Base Class Contest Chat Thread V: I Scored at the Top of My Base Class

To start with, I liked both classes. Don't think that I didn't!

I just sort of start reading things with the assumption that I'll like them and point out things that I don't like, instead of the other way around.

Sorry if this sounds critical.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mangles

I'd rather get critical notes than none. I had a long break between homebrewing and I know I'm rusty. Only way to improve is with constructive criticism. If you feel bad posting em here you can PM m

---

Knitted Knight

• Finally, somebody else makes a class entirely out of puns!
• The weapons that this class summons aren't very good (even with the meager buffs), meaning that the player needs to throw feats and/or other resources at them to make them function. This is a bad sign for a melee class, since they tend to have power level issues on a multitude of axes.
• In fact, a lot of the class features are underwhelming. To its credit, it has no dead levels, which can partially explain that.
• The largest exception is magical knit. As written, you don't use XP to craft, you don't need to know any spells, and you can use Ur-Priest casting progression to determine spell access. Magical Knit is an artificer on steroids.
• A few technical issues. No skills or skill points. Unclear action types on some abilities. Class features referring to missing stat blocks. Woolen Homonculus is either referring to a missing class feature with “the Magical Weave ability” or it’s both misnaming an existing ability and misapplying it, since no class feature would work there.
• This class basically does three things: It hits folk with needles, it makes items out of wool, and it makes dudes out of wool. It seems from the flavor and such that the first was the primary thrust, with the other two perhaps added when scrambling for content. I can't claim to know authorial intent, but the class feels unfocused.
• To sum up: This class isn't very powerful (besides its crafting) and isn't very cohesive. I could see it played, but not in a 4-man group. Maybe in a 5-man where the standard bases are covered, or a 3-man where your frontliner needs some extra utility.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Knitifine

I feel the same as Mangles expressed here.

---

The Antiquarian

• Flavor is basically dungeon delver.
• Functions mostly as a skill monkey. Has some "customizability" in terms of the artifacts it bonds, but since those can't be crafted or even bought, that's more customizability on the part of the DM than the player. Customizable classes are my jam, but this one makes me nervous. Gets full ranks in a skill with no apparent use.
• In order to hit a reasonable power level, it feels like the class needs to use ancient powers on a very specific subset of artifacts.
• There's more ambiguity in the class than I'd like. How long does artifact 1’s temp HP last? (we’ll be generous and assume it doesn’t stack) Can I create multiple undead with Artifact 2? What’s the reflex save DC of artifact 3 based on? (it sets a DC “from 20” to 15, meaning it’s talking about the strength check... neither the artifact nor class description give a default ability for saves) How do I “reflect” an existing casting of, say, Antipathy onto its caster? Etc.
• The class design of the Antiquarian just feels... dated. It leans heavily on trapfinding, that being one of the two ways to fill its daily-emptying power bucket, despite trapfinding getting less and less emphasis across 3.5's lifetime as the designers realized it was a legacy mechanic and not particularly fun for the other 3 members of the party. Meanwhile, the class doesn't technically have dead levels (gaining a class feature or artifact at every level), but that assumes that you have enough artifacts to bond things and that you consider "Trap sense +1" to be a class feature. I hope you do: It's your class capstone!
• All in all, this class feels like the rogue squared. The rogue's strengths (Skill monkeying, non-spell utility, UMD) are magnified while its weaknesses (Gear dependence, relying on the DM's level design/loot drops to contribute) are as well. This class literally gets weaker when the DM is nicer.
• To draw a parallel to some classes I've made: The first draft of the Photorealist required paints, but I stripped them. The Servant Soul, based on a manga where people evoke spirits through "class cards," abstracted the items out entirely despite people acquiring and stealing them literally being the focus of the first two volumes. The most DM-dependent class I've ever published is probably the Coalescant, weirdly enough, and the coalescant contains a 500-word essay on how the DM should and shouldn't oversee the process of unlocking its class features, repeatedly making the point that DMs and players can drop the minigame if they like, and if they don't, it should be doable and not particularly challenging. After all, these are class features. You didn't take levels in warrior. I wish the Antiquarian contained similar language.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bekeleven

The Antiquarian
Flavor is basically dungeon delver.

---

I think of them more like an art history major who sold their soul to an elder god for the perfect dig, but fair enough.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bekeleven

Functions mostly as a skill monkey. Has some "customizability" in terms of the artifacts it bonds, but since those can't be crafted or even bought, that's more customizability on the part of the DM than the player. Customizable classes are my jam, but this one makes me nervous. Gets full ranks in a skill with no apparent use.

---

The skill is for the flavor, I mention later that I'm not really getting this dystopian DM idea (first off, I can't think of a DM that allows homebrew classes, but also demands to pick their players wizard spells each level...)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bekeleven

In order to hit a reasonable power level, it feels like the class needs to use ancient powers on a very specific subset of artifacts.
There's more ambiguity in the class than I'd like. How long does artifact 1’s temp HP last? (we’ll be generous and assume it doesn’t stack).

---

Till the end of the encounter, an oversight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bekeleven

Can I create multiple undead with Artifact 2?

---

No, it specifically says you can't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Antiquarian Artifacts

If a new undead is animated with the grimorie while an older creation still exists, the older creation’s alignment changes to neutral evil and it seeks out nearby living creatures to kill until it is destroyed.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bekeleven

What’s the reflex save DC of artifact 3 based on? (it sets a DC “from 20” to 15, meaning it’s talking about the strength check... neither the artifact nor class description give a default ability for saves).

---

All spells, spell-like and supernatural abilities granted to the antiquarian are based on Intelligence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bekeleven

How do I “reflect” an existing casting of, say, Antipathy onto its caster? Etc.

---

As spell turning.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bekeleven

The class design of the Antiquarian just feels... dated. It leans heavily on trapfinding, that being one of the two ways to fill its daily-emptying power bucket, despite trapfinding getting less and less emphasis across 3.5's lifetime as the designers realized it was a legacy mechanic and not particularly fun for the other 3 members of the party. Meanwhile, the class doesn't technically have dead levels (gaining a class feature or artifact at every level), but that assumes that you have enough artifacts to bond things and that you consider "Trap sense +1" to be a class feature. I hope you do: It's your class capstone!

---

3.5e base classes don't universally (or even often) have capstones, most the reason this class lacks features it to keep it from benefiting from any of pathfinder's improvements. If one does not have a trap-heavy adventure they can always take the Scholarly Combatant ACF.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bekeleven

All in all, this class feels like the rogue squared. The rogue's strengths (Skill monkeying, non-spell utility, UMD) are magnified while its weaknesses (Gear dependence, relying on the DM's level design/loot drops to contribute) are as well. This class literally gets weaker when the DM is nicer.

---

I don't see how the class is particularly tied to gear dependence at all. The class does get weaker the 'nicer' the DM gets to full casters (less encounters per day), but that's the entire point of the essence mechanic. It starts small and builds up over time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bekeleven

I wish the Antiquarian contained similar language.

---

I really have no idea what you're getting at here I'm afraid. The only possible way to take the class more out of the DM's hands would be to give each artifact a default crafting price, like spells for wizards, but then you immediately have the issue of a mid level antiquarian crafting all the artifacts, negating the meaning of choice for the artifacts they gain by leveling up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Knitifine

I don't see how the class is particularly tied to gear dependence at all. The class does get weaker the 'nicer' the DM gets to full casters (less encounters per day), but that's the entire point of the essence mechanic. It starts small and builds up over time.

---

It has two things that it does better than, say, a warrior: One is UMD and the other is artifacts. Both of these things are literally gear.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Knitifine

I really have no idea what you're getting at here I'm afraid. The only possible way to take the class more out of the DM's hands would be to give each artifact a default crafting price, like spells for wizards, but then you immediately have the issue of a mid level antiquarian crafting all the artifacts, negating the meaning of choice for the artifacts they gain by leveling up.

---

Well, they can only have artifacts restored equal to the number in the column. If they could craft items, then instead of having a class with class features consisting of what the DM places in the drop tables, they could take a few weeks off and build the item they needed.

What do you mean "choice for the artifacts they gain by leveling up?"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bekeleven

It has two things that it does better than, say, a warrior: One is UMD and the other is artifacts. Both of these things are literally gear.

---

In the same way soulmelds are gear, yes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bekeleven

Well, they can only have artifacts restored equal to the number in the column. If they could craft items, then instead of having a class with class features consisting of what the DM places in the drop tables, they could take a few weeks off and build the item they needed.

What do you mean "choice for the artifacts they gain by leveling up?"

---

I think I see where you're getting tripped up, and it has to do with both me and the people I ran my class by understanding the Antique Restoration feature through explanation and glancing rather than reading it intently enough to catch an omission. (The line in that first draft that originally told you how many artifacts you gain, now tells you have many you can have restored at one time, and I never added another line saying 'also you gain this number as the minimum, because I kept just understanding that at reading off the table.)

This is how you seem to be interpreting it: You can somehow acquire artifacts and have a number listed under the Artifacts Restored entry restored at one point.

This is how it's intended, and how me and my editors interpreted it: You start three artifacts, and gain an additional artifact every time your Artifacts Restored goes up. Your DM may give you additional artifacts beyond this or device a system for giving out additional artifacts, in order to use these additional artifacts you have to swap them out.

It didn't really occur to me that you could read it that way you're reading it. Sorry for the confusion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Knitifine

Artist Macabre: This is a neat little class. It's a little too unfocused for my tastes, the BAB seems too low and the way Dance of Blood works seems... overly complicated.

---

The bab was accidentally not switched back to 20 at 20 over looked in final publish. Yeah there are a lot of things that didn't t get in as i finally got my idea on last day of contest so cohesion and polish are missing. I intended to be al ot more flavor things based on what they use bodies for, and other ways to incorporate art into combat.
Please excuse bad spelling as on a phone and its not cooperating.

Can I refer to or copy a pathfinder mechanism(say, bloodrager bloodlines) to my base class?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ahyangyi

Can I refer to or copy a pathfinder mechanism(say, bloodrager bloodlines) to my base class?

---

Duplication of D&D-external mechanics is perfectly fine, as is referring to easily-findable external mechanics. I think the standard is that if it isn't D&D first party, then it should be explained as far as needed for function just going off of first party rules and rules spelled out in the mechanics of the class.

Basically, copy it in full if you are using it, rather than refer to the Pathfinder mechanic. If it's stuff like Akasha, which is a 3rd party port of D&D mechanics, Incarnum in this case, to Pathfinder, translate to the actual D&D version if you can find it or spell it out, listing divergences from D&D mechanics that you can find.

1st= Antiquarian- Though I wish there were more options and the Artifacts referencing the antiquarian's True Strike spell-like ability had me searching high and low. I did finally identify it was not the class but the race that provided the spell-like. As stated in an earlier post, you may want to add the note that the items in the listed collumn are gained regardless of items found in actual game. Essence seems too difficult to aquire if your not in a combat heavy game or trap heavy one. Might I suggest gaining essence when rolling a natural 20 or similar rare case that still provides a more "reliable" source of essence.

2nd= Photorealist- By far the best put together art type in terms of casting mechanics, but I like the class as a whole little bit less than the Antiquarian. I loved the use of different real paintings to define the fantastic paintings the class would be making. I have a major issue with classes that use all 6 attributes for magic it seems senseless. There is some cases where a case can be made but this falls short. Of the catagories you povided the only ones that seemed truely out of place was danse macabre and interactive art, I have a hard time coralting str with painting, or constitution, Strength makes plenty of sense as a sculpter, and constituation could fit for something that requires endurance to complete like a difficult task that must be complete in 10 hour period but most painters would be tired or worse after 9.

3rd= Knitted Knight- This one is just fun. There are several holes, but I assume they are an oversight as that seems to have been the case based on thread chat, IE not mentioning the XP cost, I play PF rules so there is none kind of game breaky in 3.5.

4th= Wizard of the Coast- Sorry jor I love the idea and might be playing it with Nikkoli if he oks it. All-in-all great class did some of the things I tried doing with the Bellithor only better. Hats off as always. In the end neigh unuseable unless you have an awsome DM, Bellithor has same issue.

5th= Transendant- Honestly cool ideas but it felt too middle of the road, I couldn't tell if it was a painter a tree hugger or a hermit that knows a thing or two about staffs. Good work on abilites but folding half the abilites into photorealist as "paintings" would make alot of sense to me. You do set it up with bard casting which I am always happy to see Spontaneous casters. Sorry if it seems harsh, but you do have some really fun and interesting things.

6th= Artist Macabre- Fun, but haphazard. There are several gaping holes where cohesion is missing, and art is at best loosely tied to the class. The art parts could be completely ignored and the class would almost loose nothing. It is a slightly better fighter that cants use heavy armor. However does get death attack based on charisma and 1/2 level, even this can be overcome rather easily. Dance of Blood needs serious rewording to make a coheseve idea, "if multiple attacks miss adding 1 die per attack that missed." what is the intention here, there seems to be an entire section missing. With more work this could be a good class, but at this stage its at best a rough draft.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lanth Sor

1st= Antiquarian- Though I wish there were more options and the Artifacts referencing the antiquarian's True Strike spell-like ability had me searching high and low. I did finally identify it was not the class but the race that provided the spell-like. As stated in an earlier post, you may want to add the note that the items in the listed collumn are gained regardless of items found in actual game. Essence seems too difficult to aquire if your not in a combat heavy game or trap heavy one. Might I suggest gaining essence when rolling a natural 20 or similar rare case that still provides a more "reliable" source of essence.

---

Yeah, absolutely will when I publish it. But my understanding is that editing entries at this point is off limits, even if just for clarification and mistakes.

I'm not sure I agree essence is too difficult to acquire. At level 20 a base antiquarian starts the day with 4, and gets at least 1 per encounter. So 7 on average....
Actually, yeah, you're right. An antiquarian should get a guaranteed 10 essence at level 20 on the third encounter. Should have crunched the numbers a bit harder on that one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lanth Sor

5th= Transendant- Honestly cool ideas but it felt too middle of the road, I couldn't tell if it was a painter a tree hugger or a hermit that knows a thing or two about staffs. Good work on abilites but folding half the abilites into photorealist as "paintings" would make alot of sense to me. You do set it up with bard casting which I am always happy to see Spontaneous casters. Sorry if it seems harsh, but you do have some really fun and interesting things.

---

Spontaneous casters represent!

As to your comments on where the theme of the class goes, it's not really meant to be straightforward. A Transcendent is someone who was so enamoured with nature, that they tried to preserve it forever in art. Nature kind of went "Aw, that's sweet. Here, have some nature magic." So the Transcendent is a painter who likes to go around painting nature, and fighting bad guys. So the fluff and the abilities follow this affinity for art and nature, and a magical force that enhances both of these affinities.

As for the bit about the Photorealist, well, I can hardly have measured my own work by its metric, when it came later.

Wrote some comments down as I was reading these. The comments are on the RAW my vote will go as RAI.

Transcendent
Landscape Forge: Enhance Should probably have a maximum enchantment level so that you can't get +6 weapons.
Silent Poetry: Is this a fluff ability? I don't see any mechanical advantage unless you bard multiclass, but maybe i'm missing something. I don't consider a fluff only ability a bad thing at all, just wondering if i'm missing something here.
Speed Paint: Is armour meant to scale as well as weapons. As written armour goes from miute to full round to free. Why not standard action at 16th?
Exploding with Life: You really want to be as small as possible fore this ability. If you can get tiny than even flowers and grass will animate. Enlarge person cast on a Trancendent enemy as your attack of oppurtunity against this would be a great strategy.

Wizard of the Coast
Intro is confusing.
The abilities are written to go into Epic levels, which seems odd.

The Antiquarian
Essence of Discovery: You start each day much weaker than you end, unlike other classes. Your better off not resting, and if you need to have your party members set up a bunch of rabbit traps for you to disarm.
Antique Restoration: Does this force the DM to give out antiques?
Antiquarian Artifacts: Actually the class features, have to hope your DM gives you the ones you want.

The Artist Macabre
Unearthly Nerve and Unearthly Fortitude: These read as if they were written in the other order and then swapped.

Photorealist
Weapon and Armor Proficiency: Shouldnt have an adendem explaining the proficiencies are bad.
Painting: very complicated casting
Passion Project and Expert: I have never made a check to earn a living.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mangles

Intro is confusing.

---

Well, okay. The catch, when one tries creating, with only the... y'know, I'm not gonna try that any more.

Quote:

---

The abilities are written to go into Epic levels, which seems odd.

---

Odd, but deliberate. I don't like it when classes are written to just... stop at 20th, and have no epic progression or expectation for one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bekeleven

Knitted Knight

• Finally, somebody else makes a class entirely out of puns!
• The weapons that this class summons aren't very good (even with the meager buffs), meaning that the player needs to throw feats and/or other resources at them to make them function. This is a bad sign for a melee class, since they tend to have power level issues on a multitude of axes.
• In fact, a lot of the class features are underwhelming. To its credit, it has no dead levels, which can partially explain that.
• The largest exception is magical knit. As written, you don't use XP to craft, you don't need to know any spells, and you can use Ur-Priest casting progression to determine spell access. Magical Knit is an artificer on steroids.
• A few technical issues. No skills or skill points. Unclear action types on some abilities. Class features referring to missing stat blocks. Woolen Homonculus is either referring to a missing class feature with “the Magical Weave ability” or it’s both misnaming an existing ability and misapplying it, since no class feature would work there.
• This class basically does three things: It hits folk with needles, it makes items out of wool, and it makes dudes out of wool. It seems from the flavor and such that the first was the primary thrust, with the other two perhaps added when scrambling for content. I can't claim to know authorial intent, but the class feels unfocused.
• To sum up: This class isn't very powerful (besides its crafting) and isn't very cohesive. I could see it played, but not in a 4-man group. Maybe in a 5-man where the standard bases are covered, or a 3-man where your frontliner needs some extra utility.

---

I clearly need to work on the little details more.
I was hoping the feats provided by the Needle Combat tree would be enough to make it viable in melee, and here i was thinking i should give it 3/4 bab to lower the power. Clearly needed to go the other way.
Magical knit was intended to let this guy be the party crafter with the downside being that people could easily identify the items. I totally forgot xp costs were a thing but a simple change to the last sentence should fix that. I don't mind that they can choose the spell casting unless ur priest gets to cast the spells earlier than a wizard, cleric or druid. Maybe there is a better way to word this.
Woolen Homunculus was meant to refer to the Magical Knit ability. Attention to detail once again. Its meant to allow an enchantment bonus so they don't get unraveled so easily. Might need an xp discount for magical knit on this one.
I think a larger focus as a commander of woolen creatures would have been a better thrust for the class, rather than a melee combatant who self arms and has a small following. The weapons and armour were the core of the class and the minions and magic added in after.
Live and learn. I may try to republish a better version after the comp.

Thanks for all the comments. It really helps.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lanth Sor

3rd= Knitted Knight- This one is just fun. There are several holes, but I assume they are an oversight as that seems to have been the case based on thread chat, IE not mentioning the XP cost, I play PF rules so there is none kind of game breaky in 3.5.

---

I'm glad it's fun. Also part of the aim of most of my homebrew. Lots of holes that I need to remember to fix next time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mangles

Landscape Forge: Enhance Should probably have a maximum enchantment level so that you can't get +6 weapons.

---

Nope. This was made with the absolute intention of being able to hit +6 weapons. It's a +1 to attack and damage, and you can overcome the DR on some of the epic monsters. It's hardly game-breaking.

That said, this class was originally built for a friend to play in a game that's power level was on the high side, so I had no compunctions against the potential consequences of +6 weaponry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mangles

Silent Poetry: Is this a fluff ability? I don't see any mechanical advantage unless you bard multiclass, but maybe i'm missing something. I don't consider a fluff only ability a bad thing at all, just wondering if i'm missing something here.

---

It's kind of a fluff ability. It gives you the option to make some money in your downtime, if you don't have the time to sell paintings. So it's a bit of a utility option.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mangles

Speed Paint: Is armour meant to scale as well as weapons. As written armour goes from miute to full round to free. Why not standard action at 16th?

---

The original version actually didn't get that final increase to free actions. I was fine for armour to plateau where it was. After adding the final version, I looked at it, and decided that it really didn't matter all that much if your armour sped up to a standard, since you probably weren't going to take it off throughout the day. Even if you did lose it, a full-round is hardly crippling, though potentially annoying.

While the increase isn't there, that's only because of a random whim. I could have just as easily added it in. Just didn't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mangles

Exploding with Life: You really want to be as small as possible fore this ability. If you can get tiny than even flowers and grass will animate. Enlarge person cast on a Trancendent enemy as your attack of oppurtunity against this would be a great strategy.

---

Can you imagine if a Psion used their Compress power to make you something ridiculous? You could animate spores in the air. As it stands, I wouldn't be too pleased with myself if I enlarged an enemy Transcendent. Ancient trees in the middle of the forest are going to be utterly terrifying, even without the smaller fodder to support them.

If you really wanna get them, find a way to teleport them into a city. They're not likely to find much bigger than a pot plant. Then it's just the army of stray cats you need to worry about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mangles

Essence of Discovery: You start each day much weaker than you end, unlike other classes.

---

That is the point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mangles

Your better off not resting

---

If you wanna deal with exhaustion and low HP, yes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mangles

if you need to have your party members set up a bunch of rabbit traps for you to disarm.

---

That will work exactly once, since the trap must be one the antiquarian was not previously aware of. I'll make a note to add a section on allies and trapping the Antiquarian to make them more effective is the release.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mangles

Antique Restoration: Does this force the DM to give out antiques?

---

As much as Spellbook forces the DM to give out spells. These questions have been answered already.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Knitifine

Knitted Knight: Would have liked to see more cold resistance and fire vulnerability interactions in this class (especially with the familiar). I really like the concept, just wish it had more followers and perhaps a custom living construct race associated with it. I feel like there's a lot of potential in this idea. I like the alternate class features, though I would have specified that the hook does piercing and/or bludgeoning damage, since slashing doesn't seem appropriate for a crochet hook.

---

These are good ideas. I should definitely add more to do with the resistance and vulnerability and enlarge/diversify the army of constructs they control. Your damage change makes sense too for the hook.

So, what I am thinking of doing can be best described as "avatistic Incarnium-Binder"


The core of the class will be a list of "Essences" that take up the role of Vestiges. What with being bound to people all to give them benefits akin to what a Vestige would have... at the cost of influences. The catch? It's bound to your allies, not you. you prepare Essences by binding them to an ally for 24 hours, which causes them to suffer cumpulsions or manifest physical signs.

Essences can be bound to body parts, like soulmelds (though much simpler), for increased benefits.

I'm not going to do the whole Essentia shuffling thing though, you'll have plenty to deal with already.

You know all of your Essences at the start, but need to level up to unlock abilities or binding spots for all of them. So, it's a case of pick and choose what you need for the situation at the start of the day here, but maybe I can make it more flexibile.


The second part of the class would be a cache of items which serve to help you be an annoyance or support character. think of flask of alchemist fire stuff and tanglefoot bags... which can upgrrades to make them nastier.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Almarck

So, what I am thinking of doing can be best described as "avatistic Incarnium-Binder"


The core of the class will be a list of "Essences" that take up the role of Vestiges. What with being bound to people all to give them benefits akin to what a Vestige would have... at the cost of influences. The catch? It's bound to your allies, not you.

Essences can be bound to body parts, like soulmelds (though much simpler), for increased benefits.


I'm not going to do the whole Essentia shuffling thing though, you'll have plenty to deal with already.

---

Sounds pretty bizarre. I think there's probably a lot of design space to explore.
How are you going to relate that all back to nature?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Knitifine

Sounds pretty bizarre. I think there's probably a lot of design space to explore.
How are you going to relate that all back to nature?

---

Edited. But that's easy. all of the Essences you can bind are nature based. Think "Raging River" or "Fiery Typhoon" or even "Bear's Wrath". Which means you'll give your allies the emotional temperments of primal forces.

Voting is closed for the last contest.

In first place is the antiquarian, by Knitifine!

In second place, the photorealist, by bekeleven!

In third place, the transcendent, by Eno Remnant!

EDIT: Every participant voted. If peeps want to see totals, I have those, though the point totals mean little by themselves.

I would very much like to see points totals. This level of cloak-and-yet-more-cloak is somewhat irritating.

I am overjoyed to see that the Antiquarian won.

I also want to express congratulations towards the writers of the Photorealist and Transcendent and thank everyone who participated in and hosted this contest.

It was real fun. Time to go work on Egregore for the current contest.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jormengand

I would very much like to see points totals. This level of cloak-and-yet-more-cloak is somewhat irritating.

---

It's probably to ensure that people don't vote "strategically" to maximize their win chances. Which to be fair, I had to fight the temptation for quite a bit.






In other news, I could use some advice. The first part of my class is setup and now I need to populate that list, which will be done over the month. The downside is that this first, and most important part... is not useful for the class to act in combat since it's about binding buffs or "vestiges" to other people.

I want to know what I could do to represent things that the class itself does on its own time for its own benefit as opposed to others.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Almarck

It's probably to ensure that people don't vote "strategically" to maximize their win chances.

---

Right, only it just changes the strategy from "Vote for the things with fewest votes" to "Vote for the things that you think are the worst." Not only does it not actually prevent tactical voting, it actually encourages people who want to do that to vote in a way that's even less conducive to the best class winning.

That, and the fact that knowing who voted how much and what their critique was, and actually having a thread with all the critiques, is really nice, especially if I'm remaking a class later (or if a DM wants to check that it's been reviewed by other forumites) and I want to check all of the critiques for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jormengand

"Vote for the things that you think are the worst."

---

Perhaps among contributors. But I like to think that in a stakes-less contest people would just vote honestly.
Regardless, submitting votes anonymously keeps people from catching flak for their choices, which I believe is good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Knitifine

Perhaps among contributors. But I like to think that in a stakes-less contest people would just vote honestly.

---

So do I. Why we're taking such measures to protect people's internet points while discouraging people from actually critiquing the classes in question I don't really know.

Quote:

---

Regardless, submitting votes anonymously keeps people from catching flak for their choices, which I believe is good.

---

Mainly because it discourages people from actually saying anything useful. I don't come here to win internet points for things being better than other people's things. I come here for the critique. The format of the contest used to encourage this; it was changed with zero hours' notice to massively discourage it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jormengand

Mainly because it discourages people from actually saying anything useful. I don't come here to win internet points for things being better than other people's things. I come here for the critique. The format of the contest used to encourage this; it was changed with zero hours' notice to massively discourage it.

---

Disagree. People are unlikely to give substantial critique just because they're forced to give up anonymity. If they want to critique, they will.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Knitifine

Disagree. People are unlikely to give substantial critique just because they're forced to give up anonymity. If they want to critique, they will.

---

The previous contests had far more in the way of critique. It isn't a coincidence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jormengand

It isn't a coincidence.

---

This is an assumption without any substantial evidence. There has been only a single contest in which the changes were implemented. That's a current sample size of 1 which is nowhere near enough to show anything.

I kept the good points out of my critique for just such reasons. I felt that saying anything good would tip my hand as to who I voted for, so only put up negative critique.

I voted for Antiquarian because i thought the class using dug up or found artifacts was a great idea. Them interacting with each other with feats was fun and the class had a lot of flexibility. Instead I felt forced to say: "Does your DM have to give you the items" rather than "Like you've pointed out already, you should reword it to make it clearer that your DM doesn't have to give you the items."

EDIT:
Got a bit caught up there:

Also Grats on the wins all three of you. Very well made classes all round.