Help with my gestalt

[Matamane]

I'm playing a shadowcraft mage, and I don't know what I should use as my second progression.

What I am looking at now is

Gnome Illusionist 5/Master Illusionist 4/Shadowcraft Mage 5/ etc.

What would be the ideal second class. Remember, I have limited prestige available since my first progression is completely prestiged out. I'm also feat starved.

I am choosing between

Fixed Shadowcaster vs. Beguiler vs. Artificer

Any ideas?

[Escheton]

Artificer will leave you with a small army of homunculi and better protection through magic items, which are all day effects.
Seeing you have the action-using side covered thats the sorta thing ya want.

[Ernir]

Out of those you mentioned, definitely Artificer.

Factotum does famously well in Wizard gestalt builds.

[JaronK]

Factotum is an obvious choice... int based, grants extra actions (which means extra spells and the ability to combo spells), provides full skillmonkey abilities, and is an all around useful class to work with. It's just fine without PrCing out.

Archivist is also solid. It increases your overall variety of spells, and Dark Knowledge is amazing.

JaronK

[Matamane]

Factotum is a good idea, however I need the metamagic feats either Artificer or Shadowcaster give me.

[JaronK]

Archivist gives two of those as well, for what it's worth. But if not that, go Artificer.

JaronK

[Duke of URL]

The general rules for practical optimization in gestalt are:


Limit multiple-attribute dependency as much as possible
Remember the action economy
Increase your versatility
Prevent weak points


SAD is rad, MAD is bad: Whenever possible, make sure the primary ability score(s) for both sides of your gestalt are the same, hence Wizard/Cleric or Sorcerer/Cleric bad, Wizard/Archivist or Sorcerer/Favored Soul better. Alternatively, find classes that don't really have an attribute dependency (e.g., Warlocks who use invocations that aren't saving-throw based).

Gestalt offers more options, but no more actions: That Wizard/Archivist might look cool (pretty much any arcane or divine spell ever printed!), but you can still only cast one spell per round. This is precisely why Factotum is so popular in INT-based gestalts -- it breaks the action economy. That's all when and good when you're breaking the action economy to do Factotumish things... but when you're doing Wizardish things with it, it moves from mildly cheesy to over-ripe Limburger.

So, your best bet is to find classes that synergize well, from an "active" vs. "passive" standpoint. Monks, generally so unoptimal in regular play, are great for WIS-based gestalts because of all of the passive benefits that they grant -- when paired with a class that can actually do something effective, it;s pretty impressive.

Moonlighting: You have a primary job, of course, on the team, but you should also be somebody's backup. Not everyone on the team needs trapfinding (or some other way of dealing with traps/locks/etc.), but the trapfinder should have at least one backup on the team. Ditto for the "face", the "tank", the "healer", etc. Make sure the party's roles are not only covered, but multiply covered in case the party gets separated or a character is incapacitated.

No vulnerabilities: All else being equal, you really don't want a "bad save" (even if it's only Reflex) or any other drawbacks that aren't otherwise compensated for. (another reason why Monks are good gestalts -- all good saves). Likewise, having one side provide good HD is always nice.

--

Okay, so what you've got is an INT-based specialist caster. INT-based classes to consider (or not) are:

Archivist - Okay, you can't cast two spells at the same time, but you do greatly expand your spell list, and it's flavorful. The knowledge-based class skills are right up your alley.

Artificer - Infusions are nice, all the crafting feats you'd ever want are really nice. You get trapfinding and your infusions plus UMD can compensate for your restricted spell list. Good base class choice for going a full 20 levels. Not great with saves, though.

Beguiler - Add another specialist (especially mind-affecting) caster side? Not a great idea.

Duskblade - Has some merit if you want to "gish", but Warblade (see below) is probably a better choice.

Factotum - Break the action economy. As noted above, I don't like Factotum in gestalt precisely because of why it's so popular. Still has a weak Fortitude save.

Psion - Essentially, another caster/caster combo that doesn't do anything for your HD or saves, but does greatly increase your versatility.

Rogue - Lots and lots of skill points, trapfinding, sneak attack, and evasion. Factotum may do it better, but Rogue does it without the cheddar, and it's core. Again, a weak Fortitude save is a problem.

Warblade - If you want to "gish", this is the class for you. Still have issues with the action economy, so try to choose spells and maneuvers that cover all of the action types (swift, move, standard) so you can fire off multiple ones in a single round.

Warlock - Not INT-based, but great for all-day buffs and a reliable source of damage without having to invest in reserve feats. Does nothing for your saves and has generally poor HD, though.

[Matamane]

What about Shadowcaster?

6 metamagic feats is what keeps me coming back.

[Ernir]

What about Shadowcaster?

6 metamagic feats is what keeps me coming back.
What on earth are you going to be doing with all those metamagic feats? The usual ScM tactics don't leave much room for varied metamagic shenanigans. :smallconfused:

But, umm, yeah, if you want to take the class, just do it. Artificer is still better, but you'll be fine either way. :smalltongue:

[gorfnab]

What about Shadowcaster?

6 metamagic feats is what keeps me coming back.
Don't forget that the Shadow Weave Magic feat affects both mysteries and spells.

Otherwise here is a SCM//Shadowcaster build I made for someone a while ago. It wasn't the party main caster, thankfully, however it seems to work nicely as sneaky skillful caster.

Build: Beguiler 6/ Shadow Adept 1/ Beguiler 1/ Shadowcraft Mage 5/ Shadowcrafter 7 // Shadowcaster 20
Race: Whisper Gnome
Feats: 1. Darkstalker (or Magic in the Blood or Versatile Spellcaster), 3. Shadow Weave Magic, 6. Spell Focus: Illusion, 9. Greater Spell Focus: Illusion, 12. Heighten Spell, 15. Earth Sense, 18. Earth Spell
Bonus Feats from Shadowcaster: Still Mystery and either one of the following multiple times or one of each of the following Reach Mystery, Quicken Mystery, Extend Mystery, or Favored Mystery
Skill Tricks: Conceal Spellcasting, False Theurgy, Swift Concentration

[Matamane]

Residual Metamagic + Arcane Thesis is nice, but say i were to take shadowcaster, what would be a good set of abilities/mysteries to take?

Also, Shadow Weave Magic affects mysteries?

[gorfnab]

Also, Shadow Weave Magic affects mysteries?
Yes. See the Shadow Magic and the Shadow Weave box in gray from here (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/frcc/20070725)

[Wings of Peace]

I will tout the under-appreciated Generic Warrior (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/genericClasses.htm). A free feat at every even numbered level (Plus first!), a d10 for your hit die, perfect BaB progression, your choice of any six class skills with the addition of craft, and your choice of one good save are nothing to snuff your nose at.

[JaronK]

What on earth are you going to be doing with all those metamagic feats? The usual ScM tactics don't leave much room for varied metamagic shenanigans. :smallconfused:

SCMs LOVE their metamagics. You just make darn sure you have Arcane Thesis: Silent Image and Residual Metamagic. Then, you go nuts with cheap metamagics you can then apply, many of which will end up free, plus a few big power ones. It's amazing what you can do.

JaronK

[Cog]

I will tout the under-appreciated Generic Warrior (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/genericClasses.htm). A free feat at every even numbered level (Plus first!), a d10 for your hit die, perfect BaB progression, your choice of any six class skills with the addition of craft, and your choice of one good save are nothing to snuff your nose at.

Though that variety can lead to interesting and exciting combinations, a game master who desires to run a simpler campaign (while still allowing for character variety) can use these "generic" character classes in place of the standard character classes... If you use these generic classes, you shouldn't also use the standard character classes (or variants of those classes).
It's not under-appreciated; that's just not how the generics are supposed to be used. They're an alternate rule system.

[Wings of Peace]

It's not under-appreciated; that's just not how the generics are supposed to be used. They're an alternate rule system.

I view this as a gray area since it's the difference between:


The variety of class options available to characters can seem overwhelming. Though that variety can lead to interesting and exciting combinations, a game master who desires to run a simpler campaign (while still allowing for character variety) can use these "generic" character classes in place of the standard character classes.

...

If you use these generic classes, you shouldn't also use the standard character classes (or variants of those classes). You can still include prestige classes, if you wish to add that level of complexity to your game, but you may have to tweak some prestige class prerequisites that include class features not available to these classes.

and


The variety of class options available to characters can seem overwhelming. Though that variety can lead to interesting and exciting combinations, a game master who desires to run a simpler campaign (while still allowing for character variety) can use these "generic" character classes in place of the standard character classes.

...

If you use these generic classes, you shouldn't also use the standard character classes (or variants of those classes). You can still include prestige classes, if you wish to add that level of complexity to your game, but you may have to tweak some prestige class prerequisites that include class features not available to these classes.

[Cog]

I view this as a gray area since it's the difference between...
...There's nothing there that disagrees with my point. The "may" you highlighted has nothing to do with combining generics with standard classes.

Generic Warrior is almost strictly better than Fighter; the only thing it loses is heavy armor and tower shield proficiency, in return for customizing your saves and skill list, plus being able to choose from any feats instead of a restricted list. Of course, standard Fighter is weak enough that this change isn't overpowering, but that's a pretty clear indication of the intention, backing up the lines that spell that intention out.

Apologies for the derail.

[Wings of Peace]

...There's nothing there that disagrees with my point. The "may" you highlighted has nothing to do with combining generics with standard classes.

Generic Warrior is almost strictly better than Fighter; the only thing it loses is heavy armor and tower shield proficiency, in return for customizing your saves and skill list, plus being able to choose from any feats instead of a restricted list. Of course, standard Fighter is weak enough that this change isn't overpowering, but that's a pretty clear indication of the intention, backing up the lines that spell that intention out.

Apologies for the derail.

My point wasn't that there is no division in power, my point was that depending on what part of the entry is given emphasis over the other a person could argue in either direction as to whether they are a separate set of classes or an alternate rule system that replaces the first.

[Kalaska'Agathas]

Factotum would be my choice. If you pick up Gnomish Quickrazors (which you should be able to, by trading out the Gnome Hooked Hammer, if I remember correctly) and put ranks into Iaijutsu Focus you'll have a legitimate melee option for when things get pear shaped, and all it requires is one skillpoint per level. Beyond that, there's all the standard Factotum bonuses, namely, Int synergy, extra actions, the ability to ignore SR, being able to fill in party gaps, etc. And, to top it off, your metamagic feats benefit your Arcane Dilettante SLAs as if they were spells, so your feats go further for you.

[Wings of Peace]

This is based purely off my own play experience so don't assume this to be a general statement, from what I've witnessed of Gestalt the primary mistake people make is that they'll try and use each side of a Gestalt to compensate for the other side's weaknesses.

D&D however is a system which rewards specialization and as a caster your spells should be able to solve most problems so they're what you should specialize in if you want maximum results. If for some flavor reason you want to deviate some that's fine, it's a role playing game after all and at the end of the day fun is what matters. But (and again this is from my own personal experience and thus may vary) the more your second side boosts the spellcasting powers of your first side the higher a power yield you're going to see. Especially if you find a way to use the second side to mitigate meta-magics, provide more feats, etc, because these types of resources are often the most resource consuming in regular non-gestalt.