I would love to play a gestalt game using Pathfinder rules, the setting doesn't matter so much. I am most familiar with Pathfinder, Forgotten Realms, Eberron, "standard D&D", and Greyhawk. But really any setting, even a custom one is welcome.

I have not played a game using the gestalt system in a long time (and only three times with Pathfinder), and find I am sorely craving it again.

as for level, mid-to-high is always preferred, but I have no issues with starting at low-level, as long as the game will make high level (preferably 20th, 30th tops).

Using the Mythic Adventures rules is always a plus, though not necessary. I have a few concepts in mind for anyone interested.

I'd definitely be interested in playing if a GM was found.

While I do enjoy a gestalt game, I think a GM would go crazy trying to balance encounters in once just given how many different things the PCs could do.  I mean, I enjoy it because I can play concepts that just aren't viable in normal PF (like my archaeologist bard/summoner), but that is a lot of things that just that character can do.  Just imagine having a party where 3/4ths of the people are real spell casters as well as something else.

Man.  I really want to play that archaeologist bard/summoner character.

I'd love to play in a gestalt game (I've had an idea for a gunslinger/inquisitor for quite a while), but yeah, gestalt can be really hard to prepare for, especially if you throw the mythic rules on top of them.

I don't see how it's harder... I have run several Gestalt games (with Gestalt on top of it as well). It's not that much work.

Just assume there is more PC's than there actually is. I count every Gestalt PC as 1.75 PCs and make encounters that way. So, a group of 4 Gestalt PCs is about the same power-wise as a group of 7-8 "regular" PCs.

No matter how many obnoxious abilities the PCs may have, they can still only take a swift, move, and standard action, thus limiting what they can do. True, they have more options, but no more options than a "well-oiled", cohesive party of 7-8 PCs. Any GM who can't make encounters for his own game sucks. Period. Besides, put more non-combat encounters in the mix and what does it matter when everyone can cast a ton of spells?... They will STILL have to RP the encounter out.

It's always bothered me that the main issue everyone says as to why they do not like Gestalt (or can't "deal with it"), is over combat. Just throw a bigger CR creature at them! Who cares about said creatures HP?... It has exactly enough to do its job. If its attack rolls are too high/low, fudge them to get the effect you are looking for. I see nothing wrong with that, especially if it makes things interesting for the players, and easier for the GM... Hell, make stuff up! That's the whole point of this game, imagination!

I might be able to be talked into Co-GMing a Gestalt game, but I would want to just play at least as much as I GM.

Any thoughts on a Gestalt E6/E7 game?
This message was last edited by the user at 00:23, Tue 04 Nov 2014.

In reply to Apoc (msg # 6):

I have no idea what that is.

E6 is basically "you stop levelling at 6, and get a feat every X experience points".

e: Incidentally, I would be interested in a gestalt E6/E7 campaign.
This message was last edited by the user at 04:52, Tue 04 Nov 2014.

Nah, not interested in a E6/E7 game.

Regardless of how many feats I'd get, or how much gold, it still does not make up for the fact I would never get those upper level abilities I'd want. It takes the fun out of it knowing I'll never cast disintegrate, or get that 3rd-4th attack or be able to wild shape into the cool forms.

I've never understood the appeal of E6/E7. But then, I play spellslingers a lot, and I tend to dislike the 'a kobold breathes hard at you, you're dead' levels.

Same here.

I just did a bunch of reading up on the whole E6/E7 thing. I get it from a GM's point of view. It allows the PCs to be "powerful" but never reach higher than a CR 10. So it makes things easier, allows you to trow lots of bag guys at the PCs without bothering to do much work.. But no matter what I (as the PC) does, I will never get to cast a 5th level spell. Never get to use any class ability above 8th/9th level. Having a ton of feats does not make up for that. The game goes to 20th level, I've never understood the animosity (at least when it comes to 3.5/Pathfinder) with playing beyond level 10. It's like GMs TRY to avoid that. You cannot tell me "it's hard to make a game at that level" I am a GM myself. Most times I end up GM-ing the game with my friends. I've GM'ed steady games all the way up to 60th level. GM-ed epic games where we started at 21 and went to 60. GM-ed plenty of Gestalt games, even ones with Mythic Rules on top of that (I'm GM-ing one now on this site). On this site at least, I personally see way too many GMs restricting some things way too much. Yes, I set boundaries in my games, all games need them. But I see it at poor GM-ing if a GM restricts things just because "it's too hard to make an appropriate encounter" and such.