Why doesn't anyone gestalt in 5th edition

>Unneeded because unlike fucking 3.x you don't have massive power issues between class tiers.

HA HA HA HA HA HA

tell another one

Caster supremacy is a white room theorycraft myth that's never realized in the game.

double fighter.

Cool, what social abilities does my fighter or rogue get in the upcoming 'noble ball' session?

Hey, how does my barbarian make a magic weapon?

How do I fly or turn invisible instead of having to fight or sneak through an enemy camp?

I get to trip attack one enemy at a time, and the wizard gets to firebolt one foe. Seems OK.
Why does the wizard get a bigger fireball, but I don't get to trip more enemies at once?

Because the wizard is useful in one encounter and sucks for every single other encounter for the rest of the day. And no, we are not sleeping for 8 hours in a guarded stronghold closet so you can recharge your fireball you blew on the single guard at the entrance.

>Hey, how does my barbarian make a magic weapon?
How does anyone?

A few classes can temporarily make a weapon magic, and the monk is always magic, but how does anyone make a magic weapon?

>that pic
I miss Dino Riders.

Bladelocks get magic weapons

In a typical adventuring day a caster beyond the first few levels isn't going to run out of spells. Plus the wizard doesn't need to spend gold on items outside of his headband of intelligence, so he can buy pearls of power and other magic items to keep getting spells.

Y'all do realize that gestalt has appeal beyond closing power gaps?
People usually do gestalt to make an interesting, versatile character that doesn't have to wait 'til level 17 to complete it's identity.

>Buying magic items
Now I know you haven't played 5e.
Or you played with a group who has only ever played 3e/4e.

There are literally rules in the DMG for magic item crafting.
Spoilers: you need to be a spellcaster of some kind.

Or to cover much needed bases, like having a blaster, a healer, a skill monkey, and a beatstick

Bard is two of those by itself.
Two bards and two clerics (one of the tempest variety, one of war, maybe) is a better, more effective party than almost any other.

There's magic item crafting rules.
And if you can't convert gold into magic items, there's fucking nothing to spend money on after level 5 or so.

You mean the rules that follow a paragraph stating "magic items are entirely up to the DM, the following is completely optional"?

Oh not this shit again.

Because what would be the fucking point?

You are both wrong.

Bard/Bard/Bard
They see me rollin'. And they are hatin'.

Ah, yes, optional. Like feats and multiclassing are optional.
Like PrCs are optional in 3e.

Do people not realise that the comments of things being optional are a fig leaf to appease grognards?

Same way the game says "using a grid is optional" despite everything snapping to a 5 foot grid, opportunity attack rules requiring precise positioning, strict ranged weapon increments, etc

you should probably make a distinction between things you pretty much can't live without and things you can easily modify
for example, the stuff you've all mentioned is pretty set-in-stone, whereas magic item crafting is.. well, you can pretty easily live without that, or modify to your heart's content.

so while it is pretty dumb to tack on 'optional' to everything, you're intentionally overlooking the places where things ARE optional.
unless you're trying to imply that for some reason, magic crafting really needs to be that set in stone that the DM can never deviate from those creation rules or whatever

I'm tempted to run a few games where the players will be able to pick Two subclasses (All published supplements on the table, no UA). What could possibly go wrong?

I usually stick to a simple Archivist/Wizard when offered as I usually play the Wizard or Bard in the party.

...Unless the DM goes crazy and will let me play my Shifter Druid/Totemist/Battledancer/Swordsage/Totem Rager/Bloodclaw Master/Fist of the Forest/Warshaper gestalt build.

>Yes, there was one level 20 campaign I was allowed to play him.
>We were told up front we were going to deal with a Terrasque with the Demonic template.
>Has once per day ability to Blasphemy as a 40+ HD creature.
>I was the only one who bought and prepared a contingency spell.
>Everyone else dies.

Kek

>noble ball rogue or fighter
Backgrounds matter 100% more than class

>crafting magic weapons
It's all DM fiat for any class

>invisibility
RTFM on invisibility

>multiple trips per round
Extra attack gives multiple shoves, and multiple weaker does is best handled as the DMG suggests

Move the goalposts even further you sperg. Admit it, you got BTFO claiming wizards need headbands of intelligence revealing that you were specifically referencing other editions than 5e - though it was obvious as soon as you listed 3.5 examples in a 5e discussion

Only 5e campaign I've run was a gestalt game for 2 players, was heaps of fun and both of them were noobs to DnD (Had some experience in other stuff.) sadly it fell apart due to relationship drama. Had a Fighter/Ranger gestalt that was surprisingly monstrous and a Warlock/Paladin, ridiculously hard to hurt and could pump out spells and damage all the goddamn time.

Ranger/Barbarian

commoner/commoner

>you need to be a spellcaster of some kind.
So, anything from a fighter to a rogue ?

>Fighter wants to break for camp, gets out his tinderbox and tent, goes out to find firewood, sets up a bear bag, takes off his armor, hopes he doesn't get killed in his sleep by goblins
>lmao Leomud's Tiny Hut and alarm. They're even Ritual so you don't need spell slots :^)

>never realized in the game

If he thinks "spellcaster" is a requirement that fucks over a fighter, he doesn't know shit about 5e, so it's best to just ignore him.

>implying a warrior needs Leomud's Tiny Hut and alarm.

So how does it feel being a weak ass faggot who needs a hut and alarm spell to sleep properly?

How does it feel to be a hungry ass faggot whose food got stolen by raccoons and shit?

>he also cannot find food without magic

Phew lad. I don't get stolen from, i leave it out in the open so the poor animals get something eat as well. I can just find something else in the morning.

>cheap memes brought to you by someone who's never done serious innawoods

Did you have to cast Leomund Tiny Hut when being innawoods? Otherwise you would have died of starvation and cold, right?

No, but we had more than two hours of setting up camp every night.

Clearly you have not 5 levels in ranger nor have you been living in the woods since you were born.

>ranger
>a caster class

>or just Outlander background
I know it is easy to forget that backgrounds exist if you don't play the game but try making some effort.
Also rangers have so few spells with so little application that even rangers themselves usually forget they have them. And frankly, they don’t need any to prepare a camp for the night.

>outlander
Yes, you can find food and water as an outlander, and it's very helpful, I'm not saying it isn't, but you can't do it instantly. You still have to go out and get it.

>ranger spells don't matter
>even though they stop giving a shit about food at level 1 when they learn goodberry

>level 1
Sorry, level 2.

>we are not only talking about food!
> but rangers can make food!
If you talk about surviving in the woods, magic is a useful tool, but as useful as havjng the correct background. Now guess why people try to have the most diverse options in the same party.

To get LTH you have to sacrifice a spell learned, too. In 5e magic books to copy don't grow on trees anymore.

We're not only talking about food, we're also talking about time and effort. A single goodberry is all the food you'll need for a day.

Yet to have it you need to sacrifice a spell learned and the class features that non casters have. Given that a fighter can get stats so high to make checks almost trivial and the ability to say if the butler or the beggar are enemies in disguise with just a minute of evaluation, outside of all the combat prowess since we are not talking about combat it seems, i would call it a fair teade for an handful of spells. Yes the wizard can turn invisible, but the rogue is so much better at sneaking and doing things while sneaking, that since this game is cooperative you are way better off casting invisibility on him than yourself.

>Choosing a class, and another class that does the same thing but better
Why not go straight rectangle? It does everything square does and more

You cast a single spell once or twice a week and that's all the effort and time you'll ever spend for food. It doesn't matter that the fighter can kill the squirrel every time if he still needs to go out and get one three times a day seven days a week

Wizard/Factotum because that's the only way to play thief/mage.

I had that T. rex.

Witch with a side of Ranger.
Basically a Witch, but you plug all those terrible weak spots.

>Because the wizard is useful in one encounter and sucks for every single other encounter for the rest of the day.
>unironically believing this

Monk/Druid.

Aegis/anything really. Played an Aegis/Psion that eventually prestiged into Body Snatcher, so I could steal bigger and badder bodies, then go all Kamen Rider with them.

Fighter/Wizard, Barbarian/Druid, Ranger/Rogue, Monk/Cleric, Brawler/Summoner so I can pretend I have a Stand, Arcanist/Cleric

Warlord/(Anti)Paladin

Wouldn't Magic/Death/Light/Knowledge be a better choice than doubling up on beatstick clerics?

So something like:
Lore Bard (controller)
Valor/Blade Bard w/pally dip (striker)
Magic/Life Cleric (leader)
War/Tempest Cleric (defender)

Unarmed Swordsage/Dread Necromancer once tried to be Quan Chi

Of course at lvl20 with Desert Wind I end up more like Scorpion