Results 1 to 30 of 63
-
2018-06-24, 04:29 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2009
- Gender
Iron Chef Optimization Challenge: E6 Appetizer Edition (Round X)
Welcome back to the Iron Chef Optimization Challenge E6 Appetizer Edition! This is round 10, so we're going to mix things up a bit. This round's ingredient will be genuinely good, but we're going to change how we handle scoring for this round and this round only, so please pay attention!
The form of this challenge is to take a particular D&D 3.5 base class (our "secret ingredient," or SI) and turn it into a functional E6 build, which must feature the SI as heavily as possible. (The only hard rule about this is that you must take at least one level in the SI, though judges are encouraged to look favorably on builds that take all or almost all of their levels in said SI.) Your final build submission should consist of your 6 regular levels and your first 10 epic bonus feats, though providing a snapshot at earlier points through the progression is heartily encouraged. Entries are to be PM'd to the Chair (that would be me!), and they will be posted anonymously; our volunteer judges will then grade each build on a 1-5 point scale in three categories: Power, Elegance, and Use of the Secret Ingredient, and on a 1-10 point scale in Originality. (The change to how Originality is scored shall only apply to round 10!) The builds with the highest three scores will be awarded medals, with the Honorable Mention award going to the non-medaling build that the Chair likes best and/or that receives the most votes for HM in this thread. (HM may not always be awarded, particularly if the number of builds is very small.) And then we all have cake!*
*Note: You must provide your own cake.
This is basically like the regular Iron Chef, and let's be brutally honest with ourselves here: this isn't a gargantuan community, and we basically all know what we're talking about at this point. Make the builds, send 'em in, post some scores, and have fun. If you've got questions, lemme know. Still, let's lay out a few rules!
- Cooking Time: Builds must be submitted via PM to the Chair by 4:59 PM GMT - 8 on Thursday, July 12, 2018 (12:59 AM GMT on Friday, July 13). The reveal shall be on the first evening the Chair has free following the cooking deadline, which is hoped to be that evening or the immediately subsequent one. Judging is then expected (*cough*) to take no more than two weeks, so we'll put the judging deadline at approximately two weeks after that, with adjustments as necessary. (You can do the math yourselves; I don't want to put two dates here and confuse people.) Notice that this is slightly earlier in the day than previous deadlines; the goal is to have the deadline be around the time the Chair gets off of work on that particular day, thereby allowing him to post the builds without having to stay up super late or wait until the next day.
- Kitchen: Let's break this one down a bit.
Spoiler: Let's talk about sources- ALLOWED: Almost all D&D 3.5 material published by WotC: Core, Completes, monster books, Races Of books, alternate power source books (Expanded Psionics Handbook, Magic of Incarnum, Tome of Battle, Tome of Magic, etc.), Spell Compendium, Book of Exalted Deeds, Book of Vile Darkness, Eberron material, Forgotten Realms material, and other WotC-published 3.5 material. (This list is NOT exhaustive and there are many other legal books that I did not mention by name!)
- ALLOWED: Material from the 3.5 archives of the Wizards of the Coast website (including, but not limited to, the Mind's Eye articles). If you use it, link it.
- ALLOWED: Official errata from WotC. If you're relying on this in a material fashion, it's a good idea to link it and to discuss it.
- NOT ALLOWED: Unofficial errata, including "class fixes" (regardless of the source, including from the original author if not published in a WotC book) or fan-created content.
- ALLOWED: Unupdated WotC-published 3.0 material (e.g., Sword and Fist, Masters of the Wild, etc.) except for 3.0 psionics. No 3.0 psionics allowed. If you are using 3.0 material, use the general-purpose skill updates (Wilderness Lore becomes Survival, Innuendo becomes Bluff, etc.) and the general-purpose rules updates (spells with a casting time of "1 action" become "1 standard action," etc.) when appropriate.
- NOT ALLOWED: 3.0 material for which a direct 3.5 update exists. Use the updated material instead.
- ALLOWED: Dragon Compendium and its errata.
- NOT ALLOWED: Content from Dragon Magazine and/or Dungeon Magazine unless said content appears in an otherwise allowed source.
- ALLOWED: Oriental Adventures, including the 3.5 update to Oriental Adventures from Dragon Magazine #318. This is a specific exception to the "no Dragon" rule!
- NOT ALLOWED: Pathfinder content, regardless of whether it is "D&D 3.5 OGL" or not. If it didn't come from WotC, we don't want it.
- ALLOWED: From Unearthed Arcana: racial paragon classes, alternate class features/variant classes, spelltouched feats, and variant races. (Traits and flaws are technically legal, but traits warrant a -0.5 point penalty in Elegance, and flaws warrant a -1 penalty in Elegance.)
- NOT ALLOWED: Other Unearthed Arcana content, including (but not limited to) bloodlines, LA buyoff, fractional BAB/saves, alternate casting systems, alternate skill systems, item familiars, prestigious character classes, generic classes, gestalt, etc.
- NOT ALLOWED: Leadership, regardless of source. Game elements functionally equivalent to Leadership (including, but not limited to, Dragon Cohort, Undead Leadership, and Thrallherd) are similarly banned. (Familiars, Improved Familiar, animal companions, Wild Cohort, psicrystals, elemental envoys, and similar game elements are allowed, and they are not considered to be "Leadership." If the difference isn't obvious, feel free to contact the Chair with specific questions.)
- NOT ALLOWED: Third-party content, homebrew, or other non-WotC content.
- NOT ALLOWED: Epic feats from the Epic Level Handbook. Just because you're "epic" in E6 after 6th level doesn't mean that you're that kind of epic.
- NOT ALLOWED: Any race or template with a level adjustment other than +0. (Or any other source of LA other than a race or template, if any such things exist.)
- NOT ALLOWED: For our judges: penalizing solely based on legal sources used, regardless of whether those sources are plentiful, sparse, common, obscure, or something in between. If the material is legal, then it doesn't matter how many or how few books it came out of.
- ALLOWED: Also for our judges: penalizing for using a source (other than material in Core; don't be vindictive about genuinely obvious stuff) that isn't listed in the build writeup. The chef may choose to present the sources in-line with the text, in a consolidated source list, or somewhere else, but if the source is listed (and is otherwise legal), it counts. If the source is not listed, you may choose to penalize for that.
If you have questions about anything in this section (or hell, in this ruleset), feel free to ask the Chair.
- ALLOWED: Almost all D&D 3.5 material published by WotC: Core, Completes, monster books, Races Of books, alternate power source books (Expanded Psionics Handbook, Magic of Incarnum, Tome of Battle, Tome of Magic, etc.), Spell Compendium, Book of Exalted Deeds, Book of Vile Darkness, Eberron material, Forgotten Realms material, and other WotC-published 3.5 material. (This list is NOT exhaustive and there are many other legal books that I did not mention by name!)
- Character Creation: 32 point buy is assumed. For the purposes of this contest, Level Adjustment greater than +0 is banned. (This may be revised at a later point, but I don't feel that the E6 LA rules are conducive to fun in the context of this contest.) No more than two entries per chef per contest, please; if you submit two builds and somehow are so overcome with inspiration for a third that you can't help yourself, PM me and tell me which two you care about the most.
- Speculation: Please do not post any form of speculation before the reveal. Just don't do it, guys. It's not cool. This means NOT posting any of the following or anything substantially similar: what you think is going to be common, significant elements of your planned build or of other potential builds, or anything else that could directly influence someone else's build choices for good or for ill. (It's acceptable to ask for rules clarifications as appropriate, but try to avoid tipping your hand too much.) Speculation is bad because it can discourage people from posting builds and can also "taint the judging pool" when it comes to Originality, so please just try to be aware of how other people might react to your speculation.
- E6: Here's how E6 works for the purposes of this contest. Build your character normally for the first six levels. After you reach level 6, you stop gaining levels and start gaining bonus feats every time you would gain 5,000 XP. Since we aren't actually tracking XP, you'll basically list your first ten epic bonus feats in the order that you take them, and we think of them as being kind of like levels. We will not use the LA-equals-reduced-point-buy rules, instead preferring to just ban races with LA, at least for now. We will not use the "capstone feats"; all feats that you take must be normal legal 3.5 feats, not homebrew E6 ones. You may not use the Epic feats from the Epic Level Handbook, though if for some reason there are non-Epic feats from the ELH that you qualify for, you may take those. (I don't think there are any, but I'm sure someone will prove me wrong.) It is up to the discretion of each judge whether this is a "hard E6" (magic above 3rd level spells is simply beyond mortal reach, items that have a listed CL above 6th are just plain not available, etc.) or a "soft E6" (if you can somehow get the magic on your character, it's yours, regardless of level), though I honestly don't expect it to come up. Don't go crazy with making assumptions about items and we probably won't have to find out.
- Presentation: Please use the table found below in the spoiler. List your epic bonus feats (in clear order) after the table. If you find a clever way of formatting that that isn't annoying and that doesn't break anything, have fun; if it's portable, I may steal it for the next round. When sending your build or any disputes to the Chair, clearly include your build's name in the subject of the PM, and please present your build exactly as you want the Chair to copy and paste it into the thread.
If you're using a picture, cite the source and follow any relevant citation rules. Because we have had issues with this in the past, when listing your skills, please make it very clear how many ranks you have at each level. There are multiple ways to do this and we do not wish to cramp anyone's individual style by dictating exactly how this must look, but make sure that somewhere in your entry there's an explanation of how many actual skill ranks you have. It's still fine to list total skill bonuses, if that's your style, but don't only list bonuses; make sure that there is a clear listing somewhere of your ranks alone.SpoilerCode for the table:Level Class Base Attack Bonus Fort Save Ref Save Will Save Skills Feats Class Features 1st New Class Level +x +x +x +x Skills Feats New Class Abilities 2nd New Class Level +x +x +x +x Skills Feats New Class Abilities 3rd New Class Level +x +x +x +x Skills Feats New Class Abilities 4th New Class Level +x +x +x +x Skills Feats New Class Abilities 5th New Class Level +x +x +x +x Skills Feats New Class Abilities 6th New Class Level +x +x +x +x Skills Feats New Class Abilities Spoiler[table="class: head alt1 alt2"]
[tr]
[th][B]Level[/B][/th]
[th][B]Class[/B][/th]
[th][B]Base Attack Bonus[/B][/th]
[th][B]Fort Save[/B][/th]
[th][B]Ref Save[/B][/th]
[th][B]Will Save[/B][/th]
[th][B]Skills[/B][/th]
[th][B]Feats[/B][/th]
[th][B]Class Features[/B][/th]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]1st[/td]
[td]New Class Level[/td]
[td]+x[/td]
[td]+x[/td]
[td]+x[/td]
[td]+x[/td]
[td]Skills[/td]
[td]Feats[/td]
[td]New Class Abilities[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]2nd[/td]
[td]New Class Level[/td]
[td]+x[/td]
[td]+x[/td]
[td]+x[/td]
[td]+x[/td]
[td]Skills[/td]
[td]Feats[/td]
[td]New Class Abilities[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]3rd[/td]
[td]New Class Level[/td]
[td]+x[/td]
[td]+x[/td]
[td]+x[/td]
[td]+x[/td]
[td]Skills[/td]
[td]Feats[/td]
[td]New Class Abilities[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]4th[/td]
[td]New Class Level[/td]
[td]+x[/td]
[td]+x[/td]
[td]+x[/td]
[td]+x[/td]
[td]Skills[/td]
[td]Feats[/td]
[td]New Class Abilities[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]5th[/td]
[td]New Class Level[/td]
[td]+x[/td]
[td]+x[/td]
[td]+x[/td]
[td]+x[/td]
[td]Skills[/td]
[td]Feats[/td]
[td]New Class Abilities[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]6th[/td]
[td]New Class Level[/td]
[td]+x[/td]
[td]+x[/td]
[td]+x[/td]
[td]+x[/td]
[td]Skills[/td]
[td]Feats[/td]
[td]New Class Abilities[/td]
[/tr][/table] - Contest houserules: Nearly the same as the main contest's rules here: all creatures are proficient with natural weapons they have or may acquire, bonus feats that are explicitly granted without meeting prereqs are usable even without those prereqs, and feats that affect which skills are class skills for you and/or how you spend your skill points (Able Learner, Martial Study, Truename Training, Apprentice, etc.) apply immediately at the level at which you take them (even though you normally spend skill points before taking a feat).
- Judging guidelines: The minimum score in a category is 1, and the maximum is 5 (except in Originality, where for round 10 only, the maximum is 10). Judges are expected to be fair, consistent, and open-minded, and they are expected to make a good-faith effort to engage with any reasonable disputes that arise, especially when RAW is in question. That said, contestants are asked to not dispute more than necessary; let's do everything in good faith and really only dispute when a judge is being inconsistent, being unfair, or is otherwise grossly misinterpreting a build.
Judges may not penalize Originality solely because a build is a tribute or homage to an existing creative work (in or out of D&D canon; note that this is not the same thing as penalizing Originality for using well-known optimization tactics), nor may judges penalize based solely on sources used (whether those sources are plentiful, sparse, common, obscure, or something in between, you should judge the build elements and how they work together rather than what book or what books they came out of, as long as those books are legal for this contest and are cited in the entry).
As with the main contest, we will follow the "One Mistake, One Penalty" guideline, and it is very important that the judges adhere to it. I'm going to directly copy and paste this from the main thread, and hopefully the original author won't mind too much:
SpoilerJudges are only allowed to penalise once for a given mistake. If someone messes up their skills and doesn't qualify for a PrC, ding them as hard as you like. Once. In one category. You don't then get to declare that because they didn't qualify for that PrC, they don't get those levels, and thus don't qualify for anything else. If Ranger is a common ingredient, ding them for Originality. Once. Don't also take off points for Two-Weapon-Fighting being a common ingredient.
Non-exhaustive list of examples:
SkillsAllowed:
- Giving a penalty for miscalculating the number of skill points gained
- Giving a penalty for not having enough ranks to meet a prerequisite
- Increasing the harshness of a skill miscalculation penalty if it affects critical skills including prereqs
Not allowed:
- Giving separate penalties for miscalculating skill points and for non-qualification where the non-qualification is solely caused by the miscalculation
PrereqsAllowed:
- Giving a penalty for not meeting prereqs
- Scaling the penalty depending on how important the item that the build failed to qualify for is
- Giving minimum score in UotSI for not qualifying for the SI
- Not giving credit for (note: not the same as penalising for) tactics using feats or classes other than the SI that were not qualified for (but see below)
Not Allowed:
- "Cascading" failures to qualify - declaring that because a build doesn't qualify for a feat, for example, it also doesn't qualify for anything using that feat as a prereq
- Treating a build as having fewer levels than it does because of FtQ for classes
Other general things that are no longer allowed:
- Penalising because someone has chosen to build a tribute to an existing creative work
- Deciding that a backstory has not met a fluff prerequisite well enough, or because its method of meeting it is "unrealistic". You may penalise if a fluff prereq is not addressed at all, but not for how well it is addressed.
Note that these are protections, not licenses. Deliberately taking a feat that you know you don't qualify for hoping to just suck up the judging penalty for a feat that you couldn't normally take is not okay, and may lead to your build being disqualified. - Other bits and bobs: If there's something major and relevant I haven't mentioned, assume that the way I handle it will probably be the same as the main contest unless stated otherwise or unless doing so would be an obviously absurd result. If you've got questions, I'll give you answers.
This round's secret ingredient: the CRUSADER, from Tome of Battle! Allez Optimizer!
Just because I haven't said this enough, FOR THIS ROUND ONLY, JUDGE ORIGINALITY ON A 10-POINT SCALE RATHER THAN A 5-POINT SCALE. Other categories are to be judged as usual.
The Builds:
Name Alignment/Race Class Stub Score Place Chef Cray the Gnarled LE Krynn Minotaur Crusader 4 / Cleric 1 / Marshal 1 14.5 Bronze jdizzlean Meran 'The Hammer' Torson CG Maenad Crusader 5 / Warblade 1 16 Gold Randuir Justarius LN Body Hellbred Crusader 4 / Divine Mind 1 / Incarnate 1 16 Gold thorr-kan Talon ? (nonlawful?) Razorclaw Shifter Crusader 4 / Barbarian 1 / Berserk 1 10.5 4th tterreb
Spoiler: Contest History
Round 4: Knight
Round 5: Ninja
Round 6: Racial Paragon Classes
Round 7: Hexblade
Round 8: Shugenja
Round 9: Swashbuckler
Spoiler: Way Old Stuff (2012 and earlier; Amechra's run as Chair)Last edited by Zaq; 2018-08-03 at 08:43 PM.
In the Beginning Was the Word, and the Word Was Suck: A Guide to Truenamers
My compiled Iron Chef stuff!
~ Gay all day, queer all year ~
-
2018-06-24, 04:34 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2009
- Gender
Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge: E6 Appetizer Edition (Round X)
The Crusader is a fantastic class, especially in an E6 environment where martial characters haven't been totally scaled out of relevance yet. It's very easy to make a powerful and fun Crusader.
What's a little tougher is differentiating Crusaders from each other, especially at the level range we're talking about. They have a very high power floor partly because they don't have that many options yet. Most of the options they do have up to level 6 are pretty good! But your challenge is not just to make something good. Your challenge is to make something unique. What makes your Crusader different from the next one? How do you stand out from the pack?
Originality is now weighted higher than the other categories, but of course, it's not the only category. The other three combined are still worth more than Originality alone. But the point of this round is to pay special attention to Originality and to really encourage you to show off how you can make something special even when playing in a similar space to everyone else.
Round 11 will be scored normally, with each category being the usual 1-5 point scale. But let's have some fun going a little bit sideways here.
As a reminder, we'll also always need judges!In the Beginning Was the Word, and the Word Was Suck: A Guide to Truenamers
My compiled Iron Chef stuff!
~ Gay all day, queer all year ~
-
2018-06-24, 04:53 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2016
- Location
- Up in la Belle province
Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge: E6 Appetizer Edition (Round X)
Oh wow! It,s been a long time since I've delved in ToB (and when I do it's almost always for Warblade or Swordsage, my absolute favorite class). Let's see if I can unearth something fun for the crusader.
-
2018-06-24, 05:59 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2016
- Location
- Colorado, USA
- Gender
Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge: E6 Appetizer Edition (Round X)
maybe for me.
it's not a reflection on the SI, but that my brain is so toast from trying to figure out my current Hoardstealer build.
Originally Posted by Peelee
-
2018-06-24, 11:04 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2013
Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge: E6 Appetizer Edition (Round X)
I have an idea for this, I'll try to get a build in.
-
2018-06-25, 01:06 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2011
- Location
- Michigan
- Gender
Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge: E6 Appetizer Edition (Round X)
I'll be getting something in for this. I've already got one idea. Whether it's considered original will depend largely on the judge, but that's often the way of things.
Iron Chef Medals
SpoilerSir Driscoll Conia - Silver - IC L
Nick Snarespan - Gold - IC LIII
Lucy "Legs" Silvertail - Bronze - IC LXVIII
Bolfarg of Knoss - Gold - IC LXXVII
Ivarr Deathborn - Bronze - IC LXXVII
Ahmtel - Silver - IC LXXVIII
Tocke of Nessus - Gold - IC LXXIX
The Blessed Third - Silver - IC LXXXI
Galahad Galapagos - Gold - IC LXXXIV
Sai-don, Knight of the Tide - Bronze - IC LXXXIV
-
2018-06-25, 01:13 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2017
- Gender
Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge: E6 Appetizer Edition (Round X)
Heh, this is indeed an unambiguously good ingredient. I've got one idea already, but Vizzini probably has a thing or two to say about this one.
Jasnah avatar by Zea Mays
-
2018-06-25, 11:50 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2016
- Location
- The system of Sol
Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge: E6 Appetizer Edition (Round X)
This round I should be able to put together a build. I've got some ideas brewing now.
Physics in D&D is only superficially similar to real world physics.
Avatar by Honest Tiefling
-
2018-07-04, 10:51 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2009
- Gender
Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge: E6 Appetizer Edition (Round X)
How’s everyone doing?
In the Beginning Was the Word, and the Word Was Suck: A Guide to Truenamers
My compiled Iron Chef stuff!
~ Gay all day, queer all year ~
-
2018-07-04, 10:55 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2018
-
2018-07-05, 01:03 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2017
- Gender
Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge: E6 Appetizer Edition (Round X)
I'm pretty much done. I want to slightly refine my fluff a bit more, and then it's just formatting. I expect to send it in today or tomorrow.
Jasnah avatar by Zea Mays
-
2018-07-05, 07:35 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2016
- Location
- Up in la Belle province
Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge: E6 Appetizer Edition (Round X)
Work hit me hard for the last days/weeks. Plus, I read and re-read Crusader, all the maneuvers, and just drew a complete blank on doing something original.
-
2018-07-05, 04:31 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2013
Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge: E6 Appetizer Edition (Round X)
My idea 100% did not pan out.
-
2018-07-05, 05:54 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2017
Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge: E6 Appetizer Edition (Round X)
First off, I want to apologize for disappearing off the face of the Boards for the last month when I had promised judging for Round 9; that was Not Cool, and I'm sorry. Real life got a little hectic, but I should still have taken a moment to log on and let you all know I would not be able to judge.
In partial reparations (and because there really isn't time to build a good entry at this point any more), I would like to offer my services judging for this round. If that's acceptable, let me know. Looking forward to what y'all come up with!
~RaiKirah
-
2018-07-05, 05:55 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2009
- Gender
Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge: E6 Appetizer Edition (Round X)
In the Beginning Was the Word, and the Word Was Suck: A Guide to Truenamers
My compiled Iron Chef stuff!
~ Gay all day, queer all year ~
-
2018-07-06, 08:21 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2009
- Gender
Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge: E6 Appetizer Edition (Round X)
Friendly reminder: fewer than 72 hours remain!
In the Beginning Was the Word, and the Word Was Suck: A Guide to Truenamers
My compiled Iron Chef stuff!
~ Gay all day, queer all year ~
-
2018-07-06, 11:17 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2017
Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge: E6 Appetizer Edition (Round X)
Hello Folks!
I figure that it might behoove us all if I post some thoughts on my intended judging criteria. As this is my first time judging, these criteria are somewhat preliminary, and definitely malleable – part of the hope from posting these is to get feedback on any area that seems poorly defined or inconsistent with the spirit/law of the judging aspect of these competitions. My approach to judging is going to be more qualitative rather than quantitative, and certainly not granular on the level of some I’ve seen (.25 points will be vanishingly rare, and most likely only show up in disputes). This might change in future as I get a better sense of what specifically I’m looking for.
A general note on build write ups: Please be as clear and obvious as possible with any and all tricks/combos/cool things you’re including in your build. While you may be able to clearly see a four part combo and all of its implications clearly, I may not be able to do so. The clearer and more specific you are the more I can appreciate and award the awesomeness you have put together.
With the various disclaimers out of the way, let’s take a look at the categories.
Spoiler: Originality
This category is difficult to define normally, and with its double weighting in this round it becomes more so. Seeing as Originality is the focus of this round, a neutral build will be scored lower than it might in a regular round. For example, a Human Crusader 6 with only Fighter Bonus feats – which might be considered neutral in a regular round – will get a solid “meh” and be scored as a 3-4. Lower scores will happen based on over-used optimization staples without a twist (Power Attack/Leap Attack/Shocktrooper as your only trick would fall under this category, but if it happens to be an aspect of your build I’m not going to penalize it), blatant Originality grabs without a thematic or mechanical reason, and obvious build plagiarism. An example of a 1 might be an Aquatic Necropolitan Anthropomorphic Bat Crusader wielding a Sugiin (why yes, I have been researching for the Junkyard Wars competition). On the other end, scores go up as my interest/surprise/curiosity go up. Getting a reaction of ‘hmmm’ might get into the 4-5 realm, ‘oh, interesting’ could be 4-6, ‘wait, you did what now?’ might be ~7-8, etcetera. A note on backstory: I will never penalize for backstory, unless it breaks forum rules or is clear plagiarism (of the verbatim type). Homages and parodies are certainly welcome. A particularly excellent backstory might net a point, but it almost certainly won’t do more than that. That said, backstory can turn an originality grab type choice into a positive score modifier, as I can then follow the reasoning.
Spoiler: PowerTo me, Power has two primary axis upon which to judge; Power with respect to the class’ baseline competence, and Power with respect to the overall game mechanics. The first is fairly straightforward: the Crusader is a primary melee combatant, which means all builds will be judged on their ability do combat. If you make your build stronger than a standard Crusader you’ll get a bump. If you somehow manage to make your build weaker in combat than a standard Crusader, you better believe you’ll get a scoring demerit. The second realm of power judging comes with respect to the holistic game system. When you break it down, DnD gameplay roughly falls into three categories: combat, social, and what I’ll call utility (skillmonkey, knowledge bank, etc.). Crusaders are designed to be good in combat, so any true competence in the other realms that come without expense to fighting will be rewarded. True competence that comes at the expense of combat capability will also be rewarded, though the lack of combat capability will be penalized as above. So, to summarize, if you can strike a pose and crack the world in two with your muscles, you’ll be getting a 5. Similarly, if you can rule the battlefield, ballroom, and have a solution to ‘that,’ whatever ‘that’ may be, you’ll also get a 5. On the other end of the spectrum if your character spends his time alone in a sickbed unable to do anything at all you’ll get a 1. A final note: Power will be judged as if all prerequisites have been met, and where mechanics are questionable tie goes to the Chef. These issues will be covered in Elegance.
Spoiler: EleganceAs with Power, Elegance has two primary aspects on which I will judge; a mechanical one, and – for lack of a better term – a metaphysical one. Mechanical is pretty straightforward: if prereqs are missed and/or there are errors in the build you’ll get dinged for that. If everything is copacetic you get a baseline score here (3). The second aspect is where things get subjective. You’ll get points for particularly interesting usages and mechanical interactions, whereas you’ll lose points for questionable/misinterpreted rules and clunky mechanics. This one may be fairly opaque in my awarding of points, but the heart wants what the heart wants, and I’m willing to discuss with you.
Spoiler: Use of SIThis category is also fairly nebulous. I am not going to make any hard rules about how many levels of the SI you should use; that’s dependent on your build, and I will judge based on how integral the SI is to what you’re doing. That said, you should probably have a really good reason to use only one or two levels of Crusader. Taking levels in the class is not going to be enough by itself of course, as if you don’t use the class features you’re not going to get full marks. You do not have to showcase everything, but you should be showcasing some of it, otherwise why bother with Crusader? A score of 5 will incorporate enough Crusader to be unquestionably one in play, utilize most if not all of the class features in important and interesting ways, and have that certain je ne c'est qua and eau de Crusader. I suspect 5s will be rare, but 4s will not be.
Spoiler: On the Matter of DisputesOne of the reasons I’ve avoided judging in the past is that the dispute process can get very personal and vitriolic (I myself have been guilty of this) and that is rather off-putting. I would like to take a moment to ask you all to be gracious and kind in your communications to all the judges and in return we (or at least I) will attempt to do the same. In addition, as you may have noticed from my descriptions above, quite a lot of my judging is going to be gut based. If you have a dispute that is based on a difference of opinion we have, please try to refrain, unless you believe that it has its roots in a genuine misunderstanding on my part. In which case, point it out and its applicability, and I’ll reevaluate. If you also tell me I’m wrong and an idiot, I’m probably going to ignore you. For purely mechanical disputes please speak up. I don’t want to shortchange your build; I think these competitions are awesome and I love seeing builds succeed. My goal is to appreciate what you’ve built, not tear into it’s failings.
Please let me know if you have any issues/questions/concerns with anything I’ve put here. Looking forward to the builds!
~RaiKirah
-
2018-07-07, 02:59 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2017
- Gender
Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge: E6 Appetizer Edition (Round X)
That seems like a fair approach, RaiKirah. Don't worry about using your gut for a lot of judgings, just about everyone does that for the more nebulous categories, afaik. The only things you can judge 100% mathematically are build mistakes, everything else require some subjective interpretation ('Hmmm, build A has more Power than Build B, but is it 0.5 points stronger, or maybe a full point?').
Jasnah avatar by Zea Mays
-
2018-07-08, 09:08 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2016
- Location
- Colorado, USA
- Gender
Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge: E6 Appetizer Edition (Round X)
I only just now have time to devote to this, and the deadline being tomorrow means either i rush something in, or don't partake this round.
I have 11 hours right now to decide either way..
Originally Posted by Peelee
-
2018-07-09, 12:22 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2009
- Gender
Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge: E6 Appetizer Edition (Round X)
I don’t have enough builds yet, and I’ve been asked for an extension. I’ll be busy tomorrow and Wednesday, so how about a 72-hour extension? Builds are due at the same time on Thursday. I’ll go update the OP. Go make more Crusaders!
In the Beginning Was the Word, and the Word Was Suck: A Guide to Truenamers
My compiled Iron Chef stuff!
~ Gay all day, queer all year ~
-
2018-07-09, 01:05 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2017
- Gender
Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge: E6 Appetizer Edition (Round X)
Jasnah avatar by Zea Mays
-
2018-07-09, 01:30 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2010
Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge: E6 Appetizer Edition (Round X)
Huh. I thought I had a few more hours. Musta messed the GMT conversion up.
Oh, well. Submission sent. It will make the new deadline.
-
2018-07-09, 02:10 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2009
- Gender
Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge: E6 Appetizer Edition (Round X)
You did have a few more hours. The original deadline is in about 5 hours. The new deadline is 3 days after that.
The time is supposed to be 5 PM US Pacific time. Pretty sure I got the GMT calculations right for that. But if you’re in the States or close enough to recognize the time zones, that’s what I’m aiming for.In the Beginning Was the Word, and the Word Was Suck: A Guide to Truenamers
My compiled Iron Chef stuff!
~ Gay all day, queer all year ~
-
2018-07-10, 02:35 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2016
- Location
- Colorado, USA
- Gender
Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge: E6 Appetizer Edition (Round X)
thanks for the extension, finalized and submitted!
Originally Posted by Peelee
-
2018-07-10, 09:49 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2017
- Location
- Karrnath
- Gender
-
2018-07-12, 03:15 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2009
- Gender
Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge: E6 Appetizer Edition (Round X)
Deadline’s in about four hours! I have things to accomplish tonight so I won’t be heading STRAIGHT home from work, but I do plan to post the builds pretty soon after I get home for the night. If you’ve got anything else to submit, get it in ASAP!
In the Beginning Was the Word, and the Word Was Suck: A Guide to Truenamers
My compiled Iron Chef stuff!
~ Gay all day, queer all year ~
-
2018-07-12, 09:03 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2009
- Gender
Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge: E6 Appetizer Edition (Round X)
"You approach the crowd. What do you do?"
I tell them that I'm definitely good at allocating my time and at figuring out how long things will take me!
"Okay, roll Bluff."
I got a 12. I'm pretty sure they'll buy it.
You're buying it, right? You're totally buying it.
Builds incoming!In the Beginning Was the Word, and the Word Was Suck: A Guide to Truenamers
My compiled Iron Chef stuff!
~ Gay all day, queer all year ~
-
2018-07-12, 09:04 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2009
- Gender
Cray the Gnarled
Things are getting a little bit cray-cray.
Originally Posted by Cray the Gnarled
-
2018-07-12, 09:05 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2009
- Gender
Meran 'The Hammer' Torson
This kind of thing is why I get scared using kashi bachi. That's meaningful to someone who isn't me, right? Oh, just look at the build already.
Originally Posted by Meran 'The Hammer' Torson
-
2018-07-12, 09:07 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2009
- Gender
Justarius
"Squandered knowledge for power"? Now I want to build a character based off of Fossik. (I'm just chock-full of references no one else will get today! WhamBamSam should get it, at least.)
Originally Posted by Justarius