Gestalt as one level higher than normal

[yisopo]

In few months I am going to start a new campaign as DM: The Forge of Fury from the book Tales from the Yawning Portal. The original campaign is for heros from level 3 to 5.

I would like to run this campaign with PCs as gestalt heros (characters take two classes at every level).

My idea is to create rules for gestalt PCs such as they are virtually just one level higher than their real level. In practice, a level-3 gestalt hero would be equivalent to a level-4 regular hero. In this way I can just let my player start the campaign at level 2 (instead of 3) and being at level 4 (instead of 5) at the end.

Here the rules for my gestalt version:

- Classes/Subclasses. You get all the features of both classes/subclasses.
- Hit Dice. Choose the lower hit die and calculate as you were one level higher.
- Skill Proficiencies. Choose your skills from the skill lists of both classes. Whichever class gives the greater number of skills, you choose that number of skills.
- Saving Throws. Choose between one of your classes: you only get the saving throws from the chosen class.
- ASI. You only get one ASI at levels 4, 8, 12, 16, and 19. No double ASI and no ASI at different levels (Fighter and Rogue).
- Extra Attack. If you gain the Extra Attack feature from more than one of your classes, they don’t add together. Instead, if you gain the Extra Attack feature from both of your classes, you may exchange one instance of Extra Attack for a feat.
- Spellcasting. Treat both classes of the gestalt separately when it comes to determining spell slots, spells known, and cantrips known, and other. The two spellcasting systems are independent from each other.
- Multiclassing. Not allowed.


Do you think a regular hero is similar in power to a gestalt one with one level less?

[Amnestic]

Treating spellcasting as entirely separate from one another (essentially allowing a caster to have 2x as many spell slots as normal) while not letting fighters/rogues get their extras ASIs (which are class features) is certainly a wild choice.

But ultimately, no. A gestalt character with these rules is almost certainly going to always be more powerful than a non-gestalt that's a level higher, simply because they get twice as many class features and - if those features are spells - drastically more resources to play with.

[tKUUNK]

I agree this appears to favor spellcasting combinations a bit.

Also curious why the choice to go with the lower of the hit dice? Rather than higher, average, or d8s across the board.

As far as power level, yeah one level higher is probably about right. Yes, these characters will have more options, but they're still limited by action economy when it comes to combat.

[ciopo]

I'll assume you also get all class features of both classes (and subclasses, you omitted saying it, but I'll assume it.

special rule for extra attack are unecessary, they natively already don't stack unless one of them is fighter, and they are irrelevant for the campaign you are running anyway since no one will get them at all, since they will stop at 4th level

I would actually allow double ASI (and special class ASI of rogue/fighter), not that you would get any special ASI with your expected level 1 to 4 , or "one ASI and one feat" at 4-8-12-16-19


Using the lower hit dice makes no sense to me, could you explain to me your reasoning? all that encourages is picking classes of some HD bracket, rather than mixing martial ones and spellcasting ones

separate slots seems VERY permissive to me, I feel "separate spell KNOWN/PREPARED, but unified SLOT AMOUNT" would be fairer (with specific exception for warlock slots), i.e. a cleric 1//druid 1 would have X cleric spell prepared and Y druid spell prepared, but the spell slots of "a 1st level generic spellcaster"

[Just to Browse]

If I had the guess, this method of gestalt is going to skew heavily based on class choice, favoring rest classes. 5e balance centers heavily on resource attrition. This is probably going to be the least problematic at low T1, but starting at level 3 I expect a caster//caster gestalt to go nuts with their 12 daily slots.

Eyeballing how this rule could be used just for gestalt casters, I think your level adjustment would be +1 at levels 1 and 2, then +2 at level 3, +3 at level 6, and +4 at level 9.

What's your goal re:gestalting? Maybe we can investigate a different solution.

[yisopo]

I'm starting from this quote since the question is fundamental:

What's your goal re:gestalting? Maybe we can investigate a different solution.

The main reason behind my goal is that I'm lazy. I want to run a gestalt party without having to modify every single encounter of the published campaign. A simple rule "all heroes are gestalt but one level lower" would be perfect. But of course I'm open to other solutions.




But ultimately, no. A gestalt character with these rules is almost certainly going to always be more powerful than a non-gestalt that's a level higher, simply because they get twice as many class features and - if those features are spells - drastically more resources to play with.

5e balance centers heavily on resource attrition. This is probably going to be the least problematic at low T1, but starting at level 3 I expect a caster//caster gestalt to go nuts with their 12 daily slots.

Eyeballing how this rule could be used just for gestalt casters
I was thinking like tKUUNK: "these characters will have more options, but they're still limited by action economy when it comes to combat."
Moreover they are one level behind with these impacts: proficiency bonus, number of slots, level of slots, number of known/prepared spell, class feature, subclass feature.


I think your level adjustment would be +1 at levels 1 and 2, then +2 at level 3, +3 at level 6, and +4 at level 9.
Interesting. I would like to hear what others have to say about that.


I'll assume you also get all class features of both classes (and subclasses, you omitted saying it, but I'll assume it.
Yes. I edited the first post, thank you.


special rule for extra attack are unecessary, they natively already don't stack unless one of them is fighter, and they are irrelevant for the campaign you are running anyway since no one will get them at all, since they will stop at 4th level
You are right it is irrelevant for my campaign since it will stop at 4th. But I think it will be good to have a more general set of rules for future uses... and to cover the figher case.


I would actually allow double ASI (and special class ASI of rogue/fighter), not that you would get any special ASI with your expected level 1 to 4 , or "one ASI and one feat" at 4-8-12-16-19
I think double ASI would be too much if I want to have "n-level gestalt hero = n+1-level regular hero".


Using the lower hit dice makes no sense to me, could you explain to me your reasoning? all that encourages is picking classes of some HD bracket, rather than mixing martial ones and spellcasting ones
I thought choosing the greater it would encourage to much going with at least one class with d12/d10. So it would be almost always Fighter/Paladin/Ranger/Barbarian plus something else, possibly a Wizard or Sorcerer. But I'm open to change my idea here (and everywhere else).


separate slots seems VERY permissive to me, I feel "separate spell KNOWN/PREPARED, but unified SLOT AMOUNT" would be fairer (with specific exception for warlock slots), i.e. a cleric 1//druid 1 would have X cleric spell prepared and Y druid spell prepared, but the spell slots of "a 1st level generic spellcaster"
Unified slot amount? What about a Wizard-Paladin? At what level they can cast Find Greater Steed?


(essentially allowing a caster to have 2x as many spell slots as normal) while not letting fighters/rogues get their extras ASIs (which are class features) is certainly a wild choice.
More spells = more options. More attacks = better action economy. And DND 5e is based on action economy.

[Amnestic]

More spells = more options. More attacks = better action economy. And DND 5e is based on action economy.

Right, but unless you're not draining a normal caster's spell slots during an adventuring day, there'll come a time where Johnny Oneclass is down to cantrips, while Jimmy Gestalt-head still has an entire second set of slots to play with.

Besides which, more slots boost the action economy. If I'm a wizard/cleric, and I dump every wizard slot into Shield/Absorb Elements/Silvery Barb, that drastically boosts my number of usable reactions vs. a single class person, while still leaving all my normal actions free to play with.

Also the rogue and fighter ASIs don't have anything to do with action economy, so no idea what you're talking about there?

[False God]

Personally I think the maximum level of your campaign will make gestalt not mean much. If you're looking for a tougher party, just start them with higher stats. If you're looking for more options, let everyone run 2 characters. Low-level play is dominated by the d20, and gestalt, standard or your twist, really won't overcome that. I don't think the level difference will make a difference either.

Generally speaking, your specific rules really neuter the benefit of taking a martial class on the side and outrightly neuter fighters and rogues on their own. Which leaves me scratching my head since typically gestalt is meant to pair up classes on opposite ends of the stat-spectrum and get their best elements.

Your system seems designed to make Wizard-Clerics or Sorcerer-Druids. And I'm not sure I see the point. Do people not want to play casters at your table?

[Frogreaver]

I’d say that if you just dropped the double spell slots that this would work great and a 1-2 level difference would seem about right then.

Players can still choose caster classes that provide recovery of slots.

Alternatively, allow features like extra attack to stack as well and keep the double slots.

Because as it stands right now casters get alot more use out of your gestalt than martials.

[Silly Name]

Unified slot amount? What about a Wizard-Paladin? At what level they can cast Find Greater Steed?


I would have them use the "better" slot progression, so a Wizard/Paladin would obtain slots as a Wizard.

But I'd also still follow the multiclass rules re: spell acquisition. So the Wizard/Paladin can only prepare the spells a Wizard or Paladin of his character level could.

E.g., a level 5 Wizard/Paladin could learn and prepare 3rd level wizard spells, but only prepare 1st level paladin spells. So he'd still have to be level 13 to cast Find Greater Steed.

[SharkForce]

I don't think you're likely to notice a *huge* difference at the lowest levels. double-spellcasting builds will have far more resources, but in general being higher level is far more valuable on a wizard or druid than it is to a rogue or fighter.

With that said, the game is obviously not balanced for gestalt, either, so there'll probably be a few times where something really stands out as being a better option than others.

So, for general use... I think you'll have some pretty significant problems. Not just in spellcasters, either... a fighter 11/rogue 11 is going to have some pretty abnormally high consistent damage, for example; not only does sneak attack stack fully with the fighter's innate ability to do damage, but getting 3 attacks makes sneak attack damage *really* reliable, and if you can squeeze in a reaction attack that gets sneak attack damage in it's going to be well above what a typical level 12 melee can sustain, I suspect.

In the specific case where you're talking about a campaign that goes from 2-4 instead of 3-5, you may need to keep in mind that level 5 is typically a big jump for most classes; extra attack, fireball, spirit guardians, hypnotic pattern, and so on. a level 4/4 wizard/cleric is not going to have that big power spike that a level 5 cleric or level 5 wizard would have.

[ciopo]

I thought choosing the greater it would encourage to much going with at least one class with d12/d10. So it would be almost always Fighter/Paladin/Ranger/Barbarian plus something else, possibly a Wizard or Sorcerer. But I'm open to change my idea here (and everywhere else).


Unified slot amount? What about a Wizard-Paladin? At what level they can cast Find Greater Steed?


More spells = more options. More attacks = better action economy. And DND 5e is based on action economy.

Re: hit dice, that would precisely be the point of keeping the higher rather than the lower. Better build diversity instead of lowkey incetivizing making caster/caster - martial/martial combinations

I would say unified slot because the amount of slot is staying power, while spell known/prepared is a broadening of versatility.

The spell known/prepared for each side of the gestalt would simply be what a single classed character of that level would have.

Re: double ASI. My thinking is, different classes want different ability scores and/or feats. having the features of two classes makes for high competition on feats/ASI, because what a wizard wants is not what a ranger want.


As it is in your proposed model, notwithstanding the double spell slot thing, if I were to play with your system I would feel compelled to make "boring" choices like I don't know, going barbarian/fighter and only pumping STR, rather than mixing classes that are different from each other in playstyle/role/tools. Which is reductive compared to what gestalt could be.

To flip my impression a bit, your proposed model is kinda "you are a single classed (CLASS1) what also have all the class features of (CLASS2)", which is fine, but promotes chooisng a class2 that's synergetic to class 1, and so it's not really giving "more versatility" in scope compared to what class 1 would do. Like why would I pair fighter to wizard if I get "the worst of both world" if I can't chase ASI for both roles and must pick the worst HD of the two besides?

And on the flip side, bard/sorcerer or cleric/druid are just as "boring", to me.

tho, I recognize double ASI has the same problem that pairing bard/sorcerer get more juice out of it than a pairing that have different primary ability scores

[Silly Name]

Here's how I would handle ASIs:

"Any time you gain a level for which both of your classes grant an Ability Score Increase, you must use one Ability Score Increase to take a feat. You're free to use the other Ability Score Increase as you see fit (to raise one ability score by 2 points; to raise two ability scores by 1 point each; or to take a feat)."

Fighters and Rogues still get their extra ASIs, as that's quite clearly an intended class feature for them.

[yisopo]

Thank you everyone for you precious ideas. Based on those I changed my gestalt version in this way:

- Levels. nth-level gestalt hero = nth+1-level regular hero.
- Classes/Subclasses. You get all the features of both classes/subclasses.
- Hit Dice. Choose the higher hit die and calculate as you were one level higher.
- Skill Proficiencies. Choose your skills from the skill lists of both classes. Whichever class gives the greater number of skills, you choose that number of skills.
- Saving Throws. Choose between one of your classes: you only get the saving throws from the chosen class.
- ASI. No double ASIs.
- Extra Attack. If you gain the Extra Attack feature from more than one of your classes, they don’t add together. Instead, if you gain the Extra Attack feature from both of your classes, you may exchange one instance of Extra Attack for a feat.
- Spellcasting. Treat both classes of the gestalt separately when it comes to determining spells known/learned. Regarding the slot progression, you get the better one. However you can only prepare the spells your single classes/subclasses of their character level could (e.g., a level 5 Wizard/Paladin could learn and prepare 3rd level wizard spells, but only prepare 1st level paladin spells).
- Multiclassing. Not allowed.


What do you think about this new proposal?

Moreover: how do we manage a Warlock now? :smallbiggrin:

[Amnestic]

Moreover: how do we manage a Warlock now? :smallbiggrin:

Since you've split it by "better" casting, I'd suggest Full Caster>Pact Magic>Halfcaster in the 'hierarchy'.

So if you're a Wizard//Warlock, you use "normal" wizard spell slots. For mystic arcanum I'd say it just turns into an additional spell known rather than a 1/day casting.
If you're an Artificer//Warlock, you use pact magic slots, and mystic arcanum is the same as normal.

[ciopo]

I would proviso that pact magic short rest slots are sufficently divorced from normal spellcasting that they merit remaining separate. I.e. they are a class feature of warlock called "pact magic", which is distinctly different from the class feature called "Spellcasting" of every other spellcasting class.

Or, if we want to generalize it, make some proviso for other class features that have the same name in different classes.

The sa me ones that are listed under normal multiclassing rules, pretty much. Unarmored defense is the only one you havne't called out iirc

[Skrum]

If you're playing 2-4, does Extra Attack even come up....?

Also the spellcasting still feels crazy and overly complicated. I would recommend that if a character takes two classes with spell progression, they use them better of the two for spell slots/spells known, and they may use the combined spell list of both classes. I.e., wizard 4//paladin 4 would have 4 1st level slots and 3 2nd level slots, and they can prepare spell from their book and the paladin spell list.

Warlock just stacks on top, like it does for regular multiclassing. Wizard 4//Warlock 4 would have the spell slots of a wizard 4, plus 2 2nd level slots that recover on a short rest.

[Slipjig]

I concur with not giving double ASI, but I don't understand why Fighters don't get their bonus ASI. Those extra ASIs are a major class feature for the Fighter, and that's especially true if you are playing a game with feats.

Same thing with picking the lower hit die: it discourages mixing the HP tiers. The inability to mix rage and spellcasting is already going to steer most people away from Barbarian, taking away the d12 is only going to exacerbate that.

[yisopo]

If you're playing 2-4, does Extra Attack even come up....?
As stated above, my main priority is to have this variant working with 2-4 gestalt heroes (equal to 3-5 regular heroes). But I would really like to cover more levels since other future campaigns may use this concept.


I concur with not giving double ASI, but I don't understand why Fighters don't get their bonus ASI. Those extra ASIs are a major class feature for the Fighter, and that's especially true if you are playing a game with feats.

Same thing with picking the lower hit die: it discourages mixing the HP tiers. The inability to mix rage and spellcasting is already going to steer most people away from Barbarian, taking away the d12 is only going to exacerbate that.
If you see in the middle of the thread, I changed my proposal:

- Levels. nth-level gestalt hero = nth+1-level regular hero.
- Classes/Subclasses. You get all the features of both classes/subclasses.
- Hit Dice. Choose the higher hit die and calculate as you were one level higher.
- Skill Proficiencies. Choose your skills from the skill lists of both classes. Whichever class gives the greater number of skills, you choose that number of skills.
- Saving Throws. Choose between one of your classes: you only get the saving throws from the chosen class.
- ASI. No double ASIs.
- Extra Attack. If you gain the Extra Attack feature from more than one of your classes, they don’t add together. Instead, if you gain the Extra Attack feature from both of your classes, you may exchange one instance of Extra Attack for a feat.
- Spellcasting. Treat both classes of the gestalt separately when it comes to determining spells known/learned. Regarding the slot progression, you get the better one. However you can only prepare the spells your single classes/subclasses of their character level could (e.g., a level 5 Wizard/Paladin could learn and prepare 3rd level wizard spells, but only prepare 1st level paladin spells).
- Multiclassing. Not allowed.

But I'm going to change the Spellcasting rules here again soon. :smallbiggrin:

[yisopo]

Also the spellcasting still feels crazy and overly complicated. I would recommend that if a character takes two classes with spell progression, they use them better of the two for spell slots/spells known, and they may use the combined spell list of both classes.
What about known spellcasting and prepared spellcasting? How do you see a combined spell list of Wizard/Sorcerer, Wizard/Cleric and Cleric/EK?