What's Your Experience With Gestalt Characters?

[Wormwood]

I ran a gestalt game with two characters, a Ftr/Clr and a Rgr/Rog.

Both were very efficient builds, and I still had to work hard to prevent TPKs more often than I would like.

Heavy on the options, heavy on the offense, but crappy defense.

I ended up dropping the EL of most encounters by one, just to make the game playable.

 

[Viktyr Gehrig]

The monk has several benefits, especially at higher levels:

Not to mention, the Monk's powers are balanced more-or-less around its weaknesses. A clever Gestalt combination can easily avoid these-- a Monk with a Fighter's BAB and bonus feats, and GWS in the Unarmed Strike, is brutal.

Not to mention, the Monk is very good at covering other classes' weaknesses. All Good saves, d8 HD, unarmored AC bonus...

 

[Readerbreeder]

Wormwood, you say you had to drop EL's by one or so to keep the party alive; was this at lower levels? If so, did it get better once the characters cleared a few levels?

Combining what you have said (provided it applies at lower levels) with DaveMage's comments about higher (10-19) levels, it looks like there might be a power curve that becomes darned-near asymptotic after awhile (apologies to any math people if I misapplied that term). Wormwood, how did it go for you at higher levels?

It does indeed look like the monk is a good choice for the well-rounded gestalt character. Has anyone else found any unexpectedly powerful or synergistic class combinations?

 

[Viktyr Gehrig]

It does indeed look like the monk is a good choice for the well-rounded gestalt character. Has anyone else found any unexpectedly powerful or synergistic class combinations?

Core:
Monk/Druid (WIS to AC, fast movement in wildshape, natural armor bonuses)
Bard/Sorceror (Buff/utility from the Bard, blast from the Sorceror, single stat casting)
Paladin/Sorceror (Never fail a saving throw, True Strike/Power Attack/Divine Might/Arcane Strike Smite)
Fighter/Cleric (Remember all those warrior Cleric builds?)
Rogue/Wizard (load up on ray spells and spells like Invisibility and Hold Person-- take advantage of ranged touch sneak attack)

Some of these require specific builds, but they're ugly enough to be worth mentioning.

Psionics and Complete:
Rogue/Warlock (see Rogue/Wizard, above, plus all day functioning)
Fighter/Warmage (spend one feat at 9th level, cast spells in plate mail; replace Fighter with Paladin to get awesome saving throws).
Psychic Warrior/Scout (Archer build, Hustle + Rapid Shot)
Paladin/Monk 2 (or 4), Favored Soul/Sorceror X (never fail a saving throw plus evasion, single stat casting for two full casters. Go with Pal/Mnk 4 to take advantage of Divine Might, but your caster level will suffer).
Psychic Warrior/Psion into Metamind/Psion (add your +1 manifester levels to Psychic Warrior, who won't miss losing five levels of powers. Manifest Schism before using Font of Power, Hustle every round, for three fully augmented powers/round for free for ten rounds; also, tons of psionic feats).
Fighter/Psychic Warrior (depending on DM interpretation, could be almost double Fighter bonus feats.)

That's all I can think of off the top of my head.

 

[DaveMage]

I will also add, though, that when we decided on running gestalt characters, we also decided that there would be no "multiclassing" at a later time. Thus, if you were a rogue/sorcerer gestalt to start, you would *always* be a rogue/sorcerer. No prestige classes or switching to a diffferent gestalt.

We did this simply because we believed that the gestalt combo was powerful enough without anything else.

 

[Viktyr Gehrig]

I will also add, though, that when we decided on running gestalt characters, we also decided that there would be no "multiclassing" at a later time. Thus, if you were a rogue/sorcerer gestalt to start, you would *always* be a rogue/sorcerer. No prestige classes or switching to a diffferent gestalt.

Not a bad idea-- Gestalt allows for a good deal of character definition without using standard multiclassing on top of it. I think it's still important to allow Prestige Classes, though, particularly for areas not well represented by either a single base class or a good Gestalt-- for instance, the Duelist or the Dragon Disciple.

We did this simply because we believed that the gestalt combo was powerful enough without anything else.

That it is, but I don't think multiclassed Gestalts add too much more of a power ramp than multiclassing does to standard games. Most of the abusive combinations I can think of can be done as easily with a single Gestalt as with a multiclassed Gestalt.

 

[DaveMage]

Not a bad idea-- Gestalt allows for a good deal of character definition without using standard multiclassing on top of it. I think it's still important to allow Prestige Classes, though, particularly for areas not well represented by either a single base class or a good Gestalt-- for instance, the Duelist or the Dragon Disciple.

That it is, but I don't think multiclassed Gestalts add too much more of a power ramp than multiclassing does to standard games. Most of the abusive combinations I can think of can be done as easily with a single Gestalt as with a multiclassed Gestalt.

Well, there's also the issue of my groups ability (or lack thereof) to wrap our brains around the PCs getting to complex with the different variables.

But for those who love the challenge of such things - go for it!

 

[XCorvis]

Specifically, the monk is great for characters who traditionally have poor armor or physical weakness, such as wizards and sorcerers. Combining them with a monk dramaticly increases their likelyhood of surviving combat. If they can increase their strength (via shapeshifting), they can become very effective in melee. The monk's only real weaknesses are (relatively) low HP and limited ranged attacks (depending on spell selection). They also need good ability scores across the board - dex, wis, and int/cha, especially. Another possible weakness might be if the player forgot to spend skill points on Concentration - with all the additional skills available (like tumble), the selection of skills becomes more difficult.

Some other nasty combos:
Rogue/Sorcerer with blink and/or invisibility spells (sneak attack every time!) Weakness is poor defense.
Barbarian/sorcerer - great HP, good BAB, combine rage with Tenser's Transformation or shape-shifting. Also good with ray attacks.
I'm fond of the idea of a fighter/ranger or figher/rogue. Doesn't have the cool abilities that some of the other classes get, but all the additional feats should make for a very good combat character.

 

[jodyjohnson]

We've been running gestalt for about 7 months now and it really helps cover the bases. It also helps casters have something to do when they are out of spells.

No one has Monk since we did gestalt to cover all the bases and Monk doesn't really help with a niche.

We have Fighter/Rogue (not there most of the time), Fighter/Bard, Ranger/Wizard, and Cleric/Paladin.

The other campaign is Wizard/Artificer, Cleric/Rogue, and Barbarian/Druid.

 

[Readerbreeder]

DaveMage -- I agree, it sounds like putting the kibosh on multiclassing isn't a bad idea, if only to avoid the "now what all can this guy do again?" problem. Power curve aside, you can only hold so many options in your head at once.

That said, I think I will probably allow PrC's in the campaign, and multiclassing on a limited basis (for instance, if there is a valid character concept involved, rather than just "ooo! Let's throw this in and see what happens! Not that there's anything wrong with that... ).

Any suggestions for class choices while looking at this from a survivability standpoint, particularly at lower levels? I'm going to have only two players in the group for this campaign, and if I limit multiclassing, the "kitchen sink" mentality probably won't work (at least for a while).