Q&A about Gestalts [Archive] - Wizards Community

Q&A about Gestalts [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Mr Dolph
12-05-05, 04:01 PM Iv'e been thinking of adopting some of the rules from UA, to be more specific the Gestalt rules.
After my groups last session i suggested that we implemented those rules in the game.
They seemed pretty positive of trying them out.
Our groups powergamer liked the idea of playing a Cleric/Monk.
However, two of the players wants to play some variant combos i don't know are legit or not.

The first player want to build a Fighter/Rogue, but as the variant classes in UA, trade in the Fighter bonus feats for additionally Sneak Attacks.

The other player wants to play a Barbarian/Rogue, and trade in Sneak Attacks for Fighter Bonus Feats.

This combo is the one i'm sceptical about.
You lose the Tower Shield, and Heavy armor prof. But gain 8 skillpoints, more classskills, evasion, good ref saves, to name a few.
Is it OK?
Vapthorne
12-05-05, 04:55 PM The Barbarian / Rogue seems perfectly fine to me.

It's the Fighter / Rogue I'm worried about. Reading the SRD on Gestalts; I'm pretty sure you can't gain the sneak attack from both sides.

Class features that two classes share (such as uncanny dodge) accrue at the rate of the faster class.

So, I would not allow the Fighter to trade his bonus feats for sneak attacks. However, if you don't agree with my interuptation and have no problem with a Fighter/Rogue with +2d6 sneak attack at first; then by all means. It's powerful, but hardly game breaking.
Cannonballninja
12-05-05, 05:24 PM It is my understanding that if both classes grant a +1d6 sneak attack at the same time then you will only get one. However, if the classes gain sneak attacks at different levels (because of staggered leveling or whatever) then I do believe that player will get the extra sneak attack progession he wants. Some people may argue that it falls under the progession rules outlined above but as sneak attacks don't progession in that sort of sense (instead just getting an extra dice that stacks with the previous ones) I still believe it can be done.
OzyBurrfoot
12-08-05, 04:00 PM My understanding was that the variant in question gained the sneak attacks at the same rate as a rogue, and thus with gesalt rules, they would not stack.
Bard-of-all-trades
12-08-05, 04:06 PM move along ... nothing to see here ...
Bard-of-all-trades
12-08-05, 04:09 PM The write up for the Fighter variant you mention says that they Fighter loses the bonus feats and gains the Rogue's progression of Sneak Attack. In other words, they would read the same for SA on both sides and they'd only get the single progression. To put it another way, if you'd get +2d6 for SA at 1st level then you'd get 2-16 HP per level as well (1d10+1d6), which isn't going to happen.

I have a Barbarian/Rogue gestalt that is wicked. He just wades into the enemies' ranks with his Greataxe gaining flanking and SA damage.
Xabre
12-12-05, 04:36 PM I have to go with everyone else here... the Rougish Fighter gets a Rogue's Sneak attacks. a Rogue that gives up sneak attacks for feats gets them when they would have recieved sneak attack upgrades... so every odd level, instead of 1+every even level as a fighter.

a Rogue Fighter would NOT stack sneak attacks... But if a Rogue gave up Sneaks, you'd end up with feats at EVERY level.
jagggar
12-12-05, 05:26 PM Roguish Fighter/Rogue shouldn't work.
Barbarian/martial Rogue sounds good.

This combo is the one i'm sceptical about.
You lose the Tower Shield, and Heavy armor prof. But gain 8 skillpoints, more classskills, evasion, good ref saves, to name a few.
Is it OK?
I assume you're talkin' fighter here. The thug loses proficiency with all shields and with medium and heavy armor as well as the first level bonus feat in exchange for 4 skill points and more class skills.
You could allow those changes but make it a class that takes up both sides of gestalt.
Bard-of-all-trades
12-13-05, 01:16 AM I have to go with everyone else here... the Rougish Fighter gets a Rogue's Sneak attacks. a Rogue that gives up sneak attacks for feats gets them when they would have recieved sneak attack upgrades... so every odd level, instead of 1+every even level as a fighter.

a Rogue Fighter would NOT stack sneak attacks... But if a Rogue gave up Sneaks, you'd end up with feats at EVERY level.
What do you mean? As I mentioned above, the variant, as written in UA, gets the feats as a fighter would get them, NOT when they would get advancement in SA.

Here's what would happen both ways:

1) Sneak Attack Fighter/ Rogue gestalt
1 - Sneak Attack +1d6
3 - Sneak Attack +2d6
5 - Sneak Attack +3d6
7 - Sneak Attack +4d6
9 - Sneak Attack +5d6
11 - Sneak Attack +6d6
13 - Sneak Attack +7d6
15 - Sneak Attack +8d6
17 - Sneak Attack +9d6
19 - Sneak Attack +10d6
It would get full BAB, good Fort and Ref saves, d10 for HD, 8+Int for skill points, and the normal seven feats (eight if you go human). It would also get all the normal rogue abilities as well (i.e. trapfinding, Special Abilities after level 10, etc). It just loses the bonus feats.

2) Fighter/Feat Rogue gestalt
1 - Bonus Feat
2 - Bonus Feat
4 - Bonus Feat
6 - Bonus Feat
8 - Bonus Feat
10 - Bonus Feat
12 - Bonus Feat
14 - Bonus Feat
16 - Bonus Feat
18 - Bonus Feat
20 - Bonus Feat
It would get full BAB, good Fort and Ref saves, d10 for HD, 8+Int for skill points, and the normal seven feats (eight if you go human). It would also get all the normal rogue abilities as well (i.e. trapfinding, Special Abilities after level 10, etc). It just loses sneak attack.

As opposed to...
3)Fighter/Rogue gestalt
1 - Bonus Feat, Sneak Attack +1d6
2 - Bonus Feat
3 - Sneak Attack +2d6
4 - Bonus Feat
5 - Sneak Attack +3d6
6 - Bonus Feat
7 - Sneak Attack +4d6
8 - Bonus Feat
9 - Sneak Attack +5d6
10 - Bonus Feat
11 - Sneak Attack +6d6
12 - Bonus Feat
13 - Sneak Attack +7d6
14 - Bonus Feat
15 - Sneak Attack +8d6
16 - Bonus Feat
17 - Sneak Attack +9d6
18 - Bonus Feat
19 - Sneak Attack +10d6
20 - Bonus Feat
It would get full BAB, good Fort and Ref saves, d10 for HD, 8+Int for skill points, and the normal seven feats (eight if you go human). It would also get all the normal rogue abilities as well (i.e. trapfinding, Special Abilities after level 10, etc). It gets the best of both worlds.

So, if they want to cut their character short by doing either #1 or #2, let them. But if they want to play #3, let them because that's how the rules say it works for getstalt characters.
Millennium
12-13-05, 08:37 AM Rule Number One about gestalts: Level-for-level, nothing stacks. This is important, because it has repercussions that solve all your problems.
The first player want to build a Fighter/Rogue, but as the variant classes in UA, trade in the Fighter bonus feats for additionally Sneak Attacks.
While technically legal, it would be unwise of this player to do that. This variant gets exactly the same SA progression as a rogue, and so he'd be getting "Sneak Attack +1d6" twice every time. But because nothing stacks level-for-level, he actually only gets it once, and so there would be no additional benefit from taking this variant. If he plays it straight, always rogue/fighter over 20 levels, he'd be much better off with the standard fighter.

However, if your player is clever and you allow it, there's a way around this: take one level as rogue/something (anything but his fighter-variant) before starting down his rogue/fighter-variant path. Now his Rogue and Fighter-variant levels won't be the same, so the Sneak Attack buffs will come at different character levels, so he can get them all. You might not allow that in your campaign, though; the rules about further branching out into other classes when you're gestalting are never really made very clear. Or you might just disallow the variant classes all together.
The other player wants to play a Barbarian/Rogue, and trade in Sneak Attacks for Fighter Bonus Feats.
Here we have an interesting case, because you're dead-on about the result. The barb loses heavy armor and tower shield proficiency, but he probably wouldn't want those anyway, because they would hamper his movement. Once again, though, the player isn't being all that smart if he wants to powergame: Sneak Attacking with fast movement and a greataxe is a lot scarier than a bunch of extra feats.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Mr Dolph 12-05-05, 04:01 PM	Iv'e been thinking of adopting some of the rules from UA, to be more specific the Gestalt rules. After my groups last session i suggested that we implemented those rules in the game. They seemed pretty positive of trying them out. Our groups powergamer liked the idea of playing a Cleric/Monk. However, two of the players wants to play some variant combos i don't know are legit or not. The first player want to build a Fighter/Rogue, but as the variant classes in UA, trade in the Fighter bonus feats for additionally Sneak Attacks. The other player wants to play a Barbarian/Rogue, and trade in Sneak Attacks for Fighter Bonus Feats. This combo is the one i'm sceptical about. You lose the Tower Shield, and Heavy armor prof. But gain 8 skillpoints, more classskills, evasion, good ref saves, to name a few. Is it OK?
Vapthorne 12-05-05, 04:55 PM	The Barbarian / Rogue seems perfectly fine to me. It's the Fighter / Rogue I'm worried about. Reading the SRD on Gestalts; I'm pretty sure you can't gain the sneak attack from both sides. Class features that two classes share (such as uncanny dodge) accrue at the rate of the faster class. So, I would not allow the Fighter to trade his bonus feats for sneak attacks. However, if you don't agree with my interuptation and have no problem with a Fighter/Rogue with +2d6 sneak attack at first; then by all means. It's powerful, but hardly game breaking.
Cannonballninja 12-05-05, 05:24 PM	It is my understanding that if both classes grant a +1d6 sneak attack at the same time then you will only get one. However, if the classes gain sneak attacks at different levels (because of staggered leveling or whatever) then I do believe that player will get the extra sneak attack progession he wants. Some people may argue that it falls under the progession rules outlined above but as sneak attacks don't progession in that sort of sense (instead just getting an extra dice that stacks with the previous ones) I still believe it can be done.
OzyBurrfoot 12-08-05, 04:00 PM	My understanding was that the variant in question gained the sneak attacks at the same rate as a rogue, and thus with gesalt rules, they would not stack.
Bard-of-all-trades 12-08-05, 04:06 PM	move along ... nothing to see here ...
Bard-of-all-trades 12-08-05, 04:09 PM	The write up for the Fighter variant you mention says that they Fighter loses the bonus feats and gains the Rogue's progression of Sneak Attack. In other words, they would read the same for SA on both sides and they'd only get the single progression. To put it another way, if you'd get +2d6 for SA at 1st level then you'd get 2-16 HP per level as well (1d10+1d6), which isn't going to happen. I have a Barbarian/Rogue gestalt that is wicked. He just wades into the enemies' ranks with his Greataxe gaining flanking and SA damage.
Xabre 12-12-05, 04:36 PM	I have to go with everyone else here... the Rougish Fighter gets a Rogue's Sneak attacks. a Rogue that gives up sneak attacks for feats gets them when they would have recieved sneak attack upgrades... so every odd level, instead of 1+every even level as a fighter. a Rogue Fighter would NOT stack sneak attacks... But if a Rogue gave up Sneaks, you'd end up with feats at EVERY level.
jagggar 12-12-05, 05:26 PM	Roguish Fighter/Rogue shouldn't work. Barbarian/martial Rogue sounds good. This combo is the one i'm sceptical about. You lose the Tower Shield, and Heavy armor prof. But gain 8 skillpoints, more classskills, evasion, good ref saves, to name a few. Is it OK? I assume you're talkin' fighter here. The thug loses proficiency with all shields and with medium and heavy armor as well as the first level bonus feat in exchange for 4 skill points and more class skills. You could allow those changes but make it a class that takes up both sides of gestalt.
Bard-of-all-trades 12-13-05, 01:16 AM	I have to go with everyone else here... the Rougish Fighter gets a Rogue's Sneak attacks. a Rogue that gives up sneak attacks for feats gets them when they would have recieved sneak attack upgrades... so every odd level, instead of 1+every even level as a fighter. a Rogue Fighter would NOT stack sneak attacks... But if a Rogue gave up Sneaks, you'd end up with feats at EVERY level. What do you mean? As I mentioned above, the variant, as written in UA, gets the feats as a fighter would get them, NOT when they would get advancement in SA. Here's what would happen both ways: 1) Sneak Attack Fighter/ Rogue gestalt 1 - Sneak Attack +1d6 3 - Sneak Attack +2d6 5 - Sneak Attack +3d6 7 - Sneak Attack +4d6 9 - Sneak Attack +5d6 11 - Sneak Attack +6d6 13 - Sneak Attack +7d6 15 - Sneak Attack +8d6 17 - Sneak Attack +9d6 19 - Sneak Attack +10d6 It would get full BAB, good Fort and Ref saves, d10 for HD, 8+Int for skill points, and the normal seven feats (eight if you go human). It would also get all the normal rogue abilities as well (i.e. trapfinding, Special Abilities after level 10, etc). It just loses the bonus feats. 2) Fighter/Feat Rogue gestalt 1 - Bonus Feat 2 - Bonus Feat 4 - Bonus Feat 6 - Bonus Feat 8 - Bonus Feat 10 - Bonus Feat 12 - Bonus Feat 14 - Bonus Feat 16 - Bonus Feat 18 - Bonus Feat 20 - Bonus Feat It would get full BAB, good Fort and Ref saves, d10 for HD, 8+Int for skill points, and the normal seven feats (eight if you go human). It would also get all the normal rogue abilities as well (i.e. trapfinding, Special Abilities after level 10, etc). It just loses sneak attack. As opposed to... 3)Fighter/Rogue gestalt 1 - Bonus Feat, Sneak Attack +1d6 2 - Bonus Feat 3 - Sneak Attack +2d6 4 - Bonus Feat 5 - Sneak Attack +3d6 6 - Bonus Feat 7 - Sneak Attack +4d6 8 - Bonus Feat 9 - Sneak Attack +5d6 10 - Bonus Feat 11 - Sneak Attack +6d6 12 - Bonus Feat 13 - Sneak Attack +7d6 14 - Bonus Feat 15 - Sneak Attack +8d6 16 - Bonus Feat 17 - Sneak Attack +9d6 18 - Bonus Feat 19 - Sneak Attack +10d6 20 - Bonus Feat It would get full BAB, good Fort and Ref saves, d10 for HD, 8+Int for skill points, and the normal seven feats (eight if you go human). It would also get all the normal rogue abilities as well (i.e. trapfinding, Special Abilities after level 10, etc). It gets the best of both worlds. So, if they want to cut their character short by doing either #1 or #2, let them. But if they want to play #3, let them because that's how the rules say it works for getstalt characters.
Millennium 12-13-05, 08:37 AM	Rule Number One about gestalts: Level-for-level, nothing stacks. This is important, because it has repercussions that solve all your problems. The first player want to build a Fighter/Rogue, but as the variant classes in UA, trade in the Fighter bonus feats for additionally Sneak Attacks. While technically legal, it would be unwise of this player to do that. This variant gets exactly the same SA progression as a rogue, and so he'd be getting "Sneak Attack +1d6" twice every time. But because nothing stacks level-for-level, he actually only gets it once, and so there would be no additional benefit from taking this variant. If he plays it straight, always rogue/fighter over 20 levels, he'd be much better off with the standard fighter. However, if your player is clever and you allow it, there's a way around this: take one level as rogue/something (anything but his fighter-variant) before starting down his rogue/fighter-variant path. Now his Rogue and Fighter-variant levels won't be the same, so the Sneak Attack buffs will come at different character levels, so he can get them all. You might not allow that in your campaign, though; the rules about further branching out into other classes when you're gestalting are never really made very clear. Or you might just disallow the variant classes all together. The other player wants to play a Barbarian/Rogue, and trade in Sneak Attacks for Fighter Bonus Feats. Here we have an interesting case, because you're dead-on about the result. The barb loses heavy armor and tower shield proficiency, but he probably wouldn't want those anyway, because they would hamper his movement. Once again, though, the player isn't being all that smart if he wants to powergame: Sneak Attacking with fast movement and a greataxe is a lot scarier than a bunch of extra feats.