Gestalting with monster levels. Has it been done?

[Storyteller01]

Anyone tried this yet?

I don't mean 'I'm a minotaur/yaun-ti!!!', but say someone geastalts as a minotaur/barbarian? Has this been covered?

 

[Barendd Nobeard]

Never thought of that. I'm starting a gestalt game soon and this might just happen. Great idea! I hate the Level Adjustment rules for monster classes (I think it makes the monster much too weak as PCs), but gestalt solves the problem nicely. They still might be a bit behind the power curve of "normal" gestalts, but not as behind as a monster PC in a regular (non-gestalt) game.

 

[gabrion]

It's generally accepted (at least by me ) that LA in a gestalt build is better that it would be otherwise, and thus should not fill one side of a gestalt progression the same as any other class. Many DMs actually have LA take up both sides of a gestalt build, but I prefer to simply multiply it by 1.5 and then put it on one side, the way a class would work normally.

 

[interwyrm]

This is tricky. I'd say do it for non-martial classes. For martial classes, you'd be surprised, some monsters are better than if not as good as characters of the same level... lemme give you my list:


My criteria is this - will I have more than or equivalent hitpoints to a fighter of the same level? Will my attack after str mod be better than or equivalent to a fighter of the same level.
The way I've phrased these is how many class levels the monster needs to take before it is equivalent to a fighter of the same level, and how many total it needs to be better than a fighter of the same level.
Blackscale lizardfollk: viable after 4 levels, better after 6.
Erinyes: Viable to start off with, better after 1 level.
Bralani Eladrin: Viable after 5 levels, better after 6.
Troll: Better to start off with.
Gargoyle: viable after 4 levels, better after 5.
Gargoyle advanced to large (7hd): Better to start with.
Stone Giant: Better to start with
Gnoll: Viable after 3 levels, better after 5.
Lizardfolk: Viable after 3 levels, better after 5.
Hobgoblin: Viable after 4 levels, better after 6.
Minotaur: Viable after 2 levels, better after 4.
Ogre: Viable after 2 levels, better after 4.
Sahuagin: Viable after 8 levels, better after 12. Special consideration for the 4-armed.
Half-Celestial: Viable after 11 levels, better after 12.
Half-Dragon: Viable after 8 levels, better after 12.

 

[Dog Moon]

The DM in our Gestalt game has decided he disliked the idea of monsters or monster classes [such as those in SS] because part of the penalty is the losing of the HD, which also means, hp, saves, BA, skills, and feats, but in Gestalt, you would gain all those anyway, which means the monster part is even buffer than normal.

It seems like that yeah, having an LA take up only one of the levels isn't harsh enough for what I said above, but taking up an entire Gestalt level hurts even more because you're losing a lot more abilities.

But multiplying it by 1.5 and having it affect only one side might be decent, though it isn't something I've seen yet in play.

 

[Viktyr Gehrig]

Combining monster HD with class levels-- preferably monster's Favored Class-- is a mercy, and is probably necessary to make them even remotely playable.

I agree with others about the concern with LA. It can't be applied to a single side of a Gestalt progression, because the Gestalt progression involves losing things like HD and skills, but it's a greater penalty than it would be in a standard game.

I generally lower anything with an LA +3 or higher by one-- leave Half-Dragon at +3-- and anything with an LA of +6 or higher by two unless it's a Dragon or an Outsider. (Of course, I use NPC/PC Gestalt and have monster HD replace the NPC class.)

 

[interwyrm]

Well, the penalty should certainly be less than normal, because gestalt is more powerful than normal. The guideline for gestalt challenges is to assume the party's ECL is one higher than normal. Figuring that means that each character is basically as powerful as if he were one level higher, level adjustments should all be reduced by one.

I'd probably go with Korimyr's suggestion, although even without the LA reduction, I think I would jump at the chance to play an erinyes (based on the stats alone). Of course, that requires starting at what, 16th level?

 

[Viktyr Gehrig]

I'd probably go with Korimyr's suggestion, although even without the LA reduction, I think I would jump at the chance to play an erinyes (based on the stats alone). Of course, that requires starting at what, 16th level?

That's why I don't give the LA reduction to Outsiders. Outsider HD are about as good as full classes by themselves, but any Outsider worth its weight in HD will have a large LA to balance it out.

I'd allow them to use Monster classes, with the understanding that they only get to Gestalt levels that give them HD.

One of the more interesting builds I've seen is Doppleganger/Rogue 4 || Rogue/Mindspy 5 || Rogue/Warshaper 5. It's well worth the +3 LA.

 

[Luthien Greyspear]

I've been toying around with this as well, as we just added a minotaur character to our mid-high level gestalt game. In order to preserve some small balance in regards to HD, skill points, saves, etc., I ruled that any monster levels can be gestalted with another class ONLY when the monster levels grant an actual HD. So the minotaur character could, at 8th level minotaur, also be gestalted with six levels of any other class(es). I think this keeps the intent of the monster classes intact, while also allowing the character to gain gestalt benefits.

 

[Amazing Triangle]

I force my players to use monster hit dice and LA in the same vein so say it is werewolf you would have to use all 7 levels all in the same vein. This can make some pretty potent fighters, or some very dexterious rogues.