Villainous Competition XX: Elder Evil

[Telonius]

... and, I may have found a work-around for mine. We'll have to see, but I may put it together yet.

[remetagross]

I'll try to go for it as well :)

[GrayDeath]

And here goes my Idea of a Sign increasing everybodies muscle mass until they explode.

Phew....damn. ^^
Jokes aside,that did put a dampener on my plan, back to the drawing board it is then.

[danielxcutter]

And here goes my Idea of a Sign increasing everybodies muscle mass until they explode.

Phew....damn. ^^
Jokes aside,that did put a dampener on my plan, back to the drawing board it is then.

My idea involved increasing the ego scores of symbionts as well as the odds of meeting one. Drat.

[Technetium43]

So, I know we can't like, make up new signs, but are we allowed to refluff existing ones? I can't really think of an example that doesn't like, directly spoil my build, but as long as the mechanical effects are the same can we add our own sort of fluff to it? Just to match up better with a wider potential range of Elder Evils, as the ones in the book are, by and large, tailored to the existing Elder Evils which only cover a small number of themes.

[Thurbane]

So, I know we can't like, make up new signs, but are we allowed to refluff existing ones? I can't really think of an example that doesn't like, directly spoil my build, but as long as the mechanical effects are the same can we add our own sort of fluff to it? Just to match up better with a wider potential range of Elder Evils, as the ones in the book are, by and large, tailored to the existing Elder Evils which only cover a small number of themes.

Generally speaking, re-fluffing is totally fine.

[Telonius]

So how's the villainous plotting coming along? I think I've settled on just about everything.

[remetagross]

I got a nice little thematics, not sure how effective a villain that will prove to be though...

Just to be sure: contestants must bring forward a character build a minima, right? Stuff like depicting the Elder Evil like it is done in the book is optional?

[ben-zayb]

I've had this concept for an existing elder evil for a while now, but of course it's not a proper build competition for me without doing 80% of the character during the last three days before deadline.


That said, I've had this spark of inspiration for a new elder evil emissary based on one of the existing signs. Problem here is I still suck at writing, so I'm not sure how to approach the Elder Evil fluff, and by how much should I flesh it out.

[3SecondCultist]

I have two builds, each using a different Elder Evil sign (I'm keeping one of the original signs with the Evil, and re fluffing another). That's okay, right?

[Tiri]

So how's the villainous plotting coming along? I think I've settled on just about everything.

I have two sentences of backstory done.

[The Viscount]

So how's the villainous plotting coming along? I think I've settled on just about everything.

I've definitely got my concept, I just have to finish putting some crunch to it.

[GrayDeath]

Sadly no more than the name of the EE and a few Background Notes are finished.

Swamped with work until at least next week....again, sigh.

[VisitingDaGulag]

Probably not participating incase someone else wants to do it, but I'll be watching. The last thread I read about elder evils made D&D so much better.

[Thurbane]

Just a reminder to everyone: creating a new elder evil is completely optional.

If you feel a bit daunted by the amount of work, it's completely fine to base your entry off one of the existing Elder Evils.

[Tiri]

I'm sure they're aware. Everyone just wants to show off their creativity and make the most of homebrew actually being allowed.

[GrayDeath]

I'm sure they're aware. Everyone just wants to show off their creativity and make the most of homebrew actually being allowed.

That.

Even if my first Idea was shot down.....^^

[Buufreak]

I have found something:

Skills: A lycanthrope gains skill points equal to (2 + Int modifier, minimum 1) per Hit Die of its animal form, as if it had multiclassed into the animal type. (Animal is never its first Hit Die, though, and it does not gain quadruple skill points for any animal Hit Die.) Any skill given in the animal’s description is a class skill for the lycanthrope’s animal levels. In any form, a lycanthrope also has any racial skill bonuses of the base creature and of the base animal, although conditional skill bonuses only apply in the associated form.

If you can multiclass to Animal, Animal is a class. So all RHD are classes. So all the people in this competition who advanced the RHD should have done it as associated so all those builds are illegal!

In not so black and white,it isn't explicitly stating that they are not one and the same, however the amount of times it references the difference between hit dice and class levels, especially when talking about RHD that are kept, as well as when RHD are replaced entirely and solely by class levels, would beg to differ.

[The Viscount]

If you can multiclass to Animal, Animal is a class. So all RHD are classes. So all the people in this competition who advanced the RHD should have done it as associated so all those builds are illegal!

The iffiness about animal HD counting as a class aside, you'll have a tough time proving that it applies to other types.

The more important issue is that regardless of the above statement, lycanthrope has a specific line about CR.

By class level or base creature, modified according to the HD of the base animal: 1 HD or 2 HD, +2; 3 HD to 5 HD, +3; 6 HD to 10 HD, +4; 11 HD to 20 HD, +5; 21 or more HD, +6.

So if you want to post about it move it to dysfunctional rules, but if the builds abide by this rule, they're legal.

[Buufreak]

Actually, in the other thread I found that in I'm not so sure about now. It seems like there is arguing for both sides. But it is something to think about in the rules.

So you took shaky, half baked reasoning of a misreading, and the say so of a single person who was on your side, and based an entire argument of "every build that uses any HD that didn't explicitly come from a class is illegal" on it? This series has seen plenty of trolls, but I don't think any so blatant.

[Technetium43]

Also, this competition doesn't even USE the 'associated/non-associated' class rules. So it doesn't matter either way.

[Buufreak]

Also, this competition doesn't even USE the 'associated/non-associated' class rules. So it doesn't matter either way.

I'm not sure how that is applicable here. His argument simply was all HD, RHD included, were class levels, and thus any build using RHD that pushed their total above or below 20 were thus illegal. Nothing about the associated class level rules were ever mentioned.

[Tiri]

The competition does use the associated/non-associated class rules, actually. It's just that all classes are treated as associated.

[Thurbane]

FWIW, a certain someone posting in this thread was already well and truly on my watch list of being a clone account of a previously banned member, who also caused a lot of problems in the various VC competitions.

The timing of the when the account appeared was one thing, but there was also a relatively inflammatory post put into a previous VC thread by the account that was deleted moments after it first appeared - very reminiscent of the modus operandi of a certain banned account.

New competition rule: if I feel an individual has been overly disruptive during the course of competition discussion, I will not be accepting and revealing any entries from that individual, and they will also not be allowed to judge. Any judging they enter will not be taken into account for the final tally.

I got to the point of resigning as chair the last time a troll (or possibly a pair of trolls) were ruining all civilized discussion in the competition thread.

I'm not letting it happen again.

It seems to be there is one or two people out there that seem to have some sort of personal vendetta against the particular competition, so they do their best to be a disruptive influence to the process. It's kind of pathetic, actually.

[Buufreak]

FWIW, a certain someone posting in this thread was already well and truly on my watch list of being a clone account of a previously banned member, who also caused a lot of problems in the various VC competitions.

The timing of the when the account appeared was one thing, but there was also a relatively inflammatory post put into a previous VC thread by the account that was deleted moments after it first appeared - very reminiscent of the modus operandi of a certain banned account.

New competition rule: if I feel an individual has been overly disruptive during the course of competition discussion, I will not be accepting and revealing any entries from that individual, and they will also not be allowed to judge. Any judging they enter will not be taken into account for the final tally.

I got to the point of resigning as chair the last time a troll (or possibly a pair of trolls) were ruining all civilized discussion in the competition thread.

I'm not letting it happen again.

It seems to be there is one or two people out there that seem to have some sort of personal vendetta against the particular competition, so they do their best to be a disruptive influence to the process. It's kind of pathetic, actually.

Hear hear! But on a side note, I don't think its anything against this series, just usual idiotic troll behavior. We just happen to be the unlucky receivers.

[Tiri]

FWIW, a certain someone posting in this thread was already well and truly on my watch list of being a clone account of a previously banned member, who also caused a lot of problems in the various VC competitions.

The timing of the when the account appeared was one thing, but there was also a relatively inflammatory post put into a previous VC thread by the account that was deleted moments after it first appeared - very reminiscent of the modus operandi of a certain banned account.

New competition rule: if I feel an individual has been overly disruptive during the course of competition discussion, I will not be accepting and revealing any entries from that individual, and they will also not be allowed to judge. Any judging they enter will not be taken into account for the final tally.

I got to the point of resigning as chair the last time a troll (or possibly a pair of trolls) were ruining all civilized discussion in the competition thread.

I'm not letting it happen again.

It seems to be there is one or two people out there that seem to have some sort of personal vendetta against the particular competition, so they do their best to be a disruptive influence to the process. It's kind of pathetic, actually.

Is there going to be a blacklist or something akin to that now? Or will the ban apply only to individual rounds?

[Inevitability]

FWIW, a certain someone posting in this thread was already well and truly on my watch list of being a clone account of a previously banned member, who also caused a lot of problems in the various VC competitions.

The timing of the when the account appeared was one thing, but there was also a relatively inflammatory post put into a previous VC thread by the account that was deleted moments after it first appeared - very reminiscent of the modus operandi of a certain banned account.

New competition rule: if I feel an individual has been overly disruptive during the course of competition discussion, I will not be accepting and revealing any entries from that individual, and they will also not be allowed to judge. Any judging they enter will not be taken into account for the final tally.

I got to the point of resigning as chair the last time a troll (or possibly a pair of trolls) were ruining all civilized discussion in the competition thread.

I'm not letting it happen again.

It seems to be there is one or two people out there that seem to have some sort of personal vendetta against the particular competition, so they do their best to be a disruptive influence to the process. It's kind of pathetic, actually.

Know I'm with you on this one.

[The Viscount]

Well said, well done. I support you.

Finally getting down to work on the entry proper.

[Telonius]

Two thumbs up from me. Can't wait to see the entries this time!

On a completely unrelated note, idea for the next competition: "Why won't you die?" - villains that keep coming back.

[Venger]

FWIW, a certain someone posting in this thread was already well and truly on my watch list of being a clone account of a previously banned member, who also caused a lot of problems in the various VC competitions.

The timing of the when the account appeared was one thing, but there was also a relatively inflammatory post put into a previous VC thread by the account that was deleted moments after it first appeared - very reminiscent of the modus operandi of a certain banned account.

New competition rule: if I feel an individual has been overly disruptive during the course of competition discussion, I will not be accepting and revealing any entries from that individual, and they will also not be allowed to judge. Any judging they enter will not be taken into account for the final tally.

I got to the point of resigning as chair the last time a troll (or possibly a pair of trolls) were ruining all civilized discussion in the competition thread.

I'm not letting it happen again.

It seems to be there is one or two people out there that seem to have some sort of personal vendetta against the particular competition, so they do their best to be a disruptive influence to the process. It's kind of pathetic, actually.

Good call.

Getting to work on my entry as well. I might even get it in early this time.