Gestalt characters in a normal game

[nameless]

I'm wondering if anyone has experimented with allowing Gestalt characters from UA into a normal game. I think it's a mild oversight that there is no LA determined for Gestalt characters, as the level of power gained is pretty consistent over all levels. My first ad hoc instinct is to say +2 or +3 LA compared to normal characters.

Is it even appropriate to give some people the option of Gestalting in a game where not every character has the "template"? I see it as sort of a throwback to 2E multiclassing/dualclassing. Due to the exponential XP chart growth, it ended up putting a multiclassed character a couple of levels behind a single-classed one, but not nearly the same as sequential multiclassing of 3E.

 

[Chupacabra]

I have not experimented with Gestalt yet, but mixing it in with non-gestalt PC's may be kinda dicey. The gestalt characters will have loads more options (spells, combat feats, skill ranks, save bonuses) than their non-gestalt counterparts. The "normal" PC's may just feel like extras while the Gestalts are the stars of the show.

Now I don't see why you could not allow "normals" to level up as Gestalts. That is, not having to start your campaign over at level 1. Say one of your characters was a level 5 fighter. He qualifies for a 6th level and takes a gestalt level of "fighter/rogue", giving him essentially the best of a 6th level fighter and the best of a 1st level rogue in terms of save bonuses, skill points, BAB etc. But if you allowed this, again, I would think that you should open this up to all of the other PC's in the group so they would not feel left behind.

 

[Bendris Noulg]

Agreed... To me, Gestalt Characters are more for settings akin to Dune or Amber, where a few individuals (such as a Noble Caste or the last survivors of a dying Race) are head-and-shoulders above everyone else.

So, I haven't tried them (since incorporating them into Aedon would meen yet another rebuild of the rules), but I could see them as being entirely functional if the concept was a part of campaign design from the beginning and might consider doing so in the future (post-Age of Frost, perhaps).

Edit: A random thought I just had was for Dark Sun, where you essential Gestalt everybody as Psion/Whatever. But that's just a random thought.

 

[reiella]

Hmm, if I had to give an LA, I'd probably stick with a +1, possibly a +2.

To mirror the Encounter Challenge adjustment that is suggested in the write up for the Gestalt.

 

[kamosa]

In 2e

In 2E multiclassing LA worked out to about +2. A fifth level character would be about a 3/3 character. However the Gestault characters are just a little better than the 2E multiclassing. 2E you took the average hitpoints instead of best of both worlds like 3E. So, if I was going to allow it I would stick with the +3 LA for Gestault characters.

 

[Gilwen]

so far gestalt characters have worked great for my groups which consistantly has only 2 - 3 players.

Gilwen

 

[Bendris Noulg]

so far gestalt characters have worked great for my groups which consistantly has only 2 - 3 players.

Oh, that reminds me of something else I thought of: Gestalt-style is perfect for solo games and 2-3 member groups. At the very least, it makes adjusting CR a little easier than for non-Gestalt and the PC has more of her own abilities to draw on without needing (occasional-to-frequent) help from NPCs.

 

[LightPhoenix]

It's also good for theme games... a wizard's school game could have all the characters be Wizard/something. A more Wuxia style game could be Monk/something. A travelling circus theme could all be Bard/something.

 

[nameless]

Thanks for the suggestions, all.

I'm more looking to put in Gestalt characters as an option to represent a different type of hybrid archetype, not as a theme campaign. Mainly for spellcasters. Looking at non-Gestalt options for hybridization, I can see Eldritch Knights, Mystic Theurges, and Arcane Tricksters. The cost of hybridization in those cases is the loss of 2 or 3 levels of spellcasting progression in return for smoothly merging the classes into a more elegant whole. I tend to balance my games against spellcasters, because (from what I've experienced) they really define the part of the power curve that can break a game on its own. Gestalt characters are pretty much optimized for combining spellcasters with nonspellcasters (or fighter/rogues), so it's a matter of versatility more than straight power.

At low levels (5-10, counting the LA) I think I'm going to implement the Gestalt "template" as +2 LA, and at 11+, I'll put it at LA +3. I'll report back to you to on how it works out.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

If you want to have a gestalt character in a normal game, my best advice would be to use the worst of both worlds (WoBW) rather than the best. This is more what the mystic thurge looks like. So a rogue/fighter would have the feats and sneak attack (and other specials) of both, but have rogue BAB and HD, fighter skill points, and no good saves. Harsh? Definitely, but the alternative is insane to put in with a group of normally created characters. It also switches the balance of power in terms of what classes are good to stick together somewhat. Combos that would be underpowered in a BoBW gestalt system (because the strengths of both classes are in skill points and they are close on other variable factors) become better options in a WoBW gestalt.

But my basic opinion is that since some classes have their main strength in the "extras", while others have the melded "variable factors" as a source of more power, its very hard to assign a single LA to a "gestalt character". Each one has to be looked at individually.

Kahuna Burger