I have noticed a lot of threads where people ask about the Gestalt option.
Why not have a single thead where you can ask or answer those questions?
While I don't claim to be a great DM, I have been using the Gestalt option for a few years now, so I probably have run in to most problems that come up. So, I can at the least give answers to any questions you all have with the experience of trial and error concernig them.
If anyone has a questions, fire away!! I will try and answer them with the rules in mind, but a lot of the problems that come up with the Gestalt option have to be house-ruled. So, if you don't like the "ruling" I have, don't use it. Generally, though, whatever ruling I have figured out has been tested and player approved. I try and maintain that delicate balance between nerfing and munchkinism. Of course, the gestalt option is somewhat munchkin in itself, but hey...
I should also mention that I have for the most part only ran games with 2 or 3 players. That is why I started using the gestalt option, so the party was more balanced against a regular party of 4 players. That way, I don't have to have the DMPC, either. Works out nicely!!
I'm running a gestalt campaing mostly because it helps offset the abyssal power diferences betewn dedicated casters and non-dedicated casters and I`m also playing with the spell point variant system and I`m ruling (after a PvP play test with a freind) that the DC of spell is equal to one-half the effective CL + 10 + key ability modifier, because its was pretty hrad to affect opponents with spell when they got no bad saves at all.
My question is how do you deal with dual classing feats such as Daring Outlaw, wich when tried produce a pretty powerful swashbuckler with +4d6 sneack attack damage on level 4. It seem greatly unbalanced but when comparing wiht other builts it was kinda reassonable when you count the bad will save.
However a few of my players said that those feats are intended for multiclassing and its pointless in dual-classing and say that they should only be taking verticaly, others like those feats, me included, and response that the whole system is intended for a single class and taking those feats its a powerful choice but not overpowering choice.
Before anything, thanks for your help.
I'm running a gestalt campaing mostly because it helps offset the abyssal power diferences betewn dedicated casters and non-dedicated casters and I`m also playing with the spell point variant system and I`m ruling (after a PvP play test with a freind) that the DC of spell is equal to one-half the effective CL + 10 + key ability modifier, because its was pretty hrad to affect opponents with spell when they got no bad saves at all.
My question is how do you deal with dual classing feats such as Daring Outlaw, wich when tried produce a pretty powerful swashbuckler with +4d6 sneack attack damage on level 4. It seem greatly unbalanced but when comparing wiht other builts it was kinda reassonable when you count the bad will save.
However a few of my players said that those feats are intended for multiclassing and its pointless in dual-classing and say that they should only be taking verticaly, others like those feats, me included, and response that the whole system is intended for a single class and taking those feats its a powerful choice but not overpowering choice.
Yes, this type of feat makes for a stronger character. But too strong? I don't think so. I have had many people use these types of feats, and there have been no real problems. HOWEVER, the rules don't support a, say, Swashbuckler/Rogue getting any bonus from this. In the feat, it allows your two class levels to stack for purposes of sneak attack and the like, right? (I don't have Complete Scoundrel) With the gestalt option, having levels of Swashbuckler/Rogue doesn't invoke the feat, as that is only levels in one class. A fifth level Swashbuckler/Rogue isn't a fifth level rogue and a fifth level swashbuckler. If that character then chose to take levels in, say, Fighter/Rogue, THEN the feat starts to work, as he now has seperate levels of Swashbuckler and Rogue. So, the multiclassing aspect still works for these kinds of feats. It makes things a little harder to keep track of, but keeps those feats more balanced.
I have also ran it where both sides of a build work for feats like this, and the power you gain from feats like that isn't overpowering. It is also easier for new players. The first ruling above is probably more balanced, but just letting both sides of the build count for feats like this isn't really all that bad.
Another option I have considered, but haven't tried is this:
When you take level is any class, you have to have a primary and secondary class. Only the primary class of each side of a gestalt build works for these kinds of feats. Now from what I can think of, this will still give benefits from the feat, but at a delayed progression. It will still be faster than a true multiclass, but not as powerful as it would be without these limits. It might make keeping track of the benefits slighty more complicated, but what it basically would do is halve the feats effects.
And the class level thing is a good point, you're not x fighter/x rogue, you're X gestalt.
Characters are both 5th level ... Druid/Fighter and Cleric/Rogue
We played last night and almost killed both the Cleric and the Druid's companion with a single CR 3 Ogre. Even without killing them, they did exhaust almost all of their spells and that was only the first room of the ogre lair ... we called it quits for the night (was late anyway) but I'm worried about the rest of the place being overclassed for them now. encounters I have range from CR 2 (with two critters) to the boss at CR 6
I'm comfortable enough with the mechanics of the system to scale the encounter levels as long as I know what I'm shooting for. Any advice?
Instead of going with an "appropriate" CR for your group, you might have to do a little bit more work. I try and find creatures that won't do enough damage in one or two hits to kill any of the PC's, but mostly the run up and beat them up guy(s). Then, I look at any spell or spell like abilities they have, and make sure they have at least a 50/50 chance of saving.
Taking all that into mind, I then know hat kind of critter to pick.
The Ogre's seem to be under CRed, to me. For the damage they do, and the really good chance they have of hitting, there CR is too low. I usually have them show up around character level 5 at the earliest. As crazy as that sounds, they make a good minor boss at that level.
Now, you have two characters, a Druid/Fighter and a Rogue/Cleric. There is a lot about those two characters I don't know. But that is OK. Here is how I 'measue', if you will, the ECL of a Gestalt character. Each character is 1.5 normal characters. So, with two gestalts, you effectively have a 'normal' party of 3. So, you have thrown a CR 3 creature at an under powered ECL 5 party. They almost died, and used up a great deal of resources. You have to wonder why? Sure, they are slightly under powered for a fifth level party, but only by one characters worth, right?
There is where my judgement of the gestalt option in regards to ECL gets a little skewed. Here are two characters with the abilities of four solid classes. However, they only have the actions of two characters. While the Fighter/Druid or Cleric/Rogue can do healing, and they can attack well, they have to pick one or the other. So, do you attack like a fighter on this turn, or do you cast like a Druid? Sure, the fighter side of his build helps the Druid side very nicely in combat, and to some degree the Druid side helps the fighter side fight better with buffing spells and the like, you still have to pick one or the other.
Another thing to consider is the two characters don't have the best choice of classes to combine. Of the two, the Druid/Fighter is best, but not by much. Now, if one was a Fighter/Rogue, and the other was a Druid/Cleric, you would have been surprised at how they handled that Ogre.
When picking classes for a Gestalt build, it helps to pick two classes that mesh well. Consider this; the Rogue/Cleric has a class that wants to be sneaky, yet has to effectively shout out his spells, defeating the 'sneaky' aspect! So he is really forced to seperate his two halves. Also, his AC suffers more than a clerics normaly would, because he has to worry about screwing up his rogue abilities with heavy armor. He also has some MAD to deal with as well. He need to have both his Dex and Wis as high as he can get them so his abilities work.
With Wild Shape, the Druid/Fighter works together somewhat decently, as the greater hit points and bab work well with the creature form he takes. But, in his case, he loses his armor and weapons if he does wild shape. Usually, you will get a better AC and damage out of armor and weapons then you will out of an animal form. Later, he will find that he will be better off using his weapons due to iterative attacks then changing his shape. It works better for a straight druid, as there bab, hit points, and usually their AC is crap in a hat. Still, he can cast some nice buff spells on himself (and hopefully get some from the Rogue/Cleric as well), and be fairly tough in combat. He doesn't suffer nearly as much from MAD, as his Wis needs to be high, and he can get away with less stats in his others.
So, you have to consider those things. They have somewhat nerfed themselves by their choices. Now, if they are having fun with their characters, then they picked very well, as that is the whole point, having fun. I would consider these two characters to be just that; two characters. They are right around half strength for a group of four 5th level characters, and thus a CR 3 creature, especially one as overpowered as an Ogre, would be a tough fight (I think they should be CR4, personally). They didn't die, and they used up most of there resources in that fight. Sounds about right.
Keep in mind there less than steller characters, (again, not a problem if they enjoy playing them), and adjust your encounters to account for it.
If they are not enjoying there characters, then you could have them roll up new ones. Or, just allow them to change one side of there builds. Just have them keep in mind the idea of having the two classes they pick meshing, the more the better. Or, have them very carefully chose what feats they pick. With the right feats, even the 'sub-optimal' class choices they have made could work very nicely.
Hope that helps!:D
By the way i think ninja druid is one of the bests and most versatile gestalt combos ever. Nothing like an invisible lion pouncing at your boss for a +4d6 sudden strike to end and encounter. And he can poison his own claws unharmed.
(I.e make the creatures last longer without otherwise upping their difficulty)
DracoPhoenix Interesting question. I have never really considered that, to be honest...
Well, after giving it some thought, a few things come to mind. One, all the monsters in the various MM's have average hit points. Now, rolling the hit points wouldn't really improve it much, as you would mostly end up with an average anyway. But, one thing to consider is maybe not doing this for every creature, but the bosses, even just the HDIC of the encounter might have, say, max hit points for a few of its HD/levels. For example, a team of Hobgoblins led by a Lt. Hobgoblin attack the party. Lets say the Lt. has level in fighter. If he has five levels of fighter, give him max hit points for 2 of those levels. It will toughen him up, and further justify him being in charge of the other, regular Hob's.
Another idea would be to up there con score by two points. However, that could be bad, especially if they have abilities based on Con.
I would either give all of your critters a few maxed HD, or do the first option I mentioned above.
I certainly wouldn't reccomend going gestalt with all the baddies, though. I tried that, and the paperwork gets insane after fifth level...
BUT, having a few bosses that are Gestalted is very nice, indeed. Especially if the party is used to regular character types. Having a few Gestalted baddies throws a nice mix in! One of the coolest gestalted baddy encounters I used on the players was a group of 6(? maybe more...) White Spawn of Tiamat (don't recall there name at the moment) with two gestalt characters leading them. One was a Dragonfire Adept/ Dragon Shaman, and the other was a Dragon Shaman/... err... uh... I am fairly sure it was fighter...(its been a while, if you couldn't tell...). The party raved about that fight for some time afterwords. With both of the gestalt guys using longspears over the heads of the Whitespawn (they are small), AND the DFA/DS breathing fire freely (and not hurting the whitespawn thanks to the DFA invocation that makes anyone touched immune to the breath weapon), the party was VERY confused. They actually had several fire based attacks at their disposal, but they didn't use them, as they figured the enemy was immune to fire! It was pretty good, all in all.
We won't get into what the Wizard/Cleric/Mystic Theurge//Psion baddy did to them...hee hee, they HATE psions, now. Only Psions, not psionics. For them, psionics are fine, as long as it is NOT the hated psions!!
Anyway, back to the topic at hand; I would assuredly have most of the NPC's in the world be normal single class type characters, with a few Gestalt ones thrown in for flavor. Also, this makes the characters even more exceptional. There are very few other people/beings in the world as impressive as they are.
Mmmm, Voran with much wisdom speaks...
Crap. Really? I need to watch out for that.
Um...
Paris Hilton is an upstanding young dabutant! (With mispellings and all!)
Of course she is!! Any teenage idol that goes out and stars in a porn just for the fun of it is about as upstanding as can be, right? :P
Yawar Your welcome! Thanks for taking my advice! It is good to be appreciated... *basking in the glow* :P
DracoPhoenix Interesting question. I have never really considered that, to be honest...
Thanks, very useful to get another perspective on the matter
I think this has been asked before but seen as though this will be an efficient reference for most if no all question about gestalt, how does gestalt work if I have a monster class? eg. I'm a Centaur
I think it's been DM fiat'd. But usually, it's split some how between class "trees" e.g. all on one side or across both, treating each class level "slot" as +1. This usually applies to +LA's etc too.
(YMMV)
Now alot of people don't allow this because they think sense the abilities are gained at the same time they don't stack, it says "+" so i assume pluses always stack.
I think the reason they won't allow it is cause they think it's broken, the guy will be one of the few to never gain spellcasting, and his entire thing revolves around taking advantage of attack of oppurtunity, are these broken paranoia things unfounded? (Let's face it, it's gestalt. Game balance is not high on the totem pole..)
I think this has been asked before but seen as though this will be an efficient reference for most if no all question about gestalt, how does gestalt work if I have a monster class? eg. I'm a Centaur
Take in mind that monster classes is a way of playing a monster with level adjustment and racial hit dice from the very first level begining and racial hit dice is practical level adjustment. Almost anybody would play lizardfolks if they could exchange their racial hit dice for class levels.
Now here is my posible solution make them take another a class level in any every level they gain Hit Dice from they monster class. This would keep their lvl adjustment while not making them underpower, but keep mind that you should make a little playtest and advanced builds to check that they don`t end up with overpowering characters. If they do simply rule that they don`t get class level on a couple monster levels and it should fix it.
I've wanted to make a rogue/fighter gestalt build that uses unearthed arcana's fighter varaint that gains sneak attack instead of bonus feats.
Now alot of people don't allow this because they think sense the abilities are gained at the same time they don't stack, it says "+" so i assume pluses always stack.
I think the reason they won't allow it is cause they think it's broken, the guy will be one of the few to never gain spellcasting, and his entire thing revolves around taking advantage of attack of oppurtunity, are these broken paranoia things unfounded? (Let's face it, it's gestalt. Game balance is not high on the totem pole..)
As a mater of fact a ninja/rouge is much more powerful (but much more fragile) so i don`t see why not to let it in.
I've wanted to make a rogue/fighter gestalt build that uses unearthed arcana's fighter varaint that gains sneak attack instead of bonus feats.
Now alot of people don't allow this because they think sense the abilities are gained at the same time they don't stack, it says "+" so i assume pluses always stack.
I think the reason they won't allow it is cause they think it's broken, the guy will be one of the few to never gain spellcasting, and his entire thing revolves around taking advantage of attack of oppurtunity, are these broken paranoia things unfounded? (Let's face it, it's gestalt. Game balance is not high on the totem pole..)
Almost all other "stacking" effects - BAB, saves etc only stack vertically, at the rate of the best one. Though you gain singular abilities once (uncanny dodge is the example UA uses) at the earlier instance.
However, you do not get, for example, +4 will AND +2 will for +6 will from say a wizard // fighter.
These are "+" abilities / bonus' as you put it, and +SA is comparable to these as a recurring stacking feature.
IIRC, the trick you want is Rogue X // use ful dip 1 / +SA class X-1.
(apologies, it's late and I'm tired, but I think that's coherent).
NB: DM0 can overrule.
Thanks for the thread, good idea.
Though tiny suggestion, if I may:
Put a FAQ index in the first post - otherwise people may end up asking the same question every 5 pages. (I know I don't always read every single page / post of a 20 page thread.
Even a
sblock=Q:
A1
A2
...
/sblock
format will do.
I think this has been asked before but seen as though this will be an efficient reference for most if no all question about gestalt, how does gestalt work if I have a monster class? eg. I'm a Centaur
There are a bunch of answers to this one already, so I will just throw in the option I use in this matter.
1) Get the Savage Species progression for the race.
2) pick a class.
3) Gestalt those two. Basically, the Savage Species progressions is taking "levels" in the creature. On one side of the Gestalt, you would be Centuar, and on the other the class you choose. So, you would have, at first level, a level 1 Centuar/Fighter. You would have to continue to take the Centaur levels each level until it is done, then you could take another class on that side of the build.
JimProfit As they are identical class abilities, you wouldn't get them each level, unless they were gained at different levels. So, if side A of your build gives a +1D6 sneak attack at level one, and at level two you gain +1D6 sneak attack from side B, then you would gain both. Ultimately, it is up to your DM, of course, but you could do it that way.
DracoPheonix Thanks!! I thought it might be helpful to some people. As for the index thing, I have thought of that, but I have no idea how to catagorize them so that one would know what questions have been asked. Once I figure that out, I will be golden!! Also, I don't know how to link to a particular post. Haven't quite figured that out yet...
DracoPheonix Thanks!! I thought it might be helpful to some people. As for the index thing, I have thought of that, but I have no idea how to catagorize them so that one would know what questions have been asked. Once I figure that out, I will be golden!! Also, I don't know how to link to a particular post. Haven't quite figured that out yet...
My advice :
Regarding the post linking, copy the url for the post # from the # in the post's title bar (right hand side).
Just start listing the Q&As for now, the sample set is probably too small, and you can always play with it later.
Possible categories could include:
- Balance,
- Clarifications,
- Opinion / experience,
- Exceptions to the rule,
- Munchkin interpretations & other "I know I c/shouldn't, but..." questions your DM will normally say no to.
You may even find sblock-ing similar questions under a generic title to keep it tidy in some cases.
Hope this helps.
I'm running a gestalt campaing mostly because it helps offset the abyssal power diferences betewn dedicated casters and non-dedicated casters and I`m also playing with the spell point variant system
I just wanted to say before I ran off, the spell point varient system is horribly broken. It's like dropping a relatively large fraction of your wizards spells per day for the ability to be more flexible. Almost along the lines of the difference in spell slots from the Sorcerer to the Wizard as when you go from a Wizards standard slots and a Wizards spell points in this system.
I never tested it with other classes, but I am assuming they all end up losing between 1/5 to 1/3 of their spells per day with this system, and thats not even factoring in the burning of more spell points in order to keep the caster level for each spell up to your true caster level. I'm lost on how the developer who came up with this system thought it was a decent system.
After doing some math on a user created system, it seems it is extremely close to the number of slots which the wizard should have, again I didn't do the math on other classes. There is a good amount involved with just one class. I haven't play tested it, or used any of the extraneous stuff involved. However, the link is here if you would like to look at that one. http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=768788&highlight=Melayl%27s+Mana-based+Spellcasting+System
I'm running a gestalt campaing mostly because it helps offset the abyssal power diferences betewn dedicated casters and non-dedicated casters.
Another thing, have you checked out the Tome of Battle? Before you say "GAH!! Its BROKEN!!", it really isn't. Infact, it has been proven that your average Barbarian dishes out more damage per turn per level then a Warblade. In addition, the various guru's of optimization who have made it there life quest to see just how quickly each and every character type out there can break a planet have all cursed this book because of how unbreakable the classes are. The classes are THAT balanced!!
So, with that in mind, I give you this as an awesomely fun class to play, that is great at doing the melee thing!! Warblade/Swordsage. All good saves, best BAB, 1D12 hit points, and access to every discipline except Devoted Spirit. AND enough skills to be quite handy outside of combat. Which is the real problem with fighter types in my book, to be honest with you.
Just something that came to mind. Oh, and a Dwarven Crusader/Fighter taking levels in Deepstone Sentinel and Dwarven Defender later on looks mighty nice, too. I haven't crunched the numbers yet, but from what I have done, it is looking really good.
I will be starting a game really soon, here, and the first player has made up her character. Here is what she made. A Dragonborn (formerly Elven) Dragonfire Adept/Dragon Shaman. Seemed kind of redundant, until we actually made the character.
She picked wings from the Dragonborn. She has the Endure Exposure Innvocation, with plans of taking Beguiling Influence next. Her Auras are Senses, Power, and Vigor. She plans on taking Presence next. Her totem Dragon is Copper.
All in all, this is one heck of a character!! I was surprised and impressed!! Due to her innvocation choices, she doesn't care about Arcane Spell Failure, as the one she has and the next one she is going to take are 24 hour effects, so she can armor up to her hearts content. She can glide right now, and will have Spider Climb soon, so she will just climb up whatever is handy, and then reign death on my poor, poor monsters as she glides by overhead. Her Diplomacy, Bluff, and Intimidate are going to be through the roof. This has the potential of being a seriously impressive character!!
Did I mention that she is basically new to DnD? Watch out for those new players, DM's, they are always the ones that getcha!!
For example, if Joe has a question about class balance, instead of looking up a question farther back in the thread about the subject, he can ask his own, and get an answer to HIS question. You know what I mean?
How do you combine Gestalt with LA?
Do you put the LA on one class slot? Or on both class slots? Or do you halve it and put on both?
EX1: Half celestial (LA+4): Slot1: LA+4 and one class level/ Slot2: 5 Class levels? (ECL5)
EX2: Half celestial (LA+4): Slot1: LA+4 and one class level/ Slot2: LA+4 and one class level? (ECL5)
EX3: Half celestial (LA+4): Slot1: LA+2 and one class level/ Slot2: LA+2 and one class level? (ECL3)
And what about "LA Levels" in monster classes? Do you put it on both or on one class slot? Or do you ignore every second LA increase, and give the increase that you don't ignore to both?
Sorry if that's confusing, I'm a little loopy from my flu meds.
Flu...on Christmas, grr, I missed the family party and can't visit today either since I don't want to get my 4 month old niece sick.
Ehm.
How do you combine Gestalt with LA?
Do you put the LA on one class slot? Or on both class slots? Or do you halve it and put on both?
EX1: Half celestial (LA+4): Slot1: LA+4 and one class level/ Slot2: 5 Class levels? (ECL5)
EX2: Half celestial (LA+4): Slot1: LA+4 and one class level/ Slot2: LA+4 and one class level? (ECL5)
EX3: Half celestial (LA+4): Slot1: LA+2 and one class level/ Slot2: LA+2 and one class level? (ECL3)
And what about "LA Levels" in monster classes? Do you put it on both or on one class slot? Or do you ignore every second LA increase, and give the increase that you don't ignore to both?
I have fiddled around with several options. I have ended up using your first example.
I have had no balance issues doing this. In fact, using the gestalt option makes LA feasible.
However, if the race has a savage species progression, then I have them use that on one side of the build, and they have to finish it out before they can take any other classes on that side.
If the creature has hit dice and LA, but no savage species progression, then it isn't available at lower then its ECL. If I am running a high level game where they can use such a creature, then they can have a class of equal level to gestalt with the ECL of the race. I haven't actually done that yet, but I will allow it if I do.
I wish they would come out with a book or a web enhancement that has levels as found for the Thri-Kreen in the back of the Complete Psionics book. That is a great way to do it.
I recently been playing a super campaign where I have 3 classes instead of 2, Sick I know but that's not what I came here for.
Going with normal gestalt rules, of course. can I do this
Level 1 slot 1: Monk slot 2: Sorcerer
Level 2 slot 1: Monk slot 2: Sorcerer
Level 3 slot 1: Fighter slot 2: Sorcerer
Level 4 slot 1: Fighter slot 2: Monk 3rd level
basically could I take levels of monk in 1 slot and continue it in another, if I wanted to continue taking levels in fighter.
The way I see it there is no reason why this can't be done, but is there something I am not seeing.
Thanks
Going with normal gestalt rules, of course. can I do this
Level 1 slot 1: Monk slot 2: Sorcerer
Level 2 slot 1: Monk slot 2: Sorcerer
Level 3 slot 1: Fighter slot 2: Sorcerer
Level 4 slot 1: Fighter slot 2: Monk 3rd level
basically could I take levels of monk in 1 slot and continue it in another, if I wanted to continue taking levels in fighter.
The way I see it there is no reason why this can't be done, but is there something I am not seeing.
Thanks
Of course. However, I would like to point out that this:
Level 1 slot 1: Monk slot 2: Sorcerer
Level 2 slot 1: Monk slot 2: Sorcerer
Level 3 slot 1: Fighter slot 2: Sorcerer
Level 4 slot 1: Monk slot 2: Fighter
is identical to your list. However, the same limits for classes apply to gestalt as to normal classes. So, classes like Paladin and Monk that you can leave for another class, and not go back to still apply. But, as long as you follow all the normal rules of multiclassing, you can have any combo per level you want.
For example, you could, if you were somewhat insane, do this:
Level 1 Fighter/Barbarian
Level 2 Rogue/Beguiler
Level 3 Paladin/Psion
Level 4 Cleric/Monk
Level 5 Druid/Duskblade
Level 6 Warlock/Wizard
Just like you could do this in a regular game (again, if you were slightly insane)
Level 1 Fighter
Level 2 Rogue
Level 3 Monk
Level 4 Barbarian
Level 5 Wizard
Level 6 Paladin
and so on.
slot 1 :20 monk/1 rogue/+2 sorcerer
slot 2 :10 warblade/10 dervish/ 3 cleric
slot 3 :15 sorcerer/8 kensai
it is made so that I am only taking 1 prestige class at a time 5 warblade, 10 dervish, then back to warblade so I can take kensai in another. and I took versatile strike to meet prerequisites for dervish.
it was something different but I was fighting Pazuzu, graz'zt, and Orcus and They stood up to me. I laid out a Linnorm (CR 28 Dragon) in a round or two but these guys I had troubles with, I had to flee. I did cast create water over graz'zt. 42 gallons of water dumped on a demon lord. that was funny.
LOL, THAT is insane. How does it go balance wise? I mean, if you power up a PC too much, the chalenges and the XP get crazy. You either A) have them face stuff that is way too high for a normal group that size, and thus the level like crazy, or B) have them face stuff they should at their level, and they spank the creatures like small red headed step children, and are generally bored as far as combat goes. Of course, you could, I suppose, have them face stuff that is higher, but only reward them for a normal encounter. Still, the whole XP and level thing gets wonky.
LOL, 42 gallons of water over a demon lords head. I think that has to rank pretty high up there in the top ten pranks of all time list. I take it they were facing you as a group?
Almost all other "stacking" effects - BAB, saves etc only stack vertically, at the rate of the best one. Though you gain singular abilities once (uncanny dodge is the example UA uses) at the earlier instance.
However, you do not get, for example, +4 will AND +2 will for +6 will from say a wizard // fighter.
These are "+" abilities / bonus' as you put it, and +SA is comparable to these as a recurring stacking feature.
IIRC, the trick you want is Rogue X // use ful dip 1 / +SA class X-1.
I disagree, I believe that you gain all the special abilities from both classes, for example a Fighter/Wizard, they both gain a bonus feat at 10th level, I take that as gaining 2 feats, one a Fighter bonus feat, and the other a general feat. Because by what your saying I would only gain 1 ability since they are essencially the same.
To quote UA...Class Features: A gestalt character gains the class features of
both classes. A 1st-level gestalt rogue/cleric, for example, gets
sneak attack +1d6, trapfi nding, 1st-level cleric spells, and the ability
to turn or rebuke undead. Class- and ability-based restrictions
(such as arcane spell failure chance and a druid’s prohibition on
wearing metal armor) apply normally to a gestalt character, no
matter what the other class is.
So, is this option using three classes called Gestaltier?
LOL, THAT is insane. How does it go balance wise? I mean, if you power up a PC too much, the chalenges and the XP get crazy. You either A) have them face stuff that is way too high for a normal group that size, and thus the level like crazy, or B) have them face stuff they should at their level, and they spank the creatures like small red headed step children, and are generally bored as far as combat goes. Of course, you could, I suppose, have them face stuff that is higher, but only reward them for a normal encounter. Still, the whole XP and level thing gets wonky.
LOL, 42 gallons of water over a demon lords head. I think that has to rank pretty high up there in the top ten pranks of all time list. I take it they were facing you as a group?
That's the thing its not meant to be balanced, it was just something one of my players wanted to do, I said sure why not. He told me to make anything I wanted. and since I was going to be the only one I figured a 3 class Gestalt would suffice.
as far as XP and encounter goes he just tells me when I get level ups. we don't keep track of XP there is no point, because it does get sicker. I am not just any human with 7 classes no I have to be the sweetest off the wall, created by the gods themselves, race mixture of all time. I researched and found it is possible to have a half-celestial, half-dragon, Stone Giant with Natural Lycanthropy.
My parents were simply a celestial stone giant with lycanthrope and a dragon in stone giant form.
Racial bonuses like crazy.
Here is a list of some of the things I killed
2 tarrasques at once
Count strahd Von Zarovich (Ravenloft darklord)
Vlad Drakov
Azalin Rex
Linnorm
Robilar
pit fiends or balors (can't remember)
Goristro
that is a list of things that come to mind right now
the biggest challenge were Mordenkainen, pazuzu, orcus, graz'zt practically all at once they used Mord's disjunction and destroyed my uber powerful swords and other things and decided to rebuild myself into a monk, kensai something that can't be disjunctioned.
I disagree, I believe that you gain all the special abilities from both classes, for example a Fighter/Wizard, they both gain a bonus feat at 10th level, I take that as gaining 2 feats, one a Fighter bonus feat, and the other a general feat. Because by what your saying I would only gain 1 ability since they are essencially the same.
To quote UA...Class Features: A gestalt character gains the class features of
both classes. A 1st-level gestalt rogue/cleric, for example, gets
sneak attack +1d6, trapfi nding, 1st-level cleric spells, and the ability
to turn or rebuke undead. Class- and ability-based restrictions
(such as arcane spell failure chance and a druid’s prohibition on
wearing metal armor) apply normally to a gestalt character, no
matter what the other class is.
Ok, maybe the first word should have been bolded. Also, fighter feats are selected from a different set of feats than metamagic / creation feats. It would be fair to considered them different enough to no overlap.
That said, if both were simply considered "generic bonus feats", then like SA, you would only get one. It would suck, but no more than only getting SA once.
I disagree, I believe that you gain all the special abilities from both classes, for example a Fighter/Wizard, they both gain a bonus feat at 10th level, I take that as gaining 2 feats, one a Fighter bonus feat, and the other a general feat. Because by what your saying I would only gain 1 ability since they are essencially the same.
To quote UA...Class Features: A gestalt character gains the class features of
both classes. A 1st-level gestalt rogue/cleric, for example, gets
sneak attack +1d6, trapfi nding, 1st-level cleric spells, and the ability
to turn or rebuke undead. Class- and ability-based restrictions
(such as arcane spell failure chance and a druid’s prohibition on
wearing metal armor) apply normally to a gestalt character, no
matter what the other class is.
But the bonus feats from the fighter and wizard are NOT the same, because they are gained from a different list of feats. It needs to have more than just the name be identical.
For example, lets say you have two classes that give Sneak Attack (as that is the excepted example ability here). Now, class A gives Sneak Attack at the same level as class B, and the rules given on how Sneak Attack can be used are identical. BUT, class A gives a sneak attack of +1D6, and class B gives a sneak attack of +1D8. There is a difference, so both apply.
Another good example is Extra Spell Knowledge (or whatever each class calls it; there are only a few variations on the name). Basically, this ability allows you to add a spell to your spell book/ spells known/ spells available. If they don't do EXACTLY the same thing, then they both apply.
In my games, this goes for any given class ability. If they are not EXACT, they stack. The only difference is Power Points with psionic classes. As they are (effectively) the spells of psychic characters, you get the power points from both psionic classes you take, regardless of how identical they are. My reasoning is if you want to play a Wizard/Sorcerer, you get both sets of spell knowledge and spells available. Well, if you take away one of the psychic classes power points, that would be akin to letting someone play the Wizard/Sorcerer, but not allowing them to get the Sorcerer's spell's known.
So as far as I am concerned, it is more than just the name.
But the bonus feats from the fighter and wizard are NOT the same, because they are gained from a different list of feats. It needs to have more than just the name be identical.
For example, lets say you have two classes that give Sneak Attack (as that is the excepted example ability here). Now, class A gives Sneak Attack at the same level as class B, and the rules given on how Sneak Attack can be used are identical. BUT, class A gives a sneak attack of +1D6, and class B gives a sneak attack of +1D8. There is a difference, so both apply.
Another good example is Extra Spell Knowledge (or whatever each class calls it; there are only a few variations on the name). Basically, this ability allows you to add a spell to your spell book/ spells known/ spells available. If they don't do EXACTLY the same thing, then they both apply.
In my games, this goes for any given class ability. If they are not EXACT, they stack. The only difference is Power Points with psionic classes. As they are (effectively) the spells of psychic characters, you get the power points from both psionic classes you take, regardless of how identical they are. My reasoning is if you want to play a Wizard/Sorcerer, you get both sets of spell knowledge and spells available. Well, if you take away one of the psychic classes power points, that would be akin to letting someone play the Wizard/Sorcerer, but not allowing them to get the Sorcerer's spell's known.
So as far as I am concerned, it is more than just the name.
I agree the big ones that you don't get both of are evasion, uncanny dodge, Damage Reduction(barbarian) if they are both DR x/-. if it is DR x/ magic then both apply. if there is another base class that grant sneak attack it would also be one of them (most sneak atacks do 1d6).
turn undead, smite evil, auras(like cleric's aura, must be same aura), familiars mounts, animal companions, trap sense, fast movement, AC bonus(monk, ninja), trackless step, woodland stride, timeless body, aquiring certain bonus feats(like saying you get endurance, or improved unarm strike)
I can't think of any others
Would the Monk's AC Bonus ability work in conjuction with the Swordsage's AC Bonus ability?
Both add the characters Wisdom to AC. However the Monk's ability is gained at 1st level, only works when unarmored, and gains an additional +1 bonus every 5 levels. The swordsage version is gained at 2nd level, works in light armor as well as unarmored* , and does not increase with level.
*The book actually states "works as long as you wear light armor, are unencumbered, and do not use a shield" - but several customer service responses and popular consensus amend this to "light armor or no armor" - and this is the ruling we're using in the game i'm playing.
We already know the Ninja's AC bonus does not stack with Monk, but that is an identically worded ability, and expressly states it will not stack with monk in a multiclass character in it's description. Swordsage doesn't.
Now, i can see both sides of an argument on whether a Monk 2 // Swordsage 2 should or should not get wisdom added twice to AC - what's the consensus here?
On the point of which abilities stack, here's a question for you:
Would the Monk's AC Bonus ability work in conjuction with the Swordsage's AC Bonus ability?
Both add the characters Wisdom to AC. However the Monk's ability is gained at 1st level, only works when unarmored, and gains an additional +1 bonus every 5 levels. The swordsage version is gained at 2nd level, works in light armor as well as unarmored* , and does not increase with level.
*The book actually states "works as long as you wear light armor, are unencumbered, and do not use a shield" - but several customer service responses and popular consensus amend this to "light armor or no armor" - and this is the ruling we're using in the game i'm playing.
We already know the Ninja's AC bonus does not stack with Monk, but that is an identically worded ability, and expressly states it will not stack with monk in a multiclass character in it's description. Swordsage doesn't.
Now, i can see both sides of an argument on whether a Monk 2 // Swordsage 2 should or should not get wisdom added twice to AC - what's the consensus here?
Good one, do either specify bonus type? if so, and they are the same, I would imagine they overlap.
I'm afraid I'm not familiar with the swordsage to comment much atm.
Otherwise, playing advocate, I would put forward that bonuses from the same source don't stack and the source in both these cases could be considered your wisdom bonus.
As i said earlier, i can see both sides of the coin on this one. Allowing both to stack seems wrong somehow, but if you class both as "Class features that two classes share" which "Accrue at the rate of the faster class" - then which is the faster rate? You get the Monk bonus at an earlier level, and it gives extra AC at higher levels, so that'd be the most obvious - but if my Monk//Swordsage were to throw on some light armor (for whatever reason) then i'd lose all my Wisdom bonus's to AC, even though my Swordsage ability should grant me that bonus still.
I'm currently inclined to try and argue that both should work, for 3 reasons.
1) The reason above, that the features differ enough to be classed as seperate abilities.
2) There is no text in the description of Swordsage disallowing stacking with the Monk bonus (as per the AC bonus description from the Ninja class).
3) I'm playing the character and I want a high AC :D
Anyone else have any input into this?
BUT, if your DM says no, then you have to remember that the bonuses overlap instead of stack. In other words, you would still have both, but only one would apply at any given time. So, if you did throw on some light armor, the bonus from Monk would be supressed by the armor, but the Swordsage Wis AC bonus would still work, as none of the conditions apply that would supress it.
And that is the rub of it, really. They are worded differently, so you would get them both. By RAW, that is. However, some people (including yourself, as you stated in your post) feel that allowing them both to apply is wrong. But, there really isn't any rule from the books that says they do not. Should they? Probably not. Do they? As the rules are written, yes.
Does VoP stack with monk // swordsage :D
On further reflection, I would think it could probably stack.
Before I was cautious due to game balance, but afterwards, I remembers this is Gestalt we're dealing with. If you were working at it, you'd probably quite easily max out AC with the correct class combos.
Yes, there are many ways with a regular character to get amazingly high AC's. That works the same with Gestalt, only it would be easier, as you can get two of the classes at the same time. You would still multiclass like crazy, it would be just... well, more crazy!!
Yes, I am aware rightest isn't a real word.
Also, I don't want Spacehopper to get his AC too high, as it would then be more difficult to have my poxy little goblin with no class levels kill him dead! ;)
I know there is a feat out there somewhere that adds int mod to reflex saves, if I had this feat and the warblade's battle clarity would I add int bonus to reflex saves twice? the same rule still applies.
and another general rulling I just remembered. it says in stacking rules that all unnamed bonuses stack but bonuses from the same source never stack. so two unnamed bonuses from the same source would not stack.
BUT, that is besides the point. I am not sure if they meant to leave out what type of bonus those abilities give, but it would have been nice if they had included a type. However, as the rules are written, they have no type listed, so they are, by default, unnamed bonuses, and thus do stack.
I know there is a feat out there somewhere that adds int mod to reflex saves, if I had this feat and the warblade's battle clarity would I add int bonus to reflex saves twice? the same rule still applies.
Well, unless the feat gives a named bonus and it is the same type as the one from battle clarity, then yeah, they would both apply your Int mod to your Ref saves. I haven't seen any ruling that says otherwise. That is not to say there isn't such a ruling, just I haven't seen it or heard of it.
Thing is, what's "too high"? If i max out both dexterity and wisdom to 18 (giving me sod all points really to use on any other stat) i'd have an AC of 22 at level 2 (2 lots of 4 wis bonus, and 4 dex bonus). A fighter at level 2 who's found a little bit of cash can get to 21 (full plate (8), 1 dex, heavy shield (2) )and have more stat points to play with.
Guess i'll just have to come up with some fully-legal gestalt combo that gives rediculously high AC and claim i want to use that, and hope i can then use my swordsage//monk as a "fallback" option
Dwarf with Battle Plate, an Extreme Shield, and the feats of Shield Specialization, and Heavy Armor Optimization, combined with those classes abilities. Heh. Maybe not the highest AC possible, but a really high one anyway, and more defensive (and offensive, thanks to Crusader) abilities than the DM will know what to do with.
What, pray tell, is a 'git'? And what does 'sod all' mean? Just curious. :D
Git:
British Slang. a foolish or contemptible person.
"worthless person, British slang, a southern variant of Scottish get "illegitimate child, brat,"
Sod All:
British colloquial sod-all, Meaning "nothing" is attested from 1958.
Pulled from dictionary.com. So basically, my DM is not a nice person, and if i were to make my Wisdom and Dexterity 18's, i'd have little or no points to spend on other stats.
And the use of those terms hardly makes you common, good sir.
And the use of those terms hardly makes you common, good sir.
Nope, the fact i'm common makes me common :D
But enough thread de-railing from me. Thanks for your input everyone, guess it's between me and my DM now. Reckon i'll lose this argument, but monk//swordsage is only one of my many concepts for characters for his next game anyway. Swordsage//Cleric was my original choice, but i was worried about the cleric side overshadowing the Swordsage at higher levels. However, any gestalt build without a casting class will probably end up not being diverse enough.
There's so many options for a gestalt character that i can't settle on any one build
I could side either way on the AC bonus issue, to be honest. Its not going to be game breaking, but I can't see why it *would* stack, if ya follow me. Its a set buff, WIS bonus to AC. SS is better, cos it works with armour, but cripples the monk abilities in the process.
For the sake of a decent character, I might just allow it - I'm a pretty lenient and benevolent DM after all, and the character concept is a good one.
Nope, the fact i'm common makes me common :D
But enough thread de-railing from me. Thanks for your input everyone, guess it's between me and my DM now. Reckon i'll lose this argument, but monk//swordsage is only one of my many concepts for characters for his next game anyway. Swordsage//Cleric was my original choice, but i was worried about the cleric side overshadowing the Swordsage at higher levels. However, any gestalt build without a casting class will probably end up not being diverse enough.
There's so many options for a gestalt character that i can't settle on any one build
So Monk // Cleric w/ VoP is out then? :D
Only having two players, and the other being set on Paladin//Sorcerer (with the paladin side going Dragon Desciple eventually) means i want a character that can fit in well with him as a duo (so keeping my character firmly good-aligned). I also really want to use a Tome of Battle class, as i've never used the book before, and maneuvers seem like they'll be fun.
I think Bartmoss might start to cry if i threw a character into his gameworld with Vow of Poverty, let alone a gestalted monk//Cleric. I can think of few things more unbalancing.
Only having two players, and the other being set on Paladin//Sorcerer (with the paladin side going Dragon Desciple eventually) means i want a character that can fit in well with him as a duo (so keeping my character firmly good-aligned). I also really want to use a Tome of Battle class, as i've never used the book before, and maneuvers seem like they'll be fun.
Point the Pally//Sorc in the direction of Races of Dragon, the Dragon Reborn race might be of interest to them.
But, if the reason for that particular PrC is to get Dragonesque abilities, you can have those right away as a Dragonborn, and not have to take the PrC.
As a side note, that PrC is very bad, as far as PrC's go, for any caster classes. It does gain some usefulness with Gestalt, however. While a caster class loses caster levels for each level of this class taken, it does give some bonus spells like those gained for a high ability score. So, if your caster class is on the other side of this PrC, you get your caster levels, and a few bonus spells to boot!! Not bad that way. So, for your Pally//Sorc character, your best bet with this PrC is to give up the Pally side for the Dragon Disciple when you can enter that class.
If you survive long enough, get it some barding and a saddle :P
I also don't require that everyone be gestalt. In my current group of 5, only two are gestalt. This hasn't been much of a problem. I did run the gestalts through an adventure just for them to put them up a level and a bit more one time. I might have to do that once more, but that probably won't come up since one of the non-gestalts wants to do a rebuild that will give him a LA, and I wouldn't be surprised if at least one other followed his lead. Now if the gestalts go that route I'll have a bit of a problem, but I'll worry about that later.
I myself play a character under these rules, one of the players also DMs another campaign, and I think it works well enough from the player side too. Sure it is a pain sometimes to see the others legging up faster than you, but that's how it was in 2nd edition too. Its the price you pay for the versitility.
So far, there hasn't been any problem with CRs, other than it is naturally wonky with some monsters being underrated. Xp works out well enough too, but then, I like longer campaigns and slower advancement. An old first edition player, the new advancement ratings seem really fast. Fortunately, my players like playing, so we play a lot of adnventures where they earn little Xp just because they are challenging.
I remembered Gestalt as a possible option, but I'm really at a loss as to where I should be aiming for a fun average CR. Earlier in the thread it sounds like its class combination specific, which sounds like alot to chew on.
I've DM'd alot over the years, but its always been 4-8 players, so trying to figure out how to make the game fun for just 1 player and 1 DM is proving to be a challenge.
Do you have any pointers on running gestalt for a small 1-2 character group? Is there a minimum level we should start out at for it to work well?
Thanks!
[sblock=snip]My wife played D&D with my group several years ago, but since then she has had to work pretty much every time we've scheduled to play. She keeps saying she wants to play D&D, so I've been looking around for options of how to make an engaging game for a single player (I'll probably run a character too).
I remembered Gestalt as a possible option, but I'm really at a loss as to where I should be aiming for a fun average CR. Earlier in the thread it sounds like its class combination specific, which sounds like alot to chew on.
I've DM'd alot over the years, but its always been 4-8 players, so trying to figure out how to make the game fun for just 1 player and 1 DM is proving to be a challenge.[/snip]
Do you have any pointers on running gestalt for a small 1-2 character group? Is there a minimum level we should start out at for it to work well?
Thanks!
I've run a completely solo gestalt game (1) to learn DMing and 2) to trial gestalt). Was ok, but I either killed things too quickly or couldn't touch them.
I think it depends on if your wife would prefer role play or roll play.
For Roll play :
If you can roll your own campaigns, you can do what can to accommodate some of the short falls. Not completely eliminate, but make them less frequent - e.g. no rogue / skills = fewer locked doors - or certain monsters carry keys.
That or roll 2-4 characters and have her play one with effectively 3 cohorts.
(or each get one and have a cohort each)
For Role play, intrigue would be the main plot style, so you could simply have her as a "private investigator" (regardless of class) and handle the majority of the NPC interactions yourself.
Apart from the party dynamic, you will probably find you don't have to change as much of the game as you'd think. Maybe take into account that there's only one person / main persona in play with the others supporting. (unless your wife is happy to try and develop some level of schism
)As for LA, again, this would be dependent on your wife's comfort for the most part, with your comfortability with gestalt having a smaller impact.
You could always try a L1 for a bit - to get familiar with everything. Then have her flesh out the character to something you're both happy with and say "Five years later...."
Managing the mechanics will be easier - you'll only have one person to talk (/"discuss") with. You'll probably find games are quicker as you don't have so many 10min free actions while discussions on what to do occur.
Feel can be more or less tailored to your wife's taste.
Difficulty is probably going to end up trial & error. +/- 1-2 is the DMs friend for a reason.
If you want to shave prep time off, consider bumping the monster's hp instead of dual classing them for the same EL. One problem I've seen isn't so much a monster is weak against a gestalt combo, it's just neither side will last long if the other side is given a chance to bring their abilities to bare on them.
You could probably also get away with a ~linear plot progression for the character. Instead of every 13 encounters, she gets levelled up in the quest intermissions.
Hope this is of some help.
I remembered Gestalt as a possible option, but I'm really at a loss as to where I should be aiming for a fun average CR. Earlier in the thread it sounds like its class combination specific, which sounds like alot to chew on.
Well... yes. Really, a Cleric//Druid or Archivist//Artificer is virtually a god, while a Wizard//Sorcerer is actually weaker than a pure Wizard. So it's hard to gauge.
Do you have any pointers on running gestalt for a small 1-2 character group? Is there a minimum level we should start out at for it to work well?
I'm currently running a game with two gestalt players, about to add a third. I've found that setting the CRs the same as for a four person group of the same level (but non gestalt) is workable, but then again my players have decently strong builds... and it's still cutting things close. Honestly, I'd say a normal two person gestalt group is roughly equivalent to a 4 person standard party that's 1 level lower than they are. The gestalt group has far fewer total hitpoints and half the actions, but they do have better synergy (usually) and harder to exploit weaknesses.
Just be careful, and run lower CR encounters to start. Also, don't start below level 5 if you can avoid it. It's REALLY easy to kill off low level gestalt players in a small party situation.
JaronK
Just to give you all an update on how its going. After looking over several adventures, I think I am going to go with "Expedition to the Demonweb Pits", its level 9-12ish.
My wife loves faerie stuff, so we're going to play a pair of pixies (I just gave us each the first 4 levels from Savage Species on top of our class abilities). She's going to be a Rogue/Fighter and I am going to be a Druid/Sorcerer. I know my combination may not be the most potent, but it works on theme and I wanted us to have access to divine and arcane magic.
Im still toying around with what level we're going to start out at. I initially made us at 9 + 4 levels of Pixie, but that seems a bit overpowered. So I might scale us down a bit, or maybe I'll just make some across the board enemy adjustments.
So, now that we are back up and running, how has your game gone, eepop?
When deciding on gestalt character builds, should you:
1) Maximise in one area? E.g. Wiz // Sorc
2) Synergise / pick classes which complement each other? E.g. Psion / Fighter
3) Ignore the numbers and go for a really cool idea like Soulknife (/ Illumine Soul) // Incarnate.
Just to get the thread rolling again (polite / constructive arguments only please):
When deciding on gestalt character builds, should you:
1) Maximise in one area? E.g. Wiz // Sorc
2) Synergise / pick classes which complement each other? E.g. Psion / Fighter
3) Ignore the numbers and go for a really cool idea like Soulknife (/ Illumine Soul) // Incarnate.
I go with whatever looks fun because when it comes to gestalt thats what it's all about really, i mean the most fun i ever had with a gestalt character was a marshal/druid, i honestly don't remember why i combined those two classes but i did have a lot of fun playing him
One thing I do is I look at a gesltalt character as having one class. If you try and get the best of two classes, you end up short changing both, as you still only get feats for one class. So, pick a single class, and then find another class that assists the first one nicely. This can happen in many ways, like bonus feats, or class abilities.
The big enemy of a Gestalt build is MAD (Multiple Attribute Dependancy). This makes certain combos very bad. Consider the Monk/Paladin. Cool concept, but you need every stat to be high.
Another thing to consider is the limits of classes. Just becuase you have a Wizard/Fighter, he still has the spell failure for wearing heavy armor.
Can the above be done anyway? Sure. The Wizard/Fighter, if focused on the Wizard side of the build, can be very impressive. Ranged touch attacks with full BAB and a host of feats for ranged attacks? Yikes.
The Monk/Paladin is harder, but you would effectively have to make it a Monk with the Paladin as the "support" side of the build, there only to provide the class abilities.
Some classes may not work together at all. For instance, a Fighter/Monk is very nice, but trying to take a class based on heavy armor and sheild use would be worthless for this class, as you would lose so many class abilities if you started using those items.
Of course, all of this is out of the window if two classes together fit the theme of what you want to play. Then just pick what you want, and make the best of it.
As our esteemed colleague ArkhamInmate (I get a kick out of calling someone named Arkham Inmate an 'esteemed colleague', for some reason) mentioned above, it comes down to what every game should be about, having fun. If you pick two classes that totally clash, but you enjoy playing, well congratulations, you just won at DnD.
As our esteemed colleague ArkhamInmate (I get a kick out of calling someone named Arkham Inmate an 'esteemed colleague', for some reason)
Woot!!!!I feel all esteemed now
Haa haa!! Pumpkin head man make me laugh! :P
I've got a first level Swashbuckler/Beguiler Assimar. The DM is giving me two first level feats instead of one.:D
What should I choose?
A quick question:
I've got a first level Swashbuckler/Beguiler Assimar. The DM is giving me two first level feats instead of one.:D
What should I choose?
Depends. Which class is the primary one? You have an extra feat (stepping on the toes of the Human, but what ever floats the boat), which is nice. BUT, you still only have the number of feats a single class gets (+1), so trying to split them up between two classes will be less than good. Pick a Primary class out of the two ( I would reccomend Beguiler), and then see what feats are good for that class, for what you intend to do with that class. I only reccomend the Beguiler in this case as the spells for that class are mostly ones that affect others. Spell Focus, Spell Penetration, and feats of that nature will be nice for that. If you try and be a melee combatant, then the spell abilities you have will suffer badly. You will have low save DC's, for one.
But give us a character concept you have, and I could be more helpful.
Jus wondering if anyone tried the gestalt monk/warlock combo to give the DBZ feal to the character.
Any Q on how to optimize the weird bugger?
Well, take hideous blow(?), for obvious reasons.
Might be a one trick pony, but would taking the 3-4 feats hidden talent, psi-fist, psi-meditation and gtr-psi fist be of use?
(4 levels of Incarnate for the bound lightening gauntlets...)
Jus wondering if anyone tried the gestalt monk/warlock combo to give the DBZ feal to the character.
Any Q on how to optimize the weird bugger?
That would be an odd class, wouldn't it? Would Eldritch Glaive work with this? Don't see why not. Haven't looked at the various invocations in a while, but there are a few that would be quite useful to this. I think you could get away with making this class with the Monk as the primary class, and it would work nicely. Optimize your feat selections for the Monk side, and have all the nifty abilities of the Warlock.
I am going to have to take a closer look at these two classes. The only problem I can think of at the moment is how to get a Lawful Warlock. I thought they couldn't be any lawful alignment.
Depends. Which class is the primary one?...
But give us a character concept you have, and I could be more helpful.
Female orphan, raised on the sea, who found a talent as a diplomat. Very devout follower of Pelor, but questions why she can use arcane magic and not divine.
I feel that in this character, the swashbuckler side is stronger.
But I found a very cool feat, Smattering, that works perfectly with the Assimar's affinity with languages. The other, I haven't decided on.BTW, I have not been able to find the life span of Assimars anywhere.
Does anyone know what it might be?The warlock can only be chaotic or evil, so a monk/warlock is LE. Unless a DM houserules the warlock's alignment limitations as none productive.
I think in some feat called eldritch claws, but I don't know where to find it. I think it can be useful.
And what does the Incanate thing does?
Incarnate is an Incarnum class that is ~geared towards combat.
The lightening gauntlets by themselves allow a touch attack for an (incarnum agumentable) lightening effect. Bound LGs, (available at 4th level) means you can't wear magic gauntlets, but confers the lightening attack to one melee attack per round.
The nice thing about Incarnum is it scales to your character level, not class level (could go on, but I'm probably dancing on the line about rule disclosures)
That said, some of the totemist effects (also incarnum) could be equally useful - but for only a 2 level dip. IIRC, one added str dmg(?) to your natural/fist attacks.
other favourites
There's also an effect that causes fire damage against successful melee attackers.
Though my personal favourite - worth a feat to take it in another class, is a little soulmeld that makes you immune to possession, charm or compulsion.
There's also an effect that causes fire damage against successful melee attackers.
Though my personal favourite - worth a feat to take it in another class, is a little soulmeld that makes you immune to possession, charm or compulsion.
Thanks for the answer. I'm wondering if a monk/incarnate or totemist is worth more then a monk/warlock.
Could be, I managed to get fighter / incarnate (non gestalt) banned, but then I also got ecto-plasmic cocoon banned.
Not sure if that says more about me or my group....
Female orphan, raised on the sea, who found a talent as a diplomat. Very devout follower of Pelor, but questions why she can use arcane magic and not divine.
I feel that in this character, the swashbuckler side is stronger.
BTW, I have not been able to find the life span of Assimars anywhere.
Interesting character concept. So, the Swashbuckler is the primary class. Then you should focus on feats and what not that improve that aspect of the class, and not worry too much about the Beguilers magic. As this means your DC's won't be as high as they could be, you will have enemies save vs. your spells more often. This can fit your concept well, actually. For your character, this would affirm your concerns that you have arcane magic instead of divine.
A gestalt character can’t combine two prestige classes at any level, although it’s okay to combine a prestige class and a regular class. Prestige classes that are essentially class combinations-such as the arcane trickster, mystic theurge, and eldritch knight-should be prohibited if you’re using gestalt classes, because they unduly complicate the game balance of what’s already a high-powered variant. Because it’s possible for gestalt characters to qualify for prestige classes earlier than normal, the game master is entirely justified in toughening the prerequisites of a prestige class so it’s available only after 5th level, even for gestalt characters.
This line confuses me somewhat. If we can qualify earlier, does that mean we can take it at the same level we aquire the final pre-req? (Outside of the DM ruling that is)
Thanks in advance! Right now, I'm playing a:
Whisper Gnome - 5th Level
Swashbuckler 1 / Scout 4 / Wizard 5 (Yea, I know. Odd combination, but there is reasoning behind my insanity) I wanted to go 5 Swashbuckler/5 Scout, but we have a Warforged in our group that needs a constant oil change.
Could be, I managed to get fighter / incarnate (non gestalt) banned, but then I also got ecto-plasmic cocoon banned.
Not sure if that says more about me or my group....
Definitely your group. :D
I've got a question for all you Gestalt experts. Normal non-gestalt rules dictate that you must have gained the requirements for a Prestige Class befoer you take it. As an example, Blade Bravo (Races of Stone). It requires a BAB of 5. So, using normal rules, you won't be able to take it until level 6. The Gestalt Rules has a little line of text that says this:
This line confuses me somewhat. If we can qualify earlier, does that mean we can take it at the same level we aquire the final pre-req? (Outside of the DM ruling that is)
Thanks in advance! Right now, I'm playing a:
Whisper Gnome - 5th Level
Swashbuckler 1 / Scout 4 / Wizard 5 (Yea, I know. Odd combination, but there is reasoning behind my insanity) I wanted to go 5 Swashbuckler/5 Scout, but we have a Warforged in our group that needs a constant oil change.
Not necessarily, or at least, no more than normal meeting pre-reqs like feats that can be taken at the level you enter the PrC.
I think it's more for PrCs like Mystic thurge where you need 3 levels of two classes.
Gestalt would allow you to gain it at 4th. Ok, not a biggie (also a bad example as it's one of the "banned" PrC types), but i'm sure there are other examples where you could feasibly gain it 1 or two levels ahead of time.
That said the argument is there for having the last level of pre-req on the "other side" of your classes.
Not necessarily, or at least, no more than normal meeting pre-reqs like feats that can be taken at the level you enter the PrC.
I think it's more for PrCs like Mystic thurge where you need 3 levels of two classes.
Gestalt would allow you to gain it at 4th. Ok, not a biggie (also a bad example as it's one of the "banned" PrC types), but i'm sure there are other examples where you could feasibly gain it 1 or two levels ahead of time.
That said the argument is there for having the last level of pre-req on the "other side" of your classes.
That makes sense. I'll talk it over with my DM. Hopefully he'll allow it.
Thanks for the help =)