Iron Chef XIII: Vigilante

[Amphetryon]

Considering last competition's Ultimo Tarrasco bought off +2 LA (half ogre) and still won, I'd say its safe to say that its acceptable.

LA buy-off has been hit hard by some judges in the past. It may be advisable to determine who is judging before deciding if it's a wise course.

[Dusk Eclipse]

A question on sources, are setting specific things ok?

[true_shinken]

A question on sources, are setting specific things ok?

Depends on the judge, but crossing settings is almost guaranteed to get a hit on elegance.

...and I just noticed, no judges yet?! I might feel forced to drop from competing again...

[Dusk Eclipse]

Well that isn't a problem I plan to stick to just one setting.

[OMG PONIES]

Dusk, I hope we don't have the same idea...

[Dusk Eclipse]

now I am begining to worry..

[bondpirate]

I'm in, though I need a check or clarification on some rules.

1) Since the Vigilante casts and can gain Bard spells; I'm going to assume that there is no arcane spell failure while wearing light armor as per Bard class features. Does my ruling stand on this?

2) I'm confused on the Smite the Guilty (Su) ability. Mostly on this line, "Starting at 2nd level, a vigilante can attempt to smite someone whom he has personally witnessed committing a crime in his home city.

This seems to really be limiting on the way it's written, mostly the personally witnessed and home city aspects. Does this mean you can't investigate or be commissioned to stop a criminal in someones stead, whether it be the victim or a member of a guard or police force? If your in another city and see a crime, is this ability useless to stop them? If a lackey attacks you, it's technically assault, therefore a crime. So, can they be smited?

The ability also has a three day time limit. This is a pretty hard line, I can accept it, but why is the statute of limitations so short? There is no reason for your supernatural ability to just stop working when they are in fact guilty of a crime you've witnessed. There is no way a vigilante would lose their resolve so quickly. (Sorry, just had to mini rant.)

3) Can you search a body as a move action with the Quick Search (Ex) ability?

I think that's all. Also, it's my first time competing, be gentle.

[Kesnit]

I'll jump in to judge, since there seems to be lack there.

Spoiler

Show

Originality
I tend to look at each entry based on their own merit, rather than compare each to another. If two entries use the same base class, but go about them differently, they won't lose Originality points from me. If the entries are similar, they will. Multiple builds that all use the same "trick" will be marked down.

Power
I stole this from a previous judge, but it sums up my point of view. "Power comes down to, quite simply, how the build would fare in a mid-power campaign." I am not an min-maxer, and I do not play with min-maxers. I'm used to thinking of PCs as they are seen in many of the D&D books - where characters of different types of classes work together to get the job done.

Elegance
I REALLY dislike dipping, which I define as taking 1-2 levels of a base class. (Exceptions to that are if a PrC requires Class A 1/Class B 5, or something to that extent.) I am a little more open to taking 1-2 levels of a PrC, especially in a competition like this where it is expected 10 levels of another PrC will be taken. However, excessive "dipping" of PrCs will also lose Elegance points.

On the flip side, I like a good story. A lot of "strange" class changes and combos can be "overlooked" if the contestant can provide a logical reason for them. Also, I am aware English is not everyone's first language, and if a contestant feels they were marked down because they could not adequately explain their concept, I am willing to reevaluate my analysis of their Elegance. (Note I did not say I will automatically increase their score, but if informed, I will give it a second look.)

As a heads-up, an extremely powerful PC will be marked down if, in my view, it would not work well as a member of a mixed party. (Mixed party defined as "not all PCs are pure casters.") That is not to say any Tier 1 PC will lose points, as they can be built in a way to help (rather than replace) the rest of the party.

Use of Secret Ingredient
The point of this competition is the Special Ingredient, so obviously it should be the focus. Competitors will lose points if they use less than 9 levels of the SI. (I'd prefer to see all 10, but sometimes, things just cannot be helped.)

[WinWin]

Casting as a Bard means that the Vigiliante can't use silenced spells.

They still have ASF for somatic components. The Bard's armoured casting is a seperate ability.

Anyone have a standardised definition of Criminal? Can the Vigilante Smite himself (or other Vigilante's)? Are Aberrations and Undead Crimes against nature? When operating in a different region, does the Vigilante use the law of the realm, or the laws of his homeland?

The class has some interesting mechanical abilities. The fluff seems to be jamming some of the gears though.

edit: I'm submitting a build for the hell of it. If there is still a need for a judge, I'll disqualify my entry. I'll keep most of my criteria a mystery, but best in catergory will force other scores down.

[The Vorpal Tribble]

As a heads-up, an extremely powerful PC will be marked down if, in my view, it would not work well as a member of a mixed party. (Mixed party defined as "not all PCs are pure casters.") That is not to say any Tier 1 PC will lose points, as they can be built in a way to help (rather than replace) the rest of the party.

May I request you move that potential mark down to 'Elegance'?

Strength being marked down for being too powerful doesn't settle well with me. If its so powerful it detracts from the party, or is to the point of cheesiness then that is an Elegance issue, not a Strength one.

With my last judging I marked someone really high for strength, and then low for elegance because I didn't care much for their reasoning and the way they went about getting the strength.

Give each where its due is my opinion.

[bondpirate]

Thanks for the response Win, then I'll just consider Vigilantes arcane casters with ASF then.

[Kesnit]

May I request you move that potential mark down to 'Elegance'?

Strength being marked down for being too powerful doesn't settle well with me. If its so powerful it detracts from the party, or is to the point of cheesiness then that is an Elegance issue, not a Strength one.

With my last judging I marked someone really high for strength, and then low for elegance because I didn't care much for their reasoning and the way they went about getting the strength.

Give each where its due is my opinion.

Point taken. It has been moved.

[Thurbane]

Casting as a Bard means that the Vigiliante can't use silenced spells.

They still have ASF for somatic components. The Bard's armoured casting is a seperate ability.

Sorry, but can you provide sources for that interpretation? I would read "cast as a Bard" to include casting in light armor myself. Other casters such as the Beguiler or Warmage specifically have Armored Caster spelled out as a separate class feature...

[Ozymandias9]

Sorry, but can you provide sources for that interpretation? I would read "cast as a Bard" to include casting in light armor myself. Other casters such as the Beguiler or Warmage specifically have Armored Caster spelled out as a separate class feature...

By my reading, WinWin is correct. Bard's have their ASF exemption listed as an element of the armor proficiencies, not as an aspect of their spell-casting.

If anyone can provide me errata (or similar rules clarification) listed for this or any other bard-casting related class that contradicts this ruling, I will alter it accordingly.

I'm in, though I need a check or clarification on some rules.

1) Since the Vigilante casts and can gain Bard spells; I'm going to assume that there is no arcane spell failure while wearing light armor as per Bard class features. Does my ruling stand on this?

See the above

2) I'm confused on the Smite the Guilty (Su) ability. Mostly on this line, "Starting at 2nd level, a vigilante can attempt to smite someone whom he has personally witnessed committing a crime in his home city.
[...]There is no reason for your supernatural ability to just stop working when they are in fact guilty of a crime you've witnessed. There is no way a vigilante would lose their resolve so quickly. (Sorry, just had to mini rant.)

While I agree that it's limiting and I would probably structure it differently, the rules presented for the class stand.

3) Can you search a body as a move action with the Quick Search (Ex) ability?

As long as the body fits in a 5'x5' square, it would seem to qualify. I'll note here that I don't recall any specific rules for searching bodies, so if they do exist the ruling might be altered accordingly.

[DaragosKitsune]

Quick question: Are WotC web enhancements legal for use?

[Ozymandias9]

Quick question: Are WotC web enhancements legal for use?

Yes, link the page.

[Razmath]

You guys seem to be short on judges, I've been a lurker in these threads for a while now, so I'd like to give judging a try.

What I'm looking for in a build.

Spoiler

Show

Originality
Basically, what does your build do that no-one else's does? You'll pick up more points here for unexpected race and class (and to a lesser degree, feat) choices, but also for using abilities in a way I didn't expect.

Note: I'm not a fan of originality for its own sake. If I see something that's unusual but doesn't seem to have any purpose other than raising the originality score I won't score as much here and you may take a hit in elegance.

Power
How strong is your build in its chosen field? How does the build perform outside of its chosen field? How does it measure up to other builds in similar roles?

It's also important that a build should be effective through all its levels. If you're an absolute beast from level 15 onwards but excessively weak between levels 5 and 10 you're not going to get as many points as someone who manages to make a build that remains strong through its entire progression.

Note: If your character works more effectively alone let me know. Same if they prefer to work in a party, either one is fine and neither will be scored down, but the fewer assumptions I have to make the more accurate my scoring should be.

Elegance
I'm going to be fairly lenient when it comes to dipping, I don't really dislike 2 level dips, particularly if your story justifies it. I'm less fond of one level dips but if it makes sense I'll overlook it. I realise you've only got 20 levels to work with and 10 of those may well be taken up by the ingredient. Having said that I will probably penalise you here if you dip more than once, assume you'll lose half a point for the second dip and a whole point for any after that.

On the topic of LA buyoff, I'll probably hit you for it here, half a point per level seems fair. Having said that, if you think you can make up for the lost points in power with those extra levels, go for it.

The most likely way to lose points with me in elegance is by having build elements from multiple settings or just things that don't seem to make sense for the character. If you could foresee a DM having issues with a part of your build then you'll likely lose points here.

The Secret Ingredient
You don't need to use all the levels of your secret ingredient to get a max score here (although it probably wouldn't hurt). The most important things here are how much the secret ingredient helps the build. If it seems like the ingredient is tacked on because you have to use it, but you took it to level 10, then you're not going to receive as many points as the guy who only takes 5 levels but uses everything it gives him to make the build work.

Hope that all looks good, I look forward to the submissions.

[true_shinken]

I don't know if RAW Vigilantes are supposed to be able to cast in light armor or not... but RAI, they are supposed to.
The illustration is a dude in light armor, the class gains no bonus while unarmored and the example Vigilante wears light armor and has no listed ASF.
How much are we sticking to RAW here? We already had a case like that in GSA's round and went with the intended interpretation, I believe.

[The Vorpal Tribble]

I so very much hate you restricted spell schools...

[Ozymandias9]

I don't know if RAW Vigilantes are supposed to be able to cast in light armor or not... but RAI, they are supposed to.
The illustration is a dude in light armor, the class gains no bonus while unarmored and the example Vigilante wears light armor and has no listed ASF.
How much are we sticking to RAW here? We already had a case like that in GSA's round and went with the intended interpretation, I believe.

Humm. If ASF is usually listed for the sample characters (and I believe it usually is) the lack in the sample character would be enough for me to change the ruling. I'll take a closer look this evening when I have more time.

[Duke of URL]

I'm thinking of submitting here. I have a couple of ideas floating around, though I wonder how "original" they will wind up being...

[OMG PONIES]

Hmm, I think I've locked in my main idea. Hopefully it works (and is a path less travelled by).

Question for the judge(s?): In past rounds, submissions focused on one city were marked down for being "too NPC-like." Will this be the case again? I can see a vigilante being a great PC in an urban-themed campaign centered in one large city.

[Razmath]

I'm not going to mark down builds for being "NPC like". If it can be used as a character in a game, either by the DM or a player, it's fine by me.

[WinWin]

Hmm, I think I've locked in my main idea. Hopefully it works (and is a path less travelled by).

Question for the judge(s?): In past rounds, submissions focused on one city were marked down for being "too NPC-like." Will this be the case again? I can see a vigilante being a great PC in an urban-themed campaign centered in one large city.

If I am required to judge I will thinking about this. Balancing the thematic requirements of the PrC against the needs and expectations of a 'typical' adventuring party is part of the challenge.

The mechanics and theme will no doubt play a role in UoSI. Creating a character that is too narrowly focussed is an Inelegant build IMO, but too generalised and your character may come across as unoriginal. Versatility and meaningful options fall under my definition of Power, but if they overshadow the SI that score may suffer.

I wish I could give a more detailed explaination, but I don't honestly know how I will be judging (if at all) until I see a big wall of text from Ozy at the end of the week. One thing I do know is that I will be weighing my scoring according to how entries compare to one another. The best advice I can give is to briefly explain the elements of your character that you feel are the most important for judges to consider.

[Kesnit]

Question for the judge(s?): In past rounds, submissions focused on one city were marked down for being "too NPC-like." Will this be the case again? I can see a vigilante being a great PC in an urban-themed campaign centered in one large city.

Depends on how it is done. If the build would only work in 1 city (or a small group of cities), then it will get marked down in Elegance. If the chef sets the PC in a given city, but that PC could be moved to another city with little or no tweeking, then there will not be a markdown.

For example... A Red Wizard of Thay is pretty much tied to Thay. Sure, they can and do leave, but it would be weird to see a Red Wizard with a random adventuring party that didn't include many Red Wizards and their bodyguards. (There is a PrC for the bodyguards, but I cannot remember what they are called.) A build like that would get marked down because of the tie to one city.

On the other hand, if a PC's backstory says they were hired by the Lords of Waterdeep to do things the normal guards cannot do, that would not get marked down because "Lords of Waterdeep" could easily be changed to "Lord Nasher of Neverwinter" (or whatever) without losing anything.

[Duke of URL]

The problem is that one of the class features of Vigilante is specifically tied to a single city. By definition, all entries are going to be most effective in that city. It is certainly possible to emphasize other aspects of the character which makes him/her/it/they "portable", but the fluff and crunch of the class do have some focus on a specific location.

[Kesnit]

The problem is that one of the class features of Vigilante is specifically tied to a single city. By definition, all entries are going to be most effective in that city. It is certainly possible to emphasize other aspects of the character which makes him/her/it/they "portable", but the fluff and crunch of the class do have some focus on a specific location.

I may not have explained myself well... If a entry has ties to City X, but they are "fluff ties" and City X can easily become City Y, that will not be marked down. If aspects of the built tie the build to City X, and City X cannot easily become City Y, that will be marked down.

To put it another way, a Red Wizard of Thay is a Red Wizard OF THAY. Not a Red Wizard of Waterdeep.

In all honesty, I doubt this will be an issue with any build, even if the chef specifically sets the PC in a given, named city, because just about any city can be refluffed to fit into any other city in any other setting.

Given the fact that a Vigilant's class features tie the class to the PC's home city, it would not be fair to mark down a build because it has ties to a city, so long as that city could be (almost) any city.

[Duke of URL]

Given the fact that a Vigilant's class features tie the class to the PC's home city, it would not be fair to mark down a build because it has ties to a city, so long as that city could be (almost) any city.

Ah, got it. That makes much more sense.

[Thurbane]

Wow...so no casting without ASF?

I was contemplating putting an entry in, but I'm afraid this PrC is just too craptacular for me to make anything of...lots of luck to all the entrants...you're gonna need it!

(Yet another PrC with great flavour, and really poor crunch).

[Coidzor]

I dunno, but, the announcement of the secret ingredient is always hard to pick out when just skimming through the thread after reading the rules.

I think you might want to modify the formatting to at least have a text-size increase for what sets it off.