[Unchained] Why replace standard multiclassing with variant multiclassing?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

1 to 50 of 109 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

So my understanding is that the variant multiclassing in Unchained CAN be used with standard multiclassing, but it's recommended you use one or the other. So is there any real reason to adopt the variant multiclassing rules in place of the standard ones? I understand "dipping" tends to get discussed a lot here, but has it ever actually caused anyone trouble at the table? I can only think of a couple of instances of people multiclassing and it didn't really have an appreciable effect (the one "problem" player could use single classed characters to be just as powerful).


Variant Multiclassing isn't meant to stop dipping. It's meant to allow you to get some minor abilities over another class without losing a ton of power. Consider that you're a level 13 fighter, and you want to get some wizard abilities.

So you take 1 level of wizard.

Great, you have the power of a 1st level wizard at level 14. Congratulations at your poor life choices.

Or you could've taken variant multiclassing and have the powers of a 14th level fighter with a school, a familiar, the 1st level school abilities as a 14th level wizard, some minor cantrips, and next level you get a 18 HD outsider at your beck and call.

Seems like a pretty big difference in abilities.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well, it is a way to stay single classed and get sneak attack.
Some DMs have problems with multiclassinbg because in their head: classes are like majors in college.

Most of us don't see Classes like that. We see them as packages of abilities that thematically combined.

So if you are in the one school of thought you'll love the variant feat one.
But the other one thinks why not just multiclass.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Personally, I intend to tell my players that they can use one or the other. They choose which they're going to use in the campaign...I think that'll help. On the other hand, my group tends to not multiclass at all, so this likely will increase the chances of them doing this.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
John Lynch 106 wrote:
So my understanding is that the variant multiclassing in Unchained CAN be used with standard multiclassing, but it's recommended you use one or the other. So is there any real reason to adopt the variant multiclassing rules in place of the standard ones? I understand "dipping" tends to get discussed a lot here, but has it ever actually caused anyone trouble at the table? I can only think of a couple of instances of people multiclassing and it didn't really have an appreciable effect (the one "problem" player could use single classed characters to be just as powerful).

It's a different approach to multi-classing that preserves the ability to gain capstone powers in your main class. It's essentially 4th Edition multi-classing brought to Pathfinder.

The answer is it depends on what you want. It's a CHOICE, not a mandate.


LazarX wrote:
John Lynch 106 wrote:
So my understanding is that the variant multiclassing in Unchained CAN be used with standard multiclassing, but it's recommended you use one or the other. So is there any real reason to adopt the variant multiclassing rules in place of the standard ones? I understand "dipping" tends to get discussed a lot here, but has it ever actually caused anyone trouble at the table? I can only think of a couple of instances of people multiclassing and it didn't really have an appreciable effect (the one "problem" player could use single classed characters to be just as powerful).

It's a different approach to multi-classing that preserves the ability to gain capstone powers in your main class. It's essentially 4th Edition multi-classing brought to Pathfinder.

The answer is it depends on what you want. It's a CHOICE, not a mandate.

I think the disconnect comes from a lot of people never seeing the capstone ability in play so losing it is a non-issue. Myself, I see mostly power level play and some mid level play with the rare high level.

To directly answer John, it all depends what you're multiclassing for. If you're doing it for a certain ability, normal multiclassing might be the thing for you. Now if you're looking for an ability that scales with you, like a familiar, the variant works well.


LazarX wrote:
The answer is it depends on what you want. It's a CHOICE, not a mandate.

I'm not seeing why you would want to choose it (sure it opens up some multiclassing combos, but it closes off many as well). I know of no-one whose game made it to level 20 (almost none of Paizo's APs get there) so I guess I don't see the value in the capstone.


graystone wrote:
LazarX wrote:
John Lynch 106 wrote:
So my understanding is that the variant multiclassing in Unchained CAN be used with standard multiclassing, but it's recommended you use one or the other. So is there any real reason to adopt the variant multiclassing rules in place of the standard ones? I understand "dipping" tends to get discussed a lot here, but has it ever actually caused anyone trouble at the table? I can only think of a couple of instances of people multiclassing and it didn't really have an appreciable effect (the one "problem" player could use single classed characters to be just as powerful).

It's a different approach to multi-classing that preserves the ability to gain capstone powers in your main class. It's essentially 4th Edition multi-classing brought to Pathfinder.

The answer is it depends on what you want. It's a CHOICE, not a mandate.

I think the disconnect comes from a lot of people never seeing the capstone ability in play so losing it is a non-issue. Myself, I see mostly power level play and some mid level play with the rare high level.

To directly answer John, it all depends what you're multiclassing for. If you're doing it for a certain ability, normal multiclassing might be the thing for you. Now if you're looking for an ability that scales with you, like a familiar, the variant works well.

So are people planning on treating this as a player choice rather than a table choice? If so, when will the player need to decide? Level 1? Level 2? Level 3? Will you let players retrain into the variant multiclassing?

I like options, but this one (treated as a player decision rather than a table decision) seems very complex.

Sovereign Court

Frankly - it reminds me of 4th ed multiclassing.

Give up feats for abilities of a different class.


John Lynch 106 wrote:
LazarX wrote:
The answer is it depends on what you want. It's a CHOICE, not a mandate.
I'm not seeing why you would want to choose it (sure it opens up some multiclassing combos, but it closes off many as well). I know of no-one whose game made it to level 20 (almost none of Paizo's APs get there) so I guess I don't see the value in the capstone.

I think the capstone is something of a silly argument for just that reason, but the basic concept applies: Whatever level you stop at, you'll give up some abilities from the main class for a dip. Not only that, but you'll get those you do get later.

Really the capstone argument should be the "get something at every level" argument in contrast to the way many classes were more front-loaded, followed by "dead levels" in the 3.x days.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

John Lynch 106 wrote:

So are people planning on treating this as a player choice rather than a table choice? If so, when will the player need to decide? Level 1? Level 2? Level 3? Will you let players retrain into the variant multiclassing?

I like options, but this one (treated as a player decision rather than a table decision) seems very complex.

I'm planning to treat it as a player choice. However, the point they need to decide is either level 3, or by taking a level in another class. If they want to retrain those levels and change to this? I'm fine with that. I'll treat it as the cost for retraining the levels, plus any feats they have to give up for the new class abilities. Honestly...it doesn't seem that complex to me. But that's me.


John Lynch 106 wrote:
So are people planning on treating this as a player choice rather than a table choice?

I see no reason both kinds can't work together at the same time.

John Lynch 106 wrote:
I like options, but this one (treated as a player decision rather than a table decision) seems very complex.

Not seeing the complexity. Even using both types of multiclassing at the same time seems pretty straight forward.

What do you think will be tough to figure out?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
John Lynch 106 wrote:
LazarX wrote:
The answer is it depends on what you want. It's a CHOICE, not a mandate.
I'm not seeing why you would want to choose it (sure it opens up some multiclassing combos, but it closes off many as well). I know of no-one whose game made it to level 20 (almost none of Paizo's APs get there) so I guess I don't see the value in the capstone.

The capstone isn't the real reason for me. If you want say, a Fighter with a touch of magic, but who remains at his core a fighter, variant multi-classing is an excellent vehicle for this.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Personally, I think having both systems in place is preferable. Normal multi classing is needed for some kinds of builds, but Variant is great for giving your character some class features without leaving it stuck with the abilities of several low-mid level characters instead of the abilities of one high-level one.

Cheapy wrote:

Variant Multiclassing isn't meant to stop dipping. It's meant to allow you to get some minor abilities over another class without losing a ton of power. Consider that you're a level 13 fighter, and you want to get some wizard abilities.

So you take 1 level of wizard.

Great, you have the power of a 1st level wizard at level 14. Congratulations at your poor life choices.

Or you could've taken variant multiclassing and have the powers of a 14th level fighter with a school, a familiar, the 1st level school abilities as a 14th level wizard, some minor cantrips, and next level you get a 18 HD outsider at your beck and call.

Seems like a pretty big difference in abilities.

Wait, what? How do you get an 18 HD outsider?


Based on descriptions, I could see it working together as long as the classes didn't overlap

So a fighter VM wizard, and then later picking up some levels of rogue.

I think I would not allow though a fighter to VM Wizard and then also take wizard levels. Seems overly complex and kind of redundant. So a player would have to decide early on if he wanted to do one or another.


VMC, as far as I can tell is only good for very high level games, and for a few scaling features, otherwise you get more than half of the benefits right away with a single level dip most of the time.

Yes, it's a lot like 4e multiclassing but notably also a lot worse (takes more feats, has worse scaling, your abilities are pre-set, etc.), but it's a lot more like getting the multiclass feats from 3.5.

I feel that this system could have been a lot better executed.


MMCJawa wrote:

Based on descriptions, I could see it working together as long as the classes didn't overlap

So a fighter VM wizard, and then later picking up some levels of rogue.

I think I would not allow though a fighter to VM Wizard and then also take wizard levels. Seems overly complex and kind of redundant. So a player would have to decide early on if he wanted to do one or another.

using both at once seems like it'd require some limits--i'll certainly agree that vanilla multiclassing into a vmc you already have shouldn't be allowed for sanity's sake, but would you only be allowed one instance of vmc on a character? would you lose that advancement if you multiclassed the vanilla way?

example: if you were a fighter 6 (vmc wizard 6) and wanted to take a level of rogue, would you be a fighter 6/rogue 1 (vmc wizard 7) or a fighter 6 (vmc wizard 6)/rogue 1?

the former actually seems kinda neat. you could have really deep character arcs via vanilla class changes, but keep the character's core themes with vmc--no matter how many martial classes your character went though, he'd still be in touch with his latent magical stuff.

the latter might open up odd doors like a fighter 6 (vmc wizard 6) / magus 4 (vmc rogue 4) / eldritch knight 10 (vmc wizard 10)

bad example mechanically, but my point remains.


MMCJawa wrote:

Based on descriptions, I could see it working together as long as the classes didn't overlap

So a fighter VM wizard, and then later picking up some levels of rogue.

I think I would not allow though a fighter to VM Wizard and then also take wizard levels. Seems overly complex and kind of redundant. So a player would have to decide early on if he wanted to do one or another.

That was Marks suggestion. If you VMC a class you cannot take levels in it.

Personally I really like VMC as it addresses one of multiclassings major issues: ability scaling. VMC let's your main class scale fully and the good VMCs give fully scaling options. That's why the gunslinger VMC is pretty bad, no scaling and mostly things a one level dip gives


AndIMustMask wrote:


the latter might open up odd doors like a fighter 6 (vmc wizard 6) / magus 4 (vmc rogue 4) / eldritch knight 10 (vmc wizard 10)

bad example mechanically, but my point remains.

you cannot do 2 vmc options, they replace the same static general advancement feats, so you cannot give up your 3rd level feat twice.


christos gurd wrote:
AndIMustMask wrote:


the latter might open up odd doors like a fighter 6 (vmc wizard 6) / magus 4 (vmc rogue 4) / eldritch knight 10 (vmc wizard 10)

bad example mechanically, but my point remains.

you cannot do 2 vmc options, they replace the same static general advancement feats, so you cannot give up your 3rd level feat twice.

ah, excellent news then i guess.


With the retraining rules, you can use variant multiclassing at pretty much any point in your career.


question: how does vmc-granted abilities interact with regular class abilities with similar effects?

a slayer (or vivisecitonist alchemist) variant multiclassing into rogue could have loads and loads of sneak attack dice


Blackwaltzomega wrote:
Wait, what? How do you get an 18 HD outsider?

You choose Wizard as a subclass. That gives you one Arcane Discovery. I think True Name is the one that gets you an outsider.


Pretty much, although my favorite is the UNC monk with vmc rogue since the new monk has a flatfooted attack option.


Why replace when you can do both?

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Gisher wrote:
Blackwaltzomega wrote:
Wait, what? How do you get an 18 HD outsider?
You choose Wizard as a subclass. That gives you one Arcane Discovery. I think True Name is the one that gets you an outsider.

It gets you the True NAME of an outsider. You still need the appropriate spells to summon it.


LazarX wrote:
It gets you the True NAME of an outsider. You still need the appropriate spells to summon it.

No, you don't.


When you have the true name of an aligned outsider (it doesn't work with elementals and genies) you can force them do anything, even teleport to you with their own means


Cydeth wrote:
I'm planning to treat it as a player choice. However, the point they need to decide is either level 3, or by taking a level in another class. If they want to retrain those levels and change to this? I'm fine with that. I'll treat it as the cost for retraining the levels, plus any feats they have to give up for the new class abilities.

Would you disallow taking a prestige class with the variant rules? It'd be disappointing to find a good combination of base class + variant multiclassing! then due to in game events be offered a position in the hell knights (and the ability to take the prestige class) but be told you have to give up your VMC (and even have to pay and spend time to lose those abilities).

MMCJawa wrote:

Based on descriptions, I could see it working together as long as the classes didn't overlap

So a fighter VM wizard, and then later picking up some levels of rogue.

I think I would not allow though a fighter to VM Wizard and then also take wizard levels. Seems overly complex and kind of redundant. So a player would have to decide early on if he wanted to do one or another.

If you allow both then I can't be a fighter 5 / rogue 3 / VMC rogue. Makes sense. What about fighter 5 / ninja 3 / VMC rogue? Assuming we're going with standard alternate class rules that's a no. What about fighter 5 / investigator 3 / VMC rogue? Based on rules for hybrid classes that's allowed.

It might be a bit unfair though for the ninja class multiclass wanting to VMC into rogue (or some other disallowed combination)

graystone wrote:

Not seeing the complexity. Even using both types of multiclassing at the same time seems pretty straight forward.

What do you think will be tough to figure out?

It could be the complexity isn't in VMC but how it interacts with alternate classes, hybrid classes and prestige classes and the conflicting rules they have with standard multiclassed.i wouldn't want a situation where the VMC character is needlessly punished for wanting to take a flavourful option as a result of in game events, but I'm also wary of certain combinations (Arcanist /VMC wizard perhaps?) that could be significantly more powerful then other options.

Do people see an issue with converting VMC into feat chains? Something like

Rogue Sneak Attack
Pre-requisite: Level 3, no levels in rogue or ninja
Benefit: You gain sneak attack as a rogue of xxx.

That way people could hop off the VMC when they want to (or delay it if necessary). Do people see any potential balance issues with that?

It could be I'm overthinking it but I'm trying to look at it from all angles as it is new ;)


Pathfinder Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

The main issue with VMC isn't really addressed in the book -- how do you deal with overlapping abilities? Prohibiting taking levels in your VMC class eliminates most but not all such cases -- but you still have cases (especially with archetypes) where you can get class features from both regular class features and VMC class features.

And I do like the idea of turning the VMC options into feat chains, but you do need to factor in the temptation to stop advancing a VMC. The feat chain could take care of it by having the first feat grant you what you get at 3rd level, with the second feat granting you whatever you get at 7th level and improving the ability you already got at 3rd level to 7th level, and so forth.

Otherwise, I would be very tempted to take the 3rd level feat for the Bard VMC (which grants you bardic knowledge at your character level) and then ignore the rest of the sequence. If the bardic knowledge bonus did not increase unless I took additional feats, I would have a decision much closer to the one I would have to make using the system in the book.


Scaling and higher level abilities are basically the answer to the question of 'why use VMC'.

If that Fighter 13 really wants an Arcane Discovery, his choices are burn five levels on Wizard MC or burn five feats on Wizard VMC. I know which one I'd prefer, were I that Fighter.

Personally, I'm going to allow both at my table. And gestalt. You want to have a five-class mash of character Stuff? Go for it. What do I care?

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

John Lynch 106 wrote:
Cydeth wrote:
I'm planning to treat it as a player choice. However, the point they need to decide is either level 3, or by taking a level in another class. If they want to retrain those levels and change to this? I'm fine with that. I'll treat it as the cost for retraining the levels, plus any feats they have to give up for the new class abilities.
Would you disallow taking a prestige class with the variant rules? It'd be disappointing to find a good combination of base class + variant multiclassing! then due to in game events be offered a position in the hell knights (and the ability to take the prestige class) but be told you have to give up your VMC (and even have to pay and spend time to lose those abilities).

I was giving a quick reply before, not going in-depth. But would I allow someone to take a prestige class with it? If they met the requirements, yes. However, I'd talk to them before determining whether they could take 2 different base classes and the variant multiclassing. Most likely? They can choose Variant or standard multiclassing, with an exception for Prestige Classes. And that'd be it.


David knott 242 wrote:
The main issue with VMC isn't really addressed in the book -- how do you deal with overlapping abilities?

I would expect aruling along the lines of "you may stack abilities that are of the same type (unless the ability says otherwise) but may not have an effective level higher than your total character level" could be fair.

David knott 242 wrote:

And I do like the idea of turning the VMC options into feat chains, but you do need to factor in the temptation to stop advancing a VMC. The feat chain could take care of it by having the first feat grant you what you get at 3rd level, with the second feat granting you whatever you get at 7th level and improving the ability you already got at 3rd level to 7th level, and so forth.

Otherwise, I would be very tempted to take the 3rd level feat for the Bard VMC (which grants you bardic knowledge at your character level) and then ignore the rest of the sequence. If the bardic knowledge bonus did not increase unless I took additional feats, I would have a decision much closer to the one I would have to make using the system in the book.

Yeah I was afraid of cases like that. Good point. Also it doesn't work as well for fighters as I thought it would (unless I nominate all VMC feats as combat feats which wouldn't necessarily make sense).

Cydeth wrote:
I was giving a quick reply before, not going in-depth.

Understood. I'm throwing more questions at you to try to explore the ramifications of any given decision regarding VMC. I really want to include it as has been pointed out, it can be really good for certain combinations. I'm just wanting to get my final decision right before putting it in front of players.

Cydeth wrote:
But would I allow someone to take a prestige class with it? If they met the requirements, yes. However, I'd talk to them before determining whether they could take 2 different base classes and the variant multiclassing. Most likely? They can choose Variant or standard multiclassing, with an exception for Prestige Classes. And that'd be it.

Fair enough. I tried to find an edge case where that might not be fair, but I couldn't do it. It seems like a fairly solid ruling.

Alright so a ruling for variant multiclassing (I'm calling it a "secondary class" to distinguish from standard multiclassing) could be: At level 3 you may opt to gain a secondary class so long as you do not have levels in multiple base classes, alternate classes or hybrid classes (or some combination thereof). Instead of gaining a feat at level 3, 7, 11, 15 and 19 you gain the specified ability from your secondary class. If you multiclass into a base class, alternate class or hybrid class than all abilities from your secondary class cease to function until you stop multiclassing. You may take levels in a prestige class and still gain the benefits from your secondary class.

NOTE: Ninjas may not select Rogue as a secondary class, samurai may not select Cavalier as a secondary class and antipaladins may not select paladin as a secondary class.

---
Does that seem clear as to what the intent is and how the "variant multiclassing" rules work?


Ninja/Samurai/Antipaladins can't do that anyway. They can't pull a regular multiclass to those classes either, since they are Rogues/Cavaliers/Paladins.

Curious why you're more okay with Fighter/Barbarian/VMC Oracle than Fighter/Bloodrager/VMC Oracle though? Otherwise, core classes should be in that rule too.

It honestly seems like a really overdrawn way of saying it.

"You can't use the Variant Multiclass rules if you are multiclassed, or vice versa. Prestige Classes are not considered multiclassing for this rule".

Simple, clear, says the same thing.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
David knott 242 wrote:

The main issue with VMC isn't really addressed in the book -- how do you deal with overlapping abilities?

It's not complicated.. overlapping abilities do not stack. With the way VMC is set up, you're really going to have to work hard to make a problem in this way. As with the normal restrictions on multi-classing you really can't VMC a primary class with itself.

Contributor

Its a neat system, but for most classes it doesn't actually address any of the reasons that I want to multiclass in the first place. For example, more class skills and skill ranks, bonus feats, and so on.

Ultimately, I plan on treating it more like a mandatory version of the Eldritch Heritage line. You decide at Level 3 if you want to use VMC and if you do, you're locked out of that class. But otherwise you can multiclass as normal.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:
David knott 242 wrote:

The main issue with VMC isn't really addressed in the book -- how do you deal with overlapping abilities?

It's not complicated.. overlapping abilities do not stack. With the way VMC is set up, you're really going to have to work hard to make a problem in this way. As with the normal restrictions on multi-classing you really can't VMC a primary class with itself.

Vivisectionist Alchemist VMC Rogue.

Not all that hard, honestly. And a rather solid use of VMC if you can get by without lots of feats (you can).]

Alexander Augunas wrote:

Its a neat system, but for most classes it doesn't actually address any of the reasons that I want to multiclass in the first place. For example, more class skills and skill ranks, bonus feats, and so on.

Ultimately, I plan on treating it more like a mandatory version of the Eldritch Heritage line. You decide at Level 3 if you want to use VMC and if you do, you're locked out of that class. But otherwise you can multiclass as normal.

Ayup. It's got different value for different people.

The Slayer who wants to TWF with Sawtooth Sabres just needs his one level of Swashbuckler and he'll be on his way. VMC doesn't help him, even if it offered Swashbuckler- he doesn't want the full set of Swash's abilities, just the one.

The guy who really wants to combine Titan Fighter and Titan Mauler still needs to take actual levels, because you can't get those abilities off VMC at all.

The guy who wants to be a Fighter who's so good he can read his opponent's moves wants to VMC Diviner Wizard.

Depends on your concepts. Which is why I'm with you; allow both.


kestral287 wrote:
Curious why you're more okay with Fighter/Barbarian/VMC Oracle than Fighter/Bloodrager/VMC Oracle though? Otherwise, core classes should be in that rule too.

What is the difference between a base class and a core class? The only difference I can find is "it wasn't printed in book X" which means nothing from a rules perspective.

kestral287 wrote:

"You can't use the Variant Multiclass rules if you are multiclassed, or vice versa. Prestige Classes are not considered multiclassing for this rule".

Simple, clear, says the same thing.

Well fine. If you want to be obvious about it ;)


kestral287 wrote:


Vivisectionist Alchemist VMC Rogue.

Not all that hard, honestly. And a rather solid use of VMC if you can get by without lots of feats (you can).].

Likely, they stack but weirdly, just normal multiclassing with sneak attack.

So normally rogue levels grants 1/1 levels to sneak attacks. But VMC feats are slower so they add slower toward sneak attack.
How much sneak attack do they grant and at what rate?
Then add that rate to the Vivi alchemist and viola you've conquered how they stack.


I don't have access to the info, so this is based off of what was said here....

So, you are saying take a feat and you get some class features?

1) How does this affect the Homunculus? You can add HD for gp, and for every 2 HD, you get a feat. Now your creation gets class features!

2) Some class features let you add feats to your pets. Can you now give the class features? Why have a wand monkey when you can have a monkey wizard!

/cevah


Because the Monkey Wizard is drastically less useful?


Starbuck_II wrote:
kestral287 wrote:


Vivisectionist Alchemist VMC Rogue.

Not all that hard, honestly. And a rather solid use of VMC if you can get by without lots of feats (you can).].

Likely, they stack but weirdly, just normal multiclassing with sneak attack.

So normally rogue levels grants 1/1 levels to sneak attacks. But VMC feats are slower so they add slower toward sneak attack.
How much sneak attack do they grant and at what rate?
Then add that rate to the Vivi alchemist and viola you've conquered how they stack.

i think on the SA bit it's less of a question of IF they stack (both abilities specifically say they stack with similar abilities), but SHOULD they stack.

since having oodles and oodles of sneak attack dice to throw at things might seem excessive to some people.


Pathfinder Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
LazarX wrote:
David knott 242 wrote:

The main issue with VMC isn't really addressed in the book -- how do you deal with overlapping abilities?

It's not complicated.. overlapping abilities do not stack. With the way VMC is set up, you're really going to have to work hard to make a problem in this way. As with the normal restrictions on multi-classing you really can't VMC a primary class with itself.

A general rule that the abilities granted by a VMC overlap and do not stack with those granted by actual class levels would be a good start -- it would take care of the rogue/monk evasion issue and the wizard/witch familiar issue. On the other hand, it is not all that clear how you would handle a paladin who chooses to VMC into cleric, since such a character would have non-identical ways to channel energy -- so which one would take precedence if you can't have them both?


I view VMC as an expansion of the old APG Eldritch Heritage feat chain, just expanded to work with classes other then sorcerer. I have no issues with it in theory. I myself am entertained by the idea of a straight level arcane trickster (wizard/vmc rogue into PrC)due to the greater spell level access with loss of capstone access.

Also, as a general sharing, my game group does tend to see capstones, as we run long campaigns. Just saying it does happen.


I wouldn't replace standard multiclassing with VMC, I'd allow both to co exist. Of course you can't multi class into your VMC class.

I also don't see the problem with swapping your VMC class at higher levels so you could (for example) have a fighter VMCing into rogue from levels 1 to 3 and then at 7 picks up the Alchemist first VMC ability.

Complicated, but if the player can keep their head around it all, then it's all cushty.


Pathfinder Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Apocryphile wrote:

I wouldn't replace standard multiclassing with VMC, I'd allow both to co exist. Of course you can't multi class into your VMC class.

I also don't see the problem with swapping your VMC class at higher levels so you could (for example) have a fighter VMCing into rogue from levels 1 to 3 and then at 7 picks up the Alchemist first VMC ability.

Complicated, but if the player can keep their head around it all, then it's all cushty.

In the specific case you cite, your example character would gain trapfinding as a rogue at 3rd level and a Craft (Alchemy) bonus at 7th level, with both abilities scaling according to character level. Would you have both abilities scale according to full character level, or would some sort of reduction or cutoff be applied to one or both abilities?


I don't have the book yet, but from what I've read in discussions, it sounds like the variant will fit much better in my games. It was already my preference, if a player wanted abilities from another class, to figure out how how to bring abilities from the other class into the class they have.

My games usually get to 20, or beyond, so it can be important to be class focused.


kestral287 wrote:
Because the Monkey Wizard is drastically less useful?

Well, a Monkey Wizard can use wands better than a Wand Monkey. No UMD needed. And it gets spells.

/cevah


Cevah wrote:
kestral287 wrote:
Because the Monkey Wizard is drastically less useful?

Well, a Monkey Wizard can use wands better than a Wand Monkey. No UMD needed. And it gets spells.

/cevah

No it does not.

It gets one cantrip as a SLA. At level 11.


Ouch. That is a wimpy feat then. Not even opening the cafting feats back up. Well, guess I have to wait for the SRD to put up the text....

/cevah

1 to 50 of 109 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / [Unchained] Why replace standard multiclassing with variant multiclassing? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.