Iron Chef Optimization Challenge in the Playground LVI

[Deadline]

Sent.

What Outsider stuff were you planning on for the Midgard Dwarf build? Or was it more novelty than actual mechanical stuff?

That was mostly it, just the novelty (and crafting magic items). Hence why I didn't go that route (Heck, Midgard Dwarves don't even get climb as a racial skill, so the main schtick would have been hard pressed to work consistently). I'm sure that if I'd kept at it, I could have cooked up something more interesting with outsider specific feats and what not, but not today.

Also, [Westley]you guessed wrong[/Westley].

[WhamBamSam]

That was mostly it, just the novelty (and crafting magic items). Hence why I didn't go that route (Heck, Midgard Dwarves don't even get climb as a racial skill, so the main schtick would have been hard pressed to work consistently). I'm sure that if I'd kept at it, I could have cooked up something more interesting with outsider specific feats and what not, but not today.

Also, [Westley]you guessed wrong[/Westley].

Yeah... I can't think of anything except for trying to cheese access to Metamorphasis through a Magic Mantle Ardent then setting up a PP recharge trick to keep it going through the whole day with a PP pool of just 6+(bonus from high Wis). Midgard Dwarf crafting unfortunately won't get you the ability to craft Psionic ammunition, unfortunately.

I'm not sure what exactly that reference is supposed to mean in this context.

[Kazudo]

It appears you incorrectly guessed his build.

Hrnh. Hrnh. Hrnh.

[deuxhero]

I mentioned I hoped to see something as "interesting" as previous DMG SIs (assassin killed people through walls using spoons, Shadowdancer stole buildings and a few other DMG classes were key parts of non-DMG SI like one Divine Crusader build using Arcane Archer to shoot blizzards) got. Nothing really seems like it did anything with the SI beyond raw combat prowess, but I can't say I'm disappointed because I didn't expect much from DD.

[AvatarVecna]

I mentioned I hoped to see something as "interesting" as previous DMG SIs (assassin killed people through walls using spoons, Shadowdancer stole buildings and a few other DMG classes were key parts of non-DMG SI like one Divine Crusader build using Arcane Archer to shoot blizzards) got. Nothing really seems like it did anything with the SI beyond raw combat prowess, but I can't say I'm disappointed because I didn't expect much from DD.

It's about base class functions: shadowdancers teleport through shadows; there's all kinds of fun stuff you can do with that. Arcane Archers shoot magic like arrows; so many interesting spells to attach. Assassins are supposed to be the ultimate killers; my favorite assassin build, despite its less-than-effective nature, was the anthropomorphic cat that covered itself in contact poison and got people to pet it. The Dwarven Defender is a BSF at it's finest:it stands in one place, has a huge AC, and a ton of HP.

[Muggins]

I mentioned I hoped to see something as "interesting" as previous DMG SIs (assassin killed people through walls using spoons, Shadowdancer stole buildings and a few other DMG classes were key parts of non-DMG SI like one Divine Crusader build using Arcane Archer to shoot blizzards) got. Nothing really seems like it did anything with the SI beyond raw combat prowess, but I can't say I'm disappointed because I didn't expect much from DD.

Yeah. I mean, slinging deadly spoons and summoning blizzards in combat? How absurd, right?

Contrary to Shadowdancer (and, to a lesser extent, Assassin), Dwarven Defender is wholly focused on combat. It hasn't got any skills; it's just got big HP and big AC. It can't move things, or even itself, around.
It's the senile, old dad to Deepstone Sentinel, and even the Sentinel's living a life of drugs and debauchery that'll see it dead in a few years.

There are a few things I didn't expect here, though. Like barbarian.

Edit: Accursed Vecna!

Speaking of "interesting" builds, I did consider trying to get Earth Glide and simply suffocating enemies in solid stone. Downside: That doesn't synergise with Dwarven Defender's HP, Saves, AC or Defender's Stance. So I scrapped it.

[deuxhero]

Did not a single one of the builds try to loophole their way around "but he cannot move from the spot he is defending"? Standing on a flying carpet (or other solid flying thing) or potentially even mounted before using Defensive Stance for example.

[Seerow]

Did not a single one of the builds try to loophole their way around "but he cannot move from the spot he is defending"? Standing on a flying carpet (or other solid flying thing) or potentially even mounted before using Defensive Stance for example.

I'm pretty sure this was asked about during the prep time, and was ruled against explicitly.


Though it would have been pretty cool to see one of the gish builds trying to use rather than a mount or flying carpet just literally levitating a chunk of ground that they are defending.

[Tim Proctor]

Did not a single one of the builds try to loophole their way around "but he cannot move from the spot he is defending"? I defend my magic carpet!

There are a couple that are using similar issues, but the judges would skewer someone for questionable rules.

Smaug looks the closest to what you're looking for using a large mount to extend his defense range and steal attacks from allies, while giving them a big AC bonus. It doesn't look like they are riding the thing and defending it, but basically giving it a ton of AC and I'm guessing just going into the middle of combat eating up AoOs, adding flanking bonuses, etc.

Traubon doesn't list defending his mount either but he also has a mount.

Diesa uses an animal companion and could ride a dire wolf? I don't know what size it is.

Anyways there are a couple that could probably do it, but I haven't read any that tried to step into questionable rules.

[lunar2]

buy a battletitan, extend your reach by 10 feet. why didn't i think of that? on that note, was anything said against teleportation abilities? those don't actually move you at all, even indirectly. you just disappear from one square and appear in the other.

on a related note, i haven't actually read all the builds but anyone who is using reach extenders is trying to subvert the inability to move, simply by not needing to move. most battles should occur within 50 feet of the DD (and he can move as long as he's not in his stance for enemies that can attack from further range than that), which is a reach achievable without any cheese at all.

[Muggins]

The terminology used by Defender's Stance is that the Dwarven Defender can't "shift his position." Moving isn't actually referenced.

[lunar2]

yeah, i went back through the first pages. that sucks. since when did WotC get so good at preventing loopholes?

[Kazudo]

The terminology used by Defender's Stance is that the Dwarven Defender can't "shift his position." Moving isn't actually referenced.

I can see it now. The dwarven defender that wasn't: a Sumo Wrestler version of MC Hammer.

"Defensive Stance. Hammer time" *Shuffle ten feet to the left somehow, shuffle ten feet to the right some how, activates Improved Skirmish*

[Vaz]

I actually considered using Monk to get a Training Dummy of the Master for just such. But the Skirmish Damage just wasn't high enough to really make it worth it.

[lunar2]

"but he cannot move from the spot he is defending"

first reference to not moving. can be read 2 ways. 1. can't use a 5 ft. step, move speed, or other method of traveling through squares. 2. can't leave the square, period.

in a way, number 2 is actually more powerful. there is no text saying moving ends the stance, or anything like that. you just can't move, period. that no sells bullrush, awesome blow, swallow whole abilities, if you get engulfed the creature can't move while it has you, falling, and a number of other things.

so either you can cheese your way through the restriction, or defensive stance actually anchors you to a point in space, like an immovable rod. honestly, i think i like version 2 better.

"While in a defensive stance, a defender cannot use skills or abilities that would require him to shift his position, such as Move Silently or Jump."

this is the part that mentions shifting his position. it also prevents the DC 40 tumble check mentioned earlier in the thread. where is that usage of the skill, anyway? it's not in the SRD.

[Amphetryon]

"but he cannot move from the spot he is defending"

first reference to not moving. can be read 2 ways. 1. can't use a 5 ft. step, move speed, or other method of traveling through squares. 2. can't leave the square, period.

in a way, number 2 is actually more powerful. there is no text saying moving ends the stance, or anything like that. you just can't move, period. that no sells bullrush, awesome blow, swallow whole abilities, if you get engulfed the creature can't move while it has you, falling, and a number of other things.

so either you can cheese your way through the restriction, or defensive stance actually anchors you to a point in space, like an immovable rod. honestly, i think i like version 2 better.

"While in a defensive stance, a defender cannot use skills or abilities that would require him to shift his position, such as Move Silently or Jump."

this is the part that mentions shifting his position. it also prevents the DC 40 tumble check mentioned earlier in the thread. where is that usage of the skill, anyway? it's not in the SRD.

Note that "cannot move" is linguistically distinct from "cannot be moved," the latter being your proposed 2nd interpretation's root.

[Kazudo]

Would Dimension Door work, or an ability that works like it? Like the Mountebank's "poof" ability?

[Muggins]

yeah, i went back through the first pages. that sucks. since when did WotC get so good at preventing loopholes?

No, no, you've got it all wrong! They were originally good at preventing loopholes, but then they got lazy. Or stupid. Nobody's really sure which, but the number of mistakes and errata outside of Core certainly is astounding.

I can see it now. The dwarven defender that wasn't: a Sumo Wrestler version of MC Hammer.

"Defensive Stance. Hammer time" *Shuffle ten feet to the left somehow, shuffle ten feet to the right some how, activates Improved Skirmish*

Mobile Defense allows the Dwarven Crusader to take a 5 foot step while maintaining his stance. Obviously, you just need to extend the distance of his 5 foot step. I'm sure there's at least one monster that can do that.

[Vaz]

He has moved from the spot he was defending. So no. That the RAW supports this statement by explicitly creating a rule to allow a 5ft step means that any other interpretation would be undue shenanigans. RAW legal on a shaky reading of it, but fairly obviously against RAI. That shaky reading being that you've not moved, instead you stay still and the spot moves when you move. But just no. Essentially, short of making a DC40 Tumble check, or being a Monk with the training dummy, you're stuck to 5ft moves at DD8.

[Kazudo]

Oh well. Like some handsome, daring rogue said before, sometimes you're given a gourmet ingredient and told to do something interesting with it, sometimes you get a horrible ingredient and have to salvage it, and sometimes you get ham.

This one feels more like Ham than a Durian.

[Muggins]

For a contest about ham, I don't see many large ones. I don't even see anyone chewing the scenery.

Truly, a disgrace of a contest.

[Kazudo]

For a contest about ham, I don't see many large ones. I don't even see anyone chewing the scenery.

Truly, a disgrace of a contest.

Well, without an established campaign setting for Iron Chef it's really hard to tell if it's a world of ham or not. Not that I have a beef with it, really, it's just that it's somewhat rare for someone to get to the meat of the issue in such a well done fashion.

Really, I feel like I'm being grilled about it and, frankly, I don't feel like I should be raked over the coals for chickening out on the challenge.

This hurricane of puns brought to you courtesy of Kazudo's Headache Ointment.

[lunar2]

Note that "cannot move" is linguistically distinct from "cannot be moved," the latter being your proposed 2nd interpretation's root.

that is true. but "cannot be moved" is actually a subset of "cannot move". you can move without an outside influence moving you, but you can't be moved by an outside influence without moving. since no qualifiers were placed on the statement "cannot move from the spot he is defending", it applies to all situations, if the emphasis is placed on "the spot he is defending". if, on the other hand, the emphasis is placed on "move", then he can leave that square, just not through physical movement of his own volition.

essentially, the former means "can't leave this square by any means", while the latter means "can't take any actions defined as movement" such as walking, running, flying, tumbling, jumping, climbing, swimming, stepping, etc.

either a loophole exists, or he's an immovable rod, by a strict reading of the rules. yes, RAI is " cannot [voluntarily] move from the spot he is defending", but that's not what is actually written.

[Seppo87]

Talking about RAI
RAI, the reason this guy can't move is that his muscles are unable to make him walk while mantaining the defensive posture.
This has nothing to do with supernatural effects and is not, in any way, contrary to teleportation effects like Shadow Jaunt. Just saying.

[Tim Proctor]

This one feels more like Ham than a Durian.

IRL I love durian, in IC I love durian. I once had durian ice cream it was awesome. BTW durian (for those unaware) is a super stinky fruit that tastes like a sweet onion custard. It's great stuff if the smell doesn't bother you.

There is nothing stopping someone from teleporting into the middle of the enemy and then going into defensive stance. The key isn't to cheat movement in defensive stance but find the best position and park there, make minor alterations, etc. I've rarely seen D&D battles fought all over the map, they usually are short, quick, bloody,
and in a small location.

I think from a power perspective (out of combat) this build is a good point person (listen, spot, sense motive), trap sense, uncanny dodge, etc. They're the out front and are beefy enough to not die when something goes boom. They need a form of movement that helps with the 20ft issue. In combat they need to find a tactical location and park there so that they help the team, they need to block charges against the mage, flank for the rogue, and do more to help the team.

I don't think that's ham... I think that is potatoes. It supports the team, does a ton of work, and lets other be glory hogs.

[Kazudo]

The bad thing about RAW vs. RAI is that RAW is actually (somewhat) provable. As long as you know every little rule that could be cross-referenced and stacked to find gaps and loopholes in logic, RAW can be proven. RAI is pretty much up to individual interpretation.

Don't get me wrong, RAW generally falls to interpretation too, and some of the cheesiest, worst, most broken things out there that claim RAW verifiability actually have at least one component based on a hopeful intuitive leap which amounts to RAI.

[Amphetryon]

that is true. but "cannot be moved" is actually a subset of "cannot move". you can move without an outside influence moving you, but you can't be moved by an outside influence without moving. since no qualifiers were placed on the statement "cannot move from the spot he is defending", it applies to all situations, if the emphasis is placed on "the spot he is defending". if, on the other hand, the emphasis is placed on "move", then he can leave that square, just not through physical movement of his own volition.

essentially, the former means "can't leave this square by any means", while the latter means "can't take any actions defined as movement" such as walking, running, flying, tumbling, jumping, climbing, swimming, stepping, etc.

either a loophole exists, or he's an immovable rod, by a strict reading of the rules. yes, RAI is " cannot [voluntarily] move from the spot he is defending", but that's not what is actually written.

Quite possibly because the writers (at this early point in the development cycle) didn't think that they needed to write the rules with that extreme level of specificity, either because the playtesters intrinsically gravitated toward the common sense wording (assuming any testing of PrCs happened), or the loophole interpretation simply never occurred to the writers to begin with, because most folks don't consider every possible interpretation of everything they say and/or write, instead understanding their own words rather intrinsically. See also: the lack of explicit rules for what you can/cannot due when your Character is dead. Perhaps they were even convinced that folks would tend to play under RACSD, rather than trying to exploit unusual interpretations of what the verbiage explicitly said or didn't say.

Yes, I'm aware of what one of the developers later said about "Ivory Tower Design." No, I'm not convinced that was anything more than a backported explanation for unintended rules interactions and interpretation.

[Gemini476]

Quite possibly because the writers (at this early point in the development cycle) didn't think that they needed to write the rules with that extreme level of specificity, either because the playtesters intrinsically gravitated toward the common sense wording (assuming any testing of PrCs happened), or the loophole interpretation simply never occurred to the writers to begin with, because most folks don't consider every possible interpretation of everything they say and/or write, instead understanding their own words rather intrinsically. See also: the lack of explicit rules for what you can/cannot due when your Character is dead. Perhaps they were even convinced that folks would tend to play under RACSD, rather than trying to exploit unusual interpretations of what the verbiage explicitly said or didn't say.

Yes, I'm aware of what one of the developers later said about "Ivory Tower Design." No, I'm not convinced that was anything more than a backported explanation for unintended rules interactions and interpretation.

I've heard that they were surprised at how many people strictly followed the rules to the letter in 3E, since that wasn't really people did in AD&D.
I don't have a quote on that, though.

[arkangel111]

So... I was wondering if a couple judges wouldn't mind PMing me their method of judging, I can't find the previous judging criteria. I am not interested in actually judging but am "practicing" for future competitions, besides I have already submitted a build. But i'd like a go at practice judging and see how my thoughts would compare to some of you more established judges.

[Tim Proctor]

So... I was wondering if a couple judges wouldn't mind PMing me their method of judging, I can't find the previous judging criteria. I am not interested in actually judging but am "practicing" for future competitions, besides I have already submitted a build. But i'd like a go at practice judging and see how my thoughts would compare to some of you more established judges.

I'll just post mine (not judging this round).

Base 3.

Originality: +.25 per original (sub)race, class, or template. -(user/entrants) for race, class or template. I don't count originality against SI req'd things.

Power: +avg damage/300, +.05 per Init bonus. +hp/100 > 250, +.01 per AC bonus. +.25 per versatility (stealth, scout, spells, psionics, etc.)

Elegance: +.1 per level in a class (only for classes 5+), -.5 for a 1 lvl dip, -.25 for a 2 lvl dip. -.5 for a FtQ, questioable rules -.1 for a minor infraction.

UotSI: I break into 7 sections and give +.5 if the section is reinforced very well, +.25 if reinforced well, -.25 left alone, -.5 if a feature makes the section futile or worthless (skirmish build with defensive stance).