Gestalt 3.5 - new GM

[docHigh]

Hello Playground!

I am preparing a campaign for our group and decided to make it Gestalt 3.5e with core books only, starting from lvl 6-8 up till lvl15. I have read several threads of the CR and which characters do well, also about setting up encounters.

My question is in regards to what can get broken/throw GM off the track? Anything that has caught you unprepared?

The story-line is more or less thought up with different locations and challanges. Even a sequel is possible :) I tend to improvise and let players run loose by having 3-4 different encounters always prepared for the session (~4 hours). Is that enough?

[HunterOfJello]

If you're new to DMing, don't set up a gestalt game. All of the game mechanics get thrown off and things only get worse as the players level up.

Gestalt games are difficult to DM and can really run out of control. I would strongly recommend getting more experience as a DM before you consider it. Also, I wouldn't recommend running one for more than 2 players in a campaign. I run a gestalt game weekly with 3 players who are at level 11 right now. I have quite a bit of experience DMing over the last two years, but it's a huge pain for me to deal with 3 gestalt characters at such a high level. I wish I had made the game non-gestalt and will probably end the campaign soon because it's far too much of a hassle and not fun at all to DM for.

If you're new to DMing, I suggest starting a campaign at level 1-2 and making it a non-gestalt game. Learn how to walk properly before you end up running off a cliff.

[kharmakazy]

things.

Seconded. CRs are bad enough as it is, in a gestalt game you have to pretty much throw them out the window.

New dms should always start at level 1 IMHO and see how their characters grow so they can get a firm understanding of how things work at every level.

[The Rabbler]

Actually, I don't think it'll be much of a problem, as the DM specified Core Only. This will severely limit the options of the players and it'll give them much fewer classes/abilities to call upon; the thing is, this isn't necessarily a good thing. As most of the playground can tell you, wizards and druids absolutely rock core, with clerics slightly behind on the power scale. Melee is near worthless in core-only and the gap between the two is just about as large as it can possibly be.

Gestalt in core effectively gives everyone the option of picking two basic classes and progressing those until they hit 20 (sure, some of the PrCs are okay, but none of them are that amazing (archmage isn't too bad though)). And, because Wizards, Druids, and Clerics are miles ahead of every other class in terms of power and versatility, those classes with see the most use on a character sheet. Sure, a person might go wizard//fighter and try to fight with a sword, but as soon as that person has to start relying on spells, it'll effectively turn that character into a wizard with a good BAB, good fort, and good HD.

TL;DR: I would either drop the core-only clause or make it non-gestalt, as gestalt in core-only is practically pointless.

[kharmakazy]

Other things.

I disagree with most of this. A new DM is best to stick to core and non gestalt. Learn how to run a vanilla game before you start running variants. Walk before you run.

If you aren't familiar with the spell lists broken things can come right out at you from core only casters. Review what spells casters take.

[docHigh]

Thanks!
I'm not completely new to DM'ing. Had one long run of near year and half getting characters from 1-7.

But all the comments are probably true. I'll have a second thought on the gestalt set-up. Thanks again.

[The Rabbler]

I disagree with most of this. A new DM is best to stick to core and non gestalt. Learn how to run a vanilla game before you start running variants. Walk before you run.

If you aren't familiar with the spell lists broken things can come right out at you from core only casters. Review what spells casters take.

someone didn't read the TL;DR. My point with my post was that Gestalt gives you lots of options but only if you have enough sources to get those options from. Core-only is the full caster's game and gestalt doesn't change that.

[faceroll]

Gestalt is an excellent tool for new GMs to implement, so long as you grasp the rules, as it makes characters much harder to kill. It's very easy to kill PCs accidentally, or put them in a place where they lack the skills to get out of (no pick lock, spot, knowledge: what is thing and why does it hurt, etc).

In general, the party can handle about +2 CR, but that's mostly in terms of flat numbers- HP, saves, attacks, damage, AC, that sort of stuff, and only if they go for really solid synergy. Otherwise, you'll just end up with classes that can cover multiple bases. Throwing Beholders or Dragons or Mindflayers at the party two levels early, tsk, tsk, tsk. Don't do that. Anything with a lot of spell like abilities, make sure the party can get rid of/counter what's being used. Getting turned to stone before level 13 sucks.

Having two classes doesn't let you take 2x as many actions. You could be a fighter//wizard, but you still can either make an attack, or cast a spell. Not both.

Gestalt, especially core only, will really just give the players greater endurance and versatility. Druid//Monk and Druid//Cleric are the two biggest offenders in terms of sheer power increase, but then, Druid is probably the most powerful class in the game, for practical purposes.


If you're new to DMing, don't set up a gestalt game. All of the game mechanics get thrown off and things only get worse as the players level up.

Gestalt games are difficult to DM and can really run out of control. I would strongly recommend getting more experience as a DM before you consider it. Also, I wouldn't recommend running one for more than 2 players in a campaign. I run a gestalt game weekly with 3 players who are at level 11 right now. I have quite a bit of experience DMing over the last two years, but it's a huge pain for me to deal with 3 gestalt characters at such a high level. I wish I had made the game non-gestalt and will probably end the campaign soon because it's far too much of a hassle and not fun at all to DM for.

If you're new to DMing, I suggest starting a campaign at level 1-2 and making it a non-gestalt game. Learn how to walk properly before you end up running off a cliff.

There's not a whole lot of terribly broken stuff (like factotum//wiz) in core only. Any problems that crop up will mostly be due to stuff like polymorph or grease, which would be a problem even if wizards had to take a level of commoner at every odd level.


Seconded. CRs are bad enough as it is, in a gestalt game you have to pretty much throw them out the window.

Not really. Taking on giants and the like is easier, but nightshades stay pretty damn deadly.


New dms should always start at level 1 IMHO and see how their characters grow so they can get a firm understanding of how things work at every level.

Level 1 is so easy to kill players. Roll well with that orc greataxe, and it's all over. Level 2 or 3 is a much better place to start.

[Salanmander]

It really comes down to how familiar you are with the mechanics. If you're a rules guru, then you should have no trouble running gestalt. If you're not sure how to deal with multiclassing and fractional BAB, you'll have some problems, since you're supposed to be the final arbiter of that. The actual DMing isn't going to be that much harder whether it's gestalt or not.

The one thing to watch out for is that you can expect far more spells flying around. More people are likely to have a full caster for at least one side. So you don't have to deal with /different/ things, just more of the same things.

In non-core-only gestalt this isn't quite true, because being able to pack some abilities together on a single chassis can create new interesting situations. In core, however, there aren't really the options to make that true. The closest you get is the cleric with absurd touch AC, a 50 ft. move speed, and significant unarmed damage to add a cause critical wounds to.

Edit: Also, I always cringe at people saying you should start at level 1. Level 1 can be so /boring/. (For the players, that is.)

[OracleofSilence]

what things get broken? well that depends. Since yoou are saying core only, it si a little less likely that noncasters will become broken, but most gestalt characters are casters too...

in general, don't let the players do stuff you don't understand. it may seem tyrannical, but as soon as you agree to something that you doon,t quite get, the flood gates will open.

[Telonius]

My 2cp: the players' system mastery is almost as important as the DM's in Gestalt games. Gestalt means lots more options for the players to choose from. Do I charge into melee, or cast a spell? What's the best thing to be doing in this situation? That sort of thing can be overwhelming to a newer player. Forgotten bonuses can be an even bigger problem here than normal games.

If you're going Core-only, and are reasonably sure that the players won't try any shenanigans, Gestalt should probably be going against things +2CR or so than they normally would. While the classes are powerful, they still have the "action economy" problem. Especially since Belts of Battle and other action-granting things like Celerity won't be on the table, they have to pick and choose what they're going to do that particular round.

As a DM, expect the players to have a lot more defensive spells up. Since there will be more spell slots available to the party as a group, more buff spells will probably be used. Take that into account, or your monsters will find that the group is immune or resistant to practically everything, especially at higher levels.