Gestalt via job class?

[StreamOfTheSky]

Ok, so ever since my friend told me about 4E's multiclassing through feats and that it reminded him of my old gestalt idea, it's been bugging me. (For the record, I see few similarities between 4E and this myself.)

Basically, I used to LOVE Final Fantasy Tactics, and my favorite part was the fun combos you could make with the job class system, having your primary class to provide your raw stats and powers, but also a secondary class that added purely the features. Now, I'm in no mood to make a complex job points system, and (sadly) D&D classes aren't balanced nearly as well as FFT classes were, so a system of swapping around classes isn't what I was after.

Instead, I came up with an idea to make a gestalt game, except you only get class features and spells/powers/maneuvers from the second class. Now, obviously left at that, a Fighter/Wizard is much better than a Wizard/Fighter, and really, you should be better at your primary class than the secondary. So, in the secondary class, your levels progress at a 3/4 rate, increasing each level a medium BAB character would gain a point of BAB, so you start 1/0 and by level 20 have class levels of 20/15. Each "side" is completely independent for CL/ML/IL, and for effective HD, so if you're Fighter 13 / Sorcerer 9, you can't cheat the system by taking Practiced Spellcaster (since, as far as your sorcerer side is concerned, your CL = HD).

For some examples: A Fighter 2 / Rogue 1 would have good BAB and fort saves, one bonus feat, trapfinding, and +1d6 SA (hmm...maybe levels you gain in the secondary, you should gain the class skills to your list, so stuff like Trapfinding isn't worthless?). A Cleric 7 / Wizard 5 would have medium BAB, good fort and Will, turn undead, CL 7 cleric spells, CL 5 wizard spells, Scribe Scroll, and a bonus Wizard feat. Now, I'd like some opinions.

1) Just how much stronger is this than standard D&D? If it matters for MAD, I like high-powered games, so it'd likely be 32 point buy.
a) Do you think for classes with very powerful "class features" like Wizard, the slower progression and gimped CL make up for all the nice raw stats of a weaker features class like Fighter?
b) What if I limited players to ONLY the two class combo? No other multiclassing, no prestige classing. Even if I allowed that stuff, it'd be strictly on the primary side.

2) This leaves traditionally poor levels, namely 5, 13, and 17, looking even cruddier. Would it be much of a powerup to give bonus feats at these levels, since people will likely be splitting feats between two classes anyway? Is there a better option to help at these levels? (I'm aware of the "dead levels" article)

3.) What are the most broken combos with this system that you can think of? What are some that are underpowered? I'm willing to ban certain classes too good for secondary status, and to improve ones whose class features aren't good enough for the role. I have a hunch Factotem could get ugly...

Thanks for any help!

 

[Jack Simth]

Let's see....

1) Depends on how well your players optimize. The Druid//ninja will do very well at 5+ with the extreme case of SAD. Full Spellcasting, Wis to AC, swift-action invisibility, and a little Sudden Strike. With all class abilities based off of Wisdom, this character will only be very slightly behind a "normal" gestalt, and reasonably ahead of a standard non-gestalt character. If your players tend towards MAD (Paladin//wizard) or classes with a lot of overlap (Ranger//fighter) it's only a mild boost over a standard character.
a) Yes and no. Traditional Power Classes won't go on the second side if your party is optimizing, unless they're used for utility only - you are unlikely to get a Fighter//wizard, unless the Fighter is only interested in utility spells and minor buffs. You're more likely to get a Sorcerer//paladin, a Druid//monk, a Cleric//fighter, and so on - cases where the second class offers class features that complement the primary in some way (Paladin's Divine Grace and Lay on of Hands complements a Sorcerer's Charisma score very well; a Monk's Wis to AC while unarmored complements the Druid's armor restriction and Wisdom casting stat very well; the Fighter's bonus feats help out a combat cleric, et cetera).
b) It'll get rid of certain types of cheese, but not all of them.

2) Someone who is optimizing won't be splitting their feats between the two classes. They'll be focusing on their main class, and using the other for abilities that complement their main class well.

3) Very strong: Druid/ninja, Druid/monk, Druid/swordsage, Cleric/swordsage; very weak: Fighter/Barbarian.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

I notice all your "strong" combos are either Druids or Clerics (and what, no mighty Cleric/Druid?! ^_^), and I have to wonder...is it this ruleset that makes those combos overpowered, or is it simply that those two classes are overpowered from the start? Heh heh...

The Ninja nonsense is a good catch. I've considered banning that class for a long time anyway. It's just so very poorly designed, and while normally weak, your simple combo shows how it can be cheesed for all it's worth, too. I realize Druid/Monk gets the main benefit of the Druid/Ninja (wis to AC), but really...if that's all you want from your multiclass...there's already the belt and wilding clasps. Swordsage would not benefit most druids, unless you got wilding on your light armor. Well, the maneuvers are nice at least.

I didn't realize before, but I guess it is generally better to go caster/non-caster than the other way around, even with low hp, AC, and saves as a result. (I just realized --you would NOT gain weapon and armor proficiencies from the secondary -- that's kinda important.) Really though, I think that's just because full casters win at D&D, and it's not really a problem unique to this rule set. These rules at least make "gish" and combat characters with support and utility abilities more viable. And I think a "gish" who went Fighter/Wizard, or better -> Warblade/Wizard, could do quite well buffing with transmutations and polymorphs and wading into combat with good hp and maneuvers.

As for the extra feats idea, any other ideas, or is it best to just leave those levels barren?
EDIT: Or, maybe restrict the feats to ones appropriate for the secondary class? Might be too circumstantial, I prefer as little wiggle room as possible in rules.

 

[Jack Simth]

I notice all your "strong" combos are either Druids or Clerics (and what, no mighty Cleric/Druid?! ^_^)

Conservation of actions makes that particular combo not particularly good. You want gestalt sides to be different, not similar.

, and I have to wonder...is it this ruleset that makes those combos overpowered, or is it simply that those two classes are overpowered from the start? Heh heh...

A big part of it is that the Druid and Cleric are rather strong bases - but that's far from all of it. See, what I'm doing is pairing up special abilities that do not take an action with a strong base that does take actions.

The Monk's AC is nice, yes... but that's not the only reason for having Monk in the background. See, you also get the bonus speed, evasion, a few bonus feats, some immunities, and other nifties. Take the Druid//monk. The Druid side Wild shapes into something with pounce and three or more natural attacks. The Monk has this nifty ability that the unarmed strikes can be made with any body part. Now you've got a full attack on the end of a charge that deals extra sized damage, followed up by several natural attacks that also deal a fair amount of damage. You end up with a beast that's almost impossible to hit (high dex and natural armor from wild shape, higher AC from Monk's AC bonus), hits very hard (high strength from wild shape, high base damage on iterative attacks, decent base damage on natural attakcs), hits very often (no real need to Power Attack for more damage when you're hitting with that many), and can do it from sixty feet away in the surprise round. Oh yeah - and with one or two of the hits, you have to make a Fort save or lose your next round's actions. The Monk has a lot of no-action abilities that go well with the Druid's action abilities... and they're all Wisdom based. Normally, the Monk has a bad case of MAD (needs Strength for to-hit and damage, Dex for AC, Con for HP, Wis for AC), but Wildshape removes the need for Strength and Dex. Monk does very well in this combination.

The use of Swordsage or Ninja is very similar - combine abilities, and use your swift and free actions on things that significantly boost your main side.

The Ninja nonsense is a good catch. I've considered banning that class for a long time anyway. It's just so very poorly designed, and while normally weak, your simple combo shows how it can be cheesed for all it's worth, too. I realize Druid/Monk gets the main benefit of the Druid/Ninja (wis to AC), but really...if that's all you want from your multiclass...there's already the belt and wilding clasps. Swordsage would not benefit most druids, unless you got wilding on your light armor. Well, the maneuvers are nice at least.

Focus on the swift-action boosts or the immediate-action counters, and you're set. Really, you are.

I didn't realize before, but I guess it is generally better to go caster/non-caster than the other way around, even with low hp, AC, and saves as a result. (I just realized --you would NOT gain weapon and armor proficiencies from the secondary -- that's kinda important.) Really though, I think that's just because full casters win at D&D, and it's not really a problem unique to this rule set. These rules at least make "gish" and combat characters with support and utility abilities more viable. And I think a "gish" who went Fighter/Wizard, or better -> Warblade/Wizard, could do quite well buffing with transmutations and polymorphs and wading into combat with good hp and maneuvers.

Yes.. and for a Gish, look up Minor Shapeshift - the swift action temporary HP every round is worthwhile.

As for the extra feats idea, any other ideas, or is it best to just leave those levels barren?
EDIT: Or, maybe restrict the feats to ones appropriate for the secondary class? Might be too circumstantial, I prefer as little wiggle room as possible in rules.

Enforceable only by DM fiat, really. Especially when you consider that there's an awful lot of feats that apply to more than one class. Leave them barren - it's fine.

 

[Arkhandus]

I didn't realize before, but I guess it is generally better to go caster/non-caster than the other way around, even with low hp, AC, and saves as a result. (I just realized --you would NOT gain weapon and armor proficiencies from the secondary -- that's kinda important.)

Actually, proficiencies ARE class features. They're listed right under the start of the Class Features section of each class' description.

Also - I could see someone going Psion/Wilder for the scads of Power Points to just nuke everything. Power Points normally stack, regardless of which class granted them.

 

[Nifft]

Also - I could see someone going Psion/Wilder for the scads of Power Points to just nuke everything. Power Points normally stack, regardless of which class granted them.

While power points normally stack, there's at least a case to be made that they would merely "accrue at the faster rate" rather than doubling the base.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Arkhandus]

Depends on how the OP implements it. By the standard gestalt rules, yeah, you'd obviously take only the base power point advancement of whichever class was better in that regard. The bonus power points, since they work a bit differently for each class (based on different stats and such) might still stack.

Obviously, a cleric/wizard gestalt doesn't just get whichever class' spellcasting progression is better, because the specifics differ, so a psion/wilder would probably get both class' bonus power point progressions. Too bad the Gestalt rules just don't touch on psionics specifically, else we'd know for sure if power points from different psionic classes would stack in Gestalt rules. As it is, there's some precedent for assuming that the character receives all the power points he or she would be alloted, but would keep each pool of power points separate.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

The Monk's AC is nice, yes... but that's not the only reason for having Monk in the background. See, you also get the bonus speed, evasion, a few bonus feats, some immunities, and other nifties. Take the Druid//monk. The Druid side Wild shapes into something with pounce and three or more natural attacks. The Monk has this nifty ability that the unarmed strikes can be made with any body part. Now you've got a full attack on the end of a charge that deals extra sized damage, followed up by several natural attacks that also deal a fair amount of damage. You end up with a beast that's almost impossible to hit (high dex and natural armor from wild shape, higher AC from Monk's AC bonus), hits very hard (high strength from wild shape, high base damage on iterative attacks, decent base damage on natural attakcs), hits very often (no real need to Power Attack for more damage when you're hitting with that many), and can do it from sixty feet away in the surprise round. Oh yeah - and with one or two of the hits, you have to make a Fort save or lose your next round's actions. The Monk has a lot of no-action abilities that go well with the Druid's action abilities... and they're all Wisdom based. Normally, the Monk has a bad case of MAD (needs Strength for to-hit and damage, Dex for AC, Con for HP, Wis for AC), but Wildshape removes the need for Strength and Dex. Monk does very well in this combination.

This all sounds nice, but I think you're getting something confused. You can be very big for sized unarmed damage. You can have great dex. You can have pounce. You can have huge str to make up for your mediocre BAB (which is the same monk BAB people always say they can't hit with, the "flurry of misses"). But, aside from maybe some broken splatbook (I place MM's 2-x in this category), there is NO form that will give you all of these things at the same time. Now then, you could pounce in a form with 3+ natural weapons AND flurry. However, until monk 9, you'd take penalties for flurry, all the natural attacks would be secondary, suffering a further -5 to hit and doing only half str damage... it sounds scarier than it really is, IMHO. And what are all these passive abilities a monk gets based on wisdom? Only one I can think of after AC is stunning fist, which is only once per round and targets most monsters' best save. And would have a gimped DC with the secondary's level progression. If the druid/monk gimps str and dex, his pre-wildshape levels will be rough, and it'll be tough to qualify for some melee feats, possibly. It IS a great combo, though. Druid/Monk was always a favorite of mine in normal gestalt, and it loses little here. Thanks for mentioning.

The use of Swordsage or Ninja is very similar - combine abilities, and use your swift and free actions on things that significantly boost your main side.

Focus on the swift-action boosts or the immediate-action counters, and you're set. Really, you are.

Until those interfere with your quickened spells and such...

Yes.. and for a Gish, look up Minor Shapeshift - the swift action temporary HP every round is worthwhile.

I know that feat, it's amazingly awesome. It's like Imp. Toughness, only repeatable! Except if you're caster is secondary, you won't be high enough CL to qualify for a fair while.


Ark: I know normally they are, I'm saying they probably should e excluded for this, cause then it's even more enticing to go mage/non-mage and get some nice, mithral twilight armor. Just a thought.

Nifft: Why wouldn't the PP stack? It'd be like wiz/cleric. You'd have lots of spells per day, but each "side" is tracked separately for each class. Yes, a psion/wilder would have lots of PP, but he'd have to use each pool for each powers known list, no combining. This is probably more powerful than combining with a non-casting class, but the secondary ends up with the casting ability of a mystic theurge, which everyone's always telling me is underpowered, so I don't see the problem. Horrible action synergy, for one thing.

 

[Nifft]

Nifft: Why wouldn't the PP stack? It'd be like wiz/cleric. You'd have lots of spells per day, but each "side" is tracked separately for each class. Yes, a psion/wilder would have lots of PP, but he'd have to use each pool for each powers known list, no combining. This is probably more powerful than combining with a non-casting class, but the secondary ends up with the casting ability of a mystic theurge, which everyone's always telling me is underpowered, so I don't see the problem. Horrible action synergy, for one thing.

Well, like I said, "a case could be made". That means it's not 100% clear.

However, here's the skeleton of the case:

1/ "Class features that two classes share (such as uncanny dodge) accrue at the rate of the faster class."

2/ Power points are a class feature, just like Trap Sense, which is shared between Rogues and Barbarians.

3/ Thus, they "accrue at the rate of the faster class", not at double that rate.

That's the strict RAW, not a generous and humane DM looking at making Psionics & Spellcasting be equally powerful.

- - -

However, IMHO, it's just another reason to NOT play that underpowered choice. Far better to play a Warblade // Psion or a Paladin // Wilder.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Jack Simth]

This all sounds nice, but I think you're getting something confused. You can be very big for sized unarmed damage. You can have great dex. You can have pounce. You can have huge str to make up for your mediocre BAB (which is the same monk BAB people always say they can't hit with, the "flurry of misses"). But, aside from maybe some broken splatbook (I place MM's 2-x in this category), there is NO form that will give you all of these things at the same time. Now then, you could pounce in a form with 3+ natural weapons AND flurry. However, until monk 9, you'd take penalties for flurry, all the natural attacks would be secondary, suffering a further -5 to hit and doing only half str damage... it sounds scarier than it really is, IMHO.

Under this set of house rules...

The deinonychus (base Monster Manual - Core) gets Strength 19, Dex 15, +5 Natural Armor, four attacks, and Pounce. You can start up with this at 5th level (as soon as you get Wild shape) and with a good Wisdom for the Druid side with the Monk's AC bonus, you'll have an AC that will have a fighter hoping for 15+ ... and that's without any Power Attack. At 5th, if you Flurry, you're looking at 2 unarmed strike +5 for 1d6+4, Talons +0 for 1d8+2, 2 Foreclaws +0 for 1d3+2, and Bite +0 for 2d4+2; if you don't flurry, you're looking at 1 unarmed strike +7 for 1d6+4, Talons +2 for 1d8+2, 2 Foreclaws +2 for 1d3+2, and Bite +2 for 2d4+2.

Of course, at 8th, you switch critters - to the Dire Lion, who's got 25 strength, 15 Dex, 4 natural armor, three attacks on a full attack, five on a Pounce. Plus your unarmed strike attack. At this point, with these house-rules, you're treated as a 6th level Monk - so your flurry is at -1, rather than -2 for the extra attack, and as you're using a Large form, it's 2d6 damage base for the Unarmed Strike, rather than the 1d6 of last time. Oh yeah - and you're getting an iterative attack from BAB.

At 9th, you take Multiattack, and the penalty on your secondary natural attacks drops to -2.

At 12th, the penalty on the Flurry of Blows goes away (treated as Monk-9) and your Large Wildshape Unarmed Strike is now up to 2d8.

At 15th, you get an extra Flurry attack (monk-11), and get an extra Iterative Attack from BAB.

At 16th, you switch forms for a Dire Tiger (27 strength), otherwise basically the same as the Dire Lion.

This is all before Druid buffs, such as (Greater) Magic Fang and Barkskin, and items such as a Belt of Strength, Bracers of Armor, a Peripat of Wisdom, and Wilding Clasps from the Magic Item Compendium. You're limited to Lawful-Neutral, so now Vow of Poverty (which would otherwise do quite well with this build).

Oh yes, it gets scary, it just doesn't start out too bad. The Ninja is worse, due to Sudden Strike applying to all attacks and Swift Action invisibility, but the Monk is plenty good.

And what are all these passive abilities a monk gets based on wisdom? Only one I can think of after AC is stunning fist, which is only once per round and targets most monsters' best save.

Ah, right - the Monk's only got the two. Of course, with all the Large, High-strength critters you gain access to from the Druid side, Improved Grapple starts looking very tasty later on. Hmm...

And would have a gimped DC with the secondary's level progression. If the druid/monk gimps str and dex, his pre-wildshape levels will be rough, and it'll be tough to qualify for some melee feats, possibly. It IS a great combo, though. Druid/Monk was always a favorite of mine in normal gestalt, and it loses little here. Thanks for mentioning.

Pas de probleme.

Until those interfere with your quickened spells and such...

Which, you know, aren't particularly useful in battle until you reach the point where you're Quickening ... ah, for the Druid, it's Entangle, which is a 1st level base spell, so 9th. Still, most of the Swift action boosts and Immediate Action counters will be worthwhile.

I know that feat, it's amazingly awesome. It's like Imp. Toughness, only repeatable! Except if you're caster is secondary, you won't be high enough CL to qualify for a fair while.

Plus it can do other stuff, too, if you're not worried about the temp HP at the moment.

As a Whatever//Wizard gish, that'd be 10th level for the spell to qualify. 12th for the next feat slot.