Gestalt ECLx versus non-Gestalt ECLx?

[PlzBreakMyCampaign]

I saw this variation on 339 and I have been musing on it (to the point it distracted my next project):

How much more balanced is say Gestalt ECL16 than non-Gestalt ECL20? Or Gestalt15 vs non-gestalt20?

For instance what ECL non-gestalt should a articifer 10 // wizard 10 be? Would that be equal to a 13th level wizard? How about a 15th level wizard?

As I understand it, the pickle is this. Gestalt ECL20 is ridiculously powerful but not as bad as Epic. However to do fun build progressions we optimizers need to have several class levels.

But the more class levels available the more tempting it is to ditch strange gishing multiclassing for a straight caster progressed character due to the exponential increase in optimizability offered by each new spell level or power level (no its not over 9000).

So what does this board think? In terms of game balance for a DM, what are the pro's and cons of going ghestalt 10 rather than ECL20?

[BowenSilverclaw]

Well, for starters, gestalt 10/10 doesn't get 9th level spells/powers/maneuvers.

It could have more versatility and the casters could last longer, although even that is debatable...

Aside from that I believe it's strictly inferior to a normal level 20 character and I doubt it would be all that useful for tackling EL 20 encounters.


Just some basic preliminary thoughts.

[PlzBreakMyCampaign]

ah yes, yes I'm wondering is this a good thing?

Obviously its a bit suboptimal, but it seems like it might be just as fun.

Would a 10 // 10 ghestal really not be able to keep up with an ECL party's CR? We are min-maxers after all...

[BowenSilverclaw]

That depends on the nature of the enemies. If the enemies are built via 'normal' rules, they could include NPC casters (including higher level spells) and spellcasting monsters with access to higher level spells such as dragons or certain aberrations or outsiders. That's some basic stuff.

There's also stuff like higher HP, BAB, saves, skills etc.

I'm sure a properly optimized 10//10 party could take at least some EL 20 stuff, but for the casting/manifesting/SLA-using etc. stuff you'd need at least some cheese I think

[PhaedrusXY]

Gestalt characters aren't that much more dangerous than non-gestalt, mostly due to the action economy. I'd guess gestalt is worth maybe 2 levels. It's similiar to the whole Mystic Theurge vs. single-classed caster thing. Having a bunch of low level spells does not make up for missing out on the much more powerful high level spells. Mostly it just makes multi-threat characters viable, and gets rid of some of the inherent weaknesses of some classes (crappy hit points, saves, etc), and opens up some possible synergies (Cha to saves, Evasion, and Mettle on a full sorcerer, etc).

[Rebel7284]

+2 CR is I believe the accepted average difference between non-gestalt and gestalt.  This does vary though.  Still, the main power of gestalt tends to be flexibility and endurance rather than raw power.

[woodenbandman]

Plus gestalts are, like, twice as cool.

[PlzBreakMyCampaign]

Solid answers people. So If a DM asked characters to build to ECL 12, and a player wanted ghestalt, the DM should give him 10//10 instead?

Sorry if Im satifying my own curiosity but this doesn't belong in the simple answer thread

[Lycanthromancer]

I'd say that low-level characters would be ECL +1 (like, between 1 and 5). Mid-levels would be ECL +2 (say, between 6 and 12). High-levels would be ECL +3 (13-20). This is a generalization, of course, but the power of a gestalt character climbs significantly higher than a normal character does (at least if he knows any optimization-fu).

Of course, this is mostly in effect for classes that can bend (or break) action economy (casters, mainly). A plain ol' fighter/barbarian or similar would be a mere ECL +0 at low level (0-12), and ECL +1 above that. Generally because they can't really do much more than a normal character of that level.

[ErhnamDJ]

No, the DM should tell him: "Sorry, those two systems don't work when mixed together in the same party."

Wizard 12 or Artificer 10//Wizard 10?

Cleric 12 or Cleric 10//Druid 10?

Fighter 12 or Fighter 10//Psychic Warrior 10? (Look, it even works with gimpies!)

The main problem is the same as with level adjusted races: their hit points are just going to be too low if you go with an adjustment any more than +1 or +2.

Any more than +1 or +2 and they're too weak to be spellcasters (they're too far behind normal casters). Any more than +1 or +2 and they can't be melee brutes either (since they'll have too few hit points). But at +1 or +2, everyone will always take the option.

It just won't work. It's either really underpowered or really overpowered.

[PhaedrusXY]

But at +1 or +2, everyone will always take the option.

That's not true at all. I'd rather have a wizard 5/shadowcraft mage 3 than a wizard 6//anything 6. At level 20, it might be true, but it won't be at a lot of the lower and mid levels. At +1, I'd be a lot more tempted, but at +2 I'd be very likely to pass for some concepts.

[DavidWL]

It depends a lot on the concept.  And, of course, in any build there are sweet spots, when the ECL is worth more (or less).

Gestalt is worth more to people who like to play multi-threats, Gish, etc.  Probably worth +2 - +4 ECL depending on level.  Likewise, any type of non-caster gives up less.  Worth more to them.

It is worth less to people who like to play pure casters.  Probably worth +1 - +3 ECL depending on level.

Finally, it depends on how LA and racial HD are applied.  If you can apply LA to only one side, that makes Gestalt much more valuable.  Probably +1 ... + 5? ECL depending on level.  Even for casters it is worth more - you could get extremely high attributes for painful save DCs.

I'd agree with Lycanthromancer example, except I'd make it +4 at the highest levels. (19-20).  This means that few pure casters would take it, but other character concepts would.  I'm ok with that, as it wouldn't hurt them to have a power-up relative to the pure caster's.

Best,
David

[DavidWL]

Any more than +1 or +2 and they're too weak to be spellcasters (they're too far behind normal casters). Any more than +1 or +2 and they can't be melee brutes either (since they'll have too few hit points). But at +1 or +2, everyone will always take the option.

Well, in part this depends on how LA is treated.

Fighter Examples:

Example:
-- Fighter 10\\Half Celestial +2/Half-Fiend +2/Mineral Warrior +1/Half Fey +2/Feral +1/Shadow Creature +2/
is a lot better than
-- Fighter 12
Even better than
-- Fighter 14

Partly this just shows it depends on the build, and partly it shows that LA is superpowerful if treated a certain way in Gestalt.

But even a more tame:
-- Fighter 10\\Rogue 2/Monk 2/Psychic Warrior 2/Paladin 2/Warblade 2
can give a
-- Fighter 14
a run for his money.  While the HP are 33% less, and BAB is 4 less, the 1st has _much_ better saves, evasion, trapfinding, etc.  Along with an extra 6 feats, warblade goodness, etc.

It hurts, but I'd bet on fighter #1. Of course, partly this just shows that fighter is very mediocre 

For Gish, an example
 (showing that giving up more than +2 is ok):

Wizard 6/Swiftblade 10/Abjurant Champion 4
-- CL = 16, BAB = 17, a few class perks
Or:
Wizard 6/Swiftblade 10\\Fighter 2/Ranger 2/Paladin 2/Crusader 2/Warblade 2/Wizard 4/Feat Rogue 2
-- CL = 16, BAB = 16, a _lot_ of class perks, slightly better saves, slightly fewer HP.

And that's a +4 difference!

A Recaster/Warweaver would also be done better in Gestalt, because of the lost CL.

Full Caster:

The only cases where it isn't clear is the full casters - and even they can (arguably) be worth a +3 LA at high levels.

Wizard 5/Shadowcraft Mage 5/Incantatrix 10/
vs.
Wizard 5/Shadowcraft Mage 5/Incantatrix 7
\\Fighter 1/Cleric 1/Human Paragon 3/Nightmare Spinner 1/Ardente Dillitante 10/Warblade 1

version 1:  CL 20
version 2:  CL 17 + 4 free feats, + 2 domains, 1 bonus spell per level, full skill monkey.

Version 1 might win out, but version 2 is very close and isn't a slouch, only giving up 1 8th level and 2 9th level slots.  (Most of which could be made up with focused specialist).  And the shadowcraft mage is so feat hungry that the extra feats are worth a lot!

EDIT:  I realize in retrospect that the immediately above build is illegal because you have simultaneous prestige classing.  With enough sweat we could probably work it out, but partly that just goes to show how difficult it is to make it work with high LA and specific full-caster builds.

Best,
David

[PlzBreakMyCampaign]

Finally, it depends on how LA and racial HD are applied.  If you can apply LA to only one side, that makes Gestalt much more valuable.  Probably +1 ... + 5? ECL depending on level.  Even for casters it is worth more - you could get extremely high attributes for painful save DCs.

There is no accepted way? Hmm strange. I thought it was LA on one side and racial HD on the other but then again I rarely paid attention to gestalt before this.

Yes a variable difference when comparing the two makes sense, after all ECL5 and below has fewer additional levels from the gestalt side, while ECL15 and up have many more.

also ErhnamDJ's 'It's either really underpowered or really overpowered' line confuses 

[Jenos]

The point is that either mixing the two styles(Gesalt and non-gesalt) in results in one option being overwhelmingly powerful, because of the nature of the systems. Its very, very difficult to account for both gesalt and non-gesalt in the same party.

[The_Mad_Linguist]

Honestly, the best assessment I've seen of Gestalt simply charged you the xp for each class separately.  It's pretty much like having two characters, but without additional actions.  On the other hand, easier PrC qualifications. 


Oh, this includes bonus xp for being below the party, of course.

[Endarire]

Someone suggested gestalt as +2 LA on both sides compared to a normal character.

[PlzBreakMyCampaign]

Jenos I would hope this board could find a way to have gestalt and non-gestalt in the same party in a way that is balanced...

But moreso, how much less powerful and less broken would a 10//10 game be if the LA was counted on both sides (but UA buyback allowed) and racial HD was counted on only 1 side?

In short Im looking for the best gestalt approximation to ECL20

[The_Mad_Linguist]

Jenos I would hope this board could find a way to have gestalt and non-gestalt in the same party in a way that is balanced...

But moreso, how much less powerful and less broken would a 10//10 game be if the LA was counted on both sides (but UA buyback allowed) and racial HD was counted on only 1 side?

In short Im looking for the best gestalt approximation to ECL20

My advice: Eyeball it.  The difference in power at ECL 20 between, say, a fighter20 and a druid20 is so great that hard and fast rules aren't going to help.

Gestalt 18/18 seems like a decent first guess.  Depends entirely on casterness, prestige class exploityness, and stuff like that.

[Kuroimaken]

Let's not forget one thing: optimization levels tend to vary quite a bit from group to group and individual to individual. While pursuing a theoretical balance for gestalt versus straight-up is all fine and dandy, it accomplishes pretty much nothing if the guy who plays the Druid makes him a healbot and the Wizard player only ever knows magic missile. In the end, the eyeball advice will pretty much be the best course of action you can take.

It's like with women. There's NEVER a simple answer.