So, I'm an old hat when it comes to optimization.
I was there when PunPun was born, when the only way to defeat him was to abort him by sacrificing an artificer to the gods.
I was there when people widely considered psionics to be overpowered in part due to a complete lack of understanding of the system. And then when people said that PunPun technically could not work. But no one cared because you can't hold a good Kobold God down.
So I'm used to my share of outlandish claims (I had a 7 page argument with someone who thought fighters were OP) and different versions of balanced versus OP.
But recently I've heard the implication, if not the outright claim that a Path of War character is equivalent to a gestalt character. And an optimized one is equivalent to a triple gestalt.
For those ignorant. Gestalt was a rule introduced in unearthed arcana that let you combine two classes. You simply took the best of the two classes, the abilities of both and ran with it.
So, say a Paladin/Oracle would have full BAB, full casting and all the paladin and oracle abilities.
It's a pretty popular variant for a number of reasons from allowing GM's to run smaller but balanced groups to giving characters a lot of flexibility for more individualistic games to simply wanting have a nice bonkers high level game.
So, I'm familiar enough with Path of War that I'm putting some stuff together. But maybe I'm simply biased in thinking that it can be quite nutty but nothing worse than what I can pull with, say, any full caster.
So, honest opinions, do you think Path of War classes are equivalent to the monsters in gestalt games, or even triple gestalt? And why do you think so?