UA: GESTALT Characters..anybody try this yet?

[Emirikol]

All:

I'm considering doing the "Gestalt Characters" variant character rule from UA. Basically this means that characters will gain the strongest features of two classes with each level gain (best hp's, saves and abilities). Consideration: In my campaign the spellcasters (cleric, wizard, etc.) first have to have two levels in 'something else.'

Anyways, I'm looking for thoughts, experiences, and feedback.

Thanks,

jh

 

[Creamsteak]

It looks acceptable at first from a DMs perspective, but my players really couldn't keep up with their own characters, so we scrapped the idea at 4th level. They had just been getting more and more features, and were only using 45% of them, except when using one class to make the other stronger (such as casting buffing spells on yourself before you go into combat).

 

[Barmy Gith]

I've never tried this UA rule, but I recently had a conversation about it with a friend of mine.

About once or twice a year, myself and two of my friends travel to a common location (we all live in different cities/states now) for a few nights of sleep deprived gaming. One of the big problems we've run into in the past is that with only 2 players it can be tricky to have a party that covers all the bases. In the past, we've considered a few tricks, like NPCs, hirelings, running 2 characters per a player, etc.

The Gestalt rule from UA sounds like a handy solution to this kind of problem. Yet I can't help but think that taking the best of a wizard and a cleric could be a dangerous proposition. Especially if you get +1 to spellcaster level for both the cleric and the wizard as you advance. Maybe if you had to choose one or the other each level it might work out. Otherwise, I would try to limit class combos to those that are mainly 1 class non-magic user/1 class magic user.

I'll certainly be interested to see what others say, Good Gaming to you

 

[Kalanyr]

If you have to choose between 1 class or the other for a double caster why the heck would you be one ? At 20th level you're effectively a druid 10/wizard 10 with some miscellaneous bonuses that don't make up for being incredibly behind in spellcasting, compared to the Rogue/Fighter who can make 4 attacks a round with 10d6 sneak attack, can't be flanked etc, gestalts only work on the premise that EVERYONE gets the best applicable features (well assuming no one does something silly like a Wizard/Sorceror).

 

[Barmy Gith]

If you have to choose between 1 class or the other for a double caster why the heck would you be one ? At 20th level you're effectively a druid 10/wizard 10 with some miscellaneous bonuses that don't make up for being incredibly behind in spellcasting, compared to the Rogue/Fighter who can make 4 attacks a round with 10d6 sneak attack, can't be flanked etc, gestalts only work on the premise that EVERYONE gets the best applicable features (well assuming no one does something silly like a Wizard/Sorceror).

Hmmm...that is a very valid point. However I was also thinking that by choosing which caster level you selected each level you would not have to end up with an even split of magic wielding power. For instance, at 20th lvl you could simply be a druid with powerful shapechanging abilities and the offensive spell capabilities of a 20th level wizard, or some other split such as one that allows the ability to cast a few low level druid spells and wizard spells of up to 8th level. Of course, one could argue that even that kind of balance won't make up for the fighter/rogue combo you mentioned. Ow! Ow! Ow! (Hurts just thinking about it)

I think really the question that arises when using gestalt characters is are there any seriously broken combinations that will hurt the game you are running? In a uberly high-powered game, it might not be a problem, but otherwise I'd think twice about some of the combos.

For instance Cleric/Wizard. So now the cleric will not only have his normal amount of goodness, but he will also have more meta-magic feats and better offensive spells. I'd be wary of that one.

The Fighter/Rogue you mentioned might be another broken combo.

In the end, I think I like the idea though I don't think the implementaion of the rule is as simple as it sounds. Then again, I don't own UA, so maybe it doesn't read as simple as I'm making it sound.

 

[DaveMage]

I'm in a gestalt game right now. It's helping because there are only two players and the DM. We have three gestalt characters, all at 10th level (the DM is playing the Psion/Fighter):

Rogue/Sorcerer
Monk/Wizard
Psion/Fighter

So far it's working out very well. I'd say on average that the CRs that best works for these characters is 12-14. We just had a CR 16 encounter in the last session and we were very lucky to survive. We were basically 1 failed Will save away (by the BBEG) from being annihilated.

 

[Guillaume]

I'm running one and playing a Gestalt character. The main advantage is the power boost you get, particularly at low levels. However, it does have its limitations, mainly that even with four classes spread out into two characters, you still get only two initiatives per round. You can overwhelm even powerfull characters with powerful creatures. I almost splatered my group of three gestalts (monk/cleric, ranger/wizard/fighter, ranger/thief) with the Fiendish Red Wyrmling in the Dungeon of Fire Opal published in Dungeon Magazine.

In the game where I play the Ghestalt character (Cleric/Sorcerer), it is a solo game. I have managed to survive the Wizard's Amulet and Crucible of Freya. It was close more than once. But I managed. Naturally, the progression is much faster sinc I'm the only one collecting the XPs .

 

[Emirikol]

Does It Work In A Bigger Game?

How would Gestalt characters work in a game where there are 5 or 6 players? It seems like every game at least one person is gone anyways. Is the power change such a big deal with more PC's?

jh

 

[Halivar]

With 5 or 6 chars I think gestalt characters are just too much (unless you're running a very VERY high-powered game).

Barmy, it is true that a wiz/clr would be potent, with possibly the widest selection of spells possible. However, even though they can cast both divine and arcane spells, they can't do both; not at the same time. They simply aren't a replacement for a wizard and a cleric casting side-by-side. In fact, I can't help but think of a wiz/clr as just another wizard with an expanded spell list and more spells per day. In our campaigns, wizards never run out of spells in single fight. In a UA campaign, it simply means they can fight twice as many battles in a day.

I would like to point out, however, that a gestalt wiz/clr is, at any given point past 6th level, three levels ahead of an equal level Mystic Theurge in terms of casting ability for both divine and arcane spells. UA suggests that gestalt characters should face +1 CR creatures. Does this betray a weakness in the gestalt system (need +3 CR monsters) or a weakness in the Mystic Theurge? I have had problems in the past of MT's not being able to pull their weight (lots of spells that have little-to-no effect at the level they are cast at).

 

[DaveMage]

How would Gestalt characters work in a game where there are 5 or 6 players? It seems like every game at least one person is gone anyways. Is the power change such a big deal with more PC's?

jh

Well, the power change may or may not be that big a deal. I'd say it depends on the challenge level you're talking about. For all PCs, the advantage is really that you will have more encounters before having to rest. As long as the challenge ratings of the foes are +2 to +3 above standard, it really shouldn't be an issue.

As was pointed out above, a gestalt wizard/cleric still only gets one spell per round (quickened spells non-withstanding), and still only has the hit points of a single class.

I will say this, I'm really enjoying my character in the game (the rogue/sorcerer). Casting greater invisibility or mirror image and then going to town with sneak attacks is great fun!