Core/ToB Gestalt classes

[brian c]

So, this is a belated connection to a post I made in the general RPG forum a few days ago. My idea is to combine the base melee classes (fighter, barbarian, monk, ranger, paladin) with the Tome of Battle classes in order to (crunch/mechanics/gameplay reason) make melee builds viable at higher levels, and (fluff/flavor/roleplay reason) because it doesn't make sense to have "martial maneuvers" not belong to the basic martial classes.

Here's what I want to do: get rid of the ToB classes, and instead make those subclasses of Core melee classes. When you create a character of that type, you can chose an appropriate "martial subclass", sort of similar to how a ranger can be TWF or ranged.

The choices are limited to make sense (and the ToB classes are nerfed, I'll explain later)

Fighter: any (Crusader, Warblade, Swordsage)
Monk: Crusader or Swordsage
Barbarian: Swordsage or Warblade
Paladin: must be Crusader
Ranger: Swordsage or Warblade

of the 5 base classes, 3 can choose Warblade, 3 can choose Crusader, 4 can choose Swordsage (which I think is the most versatile class).

Furthermore, the ToB classes are nerfed and the following changes are made:

Crusader: remove steely resolve, counterstrike

Swordsage: remove AC bonus, sense magic, evasion/improved evasion

Warblade: remove uncanny dodge/improved uncanny dodge, bonus feats?

Class abilities that overlap, I think I removed.

So this would be sorta like gestalt the way it works; each class would keep their core HD, skill points per level, base attack and saves, but they would add the abilities and class skills of their martial subclass. More importantly, they would add stances and maneuvers of their subclass per ToB.


So, what does anyone think? I think that from what I have now, the Crusader is left with too little, and the Warblade is too smart (Int-based), especially for a Barbarian. Also, I don't know if it might be overpowered for a fighter(warblade) to get so many bonus feats. Maybe if a fighter selects that he doesn't get them but any other class would, or just get rid of them all-together. I took out the Crusader abilities because I don't really like them; should they stay in for balance? Also not sure that the classes should add class skills from their subclass, maybe let them pick a few to be new class skills?

[brian c]

bump... no one has any comments? cmon...

[brian c]

i'm bumping this just one more time and hoping that i'll get some ideas or judgements on whether or not this is balanced (in a non-gestalt game; if you did gestalt on top of this I think it might get a little much)

[Fax Celestis]

I actually came up with a progression for the noncasters to use martial maneuvers (here (http://corporation.walagata.com/fax/wiki/index.php/Tome_of_Battle_Core_Class_Update)).

[Glittersamas]

Hmmm... For starters, I'd get rid of the 'Gestalt' in your title. It's somewhat misleading. You might get more views. Also, people that are clicking on your thread probably think it is some sort of charop gestalt thread using ToB classes. I know why you used the term, but I think a different name like ToB for martial classes might work better for you.
On to the topic. I like the idea of giving core classes martial progressions. A lot. I've been contemplating that myself. I'd prefer re-building the classes from the ground up however; similar to, but much more in depth than fax's link.
For example, lets take the barbarian (I prefer to call him 'beserker' but that's unimportant). His 1st level is already pretty good. I think giving him rage, fast movement, his core chassis, and a ss or wb maneuvers might be a bit much. First level casters aren't that good (it's the higher levels we need to worry about). Keep in mind I'm only brainstorming at the moment and this is all from memory.
Chassis(HD,Skills,Skill points): Keep as is.
Rage:Should be reduced at 1st if we want to make room for maneuvers. However, it should also get much better as he levels. An idea I got from the enworld boards was something like:
Rage +2 strength, +1 will/fort saves, +1 temp HP/char level (works as normal for temp hps). (lasts +1 round than normal rage) -2 ac.
Rage improves at a much faster rate than normal (perhaps every 5 levels but I'm not sure- each time +2 str, +1 will/fort, +1 HP/lev)
He might look like:
1st: Rage (as above), Gain maneuvers perhaps as a slightly reduced wb progression with very limited school access: He should probably get at least 3, 2 of which would likely be tigerclaw and stone dragon. (I plan on creating a barb exclusive one myself- one of the million thing's I'm planning)
2nd: fast movement
3rd: Furious technique: +2 to DC of maneuvers when raging. (might be a bit much as he'd gain 2nd level maneuvers here)
4th: +1 rage/day
5th: Improved rage (again, his odd levels seem to be outpacing his even levels- this is also true for most casters so it might be ok)
If you're interested I'll share more. This might be more work than you care do do however. Also, let me go through your list quickly:

Fighter: any (Crusader, Warblade, Swordsage)
Personally I think the WB is the only one that makes sense for the fighter. He's not supposed to be supernatural imo.

Monk: Crusader or Swordsage
Sounds good

Barbarian: Swordsage or Warblade
I'm not sure what to say here. My instinct says WB and cru. WB for most and Cru for the shamanistic types. I don't see SS.

Paladin: must be Crusader
Yup

Ranger: Swordsage or Warblade
Yup

[Mr Pants]

*snip*

I'm not sure what to say here. My instinct says WB and cru. WB for most and Cru for the shamanistic types. I don't see SS.

*snip*


thats just the thing, crusaders aren't shamanistic. They're paladins. The swordsage seems the most shamanistic to me

[Glittersamas]

thats just the thing, crusaders aren't shamanistic. They're paladins. The swordsage seems the most shamanistic to me

To each his own i guess. I figured since cru's had access to devoted spirit.