Pathfinder Worst Pathfinder Gestalt Combo [Archive]

T.G. Oskar

2016-05-25, 02:09 AM

...Yeah, I'll add my voice to the chorus. I don't like Pathfinder much (and, judging by the vitriol from the most recent errata, even less), but I admit the Inquisitor is just a pretty damn good class. Perhaps those who claim it sucks haven't seen all that it offers - while it offers a Bard chassis in terms of skills, combat capabilities and spells, it offers solid alternatives for all three. They excel at Sense Motive, Survival and Intimidate; their combat capabilities in terms of offense and defense are solid between Judgments and Banes; their spell list is actually quite impressive, though they definitely excel at stealth and self-buffing. They can make pretty scary characters, to be honest.

IIRC, the current trend is to say that Shaman and Kineticist are some of the worst classes; the first because it's not the best of the hybrid classes, and the latter because of Paizo's fear to give worthwhile at-will abilities. Psyren will surely say otherwise, but I reckon the general trend is to consider them on the weaker side of classes. Dunno how they'd play with Gestalt, other that you get a Divine Magic caster coupled with some offensive Psychic Magic (urrgh, the sound of it just irritates me!).

Florian

2016-05-25, 02:24 AM

Hi! I'm running a gestalt pathfinder campaign and one player wants to have a challenge of combining the two worst classes pathfinder has to offer. I've read around that Inquisitor, monk, rogue, and ninja are pretty bad. But those were from about 2-3 years ago. I'm wondering what they are these days if its changed at all and what could be the worst combination possible.

Power level in Tiers and pure efficiency at a given role don´t really match.

The classes you named are all exemplary efficient at fulfilling their intended role but suffer from the tendency of going quite MAD when one tries to expand those roles further.

If you want "weak" classes, don´t look at the Tier rating but rather look out for classes that try to cover all bases but don´t shine in a specific role, like the Shaman.

Anlashok

2016-05-25, 03:17 AM

Interesting. Here people think the Shaman is weak. Over on the Paizo forums most of the people I see bring it up consider it one of if not the most over the top class in the entire game.

Florian

2016-05-25, 03:57 AM

Interesting. Here people think the Shaman is weak. Over on the Paizo forums most of the people I see bring it up consider it one of if not the most over the top class in the entire game.

"Strong" and "Weak" are relative terms.

Pick a task and see how efficient a class is at handling it. The more tasks you add to the list it should be possible to engage, the more the overall picture of "strong" and "weak" shifts.

You can consider the Shaman class to be either strong because it can engage in a lot of different tasks or pretty weak because it isn´t very efficient in any specific ones of them.

Without providing a frame of reference how that was judged, the terms themselves are useless as data points.

GrayDeath

2016-05-25, 05:15 AM

Aside from the obvious (Commoner/Warrior)? ^^

A COmbination of the two for themselves weakest Classes, or the goal of a really weak combination?

For 1 I`d probably go Monk/Fighter. 2 Quite weak classes, as both only "hit things".
For 2 ... maybe too.

No synergy, no overlap except that both profit from high STR, half the monks abilities stop working in Armor, half the fighters abilities (aside from ACF/Variants) require Armor/Shields.

You are welcome. ;)

If youw anted to combine 2 weak classes that rock together, thats another story. And better solved by optimizers.

It Sat Rap

2016-05-25, 05:16 AM

Barbarian with either Paladin or Monk is very silly. You could only use the abilities of one class, the abilities from the other class are blocked by alignment. (Unless you play a specific archetype that allows unusual alignments.)

Florian

2016-05-25, 05:22 AM

If youw anted to combine 2 weak classes that rock together, thats another story. And better solved by optimizers.

If the goal was to find a Gestalt where one side blocks the other very efficiently, look no further than any full caster and a Barbarian w/o Moment of Clarity.

Barbarian with either Paladin or Monk is very silly. You could only use the abilities of one class, the abilities from the other class are blocked by alignment. (Unless you play a specific archetype that allows unusual alignments.)

Not true. The Gestalt rules have not been updated since 3.5 (and where not even fully flashed out back then), but we know have the Unchained rules as a comparison point. You can slap on VMC Monk to nearly everything as Paladin VMC Barbarian is certainly an option, albeit one not really talked about.

Judge_Worm

2016-05-25, 06:52 AM

Paladin//Rogue
Super MAD: Str, Con, Wis, & Cha for the Paladin. Dex, Int, & Cha for the Rogue.

Alternatively Paladin//Monk is a better gestalt, but made of weaker classes, and will probably struggle to keep up with a gestalt party (or even a non-gestalt primary spellcaster). I will give it this, smiting with a monk's unarmed strike sounds cool.

Draco_Lord

2016-05-25, 06:56 AM

Not true. The Gestalt rules have not been updated since 3.5 (and where not even fully flashed out back then), but we know have the Unchained rules as a comparison point. You can slap on VMC Monk to nearly everything as Paladin VMC Barbarian is certainly an option, albeit one not really talked about.

Kind of a hard option to do. Given that a Paladin needs to be LG and a Barbarian needs to be Chaotic Something. If a barbarian becomes Lawful it can't rage and can't take any more levels. And if a Paladin stops being Lawful Good same sort of thing.

Florian

2016-05-25, 07:03 AM

Kind of a hard option to do. Given that a Paladin needs to be LG and a Barbarian needs to be Chaotic Something. If a barbarian becomes Lawful it can't rage and can't take any more levels. And if a Paladin stops being Lawful Good same sort of thing.

Read the actual rules you comment on. There´s a marked difference between a regular and VMC class and it shows how alignment restrictions are handled.

Gnaeus

2016-05-25, 07:25 AM

"Strong" and "Weak" are relative terms.

Pick a task and see how efficient a class is at handling it. The more tasks you add to the list it should be possible to engage, the more the overall picture of "strong" and "weak" shifts.

You can consider the Shaman class to be either strong because it can engage in a lot of different tasks or pretty weak because it isn´t very efficient in any specific ones of them.

Its a full 9 caster with hexes! It can walk around putting enemies to sleep and coup de gracing them, or pull most of the tricks that any other full 9 caster can do, coupled with one of the easiest routes for familiar abuse in the game. I can't see how shaman is weak compared with anything but a decent op T1. It would be a strong T4 or weak T3 if you took away all its casting and just used it for hexes.

Hi! I'm running a gestalt pathfinder campaign and one player wants to have a challenge of combining the two worst classes pathfinder has to offer. I've read around that Inquisitor, monk, rogue, and ninja are pretty bad. But those were from about 2-3 years ago. I'm wondering what they are these days if its changed at all and what could be the worst combination possible.

Yeah, some classes are way better in gestalt than the sum of their parts. Monk (normal, not unchained) is really bad in 3.5 or PF (unless you take the archetypes that make them decent). But it is a really strong gestalt component. Alone, monks have a hard time actually DOING anything. But they do have all good saves, nice generic defenses like evasion and immunities, and some bonus feats which can help anyone. Monk + any active class is a decent gestalt.

Worst choice? I'd probably go with Gunslinger//kineticist. They basically do the same thing but in ways which do not complement each other.

Beardbarian

2016-05-25, 07:26 AM

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/fighter/archetypes/paizo---fighter-archetypes/weapon-bearer-squire

This + any non caster

Draco_Lord

2016-05-25, 07:29 AM

Read the actual rules you comment on. There´s a marked difference between a regular and VMC class and it shows how alignment restrictions are handled.

This isn't VMC, it is Gestalt. If it was VMC I'd agree with you. Of course it is up to the DM, maybe they'd allow it.

Hamste

2016-05-25, 07:49 AM

Florian

2016-05-25, 07:56 AM

This isn't VMC, it is Gestalt. If it was VMC I'd agree with you. Of course it is up to the DM, maybe they'd allow it.

There are no Gestalt rules for PF. The next closest thing is VMC.

Talking about the whole issue means taking the holistic view and seeing what is there to handle the issue that will crop up.

Until then, issues like FCB, archetypes and overstacking stay unresolved and are not worth talking about.

Gnaeus

2016-05-25, 08:01 AM

Gestalting not-unchained Barbarian and Bard is pretty bad. While raging you can't use any of the abilities bards give you as they all require concentration. This makes bard add literally nothing if played like a barbarian and if you play it like a bard there you get some mediocre abilities when compared to other gestalts.

That is assuming we don't get into archetypes, there are some real bad ones out there whether or not they are gestalted.

Oh, I think we can do much worse. Your bardbarian has all good saves. Full bab. D12 hp. 6+ skill points/level. It isn't a lot better in combat than a solo barbarian, but barbarians are pretty good in combat anyway, and you could pick all your bard stuff for pre combat buffs or out of combat utility. Not optimized, but entirely playable.

137beth

2016-05-25, 08:40 AM

Gestalting commoner//wizard is a huge boost to the wizard: you get proficiency with any simple weapon that you couldn't have as a pure wizard!

Anyhow, barring the most obvious choices, there are things like Weapon Bearer Squire Fighter (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/fighter/archetypes/paizo---fighter-archetypes/weapon-bearer-squire)//Rogue.

Another possibility would be Combat Healer Squire Paladin (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/paladin/archetypes/paizo---paladin-archetypes/combat-healer-squire)//rogue/assasin (alignment requirement conflict between two already-weak choices).

Psyren

2016-05-25, 09:34 AM

Psyren will surely say otherwise, but I reckon the general trend is to consider them on the weaker side of classes.

Actually, I agree that Kineticist is weak. And it is really bloody complicated for how little it gives you, which makes it even worse. Seifter said it got butchered in Development; my hope is that they end up Unchaining it some day and we get a real PF Warlock. (No, Vigilante doesn't count.)

Shaman however - I don't see how anyone can call them weak with a straight face, they're clearly T1. (I mean, just look at the damn Lore Hex.) The real problem is that they're boring.

Gnaeus

2016-05-25, 09:53 AM

Actually, I agree that Kineticist is weak. And it is really bloody complicated for how little it gives you, which makes it even worse. Seifter said it got butchered in Development; my hope is that they end up Unchaining it some day and we get a real PF Warlock. (No, Vigilante doesn't count.)

While I do completely agree, I will add that they do have a couple of gems that would be handy to have on the passive side in a gestalt combo. They are pretty solid on movement modes for example, and there are lots of classes that could find a use for at will flight or earthglide. As long as you are in gestalt and have no intention of actually playing kineticist as it seems to be intended you might be ok.

Triskavanski

2016-05-25, 11:14 AM

I personally like combining Kinectist with Monk. Maybe Martial Artist Monk. My only problem with it is not getting too DBZ with the character.

Necromancy

2016-05-25, 11:40 AM

Fighter rogue is an amazing gestalt depending on your rules for archetypes or prestige classes.

If you're looking for a proper gestalt (ignoring "a cancels b" builds) that's an utter stinkpot of suck, then here you go

#1 Barbarian, wild rager archetype
This guy is like Shem from the 3 stooges with a deadly weapon and some meth+roids.

#2 Ranger - warden archetype
He's not real good with weapons but he's like super into his favored terrains. Basically he's a tree hugger

Saitox

2016-05-25, 12:50 PM

Necromancy

2016-05-25, 01:02 PM

Heh I guessed as much. You have to get into the archetypes to find the truly terrible. I recommend reading the two I just listed as I laugh just thinking about them.

Florian

2016-05-25, 01:50 PM

I highly appreciate all the responses. It seems like a consensus seems to say kineticist is not that well designed overall. To better lay down some requirements of what I'm trying to figure out is a terrible combination of two classes that do not stifle each other due to alignment and such. I know it is quite difficult to fully define worst in what we're looking for but I do thank you all for the responses so far. It's been a good 5 years or more since I've run a d20 based system so I only know of Pathfinders updates but not much on how the new classes have played.

I think that it´s fair to say that the worst classes give a lot of options but leave you lacking the actions to actually use most of them in any meaningful way. It doesn´t matter that you have 3+ powerful abilities at hand when you can only handle ever one of them at a given time.

The best classes are the polar opposite of that, either upgrading the overall economy of actions or allowing to blend different class features into one bigger action.

When it comes to a Gestalt, things change a little.

What you don´t want is a combination of two classes that would eat up your economy of actions without any additional benefit.

Cleric//Wizard is bad as they can only be one or the other on a around-by-round basis.

What you also don´t want are two classes that provide passive boni but leave you without any meaning full actions to perform.

Fighter//Rogue is bad because all their class features are passive, still leaving you with nothing to act.

Looking at the highly functional combinations, these blend an active with a passive part and overall upgrade the economy of actions along the way.

Magus//Wizard, Paladin//Oracle, Cleric//Spiritualist (or Hunter) or Cleric//Warpriest will produce fearsome results.

I used the Shaman as an example for something that is "weak" here, as you can either use a Hex and Cackle, Attack or Cast a spell with a given action. That blocks whatever the other class could do at the same time.

Mostly, the Gestalt-combination of High-TIer//High-Tier will generate lesser results than High-Tier//Low-Tier as active//active blocks out more actions while active//passive will generate synergies.

A Kineticist can be made into a freakishly good part of a Gestalt because the other side of it offsets the inherent limitations. //Paladin or //Warpriest have very high synergy, as //Hunter or //Spiritualist would have.

If you want it to be a challenge, look for classes that don´t have any gain from being a Gestalt and that don´t create any meaningful synergies when combined.

NightbringerGGZ

2016-05-25, 03:12 PM

Florian

2016-05-25, 03:40 PM

Well the worst combo I could think of would be Cavalier & Kineticist. Cavalier just doesn't have much going for it and is on the bottom tier of classes. Kineticist has a bunch of problems and needs a rewrite.

See, that showcases the point I was trying to make earlier that lack of reference points makes any mention of relative power irrelevant.

If all you do in a session is "role-play it" and for the one fight that comes up, dice rule, then everything you slap Cavalier on will rule pretty much supreme as the combination of Spirited Charge and Challenge will pretty much be devastated no matter what you pair it with.

Moving beyond that, things change pretty quickly. Going by the established standards, Cavalier//Kineticist could get you through any published Adventure Path without you every breaking a sweat.

Triskavanski

2016-05-25, 04:06 PM

Heck a Kinny with something like a Barbarian can go all day long if you went Aether.

Come in start attacking and fighting.. Your DR applies before the Temp HP of the kinny shield is lost, then you "heal" 1 hp ever 6 rounds, and if they cant break your shield, then every attack they do is a "miss"

Then if they do start hurting you, take some burn to increase your shield by 50%, recovering your entire level in temp hp as well. Throw in a kinetic heal every now and and again to keep your real hp up and you'll have a hard time going down.

Gnaeus

2016-05-25, 04:10 PM

I think that it´s fair to say that the worst classes give a lot of options but leave you lacking the actions to actually use most of them in any meaningful way. It doesn´t matter that you have 3+ powerful abilities at hand when you can only handle ever one of them at a given time.

The best classes are the polar opposite of that, either upgrading the overall economy of actions or allowing to blend different class features into one bigger action.

When it comes to a Gestalt, things change a little.

What you don´t want is a combination of two classes that would eat up your economy of actions without any additional benefit.

If you want it to be a challenge, look for classes that don´t have any gain from being a Gestalt and that don´t create any meaningful synergies when combined.

I'm agreeing so far.

Cleric//Wizard is bad as they can only be one or the other on a around-by-round basis.

That isn't entirely true. Or rather, it is true if you are trying to play a cleric like a cleric and a wizard like a wizard. Wizard//Monk is often seen as a good gestalt. Because wizard is the active class, and monk adds a pile of minor bonuses to survivability like good saves, evasion, uncanny dodge, immunity to disease, and AC bonuses.

But all those things are things that clerics can do also. If you took your cleric side, and packed it with extended or quickened buffs, you can still use it as your passive side. A wizard with Magic Vestment, Magic Circle v. Evil. Resist Energy (the 2 most likely elements for that day), Tongues, Remove Poison and Disease, Status, and some quickened spells, will play a lot like a wizard//monk. Probably better both in combat and out. You just have to remember that you are a WIZARD//cleric, like a WIZARD//monk, or even wizard//CLERIC, as long as you don't think you are a WIZARD//CLERIC.

What you also don´t want are two classes that provide passive boni but leave you without any meaning full actions to perform.

Fighter//Rogue is bad because all their class features are passive, still leaving you with nothing to act.

It isn't terrible. There is a fair bit of synergy. Rogue's problem is weakness in combat. Fighter's problem is trap options and lack of out of combat utility. Rogue//fighter has 2 good saves, full BAB and feats + sneak attack, and solid skillmonkey. Use fighter to run quickly up the TWF tree and rogue to make sure all those pathetic off hand attacks get a pile of sneak dice and it works ok as a melee gestalt. It isn't Wizard//monk, but it is big strides ahead of fighter//barbarian or cavalier.

I used the Shaman as an example for something that is "weak" here, as you can either use a Hex and Cackle, Attack or Cast a spell with a given action. That blocks whatever the other class could do at the same time.

But as a T1 caster, it can either be passive by taking a bunch of long duration or quickened buffs, or active and use its spells to dominate combat. More than that, it has built in action economy advantages, since it can use its familiar as an attacker or a UMD monkey.

Mostly, the Gestalt-combination of High-TIer//High-Tier will generate lesser results than High-Tier//Low-Tier as active//active blocks out more actions while active//passive will generate synergies.

The problem is that T1s can still, even in PF, do everything better. You DO want an active//passive, but that does not necessarily translate to high tier//low tier. It doesn't even always follow that the high tier will be the active side. For example, many low tier classes are very solid at dealing huge amounts of damage. So while WIZARD//fighter is a good gestalt, made better by taking passive fighter feats like improved initiative or toughness, Wizard//FIGHTER is also a valid, if lower op choice, using wizard spells like false life, keen edge, quickened shield and greater magic weapon to improve your combat performance, even if you plan on swinging your greatsword most rounds. You just have to know where you are going and plan accordingly.

A Kineticist can be made into a freakishly good part of a Gestalt because the other side of it offsets the inherent limitations. //Paladin or //Warpriest have very high synergy, as //Hunter or //Spiritualist would have.

Kineticist//Dungeon Master lets you rewrite Kineticist so that you never have to fight through those awful rules. Like, you could copy 3.5 warlock and paste over everything in Kineticist below the class name.

I personally like combining Kinectist with Monk. Maybe Martial Artist Monk. My only problem with it is not getting too DBZ with the character.

There is a lot of synergy there. Between the Monks high speed and all the kineticist movement modes, you have very solid ability to run away from all those monsters kicking your butt.

RolkFlameraven

2016-05-25, 04:19 PM

Kind of a hard option to do. Given that a Paladin needs to be LG and a Barbarian needs to be Chaotic Something. If a barbarian becomes Lawful it can't rage and can't take any more levels. And if a Paladin stops being Lawful Good same sort of thing.

Meh, I really want to do either Barb/Pal or Barb/Monk by using the Maenad from DSP one day because of Ordered Rage: Maenads may take levels in the barbarian class even if they are of the lawful alignment.

This would fly in the face of the intent of the OP though.

Necromancy

2016-05-25, 04:30 PM

Play a dex based fighter rogue gestalt
Go lore warden fighter, assassin prestige on rogue. HIPS with huge attack bonuses and high crit/ crit feats...oh and very good CMB

More than ok in melee

Don't forget archetypes!

Triskavanski

2016-05-25, 04:36 PM

There is a lot of synergy there. Between the Monks high speed and all the kineticist movement modes, you have very solid ability to run away from all those monsters kicking your butt.

Psshaw. The Monsters have to watch out when I divide by Zero and throw a house on them, only doing a little bit of damage from the throw and the house just.. does a thing. I'm not sure what the house does. It just disappears? while staying there? Quantum Physics?

Your main focus would be using your fists, with kinetic fist, with ether enhancement (Or at least mine would be). Get the astetic style and eventually get the other stick that lets your energy damage be untyped.

Maybe go hobble gobblin, and be a con monk.

Gnaeus

2016-05-25, 05:15 PM

Your main focus would be using your fists, with kinetic fist, with ether enhancement (Or at least mine would be). Get the astetic style and eventually get the other stick that lets your energy damage be untyped.

Maybe go hobble gobblin, and be a con monk.

So the magic is adding essentially 1/3 of kinetic blast damage to monk unarmed strikes? That's aggressively unoptimized for a gestalt combo. Monk//Vivisectionist or monk//magus should blow that out of the water, damage wise, and bring a lot more to the table in terms of utility (and much less pointless Kineticist rules text) That bardbarian or fighter//rogue we mentioned earlier as examples of poor gestalts can probably both out damage that. I guess if the DM will only let you gestalt T5s it's ok.

Deadkitten

2016-05-25, 05:29 PM

Gnaeus

2016-05-25, 06:59 PM

Kineticist is wonky. But in all honesty it's not too shabby in geatalt, its only real stats are Dex and con, this there is rarely going to be any class combo that makes you too MAD.

Any full BAB martial breaks the math on kineticist cause you would be totalling up impressive bonuses to hit with kinetic blade/whip and combining it with a caster gets you a pretty decent at will blast.

It also has good fortitude and reflex which is actually not the most common save combo.

No. Just no.

Full BAB martials do not break the math on kineticist. They give it the first part of the fix that most of us would houserule Kineticist to be decent. Kineticist should be full bab without gestalt.

A decent at will blast is an OK thing. But unless you are limited to T5 or maybe T4-5 gestalt, there are several T1-3 classes that blast far, far better than kineticist. Not at will, but more often than they will need in any normal circumstance. Alchemist, Magus, Sorcerer, Arcanist, Wizard, Druid, Shaman, and most of the psionic classes can all blast better than kineticist, and they all bring more to the table in a gestalt, with much clearer and easier rules, and much better splat support. If rather than "Blast" you mean "Put out significant at will damage totals or add significant damage to another class" the list gets even longer.

To throw out simply one of countless options, look at Slayer//Sorcerer. Full BAB all good saves blasting monster. Sorcerers have multiple ways to easily churn out damage totals in excess of what Kenny can manage. Slayer doesn't require any additional stats, but adds full bab, ranged feats, and sneak attack damage to the already superior sorcerer blasting. But unlike Kineticist, Sorcerer has all the utility of a full T2 spellcaster. A 10th level kenny has 5 utility powers and 3-4 blasts, from lists that are tightly restricted by his chosen elements, and his powers tend to be equivalent to spells casters would have gotten earlier, and some of those powers will just be prereqs. A 10th level sorcerer has at least 19 spells known (and bloodline powers and bonus feats) and plausibly many more. Either one can take full round actions to add metamagics (although sorcerer gets a much better selection, and better splat support like metamagic rods).

It isn't that kineticist brings nothing to a gestalt. There are a handful of gems in the dirty cat litter box that is kineticist. But unless you are in WLD and really need more than say 25 blasts per day, I see almost nothing that a kineticist can do, alone or in a gestalt, that couldn't be better done by tier 3 classes, let alone tier 1 classes. They are good at movement modes. Not druid good, but good.

Ssalarn

2016-05-25, 07:19 PM

See, that showcases the point I was trying to make earlier that lack of reference points makes any mention of relative power irrelevant.

If all you do in a session is "role-play it" and for the one fight that comes up, dice rule, then everything you slap Cavalier on will rule pretty much supreme as the combination of Spirited Charge and Challenge will pretty much be devastated no matter what you pair it with.

Moving beyond that, things change pretty quickly. Going by the established standards, Cavalier//Kineticist could get you through any published Adventure Path without you every breaking a sweat.

Ooh, yeah, Cavalier//Kineticist with Kinetic Blade and Spirited Charge (especially if you hit 20th and get Supreme Charge as well) is going to be able to jack someone's day up bad. Someone was pointing out on the Paizo forums that there's even a Cavalier archetype that allows you to Vital Strike on a charge, which I think you can still use with Kinetic Blade, so you're talking about some pretty serious insta-kill levels of damage (probably true even if Vital Strike is still unusable even with Kinetic Blade).
Use Coordinated Charge to get two of those charges in a round...

Deadkitten

2016-05-25, 07:47 PM

No. Just no.

Full BAB martials do not break the math on kineticist. They give it the first part of the fix that most of us would houserule Kineticist to be decent. Kineticist should be full bab without gestalt.

A decent at will blast is an OK thing. But unless you are limited to T5 or maybe T4-5 gestalt, there are several T1-3 classes that blast far, far better than kineticist. Not at will, but more often than they will need in any normal circumstance. Alchemist, Magus, Sorcerer, Arcanist, Wizard, Druid, Shaman, and most of the psionic classes can all blast better than kineticist, and they all bring more to the table in a gestalt, with much clearer and easier rules, and much better splat support. If rather than "Blast" you mean "Put out significant at will damage totals or add significant damage to another class" the list gets even longer.

To throw out simply one of countless options, look at Slayer//Sorcerer. Full BAB all good saves blasting monster. Sorcerers have multiple ways to easily churn out damage totals in excess of what Kenny can manage. Slayer doesn't require any additional stats, but adds full bab, ranged feats, and sneak attack damage to the already superior sorcerer blasting. But unlike Kineticist, Sorcerer has all the utility of a full T2 spellcaster. A 10th level kenny has 5 utility powers and 3-4 blasts, from lists that are tightly restricted by his chosen elements, and his powers tend to be equivalent to spells casters would have gotten earlier, and some of those powers will just be prereqs. A 10th level sorcerer has at least 19 spells known (and bloodline powers and bonus feats) and plausibly many more. Either one can take full round actions to add metamagics (although sorcerer gets a much better selection, and better splat support like metamagic rods).

It isn't that kineticist brings nothing to a gestalt. There are a handful of gems in the dirty cat litter box that is kineticist. But unless you are in WLD and really need more than say 25 blasts per day, I see almost nothing that a kineticist can do, alone or in a gestalt, that couldn't be better done by tier 3 classes, let alone tier 1 classes. They are good at movement modes. Not druid good, but good.

Ah I see what you did there, you read "break the math" and formed your rebuttal of my post without taking in what I was trying to say. But that's cool, I will try and be more consise.

Kineticist get bonuses to-hit, which is a design philosophy of Paizo to give medium BAB classes some form of accuracy booster in combat, throw that in a blender with a classes such as the slayer that give you mentioned get ADDITIONAL bonuses to-hit and top it off with the cherry of full-bab that gives an additional +5 to hit and another attack and you get a devastatingly accurate entity that the game math did not account for.

And as for topping blasting damage by full casters, while I'm not gonna say that they outpace a full caster, a kinetic blade/whip kineticist who dishes out 5 blasts with haste is likely to be no slouch to damage.

And if you worry about resistance, well expanding your element should not hurt as much In Geatalt.

But my greater point I was trying to convey was that kineticist is actually a fairly decent "passive side to throw on any class and doing a say kineticist/ sorcerer instead of slayer/sorcerer wouldn't be a drastically inferior choice. They both have nice perks to them that a class on the other side of can get a lot of milage with.

Gnaeus

2016-05-26, 07:21 AM

Ah I see what you did there, you read "break the math" and formed your rebuttal of my post without taking in what I was trying to say. But that's cool, I will try and be more consise.

Kineticist get bonuses to-hit, which is a design philosophy of Paizo to give medium BAB classes some form of accuracy booster in combat, throw that in a blender with a classes such as the slayer that give you mentioned get ADDITIONAL bonuses to-hit and top it off with the cherry of full-bab that gives an additional +5 to hit and another attack and you get a devastatingly accurate entity that the game math did not account for.

Kineticists get bonuses to hit by filling their elemental overflow pool. So at level 18, they get +6/+12, but only by taking 108 unhealable nonlethal damage. That is devastating, but not in the sense that I think you mean. The first time I read this I thought that you meant they could add their bonuses to hit to the other class, but sadly, it only applies to kinetic blasts. Since the damage of kineticist is sub-par for a combat class, since it is full of traps and generally not very good for utility, I would hope they can land a bunch of attacks at level 18.

And as for topping blasting damage by full casters, while I'm not gonna say that they outpace a full caster, a kinetic blade/whip kineticist who dishes out 5 blasts with haste is likely to be no slouch to damage.

Well, first, I'm going to assume that you got your haste from a potion, and that you did not waste a utility talent on the awful kineticist version of haste, because they couldn't even do that right.

Second (assuming composite blast and energy whip), thats about 16d6+16=7x8+16=56+16=72 + con mod damage/hit at level 16, buffed, with a full bab class on the other side. So 350 damage. In melee. That doesn't suck. But:
1. It is easily reachable by other level 16 gestalt characters
2. Its a combo that doesn't really appear until you can mitigate 4 burn, so if the trick is "hit things a bunch of times with a bunch of elemental damage" you are way behind the magus, who has been able to do that since level 2. At 6th level, when your multiple attacks come on line, with infusion specialization that barely covers the cost of kinetic blade (which should not have a burn cost!!!) you weigh in at 3d6+3+con, which is actually likely worse than your muggle side class would be doing with its magic greatsword. I am intentionally not including elemental overflow in this math, because the damage you do when the enemy breathes on you hard and you have a giant pile of unhealable nonlethal becomes 0.
3. Its still a bad gestalt. At the level where you are doing 350+ damage in melee with a martial class on the other side, the casters have given up damage as a losers game 5-10 levels before and are rewriting reality on a scale you can't reach. Sure, the fighter//sorcerer can do 350+ damage. But he can also do things that are better than 350 + damage, and kenny//martial can't.

But my greater point I was trying to convey was that kineticist is actually a fairly decent "passive side to throw on any class and doing a say kineticist/ sorcerer instead of slayer/sorcerer wouldn't be a drastically inferior choice. They both have nice perks to them that a class on the other side of can get a lot of milage with.

And the greater point I was trying to convey is that kineticist is actually one of the worst passive sides to throw on any class and you haven't mentioned a single useful thing it adds to a tier 1-2 caster. Even its awful elemental overflow power only applies to its blasts. I can't think of a single useful thing other than good saves and mid BAB that it gives sorcerer that sorcerer can't duplicate alone. It isn't worse than slayer in this context, it is clearly worse than fighter or monk.

Necromancy

2016-05-26, 10:41 AM

Can we get this thread back on the rails? I wanna see someone top my suggestion.

Lvl 2 Expert

2016-05-26, 11:03 AM

I like the idea of a simple rogue/barbarian. Sure, you could make it work pretty well rules wise, but it looks kind of funny when I try to imagine them using rage and sneak attack together.

Gnaeus

2016-05-26, 11:23 AM

Can we get this thread back on the rails? I wanna see someone top my suggestion.

That is pretty awful. Maybe add Skirmisher so that the ranger can't cast spells or use spell trigger items?

I still think Gunslinger//Kineticist has to be a contender. Gunslinger doesn't give kenny anything but BAB, they are both ranged touch attack damage monsters but in a way with virtually no overlap or synergy. It may as well be warrior//kineticist.

squiggit

2016-05-26, 01:07 PM

I still think Gunslinger//Kineticist has to be a contender. Gunslinger doesn't give kenny anything but BAB, they are both ranged touch attack damage monsters but in a way with virtually no overlap or synergy. It may as well be warrior//kineticist.
I think better to treat Gunslinger as your main half and mostly ignore KB unless you can't full attack for some reason. Then it just becomes a gunslinger with some SU utility added on top of that. Take air and fly around shooting people while also getting a miss chance against incoming ranged attacks. Or something with more utility to pad a gunslinger's atrocious non-combat options. Not the best thing by gestalt standards though.

Gnaeus

2016-05-26, 01:24 PM

I think better to treat Gunslinger as your main half and mostly ignore KB unless you can't full attack for some reason. Then it just becomes a gunslinger with some SU utility added on top of that. Take air and fly around shooting people while also getting a miss chance against incoming ranged attacks. Or something with more utility to pad a gunslinger's atrocious non-combat options. Not the best thing by gestalt standards though.

You are probably right. So we are comparing Gunslinger with flight, air bubble and a couple of other minor powers, vs. Barbarian + basically full ranger casting, but nothing else useful from ranger. I think ranger casting is better than air kineticist utility powers, but I can see it going either way depending on level. Or the barbarian//ranger can trade his casting for hunter tricks with skirmisher. The tricks are weaker, but have better synergy with rage.

Peat

2016-05-26, 01:39 PM

Cavalier/Rogue? I mean, I'm suggesting it mainly for the amusement value of an armoured knight on horseback trying to sneak up on someone but at first glance there really doesn't appear to be a lot going for it.

Also, there's got to be some mix of Bard and something else on the Bard chassis which is basically the same as a Bard because they've not got enough actions to use all their powers. Can't think of it at the moment though.

GrayDeath

2016-05-26, 01:58 PM

Psyren

2016-05-26, 01:58 PM

That is pretty awful. Maybe add Skirmisher so that the ranger can't cast spells or use spell trigger items?

No, use Trapper! Skirmisher is at least useful :smallbiggrin:

Saitox

2016-05-26, 02:26 PM

Wow some of these ideas are pretty crazy. I might have to rethink kineticist considering what has been said so far about its capability. Seems as though it could be more useful than I thought. The earliest time I'll see this player will be tomorrow afternoon or evening. Not sure if I mentioned this yet but as a player he is against using any homebrew or 3PP documents. Paizo only for him apparently. His first idea was a dragon bloodline bloodrager/something else. As we talked, his second idea was Grippli mutation warrior fighter/unbreakable fighter. As we kept talking we started joking about playing the worst combo we could think of and he loved the idea. I've heard bloodragers pretty good. As we continue discussing worst combos, I'm curious as to people's thoughts on his second idea.

Triskavanski

2016-05-26, 02:33 PM

No, use Trapper! Skirmisher is at least useful :smallbiggrin:

I agree. Many of the options that are like "My thing is traps!" are traps.

Consequentially I think I found a use for Kinetic Barrier. If you have earth element, you can dig a big hole, and cover it with kinetic barriers that look like the rest of the ground. So far the best use of Kinetic barrier I've found.

Seppo87

2016-05-26, 03:05 PM

Sleuth Mastermind Investigator/Brute Vigilante comes to my mind.
I'm not sure if you can use studied combat while transformed. If you cannot, this guy is easily one of the worst out there.

Triskavanski

2016-05-26, 03:56 PM

Oh that made me think of a bad one.

Alchemist/Master Chemist | Brute Vigilante.

Get ready for a total identity crisis!

Necromancy

2016-05-26, 05:37 PM

Still think I win this, let me elaborate on my pick

Ranger - Warden archetype. This guy gives up ranger feats, pet, and favored enemy for.... The ability to take 10 on survival checks... In combat. Good trade!

Barbarian - Wild Rager archetype. This guy is the real crown jewel. Any time he kills an enemy while raging he has to make a (difficult) will save or get a confusion effect on himself. A couple wonky rolls in a low level game can lead to ridiculous tpks. Always a hoot!

Peat

2016-05-26, 06:08 PM

I still think my suggestion is "the worst", but I must admit it is not the funniest.

Some of your suggestions made me laugh so hard, it was almost dangerous. Which in turn proves that a Cavalaier Rogue CAN be quite dangerous ^^

Straight Monk//Fighter would be pretty bad, yeah.

Cavalier//Monk seems to have seem legs, to jam your two ideas together. At least Monk//Fighter has a metric butt-load of feats to use. The Cavalier gets a steed (rendering all those bonuses to movement a bit moot), an even bigger addiction to charging when you want to make full attacks, and a few CHA based abilities to make you a bit MAD.

However... after much thought...

Barbarian//Child of Acavna and Amaznen Fighter

You see, Barbarian//Wizard isn't quite bad enough. What if you accidentally cast a useful spell out of combat? You might get a useful school bonus. The familiar's useful too. And you get an actual Will save.

Clearly the answer is to marry the Barbarian to far, far worse spellcasting while somehow getting even less from the class features. CoA&A Fighter definitely does the former and after you've lost 6 bonus feats and Weapon Training from a Fighter, there's really not a lot left.

I think this one is a true champion in pointlessness.

edit: For added bantz, have the Barbarian be a True Primitive so they can't read or write.

Necromancy

2016-05-26, 07:09 PM

Straight Monk//Fighter would be pretty bad, yeah.

oh but tetori/lore warden tho *drools*

Wanna see me hogtie Tiamat?

Triskavanski

2016-05-26, 07:33 PM

Straight Monk//Fighter would be pretty bad, yeah.

Actually, I'd have to disagree that Monk | Fighter would be bad. Even straight. Unless you're ignoring the player's companion books.

For Fighter - Use all of your Armor Trainings (That you can) for The Additional Skill bonus. I'd go with Arcrobatics, Escape Artist and then whatever.

For Weapon Training of course go Monk. Many of your monk abilities work with monk weapons and monk weapons is the largest variation of weapons in the game.
As soon as you get Weapon Training, also pick up the AWT armed bravery. Now you add in your Bravery bonus to all will saves, all the time due to always being armed with your unarmed strikes.

Get Power Attack, and once you get weapon training, get Cut from the Sky. You can now attack arrows, bullets and other small projectiles coming at you.
Follow up with Smash form the Sky to do the same against spells.

Pick up Ascetic Style. Get the other two feats. Anything you have with your fists, you have with all monk weapons now. Meaning your monk weapons now do damage equal to unarmed strike.

Weapon Finesse, followed by Fighter's Fineness, followed by Fighter's grace, adds your weapon training bonus onto your attacks with monk weapons a second time.

Combat Stamina to add more uses to your feats. You can also get your weapon training bonus for your reflex saves. Really by the end of it all, you're really going to have fort being your lowest save.

Of Course the real kicker is going to be the use of the new magic tactics book were you get the ability to enchant your fists (and whatever else) with any magic effects a few times a day.

Sayt

2016-05-26, 07:50 PM

Actually, I'd have to disagree that Monk | Fighter would be bad. Even straight. Unless you're ignoring the player's companion books.

For Fighter - Use all of your Armor Trainings (That you can) for The Additional Skill bonus. I'd go with Arcrobatics, Escape Artist and then whatever.

For Weapon Training of course go Monk. Many of your monk abilities work with monk weapons and monk weapons is the largest variation of weapons in the game.
As soon as you get Weapon Training, also pick up the AWT armed bravery. Now you add in your Bravery bonus to all will saves, all the time due to always being armed with your unarmed strikes.

Get Power Attack, and once you get weapon training, get Cut from the Sky. You can now attack arrows, bullets and other small projectiles coming at you.
Follow up with Smash form the Sky to do the same against spells.

Pick up Ascetic Style. Get the other two feats. Anything you have with your fists, you have with all monk weapons now. Meaning your monk weapons now do damage equal to unarmed strike.

Weapon Finesse, followed by Fighter's Fineness, followed by Fighter's grace, adds your weapon training bonus onto your attacks with monk weapons a second time.

Combat Stamina to add more uses to your feats. You can also get your weapon training bonus for your reflex saves. Really by the end of it all, you're really going to have fort being your lowest save.

Of Course the real kicker is going to be the use of the new magic tactics book were you get the ability to enchant your fists (and whatever else) with any magic effects a few times a day.

Don't forget to get the Dual Style feat from Weaponmaster's Handbook so you can get Dragon Ferocity damage bonus on your Sansetsukon/Tri Bladed sword!

With Fighter, you'll also have enough feats to pick up the Dimensional Agility Line, and Medusa's Wrath.

One of the things that I've noticed building Unchained monks is that they want Moar Feats.

Saitox

2016-05-26, 09:53 PM

One of the things I love is how all your amazing ideas on how to make any suggestion good is preparing me for anything he might try to do because he's like that. He doesn't try to min/max but he gets there somehow.

Starbuck_II

2016-05-26, 11:39 PM

Sleuth Mastermind Investigator/Brute Vigilante comes to my mind.
I'm not sure if you can use studied combat while transformed. If you cannot, this guy is easily one of the worst out there.

Don't forget you can only change to Brute Form 3 times/day (2 hours at most each). And if you succeed on save to not attack allies, you turn back to social form.

Arutema

2016-05-27, 12:07 AM

There's always Bladebound Magus // Any witch archetype that doesn't give up the familiar.

Witches use their familiars as their spellbooks, bladebound magus forbids you from ever having a familiar.

Granted, you're still a magus, but the witch side isn't doing anything being a non-gestalt hexcrafter magus couldn't.

Other bad combos include barbarian//bloodrager and monk//brawler. You get some things like bloodrager spells and brawler's martial flexibility, but most other class features are redundant.

grarrrg

2016-05-27, 12:34 AM

There's always Bladebound Magus // Any witch archetype that doesn't give up the familiar.

Witches use their familiars as their spellbooks, bladebound magus forbids you from ever having a familiar.

That reminds me of this "build (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?237668-PF-This-is-why-we-can-t-have-nice-things!-%28silly-build%29)".
Granted, there is plenty of updating you can do, but...
(copy/paste/edited)

Full Progression Mount (minus Mount):
Start with 4 levels of Cavalier (AND NO MORE!)
Take the Standard Bearer archetype. This gives you Banner at level 1, and delays Mount until level 5.
As you level put 6 ranks into the Ride skill.
At character level 7 take the Horse Master feat.
Your Character Level now determines how strong your non-existant Mount is.

Ki-Magic (minus Ki):
Add 5 levels of Monk.
Take the Martial Artist and Qinggong archetypes.
Qinggong allows us to trade away Monk features in exchange for "Ki-spells".
Martial Artist trades away our Ki pool (and lets us be any alignment).
At 5th level (the earliest we can get a Ki spell), we trade away High Jump for....let's say Scorching Ray, because it costs 2 Ki points to use.

Da Bomb! (minus Bombs):
This requires 2 classes and *works by RAW but not by RAI*.
Vivisectionist Alchemist loses Bombs and gains Sneak Attack.
Arcane Bomber Wizard loses Arcane Bond, but gains Bombs.
This one comes down to specific wording (hence the RAW/RAI disclaimer)
"an arcane bomber that becomes an alchemist does not gain that class’s bomb ability, nor does an alchemist that becomes an arcane bomber gain this bomb ability."
The ability calls out "alchemist", and not "existing Bomb ability".
So with 1 level of each, we have 0 bombs that do ?d? damage.

Spellcasting (minus spells):
Witch+Bladebound Magus
Bladebound says we don't get a familiar, EVER.
Witch cannot prepare spells, EVER. (can still cast from Scrolls and whatnot though).

Spellcasting (minus spells), Prestige Version:
There are 3 prestige options that grant "+1 spell casting" without strictly requiring spell casting to qualify for them:
Demoniac, Chaotic Evil, no casting at 1st, highest entry cost (skills@7/feats)
Diabolist, 1-step of Lawful Evil, HAS casting at 1st, mid entry cost (skills@5, cost of a scroll)
Souldrinker, Neutral Evil, no casting at 1st, cheapest entry cost (skills@5)

Florian

2016-05-27, 01:37 AM

A more depressing variant of the Magus(Bladebound)//Witch atrocity would be:
Magus (Bladebound) // Vigilante (Magical Child). Transformation sequence complete.. *poof* nothing.

Ualaa

2016-05-27, 06:30 PM

For worst, you can build in the wrong direction.

For Gestalt, you're looking for a combination of factors, to be "good".

You want to combine the classes, to achieve full BAB, and three good saves.
Obviously, the worse your attack progression and fewer good saves will hamper your character, especially if your stats don't align with your saving throws.

Also, in general, you're looking for an active side and a passive side for an optimal Gestalt.
You only have one set of actions in a given round, so while on paper a Wizard | Psion looks good, you're only in possession of the one set of actions, so something like Wizard | Ranger adds a lot more to the Wizard (who ends up with three good saves, full BAB, 6 skill points, some bonus feats, and a lot of features... compared to the Psion who is behind on all of the passive features, while adding a second spell list of which you (mostly) cannot cast from both in the same round).
To be a poor combo, you could look for either two active types, which get you a lot of longevity but don't actually make you any stronger in any given round... or perhaps for things that passively boost your active side, but not adding all that much.

I assume the player wants something that is playable and is character classes instead of NPC classes.

We're in the midst of a Rappan Athuk campaign, and I've tracked the deaths... out of a macabre sense.
Maybe one of these will be an interesting combination, although the players were not building to be weak.

Death # -- Class A || Class B
001 -- Cleric 01 | Monk 01
002 -- Inquisitor 01 || Rogue 01
003 -- Rogue 01 / Brawler 01 || Soulknife 02
004 -- Fighter 03 || Rogue 03
005 -- Ranger 03 || Monk (Zen Archer) 03
006 -- Fighter 01 / Cleric 02 || Rogue 03
007 -- Soulknife 04 || Rogue 01 / Fighter 03
008 -- Bard 04 || Paladin 04
009 -- Oracle 04 || Paladin 04
010 -- Aegis 04 || Soulknife 04
011 -- Druid 04 || Rogue 04
012 -- Arcanist 05 || Rogue 05
013 -- Cleric 05 || Psychic Warrior 05
014 -- Aegis 05 || Soulknife 05
015 -- Sorcerer 02 / Barbarian 03 || Druid 05
016 -- Cleric 05 || Fighter 05
017 -- Arcanist 05 || Rogue 05
018 -- Monk (Zen Archer) 03 / Inquisitor 02 || Ranger 05
019 -- Fighter 05 || Aegis 05
020 -- Summoner 06 || Sorcerer 06
021 -- Fighter 06 || Paladin 06
022 -- Aegis 06 || Fighter 06
023 -- Aegis 06 || Soulknife 06
024 -- Sorcerer 06 || Summoner 06
025 -- Ninja 06 || Slayer 05 / Inquisitor 01
026 -- Barbarian 06 || Psion 06
027 -- Oracle 06 || Vitalist 06
028 -- Monk (Zen Archer) 06 || Sorcerer 01 / Rogue 01 / Fighter 04
029 -- Aegis 07 || Fighter 07
030 -- Monk 01 / Sorcerer 03 / Aegis 02 / Fighter 01 || Soulknife 04 / Fighter 02 / Rogue 01
031 -- Aegis 08 || Alchemist 08
032 -- Arcanist 08 || Fighter 01 / Slayer 07
033 -- Slayer 05 / Shadowdancer 02 || Wizard (Shadow) 07
034 -- Psion (Nomad) 08 || Wizard (Evocation) 08
035 -- Psion (Telepath) 05 / Thrallherd 03 || Slayer 02 / Cryptic 06
036 -- Psychic Warrior 07 / Rogue 01 || Druid 07 / Arcanist 01
037 -- Ranger 06 / Paladin 02 || Warpriest 04 / Skald 01 / Rogue 02 / Dragon Disciple 01
038 -- Psion (Telepath) 08 || Vitalist 06 / Thrallherd 02
039 -- Cleric 08 || Vitalist 08
040 -- Psion (Telepath) 08 || Vitalist 06 / Thrallherd 02
041 -- Cleric 08 || Vitalist 01 / Shaman 07
042 -- Monk 02 / Barbarian 06 || Soulknife 03 / Oracle 01 / Fighter 03 / Aegis 01
043 -- Oracle 01 / Bloodrager 07 || Fighter 08
044 -- Monk 08 || Fighter 04 / Sorcerer 03 / Unchained Rogue 01
045 -- Fighter 08 || (U)Rogue 01 / Soulknife 03 / Psychic Warrior 04
046 -- Fighter 08 || Soulknife 04 / Monk 01 / Aegis 02 / Sorcerer 02
047 -- Ranger 06 / Paladin 02 / Slayer 01 || Warpriest 04 / Skald 01 / Rogue 02 / Dragon Disciple 02
048 -- Fighter 08 || (U)Rogue 01 / Soulknife 03 / Psychic Warrior 04
049 -- Fighter 08 || Soulknife 04 / Monk 01 / Aegis 02 / Sorcerer 02
050 -- Fighter 08 || (U)Rogue 01 / Soulknife 03 / Psychic Warrior 04
051 -- Fighter 02 / Monk 01 / Aegis 04 / Stalker 05 || Soulknife 05 / Stalker 03 / Umbral Blade 01 / Aegis 02
052 -- Arcanist 11 || Ranger 07 / (U)Rogue 01 / Aegis 02
053 -- Aegis 11 || Monk 01 / Soulknife 07 / Fighter 03
054 -- Paladin 08 / Warder 03 || Tactician 11
055 -- Oracle (JuJu) 08 / Agent of the Grave 03 || Summoner 11
056 -- Oracle 11 || Sorcerer 11
057 -- Fighter 11 || Soulknife 05 / Monk 01 / Aegis 03 / Sorcerer 02
058 -- Elementalist 09 / Incanter 02 || Sorcerer 01 / Incanter 06 / Paladin 02 / (U)Rogue 01 / Symbiat 01 ((Spheres of Power Character))
059 -- Incanter 11 || (U)Monk 01 / Elementalist 10
060 -- Fighter 08 / Aegis 03 || Soulknife 05 / Monk 02 / Pathfinder Delver 01 / Sorcerer 01 / Inquisitor 02
061 -- Psychic Warrior 11 || Fighter 09 / Monk 02

And the active characters are:
AA - Druid 11 || (U)Monk 01 / Sorc 03 / Incanter 07
BB - Elementalist 10 / Symbiat 01 || Aegis 03 / (U)Rogue 01 / (U)Monk 01 / Sorcerer 02 / Duelist 04
CC - Elementalist 10 / Incanter 01 || Warpriest 10 / Vitalist 01
DD - Monk (Crane) 02 / Psion 09 || Warder 11
EE - Silver Dragon 02 / Aegis 09 || Silver Dragon 02 / Soulknife 01 / Fighter 08

Peat

2016-05-30, 07:29 AM

Actually, I'd have to disagree that Monk | Fighter would be bad. Even straight. Unless you're ignoring the player's companion books.

For Fighter - Use all of your Armor Trainings (That you can) for The Additional Skill bonus. I'd go with Arcrobatics, Escape Artist and then whatever.

For Weapon Training of course go Monk. Many of your monk abilities work with monk weapons and monk weapons is the largest variation of weapons in the game.
As soon as you get Weapon Training, also pick up the AWT armed bravery. Now you add in your Bravery bonus to all will saves, all the time due to always being armed with your unarmed strikes.

Get Power Attack, and once you get weapon training, get Cut from the Sky. You can now attack arrows, bullets and other small projectiles coming at you.
Follow up with Smash form the Sky to do the same against spells.

Pick up Ascetic Style. Get the other two feats. Anything you have with your fists, you have with all monk weapons now. Meaning your monk weapons now do damage equal to unarmed strike.

Weapon Finesse, followed by Fighter's Fineness, followed by Fighter's grace, adds your weapon training bonus onto your attacks with monk weapons a second time.

Combat Stamina to add more uses to your feats. You can also get your weapon training bonus for your reflex saves. Really by the end of it all, you're really going to have fort being your lowest save.

Of Course the real kicker is going to be the use of the new magic tactics book were you get the ability to enchant your fists (and whatever else) with any magic effects a few times a day.

Oi! Taking options that are good is clearly against the spirit of the challenge :smallwink:

Still, valid point. Change the Fighter's archetype to anything that changes Armour Training and Weapon Training to be extra unhelpful.

(Or go Cavalier like I said :p)

Gnaeus

2016-05-30, 12:10 PM

Actually, I'd have to disagree that Monk | Fighter would be bad. Even straight. Unless you're ignoring the player's companion books.

It depends on what you mean by bad. It is functional, either as a fighter with good saves and some immunities or a monk with better bab and more feats. Unless intentionally screwed up, it is likely to function adequately in combat, so its probably high T4. I don't think it would have too much problem outperforming an ungestalted barbarian in a range of combat tests. It certainly isn't the equal in badness to some of the other deliberately unoptimized gestalts.

But it isn't exactly a good gestalt either. It has pretty much the same non-combat utility as the monk, which is minimal. It has very little potential to own action economy (no pets, no long term buffs, nothing super fantastic to do with swift actions). Campaign wise, it should hold its own in combat through most of the level range, but lacking a side with high level powers, it can't compare with gestalts using mid/high casting components after a certain level range (where exactly that range falls will depend on the specific classes of the other gestalts and the optimization level used.)

Da Bomb! (minus Bombs):
This requires 2 classes and *works by RAW but not by RAI*.
Vivisectionist Alchemist loses Bombs and gains Sneak Attack.
Arcane Bomber Wizard loses Arcane Bond, but gains Bombs.
This one comes down to specific wording (hence the RAW/RAI disclaimer)
"an arcane bomber that becomes an alchemist does not gain that class’s bomb ability, nor does an alchemist that becomes an arcane bomber gain this bomb ability."
The ability calls out "alchemist", and not "existing Bomb ability".
So with 1 level of each, we have 0 bombs that do ?d? damage.

Yeah, but not exactly a candidate for worst gestalt either. Arcane bond is OK, but it is pretty much all you lose from wizard, in exchange for extracts, full sneak attack progression, poison immunity, mutagen, discoveries, mid bab, and all good saves. SAD Int unless you have the stats to also be a melee combatant. Should be solid in or out of combat at all level ranges with few if any real weaknesses. More of an interesting rules loophole than a bad gestalt.

Abithrios

2016-05-30, 03:20 PM

Gnaeus

2016-05-30, 04:03 PM

Having played a swashbuckler, I feel that it could do really well or really poorly as half of a gestalt. The way to make a good gestalt is to take advantage of its skill at stabbing things and avoiding being stabbed. For one thing, it gives level to damage.

On the other hand, it is super draining on your swift actions. I am not sure what other classes love their swift actions to such excess, but it would be a bad idea to pair swashbuckler with any of them.

I am not saying that it is the worst half of a gestalt, but if monk gets a prize for surprising synergy in gestalt, I think swashbuckler should at least get an honorable mention for surprising antisynergy.

I am playing a Swashbuckler/Enlightened Paladin//Daevic right now. It is fun to play, very difficult to harm with a lot of combat stuff besides just I hit it. But it isn't a good gestalt and I can only get away with it by being better optimized than most of my group.

Its big problem is that even adding level to damage, rapier + dex is generally less damage than (say) greatsword +str x1.5. Even TWFing with snake style, my damage on a full attack is pretty anemic compared with what a fighter would do. And yes, as you say, I have more things to do with swift actions than actions to do them with. I'm sure there are combos that could use swashbuckler well. Bard and sorcerer come to mind. But it is kind of weak offensively for an active side and I think it is a little bit behind paladin or monk in terms of what it gives passively. I mean it is fun and thematic, but at most levels Enlightened Paladin just has more crunch for the light armored charisma muggle.

At the same time, it does offer enough that I don't immediately see an obvious paring that would fall into the worst gestalt combos. It seems like even things like Swashbuckler//Fighter, Monk or barbarian are workable.

grarrrg

2016-05-30, 05:11 PM

Yeah, but not exactly a candidate for worst gestalt either. Arcane bond is OK, but it is pretty much all you lose from wizard, in exchange for...More of an interesting rules loophole than a bad gestalt.

Have you looked at what Arcane Bomber gives up? And what it "gains" in exchange?
Doing the Vivisectionist 'trick', means you give up Bond, Cantrips, and must oppose FOUR schools of magic, and in return you get NOTHING. Massive downgrade on the Wizard side.

Also, that thread was mostly focused on Multiclassing, not Gestalt. A Vivisectionist 1/Arcane Bomber 19 is very much not optimal.

If you want to make a truly horrible gestalt, combine EVERYTHING in that thread in the same build.

Gnaeus

2016-05-30, 05:18 PM

Have you looked at what Arcane Bomber gives up? And what it "gains" in exchange?
Doing the Vivisectionist 'trick', means you give up Bond, Cantrips, and must oppose FOUR schools of magic, and in return you get NOTHING. Massive downgrade on the Wizard side.

Also, that thread was mostly focused on Multiclassing, not Gestalt. A Vivisectionist 1/Arcane Bomber 19 is very much not optimal.

This thread is about gestalt. It is called "The Worst Pathfinder Gestalt Combo" and started with

Hi! I'm running a gestalt pathfinder campaign and one player wants to have a challenge of combining the two worst classes pathfinder has to offer.

Even with 4 opposition schools, I'm pretty sure that Wizard//Vivisectionist does not make the list. Even if you banned Conjuration, Transmutation, Abjuration and one other you are still head and shoulders above the Fighter//Monk we were discussing.

Windrammer

2016-05-30, 06:20 PM

Paizo's fear to give worthwhile at-will abilities

This just as much a problem in 3.5 if not more, no? There's just not enough worthwhile at-will abilities in general.

grarrrg

2016-05-30, 06:23 PM

This thread is about gestalt. It is called "The Worst Pathfinder Gestalt Combo" and started with

Oh noes, one of the variety of copy/paste suggestions I had was not the absolute worst possible thing ever.

Gnaeus

2016-05-30, 07:17 PM

Oh noes, one of the variety of copy/paste suggestions I had was not the absolute worst possible thing ever.

Well, to be honest, I don't think any of them are. Bladebound Magus//Spellless witch is still magus + 20 levels of hexes. Not too shabby. Probably better than any random 2 tier 5s. And the Cavalier fail requires that you only take 4 levels of cavalier, so it probably isn't one of the worst 2 class gestalt combinations either.

AvatarVecna

2016-05-30, 11:15 PM

Paladin//Rogue
Super MAD: Str, Con, Wis, & Cha for the Paladin. Dex, Int, & Cha for the Rogue.

1) PF Paladin doesn't have any features that seem to run off Wisdom; spellcasting is now completely Cha-based, even. In fact, because Rogue's are more likely to want a good Perception skill, have a bad Will save, and don't get Cha to Will saves, Rogues are more likely to want Wis than Paladins are.

2) Paladins aren't required to be Str based, most of them just turn out that way; they have proficiency in heavy armor, so they don't need Dex, leaving them free to dump it and pump their Str for fighting...but Dex paladins are perfectly viable.

3) Paladin//Rogue is one of the best Gestalt chassis you're going to get: all good saves, 8 SP/lvl, full BAB, and a d10 HD.

If we're talking purely about build, a Paladin//Rogue that has Dex>Cha primary, Con>Wis>Int secondary, dumping Str will be quite capable: full BAB and cha-to-hit while smiting will basically guarantee those SAs landing, you've got more skills than your average paladin could ever dream of even if you completely dumped Int (not to mention one of the best skill lists available), and Dex pulls double-duty on Attack rolls and AC (sure, you don't get Dex to damage without a particular magic weapon, but I doubt that'll be a problem when you're getting SA basically all the time anyway).

No, the single largest problem with a Paladin//Rogue build is not in the build itself, but in the DM. This build's capabilities get utterly destroyed by one sentence: "Using sneak attack would be a violation of your Paladin oath." Personally, I would allow SAing Paladins, but at the same time I know there's DMs who wouldn't.

squiggit

2016-05-31, 12:13 AM

Well a GM can houserule anything to death, so I don't really see that as a strike against the build.

I think though two things to remember in this discussion are that a class doesn't need to be built the way one normally expects them to be built while gestalting and that a gestalt really can't be worse than either base class, so bolting anything onto a ninth level caster still gives you the awesome that is full spellcasting to play with.

With that in mind, I think the worst gestalt combo is going to be taking one of Pathfinder's incredibly high damage martial characters that has some glaring weakness and bolting it onto another high damage martial with the same issues.

I like Gunslinger//Fighter. The fighter's biggest contributions here are better damage, better survivability and more feats which sounds great on paper but they honestly aren't things the gunslinger really needs. Though with AWT you can give yourself a pretty damn great will save and better skills, at least later on.

I also like Brawler//Monk Arutema mentioned last page. Martial Flexibility is great, but there are just so many redundant class features between them.

Triskavanski

2016-05-31, 12:20 AM

If you have the player's companions open, Fighter can actually go well with just about anything due to AWT and AAT options being opened to you. You are capable of having more skill points (in a sense) than a rogue. And if they keep putting more options in the Players companions that would be great. Too bad it wont' ever make it to hard cover though.

AvatarVecna

2016-05-31, 01:02 AM

Well a GM can houserule anything to death, so I don't really see that as a strike against the build.

1) The fact that a DM is capable of houseruling anything to death doesn't mean that all houserules are equally bull****, or that the infinite number of possible houserules means we can't discuss a build while taking a particular possible (and likely not necessarily rare) houserule into account. A DM who rules that early firearms adhere to RL loading speeds is crippling anybody who uses guns in the name of realism; it's a stupid ruling, but there's a motivation beyond "hit this overpowered thing with a nerfbat", and the possibility that other theoretical houserules could balance this out doesn't mean we can't discuss the effects of that houserule on character creation. Similarly, a DM could rule, not entirely unfairly mind you, that spell component pouches carry a limited supply of common material components, rather than the (by RAW) infinite amount of all no-cost components; this adds some additional book-keeping for mages that bother with such components, and gives the DM a way to limit magic resources (particularly if they also ban the Escew Materials feat).

2) Depending on point of view, it's either a base assumption of RAW or one of the least unreasonable houserules imaginable.

A paladin must be of lawful good alignment and loses all class features except proficiencies if she ever willingly commits an evil act.

Additionally, a paladin's code requires that she respect legitimate authority, act with honor (not lying, not cheating, not using poison, and so forth), help those in need (provided they do not use the help for evil or chaotic ends), and punish those who harm or threaten innocents.

It is absolutely true that Sneak Attack is not listed as one of the examples, but it's equally true that the list was left vague to allow for additions the DM feels are appropriate...and Sneak Attack almost universally requires that you take advantage of an unfair advantage in a dishonorable manner. Whether you feel this makes it an inherently dishonorable act or not is your opinion

squiggit

2016-05-31, 03:48 AM

1) The fact that a DM is capable of houseruling anything to death doesn't mean that all houserules are equally bull****
But they're still house rules. Reasonable or bull****, it's still the DM making a conscious decision to go outside of the rules of the game to make a particular combination weaker. Which makes it, y'know, sort of beyond the scope of what we're talking about here.

A DM who rules that early firearms adhere to RL loading speeds is crippling anybody who uses guns in the name of realism; it's a stupid ruling, but there's a motivation beyond "hit this overpowered thing with a nerfbat", and the possibility that other theoretical houserules could balance this out doesn't mean we can't discuss the effects of that houserule on character creation.

So? I don't think "don't play a gunslinger because your DM might not let you attack more than once every five rounds" is a particularly compelling point to be made here either.

Besides, wouldn't that make my gunslinger//fighter the worst combo then? Since you can't even properly use guns anymore! :smallamused:

Similarly, a DM could rule, not entirely unfairly mind you, that spell component pouches carry a limited supply of common material components, rather than the (by RAW) infinite amount of all no-cost components; this adds some additional book-keeping for mages that bother with such components, and gives the DM a way to limit magic resources (particularly if they also ban the Escew Materials feat).
A DM can also rule that casting certain spells can cause the spellcaster to become possessed by demons or literally explode. I've played under DMs who've run games that way. Numerous times. It doesn't mean that I think it's something to bring up when someone's talking about playing a wizard.

and Sneak Attack almost universally requires that you take advantage of an unfair advantage in a dishonorable manner.
Er, what? Flanking is dishonourable now? I don't think I've ever seen a DM make a paladin fall for flanking a target before.

T.G. Oskar

2016-05-31, 05:39 AM

This just as much a problem in 3.5 if not more, no? There's just not enough worthwhile at-will abilities in general.

Well, at least there's the Warlock...and Reserve Magic, that one can be good enough, if not overwhelming. And feats allow for things that are already at-will (like attacks) to work well, if not work exceedingly well (like PA shenanigans).

Consider that the first thing most 3.5 -> PF people though when they saw the Kineticist was "hey, Paizo's answer to the Warlock!", and then they got somewhat disappointed. An observation I can make is that a fraction of those who saw the Kineticist = Warlock have the mentality that Warlock is a class meant to deal damage; the other fraction sees Warlock as a good utility caster. On the side of "damage!", they might have been disappointed that the Kineticist doesn't do that much damage; that's fine, the Warlock doesn't do that much damage either (barring Hellfire Warlock). However, those that saw the Warlock as an at-will utility caster might have been disappointed that the Kineticist doesn't get that many good actions, even if it has access to more stuff than the Warlock. Even its ability to flight is limited; the Warlock doesn't, even if it's technically a waste of an invocation slot. However, something like Sickening Blast/Utterdark Blast, Chilling Tentacles and their at-will Bestow Curse are solid uses of invocations; their more defensive invocations are just peachy (even if they're mostly usually based on Invisibility), and their at-will Dispels rock pretty well. I can see that as "3.5 giving a lot of nice at-will stuff".

Reserve Magic might not be overpowering, but it has some nice gems. I'm pretty sure that Touch of Healing is well-recommended, as while it takes you only to half HP, it does at least offer that, thus helping you reduce your consumption of wand charges. The damage-based reserve feats also scale, and if you notice, tend to scale just as much as Eldritch Blast with some added bits (such as Fiery Burst and Winter's Grasp [sp?] being AoE, for example). Minor Shapeshift is awesome for gishes, too. All of them at-will abilities.

Then there's PA + Leap Attack + Shock Trooper, which made your AC stink but made you ignore attack penalties, so you could deal triple damage to enemies with relative impunity. Sure, against flying enemies you're toast, but then again, unless you focus in ranged, you'd be toast anyways.

However, I mention this because of what entails: its direct competitor, WotC, has embraced using more at-will abilities. I could even give the point to Paizo to make cantrips at-will, but herein lies the problem: even in 4e, Cantrips eventually scaled. In 5e, they scale even more, to the point that, while never as good as having Extra Attack for the weapon-users, it still does well when you're out of spells, or you need to deal damage without expending your even rarer spell slots. There has been a change in paradigm in terms of d20 Systems, and Paizo isn't just catching the trend - not even for casters. It imposes penalties for trying to keep up; I'll leave it to perception to see if the penalties are better or worse on that regard. Paizo is approaching, if not already exceeded, the wealth of content of 3.5, so saying that 3.5 has the same problem is slowly losing ground; you can compare exactly the ratio of good|bad stuff of 3.5, but PF's ratio is still in flux.

As a final bit: note that the Kineticist's damage equals or exceeds the Warlock's own, it has access to more at-will stuff than the Warlock (10 utility talents, 10 infusions, plus 3 simple blasts, a commensurate amount of composite blasts and 1 defense), and it's still considered a weak class overall, compared to classes with limited resources. The Warlock is considered subpar, but never considered weak, and it has less stuff and support than the Kineticist. Surely it has to be more than Hellfire Warlock or Deceive Item, and Imbue Item is far away to justify its potency. I'd consider the utility of both classes' at-wills, and the Warlock has some hideous stinkers.

Gnaeus

2016-05-31, 08:12 AM

As a final bit: note that the Kineticist's damage equals or exceeds the Warlock's own, it has access to more at-will stuff than the Warlock (10 utility talents, 10 infusions, plus 3 simple blasts, a commensurate amount of composite blasts and 1 defense), and it's still considered a weak class overall, compared to classes with limited resources. The Warlock is considered subpar, but never considered weak, and it has less stuff and support than the Kineticist. Surely it has to be more than Hellfire Warlock or Deceive Item, and Imbue Item is far away to justify its potency. I'd consider the utility of both classes' at-wills, and the Warlock has some hideous stinkers.

I dispute a lot of this, and will happily explain why in a thread about Kineticist, not Gestalt combos.

AvatarVecna

2016-05-31, 02:13 PM

Er, what? Flanking is dishonourable now? I don't think I've ever seen a DM make a paladin fall for flanking a target before.

Flanking is a part of combat, particularly mass combat, that's just a fact of life. Specifically training yourself so that you can take advantage of such a situation, and doing so when the opportunity arises, the training and opportunistic nature that Sneak Attack represents, is underhanded. Nut shots, backstabs, sucker punches when their back is turned...these things aren't a part of honorable combat, and basing a large part of your offensive capabilities around taking advantage of such cheap shots is dishonorable. Whether it's dishonorable enough to make a paladin fall is debatable.

Flanking isn't dishonorable, Sneak Attack is. Whether it's significant enough to warrant falling in your opinion will vary from person to person, but I guess I'm never gonna convince you it's reasonable, because the rules don't specifically point it out, and because there's no rule explicitly saying a Paladin can't sneak attack, you're going to insist it's your God-given right by the holy RAW.

squiggit

2016-05-31, 02:26 PM

Triskavanski

2016-05-31, 02:31 PM

The Knight class from 3.5 specifically denied you getting flanking bonuses because it was dishonorable.

AvatarVecna

2016-05-31, 02:35 PM

It has nothing to do with Holy RAW and everything to do with the idea of +1d6 to damage while flanking being 'dishonorable' sounding kind of ridiculous.

I mean, yeah, if you fluff it in a certain way it can be, but that's on you for choosing to present it that way. Then again, capitalizing on an unfair advantage while someone is distracted is exactly what flanking is, so again the distinction seems pretty arbitrary here.

I agree that a Paladin/Rogue (or Paladin//Rogue, as the case may be) shouldn't have a problem using Sneak Attack and keeping their oath; I only wished to point out that making this build suck a lot harder doesn't require your DM to be a ****, it's just requires them to have a slightly stricter idea of what counts as "honorable combat" than most people would have, and I don't feel that it's enough of an edge case to be worth immediately dismissing.

Yes, taking advantage of a flank is potentially less than honorable, but flanking is a thing that just happens in combat, you don't specifically train to take advantage of it; comparatively, Sneak Attack is your character training themselves to take advantage of your opponent when they are unable to fully defend themselves, which is a little more questionable, honor-wise, than flanking, if only because you have to make a conscious decision to train yourself to take advantage of it in that manner.

Starbuck_II

2016-05-31, 02:49 PM

The Knight class from 3.5 specifically denied you getting flanking bonuses because it was dishonorable.

But at least, Knights can't fall for being dishonorable: try just get a minor penalty if run out of challenges.

Ualaa

2016-05-31, 10:24 PM

Worst combo...

Mechanically speaking, don't have a spell list or power list, as that a lot of power and flexibility.
Have a low HD.
Have few good saves.
Don't have statistics to improve your saves.

The D6 classes generally have spell lists.
So go with a D8 class, that is not a caster.
Ideally have one good save only.
And the key stat does not improve that saving throw, or ideally any saving throw.

I'm thinking maybe Rogue.
And then another class, with good Reflex.
That essentially adds very little or nothing to the Rogue.
So it is essentially a non-Gestalt Rogue, playing with Gestalts.

A Druid has an armor restriction.
They have two good saves, which is not ideal for a worst character.
But if they were to Gestalt with something that used Metal Armor...
A lot of the Druid features would not work.

If the player wants a challenging/crap option that they make the best of, but is still horrible... could go with a Wizard|Sorcerer.
Neither INT nor CHA improves saving throws.
Put the character in heavy armor, that they have inherited and will not give up.
Lots of Arcane failure, D6 HD, good Will save only, poor BAB.

Peat

2016-06-01, 08:06 AM

I don't think deliberately wearing armour counts.

And if it does, a Wizard//Witch who refuses to read a spell book and deliberately murders their familiar is far stupider.

AvatarVecna

2016-06-01, 08:23 AM

Florian

2016-06-01, 08:34 AM

Yeah, the impression I got from this challenge wasn't "make a whole character who's too dumb to live", but rather "there's no combination of classes that can't be optimized to be competent in gestalt". Imposing additional arbitrary limitations isn't pointing out bad class combinations, it's pointing out how stupidly you can play the character.

That goes back full circle to what I wrote earlier in this thread.

The usual rating of what should be considered "strong" or "weak" classes (or the Tier system), doesn´t hold true when Gestalt comes into the mix. There´s usually a glass ceiling between the Tiers and in most cases, nothing you can do can help you bypass it.

Besides that, the usually weakest/low tier classes bring an huge amount of synergy to a Gestalt, more so than most strongest/hier tier classes can provide.

That´s why I consider it "worst" when it comes to Gestalt when there are neither synergies nor a raise in Tier for the final build.

That´s why the basic premise of the OP is so flawed. Put two low- or mid-tier classes together and they will have high synergy, possible a step up one tier and that with next to no optimization.
Try that with T2 or low T1 and nothing will change.

Gnaeus

2016-06-01, 09:29 AM

That goes back full circle to what I wrote earlier in this thread.

The usual rating of what should be considered "strong" or "weak" classes (or the Tier system), doesn´t hold true when Gestalt comes into the mix. There´s usually a glass ceiling between the Tiers and in most cases, nothing you can do can help you bypass it.

Besides that, the usually weakest/low tier classes bring an huge amount of synergy to a Gestalt, more so than most strongest/hier tier classes can provide.

That´s why I consider it "worst" when it comes to Gestalt when there are neither synergies nor a raise in Tier for the final build.

That´s why the basic premise of the OP is so flawed. Put two low- or mid-tier classes together and they will have high synergy, possible a step up one tier and that with next to no optimization.
Try that with T2 or low T1 and nothing will change.

Disagree again.

Yes, put any 2 T5s together and you are likely to get a T4. That is simply because T5s are T5s because they may not even be good at fighting, and even the most aggressively bad gestalts we can make are likely to at least be able to hold their own in combat. That doesn't mean that fighter//monk or gunslinger//Kineticist are better gestalts than Wizard//witch. Not that Wizard//witch is a great gestalt. But it is easy enough to use 1/2 of a T1 combo as a passive side with long duration or swift action spells that provide as much to a combo as full BaB would. Wizard//witch should still be better in combat at most levels than fighter//monk, and vastly superior at anything else. Can we do better? Sure. But we can do much worse.

Peat

2016-06-01, 09:35 AM

Yeah. Weakest thing to play and Least gained from Gestalting are two different and interesting things.

I still reckon that, barring deliberately poor class choices that result in both sides of the Gestalt hitting each other in the nads, Rogue//Cavalier looks pretty bloody weak. Anyone who wants to put me right on that, go right ahead.

Florian - Would the extra spells known from Sorcerer//Oracle push that into Tier 1?

Triskavanski

2016-06-01, 10:05 AM

Florian

2016-06-01, 10:16 AM

@Gnaeus:

Before you argue on, do yourself the favor and reread the OP. Inquisitor, a solid T3 class, is lumped in with some T4 and T5 classes in the listing.

That´s a pretty solid indicator that not efficiency is asked for here, but a way to break the glass ceiling to either T2 or T1, something we know is not possible. Two T3 classes make no T2 class. Two T2 classes make no T1 class, and so on.

@Peat:

The definition here is simply. All spell access is T1, Limited spell access is T2. Yes, the limited spells could be the strongest and best picks, but that´s not enough to change the definition.

Peat

2016-06-01, 11:24 AM

Florian

2016-06-01, 11:52 AM

Florian - I've seen plenty argue with that definition, but fair enough with that as a point of view.

I also don´t agree with it. It can only hold true if there was an infinite number of equally worth spells on each spell level and that simply is BS.
But, alas, the system rates flexibility as power and not efficiency, as there´re few key indicators you could use to do that.

AvatarVecna

2016-06-01, 12:07 PM

I'd have to agree with that.

Even things that people say are 'bad' really are no where near as bad as they say they are. Like Monk | Fighter, Fighter | Rogue, Gunslinger | Fighter etc.

The Monk | Fighter for example could be built in such a way that you use AAT to increase the amount of skill points you have starting at level 7. With AAT you can become prof with all monk weapons. Easily pick up That Monk weapon group style and apply your monk unarmed bonuses to all your weapons. And thats just with your bonus monk/fighter feats. With your general feats you could train up to have more narrative power. Granted it wont' be anywhere near a Wizard with their ability to rewrite the story as a standard action.

Fighter | Rogue can become something of a Cad, but not suck like the cad does. When I tend to build these guys I lean more into the rogue part and my guy has bootblades, arrow tube shooters (seriously these things are pretty awesome), and whatever other hidden weapons I can carry on my person. Only problem is you can't wear both the Dueling gloves and shaper gloves at the same time.

Fighter | Gunslinger is a little odd, but with things like Marksman Utility you do have some odd abilities to do things beyond shooting to kill. You can shoot guns and stabilize people, (Seriously though this one should have been something where you at least had a chance to shoot a baddy) the ability to shoot doors open, blast locks. etc. Most of that is on the chassie of the gunslinger of course, but the Fighter can make it easier and again open up the general feats for narrative based ones.

First of all, Fighter//Monk gives the Monk things it desperately needed: full BAB, a d10 HD, and 11 extra feats; Weapon Training, particularly if you choose the right weapon group, is helpful as well, and I'm sure there's some kind of unarmored Fighter archetype that pairs well with Monk. No, Fighter//Monk is decent because Monk has lots of passive abilities that would be much more effective if they could ever hit; with this combo, they can hit, and hit hard.

Secondly, I don't know why you're saying Rogue is terrible: Rogue is high T4 when built to just get SA, and is low/mid T3 when they properly take advantage of their skill list, particularly Use Magic Device. Giving that rogue d10 HD, full BAB, a good Fort save, 11 bonus feats, and armor/weapon training is a wonderful upgrade.

Thirdly, Fighter//Gunslinger is amazing, but not because the Fighter chassis gives them a ton: 11 fighter bonus feats is wonderful for a Gunslinger, because it means they can spend their regular feats and Gunslinger bonus feats on things not focused on keeping them optimal. They can take the Weapon Focus line, Critical Focus, the full Snap shot line, the full TWF line if they want, the Point Blank Shot feat tree, and even a few signature deeds (which, among other things, can be used to extend their Touch AC targeting range).

No, you want a bad combo from that list? Gunslinger//Monk. There is, as far as I can tell, no way to flurry with guns...well, there's one way, but it requires a specific archetypes that's not useful for much else (Sohei), a Fighter dip, and an extremely permissive DM. The only other way is if you can find a deity with a firearm as their favored weapon.

EDIT: To be clear, if you play the Gunslinger//Monk as a regular Gunslinger, just with Monk tacked on, it's still a solid upgrade: good Will saves, Wis to unarmored AC, Evasion, speed boost, a few combat bonus feats...there's not a ton of direct synergy in offensive capabilities, since they focus on different weapons, but they're both Dex/Wis classes.

squiggit

2016-06-01, 12:24 PM

I actually like Gunslinger//Monk more than Gunslinger//Fighter. You don't gain a lot of offensive capabilites, but gunslingers don't really need more of that.

You do, however, pick up a lot of defensive support and essentially gain a free backup melee weapon from a monk's unarmed stuff, which is pretty cool.

Probably not super strong though, you're right.

Triskavanski

2016-06-01, 12:25 PM

I wasn't saying any of those are bad. Those are ones people have been bringing up as bad because they're not t1

As far as Monk | Gunslinger

I'd actually pair it up with something like a Pistoller Gunslinger | Master of Many Styles.

Get Empty Quiver style. Then blend together other styles that do a thing. You are now a graviton cleric.

AvatarVecna

2016-06-01, 12:32 PM

I wasn't saying any of those are bad. Those are ones people have been bringing up as bad because they're not t1

That's fair, then.

Triskavanski

2016-06-01, 04:54 PM

Trying to figure out the Gunslinger | Monk combo.

with Master of many Styles we start off with Empty Quiver Style. This gives us the ability to start using pistols as light maces. But the second style I don't know what to do with it.

Possible Contenders - Spring Heel Style - Though I believe I have to be wearing light armor for this.
Kitsune Style - I'm not going to be charging much though
Fox Style - I guess?
Shielded Gauntlet style - Would this shut off my Monk AC?
Blinded Blade Style - Actually This one would be pretty cool.

Gnaeus

2016-06-01, 06:18 PM

Actually, reading back, he just wanted the two worst classes to make into a combo... gods knows how he thought Inquisitor was among the worst.

Florian - I've seen plenty argue with that definition, but fair enough with that as a point of view.

Yes, I think he thought inquisitor was bad because he read some negative comments about it somewhere.

Re the question about 2 T2s equalling a T1. It depends on what you mean. Based on the definition, no. The only way you get to T1 is open ended access to a T1 list. Functionally, it should play like a T1 in any game. Even the regular PF human sorcerer taking extra spells as FCBs and with a decent bloodline can be difficult to distinguish from a T1 in play. The typical wizard or cleric isn't actually very likely to memorize more than 6 different spells on a regular basis anyway. And gestalted with oracle, so you are looking at 8-10 chosen spells +2 from a fixed list makes it act very like a T1.

Re good gestalts, if it isn't relevant through most of the level range and it doesn't have solid tools for resolving non-combat challenges, it isn't a great gestalt. It is hard to check those boxes without full or at least half casting. So none of the gestalt that meet OPs criteria are good gestalts. They are just the best of otherwise bad gestalt options.

Saitox

2016-06-02, 10:17 AM

I personally don't think inquisitor is bad haha. I don't think any of the classes are bad honestly, but my experience has only been as a bard, a Druid, and DSP's warlord. Sorry if I gave the impression that I did think they were bad. When I google searched worst pathfinder classes when I first started this post I found posts and articles where people said such things. They were from 2013 at the latest so I didn't want to accept that automatically cause a lot can change in three years if what they were saying was true. I merely wanted to state what I had found so far from searching on my own. I knew it'd be difficult to properly explain the kind of challenge the player was looking for when he asked me to present him with the "worst". I've pointed him here to see results so far. Sorry once again if I gave the wrong impressions or offended anybody.

Peat

2016-06-02, 11:08 AM

No worries man, I was just amused that someone had told you that to begin with.

Anyway, at the moment, assuming you're using everything, the weakest classes are the Corebook version of the Rogue (Unchained Rogue is a lot stronger), Swashbuckler, Cavalier, and the Gunmaster and Brute archetypes for the Vigilante. I'd include Gunfighter in the list if the Gunmaster archetype didn't exist and wasn't kinda Gunfighter but worse.

The Brawler and Stalker might be down there but don't really know them well enough to be sure. Some will put Kineticist down there as well.

Some might tell you Fighter and Monk, but the options in the expansions makes them pretty useful; certainly more than the others.

Generally anything with spells is absolutely not one of the worst Pathfinder classes though.

Florian

2016-06-02, 11:23 AM

With Stalker you mean Slayer?

That´s a pretty solid class that is a good notch above the core rogue because it centers around certain tactics but does them exceedingly well.

Cavalier is a thing where I agree. Solid, but very limited. Samurai, too.

"low but interesting" could actually be Ninja//Gunslinger (Mysterious Stranger).

Necromancy

2016-06-02, 11:35 AM

People that think rogues are bad have never truly played one. I was in that group till a friend had me join the rogues guild and we would truly destroy mobs. the rat swarm build is one of the most broken melee setups I have ever witnessed and its straight PF rogue

Peat

2016-06-02, 11:45 AM

Kitsuneymg

2016-06-02, 12:02 PM

I'd like to toss Cavalier//Swashbuckler into the ring as a poor gestalt.

You basically have a lot of conflicting class features (even though a lance can be wielded in one hand while mounted, it's *not* a one-handed weapon.) You have poor skills and few skill points. You already had good bab and HD, so you get very few passives.

The best bet, IMO, is to go Order of the Paw as a halfling and use your animal companion as a flank buddy. You can then concentrate on swashbuckling yourself. Challenge + swashbuckler's precision damage should see you through the single digit levels. But you start to fall behind after 11+ when your swift-action limit of 1 double level to damage per turn starts to make your full attacks lackluster as well as the way animal companions start to fall off at high levels. At low levels, it looks broken if you're used to playing with poorly optimized parties.

Another idea that might work is to spirited charge into combat with your lance, then drop it, five step, and lay into people with a rapier/whatever while your mount attacks too. That could be a viable tactic. With challenge and precise strike, you'll be doing a lot of damage when it counts and still getting some use out of crits.