Gestalt literally versus non-gestalt

[(Un)Inspired]

Do you think it's kosher to make a BBEG gestalt against a non gestalt party? I know as DM I can just do whatever I want but I tend to build enemies using identical rules and resources I let my plays use all the way down to the same ability point buy. That way it really feels like my ingenuity versus theirs.

I'm trying to stat out a major villain and I would save myself from walls of headache if I just made him gestalt. My honor (who knew I had any?) is telling me this is a dirty trick. What do you guys think?

[pwykersotz]

I wouldn't be too concerned. It isn't much different from fighting a highly optimized cleric, after all. Plus, action economy is still on their side.

[Nettlekid]

Because of the action economy, it would probably be weaker than having a BBEG who has a second-in-command minion who patches the BBEG's weaknesses, like a Sorcerer BBEG who has a Cleric second-in-command. And that's a setup that DMs use all the time. So I don't see a problem with it.

[(Un)Inspired]

I'm not completely worried about over powering the party I'm just concerned with meta game fairness. I know that sounds stupid.

[CyberThread]

What meta game fairness, you make challenge, if boss stomps them, then well you learn. If the boss loses, then who knows better, besides you. Bosses need not have character sheets, and just be a few scribbles on a notepad.

[Nettlekid]

I'm not completely worried about over powering the party I'm just concerned with meta game fairness. I know that sounds stupid.

The BBEG is expected to have special tricks which may or may not be kosher via rulebooks. For one, the BBEG is expected to be a few levels higher than the party. They probably have an evil ritual giving them unusually high stats or some special power. They've likely been retroactively Scrying on the party so they won't be surprised by the special plans the PCs have, unless the PCs specifically mentioned "Hey we're doing this super secretly so they can't know about it." Making them Gestalt is basically just a matter of giving them more class features. It's totally fine, and plenty fair. If the BBEG was an equal-leveled single class character, it would be a CR Party Level fight, and that's so anticlimactic.

[Twilightwyrm]

I'm not completely worried about over powering the party I'm just concerned with meta game fairness. I know that sounds stupid.

I have to say, I do understand your concern. On the one hand, it is the DM's job to devise a good and interesting challenge for the players. On the other hand, the fact that D&D 3.5, largely, uses the same basic rules for everyone is one thing I've always appreciated about the game. The basic idea that, given proper dedication and effort, any PC could accomplish if not exactly, then much the same thing as the BBEG brings a sort of meta-parity to the whole experience that I understand you not wanting to sacrifice. It (for lack of a better term) humanizes the villians. Even if the party never knows, it is fair if you decide you don't want to set this precedent for yourself. For my part, I'd typically sooner homebrew a PrC for the BBEG (because at least that way, theoretically, any player might meet the criteria to enter it as well). So this is my advice: go out of your way, explore multiple avenues, and otherwise do what you can to avoid just gestalting him. Don't drive yourself crazy, but this way, if you do have to pursue this option, you can at least do so with the justification that you took steps to avoid it, and it simply came down to PC entertainment verses meta-parity.

[Gabe the Bard]

I think the biggest concern should be verisimilitude. Is the BBEG the only gestalt character in the campaign world, who achieved their power through a special ritual or adventure? Or are there multiple characters who happen to be gestalt without any particular reason while everyone else, including the PCs, is not gestalt? If it's the former, all you need to do is raise the CR of the opponent and give the PCs more XP (plenty of high CR monsters are comparable to gestalt characters). But if it's the later, then I think you need to reconsider why the character needs to be gestalt in the first place.

You could also just create a special "monster" with its own CR rating that has all the abilities you want to give to your BBEG "character" and have them disguised as whatever race/class you want them to be. Same mechanics, different packaging and flavor.

[(Un)Inspired]

Twighlightwyrm and Gabe the Bard, you guys both make really good points. I think I'm gonna keep brainstorming and eschew gestating for my campaign villains. I don't want to have one single guy arbitrarily gestalt because I'm not clever enough to are it work.

[Gabe the Bard]

Gestalt is just one of many options. There are so many crazy things you can do with templates, classes, and monster options in 3.5 while keeping the CR within reason. Just take the Warrior NPC class for instance. It's CR is half that of a Fighter of the same level, but it has the same BAB progression. Throw in a couple of fighter levels for specific feats you want and fill the rest with Warrior levels to get some decently powerful minions. Or if you have a demon with a debilitating melee attack, give it a graft so it has an extra arm that it can attack with in exchange for a minor bump in its CR. What it really comes down to mechanically is a balance between raw power, special abilities, and CR/XP to give a good challenge. You can throw some pretty freaky things at an optimized party before they even break a sweat, like having the Titanic and Incarnate Construct templates liberally applied.

As an aside, the Incarnate Construct template is glorious since it halves the CR of the base creature, and also terrible since it loses all its special abilities, but that's a hefty chunk of hit dice and BAB right there for a pretty low base CR and you can add class levels from there. In a Tome of Battle campaign, my BBEG at the end was a pair of Titanic Incarnate Construct Warblades which was basically a Tome of Battle interpretation of Evangelion and Giant Robo. They were two giant meatbots with martial stances and making maneuvers at PCs that were smaller than their toe nail.

[(Un)Inspired]

Gestalt is just one of many options. There are so many crazy things you can do with templates, classes, and monster options in 3.5 while keeping the CR within reason. Just take the Warrior NPC class for instance. It's CR is half that of a Fighter of the same level, but it has the same BAB progression. Throw in a couple of fighter levels for specific feats you want and fill the rest with Warrior levels to get some decently powerful minions. Or if you have a demon with a debilitating melee attack, give it a graft so it has an extra arm that it can attack with in exchange for a minor bump in its CR. What it really comes down to mechanically is a balance between raw power, special abilities, and CR/XP to give a good challenge. You can throw some pretty freaky things at an optimized party before they even break a sweat, like having the Titanic and Incarnate Construct templates liberally applied.

As an aside, the Incarnate Construct template is glorious since it halves the CR of the base creature, and also terrible since it loses all its special abilities, but that's a hefty chunk of hit dice and BAB right there for a pretty low base CR and you can add class levels from there. In a Tome of Battle campaign, my BBEG at the end was a pair of Titanic Incarnate Construct Warblades which was basically a Tome of Battle interpretation of Evangelion and Giant Robo. They were two giant meatbots with martial stances and making maneuvers at PCs that were smaller than their toe nail.

Crickey! That's such a cool idea. How did you run it physically? On a game mat? Purely aurally? Graph paper? Do you mind if I use your evangelion idea?

[Jeff the Green]

What are you gestalting it with? Honestly, saying "gestalt is a +n LA template/template with significant roleplay requirements and drawbacks" would put gestalt technically available for the PCs, maintaining verisimilitude, but also make them very much not want it (assuming n is high enough: +2 for tier 6 and 5, +3 for tier 4, +5 for tier 3, +7 for tier 2, +10 for tier 1 sounds about right). Or, you know, it's perfectly fine to say "There are gods and demons and angels and dragons; this story isn't about them. Neither is it about the few people with quick enough minds/blessed enough souls/strong enough bodies to be gestalt."

[Gabe the Bard]

@(Un)Inspired: Sure! Go right ahead :) I used to bring a laptop to our game sessions regularly, so I would show pictures of events, NPCs, monsters, etc., but mostly things were just described verbally. I did show two side-by-side pictures of the Eva and Giant Robo characters, but in grayscale and with a bit of noise added because they were supposed to be stone monuments on which a ritual was performed. I said they were way too big to represent on a battle map or even graph paper. I think one of the players actually said he could not believe I had a monolithic robot pull a martial maneuver on his character with its pinky.