Gestalt?

[Gamereaper]

Can anybody explain in depth what exactly Gestalt is? What are the benefits? What are the cons?

[Yuki Akuma]

This. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/gestaltCharacters.htm)

Pros: Filling all the 'required' roles in parties that are too small, playing characters slightly more powerful than normal because being overpowered is fun sometimes, can be used to balance classes of vastly different tiers if you know what you're doing, makes certain options much easier to qualify for and some combos much easier to pull off.

Cons: It doesn't make you as powerful as you'd think it would, some combinations can actually end up being worse than straight classes, bookkeeping can become a nightmare.

[Darksword]

Gestalt is a rule variant. If a DM wants to run a high power game he may choose to make it a Gestalt game.
From the srd (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/gestaltCharacters.htm)
"In this high-powered campaign variant, characters essentially take two classes at every level, choosing the best aspects of each. The process is similar to multiclassing, except that characters gain the full benefits of each class at each level. if the two classes you choose have aspects that overlap (such as Hit Dice, attack progression, saves, and class features common to more than one class), you choose the better aspect. The gestalt character retains all aspects that don’t overlap. "

Basically it is similar to multiclassing kinda. Each time a character levels up they get 2 class level. Level base increases like HD, BAB and saves overlap, you choose the best option for each level.

[Nettlekid]

Gestalt is when you take two classes at the same time. It's a variant system and is up to the DM to use. Basically the DM would say "Build a 10th level Gestalt character" and you'd do that. You can't just choose to be Gestalt in a game with no others, as opposed to many other variant rules.

Basically the way it works is that every level you pick two classes and "gain a level" in both of them. You take the better HD, BAB, each Save, and Skill Points from both classes, and all of both classes' class skills are class skills for you. You gain all the class features of both classes. So, for example, if you took Rogue 1/Wizard 1, you'd have a d6 HD, 0 BAB, good Reflex and Will saves, 8 skill points per level, Trapfinding, Sneak Attack, a Familiar, spellcasting, etc. You make two builds side by side that don't have to sync up, so you could have a Wizard 5/Master Specialist 10/Archmage 5//Rogue 10/Assassin 10. DMs are encouraged to disallow "theurge-type" PrCs, like Mystic Theurge or Cerebremancer, because it progresses things in too much of an unbalanced manner.

It's pretty much impossible for a Gestalt character to be weaker than a non-Gestalt (I mean, Wizard 20//Commoner 20 will still be stronger than a Wizard 20. Or maybe equal. Not weaker) but some combinations are certainly stronger than others. It's good to look at ability score synergy, and most importantly action economy. Having two spellcasting classes side-by-side sounds awesome, but you still get only one standard action per turn, so you won't be throwing out Mass Harm and Meteor Swarm all over the place. So think carefully about how best to use both classes, and if you want to be an "X with a splash of Y" or a true "XY fusion"

[Gamereaper]

So if I go Warlock/Sorcerer and prestige into Eldritch Theurge, does that mean I can get another class too?

[Flickerdart]

So if I go Warlock/Sorcerer and prestige into Eldritch Theurge, does that mean I can get another class too?
Dual-progression PrCs are not allowed in gestalt.

[Nettlekid]

So if I go Warlock/Sorcerer and prestige into Eldritch Theurge, does that mean I can get another class too?

I just said that DMs are highly encouraged to disallow Theurge-type classes.

[Beardbarian]

Dual-progression PrCs are not allowed in gestalt.

Well, is not forbidden but highly recommended to disallow dual-progression PrCs since you can satisfy prerequisites easily

[Gamereaper]

I just said that DMs are highly encouraged to disallow Theurge-type classes.

I missed that tiny bit there, sorry.

[theIrkin]

Also, and I didn't see this mentioned in earlier responses, the dual progression is only for base classes. The gestalt rules specifically state that PrC's do not get a second rider class. So if you went wizard/cleric then took levels in mystic theurge, you wouldn't get anything else every time you took a level in mystic theurge.

And upon rereading, I saw that Flickerdart said something similar, but it didn't strike me as quite explicit enough. Even Shadowdancer or Arcane Archer do not get a second class when you take a level in them, it precludes the extra power from all prestige classes (although who knows why).

[Dekion]

Also, and I didn't see this mentioned in earlier responses, the dual progression is only for base classes. The gestalt rules specifically state that PrC's do not get a second rider class. So if you went wizard/cleric then took levels in mystic theurge, you wouldn't get anything else every time you took a level in mystic theurge.

This actually isn't the case, unless it was amended somewhere other than UA. UA makes mention of creating super powered prestige classes that take up both sides of the gestalt tree, but also mentions being able to use a base class to balance out a highly specialized prestige class, so the players will have less reservations about taking one that is as such. The suggestion about theurge classes, or classes that do advance to separate classes abilities under the same PrC is valid though, but it is only a suggestion after all.

[Threadnaught]

Actually it clearly states that you aren't allowed to Gestalt two Prestige Classes at the same time, though you can advance in a Base and Prestige Class, or two Base Classes each level. Best use for Theurge is to alternate between Wizard/Theurge and Cleric/Theurge after 5th level. Gaining 1.5CL for each Class per character level.

If this weren't a variant rule, Tippy would suggest it. Though he does suggest Domain Wizards... Why doesn't he suggest this? This is kinda broken. :smallconfused:

Oh, yeah, it's only kinda broken. :smallamused:

[Dekion]

Best use for Theurge is to alternate between Wizard/Theurge and Cleric/Theurge after 5th level. Gaining 1.5CL for each Class per character level.

I've never understood why any DM allows this. It's essentially the same as being a Wizard//Wizard or Cleric//Cleric gestalt (which I know isn't possible by the written gestalt rules) and stating that the levels stack, so that a level 10 Wizard//Wizard is a 20th level Wizard. Aside from where the rules specifically state caster level can exceed character level, I would turn back any player that came to me with any character where they though they could advance a spellcasting or manifesting class with a +1 per level at the same level they advanced that same exact class. To me they overlap, not stack. I know the argument is that it doesn't say that, but it also doesn't not say that. Common sense would seem to indicate that it was outright abuse. I mean, bend the gestalt design and allow multiple theurge, or multi-advancement classes if you are interested in enhancing the power curve through diversity, but 12th level characters casting 9th level spells just seems excessive.

[Flickerdart]

I've never understood why any DM allows this. It's essentially the same as being a Wizard//Wizard or Cleric//Cleric gestalt (which I know isn't possible by the written gestalt rules) and stating that the levels stack, so that a level 10 Wizard//Wizard is a 20th level Wizard. Aside from where the rules specifically state caster level can exceed character level, I would turn back any player that came to me with any character where they though they could advance a spellcasting or manifesting class with a +1 per level at the same level they advanced that same exact class. To me they overlap, not stack. I know the argument is that it doesn't say that, but it also doesn't not say that. Common sense would seem to indicate that it was outright abuse. I mean, bend the gestalt design and allow multiple theurge, or multi-advancement classes if you are interested in enhancing the power curve through diversity, but 12th level characters casting 9th level spells just seems excessive.
Actually, there is a rule against that:
"Class features that two classes share (such as uncanny dodge) accrue at the rate of the faster class."
If your DM lets you take Wizard//Mystic Theurge, you only get Wizard spellcasting once.

[theIrkin]

Thanks for the clarification guys. I guess I didn't read the prestige class qualifications as closely as I thought, forgetting (maybe conveniently) that it only specifies against combining 2 prestige classes.

[Dekion]

Actually, there is a rule against that:
"Class features that two classes share (such as uncanny dodge) accrue at the rate of the faster class."
If your DM lets you take Wizard//Mystic Theurge, you only get Wizard spellcasting once.

Thanks, Flickerdart. I felt that that specification did apply to spellcasting advancement, but I've seen a number of individuals gloss over it, because it mentions uncanny dodge and for some reason spellcasting gets lumped in as something other than a "class feature." I'm glad I'm not alone in this understanding.

[Threadnaught]

Actually, there is a rule against that:
"Class features that two classes share (such as uncanny dodge) accrue at the rate of the faster class."
If your DM lets you take Wizard//Mystic Theurge, you only get Wizard spellcasting once.

My mistake, thanks for pointing it out.

Gestalts are confusing. Tristalts are even worse.

[johnbragg]

I've never understood why any DM allows this. It's essentially the same as being a Wizard//Wizard or Cleric//Cleric gestalt (which I know isn't possible by the written gestalt rules) and stating that the levels stack, so that a level 10 Wizard//Wizard is a 20th level Wizard.

Well, I'm not sure anyone does. People have already pointed out that gestalting takes the better progression, not adding them.

But gestalting is designed for playing D&D with very few players (2-3) while still filling all roles (so Cleric//Palain and Wizard//Rogue vs the world). It's been adapted to upgrade low-Tier classes to be more competitive. So say Fighter//Expert, Wizard, Cleric, Rogue//Adept.

I don't think anyone is seriously playing with Wizard//Theurge characters.

At least I hope not.

[Luciandevine]

Heh, you'd be surprised. For as long as Gestalt has been around, I can guarantee that people wanted to make gestalt characters with theurge classes, if for no better reason than to be effectively 3ish classes at the same time, lol.

The thing I find odd is when I see gestalt threads on here explaining about their party of 6 gestalt characters. It specifically says that it's for party sizes of usually 2-3 characters. To each their own though, I guess, lol.

[Flickerdart]

A big problem with gestalt is that it makes optimization skill gaps between players all the more apparent. Some people are able to take much more advantage of a second class track than others, and it usually shows when you've got Factotum//Psions dropping five or six actions per round while in the other corner a Fighter//Paladin swings for +2 damage.

[johnbragg]

A big problem with gestalt is that it makes optimization skill gaps between players all the more apparent. Some people are able to take much more advantage of a second class track than others, and it usually shows when you've got Factotum//Psions dropping five or six actions per round while in the other corner a Fighter//Paladin swings for +2 damage.

Why is anyone doing that though? If you're short players, then why is the Melee Guy gestalting two melee classes? Factotum//Psion gives you all kinds of flexibility, although I'm not super familiar with either one.

And if you're not short players, why are you gestalting two Tier 1-2 classes? Why are DMs allowing that?

I could easily see a two-PC campaign with a Fighter//Rogue and a Cleric//Wizard, which would be two wildly different tier levels. But with only two players, the mundane isn't going to feel useless. (The Cleric//Wizard could be a step behind a straight cleric if he drops armor for in-combat arcane spellcasting.)

But why are groups of wildly different optimization levels running gestalt campaigns without the higher-op players helping out the lower-op players? Why would anyone do that? How is it more fun that just playing straight classes? What purpose does it serve?

[Threadnaught]

Why is anyone doing that though? If you're short players, then why is the Melee Guy gestalting two melee classes? Factotum//Psion gives you all kinds of flexibility, although I'm not super familiar with either one.

Why do people use Two Weapon Fighting? Double the weapons, twice the powah. OMG, you mean I get to play as a Warrior with a few magical abilities and a straitjacket alignment ability and get a load of bonus feats? Whaaaat? Awesome, I'm gonna make the most bad ass River Song clone with a conscience ever. It helps that it's more broken than Fighter//Wizard, the ability to cast Fireball or Bbull's Strength and the infinite power of a Fighter? How can my DM really challenge me without cheating?

Also some people may not enjoy the more optimal option.


And if you're not short players, why are you gestalting two Tier 1-2 classes? Why are DMs allowing that?

Because they're suggested in UA itself. Some people take these suggestions as useful advice.


I could easily see a two-PC campaign with a Fighter//Rogue and a Cleric//Wizard, which would be two wildly different tier levels. But with only two players, the mundane isn't going to feel useless. (The Cleric//Wizard could be a step behind a straight cleric if he drops armor for in-combat arcane spellcasting.)

Nope, use ACF Cloistered Cleric and the heaviest armour you can wear is Light anyway, +1 Twilight Mithril Chain Shirt offers a nice amount of protection while allowing full arcane casting, while lessening the need for Mage Armour Spells. And even without that, there's the Monk's Belt which offers the same bonus to AC if you have the minimum Wisdom to cast 9th level Spells.
The problem, if one exists, is that they have two Casting Abilities to focus on, so either they drop one, so they gain no additional Bonus Spells and the DCs remain low, while the other Class reaps massive benefits. Or they split points between Intelligence and Wisdom, getting lower Bonus Spells and Save DCs than straight Wizard or Cleric. Either you sacrifice a lot of one Class, or you sacrifice some of both.


But why are groups of wildly different optimization levels running gestalt campaigns without the higher-op players helping out the lower-op players? Why would anyone do that? How is it more fun that just playing straight classes? What purpose does it serve?

As an experiment, a DM with a decent enough grasp of optimization may call for their players to create a Gestalt Character for a short campaign. Through this, they may find which of their players has the better grasp of optimization and either talk to that player about whether they do too much, ask them to help out the other players, or find the weaker players and ask them to consider taking something a little more optimal.


A big problem with gestalt is that it makes optimization skill gaps between players all the more apparent. Some people are able to take much more advantage of a second class track than others, and it usually shows when you've got Factotum//Psions dropping five or six actions per round while in the other corner a Fighter//Paladin swings for +2 damage.

How good is your Gestalt Synergy exactly? I have a question about them that was asked in this (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=316793) thread the day after I tried making one of my own. It remains largely unanswered in the thread though.