Gestalt Character LA +2 [Archive] - Wizards Community

Gestalt Character LA +2 [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Kurama Youko
09-15-04, 06:47 PM In campaign where some players want to use Gestalt characters and others dont because they feel its to powerful is the compromise of a LA reasonable? If so is LA+2 a good price for gestalting? I for one dont feel that Gestalt characters are as insanely powerful as people make them out to be, the precise allocations of skill points and feats and as well as choosing a good combo that doesnt hurt each other makes it kind of interesting but also difficult. Though i of course can see the power difference between one and a non gestalt character of one of the two combinded classes. So what say you people that there? LA +2 or high or lower?
TJMHPH
09-15-04, 07:35 PM since the book says gestalt characters are capable of taking on cr's almost double the level say +3/4, +2 would be too cheap. consider this they get the best skill points, hd, saves, bab etc. so atleast +3 if not +4. just recently reread gestalt.
Templar_Prime
09-15-04, 07:54 PM This question seems to pop every now and then. The answer is stated very clearly in UA. It's called "all or none".
Xeviat-DM
09-15-04, 08:00 PM since the book says gestalt characters are capable of taking on cr's almost double the level say +3/4, +2 would be too cheap. consider this they get the best skill points, hd, saves, bab etc. so atleast +3 if not +4. just recently reread gestalt.

WHAT??? UA states that challenge ratings for monsters should be reduced by 1, or by 2 if they rely upon failed saves to become a challenge (the book notes the Medusa). It doesn't say anything about a party of gestalts being able to handle twice their level in a CR.

Compare a gestalt to a character with the leadership feat. Leadership can grant a cohort with a level 2 lower than the character under optimal circumstances. A level 12 Sorcerer with a level 10 Cleric cohort is suposed to be the same power as a level 12 Sorcerer with a different feat. Gestalts additionally have to spread their equipment and ability scores to cover two different classes (which is especially difficult for double spellcaster gestalts).

LA -2 would seem fine with me, but do not allow MC-fix PrCs if you do this.
Lina_Inverse
09-15-04, 08:00 PM the book clearly states gestalts are 50% stronger.hence +1CR(yes that is how much a CR represents except CR1-3.check the exp charts >.>).but they will have items consumate with there imrpoved level SOOOO.LA+2 is fair,espilly considering things such as mys-theurg(-3 levels) oh and cohorts,a level-2 buddy stronger than if your gestalted(2 actions baby!)
Kurama Youko
09-16-04, 08:41 AM Xeviat-DM and Lina (Dragon Slave) Inverse :D seem to be thinking what me and a friend were thinking. I dont know if any other DM that we know would considering this option as well but my friend is the current DM so he brought it up albeit after everyone already had characters made and the campaign was underway.

Xeviat: You mean LA +2 right? What exactly are the MC-Fix PrC, Mystic Theurge, Eldritch Knight? You mean PrC that combinations of two class aspects. Do the Full BAB half Caster Lv PrC count as MC, like Bladesinger and Spellsword? Or the few Arcane Spellcaster PrC that give access to Divine Spells albeit it at less than half caster lv?
Lina_Inverse
09-16-04, 08:45 AM Xeviat-DM and Lina (Dragon Slave) Inverse :D seem to be thinking what me and a friend were thinking. I dont know if any other DM that we know would considering this option as well but my friend is the current DM so he brought it up albeit after everyone already had characters made and the campaign was underway.

Xeviat: You mean LA +2 right? What exactly are the MC-Fix PrC, Mystic Theurge, Eldritch Knight? You mean PrC that combinations of two class aspects. Do the Full BAB half Caster Lv PrC count as MC, like Bladesinger and Spellsword? Or the few Arcane Spellcaster PrC that give access to Divine Spells albeit it at less than half caster lv?

bladesinger&spellsword dont.they really dont fix the problem unlike the fix trio.they give half caster and other abilitys while eldritch and such give full(or nearly so) and barely any abilitys.diffrent ideas in there makeing.

heres more proof its LA+2.use the flat exp system(mmmm) and give them 1/2 exp.at level20 they will be 2 levels below.
my dm is useing that option to allow us to be gestalts.
Kiri Sittori
09-16-04, 09:28 AM bladesinger&spellsword dont.they really dont fix the problem unlike the fix trio.they give half caster and other abilitys while eldritch and such give full(or nearly so) and barely any abilitys.diffrent ideas in there makeing.

heres more proof its LA+2.use the flat exp system(mmmm) and give them 1/2 exp.at level20 they will be 2 levels below.
my dm is useing that option to allow us to be gestalts.

Actually... it's more than that.

Exp === Standard level === Gestalts (1/2 exp) level
1k - 2 - 1
3k - 3 - 2
6k - 4 - 3 (barely!)
10k - 5 - 3
15k - 6 - 4
21k - 7 - 5
28k - 8 - 5
36k - 9 - 6
45k - 10 - 7
55k - 11 - 7 (and really, really close to 8)
66k - 12 - 8
78k - 13 - 9
91k - 14 - 10
105k - 15 - 10
120k - 16 - 11
136k - 17 - 12
153k - 18 - 12 (and rather close to 13)
171k - 19 - 13
190k - 20 - 14
210k - 21 - 15 (exact. And standards are Epic now.)

Or were you talking about the other method, where L20 takes 2.6 million EXP? Because, personally, I like the standard method --- it (somewhat better) resembles how single vs. multi classes worked in second edition.

(Specifically, half of L20 for fighter, paladin, ranger, or cleric was exactly L14, and half of L20 for wizard, thief, and bard was exactly L15.)
Lina_Inverse
09-16-04, 09:34 AM Actually... it's more than that.

Exp === Standard level === Gestalts (1/2 exp) level
1k - 2 - 1
3k - 3 - 2
6k - 4 - 3 (barely!)
10k - 5 - 3
15k - 6 - 4
21k - 7 - 5
28k - 8 - 5
36k - 9 - 6
45k - 10 - 7
55k - 11 - 7 (and really, really close to 8)
66k - 12 - 8
78k - 13 - 9
91k - 14 - 10
105k - 15 - 10
120k - 16 - 11
136k - 17 - 12
153k - 18 - 12 (and rather close to 13)
171k - 19 - 13
190k - 20 - 14
210k - 21 - 15 (exact. And standards are Epic now.)

Or were you talking about the other method, where L20 takes 2.6 million EXP? Because, personally, I like the standard method --- it (somewhat better) resembles how single vs. multi classes worked in second edition.

(Specifically, half of L20 for fighter, paladin, ranger, or cleric was exactly L14, and half of L20 for wizard, thief, and bard was exactly L15.)

hey um,i said flat exp.did you forget if your 2nd level and there 4th you GET TWICE THE EXP EVERYONE ELSE DOES?youll be ZERO levels behind under the normal exp system.

2E?bah in 2E everyone was multiclass and you were ONE level behind untill the equivelent of epic which was 10th.
Kiri Sittori
09-16-04, 09:54 AM hey um,i said flat exp.did you forget if your 2nd level and there 4th you GET TWICE THE EXP EVERYONE ELSE DOES?youll be ZERO levels behind under the normal exp system.

2E?bah in 2E everyone was multiclass and you were ONE level behind untill the equivelent of epic which was 10th.

My bad --- I forgot to mention that the gestalt character needs twice as much EXP as a standard character, for each level. So for you to be third level, you'd need 6000 experience (same as a L4 standard character,) and you wouldn't hit fourth level until 12000.

In other words:

Level === Gestalt experience required

1 - 0
2 - 2k
3 - 6k
4 - 12k
5 - 20k
6 - 30k
7 - 42k
8 - 56k
9 - 72k
10 - 90k
11 - 110k
12 - 132k
13 - 156k
14 - 182k
15 - 210k (and standard characters have just reached Epic here.)
16 - 240k
17 - 272k
18 - 306k
19 - 342k
20 - 380k

Thus, gestalts do fall behind, and at a rate that can't quite be called "slow."
Razorblade Smile
09-16-04, 10:22 AM Twice the experience?! That's insane. Gestalt classes are nice, but they're not that nice! You still have a limited number of feats, a limited number of skills, a limited number of magic items, and -- most importantly -- a limited number of actions. They're not even close to being twice as powerful as a normal character, and they're definitely not powerful enough to warrant an experience penalty of that huge magnitude (which is even worse than twice)! Yeesh!

That said, considering a gestalt character to be LA +2 sounds like a good house rule to experiment with to me. I'd probably add in a caveat that states that you can't buy that LA off if using the optional rule in UA for doing so. That way they're always two levels behind a standard character.
Kiri Sittori
09-16-04, 12:09 PM Twice the experience?! That's insane. Gestalt classes are nice, but they're not that nice! You still have a limited number of feats, a limited number of skills, a limited number of magic items, and -- most importantly -- a limited number of actions. They're not even close to being twice as powerful as a normal character, and they're definitely not powerful enough to warrant an experience penalty of that huge magnitude (which is even worse than twice)! Yeesh!

That said, considering a gestalt character to be LA +2 sounds like a good house rule to experiment with to me. I'd probably add in a caveat that states that you can't buy that LA off if using the optional rule in UA for doing so. That way they're always two levels behind a standard character.

It's at least better than the days when you'd *average* Hit Dice (instead of taking the best,) and didn't get ANY HD progressions after level 10... AND had to split experience in half.

But, if you wanna do a level adjustment instead, might I suggest LA+3 instead. I base it on this:

Consider the (Clr/Wiz)13 gestalt. Then compare it to the minimum core equivalent: a Clr3/Wiz3/MyTh10 (character level: 16.) You get the same caster levels, but you also get full progression on cleric's turn undead and possible domain abilities, familiar progression, wizard feats, better HD and PROBABLY HP, better Fort save, and better BAB. (Bad rolling can take anyone's HP down a notch :P )

All that extra goodness, three levels earlier. LA+3 seems just fine.

To say this, though: Would "a gestalt needs 50% more experience to level up" be quite as insane?

2 - 1500
3 - 4500
4 - 9k
5 - 15k (fully one level behind now)
6 - 22500
7 - 31500
8 - 42k
9 - 54k (nearly two levels back now)
10 - 67500
11 - 82500
12 - 99k
13 - 117k
14 - 136500 (now three back)
15 - 157500
16 - 180k
17 - 194k
18 - 229500
19 - 256500
20 - 285k (At this point, you'd be four behind... by which point, the game is Epic, and it shouldn't matter.)
21 - 315k
Razorblade Smile
09-16-04, 01:21 PM If you for a character to obtain twice as much experience, you're effectively cutting his experience in half for purposes of determining his level advancement. Thus while everyone else has 136,000xp and just hit 17th level (the point when most spellcasters get 9th level spells), you'd have the equivalence of 68,000xp which means you're just a little beyond 12th level and still stuck with 6th level spells. That's *way* insane as far as game balance.

Also, using the Mystic Theurge as an example is also bad form because the Mystic Theurge is technically just a weak gestalt class as it's pretty much Wizard-Cleric gestalt without the class features and good Fortitude save. Considering Wizards and Clerics don't really gain anything beyond spell advancement short of a slightly improved familiar and stronger turn undead capabilities, it's not even that weak of a gestalt class (though this is exactly why it's banned from the gestalt rules -- because it's already a gestalt).

In any case, an LA +3 isn't too bad but I would experiment with LA +2 first. Like the gestalt rules state, they're only slightly more powerful in the grand scheme of things than a standard character. It just seems worse on paper than it does in practice. But then again, that seems to be something a lot of people on these boards can't quite grasp.
Kiri Sittori
09-16-04, 10:49 PM If you for a character to obtain twice as much experience, you're effectively cutting his experience in half for purposes of determining his level advancement. Thus while everyone else has 136,000xp and just hit 17th level (the point when most spellcasters get 9th level spells), you'd have the equivalence of 68,000xp which means you're just a little beyond 12th level and still stuck with 6th level spells. That's *way* insane as far as game balance.

Also, using the Mystic Theurge as an example is also bad form because the Mystic Theurge is technically just a weak gestalt class as it's pretty much Wizard-Cleric gestalt without the class features and good Fortitude save. Considering Wizards and Clerics don't really gain anything beyond spell advancement short of a slightly improved familiar and stronger turn undead capabilities, it's not even that weak of a gestalt class (though this is exactly why it's banned from the gestalt rules -- because it's already a gestalt).

In any case, an LA +3 isn't too bad but I would experiment with LA +2 first. Like the gestalt rules state, they're only slightly more powerful in the grand scheme of things than a standard character. It just seems worse on paper than it does in practice. But then again, that seems to be something a lot of people on these boards can't quite grasp.

Ok... it's not exactly bad form, since it's the ONLY way to make a reasonable comparison between the two methods. To compare two things that are fundamentally similar. I could toss up "barbarian/fighter vs. pure barbarian," and show just how superior Going Nuts can be when feat chains are added in... or mention (just as gestalt rules do) how the "bardarian" can start up some of the bardic music abilities WHILE Going Nuts.

And the 136k isn't all that "insane" : going back to the MyTh example, if a character entered MyTh at Clr5/Wiz5, then after reaching MyTh7 (CL17) he'd have 12th level casting in both classes. Just like that 136kXP gestalt.

It's not insane because it's consistent with the price some core characters *already* pay for "becoming gestalts."

Now... for another argument. Please do a buildout on a gestalt that took Wizard/Fighter at first level, and Wizard/Cleric for all the rest. Is the BAB +15 or +20?

Then, take a Monk/Commoner for every level, except 5, 9, 13, 17, and 20, upon which you'd take Monk/Ranger instead. What are the saves? (Either they'll be 12/12/12, 14/14/12, or 21/21/18.)
Xeviat-DM
09-17-04, 01:04 AM Wow, you know, I never thought to compare the mystic theurge to the wizard/cleric gestalt. I still stand by my sorcerer with leadership for a cleric-2 cohort, which is one reason I don't think the mystic theurge is overpowered, but you do have a point.
darczero
09-29-04, 04:22 AM I like the idea of Gestalt characters.

In a game featuring only one Gestalt character, they should have either some penalty to XP or a LA to compensate for the fact that they are more powerful than standard (single-classed) PC's of the same level.

I also agree with the book - one Gestalt character in a group of non-Gestalts is unfair to the rest of the players. So, since everyone in the group should be Gestalt, there should be no problem.

And I haven't seen the 3.5 MM yet, but in the 3rd ed, almost all CR's for monsters were either too low or too high anyway. And almost all the CR's for monsters in the Epic book were way below the actual difficulty of the monsters.

Level Adjustment is unneccesary for Gestalt characters as long as the DM keeps track of how difficult the encounters actually are for the PC's and awards XP accordingly (1/2, or 1.25, or whatever).

And yes, if the Gestalt option is allowed, the massive selection of PrC that simply combine the features of two classes should be disallowed (20th level character... 5 Cleric/5 Wizard/1 True Necromancer/9 Mystic Theurge = Caster Level 29+ for Necromancy/Death spells!)
Kiri Sittori
09-29-04, 09:29 AM There's another problem that I realised with using a static LA for gestalts: gestalts get better disproportionately to core characters.

Consider a paladin/fighter vs. a core paladin. At first, the difference is only one feat; but as these two characters progress, the feat differences will add up fairly quickly.

Really, one could pair any two classes in this manner (consider monk/rogues, or the Improved Spell Engine capabilities of any two of cleric, druid, favoured soul, shugenja, shaman, wizard, sorcerer.)

Proposal: To simulate a desired level adjustment for gestalt/core campaigns, force gestalt players to take a "Level Adjustment" level every four, five, or six levels; the actual adjustment is up to the DM. This "LA" level does not contribute to any aspect of the character's classes; it does, however, allow the character-level feats and stat increases to occur as normal.

Example: Korjin Bloodforge is a (Ftr/Clr)4. When he increases to level 5, he must take a Level Adjustment level (since the DM chose 1/5 for this.) Thus, though he's ECL=5, he's still 4th level in his classes.
Later on, Korjin is 12th level in his classes (ECL=14.) Raising to 15th level, he must take another Level Adjustment (so now he's ECL=15 but still 12th class levels.) But he gets his character-level feat as usual.

(Inspired by the way Bloodlines are handled, as well as dragon levelling in the Draconomicon.)

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Kurama Youko 09-15-04, 06:47 PM	In campaign where some players want to use Gestalt characters and others dont because they feel its to powerful is the compromise of a LA reasonable? If so is LA+2 a good price for gestalting? I for one dont feel that Gestalt characters are as insanely powerful as people make them out to be, the precise allocations of skill points and feats and as well as choosing a good combo that doesnt hurt each other makes it kind of interesting but also difficult. Though i of course can see the power difference between one and a non gestalt character of one of the two combinded classes. So what say you people that there? LA +2 or high or lower?
TJMHPH 09-15-04, 07:35 PM	since the book says gestalt characters are capable of taking on cr's almost double the level say +3/4, +2 would be too cheap. consider this they get the best skill points, hd, saves, bab etc. so atleast +3 if not +4. just recently reread gestalt.
Templar_Prime 09-15-04, 07:54 PM	This question seems to pop every now and then. The answer is stated very clearly in UA. It's called "all or none".
Xeviat-DM 09-15-04, 08:00 PM	since the book says gestalt characters are capable of taking on cr's almost double the level say +3/4, +2 would be too cheap. consider this they get the best skill points, hd, saves, bab etc. so atleast +3 if not +4. just recently reread gestalt. WHAT??? UA states that challenge ratings for monsters should be reduced by 1, or by 2 if they rely upon failed saves to become a challenge (the book notes the Medusa). It doesn't say anything about a party of gestalts being able to handle twice their level in a CR. Compare a gestalt to a character with the leadership feat. Leadership can grant a cohort with a level 2 lower than the character under optimal circumstances. A level 12 Sorcerer with a level 10 Cleric cohort is suposed to be the same power as a level 12 Sorcerer with a different feat. Gestalts additionally have to spread their equipment and ability scores to cover two different classes (which is especially difficult for double spellcaster gestalts). LA -2 would seem fine with me, but do not allow MC-fix PrCs if you do this.
Lina_Inverse 09-15-04, 08:00 PM	the book clearly states gestalts are 50% stronger.hence +1CR(yes that is how much a CR represents except CR1-3.check the exp charts >.>).but they will have items consumate with there imrpoved level SOOOO.LA+2 is fair,espilly considering things such as mys-theurg(-3 levels) oh and cohorts,a level-2 buddy stronger than if your gestalted(2 actions baby!)
Kurama Youko 09-16-04, 08:41 AM	Xeviat-DM and Lina (Dragon Slave) Inverse :D seem to be thinking what me and a friend were thinking. I dont know if any other DM that we know would considering this option as well but my friend is the current DM so he brought it up albeit after everyone already had characters made and the campaign was underway. Xeviat: You mean LA +2 right? What exactly are the MC-Fix PrC, Mystic Theurge, Eldritch Knight? You mean PrC that combinations of two class aspects. Do the Full BAB half Caster Lv PrC count as MC, like Bladesinger and Spellsword? Or the few Arcane Spellcaster PrC that give access to Divine Spells albeit it at less than half caster lv?
Lina_Inverse 09-16-04, 08:45 AM	Xeviat-DM and Lina (Dragon Slave) Inverse :D seem to be thinking what me and a friend were thinking. I dont know if any other DM that we know would considering this option as well but my friend is the current DM so he brought it up albeit after everyone already had characters made and the campaign was underway. Xeviat: You mean LA +2 right? What exactly are the MC-Fix PrC, Mystic Theurge, Eldritch Knight? You mean PrC that combinations of two class aspects. Do the Full BAB half Caster Lv PrC count as MC, like Bladesinger and Spellsword? Or the few Arcane Spellcaster PrC that give access to Divine Spells albeit it at less than half caster lv? bladesinger&spellsword dont.they really dont fix the problem unlike the fix trio.they give half caster and other abilitys while eldritch and such give full(or nearly so) and barely any abilitys.diffrent ideas in there makeing. heres more proof its LA+2.use the flat exp system(mmmm) and give them 1/2 exp.at level20 they will be 2 levels below. my dm is useing that option to allow us to be gestalts.
Kiri Sittori 09-16-04, 09:28 AM	bladesinger&spellsword dont.they really dont fix the problem unlike the fix trio.they give half caster and other abilitys while eldritch and such give full(or nearly so) and barely any abilitys.diffrent ideas in there makeing. heres more proof its LA+2.use the flat exp system(mmmm) and give them 1/2 exp.at level20 they will be 2 levels below. my dm is useing that option to allow us to be gestalts. Actually... it's more than that. Exp === Standard level === Gestalts (1/2 exp) level 1k - 2 - 1 3k - 3 - 2 6k - 4 - 3 (barely!) 10k - 5 - 3 15k - 6 - 4 21k - 7 - 5 28k - 8 - 5 36k - 9 - 6 45k - 10 - 7 55k - 11 - 7 (and really, really close to 8) 66k - 12 - 8 78k - 13 - 9 91k - 14 - 10 105k - 15 - 10 120k - 16 - 11 136k - 17 - 12 153k - 18 - 12 (and rather close to 13) 171k - 19 - 13 190k - 20 - 14 210k - 21 - 15 (exact. And standards are Epic now.) Or were you talking about the other method, where L20 takes 2.6 million EXP? Because, personally, I like the standard method --- it (somewhat better) resembles how single vs. multi classes worked in second edition. (Specifically, half of L20 for fighter, paladin, ranger, or cleric was exactly L14, and half of L20 for wizard, thief, and bard was exactly L15.)
Lina_Inverse 09-16-04, 09:34 AM	Actually... it's more than that. Exp === Standard level === Gestalts (1/2 exp) level 1k - 2 - 1 3k - 3 - 2 6k - 4 - 3 (barely!) 10k - 5 - 3 15k - 6 - 4 21k - 7 - 5 28k - 8 - 5 36k - 9 - 6 45k - 10 - 7 55k - 11 - 7 (and really, really close to 8) 66k - 12 - 8 78k - 13 - 9 91k - 14 - 10 105k - 15 - 10 120k - 16 - 11 136k - 17 - 12 153k - 18 - 12 (and rather close to 13) 171k - 19 - 13 190k - 20 - 14 210k - 21 - 15 (exact. And standards are Epic now.) Or were you talking about the other method, where L20 takes 2.6 million EXP? Because, personally, I like the standard method --- it (somewhat better) resembles how single vs. multi classes worked in second edition. (Specifically, half of L20 for fighter, paladin, ranger, or cleric was exactly L14, and half of L20 for wizard, thief, and bard was exactly L15.) hey um,i said flat exp.did you forget if your 2nd level and there 4th you GET TWICE THE EXP EVERYONE ELSE DOES?youll be ZERO levels behind under the normal exp system. 2E?bah in 2E everyone was multiclass and you were ONE level behind untill the equivelent of epic which was 10th.
Kiri Sittori 09-16-04, 09:54 AM	hey um,i said flat exp.did you forget if your 2nd level and there 4th you GET TWICE THE EXP EVERYONE ELSE DOES?youll be ZERO levels behind under the normal exp system. 2E?bah in 2E everyone was multiclass and you were ONE level behind untill the equivelent of epic which was 10th. My bad --- I forgot to mention that the gestalt character needs twice as much EXP as a standard character, for each level. So for you to be third level, you'd need 6000 experience (same as a L4 standard character,) and you wouldn't hit fourth level until 12000. In other words: Level === Gestalt experience required 1 - 0 2 - 2k 3 - 6k 4 - 12k 5 - 20k 6 - 30k 7 - 42k 8 - 56k 9 - 72k 10 - 90k 11 - 110k 12 - 132k 13 - 156k 14 - 182k 15 - 210k (and standard characters have just reached Epic here.) 16 - 240k 17 - 272k 18 - 306k 19 - 342k 20 - 380k Thus, gestalts do fall behind, and at a rate that can't quite be called "slow."
Razorblade Smile 09-16-04, 10:22 AM	Twice the experience?! That's insane. Gestalt classes are nice, but they're not that nice! You still have a limited number of feats, a limited number of skills, a limited number of magic items, and -- most importantly -- a limited number of actions. They're not even close to being twice as powerful as a normal character, and they're definitely not powerful enough to warrant an experience penalty of that huge magnitude (which is even worse than twice)! Yeesh! That said, considering a gestalt character to be LA +2 sounds like a good house rule to experiment with to me. I'd probably add in a caveat that states that you can't buy that LA off if using the optional rule in UA for doing so. That way they're always two levels behind a standard character.
Kiri Sittori 09-16-04, 12:09 PM	Twice the experience?! That's insane. Gestalt classes are nice, but they're not that nice! You still have a limited number of feats, a limited number of skills, a limited number of magic items, and -- most importantly -- a limited number of actions. They're not even close to being twice as powerful as a normal character, and they're definitely not powerful enough to warrant an experience penalty of that huge magnitude (which is even worse than twice)! Yeesh! That said, considering a gestalt character to be LA +2 sounds like a good house rule to experiment with to me. I'd probably add in a caveat that states that you can't buy that LA off if using the optional rule in UA for doing so. That way they're always two levels behind a standard character. It's at least better than the days when you'd average Hit Dice (instead of taking the best,) and didn't get ANY HD progressions after level 10... AND had to split experience in half. But, if you wanna do a level adjustment instead, might I suggest LA+3 instead. I base it on this: Consider the (Clr/Wiz)13 gestalt. Then compare it to the minimum core equivalent: a Clr3/Wiz3/MyTh10 (character level: 16.) You get the same caster levels, but you also get full progression on cleric's turn undead and possible domain abilities, familiar progression, wizard feats, better HD and PROBABLY HP, better Fort save, and better BAB. (Bad rolling can take anyone's HP down a notch :P ) All that extra goodness, three levels earlier. LA+3 seems just fine. To say this, though: Would "a gestalt needs 50% more experience to level up" be quite as insane? 2 - 1500 3 - 4500 4 - 9k 5 - 15k (fully one level behind now) 6 - 22500 7 - 31500 8 - 42k 9 - 54k (nearly two levels back now) 10 - 67500 11 - 82500 12 - 99k 13 - 117k 14 - 136500 (now three back) 15 - 157500 16 - 180k 17 - 194k 18 - 229500 19 - 256500 20 - 285k (At this point, you'd be four behind... by which point, the game is Epic, and it shouldn't matter.) 21 - 315k
Razorblade Smile 09-16-04, 01:21 PM	If you for a character to obtain twice as much experience, you're effectively cutting his experience in half for purposes of determining his level advancement. Thus while everyone else has 136,000xp and just hit 17th level (the point when most spellcasters get 9th level spells), you'd have the equivalence of 68,000xp which means you're just a little beyond 12th level and still stuck with 6th level spells. That's way insane as far as game balance. Also, using the Mystic Theurge as an example is also bad form because the Mystic Theurge is technically just a weak gestalt class as it's pretty much Wizard-Cleric gestalt without the class features and good Fortitude save. Considering Wizards and Clerics don't really gain anything beyond spell advancement short of a slightly improved familiar and stronger turn undead capabilities, it's not even that weak of a gestalt class (though this is exactly why it's banned from the gestalt rules -- because it's already a gestalt). In any case, an LA +3 isn't too bad but I would experiment with LA +2 first. Like the gestalt rules state, they're only slightly more powerful in the grand scheme of things than a standard character. It just seems worse on paper than it does in practice. But then again, that seems to be something a lot of people on these boards can't quite grasp.
Kiri Sittori 09-16-04, 10:49 PM	If you for a character to obtain twice as much experience, you're effectively cutting his experience in half for purposes of determining his level advancement. Thus while everyone else has 136,000xp and just hit 17th level (the point when most spellcasters get 9th level spells), you'd have the equivalence of 68,000xp which means you're just a little beyond 12th level and still stuck with 6th level spells. That's way insane as far as game balance. Also, using the Mystic Theurge as an example is also bad form because the Mystic Theurge is technically just a weak gestalt class as it's pretty much Wizard-Cleric gestalt without the class features and good Fortitude save. Considering Wizards and Clerics don't really gain anything beyond spell advancement short of a slightly improved familiar and stronger turn undead capabilities, it's not even that weak of a gestalt class (though this is exactly why it's banned from the gestalt rules -- because it's already a gestalt). In any case, an LA +3 isn't too bad but I would experiment with LA +2 first. Like the gestalt rules state, they're only slightly more powerful in the grand scheme of things than a standard character. It just seems worse on paper than it does in practice. But then again, that seems to be something a lot of people on these boards can't quite grasp. Ok... it's not exactly bad form, since it's the ONLY way to make a reasonable comparison between the two methods. To compare two things that are fundamentally similar. I could toss up "barbarian/fighter vs. pure barbarian," and show just how superior Going Nuts can be when feat chains are added in... or mention (just as gestalt rules do) how the "bardarian" can start up some of the bardic music abilities WHILE Going Nuts. And the 136k isn't all that "insane" : going back to the MyTh example, if a character entered MyTh at Clr5/Wiz5, then after reaching MyTh7 (CL17) he'd have 12th level casting in both classes. Just like that 136kXP gestalt. It's not insane because it's consistent with the price some core characters already pay for "becoming gestalts." Now... for another argument. Please do a buildout on a gestalt that took Wizard/Fighter at first level, and Wizard/Cleric for all the rest. Is the BAB +15 or +20? Then, take a Monk/Commoner for every level, except 5, 9, 13, 17, and 20, upon which you'd take Monk/Ranger instead. What are the saves? (Either they'll be 12/12/12, 14/14/12, or 21/21/18.)
Xeviat-DM 09-17-04, 01:04 AM	Wow, you know, I never thought to compare the mystic theurge to the wizard/cleric gestalt. I still stand by my sorcerer with leadership for a cleric-2 cohort, which is one reason I don't think the mystic theurge is overpowered, but you do have a point.
darczero 09-29-04, 04:22 AM	I like the idea of Gestalt characters. In a game featuring only one Gestalt character, they should have either some penalty to XP or a LA to compensate for the fact that they are more powerful than standard (single-classed) PC's of the same level. I also agree with the book - one Gestalt character in a group of non-Gestalts is unfair to the rest of the players. So, since everyone in the group should be Gestalt, there should be no problem. And I haven't seen the 3.5 MM yet, but in the 3rd ed, almost all CR's for monsters were either too low or too high anyway. And almost all the CR's for monsters in the Epic book were way below the actual difficulty of the monsters. Level Adjustment is unneccesary for Gestalt characters as long as the DM keeps track of how difficult the encounters actually are for the PC's and awards XP accordingly (1/2, or 1.25, or whatever). And yes, if the Gestalt option is allowed, the massive selection of PrC that simply combine the features of two classes should be disallowed (20th level character... 5 Cleric/5 Wizard/1 True Necromancer/9 Mystic Theurge = Caster Level 29+ for Necromancy/Death spells!)
Kiri Sittori 09-29-04, 09:29 AM	There's another problem that I realised with using a static LA for gestalts: gestalts get better disproportionately to core characters. Consider a paladin/fighter vs. a core paladin. At first, the difference is only one feat; but as these two characters progress, the feat differences will add up fairly quickly. Really, one could pair any two classes in this manner (consider monk/rogues, or the Improved Spell Engine capabilities of any two of cleric, druid, favoured soul, shugenja, shaman, wizard, sorcerer.) Proposal: To simulate a desired level adjustment for gestalt/core campaigns, force gestalt players to take a "Level Adjustment" level every four, five, or six levels; the actual adjustment is up to the DM. This "LA" level does not contribute to any aspect of the character's classes; it does, however, allow the character-level feats and stat increases to occur as normal. Example: Korjin Bloodforge is a (Ftr/Clr)4. When he increases to level 5, he must take a Level Adjustment level (since the DM chose 1/5 for this.) Thus, though he's ECL=5, he's still 4th level in his classes. Later on, Korjin is 12th level in his classes (ECL=14.) Raising to 15th level, he must take another Level Adjustment (so now he's ECL=15 but still 12th class levels.) But he gets his character-level feat as usual. (Inspired by the way Bloodlines are handled, as well as dragon levelling in the Draconomicon.)