Villainous Competition XXXIX: Sorta Psuedo

[GrayDeath]

I was out of PC reach for a lot of days, but am back now.

If you`ll have me, Chair, I can judge the Competition this weekend, I have free time for once. ;)

After all, with soo many tentacles, we should also have soo many judges.

Just a side question though: GWG: If you check some of the earlier Competitions for judgements, youll note that we normally only give a 0 when the Build is illegal in that aspect, and even a 1 requires a "barely remotely legal" or "so inelegant it took me 2 extra hours or so" (please dont feel attacked, trying to helpp :) ) and that it has been tradition since ...the 3rd comp iirc, to go at "smallest" to .25, to avoid ultrra-small pt difference making the difference (and in my case as often Judge at least half to keep me saner^^).

[Thurbane]

Not once, but twice, I got a total score of 0/not eligible (i.e. not a 0/-- in one category, but for the whole build!): once for applying an illegal template (I stupidly thought Dvati were monstrous humanoids, not regular humanoids), and once for using taint (at the time didn't know it forbidden by comp rules). The thing that really stung on the second was the taint wasn't even there for any mechanical gain, it was just to justify the Tainted Raver template.

In either of those cases I would have been chuffed to receive a 0 for elegance, not outright disqualification.

When I have judged, I have had the odd entry that technically didn't qualify for something, I have pinged Elegance and moved on.

I would reserve disqualification for using known banned materials, or completely missing the round reqs/theme.

I acknowledge each judge is entitled to their own scoring rhetoric, and we should be grateful for judges at all, but those two disqualifications really hurt, after the hours I poured into what I thought were high quality entries.

[PoeticallyPsyco]

Iron Chef has the rule that if the build is truly illegal (not just massively inelegant) you give a 0/5 in Elegance instead of the normal minimum of 1/5 and judge the rest of the categories as if the build actually worked. Villainous Competition has no such official rule, but judges often borrow the Iron Chef rule for consistency's sake.

[NotInventedHere]

Iron Chef has the rule that if the build is truly illegal (not just massively inelegant) you give a 0/5 in Elegance instead of the normal minimum of 1/5 and judge the rest of the categories as if the build actually worked. Villainous Competition has no such official rule, but judges often borrow the Iron Chef rule for consistency's sake.

I would assume that that's why the Shadow dispute specifically says 'if you're giving a 0 because you think the build is truly illegal, I would appreciate you saying why' rather than '0s are totally forbidden'.

[GreatWyrmGold]

GreatWyrmGold - First off, I really appreciate that you liked my lore and my mechanical ingenuity, and the general Lovecraftian-ness of the fluff. I was never expecting more than a 1 for Elegance for this build, and it seems a bit churlish to dispute when you gave me the highest score, but that 0 does distress me.
I don't know if you're operating on a scoring schema where you're ranking things 0-5 and that's just your score for 'this build is incredibly inelegant', but I was under the impression that a 0 was strictly reserved for builds that are flat-out illegal or disqualified, and if that's your reason for scoring me a 0, I'd like to know a bit more about your reasoning so I can discuss it? Your scoring criteria is between you and the chair, but as I said in the build, I think I've got a good case by RAW that everything I did works.

I'm not familiar with any universal rubric, so I basically go with what feels right. I rate things 1-5 in the same way that a teacher might grade assignments D-A: The scale goes lower, but I save it for exceptional cases.
SotV is the D&D-monster equivalent of a Rube Goldberg machine—its design is incredible and watching how its intricate pieces work together is neat, but it's the opposite of elegant. I couldn't tell you whether it's legal or not, but it's as un-elegant as they come, and I feel like I'd need to bump everyone else up at least half a point (probably a full point for It Came From the Unknown!) to compensate.

Hi, my dispute is towards GreatWyrmGold's judgement of "Into the Unknown!"

I see in Elegance you've marked the build as a 1 for using 5 templates, and 3 classes. A deduction for that is perfectly fair, the build does involve a lot of template stacking to achieve what I wanted for the villain.

However, you mention in the latter half of that judgement that it is not elegant "especially when you used alternate versions for two of them". I'm not sure if that played a large factor in the Elegance score, but if it did, I'm not sure if that is necessarily the intent of the category.

In the clarifications section of the rules, it is mentioned that in regards to Unearthed Arcana, "The variant character options (such as Wildshape Ranger and Thug Fighter) should not be penalized". That implies that the use of Alternate Class Features (such as Feat Rogue and the two Totems for Barbarian) shouldn't be penalized result in an Elegance penalty. Obviously, this point is moot if it did not play a factor in the Elegance judgement, but I figured I should raise the dispute just in case.

Thank You for your Consideration!

Fair point, I'd missed that. I'll be adjusting the elegance to compensate. Using the alternate versions wasn't a big part of the low Elegance, but it wasn't not part of that.


I think part of the problem is that elegance is poorly-defined. It's good that there's a category for it, but the vague definition of "mechanically pretty" isn't very clear. What does an Elegance 5 build look like? Elegance 2? Even ignoring how subjective that is, I don't think it's possible to define what elements of a build make it pretty. There's a reason that that seems to get more disputes than the other categories.

Just a side question though: GWG: If you check some of the earlier Competitions for judgements, youll note that we normally only give a 0 when the Build is illegal in that aspect, and even a 1 requires a "barely remotely legal" or "so inelegant it took me 2 extra hours or so" (please dont feel attacked, trying to helpp :) ) and that it has been tradition since ...the 3rd comp iirc, to go at "smallest" to .25, to avoid ultrra-small pt difference making the difference (and in my case as often Judge at least half to keep me saner^^).

Iron Chef has the rule that if the build is truly illegal (not just massively inelegant) you give a 0/5 in Elegance instead of the normal minimum of 1/5 and judge the rest of the categories as if the build actually worked. Villainous Competition has no such official rule, but judges often borrow the Iron Chef rule for consistency's sake.

Alright, I'll be redoing the Elegance judgements with that in mind.

[NotInventedHere]

A table, with GWG's revised scores.

Name of Dish	Stub	Score - GWG	Score - Thurbane	Score - H_H_F_F	Score - GrayDeath	Current Average Score	Chef
tentacle kitty	Pseudonatural Legendary Tiger	8.8	12.5	-	-	10.65
Shadow Of The World	Shadow Simulacrum of Poisonlaced Corrupted By The Abyss Awakened Skeletal Dragon Half-Dragon (Li Lung) Hecatoncheires	16.05	14.0	-	-	15.025
Nyekdar	Half-farspawn grell Scout 3/Wild Shape Ranger 10/Whirling Frenzy Spirit Lion Totem Barbarian 1	15.6	15.5	-	-	15.55
It Came From the Unknown	Lolth-touched Feral Natural Lycanthrope(Giant Octopus) Amphibious Neanderthal Whirling Frenzy Barbarian 2/Martial Rogue 2/Witch Slayer 5	10.5	14.5	-	-	12.5
Jon Eh Zoidburg	Half-Farspawn Half Ogre Entomanothrope (Monstrous Crab) Ardent 3/Flayspawn Psychic 10	7.9	15.0	-	-	11.45

[GrayDeath]

GWG did you adapt your scoring already?

If not, dont mind me, ignore the post, I`m just being a bussybody it seems...

If yes

Spoiler: Judging Criteria and Points

Show

Well.... I wrote .25.
Not .0025 or "make the smallest step be anything25".

As in, we usually limit it in fine granularity to 1/4th of a full Point. So that there are 19 Steps from the lowest possible legal entry, and maximum points.
The reason, as I was explained to me when I first judged, (and seems very well argued imo) is that it provides more than enough granularity/Breadth to judge many a different entry, but avoids the "too many small steps lead to miniscule differences deciding over who wins". Noone likes to lose because the color of the hat of an underling granted another entry 0.000025 extra points (sorry, joking).

And as it is more or less any competition the case, all judges should judge using the same system (after all, how they judge othwerise is wholly up to us^^) I humblyx really ask you to adapt your scoring to the agrteed upon mechanics.

Sorry I wasnt clearer. My bad.


Also, I am almost done with my Judging, should post it either Friday or saturday.

[H_H_F_F]

GWG did you adapt your scoring already?

If not, dont mind me, ignore the post, I`m just being a bussybody it seems...

If yes

Spoiler: Judging Criteria and Points

Show

Well.... I wrote .25.
Not .0025 or "make the smallest step be anything25".

As in, we usually limit it in fine granularity to 1/4th of a full Point. So that there are 19 Steps from the lowest possible legal entry, and maximum points.
The reason, as I was explained to me when I first judged, (and seems very well argued imo) is that it provides more than enough granularity/Breadth to judge many a different entry, but avoids the "too many small steps lead to miniscule differences deciding over who wins". Noone likes to lose because the color of the hat of an underling granted another entry 0.000025 extra points (sorry, joking).

And as it is more or less any competition the case, all judges should judge using the same system (after all, how they judge othwerise is wholly up to us^^) I humblyx really ask you to adapt your scoring to the agrteed upon mechanics.

Sorry I wasnt clearer. My bad.


Also, I am almost done with my Judging, should post it either Friday or saturday.

I personally found on my (granted, quite limited) experience in the iron chef that using both 0.1 and 0.25 works best for me. 0.25 goes for most things, but there are plenty of things that I feel like I can't glance over, but are too minor to deduct (or give) 0.25. I usually call these "a slap on the wrist" or "a tiny boost".

I honestly didn't even consider the option that someone would feel bad because a minor issue was a tie breaker. I also don't really think judges must use the same ranking system. Using more or less diverse increments is generally much less impactful than a tendency to deduct or give points more liberally than others. Too judges could (and can. And have) use the same metric, but one judge tends more towards giving 5s and 1s than the other, so their scoring becomes much more relevant for the final tally.

In the end, we can't really enforce a shared grading system, and I don't think we want to. As long as all judges act in good faith, don't try to manipulate the tally, and generally try to rely on past judgements as precedent, I don't think we want to force any stricter method.

That's just my opinion though, I haven't been here that long.

I'm also hoping to post judgements this weekend. I had a more severe reaction than I expected to the second vaccine dose, which held me off for a few days.

[GrayDeath]

I`m not trying to start a discussion, hence why I put that all in the spoiler.

I am not the chair, I cant force anyone to do anything, I am merely trying to help smooth over potential problems bfore they come up.

If my suggestion helps, great.
If not, I can live with that either.
But I felt I had to make them.

[GreatWyrmGold]

Spoiler: Judging Criteria and Points

Show

Well.... I wrote .25.
Not .0025 or "make the smallest step be anything25".

As in, we usually limit it in fine granularity to 1/4th of a full Point. So that there are 19 Steps from the lowest possible legal entry, and maximum points.
The reason, as I was explained to me when I first judged, (and seems very well argued imo) is that it provides more than enough granularity/Breadth to judge many a different entry, but avoids the "too many small steps lead to miniscule differences deciding over who wins". Noone likes to lose because the color of the hat of an underling granted another entry 0.000025 extra points (sorry, joking).

And as it is more or less any competition the case, all judges should judge using the same system (after all, how they judge othwerise is wholly up to us^^) I humblyx really ask you to adapt your scoring to the agrteed upon mechanics.

My smallest step is 0.1, not 0.0025. If you want to get me to make my scoring less precise, exaggerating what I did ain't gonna make me receptive to your point of view...especially when you're focused on a "consistent grading scale" between judges, ignoring A. that that's impossible and B. the much bigger deviation from standard I made by cramming Limbs and Lovecraftiness in there.

Building on A: It's impossible to make every judge use exactly the same scoring system because of two reasons. One is solvable; the scales and what each category means are vague, but a more robust grading rubric could overcome that. The other is not: Different judges value different things. Look at my and Thurbane's ratings of Zoidberg for an example:

• Originality: I found it unoriginal because it was basically a mash of seafood templates with a couple classes and no unifying ideas behind it. But Thurbane rated it high on originality because that combination of templates and classes was unexpected.
• Build Elegance: thurbane rated it high, I rated it low. Thurbane thinks the build is fairly straightforward for this kind of competition, but I ding it in part because it feels so arbitrary.
• Competence and Power: This is the category I'm least comfortable rating, as a rule, but while we're here I'll note that I consider out-of-combat competence (look at ICFTU!'s archive stunt) more than most seem to.
• Memorable Villainy: Thurbane thinks it would be a decent recurring encounter and appreciates the Futurama reference. I find the lack of flavortext uninspiring and make fun of the Futurama reference.

It should be clear that the two of us are judging the entries through very different lenses. If I had to simplify the difference between my judging and what Thurbane's looks like from outside his skull, I'd say he's more focused on the mechanical side of things while I focus more on narratives. But reality is messier, because those are just easy-to-apply labels to our different ways of thinking about this contest. Our opinions are more complex than one label, and so are our judgements.

In short, our judgements are subjective. And they have to be, to be meaningful. But them being subjective means that no two judges are using the same criteria, because each focuses on the aspects they feel are most important. But that's why we have multiple judges, to aggregate a number of opinions into something that feels fairer. Losing because one guy personally dislikes an aspect of your entry feels bad whether they deducted 0.000025 points for hat color or 2.5 points for elegance.

P.S. The question of whether I rate these builds in 0.1 increments when I feel the need to split hairs or in 0.25 increments doesn't change anything meaningful. It just changes how granular my judgements are, not their substance. Even if I took the lazy way and just rounded all existing scores, the most any score would change by is 0.2, because everyone would both gain and lose fractional points.
It's so petty. Why is this a complaint? Isn't inconsistent granularity less important than inconsistent placement?

[jdizzlean]

here's another

Jon (7.9)
Originality: I found it unoriginal because it was basically a mash of seafood templates
Originality: Putting aside the Futurama jokes, there's not much to this. It's a neat mixture of ocean monsters, but that's about it. 1 —> 0.8+0 —> 0.8
[*]Build Elegance:I ding it in part because it feels so arbitrary.
Build Elegance: Two classes, one a natural prerequisite to the prestige class, is good. Two templates is alright. Half-ogre as a base is a little questionable, being (as always) just a cheap path to Large size. 2.5 2.6
[*]Competence and Power: This is the category I'm least comfortable rating, as a rule, but while we're here I'll note that I consider out-of-combat competence (look at ICFTU!'s archive stunt) more than most seem to.
Competence/Power: I don't know how to rate psionics, but they seem to add something to the beatstick routine most everyone else went for. Not sure how well the disparate aspects come together; the AoE stun can only take him so far if the gish elements aren't well-aligned. 2.5
[*]Memorable Villainy: I find the lack of flavortext uninspiring and make fun of the Futurama reference.[/list]
Memorable Villainy: Error 404 villainy not provided. All we're left with is a seafood list and a Futurama reference. Oh, and a vague handwave about ~mysterious origins~. 0 —> 0+0 —> 0

I'm confused by what you mean when you say 'mash of seafood templates, mixture of ocean monsters, and seafood list'. You've used that as reasoning to criticize the build and knock points off for it. There is exactly one aspect of Zoidburg that has anything to do with sea creatures or the ocean. That is the monstrous crab portion. What seafood list, templates, and mixture of monsters are you referring to?
Half Ogres have nothing to do with water. Half-Farspawn has nothing to do with water. Entomanothrope has nothing to do with water. Neither class or any powers/power-like abilities has anything about water. It's just the lone crab and it's amphibious, meaning it can choose either water OR land.

Originality (Is it unexpected?): You ignored what you see as jokes and still call it neat. Sounds like you didn't really except something like it.

Build Elegance (Is it mechanically pretty?): 2 templates, 2 classes (one of which you see as a natural prerequisite for the other). Your three judgements came out as Good, Alright, and a littte questionable. All parts of him are mechanically sound and show a natural progression for all of his abilities. Everything you referenced seems above average, ...but he received a below average score?

Competence and Power (Can it do what the concept asks of it? Is this a powerfully-built character?): Flying, teleportation, transformations, all sorts of mind manipulations, all well known for out-of-combat usefulness. He even has high enough skill ranks in multiple professions to make a bad living off of.
Great natural armor, blindsight, damage reduction, spell resistance, 8 natural attacks, powers, power-like abilities, great grappling, big area of attack. All powerful/useful abilities. If you don't know what to rate psionics, okay, learn about it. Don't penalize do to lack of knowledge.

Memorable Villainy (Is this a villain with style? Will it be the BBEG players long to finally kill and then talk about for weeks?): My computer decided to die and I lost most of my work, including the flavortext. Most every is familiar enough with Futurama to understand and appreciate the humor. You seem to be seeing Zoidburg was a big brainless brawler. Most of his psionic abilities and natural abilities support something much more complex. The memorability is for the players, not the characters. He is always working behind the scene, just out of reach of the characters though they'll know he is around. He'll be a hard villain to pin down and the characters will have to struggle to confront him directly

Normally, we judge based on four criteria: Originality, Build Elegance, Competence/Power, and Memorable Villainy. However, specific to this contest, we were specifically told that "the more arms, tentacles, limbs, natural attacks, etc, the better". So instead of just those four qualities, I'm going to add a fifth for Number of Limbs. (I could probably add that into one of the other categories, but it makes more sense to keep it separate; it's being counted because of a special rule, not because it's part of one of the other categories.)


Another aspect that I am going to include in the main rankings is "Lovecraftiness"—the extent to which these pseudo-pseudonatural creatures evoke that vague sense of cosmic horror associated with the late, great, full-of-hate[abbr=Okay, Lovecraft's infamous (and blatant-even-for-the-day) bigotry was borne from fear more than hate, but hate rhymes better.]([/abbr] author. I'll be rating it on a scale of 0 to 1, then adding that to the 1-4 points I assign to the Originality and Memorable Villainy rankings. This is because good Lovecraftiness is, I feel, part of those elements. Also because none of you can stop me from making these as complicated as I want.


A mixture of (half-)ogre, crab, illithid, and gods-don't-know-what. Between the entomothropy (as accurate a term as lycanthropy) and some of the psychic powers it has some neat shapechanging potential, but it doesn't seem like that's really leveraged.

Lovecraftiness: Zoidberg is from the "Go slaughter this big scary monster with lots of tentacles!" school of Lovecraft imitators. Well, not the original Zoidberg, that's more of a "Laugh at this poor sod with lots of tentacles!" situation. Anyways, 0
Limbs Ranking Jon E Zoidberg: I imagine the hybrid state of a crab entomanthrope would have fewer legs and no more arms than its crab form, so I'll count from there. Crabs have eight legs and two claws; add two tentacles from half-farspawn and we've got 12 limbs and four natural attacks. Illithid Grapple grants four additional tentacles and natural attacks, bringing Jon to 18 and 8 by level 15. I wasn't sure whether to put Jon above Nyekdar, below TK, or between them; however, the relatively slow progression (compared to Nyekdar), number of mechanically-useless limbs, and likelyhood that Jon will spend most of his time in forms with only two legs earns it this spot.

but I don't want to give Jon half as much as Nyekdar because I eventually decided it counted lower. Nyekdar gets 3.5 Jon gets 2.5
Limbs: 2 I changed my mind, it isn't even trying to exploit those legs for limb potential.

Mimic the Psuedonatural Template, w/o taking it..(mass tentacles/arms/etc)
the more arms, tentacles, limbs, natural attacks, etc, the better

Judging will be based on the following criteria, with each build rated on a scale from 1 (very poor) to 5 (exemplary) in each area: Originality, Build Elegance, Competence and Power, Memorable Villainy.

Limbs: You've counted the number of limbs Zoidburg has. 18 limbs and 8 natural attacks. It's actually more thanks to his tentacle mass ability. There is nothing in the special rules for this round that says anything about the usefulness of the limbs though. That is a separate condition you decided on. The chair said arms, tentacles, limbs, natural attacks, etc. By that criteria, Zoidberg has at least 40 total.
Limbs are also not a separate category with their own judgement. The chair listed only 4.

Lovecraftiness: Also not a separate category. In fact, it was not mentioned anywhere by the chair as something to score on. However, the most iconic/well-known Lovecraftian monster is of course Cthulhu, and you can't deny that Zoidburg is by far the closest match to Cthulhu. Both in appearance and ability.

The very first of the special limitations for this round was to mimic the Psuedonatural template. You seem to have not considered that at all in your written judgement. Half-Farspawn gives at least everything the Psuedonatural template does and adds more to it.

none of you can stop me from making these as complicated as I want.

a scale from 1 (very poor) to 5 (exemplary)

You gave Zoidburg three scores of less than 1, two of which are scores in legitimate categories. The absolute minimum score is 1. A Judge cannot arbitrary decide to change the scoring system. The system is set by the chair and was not changed for this round of the contest.

[GrayDeath]

Since all I was talking about WAS the uniform granularity, which contrary to your post is very very easy to make all Judges use, and in no way shape or form on what you think deserves pts or not, and I very clearly stated that, I cant help but feel you have been somewhat upset by my posts.

Which I did not intend to do.

All I was saying was "Hey, New Judge, how about you dont invent your own way/Granularity of scoring pts and instead, ya know, use the one the Competition has been using for years? Just saying...." to put it as bluntly and (as I feel a bit upset by your psot as well) maybe a bit too bluntly, as I can say.

However, since the chair is not intervening: Chair?
Would you please make a ruling for this specific competition regardsing the granularity of pts we use (ergo say that its not using the established one, that there isnt an established one, or tell GWG to use the established one? To avoid more intentional or unintentional misunderstandings. I`d be fine with any of the 3. Thank you!).?

Also, my Judgings will be posted at the altest tomorrow around this time.

[jdizzlean]

folks are free to use whatever metric they like to judge, just as folks are free to use whatever metric they like to build. once we start dictating either of those to be the same, the competition/s will end.

[GreatWyrmGold]

I'm confused by what you mean when you say 'mash of seafood templates, mixture of ocean monsters, and seafood list'.

Let me make it clear: The seafood is a descriptive term, one which comes up because the image you're (deliberately) creating is the same mixture of sea creatures as Zoidberg. That's not what I'm deducting points for; it's just a descriptive term. Because I don't like writing completely dry prose if I don't have to.
The thing I'm deducting points for is that it's an arbitrary mashup of templates and whatnot. Contrast It Came From the Unknown; while feral aquatic neanderthal wereoctopus is a slightly denser mashup of templates, it all fits a clear theme. You have a semi-human monster which lives in the water. Lolth-touched doesn't fit with that, but the author explained how the creature obtained that template through the narrative. You probably could have made the half-farspawn half-Ogre entomanothrope seem more natural if you'd included some kind of basic background for your entry, but you didn't.

Originality (Is it unexpected?): You ignored what you see as jokes and still call it neat. Sounds like you didn't really except something like it.

You don't get to tell me what I think about your entry. That makes me want to go back and mark your entry lower.

I told you why I marked it low on originality—not because of anything it has, but because of what it lacks. It's just a Futurama joke and a neat mixture of oce—sorry, of arbitrary monsters. Part crab, part ogre, part something-with-tentacles-that-definitely-isn't-a-sea-creature-apparently.

My computer decided to die and I lost most of my work, including the flavortext.

That sucks, but I can't judge what I don't see. I'm not going to give you a higher score because there might have been a version which was better at some point.

Most every is familiar enough with Futurama to understand and appreciate the humor...The memorability is for the players, not the characters.

You're not wrong. I don't see why that's relevant. Pop culture references don't automatically make a villain (or anything else) memorable. In fact, the two points are completely unrelated!

You seem to be seeing Zoidburg was a big brainless brawler. Most of his psionic abilities and natural abilities support something much more complex...He is always working behind the scene, just out of reach of the characters though they'll know he is around. He'll be a hard villain to pin down and the characters will have to struggle to confront him directly

If you're making a complex encounter, giving more guidance on how it works is generally a good idea. If you're making a mastermind, you should describe its plan. If you're making a villain you want to be taken seriously, you shouldn't design it after a character who exists to be the butt of the joke.

-griping about Limbs and Lovecraftiness-

Would you rather I give you a zero in those categories? I'm considering it!
If your complaints had been limited to the new categories, I'd be inclined to listen. But instead, you complained about the adjectives I used, told me how original I thought your villain was, said I should rate your monster higher because it's a Futurama reference (or something?), and talked a big deal about how much better your entry could have been if you had access to everything you'd written.

I should probably leave it at that, but:

Limb count

I can assign arbitrary numbers of tentacles to the other competitors if you want. Well, not It Came From the Unknown, but the others have tentacles which give you unclear numbers of tentacles.
Also, where the hell did you get 18 legs? Decapods have ten legs, it's in the name.

However, the most iconic/well-known Lovecraftian monster is of course Cthulhu, and you can't deny that Zoidburg is by far the closest match to Cthulhu. Both in appearance and ability.

Um, yes I can. If you think all there is to Cthulhu is a tentacle face and psychic powers, you shouldn't be complaining about Lovecraftiness.
Lovecraftiness isn't how much you mimic the brand imagery of the Cthulhu Mythos; it's about how much you evoke the feeling of the Mythos. You didn't. Maybe that ~lost draft~ did, maybe it gave your creation a sense of dread and unknowable menace that matches the grandfather of cosmic horror. But you named it after a comically pathetic character, so I doubt it.

Since all I was talking about WAS the uniform granularity, which contrary to your post is very very easy to make all Judges use, and in no way shape or form on what you think deserves pts or not, and I very clearly stated that, I cant help but feel you have been somewhat upset by my posts.

A little bit. And presenting an argument that doesn't make sense unless you think I missed that your entire complaint was about granularity also upsets me.

All I was saying was "Hey, New Judge, how about you dont invent your own way/Granularity of scoring pts and instead, ya know, use the one the Competition has been using for years? Just saying...." to put it as bluntly and (as I feel a bit upset by your psot as well) maybe a bit too bluntly, as I can say.

I'm not a new judge. I've judged before, just not for a while. I wouldn't be mixing things up with Limbs and Lovecraftiness entries if I was brand-new.

Why the heck does granularity even matter, anyways? Do you really think that losing by 0.1 points is less pleasant than losing by 0.5? If so, better tell the chair to round the averages out, because they're not going to be nearly so even!

[GrayDeath]

In short?

Because you change the expected granularity. For jo apparent reason other than that you want to, no less. I mean your arguments seem to see no difference between them, so why not just use the established method?

Ah well, not my place to argue, just wanted to make you aware of:

If we had been doing it with a lot of different point granularities for a while, I wouldn't have said anything.

But at rereading more than 90%of judges judge in steps of. 25, and so ayers can come to expect this.

Also sorry, Internet was gone yesterday.

I'll post M judging after work today.

[AvatarVecna]

Granularity isn't dictated by the contest nor is it an agreed-upon standard. Where you draw the line as a judge is a matter of personal preference. Personally speaking, I settle at quarter-point intervals when judging because:

1) Full-point or half-point intervals aren't granular enough to properly express my opinion
2) The number of things I want to mention just work out better for a 1-5 score when they're measured in quarter-points
3) Tenth-point intervals are too granular for me as a judge - judging is already hard work and I won't wanna get bogged down with "Hmmmmmm is this a 3.8 or a 3.9 hmmmmmmmm"

But how I specifically handle my judgements shouldn't dictate how anybody else handles theirs. There is nothing wrong with doing tenth-point intervals. There is nothing wrong with doing hundredth-point intervals. If somebody had an objective system measuring absolutely everything in the game against each other mathematicall for all categories, they could probably get away with thousandth-point intervals. How they judge very much isn't my problem.

I do take issue with a judge of their own volition adding a 5th judgement category. While it is part of the contest parameters, I'd prefer to push "number of limbs" into Elegance or Memorability. Sometimes the chair will have a contest where power or originality is measured on a 1-10 scale instead of a 1-5 scale, and that's fine because deciding the very general shape of the judgement rubrics is their perogative...not ours.

[Thurbane]

Personally I do increments of 0.5, starting from a base of 3.0.

If others use increments of 0.25 or 0.1, I have no issues with that.

[GreatWyrmGold]

Why the heck does granularity even matter, anyways?

In short?
Because you change the expected granularity.

Ah, I see. Changing granularity matters because it changes granularity. Thanks for clearing that up.
I know I trimmed out most of GrayDeath's post, but the rest of his argument doesn't matter unless you agree that granularity is important.


Also, another point for Zoidberg's creator: I just realized you probably misunderstood what I meant by "you're not using the limbs". Part of it is that the crab legs aren't being used for anything a single pair of human legs would do, but the fact that the villain is implied to usually spend time in a Zoidberg-like hybrid form is more important. Last time I watched Futurama, Zoidberg only had two legs.

[GrayDeath]

Since any argument seems wasted, lets end the discussion.
If you are truly unable to see "Tradition builds expectations" as an argument or not, I for one am now being angered by this conversation.

I just got home, willö finish up the Judging within the enxt hour or 2.


As a remninder, my "How I judge" Explanation:

ALL areas but elegance start at a 3, which means "Middle of the road" for the respective area (power for example would either mean a not ery powerful build with no qweaknesses, or a very pwoerful build that has a very big weakness to exploit).

Elegance starts at 5, which contains 1 Template, 1 CLass, 1 Race (unless the round DEMANDS a certain number of classes/Templates/etc, those are ignored) without dips, without any illegalities and well readable.

A 1 in any area means the entry either ahs managed to collect any and all "detractors", or is somehow illegal without breaking the actual Rounds Special Rules.

A 0 is given if that rule is broken, but the rest of the build COULD easily be made without that rule breaking. If not, the whole build is declared illegal.

And I judge in parts down to .25, but usually prefer to use halves.


Edit. And here we go.

Spoiler: Here Kitty...

Show

1.: Tentacle Kitty

O: Its a Kitty! That gives you +.5, as I am a cat person.
Sadly, nothing but the choice of the Epic Level Template (which I would have taken had I participated) is in any way shape or form “surprising/Innovative or unusual.”, so 2.0 it is.

E: However, you literally cant get mor eelegant. Race, Template (^^), done. 5.0.

P: Hmmmmm, as with many builds whose main draw are their toughnesds/Defenses, I am having trouble judging it outside of “can it face off Character X”.
As far as I could dertermin, aside from not flying and a dearth of skills, and the fact it can only be judged at CR 20, your Bouncer bounces pretty well. 3.0

M: …...Hard. If your group goes for remembering funny stuff, I`fd rate it a high 4, if not, its a mosnter of the week (but at least with tentacles, so...1.5?).
Without more details in how you want it used/what setting it makes its home in, I can only go for an average of the 2,. meaning 3.0

Total: 13.00

Spoiler: SHadowy here, hmmmm

Show

2.: Shadow of the World

O: Oh my. That was a very very nice read. Even if the myth wasnt too innovative, it was very well done, and explaining monsters via Myths always makes them better, no? And going the Hetakoncheire route is rarely seen.
Take excellent 4.5

E: Which, expectedly, beats you in the elegance compartment.
I will not go into detail, merely say that this one elegance part took me as long as Kitties whole build, that I found no DIRECT violation of any “illegal making” Rules, but its very very unelegant to require such a loooong and source rich RAW argument to even START the build.. In fact, no single Beast Class Thing I saw EVER came close to 1, but as close to horrible, even if the amount of pure RAW bull**** you are pulling, its not truly illegal, so take 1.25

P: It loses a lot of its abilities “early”, and until it is once again awakened (since you cant relay on items, you need allies to do that) its....a dumb brute with huge amounts of arms. If your intricate numbers of mititgations work, it is strong but not as strong as a well built more focussed thing. Additionally, it can be interrupted during many of these things, so take a 2.5.


M: This is where you shine.
Either your group is a more RAI one and will marvel at the amount of ressoureces spent against them, or a more RAW one and marvel at how you accomplished it. Added to that the fact that the monster CAN go many directions (possession, direct conflict, scout, etc), I give you very good 4.5.

Total: 12.75

Total:

Spoiler: I feel some Frenzy incoming...

Show

3: Nyetkar

O: Well, Grell I expected, but that build? Not so much. Intersting combination, if not entirely innovative, still good. 3.75.

E: I could not find a single illegality (only 2 parts I thought were but werent), but while it follows a clear path, its not quite as elegant as it could be .Still, 1 dip and a slightly cheesy reading only bring you to 4.00.

P: Hmmmm, as with the Kitty, the whole character is more or less a 2 trick pony. Either a LOAD of natural attacks with frenzy and pounce, or his wildshape tricks. He lacks focus to be truly amazing, but has very few weaknesses he cannot circumvent.
4.00.

M: Here we get to your weakest part. What makes your party realize the Grell is special?
What makes him a good recurring villain (granted, you are one of few participants that has a CR for ALL requested ranges, still....hes just not really the “Socialize with them, later show to be enemy” guy, nor does he evolve in a truly shocking/memorable way.
2.5.


T: 14.25

Spoiler: The Thing from an older time...

Show

4: It Came From The Unknown!

O: Oh my, Neanderthal octopus lycantrhope witch slayers? Take a full 5.00 for unexpected combinations!

E: Which hurts right here. The whole build is more or less Witch Hunbter and 5+ Small stuff/Dips/Etc. No start nor finish make any easily seeable story sense, most seem picked for power and power only.
No illegalities I could find though, so take 2.00

P: Well now, for a close combattant this thing is insane. He ahs answers for anything not flying fast, or sniping him from 500ft away or something, deals a good amount of damage, and can adapt.
Very good 4.00.

M: Another hard one. If the palyers see him come up first, or at elast close friends of them do, and the setting/Game fits, this can be pure gold. A thing from the apst, getting weirder and weirder, and never stopping.
If your world has a lot of mosnters, or your players DONT know that, its the “weird monster of the week”.
So As above, take the average of 3.00.

Total: 14.00.

Spoiler: Nothing to see, I dont know where your dollar bills went....

Show

5: ZoidbUrg, John E. ^^

O: Well, a lot of template stacking and some unusual classes, take a good 4.00

E: Hmmmm, I looked for a while, and I could not find undisputably illegal stuff, but this is not pretty (the start more than the classic class progresion). Sttll, its not too bad. 3.00.

P: Varies a lot. In his earliest or at the sweet spot, he rocks. At later CR values, he is not THAT big a physical thread, and his psionics suffer from class/template mishmash. He laso has trouble with fast flyers.
Ovberall, average 3.00.

M: OK, If your group has not experienced this before, and likes the referenced series, this will be the talk of the decade.
Even if they only know part of it, its gonna stay for a while. Take very good 4.25.

Total: 14.25

Overall, I liked these entries, and think all of them fit the theme well enough, although all of you could learn from the amount and quality of Shadow of the Worlds creators "Fluff", while they could learn from yopur “less headsplitting application of rules” for us poor judges.

HM goes to "the Kitty".

[NotInventedHere]

Thank you very much, GrayDeath. Updated table:

Name of Dish	Stub	Score - GWG	Score - Thurbane	Score - H_H_F_F	Score - GrayDeath	Current Average Score	Chef
tentacle kitty	Pseudonatural Legendary Tiger	8.8	12.5	-	13.00	11.433
Shadow Of The World	Shadow Simulacrum of Poisonlaced Corrupted By The Abyss Awakened Skeletal Dragon Half-Dragon (Li Lung) Hecatoncheires	16.05	14.0	-	12.75	14.267
Nyekdar	Half-farspawn grell Scout 3/Wild Shape Ranger 10/Whirling Frenzy Spirit Lion Totem Barbarian 1	15.6	15.5	-	14.25	15.1167
It Came From the Unknown	Lolth-touched Feral Natural Lycanthrope(Giant Octopus) Amphibious Neanderthal Whirling Frenzy Barbarian 2/Martial Rogue 2/Witch Slayer 5	10.5	14.5	-	14.00	13
Jon Eh Zoidburg	Half-Farspawn Half Ogre Entomanothrope (Monstrous Crab) Ardent 3/Flayspawn Psychic 10	7.9	15.0	-	14.25	12.3833

[GreatWyrmGold]

Since any argument seems wasted, lets end the discussion.
If you are truly unable to see "Tradition builds expectations" as an argument or not, I for one am now being angered by this conversation.

I can see the argument, I just don't see how the expectations of how many significant figures are in your score, specifically, matter.

And you know what's angering me? That you keep treating my position as "Precedent doesn't matter" and not "Granularity doesn't matter". Though I admit, it's a lot easier to make your case if you can paint the other guy as defending something completely ridiculous without ever addressing the one question they keep asking!

[H_H_F_F]

Guys, I feel like we're walking in circles now. We're all adults, we can see this discussion has not been productive. Let's move on. Also, my brain can no longer process "granular" as a word.
I hope to be done with my judgement tomorrow, by the way. I'm sorry for the delays - it seems that by agreeing to judge, I have summoned any and all things that would prevent me from doing so.

[Thurbane]

Thank you very much, GrayDeath. Updated table:

Name of Dish	Stub	Score - GWG	Score - Thurbane	Score - H_H_F_F	Score - GrayDeath	Current Average Score	Chef
tentacle kitty	Pseudonatural Legendary Tiger	8.8	12.5	-	13.00	11.433
Shadow Of The World	Shadow Simulacrum of Poisonlaced Corrupted By The Abyss Awakened Skeletal Dragon Half-Dragon (Li Lung) Hecatoncheires	16.05	14.0	-	12.75	14.267
Nyekdar	Half-farspawn grell Scout 3/Wild Shape Ranger 10/Whirling Frenzy Spirit Lion Totem Barbarian 1	15.6	15.5	-	14.25	15.1167
It Came From the Unknown	Lolth-touched Feral Natural Lycanthrope(Giant Octopus) Amphibious Neanderthal Whirling Frenzy Barbarian 2/Martial Rogue 2/Witch Slayer 5	10.5	14.5	-	14.00	13
Jon Eh Zoidburg	Half-Farspawn Half Ogre Entomanothrope (Monstrous Crab) Ardent 3/Flayspawn Psychic 10	7.9	15.0	-	14.25	12.3833

Just on the table: don't we traditionally add all scores together for a total, rather than ranking entries by an average score?

[jdizzlean]

generally, yes

[GrayDeath]

I can see the argument, I just don't see how the expectations of how many significant figures are in your score, specifically, matter.

And you know what's angering me? That you keep treating my position as "Precedent doesn't matter" and not "Granularity doesn't matter". Though I admit, it's a lot easier to make your case if you can paint the other guy as defending something completely ridiculous without ever addressing the one question they keep asking!

....


I had spent 5 Minutes trying once more to argue with you.

But no.

I would be nice if you could stop your starting Ad Hominem. Please?

As I will no longeer talk or write about this until I have calmed down.
Maybe I`ll open a thread for that.

This is not that thread.

[NotInventedHere]

Just on the table: don't we traditionally add all scores together for a total, rather than ranking entries by an average score?

Oh, sorry. I went back through the old competitions looking for a table code example, found one that also happened to be using averages, and assumed that was normal. Here's an adjusted table.

Name of Dish	Stub	Score - GWG	Score - Thurbane	Score - H_H_F_F	Score - GrayDeath	Current Total Score	Chef
tentacle kitty	Pseudonatural Legendary Tiger	8.8	12.5	-	13.00	34.3
Shadow Of The World	Shadow Simulacrum of Poisonlaced Corrupted By The Abyss Awakened Skeletal Dragon Half-Dragon (Li Lung) Hecatoncheires	16.05	14.0	-	12.75	42.8
Nyekdar	Half-farspawn grell Scout 3/Wild Shape Ranger 10/Whirling Frenzy Spirit Lion Totem Barbarian 1	15.6	15.5	-	14.25	45.35
It Came From the Unknown	Lolth-touched Feral Natural Lycanthrope(Giant Octopus) Amphibious Neanderthal Whirling Frenzy Barbarian 2/Martial Rogue 2/Witch Slayer 5	10.5	14.5	-	14.00	39
Jon Eh Zoidburg	Half-Farspawn Half Ogre Entomanothrope (Monstrous Crab) Ardent 3/Flayspawn Psychic 10	7.9	15.0	-	14.25	37.15

I don't believe it changes any rankings?

[H_H_F_F]

I don't believe it changes any rankings?

I'd be very concerned if it would.

[NotInventedHere]

I'd be very concerned if it would.

There's always the chance that I messed up with my maths with one or other of the tables. Peano arithmetic I can handle no sweat. Regular arithmetic is tricky sometimes.

[GreatWyrmGold]

....


I had spent 5 Minutes trying once more to argue with you.

But no.

I would be nice if you could stop your starting Ad Hominem. Please?

What's ad hominem about saying "You are consistently failing to argue against my actual points"? {Scrubbed}

[H_H_F_F]

Judgement coming very soon. I just wanted to say I really apologize for keeping everyone waiting. Stuff just kept piling up.