Iron Chef Optimisation Challenge II

[BooNL]

Entering as a participant. Let's see what we have this time!

[Tehnar]

I think I am in as well.

[Malificus]

I'm not sure how well I'll do, but I'd like to give this a try.

[KitTheOdd]

Count me in.

[Brendan]

I enjoy judging. Unless it would be a problem, I'd love to do it again.

[RagnaroksChosen]

sorry about no build last time RL stuff came up.

I'm in though.

[Heliomance]

Okay 5 judges is plenty, assuming you all submit a judgement :P

The interest in this one is slightly amazing - if people don't mind, I may drop the week's signup time as we have so many people interested already.

I doubt that too many contestants will be a problem, though - experience has shown that only a fraction of the people that sign up actually submit a build.

Incidentally, the judging criteria are slightly different from last time - if you haven't already, I suggest reading the OP.

[Wings of Peace]

Okay 5 judges is plenty, assuming you all submit a judgement :P

The interest in this one is slightly amazing - if people don't mind, I may drop the week's signup time as we have so many people interested already.

I doubt that too many contestants will be a problem, though - experience has shown that only a fraction of the people that sign up actually submit a build.

Incidentally, the judging criteria are slightly different from last time - if you haven't already, I suggest reading the OP.

The elegance category as it is currently written seems like it will encourage uniformity more than creativity. This is just my opinion however, others may disagree.

[RagnaroksChosen]

The elegance category as it is currently written seems like it will encourage uniformity more than creativity. This is just my opinion however, others may disagree.

I think its to decrease just pure power. and to make characters that make more sense. Ala the example he gave with cloistered cleric.

[Wings of Peace]

I think its to decrease just pure power. and to make characters that make more sense. Ala the example he gave with cloistered cleric.

But power is a category.

[Togo]

I'd like to be a participant, if I may?

[RagnaroksChosen]

But power is a category.

agreed. But power within the confines of elegance I think its to prevent uber cheese? though im sure helo can speak more on it.

[Escheton]

wings, you get the idea, you are just being stubborn and cheesy, knock it off.
also: im in

[Mushroom Ninja]

wings, you get the idea, you are just being stubborn and cheesy, knock it off.

Actually, it isn't quite as clear as you suggest. I'm a little confused about the elegance criterion myself. As it is currently worded, it seems to be slightly at odds with the power category. Personally, the way I would define an elegance category is: "The efficiency with which the components of the build achieve the build's goal."

[Heliomance]

That's quite close to what I had in mind, Mushroom. My thoughts run thusly:

Flaws are an optimiser's crutch. While I often use them myself, they are a very cheap way to get bonus feats, and feel to me like a cop-out. Thus, wile they are not banned, they will automatically lose a point in the elegance category.

There is a fairly wide gulf between TO and PO. It is the gulf of characters that aren't powerful enough to be a decent TO exercise, but are so cheesy that most DMs wouldn't allow it in any game. Falling into that gulf is likely to result in a low elegance score. Ideally, what you're aiming for is either a brand new TO build showcasing a nice trick you spotted (I'm not expecting to see many of these, simply because by this point, most of the rules abuses in 3.5 have been found and exploited already), or an actual playable character. Taking two levels in each of ten different classes while drawing spells and feats from a further 15 sourcebooks is inelegant. I have nothing against multiclassing, but it is possible to take it too far. That's why I suggested dropping points for excessive multiclassing. Of course, what exactly constitutes excessive is up to the individual judges, but I would suggest they take a fairly permissive view.

As regards the classes that don't make sense clause, I've always hated the fact that there is literally no mechanical reason to ever take normal cleric if cloistered cleric is available. Cloistered cleric represents someone who's spent their life in the cloisters studying - absolutely fine if you're building a wise old sage, but if you're building a character who goes out and spreads the word of his god by force, or who hunts down undead to cleanse their stain from the world, or what have you, then you really should be using the standard cleric. I'm pretty sure there are other examples where a class that makes sense fluffwise is weaker than one that is less explainable, cloistered cleric was just the one that sprang to mind. Elegance rewards you for going with the fluff choice even if it's slightly weaker.

Of course, if the fluff choice is significantly weaker, than you've got a tradeoff to make - do you go for the points in elegance, and risk losing points in power? Or do you make the more powerful character, and sacrifice the points for elegance?

Does that make it clearer?

[Hand_of_Vecna]

I'll participate again though I'd like to offer to pull my build from contention and be a substitute judge if necessary.

[FishAreWet]

So we should assume that no flavor is mutable? And why can't a warrior who spreads the word of god by force be a book worm?

[9mm]

Even supposedly 'useless' classes can usually be tweaked around to something useful. Hell, I did it with CW Samurai, you can do it with what is at least a caster...

meh... I'd rather have something intresting to work with, not something that basicly boiled down to "half casting, special spiritual weapon 2/day, and a ruin delvers fortune" at least samurai had something to work with.

but time permiting; I'll probably do a build.

So we should assume that no flavor is mutable? And why can't a warrior who spreads the word of god by force be a book worm?

because Helio never heard of a Two-Fisted Padre?

[BenTheJester]

This isn't directed specifically at Clockworkmonk as he may have factored this in, however, his post did make me think about it. Judging secret ingredient purely by the amount of Entropomancer levels taken becomes imbalanced when used on both level 20 and non-level 20 builds as it gives a clear mathematical advantage to the level 20s who had those extra 5 levels to work with as opposed to the below level 20 builds who chose to leave the later levels open for the player to decide upon with their own discretion.

I agree, IMHO, that category should be rated on how much the secret ingredient's class features are incorporated in the build strategy/course of action

In example, most of the builds submitted seem to make use only of the level 5 aura and ignore the rest(yes I know, the rest isn't that great).
As a counter-example, the non-submitted build that suggested using Setting Sun maneuvers to throw people into your shard should get 4-5 points

This might be good to add/paraphrase on the "use of secret ingredient", I think it makes sense, and pretty much everyone agreed upon this.
(Though it is still up to you to do it or not, this is just a suggestion)

[BenTheJester]

Actually, it isn't quite as clear as you suggest. I'm a little confused about the elegance criterion myself. As it is currently worded, it seems to be slightly at odds with the power category.

That's the fun of the challenge; being able to gauge between power, originality and elegance

It's easy to make a super powerful build. It's hard to make an original and elegant, yet powerful build.


I really like the Elegance criteria.

[RagnaroksChosen]

I doubt that too many contestants will be a problem, though - experience has shown that only a fraction of the people that sign up actually submit a build.

Ya know i was thinking about this... why even have contestant sign ups why not post the secret ingrediant and then wait for submissions?

[Tehnar]

First let me say congratulations to Akal for his win.

The problem with the shard of entropy was, that it was really, really bad. Its damage is really poor, it takes a standard action to activate (and no way around that I could find, since its a supernatural ability), and it lasts really a short time.

My original idea (when building Lothar) was to bull rush things into the shard. However that really works out poorly for the bullrusher. The time to set up is long (standard to summon, move to place it (hope that spot is within 30 ft), then hope that the enemy stands still so you can bull rush it on the same round. It even gets worse if you want to bullrush them into walls or the like.

The thrower could pull it off better though, I was hoping to see that entry.

[arguskos]

Since I've not been part of one of these before, I'd like to ask a judging clarification. I assume Heliomance will be posting builds anonymously. If he posts them here, will we be judging them publicly?

[RagnaroksChosen]

Since I've not been part of one of these before, I'd like to ask a judging clarification. I assume Heliomance will be posting builds anonymously. If he posts them here, will we be judging them publicly?

well the last one they did.

[arguskos]

well the last one they did.

K. That's what I figured, but wasn't totally sure. Just wanted to check.

[Heliomance]

Builds get PMed to me, at the end of the contest I post them all anonymously and judging happens openly. Once judging is finished, I'll reveal who built what.

[AbyssKnight]

Well, we have plenty of judges and contestants, I say will start this thing. Lets kick this pig!*



*No pigs were harmed in the making of this post.

[LichPrinceAlim]

*sits in the crowd, munching on a bag of chocolate frogs*

Note: no frogs were harmed in the making of this post either

[ShneekeyTheLost]

For the Elegance criteria, you may wish to consider the following questions:

1) Would I, as a GM, permit this character to play in a game I run? If so, how happy about that would I be?

2) Would I, as a fellow gamer, be happy to see a guy sit down at our table with this character?

3) How little 'rules lawyering' is necessary to make this a legitimate build?

4) How easy would it be to explain this build to a person who is a newbie at D&D? Alternately: Could my 12 year old kid brother play this character effectively?

5) Is this based on a CharOp build? This is supposed to be your creativity. I don't want to see a dozen variants on the 'ubercharger' or Cindy or the Mailman. Besides, CharOp is the antithesis of this category anyways. Anything smacking of CharOp... probably won't do well in this category.

Elegance isn't just doing this, it's doing this and making it look effortless. Think of it as style points, if you will. Some kludgy build containing half a dozen classes, with 'early entry' or otherwise shady means of qualifying for them, isn't very stylish, no matter how powerful it may be.

[Grynning]

As a judge in this contest, my criteria for elegance will be similar Shneeky's above. I am looking for characters that would be fun to play and have a "wow" factor; something that sets them apart from typical builds and what your fellow contestants may be submitting. Doing unexpected things with a limited set of abilities is what optimization is all about, so surprise me.

Also, I am fine with variants from UA, but your build shouldn't hinge on what are essentially houserules, such as fractional BAB/Saves.