| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| elven warriorXX02-11-06, 09:40 PM | I was thinking about how to make Gestalt balanced with Normal classes, so I thought of making use of the Multi-classed rule in good old AD&D. Here is the main rule: Gestalt PCs Gestalt PCs split the XP they earn between the 2 classes that they pick. Now here are Optional rules that you can use with the above rule. Gestalt Racial restrictions Each race can only have a small number of 2 class Combinations. See below to find out a races combinations. HUMANS Cleric/fighter Wizard/cleric Fighter/Rogue Bard/Rogue Fighter/wizard Rogue/Sorcerer Paladin/ranger Druid/barbarian Monk/ranger Monk/Paladin DWARVES Rogue/fighter Wizard/cleric Fighter/Barbarian Fighter/Druid cleric/Fighter ELVES Cleric/sorcerer Sorcerer/ranger ranger/druid druid/wizard Sorcerer/Rogue Barbarian/Druid Fighter/Wizard GNOMES Cleric/wizard Bard/fighter Bard/wizard Bard/Cleric Bard/Druid Rogue/bard HALFLINGS Fighter/rogue Bard/rogue Cleric/bard Rogue/ranger Bard/Barbarian HALF-ELVES As humans HALF ORCS Barbarian/fighter Barbarian/druid Druid/fighter Druid/Sorcerer Ranger/fighter Only Non-humans can be Gestalt This rule can be used with the above lists. This makes other races un multi-classable but they can become Gestalt. Humans can Multi-class but not Gestalt. This rule is like AD&D but it is not needed. Max levels You can only gain 16 Levels being Gestalt. |
| 2nd Ed Paladin02-12-06, 02:24 PM | I like the idea and have thought it would be something good to add to the game. On my firsat glance it appears they would be underpowered though. My understanding of Gestalt is that it wouldn't make them twice as powerfull as a reglaur build. Or is the idea that they accept low level pains for when they "pass" other characters at higher levels? However, my knowledge of gestalt is somewhat limited so I could be out to lunch here. Humans : looks good, but I would add monk/paladin - I've always liked this combo. Dwarves: I would have a Fighter Rogue over a rogue wizard. It just feels more like a stereotypical dwarf to me. I still just can't see dwarves as wizards. Elves: Why is sorceror so well represented? My initial thought would be to replace sorc with wizard. Other than that I would suggest adding the classic "Elf" from 1E, the fighter/wizard. Gnomes: Looks good. I think a nice bit of flavour, given their god, would be a bard/cleric though. Halflins: Looks good. Half-Orcs: Noticed this was the only class without a cleric option. On purpose? If you wanted to add it my suggestion would be cleric/Barbarian. |
| elven warriorXX02-12-06, 02:48 PM | I like the idea and have thought it would be something good to add to the game. On my firsat glance it appears they would be underpowered though. My understanding of Gestalt is that it wouldn't make them twice as powerfull as a reglaur build. Or is the idea that they accept low level pains for when they "pass" other characters at higher levels? However, my knowledge of gestalt is somewhat limited so I could be out to lunch here. Humans : looks good, but I would add monk/paladin - I've always liked this combo. Dwarves: I would have a Fighter Rogue over a rogue wizard. It just feels more like a stereotypical dwarf to me. I still just can't see dwarves as wizards. Elves: Why is sorceror so well represented? My initial thought would be to replace sorc with wizard. Other than that I would suggest adding the classic "Elf" from 1E, the fighter/wizard. Gnomes: Looks good. I think a nice bit of flavour, given their god, would be a bard/cleric though. Halflins: Looks good. Half-Orcs: Noticed this was the only class without a cleric option. On purpose? If you wanted to add it my suggestion would be cleric/Barbarian. Thanks for your help. A gestalt class is when you choose at first level if you want to take 2 classes at once. when you gain a level you gain a level in both classes. They use the best saves/BAB of the 2 classes, So a 2nd level Gestalt would be like a 4th level PC, with the abilties and maybe a higher BAB. But since the XP is halved for both classes the other PCs will be at 4th level when he gains a level. It is said that Elves have a knack(sp?) for magic so the Sorcerer would work well for them. The half-orc is more of a Druid race then a Clerical race, thats why the have Druid crosses. |
| spectralphoenix02-12-06, 03:22 PM | Keep in mind that the 2e XP charts scaled differently. As I recall, a multiclass character would only be a few levels behind his singleclassed counterparts. |
| elven warriorXX02-12-06, 09:38 PM | Indeed. Maybe just a 20-40% subtracted from XP? |
| Ashanti02-13-06, 08:44 AM | As I recall the AD&D experience scaling left the multi classed character always one level behind his single classed counterpart. This is not a perfect fit but if a double class is always one level lower and a triple class is always two levels lower you should be on the money. Just remember to average the hit points and take the best of saves, BAB etc. You could adjust the ECL and let the player buy off the ECL a la Unearthed Arcana. You could rule the Favoured class can gain infinite levels but the non favoured tops out at 12+ prime requiste bonus for that class. |
| elven warriorXX02-13-06, 11:34 AM | As I recall the AD&D experience scaling left the multi classed character always one level behind his single classed counterpart. This is not a perfect fit but if a double class is always one level lower and a triple class is always two levels lower you should be on the money. Just remember to average the hit points and take the best of saves, BAB etc. You could adjust the ECL and let the player buy off the ECL a la Unearthed Arcana. You could rule the Favoured class can gain infinite levels but the non favoured tops out at 12+ prime requiste bonus for that class. Nice ideas. I will use them :) |
| CaoSlayer02-16-06, 10:32 AM | here you have the original multiclass chart: Races and Multiclasses: ----------------------- Dwarf Halfling ----- -------- Fighter/Thief Fighter/Thief Fighter/Cleric Half-Elf Elf -------- --- Fighter/Cleric Fighter/Mage Fighter/Thief Fighter/Thief Fighter/Druid** Mage/Thief Fighter/Mage Fighter/Mage/Thief Cleric/Ranger Cleric/Mage Gnome Thief/Mage ----- Fighter/Mage/Cleric Fighter/Cleric Fighter/Mage/Thief Fighter/Illusionist* Fighter/Thief Cleric/Illusionist* Cleric/Thief Illusionist/Thief* *Illusionists are not in all games, this could be considered "mage" **Druids are not in all games ------------ unluckily there are not monk/sorcerer options |
| elven warriorXX02-16-06, 10:39 AM | here you have the original multiclass chart: Races and Multiclasses: ----------------------- Dwarf Halfling ----- -------- Fighter/Thief Fighter/Thief Fighter/Cleric Half-Elf Elf -------- --- Fighter/Cleric Fighter/Mage Fighter/Thief Fighter/Thief Fighter/Druid** Mage/Thief Fighter/Mage Fighter/Mage/Thief Cleric/Ranger Cleric/Mage Gnome Thief/Mage ----- Fighter/Mage/Cleric Fighter/Cleric Fighter/Mage/Thief Fighter/Illusionist* Fighter/Thief Cleric/Illusionist* Cleric/Thief Illusionist/Thief* *Illusionists are not in all games, this could be considered "mage" **Druids are not in all games ------------ unluckily there are not monk/sorcerer options Yes thats why I fixed everything around a bit :) There are also no Barbarian options. |
| Vaelan02-17-06, 07:15 AM | Making Gestalt like AD&D's Multi-classed PCs. Give gestalt characters a LA of 1, put in senseless restrictions as to class choices, and take the average of your class's hitdice. Congratulations, you've made the game stupidly broken and arbitrary, just like AD&D multi-classing used to be! |
| elven warriorXX02-17-06, 11:04 AM | Give gestalt characters a LA of 1, put in senseless restrictions as to class choices, and take the average of your class's hitdice. Congratulations, you've made the game stupidly broken and arbitrary, just like AD&D multi-classing used to be! :rofl: Thats funny. The restrictions make a lot of sense because it balances Gestalting into anything (like a Sorcerer/wizard which is stupid). They also make sense because only some races can Gestalt based on what they are good at. Were did you get the LA of 1? They must split up the xp between the 2 classes. Taking the Average hitdice is better then taking the best HD from 1 of the 2 classes. How can you say this is broken?? Also The class restrictions are optional. If you read everything in the first post you would have seen that. People can use these rules how ever they like and use what ever rules they like. |
| Vaelan02-18-06, 12:13 AM | The restrictions make a lot of sense because it balances Gestalting into anything (like a Sorcerer/wizard which is stupid). It is indeed quite stupid, because it is weak. It doesn't need an arbitrary restriction to balance it. Further, I see a lot of combinations on this list that are worse and that these restrictions don't help to balance. Lastly, straight bans should not be used to balance anything as it impacts many more subjects than the mechanics involved. The senseless restrictions that plagued AD&D were due to the designers having a very narrow view of what each race could do. Getting rid of these idiotic biases was one of the best thing WotC did for the game. They also make sense because only some races can Gestalt based on what they are good at. That seems rather racist. Further, it dictates the flavor of certain races to an unacceptable degree. For example, Gnomes can be Cleric/Thieves and Halflings cannot. Is this because Halflings aren't "good at" having faith in the gods and doing their work? Are all Halflings so undisciplined that their larcenous tendencies take precedence over all other concerns? Were did you get the LA of 1? They must split up the xp between the 2 classes. And in AD&D, every level required you to double the XP you needed to get to the previous level, thus making you exactly one level behind someone that only took one class. Taking the Average hitdice is better then taking the best HD from 1 of the 2 classes. How can you say this is broken?? The system as a whole is broken. The astute reader would pick this up by noticing that I started an entirely new paragraph to state this, deftly avoiding the common tendency to attach the statement to the last thing I have said and instead attaching the statement to the entirety of what I have said. Also The class restrictions are optional. If you read everything in the first post you would have seen that. People can use these rules how ever they like and use what ever rules they like. The restrictions are senseless. It doesn't matter if they're optional or not. A bad idea is a bad idea, even if you give me permission to ignore it. |
| elven warriorXX02-18-06, 10:59 AM | It is indeed quite stupid, because it is weak. It doesn't need an arbitrary restriction to balance it. Further, I see a lot of combinations on this list that are worse and that these restrictions don't help to balance. Lastly, straight bans should not be used to balance anything as it impacts many more subjects than the mechanics involved. The senseless restrictions that plagued AD&D were due to the designers having a very narrow view of what each race could do. Getting rid of these idiotic biases was one of the best thing WotC did for the game. I see what you mean. Anyway its still optional. That seems rather racist. Further, it dictates the flavor of certain races to an unacceptable degree. For example, Gnomes can be Cleric/Thieves and Halflings cannot. Is this because Halflings aren't "good at" having faith in the gods and doing their work? Are all Halflings so undisciplined that their larcenous tendencies take precedence over all other concerns? This is a good point but no adventurer rogue would bow before a god. Sure maybe he will look to him for guidance but not bow before to gain spells, Rogues just are not like that :) This should be talken away from Gnomes, It was a mistake. And in AD&D, every level required you to double the XP you needed to get to the previous level, thus making you exactly one level behind someone that only took one class. Indeed which is what I do here. The system as a whole is broken.It was some ways in AD&D but by puting XP penalties and the like it can balance it out well. The restrictions are senseless. It doesn't matter if they're optional or not. A bad idea is a bad idea, even if you give me permission to ignore it. Okay so you don't like them, thank you for your opinion it is greatly helpful. But some people like the restrictions and stuff like it, I am trying to make lots of people happy with variant rules to fit what they like. It is for every one. Thanks for saying thats its a bad idea, I will take note of that in the Future. I am trying to do like WOTC, make a book with something for every one but no matter how many people they please people will still bash other rules they don't. But they still make it for the other people. |
| Vaelan02-18-06, 09:31 PM | This is a good point but no adventurer rogue would bow before a god. Sure maybe he will look to him for guidance but not bow before to gain spells, Rogues just are not like that Such shallow generalizations are beneath us as rational beings. Please do not insult my intelligence and your own by attempting to present them as true, reasonable, or justifiable. For your reference, the shallow generalizations you have made are that Clerics bow before gods to gain spells and adventurer Rogues would never do such a thing. I severely doubt that any god but those of tyranny require anything more than an honest desire to further the deity's agenda and Rogues are by no means forced to reject all authority on principle. Indeed which is what I do here. Your post states that you split XP between the two classes. In AD&D, this would make a multiclassed character one level behind one who does not multiclass. However, 3.5 uses a different XP table. Since you have not addressed the issue of XP tables at all, this is not, in fact, what you do here. |
| Vaelan02-18-06, 11:51 PM | I've been thinking about this for a while, and I have come up with a way to balance Gestalt characters with normal characters. It shares some similarities with the AD&D style, but I think that it is better. Gestalt characters are hard to balance with normal characters. The best way to balance the gestalt rules using pre-existing mechanics is to apply a Level Adjustment. The problem with LA is that if you don't assign enough, the character is too close to single-classed characters in regards to class abilities (see: AD&D). However, if you assign a sufficient amount, they're usually too fragile to survive. Further, a static adjustment over 20 levels isn't accurate. Thus I propose the following: impose a scaling LA upon gestalt characters and determine their hitpoints, number of hitdice for the purposes of spells and abilities, and saving throws based on ECL. This avoids the problems of making them either too fragile or too powerful and the problem of static LA being inaccurate. The scaling LA would look something like this... At levels 1-4, a +1 LA is applied to the character. At levels 5-8, a +2 LA is applied to the character. At levels 9-12, a +3 LA is applied to the character. At levels 12-20, a +4 LA is applied to the character. The specific LA values and at which level they are applied are just my idea of what sounds good. They should be quite a bit more complicated than this as different class combinations would warrant higher LAs to make the gestalt character sufficiently less skilled. There are two ways to calculate features: you either take the best between the two or take the average. For features that are determined by your ECL, you take the average between the two. For features that are determined by your class level, you take the best between the two. Hitpoints and Base Save Bonuses are determined by ECL, and thus you take the average between the two. BAB, skill points, and class abilities are determined by class levels, and thus you take the best between the two. Now for an example... Let us say you wish to be a Fighter/Wizard... At level 2, you are a Fighter/Wizard 1 with +1 LA. You have +1 BAB, all of the class abilities and class skills of a Fighter 1 and a Wizard 1, and (2+Intelligence modifier) skill points (times four for the first level). These are the attributes determined by your class level, so you get to take the best between the two classes. Now for the attributes determined by your ECL. These are taken by finding the average of what each would normally have. A Fighter/Wizard 1 would get two hitdice, each of which grants hitpoints equal to the average of the d10 roll and the d4 roll. You add your Constitution modifier and get maximum hitpoints per die at first level as normal. Let us say you roll a 1 on the d10 and a 4 on the d4. Your hitpoint total is equal to 7 (average between 10 and 4) + 2 (the average of 1 and 4) plus two times your Constitution modifier. Base Save Bonuses are calculated by taking the average of each class's Base Save Bonuses at level 2 (round down). In this case, a Wizard/Fighter 1 would have the following Base Save Bonuses: Fortitude +1, Reflex +0, and Will +1. When you reach Fighter/Wizard 4, you would be ECL 5. When you gain enough XP to progress to ECL 6, you gain a point of LA instead of progressing to Fighter/Wizard 5. Your hitpoints and save bonuses progress at this point, even though your class features do not. While the amount of LA and when it is assigned may need to be altered for certain combinations of classes, I believe that this system is reasonably balanced and requires no alteration to XP tables, making it the best choice I've seen for implementing gestalt characters into a normal game. |
| elven warriorXX02-19-06, 10:18 AM | Very good idea. This is much better then my idea of spliting the xp. :cool: |