# Forum > Gaming > Roleplaying Games > D&D 3e/3.5e/d20 >  Iron Chef E6 Appetizer Edition, Round XLI

## Venger

Hello, all, from your new Chair. Welcome back to the *Iron Chef Optimization Challenge E6 Appetizer Edition*! It's time for round forty one: something a bit more abstract.

The form of this challenge is to take a particular D&D 3.5 game element (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where applicablein the SI, though judges are encouraged to look favorably on builds that take as many levels as possible in said SI or that otherwise use it as heavily as possible.) 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 four categories: *Originality, Power, Elegance, and Use of the Secret Ingredient.* 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 - 9 on Monday, Dec 26, 2022* (1:59 AM GMT on Monday, December 26). 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I'll do my best, anyway. Judging is then encouraged to go as quickly as possible; if multiple judges volunteer, we'll set about a two-week window, but if we only get one judge, we'll try to wrap up as soon as possible after that judge presents scores. (I will admit that the deadline time may not be an exact science, but don't hide from me and we'll probably be cool.)*Kitchen:* Let's break this one down a bit.

*Spoiler: Let's talk about sources*
Show


*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. When you're wondering if UA content is allowed, err on the side of caution and don't mess around with it.*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.) However, as a specific exception for round 26, see below.*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.*

*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.Highlighted because of past issues: *It is not enough for your build to end with a level adjustment of +0. You must be +0 from start to finish. No using ANY build elements with a level adjustment above +0, even if they then get mitigated or reduced somehow.* However, note that a special exception is in place for round 26...*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*. You are allowed, but not required, to use this extremely spiffy tool that mattie_p cooked up (thanks, mattie_p!).*Spoiler*
Show

*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


Code for the table: *Spoiler*
Show

[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). When taking Open Minded as an epic feat, any skill that has ever been a class skill for you (including through your class, your race, your feats, or similar game elements, though please don't muck around with retroactively making something stop being a class skill for some stupid reason) is a class skill when determining how the 5 granted skill points may be spent. All usual rules about HD-related skill caps apply. When taking Open Minded as a non-epic feat, treat it as normal; the class skills of the class you took at the level you gained Open Minded (plus race, feats, etc.) are your class skills for those skill points, similar to if Open Minded's skill points came straight from your class.*Judging guidelines:* The minimum score in a category is 1, and the maximum is 5 (except in high-Originality rounds, wherein the maximum in Originality 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: 
*Spoiler*
Show

Judges 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:

*Skills*Allowed:
Giving a penalty for miscalculating the number of skill points gainedGiving a penalty for not having enough ranks to meet a prerequisiteIncreasing 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 
*Prereqs*Allowed:
Giving a penalty for not meeting prereqsScaling the penalty depending on how important the item that the build failed to qualify for isGiving minimum score in UotSI for not qualifying for the SINot 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 prereqTreating 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 workDeciding 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.
*Dispute guidelines (NEW, PLEASE PAY ATTENTION):* Disputing is long, annoying, and emotional. It's also sometimes necessary, but it's often not actually something that makes everyone have more fun. Let's go into a little more detail here.
*Spoiler*
Show

*Do NOT* dispute to make an argument that goes fundamentally beyond what's in your write-up. It is the responsibility of the chef to make sure that the write-up is complete and contains their best arguments for what the build does and why it's awesome. If you didn't explain your tactics well or didn't spell out something that a judge misses, just do better next time. Don't drag it out after the fact.*Do NOT* dispute just to be clever or witty or cheeky. Please. We're all adults here and so I assume you know what that means. Don't treat the build as a setup and your oh-so-clever dispute as the punchline. It's not as funny as it is in your head. Trust me. I've been down that road.*Do NOT* dispute just to say "oh yeah, my bad, I missed that" or some equivalent. If you're not directly challenging the judge, save the commentary until after the reveal. I 100% get that the urge to respond to commentary is very strong, but type it out and sit on it for a while if you've gotta.*Do NOT* dispute just to try to wheedle more points out of the judge. Note that this is different from saying that the judge is being truly unfair or is being truly wrong by black-and-white RAW. A dispute is NOT the place to try to scrape together a few last quarter-points. If you didn't put it in your write-up, _that's on you._ This also means that a dispute is really not the place to have long back-and-forth tit-for-tat arguments. That's a surefire way to get people grumpy. It's a contest on a D&D board, guys, not the results of a federal election.*Do NOT* dispute to tear down another build. That's just plain not cool. If you entered the contest, it's not on you to judge the other builds.*DO* dispute if the judge is being blatantly biased by giving you a substantially different ruling on a build element compared to another chef who used the same build element in nearly the same way. (Note that _position_ in a build may affect if you're using that element in "nearly the same way" or not.) Please reserve this for the truly blatant examples. I mean it. Remember, it's the contestant's responsibility to make their best argument in the original write-up.*DO* dispute if the judge is actively going against the contest rules. Note that there are relatively few ways in which a judge can go against contest rules (we intentionally give very wide discretion to our judges), but examples include truly breaking One Mistake One Penalty, penalizing just because of number of sources of (legal) material, and so on.*DO* dispute if the judge is clearly ignoring unambiguous RAW. Note that this is for unambiguous RAW; if the RAW is shady and you're making an argument that isn't completely clear and that it wouldn't be strange for a GM to frown on, _the judge has every right to frown on it as well._ (You generally know when you're indulging in shady RAW. Be mature about this.) But if the judge is saying you didn't hit a prereq that you clearly did hit (and included in your write-up!), saying you can't do something that the plain text of the ability says you can do, or anything like that, by all means, call 'em out.*Do NOT* dispute if the judge doesn't agree with your interpretation of ambiguous RAW. Yes, this is a retread of the previous bullet point; this is that important. If you're relying on ambiguous RAW, it's on you to lay out clearly why it should work the way you want it to work. Again, be mature and act in good faith: you really know when you're pushing things like this. If they don't like it, they don't like it. Move on.

*Disputing is a privilege, not a right. In the Chair's sole discretion, disputes that do not meet these guidelines and/or that do not seem to be offered in good faith may be suppressed. The Chair reserves the right to choose to post all, some, or none of a dispute if appropriate.*


*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: 
*LIGHT AND DARKNESS!*
 

Your dish must use and showcase the use of light and/or darkness. What that means is largely up to you, but please be as clear as possible about how you are utilizing them in your entry. 


_Allez Optimizer!_



*The Builds:*
Coming soon!


*Spoiler: Contest History*
Show


Round 4: Knight
Round 5: Ninja
Round 6: Racial Paragon Classes
Round 7: Hexblade
Round 8: Shugenja
Round 9: Swashbuckler
Round 10: Crusader
Round 11: Soulknife
Round 12: Factotum
Round 13: Prestige Classes
Round 14: Mountebank
Round 15: Sorcerer
Round 16: Dragon Shaman
Round 17: Lurk
Round 18: Paladin
Round 19: Scout
Round 20: Incarnate
Round 21: Shadowcaster
Round 22: Dragonmarks
Round 23: Fighter
Round 24: Pets
Round 25: Warlock
Round 26: Monsters
Round 27: Ardent (exhibition round)
Round 28: Rogue
Round 29: Signature Spells
Round 30: Any Prior Ingredient
Round 31: Ranger
Round 32: Tanking
Round 33: Psychic Warrior
Round 34: Flight
Round 35: Binder
Round 36: Skill tricks
Round 37: Barbarian
Round 38: Fire
Round 39: Bard
Round 40: Poison


*Spoiler: Way Old Stuff (2012 and earlier; Amechra's run as Chair)*
Show

Round 1: Divine Mind
Round 2: Monk
Round 3: Marshal

----------


## Venger

Here's a few gentle recommendations that are intended to improve scores and make things easier for the judges. As always, *THE RECOMMENDATIONS IN THIS POST ARE NOT RULES*. Judges and contestants are free to honor them or ignore them; my intent here is only to help, and NONE of what I'm saying here is required. (*That said, did you see the new dispute guidelines? Those ARE rules, so please go read them. And I'm even going to be better about enforcing them this time.*)

*Recommendations:*
 Double-check ALL of your prereqs. *Every. Single. One.* Feats, PrCs, whatever. You might even go so far as to spell out when you meet each one, but again, that's not a requirement. But one of the single biggest causes of point loss is failure to meet prereqs.Tell the judges what's cool about your build! You spent hours or days on this (y'know, probably) and know it inside and out, but the judges are getting a whole bunch of these dishes all at once and don't know the build history of each one. You're significantly more likely to score well if you spell out exactly what makes you awesome than if you try to just let it stand on its own.Make it easy to read! Skill tables are awful, though they're an incredibly necessary evil. Full Monster Manual-style statblocks are occasionally useful but are also _insanely_ dense if not formatted well. Judges are very likely to miss something if you aren't careful with how you present your info. Remember that judging takes a lot of time, energy, and focus, so don't rely on the judge being willing/able to decode something in order to see what makes you interesting!Be memorable. Remember that we've all seen these ingredients used at least once before. What makes you different?

----------


## MinimanMidget

I've already used my only idea for this theme, so I'll plan to judge.

----------


## AsuraKyoko

Alright, seems interesting. I'm in to cook!

----------


## loky1109

I have a terrible idea...

----------


## loky1109

Hello, everybody! How are you doing?

I think I'll be judge this time. My both ideas didn't enjoy me.

----------


## Inevitability

I submitted a pretty okay build, didn't really have inspiration or time for a second one.

----------


## Venger

How are people doing? Do people need more time? As it stands, I've just got the one submitted so far.

----------


## AsuraKyoko

I could use some more time, I have a build, but I need to finish the write-up.

----------


## loky1109

With extra week I maybe could breathe life into on of my ideas.

----------


## Venger

Extension granted. New deadline the 26th. OP updated.

----------


## loky1109

Mine sent.

----------


## AsuraKyoko

Entry submitted!

----------


## loky1109

Good! We'll have at least three entries.

----------


## Venger

Time for the reveal! Please refrain from posting until dishes have been revealed!

"Anyone who can hear the tale of the little match girl and not burst out laughing as a heart of stone."-- Oscar Wilde




> *The Little Match Girl*
> _"Won't you look at those pretty lights..."_
> 
> 
> 
> *LE Strongheart Halfling Duskblade 1 / Monk 2 / Cancer Mage 3*
> *Spoiler: Story*
> Show
> 
> ...

----------


## Venger

"It is better to light a candle than to curse the darkness." -- William L. Watkinson




> _I kindle the candle and darkness will flow from it.
> Duncan Aotrom_
> Duncan was old. Very old. Almost all his life he was a wizard's apprentice. Probably, he could have become a full wizard years ago, but... You know, wizards, those people who are obsessed with knowledge and magic. It wasn't about Duncan. He always was obsessed with light, shadows and candles. Most likely,  his life story would have ended this way. Forever apprentice till death and only on his gravestone would it be posthumously written "Wizard!"
> But fate decreed otherwise, one day his teacher had a colleague who remained in visiting. He looked at Duncan and said: "You have talent for shadow magic! I could give you one grimoire if your master had no objection to it." Master hadn't. Firstly, Duncan took the idea without enthusiasm, but when he began reading he imperceptibly sank into a book with all his mind. 
> 
> *TN Human Shadowcaster 5/Candle Caster 1*
> *Spoiler: Stats*
> Show
> 
> ...

----------


## Venger

"I want that star; I want it now. I want it all and I don't care how." -- King Nothing




> *Spoiler: Introduction*
> Show
> 
> Did you hear about what happened to that charlatan who used to hang around Kahar? You know, the one who would offer healing on the cheap? Apparently, a sinkhole opened up right underneath him and he fell in. Moments later, the hole filled with darkness, and then the screaming began. After a few minutes, the pit filled in, and an old, weathered looking man rose up out of the ground. He looked at the pilgrims, nodded, and just silently walked away, carrying some kind of large jar.
> - _Overheard in a tavern_
> 
> 
> 
> *Spoiler: Build*
> ...


and that's our round! Enjoy, everyone.

----------


## MinimanMidget

All of these are really creative, no-one went for anything at all obvious. Judging should be fun, I'll get started.

----------


## loky1109

Very interesting entries. Pretty unexpected, all three (even mine  :Small Cool: ).

*Table.*

*	 	Name	*
*	Alignment / Race	*
*	Class Levels	*
*	Chef	*
*	Total	*
*	Place	*

 	The Little Match Girl	
	LE Strongheart Halfling
	Duskblade 1/Monk 2/Cancer Mage 3




 	Duncan Aotrom, Candle of Shadow	
	TN Human
	Shadowcaster 5/Candle Caster 1




 	The Sandman	
	CN Necropolitan Asherati
	Spontaneous Domain Casting Cloistered Cleric 3/Walker in the Waste 3

----------


## AsuraKyoko

Pretty cool to see such varied builds! 2 builds with 3 levels in a prestige class is unusual, too.

----------


## Inevitability

Do we have a judge?

----------


## MinimanMidget

Yes, but despite being on holiday I haven't found time* to get stuck into it yet.

*Not helped by getting a Switch and Metroid Dread** for christmas.

**Which then lead to me deciding to beat Super and Fusion before starting it.

----------


## Inevitability

> Yes, but despite being on holiday I haven't found time* to get stuck into it yet.
> 
> *Not helped by getting a Switch and Metroid Dread** for christmas.
> 
> **Which then lead to me deciding to beat Super and Fusion before starting it.


Ah, I missed your earlier post, my bad. Have fun with the games and good luck with judging!

----------


## MinimanMidget

Sorry for the wait. And thanks, Inevitability, for jolting me into action. Sometimes a friendly reminder goes a long way.

Global judging note: I still struggle with judging theme rounds. My UotSI criteria are now split into 3, with one being ingredients, another being mechanical effect, and the third being overall theme/feel. Hopefully it makes it a little less nebulous than when I judged the Fire round. I'd be interested in any and all feedback on this.

*Spoiler: The Little Match Girl*
Show


*Spoiler: Originality*
Show


Strongheart halfling, ew. (-1)

Duskblade certainly isn't usual, but it's not too weird. But Cancer Mage 3? Wow. Any prestige class is unusual in E6, let alone 3 levels of it. And Cancer Mage normally only comes up in theoretical discussion about infinite strength. (+1)

There are some familiar favourites in there, but a lot of your feats are pretty weird. It's funny, I was expecting to see a lot of feats from DotU, but I was expecting the Darkness ones. (+0.5)

You called Duskblade + Fascinating Illumination a classic combo, but I've certainly never seen it before. Your core concept is new to me, and it's an unusual take on the theme. And your intro is just great. (+1)

Overall: 4.5


*Spoiler: Power*
Show


Hypnotic Pattern is a good spell, no doubt about it. It does suffer from the limitations both on what you can affect and what you can do to them while fascinated, but you've put a lot of thought into that. Your melee damage is decent, but it's tied to an attack bonus that's definitely lower than you'd want it to be, especially considering you're only making one attack per round. You're intending to augment your attacks with poison, but you don't have an obvious way to get your hands on any. Alchemical items, Cancer Mage abilities, even Sleight of Hand - you have a lot of what I'd call miscellaneous options. (+0.25)

You have a decent amount of hp, but while Tatterdemalion is indeed good light armour, your total AC is still not great. Your Fort is good, your Ref is better than you think it is (more on that in Elegance), and your Will is a little low. Good stealth scores help, as does Stench of the Dead. (+0)

In terms of utility, you're good at stealth and Sleight of Hand (which is a personal favourite of mine, although I know it's objectively not that useful). Craft (alchemy) has some non-combat usefulness, and Silent Image is always handy. A familiar is generally useful, especially a raven - you don't need to recommend it, since it's your build, you can just pick it. Infinite use short-range teleportation is also pretty useful outside of combat, and blindsight counts for something, too. You might struggle to contribute in social situations, but outside of that I think you'll almost always find something useful to do. (+0.5)

Overall: 3.75


*Spoiler: Elegance*
Show


I feel weird about the paragraph where you talk about how great the build is. Trust me, the build speaks for itself. This feels like you're telling me how to judge. (-0)

Your IL is too low to take Assassin's Stance, even if we assume the dodgy interpretation of prestige class IL. (-0.5)

Cancer Mage has good Fort and Ref, not just Fort. No penalty since it didn't matter, but it's something to watch out for. Also, tsk tsk, dndtools. (-0)

Important note from the rules on multiplying damage: "Extra damage dice over and above a weapons normal damage are never multiplied." Decisive Strike can double Craven, but not Sneak Attack damage or Chill Touch. I'm unconvinced that Chill Touch would be affected by Decisive Strike anyway, for what it's worth. (-0.25)

It's Stench of the Dead, not Stench of the Grave. Speaking of, I wish you'd mentioned the prerequisite event in your backstory somehow - those are spells that it's totally feasible to have been hit by in E6, but still, you don't have access to them yourself, and you shouldn't just ignore the requirement completely. (-0.25)

In a similar vein, the description of Poison Immunity says that you get it via repeated exposure. There's a lot of reasons why this would be impractical to achieve with purple worm poison. No penalty since it's not listed as a prerequisite, but I wanted to mention it. It's also a weird choice - do purple worms even exist in an E6 world? Anyway, unimportant. (-0)

Overall: 4


*Spoiler: Use of the Secret Ingredient*
Show


Your Dancing Lights-related feats are definitely on theme, I'm counting stealth skills as related, and I'd say Darkstalker and Shadow Jaunt count. That's about it for themed ingredients, though. (-0.5)

In terms of mechanics, you don't actually create any darkness or light, or interact with those mechanics at all. You don't even have darkvision yourself, your companion has to use its blindsight and tell you what it sees. (-0.5)

Thematically, I see Hypnotic Pattern/illusions in general as related to light, but distinct in terms of theme. It definitely helps that you're using them via Dancing Lights, though. (-0.25)

Overall: 1.75


Total: 14


*Spoiler: Duncan Aotrom, Candle of Shadow*
Show


*Spoiler: Originality*
Show


Human, boo. (-1)

Shadowcaster is always an unusual choice, even though it is very thematic for this round. Candle Caster even more so, although it's basically pure fluff, since you're only using it as a really expensive (but thematic) way to get Scribe Scroll. (+0.5)

So, this is kind of tough for me to judge, because the concept here is "Shadowcaster crafting scrolls to fix the uses/day problem". Which is a concept I've judged before, in the Shadowcaster round. It's certainly not something I expected to see, and I don't generally deduct points in Originality for a concept having appeared in a previous round. It's still a neat idea, and not an expected one. (+0.5)

What I will deduct points for, though, is your feats. I don't like seeing a list of the same feats taken repeatedly, but more importantly, this really just seems like you read the Complete Cost Reduction Handbook and said "cool, I'm doing that". If you came up with this combo on your own then I'm sorry, I've misjudged you, but even I'd heard of it before, and I avoid crafting like the plague. (-0.5)

Overall: 2.5


*Spoiler: Power*
Show


I don't know if you noticed, but candles have a _major_ disadvantage over scrolls.




> A successfully lit candle automatically activates the stored spell at the beginning of the candle casters action in the next round


There are certainly niche situations in which the effect happening on a one round delay would be a good thing, but it's far from the norm. Relying on candles is like all your spells having 1 round casting times.

There's also extra item juggling, since you need both the candle and a tindertwig, rather than just a scroll.

Ignoring all that, you have effectively unlimited uses of your shadowcaster mysteries. What's that worth? Well, your headline item is Clinging Darkness + Black Fire. Clinging Darkness is weird, but it's solid battlefield control. A lot of creatures can potentially just ignore it, though, since it inflicts no penalties beyond being unable to move. Black Fire is 3d6 cold damage per turn, which is...okay, but it really relies on being combined with Clinging Darkness to work. It's also Reflex negates, which isn't great - it says see text, but the text doesn't mention it. Classic ToM editing, I guess. Voice of Shadows is fine, but doesn't influence me much. Overall, you're definitely going to contribute to a party, but it's a contribution more in line with a 1st-level spellcaster than a 6th-level one. (-0.5)

Your max hp is pathetic. Steel Shadows is a good amount of AC, but the duration is a problem (you'll need to recast it a lot), and with your Dex your AC is still laughable anyway. Your Will is okay, but your Fort is on the low side, and your Ref is literally negative. (-1)

In terms of utility, you've got some Knowledge skills, and Umbral Hand is something. You're nominally a stealthy character, but with a Dex of 4, your totals are Hide 4 and Move Silently 1. Sight Obscured will get your Hide to 9, which is okay (though still not great), but the short duration really limits the circumstances where you can use it. Sight Eclipsed is nice, but there's enough problems here that I think stealth is more likely to be a liability for you than an asset. (-0.5)

I'm not going to give you free points for Ritual Transference - crafting cheap scrolls of your party members' spells is nice, but you can't reliably use them yourself, and your party members who could use them can just cast their spells themselves. With no 1-round delay. (+0)

Overall: 1


*Spoiler: Elegance*
Show


Another round, another paragraph about magic item crafting penalties. The contest rules aren't clear on how xp works, and whether you can afford to lose some. If each character gets enough xp to level to E10, the moment you craft something, you've lost access to your final feat. There's also potentially an issue with gold, too. My general rule when judging is to allow mundane items and ignore any magic items, since most builds don't assume they have access and we want a level playing field. There's obviously a big difference between "my character can craft these items" and "my character wants to buy these items", but I still feel weird about assuming you can fund your crafting, but others can't buy magic items. Normally, this would be a bigger penalty, since you're so reliant on crafting (it basically _is_ your build), but you've obviously reduced your costs a long way, and that does count for you here. It just doesn't remove the penalty completely. (-0.5)

You say "I think you agree with me, the possibility of obtaining +2 Int item isn't an overly bold assumption for me." But it's not an item you can natively craft, so it's exactly as much of an assumption as it would be for any other build. It'd be _cheaper_ for you, but nothing more. [-0.25]

Not that it matters, but Magical Artisan was updated in PGtF. Speaking of, setting specific feats from both FR and Eberron. (-0.5)

Applying Magical Artisan and Enhance Item to Extraordinary/Legendary/Exceptional Artisan (and each other) is dodgy as hell. It's probably legal, but this category is Elegance, not Legality. (-1)

Enhance Item is itself a problematic feat. It's poorly written, so it's not altogether clear, but it seems like it's supposed to allow you to use your actual ability score when calculating the DC rather than the minimum score required to create the item. I can certainly see how it can be read as just adding your ability modifier to the DC, so this is only going to be a ping. (-0.25)

Candle Caster requires you to have at least 100 tindertwigs. Yes, you can probably buy them, but it'd be a lot better if you had Craft (alchemy). I'd let it slide if you'd even mentioned it, but you straight up didn't address this at all. (-0.5)

Overall: 2


*Spoiler: Use of the Secret Ingredient*
Show


In terms of your ingredients, you've got Shadowcaster, which does a lot of heavy lifting here. Candle Caster helps a little, but it could be replaced with Scribe Scroll so easily (and the build would be better off) that it's really more of a seasoning. Your feats are all generic crafting feats, and your race is human. Your skills are largely unrelated to the theme, but Craft (candlemaking) and Hide definitely count. (+0.5)

Mechanically speaking, the only actual light and/or darkness you have is Black Candle, which you listed but never talked about. And as a fundamental, you can't craft a candle of it. (Which is a shame, because creating a black candle of Black Candle which can be lit to provide either light or darkness would be absolutely beautiful.) (-0.25)

Thematically, using candles to cast shadow magic is a pretty strong concept here. (+0.5)

Overall: 3.75


Total: 9.25


*Spoiler: The Sandman*
Show


*Spoiler: Originality*
Show


Oooh, asherati. So, this is completely unrelated to your judgement, but I'm a bit embarrassed. I did an asherati entry in the Lurk round, and I completely forgot that their illumination lets them see through sand. Anyway, you don't see a lot of asherati. Necropolitan is a lot more used, although not usually in this contest (more on that in Elegance). (+0.25)

Cloistered Cleric, bleh. Walker in the Waste is a lot more interesting - any prestige class is unusual in E6, let alone 3 levels of it. (+0.25)

You've got some unusual feats there, but taking Extra Turning four times weighs down your list a bit. (+0.25)

Your core concept is basically "Black Sand is cool". And yeah, Black Sand is pretty cool! As a result of that, though, it does get talked about a lot. (-0.25)

Overall: 3.5


*Spoiler: Power*
Show


Your core combo of Black Sand + Control Sand is interesting to judge in terms of power. It is rather costly in terms of spell slots, even with Retrieve Spell. The damage is fairly low, but a lot of enemies are going to find it near-impossible to escape, and the duration on both spells is long enough that if they don't have a way to escape, sooner or later they'll die. You can freely attack them while they're in the pit (presumably with your Dessicating Touch), but with no ability to move->attack->move, you do risk being retaliated against. If an enemy is immune to (or healed by) negative energy damage, they'll be a lot less threatened by this, although Control Sand with the darkness effect is still decent battlefield control. Enemies with options that allow them to escape the pit are a problem, and that brings me to an important point. Black Sand offers a Reflex save to avoid being caught in the area where it is cast. If you create a sandpit, then cast Black Sand at the bottom, can anyone escape with a successful save? If so, ouch. It also relies on you being in a desert (or other sandy terrain), obviously. Outside of the desert, you have your Dessicating Touch, which has a rather low attack bonus, even for a touch attack, and even with Knowledge Devotion. You're also planning to use a sandblaster to spray people with Black Sand, which is cool but not particularly dangerous. Of course, five levels of Cleric casting means you do have other options if you need them. (-0.25)

You have a solid pool of hp, and your AC should be good. In terms of saving throws, your Ref is on the low side. I guess there's no point discussing your low Fort save, and your (much better) Will save is almost never going to come up either. You do have the unique (among PCs) weakness to turning, and no Turning Resistance. You haven't specified whether, as a Neutral cleric, you're turning or rebuking, but if we generously assume you chose rebuking, you can bolster yourself. Anyway, there's no denying that the defensive benefits of being undead vastly outweigh the vulnerabilities. Including, of course, being healed by your own primary offense. Five levels of Cleric casting counts for something here, too. (+0.75)

In terms of utility, your Diplomacy score is okay (although being a Necropolitain may limit the situations where you can use it), you've got some Knowledge skills, Divine Intercession will see some use, and you (still) have five levels of Cleric casting. (-0.25)

Overall: 3.25


*Spoiler: Elegance*
Show


Necropolitan? Really? You have 4 copies of Extra Turning, and you couldn't spare one feat for Tomb-Tainted Soul to avoid this mess? The rules ban templates with LA > 0, which Necropolitan technically isn't. It can't be taken until 3rd level, or you just die, and it costs 3000 gp, as well as 2000 xp (at least). This is the same problem as crafting - the contest rules aren't clear on how xp works, and whether you can afford to lose some. If each character gets enough xp to level to E10, taking Necropolitan means you've lost access to your final feat. In terms of gold, spending 3000 gp to become a Necropolitan is roughly equivalent to relying on a specific magic item for your build, both in terms of cost and the assumption that you'll be able to find someone willing to sell it to you. (-1)

You took Knowledge (local) ranks, but you don't have 8 in time to qualify for Touchstone. In theory, you could qualify with a touchstone key, but that would be as bad a penalty or worse, anyway. (-0.5)

Qualifying for Black Lore of Moil via an SLA is a little dodgy, but relying on a higher-order power from a touchstone site is worse, since it requires you to go to a specific place that may not even exist in any given campaign. I'm just relieved you at least picked a site which is doable in E6 and by your character. (-0.5)

What are you a Cleric of? CN, Sand, Travel, and "Most cloistered clerics worship deities associated with knowledge and learning." I'm pretty sure the only deity with the Sand domain is Zoser, who doesn't have Travel. Presumably you'd tell me you're a Cleric of an ideal (desert or something like that?), but you didn't mention it in your build. (-0.25)

As a side note, Black Sand has the Evil tag, so you're not going to stay Neutral for long. Not worth a penalty, but worth mentioning.

Overall: 2.75


*Spoiler: Use of the Secret Ingredient*
Show


Asherati definitely counts toward the light part of the theme here. Sunlight Eyes counts too, although I really wish you'd told me which Light spell you're keeping prepared to power it - even if you're not planning on using it. Black Sand is obviously your big darkness-themed ingredient, and the build is centred on it, but the rest of your ingredients are not light- or darkness-themed in and of themselves. (-0.25)

Mechanically speaking, you're relying on magical asherati light to see, you're spreading magical darkness everywhere, and you can see through any and all illumination conditions. (+0.5)

Thematically, it's a little less clear. It really feels (to me, at least) more sand-themed than anything else, with undead/necromancy/negative energy as a strong flavour. (-0.25)

Overall: 3


Total: 12.5

----------

