Gestalting

[Nifft]

But it also clearly lays out a system where it is treated like a single class.

That's not what it says:

The process is similar to multiclassing, except that characters gain the full benefits of each class at each level.

Looks to me like the opposite of a single class.

You get all "restrictions" of both classes - regardless of combination.
[...]
It does not state that the paladin's multiclass restriction does not apply. In fact the rules specifically state that all restrictions apply regardless of class combos.

So either Paladin's can't ever take more than one level -- because even one level of Gestalt is "similar to multiclassing" -- or Paladin restrictions don't apply to the non-Paladin "side".

Elethiomel says this better than I did, so I'll just mention that fact here.

Cheers, -- N

 

[irdeggman]

That quote cuts both ways, irdeggman. It doesn't say "other half of the class" or "other part of the amalgam". It says "no matter what the other class is". Which leads me to believe that it doesn't matter what the other class is with regards to multiclassing restrictions.

And it could be read that way.

But it is very clear that the restrictions are not ignored.

If read as an amalgam - then the sorcerer/paladin would be treated as a single class and any other class (not already allowing multi-classing paladins -like some Prestige Classes) would invoke the restriction.

If read as it only affects the paladin side then any level where a non-paladin class level is taken would thus violate the restriction.

In no place does it say that some class restrictions are ignored.

I see more evidence to indicate (at least in my opinion) that the gestalt level is treated more as single class (i.e. an amalgam) rather than two separate classes.

 

[Nifft]

I see more evidence to indicate (at least in my opinion) that the gestalt level is treated more as single class (i.e. an amalgam) rather than two separate classes.

Would you mind posting some?

I keep seeing "the two classes" and "the Gestalt character". I can't find a single instance of "the Gestalt class" or anything else that references the creation of a single new class.

Thanks, -- N

 

[irdeggman]

That's not what it says: Looks to me like the opposite of a single class.

Where in any core book does it ever talk about amalgams?

IMO they use the multi-classing comparison because people understand multi-classing and it is used in other books (i.e., there are existing mechanics for it).

Now if it is like multi-classing, how much like it is it?

It does not have multiple hit die.

It does not have stacking BAB and saving throws.

Levels of both classes do not count towards character level (e.g., no level based feats, max skill ranks or ability score adjustments).

So either Paladin's can't ever take more than one level -- because even one level of Gestalt is "similar to multiclassing" -- or Paladin restrictions don't apply to the non-Paladin "side".

Again only if it is not viewed as amalgam. Which the text does not forbid (that is it does not address it and it does not flat out say that it is not a single class with benefits fo both classes overlaid)

 

[irdeggman]

An interesting gestalt combo to me would be a soul knife/warlock.

Always has a weapon (ranged and melee), can wear armor (light) without adverse effects.

If the right invocations are chosen the character could be very, very stealthy (and deadly with psi blade properly charged).

 

[Nifft]

Where in any core book does it ever talk about amalgams?

Exactly the same place as where they discuss Gestalt. (Look at the variant classes & alternate class features, in the sections right before Gestalt. They're all about making one class with features from another.)

IMO they use the multi-classing comparison because people understand multi-classing and it is used in other books (i.e., there are existing mechanics for it).

Now if it is like multi-classing, how much like it is it?

More than it is like creating a new class.

Let's step away from Paladins for a moment and look at Fighters.

My Gestalt PC takes Rogue//Fighter for two levels, then Bard//Fighter for two levels. How many Fighter Bonus Feats does he get in total? Three, or four?

Cheers, -- N

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

I saw a Factotum//Warblade on the CharOP board...thing looked scary as...words I can't say lest I offend Eric's Grandma.

I always liked this combo for int to....everything. But, I have to wonder how it fares w/ no real casting (arcane dilettante does NOT count!).


Really, can't go wrong with Factotem/Warblade/Wizard/Factotem/Monk (w/ feat to use int instead of wis); pick 2. A wizard or psion combined with factotem and the Font of Inspiration feat could get very scary once Cunning Surge and Cunning Breach become available.

 

[Nifft]

Warblade // Psion was always my favorite. Full casting, ability to fight all day or "nova", ability synergy (Int), skill synergy (Concentration), armor works fine, and even some mystical flavor synergy.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Elethiomel]

If read as an amalgam - then the sorcerer/paladin would be treated as a single class and any other class (not already allowing multi-classing paladins -like some Prestige Classes) would invoke the restriction.

Let's say I read it that way. If so, and someone was advancing as a Paladin/Sorcerer, then as Fighter/Marshal and then wanted to switch to Paladin/Marshal, that would be fine, because that's a new class - not the "Paladin/Sorcerer" class at all, and hence the multiclassing restriction wasn't broken.

If read as it only affects the paladin side then any level where a non-paladin class level is taken would thus violate the restriction.

No, it would trigger the restriction. Going back to any Paladin combination afterwards would violate it, however.

In no place does it say that some class restrictions are ignored.

I see more evidence to indicate (at least in my opinion) that the gestalt level is treated more as single class (i.e. an amalgam) rather than two separate classes.

Then you have different eyes than I have.

 

[Herobizkit]

So you think Paladins and Monks are useless with Gestalt? That's an odd interpretation, since the designers specifically use Paladin//Sorcerer as an example Gestalt character.

... AND that Paladin // Monks are terrifyingly uber.