Gestalt: What to Fear as a GM

[Bladesong]

Let me see... I have been running a gestalt campaign for almost 2 years. The characters currently range from 14th to 16th level. There is a rogue/monk, paladin/sorceror, wizard/bard, fighter/cleric and a wizard/fighter. In the past there was also a barbarian/bard and a fighter/rogue. I did not allow any class changes, but no one asked for one. I did not allow pres. classes, but no one asked for one.
Strangely enough it is only difficult to challenge the rogue/monk; there is no save he cannot make (and take NO damage at all), no location he cannot fight in, and virtually no situation one of his skills does not apply to.
It really only matters how skilled you are as a DM. There really is not too much they can do to catch you off guard unless you are not monitoring what they have access to.
Personally, I believe the barbarian/bard was the most interesting character and is the one I would like to try if I ever was a player; which I have not been in almost 10 years, unfortunately.

 

[airwalkrr]

Actually most templates can be bad for the DM. Particularly if you allow the buy-back rules from the U.A. Feral is good fun for players...

The buyback rules are simply ridiculous if you are using core D&D mechanics for awarding XP. The XP system is self-correcting, meaning you take a small hit now to become more powerful for your level than you were supposed to be later on.

 

[airwalkrr]

Consider a Level 4 Rogue or Wizard who is also a Pixie (+8 Dexterity, +6 Intelligence, +4 Wisdom, +6 Charisma, Damage reduction 10/cold iron, greater invisibility at will, and spell resistance 19) - and compare it to your Level 4 Fighter/Cleric.

Honestly, I would recommend against allowing PC races with DR or any kind of energy resistance on principle. These kinds of things are meant to be obtained by PCs through spells or VERY expensive magic items. Additionally, they are much more valuable in the hands of a PC than in the hands of a monster.

 

[lukelightning]

Honestly, I would recommend against allowing PC races with DR or any kind of energy resistance on principle. These kinds of things are meant to be obtained by PCs through spells or VERY expensive magic items. Additionally, they are much more valuable in the hands of a PC than in the hands of a monster.

Hear hear! Very few monsters carry around +1 silver anarchic weapons. DR 10/magic is mediocre for a monster, as nearly every character has a magic weapon by level 5 or can at least make their weapons magic (magic weapon spell, etc). But most monsters use natural weapons and don't carry around things that can penetrate DR.

 

[Drowbane]

I enjoy boggling minds.

I dare you to come up with a reasonable character concept that can't easily be met by a core gestalt build.

Seriously.

Define reasonable.

Anything | Warlock: To me the Warlock is what the Sorc has wanted to be since it's inception.

While I agree that alot of the new base classes (such as Samurai, Hexblade, Swashbuckler, Wu Jen, Favored Soul, etc) don't truely offer up anything new that you can't "reasonably" fake with PHB alone... other new base classes such as the Warlock, Shadowcaster, Soulknife, Totemist) can't be faked. Well, I guess Warlock could with the Sorc... but its a rather poor representation.

I blame my old 2e group, but I detest Vanila "Core Only" D&D. I've done just about everything in the PHB that I care to a dozen times or more.

 

[Drowbane]

eep, doublepost.

Was it just me, or did Enworld go poof for abit this morning?

Most (meaning, all of the ones I've seen on ENworld) of the DMs out there that call for "Core Only" are the exact same DMs who dismiss Gestalt as totally OTT. Thus its weird that you'd be cool with Gestalt... but still call for "Vanila". As I've said in countless posts regarding Gestalt and others against "Core Only"... I'm all about character versitility. Power and thus "balance" is relative.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Fighter/Barbarian!

"Wow! You are good at fighting. And fighting!"



The scariest is probably the Paladin/Sorceror. But honestly do not see that as necessarily more effective than a Sorceror/Barbarian with a massive Cha & spellcasting feats who hangs back and blasts away. The HPs, Fort save, DR, and skill points are sweet for a spellcaster.

 

[Drowbane]

...But honestly do not see that as necessarily more effective than a Sorceror/Barbarian with a massive Cha & spellcasting feats who hangs back and blasts away. The HPs, Fort save, DR, and skill points are sweet for a spellcaster.

Not to mention being able to Rage and go to town if you really have to.... or put that better-than-average speed to use for retreat!

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Truthfully, even the Paladin/Sorceror is not that bad if you look at a real build. The limitations of feats and stat point prevent any truly monstrous synergies.

If he does not put all his feats into melee fighting and wear heavy armor, he will not make a very impressive combatant without rounds and rounds of buffing. And he needs a decent Str.

If he wants to be good at spellcasting, then it is going to Light or no armor and all those feats into his spellcasting. At that point, going Barbarian instead of Paladin is pretty comparable.

If I were playing in this campaign, I would probably go either:
(1)Fighter/Cleric -- Skimp on Wis and use spells for defense and utility purposes. Go for a classic superoffensive Fighter build.
(2)Druid/Rogue -- Be a pretty normal Druid who can set up massive full iterative Sneak Attacks with the help of the Companion or summoned helpers to gain a Flank. Saves are very strong.

 

[Drowbane]

Truthfully, even the Paladin/Sorceror is not that bad if you look at a real build. The limitations of feats and stat point prevent any truly monstrous synergies.

If he does not put all his feats into melee fighting and wear heavy armor, he will not make a very impressive combatant without rounds and rounds of buffing. And he needs a decent Str.

If he wants to be good at spellcasting, then it is going to Light or no armor and all those feats into his spellcasting. At that point, going Barbarian instead of Paladin is pretty comparable.

If I were playing in this campaign, I would probably go either:
(1)Fighter/Cleric -- Skimp on Wis and use spells for defense and utility purposes. Go for a classic superoffensive Fighter build.
(2)Druid/Rogue -- Be a pretty normal Druid who can set up massive full iterative Sneak Attacks with the help of the Companion or summoned helpers to gain a Flank. Saves are very strong.

I second the Druid | Rogue build.