Iron Chef Optimization Challenge in the Playground XXIII

[ILM]

I find this all a bit excessive, really.

There are multiple judges (usually). They are different people with different views on optimization and their own criteria. I thought that was kind of the point. Now if we start agreeing on how to score dips, how to score obscure sources and what constitutes them, how to score power vs. some kind of magical absolute scale, and so on, then what do we even need multiple judges for?

I like that sometimes, and in fact often, some judges will disagree on scores. I like that each has his own idea of what makes a build cool. Fortunately, the judges so far have always provided their perspective and explanations on the scores they give, and often I've found myself unable to disagree with either of a judge that scored high and another that scored low on the same character, because they both had valid points - it's just that they disagreed on the relative importance of some elements of the score versus others. To give a somewhat simplistic example: in the previous competition, I warned that any illegality in the build that I spotted would be aun automatic 1 in Elegance, and I had to enforce it (to my regret) on one build. Other judges merely docked a point or so and went on with their judging. Do I think they were wrong? No. We just had different ideas on how big a deal it was.

Optimization isn't a clear-cut exercise. Judges miss things. We can accept this, take it easy, and remember that in the end all that's at stake is a virtual trophy, or we can go all IRON CHEF IS SERIOUS BUSINESS and vote Olympic-style, with judges giving only scores with zero explanations nor disputes (and then chuckle at how the Russian judge gave the US contestant a terrible score, AGAIN, like we used to in the good old days). Personally, as a contestant and a judge, the thing I enjoy the most in IC is to see all the awesome ideas I didn't come up with, so for all its quirks I'm in favour of the former, more laid-back approach,

[Amphetryon]

I support the newbie guide--I'll look over my info from all past rounds to help determine consistent scoring trends. While some, like prime and myself can sit down and read all threads, it shouldn't be required for ICO success.

On the topic of dipping, it's something that varies widely from judge to judge, but has been docked consistently. I know someone could actually get hit thrice by me if they 1) take an expected entry class 2) for less than 3 levels 3) resulting in MC penalties. I admit that's harsh; perhaps we should have a hard and fast rule on dipping, or at least revise our individual stances?

We've brought up hard-and-fast rules for judges before, and they were determined to be a bad idea that stifled creativity. Paraphrased, the thinking was that hard-and-fast rules by which all judges would score would be both difficult to enforce (due to varying levels of comfort with optimization, dipping and so forth), and would encourage contestants to 'game the system' in order to win, rather than building creatively.

Remember, the judges volunteer. It's not like we can or should enforce some sort of specific level of OpFu to have them judge the contests.

[OMG PONIES]

We've brought up hard-and-fast rules for judges before, and they were determined to be a bad idea that stifled creativity. Paraphrased, the thinking was that hard-and-fast rules by which all judges would score would be both difficult to enforce (due to varying levels of comfort with optimization, dipping and so forth), and would encourage contestants to 'game the system' in order to win, rather than building creatively.

Remember, the judges volunteer. It's not like we can or should enforce some sort of specific level of OpFu to have them judge the contests.

True 'nuff. To be fair, though, I've "gamed the system" myself by avoiding dips as much as possible since I saw how hard they were scored. I'm still going to drum up a list of most frequently deducted (or appreciated) items to contribute towards a newbie guide, though. Couldn't hurt to have some info for new people looking to get involved, as it would just make this contest more sustainable.

[Sewercop]

I am considering to join in the next contest, and i have to say that a noob guide are something most people would like. At least i believe so,

I like reading the old entries so i have a good idea of what gets good scores.
But that depends on who are juding it seems.

You guys should at least tell people that backstory and fluff scores high.
And i cant understand how a judge can score the same in power on builds that obviously have different power.

And on multiclassing... I dont think it to be to much if a build has three or even four two lvl dips, as long as those dips showcase something new about the secret ingredient. Id call that elegance at it best if it brings some new to the table. And when it brings something new its orignal... But you are docked score because of that... I dont get it. But thats me..

My biggest beef are the fluff and backstory part. If i didnt read the older entries, i wouldnt botherd to come up with one if i were to enter the contest...

Rambling over.. I lost what i was thinking :) But yeah.. noob guide appreciated

[gbprime]

A guide would have it's uses, yes. Handy tips that only participation can reveal.

For example, Level Adjustment buyoff (Unearthed Arcana). I've been docked by judges for using LA Buyoff, and I've been docked by judges for NOT using LA Buyoff. It seems the best way to avoid this is to avoid LA entirely unless it totally makes the build.

[Amphetryon]

A guide would have it's uses, yes. Handy tips that only participation can reveal.

For example, Level Adjustment buyoff (Unearthed Arcana). I've been docked by judges for using LA Buyoff, and I've been docked by judges for NOT using LA Buyoff. It seems the best way to avoid this is to avoid LA Unearthed Arcana entirely unless it totally makes the build.

Don't mean to come across as snarky, but this edit may be more accurate.

[term1nally s1ck]

Except he got docked for taking LA and not buying it off.

[OMG PONIES]

My biggest beef are the fluff and backstory part. If i didnt read the older entries, i wouldnt botherd to come up with one if i were to enter the contest...

If we're still comparing ourselves to gourmet chefs, consider this part our plating . I'm working on a New Chef's Cookbook, which I'll PM to both term1nally s1ck and Private-Prinny for review (as long as that's cool with them).

For example, Level Adjustment buyoff (Unearthed Arcana). I've been docked by judges for using LA Buyoff, and I've been docked by judges for NOT using LA Buyoff. It seems the best way to avoid this is to avoid LA entirely unless it totally makes the build.

The most helpful thing I've found is to include anything from Unearthed Arcana (as Amphetryon's edit to your post is quite accurate) in an "Adaptation" section--seasoning to taste, if you will. I've never been docked for doing so, and once or twice it actually netted some added points from a judge or two.

[gbprime]

The most helpful thing I've found is to include anything from Unearthed Arcana (as Amphetryon's edit to your post is quite accurate) in an "Adaptation" section--seasoning to taste, if you will. I've never been docked for doing so, and once or twice it actually netted some added points from a judge or two.

Unearthed Arcana isn't all bad, though. Many of the Alternate class features are non-cheesy, and help make a build. Things like Divine Bard, Wilderness Rogue, and some of the Simple variants. It's the odder mechanics you have to watch out for, and use them only if you're confident you'll get more points for them than you'll lose or (as mentioned above) in an Adaptation or Sidebar section of your post.

[Sewercop]

Hehe, I just have to say this. Im am a Chef :) So i do get that referance very clear.
But here is the deal, when we compose new dishes, its all about appealing to the customers. But we atleast know that the visual and fluff are a part of it.
Having a name on the dish that sounds awesome: score
Having a dish that is visually stunning : score
Having a dish that do not taste as good as it sounds and looks: epic fail

A dish that looks great,taste great,has great texture, is fresh and original do not need fluff to sell it to a judge.

Bocuse d`or is one of the highest regarded chef competitions in the world and can to a degree be similar to this competiton.
All that participate use the same main ingredients just as here, and then they compete. There is no need to for fluff, cause all is using the same. But there visual pleasing is important to. But atleast everyone knows it.

If you score fluff, list it as a way to score.

If a dish dont need sugar, dont add sugar. But if everyone here scores an extra point for sugar, why dont add it?

Sorry if i come along as stubborn, i do enjoy good fluff myself, but its unfair to people not aware of it.

ps Bocuse d`or is somewhat above my skill level, it just mirrors this comp somewhat. my 2 cents

[kestrel404]

Hehe, I just have to say this. Im am a Chef :) So i do get that referance very clear.
But here is the deal, when we compose new dishes, its all about appealing to the customers. But we atleast know that the visual and fluff are a part of it.
Having a name on the dish that sounds awesome: score
Having a dish that is visually stunning : score
Having a dish that do not taste as good as it sounds and looks: epic fail

A dish that looks great,taste great,has great texture, is fresh and original do not need fluff to sell it to a judge.

Bocuse d`or is one of the highest regarded chef competitions in the world and can to a degree be similar to this competiton.
All that participate use the same main ingredients just as here, and then they compete. There is no need to for fluff, cause all is using the same. But there visual pleasing is important to. But atleast everyone knows it.

If you score fluff, list it as a way to score.

If a dish dont need sugar, dont add sugar. But if everyone here scores an extra point for sugar, why dont add it?

Sorry if i come along as stubborn, i do enjoy good fluff myself, but its unfair to people not aware of it.

ps Bocuse d`or is somewhat above my skill level, it just mirrors this comp somewhat. my 2 cents

Thank you for your insight. It's interesting to hear how a real chef looks at our competition.

I'm not sure if you're looking at the fluff/crunch the same way I see it, though. The 'Iron Chef' aspect of the competition is just a metaphor - while we are just comparing builds, there is an artistic element to creating characters that cannot be ignored - like having a visually stunning meal in addition to a flavorful one. That's how I percieve the 'fluff' portion of the entries - they're the plating of the dish, part garnish and part presentation. I think you've got that part of the metaphor down all right, but because of the way we categorize the scoring (Originality, power, elegance and use of the ingredient), the presentation of the dish actually touches on and influences three out of four of those elements - hence why it is often included in the scoring.

As a frequent contestant and an occasional judge, having the class presented in an interesting way, with a story that makes sense and explains how such a character might come about or be presented, it makes sense for the fluff of a build to influence its overall score. In the same way that using Truenamer (a very rare ingredient that's difficult to include properly in a palatable final product, in the same way that Durian is a very difficult ingredient to work with) can be either a master stroke of originality or an epic failure that ruins an entire piece of work - have a really compelling story to go with certain choices, tying all of the elements together thematically, it can make the difference between a lovely dish or a plate full of slop.

Hope that helps.

[Sewercop]

Thank you for your insight. It's interesting to hear how a real chef looks at our competition.

I'm not sure if you're looking at the fluff/crunch the same way I see it, though. The 'Iron Chef' aspect of the competition is just a metaphor - while we are just comparing builds, there is an artistic element to creating characters that cannot be ignored - like having a visually stunning meal in addition to a flavorful one. That's how I percieve the 'fluff' portion of the entries - they're the plating of the dish, part garnish and part presentation. I think you've got that part of the metaphor down all right, but because of the way we categorize the scoring (Originality, power, elegance and use of the ingredient), the presentation of the dish actually touches on and influences three out of four of those elements - hence why it is often included in the scoring.

As a frequent contestant and an occasional judge, having the class presented in an interesting way, with a story that makes sense and explains how such a character might come about or be presented, it makes sense for the fluff of a build to influence its overall score. In the same way that using Truenamer (a very rare ingredient that's difficult to include properly in a palatable final product, in the same way that Durian is a very difficult ingredient to work with) can be either a master stroke of originality or an epic failure that ruins an entire piece of work - have a really compelling story to go with certain choices, tying all of the elements together thematically, it can make the difference between a lovely dish or a plate full of slop.

Hope that helps.

Having a build presented with a good backstory that ties everything together is great. Sometimes even fantastic.
So yes, i do agree that fluff\backstory or what id call it,plating, is a big part of a build. But it is my opinion that it is unfair to not list it as a criteria.
I know i sound like i am taking a swing at some judges, I am not.
It just seems it weighs in alot.
Just like i think that power should be compared to the builds in the competition, not compared to similar builds outside the competiton.

Thats how i would score, if a were a judge. Just like i would want a build to show me how its tricks works in an elegant way...
rambling again...

Take the Durian, its said to have the most amazing taste of all the fruits in the world. But the smell(backstory\fluff) is so bad it actually made the fire department and police in Trondheim,Norway to go out to check were there was a propan leak!!!! Yeah that bad :) link is in norwegian.. sorry

Spoiler

Show

http://www.adressa.no/nyheter/trondh...cle1132983.ece

Then again, i would love to taste it. But thats me.

Being able to write a good(or bad) should not impact on an optimization challenge. Not all are good at that.

That said, i am looking forward to enter in one of these competitions when i get the time. If i present it with a story? Time wil show :)

Again, im not taking a swing at the challenge... I am after all planning to enter, so it cant be to bad :)

[flabort]

This is confusing. It looks like you all keep saying the same thing, but then keep replying with "Yes, but...", and then repeat your statement that was identical to theirs in the first place.
Not saying anyone in specific is doing it, but just tell me: Was there a memo to "Agree to Disagree upon Agreeing" that I missed?

[term1nally s1ck]

One is saying that since fluff is such a large part of what makes a build well marked, it should be noted as something that is judged on.

The other is saying that fluff is an intrinsic part of the categories already used, and shouldn't need mentioning.

[flabort]

...Oh.
I'd just mention in "Elegance" that fluff/back story is an intrinsic part of that category, since that's pretty much what is already says/is.

Their both right, so a compromise is in order: A passing mention in the category that already mentions it.

[Draz74]

I do not feel like any new contestant has the knowledge he needs to participate fairly.

That's what I did, anyway. My first Iron Chef was 14 (seeker of the song) and I took 1st place.

Interesting ... I have to admit, the only time I've taken 1st Place was, likewise, my first attempt at Iron Chef.

The only thing that irks me on judging is the tendency for people to dock dips instead of multiclassing penalties, or in some cases wildly more painfully than multiclass penalties.

That irks me, too, but when a couple of my entries were harshly penalized for it, I realized there was nothing to really do about it except to take this to heart:

There are multiple judges (usually). They are different people with different views on optimization and their own criteria. I thought that was kind of the point. Now if we start agreeing on how to score dips, how to score obscure sources and what constitutes them, how to score power vs. some kind of magical absolute scale, and so on, then what do we even need multiple judges for?

The in-elegance of "dipping" is a matter of opinion. It's an area where I happen to strongly disagree with certain judges that have judged me in the past, but as long as they're volunteering to spend their time and effort judging, their opinion still carries weight as far as my entries' scores are concerned. It's annoying, but it's kind of an inevitable part of having a judging system in general (particularly in a contest that is artistic, and therefore inherently subjective).

We can accept this, take it easy, and remember that in the end all that's at stake is a virtual trophy, or we can go all IRON CHEF IS SERIOUS BUSINESS and vote Olympic-style, with judges giving only scores with zero explanations nor disputes (and then chuckle at how the Russian judge gave the US contestant a terrible score, AGAIN, like we used to in the good old days).

An admirable aspiration.

[Hecuba]

On a non-procedural note, Ponies' domain swapping spell gave me an idea:

Enter Sublime Chord or Nar Demonbinder using Chameleon.
Use the flexible feat for Arcane Disciple.

It's a domain a day! A tad on the MAD side, but meh.

You should even have room in the Sublime Chord version for the Arcane Archer trick, though you'd have to take half-elf paragon for your first level to do so.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

On a non-procedural note, Ponies' domain swapping spell gave me an idea:

Enter Sublime Chord or Nar Demonbinder using Chameleon.
Use the flexible feat for Arcane Disciple.

It's a domain a day! A tad on the MAD side, but meh.

You should even have room in the Sublime Chord version for the Arcane Archer trick, though you'd have to take half-elf paragon for your first level to do so.

Chameleon can't qualify for Nar Demonbinder. Arcane disciple is fun, until you look at the 1/day usage limitation.

[ThreeDSix]

On a related note - to the thread, that is - Any thoughts on what the next SI will be?

Just asking cos nobody else has...

[DeAnno]

Send your suggestions into Private-Prinny, you could be the one to choose it yourself!

[Hecuba]

Chameleon can't qualify for Nar Demonbinder.

Why not? It should be able to get the spells and the skills are trivial with 5 other levels to burn and Able Learner. Sublime chord would be both more direct and faster though.

Arcane disciple is fun, until you look at the 1/day usage limitation.

That's standard for any class without domain slots gaining access to a domain. But choosing your domain each day would be a fairly significant flexibility option for Sublime Chord, where flexibility is normally limited by Spells Known.

[dextercorvia]

Why not? It should be able to get the spells and the skills are trivial with 5 other levels to burn and Able Learner. Sublime chord would be both more direct and faster though.



That's standard for any class without domain slots gaining access to a domain. But choosing your domain each day would be a fairly significant flexibility option for Sublime Chord, where flexibility is normally limited by Spells Known.

Chameleon can't use any of it's Focus abilities to qualify for things. It is in the class description.

You can’t use any abilities gained from your aptitude focus, ability boon, or mimic class feature abilities to qualify for a feat, prestige class, or other option.

Spontaneous casters with limited spells known don't have that problem if they get the domain another way.

[Cieyrin]

...Oh.
I'd just mention in "Elegance" that fluff/back story is an intrinsic part of that category, since that's pretty much what is already says/is.

Their both right, so a compromise is in order: A passing mention in the category that already mentions it.

When I've judged previously, I filed back story and fluff under Originality.

[OMG PONIES]

Chameleon can't use any of it's Focus abilities to qualify for things. It is in the class description.

I thought that was the problem--I want to make sure something I'm doing in another game is legal, now. If you take a level of Fortune's Friend, then take two levels of Chameleon, then another level of Fortune's Friend...do you benefit from FF's "+1 level in spellcasting class" when using Arcane or Divine Focus?

[AMFV]

All this debate is kind of pointless really in the end we (the contestants) submitted builds to the judges for their review. Of course their reviews are subjective, but then again so is the whole contest. Winning on the internet is not really all that important. I came up with what I thought was a good build, obviously I didn't win. I'm okay with that, but it bothers me that a large portion of the thread is spent arguing with judges over non rules related issues, this muddies up the the thread and makes it far less likely that genuine rules issues will be addressed at all (or if they are addressed, addressed sympathetically). In any case, I really want to thank the judges for putting in the time and effort they did to review all the builds. It's appreciated by at least some of us.

[flabort]

Winning on the internet is not really all that important.

I want to sig that. May I?

[AMFV]

I want to sig that. May I?

Go for it.

[Hecuba]

Chameleon can't use any of it's Focus abilities to qualify for things. It is in the class description.

Blah. Never saw that before.

Spontaneous casters with limited spells known don't have that problem if they get the domain another way.

Looking more closely, you're right. The larger issue, however, would be that it doesn't add to spells know, just to the class list. Would only work, then, for the controlled list arcane casters

[Cog]

I thought that was the problem--I want to make sure something I'm doing in another game is legal, now. If you take a level of Fortune's Friend, then take two levels of Chameleon, then another level of Fortune's Friend...do you benefit from FF's "+1 level in spellcasting class" when using Arcane or Divine Focus?

Nope. For the same reason it doesn't meet qualifications, Chameleon is not a "spellcasting class". Another example of a non-spellcasting class is Warlock; it gets a specific exemption to let +spellcasting affect it. Chameleon does not.

[Tam_OConnor]

On fluffing your creations: I'm actually mostly in favor of more generalized builds over specific characters. What I want out of Iron Chef is stuff I could use in my campaigns, which means that I need to be able to muck about with the backstory a bit.

However, at the same time, in the Ardent Dilettante contest, I really enjoyed one of the entries (V'grax) that gave a very complete backstory, because it was like following along a campaign.

I am human, and therefore entitled to be arbitrary.