PDA

View Full Version : Gestalt Sneak Attack



melchizedek
2007-04-03, 05:05 PM
If a player were to Gestalt a first level character with two classes that granted sneak attack, what would that character get? Would the receive 2d6 at first level, or would they only get 1d6?

I recognize that a character with two classes that grant sneak attack is not likely to be optimized. I DON'T CARE. I'm not trying to make an optimized character.

Khantalas
2007-04-03, 05:06 PM
Only one. Unless noted otherwise, class features don't stack in gestalt.

melchizedek
2007-04-03, 05:11 PM
But for most classes (Ninja and Spellthief for example) it is specifically stated that sneak attack damage does stacks with sneak attack damage that come from a different source (such as rogue.) Would that not apply in Gestalt.

Khantalas
2007-04-03, 05:12 PM
Uh, no. Unless they're on the same side of progression.

Assassinfox
2007-04-03, 05:13 PM
Sudden Strike, Skirmish, and Sneak Attack aren't, technically, the same class feature. They don't even all apply in the exact same situations.

KurenaiYami
2007-04-03, 05:14 PM
But for most classes (Ninja and Spellthief for example) it is specifically stated that sneak attack damage does stacks with sneak attack damage that come from a different source (such as rogue.) Would that not apply in Gestalt.

Ninja don't get Sneak Attack. They get Sudden Strike.

Sneak Attack and Sudden Strike would stack.

The Glyphstone
2007-04-03, 05:14 PM
The problem with Gestalt is that if both sides give the same feature, you only take it once. A gestalt Ninja//Spellthief does not have 1 level of Ninja and 1 level of Spellthief, he has 1 level of Ninja-Spellthief.

Now, if you take a level of, say, Fighter//Rogue at 1st level, then take a level of Ninja/Rogue, then continue levels of Ninja/Rogue, you'll be getting Sneak Attack or Sudden Strike +1d6 at every level, because the levels you get sneak attack in rogue are the levels you don't get sudden strike, and vice versa.

NullAshton
2007-04-03, 05:15 PM
I would rule that whichever one was most advantageously to you would apply.

Say you're a scout//rogue. You get skirmish, and sneak attack. Now, you can choose to move 10 feet and apply skirmish extra damage, or you could somehow catch them flatfooted or flanked and get sneak attack damage without moving. But if you move 10 feet and catch them flatfooted, you don't get double damage.

Of course, that is reading a little bit between the lines into the spirit of the rules.

Seffbasilisk
2007-04-03, 05:16 PM
A rogue1/ninja1 in Gesalt hitting a flatfooted opponent would do +2d6 damage.

+1d6 sneak attack.
+1d6 sudden strike.

Assassinfox
2007-04-03, 05:16 PM
I fail to see why a character shouldn't get both. They're not the same class feature, you only get the chance to use both Sudden Strike AND Sneak Attack if a foe is flat-footed.

Morgan_Scott82
2007-04-03, 05:23 PM
RAW with a Ninja 1//rogue 1 gestalt you would get both sudden strike and sneak attack, they are different class features and you would get them both, however RAW a Rogue 1//Spellthief 1 Gestalt would only have sneak attack 1d6 since the same class feature cannot be gained from both classes at the same level.

The way I avoid this problem, and the simplest answer is not to play gestalt, but thats obviously not helpful since you are asking about playing gestalt. So, if you wanted to go Rogue//Spellthief go rogue//fighter at 1st level and then multiclass into Rogue//Spellthief at second.

Seffbasilisk
2007-04-03, 05:24 PM
It's NullAshton. Same guy who said a Barbarian would beat a Wizard.

or was it a fighter?

Anyway, just a thought to bounce off y'all since most people are thinking along similar lines now.

If I made a Gesalt level 10 character like this:
Rogue1//Fighter1
Rogue2//Rogue1
Rogue3//Rogue2
Rogue4//Rogue3
Rogue5//Rogue4
Rogue6//Rogue5
Rogue7//Rogue6
Rogue8//Rogue7
Rogue9//Rogue8
Rogue10//Rogue9

Would I be getting Sneak attack +10d6, Trapsense +6?
I'd be getting shanked on lots of special features, but if I'm rocking +10d6 sneak...

Fax Celestis
2007-04-03, 05:26 PM
The problem with Gestalt is that if both sides give the same feature, you only take it once. A gestalt Ninja//Spellthief does not have 1 level of Ninja and 1 level of Spellthief, he has 1 level of Ninja-Spellthief.

Now, if you take a level of, say, Fighter//Rogue at 1st level, then take a level of Ninja/Rogue, then continue levels of Ninja/Rogue, you'll be getting Sneak Attack or Sudden Strike +1d6 at every level, because the levels you get sneak attack in rogue are the levels you don't get sudden strike, and vice versa.

Except you've missed the bit where it says that if you have two classes that share an ability, you gain it at the faster rate.

However, Sudden Strike != Skirmish != Sneak Attack, so they'd stack.

Khantalas
2007-04-03, 05:28 PM
And that's exactly why I don't play gestalt.

NullAshton
2007-04-03, 05:29 PM
Except you've missed the bit where it says that if you have two classes that share an ability, you gain it at the faster rate.

However, Sudden Strike != Skirmish != Sneak Attack, so they'd stack.

They would stack by the rules, yes. If anyone had a character that tried stacking them with me, though, I'd simply tell them no.

melchizedek
2007-04-03, 05:30 PM
If you went
Spellthief 1//Fighter 1
Spellthief 2//Rogue 1
Spellthief 3//Rogue 2
Spellthief 4//Rogue 3
Spellthief 5//Rogue 4
Spellthief 6//Rogue 5
Spellthief 7//Rogue 6
Spellthief 8//Rogue 7
Spellthief 9//Rogue 8
Spellthief 10//Rogue 9
I'd get Sneak Attack 8d6 and the special abilities from both classes, correct?

Khantalas
2007-04-03, 05:31 PM
See, spellthief and rogue both give sneak attack. They explicitly won't stack.

Fax Celestis
2007-04-03, 05:43 PM
If you went
Spellthief 1//Fighter 1
Spellthief 2//Rogue 1
Spellthief 3//Rogue 2
Spellthief 4//Rogue 3
Spellthief 5//Rogue 4
Spellthief 6//Rogue 5
Spellthief 7//Rogue 6
Spellthief 8//Rogue 7
Spellthief 9//Rogue 8
Spellthief 10//Rogue 9
I'd get Sneak Attack 8d6 and the special abilities from both classes, correct?

No. As stated prior: two classes with the same features progress the same feature at the rate of the quicker class.

Spellthief is better to gestalt with something like, say, Sorceror or Paladin. Or hell, a Spellthief//Dragon Shaman, while not incredibly powerful, would be downright nifty.

melchizedek
2007-04-03, 05:44 PM
Alright. There goes that idea. Could have been cool though.

Assassinfox
2007-04-03, 05:49 PM
Alright. There goes that idea. Could have been cool though.

What exactly WAS your idea?

melchizedek
2007-04-03, 05:54 PM
It basically involved playing a super-boosted Spellthief who gained the abilities of a rogue. It wouldn't have been an ideal character, but it would have been cool.

Morgan_Scott82
2007-04-03, 05:55 PM
Khantalas, after a bit more investigation of the RAW I recant my earlier position and agree with your assessment.

Here is the section on Gestalt character class features quoted from the SRD:


A gestalt character gains the class features of both classes. A 1st-level gestalt rogue/cleric, for example, gets sneak attack (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/rogue.html#rogue-sneak-attack) +1d6, trapfinding (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/rogue.html#rogue-trapfinding), 1st-level cleric spells (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/cleric.html#cleric-spells), and the ability to turn or rebuke undead (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/cleric.html#cleric-turn-or-rebuke-undead). Class- and ability-based restrictions (such as arcane spell failure chance and a druid's prohibition on wearing metal armor) apply normally to a gestalt character, no matter what the other class is.
A gestalt character follows a similar procedure when he attains 2nd and subsequent levels. Each time he gains a new level, he chooses two classes, takes the best aspects of each, and applies them to his characteristics. A few caveats apply, however.

Class features that two classes share (such as uncanny dodge (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/barbarian.html#barbarian-uncanny-dodge)) accrue at the rate of the faster class.
Gestalt characters with more than one spellcasting class keep track of their spells per day separately.
A gestalt character can't combine two prestige classes at any level, although it's okay to combine a prestige class and a regular class. Prestige classes that are essentially class combinations - such as the arcane trickster (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/arcaneTrickster.html), mystic theurge (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/mysticTheurge.html), and eldritch knight (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/eldritchKnight.html) - should be prohibited if you’re using gestalt classes, because they unduly complicate the game balance of what’s already a high-powered variant. Because it’s possible for gestalt characters to qualify for prestige classes earlier than normal, the game master is entirely justified in toughening the prerequisites of a prestige class so it's available only after 5th level, even for gestalt characters.Emphasis mine.

Spellthief and Rogue share the class feature Sneak attack, therefore a gestalt Spellthief//Rogue would acrue sneak attack at the rate of a rogue (the faster rate) and never from his spellthief levels.

However this points out one of the flaws in the way the Gestalt rules were written, what if a character were to be a spellthief 1//rogue 1 at Character level 1, and then multiclass so that when he reaches 20th level was a Spellthief 20//Rogue 1/Fighter 19. The arguement could be made that such a character would have 1d6 sneak attack, since rogue accrues sneak attack at the faster rate and the rules make no allowances for how many levels you have in each class only which class gets the abilities faster. Any sane DM (well I question the sanity of DMs who run gestalt, but thats another matter) would obviously house rule the spellthief 20//Rogue 1/Fighter 19 to have the sneak attack of a spellthief 20, but the RAW doesn't neccesarily support that.

These are among several reasons I've only used gestalt for fun kick in the door, kill the greenskins, take their stuff, one off adventures and not for ongoing campaigns.

Edit: Dang, I got super ninja'd. Four times over.

Assassinfox
2007-04-03, 06:00 PM
It basically involved playing a super-boosted Spellthief who gained the abilities of a rogue. It wouldn't have been an ideal character, but it would have been cool.

Could play a Ninja/Spellthief. :smallbiggrin:

Fax Celestis
2007-04-03, 06:06 PM
Could play a Ninja/Spellthief. :smallbiggrin:

Good idea, but hard to do. MAD like you wouldn't believe. Both classes need Dex, and Ninja also needs Wis. Spellthief, on the other hand needs Cha and likes Int.

Turcano
2007-04-03, 06:29 PM
However this points out one of the flaws in the way the Gestalt rules were written, what if a character were to be a spellthief 1//rogue 1 at Character level 1, and then multiclass so that when he reaches 20th level was a Spellthief 20//Rogue 1/Fighter 19. The arguement could be made that such a character would have 1d6 sneak attack, since rogue accrues sneak attack at the faster rate and the rules make no allowances for how many levels you have in each class only which class gets the abilities faster. Any sane DM (well I question the sanity of DMs who run gestalt, but thats another matter) would obviously house rule the spellthief 20//Rogue 1/Fighter 19 to have the sneak attack of a spellthief 20, but the RAW doesn't neccesarily support that.

That's not a flaw, that's a misinterpretation of the rules. You gain overlapping class features at the rate of the faster class only as along as you keep taking levels in the faster class; any further progression would be at the rate of the class you keep taking. In your scenario, you would accrue sneak attack as you would if you played a normal rogue 1/spellthief 19, trapfinding (as a first-level rogue), whatever class features you would get from 19 levels of spellthief, and the bonus feats of a 19th-level fighter.

The problem with Gestalt is that if both sides give the same feature, you only take it once. A gestalt Ninja//Spellthief does not have 1 level of Ninja and 1 level of Spellthief, he has 1 level of Ninja-Spellthief.

Now, if you take a level of, say, Fighter//Rogue at 1st level, then take a level of Ninja/Rogue, then continue levels of Ninja/Rogue, you'll be getting Sneak Attack or Sudden Strike +1d6 at every level, because the levels you get sneak attack in rogue are the levels you don't get sudden strike, and vice versa.

You don't need to stagger your progression to get both. If they're different features, they stack; if they're the same feature, they don't; staggering doesn't enter into it. Now, if you want to take a level of fighter for the bonus feat and/or weapon proficiencies, that's another matter.

Gralamin
2007-04-03, 06:39 PM
How about this one.

If you were a rogue 2/monk 2, would you have evasion or improved evasion?

Fax Celestis
2007-04-03, 06:42 PM
Evasion. Just like being an Archivist//Cleric doesn't give you a Caster Level of 2 at level 1, evasion doesn't stack.

Indon
2007-04-03, 07:04 PM
Two questions:

You're a gestalt Barbarian//Rogue. By when do you recieve Improved Uncanny Dodge (Uncanny Dodge specifies it stacks with itself)?

You're a gestalt Rogue//Scout. You take that one feat in Complete Scoundrel which allows your Rogue levels to count as Scout levels for Skirmish. Does your skirmish actually go up, or is it only if, say, you swap over to taking Rogue//Fighter levels that it makes any difference?

Bel_Bel
2007-04-03, 07:07 PM
Ninja/rogue. 2 dif class features. It stacks. 20d6 at every FF attack at level 19-20. I like. XD

Kel_Arath
2007-04-03, 07:08 PM
it says in the gestault rules if you look hard enough that sneak and sudden strike dont stack

Fax Celestis
2007-04-03, 07:11 PM
Gestalt Barbarian//Rogues receive the progression at the faster rate.

Generally, feats like that apply to only one side of the progression.

melchizedek
2007-04-03, 07:18 PM
it says in the gestault rules if you look hard enough that sneak and sudden strike dont stack
Where does it say this? It isn't in the SRD.

Khantalas
2007-04-03, 07:20 PM
That's because SRD doesn't have Sudden Strike. That's because Unearthed Arcana doesn't have Sudden Strike.

AtomicKitKat
2007-04-03, 08:22 PM
You could probably gain Improved Uncanny Dodge at level 4(Barbarian 4/Rogue 4. You could replace 2 of the Barbarian side with something else)
, which is really only 2 levels earlier than a standard Barbarian/Rogue multiclass. Funnily enough, if you took Barbarian 2 at the same level that you took Rogue 4, you wouldn't get IUD. :P

Turcano
2007-04-03, 09:05 PM
You're a gestalt Barbarian//Rogue. By when do you recieve Improved Uncanny Dodge (Uncanny Dodge specifies it stacks with itself)?

You'd get it at fifth level, just as a normal barbarian.

Ramza00
2007-04-03, 09:27 PM
Note a Wizard 5/Unseen Seer 10/X 5//Rogue 20 would get 10d6 sneak attack from Rogue and 4d6 sneak attack from Unseen Seer. This is because Unseen Seer doesn't give sneak attack, instead of giving a class feature it gives a bonus to a pre-existing class feature.

This is assuming your DM allows Unseen Seer for Unseen Seer fits in the "iffy catergory" is it a combo class or is it not.

A Wizard 5/Unseen Seer 10/X 5//Rogue 20 can easily get 10d6 (Rogue)+8d6 (Persistent Hunter's Eye)+4d6 (Unseen Seer)+1d6 (Persistent Critical Strike, note this damage is Melee Only)+20 Craven=23d6+20=100.5 Average Sneak Attack Damage per attack

Might also want to make the Rogue instead of a rouge a sneak attack fighter variant for the bab, and the fact US gives 6 skill points and a good reflex save, thus reducing overlap and giving you better bab, hp, and allowing you to get fighter only feats (which you can still get but you must use your normal feat slots on them)

Zincorium
2007-04-04, 03:31 AM
The way I see it, anyone who plays a skillmonkey//skillmonkey in a gestalt campaign should be beaten with the pointy corners of the rulebook. Gestalt is there for a reason, that reason being to allow a party with few players to fill all roles and thus adventure normally.

Rogue//ninja or spellthief or scout or whatever is a tremendous waste since you can still only fill one party role, and that only slightly better than a non-gestalt character.

As far as the hypothetical question, sneak attack and any other ability, sudden strike, skirmish, whatever, would stack. Sneak attack would, by a strict reading, accrue at the rate of whichever class got more of it. Personally, I read it as you don't get double of anything at a particular level, so you'd have a maximum sneak attack of 20d6 or so at 20th level. Remember that you can't be a rogue//rogue at any point, so it's difficult to do it to that degree, and it's honestly not overpowered compared to what else can be done with gestalt.

its_all_ogre
2007-04-04, 04:02 AM
spellthief//duskblade. you need some method of making casting stat int for spellthief to avoid MAD but its got potential!

Zincorium
2007-04-04, 04:18 AM
spellthief//duskblade. you need some method of making casting stat int for spellthief to avoid MAD but its got potential!

First off, yes, this is what I was talking about when I mentioned filling multiple party roles. Frontline combat, skillmonkey, caster, you can do any of them reasonably well, which in a two or three person group is a necessity. Yes, others can do it better, but you at least have somebody who can do it, and probably two. You also should never lack for something to do during a campaign.

As far as MAD goes, Gestalt is much easier when trying to work off one ability rather than three or four. Illumian from Races of Destiny is a perfect race for reducing MAD, as with one of their abilities they can choose to replace the stat for getting additional spells per day from any and all classes with either strength or dex. I'd say dex for this combo.

DCs, note, are unchanged, but as both spellthief and duskblade are both partial casters anyway, the save DCs of their spells are going to be low anyway. You're better off staying with buffs, utility spells, and those spells like rays which require an attack roll, which with full BAB and a good dex are going to hit just fine.

Anyway, to cast all the spells from either class, by 20th level you need to have an intelligence of 15, which as your skill stat is a good choice to keep reasonably high anyway, and a charisma of 14. That's it. Until 9th level, you can easily get away with a 12 in both. While still getting a good number of bonus spells from a high physical ability score.

The Glyphstone
2007-04-04, 04:28 AM
You don't need to stagger your progression to get both. If they're different features, they stack; if they're the same feature, they don't; staggering doesn't enter into it. Now, if you want to take a level of fighter for the bonus feat and/or weapon proficiencies, that's another matter.



Right, my bad. I had been reading SA and SS as the same ability...and was wrong anyways.

SpiderBrigade
2007-04-04, 06:31 AM
Illumian from Races of Destiny is a perfect race for reducing MAD, as with one of their abilities they can choose to replace the stat for getting additional spells per day from any and all classes with either strength or dex. I'd say dex for this combo.About that: I was looking at these abilities and it only says that you use that stat for bonus spells. It doesn't say that you don't still have to meet the "casting stat score of at least 10+spell level to cast a spell" requirement. So your MAD is not really reduced much, is it? In the listed example, you'll still need Cha 14 (for Spellthief) and Int 15 (for the Duskblade). Then with the Illumian ability you could get bonus spells for both classes from Dex, but that's still 3 stats you have to keep boosted. I might be missing something though.

Edit: reading comp. for the lose

Zincorium
2007-04-04, 06:40 AM
About that: I was looking at these abilities and it only says that you use that stat for bonus spells. It doesn't say that you don't still have to meet the "casting stat score of at least 10+spell level to cast a spell" requirement. So your MAD is not really reduced much, is it? In the listed example, you'll still need Cha 14 (for Spellthief) and Int 15 (for the Duskblade). Then with the Illumian ability you could get bonus spells for both classes from Dex, but that's still 3 stats you have to keep boosted. I might be missing something though.

You're missing where I mentioned that in my post, addressing it fully. Last paragraph, plain as day. Alright, maybe I didn't spell it out kindergarten style, but what else could I have meant by needing a certain score to cast all spells?

And like I said, you don't really need to have that score until you reach the level where you cast higher level spells. 12's in each work fine at the start, and all you need is a manual of whichever or an enhancement bonus to put you to where you need to be. That's not a whole lot in the way of 'boosting', and I never denied that there was still some MAD. You can't use either as a dump stat and still have spells. But it's workable, and that's all I was trying to show.

SpiderBrigade
2007-04-04, 06:45 AM
Yeah somehow I completely missed that :smallredface: What can i say, it's early.

Aquillion
2007-04-04, 09:03 AM
It's NullAshton. Same guy who said a Barbarian would beat a Wizard.

or was it a fighter?

Anyway, just a thought to bounce off y'all since most people are thinking along similar lines now.

If I made a Gesalt level 10 character like this:
Rogue1//Fighter1
Rogue2//Rogue1
Rogue3//Rogue2
Rogue4//Rogue3
Rogue5//Rogue4
Rogue6//Rogue5
Rogue7//Rogue6
Rogue8//Rogue7
Rogue9//Rogue8
Rogue10//Rogue9

Would I be getting Sneak attack +10d6, Trapsense +6?
I'd be getting shanked on lots of special features, but if I'm rocking +10d6 sneak...You can't take the same class on both sides of your progression in Gestalt, I think.

Morgan_Scott82
2007-04-04, 09:35 AM
Now does any of this discussion have a bearing on the proposal I once saw that a Fighter 1/Sorcerer 19//Wizard 20 has BAB +20 at 20th level? The way I saw it written up went like this:

Fighter 1//Wizard 1 (Get BAB increase from fighter)
Fighter 1/Sorcerer 1//Wizard 2 (Get BAB increase from Wizard)
Fighter 1/Sorcerer 2//Wizard 3 (Get BAB increase from Sorcerer)
Fighter 1/Sorcerer 3//Wizard 4 (Get BAB increase from Wizard)
Fighter 1/Sorcerer 4//Wizard 5 (Get BAB increase from Sorcerer)
...etc on to twentieth level.

Now, the way I've resolved this conflict in my own games the few times I've run gestalt is to compute BAB seperately for each side of the gestalt characters progression and give the character whichever is higher, which I feel is in tune with the spirit of the "Whichever accrues the ability faster" guideline, even though that guideline was for class features and not things like BAB or Base Saves. This has worked great for my games, but is it RAW or a house rule?

SpiderBrigade
2007-04-04, 09:44 AM
...that is the right way to do it, as it happens.

The flaw with the logic you posted is that people will draw up a gestalt chart, and look at each level's "increase" in BAB. So yeah, going from wizard 1 to wizard 2, you go up 1 in BAB (0 to 1). Fighter 1/sorceror 2, you go up one (1+0 to 1+1). So they argue that, at each level, their BAB is increasing by one. But it isn't. At fighter level 1, sorceror level 2, you HAVE A BAB OF +2. At wizard level 3, you have a BAB of...guess what, +1. You pick the better one of those two options, which is +2. Then, next level, you do the same thing. Fighter 1/Sorc 3 has BAB +2. Wizard 4 has BAB +2. Your BAB is +2.

I think what throws people is that the BAB column contains the +, so they mistakenly read it as "adding" to their BAB. But instead, it is simply a table which lists your BAB. Somehow this never confuses people in regular play, but in gestalt so many are confused...it's really not that hard.

Indon
2007-04-04, 09:48 AM
Now does any of this discussion have a bearing on the proposal I once saw that a Fighter 1/Sorcerer 19//Wizard 20 has BAB +20 at 20th level? The way I saw it written up went like this:

Fighter 1//Wizard 1 (Get BAB increase from fighter)
Fighter 1/Sorcerer 1//Wizard 2 (Get BAB increase from Wizard)
Fighter 1/Sorcerer 2//Wizard 3 (Get BAB increase from Sorcerer)
Fighter 1/Sorcerer 3//Wizard 4 (Get BAB increase from Wizard)
Fighter 1/Sorcerer 4//Wizard 5 (Get BAB increase from Sorcerer)
...etc on to twentieth level.

Now, the way I've resolved this conflict in my own games the few times I've run gestalt is to compute BAB seperately for each side of the gestalt characters progression and give the character whichever is higher, which I feel is in tune with the spirit of the "Whichever accrues the ability faster" guideline, even though that guideline was for class features and not things like BAB or Base Saves. This has worked great for my games, but is it RAW or a house rule?

I'd say for this, you would simply refer to the standard multiclassing rules and note that you add up BAB for all your classes; your Wizard BAB never exceeds your Fighter/Sorceror BAB, so your Fighter/Sorc BAB is the faster progression.

Morgan_Scott82
2007-04-04, 09:50 AM
...that is the right way to do it, as it happensWhich is the right way? I brought up two. The compute separately and take whichever is greater approach that I've been using, or the stupid full BAB Fighter 1/Sorcerer 19//Wizard 20.


I'd say for this, you would simply refer to the standard multiclassing rules and note that you add up BAB for all your classes; your Wizard BAB never exceeds your Fighter/Sorceror BAB, so your Fighter/Sorc BAB is the faster progression.

As I said this is what I've been doing, I was just curious if this was RAW or a house rule?

SpiderBrigade
2007-04-04, 09:56 AM
Which is the right way? I brought up two. The compute separately and take whichever is greater approach that I've been using, or the stupid full BAB Fighter 1/Sorcerer 19//Wizard 20.



As I said this is what I've been doing, I was just curious if this was RAW or a house rule?
Yeah, sorry, I thought it would be clear that I meant that YOUR way, AKA take the greater total, is correct.

Jannex
2007-04-04, 09:57 AM
Now does any of this discussion have a bearing on the proposal I once saw that a Fighter 1/Sorcerer 19//Wizard 20 has BAB +20 at 20th level? The way I saw it written up went like this:

Fighter 1//Wizard 1 (Get BAB increase from fighter)
Fighter 1/Sorcerer 1//Wizard 2 (Get BAB increase from Wizard)
Fighter 1/Sorcerer 2//Wizard 3 (Get BAB increase from Sorcerer)
Fighter 1/Sorcerer 3//Wizard 4 (Get BAB increase from Wizard)
Fighter 1/Sorcerer 4//Wizard 5 (Get BAB increase from Sorcerer)
...etc on to twentieth level.

Now, the way I've resolved this conflict in my own games the few times I've run gestalt is to compute BAB seperately for each side of the gestalt characters progression and give the character whichever is higher, which I feel is in tune with the spirit of the "Whichever accrues the ability faster" guideline, even though that guideline was for class features and not things like BAB or Base Saves. This has worked great for my games, but is it RAW or a house rule?

I'm not sure how the RAW would handle it, but for situations like this, my DM uses fractional BAB and saves. That means, a Wizard (for instance) doesn't get +1 BAB every two levels; instead, he gets +.5 BAB every level. As does a Sorcerer. So you'd still only end up with an additional +1 BAB every two levels after the first.

Saves work the same way. A good save starts out at 2 1/2 at first level, and increases by 1/2 every level thereafter. A bad save starts out at 1/3, and increases by 1/3 every level. It's a little more math, but it keeps things consistent.

Morgan_Scott82
2007-04-04, 10:00 AM
Yeah, sorry, I thought it would be clear that I meant that YOUR way, AKA take the greater total, is correct.

That is what I thought you meant, but there was some abiguity and its always good to clear up ambiguity. Thanks.

SpiderBrigade
2007-04-04, 10:11 AM
Jannex, that works too, but you don't even have to do fractional BAB and saves to get the right numbers. The thing is...you figure out a wiz's BAB progression by giving him +1 every two levels (or +0.5 every level, whichever) but the class ability is not "at levels 2, 4, 6 etc, a wizard adds 1 to his BAB, whatever that may be." Rather, it is "a level 6 wizard has a BAB of +2." Then you add the entries for BAB from each class to figure out the total

Morgan_Scott82
2007-04-04, 10:24 AM
I wasn't really confused, I knew how it SHOULD be, and had always acted accordingly in my own games. I just wasn't sure the RAW acurately reflected how I felt it should be, and I'd seen arguements for both sides.

Krellen
2007-04-04, 10:26 AM
You know, I'd argue that Sudden Strike and Sneak Attack don't stack, because Sudden Strike is really just a crippled Sneak Attack. They are similar abilities - and Sneak Attack is better than Sudden Strike, thus it is the one that "accrues faster".

Ramza00
2007-04-04, 10:40 AM
You know, I'd argue that Sudden Strike and Sneak Attack don't stack, because Sudden Strike is really just a crippled Sneak Attack. They are similar abilities - and Sneak Attack is better than Sudden Strike, thus it is the one that "accrues faster".

By RAW you are not correct. Sudden Strike and Sneak attack are different abilities. Mechanically yes Sudden Strike is a crippled version of Sneak Attack, regardless from a rules standpoint they are different. Just because something is similar doesn't make it the same.

Krellen
2007-04-04, 10:44 AM
By RAW you are not correct. Sudden Strike and Sneak attack are different abilities. Mechanically yes Sudden Strike is a crippled version of Sneak Attack, regardless from a rules standpoint they are different. Just because something is similar doesn't make it the same.
By RAW, you can't have Sudden Strike in a Gestalt, because Ninja isn't part of the SRD. The RAW isn't relevant.

Fax Celestis
2007-04-04, 10:52 AM
By RAW, you can't have Sudden Strike in a Gestalt, because Ninja isn't part of the SRD. The RAW isn't relevant.

Er, gestalt is usable with more than the SRD, you know.

Rigeld2
2007-04-04, 10:53 AM
Ummm... RAW includes all rules written for the game. Care to show me where it says that Gestalt can only ever be used for the core classes?

Latronis
2007-04-04, 11:00 AM
Yeah RAW is rules as written

the SRD is just a collection of OGL content......

Krellen
2007-04-04, 11:42 AM
Yes yes yes, I know. Why are people so eager to jump on posters around here?

Look, the point is this: without a RAW or FAQ statement saying, explicitly, that Sudden Strike and Sneak Attack stack on a flatfooted attack, there is no RAW ruling covering their interaction in a gestalt character (or a regular character, for that matter). If someone can provide such a ruling, then we have it settled. Otherwise, no one is stating the RAW - they are simply stating their opinion on how they think the RAW are supposed to cover this instance.

Fax Celestis
2007-04-04, 11:48 AM
Yes yes yes, I know. Why are people so eager to jump on posters around here?

Look, the point is this: without a RAW or FAQ statement saying, explicitly, that Sudden Strike and Sneak Attack stack on a flatfooted attack, there is no RAW ruling covering their interaction in a gestalt character (or a regular character, for that matter). If someone can provide such a ruling, then we have it settled. Otherwise, no one is stating the RAW - they are simply stating their opinion on how they think the RAW are supposed to cover this instance.

"A gestalt character gains the class features of both classes." + "Class features that two classes share (such as uncanny dodge) accrue at the rate of the faster class." + "Sudden Strike: A ninja can deal extra damage to any foe who is denied his Dexterity bonus to Armor Class (if any). Sudden strike is similar to the rogue's sneak attack ability, though it is slightly less flexible because it doesn't work against foes that the ninja merely flanks."

Sudden Strike and Sneak Attack, while similar, are not the same thing. This means that a Rogue 1//Ninja 1 has Sneak Attack 1d6 and Sudden Strike 1d6. Only one may be applied to foes he flanks, while both may be applied to flat-footed foes.

SpiderBrigade
2007-04-04, 12:08 PM
It's not like the gestalt rules cover every possible combination of abilities; instead, they lay down guidelines as to how different abilities interact. So basically, if it's the same ability (same name) there are rules for that. If the abilities are different (different name) then different rules apply. A specific instance doesn't have to be explicitly listed for it to be covered in the RAW. As a further example, the gestalt RAW say nothing about how wizard casting and wu jen casting interact...but you'd get both, even though the abilities are somewhat similar.

Krellen
2007-04-04, 12:09 PM
That's still just an opinion, not a ruling by the RAW. You're welcome to read it that way, but it's your ruling, not a RAW ruling.*

In fact, I would take the statement that Sudden Strike is similar to Sneak Attack, but less flexible as the RAW saying in a Gestalt setting, the latter trumps the former. In a multiclass character, it's not an issue, because either way you're not getting any more damage out of the two abilities stacking than would a full-leveled character with either, whereas in gestalt, this creates a (likely unintended) stacking of the abilities to double their power.

IE, a rogue//ninja deals 2d6 Sudden Strike**, rather than 1d6 - whereas a wizard//wu jen still only gets to cast one spell, even though he has a vastly increased selection to choose from.

*Yes, what I present is also my ruling, not a ruling by RAW. My contention is the RAW do not cover this case.

**Yes, yes, it's 1d6 Sudden Strike and 1d6 Sneak Attack. Functionally, however, that's the same thing as 2d6 Sudden Strike. Let's not get caught up in pedantics.

Fax Celestis
2007-04-04, 12:30 PM
That's still just an opinion, not a ruling by the RAW. You're welcome to read it that way, but it's your ruling, not a RAW ruling.*

In fact, I would take the statement that Sudden Strike is similar to Sneak Attack, but less flexible as the RAW saying in a Gestalt setting, the latter trumps the former. In a multiclass character, it's not an issue, because either way you're not getting any more damage out of the two abilities stacking than would a full-leveled character with either, whereas in gestalt, this creates a (likely unintended) stacking of the abilities to double their power.

IE, a rogue//ninja deals 2d6 Sudden Strike**, rather than 1d6 - whereas a wizard//wu jen still only gets to cast one spell, even though he has a vastly increased selection to choose from.

*Yes, what I present is also my ruling, not a ruling by RAW. My contention is the RAW do not cover this case.

**Yes, yes, it's 1d6 Sudden Strike and 1d6 Sneak Attack. Functionally, however, that's the same thing as 2d6 Sudden Strike. Let's not get caught up in pedantics.

...except it's not "a ruling". I quoted RAW regarding Sneak Attack, Sudden Strike, and gestalt. They stack.

SpiderBrigade
2007-04-04, 12:31 PM
Krellen, I'm seriously not understanding this. According to you, the idea that Sudden Strike is a different ability from Sneak Attack is creative interpretation? They have different names, are used differently, and stack when the conditions for both apply. There's even a sidebar that tells you that Sudden Strike is allowed to count as Sneak Attack (for the purpose of feats and PrCs only), because otherwise it wouldn't. They are not the same ability.

What the SRD says on the subject:
A gestalt character gains the class features of both classes. A 1st-level gestalt rogue/cleric, for example, gets sneak attack +1d6, trapfinding, 1st-level cleric spells, and the ability to turn or rebuke undead.
Class features that two classes share (such as uncanny dodge) accrue at the rate of the faster class.In the first example, Clerics and Rogues do not share an ability. Rogues have an ability called Sneak Attack, Clerics have an ability called Turn undead. They are not the same ability. Therefore the character gets both.

Rogues and Ninja do not share a class feature called Sneak Attack. Rogues have Sneak Attack, Ninja have Sudden Strike. The abilities have a similar function. They are not the same ability. Therefore the character gets both.

In contrast, the other example given is Uncanny Dodge. Rogues have Uncanny Dodge. Barbarians have Uncanny Dodge. It is not a similar ability, it is the same ability. They share the same ability. It acrues at the faster rate.

Anyway. If you're really not going to be satisfied unless you're provided with a WotC official rules quote saying "A gestalt Ninja/Rogue gets both Sneak Attack and Sudden Strike," there's not much I can do to convince you.

Krellen
2007-04-04, 12:35 PM
Anyway. If you're really not going to be satisfied unless you're provided with a WotC official rules quote saying "A gestalt Ninja/Rogue gets both Sneak Attack and Sudden Strike," there's not much I can do to convince you.
I'm not, because allowing a Gestalt with both Sudden Strike and Sneak Attack and gaining the benefits of both violates the spirit of Gestalt classes, in my opinion. You're doubling the strength of a class feature; no other instance of Gestalt classes doubles the power of a given feature. Even dual spell casting is reined in by the fact that you still only get to cast one spell a round. If a Gestalt Cleric//Wizard got to cast two spells - one Clerical, one Wizardly - each round, then the Gestalt Rogue//Ninja might get his Sudden Strike and Sneak Attack together. However, since the former doesn't happen, I can't justify the latter, either.

Ramza00
2007-04-04, 12:45 PM
I'm not, because allowing a Gestalt with both Sudden Strike and Sneak Attack and gaining the benefits of both violates the spirit of Gestalt classes, in my opinion. You're doubling the strength of a class feature; no other instance of Gestalt classes doubles the power of a given feature. Even dual spell casting is reined in by the fact that you still only get to cast one spell a round. If a Gestalt Cleric//Wizard got to cast two spells - one Clerical, one Wizardly - each round, then the Gestalt Rogue//Ninja might get his Sudden Strike and Sneak Attack together. However, since the former doesn't happen, I can't justify the latter, either.
That is a house rule, a reasonable house rule, and one I wouldn't mind if I were a player in your campaign. It isn't the rules as written though. Most people don't play games that are exactly 100% RAW, but since everyone has different house rules it is important to realize what is RAW and what is a houserule. You then communicate what is a RAW on the forum, followed by saying "it is a houserule but our group does this."

SpiderBrigade
2007-04-04, 12:47 PM
That's fair enough, but "it violates the spirit of gestalt" is not the same thing as "it isn't allowed by RAW." By RAW you can do it. Of course the RAW also allow force dragon stacking, divine metacheese, and wizards.

Rigeld2
2007-04-04, 01:11 PM
I'm not, because allowing a Gestalt with both Sudden Strike and Sneak Attack and gaining the benefits of both violates the spirit of Gestalt classes, in my opinion. You're doubling the strength of a class feature; no other instance of Gestalt classes doubles the power of a given feature. Even dual spell casting is reined in by the fact that you still only get to cast one spell a round. If a Gestalt Cleric//Wizard got to cast two spells - one Clerical, one Wizardly - each round, then the Gestalt Rogue//Ninja might get his Sudden Strike and Sneak Attack together. However, since the former doesn't happen, I can't justify the latter, either.
So multiclassed Ninja/Rogues (non gestalt) dont get to stack dice in your games either?

Krellen
2007-04-04, 01:14 PM
So multiclassed Ninja/Rogues (non gestalt) dont get to stack dice in your games either?
No, because that doesn't violate the spirit of the rules. They can have their stacking Sudden Strike/Sneak Attack. Gestalt is a special case (due, largely, to Sneak Attack trumping Sudden Strike, really.)

Then again, I don't think anyone that would be at my table would ever even conceive of playing a Ninja/Rogue. They'd be a Ninja, or a Rogue - the two classes are too similar in mechanics but too different in theme for multiclassing between them to make sense.

Rigeld2
2007-04-04, 01:19 PM
See, a multiclassed cleric/wizard cant cast more than one spell, non gestalt. A multiclassed rog/ninja can stack SA/SS dice, non gestalt.

A Gestalt cleric/wizard cant cast more than one spell.
A Gestalt rog/ninja *can* stack SA/SS dice.

SA doesnt trump SS. Theyre similar abilities, but since they arent the same thing, one doesnt trump the other. Theyre even activated by different states (SS doesnt work if you flank iirc).

Indon
2007-04-04, 01:21 PM
You're a gestalt Rogue//Scout. You take that one feat in Complete Scoundrel which allows your Rogue levels to count as Scout levels for Skirmish. Does your skirmish actually go up, or is it only if, say, you swap over to taking Rogue//Fighter levels that it makes any difference?

Did anyone actually answer this question? I'm curious as to what level skirmish, say, a Rogue 10//Scout 10 would have, versus, say, a Rogue 10// Scout 3/Fighter 7 when both have the above mentioned feat.

It seems to me that this, like Sudden Strike, is a scenario not covered by the gestalt rules which would allow for much faster ability progression than what is intended by gestalt.

Fax Celestis
2007-04-04, 01:28 PM
There's no official ruling, but I'd only apply it to one side of the progression.

Noneoyabizzness
2007-04-04, 01:43 PM
gestalt doesn't cover a lot of interestng factors. like power point pools and the like. comon sense must invade

SA is a potent ability weilded by rogues, assassins, and other incredible classes.
ss is an incredibly limited ability used to make ninjas and dread commandos seem a sliver more badash.
SA works in so many situations, can be used with weapons that do subdual. SS cannot be used in many situations, or in doing nonlethal damage.

reasons why they shouldn't stack in gestalt-ambush feats may become useful, telling blow becomes the smiffins in crit builds
reasons why they should-every other reason said by everyone else on the topic in regards to this matter

Indon
2007-04-04, 01:46 PM
There's no official ruling, but I'd only apply it to one side of the progression.

As would I. However, it's a similar logic by which a DM would refuse to let Sudden Strike and Sneak Attack stack (except on one side of the progression); two abilities with approximately the same function which stack (even if by different names), while allowing for effectively unabated progression in _standard_ multiclassing, effectively allow double progression when used in gestalt together. One could thus argue it 'violates the spirit' of gestalt, in much a way as a Rogue 10//Scout 10 having level 20 Skirmish would.

I could think of an interesting Rogue/Ninja/Monk/Scout build using Complete Scoundrel if I were playing under a DM that let all those things work on both sides of gestalt progression, though. :smallbiggrin:

Morgan_Scott82
2007-04-04, 01:49 PM
Krellen, your arguing from a faulty position. You're insisting that barring a specific inclusionary statement Sneak Attack and Sudden Strike cannot both be gained by opposite sides of a gestalt progression. However the practice of D&D has always been to lay out the general rules, and then the exclusionary exceptions, not a long list of inclusionary statments.

In this case the general rules say, as others have pointed out, that you gain the class features of both classes *except* (see a general rule followed by specific exceptions) those class features that are shared by both classes which acrue at the faster rate.

What you've proposed is fine for your game if it works for you and your fellow gamers at the table. But as Ramza pointed out its a house rule that you have instituted in your games, and thats awsome. The point of contention here is that you've asserted your position as the Rules as Written, which the evidence clearly does not support.

Krellen
2007-04-04, 01:58 PM
I never once said my ruling was the RAW. I went out of my way to say it wasn't.

I simply said the opposite wasn't RAW either.

Fax Celestis
2007-04-04, 01:58 PM
As would I. However, it's a similar logic by which a DM would refuse to let Sudden Strike and Sneak Attack stack (except on one side of the progression); two abilities with approximately the same function which stack (even if by different names), while allowing for effectively unabated progression in _standard_ multiclassing, effectively allow double progression when used in gestalt together. One could thus argue it 'violates the spirit' of gestalt, in much a way as a Rogue 10//Scout 10 having level 20 Skirmish would.

I could think of an interesting Rogue/Ninja/Monk/Scout build using Complete Scoundrel if I were playing under a DM that let all those things work on both sides of gestalt progression, though. :smallbiggrin:

Different logic, actually. A Rogue//Ninja gains two sets of similar class features. However, the feat that stacks levels like that would simply be the amplification of an existing class feature--one that only resides on one side of the progression.

Noneoyabizzness
2007-04-04, 02:04 PM
more common sense

gestalt is a house rule. nobody is entitled to the power of the gestalt. no table has to ever accept this as part of d&d. to argue any point of this arguement as "only a house rule, not the RAW" is faulty. the question is "should it stack?"

if one goes by the AW srd ogl version, it should because they are different abilities.

if one goes by the "core only" arguement, then one is stuck with the paradox: if it is core only, then why are we gestalted?

if one goes with an open ended arguement, the answer is "what works best to bring harmony to the table.

lastly, the munchkin argument, "I wanan tos in monk and asthetic feats so by 8th level, My monk1/rogue7/ninja8 will have the ki pool, unarmed strike, and rogue bonuses of a 16th level characters"

needless to say the last is pretty wrong, but the rest seem spot on.

Assassinfox
2007-04-04, 02:08 PM
Yes yes yes, I know. Why are people so eager to jump on posters around here?

Look, the point is this: without a RAW or FAQ statement saying, explicitly, that Sudden Strike and Sneak Attack stack on a flatfooted attack, there is no RAW ruling covering their interaction in a gestalt character (or a regular character, for that matter). If someone can provide such a ruling, then we have it settled. Otherwise, no one is stating the RAW - they are simply stating their opinion on how they think the RAW are supposed to cover this instance.

... basically using "The Airbud Clause" to justify your stand. They're different abilities! The coastly wizards have better things to do than write out exact rules for every single possible situation. The RAW says two classes with THE SAME ABILITY don't stack, not two classes with similar abilities. If we're gonna go that route, why not take away a Fighter//Monk's bonus feat? Both classes get a feat at level 1, which is soooooo similar!

EDIT: Ouch, Ninja Gangbang. Just go with what Morgan_Scott says. >_<

Morgan_Scott82
2007-04-04, 02:15 PM
I never once said my ruling was the RAW. I went out of my way to say it wasn't.

I simply said the opposite wasn't RAW either.

I see now that you didn't claim your interpretation to be RAW sorry for this miscommunication. However, I'm still confused how you support your claim that the more popular concensus is not RAW, and invite you to present evidence for your case.

The rules explicitly state that a gestalt character gains the feature of both classes, except in the case when both classes gain the same class feature in which case they acrue the ability at the faster rate.

Therefore since Sneak Attack and Sudden Strike are not the same class feature, a gestalt character recieves both per RAW.

Broken down into an Syllogistic arguement it looks like this
Premise: At each level gestalt characters recieve the class features of both classes except for features that both classes share which acrue at the faster rate.
Premise: Sudden Strike and Sneak Attack are different class features
Conclusion: Gestalt Rogue\\Ninja receive both the Sudden Strike and Sneak Attack class features.

The conclusion follows logically from the premises, so unless fault can be found with one of the premises using RAW, the conclusion is sound.

I invite you to refute one of the premises or, failing that, yeild the point.

Edit: Upon reading this it might sound standoffish, I hope it comes accross in the spirit of constructive debate that I meant it in and not just as some petty flame.

Krellen
2007-04-04, 03:13 PM
Tell you what: let me finishing work, and when I get home I'll hit up Complete Adventurer and find the sidebar about Sudden Strike and Sneak Attack so I can see the wording. It's entirely possible that only a generous, grossly literal reading of that allows the two to overlap in gestalt. Until I know that wording, I can't be certain - but I'm fairly sure that sidebar says something along the lines of "when it really matters, Sudden Strike counts as Sneak Attack".

Fax Celestis
2007-04-04, 03:19 PM
Tell you what: let me finishing work, and when I get home I'll hit up Complete Adventurer and find the sidebar about Sudden Strike and Sneak Attack so I can see the wording. It's entirely possible that only a generous, grossly literal reading of that allows the two to overlap in gestalt. Until I know that wording, I can't be certain - but I'm fairly sure that sidebar says something along the lines of "when it really matters, Sudden Strike counts as Sneak Attack".

The sidebar says that Sudden Strike counts as Sneak Attack for the purposes of entering PrCs or qualifying for feats, not for anything else.

Morgan_Scott82
2007-04-04, 03:20 PM
I don't have my book with me at the moment but I believe the wording is "For the purpose of qualifying for feats and prestige classes" which while not explicitly saying they're the same, very well could add some credence to your position, I will also have to take a look and see what the specific wording is.

Ramza00
2007-04-04, 03:56 PM
A Ranger/Druid gestalt will only have one animal companion yet it will progress at the Druid rate for the Druid is the faster rate.

A Druid/Sorcerer has an animal companion and a familiar even though the familiar mechanically is a similar to an animal companion but much weaker and less useful. Furthemore animal companion and familar are different named class features. Are you saying according to the spirit of the rules a Druid/Sorcerer can only have an animal companion?

Answer this question, then think about how this logic applies to sudden strike and sneak attack, its the exact same thing.

Aquillion
2007-04-04, 04:00 PM
I'm not, because allowing a Gestalt with both Sudden Strike and Sneak Attack and gaining the benefits of both violates the spirit of Gestalt classes, in my opinion.Nobody is disputing, I think, that this violates the spirit of Gestalt characters.

The issue is that isn't prevented by any of the existing rules for Gestalt characters; hence, the need for discussion and a house rule. You've admitted it yourself by indicating that your position is based on your gut feelings of what 'should be' and not the rules. That's a great reason to make a house rule, but it's important to first establish what the rules say, so you know everyone is on the same page when you present house rules to change them.

Saying "My gut tells me X, and I'll refuse to accept any interpretations of the rules that violate that, no matter how straightforward they are" is only going to lead to unnecessary arguments and confusion. A better solution is to accept what the rules say, no matter how stupid or bizarre certain combinations come out to be; yes, even when it's obvious that they just didn't think of combination XYZ or whatever. Then you can sit down with your group or whatever and de-stupidifiy them via houserules. But you have to be willing to admit that the rules sometimes end up saying stupid things, first.

Indon
2007-04-04, 04:02 PM
A Druid/Sorcerer has an animal companion and a familiar even though the familiar mechanically is a similar to an animal companion but much weaker and less useful. Furthemore animal companion and familar are different named class features. Are you saying according to the spirit of the rules a Druid/Sorcerer can only have an animal companion?


Ooh, a Druid//Sorceror could take Improved Familiar and declare a single animal to be both, granting it the benefits of both progressions, couldn't they?

Hmm...

But, on the topic, that is a very good point in favor of sudden strike and sneak attack stacking.

Krellen
2007-04-04, 04:16 PM
The sidebar says that Sudden Strike counts as Sneak Attack for the purposes of entering PrCs or qualifying for feats, not for anything else.
What else is there?


A Druid/Sorcerer has an animal companion and a familiar even though the familiar mechanically is a similar to an animal companion[.]
Familiars and Animal Companions are only somewhat similar. They receive entirely different bonuses and powers from levelling, however - they're similar only in the sense of "they're both animals, right?" Having an Animal Companion would not qualify you for Improved Familiar, and your familiar doesn't count for taking a PrC requiring an animal companion (such as the, uh, Beastmaster, I think?)

Rigeld2
2007-04-04, 04:32 PM
What else is there?
Stacking as far as progression goes? Isnt that what the debate is about?

Krellen
2007-04-04, 04:39 PM
Stacking as far as progression goes? Isnt that what the debate is about?
Which means the one thing they left out of the sidebar was an obscure-and-not-recommended variant from a suppliment that's wholly optional? Gee, fancy that.

Fax Celestis
2007-04-04, 05:09 PM
Which means the one thing they left out of the sidebar was an obscure-and-not-recommended variant from a suppliment that's wholly optional? Gee, fancy that.

Imagine also that UA was published after CAdv!

Krellen
2007-04-04, 05:18 PM
Imagine also that UA was published after CAdv!
Well, actually, that's not true.
Unearthed Arcana was published February 2004 (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=products/dndacc/881560000).
Complete Adventurer was published January 2005 (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=products/dndacc/881560000).

So at the time UA was released, they had no idea there'd be a Sudden Strike ability (well, not in Wizards rules, anyway, since the Ninja did exist previously in Dragon.) They did, however, know there'd be a Skirmish ability, as Complete Warrior was published in November 2003 (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=products/dndacc/176640000) - so there may be some credence to claiming that Sneak Attack and Skirmish would stack.

Fax Celestis
2007-04-04, 05:24 PM
Well, actually, that's not true.
Unearthed Arcana was published February 2004 (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=products/dndacc/881560000).
Complete Adventurer was published January 2005 (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=products/dndacc/881560000).

So at the time UA was released, they had no idea there'd be a Sudden Strike ability (well, not in Wizards rules, anyway, since the Ninja did exist previously in Dragon.) They did, however, know there'd be a Skirmish ability, as Complete Warrior was published in November 2003 (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=products/dndacc/176640000) - so there may be some credence to claiming that Sneak Attack and Skirmish would stack.

Hence the "imagining" bit.

Krellen
2007-04-04, 05:32 PM
So your point is that since CAdv was after UA, if they'd meant Sudden Strike to not stack with Sneak Attack in gestalt, they'd have said so, right?

My point remains: mentioning how a rule interacts with an optional rule (which, for that matter, constitutes all of UA) is not a standard operating procedure for WotC.

So are there any other examples of instances when Sudden Strike isn't treated as Sneak Attack other than Gestalt?

Fax Celestis
2007-04-04, 05:39 PM
So your point is that since CAdv was after UA, if they'd meant Sudden Strike to not stack with Sneak Attack in gestalt, they'd have said so, right?

My point remains: mentioning how a rule interacts with an optional rule (which, for that matter, constitutes all of UA) is not a standard operating procedure for WotC.

So are there any other examples of instances when Sudden Strike isn't treated as Sneak Attack other than Gestalt?

Pretty much everywhere. Sudden Strike doesn't apply while flanking, while Sneak Attack does.

And no, my point was that, since UA came out before CAdv, there's no way they could qualify a Ninja//Rogue, since Ninja didn't exist yet.

SMDVogrin
2007-04-04, 07:13 PM
So are there any other examples of instances when Sudden Strike isn't treated as Sneak Attack other than Gestalt?

When dealing non-lethal damage (not possible with Sudden strike, possible with Sneak Attack).

Turcano
2007-04-04, 07:26 PM
Ooh, a Druid//Sorceror could take Improved Familiar and declare a single animal to be both, granting it the benefits of both progressions, couldn't they?

No, but you could take a one-level dip in Arcane Heirophant and get a Familiar Companion, which does. And no arcane spell failure for druid armor. The caster level for one of the classes wouldn't stack, though, if you're allowed to do that.

Fax Celestis
2007-04-04, 07:28 PM
When dealing non-lethal damage (not possible with Sudden strike, possible with Sneak Attack).

Er, no, I think you've got that wrong:


With a sap (blackjack) or an unarmed strike, a rogue can make a sneak attack that deals nonlethal damage instead of lethal damage. She cannot use a weapon that deals lethal damage to deal nonlethal damage in a sneak attack, not even with the usual -4 penalty.

Well, okay. You can Sneak Attack nonlethal with a sap. Yippee.

Krellen
2007-04-04, 07:30 PM
Okay, the wording of the sidebar is this:

For the purpose of qualifying for feats, prestige classes, and similar options that require a minimum number of sneak attack extra damage dice, treat the ninja's sudden strike ability as the equivalent of sneak attack.

I think that "and similar options" is the kicker; I would definitely read that as the RAW saying "Sudden Strike is Sneak Attack", except as noted.

Fax Celestis
2007-04-04, 08:00 PM
Except it's "and similar options that require a minimum number of sneak attack extra damage dice". Gestalt doesnt require a minimum number of sneak attack dice.

Quietus
2007-04-04, 08:08 PM
Also, as far as the familiar/animal companion debate - I'm pretty sure (too lazy to check, but 99.999% sure) that it says explictly in the book that if you're a multiclass druid/wizard, you can't make your animal companion your familiar.

Krellen
2007-04-04, 08:33 PM
Except it's "and similar options that require a minimum number of sneak attack extra damage dice". Gestalt doesnt require a minimum number of sneak attack dice.
I can argue it does. For the ninja's Sudden Strike to be better than the Rogue's Sneak Attack, the number would have to exceed the Rogue's Sneak Attack dice. IE, for a gestalt character to get Sudden Strike +2d6, their other side must have Sudden Strike of less than +2d6. Since Sudden Strike acts as Sneak Attack for this purpose, one side of the gestalt having +2d6 Sneak Attack means that it can't gain the +2d6 Sudden Strike, for the same reason a Fighter 1/Wizard 3//Sorcerer 4 doesn't have a +4 BAB.

Fax Celestis
2007-04-04, 08:56 PM
The quote you posted refers to qualifying for feats, PrCs, and similar effects, nothing else. I don't see how you can argue otherwise.

Assassinfox
2007-04-04, 09:06 PM
Is it just SO hard to accept that the rules don't take gestalt sudden strike into account and just houserule it?!

LeeMon
2007-04-04, 09:17 PM
So, having run into this (I only run Gestalt campaigns), here's my interpretation. Note that in the absence of an official ruling, that's all any of us have; interpretations of the rules as written.

At my table, Sneak Attack/Sudden Strike/Skirmish are all "precision damage" class features. Their rulesets are very similar in form and function, and they state rules for interacting with one another. As such, they fall under the "choose the better feature progression" clause of Gestalt. Thus, at my table, you can only benefit from one of these three sources of precision damage at any time.

A gestalt ninja/rogue has only Sneak Attack, at a rogue progression. Sudden Strike cannot be used in any circumstance where Sneak Attack would not also apply. As such, Sudden Strike is a "lesser" feature, and the gestalt character gains the "better" feature, i.e. Sneak Attack.

I have a gestalt ninja/scout in my campaign. He retains both Sudden Strike and Skirmish, but he can only apply one source of "precision damage" to an attack. If the target is flat-footed, he uses Sudden Strike; if he moved 10 feet, he uses Skirmish. If he moved 10 feet and attacks a flat-footed target, he generally uses Sudden Strike, as it's the better choice. (He retains Skirmish's AC bonus, however.)

My players do not multiclass their gestalt characters, as it makes bookkeeping significantly more complicated for them, and they know that the more powerful they make their characters, the more challenging their foes will be (and I don't fudge dice). As such, I haven't formed an opinion about splashing classes on both sides to stack up precision damage very quickly.

An aside: I actually had a player leave my table because I wouldn't stack the Monk AC bonus and the Ninja AC bonus, under the judgement call that abilities with the same name and function didn't stack. It was nice to see Wizards rule the same way regarding the Monk/Swordsage AC bonus features some nine months later.

Krellen
2007-04-04, 10:45 PM
The quote you posted refers to qualifying for feats, PrCs, and similar effects, nothing else. I don't see how you can argue otherwise.
I don't see how determining gestalt features isn't a similar effect, so we've just got a difference of view points here.

Fax Celestis
2007-04-04, 10:47 PM
I don't see how determining gestalt features isn't a similar effect, so we've just got a difference of view points here.

You don't qualify for a base class or its abilities. You just take it. There's no qualification involved.

Tor the Fallen
2007-04-04, 11:10 PM
What's the big deal about stacking sneak attack?

Aquillion
2007-04-05, 01:59 AM
What's the big deal about stacking sneak attack?It isn't on its own. It's a very suboptimal build, since you're basically giving up your gestalt-ness for a bonus that is only going to apply when the enemy is flat-footed.

But it breaks the spirit of Gestalt in ways that could cause problems if the more general problem here isn't addressed. Gestalt partially depends for balance on the general concept that the two classes can't stack abilities effectively--even if you make a wizard//fighter and get full progression on each, you can't do each to its full effectiveness on most rounds, since casting most spells is a standard action and full attacking is a full-round action. Likewise, a wizard//cleric is still limited to the same number of spells per round (without quickening or cheese, but that has nothing to do with the build).

Stacking bonuses break that idea. Even if this example isn't so bad, it threatens the entire concept of Gestalt; the idea is supposed to be that since you can't combine builds optimally anyway, players are free to throw together abilities that they wouldn't normally combine in a character. If people could take wizard//other-wizard (or whatever) and get a superwizard, everyone would just use Gestalt to boost the class they'd have played anyway, and it'd become pointless power-inflation instead of an interesting varient rule.

Which brings me to my main point:
So at the time UA was released, they had no idea there'd be a Sudden Strike ability (well, not in Wizards rules, anyway, since the Ninja did exist previously in Dragon.) They did, however, know there'd be a Skirmish ability, as Complete Warrior was published in November 2003 - so there may be some credence to claiming that Sneak Attack and Skirmish would stackNo, they couldn't know that this specific case would arise--but this specific case isn't the problem. Gestalt rules need a firmer prohibition against stacking abilities from two classes.

For example: At any given point in time, a Gestalt character can only activate the features of one 'side' of their progression. They can switch as often as they want during a turn (so you can still, say, use Monk movement to get into place to cast a Warmage spell, or make attacks of opportunity as a fighter after casting a spell as a wizard), but they can't use both classes on any one attack, die roll, spell resolution, and so forth. Casting a touch spell and making the actual roll for the touch attack count as separate actions for this. (The rules actually allow you to cast, then touch later on, after all.)

Tor the Fallen
2007-04-05, 02:05 AM
So if you have a hald caster on one side, and a half caster on the other, by gestalt it'd still be a half caster?

And if you had fighter one side, and something else that also granted bonus feats (psi warrior, say), you'd only get feats as a fighter?

Gestalt is an optional, high powered variant, that it is mostly up to the DM to set multiclassing rules. As it stands, I fail to see the danger in letting a rogue get double sneak attack die, when he'll still be lackluster compared to the wizard- regardless of the wizard's other side of the gestalt.

Jannex
2007-04-05, 02:43 AM
Did anyone actually answer this question? I'm curious as to what level skirmish, say, a Rogue 10//Scout 10 would have, versus, say, a Rogue 10// Scout 3/Fighter 7 when both have the above mentioned feat.

For any feat such that "your class levels in X stack with your class levels in Y for the purpose of determining Z," I'd make the upper limit your character level. That's how I thought I remembered the Ascetic/Devoted feats in Complete Adventurer working, but I checked again and apparently they don't. But still, I think that helps it. So, by my ruling, a Rogue 10//Scout 10 and a Rogue 10//Scout 3/Fighter 7 would each have the Skirmish of a level 10 Scout, if they had the Swift Ambusher feat.

Closet_Skeleton
2007-04-05, 05:50 PM
So If I (am insane enough) to take Gestalt Fighter/Warblade, I get bonus feats at the fighter's rate. Warblade gets a bonus feat at 5th level while fighter doesn't. Therefore a Warblade that reached level 5 would get a bonus feat while a Gestalt Fighter/Warblade wouldn't.

Since a Warblade counts as a fighter of 2 levels lower for feat prerequisites, a Gestalt Fighter/Warblade 20 counts as a 20th fighter but a Warblade 20/Fighter 10 Prc X 10 would count as what? An 18th level fighter?

Since a Wizard gets bonus feats I think a Gestalt Fighter/Wizard would get a feat every two levels which could be chosen from either the Fighter or the Wizard bonus feat list. That's a lot of Metamagic feats and some extremely accurate touch attacks.

Gestalt d20 modern is humerous since all the base classes have identically named abilities just differant bonus feat lists so a Gestalt d20 modern character has no more class features than a non-Gestalt one.

Fax Celestis
2007-04-05, 05:53 PM
So If I (am insane enough) to take Gestalt Fighter/Warblade, I get bonus feats at the fighter's rate. Warblade gets a bonus feat at 5th level while fighter doesn't. Therefore a Warblade that reached level 5 would get a bonus feat while a Gestalt Fighter/Warblade wouldn't.
Since the bonus feat is a "fighter bonus feat", correct.


Since a Warblade counts as a fighter of 2 levels lower for feat prerequisites, a Gestalt Fighter/Warblade 20 counts as a 20th fighter but a Warblade 20/Fighter 10 Prc X 10 would count as what? An 18th level fighter?
Yes.


Since a Wizard gets bonus feats I think a Gestalt Fighter/Wizard would get a feat every two levels which could be chosen from either the Fighter or the Wizard bonus feat list. That's a lot of Metamagic feats and some extremely accurate touch attacks.
No, they're different kinds of bonus feats. You'd get a bonus fighter feat every two levels, and a wizard bonus feat every five.

Turcano
2007-04-05, 06:22 PM
No, they're different kinds of bonus feats. You'd get a bonus fighter feat every two levels, and a wizard bonus feat every five.
That's the way I've always interpreted it. Bonus feats always stack, since they're tied to a specific class.

Krellen
2007-04-05, 09:22 PM
I personally wouldn't let a Fighter//Psychic Warrior have both class's bonus feats - and I wouldn't let a Fighter//Wizard have both, either. I would, however, allow them to pick the feats they do get (from the Fighter side) from the lists available to both classes.

I think the nineteen feats a Fighter//Psychic Warrior would get once again violates the spirit - and, in this case, letter - of Gestalt. Both abilities are, after all, called 'bonus feats'. By the letter of Gestalt rule, two classes that have the same ability - the same name - gains them at the faster rate, which will always be the Fighter's.

Turcano
2007-04-05, 09:53 PM
I personally wouldn't let a Fighter//Psychic Warrior have both class's bonus feats - and I wouldn't let a Fighter//Wizard have both, either. I would, however, allow them to pick the feats they do get (from the Fighter side) from the lists available to both classes.

So, wait a minute. You have a problem with sneak attack and sudden strike stacking, but you'll let a wizard have eleven bonus metamagic feats?

Collin152
2007-04-05, 10:15 PM
Er, no, I think you've got that wrong:



Well, okay. You can Sneak Attack nonlethal with a sap. Yippee.
Or with a whip, but the main point is that Sudden Strike specifically states that sudden strike attempts made with non-lethal weaponry do not work.

Krellen
2007-04-05, 11:29 PM
So, wait a minute. You have a problem with sneak attack and sudden strike stacking, but you'll let a wizard have eleven bonus metamagic feats?
Sure. Not that there's a lot of use a wizard can get from eleven metamagic feats; but anyway, it makes him no more powerful in gestalt than any other class, and fits with what gestalt really does - expands the character's options.

Care to explain how eleven metamagic feats doubles the wizard's main ability (as would stacking Sudden Strike and Sneak Attack double one of the ninja's main abilities)?

Turcano
2007-04-06, 12:05 AM
Sure. Not that there's a lot of use a wizard can get from eleven metamagic feats; but anyway, it makes him no more powerful in gestalt than any other class, and fits with what gestalt really does - expands the character's options.

Care to explain how eleven metamagic feats doubles the wizard's main ability (as would stacking Sudden Strike and Sneak Attack double one of the ninja's main abilities)?

I'd probably go with Arcane Thesis on six of my most commonly used low-to-mid level spells, which either means I don't have to use higher-level slots for metamagic or that I can put more metamagic on them. Borrowing TLN's example, I can have empowered chained split ray enervation, which is like an empowered energy drain against twenty opponents at 20th level for the cost of an 8th-level spell slot. Now I can do that with five other spells (including shivering touch if I really want to be mean). And I still have three more bonus feats than I normally would have. That's a pretty big boost if you ask me; it would probably outdo sudden strike and sneak attack in terms of murdering things any day.

Tor the Fallen
2007-04-06, 12:16 AM
Give an inch, take a mile....

Turcano
2007-04-06, 12:26 AM
Give an inch, take a mile....

Hey, he asked.

Krellen
2007-04-06, 08:30 AM
Borrowing TLN's example, I can have empowered chained split ray enervation, which is like an empowered energy drain against twenty opponents at 20th level for the cost of an 8th-level spell slot.
That's nice. You can do that without Gestalt. The four wizard bonus feats plus the seven feats from levels gives you more than the eight you apparently need for that.

Turcano
2007-04-06, 11:57 AM
That's nice. You can do that without Gestalt. The four wizard bonus feats plus the seven feats from levels gives you more than the eight you apparently need for that.

Yeah, but I would be devoting almost my entire feat selection to that build. In the scenario you gave, I can do that on top of a normal wizard build with three feats left over.

Did I forget to mention that I can also quicken disintegrate? That'll do twice as much damage as SS and SA in one turn (assuming you manage to get both).

Giving wizards a fighter's bonus feat progression is like Christmas, Hanukkah, and Kwanzaa all in one day.