PDA

View Full Version : Gestalt Incarnum?



Kantolin
2010-02-23, 03:31 PM
Do you, in fact, get twice the essentia for being an incarnate//totemist? Or well, rather, do you get a single rather large pool of essentia, or does that count as overlap?

In case it matters, this is given a rather low level of optimization amongst the group as a whole.

I'm leaning towards treating it as sneak attack and sudden strike, which has the general rule of 'you get the faster progression', but I'm curious what the general opinion is.

I admittedly don't forsee this being a particular problem - incarnum synergizes so well with other things that I'm fairly certain that nobody will go incarnum//totemist in specific... but I may as well ask.

Also, in case it matters, our group has the rule that select dual-classes (Such as arcane archer) have their effects kick in if you've taken enough levels of the gestalt combination (So a Rogue//Wizard will get ranged ledgermain). Just extra information in case that influences decisions.

Godskook
2010-02-23, 03:41 PM
I would say that a gestalt incarnate 2//totemist 2 would have all the class features of a non-gestalt incarnate 2/totemist 2.(But obviously only the skill points, HP, saves and BAB of an ECL 2 character)

Otherwise, you get some wonkiness when dealing with certain features like someone taking rogue//SA fighter and winding up with only +10d6 SA at L20, while a rogue//warblade 1/SA fighter x gets +20d6.

Sinfire Titan
2010-02-23, 04:16 PM
Do you, in fact, get twice the essentia for being an incarnate//totemist? Or well, rather, do you get a single rather large pool of essentia, or does that count as overlap?

Everything stacks. You end up with the Chakra Binds/Day and Soulmelds of an Incarnate and Totemist, and your Essentia pools together and can be used for either side's Soulmelds (the same is not true of the Chakra Binds).


In case it matters, this is given a rather low level of optimization amongst the group as a whole.

I'm leaning towards treating it as sneak attack and sudden strike, which has the general rule of 'you get the faster progression', but I'm curious what the general opinion is.

I admittedly don't forsee this being a particular problem - incarnum synergizes so well with other things that I'm fairly certain that nobody will go incarnum//totemist in specific... but I may as well ask.


A Rogue//Ninja gets 10d6 Sneak Attack and 10d6 Sudden Strike. Anyone who says otherwise is house ruling.


The main problem with Gestalting Incarnate//Totemist is Chakra slots. You only get the 10 total slots, and have to divide 11+ Soulmelds between them. You can eventually bind all of your Soulmelds to your Chakras, but you're going to be taking Double Chakra at least once.

Kantolin
2010-02-23, 06:18 PM
Mrr, but I suppose that makes sense. Focusing on chakra points is the way to go, I suppose.

Thanks for the responses. Our group's very low-optimization, thus we've ruled sneak attack and sudden strike to be 'favorable progression' rather than allowing +20d6, but the general points still stand.

Sinfire Titan
2010-02-23, 06:22 PM
Mrr, but I suppose that makes sense. Focusing on chakra points is the way to go, I suppose.

Thanks for the responses. Our group's very low-optimization, thus we've ruled sneak attack and sudden strike to be 'favorable progression' rather than allowing +20d6, but the general points still stand.

Do gestalt Casters get their extra spells/day from both classes, or only the better of the two? If it's the latter, you're fine. But if the former is the case...

Kantolin
2010-02-23, 06:31 PM
Casters get spells on both sides, and keep them separate.

Barring quicken (And then shenanigans, which are not used by my group), you can only cast one spell a round, and my group is incredibly low-optimization and thus frequently at level 9 makes that spell magic missile. And most of my group loathes both quicken and spellcasters (Our one player who plays almost exclusively rogues and wizards hates quicken and refuses to take it on account of it being 'worthless', and I see no particular reason to convince him otherwise).

With no shenanigans beyond typical sudden strike ones, a rogue/ninja can apply their full lots-d6 to each swing.

I do understand - in many other games, this would be a nonproblem. But rogues are generally the highest damage-dealers in most of our games, and rogue/ninja was a particularly potent offender.

Again - I'm aware this isn't a typical problem for most people. ^_^

Sinfire Titan
2010-02-23, 06:50 PM
Casters get spells on both sides, and keep them separate.

Barring quicken (And then shenanigans, which are not used by my group), you can only cast one spell a round, and my group is incredibly low-optimization and thus frequently at level 9 makes that spell magic missile. And most of my group loathes both quicken and spellcasters (Our one player who plays almost exclusively rogues and wizards hates quicken and refuses to take it on account of it being 'worthless', and I see no particular reason to convince him otherwise).

With no shenanigans beyond typical sudden strike ones, a rogue/ninja can apply their full lots-d6 to each swing.

I do understand - in many other games, this would be a nonproblem. But rogues are generally the highest damage-dealers in most of our games, and rogue/ninja was a particularly potent offender.

Again - I'm aware this isn't a typical problem for most people. ^_^


If that's the trouble, let him be that powerful. Throw undead at him (sentient ones too). Throw elementals at him. He can't do squat to those. Don't just nerf his advancement outright, especially against the RAW (and when casters are not getting the same nerf).


Even if optimization is low in your group, there is a way to handle this. Just be accepting of his damage output, then show him he isn't all-powerful by hammering him in a single encounter or two if he gets cocky. If the others complain, show them a list of enemies immune to both effects and tell them that you can render him weaker without needing to alter the rules. Noncasters are the ones most susceptible to this treatment.

Kantolin
2010-02-23, 07:05 PM
But... why?

It's much less fun to have spurts of "Oops, not sneak attackable - you go sit in the corner." contrasted with spurts of "Hey, sneak attackable! Go be unfair!"

Compared to making the sit in the corner moments simply less frequent, and letting everyone go stab drow.

Or I suppose, another way of wording this... yes, that power can be checked in a variety of ways, one of which is simply having some enemy have a better build. But rather than spike upwards more and work around the 'this is a bit too powerful of a combo for us'... we'll just ban that combo.

Now, if the day comes that we have leap attacking shock troopering frenzied berserkers or sommat, that will change (and in a hurry). But at the moment, it's nice to be able to have a book standard duskblade with no power attack or two weapon fighting or anything be an acceptable party member. :P

(Besides, 'sit in the corner' tends to alternately result in searching for solutions - for example, there's an item in the magic item compendium that lets you solve constructs via sneak attacking. This again leads to the arms race problem, which the DM [In this case me] can/will win at any moment)

Godskook
2010-02-24, 12:57 AM
But... why?

Because it sets a bad precedent, for multiple reasons. For one, its highly arbitrary, and for another, it isn't uniformly applied.