A Couple Gestalt Questions

[thecrimsondawn]

So gestalt was a system created for use in 3.5, but we are talking about using it in place of the mythic system as mythic is just.... lets just not talk about how OP mythic is.

anyway, Pathfinder has a couple things different that may cause some conflicts, and I wanted some opinions on how you think mechanically they would or should work.

1) Thanks to the archetype system, it is possible for 2 classes to gain the same class features. As per gestalt rules, when 2 things overlap, you take the better, so if one class got sneak attack every other level, while another got it once every 3 levels, you would take the every other level one as they dont stack. however, it does not really go into details about feats. Lets just do a hypothetical situation and say someone is playing a Fighter+class that gets the same type of fighter bonus feats, or even a monk/unchained monk. Would you get the bonus feats from both since bonus feats are just called bonus feats, or since they are the same class feature, would you only get the bonus feats of 1?

2) .... I had a second one but forget it while writing the first. I will leave this here so I can edit it when I remember :p

[Jack_Simth]

You'll want to talk to the GM, as the GM is arbitrating the conversion. They might be counted as unrelated class features, they might be counted as a progression of a particular sort. The answer will vary, and depend in part on what optimization level the GM wants.

Although for fighter-base types? Let the T-4 or T-5 character have the nice things.

[GrayDeath]

Speaking only from a 3.5 pov.here, but if.both get their.bonus.feats at the same level, you.only get the "better", ergo less limited ones.

If you.have 2 classes.that, say get them at odd and even.levels.respectively, you.would get both.

Still, Pathfinders Archetypes make.gestalting really really complicated. Id suggest not allowing the use of archetypes.when gestalting.

Overall though you.should cllarify.that.with the DM.

[AvatarVecna]

So gestalt was a system created for use in 3.5, but we are talking about using it in place of the mythic system as mythic is just.... lets just not talk about how OP mythic is.

anyway, Pathfinder has a couple things different that may cause some conflicts, and I wanted some opinions on how you think mechanically they would or should work.

1) Thanks to the archetype system, it is possible for 2 classes to gain the same class features. As per gestalt rules, when 2 things overlap, you take the better, so if one class got sneak attack every other level, while another got it once every 3 levels, you would take the every other level one as they dont stack. however, it does not really go into details about feats. Lets just do a hypothetical situation and say someone is playing a Fighter+class that gets the same type of fighter bonus feats, or even a monk/unchained monk. Would you get the bonus feats from both since bonus feats are just called bonus feats, or since they are the same class feature, would you only get the bonus feats of 1?

2) .... I had a second one but forget it while writing the first. I will leave this here so I can edit it when I remember :p

I'm generally of the opinion that bonus feat progressions should be allowed to stack, by virtue of Bonus Feats from one class to another being almost universally entirely different in everything but name, but if you gestalt two classes together that grant the same specific bonus feat, you don't get to choose a separate feat in its place. Fighter bonus feat progression is not the same as monk bonus feat progression beyond just how often monks get feats: Fighters (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/fighter/) can select any combat feat, but have to qualify for it; a Monk (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/monk/) (and Unchained Monk (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/unchained-classes/monk-unchained/)) select feats from a very limited selection, but don't have to qualify for those bonus feats; Rangers select feats from their chosen fighting style, which they don't have to qualify for but they lose the benefits of if in heavy armor (even if they qualify for them and being in heavy armor wouldn't prevent the use of those feats normally); Wizard (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/wizard/) grants bonus feats that have to be item creation feats, metamagic feats, or Spell Mastery, so long as they qualify for the feat they're taking. These bonus feat progressions are all very obviously highly different.

Compare that to a specific gestalt example (pulling from 3.5 because I, and the UA writers, are lazy, which makes this easier): if for some reason you were gestalting a 3.5 Fighter (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/fighter.htm) with a 3.5 Feat Rogue (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/variantCharacterClasses.htm#rogue) or with a 3.5 Martial Wizard (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/variantCharacterClasses.htm#wizard), I would not let both feat progressions stack, because they're the same kind of bonus feat (even though the wizard gets those bonus feats much slower).

[upho]

I agree with Jack_Simth. And if you're the GM, here are my thoughts:

1) I really recommend you judge complex matters such as these on a case-by-case basis, and try to define a recommended power level for players rather than making blanket rules. That said, in basically all cases I can think of, I'd allow the stacking of two "Bonus Feats" class features. This is primarily because having additional feats is highly unlikely to be the key factor which makes a gestalt build OP IME. Secondarily, unlike SA, the "Bonus Feats" class feature is unusually ill suited for a blanket ruling. The name doesn't necessarily say much at all about actual its mechanical potential; different classes' "Bonus Feats" are rarely the same and often not even similar (compare say the fighter's, the monk's and the wizard's). Likewise, there are also class feature which effectively only grant bonus feats but which happen to go by another name (such as the ranger's "Combat Style Feat"). And in contrast to features such as SA, AFAIK no two feats have the exact same stacking mechanical effect. Instead, the more similar and specific two "Bonus Feats" class features are, the less likely they are to produce OP numbers. For example, there's far less to be gained from combining two classes/archetypes which both grant the monk's very specific "Bonus Feats" class feature than by combining two classes which grant the fighter's and/or the wizard's.

2) I'm just gonna have to 'fess up and say this issue unfortunately seems to be far beyond my capabilities... :smallwink:

[thecrimsondawn]

I agree with everyone's thoughts and opinions on this so far. I am the only one in the group who has played in gestalt games, and as I said up above - I feel them a far better match then Mythic as far as game balance is concerned. I watch some of our new players roll up casters and slow early progression classes and just sort of zone out when comabt starts because they cant (or dont know how) to do much. Gestalt really helps with this as even if you have no clue what you are doing, you can end up with a scary strong build.

Looking over some stuff on Pathfinder, I noticed that many archetypes that take from another class use the phrase 'as a [class] when ripping a skill set. Im thinking that perhaps we can use that as a guideline for stacking. For example, the mutagen class feature for alchemist is shared by a lot of classes. It would be easy to rule that you take the higher caster level of the 2 (if any) as well as the highest duration, but you would not have 2 mutagens. Likewise, if a class gets bonus feats 'as a fighter' or 'as a monk' they would not stack since it is being treated 'as a class' that you may be gestalting with.

Still, its looking like we really will need to do this on a case by case basis. Our DM is quite skilled at what he does, but his knowledge of the game itself is sadly quite limited to the point where it often falls to me to give mechanical decisions or how things work by RAW before he makes a decision himself on the matter, so that is often why you see me here asking so many dam question :D :p

also... I still dont remember what my other question was, lol...

[Krazzman]

Feats should stack when they grant access to different things. Fighter wizard bonus feats stack while those of a fighter Warpriest would not.

Channel Energy is another thing that will not stack but a DM might allow variant channels to be taken instead.

[grarrrg]

Channel Energy is another thing that will not stack but a DM might allow variant channels to be taken instead.

Channel could get a touch messy, and would have to be a case-by-case.
Without really trying to mess with things you'd have to decide how a Paladin/Cleric is allowed to Channel. Do they get the fixed uses from the Cleric? Or the convert from Lay on Hands? Can they use either/or?
And a Negative Energy Cleric paired with a Life Oracle, and...

[Krazzman]

Channel could get a touch messy, and would have to be a case-by-case.
Without really trying to mess with things you'd have to decide how a Paladin/Cleric is allowed to Channel. Do they get the fixed uses from the Cleric? Or the convert from Lay on Hands? Can they use either/or?
And a Negative Energy Cleric paired with a Life Oracle, and...

Exactly. It's a total mess. Especially when there are guys that try to quote the FAQ on this to say that it's "2 separate pools" instead...

I would allow it IF the channel is different. Picking Elemental Channel on Cleric and Positive Channel on Paladin: OK. Picking Positive Channel on Cleric and Positive Channel on Paladin: Not OK.