Tippy

[Psyren]

FYI - the final version of Eberron is not wholly Keith Baker's creation, WotC picked and chose bits and pieces from the other submissions during their campaign setting competition. For example, the Giant said that the Aerenal Elves and their mummification rituals were his idea and came from his own submission.

[Emperor Tippy]

Well his reading of the magic transparency rule allows Psionic Characters to learn spells (which would require additional text in my opinion).

No, it doesn't. Stop saying this and where did you get the idea in the first place. A Psionic character can get all spells converted into powers and then learn those powers but they can't just learn spells.

My other problem with Tippy is that as time as progressed he's moved from several optimization tricks to using the same set of three or four over and over and over again to solve every problem. There was a point when he would develop newer tricks, or create different optimization ideas, but at this point he just repeats the same tricks to different effect and furthermore his tricks are likely to be shot down even in High OP games.

I have a limited amount of time. When people ask "how can I do this rules legally" then I will generally respond with whatever method is easiest and fastest for me to articulate. Very few of those questions are ones that one of a small list of tricks can't allow to be done relatively easily and are sufficiently interesting for me to go and invest the time to find another way to achieve the desired goal.

More on the magic mantle, it states "You treat magic and psionics as identical" Which to my thinking does not allow you to learn spells, because even if your powers can affect spells, Psions don't gain spells per day, nor do they have spells known. So theoretically they could learn Arcane Powers, but since those don't actually exist they still can't learn Spells barring a reading that would allow them to do so. Which is an entirely reasonable reading. And when one-third of Tippy's current tricks require that then it's a problem, because even a high-OP DM could very easily read it that way.

To the best of my recollection I've never made the claim that the magic mantle allowed a psionic character to learn spells, and no most of what I post doesn't require the magic mantle at all.

On to his other big trick, the Ice Assassin. Or the Aleax Trick. For that trick to work it requires that items with no listed value, have no value. Which could be ruled either way, from the text. And this has been debated both ways either time. So the end result is that it could go either way, with the text as written.

No, the RAW on that issue is clear; items with no listed value are in your spell component pouch. That being said. its also irrelevant because I virtually never say "Cast Ice Assassin". I say "Shapechange into a a Zodar and then use your Wish Supernatural Ability to Wish up a Scroll of Ice Assassin of Whatever the hell you want a copy of". Being a scroll, the material components are included and need not be provided.

The issue is that a good optimizer should (in my opinion) take rules that are unambiguous to optimize. Since ambiguous things could either way regardless of the optimization level of the table in question. And since he depends on a series of tricks that he now repeats using again similarly ambiguous text, there's no guarantee that even at a similarly optimized table to his own they'd work, and that to my thinking is poor optimization since it would fail under similar circumstances with a slightly different DM ruling, and because most of his current repertoire depends on those things, with a few rulings not his way it kills most of his options.

No, most of what I post unambiguously works under the rules as written. Most people also dislike those rules. The stuff I regularly post requires no rules interpretation at all, its also stuff that is often houseruled against because a lot of people dislike things like free Wish's for some reason.

As a note, I'm not trying to restart the rules arguments over the semantics of the rules that I mentioned, I'm merely stating that a rational person could read it either way, and the problem is that that allows for either option being equally likely, and not accounting for that is not really good practice, in my opinion.

The rules that you mentioned aren't things that can be read multiple ways by someone conversant in the English language and rules of the game.

Edit: Which is for example why when you pointed out to me the Spellcasting Class Advancement for creatures with innate spellcasting, I noted that it could be perceived ambiguously and that that should be discussed with the DM prior.

I have no idea what you are referring to. If you want to post a link to whatever thread and/or post you are talking about I'll probably give it another look but I seriously have no idea what you are talking about.

[Snowbluff]

Oh hi, Tippy. How has your day been?

[torrasque666]

We should have gotten Tippy into the guild. Would have been funny to watch that.

[AMFV]

No, it doesn't. Stop saying this and where did you get the idea in the first place. A Psionic character can get all spells converted into powers and then learn those powers but they can't just learn spells.

It was a previous argument where you claimed that even barring a Spell-To-Power Erudite it was possible to learn all spells as Psionic, as I recall. Although I'm not sure what the context was, it was about a year and a half ago.

I have a limited amount of time. When people ask "how can I do this rules legally" then I will generally respond with whatever method is easiest and fastest for me to articulate. Very few of those questions are ones that one of a small list of tricks can't allow to be done relatively easily and are sufficiently interesting for me to go and invest the time to find another way to achieve the desired goal.

Which is a difference in philosophy of optimization overall. I hold that you can't use a limited trick as a solution to all problems particularly ones that are likely to be vetoed.

To the best of my recollection I've never made the claim that the magic mantle allowed a psionic character to learn spells, and no most of what I post doesn't require the magic mantle at all.

Well I retract the statement then, I recollected differently, but as I said it was a year and a half ago, so my recollection may be fuzzy. In any case the point still stands that the tricks that you recommend are not necessarily unambiguous.

No, the RAW on that issue is clear; items with no listed value are in your spell component pouch. That being said. its also irrelevant because I virtually never say "Cast Ice Assassin". I say "Shapechange into a a Zodar and then use your Wish Supernatural Ability to Wish up a Scroll of Ice Assassin of Whatever the hell you want a copy of". Being a scroll, the material components are included and need not be provided.

This is true, but again very likely to be vetoed, because a Zodar is located in Fiend Folio, which is 3.0 rather than 3.5 and is likely to not be permitted for that reason.

No, most of what I post unambiguously works under the rules as written. Most people also dislike those rules. The stuff I regularly post requires no rules interpretation at all, its also stuff that is often houseruled against because a lot of people dislike things like free Wish's for some reason.

And there are a lot of rules that are Ambigious, Zodar are 3.0, a DM could simply defeat the Aleax thing by assigning a value to a piece of an Aleax. The game does not happen in a vacuum, and a trait of good optimization is being aware of what could be ruled one way or another.

The rules that you mentioned aren't things that can be read multiple ways by someone conversant in the English language and rules of the game.

No, the English Language is VERY ambiguous, and rules are not written in a way that lends itself to only one interpretation. A lot of your rulings involve things that are committed from the rules (Spell Components for example) which could be ruled against without violating any rules or require material from 3.0 sources. I'm not saying that you are a poor optimizer, I'm saying I disagree with the philosophy of optimization you use, and the cult of personality that surrounds you on the board. Because again as I've stated, in my opinion (and very much my opinion), that good optimization involves focusing on the things that are unambigious or are likely to be ruled in your favor. The game does not occur in a vacuum, DM rulings are a part of it, and claiming that those are irrelevant is in my opinion is not the best optimization philosophy.

I have no idea what you are referring to. If you want to post a link to whatever thread and/or post you are talking about I'll probably give it another look but I seriously have no idea what you are talking about.

It's not anything you had contributed to, it was a reference to a previous discussion with the poster I was replying to.

Edit: And my post is not intended as an attack against you, but rather your philosophy of optimization. I disagree with it, and with the cult of personality that surrounds you, cults of personality make me very very edgy.

[Brookshw]

Correct. If I recall correctly the Lady was actuall wasting a bunch of power preventing other gods from following Vecna into Sigil.

Ehhhhhh.....sort of.....

Spoiler: Die Vecna Die pg 129

Show

In like
manner, should the Lady reveal herself in her true form
in all its aching majesty to do battle with the waxing
god, the multiverse would come undone like a mobile
whose strings are simultaneously severed. So, she waits.

She kinda had the choice of "get involved and destroy everything" or stay back (a reverse deus ex machina if you will) but Vecna's presence (entry gained by "pre-god" shenanigans) is screwing with the wards. And then of course afterward she goes on to rewrite all of reality to prevent this type of shenanigan ever happening again.

[ImNotTrevor]

No, the English Language is VERY ambiguous, and rules are not written in a way that lends itself to only one interpretation. A lot of your rulings involve things that are committed from the rules (Spell Components for example) which could be ruled against without violating any rules or require material from 3.0 sources. I'm not saying that you are a poor optimizer, I'm saying I disagree with the philosophy of optimization you use, and the cult of personality that surrounds you on the board. Because again as I've stated, in my opinion (and very much my opinion), that good optimization involves focusing on the things that are unambigious or are likely to be ruled in your favor. The game does not occur in a vacuum, DM rulings are a part of it, and claiming that those are irrelevant is in my opinion is not the best optimization philosophy.
of optimization. I disagree with it, and with the cult of personality that surrounds you, cults of personality make me very very edgy.

Optimization at the level Tippy practices is USUALLY (note that qualifier, it's an important one) a theoretical practice in understanding the RAW. It is based on RAW, hard and fast. It is optimization which is occuring in a vacuum because it is usually theoretical rather than practical. Most people never go to the store and buy 300 bottles of soda for 45 cents each, but we still do math problems about it when we're kids. This isn't done so that we know what to do when that situation actually occurs. It is a theoretical application of the RAW of math. A totally bizarre and highly unlikely situation, but the math, when done correctly, will still be sound.

As far as I know, Tippy plays with a group that allows these shenanigans whole-heartedly. This level of optimization is normal for his group of players, and therefore he has gotten a lot of mileage out of it.

I myself don't know how to optimize very well, but I like reading the crazy optimization hijinks one can get up to. It is amusing, and gives a general idea of how to do fun builds. (I will never walk into a store and buy 300 bottles of soda for 45 cents each, but I still know how to apply multiplication to my purchasing habits.)

TL;DR
It is pointless to say that Tippy's brand of Optimization is bad because it assumes a vacuum, when that assumption is usually considered to be a given and most of these builds aren't being lauded as things you should totally try in normal play, but as demonstrations of ways to use the RAW in amusing and delightfully destructive ways.

EDIT: Tippy is kinda like Mythbusters. There is science and numbers and such, but you only watch for the explosions. (And please don't try this at home.)

[AMFV]

Optimization at the level Tippy practices is USUALLY (note that qualifier, it's an important one) a theoretical practice in understanding the RAW. It is based on RAW, hard and fast. It is optimization which is occuring in a vacuum because it is usually theoretical rather than practical. Most people never go to the store and buy 300 bottles of soda for 45 cents each, but we still do math problems about it when we're kids. This isn't done so that we know what to do when that situation actually occurs. It is a theoretical application of the RAW of math. A totally bizarre and highly unlikely situation, but the math, when done correctly, will still be sound.

As far as I know, Tippy plays with a group that allows these shenanigans whole-heartedly. This level of optimization is normal for his group of players, and therefore he has gotten a lot of mileage out of it.

I myself don't know how to optimize very well, but I like reading the crazy optimization hijinks one can get up to. It is amusing, and gives a general idea of how to do fun builds. (I will never walk into a store and buy 300 bottles of soda for 45 cents each, but I still know how to apply multiplication to my purchasing habits.)

TL;DR
It is pointless to say that Tippy's brand of Optimization is bad because it assumes a vacuum, when that assumption is usually considered to be a given and most of these builds aren't being lauded as things you should totally try in normal play, but as demonstrations of ways to use the RAW in amusing and delightfully destructive ways.

My issue is not so much with the level of his optimization. But that he claims that his RAW interpretations are entirely unambiguous. I'm fine with high-OP stuff, but I'm very aware that even in a high-OP environment one should be aware of rules that could be interpreted multiple ways.

[Emperor Tippy]

It was a previous argument where you claimed that even barring a Spell-To-Power Erudite it was possible to learn all spells as Psionic, as I recall. Although I'm not sure what the context was, it was about a year and a half ago.

...that seems odd. I mean maybe if you squint and look at the rules from a really odd angle it might theoretically work in some fashion but I seriously question whether I ever made that claim because it really doesn't seem like one that I would make.

Which is a difference in philosophy of optimization overall. I hold that you can't use a limited trick as a solution to all problems particularly ones that are likely to be vetoed.

If people want things that work with their groups houserules then they should post those houserules. And if people are asking how to do absurd things then they should be satisfied with absurd answers.

This is true, but again very likely to be vetoed, because a Zodar is located in Fiend Folio, which is 3.0 rather than 3.5 and is likely to not be permitted for that reason.

And I fundamentally don't care. The straight 3.5 method would be "Gate in a Solar for a blood sample and then use that as the component for Ice Assassin before then using your new Solar as a Wish engine to produce all of the other Ice Assassin's that you want."

Fiend Folio is a valid RAW source for 3.5. That a lot of people don't allow or use it is not something that I care about unless they are specifically asking how to do something and have stated that only certain sources are allowed (and what those sources are).

And there are a lot of rules that are Ambigious, Zodar are 3.0,

All 3.0 is RAW for 3.5 unless something in 3.5 overrides the 3.0 source, nothing does that for the Zodar in specific or Fiend Folio in general.

a DM could simply defeat the Aleax thing by assigning a value to a piece of an Aleax. The game does not happen in a vacuum, and a trait of good optimization is being aware of what could be ruled one way or another.

House Rules. Otherwise known as things that I do not care about when talking about optimization on these forums. And again, whether the DM houserules the material component or not is irrelevant because you don't cast the spell directly and instead use a method that bypasses material components entirely.

No, the English Language is VERY ambiguous, and rules are not written in a way that lends itself to only one interpretation. A lot of your rulings involve things that are committed from the rules (Spell Components for example) which could be ruled against without violating any rules or require material from 3.0 sources. I'm not saying that you are a poor optimizer, I'm saying I disagree with the philosophy of optimization you use, and the cult of personality that surrounds you on the board. Because again as I've stated, in my opinion (and very much my opinion), that good optimization involves focusing on the things that are unambigious or are likely to be ruled in your favor. The game does not occur in a vacuum, DM rulings are a part of it, and claiming that those are irrelevant is in my opinion is not the best optimization philosophy.

Everything involving spell components is clear cut rules as written. Seriously, there is nothing in any of it that is ambiguously worded or open to interpretation. As for the rest, every DM is different and therefore the DM must be excluded from optimization discussions to the greatest extent possible.

It's not anything you had contributed to, it was a reference to a previous discussion with the poster I was replying to.

So you are going after me for what someone else claimed that I said with no evidence that I actually said it in the first place?

[Vaz]

As much as I love other settings, especially Warhammer, Fanboyism annoys me. I'd probably rate WHF as one of the better settings, with Battle Magics higher level abilities capable of dragging a comet out of the heavens, or taking the form of a Dragon.

These are 6th level spells at best. That spacebattles thread is hilarious. Epic Level Wu Jen 16/Archmage 5 outclasses anything Mercer could bring. Chaining uses of Body Outside Body gets them NI DC and CL invisibility before Teleporting Through Time (Contingent) before destroying Mercers family line and whoever/whatever created his virus before it was developed.

Idiocy at its finest.

[AMFV]

So you are going after me for what someone else claimed that I said with no evidence that I actually said it in the first place?

I'm not going to discuss the other statements, I'm just going to point out there is often ambiguity in things that may appear clear cut to somebody that is reading the rules. I'm not even disagreeing with all of your interpretations, only pointing out that they aren't unambiguous, and that the rules are not always perfectly concise.

I will however address this, I wasn't going after you for that statement, that was a completely unrelated conversation, related to a discussion I'd had with the other optimizer, where I wound up interpreting something one way and realized later that it was ambiguous, after others had posted. That's the key here, if somebody posts something different, they may not be wrong, they may have a difference of interpretation, once you've realized that such can exist, then it's wise to point the ambiguity when the trick is presented, as many do.

Again, I don't mind most of your optimization on a personal note. But Tippy=Win, bothers me, it's a cult of personality that I think is unfounded, and people asked for their opinion, which I stated, I don't agree with your philosophy of optimization, and that is largely a matter of taste.

[Vaz]

Which you backed up with false allegations to be fair.

[Psyren]

This is true, but again very likely to be vetoed, because a Zodar is located in Fiend Folio, which is 3.0 rather than 3.5 and is likely to not be permitted for that reason.

And there are a lot of rules that are Ambigious, Zodar are 3.0, a DM could simply defeat the Aleax thing by assigning a value to a piece of an Aleax. The game does not happen in a vacuum, and a trait of good optimization is being aware of what could be ruled one way or another.

Point of order here - Fiend Folio was officially updated to 3.5 and Zodar retains its Su Wish. It's not like BoVD where the DM does have to go in and individually approve this or that.

Aleax abuse is another matter, I tend to disregard that too since I consider merging with an Aleax or getting it to serve you to be another way of defeating it.

[Rubik]

If you create your own Ice Assassin aleax, you can always command it to be the one who manifests Fusion and then turns over control to you. Since the aleax is the one who "won," there's no chance that it could possibly be considered "defeated."

[Psyren]

If you create your own Ice Assassin aleax, you can always command it to be the one who manifests Fusion and then turns over control to you. Since the aleax is the one who "won," there's no chance that it could possibly be considered "defeated."

turns over control to you

You pretty much won at that point since it is quite literally surrendering.

[ryu]

---

You pretty much won at that point since it is quite literally surrendering.

Just fuse with the ice assassin of said aleax then murder the original aleax. The ice assassin has no clause for going away when the original dies last I checked.

[ImNotTrevor]

I'm not going to discuss the other statements, I'm just going to point out there is often ambiguity in things that may appear clear cut to somebody that is reading the rules. I'm not even disagreeing with all of your interpretations, only pointing out that they aren't unambiguous, and that the rules are not always perfectly concise.

Well...I just want to test one of these:

Spell Component Pouch

A spellcaster with a spell component pouch is assumed to have all the material components and focuses needed for spellcasting, except for those components that have a specific cost, divine focuses, and focuses that wouldn’t fit in a pouch.

If it is a spell component that doesn't have a specific cost, it is considered to be in the pouch. Yes. Even then. ALL material components. (For strict RAW, very unambiguous.)
Divine Focuses aren't in the pouch. (Yeah but what if....nope. Divine Focuses aren't in the pouch.)
Focuses that wouldn't fit in a pouch. (The most ambiguous, since a Pouch is just defined as, more often than not, "A small bag." But that doesn't do jack to the component issue.)
If you have a spell component pouch, you have the components you need. (Provided they don't have a specified cost via RAW.)

Given RAW in a vacuum, this is not ambiguous.

I'll grant to you that some rules are VERY ambiguous or nonexistant, (Such as what happens if a Mordenkaiden's Magnificent Mansion is dispelled or otherwise abruptly ends with occupants inside) but that if a persuasive argument can be given to a particular manner of interpretation, or if the optimization uses qualifier such as "which can be interpreted to mean..." then it still stands.

I figure that if the optimizer goes out of their way to use the least ambiguous versions of the rules to accomplish their optimization, then it is generally nitpicking or complaining to try and dig into the somewhat ambiguous notions to try and disprove it or disprove the notion of optimizing in said manner. It smacks of something...not entirely wholesome and unlikely to be based on goodwill or humility. Not sure what, though.

All in all, I think that people who have a big problem with someone on an INTERNET FORUM being popular among that forums users, even if the forumites show an unusual level of passion...are just kinda...lame. Why do you care? It's part of the fun. Let them pretend to be fanatical tippy-worshippers while they type things into text boxes and talk about D&D. It doesn't make the world a worse place, and it certainly doesn't affect your life. Chuckle. Roll your eyes. Appreciate the humor and inherent ludicrousness of such shenanigans and carry on with your day. I'm not popular on the forum. I don't really want to be. I'm just some guy who posts here for the lulz. Tippy's existence and fanbase do me no harm, nor are they a great boon...beyond being rather entertaining. The End.

[Rubik]

You pretty much won at that point since it is quite literally surrendering.

Nah. It's a willing participant and as such is no more defeated than a friend that does the same thing.

[Sartharina]

What do mean by "high level," because I took sophomore-level multivariable and it was nothing special.

What I mean is I struggled through College Algebra, and anyone who can figure out Trigonometry must be some sort of math wizard-god and I'd rather not be insulted just because I can't figure out how sines and tangents work no matter how many condescending acronyms are tossed at me.

Likewise, most the 'basic optimization' stuff Tippy and others here describe is obscenely overpowered, abusive munchkinry that shouldn't be allowed to work because what the heck is this nonsense?

[Rubik]

Likewise, most the 'basic optimization' stuff Tippy and others here describe is obscenely overpowered, abusive munchkinry that shouldn't be allowed to work because what the heck is this nonsense?

How is using the rules as they're written "cheating"?

That's like saying that you cheated by using your Get Out of Jail Free card when you were sent to jail in Monopoly.

[Psyren]

Nah. It's a willing participant and as such is no more defeated than a friend that does the same thing.

An aleax is a special case because it is created from birth to be antagonistic to you. Any success at making it friendly would defeat it.

But the more interesting problem is how you plan to get a hold of one without a deity getting involved, since they don't exist if there are no deities. If you can manipulate a deity into making one for you, why do you even need the Aleax?

[Rubik]

An aleax is a special case because it is created from birth to be antagonistic to you. Any success at making it friendly would defeat it.

Ice Assassin. It's subservient from "birth."

But the more interesting problem is how you plan to get a hold of one without a deity getting involved, since they don't exist if there are no deities. If you can manipulate a deity into making one for you, why do you even need the Aleax?

Again, Ice Assassin. As Emperor Tippy (may His name be praised in a thousand universes) pointed out, it's not horribly difficult to make one yourself. Just use Eschew Materials when you cast it, or use a Su Wish to nab a scroll thereof.

[ryu]

An aleax is a special case because it is created from birth to be antagonistic to you. Any success at making it friendly would defeat it.

But the more interesting problem is how you plan to get a hold of one without a deity getting involved, since they don't exist if there are no deities. If you can manipulate a deity into making one for you, why do you even need the Aleax?

Because once you've aleax fused you've become absolutely immune to all things in the game including the wrath of other deities? High level optimization by way of immunity.

[Sartharina]

How is using the rules as they're written "cheating"?

That's like saying that you cheated by using your Get Out of Jail Free card when you were sent to jail in Monopoly.

The rules as they are written are meant to be guidelines, not unbreakable laws! D&D is a Role-Playing game, not a Board Game.

[(Un)Inspired]

The rules as they are written are meant to be guidelines, not unbreakable laws! D&D is a Role-Playing game, not a Board Game.

Does every thread on this forum dissolve into people telling optimizers they're playing the game wrong these days?

[Rubik]

The rules as they are written are meant to be guidelines, not unbreakable laws! D&D is a Role-Playing game, not a Board Game.

That's what Theoretical Optimization is for. With the exceptions of games that explicitly use T.O. as a baseline, said T.O. is specifically for stretching the rules as far as they'd go to see what you can get away with.

It's not for standard D&D games, as is often pointed out. The fact that Tippy uses T.O. in his games is his group's business, and decrying him for it just makes people seem petty and incredibly rude.

[torrasque666]

Does every thread on this forum dissolve into people telling optimizers they're playing the game wrong these days?

Not this again..... I thought we were done and the Guild was going to go about our business in obscurity.

[ImNotTrevor]

The rules as they are written are meant to be guidelines, not unbreakable laws! D&D is a Role-Playing game, not a Board Game.

1. Oh. Hi there, WoTC. Didn't see you there deciding whether rules are Rules or Guidelines. Thanks for the clarification, glad to know you guys still care.

2. Some people like to use the guidelines as unbreakable rules. That's how they play the game. That's their perogative.

3. Most hardcore optimization is theoretical rather than practical. It's an exploration of "Wacky stuff you can do without technically breaking the rules" rather than "What to do at your next session!"

It's just for fun. It is a game. People play it how they want to. No need to use exclamation marks and get your feathers ruffled. It's just a game.

[Psyren]

Ice Assassin. It's subservient from "birth."

Again, Ice Assassin. As Emperor Tippy (may His name be praised in a thousand universes) pointed out, it's not horribly difficult to make one yourself. Just use Eschew Materials when you cast it, or use a Su Wish to nab a scroll thereof.

The weakness of Ice Assassin in this context is that it copies the subject creature exactly - including its purpose to destroy you, in the case of an aleax. This creates another Ice Assassin unstoppable force/immovable object paradox.

Because once you've aleax fused you've become absolutely immune to all things in the game including the wrath of other deities? High level optimization by way of immunity.

You should probably know that nothing in the game is actually beyond the power of deities by RAW:

"What happens when a deity casts miracle? Rather than imploring another deity to perform some task, the deity simply draws from its own divine power. It pays the experience point cost with hardly a second thought, and creates the effect it desires."

[Rubik]

The weakness of Ice Assassin in this context is that it copies the subject creature exactly - including its purpose to destroy you, in the case of an aleax. This creates another Ice Assassin unstoppable force/immovable object paradox.

Its purpose is to destroy you, but it's under your command. So command it to not destroy you, and you won't have that problem.

You should probably know that nothing in the game is actually beyond the power of deities by RAW:

Tell that to the Elder Evils, since they seem to be able to curbstomp gods quite easily.

Gods really aren't that tough. Killing them is fairly easy, really -- at least, if you know what you're doing. They die all the time, in fact, by WotC's own admission.