Roleplaying GamesThe all-purpose forum for general advice or system-independent (or multi-system) discussion. Come discuss adventure plots, gamemastering dilemmas, or player advice here. For ruleset-specific discussions, see the subforums.
I'm neutral on all that stuff. If I were actually a judge, which I'm not brave enough to volunteer for and therefore no where near as awesome as those who do, I would've given you a hit in originality but not elegance. However, I could see judges giving you a hit to elegance for abusing caster level stacking, if that's what floated their swan boat feather token.
But you didn't get a hit for that. You got hit for being a duskblade/paladin/suel/abjurant build, which is already known for being effective. I can definitely see why they saw this as a powerful build with a secret ingredient tacked on. It's just sad because I can't think of what I'd replace those 8 levels with to make the character even better. Maybe Incantrix.
That's a bit unfair. The way the judges seem to have explained it is that it's a practical optimisation challenge.
Anyway, don't quite a few optimiser-types say that optimisation is supposed to be about "executing a character concept", rather than being necessarily about power? At least, that's the argument I've seen used.
__________________
I'm the author of the Alex Verus urban fantasy novels. Book #3 in the series, Taken, is now out in the US and UK! For updates, check my blog or the forum thread.
@arguskos: speaking only for myself, I have no difficult to speak on marks after the showdown. Even to a mildly pissed-off contestant. I really can understand your feelings and what you intended, but I feel also that it is a better option to answer question, even if you think they weren't to be askd in the first place.
@Amphetryon: in the end, I guess I said more or less everything. Please ask more if you feel something is not being clarified.
@Keld Denar:
I had to read all the judgements and, as far I can see, you score terribly in USI just in one judgement. In all the others, you were in the middle scores. That may be, in my opinion, because more than someone would have felt that being "interested in rock" is the cheapest way in the world to justify GSA's entry. I did, for example.
Others may have considered yours as a "yeah, GSA, but it would have been a better Suel Arcanamarch". I did, for example.
I (to stop predictable rethorical iteration), I also felt that all the others features except for spell levels and slam were ignored. And talking about slam: if it is the core of your entry, why you also took a greatclub? I even checked if - maybe - it was a flying greatclub. It wasn't. So, at best, you used what you claim to be a optimized class feature as a backup weapon, even investing two buffs on it. Which is unoptimal.
About elegance, your entry wasn't criticized by have too many classes. I see downs to be paladin without any justification, incarnum using without justification, very poor backstory, erratic level progression, unnecessary optimization on secondary things, excessive use of fonts.
The back and forth is justified, you say, to take slam - as I've already said, your backup weapon - and the in 'n out from Abjurant Champion to take Minor Shapeshift, which is a good justification in term of power but also a minus in terms of elegance (non harmonious progression, not even following a concept, but only power)
And, by the way, you weren't "slammed" at all. In past contests, I got several poor marks. It happens.
In general, about "Optimization Challenge".
Yes, it is not just about optimization. Yes, it is also different from IC from Brilliant Gameologist. But you were warned in advance. Go read page 2, by me: "The introduction to this thread has a recap of all the former contests. You can look at them to inspire yourself on how to post (strongly suggested, also to confront with overall quality)."
If you past from earlier to latter, you can see how the presentation improved. Look at first two, then at Cancer Mage, then go forward.
See? Presentation and backstories had become more and more important.
You feel it is bad? I don't. Giving the same time passed on stats optimization, why wouldn't be fair to add some plus to those that gives you stats to better check power, a picture or two - nothing exagerate - to make it better looking and a good backstory to read, fitting with the build presented?
Like in real Iron Chef, oysters on a dirt towel would be different from oysters in a lightly but good looking garnished plate, with good wine matched and a flower on your table.
Isn't it?
If it is like you say (wish?) in any challenge how would you can do better than:
Pun-Pun with 10 levels in GSA
Pun-Pun with 10 levels in Master of Masks
Pun-Pun with 10 levels in Warchanter
Pun-Pun with 10 levels in ... (ad libitum)
Last edited by Roland St. Jude : 07-15-2010 at 10:12 AM.
C'mon, now you're being unfair. Giving away the question on why do you take this so much at heart, given you've never challenged here, this is not just optimization.
These down here are the rules
Quote:
Originally Posted by Private-Prinny
Judging: Judging will be based on the following criteria, with each build rated from 1 (very poor) to 5 (exemplary) in each area: Originality, Power, Elegance, Use of Secret Ingredient.
Power level is up to you. Cheese is acceptable, but should be kept to a sane level unless you're showcasing a new TO build you've discovered. In the words of one of my predecessors, a little cheddar can be nice, but avoid the mature Gruyere unless you're making a cheese fondue.
Elegance could bear a little elaboration. It basically measures how skillfully you put your build together, and whether you sacrificed flavour for power. We're cooking here - if your dish doesn't taste good, it doesn't matter how well-presented it is. Use of flaws is an automatic point lost in this category. Other things that will cause lost points here are excessive multiclassing, and classes that don't fit the concept - using Cloistered Cleric in a front-line melee fighter, for example, will lose you points.
In most judgements, there were congratulations for the backstory, but ranks for the build itself.
And, if you're curious, you can go see IC IV, Stonelord. Bruingar (mine) was an entry with good compliments for the story and very poor marks for everything (elegance included). I could have had a better backstory, a five tome epic saga of Bruingar the dwarf, obtaining the same marks or even lesser (noone wants to read too much, or he'll buy a book and drink a soda instead of surfing the net).
In the end, while everyone likes public and competitors, there is no rule forcing anyone to witness (you seem not willing to participate) our contest.
You can even fond your own contest, the Sofawall optimization challenge, in which backstory is a minus by default and all is about optimization and power.
I'll even may participate, a couple of times
Last edited by Roland St. Jude : 07-15-2010 at 10:06 AM.
Anyway, yes, plating is important. Something has to catch your eye before you can start analyzing. Compare the last place entry from Iron Chef III to the twowinners.
The winners did have a short story, but much more time and focus was put on explaining exactly what their builds can do. The last place entry may have been strong, but I have no way of knowing that without any sort of explanation.
As mentioned in the build, and as others indicated (and as I will probably repeat here later in this post), GSA’s Construct benefits get me several things I wouldn't get otherwise: Immunity from Sneak Attacks, immunity from unlucky Criticals, immunity from being Poisoned by my own weapon via Disarm, and allowing me to coat MYSELF with poison for the Disarm-proof Slam attacks that a Halfling would otherwise be all but completely unable to use. It may not be GSA's 'design intent,' but it makes use of GSA's abilities to do something I'd otherwise be hard-pressed to do. It was disheartening to take all 10 levels of the PrC to achieve specific, stated, benefits, and get so low a score for Use of Secret Ingredient.
If by 'hard-pressed' you mean 'forced to spend a few XP and become a necropalitan', then I agree with you. The only thing GSA gives you that necropolitan does not is a slam attack. With a single soulmeld feat you could gain other types of natural attacks.
You only used GSA because of the contest; it is no way natural and your build would be far, far more powerful if, instead of wasting all those levels on gaining immunities you could gain with a SINGLE level spent on necropolitan, you used them to increase your versatility.
That's why I don't think it is a good use of GSA. It does not showcase the class' abilities, which is hard to do, sure, but was the whole point of the contest.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saph
That's a bit unfair. The way the judges seem to have explained it is that it's a practical optimisation challenge.
Anyway, don't quite a few optimiser-types say that optimisation is supposed to be about "executing a character concept", rather than being necessarily about power? At least, that's the argument I've seen used.
Quite obvious, I believe. Thanks, Saph.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Akal Saris
Second, congratulations to VT and his first place win! Starry-Eyes was a very cool character and my second-favorite of the competition after Amphetryon's entry :)
Starry was my fave. Congrats!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Akal Saris
Third, just to clear something up, Vorpal_Tribble inaccurately attributed the Skill Mastery feat to a netbook, while it is actually from Unearthed Arcana. I didn't want to reveal my entry however, so I did not correct VT on that. Guess I should have stated that in the thread after all though.
Akal, I'll have to say I think that feat is illegal, like we already discussed before.
To me, it's in the same spirit of doing a Monk/Fighter and saying 'we are using the Defense bonus rules, so my AC is striperific'.
Last edited by true_shinken : 07-15-2010 at 09:43 AM.
Anyway, yes, plating is important. Something has to catch your eye before you can start analyzing. Compare the last place entry from Iron Chef III to the twowinners.
The winners did have a short story, but much more time and focus was put on explaining exactly what their builds can do. The last place entry may have been strong, but I have no way of knowing that without any sort of explanation.
Well, frankly, I can see why explaining the mechanical parts of the build would be of use to the judges. I fail to see how writing a backstory tells the judges what your build does, though. It could explain an alignment shift, as one of those builds had, but it seems totally superfluous in the other.
If by 'hard-pressed' you mean 'forced to spend a few XP and become a necropalitan', then I agree with you. The only thing GSA gives you that necropolitan does not is a slam attack. With a single soulmeld feat you could gain other types of natural attacks.
You only used GSA because of the contest; it is no way natural and your build would be far, far more powerful if, instead of wasting all those levels on gaining immunities you could gain with a SINGLE level spent on necropolitan, you used them to increase your versatility.
That's why I don't think it is a good use of GSA. It does not showcase the class' abilities, which is hard to do, sure, but was the whole point of the contest.
This is just me, but 'you only used GSA/Warchanter/PrC XYZ because it is the focus of the contest' is a REALLY difficult objection to overcome. Ultimately, that line of reasoning becomes "you only used all 10 levels because it's the contest focus, so I'm deducting points,' or else 'you didn't use all 10 levels of the PrC that's the contest's focus, so I'm deducting points.' It becomes a circular pattern where there's no right answer.
If there is something that a GSA-centric build can do that cannot be replicated by any other WotC combination of Race/Class/Template/Feat, I haven't seen it. By the metric applied above, that means that all builds should be penalized for poor use of secret ingredient, doesn't it? I'd like to see the build that no other WotC product combination can replicate, honestly I would.
There are well-established power-house PrCs/templates/combos that can do everything the less popular PrCs can do. Judging a given entry against whether a PrC/template/feat - that is neither the focus of the contest nor entered in the build or contest - could do it better should ultimately reduce all scores for all entries to 3 or less as I see it. The best Gish PrC is Abjurant Champion; use anything else, and you should see a deduction. What does a given full-caster PrC do that Incantatrix or Iot7V doesn't do better? Can you show me a valid reason why a charge-focused build wouldn't just go standard Ubercharger, other than to use something different? At which point, of course, you get 1s and 0s on Originality.
__________________
Star Metallurgist of the Roy Fanclub
Who made my awesome Dwarf Hexblade avatar, you ask? BRC did!
This is just me, but 'you only used GSA/Warchanter/PrC XYZ because it is the focus of the contest' is a REALLY difficult objection to overcome. Ultimately, that line of reasoning becomes "you only used all 10 levels because it's the contest focus, so I'm deducting points,' or else 'you didn't use all 10 levels of the PrC that's the contest's focus, so I'm deducting points.' It becomes a circular pattern where there's no right answer.
Yeah, I know, it shafted me as well in ten Master of Masks challenge.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amphetryon
If there is something that a GSA-centric build can do that cannot be replicated by any other WotC combination of Race/Class/Template/Feat, I haven't seen it. By the metric applied above, that means that all builds should be penalized for poor use of secret ingredient, doesn't it? I'd like to see the build that no other WotC product combination can replicate, honestly I would.
Well, I believe that's part of the reason no one got high scores on Use of Secret Ingredient.
I didn't give anything higher than 3.5, I believe.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amphetryon
There are well-established power-house PrCs/templates/combos that can do everything the less popular PrCs can do. Judging a given entry against whether a PrC/template/feat - that is neither the focus of the contest nor entered in the build or contest - could do it better should ultimately reduce all scores for all entries to 3 or less as I see it. The best Gish PrC is Abjurant Champion; use anything else, and you should see a deduction.
Yeah, that example is EXACTLY what shafted me last time. I didn't even argue on it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amphetryon
What does a given full-caster PrC do that Incantatrix or Iot7V doesn't do better? Can you show me a valid reason why a charge-focused build wouldn't just go standard Ubercharger, other than to use something different? At which point, of course, you get 1s and 0s on Originality.
That's the thing, I believe. You sacrifice at some categories to gain points in others.
'Valid reason' sometimes is backstory, which is hard to do as a GSA, because 'I like rocks' is kinda poor. Justify your choices, that's how I see it.
'Valid reason' sometimes is backstory, which is hard to do as a GSA, because 'I like rocks' is kinda poor. Justify your choices, that's how I see it.
Addiction to space crack.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dead Levels
The monk is the only other core class, aside from the barbarian, that has no dead levels. Players always have something to look forward to with the monk, which boasts the most colorful and unique special abilities of all the character classes.
Well, I believe that's part of the reason no one got high scores on Use of Secret Ingredient.
That's also why scores should scale based on the challenge... If nobody can use the Secret Ingredient, maybe bump all the scores a full point? Use the full range from 0-5?
Well, I believe that's part of the reason no one got high scores on Use of Secret Ingredient.
I didn't give anything higher than 3.5, I believe.
As I said in my original long post, that indicates to me there might be something wrong with the scoring rubric in general. Having a scale from 1 - 5 where a 4 or higher isn't possible while using the main ingredient of the contest might say something about the scale.
__________________
Star Metallurgist of the Roy Fanclub
Who made my awesome Dwarf Hexblade avatar, you ask? BRC did!
Sheriff of Moddingham: If this thread can't be operated without the bad sportsmanship and drama, we're going to have to close it. I recommend that you do not disclose any details of judging beyond the list of winners and/or create a rule against discussion of the judging after the contest has been completed.
Not only does the kind of bad sportsmanship and bickering going on make it harder to obtain judges and participants for the future, it also makes this thread one in need of constant moderation - something we don't have time for and will have to lock rather than visit and moderate constantly.
__________________
Fedoruman Roland Avatar by Chris the Pontifex
Band of local heroes seeks Magic User. Join our long-running Rules Cyclopedia/BECMI game Old Ways.
That's also why scores should scale based on the challenge... If nobody can use the Secret Ingredient, maybe bump all the scores a full point? Use the full range from 0-5?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amphetryon
As I said in my original long post, that indicates to me there might be something wrong with the scoring rubric in general. Having a scale from 1 - 5 where a 4 or higher isn't possible while using the main ingredient of the contest might say something about the scale.
Mathematically, this does not make any difference, so I don't see a reason to adress it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sofawall
{scrubbed}
That was uncalled for. I'll refrain from answering it.
Since even the mods came to talk about the discussion on judges, I'll have to add my 2 cents. I really don't think arguing like this about the scores is good for the challenge or good in any way at all. Sometimes you win, sometimes you don't. I participated as a contestant last time, got some good scores, some bad scores, saw some complains I did not agree with, but I simply took it. I think complaining about scores could be done by PM (like a few contestants already did with me this time around) specially to keep things more civil. Iron Chef is also about (or at leats I think it is) bonding with other forum members and sharing your secrets, your tricks or simply your background ideas. The complaining goes in the diametrically opposite direction and I think it should be kept to a minimum or done privatelly.
Also, Prinny - what about the next contest, what can we expect for it?
Last edited by Roland St. Jude : 07-15-2010 at 10:21 AM.
Also, Prinny - what about the next contest, what can we expect for it?
I'll have it up on Sunday. I still need to need to come up with a new Secret Ingredient (Note: it will not be Ardent Dilletante), and it'll give everyone a few days to calm down and forget the end of this thread. If this level of bickering happens again, I wouldn't blame the mods at all for locking it on sight.
Anyway, don't quite a few optimiser-types say that optimisation is supposed to be about "executing a character concept", rather than being necessarily about power? At least, that's the argument I've seen used.
That's a good point, and can explain why an "Optimization" challenge favors entries where, as some judges have put it, "I can't tell whether the mechanics or the fluff came first in designing this character."
__________________
You can call me Draz. Trophies:
Work on my homebrew system, CRE8, is still marching slowly onwards. I think I can see the light at the end of the tunnel -- an Alpha release -- in the distance now. Read my Design Goals here.
I would like to play again. I only have access to the completes, ToM, ToB, LM, HoH and a whole heap of 3e books. If you do the hippo thing, I'll have to sit the next one out.
Crazy idea: Perhaps we could make a new account on these Forums, and make its access password known to everyone who is entering an Iron Chef, so that contestants in these threads could make anonymous posts to answer questions/correct misconceptions while the contest is running?
Stolen from Doc Roc's extra "Test of Spite" account.
__________________
You can call me Draz. Trophies:
Work on my homebrew system, CRE8, is still marching slowly onwards. I think I can see the light at the end of the tunnel -- an Alpha release -- in the distance now. Read my Design Goals here.
RSS Feeds: 
Re: Iron Chef Optimization Challenge VII
