PDA

View Full Version : Gestalt variation



Fenix_of_Doom
2007-12-22, 10:56 AM
Gestalt is, to me, best known as a variant for people who like to make crazy builds or want to play high-powered campaign's, I've never been able to try it out myself, but I find the concept intriguing.
So when I was looking at a swift hunter build somewhere I suddenly thought about a ranger/scout gestalt build and if it would be balanced against, lets say, a druid. And why stop there? assuming non-ToB, would it be balanced to make non-full-casters gestalt characters?
I've just thought of this so I haven't thought it trough myself entirely, but I have some rough variations:
(note: all of this only applies to non-full-casters)

1. Players get to pick 2 characters for gestalt but can't multiclass after that.

2. Players get to pick 2 characters for gestalt at every level as per normal gestalt rules, but then without the full-casters.

3. Every class gets a "pall", a ranger will always be a ranger/scout, a rogue will always be a rogue/bard, maybe classes will get 2 or 3 options but that's it.
If you use multiclass penalties then every different combination will count as a different class. Specific combinations would have to be decided after careful consideration.

4. Players get to pick one gestalt combination, if they want to multiclass they'll only get access to non-gestalt classes, if they want to go back to their first class it will still be gestalt.
Note that players can choose ranger/scout as gestalt class, and simply start playing as a barbarian if they'd like to.


Would you find any of these 4 options interesting, and are they balanced?
Discuss!

Karsh
2007-12-22, 12:30 PM
I'd say probably 1 and 3 are the best options out of those four.

A slightly less powerful option would be to let them take one of the NPC classes as the second half of their gestalt.

Valairn
2007-12-22, 12:48 PM
A big part of me says this is totally unnecessary. If you are worried about players building power combos in gestalt, then you probably just shouldn't play gestalt at all.

Fenix_of_Doom
2007-12-22, 12:51 PM
A big part of me says this is totally unnecessary. If you are worried about players building power combos in gestalt, then you probably just shouldn't play gestalt at all.

That's because you totally missed the point, I don't want to play gestalt as it's written, I want a variant that gives weaker classes more options.

ErrantX
2007-12-22, 01:02 PM
A variant gestalt that some friends and I have used is at 11th level you pick a second base class to add to your character, which would start at level 1. So a 10th level fighter who picked up say, bard next would be an 11 Fighter / 1 Bard.

-X

Draz74
2007-12-22, 03:09 PM
A variant gestalt that some friends and I have used is at 11th level you pick a second base class to add to your character, which would start at level 1. So a 10th level fighter who picked up say, bard next would be an 11 Fighter / 1 Bard.

That's an intriguing idea. I like it similarly to the "Gestalt, but one-half is an NPC class" variant. I'd make it start at Level 6 rather than Level 11, though.

Valairn
2007-12-22, 08:32 PM
That's because you totally missed the point, I don't want to play gestalt as it's written, I want a variant that gives weaker classes more options.

Honestly I'm gonna have to maintain my original position, fixing underpowered classes can be "better" addressed through fixing the classes themselves. Options are easier to grant, extra feats, bonus abilities, whatever you please. Its a good idea, but I think in the end it adds more complication, especially when you bring in someone who wants to play one the so called better class, and they feel slighted that they don't get snazzy gestalt options for themselves. A class "fix" is generally easier to accept then letting someone else play by a different set of rules.