My fix for the caster/non-caster gap

[Umbral_Arcanist]

I was recently thinking about ways to help alleviate the power gap between non-casters and casters. Basically, the main problem is that full casters can do sooo much more than non-casters, right?

So i figured that giving non-casters more verstility would be a good way to help out. Now the idea i came up with it kind of out there and i likely haven't thought it out enough but here it is anyway:

Under this variant when a character takes a level they can take a level in a full-caster class or in two non-caster classes. This basically makes all non-casters gesalt without affecting full-casters. Obviously full-caster PrCs would need to be distinguished from non-full caster PrCs and the non-spellcasting variants would be best for the ranger and paladin.

Is this an idea worth developing or would it not help?

[Quietus]

Depends on how you run your game; If you have a bunch of pure optimized primary casters, then sure, it could work at high levels. At low levels you're just giving an insane power boost to the melee characters, at a time when the casters are feeling the need to rest after every other fight.

Personally, I'd say - if you're starting at level 10-15, or higher, it could potentially work. Otherwise, find a better way to balance things. Personally, I'd love to play a Monk/Fighter gestalt beside some pure spellcasters. The amount of unarmed/grapple craziness I could pull off would be amazing.

[Everyman]

*Blink*

This can't work. I'm sorry, but why would granting someone double "mundane" class features equal one level of casting features?

Assuming that you give said "mundane" characters double HD, saves, and what not, they will quickly render saving throws useless. Those spells that don't allow saves rarely have the benefit necessary to overcome the massive power boost multiple HD/saves grant.

If what you propose is only granting a single HD, BAB, save progression but a double ability progression, then you've given these characters far too much potential and not enough cohesion. Characters only have so many actions per round, so giving them more abilities doesn't grant them much of a power boost. If it does (perhaps granting rogue and fighter level bonuses at the same time), you give too much power to a single action and simply make the casters less useful.

Most importantly, you would be seriously corrupting the game's linear progression of levels (1-20) by upsetting the rate at which new abilities are gained. I would fully expect the "mundane" to render the casters ineffective until high levels. At that point, I am unsure how casters can even begin impact the game they way "double mundane" characters would.

[Mewtarthio]

So, you're suggesting a gestalt game in which full casting classes must take both sides of the gestalt progression?

[Umbral_Arcanist]

So, you're suggesting a gestalt game in which full casting classes must take both sides of the gestalt progression?

Yes.

Tarkahn, check d20SRD.org for the gesalt variant if you arn't familiar, it explains it there.

I got the idea from the SRDs comment about creating more powerful PrCs that counted as both sides of the progression or something like that... i think...

[Rigeld2]

So... how does a Gestalt Fighter//Fighter level work? d10HD, good Fort save, poor others, 2+Int skills, full BAB...

What is the gain here?

[Mewtarthio]

So... how does a Gestalt Fighter//Fighter level work? d10HD, good Fort save, poor others, 2+Int skills, full BAB...

What is the gain here?

He means that you could gestalt, say Fighter // Rogue, or Ranger // Monk, but Wizard would take up both sides of the progression (effectively Wizard // Wizard).

[Wehrkind]

That is kind of interesting. It might be worth a play test or two. It sort of reminds me of the old XP/level progression of AD&D, where wizards took forever to level up, almost twice as fast as fighters or rogues, but a multi class fighter/rogue only got 50% xp to each class, so they were about the same level... hmmmm

[melchizedek]

I'd be very interested to try this. I think it might work, especially in high starting level campaigns.

[Viscount Einstrauss]

Hey, fighter//fighter might not get much off of the progression, but damn if it wouldn't have mad featage. Human fighter//fighter 20 with 30 feats?!

[Rigeld2]

Hey, fighter//fighter might not get much off of the progression, but damn if it wouldn't have mad featage. Human fighter//fighter 20 with 30 feats?!

Wrong. If both side get an ability, you get the one that progresses fastest. So youd get one stack of Bonus Feats.