Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

ECL for gestalt characters

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
March 12, 2005 12:48:54 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

In Unearthed Arcana, the idea of gestalt characters was introduced. If one
was to include these in a "normal" game, what ECL should they have? Is it
even really possible to balance them with "normal" characters?

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley

More about : ecl gestalt characters

Anonymous
March 13, 2005 3:46:16 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Malachias Invictus wrote:
> In Unearthed Arcana, the idea of gestalt characters was introduced. If one
> was to include these in a "normal" game, what ECL should they have? Is it
> even really possible to balance them with "normal" characters?

As an idea, compare a Wizard-Cleric gestalt against a
MysticTheurge; that would seem to be about +3 LA for the gestalt (give
or take). That should work pretty well for most of the multiclass-fix
PClasses.

--
tussock

Aspie at work, sorry in advance.
Anonymous
March 13, 2005 3:46:17 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

tussock wrote:

> Malachias Invictus wrote:
>
>> In Unearthed Arcana, the idea of gestalt characters was introduced.
>> If one was to include these in a "normal" game, what ECL should they
>> have? Is it even really possible to balance them with "normal"
>> characters?
>
> As an idea, compare a Wizard-Cleric gestalt against a MysticTheurge;
> that would seem to be about +3 LA for the gestalt (give or take). That
> should work pretty well for most of the multiclass-fix PClasses.

I'd go lower.
A X level gestalt is worth less than two X level characters.
I'd think LA +2, or use LA=1/2 level or such.
Yes the latter exceeds yours at high level and may be too low at low
level...
But my thought is a gestalt is a character and a half.
Related resources
Anonymous
March 13, 2005 3:46:17 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Ophidian wrote:
> tussock wrote:
>
> > Malachias Invictus wrote:
> >
> >> In Unearthed Arcana, the idea of gestalt characters was
introduced.
> >> If one was to include these in a "normal" game, what ECL should
they
> >> have? Is it even really possible to balance them with "normal"
> >> characters?
> >
> > As an idea, compare a Wizard-Cleric gestalt against a
MysticTheurge;
> > that would seem to be about +3 LA for the gestalt (give or take).
That
> > should work pretty well for most of the multiclass-fix PClasses.
>
> I'd go lower.
> A X level gestalt is worth less than two X level characters.
> I'd think LA +2, or use LA=1/2 level or such.
> Yes the latter exceeds yours at high level and may be too low at low
> level...
> But my thought is a gestalt is a character and a half.

I haven't read the rules for Gestalt characters but a character and
a half is LA+1.

If all it does is give you the abilities of two character class
builds and you get to chose one each round this would be about right.
The problem is that some of the other comments lead me to believe some
stuff STACKS rather than overlapping between the two concepts.

Kill that and I would go with +1 or +2. But I don't care if you call
it suddens strike, precise strike, sneak attack, favored enemy, or
weapon specialization; extra damage is extra damage and should no more
stack accross character builds for the Gestalt character than BAB or
caster level does. ONE of the two builds is running the weapon.

DougL
Anonymous
March 13, 2005 3:46:17 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Malachias Invictus" <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> writes:

> "Kevin Lowe" <me@private.net> wrote in message
> news:me-104E25.01065213032005@individual.net...
[...]
>> So +3LA is probably well on the safe side for straightforward core
>> gestalt characters, but not remotely enough for some of the possible
>> non-core gestalt munchfest builds.

> That is what I was thinking. Sigh.

Unlike most of the abilities that factor into LA, the gestalt's
advantages scalewith level. At first level, being a GC is worth LA +1
at most; a 1st levl FtrWiz gestalt is a bit weaker than a Ftr1/Wiz1,
being short a couple hit points. On the other hand, a FtrWiz 10 is a
lot better than a Ftr1/Wiz9, or a Ftr4/Wiz6, or any other sensible
combination you can come up with. He's about on par with a 13th level
cleric. The disparity gets bigger as the level goes up.

There are two ways of handling it. One is to go the old AD&D multi-
class route and divide the GC's XP rewards in half. This will actually
do a pretty good job of getting things right, since your GC have about
7 levels for his party-mates' 10, which works out reasonably well.

OTOH, you can make the GC buy a level of "Gestalt Character" at first
level, and every 4 levels after that, kind of like the UA "blood
lines".

As for munchtastic builds like the Fighter/RogueNinja monstrosity,
just don't let people stick core classes from the splatbooks into
Gestalts; the GC provides a lot of options to begin with, and making
the character you want with the PHB classes is not hard. If your
player wants a GC who's a Ninja, he can make a FtrRog gestalt and be
a damn fine Ninja.

--
Matt Pillsbury
pillsy[at]mac[dot]com
Anonymous
March 13, 2005 3:46:18 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Kevin Lowe" <me@private.net> wrote in message
news:me-0C7DA0.11553013032005@individual.net...

> (Cleric3/MysticTheurge7)(Wizard10)
>
> 9th level arcane spells with a 10th level character.

I believe that Mystic Theurge et al are not allowed by gestalt rules.

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
Anonymous
March 13, 2005 3:46:19 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Malachias Invictus wrote:
> "Kevin Lowe" <me@private.net> wrote in message
> news:me-0C7DA0.11553013032005@individual.net...
>
>
>>(Cleric3/MysticTheurge7)(Wizard10)
>>
>>9th level arcane spells with a 10th level character.
>
>
> I believe that Mystic Theurge et al are not allowed by gestalt rules.

Yes and no...

From Unearthed Arcana (pg 73):

"Prestige classes that are essentially class combinations - such as the
arcane trickster, mystic theurge, and eldritch knight - should be
prohibited if you're using gestalt classes, because they unduly
complicate the game balance of what's already a high-powered variant."

Note the "should be", as opposed to the "are". But then, like all
prestige classes, the DM always has the option of saying "nope, can't
use 'em".

DWS
Anonymous
March 13, 2005 4:06:53 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

In article <4232d700$1@clear.net.nz>, tussock <scrub@clear.net.nz>
wrote:

> Malachias Invictus wrote:
> > In Unearthed Arcana, the idea of gestalt characters was introduced. If one
> > was to include these in a "normal" game, what ECL should they have? Is it
> > even really possible to balance them with "normal" characters?
>
> As an idea, compare a Wizard-Cleric gestalt against a
> MysticTheurge; that would seem to be about +3 LA for the gestalt (give
> or take). That should work pretty well for most of the multiclass-fix
> PClasses.

This is correct to an extent, but apparently there are some monstrously
munchkin builds that are book-legal gestalt characters, if you allow
non-core classes.

For example, I understand that you can make a
(Fighter1/Ninja9)/(Rogue10) gestalt character that has, at 10th level,
+10BAB and +10d6 Sneak Attack.

So +3LA is probably well on the safe side for straightforward core
gestalt characters, but not remotely enough for some of the possible
non-core gestalt munchfest builds.

Kevin Lowe,
Tasmania.
Anonymous
March 13, 2005 4:06:54 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Kevin Lowe" <me@private.net> wrote in message
news:me-104E25.01065213032005@individual.net...
> In article <4232d700$1@clear.net.nz>, tussock <scrub@clear.net.nz>
> wrote:
>
>> Malachias Invictus wrote:
>> > In Unearthed Arcana, the idea of gestalt characters was introduced. If
>> > one
>> > was to include these in a "normal" game, what ECL should they have? Is
>> > it
>> > even really possible to balance them with "normal" characters?
>>
>> As an idea, compare a Wizard-Cleric gestalt against a
>> MysticTheurge; that would seem to be about +3 LA for the gestalt (give
>> or take). That should work pretty well for most of the multiclass-fix
>> PClasses.
>
> This is correct to an extent, but apparently there are some monstrously
> munchkin builds that are book-legal gestalt characters, if you allow
> non-core classes.
>
> For example, I understand that you can make a
> (Fighter1/Ninja9)/(Rogue10) gestalt character that has, at 10th level,
> +10BAB and +10d6 Sneak Attack.

Half of that would be Sudden Strike, only usable against Flat-Footed
opponents.

> So +3LA is probably well on the safe side for straightforward core
> gestalt characters, but not remotely enough for some of the possible
> non-core gestalt munchfest builds.

That is what I was thinking. Sigh.

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
Anonymous
March 13, 2005 4:06:54 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Kevin Lowe wrote:

> In article <4232d700$1@clear.net.nz>, tussock <scrub@clear.net.nz>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Malachias Invictus wrote:
>>
>>>In Unearthed Arcana, the idea of gestalt characters was introduced. If one
>>>was to include these in a "normal" game, what ECL should they have? Is it
>>>even really possible to balance them with "normal" characters?
>>
>> As an idea, compare a Wizard-Cleric gestalt against a
>>MysticTheurge; that would seem to be about +3 LA for the gestalt (give
>>or take). That should work pretty well for most of the multiclass-fix
>>PClasses.
>
>
> This is correct to an extent, but apparently there are some monstrously
> munchkin builds that are book-legal gestalt characters, if you allow
> non-core classes.
>
> For example, I understand that you can make a
> (Fighter1/Ninja9)/(Rogue10) gestalt character that has, at 10th level,
> +10BAB and +10d6 Sneak Attack.

Ninja gives a more limitted version of Sneak Attack, but
otherwise correct, AFAICT.
Anonymous
March 15, 2005 5:38:43 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Time to step up the meds; I could have sworn Kevin Lowe just said...
> In article <4232d700$1@clear.net.nz>, tussock <scrub@clear.net.nz>
> wrote:
>
> > Malachias Invictus wrote:
> > > In Unearthed Arcana, the idea of gestalt characters was introduced. If one
> > > was to include these in a "normal" game, what ECL should they have? Is it
> > > even really possible to balance them with "normal" characters?
> >
> > As an idea, compare a Wizard-Cleric gestalt against a
> > MysticTheurge; that would seem to be about +3 LA for the gestalt (give
> > or take). That should work pretty well for most of the multiclass-fix
> > PClasses.
>
> This is correct to an extent, but apparently there are some monstrously
> munchkin builds that are book-legal gestalt characters, if you allow
> non-core classes.
>
> For example, I understand that you can make a
> (Fighter1/Ninja9)/(Rogue10) gestalt character that has, at 10th level,
> +10BAB and +10d6 Sneak Attack.

Not only is half of that sneak attack watered down as others have
pointed out, but I don't see how that BAB can be right. A ninja gets the
same 3/4 BAB as a rogue, giving this build a total BAB of +7.

My own solution to the Sneak Attack problem - implemented because I have
a number of feats that give one or two dice of extra damage "as though
you had the Sneak Attack ability" in certain circumstances - is to limit
the number of extra Sneak Attack dice to (level + 1) / 2. Any extra dice
are ignored. This makes the feats useless to single-classed rogues, it
just lets multi-classed rogues compensate and non-rogues share some of
the joy if they're willing to pay a non-trivial price. This house rule
would certainly extend to Sudden Strike and all the other pseudo-sneaks
in Complete Adventurer if any of them existed in my game, especially in
a gestalt game.
Anonymous
March 15, 2005 5:38:44 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Donald Tsang wrote:
> Jeff Heikkinen <no.way@jose.org> wrote:
> >> For example, I understand that you can make a
> >> (Fighter1/Ninja9)/(Rogue10) gestalt character that has, at 10th
level,
> >> +10BAB and +10d6 Sneak Attack.
> >
> >Not only is half of that sneak attack watered down as others have
> >pointed out, but I don't see how that BAB can be right. A ninja gets
the
> >same 3/4 BAB as a rogue, giving this build a total BAB of +7.
>
> See, there was a trick involved in the question: taking the first
level as
> fighter effectively shifts the level that one gains +0 BAB in ninja
and
> rogue to be non-overlapping.

Aargh! If that is the way it is now written it NEEDS to be rewriten.

One build at a time is the only really safe way, especially for each
of the individual BAB, HP, BSB, skill points type things.

I am now really tempted to try to write a "secondary class" rule as
a general mechanism to balance multiclass casters and the like, I
think it could be done, would work, and would be vastly better than
an unending stream of Class X+Y prestige classes.

> I think it's pretty clear that you should be using fractional saves
and
> attack bonuses in a Gestalt campaign, yielding a BAB of +7.75 at
10th.

Clearly it needs something other than the rule you suggest is being
used. I think best single build would work as well as fractional
(fractional is better in general, but for this I would use best
single build regardless of whether I used fractional or not).

If the rule is as you say a (Ftr1/Sor18)/(Wiz19) has BAB +19, and
his worst save (reflex) is +12, which is BETTER than a monk or
rogue at the same level!

For that matter by level 3 a Ftr3/Rog3 has better reflex than a
Brd3/Rog3. Aarghhhhh!

DougL
Anonymous
March 15, 2005 5:54:08 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Jeff Heikkinen <no.way@jose.org> wrote:
>> For example, I understand that you can make a
>> (Fighter1/Ninja9)/(Rogue10) gestalt character that has, at 10th level,
>> +10BAB and +10d6 Sneak Attack.
>
>Not only is half of that sneak attack watered down as others have
>pointed out, but I don't see how that BAB can be right. A ninja gets the
>same 3/4 BAB as a rogue, giving this build a total BAB of +7.

See, there was a trick involved in the question: taking the first level as
fighter effectively shifts the level that one gains +0 BAB in ninja and
rogue to be non-overlapping.

I think it's pretty clear that you should be using fractional saves and
attack bonuses in a Gestalt campaign, yielding a BAB of +7.75 at 10th.

Donald
Anonymous
March 15, 2005 5:54:09 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Donald Tsang" <tsang@soda.csua.berkeley.edu> wrote in message
news:D 15iog$3kd$1@agate.berkeley.edu...
> Jeff Heikkinen <no.way@jose.org> wrote:
>>> For example, I understand that you can make a
>>> (Fighter1/Ninja9)/(Rogue10) gestalt character that has, at 10th level,
>>> +10BAB and +10d6 Sneak Attack.
>>
>>Not only is half of that sneak attack watered down as others have
>>pointed out, but I don't see how that BAB can be right. A ninja gets the
>>same 3/4 BAB as a rogue, giving this build a total BAB of +7.
>
> See, there was a trick involved in the question: taking the first level as
> fighter effectively shifts the level that one gains +0 BAB in ninja and
> rogue to be non-overlapping.

That does not matter; you would still only take the better of the two
"gestalt half" BABs.

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
Anonymous
March 15, 2005 7:04:19 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Time to step up the meds; I could have sworn Donald Tsang just said...
> Jeff Heikkinen <no.way@jose.org> wrote:
> >> For example, I understand that you can make a
> >> (Fighter1/Ninja9)/(Rogue10) gestalt character that has, at 10th level,
> >> +10BAB and +10d6 Sneak Attack.
> >
> >Not only is half of that sneak attack watered down as others have
> >pointed out, but I don't see how that BAB can be right. A ninja gets the
> >same 3/4 BAB as a rogue, giving this build a total BAB of +7.
>
> See, there was a trick involved in the question: taking the first level as
> fighter effectively shifts the level that one gains +0 BAB in ninja and
> rogue to be non-overlapping.

Okay, I now see how it's supposed to work, but it falls so clearly into
the "stupid and counter-intuitive" bin that I can't imagine anyone
actually allowing it.
Anonymous
March 15, 2005 5:49:37 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

It has been brought to my attention that Jeff Heikkinen
<no.way@jose.org> wrote:

>Time to step up the meds; I could have sworn Kevin Lowe just said...
>> In article <4232d700$1@clear.net.nz>, tussock <scrub@clear.net.nz>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Malachias Invictus wrote:
>> > > In Unearthed Arcana, the idea of gestalt characters was introduced. If one
>> > > was to include these in a "normal" game, what ECL should they have? Is it
>> > > even really possible to balance them with "normal" characters?
>> >
>> > As an idea, compare a Wizard-Cleric gestalt against a
>> > MysticTheurge; that would seem to be about +3 LA for the gestalt (give
>> > or take). That should work pretty well for most of the multiclass-fix
>> > PClasses.
>>
>> This is correct to an extent, but apparently there are some monstrously
>> munchkin builds that are book-legal gestalt characters, if you allow
>> non-core classes.
>>
>> For example, I understand that you can make a
>> (Fighter1/Ninja9)/(Rogue10) gestalt character that has, at 10th level,
>> +10BAB and +10d6 Sneak Attack.
>
>Not only is half of that sneak attack watered down as others have
>pointed out, but I don't see how that BAB can be right. A ninja gets the
>same 3/4 BAB as a rogue, giving this build a total BAB of +7.

3.0 Ninja. Full BAB, full, proper, Sneak attack. Very different (and
IMHO, more appropriate) class than the 3.5 Complete Adventurer Ninja.
Anonymous
March 15, 2005 5:49:38 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Talen wrote:
>
> 3.0 Ninja. Full BAB, full, proper, Sneak attack. Very different (and
> IMHO, more appropriate) class than the 3.5 Complete Adventurer Ninja.

From OA?
Anonymous
March 15, 2005 5:49:38 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Talen" <talen@spamspamspamspam.dodo.com.au> wrote in message
news:hetd315pi53pggue9rljv4b3eabu8h8o50@4ax.com...
> It has been brought to my attention that Jeff Heikkinen
> <no.way@jose.org> wrote:
>
>>Time to step up the meds; I could have sworn Kevin Lowe just said...
>>> In article <4232d700$1@clear.net.nz>, tussock <scrub@clear.net.nz>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Malachias Invictus wrote:
>>> > > In Unearthed Arcana, the idea of gestalt characters was introduced.
>>> > > If one
>>> > > was to include these in a "normal" game, what ECL should they have?
>>> > > Is it
>>> > > even really possible to balance them with "normal" characters?
>>> >
>>> > As an idea, compare a Wizard-Cleric gestalt against a
>>> > MysticTheurge; that would seem to be about +3 LA for the gestalt (give
>>> > or take). That should work pretty well for most of the multiclass-fix
>>> > PClasses.
>>>
>>> This is correct to an extent, but apparently there are some monstrously
>>> munchkin builds that are book-legal gestalt characters, if you allow
>>> non-core classes.
>>>
>>> For example, I understand that you can make a
>>> (Fighter1/Ninja9)/(Rogue10) gestalt character that has, at 10th level,
>>> +10BAB and +10d6 Sneak Attack.
>>
>>Not only is half of that sneak attack watered down as others have
>>pointed out, but I don't see how that BAB can be right. A ninja gets the
>>same 3/4 BAB as a rogue, giving this build a total BAB of +7.
>
> 3.0 Ninja. Full BAB, full, proper, Sneak attack. Very different (and
> IMHO, more appropriate) class than the 3.5 Complete Adventurer Ninja.

Of course, they nerfed its saves (to only Reflex good) and BAB (to medium
progression) back down to a less superhuman level with the errata. It was
*still* a good class.

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
Anonymous
March 15, 2005 7:18:42 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Ophidian <oNpEhMiOdian23@cox.net> wrote:
>Talen wrote:
>> 3.0 Ninja. Full BAB, full, proper, Sneak attack. Very different (and
>> IMHO, more appropriate) class than the 3.5 Complete Adventurer Ninja.
>
> From OA?

Nah, Ninja Spy from OA had +3/4 BAB. I think he meant the b0rken Ninja
of the Crescent Moon, from Sword & Fist. Of course, it had a +6 BAB
requirement and horrendous roleplaying restrictions (back when the
designers thought roleplaying restrictions could balance d8 hit dice,
full BAB, all good saves, full Sneak Attack sequence, *and* pretty
cool class features).

I'm not sure how one would be able to take a (BAB +6, 10 ranks in
Hide and Move Silently, Evasion, Improved Unarmed Strike, Deflect
Arrows, Quickdraw) prestige class from an balance-wise incompatible
version of the rules at character level 2...

Talen just wants Real Ultimate Power, I guess...

Donald
Anonymous
March 16, 2005 2:58:12 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

It has been brought to my attention that Ophidian
<oNpEhMiOdian23@cox.net> wrote:

>Talen wrote:
> >
>> 3.0 Ninja. Full BAB, full, proper, Sneak attack. Very different (and
>> IMHO, more appropriate) class than the 3.5 Complete Adventurer Ninja.
>
> From OA?

From Rokugan.
Anonymous
March 16, 2005 2:58:12 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

It has been brought to my attention that tsang@soda.csua.berkeley.edu
(Donald Tsang) wrote:

>Ophidian <oNpEhMiOdian23@cox.net> wrote:
>>Talen wrote:
>>> 3.0 Ninja. Full BAB, full, proper, Sneak attack. Very different (and
>>> IMHO, more appropriate) class than the 3.5 Complete Adventurer Ninja.
>>
>> From OA?
>
>Nah, Ninja Spy from OA had +3/4 BAB. I think he meant the b0rken Ninja
>of the Crescent Moon, from Sword & Fist.

No.

Core class Ninja, Rokugan.
Anonymous
March 16, 2005 2:58:12 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

It has been brought to my attention that "Malachias Invictus"
<capt_malachias@hotmail.com> wrote:

>>>Not only is half of that sneak attack watered down as others have
>>>pointed out, but I don't see how that BAB can be right. A ninja gets the
>>>same 3/4 BAB as a rogue, giving this build a total BAB of +7.
>>
>> 3.0 Ninja. Full BAB, full, proper, Sneak attack. Very different (and
>> IMHO, more appropriate) class than the 3.5 Complete Adventurer Ninja.
>
>Of course, they nerfed its saves (to only Reflex good) and BAB (to medium
>progression) back down to a less superhuman level with the errata. It was
>*still* a good class.

By the errata I got my hands on, full BAB and Reflex good. We're
talking about the Sneak attack, d6 hit dice, Ninja Dodge/Shadow
Run/etc. class here, no?
Anonymous
March 16, 2005 2:58:13 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Talen" <talen@spamspamspamspam.dodo.com.au> wrote in message
news:vite31l4lms2pc20guodqkctnl55qt1qdl@4ax.com...
> It has been brought to my attention that "Malachias Invictus"
> <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>>Not only is half of that sneak attack watered down as others have
>>>>pointed out, but I don't see how that BAB can be right. A ninja gets the
>>>>same 3/4 BAB as a rogue, giving this build a total BAB of +7.
>>>
>>> 3.0 Ninja. Full BAB, full, proper, Sneak attack. Very different (and
>>> IMHO, more appropriate) class than the 3.5 Complete Adventurer Ninja.
>>
>>Of course, they nerfed its saves (to only Reflex good) and BAB (to medium
>>progression) back down to a less superhuman level with the errata. It was
>>*still* a good class.
>
> By the errata I got my hands on, full BAB and Reflex good. We're
> talking about the Sneak attack, d6 hit dice, Ninja Dodge/Shadow
> Run/etc. class here, no?

I am talking about the Ninja of the Crescent Moon, from Sword & Fist:

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/er/20040125a

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
Anonymous
March 16, 2005 2:58:13 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Talen" <talen@spamspamspamspam.dodo.com.au> wrote in message
news:khte31h9j0cjr4qlk825k45dqdg7odcno0@4ax.com...
> It has been brought to my attention that Ophidian
> <oNpEhMiOdian23@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>Talen wrote:
>> >
>>> 3.0 Ninja. Full BAB, full, proper, Sneak attack. Very different (and
>>> IMHO, more appropriate) class than the 3.5 Complete Adventurer Ninja.
>>
>> From OA?
>
> From Rokugan.

That would not be the 3.0 Ninja. Rokugan is not D&D 3.0.

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
Anonymous
March 16, 2005 3:26:20 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Talen <talen@spamspamspamspam.dodo.com.au> wrote:
>tsang@soda.csua.berkeley.edu (Donald Tsang) wrote:
>>>Talen wrote:
>>>> 3.0 Ninja. Full BAB, full, proper, Sneak attack. Very different (and
>>>> IMHO, more appropriate) class than the 3.5 Complete Adventurer Ninja.
>>
>>I think he meant the b0rken Ninja of the Crescent Moon, from Sword & Fist.
>
>No.
>
>Core class Ninja, Rokugan.

Rokugan wasn't a D&D book... it was d20 L5R. I found this:

http://l5r.alderac.com/rpg/rokugan_ninja.pdf

d6 hit points, 4 skill points per level, full BAB, good will save,
full sneak attack (10d6 at 19th), some random bonuses to speed,
initiative, dodge bonus to AC...

I dunno. Trading 4 skill points per level for fighter BAB seems
pretty good. I'm pretty sure everything else sorta just balances
out.

--
Donald
Anonymous
March 16, 2005 2:14:06 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

It has been brought to my attention that "Malachias Invictus"
<capt_malachias@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>"Talen" <talen@spamspamspamspam.dodo.com.au> wrote in message
>news:khte31h9j0cjr4qlk825k45dqdg7odcno0@4ax.com...
>> It has been brought to my attention that Ophidian
>> <oNpEhMiOdian23@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>>Talen wrote:
>>> >
>>>> 3.0 Ninja. Full BAB, full, proper, Sneak attack. Very different (and
>>>> IMHO, more appropriate) class than the 3.5 Complete Adventurer Ninja.
>>>
>>> From OA?
>>
>> From Rokugan.
>
>That would not be the 3.0 Ninja. Rokugan is not D&D 3.0.

From the Rokugan d20 book, released for 3.0 rules of D&D.
Anonymous
March 16, 2005 2:15:09 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

It has been brought to my attention that "Malachias Invictus"
<capt_malachias@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>"Talen" <talen@spamspamspamspam.dodo.com.au> wrote in message
>news:vite31l4lms2pc20guodqkctnl55qt1qdl@4ax.com...
>> It has been brought to my attention that "Malachias Invictus"
>> <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>>Not only is half of that sneak attack watered down as others have
>>>>>pointed out, but I don't see how that BAB can be right. A ninja gets the
>>>>>same 3/4 BAB as a rogue, giving this build a total BAB of +7.
>>>>
>>>> 3.0 Ninja. Full BAB, full, proper, Sneak attack. Very different (and
>>>> IMHO, more appropriate) class than the 3.5 Complete Adventurer Ninja.
>>>
>>>Of course, they nerfed its saves (to only Reflex good) and BAB (to medium
>>>progression) back down to a less superhuman level with the errata. It was
>>>*still* a good class.
>>
>> By the errata I got my hands on, full BAB and Reflex good. We're
>> talking about the Sneak attack, d6 hit dice, Ninja Dodge/Shadow
>> Run/etc. class here, no?
>
>I am talking about the Ninja of the Crescent Moon, from Sword & Fist:
>
>http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/er/20040125a

And I, as the beginning point, /not/. The Ninja from the Rokugan
Sourcebook, which is the version that must be being used (since it
/can/ gestalt (Fighter1/Ninja9)/(Rogue10) /does/ work the way I said.
Anonymous
March 16, 2005 8:03:46 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Donald Tsang wrote:
> Talen wrote:
> >
> > Core class Ninja, Rokugan.
>
> Rokugan wasn't a D&D book... it was d20 L5R. I found
> this:
>
> http://l5r.alderac.com/rpg/rokugan_ninja.pdf
>
> d6 hit points, 4 skill points per level, full BAB, good
> will save, full sneak attack (10d6 at 19th), some
> random bonuses to speed, initiative, dodge bonus to AC...
>
> I dunno. Trading 4 skill points per level for fighter
> BAB seems pretty good. I'm pretty sure everything else
> sorta just balances out.

It doesn't. The Rokugan ninja core class is basically a slightly
weaker Rogue/Monk gestalt already, and is massively overpowered. When
we played Rokugan, even my most PC-power-centric player agreed that it
was too much.

The Complete Adventurer Ninja core class is much better.

--
Nik
- remove vermin from email address to reply.
Anonymous
March 16, 2005 8:13:18 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Talen wrote:
> Malachias Invictus wrote:
> > Talen wrote:
> > >
> > > From Rokugan.
> >
> > That would not be the 3.0 Ninja. Rokugan is not D&D 3.0.
>
> From the Rokugan d20 book, released for 3.0 rules of D&D.

.... by someone other than WotC, for a game that isn't D&D. Also,
there aren't any "Dungeons & Dragons" logos anywhere on Rokugan. It's
specifically for Legend of the Five Rings, rather than Oriental D&D.

This is similar, to some degree, to someone calling the Shaman's
Handbook (Green Ronin) Shaman the "3.0 shaman", as opposed to the
Oriental Adventures Shaman core class.

On top of that, most Alderac-published Rokugan material is massively
not-balanced. I *like* a lot of it, but all of it requires careful
review and editing for balance purposes.

--
Nik
- remove vermin from email address to reply.
Anonymous
March 17, 2005 3:20:35 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Time to step up the meds; I could have sworn Talen just said...
> It has been brought to my attention that "Malachias Invictus"
> <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Talen" <talen@spamspamspamspam.dodo.com.au> wrote in message
> >news:vite31l4lms2pc20guodqkctnl55qt1qdl@4ax.com...
> >> It has been brought to my attention that "Malachias Invictus"
> >> <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>>>>Not only is half of that sneak attack watered down as others have
> >>>>>pointed out, but I don't see how that BAB can be right. A ninja gets the
> >>>>>same 3/4 BAB as a rogue, giving this build a total BAB of +7.
> >>>>
> >>>> 3.0 Ninja. Full BAB, full, proper, Sneak attack. Very different (and
> >>>> IMHO, more appropriate) class than the 3.5 Complete Adventurer Ninja.
> >>>
> >>>Of course, they nerfed its saves (to only Reflex good) and BAB (to medium
> >>>progression) back down to a less superhuman level with the errata. It was
> >>>*still* a good class.
> >>
> >> By the errata I got my hands on, full BAB and Reflex good. We're
> >> talking about the Sneak attack, d6 hit dice, Ninja Dodge/Shadow
> >> Run/etc. class here, no?
> >
> >I am talking about the Ninja of the Crescent Moon, from Sword & Fist:
> >
> >http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/er/20040125a
>
> And I, as the beginning point, /not/. The Ninja from the Rokugan
> Sourcebook, which is the version that must be being used (since it
> /can/ gestalt (Fighter1/Ninja9)/(Rogue10) /does/ work the way I said.

Actually, everyone *else* is talking about the one from Complete
Adventurer (as has been mentioned more than once).
Anonymous
March 17, 2005 11:37:16 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Talen" <talen@spamspamspamspam.dodo.com.au> wrote in message
news:ui4g31h1mu827gr066np6grkgccanojpqa@4ax.com...

> And I, as the beginning point, /not/. The Ninja from the Rokugan
> Sourcebook, which is the version that must be being used (since it
> /can/ gestalt (Fighter1/Ninja9)/(Rogue10) /does/ work the way I said.

That Ninja is completely overpowered vs. D&D core classes, so *of course*
any gestalt including it will be overpowered.

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
Anonymous
March 17, 2005 3:29:16 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

doug.lampert@tdytsi.com wrote:

> But without such a fix it is still unlikely to be more than LA+4 or
> so even at high levels (your Rogue/Ftr is only getting +5 BAB, that's
> nice, but it isn't worth all that many levels).
>
> Really which is worse to fight two Rog X's + two Ftr X's, all with
> level X gear, or one RogX/FtrX gestalt build?

That's a question of CR.

The LA question is: which would you rather be, a gestalt fighter
10/rogue 10, or regular a fighter 7/rogue 7?

But it sounds about right, in this case. The normal guy has a bit more
hp, a higher skill cap, same BAB, but a bit weaker sneak attack, and
less access to high level abilities (Greater Weapon Focus, rogue
specials).

However, ISTM that practical power of gestalt combinations (and
therefore, the fair LA to impose) varies widely according to particular
combination.

A gestalt Ftr/Pal, a weapon master paladin, might even be a fun
character to play, but compared to a regular paladin all he gets out of
gestalting is a bunch of feats. A gestalt Ftr/Rog gets (compared to a
Rog) good BAB, more hp, another good save, on top of that bunch of
feats.

It's going to be hard balancing both the gestalt Ftr/Pal and gestalt
Ftr/Rog against a regular character using a single fixed LA, since
they're not that well balanced against each other.


--
Jasin Zujovic
jzujovic@inet.hr
Anonymous
March 17, 2005 3:29:17 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Jasin Zujovic" <jzujovic@inet.hr> wrote in message
news:MPG.1ca36661fe66b8659899e1@news.iskon.hr...
> doug.lampert@tdytsi.com wrote:
>
>> But without such a fix it is still unlikely to be more than LA+4 or
>> so even at high levels (your Rogue/Ftr is only getting +5 BAB, that's
>> nice, but it isn't worth all that many levels).
>>
>> Really which is worse to fight two Rog X's + two Ftr X's, all with
>> level X gear, or one RogX/FtrX gestalt build?
>
> That's a question of CR.
>
> The LA question is: which would you rather be, a gestalt fighter
> 10/rogue 10, or regular a fighter 7/rogue 7?
>
> But it sounds about right, in this case. The normal guy has a bit more
> hp, a higher skill cap, same BAB, but a bit weaker sneak attack, and
> less access to high level abilities (Greater Weapon Focus, rogue
> specials).
>
> However, ISTM that practical power of gestalt combinations (and
> therefore, the fair LA to impose) varies widely according to particular
> combination.
>
> A gestalt Ftr/Pal, a weapon master paladin, might even be a fun
> character to play, but compared to a regular paladin all he gets out of
> gestalting is a bunch of feats. A gestalt Ftr/Rog gets (compared to a
> Rog) good BAB, more hp, another good save, on top of that bunch of
> feats.
>
> It's going to be hard balancing both the gestalt Ftr/Pal and gestalt
> Ftr/Rog against a regular character using a single fixed LA, since
> they're not that well balanced against each other.

Well, you could say the same thing about many "normal" multiclass builds.
The LA should be set according to the "play to their strengths" build.

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
!