E6 - Gestalt?

[Andor]

I haven't had a chance to play E6 but I'm planning on pitching it to my GM soon. But reading through the E6 codex I noticed a lot of references to attempts to make it more "Gestalt". Which lead to my wondering...

What if in E6 instead of a new feat advancement was gained by adding a Gestalt level? So a 6th level Fighter E6g character might advance to become a Fighter 6/Wizard 1. Effectively a 1st level Fighter/Wizard Gestalt character with 5 levels of Fighter tacked on.

The upside would be a smoother form of gestalting, and expanded character options for E6 characters, including, perhaps, access to more than one level of a prestige class. The primary thing to pay attention to is that spell casting should not progress beyond 6th level no matter how many caster level progressions your prestige class might give you.

The downside of course would be book-keeping. It would be highly desirable to track each level of a characters advancement in this set-up. A simple spread sheet would make things easier to see.

Any thoughts? Too much trouble for too little gain?

 

[Cadence]

I haven't looked into the gestalt that in depth before... but you prompted me to google gestalt E6 and do so. Wow, there's a bunch of stuff out there! My initial thoughts were negative, but reading through them is making me consider the possibilities.

Looks like a few people wonder if E6 (power limiting) and Gestalt (power increasing) are contradictory. But most of the ones who sound like they tried it say it adds flexibility without increasing the power _that_ much. One site suggested 5,000 for getting a feat, or 10,000 for getting a gestalt level (F6 to F6/W1 in your example).

I'm less sure about the prestige classes. The standard Gestalt doesn't give any powers that couldn't normally be gotten at that level (max 6 in this case). Do a bunch of the prestige classes break that?

 

[Andor]

I'm sure some do. Not that you can get your spell casting that high, but a Druid 6/Warshaper 3/ Master of Many Forms 3 would be notably badass for example.

Usually the reason gestalt is not outrageous is that the main limiting factor is the action economy. A Cleric 6/Wizard 6 can still only cast 1 spell per round. So classes where the abilities are passive or synergistic should be attended to closely. As always splat spread is where the cheese starts leaking in.

You know thinking about it, it's not the spell casters you'ld have to watch, it's the melee types. A Fighter 6/ Rogue 6 is much more powerful than a single classed character. And something like a Warblade/Totemist would be ... I don't have words. So with that in mind most prestige classes probably aren't too bad. OTOH you'll probably be able to hit some capstone abilities.

And interestingly enough this approach would salvage some mediocre PrCs that suffer from abilities with caster levels or saves that lag too far behind the level you aquire them. Hmmm....

 

[Cadence]

I hadn't thought of how abusive Fighter 6/Rogue 6 could be.

Are there some cross-class stacking that would need special rulings (animal companions with druid/ranger)?

I always have to fight getting mentally hung up on possible internal consistency/pseudo-simulationist problems. So, a new epic wizard (one of the best in the world) pretty much hits a plateau and can't really improve that way no matter how much they try, but can turn around and in pretty short order also become one of the best fighters in the world too without having any of the magic skills atrophy? Or the wizard could start working towards doubling their arcane spell capacity by coincidentally discovering they have some bloodline that gives them a new batch? The worlds greatest fighter can't increase his BAB by picking up a new fighting class, but a cleric or rogue can?

 

[doghead]

Adding gestalt to E6 would certainly change things somewhat. But I don't think it would fundamentally undermine the purpose of E6. The caps on BAB, Saves, HD, Caster Levels would all remain the same.

It would offer a degree of flexibility that the standard E6 does not. I personally am quite happy with simple characters. But many people love mixing and matching classes and feats and stuff. Gestalt E6 offers them the ability to do this in a way that the standard form does not. Players who are not than keen on playing the standard form may be more willing to play a gestalt version.

One result of gestalt E6 would be a convergence toward maxed out characters. Depending on how long the game lasts, and how many times the characters are allowed to go around the buoy, you could end up with every character at near max BAB, Saves, HD, Caster Level etc. But given the shear range of available classes, feats, spells etc, there is still likely to be plenty of differentiation between them. So I don't think that it is a bad thing, its just a ... thing.

thotd

 

[Andor]

Are there some cross-class stacking that would need special rulings (animal companions with druid/ranger)?

I always have to fight getting mentally hung up on possible internal consistency/pseudo-simulationist problems. So, a new epic wizard (one of the best in the world) pretty much hits a plateau and can't really improve that way no matter how much they try, but can turn around and in pretty short order also become one of the best fighters in the world too without having any of the magic skills atrophy? Or the wizard could start working towards doubling their arcane spell capacity by coincidentally discovering they have some bloodline that gives them a new batch? The worlds greatest fighter can't increase his BAB by picking up a new fighting class, but a cleric or rogue can?

Well the interesting thing in Gestalt is that the Max advancment sort of represents the pinacle of possible skill. So no the Best fighter can't improve his BAB, but the Rogue or Cleric can gain... 2 points over 6 levels. A wizard can gain 3 over 6 levels. That's a lot of effort for a proportionally modest gain, I personally wouldn't have a problem with it.

A Wiz 6/ Sorcerer 6 is an interesting concept but what, really, does he gain from it? A lot of spells per day which could be easily replaced by a couple of wands and a pile of scrolls? Any time 6 class levels can be replaced by some level appropriate gear, you've wasted 6 class levels. And you've given up the BAB, saves, skills, etc you might have got from branching out further. The Wiz 6/ Druid 6 would be a lot more attractive to me, as well as interesting to explore from a character perspective. Is this a Wizard going back to nature and embracing his inner hippie? Is it a Druid who has abandoned the woods for Academia?

As far as atrophy goes, nothing in D&D atrophies, except possibly by stat changes with age. God I wish the real world worked that way. ;_;

 

[Nytmare]

Forgive me, cause I haven't touched third edition in a long long time, but wouldn't this (at least from a mechanical standpoint) make it so that no one would ever multi-class?

 

[Cadence]

Forgive me, cause I haven't touched third edition in a long long time, but wouldn't this (at least from a mechanical standpoint) make it so that no one would ever multi-class?

From the d20srd for standard gestalt option you can take any two classes at each level (max of one prestige per level). So it seems like for this version you should be able to have up to six different classes getting to sixth level and then get a different six going back up with your gestalt advancement.

 

[Nytmare]

Yeah, but wouldn't a character who dabbled prior to hitting 6th level end up limiting themselves over a character who maxed out a class and then went gestalt after they hit the cap?

Wouldn't a 3/3 Wiz/Fighter swordmage kinda character end up way behind a level 6 fighter who then started tacking on levels of wizard?

 

[doghead]

Yeah, but wouldn't a character who dabbled prior to hitting 6th level end up limiting themselves over a character who maxed out a class and then went gestalt after they hit the cap?

Maybe. Maybe not. I'm not enough of a power gamer to make an assessment of which would produce a more 'powerful' character. But given that the player is free to choose either approach, what would be the problem?

thotd