Iron Chef Optimization Challenge in the Playground LVIII

[OMG PONIES]

Seriously, how hard is it to say, "at the start of his/her/its adventuring career, he took out a kobold with a lucky swing of his quarterstaff"?

Razzinfrazzin speculation, there goes my whole build for Quarterstaff Quincy!

Also, I have no idea what to do with this ingredient. It's just too good.

I, on the other hand, just got hit by the Inspiration Stick. I think I've got something simmering .

I like to over think things when it comes to our judges because while they are fair, sometimes it feels like nitpicking lol.

As someone who provided the textbook definition of overthinking by reading and creating a spreadsheet to track every judge's score over all 57 previous rounds we've had, here is the scholarly conclusion of all my work:

Opinions and scores will vary by judge. Just have fun building something you're proud of.

That's my patented recipe for Iron Chef Success™. Of course, with a little dash of nutmeg. Oh no, now they know the secret to my madness brilliance!

And to all the judges of the last round I hope you know that I only did a dispute to add amusement while we waited. No hard feelings I hope. By the way who ate the ettin

I'm glad it was amusing, but you may want to preface something like that with "This is not a dispute" in the future. Otherwise, the judges may take it in a more serious light than you intended. Also, I now realize where you got the inspiration to call me an ettin. I'm just glad it was Playground-based and not body-odor-based. *sniff* Right?

[dysprosium]

Razzinfrazzin speculation, there goes my whole build for Quarterstaff Quincy!

Wait. You too?

Opinions and scores will vary by judge. Just have fun building something you're proud of.

Exactly this. There is no way to satisfy every possible judges' criteria. What one judge likes, another could despise.

[Kuulvheysoon]

Okay I think I will actually try to make a build for this once. Two questions though.

One: Is there someone I could forward my finished draft to to make sure I have the formatting right? I would hate to get marked down for something like that.

Toss it my way and I can check it out for you.

[AvatarVecna]

It would probably be safe to assume a CR appropriate encounter. That said, if you feel that fulfilling requirements only by the merest technicalities should warrant full marks, you might be disappointed with how a judge decides to score. Then again, depending on how it was done, the humor of the situation could be fantastic.

So...I should save the cockroach crusher for a joke entry. Got it!

[Tim Proctor]

One thing I learned during my time in Kitchen Stadium is that if you have an ingredient and there is a part to it, you're better off building on it rather than checking a box.

If you go through Ponies' sheets you'll see I had some horrible builds that scored super low, and then I decided that I was going to judge and I decided that I was going to judge the UotSI by aspects of the SI. When I did that when I was building, trying to expand on everything the SI does, I scored a lot higher almost universally. If you can take a SI and break it down thematically and mechanically and build on it, you'll be better off than going with a power build and throwing the SI in.

[sideswipe]

One thing I learned during my time in Kitchen Stadium is that if you have an ingredient and there is a part to it, you're better off building on it rather than checking a box.

If you go through Ponies' sheets you'll see I had some horrible builds that scored super low, and then I decided that I was going to judge and I decided that I was going to judge the UotSI by aspects of the SI. When I did that when I was building, trying to expand on everything the SI does, I scored a lot higher almost universally. If you can take a SI and break it down thematically and mechanically and build on it, you'll be better off than going with a power build and throwing the SI in.

thanks for the tip. i was going along those lines anyway, i have classes, feats and race... now just the easy part of spells and items

[Kazudo]

Well I got an idea figured out. It's not amazing, it's probably not even good, but I'll submit it to have my name in the hat.

[dantiesilva]

thanks for the tip. i was going along those lines anyway, i have classes, feats and race... now just the easy part of spells and items

Word of advice, do not go all out on items, you will lose points if it seems you rely on them. How I lost many points in this stadium before.

[sideswipe]

question about how we present it. do we need to spend the wealth by level each level and show it? or just pick a few levels (for example every 5) to show what equipment you have?

same with spells, do we need to show them breakdown level by level or just at the picked levels? i know that if we use a spontaneous caster with set spells known we have to show how many we have at each level but not for wizards and things. but what about the actual spells?

Word of advice, do not go all out on items, you will lose points if it seems you rely on them. How I lost many points in this stadium before.

thanks, i will most probably for the build i have only be using items to boost stats and other passive things, not for a ton of activated abilities.

[WhamBamSam]

One thing I learned during my time in Kitchen Stadium is that if you have an ingredient and there is a part to it, you're better off building on it rather than checking a box.

If you go through Ponies' sheets you'll see I had some horrible builds that scored super low, and then I decided that I was going to judge and I decided that I was going to judge the UotSI by aspects of the SI. When I did that when I was building, trying to expand on everything the SI does, I scored a lot higher almost universally. If you can take a SI and break it down thematically and mechanically and build on it, you'll be better off than going with a power build and throwing the SI in.

Yeah. Both of my medaling entries used every part of the buffalo.

On a tangentially related note, I'm finding that various ideas that I had for this SI's abilities are diverging into different builds. I may have to double submit this round.

EDIT: You should only have a small list of items if you list any at all. I haven't been burned for item reliance the way others have, but I've seen it happen. Don't list out your whole WBL in gory detail.

[Amphetryon]

question about how we present it. do we need to spend the wealth by level each level and show it? or just pick a few levels (for example every 5) to show what equipment you have?

same with spells, do we need to show them breakdown level by level or just at the picked levels? i know that if we use a spontaneous caster with set spells known we have to show how many we have at each level but not for wizards and things. but what about the actual spells?

Emphasis on items is generally to your detriment, as it gives the impression that the items are the thing that makes your build go, rather than the SI, Skills, Feats, and other features less dependent upon the largess of a particular DM.

As evidenced by scores in the last round, indication of your chosen spells is often useful, giving the judges a better idea of how your build uses that particular Class feature to perform the role(s) you've envisioned.

[Deadline]

question about how we present it. do we need to spend the wealth by level each level and show it? or just pick a few levels (for example every 5) to show what equipment you have?

Actually, unless the equipment is somehow part of a new and groundbreaking trick, you're better off not including equipment at all.

same with spells, do we need to show them breakdown level by level or just at the picked levels? i know that if we use a spontaneous caster with set spells known we have to show how many we have at each level but not for wizards and things. but what about the actual spells?

Yes, spells known are going to be important. Specifically, showing what spells you have and why they enhance your build will be important.

[sideswipe]

just looked through a few of the last rounds entries and none have any items. so i can skip that that just saved me 2+ hours of searching books lol

well just skills and spells then. and what type of way are we meant to calculate hit points? the min max method?

[Tim Proctor]

just looked through a few of the last rounds entries and none have any items. so i can skip that that just saved me 2+ hours of searching books lol

well just skills and spells then. and what type of way are we meant to calculate hit points? the min max method?

Don't, just use the HD + Con bonus and leave it as a formula, or say max then average, lots of options and never seen anyone complain about any of them.

[Kazudo]

Don't, just use the HD + Con bonus and leave it as a formula, or say max then average, lots of options and never seen anyone complain about any of them.

Ah yes. Round LVIII. When the main sticking point was actually HP.

[DeAnno]

I wasn't able to find if this Iron Chef uses the "middle of level 20" or "bottom of level 20" setup with regards to XP. Do builds have any slush XP theoretically available for LA Buyoff, Necropolitan, crafting, XP Cost-ing spells, and so on?

[Kazudo]

THAT is actually a pretty major sticking point with some judges. Your BEST ABSOLUTE BET to avoid Elegance penalties is NOT to vary from the 190k EXP or so that you get for attaining 20th level. Including things like Necropolitan, LA Buyoff, Item Crafting, multiclass penalties, and XP spells.

Then, if they're still important to the build but not critical enough to cause it to fall apart, mention them in some kind of adaptations section. "If LA buyoff is allowed" "If you DO end up getting to 20th even after losing a level for necropolitan..." "Once you've filled in the XP gap for these spells and magic items should your DM allow..." etc.

[Deadline]

I wasn't able to find if this Iron Chef uses the "middle of level 20" or "bottom of level 20" setup with regards to XP. Do builds have any slush XP theoretically available for LA Buyoff, Necropolitan, crafting, XP Cost-ing spells, and so on?

As I understand it, you have just enough XP to get to level 20, and no more. So things like multiclass xp penalties can be a problem. And LA Buyoff is likely to get you a deduction in elegance. So you'll see builds that will simply eat the LA if that's what they want to take (and most of them will include a small section stating that if LA buyoff is allowed, they would take x, y, and z).

It certainly keeps things interesting.

[Secret Bard]

Oh wow, I had forgotten all about the multiclass xp penalty (my group just ignores that rule). I might have to change a few things.

[KrimsonNekros]

Build is coming along nicely for my main entry. Also got a rather humorous Idea involving a [redacted] that [redacted] and [redacted].

[Ikeren]

A fair number of judges only give a minor elegance penalty for multiclass exp penalty, since it's a pretty rarely used rule. On the other hand, I have seen a judge eviscerate builds for it, too, so...ymmv.

I think I'll be judging this, as all my builds come up too classic. I've got a couple sketches, but I don't like them.

Originality: 5 points: Of these 5 points, approximately half will be in relation to other builds in the competition, and approximately half will be in relation to the canon of optimization.

But a challenge here is that sometimes original things will be less powerful; sometimes the best known options are best known because they are powerful. Look for balance here, or a way to put in a particularly clever or original twist on a traditional option.

Power: 5 points, of which, half the score is raw power and half the score is versatility. Raw power more or less follows tiers, with 2.5 = Tier 1, 2.0 = Tier 2, 1.5 = Tier 3, 1.0 = Tier 4, and 0.5 = Tier 5 or lower, with exceptions for things that can clearly remove enemy NPC's at a rate of 1+/round. Versatility applies to in combat options (melee, ranged, casting, defense, offenses) and out of combat (skills, social encounter spells, crafting, transport, movement minigames). A character with a lot of power in one trick (an uber-charger, say) would score high for raw power (2.0) but lower for versatility (0.5 or 1) for a score of 2.5 or 3.0/5.

This competition will have the power scores shifted slightly lower; it will be slightly harder to get maximum scores on power, as the default "good" power option involves 7+ level arcane spells and 15+ BAB. (See my judging of the Mystic Theurge + Dragons Junkyard wars for similar "base power shifting")

Elegance: Mostly I'm looking for debated rulings, excessive dipping (2 or 3 dips is expected. 4+, less so), dropping casting progressions part of the way through, dropping prestige classes or base classes at atypical points, using variant rules or systems together (impulse boots to qualify for evasion), and exceptionally common cheese. Expect me to be more lenient in this category than the average judge

Use of Secret Ingredient: 5 points: Do you maximize use of the prestige class in question? Do you take advantage of each and every ability and the chasis, and find ways to augment those abilities to the max? Or is the prestige class tacked on, or just used for chasis augments and not special abilities?

[Gemini476]

Do note that multiclass XP penalty (-20% XP per offending class) is offset once you get down a level below the APL. You'll stabilize somewhere around one level lower than the rest of the party, I think. You might jump up and down a bit, but you won't really lose more than one level when compared to straight-classed characters past level five.

I'm currently working on a table, but it seems like you're only an encounter or two behind the rest of the party. It's almost like you had LA+1, in a way.

[AvatarVecna]

Do note that multiclass XP penalty (-20% XP per offending class) is offset once you get down a level below the APL. You'll stabilize somewhere around one level lower than the rest of the party, I think. You might jump up and down a bit, but you won't really lose more than one level when compared to straight-classed characters past level five.

I'm currently working on a table, but it seems like you're only an encounter or two behind the rest of the party. It's almost like you had LA+1, in a way.

The problem with multiclass penalty is that either the player whose character has it is going to be less effective (and will probably have less fun due to not shining as bright as everone else), or the DM has to build the encounters to make them more effective than normal; that means more work for the DM, and all that work is to ensure that the less impressive party member is consistently getting more time to shine than the rest.

[Vaz]

A Wizard 7 is better than Fighter 8. Effective is malleable. LA hurts melee more than CharOP would have you believe. You're a bruiser. Losing out on 2d12+10 HP is basically making you more susceptible to death one full attack earlier against basic mooks.

When a Caster can't reach 9th level spells due to LA it's like hearing a Premiership footballer whinge that they don't get paid enough to afford the latest model of Lamborghini.

[AvatarVecna]

A Wizard 7 is better than Fighter 8. Effective is malleable. LA hurts melee more than CharOP would have you believe. You're a bruiser. Losing out on 2d12+10 HP is basically making you more susceptible to death one full attack earlier against basic mooks.

When a Caster can't reach 9th level spells due to LA it's like hearing a Premiership footballer whinge that they don't get paid enough to afford the latest model of Lamborghini.

Is this about the multiclass penalty thing? If so, you're right, Wizard 7 is better than Fighter 8, but that's not what would happen.

If you were playing a Wizard 6, would you multiclass, or keep going Wizard? You'd only take another class if it was a wizard PrC you'd been aiming for, and multiclass penalty doesn't come up for you.

On the other hand, if you're a Fighter 6, you'd probably dip something to become more effective: Paladin for the Cha to saves, Barbarian for the rage, Rogue for Sneak Attack, etc. But then, in exchange for trying to make your brute more effective, you've gained a multiclass penalty.

Multiclass penalty is more likely to come up when someone tries to make a solid combat build, not a solid caster build, and that's because a straight caster is solid enough to not need a PrC or a dip. And as you mentioned, a warrior losing a level is a more significant hit to power than a caster losing a level.

[Amphetryon]

Is this about the multiclass penalty thing? If so, you're right, Wizard 7 is better than Fighter 8, but that's not what would happen.

If you were playing a Wizard 6, would you multiclass, or keep going Wizard? You'd only take another class if it was a wizard PrC you'd been aiming for, and multiclass penalty doesn't come up for you.

On the other hand, if you're a Fighter 6, you'd probably dip something to become more effective: Paladin for the Cha to saves, Barbarian for the rage, Rogue for Sneak Attack, etc. But then, in exchange for trying to make your brute more effective, you've gained a multiclass penalty.

Multiclass penalty is more likely to come up when someone tries to make a solid combat build, not a solid caster build, and that's because a straight caster is solid enough to not need a PrC or a dip. And as you mentioned, a warrior losing a level is a more significant hit to power than a caster losing a level.

There are plenty of Arcane Casting PrCs in 3.5 that are easiest to get into via a small dip into a different Base Class; in some of those cases, multiclass penalties would apply unless your FC came in to play or you chose your build order very carefully.

[Vaz]

Okay, Wizard 7/Fighter 1 versus Fighter 10/Barbarian 6/Paladin 4 etc. The point was raised it was similar to LA - which it is. You're a level behind where everyone else is. But whereas a Wizard can still make their Battlefield Controls, Summons, Polymorphs or whatnot. A Fighter not progressing their attack output being the only thing they can do seriously limits their power when monsters otherwise still scale.

Edit - I have a feeling that now Multiclass penalties will be very heavily checked over, if not penalised now.

[AvatarVecna]

Okay, Wizard 7/Fighter 1 versus Fighter 10/Barbarian 6/Paladin 4 etc. The point was raised it was similar to LA - which it is. You're a level behind where everyone else is. But whereas a Wizard can still make their Battlefield Controls, Summons, Polymorphs or whatnot. A Fighter not progressing their attack output being the only thing they can do seriously limits their power when monsters otherwise still scale.

Edit - I have a feeling that now Multiclass penalties will be very heavily checked over, if not penalised now.

Your point was that casters lose less from multiclassing than warriors. I'm not disagreeing with your point, because you're right. I'm saying it's worse than casters losing less. My point was that casters have less reason to multiclass than warriors.

[Tim Proctor]

Okay, Wizard 7/Fighter 1 versus Fighter 10/Barbarian 6/Paladin 4 etc. The point was raised it was similar to LA - which it is. You're a level behind where everyone else is. But whereas a Wizard can still make their Battlefield Controls, Summons, Polymorphs or whatnot. A Fighter not progressing their attack output being the only thing they can do seriously limits their power when monsters otherwise still scale.

Edit - I have a feeling that now Multiclass penalties will be very heavily checked over, if not penalised now.

We had this conversation last round, and it takes some math but if you break down the encounters and exp you can calculate how it effects builds and the level 4 penalty example (a 3/1 split) only costs a few fights in fact 2 more on most levels, if the penalty is resolved (3/2) then it only means for an additional fight per level for a few levels, but 5 fights and it's as if it never happened.

[AvatarVecna]

We had this conversation last round, and it takes some math but if you break down the encounters and exp you can calculate how it effects builds and the level 4 penalty example (a 3/1 split) only costs a few fights in fact 2 more on most levels, if the penalty is resolved (3/2) then it only means for an additional fight per level for a few levels, but 5 fights and it's as if it never happened.

That's only if it gets solved, and that's only if it's the easiest example to solve. The 8th level character who dips is in for a long slog to 15th level. The 3/1 who becomes a 4/1 and never fixes it still has to deal with the penalty. These examples, which are more common than the "3/1 to 3/2 and forever after solved" character you're holding up as the norm, still cause issues for whatever group they play in, unless the DM caves and says there's no multiclass penalties.