How OP are gestalt characters?

[Mr.Kraken]

Compared to a normal character, how OP can a gestalt character get (or not get)? Could a normal character defeat a gestalt 1-on-1?

[ZamielVanWeber]

At their weakest gestalt characters are barely better than a similar non-gestalt (such as swashbuckler//barbarian vs barbarian), but at their strongest they are markedly stronger. It really depends on what you are combining and well efficiently you are abusing the combo.

Good rule of thumb is to take a class with passive bonuses, such a Binder or Incarnate, and combine it with a class that like to use its actions every turn, such as Martial Adepts and casters.

[Mr.Kraken]

One combination that I've always been curious about was Hexblade/Duskblade. Is it any good?

[Zanos]

The best gestalt builds combine passive classes with very strong active classes. Wizard/Factotum is up there as one of the most powerful. Basically you use your passive side to become two wizards are one chassis with really high everything.

An optimized gestalt build can be twice as powerful as the base classes(twice as many spells = twice as much hilarity). Usually it's not as big of a deal though, I've seen folks make gestalt an LA + 2 template and it didn't wreck their game.

[Xerlith]

Shortly put - no. It's not much stronger than a normal duskblade.
To elaborate: MAD. Cha-driven Hexblade doesn't play well with Int-powered Duskblade.
Same chassis. You gain nothing advantageous from combining the two.
Hexblade's a weak class in itself - the only worthwhile abilities would be Mettle and the Dark Companion.

Compare it to a Duskblade3/Wiz17//Factotum8/Warblade12, or more sanely, to a Duskblade20//Factotum20.

[Snowbluff]

Combining Hexblade and DB wouldn't really be MAD. DB needs 15 int in its teens. A hexblade would only need 14 if you're being conservative.

That being said, don't do it.

[Mr.Kraken]

3.5 needs more gish-type base classes. There aren't much to choose from.

[eggynack]

3.5 needs more gish-type base classes. There aren't much to choose from.
Depends on how you look at it. Druids and clerics, though divine, can give you a lot of the things one would likely desire out of a gish. It's not like the spell lists are that far apart, after all, even if they are missing some things, and they beat face very efficiently. For an arcane character, you'd generally be better off with a bunch of classes, rather than a single one from 1-20.

[Icewraith]

I doubt it, you're way better off finding a nice half caster prestige class and alternating so you retain full wizard spellcasting and full BAB.

Also, staggeringly effective: Kung Fu Genius Monk//Warblade. Full BAB, d12 HD, INT synergy, and a swift action move in sudden leap (remember that increased move speed gives a passive bonus to jump checks!) give the Monk almost everything it needed to be an effective melee class. The only downside is trying to figure out how the unarmed strike, flurry of blows, and two-weapon fighting "off-hand" rules interact when you're holding something like a greatsword, polearm, or spiked chain AND kicking people in the face (because it's badass).

[aleucard]

It really depends on the combination in question and optimization skills of the player. At bare minimum, you're almost always going to be at least better than one of the two classes involved (with the exception being combos that screw with each other's abilities, though none come to mind that truly qualify). Finding a combo that's worth more than both aspects taken individually is almost brainlessly simple. However, with a little fiddling and some knowledge of the system, it's entirely possible to get a character so powerful that an entire campaign for a standard party can be run by them alone. The quickest way to get this is to employ the 'active/passive' strategy described above with either two caster classes or a T1 and a martial/Gish class. Wizard//Warblade springs to mind for a God of War type character (that is, one who would deserve the title), while Wizard//Factotum deals with basically everything else. When it comes to out-and-out supremacy, though, a properly played version of Wizard//Archivist is about the closest anyone will ever get to PunPun without involving actual cheese.

[killianh]

When I'm DM I usually treat it as +1 ECL for each level group. So 1 for levels 1-6, 2 for 7-11, and so on. While the CR system and encounter calculator in the DM's guide aren't the most exact I've found this has kept things in balance. Also depends on if you have a system you use to adjust encounter CR based on optimization as there's far more room for optimization with gestalt

[Petrocorus]

3.5 needs more gish-type base classes. There aren't much to choose from.

Or maybe it would need gish-type and alternate warrior class spoiled by poor execution like the Duskblade and its poor spelllist making him a 2-3 trick pony.

[Necroticplague]

Depends heavily on optimization. A gestalt character has a tighter squeeze on their non-class level resources. You need to split your feats between doing what your two classes do. So if your optimization is crap, you spread yourself thin, and end up being horrible at two things (instead of your normal mediocre at one). If you're optimization is good, however, you use your extra class levels on the other side as fuel for your main shtick/tactics, making you significantly more powerul. Factotum/Archivist is pretty dang potent, and having extra levels to burn means you can use a races where the ECl is normally too high, allowing things like Sharn to be properly used.

[Rubik]

The best gestalt builds combine passive classes with very strong active classes. Wizard/Factotum is up there as one of the most powerful. Basically you use your passive side to become two wizards are one chassis with really high everything.Note that psionics is an exception. Active psionic class 1//active class 2 can be utterly insane, because psionics is great for giving you more actions in myriad ways. It's an active class-set, yes, but it also gives more actions to be active with for a second class.

[nedz]

Compare it to a Duskblade3/Wiz17//Factotum8/Warblade12, or more sanely, to a Duskblade20//Factotum20.

Duskblade 20 // Beguiler 20 could be fun —or— Duskblade 20 // Rogue 1 / Beguiler 4 / Unseen Seer 10 / X+5 likewise.
Gish options // Stealth/Social options

Neither side is passive, but you do get many more options.

[Troacctid]

I've been thinking of letting my players gestalt as basically a Build-Your-Own Theurge: if you have 3 levels in each of two classes, you can continue as a gestalt between them. Just about every existing theurge class is balanced and fun, so universalizing the template seems like it would work nicely.

[torrasque666]

I've been thinking of letting my players gestalt as basically a Build-Your-Own Theurge: if you have 3 levels in each of two classes, you can continue as a gestalt between them. Just about every existing theurge class is balanced and fun, so universalizing the template seems like it would work nicely.

Wouldn't that really only work well with classes that use some sort of subsystem like ToB or MoI? Or just like "3 levels in rogue, 3 levels in cleric, can proceed to advance as both, gaining class features based on level such as SA and spells as they come"?

[TypoNinja]

Not as much more powerful as you'd think at first glance "Two classes, that's like twice as strong!", not so much, Some combos can be quite powerful, but what really keeps the brakes on the power level is action economy. No matter how many different things your character can do, you can only choose one option a turn.

So you typically end up with a character about the same powerlevel as usual, but who is less likely to be stumped on how to be useful in a given situation. The biggest strength of Gestalt is that you are bad at less things.

[toapat]

(with the exception being combos that screw with each other's abilities, though none come to mind that truly qualify).

Healer//Warmage doesnt function thanks to the Hipocratic Oath that applies to your warmage casting now. Healer actually breaks alot of classes, but most other casters are immune to actually ceasing to function. then you just have bad attribute synergies.

Paladin//Spellthief is probably one of the best dual-active classes in gestalt, even with the small number of spellslots.

[Troacctid]

Wouldn't that really only work well with classes that use some sort of subsystem like ToB or MoI? Or just like "3 levels in rogue, 3 levels in cleric, can proceed to advance as both, gaining class features based on level such as SA and spells as they come"?

You use the gestalt rules, so you get the class features of both classes, as well as the saves, skills, and BAB as normal for gestalt.

[torrasque666]

You use the gestalt rules, so you get the class features of both classes, as well as the saves, skills, and BAB as normal for gestalt.
But it would still be only from (minimum) level 7 onward right? Just trying to clarify, because this seems like a concept that I would love to introduce to my DM.

[toapat]

wait, what happens when a Paladin//Spellthief with Battleblessing casts a Metamagic'd Spell. does BB reduce the casting time to a standard action or does the metamagic keep it full round?

[Troacctid]

But it would still be only from (minimum) level 7 onward right? Just trying to clarify, because this seems like a concept that I would love to introduce to my DM.

Yep. Like a prestige class with "3 levels in each of two base classes" as the prerequisite. Of course, before 7, you're still combining the two classes, you're just doing it as a normal multiclass character, as with the classic Mystic Theurge.


wait, what happens when a Paladin//Spellthief with Battleblessing casts a Metamagic'd Spell. does BB reduce the casting time to a standard action or does the metamagic keep it full round?

Same as with a non-gestalt Paladin/Spellthief. Battle Blessing only affects Paladin spells.

[Rater202]

I once had a GM let me Gestalt Swordsage+Warblade.

I was not the most OP Melee character.

[toapat]

Battle Blessing only affects Paladin spells.

which in gestalt means all of your spells from classes which you share a level in parallel with paladin, in this case, all of those levels are spellthief

[Rubik]

For what it's worth, druids are basically tri-gestalt by themselves, and most full-casting PrCs might as well be gestalt, since the majority of casting classes don't lose much of anything by taking them.

[torrasque666]

which in gestalt means all of your spells from classes which you share a level in parallel with paladin, in this case, all of those levels are spellthief

Nooooo..... a Gestalt Wizard/Cleric has two pools of spells. His Wizard ones and his Cleric ones. He cannot cast Wizard spells from Cleric slots or vice versa, as per the line in the Gestalt Rules: "Gestalt characters with more than one spellcasting class keep track of their spells per day separately."

[Rubik]

Nooooo..... a Gestalt Wizard/Cleric has two pools of spells. His Wizard ones and his Cleric ones. He cannot cast Wizard spells from Cleric slots or vice versa, as per the line in the Gestalt Rules: "Gestalt characters with more than one spellcasting class keep track of their spells per day separately."But according to lots of people, manifesters have to take the better of their pp progressions. Shouldn't casters have to do the same with spells?

Oh, wait. That's because apparently only the casters get the best things.

[toapat]

Gestalt characters with more than one spellcasting class keep track of their spells per day separately."

doesnt for all i can tell stop the fusion of the consideration of wizard spells as paladin spells, just that you retain the spellslots of both sides

[torrasque666]

But according to lots of people, manifesters have to take the better of their pp progressions. Shouldn't casters have to do the same with spells?

Oh, wait. That's because apparently only the casters get the best things.

Manifesters explicitly pool their Power Points , as stated under Multiclass Psionic Characters. Thus, like skill points, you would take the better(A fighter1//rogue1 with 10 Int doesn't have 40 skill points to spend on ranks, but 32. When they go to fighter 2//rogue 2 they have a grand total of 40 skill points invested in ranks because the rogue has the better skill points). Spells though are stated to be kept separate.


doesnt for all i can tell stop the fusion of the consideration of wizard spells as paladin spells, just that you retain the spellslots of both sides

A wizard can cast X spells from the Wizard/Sorc spell list because thats what they cast from. A Paladin casts from the Paladin spell list because that's what they cast from. The two classes keep their spells per day separate, so why would it allow you to count one as the other? By your reckoning a Wizard//Paladin can scribe Paladin only spells in his book, thus being able to make scrolls from them, thus being able to sell those scrolls to other wizards as wizard spells allowing all wizards to get paladin spells. Or any other casting class.


Or simpler: Is the spell on the Paladin list? No? Doesn't count for Battle Blessing.

[Extra Anchovies]

As has been said before, the best gestalt takes a passive class and pairs it with an active class that has the same primary ability score(s). Wizard//Factotum (Intelligence), Bard//Marshal (Charisma), and Druid//Incarnate (Wisdom, plus Constitution) are all good examples of this.


Or simpler: Is the spell on the Paladin list? No? Doesn't count for Battle Blessing.

This. Taking a level of Prestige Paladin doesn't quicken all of your spells.

[Troacctid]

As has been said before, the best gestalt takes a passive class and pairs it with an active class that has the same primary ability score(s). Wizard//Factotum (Intelligence), Bard//Marshal (Charisma), and Druid//Incarnate (Wisdom, plus Constitution) are all good examples of this.

Eh, most Incarnates don't really care about Wisdom. It only matters for soulmeld save DCs and the level 20 capstone. Hardly any Incarnate melds force saves, and most of the ones that do are Evil-only and/or not worth shaping anyway.

[Crake]

When I'm DM I usually treat it as +1 ECL for each level group. So 1 for levels 1-6, 2 for 7-11, and so on. While the CR system and encounter calculator in the DM's guide aren't the most exact I've found this has kept things in balance. Also depends on if you have a system you use to adjust encounter CR based on optimization as there's far more room for optimization with gestalt

I've been running a game where I allow optional gestalt progression, the way I've run it so far is that each "level" of gestalt costs half the XP of one level above that would otherwise normally cost (since level 1 doesn't cost any xp). So for example, a level 5//5 character needs the xp to get to level 5, plus half the total xp needed to get to level 6. I then calculate their ECL by comparing their entire xp pool, and checking it against the normal XP table. So in the level 5//5 character, they would need 10,000xp to get to level 5, plus 7,500xp to gestalt up to 5. Their overall xp total is 17,500, which is the equivilent of a 6th level character, so their ECL is 6.

I also use this method for allowing templates as a "gestalt" benefit, but all templates in my games need to be earned in some way, so it offsets players just accruing templates at a silly rate.

[NotScaryBats]

Gestalt characters can look super OP on paper, too. Like, if you pick an impressive stat-boosting race or template with LA on one side, like a half-goristro lolth-touched water orc or something, then go Warhulk // full BAB class, you can have +yes to hit and +uh huh to damage. That's an impressive character sheet, just looking at the numbers.

You can pick up crazy immunities, a bunch of bonus feats, and other things that 'look good' on paper with ease on a Gestalt character. I think that's a feature, not a bug, and love the increased customizability.

[aleucard]

Healer//Warmage doesnt function thanks to the Hipocratic Oath that applies to your warmage casting now. Healer actually breaks alot of classes, but most other casters are immune to actually ceasing to function. then you just have bad attribute synergies.

Paladin//Spellthief is probably one of the best dual-active classes in gestalt, even with the small number of spellslots.

What Healer's Oath screws with Warmage? Also, even if Healer's casting is thrown out, it at least improves skills, HP, and Fort saves.

[Chronos]

If you want to combine something with duskblade, try the Arcane Duelist (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/re/20030224a) prestige class. It's ordinarily not worth it, since who wants half BAB on a melee character? But pair it with something that gives full BAB, and all of those other abilities that ordinarily make it almost worth it come into the spotlight.

[Mr.Kraken]

If you want to combine something with duskblade, try the Arcane Duelist (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/re/20030224a) prestige class. It's ordinarily not worth it, since who wants half BAB on a melee character? But pair it with something that gives full BAB, and all of those other abilities that ordinarily make it almost worth it come into the spotlight.

Wow! What a class! But I'm afraid I misunderstood the Flurry of Swords attack - seems VERY OP to me, specially after I read this:

"This ability allows you to once for each opponent, up to 10 times per day. As a part of a full attack action, you cast mirror image. Except, these mirror images are quasi real, and mimick your attack pattern (1d4+1/3 arcane duelist levels, so usually 3). You also get an extra attack, all attacks at a -2 penalty (a normal flurry). Essentially, your attack pattern is multipled by 4-7. If you used to attack 4 times per round, you now attack 20-32 times that round. If you got 9 attacks per round (Full BAB, TWF tree, Haste, flurry), you attack 45-72 times that round." (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=9907.0)

Now, now, this can't be true.. can it?

[toapat]

What Healer's Oath screws with Warmage? Also, even if Healer's casting is thrown out, it at least improves skills, HP, and Fort saves.

its the focus between the classes. Sure theoretically Healer//Warmage makes a balanced class but either you instantly lose either all or half of your classfeatures for using the warmage side.

[Extra Anchovies]

Now, now, this can't be true.. can it?

Arcane duelist may be poorly-written (e.g. the lack of a uses/day specification on the Mirror Image ability), but yeah, that ability is nasty powerful. Note, however, that the images deal nonlethal damage, which a good number of monsters are immune to.

It's also a 3.0 PrC from 2003, so your DM may not like it if you ask about it.

[aleucard]

its the focus between the classes. Sure theoretically Healer//Warmage makes a balanced class but either you instantly lose either all or half of your classfeatures for using the warmage side.

The only thing that I can see that would make you lose Healer abilities is wearing primarily metal armor, and you can just take a couple pages from Druid if it's that much of a big deal for you.

[torrasque666]

The only thing that I can see that would make you lose Healer abilities is wearing primarily metal armor, and you can just take a couple pages from Druid if it's that much of a big deal for you.

Aye, the only bit limiting healers is the following:

A healer who grossly violates her ethos (such as by refusing to heal an ally or a good-aligned creature) loses all spells and class features (except for proficiency with simple weapons and light armor). She cannot thereafter gain levels as a healer until she atones.
So as long as your target isn't an ally(and why would it be?) or a good aligned creature(again, unlikely) you're in the clear. Can even wear armor too.




Unless you guys are talking about a different healer than the Miniatures one.

[Gemini476]

Arcane duelist may be poorly-written (e.g. the lack of a uses/day specification on the Mirror Image ability), but yeah, that ability is nasty powerful. Note, however, that the images deal nonlethal damage, which a good number of monsters are immune to.

It's also a 3.0 PrC from 2003, so your DM may not like it if you ask about it.
It's also a Theurge-esque class, which means that it's recommended to be banned in Gestalt. Which is a bit of a bummer, but eh.

Generally Gestalt characters are stronger than non-gestalt characters, weaker than two non-geatalt characters, and possibly a bit weaker overall than some of the crazier multi-Theurge builds. The action economy acts against them unless they go Factotum or Psionic, in which case their relative lack of durability in comparison to two separate characters acts against them.

Oh yeah, and Gestalt characters are probably weaker than a Dvati deciding to Theurge it up. That's a thing.

[Troacctid]

Oh yeah, and Gestalt characters are probably weaker than a Dvati deciding to Theurge it up. That's a thing.

I don't know. Delaying your spellcasting progression when you already have LA, and you can't take any other actions in a round where you cast a spell? It doesn't seem like the best thing a Dvati could be doing. I'd rather be a gestalt character than a Dvati theurge.

And Arcane Duelist isn't a theurge class. It doesn't offer any dual progression; it gives you entirely new class features.

[Extra Anchovies]

I don't know. Delaying your spellcasting progression when you already have LA, and you can't take any other actions in a round where you cast a spell? It doesn't seem like the best thing a Dvati could be doing. I'd rather be a gestalt character than a Dvati theurge.

I think they mean caster/noncaster or noncaster/noncaster. Anima Mage, Jade Phoenix Mage, that sort of thing.

[Gemini476]

I don't know. Delaying your spellcasting progression when you already have LA, and you can't take any other actions in a round where you cast a spell? It doesn't seem like the best thing a Dvati could be doing. I'd rather be a gestalt character than a Dvati theurge.

And Arcane Duelist isn't a theurge class. It doesn't offer any dual progression; it gives you entirely new class features.
Well, alright. A Theurge with less spellcasting and more spell-like abilities/psionics, then. With as much early entry as is applicable, and preferably LA Buyoff.
It's extremely niche but to be honest that was the one example I could think of off the top of my head where a single non-gestalt character had an upper hand over a Gestalt character.

Aa for it not being a Theurge, you're completely right. I confused it with the myriad of other similar classes. It's certainly less of a theurge than the classes listed as examples.

Prestige classes that are essentially class combinations-such as the arcane trickster, mystic theurge, and eldritch knight-should be prohibited if you’re using gestalt classes, because they unduly complicate the game balance of what’s already a high-powered variant.


(As an aside, while reading through that page of the SRD it seems like WotC considered Gestalt to be equal to LA+1.)

[Extra Anchovies]

Well, alright. A Theurge with less spellcasting and more spell-like abilities/psionics, then. With as much early entry as is applicable, and preferably LA Buyoff.
It's extremely niche but to be honest that was the one example I could think of off the top of my head where a single non-gestalt character had an upper hand over a Gestalt character.

Since casting is limited with Dvati, it only makes sense to limit psionics and spell-likes; there's no real reason to punish casters while letting psions go free.

[Troacctid]

Even if your DM doesn't choose to make psionics transparent in that regard, I'm not seeing how going theurge is significantly better for the Dvati than going straight Psion and manifesting two powers each round. Or, if you need to conserve pp, using one to regain psionic focus each round while the other expends it, etc. You don't need to have a dual progression to abuse extra actions.


I think they mean caster/noncaster or noncaster/noncaster. Anima Mage, Jade Phoenix Mage, that sort of thing.

Still can't take any other actions in a round where the caster side casts a spell.

[Honjuden]

I was always partial to Egoist//Warblades. Pick up Temporal Acceleration, and use the rounds of time it gives you to buff in combat. Fission and True Metabolism are great for a melee character. There are even a few feats that complement the use of powers and maneuvers.

[mabriss lethe]

There are also some tier based partial gestalt suggestions that work rather well for bringing the power level of classes closer together.

Here's the basic breakdown by tier:
Tiers 1-2: No gestalt allowed
Tiers 3-4: May gestalt with NPC classes
Tiers 5-6: May gestalt with other T5-T6 classes.

[Petrocorus]

There are also some tier based partial gestalt suggestions that work rather well for bringing the power level of classes closer together.

Here's the basic breakdown by tier:
Tiers 1-2: No gestalt allowed
Tiers 3-4: May gestalt with NPC classes
Tiers 5-6: May gestalt with other T5-T6 classes.

T6 is for NPC classes.
I personally believe T4 classes should be allowed to gestalt with T5 so to reach T3. While most T3 don't really need gestalt.

[Knaight]

Compared to a normal character, how OP can a gestalt character get (or not get)? Could a normal character defeat a gestalt 1-on-1?

I'd generally say that a synergistic gestalt of two tier N classes is equivalent to an N+1 single class character, though there are some low tier classes that work surprisingly well in gestalt (e.g. Monks, where the saves are just really nice and get even nicer when paired with classes that have features to compensate for weaker saves).

[Petrocorus]

I'd generally say that a synergistic gestalt of two tier N classes is equivalent to an N+1 single class character, though there are some low tier classes that work surprisingly well in gestalt (e.g. Monks, where the saves are just really nice and get even nicer when paired with classes that have features to compensate for weaker saves).

I think that another instance could be Warlock // Paladin going the Clawlock or Glaivelock route.

[angry_bear]

How well would a spell to power erudite/wizard gestalt do? Seems like it'd have potential...

[mabriss lethe]

T6 is for NPC classes.
I personally believe T4 classes should be allowed to gestalt with T5 so to reach T3. While most T3 don't really need gestalt.

CW samurai is also usually benched at T6, but yeah, it's mostly meant for T5. (as a side note, not all NPC classes are T6. Expert is T5 and Adept is T4.)

[Troacctid]

How well would a spell to power erudite/wizard gestalt do? Seems like it'd have potential...

Seems like it wouldn't be that much better than a regular spell-to-power Erudite. Most of what you get from Wizard is redundant.

[Synar]

Not as much more powerful as you'd think at first glance "Two classes, that's like twice as strong!", not so much, Some combos can be quite powerful, but what really keeps the brakes on the power level is action economy. No matter how many different things your character can do, you can only choose one option a turn.

So you typically end up with a character about the same powerlevel as usual, but who is less likely to be stumped on how to be useful in a given situation. The biggest strength of Gestalt is that you are bad at less things.

And no says the Wizard//Factotum using the factotum action economy to power the wizard actions (yeah extra actions) or improve them (Cunning Breach, anyone?), while improving its chassis, defense and utility in the same time.
Or basically anything that abuse action economy paired with a caster.

Plus, a class does not only give more options (such as Cunning Brilliance or in a way Cunning Knowledge): it can also increase your defenses (such as Cunning Defense and Cunning Dodge) or help improve and combo with the options you already have, such as Cunning Breach and Cunning Surge, making yourself far more powerful AND versatile.

So yeah, you are mostly right, but it really depends on what you are combining. As a rule of thumb, pairing two "active" classes would give more versatility, while pairing a "passive" and an "active" class would tend to improve your power (and in all cases you should try to improve your chassis and defense).

[PsyBomb]

I wrote a Ten-Commandments thing somewhere, let me dig it up... here it is

1) Action Economy Is Still King
-Full Triple-progression casting is cute, but ultimately futile in combat since nearly every spell, Power, Invocation, etc takes a Standard Action to use, and you still only get one of those per round. Try to mix your activation abilities up, between Standard, Move, and Swift actions, so that you can get more out of what you have.

2) Focus On One Theme
-Having schizophrenic capabilities just means you'll be more at a loss in combat, despite the increased options, especially if the two sides interfere with each other in normal use. Barbarian/Wizard, though it may sound awesome, generally either gives up most of the benefits from one side of the progression or else is just confused in battle. If it can't be effectively done on one class, it generally isn't worth doing on two.

3) Strengthen Each Other's Weaknesses
-Since you always take the higher HP, BAB, Save, skill points and both skill lists, try to ensure that your secondary class is good at some things that your main one isn't.

4) Remember Your Stats
-Twice as many "classes" means twice as many opportunities for MAD. Make sure your key abilities from both sides are still lined up onto one or two main stats

5) Remember Your Feats
-Feats are the one thing you don't get multiples or increased numbers of normally. This makes prerequisites and feat chains just as hard to squeeze in as normal, more so if you want to Prestige on both sides of the equation (and many do)

6) Dipping Is Easier
-In Gestalt, dipping 1-3 levels on one side for supporting capabilities does not delay or prevent high-level capabilities from your other side. Ftr 2 for feats and proficiencies, Paladin 2-3 for Cha to saves and immunities, Meldshaper levels, etc are all simple and powerful options.

7) Beware Wasting Identical Advantages
-This causes pure waste. A PrC attempting to increase your Wizard caster level on one side and a level of Wizard on the other just lost a caster level benefit. Similar things go for other benefits, such as Uncanny Dodge, high HP/skills, and Proficiencies (not as much a concern as the others).

8) Active/Passive Mix is Typically Best
-Let one side have the abilities which require actions. You can put together cool utility, long-term buffing, bonus feats, and static/reactive abilities on the other side

9) The Very Worst Classes Sometimes Aren't Bad Here
-Monk, with its dominant saves, decent skills, and host of static abilities, is a FAR better choice for support-side levels than it is for single-class. The Expert, despite being an NPC class, notably is able to pick ANY TEN SKILLS as class skills with 6+Int per level, which can be clutch if your prereqs are getting tight. Any class that usually has the phrase "if only it had ___" can easily acquire it. Basically, almost anything can be of benefit to SOMEONE under Gestalt system (other than Commoner)

10) DM Always Has Final Word
-Just like normal, if you are crafting an epic masterpiece of a character but it will outshine the others of the group, expect any sane DM to veto it, or else be ready to throttle back what you can do for the sake of having, you know, fun.

That all said, if you are comparing a mid-optimization Gestalt with a mid-optimization Standard in the T3-4 range, then the Gestalt will be roughly 30-50% stronger.

[TypoNinja]

And no says the Wizard//Factotum using the factotum action economy to power the wizard actions (yeah extra actions) or improve them (Cunning Breach, anyone?), while improving its chassis, defense and utility in the same time.
Or basically anything that abuse action economy paired with a caster.

Plus, a class does not only give more options (such as Cunning Brilliance or in a way Cunning Knowledge): it can also increase your defenses (such as Cunning Defense and Cunning Dodge) or help improve and combo with the options you already have, such as Cunning Breach and Cunning Surge, making yourself far more powerful AND versatile.

So yeah, you are mostly right, but it really depends on what you are combining. As a rule of thumb, pairing two "active" classes would give more versatility, while pairing a "passive" and an "active" class would tend to improve your power (and in all cases you should try to improve your chassis and defense).

Well yea, if you get a way to break action economy things can get silly, but still not that much sillier than any full caster willing to break action economy, so its kind of a bad comparison, this isn't an issue with gestalt its an issue with anything that lets you break action economy.

[nedz]

PsiBomb makes some good points, but Gestalt is often used in small parties where you want to cover multiple threats. Now you don't need Gestalt to build multi-threat characters, but if that's your aim then obviously Gestalt helps. Having more options is often better than being very good at fewer things — YMMV.

[Petrocorus]

Gestalt can also be used to help unbalanced in the party. If you have a Druid, an Arty, and a Fighter, letting the fighter gestalt can help him not being useless.

[ben-zayb]

Speaking of Duskblades, gestalt opens up whole new tricks with it. Full Caster 20 || Duskblade 20 gives Arcane Channeling far better potential. Moreover, Full Caster 20 || Duskblade 13 / Warblade 1 / X2 / Bloodstorm Blood 4 makes you Arcane Channeling far more flexible; heck you can even be a part-time Chain-free buffer/healer/debuffer with this (reminiscent of Wild Star's Spell Slinger).

If Rainbow Warsnakes are themselves already versatile, just imagine how far more a TWF-RapidShot-Flurry Beguiler 5 / Rainbow Servant 10 / Unseen Seer 5 || Monk 1 / Duskblade 13 / Warblade 2 / Bloodstorm Blood 4 can be.

[nedz]

Gestalt can also be used to help unbalanced in the party. If you have a Druid, an Arty, and a Fighter, letting the fighter gestalt can help him not being useless.

Well unless he goes Fighter 20 // Samurai 20 or something :smallsigh:

[Mr.Kraken]

Well unless he goes Fighter 20 // Samurai 20 or something :smallsigh:

In the current campaign I'm DMing I have a Samurai 13 // Tempest 5 // Exotic Weapons Master 1 gestalt character that is very, very capable at combat. He is a Dexterity-based Rurouni Kenshin style samurai (light armor, katana and wakizashi, very fast). Granted, I had to wave my DM wand and change some of his class features (mainly, the feats that the class gives but doesn't give). He is the only gestalt character in this non-gestalt campaign, and he is slightly overpowered compared to the other characters, but not game-breaking. In fact, he is pretty amazing to use.

[Petrocorus]

In the current campaign I'm DMing I have a Samurai 13 // Tempest 5 // Exotic Weapons Master 1 gestalt character that is very, very capable at combat. He is a Dexterity-based Rurouni Kenshin style samurai (light armor, katana and wakizashi, very fast). Granted, I had to wave my DM wand and change some of his class features (mainly, the feats that the class gives but doesn't give). He is the only gestalt character in this non-gestalt campaign, and he is slightly overpowered compared to the other characters, but not game-breaking. In fact, he is pretty amazing to use.

May i ask what are the other characters?

[Mr.Kraken]

May i ask what are the other characters?

Human Duskblade 3/Wizard 1/Blade of Orien 9
Illumian Cleric 13
Fire Genasi Summoner Wizard 12
Seelie Fey Satyr Bard 5
Half-elf Rogue 9/Fatemaker 3
Pegasus-Centaur* Fighter 4
Woodling Gnome Druid 10

*Homebrewed race
Only the human, the illumian and the genasi are PCs. All the other are interchangeable NPCs.