I dunno, not too good with psionics...
Heh... ha... haha... hahahaha... BUWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! :belkar:
Printable View
I dunno, not too good with psionics...
Heh... ha... haha... hahahaha... BUWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! :belkar:
That's one vote for Psionics, a couple votes for Ardent Dilettante, and two for Scion of Tem-Et-Nu so far, by my quick count.
We'll have to see what Prinny has in store for us.
It keeps the game exiting I think. I love it when players keep me guessing. Keeping the players on their toes can be challenging too.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Vorpal Tribble
As for the next IC, I'm happy to play with anything in the sourcebooks I own or can borrow. I'll have to borrow MoP for Ardent Dilletante if that comes up though. Psionics are cool too, but I don't recognise the other PrC mentioned.
I would like too, but as a player I have much difficulties to make my DM understand what I'm supposed to do and as a DM myself, I have players which could easily take it as cheating (they prefer I pick up homebrew from others to mine, go figure...)
To the others: please private-post Prinny for the next secret ingredient
My concern is that Arcane Dillettente requires very specific abilities to fully progress it. Since contestants generally get more points from going 10/10 of a PrC, they'll all have to spent the other 10 levels assuring that the reach the end point of AD, which will probably limit the builds a bit.
I like Ardent Dilettante personally. I think you could fulfill everything quite well too with a large number of possible combinations, but that's just my faith in 3.5. Also, screw Scion. :smallyuk:
Au contraire! Like we saw with Master of Masks, this increases originality as people take less well-know routes and results in thinking outside the box, which I think is basically the premise behind Iron Chef.
Going 10/10 is an option, and considering Ardent Dilettant, it's a hard choice wetter to do it or not. I think it would be a very good choice for secret ingredient.
The requirements, though increasingly difficult, are never impossible or anything. Levels in a couple skills, arcane casting or divine casting. With a few tricks, you could do it single-classed really.
Hey Humanity, still with us, bud?
Hopefully both remaining judges will finish their tallies today. :smallsmile:
I thought Humanity said he was posting them on Wednesday?
That was Ozy, and he said Tues or Wed, so just maybe...
Humanity posted 6 votes and said he'd finish the others later.
Btw, couple things nagging me...
I can understand grafts, but why exactly would Dread Necromancer come to mind? I mean, there are only so many arcane casters that allow casting without penalty in light armor, but still...Quote:
I would rate you better, but my first thought was dread necromancer and grafts.
Why would this be a problem, out of curiosity? The character has 16 class levels, and the contest allows 20 levels worth of XP. Templates don't count towards that as far as I know, so it should be able to use that XP not used for multi-classing.Quote:
But the one dip in ranger would cause this Pc to have a penality in XP for multiclassing. Really, really sorry.
I'm here, I've been really busy, working on them right now.
did it.
EDIT: the next one is going to be Knight Protector. I have stated, and thus it will be.
Awesome.
Tally
Spoiler
#1. Little Starry-Eyes - 3.5/3.5/3.5/4 (3.625)
#2. Dr. Julius Mordenstein - 3.375/3.375/3.625/3.625 (3.5)
#3. Nicolo Egidi - 3/3.625/3.375/3.375 (3.3437)
#4. Xiajing Wu - 3.75/3/3.5/3 (3.3125)
#5. Kao Lei - 3.125/3.625/3.0625/3.25 (3.265)
#6. Glorgen - 2.875/3.125/3.5625/3.375 (3.234)
#7. Byerek Runeweaver - 3/3.125/2.5/2.875 (2.875)
#8. Stardream Kaurrek - 2.75/2.875/2.687/2.5 (2.688)
Getting down to the wire and Ozy could radically alter the whole outcome.
wow not even 1 point between first and last!
I prefer raw composite scores to averages. It keeps things simpler with 5 judges, as there are 100 possible points.
TallySpoiler#1. Little Starry-Eyes - 58
#2. Dr. Julius Mordenstein - 56
#3. Nicolo Egidi - 53.5
#4. Xiajing Wu - 53
#5. Kao Lei - 52.25
#6. Glorgen - 51.75
#7. Byerek Runeweaver - 46
#8. Stardream Kaurrek - 43
It's all on Ozy's hands!
wow not even 20 points between first and last!
Can't wait to see Ozy weigh in so discourse with the judges can take place! :smallsmile:
Answering you in private. In public, only after Ozy's judgement.
Ozy, if you want to avoid to be influenced, do not read the spoiler
Spoiler
Starryeyes count: 16 classes level + Saint Template (+2) + WereChordevoc (+2) = 20 ECL.
In my table, templates does count for the purpose of determining XP. Here for reference.
So, to reach level 16, she has to have enough XP to hit 20th level. With a 20% reduction since level 5 and ECL 7 (I guess). This is the egg he/she broke to put up a wonderful meal
Just a few questions.
Is this an optimization challenge?
What is optimization? Is it building the most powerful build?
Or, is it writing a great story for a character?
If both, which is more important?
I am curious as to the thoughts of IC participants on this. Should concept take priority over mechanical effectiveness? One can be applied to almost any game (mechanics). The other has to be modified according to the standards of the referee and players. Concept is great, but if the mechanics do not support them, is the character optimized?
How many characters in this challenge have a broad range of efficacy, not just in level appropriate combat, but to all the needs of a story and game?
How many of those characters have scored well in this challenge?
Is this an optimization challenge?
Whoops. I'm repeating myself:smallsmile:
I'll refrain from a detailed reply until after Ozy has posted his scores, WinWin. :smallsmile:
Interesting questions, indeed. Allow me to reply on what I think IC is: this is, I guess, the only answer that matters, because if you ask me about my likes, I probably answer you that character concept and story (in this order) count over everything else. IC is a different thing.
My view:
IC is a practical optimization contest. So, it is a challenge to optimize something to the max and still make it viable to a sane DM.
This said, the challenge gives you a secret ingredient (PrC) and defies you to use it the best way possible (Use of Secret Ingredient) to obtain the most optimized character in terms of power (power), in a way never seen nor imagined before (originality) and with an astonishing presentation and taste (elegance).
The latter "could bear a little elaboration", is vaguely portraited and is the land of judges tastes: one can like something (great elegance score) and others dislike it at most (zero elegance).
All parameters combined would lead to a simple evaluation (this is how I think judging builds): how would I react if someone put it as a character in my games?
To best explain, allow me some school case:
Pun-Punish character
Originality: 0 (increasing the more it is far from Pun-Pun)
Power: 5 and the score is too low
Elegance: is there a -5 available?
U.S.I.: 0 (unless the secret ingredient is kobold, in that case 5)
(see Pun-Pun)
Nup-Nupish
Originality: 0 (increasing the more it is far from Nup-Nup)
Power: 0
Elegance: 3 (despite it's lack of power, few book, not erratic. Penalty for use of flaw)
U.S.I.: 0 (in any given case)
(see Nup-Nup)
"What you couldn't think it is legal unless you see it"
Originality: 4ish usually (you didn't see it coming)
Power: usually around 4
Elegance: 1-2 (usually, great penalty)
U.S.I.: it depends on the core-ness of secret ingredient
(see Seera, last IC)
"Variation on a known S.I. related theme/association"
Originality: around 2
Power: around 4 (usually known themes are known for usefulness)
Elegance: mileage may greatly vary
U.S.I.: usually 3
(with no offense and, instead, compliments to the author, see Byerek on this challenge)
"Known concept in which secred ingredient is forced"
Originality: around 2
Power: around 4
Elegance: it depends on the original elegance
U.S.I.: 2 or less, usually.
If I may add, I have included in Elegance, section "presentation", a +/-1 point for "is the build self understandable and complete?" You can call it the figure-it-out rule. If everything is clear - weather for use of core, of easy dynamics or for a good explaination in-entry - you got a plus; if I have to figure how the entry works out, you get a minus.
Hope I answered clearly.
If not, feel free to ask :smallwink:
I have some...comments to post on this, but I think I'll wait till after the final scores are in.
I think that the IC challenge is supposed to showcase your skill as an RPG player as a whole. An amazing concept is useless if it can't pull its weight in a group, and a set of mechanics is boring and monotonous to review. By having both, we get a character that has their talents, and is able to showcase them effectively with a written background.