of the way... I don't mind dips, as long as they are reasonable and make sense. However, I will not ignore the "fluff" requirements of a class. If a prestige class requires you to be a member of the Wizards of the Unseen University and your build glosses over that requirement, expect to see a small deduction.

In any case, while I won't penalize for dips, I do like nice clean builds, where everything works in harmony, so you can pick up extra points that way. I will also give out small bonuses here if everything is written up cleanly, in an engaging manner. Nothing huge - the build is most important. But presentation DOES matter, and if you do a good job with it, I think you should be rewarded. I don't need three pages of backstory, but I do like to see more than a list of abilities.

I'm mildly cheese-tolerant - I don't mind characters being effective or using abilities in new and exciting ways, as long as the rules do indeed back you up. But this should be something you are willing to sit down with other human beings and actually play, so keep the Vieux Boulougne at home. Also, this should go without saying, but if a build element is illegal (failing to qualify for a feat/PrC, for instance), I will deduct for it.

BASELINE BUILD: A build that you can pick up and walk over to almost any table, and it won't raise any eyebrows. Builds that are DM-dependent or questionable rules-wise will score lower here, as will builds that are clunky and messy. Builds that are a thing of beauty will score higher here - ones that make even the stuffiest DM sit up and say, hey, that's awesome, I'd love to have you in our group.

Use of Secret Ingredient

Spoiler

Show

This one's pretty simple. Do you use the secret ingredient's abilities to good effect, or are they more of a footnote? Is there another class that could have done a better job at what you are trying to do? Your goal here is to highlight the secret ingredient, not to mask it. You will gain points by taking advantage of all the abilities provided, by using them in effective ways (an ability that would have been cool at level 6 won't score points with me if you don't pick it up until level 12), and by demonstrating how the SI brings your build together. You will lose points by dropping too many levels, failing to take advantage of the class's core abilities and pre-requisites, etc. You will automatically get minimum points here if you don't actually qualify for the PrC, so double-check those skill points!

BASELINE BUILD: A build that manages to use the secret ingredient without crying out to me, "HEY, this is only here because of a stupid contest, OK!" (I know, it might be hard with this one ) Builds that utilize all of the SI's abilities to good effect, and who really sell the idea that only the SI would have worked here, will score higher. Builds that don't really get any use out of the class features or pre-reqs, or that would really obviously just do better with another option, will score lower.

So, per the rules of this contest: 4 categories; minimum 1 (assuming legal entry), maximum 5 points; 6 judges means that the builds will score between 24 and 180 points, averaging 102 points. Exciting!

[Piggy Knowles]

It is vastly unlikely that I will finish judging this time around. I have preliminary notes an all the builds, but there's no way I'm going to be done by Thursday, and after that I've got to funnel any spare time I have into NaNoWriMo. Sorry, all.

[Deadline]

It is vastly unlikely that I will finish judging this time around. I have preliminary notes an all the builds, but there's no way I'm going to be done by Thursday, and after that I've got to funnel any spare time I have into NaNoWriMo. Sorry, all.

No worries Piggy. Any chance we can get a peek at those notes near the end of the judging deadline? Mostly I'm just curious.

[Vaz]

Thanks anyway Piggy; perhaps you'd be interested in releasing your notes after the comp has finished?

Edit- beaten to it :D.

[dysprosium]

No problem Piggy, you gave fair warning early on that you would probably not be able to judge this round.

[OMG PONIES]

It is vastly unlikely that I will finish judging this time around. I have preliminary notes an all the builds, but there's no way I'm going to be done by Thursday, and after that I've got to funnel any spare time I have into NaNoWriMo. Sorry, all.

No worries Piggy. Any chance we can get a peek at those notes near the end of the judging deadline? Mostly I'm just curious.

Thanks anyway Piggy; perhaps you'd be interested in releasing your notes after the comp has finished?

Edit- beaten to it :D.

Forget the notes, I want to see what you're cooking up for NaNoWriMo!

[thethird]

Why not both?

[relytdan]

Iron Chef "Corrupt Avenger" Scores:

Smeagol

Spoiler

Show

Smeagol

{table=head]

Name

|

Score

|

Deduction 1

|

Deduction 2

|

Deduction 3

|

Deduction 4

Score 10|Originality|race/template|classes|interesting|Fluff

-|-1.5|0|-.5|-.5|-.5

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

-|-4|-.5|-.5|-.5|-2.5

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

-|-3.5|-.75|-1|-.75|-1

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

-|-1|0|-.5|-.5|0
[/table]
Reason for huge penatly: alot of items are relied on in the build

*****

Driscoll

Spoiler

Show

Driscoll

{table=head]

Name

|

Score

|

Deduction 1

|

Deduction 2

|

Deduction 3

|

Deduction 4

score 15|Originality|race/template|classes|interesting|Fluff

-|-1.25|0|-.5|-.5|-.25

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

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

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

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

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

-|-1|0|-.5|-.5|0
[/table]

*****

Lost Crab

Spoiler

Show

Lost Crab

{table=head]

Name

|

Score

|

Deduction 1

|

Deduction 2

|

Deduction 3

|

Deduction 4

Score 13.25|Originality|race/template|classes|interesting|Fluff

-|-2.5|-1.5|0|-.5|-.5

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

-|-2|-.5|-.5|-.5|-.5

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

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

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

-|-1.25|0|-.5|-.75|0
[/table]

*****

Designation

Spoiler

Show

Designation

{table=head]

Name

|

Score

|

Deduction 1

|

Deduction 2

|

Deduction 3

|

Deduction 4

Score 15|Originality|race/template|classes|interesting|Fluff

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

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

-|-2|-.25|-.5|-.25|-1

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

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

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

-|-1|-.25|-.5|-.25|0
[/table]
Reason for huge penatly: items are relied on in the build

*****

Magralyx

Spoiler

Show

Magralyx

{table=head]

Name

|

Score

|

Deduction 1

|

Deduction 2

|

Deduction 3

|

Deduction 4

score 11.75|Originality|race/template|classes|interesting|Fluff

-|-1.25|0|0|-.5|-.75

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

-|-2|-.5|-.5|-.5|-.5

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

-|-1|0|-.25|-.75|0

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

-|-4|-.75|-.75|-.75|-1.75
[/table]
Reason for huge penatly: SI: requirement non-evil, SUCCUBUS/INCUBUS (DEMON) Outsider (Chaotic, Evil)

*****

Braxton

Spoiler

Show

Braxton

{table=head]

Name

|

Score

|

Deduction 1

|

Deduction 2

|

Deduction 3

|

Deduction 4

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

-|-.25|0|-.25|0|0
[/table]

*****

Eillyassa

Spoiler

Show

Eillyassa

{table=head]

Name

|

Score

|

Deduction 1

|

Deduction 2

|

Deduction 3

|

Deduction 4

Score 15|Originality|race/template|classes|interesting|Fluff

-|-1.5|0|-.5|-.5|-.5

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

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

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

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

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

-|-1|-.0|-.5|-.5|0
[/table]

*****

Giorgio

Spoiler

Show

Giorgio

{table=head]

Name

|

Score

|

Deduction 1

|

Deduction 2

|

Deduction 3

|

Deduction 4

score 12.75|Originality|race/template|classes|interesting|Fluff

-|-2|-.5|-.5|-.5|-.5

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

-|-2|-.25|-.5|-.5|-.25

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

-|-1.5|-.5|-.5|-.5|0

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

-|-1.75|-.75|-.5|-.5|0
[/table]

*****

Brooswayn

Spoiler

Show

Brooswayn

{table=head]

Name

|

Score

|

Deduction 1

|

Deduction 2

|

Deduction 3

|

Deduction 4

Score 15.5|Originality|race/template|classes|interesting|Fluff

-|-1.5|0|-5|-.5|-.5

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

-|-1.25|-.25|-.25|-5|-.25

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

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

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

-|-1.25|-.5|-.25|-.5|0
[/table]

*****

Angelique

Spoiler

Show

Angelique

{table=head]

Name

|

Score

|

Deduction 1

|

Deduction 2

|

Deduction 3

|

Deduction 4

Score 15|Originality|race/template|classes|interesting|Fluff

-|-1.5|0|-.5|-.5|-.5

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

-|-1.5|-.25|-.5|-.5|-.25

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

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

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

-|-1.25|-.5|-.25|-.5|0
[/table]

*****

Shane

Spoiler

Show

Shane

{table=head]

Name

|

Score

|

Deduction 1

|

Deduction 2

|

Deduction 3

|

Deduction 4

Score 13|Originality|race/template|classes|interesting|Fluff

-|-2|-.5|-.5|-.5|-.5

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

-|-2|-.25|-.5|-.5|-.75

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

-|-1.5|-.25|-.75|-.5|0

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

-|-1.5|-.5|-.5|-.5|0
[/table]

*****

Bug

Spoiler

Show

Bug

{table=head]

Name

|

Score

|

Deduction 1

|

Deduction 2

|

Deduction 3

|

Deduction 4

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

-|-1.25|0|-.5|-.5|-.25

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

-|-1.5|-.25|-.5|-.5|-.25

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

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

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

-|-.5|0|-.25|-.25|0
[/table]

*****

Damned of the Crab

Spoiler

Show

Damned of the Crab

{table=head]

Name

|

Score

|

Deduction 1

|

Deduction 2

|

Deduction 3

|

Deduction 4

|

Honorable Mention

Score 13.75|Originality|race/template|classes|interesting|Fluff

-|-2|-.5|-.5|-.5|-.5

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

-|-1.5|-.25|-.5|-.5|-.25

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

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

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

-|-1|-.25|-.5|-.25|0
[/table]

*****

Rand

Spoiler

Show

Rand

{table=head]

Name

|

Score

|

Deduction 1

|

Deduction 2

|

Deduction 3

|

Deduction 4

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

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

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

-|-1.5|-.5|-.5|-.5|0

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

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

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

-|-1|0|-.5|-.5|0
[/table]

*****

Pantaleon

Spoiler

Show

Pantaleon

{table=head]

Name

|

Score

|

Deduction 1

|

Deduction 2

|

Deduction 3

|

Deduction 4

Score 14|Originality|race/template|classes|interesting|Fluff

-|-1.5|0|-.5|-.5|-.5

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

-|-1.25|-.25|-.5|-.5|0

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

-|-1.25|-.5|-.5|-.25|0

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

-|-2|-.75|-.5|-.75|0
[/table]

*****

Leilani

Spoiler

Show

Leilani

{table=head]

Name

|

Score

|

Deduction 1

|

Deduction 2

|

Deduction 3

|

Deduction 4

score 14.75|Originality|race/template|classes|interesting|Fluff

-|-1.5|0|-.5|-.5|-.5

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

-|-1.5|-.5|-.5|-.5|0

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

-|-1.25|-.25|-.5|-.5|0

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

-|-1|0|-.5|-.5|0
[/table]

Comments are with each score for those that I felt needed them.

[dysprosium]

Thank you for judging relytdan.

I have to say that after reading your criteria I was afraid of really low scores across the board.

But these are all higher than I thought.

[OMG PONIES]

Ack, must resist the urge...to read...scores. I'm on track for Friday score posting. One build left, then a solid proofread.

[WhamBamSam]

I appreciate the judging, relytdan, but a lot of it could use more explanation. There are some penalties that I'm not sure if I should dispute or not, because I honestly have no idea what they're for, and I'm sure that's true for a number of the other chefs as well.

[relytdan]

I'm not sure if I should dispute or not.

my answer at this time is simple - either dispute or do not. I need not explain anything generically

[thethird]

I would also appreciate some clarification some goals are rather vague (as I said beforehand) and I don't know how they are being graded. Still thanks for judging.

Quoting myself to assess that clarification was asked (and not answered) after the criteria was posted and before the builds revealed.

Relytan there are several things of yours that I do not understand

For example what do you mean by:

"Up to 1 points of penalty for how well you do the things that you do."

Do entries get penalized for doing the things that they do well?

And also, for example, in elegance:

"Up to 1.5 points of penalty for if the build is basic."

It is rare to penalize simple basic builds, do I need to make my build overly complicated?

[WhamBamSam]

my answer at this time is simple - either dispute or do not. I need not explain anything generically

If a chef doesn't know what the various penalties are for, they're likely to dispute things that they shouldn't (which could result in people getting argumentative when they don't need to) and not dispute things that they should (which could result in the scoring becoming less fair). Clear explanation of why scores are the way they are is really in everyone's best interest.

You would want to know why your own build lost points, wouldn't you? You wouldn't want to just take a stab in the dark when making a dispute. At the risk of mixing proverbs, judge others as you would like to be judged.

[relytdan]

Here are my Criteria:

All Builds are equal and start with a perfect 5 in all areas.

Useage of any materials banned or disallowed, will result in an automatic 0 score in all areas, no exceptions.

Plagiarism of another build online, the severity of this can cause major deductions & possibly resulting in a 0 score, depending on if you are the author.

All scoring will be done based on deductions from 5 to 0 in .25 fractions In the following areas.

Originality:

Start from a baseline score of 5

Up to 1 points of penalty based on whether the race or templates used were things I expected, and whether anyone else thought to use them. cheese may see dedutions.

Up to 1 points of penalty based on whether the classes or Prc used were things I expected, and whether anyone else thought to use them. cheese may see dedutions.

Up to 1 points of penalty to a build not doing something interesting or something I have seen before respectively.

Up to 1 points of penalty to a build, if I find your fluff to be particularly long.

Power:

Start from a baseline score of 5

Up to 1.5 points of penalty for lack of versatility.

Up to 1 points of penalty for how well you do the things that you do.

Up to 1 point of penalty for if your build appears it needs help from others

Up to .5 point of penalty for each piece of specific equipment the build relies on.

Elegance:

Start from a baseline score of 5

Up to 1.5 points of penalty for if the build is basic.

Up to 1.25 points of penalty If you incur multiclass penalties, change alignment mid-build, class level dip, or the like

Up to .75 point of penalty for any rules interpretation - depending on severity.

Up to .5 point of penalty for each failure to qualify for a non-secret ingredient thing

Use of the SI:

Start from a baseline score of 5
Up to .75 point of penalty for class abilities not used in some way.

Up to .75 point of penalty for not maximizing the particular strengths or minimizing the particular weaknesses of the SI

Up to .75 point of penalty for If I feel the build really failes to capture the feel of the SI.

Up to 1.75 point of penalty for each failure to qualify for the secret ingredient- lack of skill, feat, bab & other requirements

pretty certain that the above covers why a build lost points if you want a better explaination of an area then dispute it - not to hard to do just type PM to chairmain but then if I were to re-examine a build that might also tip your hand at what build is yours for the other judges, so its your copper to toss at the chairman - I do not have to nor will not explain further

[Amphetryon]

pretty certain that the above covers why a build lost points if you want a better explaination of an area then dispute it - not to hard to do just type PM to chairmain but then if I were to re-examine a build that might also tip your hand at what build is yours for the other judges, so its your copper to toss at the chairman - I do not have to nor will not explain further

Unless the chairman uses the past 50-ish rounds of scores as precedent for why you would have to. Note the first word of that sentence, but also note you'll be the first to judge and say "I'm not giving anything but raw numbers."

[Vaz]

Not being funny, but why judge at all if you cannot be bothered? It might as well just be arbitrary numbers you've assigned, there isn't an apparent reason behind it that the competitors can see. Most (all?) judges have had the decency to explain their scores in the competition beforehand, which has led to a mostly civil disputes process if need be. It is a voluntary game, and there is no need to feel obligated to actually judge, and from what I (as a competitor) can see, my work has just had a random number put next to it wothout rhyme or reason. I feel slightly hard done by. And short of a Dispute PM saying "Explain" which you've already refused to do, I can't see exactly where I went "wrong".

Feeling slightly more annoyed than I should really, after getting the first of our results in.

[WhamBamSam]

pretty certain that the above covers why a build lost points if you want a better explaination of an area then dispute it - not to hard to do just type PM to chairmain but then if I were to re-examine a build that might also tip your hand at what build is yours for the other judges, so its your copper to toss at the chairman - I do not have to nor will not explain further

Those criteria are not entirely clear in many places, and even if they were, more explanation would still be warranted.

As an example (which may or may not apply to my entry), several builds have been marked down for questionable rules interpretations, but without telling us what interpretations you find questionable, how is one supposed to make their case in the event that RAW really is on their side?

If I were judging one of your entries and just said "the character is weak, why I think so is left as an exercise to the reader. Power: 2" and "There are two non-SI things for which you don't qualify and a rules interpretation that I find questionable, but I don't feel like telling you what those are. I don't like your overall progression for reasons that I don't feel like explaining. Elegance 2.5" would you be okay with that?

[yougi]

I will add my voice to those of the previous posters and declare my disappointment at these explanation-less rulings. Especially since this is my first IC, and I'd definitely like some feedback aside from numbers. And I believe this will most likely devolve into disputes which go "What did you find was lacking with my power level? How didn't I qualify for something? What part of the SI didn't I use?", and basically ask for all the information the judge failed to include in their post, which would only delay the next competition.

I will then also remind everyone that this conversation could easily go off topic. Maybe we should leave this up to the Chairman?

[Feilith]

It is a bit confusing, I looked through the requirements and i Have some questions about the requirements themselves..

Originality shouldn't be penalized for having a fluffy backstory, after all DnD is a roleplaying Game, and these are characters are meant to be characters, not just numbers.

I'm not sure what you mean by "basic build" in your elegance penalty, Is that a 10/10 build? or a poorly formed table?

Rules interpretations is very vague, and needs some explanation if you're going to penalize for it.

[Kuulvheysoon]

Speaking of which, I have disputes.

And judging by the reception, relytdan, it might save you time in the long (short-ish) run if you did add a little descriptor to them.

First off, thanks for judging! I wanted to address a couple of your points, however.

To address your scoring of Use of the Secret Ingredient:

The SI requires a non-evil alignment. Magralyx has a Lawful Good alignment (the fluff explains this as the inquisitor having used a Helm of Opposite Alignment on her). Therefore, she qualifies for the SI.

Other than that, I just have a few questions/disputes on each of the other categories.

On Originality:

"Fluff"

Could you explain what was wrong here? Was it "too long"? I ask this because there were a few entries that had much longer fluff, but received a smaller deduction. I understand that Originality is pretty open to interpretation, but I'd like a clearer explanation.

On Power, you made the following statements (my comments appear beneath each):

"versitile"

Could you expand a little further on this? Magralyx has a bevy of spell-like abilities (including a limited at-will polymorph ability) and an array of solid skills. What isn't "versitile" (sic) about her that cause this deduction?

"how well it does"

Could you expand on why you feel Magralyx is not excellent at what she does?

"items/equipment"

Is this in reference to the Helm of Opposite Alignment? Because RAW, that isn't required (she can just be a different alignment). As per the glossary entry in the Monster Manual, always CE doesn't actually mean always CE . That said, I did use it, so I can understand a small hit here for that.

Under Elegance, I have the following questions/comments:

"rules interpretation"

Could you explain the deduction here? I'm not sure what rules I'm interpreting in a questionable manner. I followed the Chairman's rules pretty explicitly.

First of all, thanks for the judging. Except in one case I won't criticize the judging per se, but I would try to clarify it with the judging criteria to see how to do better for future builds. Basically I am going to ask you to elaborate

Second of all, let's jump at the elephant in the room. Quoting from your criteria on originality: "Start from a baseline score of 5

Up to 1 points of penalty based on whether the race or templates used were things I expected, and whether anyone else thought to use them. cheese may see deductions."

My entry has 1.5 points of penalty in race selection, which is... unexpected. Humans are the most common race in Rokugan and from a fluff perspective the only ones that oppose Fu Leng. Yes, they might be expected but the other human entries did receive .5 or 0 penalties in the race selection. Was the 1.5 deduction an error?

Although I tried to keep the fluff really short, and it is short when compared to other entries, I understand that the penalties for being interesting and fluff are subjective and won't delve on theme (comments are appreciated though).

I'm also slightly surprised with the penalties in power. The build is versatile it works greatly as an scout and as a melee fighter, it also has some social skills (in intimidate) and some battlefield control (breath weapons and aoe effects fear/spells). One of the problems I expected was having penalties in elegance for too much power, but as is, the crab can kill any CR appropriate encounter in a full attack. It's reliance on others is kept to a minimum, being able to deal with its corruption on its own and being more than capable of finding and fighting the enemy by himself. Finally the note on use of items... I believe that assuming a portion of wealth by level is paramount, and even if items of +CON are expected they are not necessary. I don't want to build characters with integrated vow of poverty nor Christmas trees.

On the Elegance section I would seriously appreciate in a comment mentioning which rules are being interpreted. Since it is up to .75 I guess a penalty of .5 is quite a severe misinterpretation. I think I provided references to any interpretation I am doing, but if I didn't please let me know. Also... the build does not have multiclass penalties nor dips, and it finishes 2 of the 3 classes it takes (with the 3rd almost finished), could you also expand on the penalties for multiclass?

Finally UoSI is also quite subjective, and without comments it gets hard for me to understand your judging. Since I got the maximum penalty for not capturing the feel of the SI could you please elaborate in that? I felt that a samurai that roams hell on earth while still keeping its oaths and fighting against the servants of demons adjusted to the feel of the SI. Similarly the biggest weakness of the SI in my opinion, is the fact that it is really vulnerable to CON damage, in taking CON damage its treshold for corruption changes (that is covered) it also has really high fort saves to ensure that corruption is in check and finally has ways of removing corruption integrated. It uses its sworn enemy feature by having really good ranks in most of the skills that receive a bonus. Its fury helps with the problem of CON damage (by giving temporary CON) and its great attack bonus help to ensure that all of its abilities that depend on hitting take effect.