So apparently AC is a lot higher in gestalt, but not attack?

[moritheil]

I promise, I wasn't trying to break the game!

What happened is this: I was building a sneaky cleric (cleric//rogue/swordsage) for a gestalt game. Since I rolled low hit points, I thought it would be best if I threw a couple of feats into mobility and survivability, so that I wouldn't die in the process of running through melee lines to heal people. I wasn't trying to actually optimize the AC into tanky levels, but I have a habit when I design characters of building a little more AC if possible (it ensures that I won't have to eat power attacks as often.)

I started noticing something . . . odd. Other players were talking about having "high AC" at ~20. I thought this was very strange, but I figured I might simply be used to slightly higher Op games, and shrugged. Then I realized that at ECL 5, all the PC melee bruisers were coming up with an attack bonus of about +9 or +10. Total. The cleric has an AC of 27 against most enemies, and 20% miss chance. So, uh . . . it appears that if the cleric cast Shield of Faith for 2 more AC, she could only be hit on a 20, and 1/5 of those would be misses anyhow. At this point I said to myself, "What?"

Now, the point isn't that she's unkillable; that's simply not true. Of course she can still be killed easily by something like a sudden maximized magic missile or a wraithstrike power attack. The AC itself is unimpressive except for this context; I'm sure that a gestalt build which actually had AC as its main purpose, and sacrificed other things to get AC, would exceed 50 AC without breaking a sweat. (I believe one can hit 42+ as an artificer 5 even outside of gestalt, if one is willing to be worthless for anything but getting high AC for 4 fights/day.) She does terrible damage, so she wouldn't win in arena; she's built to get to party members and heal them.

But I don't normally play gestalt and just never noticed before how doing your normal, everyday character builds can actually yield disproportionately effective results with gestalt. Is this everyone's experience? And are people in this group just not optimizing at all, or is it really much harder to get a high attack than a high AC in low level gestalt?

For the curious:
Clr 4//Rog 2/Sws 2
4 dex = 16 in Dex +2 racial = 18
5 wis = 20 Wis (18 with a +2 item) gives +5 AC from swordsage levels. Those stats were rolled.
+1 size
4 dodge = Desert Wind Dodge (gives you your dodge bonus when you move over 10') + Titan Fighting (substitutes your racial dodge bonus vs. giants for your dodge bonus against larger creatures.*) I only got DWD in the first place because I had a feat to burn from the feat rogue level, and started thumbing through Tome of Battle.
3 AC = masterwork studded leather armor. This could be better, but I was out of money from doing other things more relevant to the char concept.

Total = 10+4+5+1+4+3 = 27.
20% miss chance from Child of Shadow (1st level swordsage stance)

*RAW, it's possible to read this as still limited to 1 target.

I'm sure there are much better AC builds out there, but this literally wasn't intended to be an AC build at all, just a mobile cleric, so I thought the result was funny.

[NeoSeraphi]

Your build is powerful, but it also has some flaws. You may not use Desert Wind Dodge to activate Titan Fighting. The text of Desert Wind Dodge states that you may use it in place of Dodge for the purposes of qualifying for feats, prestige classes, and etc. However, you still don't have Dodge. Titan Fighting states that you gain its benefits when you designate a target for your Dodge feat. Desert Wind Dodge is not allowed to treat itself as Dodge for the purpose of your activated abilities granted by feats, it is simply allowed to pretend to be Dodge in order to grant you access to those (often-unrelated) feats.

You have a rare feat that actually is intrinsically connected to the prerequisite, and so you must actually have Dodge and use it in order to gain the benefits of Titan Fighting.

Otherwise, yeah. Wis-focused swordsage with spellcasting is kind of BS. Your AC is high, but as you've stated, you're mostly a support character. Enemies shouldn't really be attacking you anyway, and they certainly wouldn't do it that often if I were running. (An enemy should attack the creature they view as a threat, not some gnome running around touching his allies).

[Tokiko Mima]

It's probably less because of gestalt and more because of good attribute rolls, and a WIS focus on a Swordsage. They're awesome. :smallsmile:

[moritheil]

Your build is powerful, but it also has some flaws. You may not use Desert Wind Dodge to activate Titan Fighting. The text of Desert Wind Dodge states that you may use it in place of Dodge for the purposes of qualifying for feats, prestige classes, and etc. However, you still don't have Dodge. Titan Fighting states that you gain its benefits when you designate a target for your Dodge feat. Desert Wind Dodge is not allowed to treat itself as Dodge for the purpose of your activated abilities granted by feats, it is simply allowed to pretend to be Dodge in order to grant you access to those (often-unrelated) feats.

You have a rare feat that actually is intrinsically connected to the prerequisite, and so you must actually have Dodge and use it in order to gain the benefits of Titan Fighting.

Thanks for raising this issue. That is an understandable distinction to draw, but not one that necessarily has to be made - it hinges on your idea that "qualifies for the feat" is distinct from "qualifies for using the feat," which is an artificial splitting of the general (if vague) word "qualify." The matter comes down to DM adjudication of intent more than RAW, and I did acknowledge that there were several ways to take the RAW. Simply put, if the DM believes that the author intent is to let Desert Wind Dodge work as dodge in all respects, then it works; if not, then it doesn't.

(The actual RAW argument you are making is that the ability to designate a Dodge target is a necessary qualification for the use of Titan Fighting. So for the purpose of "qualifying for feats," Dodge - since it designates a target - would qualify, and I respectfully submit that therefore so does Desert Wind Dodge. If not, this would result in a situation where the statement that "Desert Wind Dodge does not qualify for the feat, but Dodge would" is true. But we know that in any case where Dodge qualifies, Desert Wind Dodge may be used in place of Dodge. The wording of Desert Wind Dodge makes no distinction between "qualifying for taking a feat prerequisite" and "qualifying for using a feat." This is a distinction that the reader imputes. The text only says that it lets you qualify for a feat "in place of Dodge."

I could see an argument that goes a step further and suggests that everyone who attacks you is effectively your designated Dodge target, because you apply the dodge bonus against them, but that, like the splitting of "qualify" between qualifying for use and qualifying for prerequisites, is an interpretation.)

Incidentally, I suppose Expeditious Dodge raises the same questions.


Otherwise, yeah. Wis-focused swordsage with spellcasting is kind of BS. Your AC is high, but as you've stated, you're mostly a support character. Enemies shouldn't really be attacking you anyway, and they certainly wouldn't do it that often if I were running. (An enemy should attack the creature they view as a threat, not some gnome running around touching his allies).

So many swordsage maneuvers have saving throws that you kind of have to focus Wis if you want to be any good at them. But yeah, I can see how it's good. I just didn't think it was that good. I mean, single ability dependence > MAD is kind of the basics of character building. You say it's kind of BS, but isn't the fundamental idea of gestalt that you get one ability and run with two different classes that key off of it? I'm not sure my character is any more powerful than, say, a Crusader/Sorcerer ought to be.

TBH, I believe I have a higher Hide check than the dedicated scout, so at no point should I be targeted before I want to be targeted. But I now wonder if I can keep the melee line up, healing or no healing - guys with 16 AC will be eating power attack every turn.


It's probably less because of gestalt and more because of good attribute rolls, and a WIS focus on a Swordsage. They're awesome. :smallsmile:

Thanks. I am coming to appreciate that. I suppose with enough levels and concentration boosts I might actually even do appreciable damage at some point (Ruby Nightmare Blade? Greater Insightful Strike?) :smalltongue:

[sonofzeal]

AC is higher. Most of the time, AC comes mostly from items. The classes that offer abilities to boost your passive defences are generally, well, passive - and that makes them weak choices in normal play. However, the classic Gestalt formula is an active class partnered with a passive class, meaning a much wider set of options for boosting those defences.

[PersonMan]

AC is higher. Most of the time, AC comes mostly from items. The classes that offer abilities to boost your passive defences are generally, well, passive - and that makes them weak choices in normal play. However, the classic Gestalt formula is an active class partnered with a passive class, meaning a much wider set of options for boosting those defences.

This.

Melee classes have certain options for increasing their attack rolls. Unless they go gish or similar (or there are circumstances where they get higher attack rolls due to active or passively buffing class features i.e. Favored Enemy and similar) they often don't have higher attack bonuses than in normal games because these options are still the same. A fighter/monk, for example, still only has full BAB. Magic weapons, Str-boosting items and maybe a buff spell will probably be the go-to sources for their primary attack bonuses, whereas there are plenty of classes who get passive bonuses to AC (Swordsage, Monk, etc.)

[Fouredged Sword]

You put ranks in concentration right? You have a strike coming up that lets you deal a concentration check of damage to a target. Get a spellcaster's vest. It lets you add +20 to a concentration check three times per day. Great for a diamond mind swordsage. Also great for the save replacements if the DM throws something you really must save vs.

[Aeryr]

Thanks for raising this issue. That is an understandable distinction to draw, but not one that necessarily has to be made - it hinges on your idea that "qualifies for the feat" is distinct from "qualifies for using the feat," which is an artificial splitting of the general (if vague) word "qualify." The matter comes down to DM adjudication of intent more than RAW, and I did acknowledge that there were several ways to take the RAW. Simply put, if the DM believes that the author intent is to let Desert Wind Dodge work as dodge in all respects, then it works; if not, then it doesn't.

(The actual RAW argument you are making is that the ability to designate a Dodge target is a necessary qualification for the use of Titan Fighting. So for the purpose of "qualifying for feats," Dodge - since it designates a target - would qualify, and I respectfully submit that therefore so does Desert Wind Dodge. If not, this would result in a situation where the statement that "Desert Wind Dodge does not qualify for the feat, but Dodge would" is true. But we know that in any case where Dodge qualifies, Desert Wind Dodge may be used in place of Dodge. The wording of Desert Wind Dodge makes no distinction between "qualifying for taking a feat prerequisite" and "qualifying for using a feat." This is a distinction that the reader imputes. The text only says that it lets you qualify for a feat "in place of Dodge."

I could see an argument that goes a step further and suggests that everyone who attacks you is effectively your designated Dodge target, because you apply the dodge bonus against them, but that, like the splitting of "qualify" between qualifying for use and qualifying for prerequisites, is an interpretation.)

Incidentally, I suppose Expeditious Dodge raises the same questions.

Uhm... after rereading the feat, yeah, it's a problem if you cannot designate a target you cannot gain the benefits of designating the target. I am sorry.

If I were to allow that...

Well expect to meet monk/rangers with Word Given Form and cumbrous dodge.


So many swordsage maneuvers have saving throws that you kind of have to focus Wis if you want to be any good at them. But yeah, I can see how it's good. I just didn't think it was that good. I mean, single ability dependence > MAD is kind of the basics of character building. You say it's kind of BS, but isn't the fundamental idea of gestalt that you get one ability and run with two different classes that key off of it? I'm not sure my character is any more powerful than, say, a Crusader/Sorcerer ought to be.

TBH, I believe I have a higher Hide check than the dedicated scout, so at no point should I be targeted before I want to be targeted. But I now wonder if I can keep the melee line up, healing or no healing - guys with 16 AC will be eating power attack every turn.

As the one building the enemies I don't advise you to melee :smallsmile:
I think your high AC is compensated by your "low" HP.


Thanks. I am coming to appreciate that. I suppose with enough levels and concentration boosts I might actually even do appreciable damage at some point (Ruby Nightmare Blade? Greater Insightful Strike?) :smalltongue:

I believe that if that is your choice intuitive strike would prove useful.

[moritheil]

Uhm... after rereading the feat, yeah, it's a problem if you cannot designate a target you cannot gain the benefits of designating the target. I am sorry.

I'll swap the feat out.


If I were to allow that...

Well expect to meet monk/rangers with Word Given Form and cumbrous dodge.

Huh. I guess technically they wouldn't need to spend a feat on WGF, though they would have to have 12 truename ranks.

Cumbrous Dodge is interesting - RAW, I see nothing that prevents undead from taking it.



As the one building the enemies I don't advise you to melee :smallsmile:
I think your high AC is compensated by your "low" HP.

Oh, I don't plan to, unless we advance a lot of levels and I gain the ability to dish out a lot more damage. I don't want to face full attack retribution. :smalltongue: As I said in the game thread, an angry barbarian will probably vaporize her. I just didn't understand why the PC attack bonuses were so low, and I still don't think the PC armor bonuses being so low bodes well for the group. Anything that can hit me is obviously going to hit them a lot harder, if it has power attack.


I believe that if that is your choice intuitive strike would prove useful.

Yeah, I would need more levels.

[moritheil]

You put ranks in concentration right? You have a strike coming up that lets you deal a concentration check of damage to a target. Get a spellcaster's vest. It lets you add +20 to a concentration check three times per day. Great for a diamond mind swordsage. Also great for the save replacements if the DM throws something you really must save vs.

That's a neat item. Thanks for pointing it out!