Seeking Gestalt Build Advice!

[DadisGaming]

Hello all,

Long-time lurker, first-time poster. I'm currently participating in a 4-man campaign that hasn't quite begun yet. We're all gestalt characters, with a few restrictions. No prestige-classing, no class-dipping, just 2 classes, all the way up. Only Paizo materials allowed, and no occult classes. We have a Druid//Cleric, a Barbarian//Alchemist, and I was going to be a Bladebound Hexcrafter Magus//Scout Ninja. However, our fourth player just announced his build, and he's going to go Gunslinger//Unchained Rogue. So now I'm heavily debating about changing the Ninja half of my class to something else, possibly a fighter.

My main issue is having too much overlap in relation to class function. I don't know if this is unfounded, since he will mostly be ranged and I will mostly be melee. I also have mild concerns about lack of front-line tankiness.

Thoughts? Should I change my build? Am I worrying needlessly? Thanks in advance for any help!

[exelsisxax]

Druid//cleric is a hilariously bad gestalt, gunslinger//rogue is a one-trick pony, and alch//barb is an (potentially) extremely powerful one. I think your group has a wide enough skill gap that it doesn't really matter what you do from a power standpoint.

On doubling up roles, is that a problem? have you asked the GUnRogue what his build plans are, and if he is aware you have a ninja half? It is not an inherent problem in the game to have similar classes in one party. You can, for example, be all bards and the only problem will be the DM failing to deal with your shenanigans.

You are worrying pointlessly about a lack of tank. There is no tanking in 1pp pathfinder, so don't worry about it.

[Long_shanks]

It all depends on what you want to do with your character. All arcane spellcasting classes based on intelligence could work, especially witch, since it would give you all the hexes you need, plus the ability to spellstrike and spell combat with new spells through the Broad combat arcana. You could then use other Magus archetypes, like Blackblade Kensai magus (my personnal favorite).

You could also look at the Slayer. Full bab, d10, 6 + int skills, a bit of sneak (always welcomed when flanking with a rogue buddy), abilities keyed off intel (including a death attak possibly at level 10).

I could be slinging other options, but without more details on what you want to do, we can't really help you more precisely.

Edit: Also, as was said before me, is a change really necessary? I mean, there are only so many classes; redundancy is bound to happen, and two sneaky bastards are always better than one ;).

[DadisGaming]

It all depends on what you want to do with your character. All arcane spellcasting classes based on intelligence could work, especially witch, since it would give you all the hexes you need, plus the ability to spellstrike and spell combat with new spells through the Broad combat arcana. You could then use other Magus archetypes, like Blackblade Kensai magus (my personnal favorite).

You could also look at the Slayer. Full bab, d10, 6 + int skills, a bit of sneak (always welcomed when flanking with a rogue buddy), abilities keyed off intel (including a death attak possibly at level 10).

I could be slinging other options, but without more details on what you want to do, we can't really help you more precisely.

Edit: Also, as was said before me, is a change really necessary? I mean, there are only so many classes; redundancy is bound to happen, and two sneaky bastards are always better than one ;).

Thanks guys! These are all good points, and I do think that it's not a problem to have two Rogue-like people in the party. May just mean more emphasis on Sneak-attacks :smallsmile:

[Gnaeus]

Druid//cleric is a hilariously bad gestalt, gunslinger//rogue is a one-trick pony, and alch//barb is an (potentially) extremely powerful one. I think your group has a wide enough skill gap that it doesn't really matter what you do from a power standpoint.

On doubling up roles, is that a problem? have you asked the GUnRogue what his build plans are, and if he is aware you have a ninja half? It is not an inherent problem in the game to have similar classes in one party. You can, for example, be all bards and the only problem will be the DM failing to deal with your shenanigans.

You are worrying pointlessly about a lack of tank. There is no tanking in 1pp pathfinder, so don't worry about it.

I disagree. Gunslinger//rogue is the only gestalt there I would really frown at.

What you want in a gestalt are:
1. Full 9 casting (or manifesting, maneuvers, etc) on at least (better is exactly) one side. DC only.
2. Good action economy. Minionmancy, pet, swift action use. DC far in the lead. (Edit: I guess the BA could/should take a familiar, which may help on this.)
3. Good saves and defenses, at least fort and will. DC and BA
4. An active and passive class (all are ok there, you can easily make Druid or cleric a passive side via spell selection).
5. Attribute synergy. DC is only SAD combo.

Druid//cleric certainly has room for improvement, like either Druid or Cleric + rogue or ranger. But it’s still the strongest thing in the party by a fair margin.

I’d be suggesting something like slayer//witch. That gives full casting, hexes, all good saves, good skills, and a full BAB decent hp skillmonkey familiar. And it covers your Arcane casting slot better than magus. Magus is solid at damage but the entire party should be good at that. If you are wedded to magus I would suggest magus//Witch with a different archetype.

[upho]

Hello all,Hullo DadisGaming!


Long-time lurker, first-time poster.Nice to see you popping out of the shadows!


I'm currently participating in a 4-man campaign that hasn't quite begun yet. We're all gestalt characters, with a few restrictions. No prestige-classing, no class-dipping, just 2 classes, all the way up. Only Paizo materials allowed, and no occult classes. We have a Druid//Cleric, a Barbarian//Alchemist, and I was going to be a Bladebound Hexcrafter Magus//Scout Ninja. However, our fourth player just announced his build, and he's going to go Gunslinger//Unchained Rogue. So now I'm heavily debating about changing the Ninja half of my class to something else, possibly a fighter.

My main issue is having too much overlap in relation to class function. I don't know if this is unfounded, since he will mostly be ranged and I will mostly be melee.I doubt changing the ninja half of your build is necessary, at least not because of the gunslinger//rogue. As you're melee focused and they're ranged, I'd say you're actually much more likely to be stepping on the on the barb//alchemist's toes in combat, as I assume the both of you will primarily have a melee damage combat role.

I believe the only risks in terms of redundancies are found in non-combat/utility stuff, most specifically things related to scouting/thieving. Thankfully, the magus allows you to focus on other stuff, and nothing you gain from the ninja class has to be related either. For example, you'll probably want to hold back on investing into the most traditionally rogue-ish skills like Disable Device and Sleight of Hand, and put more points into other skills like Knowledge(s) instead. Might be worth noting that this responsibility is primarily on you though, since a gunslinger//rogue doesn't give much in the way of viable alternatives to the classic rogue-ish non-combat specializations.

The both of you otherwise having stuff more loosely associated with being generally sneaky, like a high Stealth and sneak attack, isn't likely to cause any problems.


I also have mild concerns about lack of front-line tankiness.A druid//cleric as well as a barb//alchemist can be built into excellent meat shields with great melee control power. I'd even say the far most obvious reason for a "barchemist" combo is to become a durable self-buffing melee monster. So I don't think you have much to worry about in this regard either, especially since the role isn't vital by any means, and the mechanical support available for it is almost non-existent in a game limited to Paizo material anyways.

That said, both of the mentioned gestalt combos can be built for very different combat roles as well. So it may be worth checking up whether the "druric" intends to focus on wild shape and/or summoning shenanigans or primarily on casting other spells from the back, and whether the "barchemist" actually intends to go Dex-based with the urban barbarian archetype and bomb - rather than hack - foes to bits.

Hope this helps!

[upho]

Druid//cleric is a hilariously bad gestalt, gunslinger//rogue is a one-trick pony, and alch//barb is an (potentially) extremely powerful one. I think your group has a wide enough skill gap that it doesn't really matter what you do from a power standpoint.
What you want in a gestalt areI suspect the general op-level of the OP's game isn't has high as to make these things worth considering quite as seriously. Reading between the lines, it may even be that doing so may make the game less balanced and/or actually make the OP's character less effective in practice due to having too many options and too much to keep track of.

Though I do agree with exelsisxax on the "barchemist" to some extent, as that combo's pure killing power is so obvious and easy also for less experienced players to make good use of in most games. Meaning it may very well be a sign that the group haven't really discussed acceptable power levels and is likely to run into problems.


Magus is solid at damage but the entire party should be good at that.It may very well be that they won't be, or that three of them will suck at damage in comparison to the "barchemist".

[Eloel]

Have you thought about gestalting with White-Haired Witch? Pick "Natural Spell Combat" at level 3, deliver spell strikes with your hair. Use your witch side spells to buff yourself (Enlarge Person is your friend) before going into battle. Your hexes come from your Magus side, and you get melee stuff from the Witch side. It's also a bit more control-based than damage-based, so gives your allies a bit of a space to shine :)

[Drelua]

When I'm planning a gestalt character, I usually look for two classes that shore up each other's weaknesses in terms of things like BAB, saves, and skills. If I were playing a Magus gestalt, I'd consider Swashbuckler, for mostly the same reasons someone else suggested slayer. If you take the Inspired Blade archetype, you've got Intelligence synergy, and since most of it's abilities are more passive, it doesn't get in the way of using spell combat/spellstrike. There is some competition for swift actions of course. But, attacking with a spell while adding your level to damage and gaining the swashbuckler's bonuses to damage sounds fun to me. Not as powerful as a Magus//Witch or Wizard, but if you want something a little easier to play I think that would work pretty well.

I might also suggest the druid//cleric consider something more passive to replace one of the two, since you can only cast so many spells. Maybe Monk, probably unchained since they'd be getting the good Will save regardless, unless there's an archetype that doesn't work with it. They would make for a pretty scary melee character combined with druid, wild shaping and beating the hell out of people. Casting stat to AC never hurts either.

[Cyrocloud]

I don't think it would be good, but it may be fun to two sides of vigilante. Probably Avenger on one side, and a warlock on the other.

[DadisGaming]

Thanks for all the advice guys! My build path was planning on making big sneak attacks to try and blow people up, as I'm fairly certain that spell combat would also trigger sneak attack, if it's used in conjunction with a regular attack. I'm also going to unify my ki and arcana pools at 6 so I have more versatility and choice.

He's Dex and INT based, with regular strength, average Con, and decent charisma, as I was thinking party Face would be fun (I'm into RP aspects as much as combat). When in combat, at low levels I may stay back and lob a few spells if needed, or I can run in and cut people up. A little later on, the idea was to use ki for an extra attack, then use spell combat to full attack, getting sneak attacks on each roll. I figured the single target damage I dish out would be monstrous.

I'm not really looking for optimization, and I don't think I'll switch after reading the perspectives here, but the advice is all very much appreciated. I've been reading old gestalt threads for weeks now, it's nice to see current opinions! Thanks!

[Florian]

Thanks for all the advice guys! My build path was planning on making big sneak attacks to try and blow people up, as I'm fairly certain that spell combat would also trigger sneak attack, if it's used in conjunction with a regular attack. I'm also going to unify my ki and arcana pools at 6 so I have more versatility and choice.

He's Dex and INT based, with regular strength, average Con, and decent charisma, as I was thinking party Face would be fun (I'm into RP aspects as much as combat). When in combat, at low levels I may stay back and lob a few spells if needed, or I can run in and cut people up. A little later on, the idea was to use ki for an extra attack, then use spell combat to full attack, getting sneak attacks on each roll. I figured the single target damage I dish out would be monstrous.

I'm not really looking for optimization, and I don't think I'll switch after reading the perspectives here, but the advice is all very much appreciated. I've been reading old gestalt threads for weeks now, it's nice to see current opinions! Thanks!

You're making a very typical miscalculation here. Combining two "burst damage" type classes, especially ones that burn thru their resources fast and hard, will net you no real synergy and prove a little troublesome to play.

See, Ninja is normally a twin Wakizashi TWF class that burns Ki Points to overwhelm with SA damage, while the DEX-based Magus is normally Shocking Grasp focussed and a crit seeker ... to overwhelm with damage. Both classes have in common that they're full frontal melee assault classes that have to be in a full attack position as fast as possible.

This is where you're getting in your own way: You'll want spell strike, not spell combat, that's why you have a high crit range black blade, after all, or you go for the close range arcana to use a cantrip for spell combat, but there's the hex crafter problem of few arcana slots. So generally, you're out of luck when it comes to TWF.
Second is duplicate abilities. Yes, (a wand of) Haste is strictly better than the Ki Pool ability because it has an actual duration and both classes will hit Improved Invisbility at the same time.

So, do yourself the favor and rethink the already suggested Slayer class instead of the Ninja, because you gain more on both sides of the Gestalt by using Studied Target.

[Krazzman]

So, do yourself the favor and rethink the already suggested Slayer class instead of the Ninja, because you gain more on both sides of the Gestalt by using Studied Target.

Slayer, Ranger and Vigilante are the MVPs of Gestalt. From a Magus perspective/starting point all 3 give most of the passives as well as access to pretty good stuff.

I would also recommend the Slayer because it is easy to use and won't compete with your actions on the Magus side. 6+Int skill points, d10 HD, all good saves, full BaB, Studied Target, Sneak Attack (albeit slower), Slayer Talents, Arcana, Spells and Spellstrike/Spellcombat give you a great chassis to deal with nearly all problems.

[Gnaeus]

It may very well be that they won't be, or that three of them will suck at damage in comparison to the "barchemist".

If gunslinger//rogue cant do a bunch of damage, he’s got big problems. That’s pretty much all that combo is good at.

[Gnaeus]

I might also suggest the druid//cleric consider something more passive to replace one of the two, since you can only cast so many spells. Maybe Monk, probably unchained since they'd be getting the good Will save regardless, unless there's an archetype that doesn't work with it. They would make for a pretty scary melee character combined with druid, wild shaping and beating the hell out of people. Casting stat to AC never hurts either.

Not saying that Druid//monk isn’t good, but remember that tier 1 classes can be better at everything. Both classes have good long/middle duration buffs like barkskin, magic vestment, resist energy, etc. It is very possible that running a steady stack of buffs will be more passively powerful than monk. Take quicken spell and you can devote multiple slots to low level quickened buffs. He can hold utility spells like condition heals without worrying about running out of spells. He has a pet to buff. And then there are the real long term powerhouses like animate dead and planar ally. By mid level, the CD & fleshraker & outsider & skeletons (all buffed) should be way ahead of the BA in total damage and total hp. The only drawbacks are that you would need a very active player and his turns will take an hour. Druid//monk isn’t stronger. It’s just easier. And while a full BAB wildshaped, buffed Druid with bonus feats would be a massive melee, in that particular group he would likely be better off as a bat throwing control/aoe/mass buffs.

[Jack_Simth]

Hello all,

Long-time lurker, first-time poster. I'm currently participating in a 4-man campaign that hasn't quite begun yet. We're all gestalt characters, with a few restrictions. No prestige-classing, no class-dipping, just 2 classes, all the way up. Only Paizo materials allowed, and no occult classes. We have a Druid//Cleric, a Barbarian//Alchemist, and I was going to be a Bladebound Hexcrafter Magus//Scout Ninja. However, our fourth player just announced his build, and he's going to go Gunslinger//Unchained Rogue. So now I'm heavily debating about changing the Ninja half of my class to something else, possibly a fighter.

My main issue is having too much overlap in relation to class function. I don't know if this is unfounded, since he will mostly be ranged and I will mostly be melee. I also have mild concerns about lack of front-line tankiness.

Thoughts? Should I change my build? Am I worrying needlessly? Thanks in advance for any help!

General gestalt advice:

Oh yes, and there is, of course, the general gestalt advice:

1) Avoid MAD, look for SAD. Sure, that Paladin//Wizard looks great on paper... but to play him as a Paladin and a Wizard, you need Str (melee), Dex (AC, as you can't use armor), Con (HP), Int (Spells), Wis (Spells again), and Cha (Various Paladin class features). The Paladin//Oracle, on the other hand, is no more MAD than a normal Paladin (Str for melee, Con for HP, charisma for spells and Paladin class features, maybe a touch of Wis for Paladin spells - no need for Dex, as you've got heavy armor proficiency).

2) Watch the Action Economy, look for passive/active combinations. Sure, that Sorcerer//Oracle looks good on paper (ALL THE SPELLS ALL THE TIME), but it doesn't work out that way generally - both classes are competing for the same set of actions, so you're not really significantly better than a normal Oracle or a normal Sorcerer. Something like a Rogue//Druid, on the other hand, is passively adding sneak attack dice to the multiple natural attacks + Pounce that the Druid gets through Wildshape; as a combat druid, it's all using the same set of actions at once. An Oracle//Paladin gets a lot of nice passive benefits from the Paladin side (Divine grace, swift-action self healing, heavy armor proficiency, full BAB, d10 HD), and can do some very active stuff with the Oracle side (spells and/or long-term buffs to wade into melee).

3) Avoid class features that interfere with each other. Sure, that Sorcerer//Paladin looks pretty good... but it's hard to cast Arcane spells in heavy armor, so you need to either give up much of the Sorcerer casting, or you need to give up much of the cheap AC that comes from heavy armor that the Paladin side lets you use. If you use a Divine caster instead of an Arcane one, however, there's no problems casting in armor.

4) Make sure to end up with a nice chassis. Yes, that Wizard//Sorcerer ends up with ultimate arcane might... but it's a d6 hit die, one good save, and poor BAB. You want at least two good saves (and can usually get three), a d8 hit die (although d10 is better), and at least medium BAB. That Druid//Rogue gets a d8 HD, all good saves, and medium BAB. That Paladin//Oracle gets d10 HD, two good saves, and full BAB.

5) The game still rewards specialization. Unless you're short party members, don't try to be a Jack of all trades, as you're likely to end up a master of none. You've only got one set of feats, one allocation of wealth, and so on. A Paladin//oracle and an Oracle//paladin look very similar if that's all you know about them, but they're actually quite different. The first uses Oracle buffs to supplement the Paladin abilities and wade into melee, and picks up feats and items primarily related to melee (so Power Attack, cleave, a nice sword, good armor, and so on). The second uses Paladin benefits to be able to slack off on a few things the Oracle would otherwise need while the Oracle zaps away with spells (so metamagic, extra revelation, Charisma boosters, metamagic rods, and so on). They play quite differently. If you try to be a full Oracle//Paladin, however, your feats and wealth are going to be stretched quite thin, and you'll be less useful at either role.

Edit: Oh yes, and you may have problems obeying all of these completely. That's actually OK. You'll usually end up not using at least some class features - for instance, that Oracle//paladin isn't going to be getting much use out of that full BAB, due to how easy it is to land (ranged) touch spells. It's still a strong combination. All else being equal, the more of these you can follow, and the better you can follow them, the stronger overall the character. However: Character power does not trump player or DM fun. It's hard to stress that enough. You're playing a game with no real stakes. The only true definition of winning is "Did everyone have consequence-free fun?" If the answer is yes, then you won. If the answer is no, then you lost. In the end, your character doesn't really matter: You do, and your friends do. If everyone has fun playing a party of bards that get TPK'd every other session? That's a win. If everyone has fun playing a party of optimized characters that roll over CR+10 encounters? That's a win too. If someone at the table is perpetually bored with the uber-characters, that's a loss. If something in-game breaks a real-life friendship, that's a loss too. Know your actual priorities.

Oh yes: Also: be aware of power curves. Martial types (Fighter, Paladin, Barbarian, Ranger, et cetera) do well at low levels, but fade out as the levels get higher. Full Casters (Wizard, Cleric, Druid, Sorcerer, Oracle, et cetera) can be rough to play at low levels, but pretty much own the table at higher levels. A Skillful character (Bard, Rogue, et cetera) is generally going to be middle-of-the-road the entire trip. It's generally a good idea to have full casting on there, and if you're starting at lower levels it's also a good idea to have a Martial type or a Skillful type in there.

Also of note is that with a full party of four gestalt characters, there overlapping abilities are really hard to avoid... so don't worry about it.

[upho]

If gunslinger//rogue cant do a bunch of damage, he’s got big problems. That’s pretty much all that combo is good at.True. But my point was more that while both the G//R (as well as the OP's M//N) can have a decent enough damage output in most combats, the B//A may pretty easily and consistently deal absolutely disgusting amounts, far beyond what any of the other builds are capable of even during a buffed up round in max murder mode. And this may be noticeable already at 1st level, growing to become overwhelmingly obvious at 12th level at the latest (when he's fly-pouncing through foes with his 7+ primary natural attacks dealing up to 60 or more average damage per hit).

(That is unless the G//R has planned to go full TWF and to (ab)use abundant ammunition with named bullet through cheap divination/scouting info as often as possible. Which of course could become even more silly, but doesn't seem very likely considering the class combo offers no particularly easy way to cast the spells.)

[exelsisxax]

Thanks for all the advice guys! My build path was planning on making big sneak attacks to try and blow people up, as I'm fairly certain that spell combat would also trigger sneak attack, if it's used in conjunction with a regular attack. I'm also going to unify my ki and arcana pools at 6 so I have more versatility and choice.

He's Dex and INT based, with regular strength, average Con, and decent charisma, as I was thinking party Face would be fun (I'm into RP aspects as much as combat). When in combat, at low levels I may stay back and lob a few spells if needed, or I can run in and cut people up. A little later on, the idea was to use ki for an extra attack, then use spell combat to full attack, getting sneak attacks on each roll. I figured the single target damage I dish out would be monstrous.

I'm not really looking for optimization, and I don't think I'll switch after reading the perspectives here, but the advice is all very much appreciated. I've been reading old gestalt threads for weeks now, it's nice to see current opinions! Thanks!

Well if damage is your goal, i'm jumping on the Slayer bandwagon. Ninja is thiefy, but doesn't really fix your meh magus chassis. As others have said, slayer gives full BaB, all saves, d10, 6 skill points. You still get some sneak attack damage, but it's worth more with more iterative attacks (because a magus cannot use TWF to stack SA like a ninja or rogue) and studied target boosts your damage and to-hit on top of full BaB, helping to negate the spell combat penalties.

[Cosi]

Druid//cleric is a hilariously bad gestalt,

This is not really true. Like, yeah, you don't get cool stats or whatever, but you gives a crap? You get double casting. You can walk in with twice as many buffs as you normally would, and still throw around spells more freely (or get even more buffs, or abuse your downtime). The idea that caster/caster gestalts is bad is basically wishful thinking. It's slightly less wrong in Pathfinder because they nerfed Persistent spell, which makes it harder for people to walk in as better Fighters, but it's still not close to true.

That said, the general advice for gestalt is that you want as much casting as you can get and the best chassis you can get. The "active/passive" thing is stupid, because casters are both active and passive. If you find yourself with spell slots to spare, there will always be ways to spend more slots buffing or gaining advantage in the action economy (that said, in the specific case of "PF only, no PrCs" this is dampened somewhat).

[Florian]

@Cosi:

Outside of very specific builds, PrC are not really that much of a thing in PF and often outclassed by archetype combos.

The active//passive setup is a major thing, tho, as the economy of actions plays heavily into it, as do "flexible builds" that can gain and swap feats on the fly. A Cleric//Spiritualist or Cleric//Warpriest is a very strong build, as would be a Warsighted Oracle//Fighter for the ability to customize feats as a free action for every fight.

[exelsisxax]

This is not really true. Like, yeah, you don't get cool stats or whatever, but you gives a crap? You get double casting. You can walk in with twice as many buffs as you normally would, and still throw around spells more freely (or get even more buffs, or abuse your downtime). The idea that caster/caster gestalts is bad is basically wishful thinking. It's slightly less wrong in Pathfinder because they nerfed Persistent spell, which makes it harder for people to walk in as better Fighters, but it's still not close to true.

That said, the general advice for gestalt is that you want as much casting as you can get and the best chassis you can get. The "active/passive" thing is stupid, because casters are both active and passive. If you find yourself with spell slots to spare, there will always be ways to spend more slots buffing or gaining advantage in the action economy (that said, in the specific case of "PF only, no PrCs" this is dampened somewhat).

It's bad, given you have the option of a non-crap gestalt. A straight wizard can certainly surpass a rogue//fighter, that doesn't make wizard//nothing a good gestalt. It's terrible. You never actually use all those slots and spells unless you have a marathon DM - in which case having something not dependent on slots remains an advantage.

[upho]

By mid level, the CD & fleshraker & outsider & skeletons (all buffed) should be way ahead of the BA in total damage and total hp.Slightly OT but this got me curious. While I have no difficulties understanding how a CD could easily amass greater total hp than a BA, how would he be able to deal greater total damage? AFAICT, this would only be true in a game where most combats consists of hordes of lower CR mooks. Because when it comes to actually challenging foes, the CD's critters typically wouldn't be able to do much outside of perhaps providing the occasional meat shield and a low level buff spell or two, while the BA will likely one-shot the BBEG nearly as effortlessly as he one-shots mooks.

Or to put it in other words, I'm having a really hard time seeing a 12th level CD having much of chance against say a bog standard CR 20 balor, regardless of whether his menagerie of creatures are available and buffed to the max. But I can definitely see an equally optimized 12th level BA not just having a chance against a balor, but likely brutally murdering it in the very first round of combat.

What am I missing here?

(Minor nitpick: there are no fleshrakers in PF. Best not get your 3.5 druid-fu confused with your PF druid-fu, the latter being less powerful in general and having none of the former's tasty aged cheese within arms reach.) :smallwink:


The only drawbacks are that you would need a very active player and his turns will take an hour. Druid//monk isn’t stronger. It’s just easier. And while a full BAB wildshaped, buffed Druid with bonus feats would be a massive melee, in that particular group he would likely be better off as a bat throwing control/aoe/mass buffs.Indeed.


This is not really true. Like, yeah, you don't get cool stats or whatever, but you gives a crap? You get double casting. You can walk in with twice as many buffs as you normally would, and still throw around spells more freely (or get even more buffs, or abuse your downtime). The idea that caster/caster gestalts is bad is basically wishful thinking. It's slightly less wrong in Pathfinder because they nerfed Persistent spell, which makes it harder for people to walk in as better Fighters, but it's still not close to true.

That said, the general advice for gestalt is that you want as much casting as you can get and the best chassis you can get. The "active/passive" thing is stupid, because casters are both active and passive. If you find yourself with spell slots to spare, there will always be ways to spend more slots buffing or gaining advantage in the action economy (that said, in the specific case of "PF only, no PrCs" this is dampened somewhat).Agreed. Although as I touched upon in a previous post, unless you have quite a lot of experience with your chosen full caster classes (and a healthy dose of system mastery), chances are you'd simply nerf yourself in practice because you won't be able to opt your spell choices and their use well enough.

A build having great versatility from many options and moving parts typically only shines in the hands of a (very) experienced player. I think this also happens to be a major reason why the C/MD issue isn't nearly as much of a problem in most groups as one might assume based on an analysis of the poorly balanced rules.

[Florian]

@upho:

Basically, a CD would start with the summoning route and upgrade to calling spells after that, possibly going Herald Caller on the Cleric side, Planar Extremist on the Druid side, for easy and early entry on the required feats. That gives you a massive leg-up on breaking the CR limit of calling spells, which also include the Entice Fey variety that Druids get. Done right and with a good investment in CHA, you can call in equal CR outsiders and fey with a good chance to waive their fees.

[Cosi]

It's bad, given you have the option of a non-crap gestalt. A straight wizard can certainly surpass a rogue//fighter, that doesn't make wizard//nothing a good gestalt. It's terrible. You never actually use all those slots and spells unless you have a marathon DM - in which case having something not dependent on slots remains an advantage.

Yes you will. If nothing else, you can use the entire pile of slots on buffs and come out with more bonuses than most (all?) classes offer. Or get extra utility without cutting into your offensive abilities. Or get better action economy. Or whatever. Your mistake is somehow convincing yourself that "cast combat spells at combat time, 1 per round" is the only thing you can do with spell slots, which represents a near-total ignorance of the things casters can actually do.

[upho]

Basically, a CD would start with the summoning route and upgrade to calling spells after that, possibly going Herald Caller on the Cleric side, Planar Extremist on the Druid side, for easy and early entry on the required feats. That gives you a massive leg-up on breaking the CR limit of calling spells,It does? Now I'm really curious, because aside from expending a 2k Caller's Feather, I can't recall anything actually allowing you to break the planar ally spells HD limit on one single creature. And definitely not by as much as +8 additional HD... :smalleek:

So, what exactly is it that enables a 12th level CD to call and gain the service of an outsider of at least 20 HD? I'm not seeing how anything you've mentioned would have any real impact on this.


which also include the Entice Fey variety that Druids get. Done right and with a good investment in CHA, you can call in equal CR outsiders and fey with a good chance to waive their fees.I don't really think I understand what you mean when you say "call in equal CR outsiders and fey"? Is it that the called fey can have the same total CR as the called outsider(s), that they both will have a CR equal to your level, or that they both will have a CR equal to a balor?

[Gnaeus]

Let’s say we get 2 cloud giant skeletons (picked at random because there’s a stat block) with huge greatsword. That’s 6 attacks at about 24/19/14 prebuffed. 4d6+18 each prebuffed. Could be more if we rebuke.

Add a Bebilith. That’s 3 attack’s at +19 prebuffed. Total 6d6 + 27, prebuffed. Plus con damage and armor rending.

The T. rex is the weak sister. Attack around 2d6+14 + grab Prebuffed. But of course he’s built like a PC, so we hand him an int headband and next thing you know he has improved vital strike or greater improved grapple.

And then there’s a level 11 Druid//cleric. I think worst case would be something like harm and quickened admonishing Ray for another 12d6+110 damage.

That looks like 44d6+269 before feats, gear, domains or buffs. Plus rend armor, con damage, and grab. And I’m not calling that optimized, I just picked a beatstick planar ally and a beatstick skeleton. Without summoned monsters/nature’s allies, rebuked undead, giant eagles, hell hounds or enticed fey. I’ve still got another 12 hd of animate dead also, before CL tricks.

It’s possible that there may be high AC enemies you could outdamage that on. But it’s also possible that there are rounds in which you can’t pounce/full attack, in which case your damage is way, way lower.

[Florian]

It does?

Jupp. Augment Calling builds upon Augment Summoning and raises the HD cap by 2. There's also a trait that raises the cap by 1, but I'm too lazy too look the name up right now. The Blackfire Adept PrC will also raise the cap by 2 and the feats Favored Prestige Class and Favored Prestige Spellcasting will turn it into a smooth progression, no worries here since Herald Caller provides for free feats. Throw in the Feather and you're practically there. Now going this route will most likely involve levels in Diabolist for the handy bonus on the negation check and handling it all as a move and standard action, pretty nifty when reacting to a situation.

Contact/Entice runs on similar but very different rules. No circles and negotiation and such. You cast it, the creature shows up. Say hello to Dominate Monster, I hope you didn't ditch enchantment.

@Gnaeus:

Too complicated. You don't know enemy types and declaring "I go out to slay a T-Rex" is just silly.

[Gnaeus]

@Gnaeus:

Too complicated. You don't know enemy types and declaring "I go out to slay a T-Rex" is just silly.

The T-Rex is the AC. The Bebilith i just pulled off the planar ally list and cloud giants are just CR 11 beatstick that happened to have a statblock. I don’t need to kill cloud giants, I just need to assume that by level 12 we’ve killed some giants or other big thudding monsters. I picked them for convenience. In a game I suspect I could do better. Actually, with a 24 hd limit prebuffed, whatever is the biggest thing the BA can kill is my new skeletal slave.

[Cosi]

Also, by 11th level, you have teleport (or at least someone in your party does). If you really need to, you can go hunt down some giant monsters if any exist at all.

[upho]

It's terrible. You never actually use all those slots and spells unless you have a marathon DM - in which case having something not dependent on slots remains an advantage.FYI, not including orisons or 3PP spells, the cleric and druid spell lists include at least 77 spells with a duration of 1 hour/level, at least 45 spells with a duration of 10 min./level, and at least 66 spells with a duration of 1 min./level.

Any character could benefit substantially from several of these spells. And a CD can have the most suitable/best ones active a lot more often than a caster//non-caster could, by mid levels during basically every adventuring day, every time when in high risk areas, and/or every time when expecting combat. All while the CD can also remain at least as capable a caster in combat as any single-classed cleric or druid (or any cleric or druid gestalt combined with a non-caster class).

And this is basically on top of the potentially greatly increased utility and versatility double full casting grants.

This most certainly can drastically increase general power and effectiveness. Especially on a party-wide scale.

What exactly is it you find so unbelievable/illogical/incorrect about this?

[Gnaeus]

Also, by 11th level, you have teleport (or at least someone in your party does). If you really need to, you can go hunt down some giant monsters if any exist at all.

Yeah. In that group it looks like the CD is the only one with the good travel spells. I’ll only take you to the boss lair after a 3 day stopover in the giantfells is for sure a thing you can do.

Oh. My math was bad. Could made a third giant skeleton. Add another 12d6+75 or pretend one just died.

[upho]

That looks like 44d6+269 before feats, gear, domains or buffs. Plus rend armor, con damage, and grab.Funny, but this is probably very close to the average damage output of the BA build I imagined (hence its balor one-shot capacity), potentially including even the Con damage!

Anyways, these numbers don't really help that much if we're attempting to determine expected actual in-game DPR differences. There are too many and significant unknown factors involved, some of the most important ones likely being the number of monsters per combat and their expected AC and HP ranges.


And I’m not calling that optimized, I just picked a beatstick planar ally and a beatstick skeleton. Without summoned monsters/nature’s allies, rebuked undead, giant eagles, hell hounds or enticed fey. I’ve still got another 12 hd of animate dead also, before CL tricks.Well, although I wouldn't exactly call it low-op either, I agree it's pretty much what one would expect from a CD minionmancer not having to hold back.


It’s possible that there may be high AC enemies you could outdamage that on.Yeah, all his attacks are probably made at +30 or more when charging decently well equipped, more with other temporary buffs on top of rage and mutagen.


But it’s also possible that there are rounds in which you can’t pounce/full attack, in which case your damage is way, way lower.Actually, since he doesn't get into mounted combat and he's not allowed to dip a monk level for Horn of the Criosphinx abuse, the damage difference between a pounce and a full attack is likely much less significant than what is typical for similar charge focused builds. That said, there certainly is a difference, on top of the great dependency on pounces/full attacks you mention. But it should be noted that with Dragon Style, high speed flight, potentially awesome targeting capabilities and possibly stuff like erratic charge, the rounds when this type of BA wouldn't be able pounce are likely very rare at this level.

I think two much greater problems are his lack of even half-way decent multi-targeting and that he's bound to waste a lot of his damage on stupid overkills, while the CD's menagerie likely won't have to waste much more than a little nibble here or there in most cases.

[upho]

Jupp. Augment Calling builds upon Augment Summoning and raises the HD cap by 2. There's also a trait that raises the cap by 1, but I'm too lazy too look the name up right now.:smallconfused: I'm pretty certain there's a difference between total HD of creatures called and the max HD of any one single creature called.

Meaning you can increase the total HD cap with Augment Calling and by wearing the Feather, but the max HD of any single creature is still capped at 12 with for example planar ally. This is why the Feather's passive benefit says (my emphasis):

"...wearer can use the feather to call 2 more HD worth of creatures when casting a planar..."

Which is BTW for all relevant intents and purposes identical to Augment Calling:

"When using the planar ally or planar binding spells, you can call 2 additional Hit Dice of outsiders with..."

But the Feather's active benefit is a lot more powerful and actually expends the Feather:

"Alternatively, when casting one of these spells, the spellcaster can expend this feather to summon a single outsider with up to 2 more Hit Dice than the spell would normally allow. For example, he may summon a trumpet archon with planar ally, or a pit fiend with greater planar binding."

Notice how Augment Calling and AFAIK all other similar benefits are worded in a way similar to that of the Feather's passive benefit, but none of them have any language resembling that of the Feather's active benefit.


The Blackfire Adept PrC will also raise the cap by 2 and the feats Favored Prestige Class and Favored Prestige Spellcasting will turn it into a smooth progression, no worries here since Herald Caller provides for free feats. Throw in the Feather and you're practically there.Besides the above also applying to the Blackfire Adept, why are you suddenly talking about PrC's on a gestalt build explicitly limited to only two classes?

And yeah, I'm still wondering how you're calling a CR 20 outsider as a 12th level CD.

[Cosi]

And yeah, I'm still wondering how you're calling a CR 20 outsider as a 12th level CD.

In 3.5 Pit Fiends are CR 20 and 18 HD. While you can't personally call one at 12th level, you can use planar binding to call an Efreet who can use wish to emulate greater planar binding which can. There's also a more complicated (and more dubious) trick where you get the Efreet to Dark Chaos Shuffle itself into the Infernal Bargainer feat, which (if you squint and believe using SLA wish is sufficiently like casting something to count) boosts the HD cap on its greater planar bindings by 2 for evil outsiders which allows it to call a CR 20 Balor. There are also outsiders with lopsided CR/HD ratios, though I don't know of any with CR 20 at 12 HD (the highest I can think of off the top of my head is the MM2's Kelvezu which is CR 18 at 12 HD). Infernal Bargainer combined with early entry into Malconvoker can potentially get you 16 HD planar binding at 12th level, which may be enough.

Of course, all of that is 3.5 or earlier, so it's only relevant insofar as you believe in "backwards compatibility". That said, it would not surprise me if there are similar things in PF.

[Drelua]

Not saying that Druid//monk isn’t good, but remember that tier 1 classes can be better at everything. Both classes have good long/middle duration buffs like barkskin, magic vestment, resist energy, etc. It is very possible that running a steady stack of buffs will be more passively powerful than monk. Take quicken spell and you can devote multiple slots to low level quickened buffs. He can hold utility spells like condition heals without worrying about running out of spells. He has a pet to buff. And then there are the real long term powerhouses like animate dead and planar ally. By mid level, the CD & fleshraker & outsider & skeletons (all buffed) should be way ahead of the BA in total damage and total hp. The only drawbacks are that you would need a very active player and his turns will take an hour. Druid//monk isn’t stronger. It’s just easier. And while a full BAB wildshaped, buffed Druid with bonus feats would be a massive melee, in that particular group he would likely be better off as a bat throwing control/aoe/mass buffs.

Oh yeah, I definitely wasn't saying Druid//Monk is more powerful, I have no doubt that the obscene number of buffs a Druid//Cleric could walk around with would make it much deadlier. I'd only suggest it because personally, I wouldn't have fun playing a double caster build, at least not unless I ignored a good chunk of the things I could be doing. I'd have more fun as the Druid//Monk, especially if my GM let me flurry while being a dinosaur, but I'm sure someone that didn't mind tracking all those spells would feel differently. Of course, I get the impression this is a relatively low-op group, so maybe he just doesn't want to run out of spells healing.

[DMVerdandi]

I am very strongly with Upho is this. Druid/cleric is DEFINITELY better than everything else shown. The thing is that nearly every other benefit that everyone else has can be easily shored up with minimal investment in a spell. Yeah. caster supremacy, okay.

Anywho, Cleric and druid already have the best chassis out of all casters, so it makes it fine if they overlap. It's not like that really matters to them, as they can natively heal themselves.

Furthermore, with archetypes, these don't even need to be the same presentation any more. Persistent spell 3.5 is gone, yes, but individually, both classes got a LOT in ways of flavor. Druid//cleric doesn't just mean "green knight". Nah. It can literally be like 100 different combinations based on all the things you can do with them.




So, on them being a subpar class combination. Absolutely not. They both work off the same stat for casting, and you get 2 full lists of it, full of practically all day buffs.
Secondly, you STILL get an animal companion, which is a great resource for a dedicated bruiser.
Thirdly, you get tons of tradable abilities for both classes' archetypes.

Not wearing armor? Trade in cleric's martial prowess for a more diplomatic/skillful archetype. You still can fall back on druid's chassis.




On a druid//cleric being more boring than... damn near anything to play.
You get channel energy which can turn into various buffs, deity, animal, and environmental domains, wild shape, and an animal companion. And two full 9/9 Caster lists.

Trading one of those for...whatever? meh. Especially for a sub-par martial class. if we were talking path of war, I would be like YES. But, something like monk? Heaven's no.
Flurry of blows is not more fun than...anything really. It is a full attack +2. It's two weapon fighting feats with unarmed attack. If that is enough to amuse you, then...well maybe it would fit if that is enough to amuse you.

[Drelua]

On a druid//cleric being more boring than... damn near anything to play.
You get channel energy which can turn into various buffs, deity, animal, and environmental domains, wild shape, and an animal companion. And two full 9/9 Caster lists.

Trading one of those for...whatever? meh. Especially for a sub-par martial class. if we were talking path of war, I would be like YES. But, something like monk? Heaven's no.
Flurry of blows is not more fun than...anything really. It is a full attack +2. It's two weapon fighting feats with unarmed attack. If that is enough to amuse you, then...well maybe it would fit if that is enough to amuse you.

I didn't say it would be boring exactly, I said it would be too much work for me to enjoy. So my idea of fun doesn't involve spreadsheets, nothing wrong with that. And no, flurry of blows would not be enough to amuse me. Luckily, Monk has a bunch of other features, and I'd be able to use a combat style. Plus, I did say unchained monk, so the full BAB and things like flying kick would be nice too. At that point, yeah, I'd be amused, meaning I'm doing it right. But anyway, I'm rambling. The point is, for a lot of people, fun and power are not the same thing. Of course monk is a less powerful option than cleric or druid, that's always true. But for me, a decently built monk is more fun.

Of course, ideally it'd be a Soulknife, with Focused Offence to be WIS-SAD and Ghost Step -> Dimensional Assault, but since 3pp's out...

[Beardyface]

In the game I'm playing in on Saturdays, I run a gestalt Blackblade Hexcrafter Magus/Slayer and let me just say that it's a lot of fun. I have the highest AC of the group (mainly because I'm the only one that has access to Detect Magic and therefore knows what the good magic items are) and I pump out the damage. Spell Combat with Spellstriking a Rime Spell Frostbite makes for fun shenanigans at a full BAB. (Also, check out Kurald Galain's guide for the Magus)

[nmitchell2]

OP, you mentioned that you like the out-of-combat aspects of Ninja, namely the high numbers of skill points and being Cha-based so you can function as a face. My question is are you truly wedded to the Magus or Ninja classes? Because if not then I have some suggestions for you.

If you are prepared to give up the Magus side, you could pick any of Bard, Sorcerer, Oracle or even Paladin as the other side of your gestalt. Bard gives you the most to do out-of-combat and has plenty of (de)buffs to help your party in combat. Sorcerer and Oracle give access to full Cha-based spellcasting, just pick your preference out of arcane vs divine magic. Paladin is a roleplay-centric option; playing as an assassin with a holy purpose, the combination of Sneak Attack and Smite Evil is absolutely brutal as far as DPS is concerned.

It is possible to make an Int-based face as an Empiricist Investigator, they actually have 8+Int skill points and other class features that focus on their out-of-combat capabilities. Replacing Ninja with UnRogue would be another suggestion for a character focused on out-of-combat abilities and combining both Spellstrike and Sneak Attack in combat. Alternatively, any Int-based full spellcaster combines well with Magus and is actually universally accepted as one of the best gestalt builds. In your position I would actually choose Kensai Magus//White Haired Witch but as a player I'm not all that great at diplomacy so I'm slightly biased against Cha-based characters.

If you are truly wedded to the idea of Magus//Ninja then at least use the Cha-based variant of Magus; the Eldritch Scion. Magus has access to spells with multiple charges that can be discharged via the many attacks of the Ninja, if you can make all those attacks with one hand free to withhold the charges.

[Jack_Simth]

OP, you mentioned that you like the out-of-combat aspects of Ninja, namely the high numbers of skill points and being Cha-based so you can function as a face. My question is are you truly wedded to the Magus or Ninja classes? Because if not then I have some suggestions for you.

If you are prepared to give up the Magus side, you could pick any of Bard, Sorcerer, Oracle or even Paladin as the other side of your gestalt. Bard gives you the most to do out-of-combat and has plenty of (de)buffs to help your party in combat. Sorcerer and Oracle give access to full Cha-based spellcasting, just pick your preference out of arcane vs divine magic. Paladin is a roleplay-centric option; playing as an assassin with a holy purpose, the combination of Sneak Attack and Smite Evil is absolutely brutal as far as DPS is concerned.The Pathfinder Bard is also an interesting pick as it becomes progressively more of a skill monkey with levels, due to the "Versatile Performance" class feature. You're going to be grabbing at least one Perform skill anyway, and at 2nd level, that becomes two other skills. And if you've got Pathfinder Player Companion: Blood of the Beast (or are OK with just grabbing the info off of d20pfsrd.com (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/Bard/#TOC-Versatile-Performance-Ex-)), that one perform skill keeps becoming more other skills as you level (three at 6th, four at 10th, five at 14th, and six at 18th). Well, with 6+Int skill points, and one skill eventually pretending to be five different skills, you're effectively at 10+Int skill points (at 18th). It gets better: Pick up Pageant of the Peacock (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/bard/bardic-masterpieces/masterpieces/pageant-of-the-peacock/), and you can trade your bardic performance to use Bluff in place of any Int-based skill check or ability check (and get a bonus to bluff besides). One skill can become... what, 14+ different skills?