Hypersmurf said:
So if I want to be a F/MU/Th, for example...
At level 1, I take Rogue and Fighter levels.
At level 2, I take Rogue and Wizard levels.
At level 3, I take Wizard and Fighter levels.
... so I have 2 levels in each class at 3rd level.
You wouldn't permit that?
-Hyp.
No, I wouldn't. Wizard swapped 'sides'. To be perfectly honest, it's mainly a book-keeping measure. It's a lot easier to keep track of saves, attack bonuses, and so one when you can look at each side independently, and Gestalt is complex enough that some smoothing at the cost of some flexibility is appreciated by my players and I.
MithrasRahl said:
Total aside, but if you're running a gestalt campaign, how much stronger do the bad guys need to be?
You don't need to make too many adjustments, honestly. The PCs will be a lot more 'broadly powerful' - in other words, they can do more things with competency - but the
height of their power doesn't really increase much - in other words, they don't get a lot more competent at anything in particular.
There are exceptions, of course (barbarian//druid is murder in wildshape, for example), but they're nearly always obvious well ahead of time. Dual full casters can also be problematic, mainly because you will never, ever drain them of all of their spells once they hit 4th or 5th level.
For example, I could easily have TPK'd my average level 7 Gestalt party using Book of Nine Swords and third party (Swashbuckling Adventures) content with the CR 11 young adult green dragon they encountered last session - and I even use Action Points and allow the expenditure of 3 APs from any party member(s) to prevent a character death (leaving the character at -1 and stable).
