Iron Chef Optimization Challenge in the Playground LVIII

[Tim Proctor]

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.

I did say IF, but you still need to calculate the levels per encounter in order to understand how it effects the builed. It is also more complicated than that, which one is harder to kill a Vrock or an Erineyes? Isn't the CR system pretty much messed up as it is? To assume that once in a blue moon when a character fights a Vrock instead can't do much is horse hockey. A single CR generally doesn't make a big difference, furthermore when facing a ton of little ****s instead of a big creature 10 dire spiders instead of 8, the difference in power is fairly null.

I use the 3/x example because people do use it Skitters, Orion, and Delhdas, all went the 3/x route... I assume people do this because at 3 levels they usually wont get pinged for dipping, and the gain for power from another dip sometimes isn't enough to warrant points generally. But honestly regardless of motivations and example is hardly wrong when it illustrates the point.

[AvatarVecna]

I did say IF, but you still need to calculate the levels per encounter in order to understand how it effects the builed. It is also more complicated than that, which one is harder to kill a Vrock or an Erineyes? Isn't the CR system pretty much messed up as it is? To assume that once in a blue moon when a character fights a Vrock instead can't do much is horse hockey. A single CR generally doesn't make a big difference, furthermore when facing a ton of little ****s instead of a big creature 10 dire spiders instead of 8, the difference in power is fairly null.

I use the 3/x example because people do use it Skitters, Orion, and Delhdas, all went the 3/x route... I assume people do this because at 3 levels they usually wont get pinged for dipping, and the gain for power from another dip sometimes isn't enough to warrant points generally. But honestly regardless of motivations and example is hardly wrong when it illustrates the point.

You make a good point; the CR system is screwed, and a single CR doesn't make much difference. My issue is that the penalty either makes the DM work harder to work with the screwed up system, or work harder to work around it. It's not an issue for the players: they just see slightly tougher, but still manageable fights, or fights where their character is slightly more effective than they'd otherwise be. But it makes the DM's job harder; the xp system in 4e is one of the things that was done better than in 3.5 IMHO; it made it easier for the DM to build combat encounters. Of course, I also think 4e was too combat-focused, but that's getting awway fom the issue at hand.

Also (small nitpick) Orion didn't solve his issue: he was Factotum 8/Savant 1 and never solved it. The bigger issue was Steven: the 1/1/3 guy who never dealt with his 40% xp penalty.

[Amphetryon]

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?

As I asked the other judges who have come forward, I'll ask you, as well: Do you think that full marks will be possible within your scoring rubric, or will contestants need to choose which deductions they should expect to receive (for example, a given judge might perceive Originality and Elegance to be somewhat antithetical), based on adhering as closely as possible to your criteria?

[Ikeren]

In Zinc Saucier I said I wasn't sure.

For this competition, the answer is "Yes, but it would be to a build that is really perfect." If you go through previous competitions, judges very rarely give out perfect scores, and I'm no different. Is it hypothetically possible? Yes.

[Tim Proctor]

I believe the closest to a perfect build in this game was an average of 4.75 The Dark Fiddler's The Sacred Demon, followed closely by 4.625 w/ The Viscount's Bjorn Ioreksen and Venger's The Rag and Bone Man. All of those were with a single judge, the highest average with multiple judges is rockdeworld's Aelquis Kethten w/ an average of 4.46875. So perfection may not be an obtainable thing when multiple judges are involved, or even a single judge but it looks like it might be, I don't know if we'll ever see it but lets keep trying.

[Amphetryon]

I believe the closest to a perfect build in this game was an average of 4.75 The Dark Fiddler's The Sacred Demon, followed closely by 4.625 w/ The Viscount's Bjorn Ioreksen and Venger's The Rag and Bone Man. All of those were with a single judge, the highest average with multiple judges is rockdeworld's Aelquis Kethten w/ an average of 4.46875. So perfection may not be an obtainable thing when multiple judges are involved, or even a single judge but it looks like it might be, I don't know if we'll ever see it but lets keep trying.

I think there's probably some value in letting contestants - particularly newer contestants - know whether scoring 20 out of 20 (even with a single judge) is as likely as scoring 100% on a school exam, or as unlikely as beating Usain Bolt in a 100m dash.

[Tim Proctor]

I think there's probably some value in letting contestants - particularly newer contestants - know whether scoring 20 out of 20 (even with a single judge) is as likely as scoring 100% on a school exam, or as unlikely as beating Usain Bolt in a 100m dash.

Getting a 20 out of 20 is like having the perfect sound track on a road trip with a Priest, a Rabbi, and a Monk. You can make almost everyone happy most of the time, but it probably wont be perfect. If it's one person you can increase your odds, and for each person above 1 the odds get exponentially more difficult.

[Amphetryon]

Getting a 20 out of 20 is like having the perfect sound track on a road trip with a Priest, a Rabbi, and a Monk. You can make almost everyone happy most of the time, but it probably wont be perfect. If it's one person you can increase your odds, and for each person above 1 the odds get exponentially more difficult.

Given a general 'nerd culture' to D&D, which carries with it more than its fair share of (former) students who were taught to think of 95% as a failure, that's a valuable insight to carry into the competition.

[DeAnno]

Using too many sources may be an Elegance deduction at the judges' discretion, but a book's relative obscurity may not.

With a heavy spellcasting SI, it might be nice if the judges elaborated if they would rather see suggested spell lists dipping over all sorts of sources to pick up the exact optimal configurations, or if trying to keep spell sourcing under tighter control (at slight expense of power) is more advisable.

Basically, are elegance hits for using tons of sources going to happen, or should we go hog wild with spell lists?

[Tim Proctor]

Basically, are elegance hits for using tons of sources going to happen, or should we go hog wild with spell lists?

Elegance hits will happen almost no matter what, just build what you think is a good fun build, if you can keep from book jumping too much you should be fine. Your best bet is to look at previous rounds and how they were judged.

The better question is how many sources are too many. My cutoff is when a source list looks like Stephen King's bibliography, or another unannounced number.

[Piggy Knowles]

I believe the closest to a perfect build in this game was an average of 4.75 The Dark Fiddler's The Sacred Demon, followed closely by 4.625 w/ The Viscount's Bjorn Ioreksen and Venger's The Rag and Bone Man. All of those were with a single judge, the highest average with multiple judges is rockdeworld's Aelquis Kethten w/ an average of 4.46875. So perfection may not be an obtainable thing when multiple judges are involved, or even a single judge but it looks like it might be, I don't know if we'll ever see it but lets keep trying.

If you're counting scores by a single judge, then there are a few others that have hit the 4.75 mark, and there are even a couple of perfect 20s, including TheGildedDuke's Spoons McGee and my own Parsifal the Fool.

That said, it has been almost two years since we've seen a perfect 20, and I'd be curious to know how either build would fare score-wise under more current judging rubrics.

(Don't get me wrong - I think perfect 20s should be rare. But I do think that, as the contest has evolved, judging styles have changed considerably, and I'd like to know how some of the classic IC builds would hold up these days.)

[WhamBamSam]

The prereqs for this are tougher than you'd think. Still, I've got both my build ideas down to a decision between two stubs (so four stubs that I'm deciding between total). I'll go over the feats sometime tonight and come to my final decisions. I've got a good feeling about this round.

[Kazudo]

I have begun to Vizzini myself too hard. I'm just gonna write it up and send it in. After all, I did say I'd be submitting the mediocre build this round.

It's a tough job, but someone has to do it.

[Virdish]

I've got a build in mind that I don't think anyone will see coming but the problem is going to come up with those 5 uses of arcane channel per day. I could always use redacted but that might shift the focus away from the si.

Short version; hoping to enter.

[Tim Proctor]

If you're counting scores by a single judge, then there are a few others that have hit the 4.75 mark, and there are even a couple of perfect 20s, including TheGildedDuke's Spoons McGee and my own Parsifal the Fool.

That said, it has been almost two years since we've seen a perfect 20, and I'd be curious to know how either build would fare score-wise under more current judging rubrics.

(Don't get me wrong - I think perfect 20s should be rare. But I do think that, as the contest has evolved, judging styles have changed considerably, and I'd like to know how some of the classic IC builds would hold up these days.)

Yeah, that's why I mentioned them. I only went down the Overall Order section, and those rounds only had a single judge, that's why I wanted to list the best build with more than one judge. Looking at the build with the best and three judges would be cool, but it's hard for me to search on the google doc.

I have begun to Vizzini myself too hard. I'm just gonna write it up and send it in. After all, I did say I'd be submitting the mediocre build this round.

It's a tough job, but someone has to do it.

Last round I assumed Adlib would be an expected build, but I figured everyone would Vizzini themselves and I'd be in the clear. I was partially right.

[WhamBamSam]

I have begun to Vizzini myself too hard. I'm just gonna write it up and send it in. After all, I did say I'd be submitting the mediocre build this round.

It's a tough job, but someone has to do it.

One of my builds involves things which are bringing out the Vizzini in me, but I'll submit it anyway. Even if other people use it, that build will just drive down their Originality scores so my other build can place higher.

[Kazudo]

Competitive Vizzini-ing. I like your style, WhamBamSam.

[Ikeren]

Since agreeing to judge, I've come up with builds who's originality I actually like and power I'm actually fine with. Oh well. Hopefully others go the same route.

[Tim Proctor]

Since agreeing to judge, I've come up with builds who's originality I actually like and power I'm actually fine with. Oh well. Hopefully others go the same route.

There isn't a shortage of judges this round, if you want to compete I say go for it, do what is most fun.

[Piggy Knowles]

Oddly enough, I have two builds that do more or less the exact same trick, and hit the exact same benchmarks, but which do it in very different ways. Have to give some thought to which one is best.

[KrimsonNekros]

I have begun to Vizzini myself too hard. I'm just gonna write it up and send it in. After all, I did say I'd be submitting the mediocre build this round.

It's a tough job, but someone has to do it.

Am I the only one who says frell it and just builds to the first idea that come into their head?

[AvatarVecna]

Am I the only one who says frell it and just builds to the first idea that come into their head?

I can't speak for everyone, but in the rounds I've played (and the past rounds I've tried to think of what I would've done), due to the anonymity of the contest, the only person I can really compete with is myself. And that's not my saying I'm so awesome, no one else can really compete with me; I'm saying I can't look at my competitor's dishes and think "how can I outdo that?", but I can do that to my own builds. And it can be maddening to fall short of my own standards over and over. I'd never submit the first idea I had, because it was incredibly boring (by my standards) and was weak sauce to boot.

[Ikeren]

There isn't a shortage of judges this round, if you want to compete I say go for it, do what is most fun.

I'll probably just chart a build and submit it with my judging like I sometimes do.

[Kazudo]

I typically do this, however as a perfectionist who's been hit for being inattentive I'm trying to make sure the build is long enough to be tasteful but short enough to be comfortable and just the right color to attract attention while not being flashy enough to upstage anyone of importance.

You know, like an old fashioned men's kimono.

[sakuuya]

The Spellsword's spell list includes "Knowledge (Int)." Should we take that to mean "Knowledge (all skills, taken individually)" like a Wizard has, or in some other way?

[Silva Stormrage]

Am I the only one who says frell it and just builds to the first idea that come into their head?

Well this is my first Iron Chef but thats what I did. I thought of a (Hopefully) unique way of using the SI and just went with it

[WhamBamSam]

Well, one of my builds doesn't work on a closer reading of Spellsword, but it led me to another idea which might still work out. My first idea is plotted out more or less to my satisfaction.

[sideswipe]

hmmmm.... i originally had a perfectly elegant build. literally nothing i could think of would have been able to deduct from it. but its power was extremely low.

now i look at my build and it looks nothing like it.

[Vaz]

That is why I am not a fan of scoring charts going up. I'd like to say "ever", but I'll stick with "before the reveal". It encourages people to build to the judges idea of a build.

Just build what you want.

[WhamBamSam]

That is why I am not a fan of scoring charts going up. I'd like to say "ever", but I'll stick with "before the reveal". It encourages people to build to the judges idea of a build.

Just build what you want.

I do it as a courtesy when I'm planning on judging, because some people like to see it, but I personally don't really look at judging criteria until after the reveal.

EDIT: Scrubbed possible speculation.