Post/Author/DateTime	Post
bigboy5584 03-10-07, 03:41 PM	If playing gestalt characters would level adjustment take up only half the level, ex. Goliath/Barbarian for 1st level? Or would the Goliath's lvl. adj. +1 take up the whole 1st level? It would seem to make sense that it would only take up half since it takes up the whole level in normal rules and then level adjustments would be powerless in comparison to regular gestalt characters. Thoughts anyone?
fatchuck 03-12-07, 03:09 PM	If playing gestalt characters would level adjustment take up only half the level, ex. Goliath/Barbarian for 1st level? Or would the Goliath's lvl. adj. +1 take up the whole 1st level? It would seem to make sense that it would only take up half since it takes up the whole level in normal rules and then level adjustments would be powerless in comparison to regular gestalt characters. Thoughts anyone? I've never seen an official ruling on this, but the one Gestalt campaign I played in used one-half of the progression, e.g., Goliath could be used at level 1 and a class could be combined with that in the other progression.
ZiggZagg 03-12-07, 03:34 PM	If that is the ruling, then what happens when someone wants to play a monster progression, such as the ones out of savage species in a gestalt game? If they take only half, then when do you decide when to get HD and level dependent increases such as BAB, skill points, feats, and such
fatchuck 03-12-07, 04:03 PM	If that is the ruling, then what happens when someone wants to play a monster progression, such as the ones out of savage species in a gestalt game? If they take only half, then when do you decide when to get HD and level dependent increases such as BAB, skill points, feats, and such Keeping this simple, let's say there are two progressions - left and right. Assuming you play a LA+2 creature/template, that would wipe out both the left and right sides of the progression for one PC level (no class levels could be taken). For a LA+4 creature, it would wipe out two whole levels of progressions for both left and right. LA+6 = 3 levels, etc... For creatures whose LA is greater than your current level (e.g., if you want to play a Mind Flayer, LA+7 but you're starting out at 2nd level), I don't know how to piece it out by each level. The strict answer would be that you can't play such a creature - it's LA can't be higher than +2 at level 1 or +4 at level 2. If you're starting at a high enough level, you can built the LA into your level 10-20 class, but otherwise, no. The loose answer is work it out with your DM. These are all house rules to start with.
bigboy5584 03-12-07, 04:21 PM	In regards to the higher level LA's I would think that they would still, I would think, have to take those levels as normal. It would just be that they could combine it with levels of other classes. Such as Mind Flayer LA 7 could be also a lvl 7 Fighter to be a lvl 7 Gestalt Character. And monster progression levels would working just as class levels and hit die and such would be taken, yet again what I would think, from your class levels or monster level whichever is higher. If there is no increase in monster hd than it would obviously come from your class. Feats would be only based off of class and character level as normally i would believe, except for any rare exceptions. Does any of this make sense?
wonlee76 03-12-07, 04:31 PM	I've used the "pay off the LA or ECL" with one side method while the PC can progress in a regular class on the other side. However, I only did this once and learned in hindsight its a really really bad idea when you use monster progressions from Savage Species. Its not so bad with relatively low +LA races though. I hate to bring up "game balance" in a gestalt game but having gone through this with a monster race, I can say from personal experience that it is too powerful to combine monster progression + Gestalt rules. Not sure how I would handle it now other than to say no monster races in a gestalt game to keep the game simpler. That or let the monster race come in but they won't be able to take gestalt class levels until the monster progression is complete (which of course completely screws monster PCs over). There just doesn't seem to be a middle ground. Either its too powerful or too weak.
Edymnion 03-12-07, 08:56 PM	I believe that the official ruling is that savage progressions act just like any other class, meaning that if you were gestalting, you could do Barbarian 1//Goliath 1, and be fine as a first level gestalt.
carcrazy202 03-12-07, 09:21 PM	maybe you could have a monster progression where you take a class level were you would normaly have an empty LA level. might be some kind of middle ground.
bigboy5584 03-13-07, 07:37 AM	What about being able to gain a class level on any level that you would not gain a hit die from you monster class? Would that be a decent middle ground... not too much advantage from monster class but offset with a slightly less use of classes. Any opinions?
elondir 03-13-07, 09:52 AM	What I do for gestalt is this: ECL = racial LA + racial HD + Getsalt LA. Racial LA and HD are taken as whole levels, you do not gestalt them. That's the price of playing monsters. [A little off-topic but related] Gestalt LA = +1 per additional class. Ftr/wiz = +1, ftr/wiz/rog = +2. You don't lose levels from the sudden gain of an LA, you just have to take longer to get to the next level. And if you go straight fighter/mage, for example, you're always 1 level behind. Combinations that are a subset of other combinations do not count as unique combinations. This starts to break when you start multiclassing your gestalt levels though. :( (A) Ftr/wiz//clr/rog = +2 (+1 for ftr/wiz, +1 for clr/rog). (B) Ftr/wiz/rog//ftr/wiz/clr = +2 +2 = +4 != ftr/wiz/rog/clr (C) ftr/wiz/rog//clr/mnk = +2 +1 = +3 != ftr/wiz/rog/clr/mnk (D) ftr/wiz/rog//clr/bbn//ftr/wiz//brd/clr//wilder = +2 +1 +1 = +4 != ftr/wiz/rog/clr/bbn/brd/wilder (A) gets clr/rog at 3000 xp but won't reach character level 3 until 10000 xp. (B) gets ftr/wiz/clr at 6000 xp but won't reach character level 3 until 21000 xp. (C) gets clr/mnk at 6000 xp but won't reach character level 3 until 15000xp. (D) gets clr/bbn at 6000 xp, ftr/wiz at 15000 xp, brd/clr at 21000 xp, and wilder at 36000 xp, when single classed characters are 9th level. He has ten class levels total (ftr2/wiz2/rog1/clr2/bbn1/brd1/wilder1). He will reach 6th character level at 45000 xp, when non-gestalts are 10th level. The strain of multiclassing knocks the power of gestalt down. But when you get a few more combinations stacked, it doesn't make any sense and your LAs stop making sense. [A little further off-topic but still related] I tend to view gestalt as simulating AD&D multiclassing, which kept you one level behind the rest until 9th level (although some occasionally caught up with single-classed characters for brief moments), then the gap started widening when the linear level progressions kicked in. By 20th level, two classes were at 63% to 67% level and three classes were at 45% to 50% level. At 30th level, the gaps were 58% to 60% and 41% to 43%, respectively. Actually, though, AD&D multiclassing set you at about level 14/14 when single classed characters were 20th level. Triple classers were at 9/9/9 or 10/10/10 at that point. So the 3.5 multiclass PrCs are roughly the same power level as their AD&D equivalents. The main difference is the initial qualification for MT; an AD&D cleric/mage is level 6/6 at when a single-classed cleric or mage is 7th level while a 3.5 cleric 3/wizard 3/mystic theurge 1 is level 4/4. However, I view these levels more as a problem with the old experience tables, and I suspect it's one of the reasons racial level limits existed. I believe LA+1 gestalt in two or three classes, without allowing any other multiclassing, is the most in the spirit of the old rules.
bigboy5584 03-14-07, 08:46 AM	Well, my problem is that why should those that want to play monsters be detrimented when it comes to gestalting when essentially they are just classes just like anything else.
elondir 03-14-07, 10:57 AM	That's a good point, bigboy5584. My argument is that a gestalt character is more powerful than a non-gestalt character of the same race, and so the gestalt character should pay more LA. Remember this system is trying to balance gestalt for use as a multiclassing option in a single-classed campaign where non-gestalt multiclassing is the norm. EDIT: I think I misuderstood the OP. I took it as using level-adjustment to balance gestalt in a non-gestalt campaign, and how to apply racial LA in that case. But now I see he means LA in a fully gestalt campaign.
HairyApe 03-14-07, 11:42 AM	The reason that players playing monsters get penalized in gestalt is that they also get penalized similarly in single-classed games. I use the racial HD as gestalt-able levels. LA is not however. LA is not a level, having a LA adjusts the amount of experience needed to gain a level. A goliath barbarian1 needs 3000xp for level 2. It is not a level, it is an adjustment. Subtle, but still prevents, in my eyes, the actual level, therefore, you can't get the benefits of a gestalt level if you don't have the level. Of course, everyone is allowed their take on the situation, so do what you want.
bigboy5584 03-14-07, 12:52 PM	In campaigns that I've played that we use gestalt characters other npcs/enemies are adjusted accordingly, either gestalting them or adding levels to adjust their CR. But, I've also played under the concept that the pcs are heroes/villains that would be "written" of in history, they should be a "little" more powerful than another one of their kind even one similar in classes and such. Otherwise why would they be adventurers that history should be concerned with and not someone else. I realized that seems a little off topic, but it runs along the same side as to the reduction in power with monster races gestalting.
mikeg710 03-14-07, 01:59 PM	I believe that the official ruling is that savage progressions act just like any other class, meaning that if you were gestalting, you could do Barbarian 1//Goliath 1, and be fine as a first level gestalt. This is not correct. Building A Gestalt Character To make a 1st-level gestalt character, choose two standard classes. Monster classes (i.e. "savage progressions"), template classes, racial paragon classes, and prestige classes are not standard classes.
ZiggZagg 03-14-07, 02:06 PM	Says who?
bigboy5584 03-14-07, 03:47 PM	So you're saying that all those "classes" aren't "classes" then? And how come even though you mentioned prestige classes you can take them as one "half" of your class level. The only restriction on this is that you can't take two prestige classes at the same time. The same would most likely apply racial progession classes as taking levels as a illithid/goliath would be lacking in common sense, but an interesting sight to see.
mikeg710 03-14-07, 06:07 PM	The "standard classes" for D&D 3.5 are: * barbarian, bard, cleric, druid, fighter, monk, paladin, ranger, rogue, sorcerer, and wizard (PHB) Additional published books (that I own) have these new standard classes: * "variants" of the above PHB standard classes (Unearthed Arcana) * beguiler, dragon shaman, duskblade, and knight (PHBII) * hexblade, samurai, swashbuckler (Complete Warrior) * favored soul, shugenja, spirit shaman (Complete Divine) * ninja, scout, spellthief (Complete Adventurer) * warlock, warmage, wu jen (Complete Arcane) * healer and marshal (Miniatures Handbook) * archivist and dread necromancer (Heroes of Horror) * battle dancer, death master, jester, mountebank, savant, sha'ir, and urban druid (Dragon Compendium Volume One) * psion, psychic warrior, soulknife, and wilder (Expanded Psionics Handbook) * ardent, divine mind, and lurk (Complete Psionic) * incarnate, soulborn, and totemist (Magic of Incarnum) * crusader, swordsage, and warblade (Tome of Battle: The Book of Nine Swords) * factotum (Dungeonscape) All of these are classified as "standard" classes. If you are unclear as to what differentiates a standard class from other types of classes (prestige, monster, etc.), read the chapter intros for these books where the classes are introduced. Now, let me again clarify (italicized text mine): Building A Gestalt Character To make a 1st-level gestalt character, choose two standard classes. A goliath is not a standard class, it is a race with a +1 Level Adjustment. How to incorporate races with level adjustments into a gestalt build is beyond the scope of the gestalt rules as presented in Unearthed Arcana. Furthermore, I believe it is also beyond the scope of the gestalt rules (as presented) on how to incorporate using "monster classes" in a gestalt build.
mikeg710 03-14-07, 06:10 PM	I believe that the official ruling is that savage progressions act just like any other class, meaning that if you were gestalting, you could do Barbarian 1//Goliath 1, and be fine as a first level gestalt. I would like to know the source of this official ruling if possible, please.
bigboy5584 03-14-07, 06:43 PM	So you're saying that only "Standard" Classes are allowed, because last time I checked they mention something about taking prestige classes. And being that prestige classes are allowed would it not follow that the concept presented by Unearthed Arcana, the book about different rules and ideas, would also allow racial progression to be included in the concept?
Krusk 03-14-07, 10:09 PM	In our group we use the following rule. ECL 5 fighter/wizard with a LA of 2. Fighter3//wizard3 ECL 5. Sucks but none of us complain about it. A gestalt character isnt too much more powerful than a normal.
ZiggZagg 03-15-07, 12:51 PM	Here we are with this whole "standard class" issue. So, prestige classes aren't standard then? I'm sorry, I must have misread the part in the gestalt rules that says you are able to take these in the game. So, if monster progressions classes aren't classes, then can you explain what they are exactly?
mikeg710 03-15-07, 12:55 PM	So you're saying that only "Standard" Classes are allowed, because last time I checked they mention something about taking prestige classes. And being that prestige classes are allowed would it not follow that the concept presented by Unearthed Arcana, the book about different rules and ideas, would also allow racial progression to be included in the concept? First, again, I am only quoting the SRD gestalt rules. Please stop trying to interpret what I say out of the context presented. To make a 1st-level gestalt character, choose two standard classes. (You can also choose any of the variant classes, though you can’t combine two versions of the same class.) My interpretation of what the SRD is saying is a 1st-level gestalt character must be a combination of two standard classes. Each time he gains a new level, he chooses two classes, takes the best aspects of each, and applies them to his characteristics. Subsequent levels beyond 1st level are not stated as "standard classes". So, technically, any type of class the character qualifies for is a valid choice at 2nd level and higher. Understand further that if you are just creating a 1st-level gestalt character - similar to if you were just creating a 1st-level nongestalt character - races with a level adjustment of +1 or higher are not valid races for creating a 1st-level character. (Read what a level adjustment means for a race.) Creating 2nd-level (or higher) gestalt or nongestalt characters allows for the use of races with level adjustments, depending upon the starting experience point total assigned by the DM.
mikeg710 03-15-07, 01:07 PM	Here we are with this whole "standard class" issue. So, prestige classes aren't standard then? I'm sorry, I must have misread the part in the gestalt rules that says you are able to take these in the game. So, if monster progressions classes aren't classes, then can you explain what they are exactly? No, prestige classes are "prestige" classes, monster classes/savage progressions are "monster" classes, template classes are "template" classes. WotC has never defined "standard class", but they use the term throughout their published material. Read the chapter introductions for the 3.5 books where they introduce new classes - NOT prestige classes - to understand the concept of a standard class. One thing all standard classes currently have in common is a 20-level class progression. Am I saying a 20-level class progression means a class is a standard class? Absolutely NOT! Prestige classes can vary from 3, to 5, to 10 level (or some other odd number) progression. Monster classes vary in level progression based on HD and level adjustment. The term "prestige class" and "monster class" have distinct meanings in WotC published products, and they do not qualify as a "standard class" unless you have a house rule allowing such.
bigboy5584 03-15-07, 01:19 PM	So then my question back would be that without gestalting you can take a monster class racial progression as normal, just as a fighter would take a fighter class progression. Yet when gestalting the rules no longer apply and you could then only take a monster class or take class/class? Now which in anyones opinion would be the better choice in multiple aspects? I don't see why when the monster has a racial progression level it couldn't be just used as a substitute. If I recall correctly in the complete psionics it has several racial progression with all 20 levels planned out, this is purely by memory i apologize for any mistakes that be in there. I just personally believe that if there is a racial progression level imitating a "standard" class then why could it not take its place, even if that racial progression does not involve a full standard 20 levels.
ZiggZagg 03-15-07, 01:33 PM	My interpretation of what the SRD is saying is a 1st-level gestalt character must be a combination of two standard classes. Case in point right there. Your interpretation. Interpret it how you want. The purpose of this thread is how to make it work. Not whether you interpret it as legal or not
bigboy5584 03-15-07, 01:50 PM	alright real quick statement, I posted this as a discussion. I would personally prefer it if there was no angriness. It would make me cry, and i can fill a river. So now that that is over with, DISCUSS.
mikeg710 03-15-07, 08:18 PM	The reason that players playing monsters get penalized in gestalt is that they also get penalized similarly in single-classed games. I use the racial HD as gestalt-able levels. LA is not however. LA is not a level, having a LA adjusts the amount of experience needed to gain a level. A goliath barbarian1 needs 3000xp for level 2. It is not a level, it is an adjustment. Subtle, but still prevents, in my eyes, the actual level, therefore, you can't get the benefits of a gestalt level if you don't have the level. Of course, everyone is allowed their take on the situation, so do what you want. I agree with this explanation of what a level adjustment represents. LA is not a "level" unto itself, but rather an adjustment to how much experience is needed to obtain a level. I would use racial HD as the actual "measure" of "levels" for a monster character under gestalt rules. LA is assessing an adjustment for the extra abilities a monster character would have compared to the standard PHB races, which I would apply as an XP penalty for the gestalt character. I would incorporate the variant Unearthed Arcana rules for buying off level adjustments. The gestalt character's XP penalty would go towards paying off the LA. If you are starting a new, fully gestalt campaign with 1st-level characters, the gestalt rules as presented do not support using monster classes or races with LA of +1 or higher.
Dark Moon Dragyn 04-01-07, 10:56 PM	*sigh* I don't know why I'm dragging myself into this argument, but I always have been a glutton for punishment. Personally, with the gestalt system, I don't really see the need to play a race that is beyond first level. At that point you are creating more paperwork and a bigger headache for both the PC and the DM. But, personal issues aside, I'll try to see if I can put my thoughts into words. Level Adjustments are supposed to "hurt" a character that takes a race that offers more than standard races do. It's a way to balance out the bonuses that these races give to a character. Such as the Aasimar's +2 Wis and +2 Cha, as well as the daylight spell and resistances. These abilities make an Aasimar more powerful than any of the standard races. What level adjustment is supposed to do, and notice how I say supposed to, is hinder the character by making them "weaker" than another character of the same level because they are getting extra benefits from taking a more "powerful" race. I personally feel that some of the LA's are not worth it, but meh that's my opinion. So onto gestalt characters and races with LA. Personally as a DM I have outlawed any race that has a level adjustment in my game with gestalt characters because the players are already "overpowered" as it is. But if we look at it from a balancing standpoint, we have something completely different. Let's take the Aasimar for example and compare them to a human character. At 1st level, we have the Aasimar taking Aasimar 1/Paladin 1 and the Human taking Paladin 1/Rogue 1. Normally an Aasimar wouldn't be playable as a 1st level character, but we are going with the fact that you can buy off Level Adjustment with it taking up one of your class spots. Well right from the beginning this character is somewhat more powerful than the Human because of the resistances and the ability bonuses and the spell-like abilities, but then we look at the human. The human gets more skill points and better saves from taking rogue but still gets the same hit dice. And wow, I'm just rereading this and I think I've shot my argument out of the water. Techinically with a LA of +1 they do become balanced or as close to balanced as they would. I say so long as everyone is in agreement and your players and DM don't care than go for it and see what happens. Basically what you are doing is trading versatility of having two classes over having a few extra perks. Give me a day or two and I will look into this on the side of going with a monster that has a higher than +1 LA, i.e. a Half-Dragon or Half-Fiend or Half-Celestial. That might be a better way to make this argument. I know this probably didn't help, but it helped me figure something out in my mind. No races beyond the standard races in a gestalt campaign.
bigboy5584 04-02-07, 07:55 AM	I don't know how you did it, but I think you both supported and unsupported my question all at the same time. I'm quite curious where this thought process will bring you. So please when you have sorted out all the multiple possiblities grace us with you newly gained knowledge. Thanks :)
Chimaera2000 04-04-07, 10:02 AM	The house rule that we've used in our games is to treat racial Hit Dice as a single class on one side of the gestalt. We then halve the Level Adjustment and apply that to both sides of the gestalt. If a half remains, you that part of your LA to only one side of the gestalt. For example, an ogre with the Dark template (4 Hit Die, LA +3) would apply his four racial Hit Dice to one side of his gestalt class. He would then half his LA, ending up with 1.5. This means that one level of his gestalt progression would be taken up on both sides by the LA, while only one side of the gestalt would be taken up by the remaining LA. It strikes a happy medium between having overpowered specialists (such as a half-dragon troll barbarian taking all of his racial adjustments on one side of the gestalt) and being completely crippled (a half-dragon is not worth three levels in a gestalt progression).